Find a bias news story. Explain how and why it is biased, link blog to the article.

http://www.umich.edu/~newsbias/articles.html
From the two different versions of the same news story, many contradictions and bias are present and explained. In the American version, it is specifically written to make it sound as though the Iraqis are trying to hurt us and our American ideals (because of the current war) whereas the European version makes the whole situation sound like a misunderstanding or miscommunication. As stated in the American version, Iraqi jets were purposely launched to intercept the American ones, when in fact this was untrue and put forth by the author to again claim that the Iraqis are against us, the European version clears this lie. Sources between the two articles are similar and even from the same closely related parties, but the information that they give is almost polar opposite. Hinted at by the American author, the article states that the UN is allied more with the bad people within Iraq who want to destroy America, talking about complying with Iraqis at the slightest drop of a hat. The American article goes on to talk about the just cause of why the jets were launched in the first place, searching for bad chemicals that could harm Americans and break the UN agreement that was put into place. In the European article version, the author defends the Iraqi actions, specifically bringing up the legality of their operations in compliance with the UN agreement. Basically, the bias blasts through in the American article because of the ties of the country in the War on Terrorism, tooting a horn of loyalty to the American people and American ideals. Since the European author is detached from the American involvement in the war, he is allowed to take a more truthful and factual approach to the incident, without tributes being paid to a specific nation. News is being twisted into propaganda to make the Americans support the happenings in the War on Terrorism. In Europe, news is news is news, nothing is really censored out because of nationalism or metal chains to the ideas of a specific nation.

4. "Orwell rolls in his grave argues the media has too much power on public perception and is almost anti-democratic. Agree/Disagree? Examples?

After viewing “Orwell rolls in his grave,” it can almost be said without much doubt that the media has its hand in what is allowed to be shown to the public eye. Media conglomerates control news programs, magazines, websites, TV stations, radio, and products manufactured for sale at a regular store. As revealed in the move, media conglomerates pay off candidates that they support, defining who deserves (in their opinion) be in running for a position. From behind the scenes (caught on tape by the “imaginative” Michael Moore), media conglomerates are running the country. Promoting who they see fit, covering up problems for themselves and their selected candidates, exposing their enemies’ flaws and problems, and overall, steering the American people in a direction unbeknownst to them. Providing the populace with limited choices that are available because of the current social conditions, Americans believe they are doing what they think is best for themselves out of the given situation, an illusion painted by the big corporations. Tricking people into thinking that they are thinking for themselves saves effort wasted on convincing informed people who understand what is going on to trade sides. “Big Brother” might as well be renamed “Biggie-Size Brother” since the little Wendy’s company has got its grease-fried hands mixed up in government and therefore, peoples’ lives besides their diets. “Would you like a tax break with that?”

3. From "Merchants of Cool": To what extent do you feel the documentary accurately portrays the effect of the media on teenagers. Examples?

In the dated film “Merchants of Cool,” a delicate economic ecosystem is discussed and explored. In the realm of teenage life, the media and its extensions are shown in their true form, the dominate parasite latching on to everyday happenings. According to the movie, everything is a ploy by the media to gain teenage attention and money. Apparently, MTV, Sprite, and Record Companies are all in cahoots, getting teens together, paying them to be cool, filming a music performance, promoting Sprite subliminally, and putting it all on MTV as cheap footage of a good time and what teenagers should be doing/wearing/etc. No one is safe from the attempts made by the media, even ads making fun of ads are out for cash. The movie hit the head on the nail when discussing the “cool hunters” that scan the teenage underground for the next big fashion trend. Everything that was once underground and limited to a local setting has been picked up on, revamped for placing in a store with a slogan or image, and sold right back to teens, but instead, the great population of teens that have yet to discover the next “cool” trend. It was interesting to see “regular” trendy kids be approached by employees of different contracted “cool hunt” firms to gather samples and ideas from the untouchable region dominated by the teenage mindset. From the streets to the store windows, everything went. Even music that was from a local band was taken and put into mainstream, even though the band talked about how much they are against mass media marketing. Teens were even interviewed about how much they dislike the media and the marketing in produces, still wearing their name brands while bashing the very same labels.

2. Should the government have oversight of internet content? Is it needed? Is it possible? Why or why not?

If the government doesn’t already have an oversight of internet content, then it will eventually gain one, even if it isn’t necessary. As the American populace becomes more fused with their internet personas, issues and problems would start to rise, serious dangers that would need some force of power to settle occurrences. Just like the police monitoring the public, the government would see it necessary for it to protect the public from anything that could damage or hurt the reputation of the average American Joe. Still, for the government to receive such control and power over the internet would be quite a feat to conquer, requiring some kind of device or government installed bug into American websites to regulate and possibly correct the public’s internet usage. For the American government to take control of an entity shared by all nations, a rigorous modification and integration of a control virus would be necessary and hard to perform without countermeasures of an opposing force taking place. Just as companies begin to grow and expand in the real world as in the net, more regulation and compliance to new rules would become more important to prevent monopolies and other crisis afflicting the public.

1. Do you think citizen journalism upholds or undermines American values? Why?

Citizen journalism is the manifestation of the thoughts and beliefs of the populace across the American nation. Since what is considered permissible and exceptional is determined by the sum of the opinions of the citizenry, American values are changing from day to day, evolving more and more as opinions develop and become influenced by citizen journalism. Since the foundation of citizen journalism is supported by the pillar of public opinion and what is to be considered, citizen journalism changes proportionally with the modification of American values themselves. Pending the popular public outlook, citizen journalism can sometimes uphold and undermine American values. It is also important to state that undermining and upholding such American values is based on suggestive viewpoints, where one event may seem “wrong” in one’s eyes, it may seem “right” in another mindset. If nothing more, the citizen journalism published for the public’s eyes is usually supportive of a common belief accepted by the general public, usually resulting in upholding of American values. It is an occasional rare sight to see when a local newspaper is spewing forth bad ideas to implement into society and supporting super racism. If citizen journalism isn’t directly the thoughts and beliefs of the people, then it at least has the decency to mimic that which is considered polite, discussing touchy subjects with a sort of firm, but self-conscious, tongue.