There's not much I can really say that wasn't already said by someone else. The best post was probably Gary's proposal, it was pretty humourous. Also, Ben was definitely the most informative poster.
I really enjoyed the class, or at least whatever I was there for. Mahoney's stories about getting arrested and watching the Jon Stewart clip were two things I found most enjoyable.
I hope everyone has a good break and stays safe and all that stuff.
Thursday, December 15, 2005
Proposal I guess
This is extremely late, but here:
My final paper will take a look at punk rock, which as been a big part of my life in the past few years, and analyzes a few of the ideas behind it and argues how it can be considered a public space. It begins with a small introduction, and continues with some of the ideas presented in early anarcho-punk. I then explain the origins of the straight-edge movement, and some ideas found in newer punk. Then I describe the do-it-yourself ethic that's very prominent in punk rock and describe how all of this comes together to make the punk scene a place where boths bands and their fans can get together and exchange ideas through various mediums. One thing I should mention is that punk rock ideology is very broad and I am taking a more in-depth look at one small portion of it as an example, and not providing a general scope of all associated ideas by any means.
My final paper will take a look at punk rock, which as been a big part of my life in the past few years, and analyzes a few of the ideas behind it and argues how it can be considered a public space. It begins with a small introduction, and continues with some of the ideas presented in early anarcho-punk. I then explain the origins of the straight-edge movement, and some ideas found in newer punk. Then I describe the do-it-yourself ethic that's very prominent in punk rock and describe how all of this comes together to make the punk scene a place where boths bands and their fans can get together and exchange ideas through various mediums. One thing I should mention is that punk rock ideology is very broad and I am taking a more in-depth look at one small portion of it as an example, and not providing a general scope of all associated ideas by any means.
Hell yeah, it's the best of blog!
First, I would just like to start by saying that I LOVED our class...I enjoyed having discussion with everyone in our class!! I'll miss all of you and good luck with everything that you do if I don't see you..ever :(
Alright, so I adored Greg's most recent blog about his final paper! The links were hilarious and I love to laugh and have a good time. Leave it up to Greg to make our class laugh...you're a funny guy Greg and I'm glad you were my desk buddy LOL!! However, I would also like to give props to Ben freaking Harvey for always having the looooooooongest blogs, and making me feel bad about myself, just kidding! No, but seriously, I always tried to have a pretty decent sized blog entry, and then BAM! there's Ben Harvey's, lol! It's cool though because you're a good guy, and your blogs always helped in the case that I didn't wholely understand the essays that we read!
Anyhooowww...Thanks everyone, once again, for a great class...you made it very enjoyable!! Hope all of you have a wonderful Winter Break, to be P.C. about it :)
Alright, so I adored Greg's most recent blog about his final paper! The links were hilarious and I love to laugh and have a good time. Leave it up to Greg to make our class laugh...you're a funny guy Greg and I'm glad you were my desk buddy LOL!! However, I would also like to give props to Ben freaking Harvey for always having the looooooooongest blogs, and making me feel bad about myself, just kidding! No, but seriously, I always tried to have a pretty decent sized blog entry, and then BAM! there's Ben Harvey's, lol! It's cool though because you're a good guy, and your blogs always helped in the case that I didn't wholely understand the essays that we read!
Anyhooowww...Thanks everyone, once again, for a great class...you made it very enjoyable!! Hope all of you have a wonderful Winter Break, to be P.C. about it :)
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Best of Blog!!
For the best of blog, I'd choose Greg's Quag-Miers blog. Not only was it the funniest blog I've read in the class but it also was a great proposal for his final paper. It got the job done and made the class laugh...a lot. So that's my nomination for best of blog.
Benji, the Harvey.
Ben Harvey receives my nomination for the most comprehensive blogger. When I needed to read the summary for an assignment I hadn't bothered to read in order to be able to bullshit my own response, Ben Harvey was my go-to guy.
best of blog
Content wise I definetly think that "Quag-Miers" was the most enjoyable to read. However during the school year the titles were very amusing. Here are some titles that I particularly enjoyed. "Mmmmm....Angus", "Burger King Response", "Han, Solo", "Hay Said...What did you just say???", and "<3 OmG pAsSpOrT pHoToZ lOl! <3 "
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Bestest of Blog
Here is my nomination for best of blog. It was by far my favorite. I liked it because it was funny, and also got the job done for that day.
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
Quag-Miers.
I should get bonus points for that title.
For my final paper, I intend to compare how two newspapers from the same city framed a recent news story, the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. The two papers I chose were the Washington Times (generally regarded as a more conservative publication), and the Washington Post (generally regarded as a more liberal publication). My research also extends to statements made by the administration pertaining to the Miers nomination (specifically statements from the President himself), and background information about Miers as found on Wikipedia.org. By evaluating how this issue was framed, I seek to understand the intention of each publication in its slant, and whether or not such allegations are entirely true.
For my final paper, I intend to compare how two newspapers from the same city framed a recent news story, the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. The two papers I chose were the Washington Times (generally regarded as a more conservative publication), and the Washington Post (generally regarded as a more liberal publication). My research also extends to statements made by the administration pertaining to the Miers nomination (specifically statements from the President himself), and background information about Miers as found on Wikipedia.org. By evaluating how this issue was framed, I seek to understand the intention of each publication in its slant, and whether or not such allegations are entirely true.
Monday, December 05, 2005
Intelligent Design vs. Evolution
SURPRISE!
Happy now Greg?
I actually have something done today. I went out and found some sources and I even have a rough draft. Now that I've shocked you all my paper will be following the recently revisited discussion of Intelligent Design Theory and Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution. The first part of my paper will be an objective look at the arguments of each side. The second part will be me putting forth my own thoughts and opinions after I have done the research required to make an informed decision.
Happy now Greg?
I actually have something done today. I went out and found some sources and I even have a rough draft. Now that I've shocked you all my paper will be following the recently revisited discussion of Intelligent Design Theory and Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution. The first part of my paper will be an objective look at the arguments of each side. The second part will be me putting forth my own thoughts and opinions after I have done the research required to make an informed decision.
Sunday, December 04, 2005
The Internet and the Public Sphere/Cyberdemocracy
Cyber democracy is the move into a digital democracy, in which politcal debates, conventions, and voting will occur online. The goal of this is to bring back power to the people and to form a true "participatory democracy", in which many feel our nation should be based on. The world wide web will then become our newly claimed public sphere. The ideal public sphere and cyber democracy would open up communication amongst the electorate about important issues in the U.S., while allowing a debate forum to begin in an effort to form a consensus about how to solve the problems. Many problems surface when the internet becomes the public sphere.
The economically disadvantaged are left out of the democratic process because they cannot afford internet services. Many minority groups are inclded in those that lack a great socioeconomic status, therefore their thoughts are also neglected in this process. Only 30,000,000 out of almost 300,000,000 people in the United States are online, which counts for only about 10% of the population that can vote. Many people would have to be able to gain access to the web in order to participate in the debate forums, in which do not necessarily work anyhow.
Many of the debates rarely come to a common public opinion, which is the purpose of the debate rooms. The only commonalities occur seem to happen after the members of the chats separate into their respective groups. Quickly the participants form into sects after figuring out what beliefs they have in common. Of course there are the people that sign onto a debate forum, but never really participate and maybe utter a sentence or two, here and there. However, when a politician is identified in the debate forum, the debaters automatically flock to his debate room and hang on to every word that he says. A participatory democracy is supposed to put the formulation of important issues that need to be addressed into the hands of the electorate, but these debate forums only give the government and politicians another pathway to influence more possible voters.
Another problem surrounding a cyber democracy is the growing possibility for corruption of the government. Online conversations are very difficult to monitor, and the federal government will grow nervous about what is being said in these debates and chats on the web. One way they may try to solve the problem would be to create and provide software that gives access to the wealth of information about politics that allows the people to form their opinions. The problem with this is that it is too easy and too tempting to not create biased opinions throughout the materials present in the software. Media's influence will still be there, even though the move to the internet as our public sphere is trying to avoid media bias and conglomerates. On the other hand, the government could begin to figure out ways to control the debate forums, and to monitor conversations of the citizens. With the possibility of anarchists uniting and the open invitations to criminals who will steal identities, or use fake ones to con people, the federal government will be called upon to regulate the internet, which would be a very difficult task. This, however, will lead to violations of our freedom of speech, and an even larger uproar will occur.
The ideals of the cyber democracy and creating a public sphere on the internet are with good intention, but they are unrealistic and, in the end, impractical. The many problems that will occur outweigh the good that will come out of it. Technology such as the internet creates for a vast amount of opportunities, but to revolutionize our entire democratic system according to the internet and online access is not safe or secure for many different reasons.
The economically disadvantaged are left out of the democratic process because they cannot afford internet services. Many minority groups are inclded in those that lack a great socioeconomic status, therefore their thoughts are also neglected in this process. Only 30,000,000 out of almost 300,000,000 people in the United States are online, which counts for only about 10% of the population that can vote. Many people would have to be able to gain access to the web in order to participate in the debate forums, in which do not necessarily work anyhow.
Many of the debates rarely come to a common public opinion, which is the purpose of the debate rooms. The only commonalities occur seem to happen after the members of the chats separate into their respective groups. Quickly the participants form into sects after figuring out what beliefs they have in common. Of course there are the people that sign onto a debate forum, but never really participate and maybe utter a sentence or two, here and there. However, when a politician is identified in the debate forum, the debaters automatically flock to his debate room and hang on to every word that he says. A participatory democracy is supposed to put the formulation of important issues that need to be addressed into the hands of the electorate, but these debate forums only give the government and politicians another pathway to influence more possible voters.
Another problem surrounding a cyber democracy is the growing possibility for corruption of the government. Online conversations are very difficult to monitor, and the federal government will grow nervous about what is being said in these debates and chats on the web. One way they may try to solve the problem would be to create and provide software that gives access to the wealth of information about politics that allows the people to form their opinions. The problem with this is that it is too easy and too tempting to not create biased opinions throughout the materials present in the software. Media's influence will still be there, even though the move to the internet as our public sphere is trying to avoid media bias and conglomerates. On the other hand, the government could begin to figure out ways to control the debate forums, and to monitor conversations of the citizens. With the possibility of anarchists uniting and the open invitations to criminals who will steal identities, or use fake ones to con people, the federal government will be called upon to regulate the internet, which would be a very difficult task. This, however, will lead to violations of our freedom of speech, and an even larger uproar will occur.
The ideals of the cyber democracy and creating a public sphere on the internet are with good intention, but they are unrealistic and, in the end, impractical. The many problems that will occur outweigh the good that will come out of it. Technology such as the internet creates for a vast amount of opportunities, but to revolutionize our entire democratic system according to the internet and online access is not safe or secure for many different reasons.
Abstract Revision...yeah, it's really late...
Culture and identity with a certain group of people is the main theme for my paper. I find the thought of language use in culture, and the idea that people can identify with certains areas through language, fascinating. So, to begin with, I was inspired to do this paper by the article "Arts of the Contact Zone" by Mary Louise Pratt. Throughout my paper I refer to her writings, and also other authors who have written about the importance of lanuage as well. I found that many traditions and national patriotism stems from a sense of unity through a common language. Language helps one person relate to and share their ideas and thoughts and feelings with someone else. Underestimated is the fact that people rely on this common bond to get through life because without the ability to express ourselves in one way or another, human life would either be a horrible experience or completely nonexistent. It all goes to show that everyone should take pride in not only their culture, but the language and communication that allows us to identify with that specific culture and nationality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)