http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/
For our blog of choice, we decided on “It’s Getting Hot in Here,” a blog known to be “the voice of a growing movement.” As you can infer from the title, the blog is an effort to stop global warming around the world. The posts are written by the youth leaders of the global movement for saving the environment and consist of articles/their opinions on the steps we need to take to save our Earth. Though originally created by a small group of leaders, “It’s Getting Hot in Here” has grown into a global online community, including 300 writers from all over the world. Since the blog is a worldwide movement, can we assume that the posts are more legitimate and unbiased? Or do we still see people using fear of what may happen to the world in the future to promote their own wishes and personal stance on a topic?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGet In The Mood...
ReplyDeleteI'm commenting on the "Chevron’s New Ad Campaign Hijacked by Truth…and the Yes Men" post.
ReplyDeleteResponse to number 7.
I don't feel as though this particular post achieves its' purpose. I arrived at this conclusion because it is almost too passionate. The person who wrote it clearly feels very strongly about the subject however they have allowed their feelings to interfere with their ability to report factually. The use of insults and insulting language against Chevron is much more prevalent than actual facts. The only only solid fact in the whole post is that Chevron spends twice as much on advertising than on a specific spill cleanup. I'm not defending Chevron I just think that any person "analytically" reading this article will be able to distinguish the difference between insults and information.
Response to number 7:
ReplyDeleteMy comment pertains to the post "Activists Derail Business School Q&A With Chevron CEO John Watson". The post was all about how the people who run and publish on the website visited a local business school at which CEO of Chevron, John Watson, was speaking at. Then the post goes on to talk about how then asked the CEO rude questions and basically made themselves look ridiculous. I found it particularly interesting that most of the comments were bashing the writers and not in support of them. Their followers found the act to be quite immature and let the posters know about it, criticizing the way they went about asking questions at the Q&A session. Its good to see that people reading this post aren't simply blinded by the poster's ideas.
Response to #7:
ReplyDelete"Spruce Mine: Another Nail in the Coffin for Mountaintop Removal" This post was about the apparently "atrocious" practice of mounaintop removal mining. I don't think this post at all accomplished its purpose. It wasn't backed up by any real data, simply claims of severe harm to the environment, without any real information. One commenter replied with several statistics about how much better surface mining was for the miners themselves, with higher salary and a fraction of the injuries. I do realize this is a blog about global warming and environmental issues, but their views seem to be pretty extreme on most subjects. They are all about elimination of oil and anything that could possibly harm the environment. It's quite unrealistic at this point, as one person said in a comment on a separate entry, "there is no technology at this point in time that could replace it". It would be great to replace it eventually, but these ideas are further away than these writers want to believe.
I mainly focus on the article “Stop the Enbridge Gateway Pipeline, Tanker Traffic and All Tar Sands Expansions to B.C.’s Northwest Coast!” Actually, I was attracted by the two pictures in the article more than the long passage. The article claims about the disagreement of setting pipeline. So in the pictures, we could see how blooding the earth is going to be and how angry the animals are after building the pipeline. Since the article is talking about global warming, we could see in the picture, there are few trees left. And all the pipelines are changed into the image of snakes. From my point of view, these pictures contribute a lot to the blog. It helps people get clear about the main idea of the passage and it makes the points more vivid. Inserting pictures is not necessary in a blog, but it does help convey the idea and emotion, say fear in this article.
ReplyDeleteI am commenting on question number six. I mainly focused on the post called "Activists Derail Business School Q&A with Chevron CEO John Watson." The author discusses how he and some of his friends who were fellow students at Chicago Booth, took part in a Q&A with John Watson. When they did so they disturbed the presentation. Many of the comments disagreed with his approach and the way he handled the situation. They said he was "immature and lame." His rhetorical techniques were not effective because he assumed the people who were reading his blog would consider him a hero for the actions he took rather then a coward doing it in the setting he did and interrupting a school sponsored event. Many of the people who commented also had a problem with the information he gave, saying he did not back up his own argument with sufficient information. Overall the authors use of rhetorical techniques tended to have a negative effect on his audience because he was not really considering who is audience was.
ReplyDeleteI would like to comment on the article "Chevron’s New Ad Campaign Hijacked by Truth…and the Yes Men". The author does a great job of getting his point across, and used some interesting things said by Chevron in their ads against them. I do believe the article is heavily biased, however. This is because like every environmental activist group, "Its getting hot in here" and its bloggers point out everything the oil company is doing wrong. "Truth- Last year Chevron spent less than 2% on 'alternative energy' projects while spending 98% of their exploratory budget on oil and gas". Obviously an oil company, who makes their profit from selling oil, would not put 110% into researching alternate fuel methods to oil. Besides 2% from a billion dollar corporation like Chevron is a ton of money. The author of the article decided not to acknowledge these facts however, due to bias.
ReplyDeleteI think this article is very well put together, and it gets it point across. It is abundantly clear, however, that the author is leaning a little towards one side. This is expected, though. Environmentalists will one day live in a green world, but right now, the world demands oil, and without it, what would we be? I'm not saying oil company's don't do anything wrong and, I sincerely disapprove of the Ecuador-oil situation. However, if someone else was in the shoes of the CEO of Chevron, they would certainly be doing a lot of the same things
I will be responding to this post with prompt #1.
ReplyDeleteThis blog has a very professional and clean looking interface. Due to the appearance it looks as if it could be a legitimate source for information. Upon inspection of the page one does not see any inappropriate or obtrusive ads and the graphics at the top of the page are simple yet effective. The blog also features a short about section, that details what the purpose of the blog is and what their intentions are. The blog also sports a very modern stylization and color scheme giving the impression that the blog and its contents are up to date and current.
I am responding to the post "The Dalai Lama on Global Warming". I found the post moderately interesting. It is nice to see a new face in the global warming movement. Its about the Dalai Lama voicing his opinion on global warming. He was quoted to saying, “These tragedies are not natural disasters, they are human disasters. They are man-made tragedies." Although it was interesting to hear a new opinion. That's simply all it was. It did not appear that he presented any factual information, it was him simply stating his feeling towards global warming. I feel it wouldve been much more influential if he stated a few facts, instead of just re-establishing the fact that something must be done about global warming.
ReplyDeleteim going to answer the point number 7.
ReplyDelete"The Dalai Lama on Global Warming" in this part, as a Chinese, of course it cannot give anything influnence to me. everything he did, and everything he said is fake. he is trying to set everyone without peace.
at the subject of Global Warming, he is saying the right thing, his comment will help people out. but i thought it is a way to confuse people, and make them under his control.
I am commenting on the "The Dalai Lama on Global Warming". The article was wrote very well, however I would have to agree with some of the posts that the writers let their emotions get in the way of what they write. The article does get to the point and jumps right in to explaining what the article is about. Which did bring me in and interested me but the article lost me as soon as global warming was mentioned. I know that global warming is a big deal in our everyday lives, but I do not understand how this many articles can be written about one subject. The website was very organized but very biased on the facts of global warming especially.
ReplyDeleteIn response to prompt seven, "does this blog actually do anything?", there is much evidence that indicates that yes, this blog is doing its best to try to make an impact on its readers.
ReplyDeleteThe best example of this that I saw on the blog was the post entitled "Launch the Summer of Solutions: Change the Story". In this post, the organization Summer Solutions calls upon young leaders to get together and work to create solutions (presumably for Green Issues) in their local communities. To date, I don't think I have seen any other blog that has been featured as the blog of the week have a post quite like this one. Since the description of the blog says that "It's Getting Hot In Here" is written by a number of youth leaders of the global movement for saving the environment, a post like this, which calls on these young people to actually make a difference, asserts that this blog is trying to make a difference. If even one person who writes/reads the blog responds to that call to help in their community, then the blog will have served its purpose, and thus can legitimately say that it "actually does something".
Also, the amount of bias in the blog's posts is relatively low compared to the posts that we saw in the other two blogs. This is usually a much better way to start conversation; that is, instead of leaning to one side in order to make a point, actually presenting facts that would allow the reader to think for themselves. This is yet another reason why the blog actually does something.
As a matter of fact, this website truly provides numerous latest news about global warming. On one hand, there are some professional posts which introduce the strategies to slow down the global warming; while on the other hand, the audience can learn the new movement about this climate disease from the website. For instance, the post about "stop the Enbridge Gateway Pipeline", emphasizing the significance of protecting wildlife at that region can never be exaggerated, help people realize the harm of setting up pipelines is bigger than the advantages. All in all, sustainably paying attenion to this blog is certainly a good way for acquiring latest knowledge about global warming.
ReplyDeleteIn response to #7. I think that this blog definitely makes an impact. Every article has a multiple responses to it so it is certainly having an affect on the readers. Also, many of the article deal with politics and the candidates that and running for better energy and agricultural laws. An example of this the article about Francis Thicke. He is running for secretary of agriculture in Iowa. This is so important because Iowa is the most influential state when it comes to the US food system.
ReplyDeleteResponding to #7. I believe that this blog is perhaps the most authentic and effective compared to the past blogs that were analyzed. The blog appeals to its audience by its layout, content, and most importantly, its "timeliness." As soon as I opened up this blog, the artwork on the top of the webpage and the green sides made me feel comfortable and gave portrays the site as something that represents peace and love for the nature. The authors not only put much time and dedication to this part, but also to the research, statistics, and interviews. The blog features famous figures such as Dalai Lama and influential people such as Francis Thicke who is a PhD in soil science. This blog contains articles that retain to the generation within the 20th century that has the possibility of affecting the countless decades and generations in the future, therefore the timeliness of this blog cannot be any better. Overall I believe this blog is very successful in attracting and keeping its readers.
ReplyDeletePrompt 7 to the article America Flunks Climate 101. I think this article does inform people that Americans need more education. In the article it states that 52% of Americans would flunk a climate 101 test. Only one percent of Americans would get an "A." It also states that 66% of Americans understand the greenhouse effect in concept, only 45% seem to understand that carbon dioxide traps heat. Americans may think they know the idea of climate change but not many people actually do research on it to support their claim.
ReplyDelete