Additional Blog Opportunity

I was told to live a day without my forms of media. I did this on January 14th. It was a Friday, and even though it was an early release, I was in school until three o clock, preparing for the Hockey Marathon. I did not bring my laptop to school, I made sure I avoided using my phone in my bag (only for emergency purposes), and kept my best friend--my Itouch, at home. It was EXTREMELY difficult. Not listening to any music on my bus ride to school was literally like HELL. I was just like "what should I do?" and "I am so bored!". I couldn't last, but it was alright after twenty minutes when I got to school. But then as the day went by, I just couldn't do anything. I was so bored. Yes, in the end I gave up. Not because I was bored, but because there was nothing to do. I realized that I depended on the several media forms that I own. Its interesting because initially I thought I could live a day without my needs. But I couldn't, and I did go on Facebook. 


Being a way from the media life makes me feel isolated. I had no contact with anything. I technically can't even go on to BBC News on my laptop! Thats like keeping myself away from the worlds news!


Its too difficult, but maybe some other day? :)

I Can't Spell?

Over the winter break, I was just writing my college supplements and I realized something. I couldn't spell certain words. I spelled definitely like "definitly" and different as "differrent". I was shocked by the fact that I forgot how to spell such simple words. But then I began to look at why. Why do I have such stupid spelling errors? In fact, forget just me,  I know others who spell terribly, probably worse than me! "Speek" instead of Speak, "weather" when they mean "whether", "collage" instead of college. It's really ridiculous. But what I realized was that these errors primarily come up because of the new tool on our belove computers: SPELLCHECK. Spell check checks whether your spelling is correct, and people these days begin to rely too much on it. Instead of hearing someone say "oh, I spelled that wrong so let me check how its actually spelled", I hear "don't worry about the spelling and grammar mistakes, Spell Check will do it for ya". It's pathetic. We're seniors, most of us are 18, and we don't even know how to spell simple words. Clearly, these computers and SPELLCHECK are making us stupider. 

Digital School Library

As I was looking at all the comments, I couldn't just agree to one. In a way, my attitudes weren't best expressed in any of these comments, but I can combine. I would agree with Brieanne Warren and David Bockoven. I agree with David because it is irritating being in front of the bright screen for hours, trying to learn. In fact, you would get more information reading a normal book than an online book. Also, the sounds of the computers can't keep you focused for a long time. You are bound to get annoyed after a few minutes in a room filled with laptops and computers making those "zzz" sounds. In addition, I also agree with Brieanne Warren because she states how people aren't doing what they are supposed to be doing when they are on the computer. In other words, people get distracted. This is completely true. If you are reading a book, you are going to focus only on the book. If you are going to read online, you are going to focus on your Facebook, your Skype, your online story, and much more!
I agree with all of this. In fact, if I would be writing a research paper, I would want books to get my facts. Going on the Internet would waste time for me because there would be so many distractions!

Sports and Show Business

Just like how Ronald Reagan said "politics is like show business", so is sport. Of course, sport has to be entertaining and thats the main part of the game. Football, however, has much more to just entertainment. Fans have a huge impact on football, who tend to get emotional when their supporting team loses out. But I just read about the sacking of Chris Hughton, who just recently managed Newcastle United. Hughton, who has proven to create impressive results against top teams like Chelsea, Arsenal, and Tottenham, was sacked on Sunday. According to the Daily Mirror and Eurosport, Chris Hughton was sacked because he failed to bring a team that would produce "show business". After the 5-1 victory over Sunderland, he was "milking the crowd" or getting the crowds attention, but that was only once. The owner of the club, Mike Ashley, said he was disappointed with the performances and were "boring". Despite coming back up from the second division, Hughton's team have performed well enough to get a ranking in the mid table.

Is Julian Assange a Terrorist?

Much has been said in the past two years about the WikiLeaks, which is an non-profit media organization created by Julian Assange in 2006. These documents have been harmful to families and individuals across the world, threatening the lives of several. Today, some consider Assange as a terrorist. I was asked in my International Relations class not too long ago a similar question. Mrs. Shapira asked me, "Falak, do you think Assange is a terrorist, or a freedom fighter?" We were actually learning about what the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter is, and Assange just came up. We spoke about Assange with a guest speaker in the International Relations class. People are scared of him because he has caused trouble with many people. However, I won't agree. I think Assange is a freedom fighter, or a normal human being. So what if he leaked those documents? Yes, they revealed secrets. But we live in a democratic world, and I think the media should be exposed to the truth and what is really going on in the world. Lets take for example that attack by the US forces in Iraq. I saw it on an interview of Assange that was posted on Aadesh's blog and on Moodle. The video footage that was leaked showed US forces attacking from helicopters, not knowing who exactly the targets are. Thinking that they were terrorists or anti-Americans, the went for the blow. However, several international journalists and Iraqi boys were killed. Innocent people's lives were taken away. How can Assange be considered a terrorist for showing the truth? Don't you all agree that whatever action you take, you must be ready for its consequences? Assange is a true democrat, and I completely think that there should be no secret kept away from the media.

And take a look at this video. It talks about the reactions of the Iraqi public after the documents on the US attacks on innocent people were exposed.

Al Jazeera Reports on Iraqi Reaction

Is Politics Really Entertainment?

When Ronald Reagan was quoted, "Politics is just like show business" in the Postman's book Amusing Ourselves to Death, I was quite surprised. I won't completely disagree with what Postman said in that particular chapter, because it is partially true. It is true that politicians use TV commercials as part of their campaign methods, and it is true that they are considered as celebrities in some societies. But I don't think politics can be termed as "entertainment". Politics is still serious today. I mean you do see Obama and James Cameron taking trips every month to visit other countries and improve foreign relations. You do know about the important meetings between world leaders. You do have the UN as well, no? I remember watching the news in India where one of the celebrities, John Abraham, was being interviewed about the elections. Abraham was expressing his anger towards those who weren't voting, mainly the poor, because he said that "it is their leader who will be making their laws!". Quite disturbed he was.

But that's one example. Look at he past US history presidents. Postman says that people vote based on appearance. Sure, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Carter, and Nixon were all slim and good looking men. But if you look back into history Mr. Postman, you'll see that this doesn't happen all the time. Franklin Delano Roosevelt was rather big and buff. He wasn't obese, but he was definitely bigger than all the presidents I just listed. He was arguably the best president the United States has ever had. Clearly, Postman didn't have all his facts right. Maybe it is because today's generation is easier to manipulate from all the commercials. Maybe Roosevelt was lucky (he wasn't). What my main argument here is that though Postman has a point, its not always like that.

The Importance of a Name?

When you see laws or acts being passed by the legislature, you will either understand the act or be confused about it all by the name. Now lets just take the Emancipation Proclamation.

Names of Group Members: I was in India for my cousins wedding, so I am working on this alone. 

What policy or Act were you assigned? Emancipation Proclamation

What did it say? Basically emancipated all of those who were working under forced labor from the rebellious states. In other words, it freed all black slaves from the rebellious states.  

When was it passed or proposed? It was passed in 1863.  

What were the important events going on when it was passed or proposed? Well it was the Civil War. The North had an abolition movement that the South really disliked, so they seceded. President Lincoln finally admitted that the Civil War was being fought for the end of slavery. 

Who favored it and why? The North would obviously favor it because they were the side that wanted to have the abolishment of slavery in the South. Also African Americans would be in favor of this because they would be free. 

Who opposed it and why? The south with its farmers and plantation owners. They would want these slaves because the slaves would help them grow crops that would be sold in the market. All the profit they earn would be the theirs. Slaves wouldn't even get a penny. 

List any special impact that it had on particular demographic groups:

 Northerners

Abolitionists 

African Americans 

Is the current title truthful, or does it mask the content of your policy or act?

 The current title is truthful. It is a proclamation of emancipation, or freedom. Its freeing all the African Americans. Also considering the time period, it is easy to tell that the act was talking about freeing slaves. 

Which target audiences are likely to see the title as accurate?

 I'm sure the African American's and the slaves would have seen this title as accurate, as it was something they really wished and dreamed for. 

Which target audiences are likely to see the title as misleading?

 The southern plantation owners. They really feared of this. 

Which group(s) of people would favor keeping the name as is and why?

I think the abolitionists and the slaves in the south because they would obviously want it to be an important document that freed them. In fact, I think everyone TODAY would like the name to be kept the way it is because the name is truthful. 

Which group(s) of people would want to change the name and why? What more accurate phrase or title might they use instead? (Use the back, if needed). 

Well, I really think that the slaves from the NON rebellious states would want the change in the name. You see, not all slave states joined the Confederacy in the Civil War. And the Emancipation Proclamation didn't free the slaves in the slave states that were part of the  Union. So I think they would want the name to change, because it may confuse several slaves.