This idea provides interesting theory as to how consumers attach authenticity to the things they purchase. I can use this idea to supplement a paragraph where I discuss why exactly people are on the "search for authenticity".

This Science daily article seems to be a paraphrase/summary of a larger research study. Science Daily hits on the main points of the study and presents the information in a way that would appeal to their readers.

"...on a particular object for sale at a particular price, and more on aura and setting, promising consumers not single products but new identities and new ways to live"(could not annotate across pages)

This fact could provide excellent motive and background to my paper's claim re. food services reinforcing cultural stereotypes by making their dining experience catered to customers expectation of culture.

For Outka to attempt to define authenticity and distinguish between these two synonyms of authenticity serves as great theory for the group to better use authenticity as a broad tool kit in own essays. Her particular stance on commodified authenticity is one of "skepticism and attraction" in that it can "distort history and present present crass imitation of something valuable." This perspective of authenticity will edify the group's use of the authenticity tool-kit.

This is an interesting idea that highlights the effect of time on an actors role in the authenticity building process.

This portion/citation from the essay provides good background to my argument-- that firms who feign cultural authenticity to satisfy customers’ distorted generalizations of a culture are perpetuating the acceptance of stereotyping in the customer’s’ society.

Peterson cites Beverland's article not only to establish a background for one of his authenticity arguments but also to motivate the reader to find interest in the subject at hand- the mechanics behind and the implications of socially constructed authenticity.

Hate speech seems like a common thing in violent rap. Author argues violent rap should be recognized as art in the public's eye and the court's eye. Should hate speech also have that option? Are violent threats more ok than hate speech, strictly in regards to being art?

Tangent: starting sentences with "as a x " usually ends up pushing some stereotype that may not be true for every x. Are stereotypes necessarily a bad thing?

Anyways, Morgan is able to look past the artificially macho lyrics of sexist rap to examine what really matters--the true motivations and feelings of the artists behind it all.

Hyden uses the evidence in his article to pose this fascinating implication about the future of music. I do not know how Hyden feels toward this implication, but I do not like the sound of it.

Does this mean that all successful poems should not be understood completely when they are first heard, and that they should be tediously decomposed until they are?

Sort of like identifying with a message someone else is saying that's not on the forefront of your mind.