Fareed Zakaria has a bone to pick with America, and not really the country America, just the people who live in it. Zakaria, current editor of Newsweek International, thinks that Americans are no longer keeping up with the times of globalization. What is meant by this is that we, as Americans, think that the only way to keep things on top is to do it the American way, no more of this “If we work together” Disney morals. Zakaria thinks that Americans have become too ignorant to accept the possibility that somewhere outside of the perimeter that is this great country, some other country is coming up with a better idea to help the world.
I think that for the most part, Zakaria is right; people who live in America think that the only way to do things is the American way. I have been in a few restaurants where there will be a foreign worker, or maybe the whole building itself is owned by a foreign person. There have been times when a customer has not been satisfied by his meal and asks for the manager in charge of the store for a refund after the customer had asked to get his meal re-cooked several times. When the manager gets to the table he sees the customer has actually eaten all the food and is asking for a free meal. When the manager says he cannot give the man a free meal because of his eating of the meal, the customer would say “damn foreign customs.” This is a real life example, this shows just how Americans can be when change is at their front door and are asking politely, mind you, to try and think in a new way that would benefit everyone.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Sunday, November 8, 2009
The Spectrum of American Standings: Where Do We Lie?
Herbert, an op-ed columnist for the New York Times, has a lot of problems with America, mainly about its economy and where it is headed. One of the main points Herbert focuses on is that class division is no longer a hierarchy, now it is more of a “you’re in this side of the spectrum of income, or the other.” Herbert explains this very well in one of his last paragraphs of his article “A Fire in the Basement,” by presenting a quote by Robert Reich saying, “Over the coming decade, the Bush tax cuts will transfer more wealth to the richest one percent of the population than any fiscal policies in history” (402).
Another one of Herbert’s ideas is the progress we Americans made post-World War 2. Harry Truman took the reigns and put America back on the map with the programs he and his cabinet created. Herbert shows just how important these events were by pulling a Stephen King and making a one line paragraph saying, “It was a hell of a few decades (402).
Alan W. Dowd, an editor at the World Politics Review, says just the opposite of Herbert. Dowd may agree with Herbert by saying America has spent a lot over the past decade, but then argue why America is in the lead on economy standards. Dowd says to back up his belief by saying, “At $13.13 trillion, the U.S. economy represents 20 percent of global output. It’s growing faster than Britain’s, Australia’s, Germany’s, Japan’s, Canada’s, even faster than the vaunted European Union” (405).
Another one of Dowd’s ideas is that terms such as “Globalization” are due to American work ethic. Robert Kaplan agrees with Dowd by saying, “Globalization could not occur without American ships and sailors” (407). Dowd is very much aware that many Companies and Franchises are doing extremely well in both America and in other countries in the world, therefore giving more money to the American economy.
Another one of Herbert’s ideas is the progress we Americans made post-World War 2. Harry Truman took the reigns and put America back on the map with the programs he and his cabinet created. Herbert shows just how important these events were by pulling a Stephen King and making a one line paragraph saying, “It was a hell of a few decades (402).
Alan W. Dowd, an editor at the World Politics Review, says just the opposite of Herbert. Dowd may agree with Herbert by saying America has spent a lot over the past decade, but then argue why America is in the lead on economy standards. Dowd says to back up his belief by saying, “At $13.13 trillion, the U.S. economy represents 20 percent of global output. It’s growing faster than Britain’s, Australia’s, Germany’s, Japan’s, Canada’s, even faster than the vaunted European Union” (405).
Another one of Dowd’s ideas is that terms such as “Globalization” are due to American work ethic. Robert Kaplan agrees with Dowd by saying, “Globalization could not occur without American ships and sailors” (407). Dowd is very much aware that many Companies and Franchises are doing extremely well in both America and in other countries in the world, therefore giving more money to the American economy.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
A Bright Future, or a Stormy Horizon?
In Bob Herbert’s article “A Fire in the Basement,” Herbert discusses many problems that plague present day America and shows what was better in the past days of our parents and grandparents. In part of his essay he reminices about the America that used to be, soon after the end of World War 2, showing us all the good that came from great leadership and excellently crafted programs to strengthen America economically and morally.
While discussing about the postwar and how everything was seeming to go well, he then goes back into his main argument about how America is doing to poorly now. What I think Herbert is trying to prove in his article is that even though times are hard right now, with good leadership and perseverance, we will be able to come out of this recession and other ill talked about topics like the war in Afghanistan. Even though he is saying what we can do in the future, I think he is also reminding us readers that it will take time. Time that will seem like an eternity at first, but when this is all said and done with, we will be glad we took that time, no matter how long it might have taken.
I think Herbert is stepping in the right direction with these paragraphs he uses as a motivational build to the American people. Though he does have a lot of negative things to say throughout his article, he also has some of the most motivational words one could read, you might have to read it a few times to understand the whole concept of “A Fire in the Basement,” but when you do, I am sure you will be just as enlightened as I am.
While discussing about the postwar and how everything was seeming to go well, he then goes back into his main argument about how America is doing to poorly now. What I think Herbert is trying to prove in his article is that even though times are hard right now, with good leadership and perseverance, we will be able to come out of this recession and other ill talked about topics like the war in Afghanistan. Even though he is saying what we can do in the future, I think he is also reminding us readers that it will take time. Time that will seem like an eternity at first, but when this is all said and done with, we will be glad we took that time, no matter how long it might have taken.
I think Herbert is stepping in the right direction with these paragraphs he uses as a motivational build to the American people. Though he does have a lot of negative things to say throughout his article, he also has some of the most motivational words one could read, you might have to read it a few times to understand the whole concept of “A Fire in the Basement,” but when you do, I am sure you will be just as enlightened as I am.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Smart and Smut: the Fine Line
There seems to be a time in everyone’s life after watching a television program where they stop and ask themselves “Is this show making me any smarter?” In Gerald Graff’s argument in “hidden Intellectualism” Graff thinks that no matter what the show, there is some form of intellectual analysis that the viewers must have in order to make them smarter. While many say that most television shows are dumbed down so the masses can understand without thinking, Graff thinks there is just as much going on in a sitcom as there is in a History channel program.
One who agrees with Graff’s argument is Antonia Peacocke, a student at Harvard University. In her essay “Family Guy and Freud” Peacocke once thought a show like Family Guy had no class, though after viewing the program more and more, she realized, like Graff, that there was something to take from the 30 minute program, something to dissect, and keep through everyday life. In part of Graff’s argument he explains how the supposed non-intellectual activities he was participating in were actually smarter than others would think. Graff says, “I was practicing being an intellectual before I knew that was what I wanted to be” (Graff 300). Like Peacocke, Graff was partaking in various routines that were making him think more about what could happen in a debate about sports, or in Peacockes essay, Family Guy.
Both Peacocke and Graff have the same view, though throughout Peacockes essay, she is sure to remind her audience that some humor can go too far and stray away from its intellectual pursuit to educate the masses. The same is with Graff’s argument, no matter where you dive your interests into, there are going to be times when the intellectual bits disappear into non-intellectual zones, it’s just a matter if you can go back into more sophisticated work without staying in the same place where nothing is beneficial.
One who agrees with Graff’s argument is Antonia Peacocke, a student at Harvard University. In her essay “Family Guy and Freud” Peacocke once thought a show like Family Guy had no class, though after viewing the program more and more, she realized, like Graff, that there was something to take from the 30 minute program, something to dissect, and keep through everyday life. In part of Graff’s argument he explains how the supposed non-intellectual activities he was participating in were actually smarter than others would think. Graff says, “I was practicing being an intellectual before I knew that was what I wanted to be” (Graff 300). Like Peacocke, Graff was partaking in various routines that were making him think more about what could happen in a debate about sports, or in Peacockes essay, Family Guy.
Both Peacocke and Graff have the same view, though throughout Peacockes essay, she is sure to remind her audience that some humor can go too far and stray away from its intellectual pursuit to educate the masses. The same is with Graff’s argument, no matter where you dive your interests into, there are going to be times when the intellectual bits disappear into non-intellectual zones, it’s just a matter if you can go back into more sophisticated work without staying in the same place where nothing is beneficial.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
A Perfect Show
Shows on networks come and go these days, it seems sit-coms are having the toughest time maintaining apposition on the weekday line up, and I can see why. Out of the successful shows today, one that stands out to me and most of my friends is LOST on the ABC network. Not only does the show implement parts of suspense, action, and thriller aspects, but a large portion of the show throws comedy in the mix which doesn’t seem like it work on paper, but it is all about how the actors deliver these lines. In my view, what makes LOST so popular among the American population are the storylines, the multiple characters, and the sound of the show.
LOST has something that many would relate the hit show 24 on the FOX network, which would be the multiple storylines and complicated non linear storytelling. I agree with this and disagree at the same time. One the one hand both shows do have complicated storytelling, but on the other hand no one on the show LOST are safe to say they will live throughout the season, while I am fairly sure they won’t kill off Jack Bauer anytime soon due to ratings. Having multiple well fleshed out characters is essential to captivate an audience and I think 24 lacks in that department with only a few good characters that audiences actually care for.
Throughout the seasons in LOST there have been multiple, well fleshed out characters that have their own personalities and every decision they make seems right with the way they are introduced throughout the episodes. What America loves so much about the show is that the writers stay so true to the characters and never stray away from them for too long when focusing on another main character. My friends and I have loved the show LOST because of this feature it carries to keep the audience actively engaged to keep remembering every mini story even if they do not live long enough to play a huge role.
LOST is a television show that I think will live on for a very long time because of its delivery and how each person acts with one another. LOST asks so many questions that one might forget, but then later give the answer to that question a season later. This is a perfect way to keep and audience, and have them stay tuned for each episode, a perfect marketing ploy. Though there are plenty of marketing techniques used in the show LOST there are also plenty on genius methods that make the show an individual from the rest of the shows that try to take their own spotlight from the rest. I think LOST is one of a kind.
LOST has something that many would relate the hit show 24 on the FOX network, which would be the multiple storylines and complicated non linear storytelling. I agree with this and disagree at the same time. One the one hand both shows do have complicated storytelling, but on the other hand no one on the show LOST are safe to say they will live throughout the season, while I am fairly sure they won’t kill off Jack Bauer anytime soon due to ratings. Having multiple well fleshed out characters is essential to captivate an audience and I think 24 lacks in that department with only a few good characters that audiences actually care for.
Throughout the seasons in LOST there have been multiple, well fleshed out characters that have their own personalities and every decision they make seems right with the way they are introduced throughout the episodes. What America loves so much about the show is that the writers stay so true to the characters and never stray away from them for too long when focusing on another main character. My friends and I have loved the show LOST because of this feature it carries to keep the audience actively engaged to keep remembering every mini story even if they do not live long enough to play a huge role.
LOST is a television show that I think will live on for a very long time because of its delivery and how each person acts with one another. LOST asks so many questions that one might forget, but then later give the answer to that question a season later. This is a perfect way to keep and audience, and have them stay tuned for each episode, a perfect marketing ploy. Though there are plenty of marketing techniques used in the show LOST there are also plenty on genius methods that make the show an individual from the rest of the shows that try to take their own spotlight from the rest. I think LOST is one of a kind.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Cyborg America
In Sherry Turkle’s article “Can You Hear Me Now?” Turkle shows just how reliant people are on technology in the present day world. Whether it be from a Blackberry to contact a friend, or laptops to search email and hard to find answers, Turkle believes we as people, have lost the aspect of being a human. Throughout her article, Turkle gives five main focus points on which she thinks has the most valid points that have effect on the reader. I am one of the readers she had effect on.
In the article, Turkle has five main points she wants to address to her audience, showing just how neglective we have become of our peers, even though we have the world in our hands. During one part, Turkle tackles the argument of people being too dependent on wireless devices rather than a close friend or perhaps a dictionary. “We are learning to see ourselves as cyborgs, at one with our devices” (Turkle 274). Turkle is right in this aspect, we have become way to reliant on what he have strapped on belts rather than wit and mind power we have been building up since grade school, but this is not the only thing Turkle is right about.
To me, Turkle has shown what is wrong with today’s society in a very humorous way. Her constant use of imagery and different examples are perfect for setting the scene in each of the five points she sets out to show modern day. I think when Turkle talks about a kid being in a city with a cell phone and having security you know she understands the importance of security of a young mind going through unfamiliar places. Turkle also goes on to tell that even though security is a good thing, having a kid know the sense of being completely independent is possibly more important than having the said security at all. This article by Sherry Turkle has to be one of the few articles I have read where I have agreed with everything the author has said.
In the article, Turkle has five main points she wants to address to her audience, showing just how neglective we have become of our peers, even though we have the world in our hands. During one part, Turkle tackles the argument of people being too dependent on wireless devices rather than a close friend or perhaps a dictionary. “We are learning to see ourselves as cyborgs, at one with our devices” (Turkle 274). Turkle is right in this aspect, we have become way to reliant on what he have strapped on belts rather than wit and mind power we have been building up since grade school, but this is not the only thing Turkle is right about.
To me, Turkle has shown what is wrong with today’s society in a very humorous way. Her constant use of imagery and different examples are perfect for setting the scene in each of the five points she sets out to show modern day. I think when Turkle talks about a kid being in a city with a cell phone and having security you know she understands the importance of security of a young mind going through unfamiliar places. Turkle also goes on to tell that even though security is a good thing, having a kid know the sense of being completely independent is possibly more important than having the said security at all. This article by Sherry Turkle has to be one of the few articles I have read where I have agreed with everything the author has said.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Are We as Smart as Our Parents?
It seems parent have another thing to put on the “brain rotting check list,” the internet. The internet has been a growing sensation since the mid to late 80s and is now accessible to almost everyone around the world today! That said, it has been targeted by many people such as researchers who say the internet is one of the main reasons why generation Y has come to a screeching halt in basic history and literature knowledge. Today over 33 million Americans use the internet to check out personal interest articles, update their blog space, or just to sit and play games on. But what most parents are saying today is that the internet has put a constricting bubble on their child’s will to learn. I think the internet is not constricting, but liberating in all aspects of the word. With the internet teens can find information in a way they find suitable for their needs without the hassle of feeling like they are meeting a deadline.
Amy Goldwasser, a freelance editor for magazines such as Vouge, seventeen, and the New Yorker, takes side with me saying teens are using the internet for more beneficial uses than parents give them credit for. In her article “What’s the Matter with Kids Today?” Goldwasser shows just how much teens are keeping up on their literature readings. “The average teen chooses to spend an average of 16.7 hours a week reading and writing online” (Goldwasser 239). This quote from the freelance editor shows just how much teens will read voluntarily to educate themselves (even if they are unaware they are doing so). Goldwasser also goes on to say that teens who blog about their everyday lives while reading headlines on online newspapers could quite possibly be the next famous writer to show up on the New York Times Best. I agree with Goldwasser a hundred percent that without a doubt teens should be able to continue their daily routines without being shunned by the older generation of the way they learn.
I think teens should use the internet no matter what they are using it for. Teens who go on the internet and have Yahoo! As their homepage will always see the headline article as the first thing they see. Even this little headline page opener, will keep teens up to date on the current events. If teens want to know more about Stalin in World War 2 they can easily go right to Google and find the information they want without having to stay in a classroom and hear a dry lecture for 50 minutes of their day. Now, this is not to say that the educational system in America is obsolete, I am merely saying educational systems and older generations of people should embrace the fact their children are using the internet as a tool for their futures. Whether they are on a CNN headline article researching what is happening in Afghanistan or just on their Facebook updating what they did for the day, I think their brains are soaking up precious information they will need later on in life to succeed.
Amy Goldwasser, a freelance editor for magazines such as Vouge, seventeen, and the New Yorker, takes side with me saying teens are using the internet for more beneficial uses than parents give them credit for. In her article “What’s the Matter with Kids Today?” Goldwasser shows just how much teens are keeping up on their literature readings. “The average teen chooses to spend an average of 16.7 hours a week reading and writing online” (Goldwasser 239). This quote from the freelance editor shows just how much teens will read voluntarily to educate themselves (even if they are unaware they are doing so). Goldwasser also goes on to say that teens who blog about their everyday lives while reading headlines on online newspapers could quite possibly be the next famous writer to show up on the New York Times Best. I agree with Goldwasser a hundred percent that without a doubt teens should be able to continue their daily routines without being shunned by the older generation of the way they learn.
I think teens should use the internet no matter what they are using it for. Teens who go on the internet and have Yahoo! As their homepage will always see the headline article as the first thing they see. Even this little headline page opener, will keep teens up to date on the current events. If teens want to know more about Stalin in World War 2 they can easily go right to Google and find the information they want without having to stay in a classroom and hear a dry lecture for 50 minutes of their day. Now, this is not to say that the educational system in America is obsolete, I am merely saying educational systems and older generations of people should embrace the fact their children are using the internet as a tool for their futures. Whether they are on a CNN headline article researching what is happening in Afghanistan or just on their Facebook updating what they did for the day, I think their brains are soaking up precious information they will need later on in life to succeed.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)