The Fear to Stand Up

In all honesty the War on Iraq has been a distant memory from my thought process. I think not only because I was about eight when America was attacked in 2001, but also because my thoughts on any war are not in favor. During 2001-2003 when chaos and terror spread throughout the U.S I was too busy being a kid, like I should have been. When I look back today, in my state of age, twenty-two, I still feel the same as I did back then. Obviously I have obtained more knowledge and understanding on the matter, but why does war exist? I most definitely support my country and I am so thankful for the people who are willing to risk everything they have to protect our country. Although this statement becomes elastic in my mind, when in relation to 9/11. I say this because I have always felt that war is not the answer and during this time there was not concrete proof to kill thousands of lives on both sides during this war. I feel ashamed to think that journalists, the U.S government, and many other leading roles attempted to support something that was not even fully visible. How can we support and encourage a situation if we are so strongly being unfairly persuaded? The creation of "probable cause" throughout the process was in order to stir up patriotic feels in attempt to get all Americans on the same page.

For a society that is feeling helpless, the only thing to do is to unite together. Creditable news sources were feeding this gullible society with hate, false information, and untalented journalism. The reason I say untalented journalism is not stating that these sources were uneducated, but because they were only writing what was selling at the time, true or not. Fear filled these sources, not with the fact that the United States was at war, but with the fact that these journalists feared being different and calling out so-called, "experts" on the War on Iraq.

With all this being said, journalism is a form of freedom of speech, but were the journalist involved with the War on Iraq really free?

You Never Know Who You Are Going to See

The article relating to dressing well and testing scores stuck out most predominantly because of my love for fashion. You most likely will not see me dressed down, and especially you will not see me without make up. I am a strong believer to always look presentable, approachable, and well cute!

My mother always and still preaches to me that, "you never know who you are going to see." Even if you are running errands throughout the day, that is the most prominent time to run into that old boss or maybe even an ex-lover! OH the horror to think that you may not look your best, and obvious that you are in fact, not doing better!

Pairing the right top with your footwear is not only about looking awesome, but the way that one dresses is one way to express their personality! What I decide to wear is a physical representation of who I am and I enjoy expressing myself, because what is the point of looking the same as everyone else? From the article, Hannah points out the likely correlation that what you wear could potentially help you on exam day. She states that there is no proven fact yet, but does hint at the underlying effects that apparel may have on one's self-esteem. I, in fact must agree with this statement presented. For presentations, one is told to "dress your best" for numerous reasons. To look professional, pleasant to watch, and one that I will elaborate on the most, is the fact to feel confident. I don't know about you, but I honestly would not buy anything from someone wearing sweat pants and a mismatched shirt. In order to feel confident one must psychologically and physically meet their own personal standards. So if you are trying to pitch an idea, not only should you feel internally good about yourself, but a good appearance can play a role in one's overall confidence. Get your audience nice and buttered up while you happen to be "killing" the presentation because your outfit is on point and the whole class is interested in what YOU have to say.
In relation to media effects and priming, how well do you think your audience would remember your presentation according to your confidence level? Although the correlation has not been directly proven on this matter, the overall context must flicker a light bulb.

Point of Vew

There is so much buzz and hate towards our police officials nationwide. The stories and incidents just like any situation have a, "he said, she said" dilemma which forces executive decisions to be made. The decisions may not  be appreciated by all viewers but something must be decided. Body cameras, and patrol car dash cams are required by the police force in order to capture all angles of any given situation.While the intentions of these cameras are good, sometimes the point of view that the camera is capturing may be construed. This observation can "prioritize officers point of view" and can better be refereed to as "camera perspective bias." The cameras are meant to have a better representation of what actually happened in a situation and with of course each individual's statement (officer, suspect, bystanders). Now in the heat of the moment it may hard to recall what actually happened because honestly a situation can take a turn at any moment. The footage caught on camera may be obvious or maybe not so much. On the website I thought it was very intriguing how throughout the site, multiple choice questions followed video clips demonstrating officer/individual encounters. Each clip had different view points but I was able to answer the questions correctly or I chose the answer that had the highest percentage of approval. In most instances actions were obvious to me, but in one clip I chose that the "fleeing suspect" fell, when actually the demonstration stated that the suspect was tasered and that is why he fell. So even though I thought I was so certain, it really is difficult on seeing the full truth from these types of camera footage. Honestly in my opinion, the cameras are positioned awkwardly leading to shaky footage and not accurate. A solution could possibly be a head cam but I don't know how well that would work. All in all the recorded evidence can either help or hurt all individuals involved, no matter how you look at it. The thought of just doing away with these cameras until a stable shooting method is invented, comes to mind.That is a little unrealistic but the footage caught is not quite accurate and the story or situation now has opportunities to be skewed or altered. As a society why are we creating the opportunity for alternatives in a story for either the suspect at hand or even the police officer? I know the presence of the body cameras mean well, but after watching the video clips, I do not feel as certain as I did before watching them. This is a scary thought and I hope more research can lead into this epidemic so we as a nation can all put faith back into our police forces.

What Catches the Public Eye?

News agencies must put into consideration who is the targeted audience upon publishing an article. For example, if the topic is over violence, the agency probably would not put a headline reading, "Happy Fighting!" This would not make sense and could mislead the viewers. Reaching out to a particular audience has much to do with the headline or title, visuals, and most importantly the text. To go more into detail about the text, I would like to state that specific words or phrases can grab the audience inward or very much push away. When I read the article over Robin William's passage, I could not believe that I did not see the "Genie, you're free" post by @TheAcademy. It is very alarming that this brand would try to glamorize the fact that this was a suicide case. Especially using a reference from a Disney Princess classic. I do however, understand that @TheAcademy meant the best intentions but failed to capture the true essence of William's life and passing. The post came off to be insensitive and in a playful manner. Suicide is not a joking subject and many individuals contemplate each day about their life. So for @TheAcademy to display Robin William's successful suicide as a cartoon escaping reality, is disturbing. The overall thought for language and perception is words and visuals can send very strong messages. One must view a story or opinion in all different aspects. Therefore the whole picture should have a long thought process and should always manage the possible outcomes, in a positive or negative light.


via GIPHY

Let's Take the Easy Route!

I found the 6 Degrees of Plagiarism . . . to be a very interesting read. The relation to political figures having the audacity to steal another one's work without credit is quite alarming. I, myself at the beginning of my college career, unknowingly plagiarized an assigned essay topic. I know what you are thinking, "how do you unknowingly?" Well upon my visit to the assistant dean's office, I felt like my preparation for college was not set to the proper standard. What I mean by that is that my high school teachers, I feel did not prepare me for citations. Again, I know what you might be thinking, no I was not the student who skipped or slept during lessons. In another instance, I would like to address Shia Labeouf's incident that he had a few years back. Within this incident, or should I say plagiarism scandal, Shia was somewhat of a director and he supposedly had this brilliant idea for his next movie and went to town on creating a script. When everything was laid out for others to view and critique, the reactions were flattering. Well not from one particular individual, someone viewing Labeouf's work felt the urge to think that this work seems all too familiar. And indeed it was, Shia had stolen another author's work and wanted to turn it into a film. The resemblance was scary, and for that Labeouf had plagiarized. His work therefore was to never be looked at the same. His lack of crediting the proper author, left him with nothing and a loss of a huge appraisal group. The point to be made here, is that there is a difference between not knowing, and plain stealing. With integrity and honesty built into someones efforts, the reward will seem that much better. Take a second before clicking the copy and paste option, and think about originality and what the future will hold if you follow through. Everyone should know being original adds way more "cool points" versus being lazy.In relation to the reading over climate change, the "doubters" can be compared to those who plagiarize. These possible candidates for doubting or flat denying climate change would get along well with those who steal other peoples work. The comparison is not blunt, but it is presently vague. For those who do not want to believe that we as humans are burning too much into our everyday world, then I cannot help but to think that they are too lazy to piece together the fact that are so very much visible. If the "non-believer" were to take there time to look at the scientific findings to support climate change, and then take the information into consideration, their opinions may be altered. If this is not the case, then the denial is real and very much like the plagiarizing politician, the facts are not welcomed and the easy route is taken!