BART Police Shooting of Oscar Grant ( Article Compare and Contrast)

I chose two articles, one titled “Fruitvale Station is Loose with the Facts in an Effort to Elicit Sympathy for Oscar Grant” by Kyle Smith and the other “A New Year, and a Last Day Alive” from NY times. Both of these articles were movie reviews in a way but they still tied back into the shooting of Oscar Grant.

• How are the articles the same? How are they different?

The articles are similar because they both bring up the fact that this movie was released around the time that George Zimmerman was o trial. However, how they differ is that fact that the article written by Kyle Smith thought that the movie was released around the time of the trial to reach out for sympathy and to possibly have an effect on the verdict of Zimmerman. The writer of the NY times article thought that it was good that this movie was released at the time that it was. Even though the story was made public, many people were still clueless about it. The writer thought that it would be good to keep the past injustices relevant so that the Trayvon Martin case wouldn’t go unjust also.

 

• Do they take a different point of view?

The articles that I chose do take different points of view. The article written by Kyle Smith has a negative perspective on Oscar Grant. He didn’t quite understand the term based on a true story. He stated that a particular scene about Oscar Grant saving a dog in the movie was just a cry for sympathy. He thought that the whole movie was a cry for sympathy. He believed the scenes where Oscar was in jail arrested for possession of a handgun. Also, he believed that part that had something that involved weed. He thought that this was too important of a story for the director to throw in a fiction scene of Oscar “being” an angel saving animals. On the other hand, the other article was very positive. They thought that it was good that the director wanted to express the last hours of Oscar Grants life. The author didn’t focus on the fact that Oscar had been arrested or even had weed in his possession who knows how many times. But, the author pointed out how the movie showed how much he loved his daughter, his family and the real struggles he faced like losing his job but keeping it from his family.

 

• Who are its sources? Does it quote from just one person?

Both of the articles both speak directly from the movie. There were some background information, but it wasn’t stated where it was gathered from.

 

• Why is this article news? Immediacy, Proximity, Prominence, Uniqueness, Emotion

These articles are ews because of emotion. Both articles express significant amounts of emotion. The article written by Kyle Smith expressed negative and frustrated emotion. He seemed frustrated because he feels like all the wrong and illegal that Oscar Grant did during his life is looked passed. He also sides with the officer who shot and killed Grant when he says that its was an accident. The officer claims that he thought he was reaching for his Taser not his gun.

The other article expresses positive emotion. They are happy that justice is still being fought for and the awareness of Grants story is still spreading even after some time after the incident.

 

 

Smith , K. (2013, July 25). fruitvale station is loose with the facts in an effort to elicit sympathy for oscar grant. Forbes . Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/kylesmith/2013/07/25/fruitvale-station-is-loose-with-the-facts-in-an-effort-to-elicit-sympathy-for-oscar-grant/

 

 

 

A new year, and a last day alive . (2013, July 11). The New York Times . Retrieved from http://movies.nytimes.com/2013/07/12/movies/fruitvale-station-is-based-on-the-story-of-oscar-grant-iii.html?_r=0

Google Email Advertisements vs. Advocacy Groups News Articles

I critiqued these two news articles about my conflict:  “Seriously, This Again? New, Aggressive Marketing From Microsoft Warns Gmail Users That Google Reads Their Email” from TechCrunch and “Google: don’t expect privacy when sending to Gmail” from TheGuardian. The articles are similar because they both discuss the Google email ad controversy, but this is probably the only way. The two articles are different because they focus on two different aspects of the Google email ad controversy. The TechCrunch article shows Microsoft’s opinion of the controversy. Microsoft being a major competitor of Google in smartphones, operating systems, and computers, is always critical of Google. It is critisizing Google of scanning emails and its Gmail users. But this article is interesting because the author Sarah Perez, is critisizing Microsoft for criticizing Google and its users. Perez being a TechCrunch writer and having worked in I.T. in a number of industries such as banking, retail and software has probably writen her fair share of articles about Microsoft’s criticism of Google. WIth this in mind, she argues that Microsoft’s argument is outdated and old.

The second article from TheGuardian describes Google’s opinion of its Gmail scanning service. The article refers to a court filing in which Google executive chairman Eric Schmidt stated that “Google policy is to get right up to the creepy line and not cross it” (Rushe 2013). This sparked outrage despite Google saying “all users of email must necessarily expect that their emails will be subject to automated processing” (Rushe 2013). The author Dominic Rushe, is the US business correspondent for TheGuardian and the this entire article is written in a accusatory tone by saying Gmail users shouldn’t expect privacy. These articles qualify as news because it is relevent because of continued court cases accusing Google of invasion of privacy.

 

Work Cited

“Seriously, This Again? New, Aggressive Marketing From Microsoft Warns Gmail Users That Google Reads Their Email | TechCrunch.” TechCrunch. TechCrunch, 7 Feb. 2013. Web. 30 Sept. 2013. <http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/07/seriously-this-again-new-aggressive-marketing-from-microsoft-warns-gmail-users-that-google-reads-their-email/&gt;.

 

” Google: don’t expect privacy when sending to Gmail | Technology | The Guardian .” Latest news, world news, sport and comment from the Guardian | theguardian.com | The Guardian . The Guardian, 14 Aug. 2013. Web. 30 Sept. 2013. <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/14/google-gmail-users-privacy-email-lawsuit&gt;.

Fisher V. University of Texas

In the discussion of the controversial topic of Fisher v. university of Texas I read two interesting articles from the new source called USA TODAY and CNN. Both new sources had similar view points and slightly different perspectives. USA TODAY and CNN was both similar because they talk about how the courts will make it harder for institutions to use policies to achieve diversity. Another reason why the new sources was similar because both articles argued the school defended it policy of considering race just as any other factor, In the CNN article “Supreme Court sidesteps big ruling on Texas affirmative action” it says “The Texas case, the school defended its policy of considering race as one of many factors, such as test scores, community service, leadership, and work experience, designed to create a diverse campus”.

The two new sources articles was different because in USA Today it talks about the student organizations groups on campus that supported UT, it says “ We remain steadfast in our support of the current admission process of UT”. It also explains how students believe the race consideration policy is necessary and help give fair chances. In the article it says “Prospective students will continue to benefit from an individualized admissions program that furthers equal opportunity”. In the CNN article it talks about how fisher thanks the justices for their consideration of racial policies being unconstitutional, she states “I’m grateful to the justices for moving the nation closer to the day when a student’s race isn’t used at all in college admissions”. Also the article explained how Clarence Thomas felt about the race policy he said “Although cloaked in good intentions the university’s racial tinkering harms the very people it claims to be helping”.

Both news articles receive their information from the court hearing itself. In USA TODAY they receive some of their info from students and press conferences while CNN only receive their info from press conferences. These articles are traditional news because they give their audience quick, late breaking, and important information.

                                              Work Cited

Mears, Bill. “Supreme Court Sidesteps Big Ruling on Texas Affirmative Action.” CNN.com. CNN Politics, May-June 2013. Web. Sept.-Oct. 2013.

 Psencik, Katey. “Both Sides Claim Victory in Fisher v. UT.” USA TODAY. USA TODAY, June-July 2013. Web. June-July 2013.

 

 

Civil Rights v. States Rights

One of the articles i used to compare and contrast was “Outrageous or overdue? Court strikes down part of historic voting rights law” an article from CNN by Bill Mears and Greg Botelho. The other article from The Nation Journal “ Supreme Court Shreds Key Provision of the Voting Rights Act “by Matt Berman, Brian Resnick, Matt Vasilogambros and Brian Fung, both critic the Voting Rights Act revisions of the Supreme court. However the CNN article is more analytical then the National Journal Article. The CNN article gives more details about the ruling, and actually quoting the words of Justice Roberts when delivering the decision. Whereas the National Journal article gives excerpts of what was said during the case. Both articles have almost no opinion on the subject from the author. But the article from CNN does pull in a great amount of personal interviews on the side of the decision being wrong. To a reader this may sway their opinion on the subject if they have not already made up their mind. The National Journal article is stronger in terms of verbatim reporting the facts about the case, because the CNN article has so much opinion in the form of the personal reactions. But that is does not rule out the CNN article as being inaccurate or ultimately bias because the author includes the decision before the reactions.

Works Cited

Berman, M., Resnick, B., Vasilogambros, M., & Fung, B. (n.d.). Supreme Court makes historic voting rights law harder to enforce – CNN.com. CNN.com – Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. Retrieved September 30, 2013, from http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/25/politics/scotus-voting-rights/index.html

Brownstein, R. (n.d.). Supreme Court Shreds Key Provision of the Voting Rights Act – NationalJournal.com. NationalJournal.com. Retrieved September 30, 2013, from http://www.nationaljournal.com/domesticpolicy/supreme-court-shreds-key-provision-of-the-voting-rights-act-20130625

City Gang Violence “Chicago”

 

One article “Feds: 9 charged in gang conspiracy, including 5 murders” by Jason Meisner comes from Chicago Tribune a daily newspaper in Chicago, Illinois. The other article “Feds Indict 9 Alleged Chicago Street Gang Members” comes from NBC Chicago a local news station. Both articles are about nine members of a Chicago street gang called “The Hobos” being indicted on federal racketeering chargers. “Law enforcement has identified the Hobos as a tight-knit, violent crew that originated in the former Robert Taylor Homes and banded together from factions of the much larger Gangster Disciples and Black Disciples street gangs,” prosecutors said in a news release (Meisner, 2013, para. 5). The Chicago tribune gives more specific details and more background information about the incident than NBC Chicago. Both articles give off slightly different information to. In the NBC Chicago news article it says “Four of the defendants are accused of shooting four people to death between 2006 and 2009” but in the Chicago tribune it says “Four of the defendants are charged with personally shooting to death five victims between 2006 and 2009.” Both articles have the same point of view and come from the same sources a press conference with U.S. Attorney Gary Shapiro and Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy in announcing the charges against members of the Hobo street gang. “Grand jurors indicted them on charges including murder, attempted murder, robbery and narcotics distribution” (Feds Indict 9 Alleged Chicago Street Gang Member, 2013, para. 2). All of those charged are currently in either federal or state custody. These articles are traditional news because it gives readers immediacy fast access to late breaking news and Proximity because both sources are located in Chicago.

 

  Work Cited

Meisner, J. (2013, September 26). Feds: 9 charged in gang conspiracy, including 5 murders. Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-09-26/news/chi-feds-9-charged-in-gang-conspiracy-including-5-murders-20130926_1_federal-informant-four-attempted-murders-law-enforcement

Feds indict 9 alleged Chicago street gang members. (2013, September 26). NBC Chicago. Retrieved from http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Feds-Indict-9-Alleged-Chicago-Street-Gang-Members-225386842.html#comments

 

Edward Snowden: Whistleblower or Traitor?

Edward Snowden: Whistleblower or Traitor?

This conflict is between proponents of stricter national security measures and those who support more personal privacy. These correlate to if you call Edward Snowden a traitor or a whistleblower. The articles are the same in that they both call Snowden a traitor. Some people have mixed feelings about it. Stephen Vladeck, an expert on national security, says, “At the end of the day, if someone asks me ‘is Edward Snowden a criminal or a whistleblower,’ I would say ‘yes’ — he’s both. And that’s okay.” This is clearly not a clear cut issue. Americans have also been divided on it; a recent poll from Quinnipac University says 55 percent believe Snowden is a whistleblower, not a traitor. The article by Business Insider analyzes a little further adding that although Snowden’s initial leaks may have been made with good intentions, he has later released more documents with no legal or moral justification. Glenn Greenwald, the reporter Snowden initially sought out to publish his story has said, “What motivated that leak (later leaks) though was a need to ingratiate himself to the people of Hong Kong and China.” The two articles do not take the same point of view. The Business Insider article is biased and is clearly written by someone who believes Snowden is not a whistleblower. Whereas the other article merely collects many different opinions and allows the reader to take his choice. These articles are news because of its prominence in the world at the moment. The Edward Snowden saga is a hot button issue. It is an issue that everyone has heard about and has some opinion.

 

Works Cited

Ingersoll, G., Mr. (2013, September 27). There is no justification for Edward Snowden’s latest leaks. Business Insider. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/edward-snowden-is-not-a-whistleblower-2013-9

Nesnera, A. (2013, August 08). Is NSA leaker Edward Snowden a traitor? VOA. Retrieved from http://www.voanews.com/content/snowden-traitor/1726272.html

 

Citizens v. Government Border Control

I critiqued these two articles because they indicate how life is affected by the bonder control and the government’s response to citizen’s outcry about how they are affected by the rise in patrol across the border. The article from Aljazeera America indicates that life in Texas is affected by the increased patrol because the officers constantly trespass and checkpoints all around Texas makes it hard especially when driving on the road. The other article I critiqued is from Skift which talks about how the government is giving the border patrol the right to conduct warrantless searches on devices within the state. This is a violation of privacy because it gives the border patrol the right to just snoop around in a person’s personal life. These two articles are different because the Skift article gives a more in depth look at how the government is abusing their power to worry us about false threats. In my other article by Aljazeera America it focuses more on the citizen’s uproar about the how the government is making life miserable in Texas with the constant trespassing to search for immigrants.

 

 

Garcia, M. (2013). Securing the border imposes a toll on life in Texas. Aljazeera America, Retrieved from http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/9/25/living-under-thelawofbordersecurity.html

Flaherty, A. (2013). U.S. border control has permission to conduct warrantless searches of travelers’ devices. Skift, Retrieved from http://skift.com/2013/09/10/u-s-border-control-has-permission-to-conduct-warrantless-searches-of-travelers-devices/

Washington D.C. Gang Violence Articles

Both articles, “Police Chiefs Focus on Disparities in Gun Violence, With an Eye Toward Solutions” and “D.C. area’s high-end neighborhoods not spared from gang violence”, highlight the presence of gangs throughout many of the neighborhoods in Washington D.C. The social class of the neighborhood, whether they be wealthy and or poor does not make a difference in the acts of gang violence throughout the region. The articles declare that the time to take action about this is now and not later. The primary difference between the two articles is, “Police Chiefs Focus on Disparities in Gun Violence, With an Eye Toward Solutions” talks mainly about the gun violence that gangs bring to many poor areas of cities such as Washington D.C. and what possible solutions they should take in order to stop these violent crimes that are brought on by different gangs. The article, “D.C. area’s high-end neighborhoods not spared from gang violence” talks about crimes such as rape and sex trafficking throughout the different more affluent areas of Washington D.C. Both articles have the same relative point of view that is gang violence needs to come to an end sooner rather than later because of the high crime rates and the danger they bring the innocent people of these neighborhoods. Both articles have proximity to them and prominence. Proximity because it’s local news to those living in the D.C. area and prominence because this is very important to the people whose lives are affected due to high gang crime rates as in Washington D.C

Sources:

 

Durgin, C. (2013, July 10). D.C. area’s high-end neighborhoods not spared from gang violence. The Washington Times, From http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jul/10/dc-areas-high-end-neighborhoods-not-spared-from-ga/

 

Goode E. (2012, April 27). Police Chiefs Focus on Disparities in Gun Violence, With an Eye Toward Solutions. The New York Times From http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/28/us/police-chiefs-focus-on-disparities-in-gun-violence.html

 

Gender Wage Gap: News Article Critique

These two article both discuss the gender wage gap, however they differ greatly in their content. The first article claims that if the gender wage were to close completely it would greatly influence women to enter the workforce increasing the amount of money they bring home, which in return they will spend on goods and services allowing that money to flow through the market and possibly increase the state of the economy. The second article uses statistics to show that over a 30 year period, the wage gap between men and women has dropped by half of what it was in 1979 and reasons women may be underpaid, such as women are less likely to work more hours than men due to home life. These articles take a similar point of view in that women entering the workforce can be a benefit, the second article believes that  the wage gap is shrinking which could potentially flow into the viewpoints of the first article. The second article lists numerous references including the Bureau of Labor Statistics, while the first article quotes numerous experts who have been conducting research on the subject. This article is news because of its prominence amongst women in the workplace, the subject has been brought up numerous times to political officials and has been dodged just about every time and it is getting frustrating to those that want equality.

Basset, L. Closing the gender wage gap would create ‘huge’ economic stimulus, economists say.  Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/24/gender-wage-gap-economic-stimulus_n_2007588.html 

Kolesnikova, N. A., & Liu, Y. (n.d.). Gender wage gap may be much smaller than most think. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis | Economic Data, Monetary Rates, Economic Education. Retrieved September 30, 2013, from http://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/re/articles/?id=2160

‘Anchor’ news

The first article I read was about 14 states working on a legislation to deny U.S. citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants, although they were not specific about how they plan to do so. Some states have a working draft of their model legislation and have even consulted a constitutional scholar to change the 14^th amendment. In this article senator Russell Pearce voices his opinion it is clear that he is against ‘anchor babies’. Paul Bender on the other hand doesn’t really take either side he simply says “with subject to jurisdiction, this chance won’t get very far because the founders only meant it to apply to the children of foreign  diplomats born in the U.S. Carlos Galindo-Elvira VP of Valle del sol says “the U.S. should focus more on other economic woes.”(Associated Press. (2010, October 19).Politics: lawmakers in 14 states draft bill to deny citizenship to ‘anchor babies’.foxnews Retrieved from www.foxnews/politics/2010) the 2^nd article I read  was more about the benefits that the U.S gives ‘anchor babies’ and their families. Some people have an issue with president Obamas birthplace the fact that a child of an illegal immigrant can be president doesn’t sit well with them. One man (anonymous) said “if you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child we reward that child with U.S. citizenship and guaranteed full access to all U.S. Services.” Majority of Americans 56% opposed to changing the 14^th amendment while the other 41% of Americans favored changing it.  (Hornick,Ed.(2011,April 28).CNN politics: is the next immigration fight over ‘anchor babies’? Retrieved from www.CNN.com). Both articles mainly discussed the 14^th amendment the only difference was the positions they took the first article was against ‘anchor babies’ while the 2^nd article took on both positions.