essay 2 final

Bryce Quigley

Eric Leake

Writ 1122

March 11, 2013

What To Do With Guns

The second amendment, adopted by the United States on December 15, 1791 in order to give the citizens of America the right to bear arms. Now over two hundred years later this amendment has come under a lot of scrutiny. People are questioning if it is a good law and whether it needs to be changed immediately. The idea to change the second amendment is very controversial and over the past few months has been a major topic in the political scene. The following follows the spider web effect the Sandy Hook shooting has had on the second amendment.

            December 14, 2012, twenty-six children as well as adults are gunned down at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newton Connecticut. The shooter was identified as Adam Lanza a 24-year-old man whose mom worked at the school. It was reported that Lanza had three guns as he entered the school (NewsTimes). This shooting event can be identified as the day that started the recent gun control outburst. Some say gun control issues goes back to a shooting in Colorado when a man killed twelve and injured 58 others using high-powered weaponry. These first reports were often inaccurate as the reports came out in a quick and frantic manner.

 Nonetheless these recent shooting have caused a long chain of events to spur. Just four days after the Sandy Hook massacre, Fox news showed gun prices and ammunition prices rising significantly(Fox News). People immediately started buying guns, all because they were worried that soon they would not be able to under the protection of the second amendment. People are clearly scared that something like this may happen again. When is does happen more people want to be prepared in order to stop something terrible.

            December 20, 2012, a report is released by PewResearch stating the new change in opinion on gun control. It stated that as of December 19 about 49% of the us population believe that controlling gun ownership is a must while only 42% believed that gun rights should be protected, 9% were not opinionated. These beliefs are almost equally divided and because of that this topic becomes extremely controversial. In order to repeal a constitutional amendment there needs to be two thirds support in both the house of representative and the Senate. With the current split in beliefs this would be impossible. Furthermore 42% believe strongly in gun control while 37% believe strongly in keeping the right of the second amendment(Pew Research Center for the People and the Press RSS). With two sides so separated as well as holding strong beliefs it can be immediately seen that this is going to cause issues in the government. This form of reporting was purely statistics. However the information may have been skewed depending on who/ where they polled the information.

            December 21, 2012, the National Rifle Association makes a statement regarding their own beliefs of on gun control. In the statement a NRA representative is quoted saying “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,’’. The NRA thoroughly believes that the only way to stop these massacres, such as the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, is some other officer or good citizen with a gun. If there are more armed citizens with good intentions, they will be able to stop the people who are looking to kill. The National Rifle Association has gone under scrutiny during the new conference there were “two interruptions by gun-control proponents unfurling signs and shouting “NRA, stop killing our children’’ and “NRA has blood on its hands.’’ People are very upset with the current control laws and they are making it clear by speaking outwardly about it. There are very strong opposing viewpoints and it was made clear during this news conference.

            January 15, 2013, President Obama makes his first official address regarding the laws on gun control and the possible future. The address proposes an assault weapon ban as well as background checks for gun buyers. "There are specific legislative actions that he will continue to call on Congress to take, including the assault weapons ban, including a measure to ban high-capacity magazine clips, including an effort to close the very big loopholes in the background check system in our country,”( Reuters.). This comes exactly one month after the Newtown elementary school shooting. This proposal was Barack’s first official announcement on gun policies since coming into office just over 4 years ago. This announcement was very important because it shows that the president is recognizing that there is an issue with current gun control. This policy would not fully remove the second amendment but it would serve as a system of regulation. According to the Obama administration large clips and assault weapons are not necessary for normal citizens to own or use. The second amendment, a 200 year law, is getting redefined and is in jeopardy of being changed. President Obama, being a democrat has very liberal views on policies like this. Republicans and Democrats are the most separated in history right now and this new controversy is adding to that separation.

            January 16, 2013, the National Rifle Association responds directly to Obama’s proposal on regulating weapons. A NRA representative was quoted saying "Barack Obama, Joe Biden and their gun ban allies in Congress only want to BLAME you, VILIFY you, BULLY you, and STRIP you of your Second Amendment freedoms,"( The Huffington Post). The battle between the two sides gets heated. It is no longer stating beliefs, but this is rather a direct attack from the NRA on Obama. They both want to protect citizens as best as possible but they have completely different ideas on how to execute that. The National Rifle Association also released a commercial calling Obama an “elitist hypocrite” because his children have their own bodyguards while normal children have to go to school unprotected. The NRA was clearly upset with the proposal Obama gave and they were not going to let it go without a response.

            Febuary 12, 2013, Obama gives the State of The Union address to the country. This is where he updates the country on current policies and tell the citizens what the government is doing. During the address Obama faces the issue on gun control. He made an emotional speech saying, "Each of these proposals deserves a vote in Congress," he said. "If you want to vote no, that’s your choice. But these proposals deserve a vote. Because in the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand birthdays, graduations and anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun." This proposal allows for a democratic vote in the house and senate. Obama want to make a fair decision in the policy regarding gun control. During the speech Obama also makes it clear his stance on the issue. He tells a story about a little girl that went

 "One of those we lost was a young girl named Hadiya Pendleton. She was 15 years old. She loved Fig Newtons and lip gloss. She was a majorette. She was so good to her friends, they all thought they were her best friend. Just three weeks ago, she was here, in Washington, with her classmates, performing for her country at my inauguration. And a week later, she was shot and killed in a Chicago park after school, just a mile away from my house,". (The Huffington Post)

 The sentimental story gives a perspective on what gun control could actually solved if it were enacted. Obama even describes the girl so that the average parent or sibling could personally relate and feel an emotional connection to her death.

            March 2, 2013 and article is released by Fox news regarding gun control specifically in the state of Colorado. The gun control policy is not just controversial on the national level but it is also up for debate on the state level as well. As noted before Colorado had a mass shooting in a movie theatre and since then the state has been revaluating their policy. The bill calls for making  “it a crime to have magazines that can carry more than 15 rounds, with a stricter limit of eight for shotguns. People who own larger magazines now would be allowed to keep them.”( Fox News) Although this proposal is not extreme, it does call for change, which many people are opposed to. Gun control may have an economic effect as well; there is one gun company that is threatening to leave Colorado if the bill passes. This article from Fox News is written in a very liberal way. The reader could definitely understand that Fox was trying to describe why gun control would be productive.

            So far there is no definite policy regarding gun control. As of now the second amendment is safe and anyone eighteen or older is free to buy all the guns they would like. The conflicting sides have created a heated battle that may not be solved anytime soon. However, the policy is going to be voted on soon and those once legal guns may not be legal anymore. The policy that the government makes a decision one is going to have a lot of repercussions. It is unclear what direction the country is moving in at the moment. One thing that is clear is the country is separated when it comes to guns and even when a decision is made there are going to be some unhappy people one way or another.

Works Cited

"911 Sandy Hook Call Shows Early Confusion." NewsTimes. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

"After Newtown, Modest Change in Opinion about Gun Control." Pew Research Center for the People and the Press RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

"Company Will Move If Colorado Approves Gun Control." Fox News. FOX News Network, 02 Mar. 2013. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

"Gun Sales Surge after Connecticut Massacre." Fox News. FOX News Network, 18 Dec. 2012. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

Mason, Jeff. "Obama to Propose Sweeping Gun Control Measures Wednesday." Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 15 Jan. 2013. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

"Politicssource." Politicssource. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

Wilkie, Christina. "NRA Slams Obama Gun Control Proposal." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 16 Jan. 2013. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

Wilkie, Christina. "Obama State Of The Union Speech Demands Vote On Gun Control Bills." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 12 Feb. 2013. Web. 11 Mar. 2013.

writing the news and this class

Writing and the news... Well so far this class has certainly set a specific structure for me when it come to the news. Because of this writing class I started paying a bit more attention to the new whether it was just listening in on something someone was saying or even checking the interweb once every other day. I truly enjoy the blog style of writing we used in this class because I was able to use words like "interweb" and I didn't have to structure my writing as if I were a robot. My writing style definitely was a "train of thought" style throughout the course, which I found to be quiet enjoyable. In the future I will be able to use this skill to insert more of a personal voice in to my writing. Overall I feel like I can take some productive skills away from this class.

What To Do With Guns

Bryce Quigley

Writ 1122

March 3, 2013

What To Do With Guns

The second amendment, adopted by the United States on December 15, 1791 in order to give the citizens of America the right to bear arms. Now over two hundred years later this amendment has come under a lot of scrutiny. People are questioning if it is a good law and whether it needs to be changed immediately. The idea to change the second amendment is very controversial and over the past few months has been a major topic in the political scene.

            December 14, 2012, twenty-six children as well as adults are gunned down at Sandy Hook elementary school in Newton Connecticut. The shooter was identified as Adam Lanza a 24-year-old man whose mom worked at the school. It was reported that Lanza had three guns as he entered the school. This shooting event can be identified as the day that started the recent gun control outburst (http://www.newstimes.com/policereports/article/911-Sandy-Hook-call-shows-early-confusion-4127274.php ). Some say gun control issues goes back to a shooting in Colorado when a man killed twelve and injured 58 others using high-powered weaponry. Nonetheless these recent shooting have caused a long chain of events to spur. Just four days after the Sandy Hook massacre, Fox news showed gun prices and ammunition prices rising significantly. People immediately started buying guns, all because they were worried that soon they would not be able to under the protection of the second amendment. People are clearly scared tht something like this may happen again. When is does happen more people want to be prepared in order to stop something terrible. (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/18/gun-sales-surge-after-connecticut-massacre/ )

            December 20, 2012, a report is released by PewResearch stating the new change in opinion on gun control. It stated that as of December 19 about 49% of the us population believe that controlling gun ownership is a must while only 42% believed that gun rights should be protected, 9% were not opinionated. These beliefs are almost equally divided and because of that this topic becomes extremely controversial. In order to repeal a constitutional amendment there needs to be two thirds support in both the house of representative and the Senate. With the current split in beliefs this would be impossible. Furthermore 42% believe strongly in gun control while 37% believe strongly in keeping the right of the second amendment. With two sides so separated as well as holding strong beliefs it can be immediately seen that this is going to cause issues in the government (http://www.people-press.org/2012/12/20/after-newtown-modest-change-in-opinion-about-gun-control/ ).

            December 21, 2012, the National Rifle Association makes a statement regarding their own beliefs of on gun control. In the statement a NRA representative is quoted saying “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,’’. The NRA thoroughly believes that the only way to stop these massacres, such as the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, is some other officer or good citizen with a gun. If there are more armed citizens with good intentions, they will be able to stop the people who are looking to kill. The National Rifle Association has gone under scrutiny during the new conference there were “two interruptions by gun-control proponents unfurling signs and shouting “NRA, stop killing our children’’ and “NRA has blood on its hands.’’ People are very upset with the current control laws and they are making it clear by speaking outwardly about it. There are very strong opposing viewpoints and it was made clear during this news conference.

http://blog.timesunion.com/politicssource/nras-big-announcement-put-guns-in-every-school-that-wants-it/3874/#8998-4

            January 15, 2013, President Obama makes his first official address regarding the laws on gun control and the possible future. The address proposes an assault weapon ban as well as background checks for gun buyers. "There are specific legislative actions that he will continue to call on Congress to take, including the assault weapons ban, including a measure to ban high-capacity magazine clips, including an effort to close the very big loopholes in the background check system in our country,”. This comes exactly one month after the Newtown elementary school shooting. This proposal was Barack’s first official announcement on gun policies since coming into office just over 4 years ago. This announcement was very important because it shows that the president is recognizing that there is an issue with current gun control. This policy would not fully remove the second amendment but it would serve as a system of regulation. According to the Obama administration large clips and assault weapons are not necessary for normal citizens to own or use. The second amendment, a 200 year law, is getting redefined and is in jeopardy of being changed. President Obama, being a democrat has very liberal views on policies like this. Republicans and Democrats are the most separated in history right now and this new controversy is adding to that separation. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/15/us-usa-guns-violence-idUSBRE90E0UF20130115 )

            January 16, 2013, the National Rifle Association responds directly to Obama’s proposal on regulating weapons. A NRA representative was quoted saying "Barack Obama, Joe Biden and their gun ban allies in Congress only want to BLAME you, VILIFY you, BULLY you, and STRIP you of your Second Amendment freedoms,". The battle between the two sides gets heated. It is no longer stating beliefs, but this is rather a direct attack from the NRA on Obama. They both want to protect citizens as best as possible but they have completely different ideas on how to execute that. The National Rifle Association also released a commercial calling Obama an “elitist hypocrite” because his children have their own bodyguards while normal children have to go to school unprotected. The NRA was clearly upset with the proposal Obama gave and they were not going to let it go without a response. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/16/nra-obama-gun-control_n_2489693.html )

            Febuary 12, 2013, Obama gives the State of The Union address to the country. This is where he updates the country on current policies and tell the citizens what the government is doing. During the address Obama faces the issue on gun control. He made an emotional speech saying, "Each of these proposals deserves a vote in Congress," he said. "If you want to vote no, that’s your choice. But these proposals deserve a vote. Because in the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand birthdays, graduations and anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun." This proposal allows for a democratic vote in the house and senate. Obama want to make a fair decision in the policy regarding gun control. During the speech Obama also makes it clear his stance on the issue. He tells a story about a little girl that went "One of those we lost was a young girl named Hadiya Pendleton. She was 15 years old. She loved Fig Newtons and lip gloss. She was a majorette. She was so good to her friends, they all thought they were her best friend. Just three weeks ago, she was here, in Washington, with her classmates, performing for her country at my inauguration. And a week later, she was shot and killed in a Chicago park after school, just a mile away from my house,". The sentimental story gives a perspective on what gun control could actually solved if it were enacted. Obama even describes the girl so that the average parent or sibling could personally relate and feel an emotional connection to her death. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/12/obama-state-of-the-union_n_2647639.html )

            March 2, 2013 and article is released by Fox news regarding gun control specifically in the state of Colorado. The gun control policy is not just controversial on the national level but it is also up for debate on the state level as well. As noted before Colorado had a mass shooting in a movie theatre and since then the state has been revaluating their policy. The bill calls for making  “it a crime to have magazines that can carry more than 15 rounds, with a stricter limit of eight for shotguns. People who own larger magazines now would be allowed to keep them.” Although this proposal is not extreme, it does call for change, which many people are opposed to. Gun control may have an economic effect as well; there is one gun company that is threatening to leave Colorado if the bill passes.  (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/02/company-will-move-if-colorado-approves-gun-control/ )

            So far there is no definite policy regarding gun control. As of now the second amendment is safe and anyone eighteen or older is free to buy all the guns they would like. The conflicting sides have created a heated battle that may not be solved anytime soon. However, the policy is going to be voted on soon and those once legal guns may not be legal anymore. The policy that the government makes a decision one is going to have a lot of repercussions. It is unclear what direction the country is moving in at the moment. One thing that is clear is the country is separated when it comes to guns and even when a decision is made there are going to be some unhappy people one way or another.

1000 words in a picture?

In the article “Liar Liar Pants on Fire” by Errol Morris, he argues that a picture is not always worth one thousands word, but a picture without words can be meaningless. I agree with parts of his argument however disagree with other parts.

I enjoy how Morris makes the argument that a picture can be “true or false”. When you take it upon yourself to interpret a picture, you are not necessarily getting the complete truth or any truth at all. When the is a fact or caption next to the picture the reader/ viewer is able to get a much more accurate depiction of what the photo is actually portraying. Morris describes a photo like this is this quote “Without a caption, without a context, without some idea about what the picture is a picture of, I can't answer. I simply cannot talk about the photograph as being true or false independently of beliefs about the picture. A captionless photograph, stripped of all context, is virtually meaningless. I need to know more”.

Although I do I agree that a caption can add a lot of value to a photo, I do not believe that a photo is “virtually meaningless” without it. I believe that a picture is still worth a thousand words it just may not be the one thousand words it was originally purposed for. The viewer has the power to see what they want and a picture can be interpreted in so many ways. I think in a sense a picture is worth more words if there is not a caption added. Although Morris does have several good points I do not believe in what he is trying to convince me of. Pictures will always have meaning even if there are absolutely no words attachted.

taking an approach

            The way I look at “taking an approach” is taking an article and combining, rewriting, countering, and forwarding while adding a unique voice into your own article. Taking an approach is a way to turn any article to something that has your own voice and ideas. With taking an approach you are reshaping another work “Otherwise you are simply applying ideas to examples. To transform is to reshape, not replace or rebut. The original does not go away but is remade into something new” (74). Taking an approach is crucial when it come to differentiating a piece of writing that one creates.

            The New York Times has a very distinct approach on most of their articles. With the New York Times they try to write from a non-opinionated stance without to much personal emotion. I think that is this form and personal connection to the story is lost. On the other hand it is easy to see the facts and therefore be able to form your own opinion. On the other hand I have talked about a blog I read called Barstoolu. This blog is extremely opinionated and is specifically written toward the audience of college-aged students. With this type of “stance” you get a lot of opinions and ideas written directly into the article. It is very easy to connect to, forward, or counter but on the other hand I think specific facts are lost in translation. With direct written opinions often times emotions get in the way and in that sense the writing can be skewed.

            I believe that taking and approach when writing is crucial that you make it clear the direction you are portraying in order to be as unique as possible.

covering the sex change

Bryce Quigley

Writ 1122

February 15, 2013

Covering the Sex Change

I read a very biased college blog called Barstoolu. Typically they take an article and look at it from a ridiculous point of view. They first summarize the article then give a personal take on the same article. If I were to take an article such as this and write it for barstool this is what is would sound like.

            Recently Brown University became the 36^th college to start having their insurance cover gender reassignment surgery. In addition to 36 colleges that cover the surgery there are 25 other colleges that will cover related hormone treatments. This idea is still radical but it is a large step in recognizing transgender rights. This directly affects a small group of students but it is another step toward equality. It is no longer just recognizing that trans-genders can use their respectable bathroom, it is taking it to the next level. There has been a guide for transgender students released online that includes Brown as a top ten transgender friendly school.

 This trend is something we are seeing not only in colleges but also about a quarter of fortune 500 companies support the same or similar insurance policy. Gender reassignment surgery is a complex process that requires psychological treatment as well as hormone treatment. The entire process costs tens of thousands of dollars, however colleges are not concerned about that, as it is a process that is rarely seeked. Transgender issues are relatively new around campuses in the United States. Even in colleges that are progressive about gay and lesbian rights can still be relatively naïve about the issue. www.nytimes.com/2013/02/13/education/12sexchange.html?hp&_r=0

            According to the New York Times Brown University just released a statement saying that their health care program will cover “gender reassignment surgery”. Brown is now the thirty-sixth university to do so. Only six years ago this type of thing was unheard of and now it is becoming a bit of a norm. They are now not only supporting transgender people but they are now financially helping people who want the surgery. I am not sure about you but seriously? I am all for supporting people who are transgender or people who want to change their lives in that way. But to have a University help pay for it with insurance is just silly. If every type of plastic surgery was supported like this girls would be getting breast implants left and right and the country would be full of synthetic people. I think that if you want a surgery this drastic you should have to go out of your way to take the measures, not have an insurance company pay for it.

            According to Princeton, Brown is one of the top ten-transgender friendly schools. That is something I fully support. I believe everyone should be treated equally no matter his or her race, ethnicity, gender, or personal views. But this is so radical it seems to be encouraging something that is very extreme.

            I fully encourage people to be themselves but to have insurance to cover an extensive plastic surgery process seems a bit intense.

Charlie review:

1.     A times article that covers transgender surgery at universities.  The audience is other college students who are the majority on barstoolu and the purpose seems to be purely informational for the reader. 

2.     It seems to be written more loosely and is very easy to understand it also has an opinion at the end of the article so it seems to be written in more of a blogging format.

3.     Maybe introduce the article that you are talking about if you are planning to keep the last sentence in the opening paragraph.

4.     I have been on the site and this is a pretty good interpretation of how the site actually runs and gives out information

5.     Grammar check, maybe a little formatting with the first paragraph that’s about it.

Carter review:

1.     What is the original story, audience, and purpose? Whatis the new audience and / or purpose?

The original audience is prospective students for Brown or anybody looking where to go for college. The purpose is to inform readers that their [Brown College] has certain aspects few other colleges and if it interests you then go there. The new audience is the same people, but those who are opposed to the idea or basically think it is dumb.

2.     How is the change in audience and / or purpose reflected in the rewriting of the piece?

The change is used with the Barstool approach of summarizing the initial article and then voicing a specific opinion on the matter. The author does a good job of this by explaining the fashion he is going to take in changing the article. Then he does a good job of emphasizing his opinion about why it is dumb and giving examples of what the future might hold for similar situations.

3.     What is the single best thing that could be added to the introduction?

Grammar. There are a few grammatical errors that are easy fixes and can touch up the introduction to make it easier to read and more effective.

4.     In what other ways might the piece better target its new audience and / or purpose?

Maybe continue to use the questionnaire approach. An example would be to ask, are you really considering choosing a college because of a transgender operation you want done? Or if you disagree with this idea do you want to attend a college where your tuition is going to funding of transgender operations?

5.     Any additional comments?

I like the Barstool approach and Bryce does a good job of explaining as well as portraying it.

countering for real

Another aspect Harris describes in terms of writing is called “countering”. Like forwarding, countering is a way of keeping a conversation going. The idea of countering is that people are challenging an idea instead of taking the information and just recirculating it into another piece of writing. Countering occurs when someone has a different way of thinking about a certain article or fact. Harris describes it best when he says countering is not to “nullify” someone’s ideas but it “suggests and different way of thinking”. There are so many ways to look at a topic that there is no specific right or wrong, and that is what countering proves. I used countering in my last essay, when an author suggested that society was getting lazy with the improvement of technology, I countered that idea and suggested that society is just adapting to their surroundings.

Countering is a common thing to do in articles, blogs, tv, and any other source of news. It is all over the place. Some of the biggest examples can be seen in politics. One party may think lowering taxes will improve the economy while one party may think the opposite. Neither party is necessarily wrong but they just have different ideas on the same situation presented in front of them. Another topic that one can see countering in lately is on the topic of gun control. In this article http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/gun-control-constitution_b_2657841.html it questions whether or not the constitution restricts gun control. It is not saying that people are interpreting the constitution wrong, it is once again just another way to look at a piece of writing.

info passed foward

Joseph Harris’s concept of forwarding is basically the idea of keeping a conversation going by using certain techniques. Harris uses the specific examples such as sending  emails to one another. In this sense writers are not directly responding to the text but they are rather taking information from online articles or other writing forms and moving the information to a new source. What happens when you are circulating information like this some of the authors thoughts and ideals get lost in translation. The person who is forwarding on the information of another writer has their own opinions that they work into a message that uses forwarded information and facts.

An example of this “forwarding” can also be found in almost all new york times articles. For example, in a recent article I read about Frank Ocean there was a hyperlink to his tumbler in the quote “Channel Orange,” Ocean took to his Tumblr site — his main point of contact with his fans”. This shows that the times is not trying to summarize his blog but rather trying to give readers a first hand example of the blog in order to make the article more specific. They are taking information from other websites and putting it into their own to redistribute that material. Examples of this are not just limited to news articles, it can be seen in other blogs and even social networking. Forwarding is in essence another way to take information and move it forward in order to keep  conversation/topic going

jeff jarvis...?

I just read The Press Becomes the Press Sphere by Jeff Jarvis and even after reading it several times I am still not sure if I know exactly what he is talking about. In the blog article he uses many charts all of which are pretty hard to read. To me it almost looks like a bunch of random circles and arrows.
In my humble opinion I came to the conclusion that Jarvis is trying to state how news these days revolves around the press and not the other way around as it should be. I find this fairly accurate when relating it to the New York Times. The New York times always has news available whether it be good or bad. Also the New York times has an elevated status in our minds as an always reliable and accurate news provider. It is almost as if the New York times can influence more than our own peers who we see everyday. With social media anyone can be a reporter by posting thing about the latest news stories online. I believe Jarvis is trying to explain how the power should not be given to the press but the news itself.... if that makes much sense. The news is the important part that everyone should be paying attention to. Jarvis states it best when he says " It focuses on the press as if it were at the center of the world, as if it owned news, as if news depended on it, as if solving the press’ problems solves news. That’s not the ecosystem of news now".  Thank you Jarvis for you great wisdom and insights.

How does everyone else get the news

I can certainly tell the primary method of how people get there news in modern times. I read from several different blogs that people get most of their news from social media. Often times people post status about import current news on twitter or facebook. I think that this way of getting news has only arose in the last few years and it is a progressive trend I am seeing. Gone are the days where people pick up the paper every Sunday and read everything that has gone on in the world. Even turning the tv to a news station is a common practice that people no longer do. Another common source of news that seems to be trending is getting news from apps on a smartphone. This allows for quick news updates on the go. I think Sullivan would appreciate all of these new ways to obtain news. He was one of the first to catch on to blogging as a new way of writing and I think he would accept this new age way as well. Hedges on the other hand would most likely criticize us for being lazy.

I also read in a few blogs that some people do not pay attention to the news entirely. They do not visit any news websites, tv shows, or any other of the various sources. I find this kind of silly because personally I believe it is important to stay updated on current events. Hedges would certainly criticize this and most likely argue that it is contributing to our illiteracy.

News in the times

The New York times has an abundance of information and news. The website has a very clean look and is separated into neat categories. Some of the features that I really enjoy is the popular news story feature. This makes it super easy to find news stories that other people find interesting. Typically when other people find things interesting, the article appears to mass amount of people. I still do not completely rely on the new York times as I find the news dry sometimes. As far as how it has influenced my reading scheduling, it has not really at all. I spend a very brief time on the New York times and during that time i skim the main page looking for something that sparks my interest. When I find that article I do not always read the whole thing. With the news I like to get the general idea of what is going on. Unless something is extremely unusual or odd I do not spend the time to get every bit of detail.
I think i will continue to browse through the New York times in the future. I do believe it is very important to stay up to date with current events and breaking news. Without a source such as the New York times i would not have heard of stories such as the recent one. Korea is testing a nuclear bomb soon and they released a threatening video toward the United states. When I saw this news story i took the time to find the details because it was so new.

Oh Yea The News!

            Getting news these days can come in many different ways.  You can get it online, on the radio, newspaper, or on TV. Even with all of these options I still find it hard to keep updated on what is going on in the world sometime. However when I do get the news I use mostly utilize the radio and internet. With the internet I often can see what is going on just through social media. With facebook and twitter I can look at people’s statuses (often about what is going on in the news) and immediately get a brief update on current events. One of my other favorite places for news is a blog called barstooolu.com, they typically have funny views on news stories and it is always interesting to see their perspective. This I found is one of the best ways to get the news because I am entertained at the same time.

In the summer when I work, I listen to the radio a lot, which does include Nation Public Radio. I found that NPR reports all of the major stories in current times and is a great way to stay updated.

            Since this class began I have been checking the New York times much more than I ever have before. Once again I found that it is a great resource for everything I could possibly want to know. It has categories that separates the topics into things from sports to politics and everything in between.

            I try to stay updated as much as I can, with all of these resources it is not to hard. I am not sure how up to date I would be if I had to read a newspaper all the time. News is out there and available in many forms so stay entertained and updated!

Literacy... Evolution in Progress

Literacy… Evolution in Progress

            Literacy, is something that is that can be defined in several different ways. Many writers have tried to give their own personal perspective on literacy, but now I am here to give you my own personal take on literacy, what it means to me, and how it stacks up to other authors definitions. In the simplest form, literacy is a mode of one human being communicating to another through symbols, letters, and words. But literacy has so much more power than just that, and through the years I believe literacy has evolved from the technology accesses able to everyone, it my be good, it may be bad, but that is not for me to decide.

            My favorite example in how literacy does evolve comes for the article Is Google Making Us Stupid? By Nicolas Carr. He describes how technology is changing how we read, he states “My mind now expects to take in information the way the Net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particles. Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski”(Carr).  This is something I can relate to. With Google an incredulous amount of information is always available at my fingertips. If I have to read an entire article to find the information I want, I most likely am going to be very frustrated. The way I look at it is I am not missing information, I am making more effective use of my time, and that is something I can accredit to Google. I can use it to find extensive information in fractions of a second. Does skimming make me less literate? This problem is not only seen with Carr, when he asks his friends he comes up with the conclusion  “The more they use the Web, the more they have to fight to stay focused on long pieces of writing”(Carr). Even as I write this very essay I find myself being distracted by what’s around me…. The X games are on, watch a run, write a bit more, go on Facebook, write a bit more. I believe this is just another step in the evolution of literacy. Todays world is just incredibly fast moving and it is almost impossible to keep up if you are not constantly multitasking. We may not be going as in depth with our reading and literacy but I truly believe America as a whole is able to great a large variety of literacy with technology. We are able to read about things many miles away instants after it occurs, people are always just looking for the next interesting thing to keep moving forward. Another prime example of people taking shortcuts to literacy stems from the article Our Semi Literate youth? Not so Fast by Andrea A. Lunsford. In this article it specifically talks about how college age students use text slang often, and how it might be detrimental to their literacy skills. Lunsford’s main argument can be summarized in her statement “So yes, these students did plenty of emailing and texting; they were online a good party of every day; they joined social networking sites enthusiastically. But rather than leading a new illiteracy, these activities seemed to help them develop a range or repertoire of writing styles, tones, and formats along with a range of abilities”(Lunsford). The way Lunsford looks at writing with the new age technology is something I had not truly thought of before this. I do agree with what she is saying however, through high school I have been taught to read Shakespeare, epic poems, and so many more types of writing. This new age form of texting, bogging, and emailing is not making us lazy but it just shows us the new age style of writing. As writing is always evolving it is important to stay familiar with the current and past styles of writing. I appreciate Lundford’s view as she looks at more of the positive aspects technology has on writing.

            Writing is not only changing because technology has allowed us the shortcuts of communication and searching but it has changed the way writers can publish their own work. Andrew Sullivan is an extremely successful blogger and in his article Why I Blog he explains “as blogging evolves as a literary form, it is generating a new and quintessentially postmodern idiom that’s enabling writers to express themselves in ways that have never been seen or understood before.”(Sullivan) This is a perfect example of how technology has improved literacy in the sense that more people get published. People are able to express themselves without the difficulties of publishing companies and editors. In this sense this is literacy at its purest form. Each author expressing themselves with no limitations. That is something that was never achieved until blogging became prominent.

            I do not however agree with all of the articles I read concerning literacy. Some are very unusual, and as far as I am concerned have an outright absurd approach on literacy. Chris Hedges completed a piece called America the Illiterate. This article seemed to only scrutinize America and its literacy as a whole, in a somewhat angry fashion. Chris Hedge’s uses unsupported facts such as “there are over 42 million American adults, 20 percent whom hold high school diplomas, who cannot read, as well as the 50 million who read at a fourth- or fifth-grade level. Nearly a third of the nation’s population is illiterate or barely literate”(hedges). This means that according to Hedges an average of one out of every three people you meet can barely read or write. Where did these facts come from? From personal experience, I rarely, if ever have met a fully-grown adult who cannot read and write. I believe Hedge’s is utilizing scare tactics to lead us to believe we are not competent. This is something that I do not agree with, I would rather praise people so that people have something to look up to, rather than scare them into learning more. If someone truly wants to learn and gain a deeper ability to read and write, they will do it on his or her own. Hedges then goes on to insult those who are illiterate even more as he says

“The illiterate and semi-literate, once the campaigns are over, remain powerless.  They still cannot protect their children from dysfunctional public schools. They still cannot understand predatory loan deals, the intricacies of mortgage papers, credit card agreements and equity lines of credit that drive them into foreclosures and bankruptcies. They still struggle with the most basic chores of daily life from reading instructions on medicine bottles to filling out bank forms, car loan documents and unemployment benefit and insurance papers. They watch helplessly and without comprehension as hundreds of thousands of jobs are shed. They are hostages to brands.”(Hedges)

Hedges just continues on and on, criticizing these people for their lack of knowledge. This is not the fault of technology, anyone who ends up in the situation he is describing would not be functional in todays society. Hedges seems to be picking out specific cases to criticize America as a whole and because of that I believe he is describing literacy completely inaccurately. One last point Hedges makes that is silly is “During the 2000 debates, George W. Bush spoke at a sixth-grade level (6.7) and Al Gore at a seventh-grade level (7.6). In the 1992 debates, Bill Clinton spoke at a seventh-grade level (7.6), while…. In the debates of Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas the scores were respectively 11.2 and 12.0.” (Hedges). How can he compare the people of today to the people of the past? So much has changed in the time period between these two debates that comparing them is unbelievable. To me it is similar to comparing old English to modern English and calling anyone who spoke modern English stupid. When technology, ideas and culture evolves so does the way people communicate. The literacy is not missing, people can still communicate in a very effective way, it has just changed as it always does.  America the Illiterate has a very pessimistic view on literacy and I find it ridiculous.

            Technology is changing at a rate faster than anyone has ever seen before. As technology changes, the way people read, write, think, and communicate in any sort of way has to change as well. Whenever humanity started literacy is nowhere near the same as it is today and it would be completely unfair to come why is it any different today? People may not have the same literacy as 50 years ago; instead literacy has evolved into something completely new. Do I expect literacy to be completely different within twenty years? Yes, I do technology will not stop progressing and that means neither will the way people communicate with each other. In the future it may be perfectly acceptable to write books that are fully informal, who knows, only time will tell.

Blogging a bit better

Blogging has been a love hate relationship for me so far.

 I really enjoy how I am able to input my own personal ideas easily with little to no structure required. It makes the blog much more personal and I feel that it is easier to have a strong voice. I feel I can freely write and sometimes I do get side tracked from what the actual goal is. Blogging is certainly a type of writing that I enjoy over essay writing, poem writing, or research writing.

This is where the hate part comes in. Ok… I do not actually hate these aspects, they are more of the challenges. A lot of the time the articles that I am responding to are much longer than I expect and therefor I get caught up and bored.

My attitudes toward blogging have certainly changed. I typically am not a fan of writing but blogging has slightly changed that. I do not actually dread writing blog post as that is the way I typically feel with writing essays. I am able to get my ideas on to the page without worrying about it being a specific tense or being 100% grammatically correct. I do understand that that is still important, however not having to worry about it has made me think differently than I normally would.

This writing course has changed the way I viewed a typical writing class and the reason for that is these blog posts. I have enjoyed a less structured system and am glad that this was required.

Once again another take on literacy

Scribner takes a completely separate look at literacy than Hedges or Carr. She breaks literacy into three specific sections, they are literacy as adaptation, literacy as power and literacy as a state of grace.

            I found it quite interesting how she could break down this simple concept into these three very specific categories. I also enjoyed how she made it clear that it was not necessary to be literate to live a good life, rather literacy just makes life better. Literacy is a privilege not a right in her eyes.

            Adaptation, the first metaphor, I found to be the most relatable. Language and literacy is always changing. People today do not talk as they used to in Shakespearean times. If you heard a person walking down the street talking like Shakespeare you would immediately think that they were insane. The world is always seeing progression and that is very apparent in literacy.

            The other metaphor that appealed to me was literacy as power. Even without her own personal explanation, I had my own idea about how literacy is power. In the old days only important people were literate and because of that they help power. Literacy is essential to the growth of power. Our literacy level has improved immensely since the beginning of mankind. We have gone from a species that used grunts and hand signals to something much much more complex. A good writer can now transfer emotions and so much more just through pen and paper. With literacy people are able to communicate in such a powerful way that it can not be achieved by any other species on earth.

            I agree with Scribner’s view on literacy and may take a little more time to appreciate a good article or book.

Where is our literacy?

 Over the last few decades Americas literacy and ability to research has dwindled...

Google is not directly making us stupid, it is just making us a product of what its primary function. Google wants to create information that is easily and readily accessible to everyone. What is resulting is people who can not concentrate on long articles, books, or other things that take extended lengths. I like how Nicholas Carr related Google to the clock. When the clock was invented peoples days started revolving around what time it was on, not on the instincts they once used. With Google people do not spend time researching in a library or spending time reading through articles because all of the information can be in front of them in a matter of seconds. This connected to Chris Hedges “America the Illiterate” in the sense that americans are not taking the extra step to obtain information they want. Hedges describes how people are typically speaking on a 6^th grade level when only a couple decades ago the average persons vocabulary was much more expanse.

America the Illiterate was quite confusing. Mainly the facts Hedges uses, for instance he writes “There are over 42 million American adults, 20 percent of whom hold high school diplomas, who cannot read, as well as the 50 million who read at a fourth- or fifth-grade level.” If there are only 42 million American adults, how can 50 million read at a fourth of fifth grade level? I am mot sure how accurate these statistics are and it makes me question some of the writing. Hedges define literacy as being able to understand what you are reading, not just being able to say the words out loud. I do agree with him that without having a vast vocabulary is something that is rare these days. If this pattern continues our future will be filled with people who have trouble with some of the most common things.