Can you believe it? This is my last blog ever!!

In our final blog, we have been to analyze our writing over the past year. Well to think about it, that is exactly what we have done. Analyze would be the word of the semester. In all of our writings we have had to analyze something, whether that be the media, a popular icon, or something or someone else. I think that if I have gained anything this semester, it would be that, the ability to analyze. In the beginning it would be moderately difficult for me to come up with ideas and thoughts towards an argument. Towards the end, I took a different approach in writing papers. I cannot really describe it, the only words I can really say is that my perspective towards arguments and analyzing something has changed. I can pick up different and several details that I would not usually see.

To be perfectly honest however, I cannot really admit to gaining any real skill or knowledge when it comes to writing papers. My skill toward my paper writing has improved slightly at best. Also, the reading and assignments did absolutely nothing for my writing and me. I did like the natural progression I had made, which I can correlate to the discussions we had in class. The MLA format has also become second nature, especially when it came to citing things. That was probably the thing I was worst at, and now I can safely say that I have some kind of moderate skill at it. I guess the phrase of the moment is that practice makes perfect. And that is what I have taken and transformed from the beginning of this semester to today.

Final Blog!!

For our final blog, we were required to respond to a reading from our text claiming that “the media machine has become a propaganda organ of the state”. To be perfects honest, I do believe in what the author is trying to say and get across. Actually, I played a videogame for the PlayStation 2 one time and it pretty much said the same thing. But there are defiantly a lot of holes in the story.

The first obvious hole is the article itself. The first thing that came to my mind was that the article’s existence in itself is a contradiction of what it is trying to say. This is defiantly the kind of media that the government does not want to come out, yet, here we are in class, not only reading it but being required to comment and think about it. Not to mention other media outlets besides television and radio. The internet has allowed a much greater freedom of the press in more alternative forms of government. Besides the obvious outlets, the internet has allowed pretty much any and everything to be published for all to see.

The second hole in the article’s argument is that it lacks details. The author makes a lot of outrageous claims that personally I believe, but he lacks details. Not only does he lack specific examples of when the media filters out, (with the exception of the human clone story) he lacks proof. How am I supposed to believe a word of what this person says if I do not see any proof at all?

All in all I think he makes some very good points, but he lacks credibility in his argument to make the hardcore nay-sayer believe him. Thank you and have a nice day.