Take Charge Assignment 9/13

This whole assignment is kinda dumb. these are the types of assignments that everyone does in middle and high school and the teachers think we get something out of it but we really learn nothing . so i don't even know why we have to do it to begin with but whatever. i know that if i try to write too long of a blog on the assignment, i am just going to end up doing the assignment in the blog and i don't want to ruin the surprise for you so i will keep this blog relatively short.

My main problem with the media is that I find it very hard to believe pretty much anything I see without substantial proof. This is why I will probably do my Take Charge Assignment on abuse in the media. I would like to discuss different ways journalists and other sources of media abuse their jobs and cause the public to believe something that is possibly not true. This topic would cover fake images, heavily exaggerated stories, and just straight up lies within the communicative world. While I do believe it will be hard for me to find examples of this because I am not exactly a professional when it comes to these sorts of things, I do believe other articles will come to my aid and if not, I am sure I can still persuade my audience that it does exist and that media cannot always be trusted. One website that i already found that looks like it could help is http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr110.html.

Which Media Do you Trust? 9/6/07

1. This article provided me with the insight that not everybody in the world is completely oblivious to the way things are. Mr. Mark Glaser and I share the opinion that you cannot say that you trust or distrust any one form of anything--media, in this case. The basis for your trust should vary on each individual story. Some blogs can be trusted, some cannot. Some radio broadcasts can be, some cannot, etc. I am not one that is very interested in media or politics or anything of the sort so this article does not have anything to do with my personal life. The article was easy to read though. I guess because i agree with the author's main point and i was interested in seeing what else someone who thinks as i do had to say.

2. This article's claim is that one cannot trust any one platform of media but rather trust each story on a case by case basis. The evidence that the article puts forth for this claim includes a variety of quotes from people who, according to the context of the article, are respected journalists or at least show some forme of expertise on the subject. Also, the article provides a statistic that the Globescan survey perhaps should have displayed. In the Globescan survey, 25% of the people surveyed trust them; however, this does not mean that 75% did not trust them. The article provided that while 25% trust them, only 23% distrust them. The rest had no opinion on the matter. This is not so much evidence for the articles claim but it is a good piece of evidence to put down the opposing claim. The final piece of evidence the article uses is just simple logic. It should be common knowledge that all platforms are going to have some truth behind them while they all will also have some bogus stuff. In all honesty, i cannot think of a counterargument against this claim. It just seems like such a simple concept that should be obvious.