Michael Vick Released

Link: http://www.charter.net/news/read.php?id=15553766&ps=973&cat=&cps=0&lang=en&page=1

After reading this article I was aggravated by its portrayal of Michael Vick, the former NFL star who served a sentence in jail and is now on probation for dogfighting charges. If you were basically unawares of the case, reading this article you would basically think the whole thing was overblown and Vick was pretty much just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Most of the quotes are sympathetic towards Vick, the only critical ones falling at the end of the article, which let's face it, most readers won't get to.
To me the article is very pro-Vick, including quotes such as "I think that from a legal standpoint and financially and personally, he has [paid his debt to society]," and "'There's the expression 'you are what you eat.' To some extent, you are who you hang with too, and that does have an effect on lives for all of us'" These quotes make it seem like Vick was there by accident but he wasn't. It was his dogfighting operation, or "kennels", and he was very largely invested in the fights, and in more ways than just financing them.

What this article also left out was that it wasn't only dogfighting that went on at the Vick operation, though that is certainly horrible enough. The "Vick dogs" were often forced to fight to the death, and dogs that did not look promising for fighting were killed by hanging, drowning, electrocution, shooting and "slamming at least one dog's body to the ground." (CNN.com and The United States Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals). Vick himself participated actively in at least eight of these deaths according to investigation and a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) report revealed that Viuck "enjoyed placing family pets in the ring with fighting pit bulls and that he laughed as dogs ripped each other apart." Vick's operation also included bait dogs, weak animals used in fights to build up the confidence of stronger dogs.

One quote in the article particularly angered me. A representative from the NFL Players Association was quoted as saying they supported Vick and his family "as he works to rebuild his life." Talk about missing the point. Vick's the one that ruined his life by being violent and cruel. His actions were desipicable.

I've seen the Vick's former fighting dogs on various programs on TV. Organizations such as "Dog Town" have taken on many of the dogs to work to rehabilitate them. These dogs are scarred beyond belief, missing teeth, have poorly healed broken bones, and countless mental issues stemming from their time in the fighting ring. When they came they were scared and trusted no one. Miraculously, with the help of kind-hearted people these dogs are healing, but there are some scars that can never be healed from their past. People who say Vick has "paid his debt to society" really should take a look at what he did to those dogs and think again. Vick has a very, very long way to go before he even begins to repent for his crime, and truly, I believe he can never fully atone for his sins. You don't do that to an innocent animal and just say "I'm sorry" and then hand over a bunch of money. It's not enough, and I don't think anything ever ever can be enough.

Neque Ego Haer Intellegere Possum

This is an interesting op-ed column on the use of Latin on diplomas. The author, despite being a "Latin scholar" (for those of you who take Latin :) ) themselves, strongly believes that diplomas should be written in English.
To be honest, I have never really given much thought to this issue. However, I do have to agree with the author that the Latin on diplomas is clearly intended to impress rather than serve any educational purpose. Even so, I don't really think it's that big of a deal. Latin script on diplomas is a tradition, and it looks kind of neat. Even though I doubt most people can read the Latin on their diploma, this shouldn't really matter, after all they are the ones graduating and I sincerely hope they know what degree they are graduating with without having to read a piece of paper. I suppose it would be nice to be able to display a diploma without having to explain to everyone what it means, so in a way the author has a point. But to me at least, saying "Why, then, celebrate that education with a document that prizes grandiosity over communication?" is going a little far. Does it really matter all that much? If it's that vital, why not print a translation and hang it underneath the original?

Seriously? What are the Odds?

Link: http://cavett.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/08/seriously-what-are-the-odds/?ref=opinion

This is just a short but funny column on a common aspect of life, coincidence. Coincidences are oftentimes amusing, but as the author points out, just as often embarassing. I loved the little anecdotes Cavett uses to personalize the phenomenon and his use of humour and self-humiliation to relate to the readers.
In the matter of Freud's theory of "no accidents" I'd have to disagree. I'm pretty sure coincidences exist, I mean how can you explain the matching license plates described at the beginning of the column? The families had never met before, lived far away, and just happened to have the same license registration. Sure, you could say it was fate but I'm pretty sure Freud didn't believe in that either.

Mr. Darcy Woos Elizabeth Bennet While Zombies Attack

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/14/opinion/14tue4.html

I have to admit that when I saw the headline of this op-ed I immediately did a double take and then clicked on it. What on earth? I thought, though I was sure it must be some gimmick by the author, a sort of play on the topic to interest readers. No such luck. Unfortunately the piece is actually written about a "mash-up" of the classic "Pride and Prejudice" and, yes really, zombies. All I can say is "WHY???!" Personally, I hate so-called "mash-ups," whether they are books, music or movies. I mean honestly, can't writers come up with their own original content?
As far as the article goes, I found it to be quite confusing,very jumpy and noticeably hard to follow. If I hadn't been determined to comment on it for my blog than I probably wouldn't have read past the first few paragraphs, interesting subject matter or not.

Life Lesson's From the Family Dog

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/31/life-lessons-from-the-family-dog/

I thought this column was a beautifully written and very moving piece addressing the importance of dogs in humans' lives. It demonstrated how inspiring dogs can be to their human companions, and how we should all really take a leaf out of a dog's book and live in the moment. Even when dogs get older they still find time to enjoy the simple pleasures in life.
Any pet owner who has lost an animal understands the horrible process of watching their beloved creature begin to fail and knowing there is nothing they can do about it. Animals are such big parts of the lives of people who love them. To the author, Dana Jennings, Bijou is not really "just a dog." No truly loved pet could ever be "just" an animal.
Animals can also be healers, not only physically but, even mostly, mentally. They give love unconditionally. And caring for an animal can give a sick person purpose as Jennings describes.
There really isn't much more I can say, the article pretty much says it all for itself. It was very sincere and heartfelt, Jennings' last sentence brought tears to my eyes.
I wish both Jennings and Bijou the best of health.

Madonna's Adoption Struggles

http://www.charter.net/news/read.php?rip_id=%3CD97C6AH80%40news.ap.org%3E&ps=101
6&_LT=HOME_LARSDCCL3_UNEWS

This case is an interesting one, made all the more noteworthy in the public's
eyes because it involves a well-known celebrity. As far as I'm concerned, I know
Madonna is trying to help the child, but I think that if she really wants to
support Malawi in general she should probably follow their adoption laws.The way
I see it, there is a reason why these laws are in place. If Madonna thinks they
are too harsh and will prevent other suitable prospective, adoptive, parents
from adopting in the future then perhaps that is an issue she can address at a
later date. For now though, I think she should probably just comply and do what
it is they are asking of her. Obviously the rules are meant to be in the best
interest of the child. Besides, does her whole family really need to be dragged
into the spotlight becaue of this one issue? She may be used to it or not care,
but her other children are surely going to get their share of publicity.
I am tired of hearing of rules and laws being "bent" for celebrities. Many of
them say they want to be viewed "just like anyone else" but if that's the case
then they need to learn to deal with not getting everything they want simply
because of their social status. A little patience can't hurt and if Madonna
truly cares about this child, Mercy, then she should be content to wait.

To pun or not to pun?

This op-ed seriously made me laugh out loud. I thought it was cleverly and
humourously written. Part of the appeal in this op-ed is that it is
lighthearted, as I have said in previous posts it was nice to read something
that wasn't about war, the economy or death. The author, Joseph Tartakovsky,
took a regular, every day concept and wrote an entire piece about it.
Tartakovsky related well to his audience, providing personal anecdotes and
asking them to draw on their own experiences. I mean who hasn't groaned at the
corniest pun? I know I am constantly rolling my eyes at my father when he
decides it might be fun to quote something like Wigler's Bakery slogan ""Look
deep into our ryes." So. Cheesy. Tartakovsky even makes use of his subject
matter, the ever-contreversial pun, in his own piece.
On the matter of puns I have to say I am mostly inclined to agree with Dryden,
who called them the “lowest and most groveling kind of wit.” Especially if it
wasn't even thought up by the speaker.
I recognize that puns can have be useful in literature, particularly
rhetorically or to lighten the mood of the text, but it seems to me they still
add a certain cheapness. I am not a huge fan of puns, one or two is ok I guess
but when they get overwhelming I sort of tune them out and they become
redundant.

In some cases puns can be fun, such as in the novel "Night Mare," whose title
itself is a play on words. In this novel the puns and wordplay serve to keep the
reader on their toes, constantly sorting our the double entendres from the
literal statements. Still, puns can always be overdone.

Finally, I thought it was really interesting how Shakespeare's writing would not
have been considered full of puns but *word play* in his time. I had always
wondered why he would use a technique that is intended to be humouress when
talking about something serious. Because of the puns or wordplay, I would often
take the situation less seriously. However, if I were to now go back and reread
some of his works I would think differently.

Anyways, here's the link.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/28/opinion/28Tartakovsky.html?_r=2&em

"Slimey time expected at Kids Choice Awards"

Link: http://www.charter.net/news/read.php?ps=1016&rip_id=%3CD9778TFO0%40news.ap.org%3E&_LT=HOME_LARSDCCLM_UNEWS

I don't know if it's just me but I found the use of, shall we say "creative," adjectives in this article very distracting to the overall story. The use of these adjectives was likely an attempt to connect with the audience but personally I spent so long trying to work out what the author meant by "glop" that I'd pretty much forgotten what the sentence was about and had to go back and reword it. This article was very short but it took me twice as long to read as it should have just because these adjectives were so disrupting to the flow of the story. Yes, I agree it is nice to be creative and connect with the core audience, but seriously, enough is enough. Even the header frusterates me, I mean what is "slimey" supposed to mean in this context? Does it have some connection to the Kid's Choice Awards? I'm presuming the answer is yes, but it would have been nice if this was made clear somewhere in the article.

The Dismal Economy Effects Everyone

Link: http://www.cnn.com/2009/LIVING/03/22/homeless.horses/index.html

This article serves as a reminder that the current economy is hard on everyone, even the animals. And horses, who have high costs associated with them, are some of the hardest hit. It is truly tragic to think of people having to give up their beloved animals, many of whom are like family members. Hopefully some of these families will be able to reclaim their horses when their situation improves.
A common misconception with horses is that they can just be turned loose and they'll be fine on their own. The trouble is that a) these horses do not have the fine-tuned instincts of their ancestors (they haven't needed them before) b) horses need the company and protection of a herd, which means they'll have to find one c) it's illegal and d) life for wild horses is dangerous. It's better for horses to be taken to rescue centers than simply left by the side of the road.
Finally, I found it truly horrible that some of the horses given up by their owners are being euthanized. I hope that in these cases every other possible alternative has been considered. Even in these cases I am horrified. For these animals to have to die because of human's problems is to me truly very upsetting.
I can only hope that we'll start pulling out of this recession soon. For the sake of everyone involved.

Dog Show Contreversy [I meant to post this over the weekend but I was sick, sorry]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_midlands/7931691.stm

After reading this article I was glad to see that this situation was finally coming to light. I have heard of such breeding malpractices with high class show dogs before but never have I seen it properly publicized. I think it is ridiculous that people in-breed dogs to enhance desirable traits to the detriment of each individual dog. It's not healthy and disgusting that people would do that for profit. Not only this, but breeders often breed to exaggerate a typical characteristic of a breed, like they do with horses, resulting often times in an unhealthy animal (think pugs who have been bred over the years to have increasingly 'squashed' faces with the result that many of them have breathing difficulties). I was also glad to read in the article that the RSPCA, Pedigree and BBC stopped supporting the Crufts Dog Show after the expose was released on the unhealthy breeding practices behind the scenes.
Having said this, I wish the article had gone more into depth about the story behind the charges and had given examples for people who might not have had prior knowledge pre-reading the article. I knew what the author was talking about but other people may not have had an idea of what breeding problems there are in the world of show dogs. I think this is an important topic and the article did not quite do it justice. I realize that the contreversy wasn't the only point of the article but the author mentioned it in the header and really should have given a more detailed explanation of the contreversy.

A New Kind of "Novel"

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/02/25/japan.mobilenovels/


I just thought this was a really interesting topic to write about. I never would have thought of writing novels on a cellphone. Quite frankly it seems quite impractical to me, I mean how long must it take to type it all out? But I suppose the cell phones do have the added bonus of being easily concealed as mentioned in the article. One thing I found about the article was that the author wrote it as though the instant chapters and the commentary from readers was a new concept. However, I've seen this on the internet for quite some time now. It's really just the exact same as writing stories online, except it's done through a cellphone, not a computer. I can't really see the fad catching on here as much as it did in Japan as the topics they write about on the less conspicuous cell phones aren't as taboo to write/read about over here. And it really isn't conveniant.

Is Michael Phelps the victim of an overzealous legal system?

Link: http://www.charter.net/news/read.php?ps=1013&rip_id=%3CD96A97981%40news.ap.org%3E&_LT=HOME_LARSDCCLM_UNEWS

I thought this article brought up some very interesting points in regards to the recent uproar surrounding Michael Phelps. In a way I definately think the whole ordeal has been overblown due to Phelps' celebrity status. I mean, the first headline I read to do with the situation led me to believe that Phelps had done something hideously wrong, not simply been caught acting in a manor that could land him with a minor drug charge. Not that I'm saying what Phelps did was right, it wasn't. But honestly, who was he really hurting? Surely the offense didn't warrant all the newscovering and attention it recieved. Perhaps the judge involved in the case is hoping to use Phelps as an example to other would-be drug offendors. I don't know. However, the way this is going I think Phelps is going to end up warranting an apology from the legal system handling his case.

A New Kind of Fitness

Link: http://videogames.yahoo.com/feature/the-truth-about-wii-fit-and-weight-loss/1284826

To begin, this line made me laugh. "Fitness videogames might be able to keep players in shape--but not if they don't play them." It seems so obvious but yet...it's true. Despite the many benefits that could be gleaned from participating in a fitness program, even if it is set up as a videogame, people do have to put in time and dedication to ensure positive results. This article was interesting,exploring whether or not the Wii Fit was just another fad and if it could have any longterm health benefits. Maybe it could for the dedicated enthusiast but not for the typical audience it seems.
Another quote that I loved from the article was "even though it's a videogame, it's still exercise. It might be fun a little bit, but it's work."
It's true, the general feeling about the Wii Fit is that it is a video game so it [i]must[/i] be fun. But even if it's more fun than traditional excercise, the pain and sweat that comes with other forms of excercise is still going to come with the Wii game, if you're gaining any benefit from it that is.

Remembering Paul Newman

In December I wrote an tribute article to Paul Newman and then placed it on Wordle. I really like how it looks, check it out :) RIP Paul Newman

Linky: Newman article: http://www.wordle.net/gallery/wrdl/497376/Paul_Newman_

Erasing all traces and moving on....

link: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/30/blagojevich.gone/index.html

I just found this article very interesting as it was very much about the symbolism of taking away the images and other traces of the former governor that could be found in the state capitol. The author writes that a crew "brought down the 5-foot-high sign [with Blagojevich's image on it] to make the official change" almost immediately after the Senate had voted to impeach Blagojevich. I thought it was interesting how the author of the article refers to taking down the sign as an "official change," almost as though it was only by removing the reminders of the governor that he was completely stripped of his power.
One of the maintenance workers was quoted as saying "Was that quick enough?" which exemplifies the eagerness to move on from the whole embarassing situation.

"This isn't Milli Vanilli"

Link: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/01/22/famed-quartet-played-recordings-tunes-inauguration/

I just thought this article was kind of interesting. It reminded me of how everything is expected to be perfect for the presidential inauguration. And I was reminded of the pressure that is on the shoulders of the musicians. To me, the presidential inauguration appears to be alot about ceremony. It's a huge deal, obviously, but it seems almost vital that everything go exactly as planned. It was interesting to me, too, how much those involved felt that he had to justify the decision the quartet made. Obviously a lot of people were watching the historic moment and they wanted it to go perfect, so they had justify themselves themselves to the audience, but also, I believe, it had something to do with the media. As we all know the media can be very attacking and I'm sure somewhere someone would have jumped on the "meaning behind the the pre-recording" or the huge "scam" of them not amplifying their music for everyone to hear if they hadn't explained it themselves. But it's still kind of sad really how, even such a simple and well-thought out decision would have likely been blown out of proportion.

The Name Game

Link: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/01/21/obama-called-different-names-inaugural-ceremony/

Ever since Barack Obama's middle name, "Hussein", was made public knowledge people have feared the worst, being reminded, of course, of Saddam Hussein. As this article points out, Obama's middle name was downplayed during his campaign, supporters obviously worried it would cost him votes. But I was surprised to read this article after the election, in which the author claims significance behind the announcer calling Obama "Barack H. Obama" and the Rev. Joseph Lowery's addressing him simply as "Barack Obama." I thought we'd moved beyond the matter of his second name. To be honest, I hardly noticed the fact that Obama was addressed in three slightly different ways throughout the inauguration. It didn't seem significant to me. Obviously to some people it is though.
"The tradition is that they use all three names and I will follow the tradition," said Obama on the matter, after he became the President-elect last November. I'm glad he decided this. I see no reason why he should be feared for a name. He didn't name himself after all, and it's his decisions that we should be judging by as he prepares to lead the country.

Facebook....how do we solve the problem of who's really who?

Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7807466.stm

I thought this article was really interesting because it details with a specific
case of impersonation on Facebook. I know that on the terms of service etc.
Facebook warns you that you must only sign up as yourself and that it must be
your true name (not that anyone really pays much attention to this part). I also
know that lots of times, especially with public figures, people wonder if the
account is legitimately operated by the person whose name appears in the
profile. And to be honest, there is no real way to know for sure. In fact,
there's not really anyway to make sure that the people you are "friending" are
actually your friends. But the people who use Facebook just have to deal with
this and be careful, there's not much that can be done about it- right? Aren't
these kind of risks inherent with a "social networking" site? This is where it
gets interesting. When you defame some one on Facebook are you committing libel?
How is Facebook supposed to keep tabs on this kind of stuff?
Obviously when discrepancies are brought to notice something needs to be done to
sort out the issue but it seems to me that these kind of things are going to
happen all the time and it’s simply a constant risk in this “age of technology”
that if you are a public figure someone might try and defame you. Facebook is
now just one of the many ways people can try and challenge the reputations of
those they don’t like.
I think everyone needs to take whatever they read by a stranger on Facebook with
a grain of salt. This kind of stuff happens all the time on the internet,
Facebook is just another, perhaps easier, way of impersonating someone online.
Just because Facebook warns people to be truthful it doesn’t mean they abide by
this rule, I think users should treat the website as they would any other online
source, with caution.