DOCSLIB.ORG

2017 Impact Report Table of Contents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2017 Impact Report Table of Contents BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS 2017 IMPACT REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS 04 06 08 INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW OUR FUTURE A Letter from Our Programs New Mentoring Our CEO at a Glance Programs 10 12 14 ACKNOWLEDGING MENTOR SUPPORTING EXCELLENCE INDEPENDENCE OUR MISSION 2017 Matches REGION Signature Events of the Year Community Impact 17 18 22 OUR FINANCIALS OUR BOARDS LOOKING BACK 2017 Financial Boards of A Year in Results Directors Photos VISION & VALUES OUR MISSION: To provide children facing adversity with strong and enduring, professionally supported one-to-one mentoring relationships that change their lives for the better, forever. OUR VISION: All children have opportunity, access and hope to achieve their full potential. OUR VALUES: We respect all people, and are open-minded. We embrace collaboration and great teamwork. We exercise transparency and are accountable for results. We are a learning organization, eager to improve. We advocate for the welfare of children 3 4 A LETTER FROM OUR CEO Dear Friends, As I reflect on 2017, I can’t help but feel enormous gratitude for having the responsibility of running an organization tasked to address our nation’s most pressing issue, our children’s future. Labeled as the poorest big city in America, citizens of Greater Philadelphia come face-to-face with the challenges of poverty, crime, poor educational outcomes, economic inequality, and social injustice. These issues negatively impact children in our communities. Make no mistake, our children are under siege. Fortunately, volunteers, Bigs, and concerned citizens are willfully standing on the front lines, advocating on behalf of young people providing real solutions to help them overcome life’s challenges and succeed along their journey called “Life”. Our guiding principle is to ensure that all young people have opportunity, access and hope to achieve their full potential. Our formula is simple and has not changed since 1915. We match a caring adult volunteer with a child, and provide ongoing mentoring support so that the relationship can flourish. Each year every one of the Littles we match to a volunteer Big Brother or Big Sister embarks on their own individual journey that takes them beyond their present circumstances and helps them move towards becoming the best possible version of themselves. As a supporter of Big Brothers Big Sisters, you have been a part of each Little’s journey. It truly takes a village. Thanks to your support, we’ve changed the trajectory of thousands of Littles and their families. Together, we’re a collective of everyday defenders, stepping out of our bubbles to make sure the littlest among us have the biggest possible futures. Changing the world for a child doesn’t take a superhero. It takes showing up, being an example through consistent action and active listening. These small but simple steps make a big impact. Looking forward, we intend to transform our organization by investing in infrastructure and technology. Our goal is to set a foundation for our future with modern tools that will enable us become a more constituent-centric, data-driven, digitally oriented organization. Thereby allowing us the ability to efficiently serve more children across our region. Life’s a journey no one should have to travel alone. And thanks to your generosity and caring, 3,452 children will have someone riding along with them. I thank you for your support this year and in years past. I ask for your continued support as we rededicate ourselves to this noble and critical mission. This journey is ours together. MARCUS ALLEN Chief Executive Officer Big Brothers Big Sisters Independence Region 5 OUR YOUTH MENTORING PROGRAMS We offer two types of youth mentoring programs: Community-Based and School-Based. In 2017, we engaged 7,562 children and volunteers in these programs. COMMUNITY-BASED SITE-BASED MENTORING PROGRAMS MENTORING PROGRAMS Volunteers (Bigs) and their mentees Volunteers (Bigs) mentor school (Littles) meet on weekends or after students (Littles) during the day at school to enjoy activities, play their school or place of business sports, visit museums or just talk. Traditional Community-Based Beyond School WallsSM Mentoring Littles visit their Bigs at their Bigs and Littles engage in 1-to-1 workplace, giving children an outings and activities they both opportunity to experience the enjoy, 2-4 times per month. corporate world first-hand and to set goals for the future. Back on Track Philly Girls College Bigs Adult volunteers serve as Bigs College students are matched to justice-involved young girls, with elementary and middle offering a positive influence school students, and spend time through compassion and together at the Little’s school during guidance. lunchtime or after school. LGBTQ Mentoring Corporate Bigs Responsible and caring Bigs who Professionals in Center City identify as part of the LGBTQ Philadelphia mentor children at community mentor high school local charter schools once a week, Gender and Sexuality Alliances during lunchtime, throughout the (GSAs). school year. Mentor 2.0 (eMentoring) College-educated Bigs are paired with students at Parkway Center City High School for four years to help them navigate their college journey. Relationships are maintained mostly online. 6 Reed Smith - 2014 D. Newlin Fell School Our corporate BSW Partners, listed by company name, year started, and partner schools SEI - 2007 East Norriton Middle School AmeriHealth Caritas - 2012 Urban Outfitters - 2007 Widener Partnership Charter School Sharswood Elementary School Bentley Systems - 2008 US Attorney’s Office- 2011 Collegium Charter School Dr. Ethel Allen School BNY Mellon - 2013 Vertex - 2015 Stewart Middle School Eisenhower Science Technology Leadership Academy Cigna - 2006 VideoRay - 2013 William Dick Elementary School Pottstown Middle School Comcast - 2008 Wawa - 2006 Potter Thomas Elementary Highland Park Elementary School Exelon Corporation - 2008 Wells Fargo - 2012 Bancroft Elementary Feltonville School of Arts and Sciences FDJ Judges - 2016 Benjamin Franklin High School KeyBank - 2012 Bridgeport Elementary School Fox Rothschild - 2010 Waring Elementary School Our college partners, listed by university name, year started, and partner schools Gloucester Township - 2017 Glen Landing Middle School La Salle University - 2004 Hamilton Lane - 2009 Logan Elementary Mastery Charter – Shoemaker Campus Philadelphia University - 2010 Holman - 2017 Mifflin Elementary School Lawnside Elementary School Saint Joseph’s University - 2008 Janssen - 2016 Gompers Elementary, Victorino Boys & Girls Club, Eisenhower Science Technology Leadership Academy Heston Elementary School Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc. - 2016 Temple University - 2004 AB Day School People for People, Alliance for Progress Charter School, St. PECO - 2010 Malachy’s Elementary, Dunbar Elementary, Duckery Elementary, Logan Elementary School Independence Charter School, Meade School Philadelphia 76ers - 2017 University of Pennsylvania - 2003 Camden High School Lea School, KIPP - West Philadelphia, Samuel Powel Elementary School, Our Mother of Sorrows, St. Ignatius, Greenfield School, Philadelphia City Hall - 2013 Mitchell School Delaplaine McDaniel Elementary School University of the Sciences - 2014 Philadelphia Entrepreneurs - 2016 Comegys Elementary School, Mitchell School Carver High School of Engineering & Science Ursinus College - 2009 Publicis/ Digitas Health Media - 2015 Barkley Elementary School Martin Luther King Jr. High School QVC - 2008 Renaissance Academy 7 REACHING MORE YOUTH WITH NEW PROGRAMS The communities we serve in Greater Philadelphia and Southern New Jersey are facing unprecedented challenges due to the eff ects of economic inequality and poverty. As we engineer for the future, it becomes increasingly important that we adapt and innovate to serve the youth who need us most. In that vain, we are excited to announce new programs which adress some of the most diffi cult to reach populations. BACK ON TRACK PHILLY GIRLS When youth enter the juvenile system, they become crime and expand their opportunities for success. We provide statistically vulnerable to a criminal lifestyle and limited ongoing training to our adult volunteer mentors and carefully educational and occupational opportunities. The Defender match them with justice-involved girls, ages 11-18, that Association represents over 5,000 children processed through have committed mild off enses. Mentors and mentees meet the juvenile justice system each year, and many of these 2-4 times monthly for at least 12 months for fun activities, children will return back to the system less they are presented sporting events, museum visits, and more. with a strong role model. Under the guidance of capable and compassionate mentoring In partnership with the Defense Association of Philadelphia, fi gure, we want to help give our region’s girls get back on the we have created The Back on Track Philly Girls program to track of success and divert them from a potential cycle of guide our region’s female youth away from a potential life of entering in and out of the juvenile system. LGBTQ MENTORING It is our core belief that supportive mentorships are the of the LGBTQ and are 28 or older, serve as advisors to the key to helping our youth facing adversity prosper. We schools’ GSAs. These advisors regularly attend meetings for dutifully serve our region’s struggling children, and it the duration of at least one academic year, and act as a source is no secret that an unfortunate number of our LGBTQ of comfort and guidance
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Big Brother House Is Watching You Ed Hollis, Edinburgh College of Art, Edinburgh, UK Andy Milligan, Duncan of Jordanstone College of Art & Design, UK
    Big Brother House The Big Brother House is Watching You Ed Hollis, Edinburgh College of Art, Edinburgh, UK Andy Milligan, Duncan of Jordanstone College of Art & Design, UK Abstract: The transitory celebrities who compete in Big Brother occupy the arena of their competition agog and open mouthed, for while Big Brother is, apparently, about the contestants, the real star of the reality show is the House in which it takes place. The Big Brother House is a place of mirrors concealing hidden eyes, disembodied voices and multiple voyeurs. Rather than granted refuge in this house, its occupants are exposed in a crazy cottage where Orwell meets vaudeville; and prison cells or luxuriant dens appear overnight installed by mischievous pixies. The BB House is the antithesis of Bachelard’s vertically ordered Oneiric Axis of nightmarish cellar, formal, domestic ‘middle kingdom’, and the dream space of the attic. The Big Brother house is horizontally layered but fabricated, (to build and to lie). The Big Brother House is a model in extremis of what contemporary domestic interior has become. Like a Foucaulvian heterotopia it is an hermetic, apparently complete model of occupancy. Indeed there is no exterior to this house, which is both closed-off and opened-up through live digital streaming, RSS feeds, and text updates. As such the BB House reveals surrealist tendencies: the mirrors are evocative of Magritte; the windows are for the voyeur not external vista; the BB occupants and the TV viewers are passive idle loafers. In this respect, the Big Brother House reflects the spectacular model homes that have adorned expos from the Great to the Ideal Home exhibitions, from Peter and Alison Smithson’s House of the Future (1956) to Archigram’s 1990 Automated House (1967).
    [Show full text]
  • Big Brother As Ritual Event
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by LSE Research Online Nick Couldry Playing for celebrity: Big Brother as ritual event Article (Accepted version) (Refereed) Original citation: Couldry, Nick (2002) Playing for celebrity: Big Brother as ritual event. Television & new media, 3 (3), pp. 283-293. DOI: 10.1177/152747640200300304 © 2002 SAGE Publications Ltd This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/17652/ Available in LSE Research Online: September 2013 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s final accepted version of the journal article. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. PLAYING FOR CELEBRITY: BIG BROTHER AS RITUAL EVENT NICK COULDRY Although Big Brother in the UK is now two series old, with a third series planned for 2002, there is a special reason for concentrating, as I do here, on the first Big Brother series broadcast in the UK by Channel Four (July-September, 2000, hereafter ‘BBUK1’).
    [Show full text]
  • Adjudication of Ofcom Content Sanctions Committee
    Ofcom Content Sanctions Committee Consideration of sanction against Channel Four Television Corporation in respect of its service Channel 4. 1 For Breaches of the Ofcom Broadcasting Code: • Rule 2.3 – Broadcasters must when applying generally accepted standards ensure that material which may cause offence is justified by the context; and • Rule 1.3 – Children must also be protected by appropriate scheduling from unsuitable material. On 15, 17, 18, 19 January 2007 Decision To direct Channel Four (and S4C) to broadcast a statement of Ofcom’s findings in a form determined by Ofcom immediately before the start of the broadcast of the first programme of the eighth series of Big Brother on Channel 4; immediately before the start of the broadcast of the first re- versioned programme of the eighth series of Big Brother on Channel 4; and immediately before the start of the broadcast of the programme in which the first eviction from the eighth series of Big Brother occurs on Channel 4. 1 This sanction also applies to Sianel Pedwar Cymru (“S4C”) which transmits Channel 4’s (Celebrity) Big Brother series on its service. 1 Contents Section Page 1 Summary 3 2 Background 6 3 Legal Framework 8 4 Issues raised with Channel Four and Channel Four’s Response 12 5 Ofcom’s Adjudication: Introduction 36 6 Not In Breach 42 7 Resolved 55 8 In Breach 57 9 Sanctions Decision 66 2 1 Summary 1.1 On the basis detailed in the Decision, under powers delegated from the Ofcom Board to Ofcom’s Content Sanctions Committee (“the Committee”), the Committee has decided to impose a statutory sanction on Channel Four (and S4C) in light of the serious nature of the failure by Channel Four to ensure compliance with Ofcom’s Broadcasting Code.
    [Show full text]
  • Big Brother Nigeria Returns for Third Edition
    It’s BACK!!! Big Brother Nigeria returns for third edition November 2017 MultiChoice Nigeria has announced the return of Africa’s biggest reality television show, Big Brother Nigeria, for a third edition proudly sponsored by Payporte, Nigeria’s leading online store. The return of Big Brother Nigeria follows the critical success of the second edition which saw aspiring hip-hop artiste Efe Ejeba winning the coveted N25 million prize money and SUV after almost three months of drama, intrigue, betrayal and entertainment in the Big Brother house. Speaking on Big Brother Nigeria’s return, the Regional Director, M-Net West Africa, Wangi Mba-Uzoukwu said: “Around the globe, the Big Brother format remains one of the most popular genres of entertainment and this is also the case in Nigeria. The edition of Big Brother Nigeria was one of the most successful reality shows not just in Nigeria, but around the continent with a record number of votes and many of the housemates going on to pursue careers in entertainment. We are delighted to have the show return for a third edition and cannot wait for our audiences to once again tune in to experience all of the exciting entertainment that the show is sure to provide. Speaking further on the show’s return, the Managing Director, MultiChoice Nigeria, Mr. John Ugbe said: “At MultiChoice we take pride in providing the best entertainment available to viewers not just in Nigeria, but across Africa. The last Big Brother Nigeria was a tremendous success and prompted multiple queries about the show’s return.
    [Show full text]
  • Week 14 – Thursday, December 10, 2015
    WEEK 14 – THURSDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2015 MINNESOTA VIKINGS (8-4) AT ARIZONA CARDINALS (10-2) SERIES VIKINGS CARDINALS THURS. RECORD 11-9 8-20-2 SERIES LEADER 13-10 STREAKS 5 of past 6 COACHES VS. OPP. Mike Zimmer: 0-0 Bruce Arians: 0-0 LAST WEEK L 38-7 vs. Seahawks W 27-3 at Rams LAST GAME 10/21/12: Cardinals 14 at Vikings 21. Minnesota RB Adrian Peterson rushes for 153 yards & TD. Vikings S Harrison Smith records 31-yard INT-TD. LAST GAME AT SITE 12/6/09: Cardinals 30, Vikings 17. Arizona QB Kurt Warner throws for 285 yards & 3 TDs. Cardinals WR Larry Fitzgerald has 8 receptions for 143 yards & TD. REFEREE Gene Steratore BROADCAST NFLN (6:25 PM MT): Jim Nantz, Phil Simms, Tracy Wolfson (field reporter). Westwood One: Ian Eagle, Tim Ryan. SIRIUS: 88 (WW1), 83 (Min), 81 (Ari). XM: 88 (WW1), 225 (Min), 226 (Ari). STATS PASSING Bridgewater: 225-347-2398-8-8-83.0 Palmer: 267-418-3693 (1C)-29 (1C)-9-106.3 (1C) RUSHING Peterson: 245-1182 (1L)-4.8-8 (T2L) D. Johnson (R): 57-238-4.2-4 RECEIVING Diggs (R): 42-626-14.9-2 Fitzgerald: 91 (3L)-1047 (3C)-11.5-7 (T3C) OFFENSE 315.8 419.5 (1L) TAKE/GIVE +3 +3 DEFENSE 342.3 316.8 (3C) SACKS Griffen: 7.5 Freeney: 3 INTs Newman: 3 R. Johnson: 5 (T3L) PUNTING Locke: 41.7 Butler: 42.6 KICKING Walsh: 92 (20/23 PAT; 24/29 FG) Catanzaro: 108 (3L) (42/45 PAT; 22/24 FG) NOTES VIKINGS: QB TEDDY BRIDGEWATER has won 6 of past 8 starts…In past 3 meetings, RB ADRIAN PETERSON has 356 rush yards (118.7 per game), 425 scrimmage yards (141.7 per game) & 6 TDs (5 rush, 1 rec.).
    [Show full text]
  • Playing for Celebrity: Big Brother As Ritual Event
    Nick Couldry Playing for celebrity: Big Brother as ritual event Article (Accepted version) (Refereed) Original citation: Couldry, Nick (2002) Playing for celebrity: Big Brother as ritual event. Television & new media, 3 (3), pp. 283-293. DOI: 10.1177/152747640200300304 © 2002 SAGE Publications Ltd This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/17652/ Available in LSE Research Online: September 2013 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s final accepted version of the journal article. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. PLAYING FOR CELEBRITY: BIG BROTHER AS RITUAL EVENT NICK COULDRY Although Big Brother in the UK is now two series old, with a third series planned for 2002, there is a special reason for concentrating, as I do here, on the first Big Brother series broadcast in the UK by Channel Four (July-September, 2000, hereafter ‘BBUK1’). I want to think about Big Brother not as production or text, but as event stretched across multiple sites, an ‘instant condensation’ (Maffesoli, 1993: xv) of participation which was also an insistent representation of participation, in short, a media event.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nigerian State and the Problematic of Nigeria's Big Brother Role in Nigeria's Foreign Intervention Missions
    International Journal of Innovative Research in Education, Technology & Social Strategies p-ISSN: 2465-7298 | e-ISSN: 2467-8163 IJIRETSS Volume 6, Number 1 March, 2019 The Nigerian State and the Problematic of Nigeria's Big Brother Role in Nigeria's Foreign Intervention Missions Ugwu, Dave Ude Institute of Public Policy and Administration, IPPA University of Calabar – Nigeria A b s t r a c t igeria's foreign or external intervention policy is an important aspect of Nigerian's external relations whose primary focus is on the African Ncontinent. Within Nigeria's foreign intervention outreach, Nigeria relates as a Regional Power within the West African Sub-Region and as a Big Brother Nation and as a 'Giant of Africa' within the African continent. The reasons for this pride of place are arguably fascinating. Although Nigeria also has several external relations with the rest of the world, its role as a Big Brother Nation in Africa consist in an attachment to ensuring several fundamental objectives, chief among them of which are those of the following, namely, the political independence of African states from colonialism, the unity and mutual coexistence of African states, the political stability of the continent and the socio-economic and political progress of Africa. Achievement of these external objectives and missions has historically been an uphill task, and in consequences, some of the challenges or problematic of Big Brother Nigeria in leading the rest of Africa towards these objectives have been those of the following: the problematic of intelligence, strategic inefficiency, corruption, political and economic instability, and the dwindling image of the country in the global community.
    [Show full text]
  • In the High Court of Judicature at Bombay Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction in Its Commercial Division
    904.10.comipl.147.2020.doc dik IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1 OF 2020 AND LEAVE PETITION NO.56 OF 2020 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT (L) NO.147 OF 2020 Endemol Shine Nederland Producties B.V. & Ors....Applicants(Org. Plaintiffs) In the matter between: Endemol Shine Nederland Producties B.V. & Ors. …Plaintiffs Versus Andaman Xtasea Events Private Limited & Ors. …Defendants ---------------- Mr.Hiren Kamod, Advocate along with Mr.Vaibhav Keni, Ms. Doyel Sengupta Mattoo and Ms. Neha Iyer, Advocates i/b Legasis Partners, for the Applicants/Plaintiffs Mr. Lalit Sharma, representative of the Plaintiffs’ None for the Defendants ..... CORAM : B. P. COLABAWALLA, J. 21 FEBRUARY, 2020. P.C. : 1. Mr. Kamod, learned Advocate for the Plaintiffs submits that the papers and proceedings in the present matter have been duly served upon Defendant Nos.1 to 3 on 10th February, 2020 and Defendant No.4 on 8th February, 2020. An affdavit of service dated Pg 1 of 18 ::: Uploaded on - 24/02/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 24/02/2020 14:30:48 ::: 904.10.comipl.147.2020.doc 14th February, 2020 evidencing service of documents upon the Defendants was tendered before this Court on 14th February, 2020 and the same was taken on record. As per the order passed on 14th February, 2020, the Plaintiffs have given one more notice of this application to the Defendants vide emails dated 18th February, 2020. A copy of the said order dated 14th February, 2020 is also served upon the Defendants through email.
    [Show full text]
  • Reality TV As a Trigger of Everyday Political Talk in the Net-Based Public Sphere
    This is a repository copy of Reality TV as a trigger of everyday political talk in the net-based public sphere. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/113489/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Graham, T orcid.org/0000-0002-5634-7623 and Hajru, A (2011) Reality TV as a trigger of everyday political talk in the net-based public sphere. European Journal of Communication, 26 (1). pp. 18-32. ISSN 0267-3231 https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323110394858 © 2011, The Author(s). This is an author produced version of a article, published in European Journal of Communication. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy. Reuse Items deposited in White Rose Research Online are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved unless indicated otherwise. They may be downloaded and/or printed for private study, or other acts as permitted by national copyright laws. The publisher or other rights holders may allow further reproduction and re-use of the full text version. This is indicated by the licence information on the White Rose Research Online record for the item. Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Reality TV as a Trigger of Everyday Political Talk in the Net-Based Public Sphere Todd Graham and Auli Harju Please cite as: Graham, T., & Harju, A.
    [Show full text]
  • Reality Games En España
    6. Reality games en España: View metadata, citation and similarcrónica papers at core.ac.uk de un éxito anunciado brought to you by CORE provided by Repositorio Documental de la Universidad de Valladolid Belén Monclús Griss1. Unversitat Autónoma de Barcelona Miguel Vicente Mariño. Universidad de Valladolid En 2000, Gran Hermano irrumpía en el ecosistema audiovisual español como un vendaval y abría las puertas a un nuevo formato televisivo, el reality game, que se ha convertido en un elemento habitual en las pantallas españolas durante la última década. La aproximación de las cámaras a la vida cotidiana del telespec- tador fue un proceso lento pero continuo, que ha mostrado escasos síntomas de agotamiento a pesar de las críticas recibidas. Los debates éticos que poblaron los medios de comunicación y las conversaciones cotidianas terminaron por langui- decer ante unos índices de audiencia que justifi can, según los dominantes crite- rios de racionalidad económica, su propagación por las cadenas televisivas (Prado, 1999; Bueno, 2002). Este capítulo profundiza sobre la evolución del formato televisivo de los juegos de telerrealidad, perfi lando el recorrido seguido desde 2000 hasta la actualidad. Son ocho años muy intensos, presididos por una veloz transformación formal y por una constante diversifi cación temática de las propuestas, que han ido distri- buyendo tanto aplastantes éxitos (Operación Triunfo, ¡Mira quién baila!) como mediocres programas que pasaron sin pena ni gloria por las parrillas televisivas. La audiencia ha sido, una vez más, el juez implacable, obligando a los profesio- nales de la televisión a reinventar constantemente el formato en un entorno alta- mente competitivo, donde los reality games han pasado de ser la excepción a ser la norma en las programaciones, proporcionando argumentos para sostener la hipó- tesis de que, quizás, la telerrealidad se esté convirtiendo en la tele-normalidad.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dynamics of Race, Class and Gender in the UK Big Brother Jade-Shilpa Row
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Goldsmiths Research Online !∀ # ∃ %& ∋ ∋ ( )∗ + # , ∀ −./. !∀ # ∃ %& ∋ ∋ ( )∗ 0 ( 1 2 ∀ # ,3 ∀ ∗∀44 ∗ 45/.64 # ∗∗ , # 3 # 7 8 ∗ 3 ∗ ∗∗ + # ∗ ∃ ∗ ∃ ∗∗ ∃ 3 %& ∗ ∗ ∃ # ∗∗ , # ∗ 3 ∗∗ ∗ # ∗ ∃ ∗ ∃ ∃ 9 ∗ # : ; ∗ ∃# # 3 ∗3 ∗ ∃ ∗ 4 ∗∀44 ∗ ) # 9 # ∀ 3) ∗ < Language, Power and Reality TV: the dynamics of race, class and gender in the UK Big Brother Jade-Shilpa row Rosalyn George, Goldsmiths, University of London, [email protected] Heather Mendick, Goldsmiths, University of London, [email protected] Abstract: Reality TV is often presented as an unproblematic social phenomenon which is consumed and digested by an unthinking and unsophisticated general public. We, however, argue that Reality TV is both a pervasive and important cultural form, and as such it is vital that researchers and teachers engage with it. We return to the controversial UK Big Brother 2007 arguments involving Jade Goody and Shilpa Shetty. We explore how the dynamics of class, gender and race played out in this case. Using this example, we look at how celebrity culture, ideas of truth and dominant discourses of White working-class culture position both the housemates and their audiences. We further argue that the coverage of the event foreclosed any discussions of White middle-class racism by drawing on discourses that denigrate the White working-class. In this paper we argue that Reality TV is an important social phenomenon as evidenced by the amount of controversy and debate that this genre generates. It is also a site of pleasure for both of us writing this paper and provides us with an intermingling of emotional pleasure and academic challenge.
    [Show full text]
  • PHILADELPHIA EAGLES OAKLAND RAIDERS RAIDERS 13 Agholor, Nelson WR No
    EAGLES RAIDERS 4 Jake Elliott K PHILADELPHIA EAGLES 2 Giorgio Tavecchio K 7 Nate Sudfeld QB 3 EJ Manuel QB vs. 8 Donnie Jones P 4 Derek Carr QB 9 Nick Foles QB OAKLAND RAIDERS 7 Marquette King P 10 Mack Hollins WR MONDAY, DECEMBER 25, 2017 • 8:30 PM 10 Seth Roberts WR 13 Nelson Agholor WR LINCOLN FINANCIAL FIELD 15 Michael Crabtree WR 14 Marcus Johnson WR 16 Johnny Holton WR 17 Alshon Jeffery WR 18 Connor Cook QB EAGLES OFFENSE EAGLES DEFENSE 18 Shelton Gibson WR 19 Isaac Whitney WR 21 Patrick Robinson CB WR 17 Alshon Jeffery 14 Marcus Johnson DE 75 Vinny Curry 96 Derek Barnett 51 Steven Means 21 Sean Smith CB 23 Rodney McLeod S LT 72 Halapoulivaati Vaitai 73 Isaac Seumalo DT 93 Tim Jernigan 94 Beau Allen 23 Dexter McDonald CB 24 Corey Graham S LG 61 Stefen Wisniewski 67 Chance Warmack DT 91 Fletcher Cox 97 Destiny Vaeao 98 Elijah Qualls 24 Marshawn Lynch RB 26 Jaylen Watkins S C 62 Jason Kelce 61 Stefen Wisniewski 26 Shalom Luani S DE 55 Brandon Graham 56 Chris Long 50 Bryan Braman 27 Malcolm Jenkins S RG 79 Brandon Brooks 73 Isaac Seumalo 27 Reggie Nelson S OLB 95 Mychal Kendricks 54 Kamu Grugier-Hill 47 Nathan Gerry 28 Wendell Smallwood RB RT 65 Lane Johnson 66 Will Beatty 29 David Amerson CB 29 LeGarrette Blount RB MLB 59 Joe Walker 57 Dannell Ellerbe 30 Jalen Richard RB TE 86 Zach Ertz 87 Brent Celek 88 Trey Burton 30 Corey Clement RB OLB 53 Nigel Bradham 52 Najee Goode 32 Antonio Hamilton CB WR 13 Nelson Agholor 10 Mack Hollins 31 Jalen Mills CB CB 33 DeAndré Washington RB WR 82 Torrey Smith 10 Mack Hollins 18 Shelton Gibson 31
    [Show full text]