My Controversy

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/05/mass-murder-should-not-be-a-ticket-to-fame/371599/#disqus_thread

This article written in The Atlantic outlines a way for the media to stop mass murderers from attaining fame. The author, Conor Friedersdorf, explains in his article that mass murderers enjoy the thought of their faces plastered all over the media. So if the media was to not publish information about the mass murderers but instead focus on the victims this may take part of the thrill away for the murderer and possibly prevent more mass killings. This article interested me because I have always found it morbid how much the media focuses on the killer instead of the victims. Also, as an aspiring law student, the author's idea interests me from a law standpoint because it works around the 1st amendment in a way that is lawful.

My Thoughts on Comments

These are four select comments from comment section of an article on The Atlantic website titled "The Media Can Prevent Mass Murderers From Becoming Famous". This a continuation of my post titled "My Controversy".


Credible Comments

1. The commenter is expressing anxiety in his comment. DoctorFakename is anxious about the lack of coverage of mass murder caused by arson in comparison to a shooting spree. It is easy to see his anxious state by the questions he poses and then immediately answers. Also, his vocabulary is crass which further conveys his anxiousness.
2. DoctorFakename believes that one particular atrocious act should not receive more attention than another different but similarly atrocious act. He values human life greatly because he pays attention to loss of human life and it angers him that all loss of human is not covered equally. Finally, DoctorFakename believes the media is what drives these shootings because he equates shooting a gun in public to being famous which is line with the article.
3.  DoctorFakename is reasonable and credible to me because I can see the emotion behind the words but he uses it in a constructive way. Also, the examples he provides to back up his thoughts is not outlandish or even noticeably untrue. His levelheadedness throughout the comment allowed me to take him seriously.

1. In Lizzie's comment, it is easy to tell she is expressing a wish. Throughout the comment she is explaining and creating a different reality. This reality is distinctly different from our world therefore she is expressing a wish for change.
2. Lizzie has conservative political beliefs. She has a conservative outlook on life because she feels the media doesn't need to be a major part of everything. She most likely finds the media to be too invasive in most news stories.
3. I find Lizzie's comment to be reasonable because she began her comment with some evidence. She mentions Gavin de Becker and some his ideas as her evidence. After a quick Google search it easy to understand why she chose him as an example. She then puts de Becker's idea into an example I could understand as someone who is foreign to de Becker. All of this made her comment one of the more reasonable, trustworthy and credible comments in the comment thread.

Not Credible Comments

1. LittleWillie is expressing fear in his comment. He is scared by this radical idea the author is proposing. His language is extreme and misused which lends more to the idea that he is expressing his fear.
2. LittleWillie most definitely believes in his rights. He is terrified that they may be limited or taken away. His political opinions are very transparent as well. He is definitely a conservative, even a libertarian. His distrust in the government and its perceived ability to censor is what tips me off to his political views. Finally, LittleWillie strongly believes in his right to free speech because he defends vigorously throughout the comment.
3. LittleWillie lacks credibility to me because he does not see the whole picture. His aggressive defense of his rights throughout the comment is not at all warranted because the author of this article is not suggesting a restriction of rights. LittleWillie is simply off subject with his comment. Next, his escalation of events from censoring the name of mass murderer to the evisceration of freedom of thought is completely ridiculous. All of this made LittleWillie not credible in my eyes.

1. scott_lewis is expressing anxiety in his comment. He is concerned that the media, video games, society, etc. as he put it will be blamed for mass murders instead of what he sees to be the real problem which is mentally unstable people having access to firearms.
2. scott_lewis believes there is a simple answer to most of societies problems. He also believes that these problems are often blamed on the wrong parts of our society for various political and economic reasons. His tone throughout the comment also suggests he is cynical.
3. I did not find this comment credible for one reason. scott_lewis boils down the complex relationship between mass murders and media outlets to a single reason. That simply reeks of ignorance. Nothing is that simple and scott_lewis does not acknowledge that at all. I see a lot comments like these on news posts. I find them to be a waste of time because they refuse to acknowledge the vast complexity behind many of the problems in our society. There is no one time fix to any problem and that is why I find this comment not credible.

Edit:
I commented on Lauren and Ann Emilie posts. Both did a fantastic job of understanding the feeling of each commenter. They could read whether or not the commenter was expressing fear about the topic or hope for a new reality to emerge some day. In Lauren's analysis of Chelseagrilll comment Lauren saw that the commenter was hoping for the day when medicinal marijuana is legal everywhere. In Ann Emilie's post she did an excellent job of with the comments that were deemed not credible. Her criteria for what made a post not credible was defined well and the comments fit neatly into the set lines. Generalization, name calling and racism were her lines for a comment being not credible and the elegant way she wrote about it in her analysis was something I had aimed for in my own post but failed to do. Overall, my peers did an excellent job in their analysis of comments relating to their controversy.

Calendar Reflection

Finding time in college for studying, completing homework, doing laundry and hanging out with friends can be exhausting. It makes me wish for my high school days when my mother did my laundry, school work took two hours each night and hanging out with friends until late in the evening was the norm. But now that I am in college this calendar reflection put things into perspective.

OpenClipartVectors "Calendar Date Desk Office Organizing Planning" 08/29/14 via Pixabay.com Public Domain Dedication License

For instance, I noticed I had a lot of extra time during my lunch break in the middle of the day. I could easily do a couple hours of homework then and save myself some time in the evening. What more I realized is that I can easily accomplish my English homework for the week by doing an hour of it while I eat my lunch. In conclusion looking over my calendar; seeing how my day progresses showed me how I can manage my time more effectively.

Edit-

I commented on Jessi and Mark's posts about Calender Reflection. They each have excellent time management and had no problem finishing six hours of English homework each week.  I too have no problem fitting the homework into my week. What I realized though is that I need to be on top of my time management. In order to have enough time to do my homework in the week, I need to use my time effectively and not get distracted.  In order to be more effective, I am going to use different strategies like studying in the library, doing homework during my lunch break, and waking up early to finish my homework. I feel that if I stick to this principle I will be more successful.

My Writing Process

There a thousand and one ways to write a paper. Some people write a paper after countless hours of prepping. Some people write a paper and then spend hours deleting, revising and rewriting. Finally, some people write their papers the night before its due or in the UA Library on a Thursday morning before class.

climbtreez "The Procrastinator" 01/06/2007 via deviantart.com Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 License

All these different ways of writing a paper can be boiled down to four main categories:

1. Heavy Planners- people who plan their papers extensively

2. Heavy Revisers- people who revise their papers obsessively

3. Sequential Composers- people who find a happy medium of planning and revising

4. Procrastinators- people who write their papers while riding a high from red bull the night before
 the paper is due

 
My writing requires a lot of revising simply because I never know exactly what I want to say until I put the pen to the paper. The ideas that flow from there are ideas I modify, revise and sometimes simply delete throughout various drafts.

McPhee, Nic "2008-01-26 (Editing a paper) - 31" 01/26/2008 via Flickr.com Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 License

This means I use the strategy of a heavy reviser. I constantly revise my paper; adding, deleting and tweaking various words. All of this revising to get across my point through my paper. This approach thus far has seemed to be working for me. Through my own revising and through my peers revising my paper, the "Heavy Revisers" approach has allowed me to write coherent papers driven by my points.


There are obvious strengths and weaknesses to the "Heavy Revisers" approach.
Some strengths are:

• Limited time experiencing writers block
• A rough draft takes hours not days
• Puts your ideas on paper right away so no forgetting that brilliant thing you just thought of

Some weaknesses are:

• Back loading the time put into the paper
• Spend a lot of time trying to understand your rough draft and your points
• Deleting a majority of the paper by the end of the revising

Although I am a staunch supporter of the "Heavy Revisers" approach to writing, I think it would be beneficial for me to try another approach. For instance, the "Heavy Planner" approach is one I have tried before and great success with. But being a procrastinator at heart, front loading my writing schedule for a paper typically isn't a good fit. As I write this now, I am using the "Sequential Composer" approach and enjoying it.

I think it is good to try different approaches to writing simply because it expands how one thinks about his or her writing. What approach to writing do you take?


Edit:

I wrote comments on Cynthia and Scott's post about their writing process. Like most outgoing high school students, they are both procrastinators. They are procrastinators for different reasons. Scott is a procrastinator because he feels he is not good at writing and Cynthia is a procrastinator simply because that is how she has always written papers. Reading their posts made me realize that a majority of us are most likely procrastinators when we write. Which in turn made me realize that this class is going to be a wake up call for all of us. This is not high school, it's college. Average work is not going to earn an A or a B anymore.  Exceptional work will earn you an A, good work will earn you a B, and average work will earn you a C. After this realization, I felt slightly overwhelmed. I'm feeling this way because I do not know how my work will stack up to the college standard; I don't know if my work will ever meet it. However what makes me feel better, is that with the right mindset and dedication to my writing I feel that I will be able to meet the college standard.

Reading their posts I saw that my writing process reflected more of a procrastinator than a heavy reviser. I write a rough draft immediately but I wait as long as possible to revise it.  This puts me under a lot of pressure to complete the assignment by the due date. I am not completely mirroring either of their processes but I am procrastinating.

I enjoy writing because I want to communicate.  I find it hard to use language as effectively as I want to. Putting an abstract thought or idea into coherent language so that the audience can follow is something I struggle with. I enjoy the process though and this class will continue to challenge my writing.