It’s interesting how you brought up a new generation and their relationship with the computer. It’s true that they are more dependent of the computer for answer than our generation which is pretty sad. I never thought about how they would be affected by such websites that propose answers. Some kids might be thinking the oddest things are true because misleading websites. The same may be true for myself. Your blog post brings me to wonder about what will happen to the even earlier generations if they continue to be dependent on the websites for answers. Maybe they will be luck enough to live in a day in age where misinforming websites are non-existent.

I found this section a little helpful in evaluating websites as sources. It would seem like common sense to have thought of these simple concepts on one’s own but I never cared much for websites as sources anyways. I think the most effective way they mentioned of finding out if it is credible is by researching the domain of the website. Who better to research than the informers themselves? The other aspects mentioned that should be looked into kind of go along with the first concept. When it comes to accuracy I don’t see how one would really be able to tell how old the participant is in Speak Out. Take Myspace for example, it’s obvious that children at age 12 have one when they are not supposed to. Objectivity I don’t completely see the importance of yet. Currency and coverage I think may be something hard to find in a lot of websites. I don’t find too many informational websites that are well maintained or that change what they cover very often. Comic strip websites are probably most accurate with that as well as news ones. All in all, when I look at websites I may have a different view on some of them now by looking to each of the aspects.

EOA p.354-400

When I started reading this I knew it would be an odd read to blog about just like the last one because it is what it is and didn’t strike much thought. To begin with, I don’t care for the side notes because I feel that if I wanted to read actively and annotate what I’m reading then I would do it myself. Also, I found it hard to imagine George Bush saying this since anytime I’ve ever seen him speak it sounds confused or preach-like. No doubt that at the end of this speech he does sound like a preacher with the “God Blesses”. Most of this sounded repetitive about how the terrorist loathe freedom and how we are fighting so hard to fight them off. What I liked most was the personal experience that was added at the end of the speech. I think that comes through to people more than half of the rest he was saying. The situation sounds like it comes from a movie almost, so dramatic and encouraging. Comparing what was going on to the World Wars I thought was a good tactic, but it was uninteresting for someone like me who doesn’t care for history.

Talk About Dead Baby Jokes (EOA p.354-361)

I was confused in the beginning and getting a little disinterested until a paragraph on the second page. I had to ask the person next to me: “did he just talking about eating babies?” The person actually knowing who the author was informed that he wasn’t being serious. After I continued reading I thought that it wouldn’t be the most inconvenient way of solving all that poverty. To some it would just seem unethical. Who knows, something like that could work if enough people opened up there minds. (Is she joking you ask. Maybe.)Most of my thoughts died about the subject when I was told that the author didn’t mean this as a literal scheme.

Eating babies… other carcasses… it is potentially unhealthy but babies or toddlers may be less apt to having diseases at that age. Like I said before I wouldn’t disagree with the idea. With people living longer the population has to be controlled somehow right? Though diseases take care a good amount of that it’s still not enough. I wouldn’t recommend eating the impoverish people though because of what they may have been exposed to. Also, it’s not like we don’t eat animals anyways or kill other humans. So what he was saying and my agreeing isn’t as absurd as you may think. It would also be efficient for the environment because there would be less people to pollute and all. That’s why the eating babies sounded more logical.

Speaking of logic, this section was title “Avoiding Flawed Logic”, I’m not sure but I didn’t recognize the flaw in this author’s logic. I’m sure I’ll be exposed to that during class though.

Fatty McFatso (EOA p.317-320)

I might agree with the first article in which fat taxes may have been a little too much of a change. At the same time I think such measurements may be one of the only ways to sway people away from eating fatty, unhealthy foods. Sure you can tell people to eat right and exercise but look at them while you walk down the street. You’ll see there has been no difference. Also, most advertisements are through the television, which is not exercising, so there seems to be a it of an issue.

The second article I don’t really agree with. I don’t think the government should be blames for spending only $2 million against fat whereas McDonald’s spent $500 million towards it. I don’t believe it’s the government’s responsibility to keep us in shape and to make us feel good. Parents should be responsible and people themselves should be. It’s not too hard to stay away from nasty fast food besides the fact that its easy and cheap. Maybe if people actually looked at their food while they ate it they wouldn’t want it so much. Or maybe if they notice a lot of fast food places don’t wear gloves when preparing food since they find it inconvenient. They say they have a every 30 minute wash the hands policy, but do you honestly think every employee would bother? Yum, germs.

Anyways, my solution to both of these arguments would be to make fast food commercials illegal. Similar to the cigarette commercial terms. That way people will know the fast food is there but won’t be as tempted I suppose. But a fat person is a fat person is a fat person.

Get Your Face Out of My Book (EOA p.288-289)

All the controversy about the internet profile and picture websites is overrated. People risk their image and reputation by using and exposing themselves on these websites and they are aware of that. Whether their parents are aware of that is a whole other story we’ll probably read about in this book. Anyways, the bit about control is only interesting because if you’ve experienced these websites you would know that many people don’t understand the concept of control, thus they don’t care about their privacy. Of course people leave themselves out to become transparent with these websites and that’s there problem to handle.

“The Internet is often accused of leading to uncivil behavior”, “Identity will lead to civility….”(EOA p.289). I found those a funny pair of quotes. The first I believe to be true because I have seen my friends behave ridiculously and expose the idiotic sides of themselves to show off on the internet. This makes the second quote not so true in my mind because all these people know they are being watched. This fact doesn’t change the photos they decide to put up or the comments they decide to share with others. I think the most popular photos are those of people drinking, and often underage people post these. A little further into that last paragraph on page 289 states that the how thing is like being living in a small town. Well, I think that it’s the most overly populated small town that exists and the citizens in that small town are all careless of their reputations and possibly self-images. Doesn’t say too much about control when compare something to a “small town”. A small town could be full of bums.

Shootings, Bombs, and Donkeys, Oh My! (EOA p. 266-269)

The first article was repetitive with two or more words, such as ordinary and citizen. It was annoying after the first five times. I believe that the ordinary citizen reporter did take a risk but nothing seemed too extraordinary to me. And for some reason people mentioned in the article couldn’t grasp the concept that he was used to that sort of thing because of his background. If reporters have an issue with an ordinary citizen reporter having better reporting skills then so be it, I could care less.

The second article was just as annoying. If Ho wanted to take some pictures let the guy take some pictures. He obviously didn’t stop anyone from getting out of the flight to pause and take a picture. The article makes it sound as if he stood right in the middle of the existing route to take pictures of people exiting or what have you. The other pictures were of the outside so I don’t see how he interrupted anything there.

If the point was to show how the two stories were contrasting in which one picture-taking citizen was praised and the other was blamed then it’s ridiculous. Both stories themselves are contrasting because one takes place in a building and another takes place in an airplane. One with many exist and one with maybe two.