Lessons from the War Zone

This was an essay written by Farnaz Fassihi, and he talked about what good journalism was like, as he was taught in school. He briefly compared the differences of the American press with journalism outside of America. He writes, "The American press, on the contrary, prides itself on reportage that is independent, free, objective, balanced, fearless, and truthful" (166).

Upon reading the essay, one would already be able to conclude that Fassihi takes his job seriously. He was very reflective in the way he questioned where he stands as a journalist, whether his citizenship or his job come first. What I found the most interesting was when he writes, "We find the right words to depict the horrors of war in spite of the military minders and government officials who try to muzzle us and feed us their perspective" (168). There they are, trying to do their jobs, yet the military tries to censor them. Is it not part of their job description to give their audiences raw, unbiased news? At the war fronts, are they not supposed to be our eyes and ears? I understand that military censorship - or censorship by itself, for that matter - isn't new in any media. But trying to omit important information such as the status of the war in which family members may be playing an active role in is not immoral. Those soldiers are dying at war, and yet their superiors don't want the people back home to know what they're going through? What the hell kind of world is this? With the taxes I'm paying they wouldn't even tell me the truth about what the hell is really going on out there?

Going back to the top... I'm sure the American press could be objective, fearless, and truthful, but having the military tell them what to write on paper, or otherwise be accused of treason, doesn't really make them seem like they're all that objective, fearless, and truthful. I wouldn't wanna be jailed for being honest. Then again, it defeats the purpose of giving clean, untainted news. Ugh, such hard decisions journalists face.

Anyway, I read the essay and I thought to myself, "Time to take over the world." Yup, I'm gonna create myself a utopian nudist community where everyone will live in peace and harmony without censorship. :D

Bad Knowledge

The essay is written by Alice O'Connor and she talks about these think tanks feeding us "bad" knowledge. The research that the "idea mills" were churning out are pretty much skewed and are designed to support whatever company is sponsoring them. "They are also highly misleading and in some cases demonstrably false" (100). She then gives examples that contribute to bad knowledge and categorizes them as: 1) hidden premises, 2) misleading "indicators", 3) methodological creep, 4) pretentious diction, and 5) historical vacuums. She also forwards and adds to Orwell's rules that will ultimately promote political knowledge.

At first, I didn't like the essay. I was trying to read it and I didn't understand it. Also maybe because there was a lot of distractions in this damn house. Irrelevant.

After reading the essay, I thought to myself, "Wowzaaa! I never thought of it like that!" I mean, I had an idea that the materials that we get to peruse and the information that we take in are manipulated one way or another, but O'Connor was able to write it in a 12 page essay!

In her essay, it seemed like she was against the right-wing way of thinking. She just seemed to bash a lot of the traditional things that the conservative people are trying to preserve, even though they're totally outdated.

Infotainment Freak Show

AHAAAAA. That's a combination of Information and Entertainment. I've got a knack for the obvious, obviously.

Martin Kaplan, you're a genius. I thought it was super interesting. It's about "entertainment [substituting] juxtaposition for order, storytelling for truth telling, graphics for text, sensation for reason, spectacle for seriousness, combat for discourse, play for purpose, sizzle for steak" (137). He pretty much states that it's not Big Brother who rules us, but entertainment. He then goes on that it's very important that every domain of human existence grab and hold the attention of its audiences. In politics and in news, it's pretty much just a popularity contest. He talks about how everything has to have some sort of entertainment aspect, otherwise we won't get sucked in.

After I read this, I was like, "WHOAAAA, you are so right! How could I have been so ignorant all this time?" So yeah, he was pretty much right about entertainment substituting almost everything. If you suck at parenting, turn on the TV, buy a game console, and voila! You've got a substitute mother (or father. I wouldn't want to generalize now). Kaplan says that "objective knowledge is a mirage" (139) which just means that there really is no such thing as objectivity anymore, because according to him, all reality is socially constructed, and that everything, including truth, is politics. We're all pretty much screwed then. I wonder how long it took him to realize everything that he's written? He just might be my new savior.

Everything that's being done nowadays are pretty much for entertainment. In class, we talked about how the media decided to put so much airtime for balloon boy, instead of something really newsworthy. That family didn't need any more additional 15 minutes of fame. They were in freaking Wife Swap. OOOOOH, the lenghts people would go through just to get some airtime. Seriously, go pull a William Hung and audition for American Idol. That would be much more entertaining.

OH NO!

I said a baaad word. I am falling into the media's trap!

UGH, I go to church at 12:30 today. Damn. Yay for family not giving you room for choice.

George Orwell

So my good friend George Orwell wrote an essay that show how the English language plays a big role on politics. He claims that "language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes" (205). He says that English is full of "bad habits"(206) and getting rid of these bad habits is the way to go so that we can all think clearly. And according to him, thinking clearly is the right path to political regeneration. He then gives four examples of what he calls "tricks" that prose-construction habitually dodges. The examples are: 1. dying metaphors, 2. operators of verbal false limbs, 3. pretentious diction, 4. meaningless words.

I thought the essay was pretty interesting. As I was actually writing this, I'm thinking about the six rules that he outlined so that I wouldn't continue to contribute to the bad habits of the English language. His opinions were strong, and it makes sense. Politics isn't necessarily my subject of interest, but in the 19 years that I've been alive, I've experienced several types of government from two different countries. Needless to say, Orwell was correct in that politicians manipulate the language in order to sway their constituents' thinking, which I think is quite clever. Why not take advantage of the fact that you can use your speech for your own advancement? Then again, if other people were to manipulate me with their speech, I'd be outraged. So I guess it's not really fair for me to have the power of manipulation, and someone else not.

I'm thirsty. I think politics dehydrates me. Or it could be the weather. It's 79 degrees right now.

The four "tricks" that he mentioned were pretty spot-on. Who the hell would be able to relate to a metaphor if it was a metaphor from, like, the 1800's? I mean, maybe it makes sense... but as Orwell said, some people don't even know the correct meaning of the metaphors that are being thrown about anymore. If people are able to mold and shape language to their personal advantage, can't they also think up of new metaphors that would actually be compelling to people? For his "operators of verbal false limbs"... I like long phrases, :(. I use it all the time. It makes my writing sound smart, but I suppose Orwell is correct in using his analogy of waxing a car that doesn't have a working engine. What the hell are long, smart-sounding phrases going to do for you if it's just full of shit? Then again... that's a tough call: sentences sounding wonderful and yet full of crap, or sentences that are short and succinct and NOT full of crap? Hm.. thinking thinking thinking. Anyway, moving on to pretentious diction: yeaaaaah, I know of some people who do that, trying to act smart, or sound smart rather, and use biiiig words quite excessively. We get it, you're smart. You don't have to continually try to prove it, because then it just makes it seem like you're compensating for something. Like a short guy with a huge truck. Yeah. Like that. Finally, meaningless words. Pretty much, those words are not interpreted using one solid definition. The people don't care to know the exact definitions of words, nor do they want to acknowledge the exact definition so that they can use it to their own liking. A discussion we had in class was regarding the word "democracy". That word is continually used by both sides of the political system, using their own definition of it. If the word was given an exact definition, it would not be applicable to the motives in which it is being used for. The word won't be able to be manipulated according to people's personal preferences.

So that's it for my rant. I'm not thirsty anymore. I got a drink of water. :D

English Blog Number Quatro(?): Swine flu = National emergency?!

The article is from the Los Angeles Times Website: http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-na-national-flu-emergency25-2009oct25,0,7907031.story , written by Janet Hook on October 25, 2009.

Apparently, our dearest president Barrack Obama declared the H1N1 Virus a national emergency. By doing so, he gave the Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius temporary authority to grant waivers that will expedite the steps needed in order to set up off-site emergency rooms to treat the flu "victims" separate from other patients. It's supposedly a preemptive measure "to ensure that the tools for a quick response were in place".

So this H1N1 virus has gotten quite a notoriety because it is now considered to be a pandemic. Ooooh. A pandemic. How fancy sounding. Anyway, it's the influenza virus -- just a different strain, so what's all the fuss about? According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, approximately 36,000 people in the United States die each year due to flu complications. There's only been 1,000 deaths since the start of the "pandemic" -- which was April of this year. That's 6 months. If it follows the trend, another 1,000 people will die additionally in the next 6 months. Whoooaaaa, 2,000 deaths in one year from the H1N1 virus, compared to the seasonal flu. That's huge. I suppose the people from the White House who referred to the H1N1 virus as a pandemic were right. The H1N1 virus is like the black plague of the 21st century. It's gonna kill off all the Americans. How scary.

I think the article, though informative, is scaring people into thinking that this is gonna kill off the entire population of the great United States of America. What's up with the usage of the word "victims" when referring to the flu? Is it some sort of serial killer out to kill the types of people that would make them notorious? A pandemic? No. AIDS and HIV are pandemics. And what's with the whole situation that I'm hearing about mandating the vaccination of H1N1? I understand that people are trying to stay alive, but mandating the vaccination of H1N1 is a bit of a stretch, I think. Also, at the end of the article, with the national emergency declaration, some hospitals are making off-site tents to isolate the infected patients. What is this? Leprosy? Does the declaration of the H1N1 virus as a national emergency and pandemic create some sort of social stigma? I haven't heard of any off-site tents for the "victims" of HIV and AIDS. Are they being isolated as well? Are the articles covering the "swine flu pandemic" some sort of propaganda scaring people shitless with this whole thing? I just think people should just say it exactly how it is, without all the medical jargon that all sound so serioius. That way, people don't go nuts, increasing the amount of hypocondriacs with have in this world.

English Blog Numero Three: Civil Rights Curriculum

This was taken from the ABC News website: (http://abcnews.go.com/US/mississippi-schools-introduce-civil-rights-curriculum/Story?id=8793332&page=1), written by Carmen K. Sisson on October 11, 2009.

The story is about the US State of Mississippi mandating Civil Rights to be part of the US History curriculum. It is said to be a groundbreaking reform -- believed to be the first one in the country. It will be taught and tested all throughout the Mississippi public school system. Proponents such as state curriculum specialist Chauncey Spears wonders how we can have such a strong educational program with high-achieving students who have little understanding of history. Black civil rights organizer Jacquelyn Martin believes that healing does not begin until the problem is talked about. The story also covers some opponents of the new bill, saying that the wound is still fresh, and it does not need to be talked about.

I believe this story is worthy of attention because it is in fact true that many students in this country do not know much about their nation's history, let alone the number of presidents this country already has had, and the names of prominent leaders who run this country. I found the news with little bias, since Sisson covered both views on this new law. However, even though both sides of the situation were outlined, I found that very little was said about the opponents of the bill. Regardless, I found this story interesting, and I think it should really be part of US History curriculum. Not just in Mississippi, but nationwide. It sounds interesting to learn the struggle that Americans went through to shape this country that I now call home. And I do agree with one of the proponents saying that healing does not begin until we start talking about it. The story of ordinary groups of people going through extraordinary lengths to acquire the freedom that they have been promised after the Emancipation Proclamation is extremely moving. The injustice and inequality that happened throughout those years should be something that students nationwide should be familiarized with, because I believe that through this, they will know the origins of all the prejudice and hatred that are plaguing the society. That way, educating everyone about that particular issue would eradicate most ignorance that some people hold to this day about race matters.

Also, maybe, just maybe, people would be a little more careful in their assumption that all the Asians they meet are Chinese. HAAAAH. Completely irrelevant.

Fin. :D

English Blog Numero Dos: Soda Tax

The article is from the LA Times website, written by Jerry Hirsch on October 3, 2009. The website is .

The story states that The Center for Science in the Public Interest is lobbying to add an excise tax to sugared drinks because they conducted a study in which they found that states -- including California -- whose budgets are strapped can generate up to $10 billion a year by adding a 7 cent tax per 12 ounce can of soda or any other beverage. They also believe that raising the prices would reduce consumption, and as a result reduce obesity (considering that many studies were conducted proving the correlation of sugared drinks and the disease) and skyrocketing medical costs. However, people who disagree with the tax see the tax as a sort of intrusion on people's personal choice, believing that the tax would come off as controlling people's dietary choices.

I find the article free of any biases. It's not a very controversial topic, and even though the matter has sides, the journalist did not disclose his opinion on the news. Politics aren't really my thing, nor is lobbying for taxes, but it does make sense to put a tax on sodas. If it helps raise money which will help the budget deficit, then yeah, that's fine. It's not as though soda is a super major thing like adding a tax on the very precious polluted air we breathe. I suppose it's also somewhat of the same concept as the tax placed on cigarettes and alcohol. Plus, if it reduces consumption, it can definitely help with the ever increasing health problems that are pestering Americans. It's funny how the cheapest things could cause the most debilitating problems in a person's life. Like sex. Sex is cheap, and it causes such a pain in the ass when done wrongly or stupidly. However, there are instances when sex is definitely NOT cheap... but I digress.

So my point being: I guess I wouldn't mind the tax being imposed; I'm not a big soda drinker anyway. I prefer water. :D. Do they have a tax on that one too?

English Blog Numero Uno: College Radicalism Redux

The article is from the LA Times website (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-week27-2009sep27,0,5103616.story), written by Cathleen Decker, September 27, 2009. Pretty much, it talks about how the protesting of hundreds of students in different California campuses is reminiscent of the 1960s. This time though, the students' concerns are not for civil rights, nor for war, but it is for the rising costs of education. According to the article, in November, the UC regents are expected to approve an increase in fees by $2500. And to add to the extent of which educational costs are rising, the California Post-Secondary Education Commission concludes that fees have quadrupled from 1965 to 2008 (in constant dollars) with inflation being taken into account. And while the costs continually rise, the per capita and median income for Californians and their families didn't even double throughout the 43 years. To add to all the dilemma and worry, post-graduation jobs that are supposed to pay off debt are now appear to be merely a "mirage".

The story seems unbiased, considering the quantitative figures that the reporter had included in her article. The article is regarding education itself, and I most certainly have strong opinions towards it. The story is important because it gives readers an idea of how difficult it is to get a decent post-secondary education for the middle class nowadays. Since I myself am in college, this story affects me greatly. I adore school, and I believe that everyone should have a right to a decent education. I moved to this country at age 11 from the Philippines, and with naive and innocent eyes, I saw that country's educational system. And while I was privileged enough to have parents who are fiscally stable, and who were able to send me to a decent school, some people broke their backs working so hard in order to send their children to a public school. A public school that isn't free?! In this country, that may be unthinkable, but in the Philippines, there are no other ways to get an education... you either have to cough up the money and pay for school, or you just settle for something less such as ignorance. Stupid corrupt politicians...

Anyway, a higher education is demanding so much from families financially. The ever so expensive investment that's supposed to lead to future success seems to become slowly unattainable. It's kind of why my mother's proposition about just studying in a different country makes sense to me. It's going to be fully paid for as I go. But what about the other people in that country who barely made it past elementary school? My mother told me not to worry about it, that it isn't my problem. But if I never allow it to become my problem, how would this situation change?

It's so horrible because the education part isn't the only thing we should be worrying about. And just as the article had said, the "jobs that are supposed to pay off debt are now appear to be merely a 'mirage' ". I only like mirages when they're of shirtless guys or of food. HAHA. But seriously. Students pay thousands of dollars to pretty much plaster "SUCCESS" all over their future, only to find that the jobs they studied so damn hard for isn't gonna get them jack shit.

So much for the twenty-thousand-dollar investment that's supposed to inherently lead to your Ferrari.

Education

Balitang Amerika was on earlier today. It's a Filipino news show whose main focus are Filipinos and afflictions that affect them here in America. I saw a little bit of this one segment where students are rallying at UC Berkeley, due to budget cuts and furlows and all other dilemmas that are affecting schools nationwide. My mother decides to comment saying, "See, it's really bad here now." I told her that the Philippines isn't any better. Schools aren't free over there, let alone budgeted by the government. There are plenty of children who cannot get into schools because they cannot afford it. My very wise mother then said, "It's not your problem". I walked away to walk upstairs and told her to stop thinking so selfishly.

I'm not sure what it is... maybe the generation gaps, our cultural differences (considering that I pretty much spent my adolescent years in America), or I was just born to refute everything my mother tells me, but I really dislike her way of thinking. "It's not your problem". Seriously? It's extremely unfair that children are yanked away from an opportunity such as education. Sure, it's not personally my problem, but it's still a problem when a lot of kids are unable to go to school because they're not as fortunate as me...

I'm going back to the Philippines to finish college, and yeah, I'm grateful -- happy, even -- that my family can afford to send me to school... but I'm not gonna hear it when my mother tells me that it's not my problem, because I feel like I have an unfair advantage over all of them...

Adulthood

Perhaps today would be considered the day that I officially enter adulthood. Not my 18th birthday, nor my 19th. It's got to be the first day I attend college. I suppose that makes sense, considering that my parents wouldn't be there to hold my hand along the way. Then again, I've pretty much done things on my own from the very beginning. I hardly ever asked for their assistance, unless it involves fiscal assistance, because I'm still dependent on them financially -- and will be until I finish school. Does that mean I've been adult since I was 10?

I should e-mail my professor now, but I have the urge to write... write something. The diary's in the drawer, 2 feet from where I sit, but I'm lazy right now, and typing is the faster way.

Today was exciting. Tiring. Wonderful. Fun. :) I enjoyed my first day back to school after 3 -- or was it 4? -- loooong months of idleness and laziness.

K, I'm out. Haha.

-TS