Web Critique 15

Website Name:  http://amnesty.org
Operated By:  Amnesty International
Funded By: Donations

The website of Amnesty International is a very good resource to people who would like to have their eyes open to human rights violations around the world. I believe the best feature of the website is the ability to look, by country, at current human rights violations. There is also a downloadable PDF file titled “The State of the World’s Human Rights”. Amnesty publishes such a report each year outlining the state of human rights by region and by country. They offer the report in a good number of different languages. There are many fantastic education resources on the site, many of which are in other languages than English, such as “Human Rights Bingo”, education blogs, the link to Amnesty’s site www.respectmyrights.org which has two great interactive tools, the Poverty Trap, and the Housing Journey regarding how lack of housing affects human rights, and more. Overall, Amnesty International is doing good work. I don’t personally agree with all of their stances, but they are a loud voice for many many good causes and their website is a big part of their movement. 

Instructor Notes - Economic Policy

Instructor Notes for Week 14 –Chapter 18 - Economic Policy This Chapter and this topic are very important for the public to understand because there has been so much political rhetoric and misinformation distributed about the economy by the corporate owned media. The selftest is therefore a bit longer this week with 60 questions. There is much to learn and it is a topic that most people avoid if possible. However, the USA cannot afford to avoid this topic with the current unemployment rate and the need for the public to speak as loudly to influence Congress as the lobbyists for corporations and the 1%. The voters decided that they believed President Obama presented the best approach to creating jobs and strengthening our economy with his often repeated call to increase taxes for the wealthy. In spite of being outspent by his opponent’s super pacs three to one, the American public chose to reelect President Obama. If more of the public had truly understood the state of the income gap in the USA, I believe the President’s victory margin would have been much greater. This is a great video that is well worth your time to watch. Economist Richard Wolff joins Bill Moyers to shine light on the disaster left behind in capitalism’s wake, and to discuss the fight for economic justice, including a fair minimum wage. A Professor of Economics Emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, and currently Visiting Professor in the Graduate Program in International Affairs of the New School, Wolff has written many books on the effects of rampant capitalism, including Capitalism Hits the Fan: The Global Economic Meltdown and What to Do About It. http://billmoyers.com/episode/encore-taming-capitalism-run-wild-2/ (Links to an external site.)   (Links to an external site.) It would also be worth your time to listen to this debate that addresses the question our Congress must now actually face. Try not to succumb to the hollow “flat tax” argument as that is quite simply a regressive tax. There is a video and two versions of the audio one of which is condensed if you don’t have much listening time. Please check this out and you can debate all your family at your next Thanksgiving dinner. http://intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/past-debates/item/775-the-rich-are-taxed-enough (Links to an external site.) The Rich Are Taxed Enough  (Links to an external site.) Most Americans have no idea how much wealthier the top 1% have gotten in the last couple of decades. The data below is taken from 2007 figures and the situation has grown much more extreme since then. Measuring the Top 1% by Wealth, Not Income  http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/measuring-the-top-1-by-wealth-not-income/  (Links to an external site.) “But an analysis of the Fed data is still revealing in that it shows the wealth gap, as measured by net worth, is much more extreme than the chasm as measured by income. The Times had estimated the threshold for being in the top 1 percent in household income at about $380,000, 7.5 times median household income, using census data from 2008 through 2010. But for net worth, the 1 percent threshold for net worth in the Fed data was nearly $8.4 million, or 69 times the median household’s net holdings of $121,000. . . . Other nuggets about the wealthy from the 2007 Fed data: — The wealthiest 1 percent took in about 16 percent of overall income — 8 percent of the money earned from salaries and wages, but 36 percent of the income earned from self-employment. — They controlled nearly a third of the nation’s financial assets (investment holdings) and about 28 percent of nonfinancial assets (the value of property, cars, jewelry, etc.). These measures will be particularly interesting to revisit when the new, post-recession data arrives. — Money may not buy happiness, but the Fed survey suggests it buys good health. About 90 percent of the 1 percenters describe themselves as being in excellent or good health, compared with 75 percent of everybody else. About 85 percent expect to live into their 80s, compared with 68 percent of everybody else. — Nearly half of the 1 percenters own two or more pieces of real estate. That was true for just 5 percent of the rest of the population.” The article below further explains the current decline in incomes. September 12, 2012, 1:24 pm Behind the Decline in Incomes By CATHERINE RAMPELL  (Links to an external site.) The Census Bureau just released its sweeping annual report (Links to an external site.) on income, poverty and health insurance coverage. As my colleague Sabrina Tavernise writes, median household income declined (Links to an external site.) last year to $50,054, a level last seen in 1996 when adjusted for inflation. Here are a few quick graphical bullet points from other findings in the report: 1. Median incomes fell from 2010 to 2011 for all races, although the change was not statistically significant for Asians and Hispanics. 2. Inequality rose, and is at its highest level on record since 1967.

The Gini Index is a standard measure of inequality, in which higher values represent more unequal distributions of money income. The “equivalence-adjusted income estimate” (blue line above) takes into consideration the number of people living in each household, and how these people share resources and take advantage of economies of scale.

3. Men have gained more jobs in the recovery (dubbed the “he-covery”) but they also lost a lot more jobs in the recession (“man-cession”).

4. There’s more evidence that the work force is “hollowing out,” as there was significant job growth in the first, second and fifth income quintiles, but not in the third and fourth ones.

5. The share of people without health insurance fell. The biggest drop was among those 19 to 25 years old, who can now join their parents’ health insurance plans. (The number of insured children also showed a decline from 2010 to 2011, but it was not statistically significant.)

Source: Census Bureau

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/behind-the-decline-in-incomes/ (Links to an external site.)

Web Critique 8

Website Name: Vote Smart www.votesmart.org
Operated By:  Center for National Independence in Politics
Funded By:  Contributions/Donations

            Project Vote Smart is a pretty large-scale organization which exists to inform voters of the views of politicians so that they don’t have to rely on emotional and manipulative campaigning tactics that fail to provide important information to voters.  This organization’s website is very user-friendly. On the home page, there is a prominent video player providing an introduction to the organization, a summary of its services, and a tutorial for the website.  The website has two different interactive tools for voters. One called VoteEasy helps you decide who to vote for in an upcoming election, and the other called Political Galaxy gives a visually appealing avenue for finding information on government leaders searchable by ZIP Code or by name.  I wish that more local politicians were included on the Political Galaxy and VoteEasy. Also, it was a bit annoying that there was no way to easily navigate back to the main site from Political Galaxy. Even hitting the back button did not take me back to the main site. One unique thing about this organization is that they have a phone number you can call at which a researcher will be available to instantly look up information for you. Visitors to the website can also register for myVoteSmart which lets you track changes or additional information on politicians of your choice. It would be helpful if there was actually some information on local officials. It seems that most effort is focused on federal leaders, understandably, however.  There is also a great amount of information for voters available through several links at the bottom of the home page. Something worth noting on a more critical side, is that there are many pop up requests for help (monetary, volunteer, etc.) while on the website. Since almost 95% of their revenue is generated from donations, it is necessary that they request monetary donations and volunteer help. Some site visitors may find this annoying, though. It didn’t really bother me or impede my viewing of the site. 

Discussion 5

Prompt: When has unconventional participation been successful in bringing about political change in U.S. history? Are those instances viewed differently in hindsight than they were at the time? Why?

I think that the reason that unconventional participation is so successful in bringing about political change is its ability to draw public attention. The media usually covers these occurrences and brings the issues to public attention. Then, citizens will make a choice about the issue.  A major issue that was brought further to the light through unconventional participation is the Selma march in 1965. The awful governmental response to the demonstration only further alerted the public to the problem. Then, pressure has been continually placed upon politicians about civil rights, even to this day.  Looking back upon the Selma demonstration, however, there has been a huge change in climate for blacks, and the demonstration is now viewed solemnly as a day when those facing voting right discrimination stood up and were successful in awakening the nation to the civil rights issue. Now the attitude of most black and white people alike is a gladness that change has occurred for those oppressed in our country. This change is a direct result of the attention brought to the issue by the numerous forms of conventional and unconventional participation performed in the past. If no one were to speak up, nothing would have changed.  

Instructor's Notes-Voting and Political Parties

Instructor Notes for Chapters 7 and 8 - Participation and Voting and Political Parties

Each of the chapters in the textbook contain just the basics about the topics covered when actually political scientists devote their entire careers to the study of each individual aspect of our political system.  This is a very interesting time in our country to be studying these two topics as we are in the midst of an important election campaign. During the study of the media in the last chapter, you should have noted the activity of the political parties and the changes that have been made in voting laws in a number of states. These laws will undoubtedly affect voter participation for the upcoming election. As you study these chapters and you learn of the history of the election process in the USA you will have a better understanding of current events affecting our voting process.

A very recent development highlights concerns expressed by a great number of American citizens and now the international community. " US election system criticised over finance rules and voting restrictions Commission led by Kofi Annan says the rise of Super Pacs and voter ID laws has 'shaken citizen confidence' in elections." Read this story at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/14/us-election-campaign-finance-voting (Links to an external site.)

DC Douglas' "Why #OccupyWallStreet? 4 Reasons."   

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wK1MOMKZ8BI#! (Links to an external site.)

Chapter 8 gives us a brief history of political parties and their evolution through the years. The parties are still in the process of evolving. It mentions the Tea Party that has become part of the Republican Party. Since the textbook was written another movement has been formed called the Occupy Movement. Occupy does not align itself with either political party. “Occupy Wall Street is a people-powered movement that began on September 17, 2011 in Liberty Square in Manhattan’s Financial District, and has spread to over 100 cities in the United States and actions in over 1,500 cities globally. #ows is fighting back against the corrosive power of major banks and multinational corporations over the democratic process, and the role of Wall Street in creating an economic collapse that has caused the greatest recession in generations. The movement is inspired by popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia, and aims to fight back against the richest 1% of people that are writing the rules of an unfair global economy that is foreclosing on our future.” http://occupywallst.org/about/ (Links to an external site.) There is an Occupy Group that meets regularly here in Wichita.This week has a 50-point selftest with 50 questions to assist you in learning the basics of Participation and Voting and Political Parties

Protesters unveil a banner at the Lincoln Memorial in 2010 to protest the Citizens United ruling. The Annan report criticises the ruling for shaking Americans' confidence in the political process.
Photograph: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Discussion 4

Prompt:  

In the United States, the mass media are predominantly owned by for-profit corporations. Do those companies have any particular obligation to the public in how they cover the news? Or, is their obligation to simply focus on returning a profit for their investors?

My response:

I think that morally, these corporations should be committed to providing truthful information to the public. However, even the most committed to honestly still may subtly instill a bias into their reporting. Also, from a Capitalistic standpoint, the media will do what it takes to continue receiving funding from their corporate owners. These two simple facts are why we as the public need to be discerning when processing data from the mass media. Simply asking ourselves "what are they really trying to say?" or "what message are they trying to imprint upon the public?" can go a long way in decoding the rhetoric so commonly seen especially in newspaper headlines, major television news channels, or opinion websites. The reason I mention rhetoric is because many reporters, writers, news anchors, and politicians are expert rhetoricians. They know how to say something and send a message that may not be overt. I am not saying we should be constantly fearing conspiracies or brainwashing, just that we need to realize that everyone has an angle, which is not a bad thing. It's only natural. We can have freedom from being tossed to and fro by the opinions of the mass media with a little thinkwork of our own. 

Web Critique 4

Website Name: CSPAN  http://www.c-span.org/ (Links to an external site.)
Operated By:   National Cable Satellite Corporation
Funded By:  “C-SPAN (Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network) is a private non-profit company, created in 1979 by the cable television industry as a public service. C-SPAN receives no government funding; operations are funded by fees paid by cable and satellite affiliates who carry C-SPAN programming.”

CSPAN, or Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network, was not an oft visited channel in our home growing up. I have memories of flipping through the channels looking for Disney channel and coming across some government proceeding on CSPAN. I inwardly groaned, repulsed by how boring the channel seemed to me, a child, then I flipped quickly on to the next channel. Now that I am an adult, and I have been to the CSPAN website and observed a few video clips and have read the history of CSPAN, I feel a bit more welcoming of the organization which as a child I would never have enjoyed. This week in investigating the website, I watched a video of a Gallup representative discussing the current 40% mass media trust rate, and I watched/listened to a 30 minute video of the director of the U.S. Botanic Garden discussing the history of the Garden. Truthfully, CSPAN has actually developed since my childhood, as has my understanding and interest in the government and our country.  In 2001, CSPAN launched its third associated channel “CSPAN 3” in addition to the others, “CSPAN” and “CSPAN 2”. CSPAN also has a radio station available on Sirius XM. The website is very expansive, with a large video library free to watch, many podcasts, a blog, and among other various types of information, there is an interesting website about the First Ladies of the United States. There is also a Series A-Z page that helps you find helpfully grouped information. One of the major collections of information is regarding Congress. They have gone to great lengths to provide a lot of info on our lawmakers. One more major item on the site worth noting is “CSPAN Classroom” which has a lot of helpful resources for teachers. The website has a corresponding free Android/Apple app that lets you listen live to all three of the stations and CSPAN radio. This is nice, but it is regrettable that the app only allows the audio and that the main website only allows for streaming of the channels if you log in with a cable provider. I think that they put off a lot of viewers by requiring cable service. Many citizens don’t have cable service anymore, but rather opt for online news and subscription movie and tv service, like XBOX video, hulu, or Netflix. We are one of those families. In any case, CSPAN is still a great resource for Americans because they provide unedited raw video of many US court, Congressional, and public affairs proceedings without bias or interruption, and also provide American history programming and non-fiction book and author events from around the country, much of this free on their website. 

Web Critique 3

Website Name: Political Compass, www.politicalcompass.org
Operated By:  Pace News, Ltd.
Funded By:  Sponsorships, seminars

The makers of this website have done a great job creating a test to help you see where you fall on a chart similar to the one in chapter 5 of our book on p. 135-136. Although not exactly the same, both our book and the Political Compass show a way to classify people in a two-dimension manner rather than unilaterally from Left to Right. Many people don’t fit the overly simplistic classifications of Left/Liberal or Right/Conservative. The Political Compass test classifies test-takers based on two continuums: Left to Right and Libertarian to Authoritarian. This site has a lot of information regarding these continuums for those coming to the website who may have a limited understanding of the topic. 

The website shows you where you lie on the scale immediately after you take the test. There is also an option to create a group-chart where you and family or friends can plot your points together. There are plots of famous leaders on the site as well, so you can see how you compare. 

There is a separate smaller quiz called “Iconochasms” where you can “see how well you know your political icons”. I discovered that “iconochasm” is not a word. I think they might actually have meant to say “iconoclasm”. The word “iconoclasm” seems to have the meaning they were trying to construe. That would be one thing I could “constructively criticize” about the site. 

Another few items to critique: the site looks and feels low-budget. The site is low-budget most likely, however there are many free resources to utilize on the internet to make the site look more modern and appealing. Overall, its appearance is not too bad, though. It is fully functional and easily navigable. Their reading list includes writers from the four separate quadrants, but I would have liked to see a list of readings from writers that fall right in the middle of all four. 

Overall, this website and test are a great way to assess yourself and have a starting point for political discussion with others.

Web Critique 1

Website Name: Politics1.com 
Operated By: Ron Gunzburger-“attorney, journalist, businessman, civil servant, and owner of the sole-proprietorship that is Politics1.”
Funded By: Paid advertisements on said website; funding likely handled by Ron Gunzburger

I definitely plan to use this website in the future, for it is truly a great resource! On the website, one can find listings of current candidates for elections and outstanding lists of resource websites organized by Issue topics, among other additional types of information. I am impressed by the website operator’s willingness to include a balance of resources from both sides of the major arguments. Even the descriptions of all the offshoot parties are respectful and factual. One critique I would give for this site is that it is not very aesthetically pleasing. Its navigation menu, and whole website, really, is incredibly simplistic. It was also not very easy to navigate, because in the Directory I could not find any option to direct me to the ideological debates I was trying to find. For some reason after using the search bar, on the search results page I was presented with a slightly different Directory with more options, one being “Issues” which, of course took me right where I wanted to go. But that was only after searching all the home page options to no avail. The site has got great information but to truly optimize its potential, it needs a face-lift and a revamp of the site map.