Trump's attack on Syria

One recent event that generated a range of interpretations across the media landscape is Donald Trump’s decision to strike Syria with a chemical bomb. “The media falls in love with this affair,” says media analyst Jamal Dajani. Many would say he has made foreign policy more effective. This is the way his decision was described in a BBC article, making him look like a hero. This article states that President Trump has brought US foreign policy back in line with conventional thinking. Comparing this to a Fox news article brings out a completely different view, a view that portrays President Trump as more of a bad guy, stating that the attack was emotional and illegal. This Fox News article states that Syria is not a threat to the United States, nor is likely to become one, so why make this decision? The targeted demographic of the Fox News article would be those who voted against Donald Trump, and the targeted demographic of the BBC article would be those are support Trump and who are in favor of the decision he made. Andrew Napolitano states, in his Fox News article, that Trump apparently did not have all the intelligence he needed in front of him before he attacked Syria. He also goes on to included that, legally, he cannot use military force to punish or to teach a lesson to another sovereign state that poses no threat to the United States. Coming back to the BBC article, the writer states that, because of this decision, President Trump is beginning to know what he doesn’t know. He states that the use of this force sends a message to America’s adversaries that Mr. Trump is not as war-averse as his predecessor. Basically, this writer states that these “signals” and “messages” Trump is sending out are positive. He’s sending a message to everyone to let them know where he stands, which is exactly that the other article talks about in the complete opposite way, stating that it is illegal and inhumane to do something like that. Techniques that are being used by each article differ. In the BBC article, there are numerous pictures of President Trump shaking hands with other leader, smiling, portraying a positive outcome from his decision. Also the title of the article, “What does all this bombing tell us about Trump?” This title is safe and doesn’t really attack his character. As apposed to the other article, which is titled, “Trump’s attack on Syria was both emotional and illegal.” This title takes a stab right at his character, making him seem like a villain. Also in this article, there are photos and video of the awful outcomes this decision has caused.

Blog 1 (Redo)

           There is a lot of controversy between many people following the recent legalization of marijuana. Marijuana is becoming legal in various places now, both for medical and recreational use. In the past, Americans and people everywhere often associated marijuana with dull, snack hungry teenagers with addiction issues. Though, recently, twenty-three states have legalized it, and five of those states approved it for personal and recreational use. While many people say that there are legitimate reasons for legalization, there is sill a concern that remains about the effect it has on users and their communities.

            Those who are in favor of the legalization of the drug say that cannabis’ active ingredients can offer relief from some medical conditions. This is nothing new. People have been using the drug for medical reasons much before it was legalized in some states. It contains substances that help those with various conditions. For example, it holds the ability to alleviate nausea and increase appetite. It also has properties that are helpful for cancer and AIDS patients. Though these facts are true, there is still a large portion of the country that disagrees with the legalization. This could possibly be because of the smoking aspect, but it is important to note that medical and recreational marijuana isn’t limited to just smoking the drug. It is available in pill, oil, liquids, and even edible objects. Besides all the good that marijuana does for people, it also generates revenue.

            Those apposed to the legalization of medical and recreational marijuana might say the drug is addictive. There is a common misconception that the drug is not addictive, though research and experience have shown that some users will develop dependence on the drug and even experience withdraw when they stop using it. Some would also say that marijuana use impacts public safety. Marijuana is a drug that alters both perception and judgment. This has serious effect on communities. Research shows that, in many cases, marijuana is one of the most common drugs found in the systems of drivers who were impaired or fatally injured.

            There are many different groups of people who argue over this controversy, old and young. One bid group would be those of cancer patients, those fighting cancer and those who have beaten cancer. This is a big demographic that is being targeted who are usually pro marijuana legalization. Another demographic that this controversy targets are those who have unpleasant experiences with marijuana, or know people who have. This demographic are those who would be against the legalization of marijuana, both medical and or recreational.

            Some techniques that people use that are pro marijuana legalization would probably be tests. This is a big one. Marijuana that is tested on people, primarily those diagnosed with cancer, show actual results that can then be viewed by the public. There is evidence from these tests that marijuana does help patients who are diagnosed with cancer. This evidence is good for those who are pro marijuana legalization. On the other hand, those apposed to marijuana legalization might you techniques to persuade others that there should be no legalization of the drug. Those techniques might include showing evidence and telling stories about the harm the drug does to people.

Blog 1

A recent even that has generated a range of interpretations across the media landscape is the dispute between Conor McGregor and Floyd Mayweather. They are trying to agree on a contract for a boxing match which is Floyd's sport. Many think that McGregor has a chance of defeating Floyd, and other think that McGregor will absolutely be beaten. Everyone know that each fighter is the best in their own sport, being that Conor dominates the UFC and Floyd dominates boxing. Conor McGregor is a man that not a lot of people like because of his attitude, though they like his fighting style. On the other hand, most people love McGregor because of his attitude. It's very dominant and confident. Many people have the same opinions toward Mayweather. The demographics that are being targeted are boxing fans and UFC fans. If this fight were to come to an agreement, it would be the first of its kind. It would be the most viewed pay-per view event in history. This would be a unique match up because though Conor McGregor is still a great boxer, he is naturally more used to martial arts, where as Mayweather knows strictly boxing skills. Like I said, they are both the best in their own sport, so weather or not you are a UFC or a boxing fan, you will enjoy watching this fight. This is also interesting because even those who don't enjoy watching either of these sports will watch this event. That just goes to show how much this topic is bouncing around the media and catching everyones attention. This is a fight that everyone is going to watch being that Conor McGregor and Floyd Mayweather come to a contract agreement. There are many techniques being used to influence people whose side to take. Most people are rooting for Conor McGregor to win, therefore, his fans need to persuade the Mayweather fans to switch over, and visa versa. Some techniques being used are statistics. People are comparing statistics of the Conor McGregor and Floyd Mayweather to persuade people to take either side. Other techniques are videos of the fighters fights. Comparing their fighting styles and movements. People are also using press conferences, public events, and many others to get people to take either fighters side.