A fellow classmate in my Politics & Media class recently wrote a blog regarding a story that appeared on the front page of the New York Times a few days ago. The article she discussed utterly blew me away. Twitter and Facebook, internet social tools, were actually considered legitimate grounds for a mistrial for a Pennsylvania state senator!
Not only is this outrageous, but I completely agree with my classmate when she states that the legal system must comply with new technology, because technology is only going to improve and become more accesible. She does an excellent job conveying both sides of this controversial issue. She then articulates logical arguments for both sides of this issue and asks questions that can only be answered through policy.
With internet and technology becoming more advanced and accessible each day, new laws have to be created that cater to this changing society. The laws that exist today do not safeguard the judicial system as we know it. It starts off with one case of a Pennsylvania state senator. Soon if not already, every case will have this potential downfall. Another caveat is, some jurors may not even be caught, and the rule that any information from outside the trial will be broken without any notice.
In a nutshell, if justice shall prevail as it has in the past, the laws of the judicial system must comply with the current trends of today's advanced technological society. Until that happens, as my classmate would concur, the legitimacy of our judicial system is skating on thin ice.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Femenist Blog: Spitzer Wants Back In
In the feminist section of The Pandagon, a post was written regarding Eliot Spitzer's attempted comeback in the political realm. The author of this blog wants to make certain that he is not let off the hook based on his supposed ignorance. She insists he has proven himself an intelligent man who understands the game of politics perfectly, as well as the rules and regulations that come with it. Let's face it, he wouldn't have been elected governor of New York if he didn't know how to play the game. She strongly argues that in our cultural society, sex is already degrading when concerning women. She claims this is evident through the automatic punishment of unintended pregnancy. What's worse, Spitzer attempted to throw these prostitutes into jail, just like the prostitute he screwed that eventually screwed over his career. The author eventually drifts off to movies, then sex in general. She makes legitimate points about the role of women in society. However, it's not necessarily relevant when talking about Spitzer getting back in the game.
Personally, I agree with this author. I don't believe Spitzer should have any leeway, simply because he violated a law he so vehemently attempted to enforce. However, a politician is a politician, and that means he will take every initiative possible to stay in the game, no matter how much dirty laundry has been aired. She has a right to be angry, we all do. But that's not going to stop Spitzer from doing everything he can to gain his power back. He may not be returning as governor of New York, yet I wouldn't be surprised if he attempted to get back in the swing of things, at least in some capacity. Of course he will say that he laments his mistakes and hindsight is 20/20. That's the role of every politician who's put in a tight spot.
NPR: Get Out Your Paper Masks
In a recent "All Things Considered" program on NPR, the topic of discussion was none other than Swine Flu. More specifically, the plans, or lack thereof, to deal with such a situation. President Obama has just asked for 1.5 billion dollars to combat it, the CDC. WHO and HHS are all scrambling to figure out where it is headed next. Citizens across the country, and the world are in a state of panic.
Richard Besser of the CDC was interviewed, and he explained the new emergency kits that are being send across the country. One component of these kits are paper masks, which have been said to be useless in Mexico. So is this "forward leaning step" (according to the CDC) just a placebo to prevent mass panic?
The top minds in America's health organizations are also trying to decipher the what ifs...what if the swine flue disappears only to return in the winter months? What if it reaches other poor countries? What if it never goes away? As these experts scramble to find the answers to these questions, the spread of the flu continues worldwide.
Even worse, none of these questions have been or will be answered for some time. We'll just have to strap on our paper masks and wait.
Pandagon on Specter
Pandagon recently wrote a hilarious post on Jim DeMint attempting to twist Senator Specter's flip to Democrat as a victory for the GOP. The hysterical entry describes how DeMint, a South Carolina senator, attempts to see the glass half full, stating "Republicans are seeing across the country that the biggest tent of all is the Tent of Freedom”.
All the while, a senator from Maine, Olympia Snowe, is left hanging with a bunch of extreme right wingers, according to Pandagon. She is not as positive as DeMint, insisting that this switch over is devastating for the Republican party. Snowe, a moderate Republican, lamented the extremist views of the Republican party and their exlusionary policies towards moderates. For now, Snowe is sticking with the party. Although it is a hostile place for moderates, she still believes in sticking with the essence of the party, and thinks that those currently representing the party have abandoned those principles.
Reading the Pandagon opened my eyes to information that objective news wouldn't provide for me, not to mention the post was hysterical. Posts like these open up channels for information on ridiculous senators and the truth behind major political news, that wasn't available for the average person not linked with anything but an internet source in the past.
All the while, a senator from Maine, Olympia Snowe, is left hanging with a bunch of extreme right wingers, according to Pandagon. She is not as positive as DeMint, insisting that this switch over is devastating for the Republican party. Snowe, a moderate Republican, lamented the extremist views of the Republican party and their exlusionary policies towards moderates. For now, Snowe is sticking with the party. Although it is a hostile place for moderates, she still believes in sticking with the essence of the party, and thinks that those currently representing the party have abandoned those principles.
Reading the Pandagon opened my eyes to information that objective news wouldn't provide for me, not to mention the post was hysterical. Posts like these open up channels for information on ridiculous senators and the truth behind major political news, that wasn't available for the average person not linked with anything but an internet source in the past.
FOX vs. CNN
Today I watched FOX news and compared it to CNN. Oh, the differences of obviously right wing and left wing media. They cover major events in very separate ways.
The three big news stories discussed on both networks were: The swine flu, the Specter switch and the end of Obama's first 100 days.
FOX news scorned Obama on his spending spree in his first 100 days, insisting he spend so much money and that it will continue to rise. They stated he racked up a massive spending tab, but never stated what that tab was used for or why it was so horrible. They moved on to the swine flu, even making that a bipartisan debate. They alleged that Democrats are accusing Republicans of blocking the flu in the stimulus package, as the number of confirmed cases in the U.S. continues to rise. Then they switched on the Senator Specter's switch from the GOP. They scorned Specter harshly, with reactions from Reagan and Guilliani. Reagan stated, "Good riddance". He was one of three Republicans to vote in favor of the stimulus package, the "monstrosity". Overall, the FOX news station just sounded like a few angry Republicans got together and reported the news with animosity.
CNN reported on a greater range of news stories, but covered those major ones in depth, as well. Other news stories highlighted the stimulus positively, insisting Chrysler reached a debt deal, and that the American citizens have the highest level of confidences regarding the Economy since November, which is how they opened the discussion for Obama's first one hundred days coming to an end tomorrow. In regards to the swan flu, they reported the news without much partisan view. When discussing Specter, they reported on Nancy Pelosi's reaction to the switch, as she stated that she was excited. What was interesting about CNN, even their commercials support Obama's stance on stimulating the economy via green jobs.
What was so interesting about watching both networks, was that although I gained the same information listening to either station, FOX just sounds like a bunch of bitter politicians who wanted to complain, while CNN just put an angle on their news stories to favor Obama. In a nutshell, if I ever had to choose only one as my news source, CNN would win with no competition.
The three big news stories discussed on both networks were: The swine flu, the Specter switch and the end of Obama's first 100 days.
FOX news scorned Obama on his spending spree in his first 100 days, insisting he spend so much money and that it will continue to rise. They stated he racked up a massive spending tab, but never stated what that tab was used for or why it was so horrible. They moved on to the swine flu, even making that a bipartisan debate. They alleged that Democrats are accusing Republicans of blocking the flu in the stimulus package, as the number of confirmed cases in the U.S. continues to rise. Then they switched on the Senator Specter's switch from the GOP. They scorned Specter harshly, with reactions from Reagan and Guilliani. Reagan stated, "Good riddance". He was one of three Republicans to vote in favor of the stimulus package, the "monstrosity". Overall, the FOX news station just sounded like a few angry Republicans got together and reported the news with animosity.
CNN reported on a greater range of news stories, but covered those major ones in depth, as well. Other news stories highlighted the stimulus positively, insisting Chrysler reached a debt deal, and that the American citizens have the highest level of confidences regarding the Economy since November, which is how they opened the discussion for Obama's first one hundred days coming to an end tomorrow. In regards to the swan flu, they reported the news without much partisan view. When discussing Specter, they reported on Nancy Pelosi's reaction to the switch, as she stated that she was excited. What was interesting about CNN, even their commercials support Obama's stance on stimulating the economy via green jobs.
What was so interesting about watching both networks, was that although I gained the same information listening to either station, FOX just sounds like a bunch of bitter politicians who wanted to complain, while CNN just put an angle on their news stories to favor Obama. In a nutshell, if I ever had to choose only one as my news source, CNN would win with no competition.
Monday, April 27, 2009
End of the Widow Penalty, Op-Ed from the NY Times
In today's Op-ed Section of the New York Times, an article entitled "End of the 'Widow Penalty' " was an eye-opening editorial. According to this article, when an immigrant's citizen spouse dies, the 'widow penalty' gives that unlucky immigrant an order to leave the country before their paperwork can be processed.
This unjust law was unknown to me before reading this editorial. The author states that no exceptions have been made thus far. This means that after suffering the loss of a loved one, this person must get deported, severed from new family members as their entire life is uprooted.
Up until recently, there has been little progress with correcting this injustice. Finally, in a court case last week, the ball started to roll on fixing this awful penalty legislatively. The author notes that we should not punish immigrants who follow the rules, especially if it is a punishment caused by the death of a spouse.
This is one of my first times reading the op-ed section of a newspaper. I tend to skip right through it, thinking this section is not as important as the more objective news stories. Yet after reading this op-ed, I began to read a few more. Not only did I really enjoy them, but I actually learned a thing or two. This author makes a lot of sense and really gets to the heart of the matter. There still remains injustice in our legal system as the tyranny of the bureaucracy can dictate the lives of good people.
This unjust law was unknown to me before reading this editorial. The author states that no exceptions have been made thus far. This means that after suffering the loss of a loved one, this person must get deported, severed from new family members as their entire life is uprooted.
Up until recently, there has been little progress with correcting this injustice. Finally, in a court case last week, the ball started to roll on fixing this awful penalty legislatively. The author notes that we should not punish immigrants who follow the rules, especially if it is a punishment caused by the death of a spouse.
This is one of my first times reading the op-ed section of a newspaper. I tend to skip right through it, thinking this section is not as important as the more objective news stories. Yet after reading this op-ed, I began to read a few more. Not only did I really enjoy them, but I actually learned a thing or two. This author makes a lot of sense and really gets to the heart of the matter. There still remains injustice in our legal system as the tyranny of the bureaucracy can dictate the lives of good people.
The Daily Show and The Network News
Who needs to watch the network news when you've seen The Daily Show? Today's episode of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart was funny yet informative. Although I watched the Network News, I was much more informed after watching Jon do his thing. The show was broken down into three parts: Swine Flu, White House apology to NYC, and a very informative interview with the Christine Lagarde, the French Finance Minister.
I noticed that Jon Stewart uses the network news as part of his jokes and also to give the background information for his jokes. When discussing the Swine Flu, Jon Stewart showed clips from ABC, CNN, MSNBC, and FOX news and turned what they said into jokes. In a satirical manner, Jon insisted that the media is the reason we as a society are freaking out about this "pandemic". He then compared far fetched news to practical news, with a reporter from the "Center for Disease Control" and a reporter from "Center For Stuff I heard from Some Guy". In the end of the spoof, the far fetched news prevailed.
He then moved on to the White House apology to New York City for flying a 747 over ground zero for a photo-op, insisting they wanted to see what it would look like to fly air force one over ground zero and scared the living daylights out of New York City. What's worse is no one even told the mayor this was happening! In this story, Jon Stewart uses the media as the foundation to later create his joke, as opposed to the first part of the show, where he used the network news as his joke.
He ended the show with a wonderful interview with Christine Legarde. He asked her hard hitting questions that allowed me to better understand how the current economic depression is effecting Europe and what France is doing about it. She informed the audience that France is in the same boat as everyone else, but is using strict regulation. She already fired bankers and is imposing penalties. When Jon asked which country is more socialist between the US and France, she stated both are free markets, yet France's has a lot of safety nets, including more benefits, something President Obama is doing, which will lead to a more stabilized economy in the long run. Our country is moving in France's direction.
Overall, the show was informative and funny. I got my news, but I was entertained as well. The network news may have covered more, but in less detail, not to mention much less entertaining.
I noticed that Jon Stewart uses the network news as part of his jokes and also to give the background information for his jokes. When discussing the Swine Flu, Jon Stewart showed clips from ABC, CNN, MSNBC, and FOX news and turned what they said into jokes. In a satirical manner, Jon insisted that the media is the reason we as a society are freaking out about this "pandemic". He then compared far fetched news to practical news, with a reporter from the "Center for Disease Control" and a reporter from "Center For Stuff I heard from Some Guy". In the end of the spoof, the far fetched news prevailed.
He then moved on to the White House apology to New York City for flying a 747 over ground zero for a photo-op, insisting they wanted to see what it would look like to fly air force one over ground zero and scared the living daylights out of New York City. What's worse is no one even told the mayor this was happening! In this story, Jon Stewart uses the media as the foundation to later create his joke, as opposed to the first part of the show, where he used the network news as his joke.
He ended the show with a wonderful interview with Christine Legarde. He asked her hard hitting questions that allowed me to better understand how the current economic depression is effecting Europe and what France is doing about it. She informed the audience that France is in the same boat as everyone else, but is using strict regulation. She already fired bankers and is imposing penalties. When Jon asked which country is more socialist between the US and France, she stated both are free markets, yet France's has a lot of safety nets, including more benefits, something President Obama is doing, which will lead to a more stabilized economy in the long run. Our country is moving in France's direction.
Overall, the show was informative and funny. I got my news, but I was entertained as well. The network news may have covered more, but in less detail, not to mention much less entertaining.
The Girl's Next Door
To my dismay, I recently watched an episode of The Girl's Next Door. The episode (Season One Episode Twelve) is a perfect example of how the show depicts every negative stereotype about women in society as truth. I can only describe these girls in one word: ditzy. If these play bunnies portrayed a true representation of women, then everything women have fought for until this point has been for naught. The show makes sure to distort the image of women in society, by suggesting that these women are only but beautiful bodies, and have no brain in between their ears. Everything about the show, from the music in the background to the topics discussed, degrades women.
To give an idea of the level of intelligence these girls who, sadly enough, represent women actually have, I'll provide a quote from the show. On their first trip to New York, one play bunny actually stated, "Is the Statue of Liberty a real person?" Another play bunny insisted the statue needed a makeover. In any other possible moment, either boobs or sex were discussed in serious context.
The media also craves covering stories regarding the play bunnies. Not only do they have their own show, but the entire episode revolved around media coverage. From Virgin Records to The View, everyone wanted the girls in the spotlight. They were even mentioned in an article in the daily news. The article centered around whether one of the bunnies was going to have Hugh's baby, a man well into his 80s. What is so enticing about these women? The fact that most have silicone breasts and speak as if they're seven years old? And what does this say about the audience attracted to such a show? If I'm sure of one thing, it's that shows like this make it that much more difficult for women to be taken seriously in a society where they are portrayed as nothing more than beautiful bodies made up of artificial parts.
To give an idea of the level of intelligence these girls who, sadly enough, represent women actually have, I'll provide a quote from the show. On their first trip to New York, one play bunny actually stated, "Is the Statue of Liberty a real person?" Another play bunny insisted the statue needed a makeover. In any other possible moment, either boobs or sex were discussed in serious context.
The media also craves covering stories regarding the play bunnies. Not only do they have their own show, but the entire episode revolved around media coverage. From Virgin Records to The View, everyone wanted the girls in the spotlight. They were even mentioned in an article in the daily news. The article centered around whether one of the bunnies was going to have Hugh's baby, a man well into his 80s. What is so enticing about these women? The fact that most have silicone breasts and speak as if they're seven years old? And what does this say about the audience attracted to such a show? If I'm sure of one thing, it's that shows like this make it that much more difficult for women to be taken seriously in a society where they are portrayed as nothing more than beautiful bodies made up of artificial parts.
New York Times Front Page News on Obama
In the front page of today's New York Times, Obama was highlighted in quite a positive way. Entitled "Poll Suggests Obama's Term is Altering Views on Race", the article suggests that the president is changing this country for the better, in direct and indirect ways. The article states that two-thirds of Americans think that race relations in the U.S. are in generally good conditions. The percentage of blacks who say so has actually doubled since his presidency began according to this poll. The poll also states that most of the country feels Obama is headed in the right direction and they agree with Obama's approaches on a plethora of issues. The article continues displaying Obama's success, insisting that even at this point in his term, he has higher approval ratings than any other recent president.
Perhaps these delightful stories about Obama still appear on the front cover of the NY Times and other mass media sources because we are still in the honeymoon stage, or perhaps it is something more. Obama's relationship with the press has been so strong thus far, I feel that they are inclined to continue such positive relations to get more stories. After all, the press is a only a business and needs to keep customers interested. As a direct result, they tend to show positive stories that will generally please Americans. With stories favoring Obama making the front cover of mass media, everyone is happy in this win-win, symbiotic relationship.
However, as much as I like what Obama has done with his presidency thus far, I am still a bit apprehensive that the media is not taking their job as government watchdog seriously. They are so overwhelmed with the amount they have to work with, they are eating it up without any cynicism. As Obama is reaching his 100th day in office on Wednesday, we will see if media begins to speculate further and question his authority, now that the honeymoon stage will be over.
Perhaps these delightful stories about Obama still appear on the front cover of the NY Times and other mass media sources because we are still in the honeymoon stage, or perhaps it is something more. Obama's relationship with the press has been so strong thus far, I feel that they are inclined to continue such positive relations to get more stories. After all, the press is a only a business and needs to keep customers interested. As a direct result, they tend to show positive stories that will generally please Americans. With stories favoring Obama making the front cover of mass media, everyone is happy in this win-win, symbiotic relationship.
However, as much as I like what Obama has done with his presidency thus far, I am still a bit apprehensive that the media is not taking their job as government watchdog seriously. They are so overwhelmed with the amount they have to work with, they are eating it up without any cynicism. As Obama is reaching his 100th day in office on Wednesday, we will see if media begins to speculate further and question his authority, now that the honeymoon stage will be over.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Good Night, and Good Luck
Last week, I watched a film called Good Night, and Good Luck, starring George Clooney and David Strathairn. With a historically accurate approach, the film gave an excellent reenactment of the conflict between Senator Joseph McCarthy and famous TV journalist Edward Murrow. Directed by and co-written by George Clooney, the film served as a marvelous depiction of how media can effect government and politics. The senator's anti-communist actions soon became a list of bogus accusations of U.S. citizens involved in communist related activities. Ed Murrow and Fred Friendly quickly decided that he has gone too far and transform their weekly show into a ploy to bring down Senator McCarthy and his accusations.
The film has an underlying theme of media responsibility to the general public as watchdogs of the government. The reporters and journalists involved continuously battled with an internal struggle, as they risked their jobs as well as their reputations in order to do what they felt was right. In the end, the show was canceled, but they brought down McCarthy. The movie ends with Murrow giving a spine chilling speech regarding media responsibility. He states that a television set is more than just a box with wires, but an education tool that should be used for the good of society.
If we carry this last statement over to today's society, we find that these words are meaningless. Top ratings today portray the true interests of Americans. Dating and fashion shows have flooded the networks, leaving little room for the general public to gain knowledge on political agendas. If Murlow's ideas were put in place, if his words were taken seriously in today's mass media, then America would be a better informed body of people. Until that day comes, it will just be a very powerful tool, hidden in a box of wires.
The film has an underlying theme of media responsibility to the general public as watchdogs of the government. The reporters and journalists involved continuously battled with an internal struggle, as they risked their jobs as well as their reputations in order to do what they felt was right. In the end, the show was canceled, but they brought down McCarthy. The movie ends with Murrow giving a spine chilling speech regarding media responsibility. He states that a television set is more than just a box with wires, but an education tool that should be used for the good of society.
If we carry this last statement over to today's society, we find that these words are meaningless. Top ratings today portray the true interests of Americans. Dating and fashion shows have flooded the networks, leaving little room for the general public to gain knowledge on political agendas. If Murlow's ideas were put in place, if his words were taken seriously in today's mass media, then America would be a better informed body of people. Until that day comes, it will just be a very powerful tool, hidden in a box of wires.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
