Internet: The Newest Mass Medium Essay -- Essays Papers

Internet: The Newest Mass Medium In order to analyze the Internet as a mass medium, we first have to look at the original intentions of the Internet. Originally the Internet was utilized strictly by the government and educational institutions. Its primary purposes were research and education, although it soon became a form of entertainment for a portion of the population through games, chat, and email. The idea of using the Internet for entertainment and commercial use was outrageous to the current users of the technology, and when listservs began posting advertisements, they did not respond well. These users wanted to keep the focus of this particular media very narrow and two-dimensional, so to speak. However, commercialization of the Internet allowed for exponential growth in for-profit and subsidized sites, which generated a greater demand for a larger user base. Profitability became an issue as soon as the Internet became commercial. In the 1990s, the Internet wielded a significant impact on people and businesses of all types, and there were many organizations and individuals that grew concerned of this impact and new issues arose. From a business aspect, telecommunications companies began to worry that the Internet would take away their customers because people were now able to place phone calls online with no long distance charges. From an individual, or general population aspect, people were concerned with the social implications of the Internet, and the negative impact that certain content could have on individuals or groups, such as children being exposed to pornographic content. There is also the growing concern of security and privacy, because not only can personal information be used for illegal purposes, it can be used without someone’s knowledge, for marketing purposes, which some people find to be an infringement of their privacy. The Internet is a breeding ground for freedom of expression and freedom of speech, which is why certain countries such as China and Germany, have done everything in their power to restrict the content made available to citizens. However, because of the Constitution, American government is finding it rather difficult to set up a ‘gatekeeping’ system, which will restrict content available within the United States. To allow the government to do this would completely defeat the purpose of such ... ...of thought was easily manipulated by the corporate/government cooperative that ran (and still runs) traditional ‘old’ media in the United States. The versatility and multidirectional communication makes the Internet one of the most exciting mediums because content can be very diversified and users are not only able to receive messages, but they are able to respond as well. The Internet is an interactive medium with potential to expand even farther than it already has. The Internet defies the controlled, one-way broadcast model of information distribution and empowers the user with the capability to talk back to the sender. References Beacham, F. (1998, December). Dark Alleys of the Internet Frank Beacham’s Questioning Technology [Online], 20 paragraphs. Available: http:// ****CHECK**** Grant, A., & Meadows, J. (2000). Communication Technology Update (7th ed.). Massachusetts: Butterworth-Heinemann. Public Agenda (2000). Internet Speech and Privacy. Public Agenda [Online], 10 paragraphs. Available: http://www.publicagenda.org/ Schmesier, L. (1996, March 1). Why bring gender online? CMC Magazine [Online], 7 paragraphs. Available: http://www.cmcmagazine.com

Continential Congress :: essays research papers

1775 Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  May 10. Second Continental Congress convenes in Philadelphia. Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  June 14. Continental Congress creates Continental Army Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  June 17. Battle of Bunker Hill. Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  July. Congress offers the Olive Branch Petition in attempt at reconciliation with king. Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  American armies march on Montreal and Quebec. 1776 Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  January1. Americans lose assault on Quebec. Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  January. Thomas Paine’s Common Sense published. Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  March. British evacuate Boston Ø  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  July 4. Declaration of independence adopted. The British defeated the French and their Indian allies in the French and Indian War (1754-1763). The result was British control over much of North America. But the war had cost England a great deal of money and Parliament decided it was time for the Colonies to pay a share for their own defense. The American Revolution became inevitable as far back as 1643 when the New England Confederation of Plymouth, Massachusetts Bay, Connecticut, and New Haven were formed for defense against Indians and the Dutch. In 1754 representatives of seven northern colonies met at Albany, N.Y. to consider plans for a permanent union of all colonies for defense against the French and Indians and for other purposes, however, the time was not right for a union. After England won the French and Indian war in 1763, England turned its attention to ways of increasing government revenues to pay the war debt. England believed that the best way to increase funds was to further tax the colonies. It imposed Navigation Acts of 1651, 1660, 1672, 1696, the Molasses Act of 1733 and the Sugar Act of 1764. It required that most of the trade of the British colonies be carried on in British or colonial ships so that all tax collection could be controlled. The frontiersmen found that a Royal Proclamation of 1763 halted their expansion westward stopping them at a line created at the Appalachians. Open opposition to all of these acts became serious when the Stamp Act of 1765 was passed. Parliament passed it with no thought that any colony would object. But the slogan â€Å"no taxation without representation† swept over the land and unofficial delegates of nine colonies met in New York City in September 1765 and drew up declarations of rights and grievances. Although the hated stamp act never went into effect and was repealed in less than a year, trouble continued. In 1767, Parliament, reasserting its sovereign power, passed an act levying duties on tea, glass, paper, and a few other articles, only to arouse new opposition from the Colonies.

“Mythology” by Edith Hamilton

â€Å"Mythology† By Edith Hamilton Mythology is mainly known for the pagan religions that dominated Europe during the times of the Greek and Roman Empires. The main pagan religion being that of the Greek gods like Zeus, Hera, Ares, and Hercules which was the most prevalent and accepted amongst Europeans at the time. The religions although very harsh and unforgiving were prevalent because the people needed a strong spiritual source to depend on. The people needed a sense of unity in order to have their rising civilizations succeed. The people need someone to blame for the many negative things that may have happened during their times.All of these things contributed to the success and need for the pagan religions in Europe. The Greek pagan gods were a very harsh and unforgiving lot. Zeus the father of the gods along with his brothers betrayed and banished his father Kronos after he tried to devour them all. Zeus then tricked his brother Hades into being the master of the Underwo rld where only death and sorrow prevailed and Poseidon the king of the Oceans. He then proceeded to make himself the ruler of the gods effectively making sure he wasn’t challenged as he ruled from the heavens.In the same way the people of the Greek and Roman empires pursued power and fame. The Greek city states warred with each other endlessly, constantly making and breaking alliances in order to gain the upper hand in the name of their respective god or gods. The two gods who were the cause of the greatest of catastrophes were Athena and Ares. Which were the gods of the city states of Sparta and Athens. Both of the city states believed that their god was superior and that they should in turn rule over the other Greek city states and all the other lesser gods.This led to great conflicts between the two nations which in mythology is depicted by the grand arguments and betrayals that Athena and Ares committed on one another. The people always praised their gods and offered them bountiful gifts and sacrifices. They believed that in doing this the gods would grant them the ability to win any war or avoid any catastrophe. With this feeling of superiority and divine intervention they felt invincible and so always went out to carve out their empires at the expense of lives and money.Because of all the bloodshed brought forth from the different gods and different cultures ending in wars it was necessary for the Greek and Roman city states to have gods that were strong and merciless. The people needed to know that their god would not allow any other nation or god to harm his people or disturb his domain. Anywhere where the dominant god was not of a warrior personality city states fell to more aggressive ones and anywhere that these aggressive city states went they carved out territories and imposed even greater control of entire regions. A weak god was indeed a weakness and a strong, merciless one was indeed the way to go.

DBQ Atomic Bomb Essay

In August of 1945, the United States launched two atomic bombs on Japan; the first, in Hiroshima on August 6, and the second in Nagasaki a few days later. Despite the obvious diplomatic advantage to implementing one of the most intimidating weapons of that time, the United States’ tactics and goals behind dropping the atomic bombs were purely military oriented; the political benefit was merely an added bonus. The atomic bomb was necessary due to the Japanese’s refusal to surrender and the hundreds of thousands of lives at stake. Although there were attempts at peace, Japan showed no signs of agreement towards a peaceful and unconditional surrender. Japan’s reluctance to stop fighting could have left to months more of fighting and thousands of more deaths. The atomic bomb ensured an enormous display that could quickly end the war. As Cuhrchill proclaimed, â€Å"the end of the Japanese war no longer depended upon the pouring in of their armies for the final and perhaps protracted slaughter†¦ this nightmare picture [has] vanished†¦ in its place the vision of the end of the whole war in one or two violent shocks† (Doc E). Churchill summed up the gist of America’s reasoning for implementing the bombs. The United States did not have to depend on the slaughter of millions of people in bloody, messy fights, and , instead, â€Å"a speedy end to the Second World War† could be reached with one machine (Doc E). However, once the first bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, the Japanese continued to resist. It wasn’t until a second bomb was dropped that Japan surrendered with a simple stipulation that their emperor remain in his position. This alone proves the military necessity of the bombs. Despite the attack on Hiroshima, Japanese still wished to continue their war. If not for the second bomb, who know how many lives would have been lost. In Document B, General H. H. Arnold mentions that, even before the atomic bombs were dropped, Japan was already in a state of disarray and on the verge of collapse (Doc B). His argument was that Japan would not have lasted much longer and would not have been able to â€Å"carry on a large-scale war† (Doc B). However, despite this, the Japanese refused to surrender, and, though they may have been on the verge of a complete depletion of supplies and resources, there is no way to determine how long Japan could have or would have continued fighting. This could have meant months more of fighting and  Americans dying. As of July 1945, the Japanese army surmounted to over 5 million men (Doc A). Had the Japanese not surrendered- which they showed no inclination towards doing so u ntil after Nagasaki was bombed- Americans, and possibly the Soviets, would have been â€Å"faced with the enormous task of destroying an armed force of 5 million men† in unfamiliar terrain with 5 thousand suicide bombers overhead (Doc A). According to Henry Stimson, if the United States had continued with their original plans, – a combination of naval blockades and land invasions- the war could have lasted until â€Å"the latter part of 1946† (Doc A). The atomic bombs obviously affected diplomatic relations after implemented, but, despite the obvious benefits, the United State needed this advantage of nuclear weapons to win the war. Had the bombs not been implemented, Japan would not have surrender so quickly and peacefully, and hundreds of thousands of lives could have been lost in the fight for peace. Had the United States not come out with the bomb, Germany would have undoubtedly discovered it, and the results of Germany using the bomb would have been much more devastating than the results of America’s excursions. The bombs were definitely a military strategy to win the war and any diplomatic advantage was simply an added benefit that ensured future peace.

Diffusion and osmosis lab Essay

What happened to the iodine, the starch, the glucose and the water in your experiment? Explain which molecules did/did not cross the membrane and in which direction they moved. Substance Prediction Results Starch Starch will stay in the cellulose tubing The results were correct Glucose Glucose will defuse and move out The results were correct Iodine The iodine will change color The results were correct 2. Did the results of your experiment agree or disagree with your prediction? Why or why not? My results agreed with my prediction because the starch, glucose and iodine stayed in the cellulose tubing, or the water changed color. 3. Considering your observations, suggest an explanation for the results of your experiment. What assumptions did you make about the nature of the membrane? The cell contains what enters. Small molecules can quickly go through and out of the cell. Meaning the small molecule diffuse through the process of osmosis. Lab 2 – ELODEA Objective: To demonstrate and explain effects of osmosis across a living membrane. 1. What changes took place in the Elodea cell after salt water is added? Did these changes agree or disagree with your prediction? Why or why or not? When the salt was added to the water it caused the water concentration to lessen but the solute to increase. There are more water molecules going out of the cell than in the cell the cell membrane began to shrink known as dehydration. 2. Explain, in detail, the process that caused these changes to occur. The elodea would not be able to live in salt-water environment because there is a greater concentration of the water in the cell. When there is salt in the cell, it would die. 3. Is this process reversible? If so, describe how you would reverse it? Yes, I think this process is reversible. You would have more of a salt solution then a water solution. Then you would add the water to the concentration then it will be revered

The Relationship Between Religion and Morality

Morality (sometimes called â€Å"true morality† or â€Å"high morality†) should be distinguished from those rules which are simply those which are considered necessary for the efficient running of a society. Such rules of a society are enshrined in law, custom and convention; and are supported and enforced by society through the legal system and public opinion. These rules are usually obeyed because of self-interest, a kind of â€Å"social contract† in which, for example, we agree not to steal from anyone else in the society if they agree not to steal from us. In very early societies these social rules were supported by religion, and presented as behaviour which the gods insisted humans obeyed. It is arguable that some (ie numbers 5-9) of the Ten Commandments (13th Century BCE) are just such social rules. However such a system of social rules may break down, particularly in a secular or pluralistic society. For example some people may consider that the society in which they live is unfair, and only benefits certain groups in it; or the legal system may be too inefficient to prevent other people stealing. In such situations individuals may think it is no longer beneficial for them to continue to agree to the social contract, and then there would be no compelling reason why they should continue to obey society's laws. What we consider to be true morality is different from social rules in two important respects: 1. It is based on real concern for others as human beings of equal value to ourselves 2. Our motivation for behaving morally is that such behaviour is â€Å"right† and we feel we â€Å"ought† to do it, even when it is inconvenient to ourselves. Is Morality dependent upon Religion? The evidence to support this view is: * All religions insist upon a moral code as a central part of the religious life. * Even non-religious people when discussing where ethical values came from will refer to religious sources, such as the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20. 2-17), or the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5. 3- 7.27). * When people (eg newspaper reporters) require an expert opinion on moral issues they will ask religious leaders. * People expect higher standards of moral behaviour from religious people (a story of an adulterous vicar is more likely to appear in the newspapers that a similar tale about a bank manager – unless, of course, the latter is a churchwarden!). * Even in our largely secular society, â€Å"high† morality is often referred to as â€Å"having Christian values†. * When people talk of someone being â€Å"a good Christian† they are usually referring to their moral behaviour (ie how they treat others) and not to their doctrinal orthodoxy (ie whether they hold the traditional Christian beliefs). * True morality sprung up within religion. Arguably the first clear and unequivocal expression of true morality was the insistence by the Israelite prophet Amos in the 8th Century BCE that Yahweh (God) required honesty, truth and justice among his people more than religious observances (sacrifices, etc): â€Å"Even though you offer me [Yahweh] your burnt offerings†¦I will not accept them;†¦but let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream† (Amos 5.22-4). * No society developed morality without having developed religion first, and all morality was originally proclaimed in the name of religion. It could be asserted, therefore, that morality is a product of religion, and true morality can only derive from religion. * Conscience can be interpreted as the voice of God telling us what is right and wrong. * It can be argued that even when societies lose their interest in practising a religion, they still maintain the moral values which that religion originally instilled into the society. Thus it can be claimed that in Britain today, where about 1 person in 30 is a practising Christian, the moral values which the society proclaims, believes in and tries to live by are Christian moral values (secularised). * It can be claimed that people will not chose to be moral unless encouraged to do so by religion. Is Morality independent from Religion? The evidence to support this view is: * Religions existed for many thousands of years before they developed a real morality. This suggests that morality is not an essential part of religion. * Atheists and agnostics, who do not believe in or follow any religion, can still live truly moral lives, with a selfless compassion for other humans. * Whole societies (eg China and the former Soviet States) can be officially atheistic, and there is no evidence that such countries or governments are necessarily more wicked than ones which claim to be religious states. * The origin of moral values can be explained in terms of Evolutionary Ethics (ie as societies develop and become more complex and sophisticated so social rules become more demanding, evolving into true morality). * Conscience can be explained in other ways (eg Sigmund Freud's concept of the internalisation of parental norms). * Agriculture, families, medicine and learning all developed within a religious context, as did morality. They have now all entered the secular domain, and are considered independent of religion, so the fact that morality developed in a religious context does not mean that it is necessarily dependent upon religion. * Plato posited the â€Å"Euthyphro Dilemma† which raised the question that good must be independent of God, or there would be no way of knowing if God's commands were actually good or not. Can we come to some kind of conclusion? How you evaluate the above evidence, and the conclusion you come to about where the balance of the evidence lies is something you have to do for yourself; but you must do it honestly, thoughtfully and intelligently. You may like to consider the following thoughts: * All people have some kind of beliefs concerning the nature of humanity, what is of real importance and value, and what one should do with ones life. * Religious people will refer to these beliefs as their religion, and associate with groups of like-minded people who share the same religion. Atheists and agnostics will tend to refer to their beliefs as their philosophy of life, and may consider them a more individual matter. * These beliefs (whatever we call them) affect our behaviour, and we legitimately judge a person's philosophy of life by how it affects their moral decisions and actions. * So ones beliefs determine ones morality.

Home School Essay

It has come to the attention of many that the debate over home schooling has been getting more brutal each and every day. Below is reassurance on why the board should offer this marvelous opportunity to these students. Every student is different, each has its own learning curves; some more then others. I am for home school because students can be overwhelmed by the large amount of work, students can get off task easily in traditional school, and if a student is home schooled, the student is the center of attention. When students go to traditional school, there are a lot of other students. Being with so many other students can be overwhelming for some, not all. For the students that it is too overwhelming for, why shouldn’t those students get an equal opportunity to do there best in school? If it is school were talking, then throw in the conversation of life as well. Without good schooling, students will be unable to get into a good college, without college, well it is kind of sad for the rest of their lives. As the Board of Education you want students to succeed in school, and in life, well then tell people to stop trying to slow down there education and the process in which students and parents educate. A positive in being home schooled is not getting off task. If the students do not have a large amount of distraction, then the want for distraction will be eliminated. Students get off task very easily (Trust me). An example of an off task student is a student talking to another student, thus far not hearing the teachers instructions. By keeping them on task then that is a great way to destroy a learning curve or learning curves. Another positive in home school is, the student is the center of attention! In any traditional school, there is a lot of students that do not understand or get the concept of a focus of study. Teachers have many students and may not always be available to make the focus of study more clear to the student. Home school guarantees the idea of a student never being left behind. What is the point of putting a student through school and the student only grasps bits and pieces, when the student could understand it all and probably even learn more then the average student in traditional school. To conclude this essay, please remember that home schooling is a great opportunity. Students are different and need special attention. I am for home school because students can be overwhelmed by the large amount of work, students can get off task easily in traditional school, and if a student is home schooled, the student is the center of attention. If the student can afford and have the means to do so, let home schooling happen!