Friday, August 19, 2011
F-word during the NTU valedictory speech by Trinetta Chong
Ok... How should I start? Even I am at a loss to approaching this question :D
Let's just say that we hear so much of crude words in our private conversations that we have become insensitive to such once taboo words. Even I have to admit that I close one eye whenever a classmate of mine says such vulgarities, whether it is in Hokkien, or the four-lettered word.
However, this is to my surprise that even the NTU valedictory speech can contain such profanities. Moreover, this student, Trinetta Chong, is apparently a graduate from the Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information. Doesn't she have any word better to say besides the the f-word to express her feelings then?? Moreover, the fact that she is a valedictorian shows that she has immense popularity among her peers. Instead of encouraging her schoolmates to be more crude in their conversations, why can't she use her popularity to influence her schoolmates to be more civil? In fact, just to digress a little, people always say that if you wish to change the world, you just need to change yourself. This is especially applicable to celebrities and royals, who are looked up to by millions of fans. These fans always wish to imitate the celebrities' actions. Instead of taking drugs and committing crimes like nobody's business, celebrities should start doing good.
To end this extremely short post, let me just say, this is the result of saying profanities and swearing in conversations everyday. I tell you, it would become a habit and these vulgarities will come to you extremely naturally. If you lose your control, the first words that come to you will definitely be these profanities. To my classmates reading this post, let me advise you, BE CIVIL IN YOUR CONVERSATIONS FOR ONCE! :)
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Week 6 Blog Prompt: News Media
Read up on the Rupert Murdoch phone scandal. You can find some links (from TIME online) I posted up in Week 6, as well as read up on the Newsweek coverage of the news.
In relation to the news coverage on the scandal, answer the question:
"The news media should be blamed for the unhealthy paparazzi culture and going to the extremes for sensational news. How far do you agree?"
The media has always been associated with paparazzi and reports desperately searching for news and people to interview about certain incidents. The media are known to exaggerate the truth, sometimes a little too far. The Rupert Murdoch phone-hacking scandal has revealed a darker side to the world of journalism. I would like to agree to a rather small extent with the statement that the news media should be blamed for the unhealthy paparazzi culture and going to the extremes for sensational news.
The very first factor would boil down to the news media itself. The news media, in order to keep their customers reading their paper. The news media companies would always want to get the latest and juiciest news for their customers to enjoy. News not reported by other news companies would also be an added advantage to news media companies as readers would talk about this news to others, who would soon know through rival news media companies and come to trust the news media company who got the piece of news first, increasing the reputation of the company, attracting more readers and result in more income. As the saying goes: "the early bird catches the worm", the only way for the news company to be an early bird is to have paparazzi to spy on the influential and even go to the extreme, like the phone-hacking scandal, to get the news.
However, we need to be aware of the fact that the news media use extreme measures to get news, because of the very fact that the general public wishes to get such information. For example, in today's society, people love sensation. Most people like to see scandals in the news paper as it is more easier to read than hard facts like updates on economy and new laws implemented by the government. People would also want a piece of news to talk about and gossip. Many others would naturally be curious about what their celebrity idols are doing in their private lives, thus when this kind of scandal comes out, people would be interested. Tabloids are papers which report on matters which do not actually concern us, like an argument between 2 people on a bus, or accidents that resulted in injuries. Why is it that these kind of Tabloids are able to thrive? It is because of the very fact that people prefer to look at the latest sensation than to look at heavy-going articles on the large-print. As a result, the news media would be forced to look for new information to feed to the readers, resulting in the usage of extreme measures and the paparazzi.
Since tabloids are created due to public interests, the main root of the problem would be the general public. If people enjoy reading heavy-going news than the latest gossip, then tabloids would not exist in the first place. Therefore I would say that it would be the general public causing the news media to go to extreme measures and making use of the paparazzi to get hold of information. Therefore I agree with the statement only to a small extent.
In relation to the news coverage on the scandal, answer the question:
"The news media should be blamed for the unhealthy paparazzi culture and going to the extremes for sensational news. How far do you agree?"
The media has always been associated with paparazzi and reports desperately searching for news and people to interview about certain incidents. The media are known to exaggerate the truth, sometimes a little too far. The Rupert Murdoch phone-hacking scandal has revealed a darker side to the world of journalism. I would like to agree to a rather small extent with the statement that the news media should be blamed for the unhealthy paparazzi culture and going to the extremes for sensational news.
The very first factor would boil down to the news media itself. The news media, in order to keep their customers reading their paper. The news media companies would always want to get the latest and juiciest news for their customers to enjoy. News not reported by other news companies would also be an added advantage to news media companies as readers would talk about this news to others, who would soon know through rival news media companies and come to trust the news media company who got the piece of news first, increasing the reputation of the company, attracting more readers and result in more income. As the saying goes: "the early bird catches the worm", the only way for the news company to be an early bird is to have paparazzi to spy on the influential and even go to the extreme, like the phone-hacking scandal, to get the news.
However, we need to be aware of the fact that the news media use extreme measures to get news, because of the very fact that the general public wishes to get such information. For example, in today's society, people love sensation. Most people like to see scandals in the news paper as it is more easier to read than hard facts like updates on economy and new laws implemented by the government. People would also want a piece of news to talk about and gossip. Many others would naturally be curious about what their celebrity idols are doing in their private lives, thus when this kind of scandal comes out, people would be interested. Tabloids are papers which report on matters which do not actually concern us, like an argument between 2 people on a bus, or accidents that resulted in injuries. Why is it that these kind of Tabloids are able to thrive? It is because of the very fact that people prefer to look at the latest sensation than to look at heavy-going articles on the large-print. As a result, the news media would be forced to look for new information to feed to the readers, resulting in the usage of extreme measures and the paparazzi.
Since tabloids are created due to public interests, the main root of the problem would be the general public. If people enjoy reading heavy-going news than the latest gossip, then tabloids would not exist in the first place. Therefore I would say that it would be the general public causing the news media to go to extreme measures and making use of the paparazzi to get hold of information. Therefore I agree with the statement only to a small extent.
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Blog Post Term 3 Week 5: Merchant of Venice Act 4 Scene 1
By the end of the trial scene, do you think true justice and mercy was achieved? Reflect and write on the following questions:
1. Is there true justice? Why?
1. Is there true justice? Why?
Personally, I feel that there is no such thing as true justice in this world. The justice that one perceives is different in everyone.
For example, we may say that there is no true justice in the trial scene as Shylock is still a victim of discrimination and abuse by Christians. We may say that the Christians are the 'villians' here and Shylock is just a pitiful Jew who is constantly tormented by society. In modern times, we all try to uphold the view that everyone is equal. That is way we have racial harmony, why racism and discrimination against religions are considered taboo in Singapore. This is why there are human rights organisations fighting against the oppression of groups of people like the African-Americans.
However, during the time of Shakespeare, the persecution of Jews was not a rare sight. Jews are even banned from certain countries of continental Europe like England during the Middle Ages. There were even violence against the Jewish people like massacres, forced conversion. Why? That is because the Christians had the stereotype that all Jews were guilty of killing Jesus. The fact that Shakespeare, through this play has implied that Shylock should be the sympathised with is quite surprising, due to the fact that he would not have met any Jewish person in his life and that he would have been brainwashed by the values of the society then. To the people watching the play then, they would have thought that there absolutely true justice as Shylock is too heartless has been too greedy to get that pound of flesh from Antonio's body. Thus, he needed to be thought a lesson, which is delivered by Portia.
As you can see, Justice can never be defined in black and white. No matter how one objects, one can never explain this grey area in Justice.
For example, we may say that there is no true justice in the trial scene as Shylock is still a victim of discrimination and abuse by Christians. We may say that the Christians are the 'villians' here and Shylock is just a pitiful Jew who is constantly tormented by society. In modern times, we all try to uphold the view that everyone is equal. That is way we have racial harmony, why racism and discrimination against religions are considered taboo in Singapore. This is why there are human rights organisations fighting against the oppression of groups of people like the African-Americans.
However, during the time of Shakespeare, the persecution of Jews was not a rare sight. Jews are even banned from certain countries of continental Europe like England during the Middle Ages. There were even violence against the Jewish people like massacres, forced conversion. Why? That is because the Christians had the stereotype that all Jews were guilty of killing Jesus. The fact that Shakespeare, through this play has implied that Shylock should be the sympathised with is quite surprising, due to the fact that he would not have met any Jewish person in his life and that he would have been brainwashed by the values of the society then. To the people watching the play then, they would have thought that there absolutely true justice as Shylock is too heartless has been too greedy to get that pound of flesh from Antonio's body. Thus, he needed to be thought a lesson, which is delivered by Portia.
As you can see, Justice can never be defined in black and white. No matter how one objects, one can never explain this grey area in Justice.
2. Is there true mercy, as expounded by Portia? Why?
I believe that this is even true mercy. Yes, it may seem so on the outside, but is merely putting up a facade to hide the fact that she just wants to play the "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth game" with Shylock.
Portia can be seen as being merciful as it is because it can be view that either Shylock loses his fortune, or his life. In this case, Portia chooses to let Shylock live. Thus some would view her as merciful.
However, Portia, in the first place, shouldn't be even tell the court that Shylock is attempting murder on an innocent victim. It is that fact which shows that she able to manipulate and persuade, yet cunning enough to make herself the heroine of the story with a heart of gold.
Therefore, it is hard to say if Portia is being merciful.
I believe that this is even true mercy. Yes, it may seem so on the outside, but is merely putting up a facade to hide the fact that she just wants to play the "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth game" with Shylock.
Portia can be seen as being merciful as it is because it can be view that either Shylock loses his fortune, or his life. In this case, Portia chooses to let Shylock live. Thus some would view her as merciful.
However, Portia, in the first place, shouldn't be even tell the court that Shylock is attempting murder on an innocent victim. It is that fact which shows that she able to manipulate and persuade, yet cunning enough to make herself the heroine of the story with a heart of gold.
Therefore, it is hard to say if Portia is being merciful.
3. Justice and Law can be manipulated by people in power. Comment on this with reference to the text and other real-life cases and examples.
According to the text, Portia is the person in power, with the looks that charm, the intelligence and a fortune left by her father. Portia, during the trial of Antonio, managed to turn the table around during the court, to win a losing battle, and to find a loophole in the deal, thereby accusing Shylock of attempted murder. This is the manipulation of the Justice and the Law of that time.
In real life, one can see that those in power, like presidents, or even celebrities, get away from crimes scot-free. Recent cases would include the Dominique Strass-kahn's involvement with the hotel rape scene, President Bill Clinton's sex scandal, or even sports celebrities' scandals like that case of Tiger Woods and Wayne Rooney. In the past, sometimes even now, the richer people would only have the power and money to hire lawyers. As a result, the poor had no justice and the rich would always be not guilty, unless there is extremely concrete evidence. Besides that, the is Rupert Murdoch's News of the World, where it took messages of dead soldiers and murder victims, with the ability to hide their dirty secrets till recently.
As stated earlier, there is NO true justice. The society is always controlled by those who have the wealth and influence. That is why I aspire to work hard and become influential. That way, I would be able to induce positive values in this degrading society easily. :)
According to the text, Portia is the person in power, with the looks that charm, the intelligence and a fortune left by her father. Portia, during the trial of Antonio, managed to turn the table around during the court, to win a losing battle, and to find a loophole in the deal, thereby accusing Shylock of attempted murder. This is the manipulation of the Justice and the Law of that time.
In real life, one can see that those in power, like presidents, or even celebrities, get away from crimes scot-free. Recent cases would include the Dominique Strass-kahn's involvement with the hotel rape scene, President Bill Clinton's sex scandal, or even sports celebrities' scandals like that case of Tiger Woods and Wayne Rooney. In the past, sometimes even now, the richer people would only have the power and money to hire lawyers. As a result, the poor had no justice and the rich would always be not guilty, unless there is extremely concrete evidence. Besides that, the is Rupert Murdoch's News of the World, where it took messages of dead soldiers and murder victims, with the ability to hide their dirty secrets till recently.
As stated earlier, there is NO true justice. The society is always controlled by those who have the wealth and influence. That is why I aspire to work hard and become influential. That way, I would be able to induce positive values in this degrading society easily. :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)