Monday, June 1, 2015
Analysis: El Chapo
It is normal to see people frown upon criminals, more specifically drug dealers that take big part in the business. On top of that, social media will most of the time go against the subject and make it look worse than what it is. This is not only the case with the drug dealer presented by Patrick Keefe, El Chapo, but also with most drug dealers around the world. The authors intention with the article is to prove to the readers and people in general that even though people engage in criminal activity, some could have soft hearts and be kind human beings. Although the main character has fallen into a wrong business, he takes it very seriously, like it was a normal job and that does not mean he is a bad person despite all the trouble he has caused (damage and murder). The author clearly shows why he is a kind hearted person as seen in the dinner table where he offers and pays the meal for those who do not have the sufficient funds to pay for their own meal. He also presents the character as a socially outgoing human being, interacting well with others and without the intention to cause harm. Also, one has to take into consideration the backstory of the character. Who is behind the entire business? Was he forced to do this or is it a voluntarily action? In Mexico there is a lot of controversy in regard to drugs and people usually avoid getting involved since it is dangerous but that does not mean that all of the people involved are in fact dangerous. The author blames not El Chapo but the people behind the industry because they are the ones to give orders and cause harm to others. People around the world and in Mexico are wrongly informed but since the drug war has been around for so long, there is really no choice but to frown upon it and try to stay the furthest away from the drug industry.
Patagonia Reaction # 3
Even in the most unexpected areas of the world, things change. Whether it is nature it self changing or human impact, things eventually change. Like any other place in the world, Patagonia has been through a great amount of human interaction since the mid 70's. Bruce Chatwin's experience in Patagonia, as seen in his book, took place way back in the 1970's and the description he provides to the readers, now days is extremely inaccurate. Patagonia since then has become a central hub for tourism and people all over the world come down here to check it out. So if it is a popular tourism area, then how much has changed? From being a unpopulated, completely natural area, it comes close to a city now with all the buildings, hotels and lodges provided for the tourism. Of course, back in Chatwins time, people could easily go visit the beautiful area, but received less attention and was equally or maybe a better experience than it is now. It was a pure experience rather than now where you cannot really experience the true beauty Patagonia has to offer and this is because it has been taken over by numerous companies as it is the untapped market not only for tourism but for many other things as well. Although it has come down to this, the country has managed to generate a lot of income for their own benefit through this so it still has something good coming from it. Also, many people consider the beauty of Patagonia being modified or altered rather than destroyed in order to please and satisfy the ordinary customer visiting a beautiful, touristic place that Patagonia is.
Patagonia Reaction # 2
After having explored numerous sources about Patagonia, the reoccurring topic that kept on popping up really impacted Chile's reputation when it comes to taking initiative. Like most people know, the Patagonian reserve was the next untapped land to build new technology in order to provide energy to the people of the country. It was a project that took numerous years to plan. Chile is a rising, developing and influential country which has sufficient government power to make decisions for themselves. So much controversy has been created due to these ideas and has made the countries citizens go crazy over it but the government has never been able to put those thoughts aside and carry on with the project. Of course, there are two points of view one has to look at when it comes to destroying beautiful land with so much history just to make it more modern but the fact that it took them so many years to plan, so many years of delay and finally it being cancelled is a big waste of time and money by the Chilean government which in the long run prevents them from becoming a fully developed country. Personally, the project being delayed was the better decision but keeping the entire country stressed out and confused for so much time just put the government in a situation where they are not ready to be a fully developed country. These projects might be reconsidered in coming years but nothing should be started until there is a solid plan to pull it off. 
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
Patagonia: "SIN REPRESAS!"
Sources: http://www.sinrepresas.com/struggle.htm
http://www.internationalrivers.org/campaigns/patagonia-sin-represas
For years now, there has been two opposing sides in regard to a now worldwide known matter, Patagonia's dams or more commonly heard, "HidroAysén". This project consists in building dams that would "capture the furious turquoise flow emanating from the two largest ice caps outside Greenland and Antarctica to spin turbines for electricity". In other words, the people in charge of this project want to provide clean and efficient energy for their country. Other than building the dams which would alter the river streams, power lines would also be built throughout also affecting the natural beauty the Patagonia has sustained until today. Although this project would provide fast energy, bettering the lives of many citizens, its costly prediction changes the mind of many people and also the fact that the original essence of the area would be destroyed. These images show how it would look with and without the dams and power lines.
Most people who live in Patagonia that make their living off the land do not accept the fact that this could happen to their homes. They believe that great landscapes and economical potential that this land has will be significantly limited due to the building of dams. Not only the locals of Patagonia are in disagreement but foreign industries and companies agree that it's a negative addition to build the power lines and dams. Most of these outdoor companies support the many campaigns that have been created to stop or delay this project. The image below says that destroying the landscape is not the solution to provide energy. There is many other non-harmful ways to provide energy and Patagonia's dams is not one of them.
http://www.internationalrivers.org/campaigns/patagonia-sin-represas
For years now, there has been two opposing sides in regard to a now worldwide known matter, Patagonia's dams or more commonly heard, "HidroAysén". This project consists in building dams that would "capture the furious turquoise flow emanating from the two largest ice caps outside Greenland and Antarctica to spin turbines for electricity". In other words, the people in charge of this project want to provide clean and efficient energy for their country. Other than building the dams which would alter the river streams, power lines would also be built throughout also affecting the natural beauty the Patagonia has sustained until today. Although this project would provide fast energy, bettering the lives of many citizens, its costly prediction changes the mind of many people and also the fact that the original essence of the area would be destroyed. These images show how it would look with and without the dams and power lines.
Most people who live in Patagonia that make their living off the land do not accept the fact that this could happen to their homes. They believe that great landscapes and economical potential that this land has will be significantly limited due to the building of dams. Not only the locals of Patagonia are in disagreement but foreign industries and companies agree that it's a negative addition to build the power lines and dams. Most of these outdoor companies support the many campaigns that have been created to stop or delay this project. The image below says that destroying the landscape is not the solution to provide energy. There is many other non-harmful ways to provide energy and Patagonia's dams is not one of them.
Tuesday, April 7, 2015
25th Hour - 9/11 Reflection
Spike Lee's film, 25th Hour is a underrated film that explores in great detail the city of New York after the devastating events that happened on the 11th of September, 2001, better known as 9/11. The director of the film is considered one of the most controversial filmmakers due to his cinematic voice regardless of what is usually seen in mainstream Hollywood. This way he is able to create one of the most powerful films in these past years. The plot of the movie is straightforward, allowing anybody to watch and understand the movie but at the same time Lee saw this film as a golden ticket to expose 9/11 because the original novel published before 9/11 by David Benioff had no correlation to the terrorist attacks. The film is about Monty Brogan, a drug dealer who is sentenced to prison for seven years and lives his last 24 hours before being imprisoned. Throughout the film, Monty has various dialogues that express his feelings towards the terrorist attacks and one very powerful monologue known as the "Fuck You Montage" where he looks at himself in the mirror and criticizes the city that raised him and every other cultural aspect within New York. This might be the most obvious part of the film where the main character relates to the terrorist attack. Besides that, throughout the film, the color and tone shows why the movie has a direct relation to 9/11. Lee shows a broken down New York city and the stressful lives that citizens were living during the time. As said before, the criticism that Monty sets on the table is displayed by his little care of moving away from New York city or other aspects such as Frank accusing Naturelle because of her ethnicity. Within the movie there are numerous details that explicitly shows why this movie is so powerful.
Personally when I watched this movie, I did not pay much attention to why and how this movie was such a huge hit in relation to the 9/11 attacks but focused more on the plot. Replaying the scenes in my head and feeling the setting of the movie, makes it clear in my head why Spike Lee showed things the way they were in the movie. It is a complex, very powerful film and a good one to watch. Spike Lee does a outstanding job portraying the post 9/11 scene through 25th Hour.
Personally when I watched this movie, I did not pay much attention to why and how this movie was such a huge hit in relation to the 9/11 attacks but focused more on the plot. Replaying the scenes in my head and feeling the setting of the movie, makes it clear in my head why Spike Lee showed things the way they were in the movie. It is a complex, very powerful film and a good one to watch. Spike Lee does a outstanding job portraying the post 9/11 scene through 25th Hour.
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
Reaction Response # 4: Overall Reaction + Sources (with links)
Source # 1: http://www.history.com/topics/
- This article comes from the History Channel and gives a generalized account of the US reaction towards the 9/11 attack and a brief International reaction on the same topic giving a few examples. It keeps the reactions short and simple, providing little personal perspective.
- Publisher Ted Hesson extracts many comments from forum based website called Reddit and provides the readers reactions coming from everyday people all over the world and digs deeper onto personal perspective on the matter.
Source # 3: http://nymag.com/news/features/20288/
- The NYMag creates a entry where they show raw quotations of New Yorkers living on the day of the attack. These comments are disturbing since they precisely show people's reactions while the attack was happening.
- Survivor Ian Robb tells his story on how he survived the attack of 9/11. He was present in the World Trade Center as the attack was happening and tells somewhat of a story of how things happened from his own eyes.
- Website called 9/11 Research includes videos, photographs and in this case eyewitness accounts of New Yorkers around the World Trade Center, showing their point of view on the attack.
Overall Reaction: It is clear that every single of one these sources is unique in the sense that the reactions in each are shown in different ways but all accomplish the goal which is to intact share their reactions. The most broad reaction between these five sources is the one coming from the History Channel which displays a more formal view of looking at the reactions in countries. The most interesting one and the one that can relate the most to the CNN video watched on the first day of class is the post on the NYMag which displays unedited reactions to the attack. As seen on the unedited CNN news feed, the reactions that were coming from the broadcasters themselves and the eyewitnesses being interviewed were out of control and their words were all over the place because of the shocking feeling that ran through their body as they saw the planes crash into the World Trade Center. It was really interesting to read those comments because it is almost as reading the CNN news feed rather than watching it. Internet users all over New York were sharing their comments and helping each other to understand what was going on similarly to what the CNN broadcasters were doing interviewing the eye witnesses trying to get an understanding of what was happening. Other sources such as the Reddit extracts and the eye witnesses from the website "9/11 Research" were similar in explaining the different scenarios people were in while the attack was happening and was also interesting to read because those scenarios affected the way people react the what was going on. Finally the most eye opening, more than the raw comments from NYMag was the story told article of the survivor Ian Hobbes. One would think that survivors would be scarred for life and are timid or not interested in sharing the horrific moments they lived through while being victims of the attacks. Personally, the survivors story was the most touching but the one that was found to be the most interesting were the unedited comments coming from the CNN footage and the comments displayed in the NYMag.
Reaction Response # 3
Source of Reaction: http://nymag.com/news/features/20288/
"Item 245: Breaking News." NYMag.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2015
"The posts can be very disturbing to read, since they so vividly replicate the raw, chaotic state of mind of New Yorkers trying to wrestle with the events of the day." This somewhat article shows the public quoted text of people's immediate reaction to the events occurring that day, these reactions coming from tapped phone lines, online chatrooms, website posts and many more. There is a large amount of pages showing just comments of New Yorkers who expressed their reactions literally as the attack was happening from 8:47 AM to 10:46 AM of the same day. Although the reactions were being posted so fast that day, creating a sense of confusion in the citizens of New York as they browsed the internet, the NYMag says that "they captured with moving precision the way people worked together, even in the midst of great confusion, to trade information and offer support in moments when no one knew what was going to happen next. This way of showing peoples reactions is completely different to any other media post on 9/11 because it quotes word for word what people were saying during the attack. This is the most "accurate" way of displaying reaction because none of it is edited or gone through editors in newspapers or well known websites. It is plain and raw reactions that came from everyday New Yorkers on the day of the attack and all of them have a sense of shock and confusion to them. Comments go from one word all the way to many sentences but they all share that sense of shock in them and everyone knew they were feeling the same thing on the day of the attack. The first comment being, "A PLANE JUST HIT THE WORLD TRADE CENTER", from Stacy Horn is instantly followed up by many similar comments with the same feel to their reaction. As said before, these reactions are raw and unedited and on a personal level feel that it is the best way to see how people felt on the day of the attack because it does not express the aftermath but rather exactly what was happening during the attack.
"The posts can be very disturbing to read, since they so vividly replicate the raw, chaotic state of mind of New Yorkers trying to wrestle with the events of the day." This somewhat article shows the public quoted text of people's immediate reaction to the events occurring that day, these reactions coming from tapped phone lines, online chatrooms, website posts and many more. There is a large amount of pages showing just comments of New Yorkers who expressed their reactions literally as the attack was happening from 8:47 AM to 10:46 AM of the same day. Although the reactions were being posted so fast that day, creating a sense of confusion in the citizens of New York as they browsed the internet, the NYMag says that "they captured with moving precision the way people worked together, even in the midst of great confusion, to trade information and offer support in moments when no one knew what was going to happen next. This way of showing peoples reactions is completely different to any other media post on 9/11 because it quotes word for word what people were saying during the attack. This is the most "accurate" way of displaying reaction because none of it is edited or gone through editors in newspapers or well known websites. It is plain and raw reactions that came from everyday New Yorkers on the day of the attack and all of them have a sense of shock and confusion to them. Comments go from one word all the way to many sentences but they all share that sense of shock in them and everyone knew they were feeling the same thing on the day of the attack. The first comment being, "A PLANE JUST HIT THE WORLD TRADE CENTER", from Stacy Horn is instantly followed up by many similar comments with the same feel to their reaction. As said before, these reactions are raw and unedited and on a personal level feel that it is the best way to see how people felt on the day of the attack because it does not express the aftermath but rather exactly what was happening during the attack.
"T
"trf
Reaction Response # 2
Source of Reaction: http://fusion.net/story/17323/what-did-911-look-like-around-the-world-reddit-answers/
Hesson, Ted. "What Did 9/11 Look like around the World? Reddit Answers."Fusion. N.p., 11 Sept. 2014. Web. 10 Mar. 2015.
The second source being looked at digs more into the personal lives of people who commented on a very famous forum based website called "Reddit". Ted Hesson introduces his blogpost called, "What did 9/11 look like around the world? Reddit answers." This means that the author extracted different responses from different posts on Reddit, creating one large post with many reactions of people from all over the world. This post was published over ten years after the terrorist attack so the reactions could be possibly be ones expressed way after the attack took place. The author states that, "The answers are a grab bag of sentiments - personal and not necessarily indicative of national or cultural mood. This shows how the reactions displayed are shown from one's exact perspective and how they saw it from their own eyes rather than the media generalizing a lot of reactions into one big reaction as shown in the previous entry talking about the History Channel. How this entry from Hesson is structured is displaying the username of the Reddit user followed by which country they are posting from and basically what reaction they had to the 9/11 attack. The countries that express their reaction are "felt from all around the world, from Cuba and Chile to Australia, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Most of the reactions displayed show a little elementary or middle school student who's teacher or coach had to stop class, soccer practice and other things to turn on the television and view what was happening the day of the attack. According to these, all shared the same reaction which was sympathy towards the USA and their government as well as shock to see on the television live what was going on. All the reactions talk about these feelings as they stopped whatever they were doing in their tracks have their faces stuck watching the news. The interesting part here is getting to realize how everyone was in a different scenario while the attack was happening which potentially affects the reaction that one would have on the attack while it was happening. As it is shown in the post by Hesson, all the users had the same feeling after learning that the attack had struck but everyone was placed in a different position as it was happening. This is a very good source to take a look at if one wants to see the reaction of users all over the world in this forum based website called Reddit as it is more informal and it goes into a more personal and intimate level of expression.
Hesson, Ted. "What Did 9/11 Look like around the World? Reddit Answers."Fusion. N.p., 11 Sept. 2014. Web. 10 Mar. 2015.
The second source being looked at digs more into the personal lives of people who commented on a very famous forum based website called "Reddit". Ted Hesson introduces his blogpost called, "What did 9/11 look like around the world? Reddit answers." This means that the author extracted different responses from different posts on Reddit, creating one large post with many reactions of people from all over the world. This post was published over ten years after the terrorist attack so the reactions could be possibly be ones expressed way after the attack took place. The author states that, "The answers are a grab bag of sentiments - personal and not necessarily indicative of national or cultural mood. This shows how the reactions displayed are shown from one's exact perspective and how they saw it from their own eyes rather than the media generalizing a lot of reactions into one big reaction as shown in the previous entry talking about the History Channel. How this entry from Hesson is structured is displaying the username of the Reddit user followed by which country they are posting from and basically what reaction they had to the 9/11 attack. The countries that express their reaction are "felt from all around the world, from Cuba and Chile to Australia, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Most of the reactions displayed show a little elementary or middle school student who's teacher or coach had to stop class, soccer practice and other things to turn on the television and view what was happening the day of the attack. According to these, all shared the same reaction which was sympathy towards the USA and their government as well as shock to see on the television live what was going on. All the reactions talk about these feelings as they stopped whatever they were doing in their tracks have their faces stuck watching the news. The interesting part here is getting to realize how everyone was in a different scenario while the attack was happening which potentially affects the reaction that one would have on the attack while it was happening. As it is shown in the post by Hesson, all the users had the same feeling after learning that the attack had struck but everyone was placed in a different position as it was happening. This is a very good source to take a look at if one wants to see the reaction of users all over the world in this forum based website called Reddit as it is more informal and it goes into a more personal and intimate level of expression.
Monday, March 9, 2015
Reaction Response # 1
Source of Reaction: http://www.history.com/topics/
"Reaction to 9/11." History.com. A&E Television Networks, n.d. Web. 06 Mar. 2015.
This first response addresses a more "legitimate" reaction to the 9/11 terrorist attack. This is said because the information and reaction comes from a source that is not usually questioned, this being an article from the History Channel in regards to the 9/11 attack. The History Channel as well a1s many other big companies that provide news give a more broad view of the event that happened and similarly also show the worldwide reaction of the terrorist attack whereas going deeper in the internet, one can find more personal reactions as found in forums, youtube videos and blog posts. The title of the article posted by History is called "Reaction to 9/11" and gives us intel on the reaction the USA had on the attack as well as a generalized international reaction about this subject. It is no surprise to see that the country that was attacked support themselves as mentioned in the article. People from the country did acts of patriot ship towards their country by hanging flags around their homes, doing charity work and other small details that contributed to putting a smile back on the citizens of America. On the other hand, the international reaction is not exactly the same. Although many countries as mentioned by the article, like France and Germany who stated that "The events were not only attacks on the people in the United States, our friends in America, but also against the entire civilized world, against our own freedom, against our own values, values which we share with the American People", others like the leader of an Islamic military group begged to differ. It is interesting to see how the History channel provides to the readers a mixed set of reactions coming from many countries and citing important names in the world, but that is one of the reasons why this reacion is only so good. As one reads the articles, they only learn about the reaction of big political names and nothing turns into something personal and that is something that should be implied into the reactions to create a sense of movement on the citizens of the world. These reactions are based on facts which cannot be questioned but what happens when the reaction is coming from an everyday normal citizen of the world.
"Reaction to 9/11." History.com. A&E Television Networks, n.d. Web. 06 Mar. 2015.
This first response addresses a more "legitimate" reaction to the 9/11 terrorist attack. This is said because the information and reaction comes from a source that is not usually questioned, this being an article from the History Channel in regards to the 9/11 attack. The History Channel as well a1s many other big companies that provide news give a more broad view of the event that happened and similarly also show the worldwide reaction of the terrorist attack whereas going deeper in the internet, one can find more personal reactions as found in forums, youtube videos and blog posts. The title of the article posted by History is called "Reaction to 9/11" and gives us intel on the reaction the USA had on the attack as well as a generalized international reaction about this subject. It is no surprise to see that the country that was attacked support themselves as mentioned in the article. People from the country did acts of patriot ship towards their country by hanging flags around their homes, doing charity work and other small details that contributed to putting a smile back on the citizens of America. On the other hand, the international reaction is not exactly the same. Although many countries as mentioned by the article, like France and Germany who stated that "The events were not only attacks on the people in the United States, our friends in America, but also against the entire civilized world, against our own freedom, against our own values, values which we share with the American People", others like the leader of an Islamic military group begged to differ. It is interesting to see how the History channel provides to the readers a mixed set of reactions coming from many countries and citing important names in the world, but that is one of the reasons why this reacion is only so good. As one reads the articles, they only learn about the reaction of big political names and nothing turns into something personal and that is something that should be implied into the reactions to create a sense of movement on the citizens of the world. These reactions are based on facts which cannot be questioned but what happens when the reaction is coming from an everyday normal citizen of the world.
Wednesday, March 4, 2015
9/11 CNN Reaction Writing
The news report regarding the 9/11 incident was a very informal, causing people to be confused and uncertain of what was going on. The people interviewed during the new report were unreliable to learn about what was going on which led people to be extremely confused. Either way though, it was a devastating situation and people all over the world watching were surprised to find out that planes had crashed into the world trade center. Focusing on the new report though, not only the people being interviewed were being informal but the new reporters themselves could have taken their job way more seriously. Being present in the day the event happened and watching CNN, it would have been extremely hard to grab an understanding of why, how and why everything happened. CNN was not living up to its name but in their defense it was a stressful situation not only for the citizens of New york and around the world but also the media trying to figure out what was going on.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)