United States Involvement in Ukraine: Bad or Good?

U.S Involvement in Ukraine: Good or Bad?

Since President Barack Obama recently announced that the United States will do whatever they can to help Ukraine and its fight against Russia, there has been much debate about this subject. Back in December, Obama gave a televised speech announcing the stance that the United States will take on the Ukrainian Revolution. He essentially stated that the United States will not tolerate Russia “bullying” Ukraine. Obama said that no matter what, the United States would back Ukraine and do whatever they could to show Russia their corrupt actions will not be tolerated. President Obama even went as far as to say that “the United States has brokered a deal to help transition power in Ukraine.” Due to the fact that President Obama announced his support for Ukraine people within the United States have been debating if this would help create peace or would it actually make things worse?

To date, President Obama has helped lower oil and gas prices which in turn have significantly hindered Russia and their economy. While things seemed to mildly die down for a little, they have recently sparked back up. Now the newest question is should the United States arm the Ukranian people? There has been much debate on if this is a good idea or not. Some feel as though arming the people of Ukraine would be a good idea. They feel as though if they arm them it could get them a fair chance to defend themselves against Russia and their government. However, the other side of this argument is that it would be unnecessary and it would create violence for no reason at all.

Just this past Saturday, the Kiev army accused Russia of sending in tanks and more men towards a small town in Ukraine. This has generated much fear because it could very well be the next battleground. Although Russia did not deny nor confirm this, they have denied that they even have forces fighting there. John Kerry commented on the situation stating, “We know to a certainty what Russia has been providing and no amount of propaganda is capable of hiding these actions. For anyone wanting to make gray areas out of black, let's get very real, the Minsk agreement is not open to interpretation, it is not vague, it is not optional.”

There have been many talks of forcing a cease-fire but if Russia continues to ignore than there could be an attack. Kerry also stated, “If this failure continues, make no mistake, there will be further consequences, including consequences that will put added strains on Russia's already troubled economy. We are not going to sit back and allow this kind of cynical, craven behavior to continue at the expensive of the sovereignty of another nation." While people in Ukraine are preparing for the worst and a possible attack they know they have the United States behind them. Along with the support of the United States, much of Europe is also in talks on how to avoid an attack on Ukraine. There are a ton of meetings and time is continuing to tick away. A March 31^st deadline for Russia to cease fire needs to be met or else this could erupt into something much larger and affect more countries other than just Ukraine and Russia.

file:///Users/kuschykk/Desktop/US-Ukraine.jpg

here is a link to a photo which shows Ukranian People supporting The United States and their involvement to help shift power! 

Can Blogs Revolutionize Progressive Politics

“Can Blogs Revolutionize Progressive Politics?”

 

1.       Why do the Democratic leaders embrace blogging as a potential political communication considering the traditional media landscape in politics?

·         Blogging is becoming increasingly more popular among democratic leaders. They are using blogging as a way to communicate political agendas better to the public. The traditional media landscapes that are usually used, can be both slanted and expensive. For example, FOX news is more right wing and conservative while CNN is left wing and more democratic. Also air time is increasingly hard to come by and very expensive.

 

2. Blogging encourages a participatory culture. In what way does the participatory culture in blogging expand digital media convergence?

·         If people within society equally contribute to the new culture in blogging it can expand digital media convergence. More and more opinions and voices will be heard starting through one single blog post. Soon after that it will grow and expand through many different types of mediums.

 

3.       In the article, the author says: “The ability of the Internet to erase geographical distances can become a structural weakness in elections where district lines and eligibility are key.” How can blogging counter this weakness in the process of turning the netroots to grassroots?

·         The internet gives people the ability to read something that was written thousands of miles away from them. This sometimes can be a negative aspect of a republican candidate’s election strategy. For example, in the state of Texas a republican candidate would initially do well there and win the state. However, with an increased number of people blogging this can potentially change. Democratic leaders and supporters of the

Democratic Party have the ability to blog about different issues they find important. The word could travel all the way to a state such as Texas changing the opinions of voters nationwide.

 

4. The author spends the second half of the article discussing the lack of diversity in current blogosphere dominated by elite bloggers. Please use the concept of digital convergence to explain how blogs can become the real bearer of freedom, democracy, egalitarianism, and participation in the new media communication?

·         Blogging is not just limited to an elite group of bloggers; blogging is accessible to everyone who has access to the internet. This means that everyone who has an opinion on topics that are crucial to societies function can comment on it. People in the United States have the ability to comment on everything and anything they feel necessary.

Virtual Revolution

Questions for the documentary “Virtual Revolution” part 1, 2, and 3.

1.    The web is celebrated as the revolutionary technology that is great leveling of humanity creating equal opportunity, equal access, and equal potential. However, there are only a quarter of people on the earth who can use it. How do you explain the controversial argument here?

·         While I am positive that there are multiple arguments supporting the idea that the web is leveling humanity, there are many arguments against it. The web is argued to create equal opportunity, equal access and equal potential. Yet, only a quarter of the people on earth actually use it. Therefore one cannot simply argue that the web is heling to level humanity. Based on the facts given, I believe that the web is actually separating humanity even more. For example, wealthy people have access to the newest and most advance technologies out there on the market simply because they can afford it. Children in inner city schools barely even have enough funds to own the books that they need for their classes. While my school had multiple computer labs filled with brand new macs. This to me separates humanity even more and it starts earlier on than most would think.

 

2.    How is Wikipedia the best example to implement the leveling ideas of the Web rooted in the cultural revolution of 1960s, namely the Libertarianism in the counter culture? How does it explain some of the digital convergences?

·         The web especially that of Wikipedia allows for anyone to be the author. Anyone is now allowed to be a publisher and author sending their message out. Wikipedia allows people to go in and changed published facts in hopes to get the best source. The libertarianism point of view allows for “social misfits” to continue being so by publishing online. Nobody is in charge on the web which allows for many drastic and different point of views. Libertarianism essentially is the idea that left and right wing ideals mix together and essentially mold for the best possible way of doing something. This is all traced back to the 1960’s and was first demonstrated through hippies. It’s about all about self-expression and what else really is the web? Self-expression is especially popular on Wikipedia because people post and edit what they feel is correct. 

 

3.    How does the Web make it possible for different kinds of digital convergence?

·         The internet really integrates many ideals and digital convergences. The internet as created by the counter culture really makes is possible for everything to come together. Without the internet there would be no mixing of left and right wing opinions. There would not be hate speech surrounded by opposing views urging them to not be so hateful. The internet makes this possible by letting everyone’s voice to be heard.

4.    How can the Internet become a challenge for traditional authority? Use the political landscape changes in some counties to illustrate your answer.

·         The internet is a challenge for traditional authority in more ways than one. The internet isn’t ran by anyone and there is free run for everyone who access to a computer. For example, the United States has had to start changing up their policies because now the internet is becoming more and more of an issue. Online bullying is becoming such an issue that now people are actually killing themselves. The government and school system now actually has to pay more attention to online social media sites.

 

5. Do you believe that getting information free can set us free eventually? Why or Why not? Do you see any concerns of the complete freedom or self-expression without limit on the Internet? Why or why not?

·         I believe that getting information for free can definitely set us free. Now instead of scholar’s spoon feeding us what they want us to hear, the people can actually give us the information. For example, Wikipedia allows people to edit information that they don’t necessarily feel is true.

5.    In traditional media communication, it has the “vertical” authority. In the Web communication, it becomes “horizontal?” How do you explain the change? How does this create the possibility for digital media convergence?

·         The change occurs because the internet gives everyone access to put information out there. Now, the traditional norms that society has used for years is changing.

 

6.    Why is it that the Web is free critical for the success of the Web itself? How does that clash with the corporate business ideology? How does that pose challenges for copyright issues at the same time? What will happen if the Web is not free?

·         The web definitely needs to be free because if it’s not then there will be a huge digital divide. Digital divide occurs when some have access to the internet and its knowledge within and others do not. This is not good for humanity because it does not in any way level out the “playing field.” If everyone does not have access to the same information and knowledge than it will only have a negative impact on society as a whole.

Acoustic Space

1.    What are the differences between the pre-literate acoustic world and the alphabetical visual world? How does the media of television become a part of the acoustic world?

The pre- literate world is very different from that of the alphabetical visual world. The pre- literate world was very one tracked and single minded for several reasons. During this time there was no means of mass production, essentially this demonstrates that access to different works and such were very limited. Also, only few were able to understand and or interpret the meanings of these various kinds of works. Now, the alphabetical visual world is much more engaged and in tune to one another. The world in which we live today, has made it very easy to combine each of the many senses that were noted in the article. The television has very much become a part of this alphabetical acoustic world by bringing both visual senses and acoustic senses together into one. For example, people watching a broadcast production produced by CNN have the ability to hear, see and feel something that is miles away. This brings viewers worldwide together for one single work.

2.    Why does the alphabet have the segregating tendencies? How exactly does the printing press reverse the segregating tendencies?

The alphabet has many segregating tendencies. Prior to a printing press which gave the ability of mass production for literary works, access was limited. The printing press really changed the way in which people hear, see and feel about different published works. The bible, which is one of the most influential published works ever created was only seen and read by few at the time of its creation. In my opinion, this is the biggest form of segregation that the human race has ever gone through. A literary work that was controlling the way in which society functioned, was only seen by a small portion of people.  

3.    How does the alphabetic communication in online communication make cyberspace acoustic? How is the online acoustic world different from the television, radio, or print acoustic world?

Online, whatever characters, pictures or sounds that someone wants to see or hear is readily available. The internet gives everyone access to pretty much anything out there. The internet is also very different from that of the radio, television or print acoustic world for one major reason. The internet is able to connect all three of the acoustic worlds together for an exquisite experience.

 

4.    Not only do we invent media and media technologies but also we select their uses in different contexts. What are the two selection criteria? According to the selection criteria, please discuss what will happen to our online communication in 20 years.

There are two major pieces to the selection criteria that one uses. One is, we want media to extend our communications beyond the biological boundaries of naked seeing and hearing. Next, we want media to recapture elements of that biological communication which early artificial extensions may have lost. Both of these criterion in my opinion play an active role in how people think about internet as a whole. While many people are scared that maybe technology (especially the internet) has become too prevelant in our everyday lives. Yet, within the next twenty years, I believe that online communication will become a major part of society’s means of communication. I believe this because I feel as if people are becoming more and more comfortable with the idea that technology will become an even bigger part of the human race than it is currently.