To Tweet or not to Tweet

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/opinion/22dowd.html?em
This op-ed was written by Maureen Dowd, in which she discusses the Twitter phenomenon that is sweeping across the country. Dowd, who makes it clear that she is not a fan of this new technology, scheduled an interview with the two masterminds behind Twitter. However, to keep the article creative and upbeat, while also playing off the short “tweets” created on the website, Dowd limits the interviewees to answer her questions within “140 characters.” I think this is a humorous aspect of Dowd’s editorial because it accomplishes the task of combining humor with her personal opinions in order to inform the public of how Twitter is overtaking our society. Personally, I think that Twitter is a fun and interesting technology, and although it is not essential to daily functioning, it can be a big part of people’s lives. I think that it’s an even faster version of emailing, all created in attempts to keep up with the fast paced American lifestyle. However, one of the best parts of the op-ed comes at the end when Dowd expresses her distaste for the technology stating that she’d rather be tied up to stakes in the Kalahari Desert, have honey poured over me and red ants eat out my eyes than open a Twitter account.” When she asks the creators for their response, they reply by saying, “Well, when you do find yourself in that position, you’re gonna want Twitter. You might want to type out the message ‘Help.’” This was a clever statement and it puts an ironic twist on the overall tone of Dowd’s article.

Hard to get Tickets Online

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/arts/music/01tickets.html
This article, written by NY Times columnist Ben Sisario, discusses how online ticket sales are making it more difficult for fans to see their favorite performers live in concert. Companies such as TicketMaster and LiveNation are responsible for selling concert tickets, yet online sales have paved the way for scalpers to get these tickets as quickly as possible and charge desperate fans way more than face value of the tickets. It is becoming easier for scalpers to take advantage of innocent people who just want to treat their friends/families to an enjoyable concert. In the current economic state of our country, it is also becoming increasingly difficult for families to afford the ever-rising ticket prices, with or without resorting to scalpers. A typical concert ticket now sells for $67, almost double what the price was ten years ago. Also, fan clubs offer presales, which decreases the amount of tickets available to the public. Scalpers can also invade the presales, with authorization codes being sold through ebay, and rip off even more people.I believe that people are easily taken advantage of, and this is not fair. If I want to see my favorite band perform, why must that be so difficult? Enjoyable opportunities are becoming less and less available to average citizens as many families are financially struggling, and I feel like they should have a chance to experience some of the luxuries as everyone else. I understand why ticket prices on the rise, but I feel like scalpers are making the situation worse.I think that performers also recognize the financial hardships their fans are facing, and therefore do not condone illegal ticket sales. However, I think that if these performers wanted to, they could put on more free shows, and give die-hard fans a chance to enjoy a concert without the financial burdens, but in all reality, that would be very difficult to accomplish. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I just wish everyone had equal chances to experiences perks like concerts, and I think that the entertainment industry should also try to make more efforts to ensure that all are given a fair chance to performers.

Walt Disney's Legacy

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/01/movies/01disn.html?_r=1&ref=arts

This article, written by NY Times columnist Brooks Barnes, discusses the museum that Walt Disney's family is currently creating to protect their father's reputation.
Throughout the years, Disney was subjected to harsh criticism such is the case with biography, "Walt Disney: Hollywood's Dark Prince," which depicted him as a bigot. In attempts to restore his reputation and bring honor to his legendary name, a museum is being built in his honor.
The author of the article was successful in providing the audience with a background on Walt Disney's life and explaining why it was so important for the family to have the museum built for him.
However, from the article as a whole, one can infer that while although the author felt it was necessary for Disney to be respected for all his accomplishments, his family was pushing the limits in taking on this project.
The Disney corporation already puts efforts into offering the general public an opportunity to learn who Disney was as a person through DVD specials, fan clubs, magazines, and an exhibit at California Adventure Park.
The author's perspective can especiallybe heard through the ending quotation, "Anything my mother wants, she gets."
This shows that Walt Disney's sole living daughter is pushing the limits in attempts to restore her father's strong name, yet it may be rubbing people the wrong way, but she will do what she believes to be right, no matter the consequences.
Walt Disney was a successful man with many great accomplishments in his lifetime, and his name will last forever. I think it is important that we recognize him for his successes without getting hung up on any imperfections he may have had. Therefore, I do not think this museum is necessary but if the family feels this is the only way to inform the public of who their father was, so be it. For me, my respect for Disney grows each time I watch one of his movies or see one of his characters, and that is good enough for me.

Twitter Ecosystem

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/fashion/29twitter.html?ref=style

Twitter is the new phenomenon sweeping across the country. This social networking site allows people to "follow" each other and be alerted to where their friends are and what they are doing instantly- at any point throughout the day. However, it is not required for a Twitter subscriber to personally know the person they are following, as many people choose to be alerted to the daily ongoings in the lives of their favorite celebrities.
"The Celebrity Twitter Ecosystem" was published in the New York Times and the author, John Metcalfe, understands this newfound craze in society, and he allows his opinions on the matter to be heard loud and clear.
"Honestly, does anyone care that Martha Stewart has a blog supposedly written by her French bulldogs, Francesca and Sparky?"
This opening quotation to the article captures the fact that although Twitter is gaining popularity and becoming well-known throughout society, some of the things we are alerted through via this website are nonsensical and serve no purpose. His use of sarcasm in regards to the blogging on Martha Stewart's bulldogs shows how many Twitter followers want to be deeply immersed in the lives of celebrities. Many people will respond to Metcalfe's comment thinking, "Does Martha Stewart care about what my pets are doing? Why do I need to know this?"
The use of Twitter is an attempt to connect members throughout society using the vast technology that is available to us in modern times. I personally do not feel the need to know every minute detail about Snoop Dogg and his whereabouts, but hearing Ashton Kutcher and John Mayer discuss the possibility of opening 31 Club together is pretty interesting.
I think this website is all in efforts to connect people throughout the country. Many of us will never have the opportunity to meet our favorite celebrities in person, but if we follow them on Twitter we feel that we are a part of their lives in some way, even if they do not know who we are.
Although Twitter is interesting and exciting technology, it should not be used as a new method of stalking which, as the tone of the article suggests, Metcalfe believes this application could lead to. It is important for us to find the proper balance between daily human interaction and the perks and excitement that come along with submerging ourselves in celebrity culture a world away via the Twitter ecosystem.

Standing Behind Chris Brown

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/fashion/19brown.html?pagewanted=2&ref=style
Chris Brown has been under harsh public scrutiny after an incident back in February which resulted in sever injuries to his girlfriend, Rihanna. However, even though the incident portrayed what is termed "dating violence and abuse," many teenage girls are coming to Brown's defense and unwilling to understand the serious consequences his actions had.
The author of this article, Jan Hoffman, interviewed a wide group of teenage girls and got their opinions on the issue. Many girls idolize Brown, and therefore will not allow themselves to believe that he did anything wrong. This issue has become so publicized, and created much online drama between teens throughout the country, and the event has even been discussed on Oprah.
From the tone of this article, one can infer that the author believes what Brown did was wrong and that he should be reprimanded for his actions. I personally agree with that opinion. Even though I am a fan of Brown's music, his actions cannot be justified. It was morally wrong and showed that he is not the person I thought he was. Even though troubles in his past contributed to his acting out, he needs to publicly address the issue, accept the consequences of his actions, and get help. If Brown faces this ordeal head-on in the public eye, I think he will inspire many of his fans and send the message that dating violence is NOT acceptable. Hopefully, he can help others in similar situations.

Progress in Embryonic Stem Cell Research

On Monday March 9, 2009 President Obama lifted the strict limitations the Bush administration had placed on embryonic stem cell research, stating that his administration will, "make decisions based on facts, not ideology." For years, the issue of embryonic stem cell research has been a controversial divide within our country, but Obama is taking a step that will allow us to move forward in our research and progress in the scientific community.
Obama was very careful in addresssing this issue, as many people are morally opposed to it while others see it as the only opportunity to progress in science and learn more about diseases that can afflict people through life. Obama was successful in the fact that even though his views on this issue are very liberal and open, he still wants to respect the viewpoints of the more conservative citizens.
I think the author of this article, Sheryl Gay Stolberg, accurately represented both liberals and conservatives, as she was very objective and did not let her own personal biases affect her article. Stolberg quoted both people supporting Obama's decision and people against it, and the article presented Obama in a light which all citizens can respect.
Obama believes in human embryonic stem cell research, but only for essential scientific purposes, as he draws the line at human cloning, believing in has no part in our society, or any other society for that matter.
Obama passing legislation to support this issue represents a huge change from the previous policies put in place by the Bush administration; a change that many people have been waiting years to see.

Where does taxpayers' money really go?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/opinion/25dowd.html?_r=1&em

Maureen Dowd, an op-ed columnist for The New York Times, recently wrote an article in which she expresses her frustration at the fact that, while the American economy is struggling, business officials are off spending our money at their lavish events.
The article begins with the Northern Trust of Chicago. In a posting on TMZ.com, the website stated that shortly after receiving $1.5 billion in bailout money, the company sent employees to Los Angeles where they were treated to "posh hotels, salmon and fillet mignon dinners, music concerts..." and a variety of other luxurious perks. Choosing to include this example in the front of the article underscored Dowd's opinion that these businesses were sly and sneaky. Readers could then identify with a solid example of this deceit and wonder: Did they really need the $1.5 billion bailout? Shouldn't that taxpayer money be put to good use? Why am I paying for luxurious "business trips" for other people?
Dowd continued to emphasize her belief as she referred to the Northern Trust as "Northern No Trust" and "Northern Untrustworthy" at various places throughout the article. This element was successful in presenting her beliefs to the public as she offered the readers not-so-subtle clues that this company was deceitful; just bad!
I agree with what Dowd is saying because it seems like companies oftentimes participate in luxurious "meetings" such as these, but are they really necessary? In a time when many Americans are out of work or struggling financially to make ends meet, is it fair and morally right that these other employees are living such a glamorous and luxurious life? In my opinion, companies such as Northern Trust need to cut back on this type of spending because that is not where taxpayers want to see their money going. I think these big companies need to make some sacrifices so more jobs can be made available in society and more Americans can obtain financial stability.

"In Praise of Oscar Long Shots"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/movies/awardsseason/13carr.html?ref=arts


This article, written by David Carr, focuses on Oscar nominations: who was nominated? Who wasn't? Do these people deserve nominations? What determines if an actor should be nominated or not?

The perspective on this article is to pull away from all the glitz of the awards show- the fashion, red carpet, etc.- and focus on the credibility of the actors actually nominated. Oftentimes there are nominations that are obvious and, well, expected as is the case with Mickey Rourke this year. Rourke's "The Wrestler" has received much buzz in recent weeks although it was not an initital front-runner. However, Rourke's "comeback" and backstory contribute to this publicity and the movie is gaining more recognition.

However, there are still some films which were not highly publicized receiving nominations- have many people heard of Melissa Leo in "Frozen River?" Either way, Carr states that the awards should be determined by the acting talent and not the publicity surrounding the film.

Carr provides much detail about the films/actors he is discussing so that the readers know the background information and can understand why they are nominated. Carr writes, "Sometimes it’s not the actors who pull us — and the academy — into films, but the films themselves." Therefore, the award should not be given to the actor with the biggest name, but rather the actor with the biggest talent.

I agree with Carr because the general public tends to get caught up in the glamour and publicity surrounding the nominations while not even thinking about the actual talent all of these actors possess. If we focus on popularity or names to determine the winner, aren't we losing the purpose of the awards being given?

Carr says it best when he writes, "But for those of us who are either too busy or too lazy, the Oscars, of all things, can serve as a frame on the wonders we might otherwise miss." There is true talent within many films, even if we have never heard of them, and we must respect that or else genuine talent in our generation may go unnoticed, which we be an upset for us.

Native American Boxing Network

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/09/sports/othersports/09boxers.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=us

This article follows the story of Cheryl Ziegler, an 18 year old single mother who travels to various boxing matches with her trainer. Ziegler is a member of the Native American Warriors Pro-Boxing Network, which provides an opportunity for Native Americans to escape lives ridden with poverty, drug abus, alcoholism, etc. It is believed that organizations such as this one willallow Indians to help each other improve their lives
I think that, although organizations like this may provide more opportunities for struggling Native Americans, it can also be a very intimidating lifestyle for a majority of them. It seems like it may be forced upon many of them as it proves to be the lesser of two evils.
The article then goes on to explain some history of this network and profile some more members of it. I think that, although this lifestyle would appear less dangerous in the short run, it may actually end up having poor consequences for its members- both physical and emotional. Boxing obviously takes a heavy toll on the body, but I think the mindset required to be a boxer is very different from that of the average person. Therefore, if people are thrust into this lifestyle, they will be forced to adapt to it quickly and it may make them feel insecure, intimidated, and frightened.
Overall, however, I think it is good that this option is available to Native Americans because if they can put themselves in the proper mindset, they can adapt to this lifestyle and overcome challenges they were faced with in their pasts.

"White Like Me"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/18/opinion/18rich.html?pagewanted=1&em

"White Like Me" is an article written by NY Times Op-Ed Columnist Frank Rich in which he presents the history of Washington through a white man's eyes. With the inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama occurring this week, Rich states that this is a day he was never sure would come. A Washington native himself, Rich recalls the time when DC was the "first American city with a black majority," although there were still many racist issues the city would face.
Although at the time of JFK's presidency there was much talk of integration, as it was displayed through different areas of the media such as television and novels like "Black Like Me." At the time, many wanted to believe that our nation's capital was ahead of the times and above the racism that was common during this era, yet the truth is Washington had its own "Jim Crow" era.
As Rich elaborates upon, there was so much Americans did not know about going on in Washington. It was like "a secret city unknown to the white world round about." What pride could we have in our capital during this time if it was just as bad as, if not worse than, the rest of the nation in its racist perspectives?
Therefore, Obama truly represents the changing views of American citizens. Although only half black, Obama has been subject to discrimination due to his appearance during his life. In a nation where blacks were once though only inferior to whites, Americans are placing their trust behind an African-American in the hopes that Obama is the change our country so desperately needs right now. By no means am I implying that Obama was elected solely because of his race, yet his election reflects that Americans have broken the racial barrier as they elected a President based on his views and opinions and can put all of the prejudices from history behind us in order to move forward in a more modern society.
When Martin Luther King gave his "I have a dream" speech in Washington during the civil rights crusade, how many Americans truly thought we would arrive to where we are today? According to Rich, not many.
However, the conflicts Obama will come to face during his presidency are much bigger than race. Although that represents one of his personal obstacles, he still has the duty to protect Americans and "clean up the mess" left after the last eight years. As Obama has said before, "in no other country is my story even possible." America is truly the land of opportunity, and Obama will continue to overcome any obstacles he faces in the next four years and lead America in the right direction. He has the ability to change and improve our nation and he proves that America has the ability to improve from its past and move into a brighter future.

Vans Take HIV Tests to Neighborhood Spots

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/nyregion/westchester/11testswe.html

Westchester NY has one of the highest HIV rates in NY state outside of New York City itself. In attempts to prevent the spread of this disease, mobile health vans are travelling throughout the county to administer tests to the people living in the area in order to educate them about the disease and alert them if they are positive.
Many people in this area either do not have access to health care, are uneducated about the importance of these tests, or fear going to the doctor. Therefore, this program will help provide better care for these people and protect them from exposure to the disease.
I think that this is a good effort because it tries to provide vital healthcare for all, and the goal of this program is ultimately to educate people about HIV and prevent the spread of disease. Although this effort is kind-hearted and would be very beneficial, it would be very difficult for health care officials to appply it to a larger scale. The most important aspect of this practice is the education it will provide for the citizens. If we are able to initiate health care and show its importance, then these residents will learn to take care of themselves and protect themselves, therefore creating a healthier society.
I think this article was written to persuade the general public that the efforts of this program are essential to protecting residents and that it needs to be supported. Although unintentional, the author's personal biases somewhat resonated throughout this piece as he simply praised the efforts of this group and inspired the audience to accept it as a good idea/practice.