Dubsmash is a video message app that allows you to record yourself to a pre-selected synced sound clip. You can record yourself in a small mini video saying famous movie lines, singing songs, animal sounds, speeches, TV , internet hits, and many more. You can save the video to your phone, in fact that is the only way you can save the video. Then you can upload the video, to Facebook, Youtube,Snapchat, Instagram, Vine, or even via text. They do not yet have a page where you can upload your videos to the public, and view other dub videos. The owners of the app wanted the videos to be personal, for friends and family. While still leaving the option for you to upload your video on any social medium, this app is only for Ios and Android.

The app first came on the scene November 19, 2014. The founders of dubsmash are Jonas Druppel, Ronald Grenke, and Daniel Taschik. Seven days after they released the app, in their hometown of Germany it had reached number 1. Then after that 29 other countries pushed the app to number 1 as well, countries such as the UK, France, and Holland. Co- Founder Ronald Grenke stated,

“A first strong indicator for a hit was reaching the number one position in Germany within a week after the official release. Repeating this situation in a different markets confirmed that Dubsmash can be internationally successful”. 


The app is still being upgraded, new features are coming to the app. The app will improve the sound discovery, add sound boards where you can upload your own sound and share as well as subscribe to other boards. This helps to make the displayed content way more relevant and personal to each individual user. They are also considering making a different app where you can upload and watch videos from other dubbers. The founders of dubsmash had made a previous app  called Starlize that was not successful. The makers thought that the app was to complicated for most people although it was similar to dubsmash in certain ways.They learned a lot from the failed app and that’s where they realized they wanted to keep the app more personal.

Dubsmash started receiving attention from the media appearing on Good Morning Philadelphia, CBS, and other local news station across America.On the air the explained how the app works, and everyone had  made their own videos.This is a clear example of taste making, and the news are the taste makers.  Jack Lule wrote an article on taste makers, the article is called Understanding Media and Culture. In the article Jack says “Historically,Pop culture has been closely associated with mass media that encourage the adoption of certain trends. We see the media as taste makers people or institutions that shape the way others think, eat, listen, drink, dress and more. Taste makers can have a huge influence”.


Dubsmash also became known more in the USA, because they have a large selection of internet sensations. From small sound clips of Donna Gooding  being arrested saying  ” POP hold it down” , or who can forget the cute little boy “You think  I am cute yes or no” and then he gives a little laugh. Songs from Nicki Minaj, Lil Wayne, U2, Meatloaf, etc. The famous speech from our former president Bill Clinton ” I did not have sexual relations with that woman” or the most recent speech from our current president Obama ” I have no more elections to win. I know because I won them all”.

I think that this app is Pop culture totally because, its fun and silly. You get to relive things that use to make you laugh. You can act and be certain character, animal, or make silly sounds. Then just upload them  on other social sites and laugh with your friends. In today’s time a lot of like to record silly things that we do on a daily basis,  thats why sites like snapchat, vine, insatgram are so successful. We post them for the world to see in hopes that one of or silly videos may go viral. I think that some people would love to become an internet sensations overnight. The app is simple anyone can use it, all age ranges. With the large sound collections ranging from 80s hits to the new millennium anyone can find a sound clip that they would want to use.


“4k’s marketing team gets replaced by that one neighbor who has a 60 inch”

The perceivable distance from SD and HD was huge, although 4k is technically a similar jump in terms of detail, the amount of perceivable detail in a 4k shot would be akin to Full hd shot unless you were close enough to identify individual pixels. (which in most cases is too close)

The perceivable distance from SD and HD was huge, although 4k is technically a similar jump in terms of detail, the amount of perceivable detail in a 4k shot would be akin to Full hd shot unless you were close enough to identify individual pixels. (which in most cases is too close)

4k or QHD, as it’s called by monitor and television manufacturers, is being made out as a pretty big deal. The amount of detail in 4k footage is a whopping 8 times that of full 1080p HD. But, this doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll notice it. The reason why HD and Full HD were big deals in early millennial pop culture isn’t because it was new and expensive, (like 4k is for now) but because the detail in the image was drastically different than that of VGA(640×400) and PAL (768×576) which simply couldn’t manage to create lifelike images. Now that HD can create realistic scenes, what advantages does 4k offer us?

Older resolutions could not display enough information to create a realistic and non pixelated images, at 8x the detail of SD, HD created crisp images with adequate color out far exceeding the blurry and pixelated images of SD

Older resolutions could not display enough information to create a realistic and non pixelated images, at 8x the detail of SD, HD created crisp images with adequate color out far exceeding the blurry and pixelated images of SD

When introduced the Full HD standard provided enough pixels to offer amazingly vivid and crisp images to the eye, through means of increased resolution. HD made a difference no matter if it was a handheld device, Tv, or computer monitor. It was simply better than previous standards and their respective resolutions which had failed to create crisp images. Although 4k is 8 times more detailed than Full HD, it does not seem as big of a jump as SD was to HD(which was also around 8x the detail). [Denison] This is because HD already offers us crisp images, the increased pixelation of 4k is largely unnoticed unless the viewer is watching a large screen at a very close. This is because most devices do not benefit from the added resolution as the eye can only perceive fine details of a few mm before the mind literally removes it. [Diaz] Because of this though 4k can be used to make even larger televisions and screens meant to be viewed up close. This is why many reviewers note that there is not a great difference when watching 4k TV shows over full HD.

Retina display test. The black and white lines are only 1 pixel wide and hence only show up on displays that have visible pixelation at normal viewing distances.

Retina display test. The black and white lines are only 1 pixel wide and hence only show up on displays that have visible pixelation at normal                                               viewing distances.                           NOTE: this is not a working test. follow the link if you wanna try your display!

This same idea is expressed through the science behind Apple’s retina line which holds that 326ppi is enough to fool the eye to not perceive pixels up to 6 inches close to your face. [Bayon] The math behind this depends largely on the size of display and average viewing distance, you can see if your display is “Retina” quality or not through this retina test. Now that you have a better idea of the science behind pixel quality, imagine a Tv with a high PPI (pixels per inch) that is around 6 feet away? The amount of information your eyes would receive would be about as much as Full HD. This means that video display technologies have reached a “perception filter”. The scientific principles of this can be explained through what is called the nyquist limit. An example of which can be described in terms of Audio Standards. The CD studio standard for sampling a digital recording is 44.1KHz or about 2 times the amount of frequencies a human can hear.  Since humans can hear up to 22khz the sampling rate is 44.1k so the wave can fluctuate the full 22khz  in both directions. Now there are newer standards such as 48k, 96k, and 192k that claim drastic advantages over the 44.1 format. Although the added resolution is ideal for pitch or time stretching of the audio in a professional environment, we will never technically hear the advantages of the added resolution. The reason why 44.1k was used as a sampling rate for music isn’t because of some patent or inventor, but rather we cannot physically hear any frequencies not between 20-22,000 Hz. In fact most humans can barely reach 15khz before drop out. Now for the first time, we have reached that level in video. Where the amount of data we can display exceeds the amount we can perceive. This wont stop manufacturers from marketing to you the same plea they did during the jump from SD to HD though.

4k holds about 8x more pixels over full HD, but at an average viewing distance of 6ft most probably won't even notice the changes.

4k holds about 8x more pixels over full HD, but at an average viewing distance of 6ft most probably won’t even notice the changes.

Now 4k isn’t totally pointless as TV’s over 60 inches will benefit from the extra pixels, if only very little. On the production side 4k is both a fading gift and a nightmare. 4k means producers can capture a scene in 4k and effectively crop close scenes of areas zoomed 8x in the shot.  [Cronk] Allowing producers great freedom when preparing scenes with non-linear editing. The problem with this is, as the push for 4k goes on producers won’t be able to use the amount of HD shots they cropped from a 4k video because now more consumers are expecting native 4k content all around. Although up sampling HD to 4k will certainly do many consumers have a negative annotation around this because they bought a new hi-res screen for the new hi res content. 4k is a nightmare for producers also in the fact that 4k implementations have been weaker to catch on than HD, forcing many film companies who made the jump early to face many hurdles such as lack of distribution, space difficulties, as well as costly displays and cpu/gpu combos required for 4k playback. [Q Artis]

So why is 4k not doing as well as HD did when it debuted? Well that is most likely due to content distribution, 4k screens have cheaper options than HD did at first but very little content to play. Of course consumers may also realize the limited advantage of having one, as HD already provides adequate color, full audio spectrum coverage, and realistic images without pixelation in most situations. 4k just doesn’t have as much (noticeable) bang for their buck.

I believe the current Pop technology culture definition that surrounds the standard is the reinforcement theory.  As explained by sociologist Joseph Klapper; “Klapper argued that people’s attitudes, beliefs and behavior were more likely to be influenced by their family, schools, communities and religious institutions. According to Klapper, the only time the media can influence people is when the media introduces a new idea or concept..” This is especially true for 4k as manufactures frame the technology as revolutionary, yet the masses have yet to catch on. Rather they are more likely to upgrade to modernize their home or impress their neighbors, family, or coworkers. This goes to show they are more directly influenced by other people  than the mass media. 4k will catch on but for now repeated attempts to frame 4k as more radical jump than HD to SD are just plain wrong. Despite the marketing used it’s evident that the consumers are more likely to use the new standard as those close to them utilize it as well, effectively reinforcing the consumers own thoughts about the necessarily of 4k.

Q Artis, Anthony. “Cinematography- The Problem With 4K.” Mastering Film. N.p., 12 Nov. 2014. Web. 08 Mar. 2015.

Cronk, Steve. “The Benefits of 4K Video.” Aberro Creative. Aberro, 17 Nov. 2014. Web. 08 Mar. 2015.

Diaz, Jesus. “The Cutting Edge of a Knife Is Totally Invisible to the Naked Eye.”Sploid. Gizmodo, 23 Dec. 2014. Web. 08 Mar. 2015.

Bayon, David B. “The Science of Retina Displays.” PC PRO. N.p., 5 Oct. 2014. Web. 08 Mar. 2015.

Denison, Caleb. “Yes, You Really Can See a Difference between 4K and 1080p.” Digital Trends. N.p., 31 Oct. 2014. Web. 08 Mar. 2015.

Parks and Recreation: A Feat in Satire

Starting in 2009 and coming to a close less than a week ago, after six years of airtime, Parks and Recreation, a television show on the NBC Network, featuring some of the currently, and previously, biggest-named actors and comedians (such as: Chris Pratt, Aziz Ansari, Amy Poehler, and Rob Lowe), among countless popular guest stars, has accumulated a rather large and dedicated fanbase over it’s years airing, partly due to the cast and partly due to the creative joke writing in the show.

parks and rec ben

In gaining its large fanbase, Parks & Rec has built up an intricate story over the years, but building its foundation with political and social satire, with absolutely brilliant writing, hilariously commenting on all types of current issues. For the most part of the show, the story revolves around Leslie Knope (played by Amy Poehler), a citizen of Pawnee, Indiana and a government worker first assigned to the Parks and Recreation department. Leslie’s story also involves her nine other friends and co-workers, who, altogether are complete polar opposites of one another; however, as seen throughout the show, they typically come together as one cohesive unit.

Throughout the last few seasons of Parks & Rec, viewers have seen many worldly famous American political figures with guest spots, such as: Vice President Joe Biden, First Lady Michelle Obama, Newt Gingrich, John McCain, and plenty more. The use of figures like Joe Biden and Michelle Obama also puts an extremely human side to them, making them appear as something that’s not just a decision maker, but also a human being with a sense of humor, while also drawing attention to the show to people who normally wouldn’t care about a satirical program. In having these powerful political figures/tastemakers on the show, Parks & Rec broke boundaries on how to promote a satirical show such as itself. It’s been done on talk shows millions of times, but never, not that I can recall, in a sitcom.

Pop culture and American media are inextricably linked—it’s no coincidence that Jenny Lind, the Beatles, and American Idol were each promoted using a then-new technology—photography for Lind; television for the Beatles; the Internet and text messaging for American Idol. For as long as mass media have existed in the United States, they have helped to create and fuel mass crazes, skyrocketing celebrities, and pop culture manias of all kinds. Whether through newspaper advertisements, live television broadcasts, or integrated Internet marketing, media industry “tastemakers” help to shape what we care about. – Jack Lule

It seems as though, to build its fanbase and appearance in pop culture, Parks & Rec has clearly utilized social media outlets and tastemakers, along with political tastemakers. For example: Barack and Michelle Obama are two of the most important people in the United State, with a strong presence on social media, enabling the word about Michelle Obama on Parks & Rec to get out fast and generate an audience for the show.

Among its political credibility and media presence, Parks & Rec also has a cult internet following, with million of memes gifs, youtube videos, and tumblr fan pages. Although someone hasn’t watched more than an episode of the show, a lot of the times they’ll have seen a video on youtube of the hilarious blooper reels released with the season DVDs.


In closing, I believe that, although Parks and Recreation is now off the air, it will never be forgotten and will be looked at as a landmark in satire and comedy, hopefully paving the way for shows like it to come. And if you haven’t watched Parks & Rec yet, then I hope this article and the clips will persuade you to watch it. It’s certainly worth the invested time. If not for me, or even yourself, watch it for Ron Swanson.