Immigration. Is it good?

In a country that was founded by immigants, who would have ever thought that immigration would be a problem. Not just any problem, a huge prolem, striking a debate across the nation. Every person has their own beliefs, whether to let them stay or to force them out. Some people have stereotypes that every immigrant is illegal, some people have steretypes that every immigrant is a Mexican, some people are wrong.

A blog written by Dee, titled, Comprehensive Immigration Reform: PROs and ANTIs, shows a different viewpoint and gets a little controversial. Dee begins by stating that the country is divided between Pro-Immigration and Anti-Immigration groups. She is obviously a member of the first. In the paragraph on Pro-Immigration she talks about pro-immigration foundations and how they rarely ever make internet posts. She says that they rarely ever rally together. She then finishes her paragraph saying, "The difference between Anti's and Pro's is that the Pro's advocate a path a path to citizenship for the 12M(number of immigrants)."

This paragraph is absoulutely true, Pro groups rarely ever make public statements, let alone internet posts, so they are not usually well-known. Also her last statement is also very true. Pro groups are for creating a better and quicker way for an immigrant to become a citizen, while Anti groups are just against immigration completely.

Dee then goes on to talk about the Anti groups. This is where her blog gets controversial. Dee associates the term "American" to a white, northern, European ethnicity. I feel as if this statement was just put in her blog to cause controversy so that people would post, it is in fact an internet blog, because it has no other purpose. She says Antis tend to be "very angry" and that they "claim the 12M drag down the minimum wage." Both of these statements are stereotypes, making her a hypocrite.

Big Brother's Cell Phone

1. Nikki Swartz's view point on cell phones is that America is unaware of the fact that their cell phone providers can pin point their exact location, and store that location. They can then give this information to the government to watch-over suspects. However, recently it is getting much more difficult for prosecutors to get this information because it would be ruled unlawful. Terry Allen uses the Verizon Wireless commercials as an image that Verizon is a "Big Brother", an idea from George Orwells book, 1984. Allen also talksBoth om companies are not eager to advertise the trackig capabilities of the phones.

2. Both of these authors share the common idea about how because of capitalism, cell phone companies would be more than eager to sell the tracking information to prosecuters. They also share the idea on how that this could give the government the power of being able to watch our every move and know exactly where we are.

3. The two authors have very few differences in their essays, one of those is that Terry Allen talks about the Bush administration in his essay. He uses the fact that the Bush administration said that time lost justifying a warrant can mean dangerous delays. He uses this to relate to his essay by helping the side that prosecutors should be allowed to use this information because waiting for a warrant can allow enough time for the suspect to strike again.

4. I believe that the government should be able to use the tracking information, but only with suspects. I don't agree with the idea of the government being able to watch everyone to protect us, because I don't see how that would do anything good. How could watching over innocent people help protect innocent people? Unless they can see the future and know who is going to commit a crime, they won't be able to prevent any crimes by using this information.

Race in Advertisiments

Recently advertisers have been worrying about racial and/or ethnic stereotypes. They know that race is a hot topic right now especially because we now have our first black president. However, when an advertiser goes out of their way and worries about race to try and avoid being racist, isn't that just counterproductive? Racism means treating one person better than another because of their race or ethnicity. In order to stop racism we need to treat EVERYONE the same. However, if we are just using blacks in advertisements, isn't that just being racist to everyone that isn't black? I have no problem with using a black person in advertising, but when a company uses a black person just to not be racist, is just as downgrading to black people as well. It gives the viwepoint that the only reason they are there is so that the advertisers don't get in trouble. I just think the whole idea of race is belittling to everyone. Why should it even matter?


Also advertisers have been using black and white people to show that racism is no longer around. In a way this is a good thing, but then when you think about the reason behind the advertisers are doing this it is just as racist. By worrying about race and trying not to be racist they are ovrcompensating which is not solving the problem. In fact, it is just adding to the problem. If a company didn't want to be looked at as racist they would pick the best model available no matter what their race might be. Once again, by worrying about race they are being racist.


One of the only times I view advertisers worrying about race as being acceptable is if they are advertising world peace. By showing one person of every race and they are all are helping one another this portrays world peace. The reason this is acceptable is because world peace involves people of different races living as one and enjoying life. They aren't trying to sell a product and they aren't worrying about being racist, they are just trying to show a point. That is why it is acceptable.

Are we test subjects for advertisers?

A group of scientists are doing test on a group of mice. The test consists of eachscientist has their own thing of cheese and the object is to get the most amount of mice to chose their cheese. They have a month to study the mice and look at the way they act and what the mice seem to like and dislike. This is also the same process that advertisers use on their customers (us) to try and sell as much of their product as possible.


In order for an advertiser to attract customers they have to show us something that attracts us. To do that the advertisers study us. They look at the likes and dislikes of their targeted audience. They look at what activities their targeted audience take part in. They take in mind the enviroment their targeted audience feels most comfortable and excited in. After they know this they are able to to appeal their targeted audience and give them (us) what they want.


For example in an ad for a Hummer they have the viewer looking down upon the car from above, giving the audience a feeling of power. Also the enviroment the car is in is "rocky" area. They are trying to attract people who like are active in nature and that like to either hike, rock climb, or other similar activities.  However, they leave out the negative sides of the car. They don't tell the audience anything about the high price of the car or about its poor gas mileage. If somebody looks at this ad and it meets all of their likes, there is a much higher chance that they will buy the car than someone who doesn't like the same these things.

Another example is an ad for a JEEP Grand Cherokee. In this ad the car is on a street that has an apartment building behind it that looks somewhat liek a castle. It looks like the car could be in England and surprisingly it has a random waterfall coming from the roof of the appartments. In the upper left hand corner the ad says, "Always have adventure in your heart". This ad does a good job of attracting people of all kinds. Because of the fact that the surroundings of the car have two completely ideas (a really nice neighborhood and a waterfall) they attract multiple types of people. The ad says that the car can be whatever you want it to be. If you are adventurous the car appeals to you because of the waterfall. Also if you are a person who cares more about living in a good neighborhood and your family the car appeals to you.

Advertisers are very good at what they do, that's why they do it. They know how to appeal to an audience because they study us and know what we want. By knowing this they are able to make an ad appeal to anybody they want to. Usually those people are the ones who end up buying the car in the end.


So are we test subjects for advertyisers? Make that decision next time you look at an advertisement.

Today's Doctors vs Yesterday's

The painting by Norman Rockwell titled "Doc Melhorn and the Pearly Gates" depicts an older doctor wearing all black with a black handbag and a stethascope. The doctor appears caring and gives the feeling of a grandfatherly figure. This was how doctors were look upon a a long time ago. Unfortunately that feeling has changed, even though people today wish their doctor was more caring. It seems today that people are afraid of their doctors because they are not used to the technology that their doctor uses. Today doctors use machines and technology that no ordinary person would know how to use and because it is new and different their patients are afraid. People also now look the qualities of a good doctor differently. It used to be what made a good doctor was that he was caring and thoughtful, but now in order for a doctor to be classified as "good" he must be the smartest in his field and be the most up-to-date on technology.


After looking at the painting by Norman Rockwell and photos of modern day doctors I have come to the conclusion that doctors are viewed almost as "higher-beings". We look to doctors today to be able to fix any medical problem we have and if we don't understand how or why they are doing something it means they are doing a good job. Doctors have their own language that nondoctors don't understand and we are beginning to grow accutsomed to no knowing. I think this is why people are afraid of going to their doctor though, even if they don't realize it. People are afraid because they don't know what's going on.


Insurance companies also play a huge role in our viewpoint of doctors in today's world. Insurance companies and HMO's portray doctors with high-tech images to give the effect that the doctor has the technology that we don't to fix whatever problem we have. This comforts us in a different way than a doctor comforted his patient a long time ago. A doctor is yesterday's world would comfort a patient by being nice and caring. However, today we are comforted knowing that our doctor is "better" than us.

All in all I guess what I am trying to say is that in the past and in the present doctors have always comforted their patients, just in different ways. it used to be that doctors were caring and could relate to their patients. Now, we are comforted by knowing our doctor is smarter, has more technology, can fix whatever problem we have, and by not knowing what is going on. It may seem as though we are scared and worried because we don't completely understand our doctor, but it is exactly that which comforts us.

Doc Melhorn and the Pearly Gates : Norman Rockwell

Outsourcing

Thomas L. Friedman's article, "30 Little Turtles", does an excellent job of making the reader feel good about outsourcing jobs, however, many of the ideas Friedman states are generalized by his few experiences visiting call centers in India. Friedman talks about how Indians are thrilled to work in call centers and it has positiely effected their lives by either allowing them to recieve a college degree or just by giving them self-confidence. However, he over generalizes all Indians with the few that he met in his village.

Stephanie Malinowski's  response to Friedman's article produces so very strong points. Stephanie shows how Friedman creates points almost seemingly to just make the reader feel happy about outsourcing, therefore some of the points appear to be erroneous. Because of the fact that Friedman only saw a few Indians during his visit, how can he claim that all Idians love working at call centers. He also states that a call center is a deadend job. If a job is deadend and the sallary is not very high, how can a person be satisfied with where they work?

I can't personally say whether or not all Indians love working at call centers because I have not done any research on the topic, nor have I talked to any/all of the Indians that work in them. Friedman definately shows us that some Indians must be satisfied with their job so we do know that not all Indians hate working in outsourcing. I think Friedman's article could have been much stronger if he wouldn't have over generalized the employees of the jobs and would have just talked about that certain branch of employees loving their jobs.

A Response To Sean Barry

In Sean Barry's response essay to Dr. Andres Martin's Essay "On Teenagers and Tattoos" he claims that Dr. Martin has an interesting and valid point on why teenagers get tattoos. Dr. Martin says teenagers get tattoos because a tattoo has a deeper meaning than just the image itself and that some teenagers get tattoos because they need something permanent in their lives when nothing else is. Barry says that this is a valid point but that the first reason a teenager gets a tattoo is to fit in. Barry claims that tattoos are the "in" thing so a teenager will get a tattoo to be cool, however they also chose for the tattoo to have a meaning because it is permanent. Barry also claims that a lot of teenagers get tattoos as a group to unify themselves and to have proof of it.

Sean Berry's viewpoint is different than Dr. Martin's because Berry is a teenager himself. This gives him the opportunity to have a first hand view as to why teenagers want to get tattoos. Dr. Martin's viewpoint is a little obscurred because he is an adult and his audience is directed to other psychiatrists. Therefore, Berry is able to have a different look on the reasons teenagers get tattoos.

I agree with Berry's viewpoint because as a teenager I know a lot of people my age who get tattoos because they know somebody who has one which makes them feel like they too need to get one. Tattoos are beginning to become just another fashion accessory like jewelry, and tattoo parlors are beginning show up in suburbs, not just in shady areas. However, tattoos are different from any other accessory because they are permanent and if a teenager decides to get one they must keep it forever, even if tattos go out of style.