Blog #10: Final Blog - The Eye is Watching You

For the final article, I present a buffet of stuff with one connection: intrusion.

Last year I ran across this article HERE on Slate.com. I thought it was pretty interesting from a collegiate standpoint.

Here's the second portion: Techno Buffalo is reporting a town in Leon, Mexico is taking security about 12 steps farther than anyone else. Read about it HERE.

Next, Part 3: Those iPhones and iPads you love are storing a crapload of data about you. Read about it HERE and why they do it HERE.

(Side question: does a liberal media, who loves Apple, have the stones to get tough with Apple over the issue of personal freedoms? Just a thought...)

Increasingly, we are left with less and less privacy. Throw in the TSA keeping scans of our bodies -- and finding them on Google -- and Facebook tracking our every move as well, and what do we have to look forward to in the 21st Century? Do you feel comfortable being watched over? Is this a real concern? Or is the old professor trying to scare you?

Your responses, in 300-500 words, please.

This is the last blog...enjoy your summers, and take care.

-- MP


-- MP

Blog #9: When Boys Get Toenails Painted

There's two interesting points you can talk about on this one.

First, watch the video HERE. It runs a few minutes.

So, a mom -- who happens to be the #2 person at J.Crew -- is coloring her boys toenails pink. Is this right, or wrong, in your opinion?

The video, around the 1:23 mark, mentions a counter response blog from Dr. David Ablow, a sometime contributor to Fox News. It's linked to in the story, but you can read it HERE.

Two things struck me about this article. One was the story itself. Is this pushing the edge of gender identity too far? Do you think we should leave things well enough alone, or have we not gone far enough? Does this even matter at all, or is this a tempest-in-a-teacup (much ado about nothing)?

The second thing that hit me was the angle of reporting itself. Did The Lookout even bother to take an even view of the situation, or did they completely cherry pick their interviews (and resultant points of view) in this article? And something else of note: at the end of the interview, Robin Roberts actually makes a comment stating that she knows the J.Crew executive featured in the ad, and vouches for her. Is this something a journalist should do (despite the fluff-show format, Roberts has won awards for her journalism and is considered a quality reporter)? Which leads me to the second point: should we accept journalistic bias in the reporting we consume? Regardless of point of view, does this "positioning" of the story hurt or harm the discussion of the points? (shades of Gerard Alexander here -- does this relate?)

Discuss either point at the usual length -- 300-500 words.

Blog #8: Twixters

As part of the readings for this mysterious fourth essay, I ran across this little gem from Lev Grossman.

Some of you may have already read it in the book. Some may have not (it is in Chapter 14). Either way, I think it's worthy of discussion.

You can read the article HERE.

300-400 words on your honest responses to this article. I think this is a topic that all of you should be able to weigh in on. Is this your generation? Is this you? Or is some other agenda at work here? In the new post-depression American economy, do we have the luxury of never growing up?

-- MP

Blog #7 - Multiculturalism Wars: A Little Punishment, Harshly Delayed

So, you recall when I conveyed that little extra assignment as we started this fourth paper? The one that I said had to be posted on the blog, only I didn't give you a blog to post it on?

Well, here it is.

For those of you who don't remember, or weren't there, I realized that people weren't reading their work. And I posted this assignment and made people aware of it.

The assignment particulars are as follows, pulled directly from the assignment in question (listed as "Assignment", in the folder "Other Assignments" on Vista:

Assignment: Discuss, in detail, Bharati Mukherjee’s mediatory essay “Beyond Multiculturalism: A Two-Way Transformation”.

Format: Responsive Essay
Since I’ve discovered that many of the class did not fully read Ms. Mukherjee’s essay which was to be the topic of Friday’s discussion, I think it is time to put our studies where our mouths weren’t.

YOUR TASK:
Critically analyze Ms. Mukherjee’s essay. Refer to our process of critical analysis that we discussed earlier in the semester. Identify the writer’s position, her background, and her ideas.

We are considering Mukherjee’s essay a mediation of the previous two essays, Roger Kimball’s “Institutionalizing Our Demise: America vs. Multiculturalism” and Elizabeth Martinez’ “Reinventing America: Call for a New National Identity”. (You’ll want to refer to these essays as well.) Whose ideas do you identify with, Kimball’s, Martinez’, or Mukherjee’s? Why or why not? Does Mukherjee have the authenticity to discuss immigration and multiculturalism for America? Who has the right to discuss this topic? Do you have to be born here to be an authority on things American? You may touch on some of these questions, or others that come to your mind, in discussing these three essays.

Your essay will be at least 900 words long. You will also POST it on the blog (under Blog #7 – Multiculturalism Wars) no later than FRIDAY, 4/15 at 11:59 pm.

Bottom Line: I want to know that you understood the reading that so few of us have (apparently) done.


This should be an easy blog to post, since you should already have done the assignment.

I will now return you to your regularly scheduled programming...

-- MP

Blog #6 - No More Teachers, No More Books

So I finally found an interesting article that didn't have to do with Libya, politics, or what's going on with Charlie Sheen.

The article is from the Akron Beacon Journal's Eric Gorski, and it concerns, well...you.

Read it HERE.

What does this mean? Are you actually getting something out of your college education? Or is this merely a trampoline for you to bounce on for four (or five or six) years until you're ready to feed yourselves?

You know what I want...300-400 words, on this topic. Be thoughtful about your experiences. I want to know if this guy is right, and if so, why.

-- MP

Blog Post #5 - What Awaits You On the Other Side?

The other side of college, that is.

(Photo courtesy of United Press International)

This week's blog post is in response to a couple stories from the Wall Street Journal.

The first one - about jobs going bye-bye - can be found HERE.

The second one - about extending adolescence - can be found HERE.

Are these articles related?

At this point, this process should be understood by all. 300-500 words, well thought out, employing the tools of critical analysis. Commentary, please. Due Date: Call it a week or so from now...say, March 2nd.

I think people should be able to direct their responses more accurately now. I'm going to leave more and more open to interpretation, and see where the dialogue goes.

Enjoy -- MP.

Blog Post #4 - You Asked For It, You Got It --

...with all apologies to Zoey Sollisch's upcoming paper...

Here it is, boys and girls, ladies and gentlemen, and everyone else that may or may not have covered. Your absolute chance to weigh in on the "high"-ly charged topic of getting high...legally.

You will notice the graphic I've posted is neutral...not for or against, not funny or angry, or any other emotion. This is what we're talking about -- marijuana.

Four articles/videos for you to peruse.

From the pro-side: a look at anti-marijuana arrests, and who they think is behind it. Click the link HERE (there are multiple pages, so read everything)

From the con-side: a discussion of what is factual from that perspective. Click this link HERE for this story.

For a statement from allegedly a neutral source, try this article from The Economist regarding the economic benefits of marijuana legalization. The link is HERE.

And lastly, here's what the President of the United States, Barack Obama, had to say back in 2009 regarding the topic. The :50 video is HERE.

These are a sampling of what you can find. Note the differences in stated facts from both camps, and the types of arguments the sides attempt to employ. Weigh in on your ideas on this topic. However, I suggest you make it a little more in-depth than some of our previous discussions. Call it 500 words, and call it officially due in TWO WEEKS. Say, March 1st?

I'll probably post another blog up here that overlaps, but the idea, of course, is to contribute what you have to say. If you find other links to articles or sources that you feel are relevant to your position, then by all means, post those.

It's time to start driving the discussions yourselves on the blog, rather than just have me point you to something.

Enjoy!

-- MP

Blog Post #3 - Now This is Something New (Old)...

And I thought we had seen the end of Plessy v. Ferguson's influence.

Riddle me this: is segregation considered segregation when it's voluntary?

I find this one a little fascinating, myself.

Read the story HERE and respond with your views.

What is the issue here? Bearing in mind, if you recall from history class, the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s, is this a return to the old times? Or is this something else?

What does this say about other cases? Is it wrong for private institutions, such as The Citadel, to attempt to deny women the right to enter? (They lost that case). What about the Augusta National Golf Club denying entrance to women? Or is it different if it is race, and not gender? Can a person voluntarily segregate themselves from the rest of society if they choose? Why or why not?

Answers in 300-500 words, please.

MP

P.S. Since my name has become synonymous with "Late Blog Posting", this little baby is due on WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2011, when we won't have class anyway. So, good luck with that...MP

Blog Post #2: Freedom of Speech? Or Inciting Terror? Part One

I am not a huge fan of this, but recent events in Tucson, AZ have pulled everyone into this country into the talk about "inciting speech". The Left has been accusing The Right of making incendiary comments. The Right has been counter-accusing The Left of attempting to shut off speech that does not comply with "The Big Government Regime" (all emphasis mine).

Regardless of how you feel about this topic, I think it is having a major effect on the idea of freedom of speech as currently understood in this country.

Check out this article here, posted last week on The Agonist. Critically analyze this argument. Who's making it? What side of the political fence are they? How does this relate to what happened in Tucson, Arizona? Is this a way to corral free speech? Or is this a way to control dangerous potential threats to the country? Does this blog fit the idea of Mature Reasoning we'll discuss in today's class? Why or why not?

This is the first part of a set of ideas, as we hit this from different sides.

As for the picture, I found it funny how both political parties could use this picture (the Democrats from 2001-2008; the Republicans from 2009 to now). It's the ultimate bipartisan picture. picture found on samsonblinded.org

MP

Blog Post #1 - Better Late Than Never

All right, I missed the boat on the blog for the first week. So, we'll catch up.

Since Monday is MLK day, we'll say this blog is due on TUESDAY, JAN 18 -- that's 4 days from now. And Week 2's blog will be up on Monday, so that will catch us up.

Since we're all waiting for the textbook to come in from Amazon, I've got this assignment, which we can start today and have ready by TUESDAY, JAN 18.

Click this link here to read this article. Be sure to read all of this article...it's a little bit longer.

Be prepared to discuss this information in class as well on Wednesday. There will probably be an in-class writing assignment on Wednesday, to get us all loosened up -- and we're going to talk about the near future in a few seconds, soon as I finish typing this...

MP

Welcome to the Class Blog!

All right, here's how it goes:

Each week, I'll put in a blog post posing a question or referencing some of the reading we've done. Each student responds at least once to the post, answering the question, responding to it, riffing off it, et cetera. Pretty simple.

To set you up on the blog, I will need the email address that you wish to use. If you have a Blogger account, you can use that, or create a new one if you like. Your reply to the blog can be done as a comment to the original post. If you create a new post, please put your name and the date of the post in the title, so I may be able to track these better.

Remember, each week you're responsible for 300 words on the topic at hand. Don't stretch, or try to fill -- if you give the topic proper thought, one page should not be a problem at all.

You will also see other posts and the occasional Powerpoint or video up here to give you something to think about/read/understand/see, etc.

GROUND RULES FOR POSTING:

-- No flames. The most annoying thing in the world can be "Pajama People".
-- No personal attacks. That would be BAD.
-- I don't need to reiterate that hate language won't be tolerated, but I will.
-- When making an argument, be respectful and state your position. Since this class is about learning how to make an argument, NOT how to argue, I expect civility and respect for posters at all times. Marquess of Queensberry rules, please.
-- This is an academic forum. Remember that your words are visible to other people in the world. Be yourself, keep more or less on topic, and do not be afraid to speak your mind.
-- Finally (and this may seem contrary to the above rules sometimes), feel free to state your position if I ask for it. We're going to speak about some topics that may not make everyone comfortable -- I understand that. Part of participating is learning to move a little bit outside your comfort zone. Don't be afraid. Or, be afraid, and do it anyway. Courage is nothing more than holding off fear for one more moment.

That finished...welcome to the class, everyone.

- MP