Final Blog Post

Throughout this course I have gained a much more expansive perspective on writing. Writing is not just formal, educational papers but a comes in a wide variety of forms. A blog post has just as much value and merit as a research paper. The blogging was a very interesting take on a writing class. I have never had such a technology-based approach to a writing class and it was a very interesting experience for me.  The blog style writing has forced me to make my writing a bit more conversational rather than formal and has made me much more comfortable with my classmates reading my work. Andrew Harris has provided me with insight on the ways in which many people write.  He essentially tells us that we use the ideas of others and change and transform it into something that is our own. We can create a new opinion by countering the opinion of another or create a new work by forwarding someone else’s ideas. The course has also taught me that writing and literacy are culturally relative. They take on a different meaning depending on the context that they are found. Another focus of the class is the impact that technology is having on writing and the news. Some say that technology is advancing the news and writing while others claim that it is destroying them. We cannot be sure but we do know that technology is definitely changing the way we perceive and interact with writing and the news. Knowing these things will help me keep a broader perspective of writing and literacy as I progress in writing courses and in life.

Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting: From Small Town Story To National News

 The media is a very complex and expansive system. There is not one single news source or one single perspective or bias. No story is ever reported on just once and then forgotten about. Stories go through multiple stages and are written about through countless lenses and viewpoints.  A news story can be written about thousands of times in thousands of different ways. We can see the development of stories from their uninformed infancy to their stage as an archive when we can look back on them with informed hindsight. At each stage the story changes and becomes something new. Every story goes through this process and countless aspects of every story are explored.

            Just a few short months ago on Friday December 14^th, 2012 a devastating tragedy occurred in the small town of Newtown, Connecticut.  A gunman, Adam Lanza, entered Sandy Hook Elementary School armed with semiautomatic pistols and rifles and killed twenty-six innocent people.  With this high victim count, the Sandy Hook shooting was reported as one of the deadliest school shootings in the United States. The nation was shaken by the shooting and the tragedy spurred a period of national outreach and condolences and was the topic of conversation for quite a while. I vividly remember the day it occurred and receiving the information through various news sources – word of mouth, Facebook, television news programs, and the newspapers. Almost every type of news outlet was scrambling to report on the tragic event and provide insight into what had happened that day.

            One of the earliest articles that I found was by CBS News. The article, Connecticut School Shooting: Police investigating reports of a shooting at elementary school, written just around an hour after Lanza had entered the school, reported very general, uniformed information regarding a school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. The article is extremely brief and explains that the Connecticut State Police were assisting the local police at an elementary school shooting. The only information they had about victims was that there were several injuries and unconfirmed reports. At this point the media believed that there were two shooters involved (Crimesider Staff). This underdeveloped local story just proves how inaccurate stories can be in early stages of development. Reporters are simply trying to get out any information they can as quickly as possible. The early articles are all about the scarce information that can be gathered at such an early stage.

            One of the first news sources to publish a complete story of the school shooting was the New York Times article, Nation Reels After Gunman Massacres 20 Children at School in Connecticut, by James Barron. As with any story reported within twenty-four hours, the purpose of the Times story was to let the public know what happened and to give details about the event. But this article was far more informed than the previous local article. It provided the name and age of the shooter, twenty-year old Adam Lanza, and gave the details of the weaponry he used in the shooting. A Sandy Hook Elementary School parent tells reporters “There is going to be a black cloud over this area forever. It will never go away” (New York Times). The article aimed to create emotion, sympathy, and understanding among the readers.

            As time progressed more and more information came out concerning the victims, their families, and the shooter himself.  The day after the shooting the Huffington Post released the names of those who lost their lives inside Sandy Hook Elementary School the day before. The article by David Lohr detailed the first name, last name, age, and gender of the “12 girls, eight boys and six adult women” whose lives were taken by Adam Lanza. (Lohr). Another local newspaper, The Hartford Courant published an article the day after entitled, Who Are They? Stories About The Victims Of Friday's Shootings. In this article the author spends fifteen pages providing much more detailed, intimate, and personal information about the victims. The personalities, likes, dislikes, and memories of the children and adults were described in vivid detail. The purpose of the article was to personalize the tragedy and make it less distant from our lives. But the victims were not the only ones receiving news coverage. Details also emerged about the infamous shooter, Adam Lanza. Many news sources published stories on Lanza and what led him to commit such a horrible crime. One of these stories was Adam Lanza’s Path to the Sandy Hook Tragedy by PBS Frontline that detailed the course of Lanza’s life leading up to the day of December 14, 2012. The article described Lanza as a quiet and withdrawn child who seemed to have a pretty normal life and “somewhere along the way… made the fateful decision that ended in the second deadliest school shooting in American history.” The article continues to detail the struggles Lanza had with social interaction throughout his life and constantly switched schools.

            But as with every tragedy the initial shock and sadness eventually fades away and the event is discussed in a new light. Rather than being seen as just a tragedy, the shooting was being seen as the catalyst for a variety of political debates.  The Sandy Hook shooting sparked discussion and debate over gun control, mental health issues, and security of schools. Shifting away from discussing the events of the day, various forms of social media were putting the shooting into a different context. The most recent school shooting has forced the government to take action to address these pressing social issues. A CNN article entitled Gun violence plans: What's in the works describes what the White House has in store in terms of gun laws. The President planned to strengthen existing gun laws, limit magazines to ten rounds, and tighten up the background checks on all gun buyers. The ultimate end goal is to "dry up the supply of these weapons over time." Says California Senator Diane Feinstein (CNN Politcial Unit). Regarding gun control, there are a wide variety of opinions ranging from those who want stricter gun laws to those that cling to their second amendment rights. On one end of the spectrum many people agree with a statement made by President Obama in his Newtown vigil speech, “Are we prepared to say that such violence visited on our children year after year after year is somehow the price of our freedom?” (Huffington Post). These people feel that tragedies like Newtown strongly reinforce the fact that gun laws are not strict enough. Supporters of stricter gun control believe that our nation’s love of Second Amendment Rights is not at all worth the damage it is causing. Those on the other end of the spectrum agree with the statement made by President of the National Rifle Association, Wayne Lapierre, when he said “When it comes to the most beloved, innocent and vulnerable members of the American family – our children – we as a society leave them utterly defenseless, and the monsters and predators of this world know it and exploit it.” (New York Times). Supporters of this viewpoint claim that mental health, video games, and school security are the true issues to focus on. From this perspective it is not guns that are causing the problem but rather how people choose to use them. Neither of these speeches and none of the debates about these social issues would have even existed had it not been for the shooting in Newtown.   

            However, in Newtown there is not much of a divide on the issue of gun control. In a USA Today article by USA today travel editor and reporter Gary Stoller, it seemed that “people on all sides of the political divide” expressed support for President Obama’s plan to ban assault weapons and ensure tighter background checks on gun buyers. It comes as no surprise that in a town so tragically affected by this monstrous weapon, most of the residents would fully support its ban. Local Newtown school bus driver and Democrat Marsha Moskowitz explains that instead of making this a democratic or republican issue people should realize that "It's a human issue. It's about humanity." Alan Brown a Sandy Hook resident, gun owner, and life-long republican agrees that Obama’s proposals make a “whole lot of sense.” Brown supports gun rights yet never felt comfortable with assault weapons and after the shootings stated that he is “now strongly opposed to these types of weapons.” The common sentiment in Newtown seems to be that these assault weapons are extremely dangerous and absolutely unnecessary and if there had been a ban on these types of weapons then many of the victims lives would have been spared (Stoller).

            The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting has gone through quite a development in the news and blog world: from its beginnings as a freshly reported elementary school shooting to its explosion into an endless supply of articles and opinion blogs. The shooting transformed itself into a countless number of stories ranging from gun control to the life of Adam Lanza. Almost three months have passed and people continue to write about the shooting and its memory continues to live in political debates and tribute articles. First Selectman of Newtown Pat Llodra stated, “Many have said that this awful happening in Sandy Hook has changed the world — changed the way we think and act and made us more committed than ever to stem this kind of violence.” Sandy Hook has changed the way we think and given us a new perspective on violence. A perspective that is continually present throughout the news world and will continue to be present for a long time. We may no longer be talking about the events of that day but the Newtown story continues to evolve in the news sphere.

Taking an Approach

-->

As I continue to read his book, I am getting the feeling that Harris is getting a little repetitive. Most of the concepts he explains seem to have a lot of similarities. His Taking an Approach concept sounds very similar to Forwarding, Coming to Terms, and Countering. In all of these we as writers are using works that have already been writer and points that have already been made and making them our own. Creating something original from something original.  “The original does not go away but is remade into something new.” Taking an Approach is working in the mode of another writer adopting their style. Taking an Approach can have various forms depending on the choices the writer makes when they read any given work. The New York Times most often does not take an approach because they are reporting news and facts and these are more important to its readers than the style of writing. But in blogs and the opinion section of the Times taking an approach is most likely widely used. Because these types of writing are opinion based people often attempt to create original thoughts or ideas based on the work of another, essentially Taking an Approach. Many opinion articles will read fact based stories and create unique opinions and perspectives based on the unbiased sources. This is a way to Take an Approach on something which improves the quality of the writing. In any opinion or argument based writing, it is extremely difficult to avoid Taking an Approach because this is essentially what one has to do in order to form a unique opinion or argument.

Short Essay 1

I decided to use an article from Townhall, the Fox News online site, concerning same-sex marriage. The article was written from a very conservative standpoint and describes how it feel that same-sex marriage will threaten the institution of marriage and the dangers that redefining marriage will have for us in the future. The original article argues that recognizing same0sex marriage as legitimate will sacrifice the best interests of children.  I rewrote the article for a more liberal, pro same-sex marriage audience. I changed the language to suit this new audience and replaced skeptical, negative opinions about same-sex marriage to opinions reflecting a supportive view of same-sex marriage. The rewritten article endorses an acceptance

Redefining Marriage Raises Concerns For Children and Society

http://townhall.com/columnists/austinnimocks/2013/02/14/redefining-marriage-raises-concerns-for-children-and-society-n1511868/page/full/

Much of the discussion around same-sex marriage involves the impacts it may have on society. The advocates reassure us that redefining marriage will not bring harm to anyone and this is a reassurance that we can confidently trust.

The concept of traditional marriage as a social institution is something that is becoming increasingly outdated. The family is the social institution that holds true significance and it is in institution that comes in various types and forms. Altering the definition of marriage to include all forms of marriage will positively impact the public’s understanding of the institution and affect society’s acceptance of the cultural norms associated with it. The redefinition will shift the institution from a child-centric to an adult-focused institution. 

Children are still held at the utmost importance and are loved and cared for by same-sex couples in the same way as heterosexual couples.  Same-sex couples are still able to create a traditional family by adopting children who cannot be cared for by the so called ‘traditional’ heterosexual couple. Solely because a marriage is between a man and a woman does not mean that they are fit to raise a family.  The interests of children are not being sacrificed by the new definition of marriage.

The decisions of court reflect these beliefs that children are still being valued. The California court declared that children derive no benefit from having both a male and female parent, and that genetic relationship between a parent and a child is irrelevant in a child’s upbringing. Additionally, the court puts the force of the constitution behind a conception of marriage that (1) severs it from any inherent connection to procreation and children, and (2) transforms marriage from a public institution with child-focused purposes  into little more than a private self-defined relationship focused on adults. It denigrates the importance of mothers

Officially changing the public meaning of marriage sends a message to the public that we all need to learn to be more open to broader definitions of marriage and that love and marriage transcends gender.

We as Americans stand on a precipice regarding marriage – an age old and fairly outdated social institution. Just as we evolve in so many other aspects of society – civil rights, women’s rights, etc. – we need to evolve in our acceptance and legalization of gay rights as well. It will not destroy the institution of marriage but instead create a countless number more happy, loving families and create a much more accepting and tolerant nation. We need to let go of these traditional institutions that we so desperately cling to and change along with the times.  We should move forward with confidence that endorsing same-sex marriage will not have any negative ramifications on us as a nation.

Fascination With Photographs

I found the article, “Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire,” by Errol Morris, to be very insightful and thought provoking. He brought up points about the nature of photography that I had not given much thought to. Morris focuses on the contextual nature of pictures and how the meanings of each photograph can be changed based on our knowledge of the context. The example he provided of the Lusitania was very interesting to me especially because in my AP American History class my teacher provided us with an alternative context for this exact same picture. He explained that it was suspect that Americans wanted to become involved in the war but since we always have to play the victim we could not attack another country so we sent a boat into a line of German fire that we were well aware was present there, thus giving us a reason to enter into the war because we were ‘attacked.’ Now I am not saying this theory is true but it just goes to show how many different meanings one photograph can have depending on the context that is provided. Another concept I liked from the article was when Morris was looking at pictures of his own family and he inquired to himself “Who are these people? Do they have anything to do with me? Do I really know them?” The simple fact that we can be a completely different person than we were in an old picture is fascinating to me. The fact that we cannot ever really remember or know what that version of our self was thinking or feeling in that moment captured by the camera. I have an absurd amount of pictures from high school and middle school due to my picture-obsessed friend and going back to look at these pictures is really entertaining and interesting to me. In so many of these pictures my friends and I will be doing something weird and I wonder to myself ‘Honestly, what were we thinking?’ or there are a bunch of pictures of us doing some inside joke that I cannot even bring myself to remember anymore. Morris does a great job of capturing the transitory and contextual nature of photographs that fascinates me so much. One thing Morris says accurately sums up, I believe, the main message of his article, “Pictures may be worth a thousand words, but there are two words that you can never apply to them: “true” and “false.”’

Don't Fight About Fighting

Harris describes the idea of countering as pointing out shortcomings and arguing with an author not just for arguments sake but only if your purpose is to add something or give an insight of your own. The example he opens with reminds me of times when I have actually had fights with my siblings about whether or not we were in a fight. Its completely useless and that is exactly what Harris is saying; you need to have a purpose for pointing out the flaws in another’s work, other than the fact you believe yourself to be smarter and want to prove them wrong. Instead we should use other authors arguments not to prove them wrong but to create an intellectual counterargument of our own. A place where countering is often unavoidable is any context that politics is involved. For example the blog, http://hipsterlibertarian.com/ entitled the Hipster Libertarian. The tumblr page is description reads, “I like freedom, peace, and property. I don’t like corporatism, war, and the government telling us how to live, no matter who is in office.” There is a clearly defined argument and opinion running through this page created by Bonnie Kristian. Throughout the blog there are numerous online discussions and arguments in which she engages her followers about various topics that they may agree or disagree on. I think this countering style adds something to her pages because she is not just stating what she believes she is interacting with people who possess different opinions than her own and not just saying ‘anyone who believes differently than I do is wrong.’ The term that Harris came up with for the concept is very fitting and something that all writers can benefit from using. 

The Continual Nature of Writing

“Academic writing is often described as a kind of conversation. You read a text, you talk about it, you put down some thoughts in response, others respond to your comments, and so on. Compares this idea to a person entering a room during a heated conversion that cannot be stopped to explain and yet every person has walked in and has not received any explanation of what they have missed. The individual takes part in the discussion and when they leave the discussion still continues. To me this reflects that writing is not being meant to have a definitive beginning or end but to just be a continual flow of information, ideas, and discussion. Something that anyone can pick up in the middle and add something of their own and then allow the next person to contribute another continuous thought.“It suggests that the goal of such writing is not to have the final word on the subject.” We do not want to end the conversation; we want to perpetuate it. I do not think any blog or any writing can really exist without the concept of forwarding. People have been writing for so long that most of what people can think to originally say has been said. Now it is just a matter of adding to the conversation, then other people adding to what you have contributed and so on and so on.