In seventh grade my father brought me to the Madison Art House Cinema to see a new documentary by a film maker who had sparked my interest when I saw him on Oprah. The film make was Michael Moore, and the movie was Bowling for Columbine, a movie that would launch my interest into politics. A move that would have more of an effect on the direction of my life perhaps more so than any other media source. With out this man's courage and undeniable film making technique on addressing violence in America I may never have found my own courage to find answers.
Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine would become the second highest grossing documentary of all time, only to be second to his later film Fahrenheit 9/11. It would receive multiple awards, including an Oscar and be featured on over 100 top ten movie lists. However most importantly it would spark a conversation in America about gun violence. Most importantly, people would begin to feel comfortable about talking about Columbine. To think about that day.
His official website has become a one way ticket to slew of information encouraging people to question what is going on. For those who claim him to be a man who manipulates facts to fit his own opinion he opened a page on the site for each of his films, presenting the irrefutable evidence.
For my paper I will use his BFC Fact Check page, which uses sources from all over the media and government, both pre-BFC and post. This will inevitably prove to be a valuable source for this topic at hand.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Searching for Answers
Its a vivid memory now, I was only in third grade when it all happened, but yet it would all prove to be a trigger in my life. A question that would push me forward into a life of trying to find answers.
The school doors are flung open, students file out with tears streaming down their cheeks, trembling, struggling to stand. They are met with a swarm of guns pointed in their direction, an all too real and horrifying sight that makes the tears flow faster. A voice echos for them to put their hands in the air. Helicopters circle overhead, as students struggle to find the strength to look up. A swarm of men dressed in black armor surround the building yielding guns. They stand still and wait as the kids, each one a suspect files out. In side, a gun shot rips through the library.
The United States of America is the only nation in the world where so many people of the same nation kill one another. It is also home to the record of youngest murderers. On April 20, 1999 a massacre would occur in Littleton, Colorado when two teenage boys would enter their high school with guns, and begin to open fire on their peers.
Why is there this surge of violence among the youth in our nation? Where does it stop being a system of blame and a system of action? These are questions where answers, and blame, can be found on hundreds of different variables. However one thing is for certain, everybody has an answer.
The school doors are flung open, students file out with tears streaming down their cheeks, trembling, struggling to stand. They are met with a swarm of guns pointed in their direction, an all too real and horrifying sight that makes the tears flow faster. A voice echos for them to put their hands in the air. Helicopters circle overhead, as students struggle to find the strength to look up. A swarm of men dressed in black armor surround the building yielding guns. They stand still and wait as the kids, each one a suspect files out. In side, a gun shot rips through the library.
The United States of America is the only nation in the world where so many people of the same nation kill one another. It is also home to the record of youngest murderers. On April 20, 1999 a massacre would occur in Littleton, Colorado when two teenage boys would enter their high school with guns, and begin to open fire on their peers.
Why is there this surge of violence among the youth in our nation? Where does it stop being a system of blame and a system of action? These are questions where answers, and blame, can be found on hundreds of different variables. However one thing is for certain, everybody has an answer.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Niether WIns
In the classes latest assignment to write a comparison essay we were given the opportunity to read two articles from The New York Times that compared two different issues, on of which involved two brothers involved in the Blackwater scandal and the other of which dealt with two motor vehices. While the two articles essays show clear separation in genre they display a similar ability of comparison.
The article in regard to the Krongard brothers controversy brushes on slight comparisons of the two men and how they differ from one another, even pointing out their lack of contact with each other. Where are the car article makes two clear distinctions on the Ford Sport Trac and the Chevy Avalanche. In the car article there is an abundant amount of information given to help the reader pick out the best car for them, in the other article there is no winner.
The ending result of both articles can be summed up with the ending statement from the car article, "Are either of them a good value? No, not really." Where it concludes that neither vehicle is the best buy, and in the Blackwater case the article ends with stressing a lack of value and rust in Buzz Krongards testimony. Both cases display a frustration with their represented, "Product."
The clear similarity between the two NYT pieces is their formal writing style and their conclusions, where in that they are conclusions that lead you down a dead end. One article has not yet been able to have an ending written, and the other simply states you're better off with neither.
The article in regard to the Krongard brothers controversy brushes on slight comparisons of the two men and how they differ from one another, even pointing out their lack of contact with each other. Where are the car article makes two clear distinctions on the Ford Sport Trac and the Chevy Avalanche. In the car article there is an abundant amount of information given to help the reader pick out the best car for them, in the other article there is no winner.
The ending result of both articles can be summed up with the ending statement from the car article, "Are either of them a good value? No, not really." Where it concludes that neither vehicle is the best buy, and in the Blackwater case the article ends with stressing a lack of value and rust in Buzz Krongards testimony. Both cases display a frustration with their represented, "Product."
The clear similarity between the two NYT pieces is their formal writing style and their conclusions, where in that they are conclusions that lead you down a dead end. One article has not yet been able to have an ending written, and the other simply states you're better off with neither.
Friday, November 9, 2007
Jam This
Cell phones, perhaps one of the most profitable and innovative inventions of the last century have turned into an epidemic as useful as a vacine and as deadly as the plague. A double edged sword. For as useful as they may be they are hardly ever used for their real purpose, the abiity to get a hold of somebody from any location when their is no ther form of communication. Infact they are msore used to just get a hold of people with no merrit, n purpose other than the fact that the ability is there and mans unwillingness to look alone. By talking on the phone it looks lke you are not alone. So the masses chat and text, text and chat. And the bystanderds, those who are near a person on one of these free wheeling calls, have to take it all in, have to hear every drawn out detail of that persons conversation. Well not any more. Thanks t the invention of a cell phone jammer a person has the ability to jam the frequency service waves and force the persos phone to lose service...thus forcing them to shutup. Haleluiah! rIGHT? Not really, cell phone jammers are illegal , and perhaps righfully so.
Who gives you the riht to jsut block off somebodies conversation? Who knows what that conversations level of importance is? grant it if I had one of these jammers I would jam every person on a phone. I frequent NYC and one of the worst parts about the city is on the train rde there almost always I'm near some pin head who is yapping on their phone. It's horrible. And god knows the other person is always inconciderate, but you never are. And God knows that 9 out of the 10 users have zero importance with in their calls, their purose is to void their boredom. An architect named Andrew described to the NY Times how on his train ride he used a jammer to stop a passengers conversation, and all you can help but think of is the peace of mind.
Few will argue that it would be bliss to silence rambling self-concious iddiots and their phones in innapropriate places. Because let's face it, unless you are a doctor on call odds are you proboably don't need to answer that call, because odss are its just he baby sitter asking where the ketchup is.
Who gives you the riht to jsut block off somebodies conversation? Who knows what that conversations level of importance is? grant it if I had one of these jammers I would jam every person on a phone. I frequent NYC and one of the worst parts about the city is on the train rde there almost always I'm near some pin head who is yapping on their phone. It's horrible. And god knows the other person is always inconciderate, but you never are. And God knows that 9 out of the 10 users have zero importance with in their calls, their purose is to void their boredom. An architect named Andrew described to the NY Times how on his train ride he used a jammer to stop a passengers conversation, and all you can help but think of is the peace of mind.
Few will argue that it would be bliss to silence rambling self-concious iddiots and their phones in innapropriate places. Because let's face it, unless you are a doctor on call odds are you proboably don't need to answer that call, because odss are its just he baby sitter asking where the ketchup is.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
A Weapon of Choice: The Blog, a Growing Force
Blogs tend to be full of short opinionated commentaries. The most popular ones for the most part are celebrity or politically based. Most notably these blogs all tend to exert a politically incorrect point of view, one you would never read on a CNN.com or MSNBC.com.
Some blogs have evolved far beyond just a blog. The # 2 most viewed blog, TMZ.com has just recently become a TV show, bringing a whole new audience to the blogosphere. Also the wildly eccentric Perez Hilton has made himself into a celebrity, having cameos through major TV shows and feature films all because of his tasteless gossip blog. Those two blogs specialize in celebrity gossip and rely on people like Britney Spears and Lindsay Lohan to screw up for their own material. They ave launched a new market for paparazzi photos, a place where photos can be posted on the net just seconds after they are taken.
Then there's the semi-more respectful blogosphere of political pundits. People who caral their opinions on campaigns and officials with the desire of being heard. One of the most noteable is the multi-millionaire Andrew Sullivan's blog. Where Andrew Sullivan, a once unknown reporter putts his spin on the political issues of the day. He has been given a platform he, an openly-gay republican, might otherwise not have had. Through this he has become one of the top blogers in the world, making weekly appearances on political shows on all the major stations and being highly courted by the republican presidential candidates.
While all of these blogs offer a new and fresh take on issues that otherwise would just be reported and left flat, only for op-ed and TV hosts to opine on, they can also damage the careers of those that keep them. The once American queen of nice Rosie O'Donell got into huge trouble with ABC TV after she posted a picture of her child on her blog dressed like a terrorist. ABC demanded that she take the photos off, as she was already in hot water over remarks she had made about 9/11. Shortly there after she was fired from ABC, but she would go onto her blog to sound off against the company and the cast. showing that TV was no longer the only outlet.
Again with these situations we see the negatives. Blogs give whack jobs who believe that 9/11 was a set up a venue to voice their damaging opinions. While it is truly an American right, it is also a truly tasteless path. These hate filled writers do no good with their blogs and only show a dark negative side of the Internet. Through this we have seen paparazzi photos increase in demand, making the sport of hunting celebrities all the more profitable and the dangers ever more present. To the smart and needed political opinions that can slip out of control. Either way one thing is for sure, the Internet sure has changed the way things are done, and blogs have forever changed the landscape of American media and life.
Bill Clinton wrote in his ingenious book Giving that when he first entered the White House there were only 55 website on the Internet, when he left there were 90 million, and now another 8 years later there is a countless number with new websites being created every day. A force that has never been seen before, and a force that would be difficult if not impossible to contain now. Blogs are in essence, in their simplest form, a way one connection for the key board to become a weapon to the curious. A hand to mouth system that is on a fast track towards the future and is revolutionizing everything it passes.
Some blogs have evolved far beyond just a blog. The # 2 most viewed blog, TMZ.com has just recently become a TV show, bringing a whole new audience to the blogosphere. Also the wildly eccentric Perez Hilton has made himself into a celebrity, having cameos through major TV shows and feature films all because of his tasteless gossip blog. Those two blogs specialize in celebrity gossip and rely on people like Britney Spears and Lindsay Lohan to screw up for their own material. They ave launched a new market for paparazzi photos, a place where photos can be posted on the net just seconds after they are taken.
Then there's the semi-more respectful blogosphere of political pundits. People who caral their opinions on campaigns and officials with the desire of being heard. One of the most noteable is the multi-millionaire Andrew Sullivan's blog. Where Andrew Sullivan, a once unknown reporter putts his spin on the political issues of the day. He has been given a platform he, an openly-gay republican, might otherwise not have had. Through this he has become one of the top blogers in the world, making weekly appearances on political shows on all the major stations and being highly courted by the republican presidential candidates.
While all of these blogs offer a new and fresh take on issues that otherwise would just be reported and left flat, only for op-ed and TV hosts to opine on, they can also damage the careers of those that keep them. The once American queen of nice Rosie O'Donell got into huge trouble with ABC TV after she posted a picture of her child on her blog dressed like a terrorist. ABC demanded that she take the photos off, as she was already in hot water over remarks she had made about 9/11. Shortly there after she was fired from ABC, but she would go onto her blog to sound off against the company and the cast. showing that TV was no longer the only outlet.
Again with these situations we see the negatives. Blogs give whack jobs who believe that 9/11 was a set up a venue to voice their damaging opinions. While it is truly an American right, it is also a truly tasteless path. These hate filled writers do no good with their blogs and only show a dark negative side of the Internet. Through this we have seen paparazzi photos increase in demand, making the sport of hunting celebrities all the more profitable and the dangers ever more present. To the smart and needed political opinions that can slip out of control. Either way one thing is for sure, the Internet sure has changed the way things are done, and blogs have forever changed the landscape of American media and life.
Bill Clinton wrote in his ingenious book Giving that when he first entered the White House there were only 55 website on the Internet, when he left there were 90 million, and now another 8 years later there is a countless number with new websites being created every day. A force that has never been seen before, and a force that would be difficult if not impossible to contain now. Blogs are in essence, in their simplest form, a way one connection for the key board to become a weapon to the curious. A hand to mouth system that is on a fast track towards the future and is revolutionizing everything it passes.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Writing a college essayis a very delicate process. Its the writer's chance to attempt and sell themselves to a University or College, it's telling them why they should invest in you. To top it off you have to do this in a short amount of length, which means every word ccounts, every coma, every period makes a difference. I think it's very exciting, and I think to think of it otherwise can be paralyzing to the mind. You have to look at it as a chance to attempt and win people over, to tell a whole room of people why you are so great. I think that's really cool. The only problem is you only get to write one (for that college/university), and then thats it. Once you submit it its the ball is in their court. Will they submit you? If you don't submit yourself, why should they?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)