Airbag Advertisement

I chose to discuss about an article talking about Car safety. On the advertisement is a blurry picture of a person riding a bicycle. However, beyond the picture are words that, for once, speak louder than the picture. Shouldn't a car have more airbags than cup holders? It is an advertisement for thinkaboutit.com. The target audience is producers of these vehicles. Vehicle companies produce cars to have the hottest items around such as amazing stereo systems, excessive amounts of horsepower, and sleek designs. What the car company is implying here is that they are focusing too much on accessories rather than the purpose of the vehicle: To get a person from point A to point B SAFELY. The warrant of the advertisement is that car producers need to start making the cars safer by implementing more airbags. I really do not believe that there is any evidence because the picture is a person riding a bike, and the words imply that cars need to be made safer. It does not directly say that they need to.

Response to "My Plan to Save Network Television"

'In Charlie Hauck's article "My Plan to Save Network Television," he discusses how old people hurt modern network television. Explained in the article is how the network attempts to attract people withing the ages 18-49 because they are more likely to buy more interesting products, while people over that age group will not buy products. As Hauck says, they are not an "Opportunity audience." Hauck says that we should ban people over 49 from watching the main four networks.
My opinion towards this is that Hauck should really re-think what he is saying. To ban people over 49 from watching a certain TV show is ridiculous. What's the big deal with a little market boost? Sure most people over 49 are less inclined to purchase certain products, but I'm pretty sure a good portion of these people have kids and grandkids who would like these products, and their exposure to these shows would help the network out with ease. Plus, a banning of television to elderly will cause an uproar amongst just about everybody. There is just no reasonable cause to perform such an action. Basically, my response to this article is: Welcome to America. People can watch what they want when they want it.

Response to "Gen Y's Ego Trip Takes a Bad Turn"

In the article "Gen Y's Ego Trip Takes a Bad Turn," written by Larry Gordon and Louis Sahagun, the two authors discuss how modern society's mindset of themselves makes them more confident and self-centered. Associate professor Jean Twenge says that "We are heading to a society where people are going to treat each other badly, either on the street or in relationships." Studies drawn up by three colleges show that over two-thirds of modern society have higher egos than the modern man in 1982. Studies also show that every year of upcoming freshman is more concerned with financial success rather than living a meaningful life. Assistant professor Marc Flacks gives a reasonable opinion saying that "Narcissism was too harsh a description for the current students." He understands that students are seeking the direct route to success, and that we need a "Me first" attitude to accomplish this. Flacks opinion is the only one that shows some sense of understanding in my opinion.

In my opinion, this whole article(Minus Marc Flacks opinion) proves to be atrocious. Sure our world has the occasional person who we think is completely full of him or herself, but in all honestly: What is so bad about having confidence and thinking highly of ourselves? If we filled our world with nothing but pushovers, who I think is one who cannot think for him or herself and has low self-esteem, then we would get nothing accomplished. Competition makes the world grow when it comes to economy, school work, and overall just life in general. Confident people will take the first step to increasing the level of competition. Pushovers will let people run them over, which will lead the confident people into a dead-end because they will have nobody to fight against. They will just sit at the top until somebody gains the confidence to challenge them.

Rhetorical Analysis

Essay"Your Appearance, Good or Bad, Can Affect the Size of Your Paycheck"
Central Claim:
"Looking good on the job is an intangible aset that can be important, justas sharp technology skills or the ability to be a team player can give certain workers an edge"(p.255)
My Central Claim:
"Stephanie Armour backs up her arguments with sound reasoning, fact, and stats to prove that discrimination is happening in America's workforce."(p.3-4)
My Conclusion:
"Stephanie Armour successfully exemplifies the discrimination occuring in today's workforce."

In the article “Your Appearance, Good or Bad, Can Affect the Size of Your Paycheck,” Stephanie Armour disputes the discrimination based on appearance occurring in America’s modern workforce. Giving example after example, she tries to sell the idea that having a good looking, fit physique and face can improve a future employee’s chance of acquiring a job. She also claims that having a great body and good looks can increase an employee’s pay after earning the new job. But it’s not just having both the looks and body that consumes Armour’s mind. She also covers how height can affect one’s opportunity of achieving promotions and how not wearing makeup can either make or break a person’s employment with a company.

To start off her argument, she tells personal trainer and aerobics teacher, Jennifer Portnick’s, story. She mentions how Portnick does not acquire a job because of her figure. Standing at two-hundred and forty pounds, she did not appear fit according to Jazzercize’s standards. Armour telling this story shows how a company can discriminate based on looks. However, after the story, she claims how multiple stories like Portnick’s raise awareness when it comes to discrimination based on appearance. She brings up how the International Size Acceptance Association attempts to call for a legal protection for appearance based discrimination. However, although there are some circumstances where the ISAA is achieving results, it is almost impossible to receive a full ban on appearance based discrimination without basing people on their race, gender, or age. Employment Lawyer Bill O’ Brien compared this discrimination to the playground, where all the popular kids would act as leaders and choose their own friends. Armour shows concern over this comparison by bringing up how discrimination can really affect one’s paycheck. She brought up the study researched by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, which shows how a worker with below average looks can earn around nine percent less than a person with above average looks, and how people with above average looks can earn around five percent more than their average looking co-worker.

After her opening statement about overall job discrimination, she then focuses her attention on overall appearance. She compares looking good to being a team player and having useful technology skills in terms of job importance. However, it’s her references of other people which make Armour’s argument much more persuasive, giving stories of people like Patti Pao, who will not attend a meeting without putting on lipstick, or Matt Kennedy, who now wears glasses and sweeps his hair to the side in order to receiver more job offers. The employers also agree with employees when it comes to appearance. Mindbridge Software now requires formal business apparel while on the job. They have to be clean cut, without any visible piercings or tattoos. Scott Testa’s response infers that the clean cut looks that employees have revolve around a client’s preference of having a more conservative workforce.

Armour then covers height discrimination. She brings up the study from the book Blink, which polled the height of all Fortune 500 CEOs. The average of all the CEOs revolves just less than six feet tall, which is three inches taller than the average man. Dan Okenfuss, public relations vice president at Little People of America, says that “People with dwarfism are capable of doing anything in the workplace.” However, it is inferred that he understands because he mentions that “Companies need leaders to be tall and broad-shouldered.” Along with height discrimination comes weight discrimination. A study done by New York University sociologist Dalton Conley shows that increase in mass in a woman’s results in a decrease in family income and job prestige. Men experience no effect. The most impacting story that Armour shares is one that comes from the Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa. The bartenders and cocktail waitress are forbidden from gaining more than seven percent of their beginning weigh-in. Those who do will either receive ninety-day unpaid suspensions, or in some cases, be fired. She then brings up Richard Chaifetz’s comment that overweight people have twice as low of a morale as those with healthy weights.

In Armour’s last attempt to prove her point that appearance affects paychecks, she tells the story of a former casino bartender named Darlene Jespersen. Jespersen is known for suing Harrah’s Entertainment because she was fired for not wearing makeup. However, Jespersen almost never wore makeup and had been working for Harrah’s for twenty years. After hearing both cases, the U.S Court of Appeals favored Harrah’s because they had a requirement stating that makeup must be worn. After Harrah’s revamped their company policy, which no longer made makeup mandatory, they then offered Jespersen her job back. She declined, feeling that it was humiliating because in her opinion, “All the women should be 16 and look like the girl next door.”

It is Jespersen’s quote that drives Stephanie Armour to write this article. America focuses on appearance too much, which leads to appearance based discrimination. However, Armour’s arguments prove to be persuasive by giving sound reasoning, statistics, and studies in order to prove that companies do base some of their decision making on appearance. On the other hand, I think she keeps her argument fair by including people who give off opinions that oppose those of Armour’s. This ability to keep the argument fair gives Armour an advantage because attempts to be as unbiased as possible. She lists the facts and lets them prove her point. When she backs up her arguments with proven studies and statistics, how can you say that discrimination is not happening in America’s workforce? Armour’s article successfully proves that companies will look at both credentials and appearance, and that companies have no problem making the right decision based on appearance.

Virginia Tech Shootings Cause Concern

The recent shootings at Virginia Tech led to controversy amongst college campuses. Cho Seung-Hui, the man known for the shootings located at Virginia Tech, is one person who proves why locating the threats of a college campus can be very difficult. Students describe Cho as a loner. He never gets out of the dorm, and lacks the socials skills of one considered to be accepted by most of his peers. Certain girls explained tendencies of a stalker that Cho performed through text messages. Simply enough, Cho was not socially accepted by the majority of his classmates. However, there are students with different attributes than Cho’s who still perform the same actions. It is the uniqueness in each case of school shooting victims that make the prevention of these incidents from happening.

Nancy Shute discusses the efforts that college campuses make in order to find and assist students who pose a threat to the rest of their peers. She also goes through the efforts made by the Virginia Tech counseling system in order to help Cho. She mentions that Cho simply refused all help thrown his way. He said to counselors that he would not commit suicide. One person in Shute’s article blames the fault on upbringing. Cho came to the United States when he was eight years old. It is said that Koreans frown upon people with mental illnesses.

With unique issues like that, it is very tough to determine who is likely to be a threat to a college campus. Cho’s case is unique, but so are all the others. Studies show that school shooters come from all different backgrounds, races, upbringings, and social statuses. This makes colleges take different approaches when handling these cases. Many colleges have increased the workload in order to spot individual problems. Psychologists teach professors how to spot poor mental behavior. Some colleges have created Swat programs consisting of policemen, psychologists, and dorm staffers. However, despite all attempts to fight this problem amongst college campuses, finding all threats proves to be impossible.

This I believe is the main idea that Shute tries to get across. Colleges attempt to make the progress, but students make their attempts futile. She constantly states that studies were taken, and that every case of a school shooting differs from the rest; that every suspect has a different upbringing and background. Also, there is a cutoff line that colleges cannot cross simply because unless they have absolute proof, one cannot blame a student a problem without having notable cause. So, they cannot simply make a move based on minor mental behavior that a student is showing. On the other hand, colleges also get sued for not making actions, and people blame them for not preventing suicides. It’s a fine line that colleges have to ride in order to ensure the safety of their students.

Cases like Cho and others make the prevention of school shootings impossible. Every case is different. They are all raised differently and have their own social attributes. Colleges do, however, make the attempts to stop these crimes from happening again. The students need to express themselves positively to the psychologists to gain assistance, and not shut down their help like in Cho’s case. With the attempts made by colleges, the prevention of school shootings will be able to improve slowly and steadily, as long as they are constantly making an effort to fight against the potential suspects.

The Social Networking and Blogging Uprise

Throughout the past decade or more, people are using the internet in order to accomplish anything. Whether they online shop, find directions, or find scores for the latest football games, the internet continues to rise as the greatest universal source that can be offered. Anything can be done on the internet. However, it is not just finding information that makes the internet useful. Its benefits can assist people with interests such as writing. Lately, the inventions of blogs and social networking have impacted the world greatly, mainly the social networking systems known as Facebook and Myspace. It is rare to find an American college student who does not have an account to one of these two social networking systems. In some cases, a student will be members to both websites.

Facebook and Myspace have taken the world by storm. Its way of keeping students in touch with each other keeps people coming and inviting friends to experience what the person is experiencing. Also, people have options to tell about themselves such as interests and other things of that nature as well as being given web space to write about whatever fills their mind that day. People give this web space the title “Blogs,” which people use to express personal opinions to be up for opinion or to just get their ideas.

There are also websites that specialize in blogs. One just signs up and the website gives him or her web space that can be used to give ideas out. These people debate anything from politics to religion, or whatever fills up ones mind. People will discuss ones blog and they will generate debates. Many people enjoy this and people will discuss as a hobby. Whether it is Facebook, Myspace, or another website which promotes blogging, people will use it to discuss with each other and debate certain issues.

However, there are similarities between social networking and blogging. The difference is that social networking has blogging, but more. There is more to Facebook and Myspace than blogging. People use it to keep in touch. College students use it in order to keep track of friends lost throughout the high school to college transition. There are comment sections that people will use to see what other people are doing and how life is going. Blogs on the other hand are used to debate. They are used to get views across without the tools that Facebook and Myspace have to contact with people.

Social networking and blogging are two means of communication that are taking over the internet and people. It has given people ways to get points across and have constant debate. Social Networking allows people to keep in contact with each other. Its impact is unprecedented because it is rare not to find somebody not involved in a social networking or blogging website. Also, it is convenient because everything can be done right at the comfort of the home computer. With convenience like that, there is no sign of the rise of both social networking and blogs to stop.

Modern Argument

Modern society separates themselves into two types of argumentative groups: The adversarial and the consensual. The adversarial prides himself or herself on domination. Does he or she have the ability to take over a debate and “Win” in his or her own mind? He or she will always take the time make points clear and to do anything to become a victor, whether it’s through becoming aggressive and competitive. The consensual does not always have victory in mind, but tries to come up with logical solutions and gives reasons to support a case. One labeled as a consensual arguer will always place the team before the individual, unlike the adversarial.
Ph.D. candidate Paul G. Cook says that argument can be found everywhere: On the television, newspaper, songs, etc.. However, his problem revolves around how society handles argument. He says that people argue with a “Knee-jerk” reaction, which occurs when one reacts to something that contradicts his or her current beliefs. It can be inferred from Cook that this reaction results from a desire to “Win,” instead of trying to come up with reasonable solutions to the topics in question.
From my experience, it seems that it’s not the aggressive nature of the argument that concerns Cook, but the person’s desire to “Win” the argument. This is not the purpose of arguing. The purpose is to come up with reasonable solutions and eventually an agreement to the topic at hand. My style of argument revolves around this purpose. If given a label, I would have the argument style of an adversarial with the mindset of the consensual. My purpose focuses on achieving an agreement that everybody can abide to. More often than not, I will perform all means necessary to attain this agreement, whether it is through being aggressive or attempting to compete with another person in the argument. The purpose of argument is to achieve a agreeable solution, so why not attempt all means necessary? The way I want to argue also revolves around this style. I always place the group or team before me, and as long as we agree in the end, then I’m happy. After all, what is the purpose of arguing if your only goal is to come out victorious? It sounds like an ego boost to me.

A World Of Moderates

Kathleen Parkers’s article “Seeking Balance in an Either-Or World” discusses why it is so hard to find a reasonable spot to place your self when dealing with controversial issues. She deduces that most of modern society usually settles in the middle. They will not choose to side with one group. “Fence-straddlers” she calls them. However, this type of practice does not settle well with opinion columnists. These columnists cannot simply ride the middle route throughout I their entire article. They must pick a side.
The example Parker gives in her article to back up her argument is abortion. Like most people, she believes that abortion is something that should be frowned upon, but she cannot find a way to justify this. She believes that there could be circumstances where abortion serves as the only option. On the other hand, she believes that abortion can be prevented through effective teaching. She says that if high school students can be properly taught how to effectively use a condom, then abortion will find its place. We will be able to view the advantages and disadvantages of abortion.
As a student who has gone to Catholic schools for thirteen years, my views can relate with those of Kathleen Parker. As my views of religion switched from those of a diehard Catholic to an agnostic, I noticed my political views transfer from one of a conservative to those of more moderate views. When I was young I was taught to obey the Ten Commandments, God, and other religious aspects such as those. Along with those came the views that Gay people should not be married, and that abortion should be permanently prohibited. However, I noticed my outlook on these topics change. I started to fade away from God, gaining my own beliefs, and with that, I gained new opinions on abortion and gay marriage. This pushed me to more moderate views.
It’s the transfer of my opinions on controversial topics that make me agree with Parker. For most subjects, there are too many opinions for one to be labeled clearly on one side. These opinions also have the ability to lead to contradiction, canceling out a person’s one-sided view. She sums it up clearly when discussing her opinions on abortion. It can be inferred that she would clearly be fine if abortion became banned, however she cannot give a reason why it should be banned. I believe a person has to be completely closed off to one set of views to be completely labeled a “Democrat”, or “Republican”, for example. Because of most people’s ability to agree with somebody, and in turn, change their views, the majority of people will take a more moderate stance when it comes to debatable topics.

The Inarticulate Modern High School Student

Journalism teacher Michael Skube argues about the contemporary high school student’s inability to write and speak with proper English. With all the impressive grade point averages these students achieve, Skube ponders why these students cannot comprehend words that have been exposed to them for years, and why they cannot distinguish the use of words like “Accept” and “Except”. Because of this, he questions the meaning of a high school diploma. Certain states have a mandatory exit exam that students must pass before graduation. A good portion of these students do not pass despite having an impressive GPA. With all these students who do not pass while having a good GPA, how does anyone believe that these students can handle the challenge of a college level class? Also, Skube condemns the purpose of a grade point average, saying that when it comes to college level readiness, a high SAT score will provide a better predictor of success than a high grade point average. He blames this on the fact that those who have higher SAT scores and mediocre grade point averages were bored throughout high school and read more for pleasure, which is the cure for all the aforementioned problems in Skube’s opinion.
English teacher Todd Hagstette believes that “Aggressive Reading” will cure the modern high school student’s inability to speak fluently because he blames the cause on passive reading. “Aggressive Reading” involves reading over material multiple times, arguing with the author’s point of view, and placing one’s self into a level of discomfort in order to fully grasp a written work. Passive reading includes skimming through a work in order to accomplish a task or to enjoy a book, not to fully understand what is written. This helps the issue that Michael Skube proposes because “Aggressive Reading” helps others comprehend the material. This comprehension of the material will help others become more fluent, which translates into improved speech and writing.