Donald Trump and Times Magazine

This week's blog is going to be able the alleged news bias and the misinformation our "Madam President" has tweeted about in the last week or so about how he turned down the whole TIME magazine's title of "Person of the Year" and ultimately how the people themselves take to the internet and troll the living hell out of this over grown man child and probably why we see the net neutrality situation occurring. I won't go into huge detail on each and every part of this because it will only be speculative due to the time crunching that will occur as we have finals coming up (btw best of luck for my peers and such. It's been a blast to have shared this experience and this year with y'all.)

So, this week I pulled my information from Politico yet again! I have really grown to love the fact that one story is backed by at least 3 articles having different views on said story. This was the exact premise of my blog in the first place so it has been good to be able to stream line by blog posts. 

The story has to do with Trump stating that he had to turn down the person of the year cover and all from TIMES magazine to which TIMES shot back stating that they had never offered this spot to the president. That could be simple because there are actually people out there in the world who deserve this position more than this man child (my words). More to the fact is that twitter blew up with people basically trolling the president in various ways (please click the link to see more information about this). As you are probably all aware if you have me on twitter, I have made it a point to leave comments on his statements as I find him to be the least credible individual on the planet and as much as I might not like CNN and their ways of presenting their stories there is still some shred of truth to their blog like story telling posts.The fact is, our news stations are corporate ran and as a result their sentimentalization of simple stories has grown quite large. 

This brings me to the fact that Net Neutrality is under fire currently and I personally think these situations are prime examples why that might be the case. There is a lot of internet traffic occurring which is good but I feel as though the pull of NN might be a way to which individuals are limited to their ability to seek out actual news and not the propagated stories to which our news sources allow us to believe. 

If you are not familiar with this then I IMPLORE YOU TO RESEARCH AND PLEASE LOOK INTO SIGNING THIS PETITION TO REJECT THE REPEAL OF NN BY THE FCC

here is the link 

I will leave this short and sweet and say this year has been one hell of a ride and I wish the best for you and yours. Happy Holidays and have a wonderful and safe New Years! 

Thank you!

New Tax Bill Gets Past the House!

So today the proposed tax bill made its way through the House of Representatives by a 22 vote margin. This is kind of huge due to the fact that a tax bill has not been passed like this in a while. Not a single democrat voted in favor for the bill and about a dozen Republicans voted against the bill but never the less it still went through. The thing is these bills often include more substance than just the issue of tax as we have seen time and time again when a huge bill makes its way through the house. The reality is that this bill if it makes its way further through the law making process will see itself change into something much different than what it currently is. For instance, the bill currently has within its content a repeal of the Affordable Care Act. This is huge because the president CANNOT line item veto the bill once it makes its way to his desk so if Trump really wants the bill to go through he will sign it without ever really looking into the fine print.  This bill is supposed to redistribute the tax burden on those states like New York and California who's personal state and sales tax are high and low tax states basically have to supplement the difference in taxes to those states. Personally, I'm broke as can be so no amount of tax change alters my life of roman noodles and $0.99 sandwiches.


As always, I have used Allsides (Politico) as my means of information because I like the approach of the website. The blog speaks on the subject and provides three separate stories from the LEFT, RIGHT, and CENTER. Please skim through them and consider each of their approaches and what information that they choose to provide. Make up your own conclusion on the subject and go from there.

Have a wonderful day and comment below if you feel so. :)

Politico - The Subtleties of Media Bias

This weeks post is going to recap on much of what we have learned in class about the media and its ultimate and unavoidable bias which comes with it. The article is found in their "Perspective Blog" section and is titled The Subtleties of Media Bias. I find this article extremely important because it speaks on the very point to which my blog is set up! I've spoken on this subject as well we have learned much of this in our readings. Media outlets are inherently bias and we often end up leaning toward the media to which cradles our ideas and political identify without ever really looking toward the other side of the fence for a better understanding of the information. I myself have found that finding the most unbias, neutral information within the media is more important. This blog states that doing so isn't always the best thing but that we should also willingly read information which comes from all sides of the spectrum. So what we read ultimately has a bias to it whether we realize it or not and this can be witnessed through what and how information is delivered to its consumers.


Types of Bias

1.) Bias by Omission.
2.) Bias by selection of sources.
3.) Bias by placement
4.) Bias by labeling
5.) Bias by spin

Each one of these forms of bias can be seen and understood once one admits to the fact that there is bias in all forms of information. By doing this one can read an article by FOX news and say, "hey they left out ____" or watch CNN and ask, "hey, this person really an "expert?" or "Why is President Trump's tweet more important than the issue in Flint?" Surely there are more important things to discuss than Don Jr's new tie he wore to an interview...



This blog goes on to speak on gate keeping bias to which conservative outlets tend to speak on illegal immigrants and the crimes in which they commit while liberal outlets speak on white terrorist occurrences which have been more frequent. In this, though both may be occurring both sources choose to speak on these subjects exclusively and because of this the fact is distorted and often made to seem more frequent than in reality. This is not to say the act should be taken any less than it is.

In addition, because of the ownership of the media outlet the advertising and corporate bias ultimately shapes the content and delivery of the information. Lastly, this blog speaks on tonal and concision bias which occur through the media. Tonal bias ultimately deals with the delivery of a story to which can be drastically different based on who you get the information from. This is something that I spoke on in one of my first blogs where RT (Russian Television) spoke on German-American relations if we were to go to war with North Korea. You did not hear about this in American media what so ever. Concision bias deals with the fact that information is compressed to the point where the entire subject matter cannot be discussed to a full understanding and because of this really important information is broken down into Powerpoint - bullet points of information to give a general overview of a story which often times makes something that is extremely important seem much less so.

Please take the time to read the blog from Politico and tell me what you think of this blog below. Since this has probably been one of the most busy looking blog I've posted lately I figure I'd wrap the blog up with some funny political cartoons. :) Goodnight

Russian manipulation of Facebook and Election

Hello again blog people! Here is another week where I'm going to bring you something from Politico. I know probably by this point you are noticing that my content is starting to get predictable in terms of where I'm getting my information. I have to admit I have been extremely busy and I haven't had the time to really look into a bunch of different sources to which I could pull from this particular website. I find this to be much more convenient. Never the less! I found this article I really like which speaks on the election (I'm sure we're all tired of hearing about it) and how the original investors of Facebook were actually Russian investors. We can all agree that Facebook has played a large part in how we all get our politically driven news sources and MEMES. So, in theory it could be safe to say that the investors to which helped fund Facebook in the beginning might control the content in which it produces and allows so in this idea it's accurate in saying how the speculations of "Russian involvement" could be plausible - however you might view it. Personally, I think it's iffy at best!




The story here goes on to say that Silicon Valley managed to get an investment from a Russian bank. This guy by the name of Yuri Milner invested around $850k of her own money into a company Donald Trump's step son Jared Kushner partially owns.

Apparently the bank is called VTB and was eventually sanctioned and is currently being investigated by the U.S. for its potential involvement in the 2016 election. As a general over statement it seems like there was investment in this company prior to it becoming public and in addition over time these folks grew in wealth and managed to pull some really big profits. There was a lot of people who refused to speak on the situation (I would assume because to them it's speculative) yet it seems really odd with all of this going on but in the same situation....I feel like it's possible that Silicon Valley is just a hot bed for investing toward technology and it could be a coincidence that the person who happen to invest in this company was Russian...or maybe not. I guess we will see as time goes by.

Weighing Immigration Status in The States

Hello everyone for our 11th week in the class (I think) hope you are all doing well with everything going on in the world. I am here once again with information to consider and hopefully offer something in terms of perspective on an issue which seems very important to many Americans - immigration policy and the over all impact to which these individuals have on our country and society as a whole. So, I'm not going to state my opinion on the matter because I like to think I see the big picture and understand why folks come over and I won't debate the legality of it because I mean let's face it...we've all run a red light or stop sign before knowingly. We've all jay-walked but it just seems like a better option than walking all the way to the cross walk so I won't go into all that.

So there are many issues in which people like to associate illegal immigration with such as crime and taking advantage of tax payers money where as others who defend it often say that these individuals take the jobs too low in wage or just undesirable for Americas to have. In addition to this (I'm personally stating this) I think the tax issue of undocumented workers is tricky because what is not paid to the state or federal income tax is most definitely being done so through sales tax. That's all I'll say on that.

I was looking for a number of pictures but some of which popped up made me feel uncomfortable to post up and I figure if that is the case then I don't want to be misunderstood as "this or that". Ultimately though what it understood whether you look at the immigration of those coming from economic crisis, religious persecution, war, etc.  Folks are coming to this country to start over and have a better life than they did before and that's all one can really ask for. Now, I know a lot of you will argue "well then they need to become citizens or what have you" but honestly how many of you actually know the process to which it takes to become a citizen or even to become a permanent resident for that matter? Never the less, here are two pretty cool websites which speak on the Pros and Cons of illegal immigration from ProCon.Org through AllSides (Politico) and an open debate on the subject brought you to by Debate.Org. I figure as an added bonus, if you are interested on steps to which it takes to get your Green Card or Citizenship HERE you are. There is a link box to the rightin this page that will bring you to everything. 

Also this site gives information on the cost to which it takes to become a citizen 


Green Card Costs <----Here. 

^^^^^^^ Can I just take a moment and ask why in the hell is her name "Test 5 Specimen?!" that's really sketchy to me.  This was pulled from the Immigration Direct website too.

Personally, I'd be screwed because I don't have that kind of money and time just lying around as I have bills to pay. I'm sure everyone else does too.

Anyway, there are a lot of steps to which one has to take just to be qualified to get the card or citizenship so I feel like it's a catch 22.

"Oh, how things have changed"

How is everyone this wonderful Sunday? I normally try and keep up with the class subject in terms of these blogs to keep the pace with the class and to better idea as to where you can find this weeks blog entry. In any case, I figured to kind of go with the original concept of the blog itself where I look at one story or an idea and show how different media sources write about the story to give you a better understanding of bias and the spin to which journalists use to shape an idea within their story.

In this weeks blog entry I figured that since I had so much to go off of I would pick a story...or speech which I actually really enjoyed which I didn't think I would. SO! A few years back (if anyone in the class is old enough to really remember him while he was in office) we had a man, a republican by the name George W. Bush or "Dubya" to which a lot of folks after a while felt like he wasn't the brightest bulb in the pack but lately with all the memes of him looking longingly at Michelle Obama (which personal I absolutely love and find hilarious) you kind of grow to miss the ol' idiot. Anyway, the man and his swagger gave a pretty damn good speech on where America needs to be and tried to remind us of what America stands for. 

This week and most likely the remainder of the class I will be pulling from politico because it gives the exact example as to what I was hoping to provide within my blogs. In this link below I will present the main story of   George W. Bush's speech which will open a link and provide an overview of his speech and then three sources to which leans to the left, right, and center but not on any one extreme but immediately even before reading any of the links you can see in the title itself how it may shape the way in which you go into the article right of the rip.


This video below is a speech he gave some years back and honestly it shows my age because I grew up at the end of my years in high school and then some after with him on television and through out the year 2000's. It's weird as I grow older how my feelings toward this man change with the more I know. 

But without any "dilly dally" here is the speech in which George W. Bush gave which I find to be just absolutely wonderful. I love to see old presidents get back up and speak. It kind of gives light as to what captivated the American people into voting for them in the first place without all the political influence involved to shape them and without the stress of political backlash.


Lastly, for those who still think George W. Bush in some way doesn't deserve a special place in American history... maybe these sweet...sweet moves will convince you otherwise. 


EDIT: I figure if everyone loves Michelle Obama and she's cool with o' Dubya then maybe he's alright hahah

Muckraking and the governement

Hello there! So for this weeks blog post I'm going over activist journalism and muckraking. In other words, when a journalist or media source uses a story to directly or indirectly influence people on a situation and as a result (sometimes) policy is set forth to correct the situation. More often than not these policies fail to be presented because it's not an issue to the public officials or that the people themselves are not aware. The American attention span on some issues are short term and because of that many of those in office to not find it worth while to actually go ahead and correct the issue itself or even to a point it's like opening up a can of worms and will be more trouble than it is worth that is...unless it provides upward movement for the individual's career who might implement the policy.


With the inequality becoming ever more of an issue as time goes by it would seem that there is a great need for activism journalism and muckraking to come back into prominence. Yes, I truly understand that it is of the utmost importance for a journalist to be objective but in these cases I find that it is more important for those who tell the story of the down trot to take a side clearly and firmly.

This article done by the Huffpost speaks upon the ever growing issue of homelessness which seems to be increasing as time goes by.  As the numbers stated in this article claim 22,000 homeless children in New York is an amazing number of homeless I fear that this number is probably conservative at best and the numbers are much higher. Still, this only touches on the homeless children and not the adults which I can assume is equal if not higher than that of this number shown. For a country which speaks on the importance and duty we have to this countries children - the fact that there are this many in New York ALONE is a scary truth that this country does not in fact give a damn about homeless and especially as it claims to follow Christian morals and principles. Would you know say that this is a corner stone to the religion?


Flint Michigan's water situation is a perfect example as to why muckraking needs to come back into the playing field ASAP! The fact is this issue has been going on for years now and more often than not unless you're near those who are dealing with this you only really ever hear about it in random situations that is ...if you're not one to seek out information about these sort of problems. It seems that there are no officials really being held accountable for this and there seems to be very little going on in the way to improve it either. You'll hear about those artists and athletes who are donating money to the problem but let's be honest, most of that money doesn't go completely to the problem to which the money is donated.



I think this cartoon of the situation is actually pretty spot on. It is brought to you by an article which was written by The Mercury News. That's mercury...both on the page and in the water ;) and honestly I could go into so many more issues here in terms of public issues which need to be brought to the attention of those in power but more importantly there needs to be a DEMAND for action and not simply words. If they are unable to do anything about it then we as citizens need to hold them accountable until someone does something about it!

I will leave this blog post short and sweet for the sake of time but I wanted to leave this last picture up so you get what kind of issue this is...and really think about it, would you drink this water?!

The Media and the Government

Alright, so in this weeks blog I was going to go with the run of the mill, "Pick a few stories from different news sources" but then I got to thinking about the initial bias in which each site has. Whether or not the media selection leaned left or right has influenced what stories in which I pick and how it shows the spin which is presented. As a result I decided to instead pick stories which the subject falls on all three of the political branches of the government: President, Courts, and Congress. To do this, I made it a point to find a news outlet which could be framed as neutral or centralized.

"But Tim, how do you know if the source is neutral or not?"

Well, I happen to come across a website called "Allsides" which I thought was pretty neat.
 :)
----- CLICK ON THE LINK

So, I decided to go with Politico as my news source because it falls into the spectrum in which I was hoping to use. The first story will be about issues involving congress, the second, about the courts and lastly about the president. I'm doing the stories in this order as a mirror of how it is in the media normally just as a refresher. I hope all my links, pictures, and such work so here we go!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1.)The title in this article is: 9 GOP senators ask ATF to review gun "bump stocks"
     - Nine republican senators have asked for the ATF to review an accessory which was used in the shooting in Las Vegas which modifies semi-automatic rifles. Many other pieces of legislation are looking to be passed or considered which would bar accessories on weapons and the such issues as a means to reduce occurrences which took place in Las Vegas. Even though this is the case many republicans are not going to get on board with Democrats looking to pass legislation which would ban the sale of bump stocks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


2.) Supreme Court eyes partisan gerrymandering.
      -The GOP has taken part in a number of cases were gerrymandering has taken place in order to get their advantage over the Democrat party. The court found this to be unconstitutional in many cases and stated that reshaping districts to be predominately republican or democrat violates the right to free-association. Many of these states or districts themselves are becoming increasingly polarized and this can be a problem with political control. The court is taking place in this issue in an attempt to reduce partisan bias rethink district maps.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


3.) Trump: Tillerson could be 'a little bit tougher'
     - A report came out yesterday about the Security of State Rex Tillerson and Trump's relationship which has recently under scrutiny with Tillerson calling Trump a moron "allegedly". Yet, in this case the article speaks on Trumps opinion on Tillerson and his need to be "tougher". Despite the allegations that Tillerson is not a "fan" of the president both individuals maintain that their  relationship is "great". Trump also extended compliments to John Kelly who has been doing an "incredible job". Never the less, with the conflicts arising with good ol' Korea...maybe this kind of bickering in the white house isn't necessary but you can't be mad at someone for their criticism of the president. You either love or hate the guy.

Freedom of the Press VS National Security

So, in class now we are speaking on which should hold precedent, if the freedom of the press is more important than national security. We had two examples in which allowed for a critical breakdown of which is more important and why. It is easier to understand why the safety of our nation is important but at the end of the day that seems to become an ever encompassing problem for the people to whom the protection contains. Two examples in which we spoke on was that of the Iraq prison scandal of Abu Ghraib and that of the many, many undercover files in which Wikileaks indiscriminately leaked. In addition to these there are a number of other "whistle blowers" such as Edward Snowden who uncovered the NSA surveillance of on the American populace on its own soil to Mark Felt which took park in the Watergate Scandal which ultimately led to the end of Nixon's presidency. This situations ask of the American people, "what do you value more?" Comfort food is always nice but too much of it will lead to nothing good and this goes in the same path with regards to safety or the illusion itself. Would one rather be mindfully ignorant to what is going on around them for the comfort of safety or would they property state truth down knowing full and well the fresh new hell in which we have permitted to go unchecked by our own complacency.

The man in the picture above is Julian Assange. Many of you are probably aware of this man and know that he has become a bit of a target around the world for his leaking of many classified, highly sensitive material and documents in which many claim jeopardizes American efforts around the world both in war and in "peaceful diplomatic" efforts.  Yet, the real question here lies in whether or not you believe in "free press" or not. Does what this man strike you as criminal if the activities that were being taken part in were criminal acts themselves? The same would go for Edward Snowden. Do you think what he did was "un-American" because it was an act against an American agency or is it in fact our burden and responsibility to know what is actually going on with our hard earned tax dollars which are funding such activities. When the pentagon randomly looses trillions of dollars and seems to have no idea where it goes, does one not wonder if there as actual knowledge on the location of where the money went or is this truly an "oops" moment from this organization and if that's the case, how has no one been held accountable for such a fumble? When weapons cache seem to fall in the hands of "insurgence" in civil wars and instances like ISIS is it truly a fumble on the part of our military or is this just a way to perpetuate a  conflict to which we have a stake in? Is this lack of transparency truly for the American betterment and in what was is our safety truly in danger when most of these people in these countries barely have homes? Does our involvement simply not create the very problem we claim to want to end? People may look at these individuals are only wanting to disrupt the status quo but is it not in the best interest of the American people to know good and damn well what is going on in their own country? Is this not the corner stone to our great country that we are informed as to what our money is going toward and what our money is ultimately helping to create and more importantly can we truly be content within our ignorant complacency to allow such misuse of tax dollars go to stripping what little others have left in the world for the betterment of our "feelings" of safety?

All I will do is drop the link to the wikileaks page and allow you to comb through documents in which you personally might find interesting. I know normally I would go through and give you a number of different news outlets on the subject but as all the media is owned and operated through a handful of corporations to which their entire mantra is how to turn a profit this blatant censorship and spin in the media of discrediting whistle blowers comes off to me as an attempt to cover their profits and nothing more.

https://wikileaks.org

I will let you decide what you think and feel on the subject. My job here is not to alienate anyone but to provide the same information many of these brave vigilantes of truth and justice seek to present to you as well!

Good day and stay informed!
Thank you. 

Facts Over The Narrative

So this week we've gone over the fact that a narrative of a story with or without truth can be seen as a powerful tool to shape public opinion. Perfect example was the NAACP excerpt which ultimately ran on FOX news and resulting in the firing of Shirley Sharrod. This is a prime example as to where narrative can be run as news without the full story and the facts behind it. It is powerful when those who present the news do not do their job effectively and again, simply sensationalize the news. Though this weeks blog is not about that.

This weeks blog is about Mexico's earthquakes and of its people. I will refrain from personal 'narrative' and present articles from some different news sources than I normally use (excluding Al Jazeera because they are my personal go to for news).


So, the two new news sources which will be used this week are Mexico News Daily because I find that it is more fitting to use a news source to which the disaster originated and a a video which comes from The Independent Daily Edition. I'm trying to expand my pool of new sources so that I do not limit my pool to which I can pull information. I believe this is the key point to the basis of my blogs and I wish to continue to expand upon that point.

Let's first start with The Independent Daily Edition's article which has a video. I find that this would be the best way in which to display the situation. Imagery it a very powerful tool to use when it comes to displaying the severity of a situation. This video can be found of that link below:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mexico-earthquake-today-latest-mexico-city-magnitude-6-tremor-damage-a7963211.html




I know this video isn't much to go off of but it shows the beginning of the situation which I thought was important. This site also shows a dozen pictures of the aftermath of the 6.2 earthquake which hit Mexico City. Must of the damaged seem to be set up by the previous earthquake which occurred just a few weeks prior which involved an earthquake with a 7.1 on the Richter Scale.

http://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/damaged-buildings-total-10000-in-puebla/



The second article which is pulled from Mexico News Daily was of the first earthquake which hit not only Mexico City but many neighboring areas surrounding the capital. Many people are left without homes and jobs as buildings lay in ruin. Many of you may have heard about the school building crumbling while trapping people inside and I'm sure you've heard about a number of instances where gas pipes were damaged in the quake leaving buildings spewing flames from the rubble but worse than anything here are the lives lost in the damage. As many of these buildings where build over a decade ago their fortitude against such an earthquake proves little to no resistance. So where does that leave thousands of citizens to do? For now, all they can do is attempt to find their loved ones and wait for aid from the government and additional global actors.


The last paragraph from this page reads:

"Hundreds of homes were severely damaged including around 70% of all buildings in the town of Metepec, where scores of homes collapsed completely. One Metepec resident whose house collapsed says she “will have to start from zero” and called for the donation of blankets and tents for people who have been forced to sleep in the street."
I'm putting this up as a reference point. The town/city you live in now...what would 70% look like?

Lastly, Al Jazeera

http://www.aljazeera.com/Search/?q=Mexico%20EarthQuake

Now, I could pick an article and present it but instead simply chose to search a number of articles and let you guys pick from them. The selection ranges from factual straight forward news pieces to op-eds and interviews. From here give more of a general informational umbrella in which you can take part of reading more on the subject. People also seem to fail to realize that when Houston was hit Mexico sent aid to their neighbors north. It is important for people to realize that in times of crisis we are all human, living on this earth. These boarders in which we set up for ourselves which govern what we determine is "normal" and what "defines" us aren't anything but boxes which we simply agree upon or fall subject to. Yes, culturally there are things that divide man and set there are many other things which will do the same but when these sort of things occur it's important to remember that most, if not all of that is some what superficial and nonsensical when in the end I think it's safe to say we all just want to live freely and happily. Thank you!

Addition Sites on the subject added after the initial post formation.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2-devastating-earthquakes-hit-mexico-many-weeks-heres/

https://www.rt.com/news/404298-mexico-earthquake-hits-usgs/

Ways to help!

Remember!!! Do your research before donating! There are people out there looking to scam good intentions. Don't let crooks take away from the impact you have as good, charitable folks! The people of Mexico can really use a helping hand in these times of need. Thanks!

https://donate.worldvision.org/give/mexico-earthquake-relief

https://www.unicefusa.org/donate/disaster-relief-help-protect-children-harm/32787?utm_campaign=2017_misc&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=0178/2/_Google&utm_content=Mexico_Earthquake&ms=cpc_dig_2017_misc_0178/2/_Google_Mexico_Earthquake&initialms=cpc_dig_2017_misc_0178/2/_Google_Mexico_Earthquake

There is a wonderful list of donation sources on:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/heres-can-help-victims-mexico-earthquake/

Media Owners

The world of media has grown from a vast market of independent companies which provided a wonderful service to those seeking information. This has not become the case in the last decade or two since the deregulation over the media and public airwaves. Larger companies have bought out many aspects of these sectors and has made it very difficult to compete on an independent scale in the sake of cost. This does not mean that there still aren't smaller companies which do so but it isn't the same playing field in which we all have known in the past. I don't think it's something that we can go back to in this day and age. There is nothing wrong with this but it must be understood that change is needed now more than ever. Those who do not recognize this change will ultimately fall by the wayside of change and movement. One thing I have learned from this class is that as technology changes to make things easier to obtain information so too does the quality of the "mass production" of information in the case of general goods and services. In this blog I will provide articles which speak upon the world of media growing ever smaller and well diversified and how these companies now are more interested in profit margins than that of the information which these news companies, by definition are meant to provide.

Corporate media is a term which refers to a system of mass media production, distribution, ownership, and funding which is dominated by corporations and their CEOs.

FreePress.net 

https://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart

This website provides are wonderful example which breaks down each part of the media and gives the main companies which involved within the production of media within each area. Please look for yourselves as how small the "pond of providers" has become and ask yourself, "Is it possible that there is a filter on which the information flowing through these sources might reduce the flow of information?" I ask this because it is important to understand the inherent bias which might occur due to the sake of profit margins each company/corporation. It is important to understand the advertising and marketing schemes in which might be used to entire those demographics that are more likely to consume a produce via these ports of consumerism of products, both entertainment and information - "infotainment".

Keep in mind, the airwaves for T.V, Radio- Cable and Telecommunications are all considered a balic public necessity which allows these companies to use them free of charge all the while making huge profits for their companies. In each of these there are lobbyists who sway the companies to provide specific information, products, and form the narrative of each for which ever agenda is footing the bill. These services are intrinsically set up to provide for public a basic service which provides that same public with vital information and news; this has slowly been less of the case in my opinion as time as gone by.

BusinessInsider.com

http://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6

If you do not want to go to the link, I will provide the image from the article which I do think breaks down the general difference over the years in terms of control over the idea and how it has become a smaller pool of players across the board. The writer in this article speaks on how 50 companies provided the same services that basically 6 do today back in the 80's. She also states that this picture below is not up to date as GE does not own media companies anymore and so GE should be replace by Comcast, respectively.





Lastly, it would not be an integral part within the theme of this blog to simply speak upon the perceived negative attributes of corporate media without also providing information which speaks on the merits of such marriages within these companies and their ability to provide for their customers something in which smaller, independent companies may not be able to provide.

DoubleTheDonations.com

https://doublethedonation.com/why-corporate-social-responsibility-is-important/

Now, I have to admit I have never come across this website nor am I familiar with their lean in terms of where they stand in all this fun lovin' "hoopla"  (I wouldn't call this subject unnecessary but I just wanted to say "hoopla").

ANYWHO! 

This article does provide a pretty great break down of how corporate media has respectively provided services across the board, quantitatively and qualitatively.

The article starts off explaining what CSR is and how it has impacted society since taking a firm grasp of the media outlets.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a broad term used to describe a company’s efforts to improve society in some way.

This website is pretty great in terms of having data presented in case to grasp pictures and what not but I am a huge fan of tangible sources and from what I have found seems like the CIA doing an investigation on itself and finding no foul play occurred. I'm taking a policy analysis class as well which makes me want to look into the data which is provided. All data is important not simply the data which fits in the box you create. CONTEXT is key my friends.


I hope you guys enjoyed my article this week! Let me know what you think below in the comment box and as always if there is anyway to improve upon this let me know.

K. Thanks. Bye!

The Hard truth about Soft News

     So this week I was going to try and do something a little more interesting. As I've been extremely busy with my new job (full time and starting at 4 A.M) I haven't really had the time nor the energy to get school work and research done but since reporters can use soft news as a means of entertainment without boring the crap out of their readers/listeners I figure I'd do the same!

     I'm going to start off by giving you two articles about science and technology pulled from a couple preferred news outlets; Aljazeera (again) and let's go for BBC this time. Lastly, I'm going to pick an article that seems like something light but could have a possible "hard news" back story involved. The main reason for this in my opinion is sometimes soft news is much more entertaining for the ones reading or listening but there might be something much more important between the text. Much like those writing those articles I hope not to bore you with political drama that you might tune out of. So lets begin...

Edited: Turns out I went the other way around on this one or maybe it was soft news with an underlying sense of seriousness. I'll let you guys decide on it. Leave a comment...or not it's up to you.




     The first article of soft, entertainment new comes to you from Al Jazeera. I have always enjoyed their news so bare with me. With the earthquake in Mexico and the hurricanes hitting damn near the whole south end of the United States I wanted to show crazy occurrences which aren't going to end in sadness and loss. The 'nocturnal sun' is explained by Canadian scientists! This is a term that was used by the Romans during their time and in fact interestingly enough this 'nocturnal sun' does in fact tie in with all this severe weather! The combination of wind and high level energy coming from surface of the earth is referred to as "air glow". Anyway, watch the video and enjoy the sweet sweet knowledge and I hope you find it as interesting as I do. OH! and apparently you can read comfortably during this even in the middle of the night!


http://www.aljazeera.com/video/news/2017/08/canadian-scientists-explain-rare-nocturnal-sun-phenomenon-170824110314641.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This second article come to you from BBC and involves the latest baby relevant technology!
It's basically a smart diaper changing station which can monitor your babies weight and  growth! This is a great way to keep track of your babies development and save some money and time staying at home in contrast to going to the doctors for your little clone!
Here is the kicker though! So, yeah sure this gives those people peace of mind and being able to see this data regularly but as we seem to find ourselves more and more attached at the hand with new apps and everything else the question then seems to be if maybe this readily available data might cause some parents to become anxiously obsessed with the numbers and actually stop paying attention to what's more important - the baby and the bold between child and parent.  I'll let you guys look into it yourself and give it a thought. Personally, I think it's kind of cool but maybe somewhere out there you'd have that parent who's got their kid on a strict diet or something wild. There's not one right way to take care of a child but I figure there are a lot of factors in what goes into the bond. I figure don't stress over what you can't change and just enjoy what you've got while you can!

http://www.bbc.com/news/av/technology-41168076/smart-nappy-changing-mat-lets-parents-track-baby-s-growth
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lastly, and in bad form for my taste The New York Times with an article about a couple who have been married for 75 glorious years!

Their names..... Harvey and Irma  -.-;; Yup, you read that right. Let's all take a moment at the "thing" New York Times did here. I'm all for some seriously messed up jokes and all but wow. How soon is "too soon" and honestly I even have jokes and considered putting them on here but again...bad form.

Well I will say it like this, what do you the two hurricanes and this couple have in common? Retirement.


Anyway, read the article. It's nice but in light of what's about to happen to Florida and Georgia as well as other states and the islands (which already occurred) I have to say this article had to come out before anything huge happened **Timing is key**.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/us/harvey-irma-couple.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Famericas

Mass Media and Activism(Protest)

1.
2.
3.
4.


The pictures above were pulled from The Guardian since both Aljazeera and BBC had videos and no pictures.

Alright, so as we continue on with class I've been trying to fine tune my approach to my stories and found that it might be easiest to maintain the course of the material to which we have gone over for that week while maintaining my goal of showing how each news source plucked shows the same stories or articles as best as I can. The sources themselves will never be the same as I want to be able to keep this blog a little fresh.  So for this blog I have chosen the subject of the Boston "free-speech" protest/rally. As it seems to be relevant on a number of counts. The news sources I've decided to go with this time are BBC, Aljazeera, and RT. Yes, I am aware that two of the three have been used however each week I will attempt to change it up again with a new group of new sources. In addition to this I have a special article I will post from NPR which goes with how I feel the governments response and countermeasure to internet activism and the ability to assemble. So here we go...


http://www.aljazeera.com/video/news/2017/08/boston-hold-massive-free-speech-rally-170819075717361.html

I start off with Aljazeeras article on the subject which mostly consists of a video and short text to supplement the the video itself.
Here in the video we have interviews with a highschool girl Marri Gashaw who feels as though being a black female in America has left her feeling under potential threat simply by existing and addition to this the growing white nationalists organizing only reinforces her belief that this is the case. Monica Cannon believes that America is founded upon white supremacy and that laws themselves are inherently racist as they favor white people all together. John Medlar is apart of the "free speech" movement group which claims that politicians have fallen pray to the PC movement (if you will) has led to an unfair narrative and even though he does not agree with the alt-rights racism and hatred finds himself aligning with that same very cause. Medlar claimed to have had the rally set up prior to all of the issues in Charlottesville, VA. The rally was under consideration to be canceled but realized that the issue had grown larger and people would arrive with or without the rally. As tensions grow, it is even hard for myself to see the line between  the white supremacist groups and simply right leaning ideology which claims the "left" is getting out of hand. Wouldn't it simply be easier as someone who is more right ideologically yet does not agree with white supremacist ideals to just back away from this mess? I'd assume your message becomes less in value as you side yourself with these kind of people and this kind of rhetoric?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The next article I chose was an article from BBC also addressing the Boston Protest. Much like the previous article, BBC presents a video and supplemental text as to give summery of said video. This video, unlike the Aljazeera article takes place around the rally itself not the subject of the protest and before hand.  FIRST! I would like to say that there is a difference between those who are right leaning politically and those who tend to be Alt-right. If people cannot differentiate between these two then you'll only make those who don't side with the Alt-right alienated into the same people you accused them of. That's the poison of rhetoric. If one continues to call people Nazis simply for having a conservative ideology then you ultimately produce that.  With that being said, let's get back to the article at hand.

http://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-40989978/boston-protest-thousands-surround-free-speech-rally

BBC starts with an already apparent bias toward a conservative party simply showing the large number of "anti-protest" groups which at its core are limiting these individuals LIBERTY TO protest. The reporter used the term "so called" free speech rally. The fact is, unless there are acts of violence anyone in America has the liberty and right to be able to speak their mind. Even if you do not agree with them the act of violence itself impedes upon the basic liberties which the constitution was meant to uphold. Now let me be clear. I do not advocate for hate groups nor racially elite individuals. I personally find the subject for those who are far too ignorant to understand no one chose the color of their skin at birth and it does not define you nor determine your outcome in life. I do however see that BBC looks to discredit the rally itself to do the general association the right has all together with extremists in their "political sect" however this is also the case on the left and in terms of religion (in all aspects). I will add however, that it was the anti-protesters who did get aggressive with the police officials. If one has a permit to gather for protest then they have the right to do so, even if you disagree with it. You've the right to protest against said gathering.

I'm disappointed that there was no interviews with people within this event on the part of BBC. Otherwise, this is simply speculative. There is no objective approach to this article.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



https://www.rt.com/usa/400579-boston-rally-assault-police-officers/

Lastly, RT which seems to be - out of the three - the only one that decided to actually put quantitative data in their report and not basically op eds. RT report speaks of those who were arrested. Stating that some individuals were throwing objects at police and out of the 18 defendants arrested during the August 19th "event" in Boston 15 of the individuals were arrested on the accusation of assutiof a police officer. Police reported that one individual wearing body armor had on his person, one loaded gun as well as four knives. In my opinion, there is intent there.

The number of people at this "event" made its way into the number of 40,000 people and although both parties seemed to conduct themselves peacefully there were those whom did not follow this statement.  An additional statement said over all out of the 33 people that were arrested 4 were carrying some kind of weapons.

The original purpose of the rally had to do with the issue of the Confederate statues being taken down. Whatever your position on this is you have to agree that it has become something more than just simply history that is being uprooted here and with this history there is a lot of emotion. I like to think of it like a band-aid.

A week prior, during the Charlottesville rally brought light to a group calling itself "Antifa" which has in response has resulted in a petition of around 250,000 signatures requesting Antifa to be categorized as a terrorist group.

In the end, I'm all for unbiased and objective reporting and it's sad to see that the only true reporting seems to be occurring with the Russian Television New Network. It's almost as though there is a divisive agenda being set forth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alright! After all that headache and right of assembly let us speak upon the reactionary aspect of the social media, activism and the response of the state to combat it!




http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/24/545843131/judge-says-government-can-search-protest-site-records-with-safeguards


This article is brought to you by NPR here in Atlanta.
A government request was approved by a judge in Washington D.C which grants access to website data used to organize protests (mostly used in protest of Trumps inauguration). Now, the original reason for this might have been to keep individuals from rioting and causing damage to area and to maintain order yet the issue isn't in the ability to maintain order but that this gives a snowball effect. While this is allowed to happen, other departments might use this in other ways which would ultimately work against free speech and basic privacy online. Where do you draw the line on this? Soon, it seems as though any opposition what so where will be tracked and pinpointed. For me, I can't help but to think of V for Vendetta in which the government controls every aspect of your lives and coercion keeps those from speaking against the state. My issue is this is the same problem we faced with the wiretapping of from the federal government. The argument people made was "I'm not doing anything wrong so I don't see the issue in this". The fact of the matter is this is a blatant move against your basic liberties as Americans. As well, now your names can be given out to investigative agencies to stream line the process which aims to protect YOUR identity. Again, the issue is at what point do these measures become too much? Each and every move made my the state seem to encroach upon your rights and liberties as a "free" people. While we all squabble over social issues a more sinister agenda is occurring and while we fight among ourselves a larger cage is being dropped all around us.

When we are divided we are easier to control. Keep that in mind. A NETWORK IS EASIER TO MANAGE AND DESTROY THAN A GROUP WITH STRUCTURE (HIERARCHICAL  OR NOT).

Have a wonderful day and keep opening your mind to different ideas. :)

Different News Different Stories

Different News Stations Choose Different Stories To Headline!

I have chosen to search of a few known news sources the same thing in their search box, "North Korea". It seems to be a very popular topic recently and this topic as a lot of people questions what's in our future. Now, each person you speak to seems to have somewhat of a different opinion and a range of confidence in said situation. The question I ask is, "is their opinions based on which news source these folks go to for their information?" Below are those websites links and pictures of headlines (as well as their articles) as to how these particular news stations have chosen to pitch their stories. Please take a moment and look at these objectively and decide for yourself where you stand in all this craziness. 

https://www.rt.com/news/400738-germany-support-us-korea/

The picture above is from RT.com where I looked up North Korea. That's all. This article was the second link that came up in my search. The article speaks on Germany's stance toward diplomacy and potential conflict with North Korea and America and how the Prime Minister left as though brute force was not the option in dealing with this issue. German is considered an America ally but much like England in the Iraq conflict the America media told us that there was overwhelming support to go in and occupy Iraq when in fact this was not the case.


http://www.aljazeera.com/Search/?q=North%20Korea

A basic search for North Korea on Al Jazeera shows a number of articles speaking on the unlikely chance that there would actually be an escalation of conflict between America and North Korea. While others simply explain as to why the tensions are happening. In a nutshell most of these articles attempt to explain why this is happening and what are the points in which we should consider.


http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/24/europe/ukraine-north-korea-spies/index.html

CNN, while looking up North Korea only seemed to write about spies that were caught in Ukraine looking to get some middle blue prints. The second link which came up spoke on the price of GOLD! I'm not exactly sure what that has to do with North Korea but so far none of the searches seem to bring up potential allies or neutral actors if any conflict did occur. An article that does pop up simply questions President Trump's mental health but does not look at the country as a whole but focuses simply on the president. This is something I would expect out of CNN.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5493084959001/?#sp=show-clips

Oh, FOX News...same process. Simple search, "North Korea" results mostly consist of missile development and more information on this than CNN. It seems as though FOX News is more aligned with the fear of North Korea and its threat to America and our allies as well as our territories.This is something that I would expect from this particular news station

Now, here's the thing. I have my personal new source that I prefer. I considered putting in an article from BBC but I decided to leave it alone for now. Looking at each new source there is a way in which they describe and choose to show each article as well as what is chosen AS articles which are shown on their websites. This goes back to not only bias within each new source but this also aligns and reflects what people look for and generally what consumers WANT to see and read. Is it possible that RT might actually be more truthful in what's actually going on with America and international relations? Is it possible that FOX wants their consumers to be concerned with an impending attack? Is it possible CNN does not find the topic as important as others and does Al Jazeera seem to find all of the commotion simply a show of "who's got a bigger missile"?

Each news outlet gets to choose what is more important to their own consumers and each has an agenda but at the end of the day each seems to know what will get more clicks and more attention. All I can ask is that you look for yourselves as unbiased as you can and attempt to see how each news station words their articles as to grab your attention. The tone of these sources is important to understand when taking the information and should never be done so on face value. :)

Hope you enjoyed my 2nd blog! I hope to tighten up these blogs as time goes by and really be able to give you something worth reading.

Thank you and have a great night!

1st Post on Blogger.com!

Alright, so this is going to be short and sweet but my main goal with this blog is to tie this site in with my twitter as to connect and maintain updated information on the subject of bias within the same story between a number of new sources. In doing so I hope to shed light on what is actual fact and what is bias new story telling. My issue is that people today have no passion in finding out for themselves what is actually true and what is simply "click bait" worthy story telling.

We've read on how with the advancements in technology there seems to be a lack of professionalism within journalism and that personally is a scary situation. This means anyone basically can post and report information and call it news. The worst part about this is the fact that people will take this information for truth on face value. This could be used to mislead people and stir up emotions which aren't truly directed in the right place. This could be used to manipulate people into acting or thinking a certain way. Ultimately, my goal is to attempt to keep the people from being puppets of their own ignorance and emotion. I will try and keep up with these posts as best as I can and hopefully really get used to all this social media junk.

Oh and before I forget!!! I read something interesting in this idea. So if everyone can basically become an outlet for news then that means oil companies can become new stations or new outlets and give case studies funded by themselves in an attempt to put false or "altered" information out there and parade it as actual facts. This do happen with out this speculative statement but with no restriction on this or knowledge individuals could easier be caught up in the misinformation of it all.
So feel free to follow me on twitter though it probably won't be all that exciting :)

https://twitter.com/TPickle89


Thank you!