Monday, October 4, 2010
Blog Project Group #1
We have determined that we will be using the blog "Pirate's Cove". "Pirate's Cove" is a very conservative blog that exhibits a good amount of bias towards political movements (an example would be calling Rahm Emanuel a "Thugocrat"), military movents, food industry processes, and environmental issues. This blog is a good example of how bias can be used in writing in order to try and persuade or intimidate people into believing what they want them to believe. An example of using fear to persuade can be seen even in the first post on the blog. The author writes about how Rahm Emanuel has no real chance at running in the election but the government may be corrupt enough to swing the election in his favor. This is a good example of fear-mongering because it brings into question if the government is corrupt and really does not care about the general populous.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
(option number 7) This blog was quite interesting, even though it has quite a bit of bias towards the right, "Pirate's Cove" still has it's points. I noticed with a lot of the comments there is quite a bit of sarcasm, so it is hard to tell if these posts are actually changing anyones life. Though I fully believe that many out there feel the same way that the poster (William Teach) feels. Teach even comments back to most people which is not seen very often in blogs.
ReplyDeleteMy comment is kind of a mix between question 6 and my own thoughts. I am writing about the post on Europe's "Coldest Winter in 1,000 Years," and noting on how the poster took the route of trying to convince people that this is not true. In order to do this, they first posted the news clip discussing the possibility of a coldest Winter for Europe and then basically bashed it. The writer did a good job persuading readers that this is illegitimate in pointing out the part of the video where the newscaster is "not really sure" and states it "may be a matter of global warning." This makes the news report look not very credible; however the person posting could have persuaded more effectively and would have looked more credible themselves if they included facts and evidence in their dispute, rather than solely their opinion on the matter.
ReplyDeletei am answering question 7 for this blog. particularly, i am focusing on the article: Don’t Tell Cities The Recession Has Ended. i think it's a persuasive blog that make us go back to the fear of recession by using a lot of academic eco words and many negtive adjs. a good example would be using words like bankruptcy,yawning,rarely and needless. the writer not only explain his own thoughs but also provide us with the original statistics which make us believe what he is talking about. however, at the end of the article, the writer left us a question which offer us the chance to think about what the governnment have done and what is the current economic situation. i believe if a reader really start doing a research on himself, he would definitely come up with his own thought towards this issue rather then blingdly believe what the writer said in such a short piece of blog.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the first couple articles on the blog pretty thoroughly and checking out other sections of the web page, I came to the conclusion that this blog does not contribute at all to a meaningful or intelligent discussion about issues affecting Americans today. All posts and editing are done by one man name named Porter Good who goes by the pen name “William Teach.” He doesn’t appear to have any qualifications that would make him an expert for any of the things that he writes about. The tone of all the articles is sarcastic and nothing about the writing is very mature or professional. Global warming is consistently referred to as “globull warming”, people who believe in global warming are referred to as alarmists, and Rahm Emanuel is referred to as a Thugocrat but it is never really explained why. I found improper sentences, inconsistent formatting, and even an instance where the author forgot a period on this website. Opposing views are not welcome and facts and figures or any kind of evidence to back up claims are nowhere to be found. The reader comments clearly show that everybody who follows this blog agrees with pretty much everything the blogger thinks.
ReplyDeleteThus, meaningful discussion is obviously not the point of this blog.
However, the blog doesn’t claim to be fair, balanced, thoughtful, or intellectual, or any of the normal things you would expect a good blog to be. What this blog does do is offer is a haven for like-minded people to get together and agree with each other in an ultra-conservative manner. People will go to this blog to reaffirm their views by finding people who share them, not by finding facts that back them up. Even though the blog pushes an ultra-conservative viewpoint, it does not seem to be trying to sell it to non-conservatives. It’s a conservative-only blog. Read it only if you want to agree with the author.
In response to #6. In the article "Uh, Oh, More Stuff On O’Donnell…Wait, They’re Of A Democrat? Never Mind" I thought the author introduced a controversial topic. The article is about a democratic nominee that had a picture (of her leading her husband around on a leash with a sex toy strapped to his face) posted on the internet. It talks about the double standard between republican and democrats and how the media got upset with the person who posted it rather than the details behind the story instead. It goes on to discuss that if it had been a republican candidate that the media would have jumped all over the details behind the picture/rumor, etc instead of attacking the person who brought it to light. A good example of this is when back when George W. Bush had been campaigning, a rumor can out that he and Laura had done cocaine back in college or something of the sort and the media was all over it like a fat kid on a cupcake and no one was looked down upon for bringing that to light.
ReplyDeleteI am responding to option number 7. I read the blog called "Perhaps Those Windmills Aren't So Great After All". This blog stuck out to me because windmills are becoming very popular in the area where I am from. The article was about how windmills provided a noise inconvenience to surrounding residents of the windmills. The comments on this blog seemed to be aimed more towards the government and their choice of where to put the windmills, not so much the noise of the windmills. I also read the blog entitled "Are You Ready For A Study On How Camel Poots Affect Climate Change?". This article was about how camels and other animals produce CO2 which could potentially destroy the planet. The comments for this seemed to get off topic very quickly as almost all of the comments are about drugs. I feel that this blog site did not reach readers as well as the last blog site that we used.
ReplyDeleteI am responding to prompt 7 on the article "Consumer Bankruptcy Filings Up 11% In 2010" on the blog Pirate Cove. It does have an affect on people because it instills fear among people. No one wants to here bankruptcy has rose 11% in the first nine months of this year. There already has been 100,000 more bankruptcies than was was of all of last year according to this article. This is keeping Americans more fearful.
ReplyDeleteI am responding to prompt #7, "Uh, Oh, More Stuff On O’Donnell…Wait, They’re Of A Democrat? Never Mind". I do not necessarily think the blog is very effective or does much. In a way, it is just exposing the Democratic nominee for something she did in her past. I do not believe right winged OR left winged media should expose candidates or use "black mail". It can be seen on CNN OR Fox News. The candidates should be judged by their platforms and political beliefs. It is not necessary for any party to attack the other party on a personal or humiliating level.
ReplyDeleteI am responding to prompt number 7 on the blog Pirate Cove. The article I really focused on was, "Perhaps those Windmills aren't so great, After all". I do think that it is pretty effective as to what it wants to say. Basically homeowners are upset because of the noise. I do think though, however, that with this modern age of technology you could of found out more information on the pros and cons of windmills to see if they do make noise. If so, the homeowners always have an option of moving. I will agree that they probably should be placed out in a more remote area but still, everything has its negatives. Like i said, if you cant deal with the sound and if there is no constiutional thing you can do, the option of moving is always present.Anyone looking for a new home might want to think of this if a windfarm is near by.
ReplyDeleteI am responding question 7 for this blog. I read the article called "Uh, Oh, More Stuff On O’Donnell…Wait, They’re Of A Democrat? Never Mind". The article talks about a picture of a woman leading her ex-husband around on a leash, and with a sex toy on his nose was exposed. The most important point to the picture is the woman in this photo is a Democratic nominee. If the status of the woman was changed, if the woman was just a commoner, nothing would happen. Any party or media can judge candidates what they did on the platforms, not their private life, especially the thing was happened six years ago.
ReplyDeleteI am responding to question one for this blog. In this blog most of the ideas are very explicit. However, there are some things that are a little more implicitly mentioned. At the top of the home page there is an elephant holding the American flag. The elephant is the symbol of the Republican party. This immediately shows that the blog is geared toward Republicans. He also has many symbols on the side, such as a sign that says "Banned in India" and "RIght-Wing Extremists of the USA". These show that this it is an extremists blog, and to the extent that it is banned in other countries. Showing that many of his ideas are to the extreme that other governments do not support what he is saying. Also the title of the blog is Pirate's Cove, which could signified many different things. I think it is implicitly suggesting that like in a pirates cove, this is where the "treasure" is kept. Comparing his ideas as hidden treasure that are kept in his blog.
ReplyDeleteI am responding to question 7 for this blog. Unlike many of the other comments I saw above, I actually like the posts within this website. Even though the initial image that the website portrays itself as a "prank" instead of a "conservative" blog group 1 listed it as. Without reading the articles, I think the general image of the websites attract audiences rather than repelling them. Web-surfers these days prefer less serious and easy going websites that they can read casually instead of spending their mind pondering (which is a depressing fact in reality). The articles in this blog are written to entertain and to educate, and therefore I enjoy reading articles such as "Beef Industry Speaks."
ReplyDeleteResponse to 7: When I first read this, without dropping my personal opinions, my exact words were "what is this?". After I dropped my personal bias, bias was ever present. It has the appearance of a decently politically-correct version of the National Enquirer. The language used is expressly bias toward the conservative side, but even more so in attacking the liberal side. The website is a far-right conservative, if not extremist, blog, clearly bent on attacking the Democratic party in any manner which will make the Republicans seem superior. These extremist views do little or nothing to educate the public on views. However, I can expect that this blog is read by those uneducated, who believe that this qualifies as a source of news. So, all in all, this blog actually does nothing. It's just a repetitious insult to the Democratic Party, in a fashion which can be compared to the blog writer's views on the actions of the democrats: "if it hasn’t worked well, do it again".
ReplyDeleteIn response to #5:
ReplyDeleteThe article "Snap! Even Dying Is Now Bad For The Climate" is a direct reference to the audience. It's very easy because the author is writing to the entire population, unless for some reason you're not going to die. The author, William Teach, is writing as a victim of this instance as well.
The article claims that the effects of burial dangers the environment. Coffins are nonbiodegradable and embalming liquid can leak into the earth. But no worries, even cremation is harmful. The burning of corpses lets off a high volume of gases which, you guessed it, are harmful.
OK, so how does this relate to fear? Well, a company has been producing a "greener way to die." So, now that people fear they are harming the environment, the company can make money.
I am responding to question number 7. Pirate's Cove obviously has some sway on people's opinions, especially when it comes to politics. It's a more conservative site and it uses fear, in particular, to influence its reader's opinions. The article that sparked my interest was "Obama And Democrats Continue Assault On Chamber Of Commerce". I admit I am more of a conservative, and I feel like this article is well put together and makes some valid points. However, I've noticed that this site is somewhat unprofessional in the way things are said; for example, calling Obama "inept". It seems a little harsh, however, I reflect on the way President Bush was treated by Democrats and find justification.
ReplyDeletePeople certainly find Pirate's Cove intriguing however, "Harry Reid Could Use Some Viagra For His Campaign After This Ad" has 6 comments and many other articles do too. Obviously this is a somewhat radical article, but then again, that's what attracts people's attention.
WOW! I suppose I am responding to number 7. I found the blog hard to follow and read, but this could be explained by my lack of experience blogging. I looked at a post that was simply a picture titled "Friday Motivation". I found it interesting because it was a picture of the Burgerking "King" rubbing lotion onto a beautiful woman saying "Its good to be a King". This made me think that majority of the bloggers were males. I do not believe the blogs effect people who read it. I mainly thought the blog was a way for people to read about something interesting a to comment harshly or do some bashing. Did not seem like a good blog for people looking for hard facts or people giving their real opinions in the comments area.
ReplyDelete