Analysis: Two Media Giants Express Concerns Over Recent Child Pregnancy
Introduction
“They are so blatant these days, they think it’s a big joke to lift up their skirts and have sex.” This is a statement that can sum up today’s teenagers’ perspectives on engaging in sexual intercourse. We are living in a world where the information is presented on the web in an unimaginable amount. Those who can filter out what is right and wrong can get away with it, but for the ones who don’t, they tend to think this world is beyond being saved. This paper is about two media giants presenting news about a British adolescent having a child. TIMESONLINE website issued an article days after Alfie Patten, a thirteen-year-old boy who had a baby with Chantelle Steadman, a fifteen-year-old girl from England. The article (The baby shambles of Alfie Patten and Chantelle Steadman from http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article5734056.ece) pointed out the imperfection of sex education in Britain and the society as people do not emphasize the values of having sex in an appropriate time. CNN, an American news website also issued and article online (UK: Birth of 13-year-old dad's child sparks outrage from http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/02/14/boy.baby.dad.england/index.html).
News
TIMEONLINE focuses on the interviews from the people around the neighborhood as to how well they know the new teenage parents. The article showed that these people around the area tend to be ignorant about the fact that child pregnancy is jeopardizing the image of the country and the society as a whole. The neighbors who were interviewed gave mixed receptions in this matter. Some think it is okay to have it while many think the parents are to blame for the two teenagers ended up having a child. CNN website focuses on the media outburst as the conservative party sparked outrage on how the country is viewed globally.
Analysis
This is not just about one country any more. It is a far bigger issue than what we see. If people think this is okay then there will be many more examples from many countries. This news came from a country that is rich in education and finance, even included in G7, yet they still struggle to achieve a proper family value. These kids do not even know how to raise a child. They are kids making kids, which is traditionally and legally wrong. According to CNN, the new teenage parents seek to have income from child support, donations, and labor. A labor, for crying out loud; I personally cannot believe it came from this generation’s ideas. They do not view this in a long term thing. Many examples were given by the media as to whether or not the teenagers can be responsible in early major decision-makings. Take Macaulay Culkin, a former actor (from the movie “Home Alone”) who turned his life around when he married at the age of 18 in 1998, which is considered very young by many people. His marriage did not last as he said to the media when they divorced two years later and he became a low grade actor afterwards. Child domestic violence and improper care from the parents have a lot to do in this subject. We need to take this problem as a global concern. England is just not the only country that has this kind of issue. Thailand, for instance, is facing the same thing as teenagers’ morale became less and less. People think being religious is something that is weird. The media portrayed almost naked woman on Sunday newspapers. We cannot deny that in the downfall of the economy like this, anything that makes money can be done, and of course, sex sells. If it can happen to a big country like The United Kingdom, why not the rest of the world?
Conclusion
The two media giants deliver clear messages: desperate times call for desperate measures. We all have to admit that something is wrong about this society and there are things needed to be done in order to protect the youth of the generation. First, parents need to take advantage of this matter by nurturing the kids about how to behave properly at a certain age. Second, the government has to put more emphasis on sex educations and how to save the culture from being invaded by the ill-morale thinkers. When those can be achieved, there will be inner voices tell these people that once the proper time comes, they can all cherish the fruit of the labor and will be able to prepare a good family under their belt, not counting on food stamps for a living.
วันอาทิตย์ที่ 15 กุมภาพันธ์ พ.ศ. 2552
วันอาทิตย์ที่ 25 มกราคม พ.ศ. 2552
Assignment #2
Analysis: BBC News Not Reporting its Gaza Aid
Introduction
The ongoing, ever-lasting war between two nations that clouded fears and terrors over the people living there reach many media. The Palestinian – Israelis dispute which goes on for years caught a big attention once again when there were many people killed by the bombardment of the Israelis at the city of Gaza in Palestine. Many media channels throughout the world came out with the reports on casualties along with updating the current issues that happen there, making sure everyone who is missing any relative can find out more information and what not. Big media outlets such as Associated Press, CNN from the United States, NHK from Japan, TV5 from France, CCTV from China keep up with the situations along with asking the people to donate whatever they can in order to save the lives of those who were the victims and relatives that need help. One network that refused to do so is BBC news from the United Kingdom. The reason behind the decision was that the network would “compromise the broadcaster’s appearance of impartiality”. This paper will analyze on how BBC made its decision by comparing to one of the concepts covered in our Social Responsibility in Media Communication class. The sources will derive from CNN (http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/01/25/bbc.gaza.advert/index.html) and Time (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1659242,00.html?xid=feed-cnn-topics) and the yours-truly BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7849943.stm) news site.
News
The news started from CNN website stating how BBC refuses to broadcast charity appeal for Gaza aid. The American news source pointed out that UK’s Disaster Emergency Committee (DEC) asked the British network to broadcast the aid but was rejected in which results in a storm of malicious messages from all over the press as well as online communities. CNN stated that the British network would be praised or insulted either way. TIME website has a timeline on the history of how the whole dispute between two countries started which led to a bloodshed war until now. TIME interviewed civilians and passerby’s about the incident where it adds more fuel to the people who are already worried about the situation and wish to help.
On the other hand, the BBC news website showed that they were facing a difficult decision since they believe that what they did would show the world that they do not want to be involved with any type of politically-motivated approach. One commentator stated that Hamas, a group of violent Muslims, funded Gaza and that the network does the right thing by not broadcasting the aid. All in all, the view whether or not BBC thinks about impartiality is entirely up to the network.
Analysis
BBC’s intention is genuine. They do not want any type of backlash from anyone. However, one can only do so much. As discussed in class, Immanuel Kant’s view on ethics is that the most important thing is good will. In my personal opinion, BBC is following Kant’s view while others tend to look at the ends instead of the means. John Stewert Mill’s Utilitarianism should be the course of action that BBC should have done in the public view. However, looking at the consequence without looking at how to attain it is not valid as well. No matter what the BBC did, they will hold accountable for its early refusal for not broadcasting the aid. We as regular viewers of the news, get as much information as others get worldwide, will not be able to gain any plausible data from any other sources. Since one cannot save the world, at least BBC chose to focus on its intentions; its means, instead of how it ends.
Conclusion
BBC will have to endure this situation for a while until things become less intense. While the situation in Gaza is still active, any media networks cannot just jump on the bandwagon and then assume that things are they way they are just because the other media say so. Ethics have its limits. Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative is not the most perfect vision on ethics, but it clearly takes a stand while others are doing the identical things around.
Chanoktip Srisomasajakul
1481001608
Introduction
The ongoing, ever-lasting war between two nations that clouded fears and terrors over the people living there reach many media. The Palestinian – Israelis dispute which goes on for years caught a big attention once again when there were many people killed by the bombardment of the Israelis at the city of Gaza in Palestine. Many media channels throughout the world came out with the reports on casualties along with updating the current issues that happen there, making sure everyone who is missing any relative can find out more information and what not. Big media outlets such as Associated Press, CNN from the United States, NHK from Japan, TV5 from France, CCTV from China keep up with the situations along with asking the people to donate whatever they can in order to save the lives of those who were the victims and relatives that need help. One network that refused to do so is BBC news from the United Kingdom. The reason behind the decision was that the network would “compromise the broadcaster’s appearance of impartiality”. This paper will analyze on how BBC made its decision by comparing to one of the concepts covered in our Social Responsibility in Media Communication class. The sources will derive from CNN (http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/01/25/bbc.gaza.advert/index.html) and Time (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1659242,00.html?xid=feed-cnn-topics) and the yours-truly BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7849943.stm) news site.
News
The news started from CNN website stating how BBC refuses to broadcast charity appeal for Gaza aid. The American news source pointed out that UK’s Disaster Emergency Committee (DEC) asked the British network to broadcast the aid but was rejected in which results in a storm of malicious messages from all over the press as well as online communities. CNN stated that the British network would be praised or insulted either way. TIME website has a timeline on the history of how the whole dispute between two countries started which led to a bloodshed war until now. TIME interviewed civilians and passerby’s about the incident where it adds more fuel to the people who are already worried about the situation and wish to help.
On the other hand, the BBC news website showed that they were facing a difficult decision since they believe that what they did would show the world that they do not want to be involved with any type of politically-motivated approach. One commentator stated that Hamas, a group of violent Muslims, funded Gaza and that the network does the right thing by not broadcasting the aid. All in all, the view whether or not BBC thinks about impartiality is entirely up to the network.
Analysis
BBC’s intention is genuine. They do not want any type of backlash from anyone. However, one can only do so much. As discussed in class, Immanuel Kant’s view on ethics is that the most important thing is good will. In my personal opinion, BBC is following Kant’s view while others tend to look at the ends instead of the means. John Stewert Mill’s Utilitarianism should be the course of action that BBC should have done in the public view. However, looking at the consequence without looking at how to attain it is not valid as well. No matter what the BBC did, they will hold accountable for its early refusal for not broadcasting the aid. We as regular viewers of the news, get as much information as others get worldwide, will not be able to gain any plausible data from any other sources. Since one cannot save the world, at least BBC chose to focus on its intentions; its means, instead of how it ends.
Conclusion
BBC will have to endure this situation for a while until things become less intense. While the situation in Gaza is still active, any media networks cannot just jump on the bandwagon and then assume that things are they way they are just because the other media say so. Ethics have its limits. Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative is not the most perfect vision on ethics, but it clearly takes a stand while others are doing the identical things around.
Chanoktip Srisomasajakul
1481001608
สมัครสมาชิก:
ความคิดเห็น (Atom)
