Scottish Independence Primary Source

When researching for my conflict, the Scottish Independence debate, I found a picture of a rally of a group of people who looked like they were at some sort of assembly, with Alex Salmond leading the speech. Alex Salmond is Scotland’s first minister, and the people at the event were wearing shirts that represented the Scottish flag, as well as waving Scottish flags. This leads me to believe that the speech was about gaining independence and what needs to be done to gain independence. I think that this picture shows that there are a lot of people in Scotland that want their independence and shows that they are very open about their opinion. Most likely the person that took the picture from the angle that he did was trying to send a message to England that the Scottish knew what they wanted and were determined to get it. This picture helps me with my understanding of the conflict because it shows just how empathetic the Scots were towards their goal.

You can view the picture and the article related at:

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/sep/21/alex-salmond-scotland-independence

Fast food strike for minimum wage News Articles

Many of the news articles I’ve read on my conflict, has pretty much been the same. But these two articles tell of one of the biggest strikes to occur in years. The strike began in NYC where there was very angry fast food employees demanding for better pay to accommodate the continuously rising cost of living. The strike spread all the way to the once before pro Jim Crow, low wage pay, South.

NBC news talks about the strike being huge in 50 U.S. cities. Workers demanded $15/hr, while restaurant owners defending the wage saying it’s appropriate and reasonable. The article says that a lot of the minimum wage jobs go to adults that are supporting their families, rather than teenagers. “Only 16 percent of fast food industry jobs now go to teens, down from 25 percent a decade ago. More than 42 percent of restaurant and fast-food employees over the age of 25 have at least some college education, including 753,000 with a bachelor’s degree or higher, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.” In defense, the National Restaurant Association says that only 5% of workers earn minimum wage. McDonald’s defending them by stating, “McDonald’s aims to offer competitive pay and benefits to our employees. We provide training and professional development for all of those who wish to take advantage of those opportunities” Michael Saltsman, EPI’s researcher director, says that raising wages will mean raising prices, eventually losing customers and possibly having to automate the jobs, which men less entry level jobs.

NY daily news article was very similar. It also agrees that Thursday’s strike was one of the biggest nationwide, usually strikes occur in one city. An employee tells of both she and her husband struggling to make ends meet, the recently could afford to buy a kitchen table, they used to eat on the floor. Another employee Simon says, “We don’t think it’s too much to ask, we’re still going to struggle on $15 an hour.”  McDonald’s states that, “the raises “would potentially have a negative impact on employment and business growth in our restaurants, as well as value for our customers.”  The article ending stating that minimum wage was last raised in 2009, and that President Obama hopes to raise it to $9.

Both articles simply just state the opinions and views of both sides. The question that’s still in the air, is if $15/hr is too much to ask for?

Links:

Sandoval, E., Paddock, B., & Mcshane, L. (2013). Fast-food workers strike to protest low wages at McDonald’s, Taco Bell, other chains. NY Daily News. Retrieved from http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/fast-food-walkout-workers-u-s-protest-wages-article-1.1440232

Cox, J. (2013). Fast food strike go super-sized in clash over wages. NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com/business/fast-food-strikes-hit-cities-across-country-8C11028643

Syrian Civil War News Articles

The articles that I chose to discuss are called Syria chemical attack: What we know now from BBC news and Syria believed to be moving “some” chemical weapons” from CNN. Both articles discuss topic of the chemical weapons in Syria. Both articles also use video clips along with their stories. The BBC news videos are clips of what they believe were the effects of the weapons on the population. Syrian civilians sent in these clips. The BBC mentions that they are not one hundred percent sure whether the videos are real or fabricated. The CNN video involve a very small clip of Syria but is mostly set in the United States. It involves live footage of US government discussion about this issue and future plan of action. This article was before the actual chemical attacks. Both articles believe that Assad’s regime is behind all the chemical weaponry activity but both are not positive of this or of its intention. The reported CNN article speaks more specifically of US action and how these new findings of chemical weapons effect or could affect the US. Both articles never directly or specifically mention sources other than video received by civilians. They both use the phrase, “sources say”. Both articles serve as news because they involve immediacy. These articles discuss very current news in Syria, which involves chemical weapons.

 

Work Cited

Kendall,B. (2013, September 24).  Syria chemical attack: what we know now. BBC News Middle. Retrieved from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23927399

 Starr, B. (2012,July 13). Syria believed to be moving “some” chemical weapons”. CNN News. Retrieved from: http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/13/syria-believed-to-be-moving-some-chemical-weapons/?iref=allsearch

News Articles

On 6 July 2013, Chinese military police fired upon a crowd of Tibetans, while they tried to celebrate the birthday of the Dalai Lama, their exiled spiritual leader, and injured six Tibetans, as describe in the articles “Reports say six Tibetans hurt in shooting incident” and “China tightens the screw after shooting Tibetan worshippers in Tawu”. Nevertheless, while they are about the same story they do so in different ways. The first article takes a more neutral standpoint in the incident as explains the situation at hand while not being influenced by bias, the same however, cannot be said about the second. The second takes more pro Tibet standpoint, condemns the action of the Chinese, and considers it a “crackdown” on Tibetans. This is because the second article comes from the website that promotes the Tibetan quest for autonomy. The first article comes from a Chinese newspaper that is not owned by the government and as such is a free newspaper that is not influence by the Chinese government to run stories that are against them. These articles show a great deal of importance because they both describe how the Tibetan quest for autonomy, a conflict that has raging for decades, still affects  the lives of people today in the most serious of ways.

 

References:

China tightens the screw after shooting Tibetan worshippers in Tawu (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.tchrd.org/2013/08/china-tightens-the-screw-after-shooting-tibetan-worshippers-in-tawu/

Associated Press in Beijing ( 2013, July 2013). Reports say six Tibetans hurt in shooting incident. South China Morning Daily. From http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1278142/reports-say-six-tibetans-hurt-shooting-incident

The New York Times Vs Fox News

I critiqued the new york times and fox news about the Dream Act. In the new york times post it discusses the story of one person which was Angie Escobar. In the new york times it relates back to Angie’s life and reflects on how she wants better for her family. In the article Angie states “I could relate to him, to have the desire to go far in a career but not being able to even begin”. (Escobar, Angie). This shows how the new york times really wanted to link into someones life who was actually effected by the Dream Act. While in the fox news article it explains how there is some flaws in the Dream Act and how the information they are putting out there is not accurate. In the fox news article they state ” But the descriptions of the DREAM Act voiced by President Obama and his cohorts are not accurate. And the consequences are never told.” (Smith, Lamar). This quotes express how he wanted to show the outcomes of The Dream Act. While in the new york times they wanted to give a real life situation. The two articles are completely different because the new york times speaks highly and is for the Dream Act, while the fox news article was more against it and talked about its flaws. The times use an actual person for its source, while the fox news uses information from the act itself. This information is news because its discussing a matter that was very controversial and important to the people at the time.

 

APA citation

Otis, J. (2012, November 25). Following Her Dream, And Hoping For The Dream Act. The New York Times, p. A24. From http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/nyregion/pursuing-dream-of-us-citizenship-colombia-native-applies-to-stay.html?_r=0

Smith,L. (2012, March 20). The truth about The DREAM Act. Fox News, p. B6. From http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/20/truth-about-dream-act/

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