I am well aware of what to do

A reading blog is fine. The student should be able to understand both sides of an argument and make a sound judgement regarding which side he is on. The student should be able to back up his thoughts and ideas with various writings. The assignemnt turns to mind control when we are told what to read in order to come up with our thoughts. Furthermore in regards to class today, an intellectual exercise is requiring someone to look at a different side of an issue. Forcing a person to belive an issue is an issue when they belive otherwise is also a form of mind control. With that being said C's get degrees so from this point on I will strive to get a C or better in your class.

Can media regain our trust?

I have decided this book is a prime example of what is wrong with the educational system in this country. Furthermore I find it hysterical that we are supposed to start a blog and reguritate what some other people think instead of writing our own thoughts on the matter. Didn't blogs start by people wanting to get their ideas and feelings out in the open? Now the blog has been hi jacked by the educational system and instead of people getting in tune with their thoughst and fleshing out ideas we are being order to be drones and vomit out other peoples idea.
To answer the question though I have to ask a question, namely has the media lost our trust? The popularity of Bill O'Reily, Keith Olbermann, Glenn Beck, and Rachel Madow, to name a few, seem to indicate that people still trust the media. In my opinion the media won't be trust worthy until it is a publicly own company. Corporations always have and always will have their own interest at heart, and until the day the news is publicly own, there will be a basis. This also is in a sense an economic issue. The bulk of American Politicians, especially on the right, follow the economic policy's of Milton Friedman. In a nut shell Friedman believe that any government interference in the economy, weather it be minimum wage laws, or regulation on industry's, will cause distortions that will lead to an economic crisis. In other words industry's that should never be privatize, such as our media, are privatize. The government stepping in and not allowing privatization of anything is a major no no in Friedman playbook. Sadly, what I have just wrote reeks of socialism which for some reason has become a bad word in American society.

It is all bullshit

Meg Whitman is a republican and Jerry Brown is a democrat. Each promise to fix California. The problem is how can California be fixed by either one? Democrat and Republican are just two sides of the same coin. They both suck on that corporate cock like it is going out of style. They both will whore themselves out to the public in the hope for votes, however unlike a whore they will spend a good deal of money trying to get elected. Meg Whitman makes the usual republican promises, lower taxes, less goverment etc. At the end of the day though Meg Whitman is still a cronie of a giant corporation, namely ebay, and knows that her meal ticket is the people with money. Jerry Brown will promise fiscal responsibiltie, will point to whatever successes he had as governor back in the eighties. At the end of the day he too will be there for the money. Politics is simple. We the people will get brutally raped in the ass that we can't do anything about. What we can choose is weather we want a five dollar bill thrown on the bed or not. I will let the reader decided which party is more likely to throw that five.

Assignment 3

I decided to compare the Daily Show's segment on  the victorys of the tea party over the republicans to Olberman's segment on the tea party victorys. . More specifically the segments I focused on was Christine O'Donnel who had a major upset in Delaware.  First off there was a significant time difference in the two. The Daily show's segment ran for four minutes and thirty four seconds, while Olberman's segment ran for one minute and forty four seconds. The Daily show though averaged and impressive fifty two seconds of actual hard news. Olberman only used ten seconds on actual hard new. The rest of Olberman's segment was him teasing data, and inserting hypotheticals in order to prove O'Donnel was not capable of defeating the Democrat in the primary. The Daily show used its time to tell jokes, and play an anti masturbation video, that Christine O'Donnel filmed a while back. My issue with Olberman, is that he and his network present themselves as the news. This can confuse some people and have them accept Olberman's opinions as fact. In other words it errodes what is left of the ability to think for ourselves. Stewart and the rest of the Daily show team, present themselves as a Joke. They don't try to put on airs. If in the process of getting a few laughs you end up learning something about current events, that is just icing on the cake so to speak.

Blog 2

I did not watch olberman, O'Reily, Maddow, or Beck. I have seen them all before and I would rather, have a lobotomy then hear another second of what they offer. People are sheep. Most won't admit to that, but then again most people also lie. It is not enough to have the news deliver to a person in a tidy little bundle, but now people demand that there response to the news is to be determine by a talking head on television. I choose not the have Rachel Maddow or Bill O'Reily tell me what to think of the world. I have a brain I can think for myself. referring