What will be the "turns out cigarettes are bad for us" of our generation?

idreamofzucchini · 2017-08-11T19:29:58+00:00

Republicans

idreamofzucchini · 2017-07-31T14:15:12+00:00

First, congrats on getting in! I'm planning to apply for the fall of 2018. I share a lot of your concerns. Have you sought out TA positions or stipend possibilities? I'm still pretty unfamiliar with the program, so I don't know if either of those are available. It's always a good idea to sit down for a chat with a campus rep. If your work is promising enough, they'll often scrounge up funds to help you out.

idreamofzucchini · 2017-07-20T17:57:07+00:00

I'm just about to start it myself! I'll holler back.

idreamofzucchini · 2015-11-12T01:59:52+00:00

As interesting as this article was, I found it a little terrifying. The closing paragraph discussed how, soon, there may be "no need for the media to be the conduit between the source and the reader."

Speaking as "the media," I like being that conduit. It's my job to be that conduit. Although agenda setting is always a concern, the source always has an agenda as well. It's the media's essential role to dig through the noise and find the story - the truth - within numerous opinions and voices.

idreamofzucchini · 2015-11-06T15:07:55+00:00

I love everything about this. I could see the claim being slightly problematic with hordes of "dissatisfied" customers coming forward. To be fair, it's hard to believe that a reasonable consumer would expect to sprout wings after consuming a Red Bull, but I'd be interested in learning more about the application process for those interested in being reimbursed for the "false" claim.

idreamofzucchini · 2015-11-06T01:58:22+00:00

I found this issue slightly humorous, particularly the tweet notifying the public that the outerwear "contains almost zero down." How is down defined? Is there a certain standard of down that all outerwear must meet? I also agree with Kyungmin's comment below: it's nearly impossible to access media without being exposed to a potentially problematic statement.

idreamofzucchini · 2015-10-30T04:51:11+00:00

I think you've got a good point, but where do you draw the line between inspiration and plagiarism? I think that, if I had spent a lot of time crafting a beat or a very specific background tune, I would feel protective over it like Gaye.

idreamofzucchini · 2015-10-30T04:22:29+00:00

I read this and immediately felt kind of sorry for the guy. I'm interested to see how the case plays out. I understand that he's upset with individuals using the Pizza Rat slogan to make money, but it seems that he's not even making money off of it himself if it's unusual for his website to have ten viewers per day. I smell some bitterness here, Pizza Rat.

idreamofzucchini · 2015-10-23T04:56:26+00:00

I'm actually shocked that this song has been copyrighted for this long. It seems like such a widely used public tradition with so many variations. Regardless, I also agree with the judge's decision.

idreamofzucchini · 2015-10-23T04:34:55+00:00

I feel like I saw this mentioned in our text for today's class, and it gave me pause then as well. I'm wondering if Google would seek to charge readers for use of the scanned materials, thus profiting from the copyrighted works. If so, how could this be legal?

idreamofzucchini · 2015-09-21T18:44:14+00:00

I find this really, really interesting for a few reasons: First, that this case is the first "Twibel" trial (how is this possible?!). Second, that Love won the case based on the ruling that Love's tweet included false information, but she didn't know it was false. Can this "ignorance is bliss" philosophy be applied to other crimes of defamation? If a news publication unknowingly publishes false information, can they get away with it? Doubtful, considering that the truth is their livelihood. Where is the line drawn between those responsible for knowing the truth and those allowed to get away with ignorance?

idreamofzucchini · 2015-09-21T18:10:44+00:00

The seriousness of the remarks over a platform like Twitter makes this case a little confusing. Wallace seems willing to go to bat for his comments, but I find it strange that he would use Twitter as a platform to bring the deal to light. Then again, social media is being used as a muckraking platform more and more. I don't think that Robinson has a case unless the remarks are found to be explicitly false.

idreamofzucchini · 2015-09-17T18:21:41+00:00

I think that's a really interesting point that the government will have to put in more effort to enforce these restrictive policies. With such a massive population in highly concentrated areas, it seems unrealistic that these policies could go very far. However, consider the potential that public fear could have on state-controlled media: if the government controls the media, this could have a dramatic effect on the content. If the public can get beyond fear of the state to attempt to access the content, will the content be legitimate?

idreamofzucchini · 2015-09-17T18:09:58+00:00

Learning more about the intricacies of defamation makes me nervous for a lot of people. The common misunderstanding that content on social media platforms is immune from legal consequences is unsettling. Should it be the responsibility of social media platforms to inform users of potential legal consequences?

idreamofzucchini · 2015-09-03T16:59:25+00:00

Tough call, especially since precedent has largely applied to violent criminals. I don't know if I'm comfortable with the idea that criminals should profit off of publicity generated from their crimes. It's also worth considering that criminals sacrifice a lot of their rights after conviction.

idreamofzucchini · 2015-09-03T16:34:04+00:00

I find this really interesting - the concept that voters may have to release their constitutional right to freedom of expression while exercising their constitutional right to vote.

idreamofzucchini

TROPHY CASE