The Talent of Iago in Shakespeares Othello Essay -- Shakespeare Othel

The Talent of Iago in Othello  Ã‚        Ã‚   William Shakespeare's Othello is a tragic drama that shows the overwhelming power of deception and the damage it can lead to.   Othello's right-hand man is Iago; on the surface a die-hard friend and confidant, in reality comparable to the devil himself.   Iago uses other characters as though they were his puppets, planting lies and watching the sorrowful fruit born.   Iago deceives virtuous, yet weaker men (such as Cassio and Roderigo) with ease, but feels greatly threatened by the most powerful, virtuous general in the land - Othello.   Othello's only flaw is jealousy, and Iago exploits this to no end, using him to get what he wants.   Iago's talent to manipulate the truth and control other people with his lies is what gives this play momentum.   More than any other characteristic, Iago preys on those who are emotionally unsure of their desires.   Iago manages to find ways of altering these characters' perceptions of reality, forcing them to believe in the dark world that Iago has created for them.   The main emotions that Iago bends and twists are those of love... ... Castlerock Entertainment, 1995.    Shakespeare, William. The Tradegy of Othello, The Moor of Venice. Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, and Drama, sixth edition. Ed. X.J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia. New York: Harper Collins, 1995.    Wright, Louis B. and Virginia A. LaMar. "The Engaging Qualities of Othello." Readings on The Tragedies. Ed. Clarice Swisher. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1996. Reprint from Introduction to The Tragedy of Othello, the Moor of Venice by William Shakespeare. N. p.: Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1957   

The Rain Man Essay -- Movie Film Rain Man Rainman Essays

The Rain Man The Rain Man stars Dustin Hoffman and Tom Cruise. The movie was made in 1988. The movie is about an autistic man named Raymon, who is a idiot savant played by Dustin Hoffman and his fast, talking self absorbed, egocentric brother Charlie Babbitt, who is played by Tom Cruise. A egocentric person is a person with the simple recognition that every living thing views the world from a unique, self-oriented perspective(LIFE: Inherently Egocentric written by James Craig Green http://pw2.netcom.com/~zeno7/ego.html). Charlie is a car salesman whose business is going down hill. Charlie and his girlfriend are on their way to Palm Springs when Charlie gets a call from his friend and co-worker. He tells him that his fathers' lawyer has been trying to reach him, because his father was dead and the funeral was the next day. Charlie who never had a good relationship with his father decided to go out there to pay his respects and to go get his share of his fathers estate. When the lawyer read the will, Charlie finds out all he received was his fathers' 1949 Buick and his prized rose bushes. The lawyer says the rest of the estate is going to a beneficiary. Charlie is mad at what his father did. He tries to find out who get everything else, because it is worth about three million dollars. Charlie finds out the name and location of the beneficiary, but does not know anything else. So Charlie goes to Wallbrook institution to find out who this guy is. While he is inside a man comes up to Charlies' car and hop s in. He says he drove it just last week. After Charlie asks him a couple of questions he finds out that they are brothers. Charlie's first impression of Raymon is that he is retarded. Charlie decides in order to get his cut of his fathers' money, he will abduct his brother and wait for them to hand him his one and a half million dollars as a ransom because he thinks he deserves it. Charlie takes Raymon from Wallbrook and heads out on the road back to Los Angeles. Charlie tells him if they make it back soon they can go and see a Dodgers game. Charlie's girl friend objects to what Charlie is doing to Raymon and decides to leave him. The next morning Charlie and Raymon go out for breakfast and Raymon starts to throw a fit when the maple syrup is not on the table before they order. He also wants toothpicks to eat with, not the knife and fork provided. C... ...ctured and safe. The fact that Raymon is a brilliant idiot savant would be interesting but have little value in his day to day life. Charlie's portrayal as an egocentric person was also very believable. It was obvious from the beginning of the movie that he viewed everything that happened very personally. He was self-centered and could not think of others. By the end of the movie he learns to think of others including Raymon and he even wants to incorporate Raymon into his everyday life. I think it happened too quickly though, I mean how many people can go from being egocentrical to a person who is at the exact opposite side of how to live life. Even today autism is not recognized or else it is misunderstood by the public, parents and professionals. This film put a lot of the rumors of autistics and savants to rest. Before this movie not a lot of people had known how you could recognize an autistic person. This film was a really good film. As stated before this film not many people knew much about autistic people. This film opened up the eyes of people to autistics. This was the first film to actually show how autistic people live and how they like to have a daily schedule.

Super Size My Life : the Mcdonaldization of Society

Loni Bauer Date: 04-10-2013 Sociology Assignment W2-2 Super-Size my WorldMcDonaldization Of Society Growing up I have always lived in a very small town, just to the north of our beloved city Chicago. It was a huge city full of hustle and bustle. Whenever I would visit the city I would feel so rushed, and crowded. Now that I’m older I am used to a fast paced life. I always drive to school, I am always on a busy campus, and I always am being pulled in so many directions it makes my head spin! I can see the highs and lows in the whole MDoS (McDonaldization of Society).It truly is something that a lot of us have grown accustomed to. Whether it be a fast food restaurant or a store, these small shops has grown into large conglomerates to supply us with two things. Convenience and low prices. But unfortunately, when it comes to most places you can’t always find quality with quantity. Because even though it tastes good (sometimes) McDonalds is not good for anyone who eats it. I have fallen victim to the sirens call of their new spicy chicken sandwich they’re only a dollar so I don’t have to pay much money to get more than one to fill myself.In a society that caves to good deals because of how expensive and time consuming everything is. People have no time to actually sit down and eat at the table with their families, or even cook the meals to start. What I’m trying to get at is, that we really brought this upon ourselves whether we like it or not. It’s not something that will easily go away, and to be honest I don’t think it ever will. MDoS consists of these four things. Efficiency: This is Optimal Method for completing a task. When a company is geared towards minimizing your time.In McDonalds case it’s the fastest way to go from hungry to full in a short amount of time (Ritzer, 2000)While sometimes this is a great thing, I personally don’t like food. I don’t really enjoy eating food, so I want to sp end as much time not doing it as possible. So the fact that I can actually get my food, and eat it quickly is a great thing to me. When it comes to say a grocery store, they have a standard in service to uphold, where you get quick and efficient service while you’re in their store, from their baggers and Cashiers.What person really likes grocery shopping? I have never seen anyone get excited to go buy food for the week. So from what I’ve seen, people would most likely want to get in, buy their food and get out as soon as possible so they can get on with their day. Calculability:This Rule in simple terms judges those by how fast they work not the quality of their service. In a way this is true for a lot of things these days. However it doesn’t really apply to all businesses. Once again using McDonalds as an example.In my town (which is the worst place to live in the world if you ask me) People here are very lazy and most likely don’t understand English. Wh en you visit the McDonalds in my town you are most likely to get very fast and very bad service. The food is old, gross and tastes horrid. When you try to tell them how much you hate it, the people can barely understand you. However, when I go to the McDonalds by my school it’s a very different experience. The people are nice, they speak English, and the food looks fresh and tastes fresh. While the service is quick and accurate without any mistakes.So in reality sometimes it really just depends on the neighborhood, and the people working there. Just like any business. When I go to the Jewel Osco in my town once again I repeat what I say above, the service is slow and un-pleasant. When I visit the next town over, completely the opposite. So I am convinced my town is cursed haha. Predictability: No matter where you go you will receive the same service. The workers jobs are repetitive, highly routine, and predictable. While this is true I ask you to revisit the statement above.W hile I’m on this subject I will also touch upon something else. When you visit a KFC, or Popeye’s Chicken, Wendy’s, Burger King, or any other chain fast food place you will usually get the same recipe for that burger no matter where you go. Usually it will taste the same no matter what part of the world you actually purchase it from. Most of the time this is true, with few exceptions. There is absolutely no creative freedom for a grill operator at these places, if the cook wanted to create a â€Å"special† there’s no way that would happen.If you work at one of these places you are a slave to your position without creative liberties to stray from the beaten path. If you find something wrong with your burger or chicken and you make a fuss about it. They always give you a new one, and then send you coupons! Is that a bad thing? No, free food is always welcomed to the average person. But, maybe I would like a heartfelt apology for messing up my meal, o r perhaps a joke or two from the manager about how embarrassed he/she is. That human element that makes a place special is basically lost at these establishments, Which leads me in to the final issue.Control: Standardized and Uniformed Employees, While also including the replacement of human workers with Machines. This is a bit scary to me to be honest. Even though I don’t fully enjoy food, there are some people that truly treasure culinary arts and truly believe there’s nothing better than a home cooked meal Shared with family. I believe this too. When these people visit a restaurant they want to feel comforted like they’re in their mom’s kitchen. When you take the heart out of cooking, we might as well be eating nourishment pills.In case you've noticed, as I have been writing this paper for the past hour my opinions have changed as I sat here thinking, and writing. I was thinking about re-writing this paper, but I wanted you see how this subject changes people. I went from not caring about food, to actually thinking about the heart of it, just because I thought about these four elements. There’s a lot wrong with the way society is now it’s very impersonal and de-humanized. Why, on this TV my strange addiction this man was basically Married to a sex doll. She couldn't talk, or give him Human compassion. That’s crazy right?Maybe it’s not as crazy as we think in this new society. Human beings strive for perfection, for that plane of godliness. We all want to be perfect. But it’s those little imperfections that make us perfect. It’s the chef trying new things, adding a little more cheese to the pasta sauce, the designer raising a picture and tilting it slightly, the Painter who adds pink to her clouds, and the Interior Designer angling a couch slightly off so that it’s not straight. These small details make us imperfect, makes our lives imperfect, but to be Honest, that’s perfect ly fine with me. |

Power as Exercised in Totalitarian Regimes of the Stalinist Era

Mao Zedong, founder of the People’s Republic of China, once said that â€Å"Every communist must grasp the truth: political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. † Zedong’s metaphor accurately characterizes the oppressive nature of the Communist regime of the Stalinist era. Such totalitarian systems maintain control over its citizens through the exercise of coercion, reward systems, mass media, and propaganda. This kind of totalitarian government sought to deprive its citizens of individual rights and integrate them into the system as parts of the Stalinist machine. In One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, Alexander Solzhenitsyn illustrates how the Stalinist labor camps, or gulags, utilized various modes of surveillance, the constant dehumanization of political prisoners, manipulative reward systems, and frequent brutality and force to maintain control over prisoners and uphold the ideology of Stalinism. Another perspective of the Stalinist power structure is offered in Andrezej Wajda’s controversial film, Man of Marble in which a young filmmaker tries to uncover the truth about a former national icon, Birkut, who fell to obscurity and encounters frequent resistance in her attempts to do so. This film illustrates how the Stalinist government manipulated the media and censored controversial literature, film, and artwork to portray false government success and brainwash its citizens into obeying the repressive regime. This paper will analyze the different mechanisms of power employed by the Stalinist totalitarian regimes depicted in Solzhenitsyn’s novel and Man of Marble and will further evaluate how the study of power in specific historical situations enables historians to determine the motivations of those in power and the effectiveness of certain power structures to achieve its goals and provide for its citizens. In Solzhenitsyn’s One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, the labor camps are depicted as a microcosm for the totalitarian state in existence. Gulags became the Soviet government’s method of transforming individuals under its control into obedient workers existing simply to physically construct the Soviet state and strengthen the economy while embodying the ideology of the Stalinist system. The prisoners were forced to work in severe weather conditions, consume very little food, wear very little clothing, and were encouraged to spy on one another to improve their individual situations. The majority of the prisoners in the cap are helpless victims who should not even be imprisoned; the Soviet authorities have unjustly punished them for they provide free labor. At the camp, many of the officials delight in treating the prisoners with excessive cruelty. The Captain is sentenced to ten days of solitary confinement because he has worn an unauthorized jersey under his uniform in order to stay warm. They also think nothing of stealing part of the meager rations of the prisoners so that they can have more for themselves. The prisoners cannot receive adequate medical care for the rule of the hospital is to admit only two people a day no matter how many may be sick. Consider for example, the exchange between Buynovsky, who jokingly announces the Soviet decree, and Shukhov which shows the absurd pompousness of the Soviet government: â€Å"Since then it’s been decreed that the sun is highest at one o’clock,† Shukhov replies, â€Å"Who said that? † and Buynovsky replies â€Å"The Soviet government. † () For the characters laws are both unavoidable and arbitrary. The Soviet people have little to say in their government and they do what it tells them to do. Buynovsky’s joke reveals the Soviet regime’s delusion of grandeur. Shukhov’s forced false confession to being a traitor to his country also exemplifies the way in which the Soviet government tailors the truth to fits its needs. The Soviet regime imagines itself stronger than not only the sun but also reality itself. Furthermore, Volkovoy’s differing responses to Buynovsky’s charges exemplify the hypocrisy in which the entire Stalinist state thrives. He ignores Buynovsky’s assertion that strip searching in subzero temperatures outdoors violates an article of the Soviet Criminal Code, showing his lack of concern for right and wrong. He is altogether indifferent to others’ opinions of state-sponsored actions. Yet when Buynovsky goes a step further and accuses Volkovoy of being a bad Soviet citizen, Volkovoy becomes violently indignant. He knowingly violates Soviet law and is thus, in a way, a bad Soviet citizen, but he is unwilling to admit as much. He cares much more about making himself look good than making his country look good. Though he disrespects his country’s laws with his action, he wants, hypocritically, to be seen as an ideal Soviet citizen. The labor camp also attacks its prisoners spiritually. By replacing their names with a combination of letters and numbers, the camp erased all traces of individuality. For example, the camp guards refer to Shukhov as â€Å"Shcha-854. † This elimination of names represents the bureaucratic destruction of individual personalities. In Man of Marble, Andrezej Wajda attempts to expose how propaganda, through national icons, was used to present a false impression of Polish success and how these national icons were removed and fell to obscurity when they offered the slightest hint of discontentment with the norm. The film begins by showing propaganda films that praise Birkut as a devout worker who slaves away at brick laying for the officials. Then, Agniezka proceeds to interview the director, who was hired by the government. He tells her about the reality of making the film such as how Birkut was given more food and water unlike the other bricklayers. This is an example of reward power in which the government manipulated Birkut, elevated him to the status of national icon, and gave him additional food and water to ensure that he would continue to work hard for them thereby sustaining that glorified worker’s image common to the Stalinist ideology. Wajda uses these two scenes to deconstruct the false imagery that propaganda gives to its viewers. He illustrates how officials manipulate these kinds of situations to their own political good. The character of Agniezka, the young filmmaker, resists this form of government manipulation of film and art by embarking on an endeavor to uncover the truth about a once great Polish national icon that fell into obscurity, Birkut. She encounters frequent resistance from others regarding the subject matter of her film but despite the controversy, she continues her work and unleashes the truth about Stalinism. Moreover, Birkut is fundamentally erased from memory because he refused to change with the existing political system that was overwhelmed with corruption, manipulation, and exploitation. Birkut spoke against that system and essentially the Stalinist government of Poland at this time, erased aspects of the nation’s collective memory in order to control its citizens. This kind of erasure from memory appeared to be the standard penalty for those who refused to conform. Consider the scene in which Birkut is trying to defend Witek who has been accused of treason. The bureaucrat informs Birkut to â€Å"don’t try to take things into your own hands. Leave it to us. Trust the people’s Justice. † This statement reveals how the government attempted to integrate its citizens to fully that their existence became that of automatic obedience, the trust in the Soviet regime would be so solidified that there would surely be little resistance or defiance and the utter submission to their power. At a union meeting where Birkut again tries to address the question of Witek, he shouts that a horrid injustice has been committed. Trade union officials then turn off his microphone and a chorus begins: â€Å"Socialism will prevail by force of example, onward stout workers! † This line is quite possibly the most important in the film for it exemplifies how the Soviet regime would glorify workers like Birkut and broadcast his intense labor and a glorified image of him through the mass media to encourage citizens to abide by the socialist ideology. However, later on as the film reveals, Birkut becomes demoralized and turns to drinking. His life is now in ruins. Birkut originally came to prominence for supposedly breaking the single shift brick-laying record. However, the newsreel director who recorded the event confides to Agnieszka how he manipulated and outright fabricated aspects of the episode for propaganda purposes. Yet poor guileless Birkut originally accepts everything he is told at face value. As a result, when he falls out of favor with the Party for championing workers’ rights, it is wrenchingly difficult for him to adjust to life when essentially persona non grata. There mere difficulty that Agniezka experiences in her quest to finish her film exemplifies how the government employs censorship to hide the truth. The propaganda newsreel claiming to chart Birkut’s life only demonstrates the parading of his image, as he acts out the role of labor hero, admires his marble stature, and the endless posters, which produce his form, and appears before the public as a crowd-pleasing vision of physical glamour. The proliferation and repetition of images of the idealized citizen were designed to eclipse any suggestion that the state may have no other basis for authority other than the manipulation of these icons. The power of the state to appear to dissolve the individual into the mass is disturbingly echoed twenty years later in exchanges between Agonies and two women who belonged to the generation of the 1950’s: the television editor tells Agniezka that, â€Å"I’ve selected everything to do with Birkut†¦although the rest is pretty much the same†, while Agonies, attempting to divert suspicion as to why she is particularly interested in Birkut’s statue in the museum when, as the museum guide points out, there are so many others like it, says, â€Å"I like this one†¦although it’s all the same. Implicit in this proliferation of idealized effigies of model citizens and leaders is the constant presence of state ideology. The collective memory that she unearths crumbles the seamless portrait of Birkut though revealing the painful, lived-through process of molding his image, which the opening newsreel only parades as a finished product. In flashbacks, Birkut is shown to be force-fed for weeks before the event, shaved, and groomed, when to smile, and carefully directed by Burski who ironically tells him to act more like a worker, and quickly turns his camera away when Birkut collapses, bleeding from the hands, upon completion of the task. Agniezka’s investigation of the manipulation of Witek and Birkut is synonymous with the excavation of the very foundations of the communist system itself, which claimed popular support upon the basis of the patronage of the worker. Her disinterment of the hidden infrastructure of totalitarian power reveals its construction on baseless myths and rituals. â€Å"Better to growl and submit. If you were stubborn, they broke you. † (41) This quote exemplifies how the Stalinist regime used brutality and force to ensure obedience. Throughout history, individuals and groups have exercised various forms of power in order to control others and their surroundings. It is important to analyze how power is exercised, constituted, and contested in specific historical situations because the world will learn how to use power to produce the greatest results in a given situation. In a totalitarian regime as those depicted in One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich and Man of Marble, the individual operates as part of a social machine on the principle of automatic obedience. This is the highest level of the institution of power, the creation of an efficient mechanism in which individuals act predictably on the principle of utter submission. The oppressive nature of the Stalinist regimes depicted in the aforementioned novel and film illustrate how the coercive power employed by the system was most ineffective because it builds resentment and resistance from the people who experience it. â€Å"He was a newcomer. He was unused to the hard life of the zeks. Though he didn't know it, moments like this were particularly important to him, for they were transforming him from an eager, confident naval officer with a ringing voice into an inert, though wary, zek. And only in that inertness lay the chance of surviving the twenty-five years of imprisonment he'd been sentenced to. † (65) This quotation exemplifies how the gulag transformed once proud individuals with fulfilling lives into components of the Stalinist machine and illustrates how the basic need to survive was motivation enough for the prisoners to obey those in power. A man that at was formerly a distinguished Naval officer was now being integrated into the masses and stripped of his individuality and identity to join the Soviet’s source of free labor. The passage suggests that by submitting to the hopeless status of a zed without resistance, one would almost surely survive the brutality of the camp. Works Cited Man of Marble. Dir. Andrezej Wajda. Poland 1977 Solzhenitsyn, Alexander . One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. New York : Farrar, Straus, and Giroux Inc, 1991. The Definition of Totalitarian. www. dictionary. reference. com/browse/totalitarian

Social Media and Social Change

Social Media and Social Change: A Closer Look at the Revolutionary Qualities of Social Media In Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, Marshall McLuhan coined the phrase, â€Å"the medium is the message† (McLuhan). McLuhan suggests that messages are greatly affected by the medium in which they are delivered. Messages must be received in the proper channel to create social change. On July 21, 1969, the American astronaut Neil Armstrong created history when he sent his message to 3. 31 billion people via radio and television, â€Å"That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind†. Forty years later another astronaut created history by sending the first tweet from outer space, â€Å"Launch was awesome!!! I am feeling great, working hard, and enjoying the magnificent views, the adventure of a lifetime has begun! â€Å"(AP). While many people see online activity on social media sites as a past-time, a growing trend and even a fad, it is actually the biggest key player in creating social change. This is why NASA has more Twitter accounts than any federal agency. The biggest reason NASA has been extremely keen about adopting social media is because of the collapse of interest in space programs, said the NASA chief of public affairs Bob Jacobs. NASA also has plans to incorporate YouTube on their next shuttle flight to field questions from space (AP). The message is clear, NASA looks to generate more interest in space programs or to create social change and they look to social media tools to help them. We are in the midst of a communicative revolution fuelled by social media and driven by the masses. Social media possesses the intrinsic power to change the world even in the most marginal of ways. A closer look at the ability social media has to generate dialogue, its ability to change perception and persuade, and its ability to connect and unite the masses democratically, will demonstrate the power that social media possesses to enable a revolution. It will demonstrate a profound shift in the way that we communicate and denounce social media as a current fad or passing trend. Many people credit the television for its ability to deliver a high quality message. In fact it would be extremely hard to misunderstand a message delivered through such a high sensory communicative channel. Social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter have been criticized for its â€Å"dumbing down† qualities. In Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes our Future, Mark Bauerlein suggests that Generation Y, that is – a generation of youth born in the late 1970's to the late 1990's – spend wasteful hours on social networking sites posting useless updates and sending mundane messages (Bauerlein 12). But the Harvard Law professor Jonathan Zittrain reminds us that â€Å"the qualities that make Twitter seem inane and half-baked are what makes it so powerful† (qtd in Cohen). It is the same qualities that give social media a high quality communication channel for inspiring social movements amongst participants. Participants of social media are often required to create accounts or profiles and as a result participants are left with a sense of community. Because all content on social media sites are user-generated, any information or message posted on a given site is automatically received as word of mouth dialogue and this is the powerful nature of social media. It is important to note that dialogue is unrestricted to mediums. It can occur via face to face interaction, by telephone, by email or even a social media site such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube or MySpace. Danah Boyd suggests that comments in a world of social media act as conversation in the real world (Boyd 124). Her compelling article, Why Youth Love Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life argues that profiles, friends and comments â€Å"differentiate social network sites differentiate from other types of computermediated communication† (124). Boyd explains that comments are what engage and encourage users to participate and when they do they become participants (127). In Sociability and social interaction on social networking websites, Andrew Keenan and Ali Shiri identify the emphasis social media outlets place on transferring your existing â€Å"real world† experiences, connections, networks and information to the web and making them accessible (Keenan & Shiri 443). Naturally users are inclined to do the opposite. Any dialogue generated online is not limited to or even discouraged from entering the real world. What Boyd, Keenan and Shiri remind us is that social media sites are not only encouraging us to socialize on their sites, they are encouraging us to participate and to socialize in the real world. In The Power of Dialogue, Patrick Jenlink highlights the contributions dialogue makes in creating social change: The primary challenge to global society, as we pass the threshold of a new millennium, is to transform existing social systems, and therefore American society, in such ways as to embody a more inclusive, democratic, and open-ended communicative spirit. Necessary to this transformation is a social discourse that enables the power and potential of global citizens to be realized. Dialogue is such a discourse that enables citizens in unconcealing societal patterns and structures, which guide and direct individual and collective interactions within and across events and activities. Engaging in dialogue, as a social discourse of creative possibility, with others in our daily lives can contribute to change in our selves and society (Jenlink 1). One example of social media's ability to use dialogue to create social change is the recent use of Twitter to coordinate protests. The Iranian government's attempts to restrict and censor media outlets was challenged by citizens that used Twitter to spread the word about the Iranian Election (Cohen & Stone 2). When the Chinese government censored citizens from accessing the internet the Global Internet Freedom Consortium provided Chinese movements with software that helped evade censorship. When asked about the increase of traffic from Iran, the founder of the organization suggested that â€Å"the Iranian people actually found out by themselves and have passed this on by word of mouth† (Cohen & Stone 2). Furthermore, Zittrain suggests that â€Å"Twitter was particularly resilient to censorship because it had so many ways for its posts to originate – from a phone, a web browser or specialized applications – and so many outlets for those posts to appear† (qtd in Cohen & Stone). Similarly, word of mouth messages are difficult to avoid because they can be delivered from so many places – a neighbour, a teacher, a coworker, a classmate or even an astronaut. In short, the intrinsic nature of social media sites to turn user generated content into word of mouth information, that is – unrestrictive dialogue – allows for users to spread messages quickly and effectively. Social media outlets such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and MySpace have not only given us a way in which we can converse, they have given us a space in which conversation and dialogue can start and continue to grow. When John E. Kennedy first tried to define advertising in 1904 he did so with three simple words, â€Å"salesmanship on paper† (O'Reilly). While he might rework this phrase, first to include all forms of advertising media and then to comment on some form of social change; he would certainly be forced to include social media tools such as YouTube, Facebook, MySpace and Twitter as they have changed the way in which we choose to communicate. When considering social change it is imperative to consider advertising. The first step to creating social change on any level is to change public perception and there is no other industry known more for changing perception than the advertising industry. It is best explained by notorious ad man who persuaded millions to watch MTV and wear Tommy Hilfiger, George Lois who said, â€Å"Great advertising can make food taste better, can make your car run smoother. It can change your perception of something. Is it wrong to change your perception about something? Of course not. I’m not lying; I’m just saying, ‘This one’s more fun, this one’s more exciting. ‘† The advertising industry is typically always the first one to recognize the capability of digital technologies to create social change. This is why Katalyst Media, a media agency dedicated to producing content on social media has more campaigns than they can handle. The founder and CEO of Katalyst Media, Ashton Kutcher uses social media sites like Facebook and Twitter to send his message and to persuade others to join his causes. It started with a message to promote World Malaria Day that read â€Å"Every 30 seconds, a kid dies of malaria. Nets save lives. $10 buys a net† and was followed by a link to Malaria No More's web site where people could donate (Macsai & Wilson 80). The celebrity's tweet persuaded millions to join and the donation website had more traffic in one month than it did the previous twelve (80). Kutcher was able to tally nearly 90,000 nets in a very short time. What Kutcher did was raise awareness to a cause and by taking advantage of the most popular space in modern times to have a conversation he created action. Another celebrity to cash in on free advertising, that is – the process of attracting public attention to a product, business or cause through multiple forms of media with the ultimate goal of delivering a message to create action – is Bill Cosby. Cosby recently held a virtual town hall to discuss issues that face the African-American Community and to promote this town hall he advertised his message on social media sites, Facebook and Twitter (Hein). Cosby launched his ad campaign in a few simple words, â€Å"Our children are trying to tell us something, but we are not listening† followed by a link to Ustream – a website that streams footage live alongside a comments box where the streamer can read at the same time. Cosby was capable of generating 1. 3 million views which set a record behind President Obama's inaugural address (Hein). Similarly, companies are taking advantage of social media sites by gathering positive word of mouth dialogue to create a social change, that is – a higher demand and positive brand relationship with consumers (Schmitt). Companies like Nike, Red Bull and Samsun all have their own Twitter and Facebook pages where consumers post reviews and experiences with relative products. In The Last Campaign: How Experiences Are Becoming the New Advertising, Garrick Schmitt highlights the increasing awareness that companies have for social media (Schmitt). He also argues that companies unwilling to adapt are unlikely to survive (Schmitt). The ability that social media has to change perception is largely fuelled by its ability to generate dialogue in a public space. In creating a public space social media sites provide a space where the masses can rule, even if the masses are as marginal as a group of chess players. In Explaining Why Young Adults Use MySpace and Facebook Through Uses and Gratifications Theory, Mark Urista, Qingwen Dong and Ken Day assert that â€Å"the uniqueness of social networking sites is not in their ability to allow individuals to meet strangers but rather their ability to enable users to shape and make their social networks visible to others (Urista et al. 17). Because social networks are visible to the public it is easy to find the best or most popular product. Persuasion and the changing of perceptions becomes easy when 500,000 people think the same way you do. This is why Bill Cosby was capable of generating 1. 3 million hits when he only had 650,000 Twitter followers and 26,000 fans on Face book. In short, social media sites present users and companies with a platform for persuasion through a visibly public space. Effective companies and social change movements relish critical feedback via social media and used correctly can persuade the masses to take part of revolutionary change. Perhaps the most powerful quality that social media possesses is the ability to connect, unite and democratize traditional forms of communication. All of which help to generate social change albeit unintentionally. The most recognizable form of social media's ability to democratize and unite can be found in its language. Twitter for example opened up its ever evolving language to its users. Tweets is a term that refers to a Twitter post. the letters RT is a negotiated term amongst all users that stands for Retweet which means to forward, like an email or repost. As more and more uses are found for social media sites such as Twitter, the language evolves. For example, Tweet-Up is a recently added term that refers to a real-world meeting of people who connected via Twitter (Wired). Another way in which social media acts as a democratic force is its ability to give power to the masses. User-generated content certainly adds to the democratic nature of social media sites because the content on them can become important or redundant but it is up to participants and users to decide. When something becomes popular often times groups will be started and streams of meta data are collected and grouped to provide easy access. In Socialnomics: How Social Media Transforms the Way We Live and Do Business , Erik Qualman suggests that â€Å"human beings have the dichotomous physiological need to be our own individual, yet we also want to feel like we belong to and are accepted by a much larger social set. People are willing to have an ‘open diary' as a means to stay connected – as their ultimate desire is to feel connected† (Qualman 43). This idea suggests that we are rewarded for participating so a simple call to action is in fact rewarding: Part of this lies in a yearning to have a clear understanding of what the majority is ding. It was much easier to know what the majority was doing when all on had to do was tune into Casey Kasem's â€Å"American Top 40† to find out the latest and greatest in music or to flip through â€Å"Vogue† magazine to quickly grasp ever fashion trend. â€Å"Social media help us make sense of information overload by quickly seeing what our friends find important, helpful or interesting. It also helps eliminate people performing he same tasks – if three of your friends have already performed the task (finding a good hotel in Bermuda), why should you be redundant? (Qualman). Danah Boyd also highlights social media outlets call to participate as a reward (Boyd 126). Social Media makes participation in social movements rewarding and democratic. Participation in social medi a allows users to connect and unite as the public platform used by social media sites makes it easy for users to connect and to participate with others. These qualities are the underlying reasons surrounding the profound shift in the way that we choose to communicate. Social media has become the biggest change to our society since the industrial revolution (Qualman). Qualman states the following statistics while arguing his case for social media revolution: 96% of Generation Y have joined a social media network, is the number one activity on the internet today, 1 out of 8 couples married in the US last year met via social media, it took the radio 38 years to reach 50 million users, the television took 13 years, the internet took 4 years, the iPod took 3 years, Facebook added 100 million users in less than 9 months (Qualman 2). Along with it are the intrinsic qualities social media carries with it, that is ability to generate dialogue, to change perception and persuade, and its ability to connect and unite the masses democratically. The social media revolution is incipient and inchoate. The creation of every new medium brings with it a learning curve and as its strengths are developed and its language invented, social change will be one of its many uses.

Biography of J.P. Morgan

Hartford, Connecticut was the birthplace of J. P. Morgan. His parents, Junius Spencer Morgan and Juliet Pierpont, hailed from Boston, Massachusetts. J. P. Morgan was educated partly at the English High School in Boston and finished his education at the University of Gottingen in Germany. After leaving the University he had entered his father's office in London. He was an extraordinary mathematician and had been strongly tempted to take up the career of professor of mathematics.But his father thought otherwise, and in the offices of George Peabody and Company young Pierpont got his first training in the technicalities of commercial banking and no doubt began the development of that unusual cepacity for accurate and quick decision which so strongly characterized his entire career. (Hovey, 2) He suffered with rheumatic fever in the spring of 1852. The illness took such a toll on him that he was left unable to walk. This was the start of a life long battle with diseases of different sort s that recurred throughout his lifetime.As part of a recovery effort, his father sent him to the Azores on a ship owned by Charles Dabney, named Io. It took him an year to fully recover and be able to attend school again. After graduating from Boston, a school named Bellerive at Vevey in Switzerland became his home. Once he gained command on the French language, the University of Gottingen became his new abode where he worked on his German. Within half an year, he developed a satisfactory base in that language. Done with his studies, he arrived in the English capital passing through Wiesbaden on the way..Personality Description John Pierpont Morgan was an example of moral excellence, singing the old hymns his mother taught him, fraternizing with bishops, forgiving his enemies, loving those who hated him, visiting sick friends and going sorrowfully to their funerals, bouncing his grandchildren on his knees, and molding his numerous corporate reorganizations for the good of the countr y. The man was magnificently endowed to play the role of financial imperator. There was the necessary bulk of bone and flesh.He was six feet tall, weighed two hundred pounds. Standing with feet apart, looking forward, he seemed poised to make a formidable advance. His head was large, craglike, well poised on his broad shoulders, his countenance rough-hewn. The upper lip, even as a boy, was heavy, and as he grew older, hidden behind his unruly mustache, it gave to his face an aspect of cruelty. His powerful jaws and rugged brow were drawn down in an imperious scowl. His bulbous nose accentuated the dark aspect of his visage.His large, wide-opened hazel eyes bent upon a visitor or suppliant with terrifying attentiveness and made him a formidable man in conference. (Hovey, 2-3) As a boy in high school his teacher said he was little short of a prodigy and could solve mentally problems in cubic root and numerous decimals. He could speak French and German because he had spent two years in a French school in Switzerland and two at the University of Gottingen. But he had no use for the classics. He could express himself in written English in a clear, direct, and vigorous style.Furthermore, even as a youth, he could put these excellent sentences down in a hand of great neatness and symmetry. He was superlatively choosy about his friends. Even as a boy in school he mixed with but few. But he was deeply devoted to them as well as to his family, his parents particularly. From the time he returned to America from school at Gottingen in 1857 to 1890, when his father died in Europe, he never let a ship leave for England without writing him a letter. Often he had to write these letters late at night after the rush of the day's work.His father preserved them in a series of books in his library. Twenty years after his father died, Morgan, looking through them, put them into the furnace. That was in 1911, a year of magnate hunting. He was growing old, and these letters were full of news, comments, opinions on the events and men of his time. Early Life John Pierpont was successively academy teacher, private tutor, lawyer and merchant. Urged to the church, he was ordained minister in 1819, accepting a call to become pastor of the Hollis Street Church, Boston.Pierpont was a vital force in the Unitarian Church and one of the most active organizers of the American Unitarian Association. But the man was more than a minister, he was a social rebel. Compact of scriptural austerity, righteous indignation and moral passion, John Pierpont's religion was warmed by humanitarian aspirations for social betterment. (Magill, 15) It was in 1857, the year of a great financial panic in the United States, that John Pierpont Morgan, a tall, taciturn young man of twenty, stepped on the stage of American business.At that time the house of George Peabody and Company was doing its American business through the New York firm of Duncan, Sherman and Company, and this firm was so serio usly crippled in the financial crisis that in order to save the situation George Peabody and Company had to appeal to the Bank of England for assistance. This experience impressed the London house with the vital importance of closer control of its American business, and it was decided to send young Pierpont Morgan to represent the firm in New York as cashier of Duncan, Sherman and Company.In the offices of Duncan, Sherman and Company, Pierpont Morgan met Charles H. Dabney, a partner in the firm and also the accountant. It was through association with Dabney that Morgan acquired his remarkable and accurate knowledge of bookkeeping and accounting. (Brandeis, 56) But the connection of the Peabody firm with Duncan, Sherman and Company was not destined to last very long. In 1864, the year in which George Peabody retired and was succeeded by Junius S. Morgan, Pierpont Morgan and Dabney formed a new firm under the name of Dabney, Morgan and Company, with offices in Exchange Place, New York .This new firm became the correspondents of J. S. Morgan and Company of London. A few years later, Duncan, Sherman and Company failed and faded from view. 1871 saw the establishment of Drexel, Morgan & Company. Based in New York, it was the result of Morgan joining hands with the Drexels of Philadelphia. By 1895, the company became to be known as J. P. Morgan & Company. It preserved its earlier relationships with Drexel & Company, Philadelphia in the USA. On the other side of the Atlantic, close relationships were also maintained with Morgan, Harjes & Company in Paris, and J. S. Morgan & Company in London.From 1910 onwards, the latter came to be known as Morgan, Grenfell & Company. (Magill, 17) The group turned into an influential banking concern by the turn of the century, brokering big money deals in the corporate world relating to reorganizations, mergers, acquisitions and takeovers. Although Morgan worked with a number of partners including George W. Perkins, he managed to keep managerial control with him over the course of his career. Morgan rose to prominenece through his constant involvement in large corporate and financial deals that seemed more like wars then mere business.He stripped Jay Gould and Jim Fisk of the Albany and Susquehanna Railroad in 1869, and then lobbied Washington DC to put an end to the financial assistanc granted to Jay Cooke by the government. This was folowed by the development of a kingdom of railroads across the USA. (Brandeis, 62) This was accomplished through, M & A activity and monetary assistance. Morgan then went on to raise huge funds on the other side of the Atlantic. This money was utilized in the restructuring of the rail roads so that higher productivity could be attained.Speculation was discouraged by Morgan as he purported a plan to transform the existing transport infrastructure ino a unique connected and inter linked mechanism. In 1885 he reorganized the New York, West Shore & Buffalo Railroad, leasing it to the N ew York Central. 1886 saw Morgan putting his efforts into the Philadelphia & Reading rail road followed by Chesapeake & Ohio in 1888. Following the the Interstate Commerce Act in 1887, Morgan hosted industry conferences in 1889 and 1890. (Hovey, 3) It served as a forum for railroad bosses to highlight the oppurtunities that the new legislation provided.Consensus was obtained for the charging of â€Å"public, reasonable, uniform and stable rates† to consumers. This was a unique initiative on the behalf of Morgan, the outfall of which were the M & A activities in the 20th century. About the time he went into business for himself he also fell in love with a young woman named Amelia Sturgis. And this romantic episode forms one of the most appealing incidents in the life of this grim man. It revealed in him depths of tenderness, which his later life in Wall Street concealed wholly from the public.She was perhaps the first or at least among the first young women he met when he arri ved from Europe. His attachment to her deepened slowly but it was probably begun in those first meetings at Newport in the very first week he spent in America. In the spring and summer of 1861 he was completely immersed in the personal problem created by Mimi Sturgis' condition. She had contracted tuberculosis. She was wasting away rapidly. There was very little that could be done then against the ravages of this dread enemy.Before the summer was over he made up his mind to marry Mimi, to give up his business and devote him completely to saving her life. Her parents tried to induce him to give up his chivalrous project. But he was not to be turned aside. And so in early October, in the Sturgis home in East Fourteenth Street, with only the family present, young Morgan carried the frail Mimi downstairs in his arms, held her at his side while the marriage ceremony was performed, and then tenderly lifted her again in his strong arms and bore her to the waiting carriage and on to the pie r.They went to London and then to Algiers with its warm sun and then, as she continued to fade, to Nice. There she died four months after the marriage. Two months later, in May, he brought her body home and laid it to rest at Fairfield. This tragedy crushed him, for a time seemed to have broken his spirit and watered down his ambition to utter frustration. But slowly he took up the broken threads, brought his old Cheshire school friend, Jim Goodwin, into partnership with him, and set off again upon his course. Later Years Following the elderly Morgan’s death in 1890, J.S. Morgan & Co, known as Morgan, Grenfell & Company from 1910 onwards came under the leadership of the son. In 1900, he began negotiations with Charles M. Schwab then head of Carnegie Co. Andrew Carnegie had a direct stake in the company. Morgan aimed to takeover a number of steel and iron businesses including Carnegie's. The final plan was to merge them into one, thus giving birth to the United States Steel Co rporation. The deal was struck for a staggering sum of $480 million. No lawyers and no written proof of the sale were the highlights of this deal.By 15h of January 1901, newspapers were filled with the news of the impending merger. Late 1901, saw the birth of U. S. Steel with a capitalization of $1. 4 billion. (Hovey, 5) Given its financial strength, it was the first company of its kind. The mission of the new coompany was to gain the advantages offered by economies of scale. These included cutting down transportation and resource costs, diversifying product lines and focusing on efficient delivery. Moreover, now the USA was in direct competition with the likes of Brit steel and and the German steel giants.(Forbes 15) The sheer size of the company was instrumental as it paved the way for a global market for steel and its products. The company came under heavy fire from industry observers who blamed the company’s management of trying to establish an industrial hegemony by vent uring into the construction of all products that embodied the use of steel as a major raw material. Morgan soon controlled 67 percent of the market share and Schwab predicted the company to hold three quarters of the industry under its belt. However, time proved otherwise as the market share detoriated, proving his prediction wrong.(Brandeis, 63) Morgan also ventured into the manufacturing and mining sectors. Morgan also had stakes in Banks, insurance companies, shipping lines and communications systems providers. His concern routed large amounts of capital that was instrumental in the development of America. (Magill, 16) Morgan was criticised for financing the federal government in the 1895 crisis through the use of gold. The critics disagreed with him on his proposed solution to the Panic of 1907, and blamed him for the poor economic state of New York, New Haven & Hartford RR. It was discovered that the J. P. Morgan & Co.coupled with the board of the First National and National Ci ty Bank had a resource pool of $22,245,000,000. This fact was made public in 1912 by a a subcommittee of the House Banking and Currency committee. This financial resource pool was equavivalent to the valu of real estate in the twenty-two states that lies west of the Mississippi River, according to Louis Brandies, former Judge of the Supreme Court. (Forbes 15) Nikola Tesla and his Wardenclyffe Tower were recipents of monetary support from Morgan worth $150,000. Following Tesla’s failure, Morgan pulled out of the venture in 1904.It is estimated that Morgan and his firm of partners controlled assets worth $1. 3 billion during the peak of their power in the dawning years of the 20th century. Works Cited Magill, Frank N. Great Lives from History. Michigan: Salem Press Inc. 1987. Pg 15-17. Hovey, Carl. The Life Story of J. Pierpont Morgan. New York: Sturgis & Walton Company. 1911. Pg 2,3,5. Brandeis, Louis D. Other People's Money: And how the Bankers Use it. Sunnyvale: Stokes. 1914 . Pg 56, 62, 63. Forbes Bertie C. Men who are Making the West. Emeryville: Forbes publishing Company. 1923. Pg 15.

Argumentative Essay: Guns Make America! Argumentative Persuasive Essays

With the possible exception of abortion, no other current issue has split the country in two like the debate surrounding gun control.  Ã‚   Both sides are equally adamant.  Ã‚   The pro gun side, as represented by the National Rifle Association, continues to oppose all gun control measures primarily on the grounds that any law restricting gun ownership is unconstitutional.  Ã‚   Proponents of gun control argue that gun violence is an epidemic out of control across the country, and call on federal lawmakers to stem the flow of blood with anti-gun legislation.  Ã‚   This side won a crucial battle in the debate two years ago with the passage of the so called   â€Å"Brady Bill,† Federal legislation that banned the production and sale of some semiautomatic rifles and initiated a waiting period and background check for gun buyers.  Ã‚   However, more recently than now Republican-controlled Congress, with the backing of the NRA, has reignited that battle with plans to repeal the Brady Bill.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The second amendment to the constitution guarantees Americans the right to keep and bear arms without government interference.   gun control advocates seem ready and eager to disregard this right which is currently being exercised by 70 million Americans.   (METSKA)      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   I believe that the governments struggle to keep guns out of the hand of juveniles and criminals is a worthy one, but when it comes   to unconstitutional interrogation then its getting out of control.   The government is currently trying to implement laws that will keep weapons out of the hands of every one. The people on capital hill say that they want a safer America, they want the youth of America to grow up in a caring non-violent environment,   yet all they really want is a more productive best in its class nation.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   History proves that criminal behavior cannot be controlled by the government attempting to regulate inanimate objects.  Ã‚   In other words, criminals will always find a way to get a hold of drugs, guns, what have you.   Proof: drugs may be illegal yet we still have one heck of a problem with them;   thus, if guns of some sort are made illegal then, we will probably end up with one heck of a gun problem. I believe that its not that they need a gun or think its