Politicians Use the Media to Shape Public Opinion

For many years, drugs have been the center of crime and the criminal justice system in the United States. Due to this widespread epidemic, President Richard Nixon declared the “War on Drugs” in 1971 with a campaign that promoted the prohibition of illicit substances and implemented policies to discourage the overall production, distribution, and consumption. The War on Drugs and the U.S. drug policy has experienced the most significant and complex challenges between criminal law and the values of today’s society. With implemented drug polices becoming much harsher over the years in order to reduce the overall misuse and abuse of drugs and a expanded federal budget, it has sparked a nation wide debate whether or not they have created more harm than good. When looking at the negative consequences of these policies not only has billions of dollars gone to waste, but the United States has also seen public health issues, mass incarceration, and violent drug related crime within the black market in which feeds our global demands and economy. With this failed approach for drug prohibition, there continues to be an increase in the overall production of illicit substances, high rate of violence, and an unfavorable impact to our nation.

Dangerous illegal drugs have plagued American citizens and their youth for as long as the country has been in existence. These harmful drugs are not only responsible for countless amounts of deaths, but the corruption of the American society in general. All too many times have these drugs been blamed for insanity, racism, rebellion, and straight up violence. Today the government is spending approximately $19.179 billion in one year to combat these evils (Gifford). Unfortunately, even with all of this effort going in to stop illegal drug use, the “War on Drugs” is yet to produce almost any positive results. Because of this, politicians are urging the government to spend even more money to combat the seemingly

First, from 1900 to 1940, marijuana, including opium and cocaine were considered part of everyday drugs. As time went on, the U.S. cracked down on crack and opium, eventually outlawing them, but continued to be very “loose” with the use of marijuana. Hoxter a weed smuggler explains how he began in the 1960’s trying weed and years later saw himself unloading four hundred pounds of pot in Vancouver. The story of this man ends in his isolation and argument of why he couldn’t smoke weed even if he stopped selling? He asked a parole officer and she didn’t know what to respond. It is true what Hoxter states, fifty years ago alcohol was illegal and now it’s not, was it bad then? Will weed be legalized? And will the conflicts have been in vain? (Schou 8). Around the late 90’s and early 2000’s, scientific studies started to produce jaw-dropping results. Scientists started to discover that marijuana can significantly help people who have become ill. Medical Marijuana has been tested to help people with cataracts, cancer and severe depression (Zeese 1999). With this new worldwide discovery, the argument about medical marijuana ignited. States wanted to only make medical marijuana legal so it may help sick people, but the government did not want any form of marijuana legal. The law that was known throughout the United States was any form of marijuana was illegal. But now with this new discovery, doctors in states across the country want the

In the society we live in, everybody wants to be right. People will have their own unique stance on any controversial subject, and marijuana is no different. Marijuana is a very important topic of discussion especially in the current election season. The drug is discussed on television, social media, and virtually everywhere on the internet. In the article “This Is Why Marijuana Should Be Legal Everywhere” associate viral content editor for The Huffington Post, Renee Jacques, challenges traditional notions of the prohibition of marijuana by brilliantly using rhetorical appeals to persuade you to join the majority. Contrary to Jacques, John Hawkins, writer for www.townhall.com, takes a different stance in his article “5 Reasons Marijuana Should Remain Illegal” holding tight to the traditional, negative view of the drug by using a mixture of logos and pathos to make you question why any human with a brain would smoke cannabis. Although both writers use rhetorical strategies to persuade you to their respective side of the argument, the differing degrees the authors use those strategies renders Jacques’ article much more persuasive to a general audience.

In the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, drug use became a major concern for most Americans. As the War on Drugs and “Just Say No” campaign were being thrust into the spotlight by the government and media, the public became more aware of the scope of drug use and abuse in this country. The federal and states’ governments quickly responded by creating and implementing more harsh and punitive punishments for drug offenses. Most of these laws have either remained unchanged or become stricter in the years since then.

This is written as if not a call to action, then a call to galvanize. The purposes of this report is to enable readers to through empirical and contextual description see the war on drugs for what is really is: a public relations ploy whose end results are not fighting drugs, but

The use of medical marijuana (slang: Acapulco gold, ace, bhang, cannabis, hash, dope, ganja, grass, weed, hashish oil, hemp, home-grown, honey oil, indica, Jamaican roach, sativa, sinse, sinsemilla, tea, weed oil) has a been a major topic of debate for countless years. People all around the United States have seen propaganda of some sort regarding the legalization of marijuana. For example, with the ongoing discussion of legalization throughout the states, it’s abruptly mentioned in the news, everyday conversations, school topics for debate, and within stories of social media. In the article, “Is marijuana prohibition coming to an end”, Michelle Johnson a North Carolina journalist, states “Legalizing marijuana for a medical or recreational

Over the last 30 years public opinion has changed about the legalization of marijuana, mostly likely because a sizable percentage of Americans about 38% admit to having tried the drug, according to a Gallup study (Swift, 2013), approval has risen from 28% of

Marijuana is a drug that is an ongoing issue in the United States for many years debating about whether it should be legal, so in 2010 the state of California proposed the “Tax, Regulate, and Control Cannabis Act” for voters to vote on which would make marijuana illegal. Charles Stimson, a former assistant U.S. Attorney specializing in crime, had strong opinions about what he thought about the issue and was paid to write an article by the Heritage Foundation where he could voice his opinion about legalized marijuana. In his article “Legalizing Marijuana: Why Citizens Should Just Say No,” Charles Stimson tries to persuade his audience, voters of California, that they should vote against legalized marijuana. He tries to persuade his audience

Lately it seems that drug policy and the war on drugs has been in the headlines quite a lot. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the policies that the United States government takes against illegal drugs are coming into question. The mainstream media is catching on to the message of organizations and individuals who have long been considered liberal "Counter Culture" supporters. The marijuana question seems to be the most prevalent and pressed of the drugs and issues that are currently being addressed. The messages of these organizations and individuals include everything from legalization of marijuana for medical purposes, to full-unrestricted legalization of the drug. Of course, the status quo of vote seeking politicians and

The War on Drugs and Mass Incarceration have been two very well-known topics of society. While these have taken place during the Cold War, there is still a continuance in them today. The impact that has been left on society from these issues have stuck around, while mass incarceration is still of talk today.

There are many differing viewpoints in the United States when dealing with drug policy. Within the political arena, drug policy is a platform that many politicians base their entire campaigns upon, thus showing its importance to our society in general. Some of these modes within which drug policy is studied are in terms of harm reduction, and supply reduction. When studying the harmful effects of drugs, we must first to attempt to determine if drug abuse harms on an individual level of if it is a major cause of many societal problems that we face today. In drawing a preliminary conclusion to this question we are then able to outline the avenues of approach in dealing

Ever since marijuana’s introduction to the United States of America in 1611, controversy of the use and legalization of the claimed-to-be Schedule I drug spread around the nation. While few selective states currently allow marijuana’s production and distribution, the remaining states still skepticize the harmlessness and usefulness of this particular drug; therefore, it remains illegal in the majority of the nation. The government officials and citizens of the opposing states believe the drug creates a threat to citizens due to its “overly-harmful” effects mentally and physically and offers no alternate purposes but creating troublesome addicts hazardous to society; however, they are rather misinformed about marijuana’s abilities. While

Politicians and the media have both used their power to construct the image of the addict in the United States. It is not wrong that they have constructed an image, but the image that they have constructed is not true. Politicians and the media have scapegoated the addict for their own benefit. In Henry Brownstein’s article, The Social Reality of Violence and Violent Crime, he looks at how the United Stated has constructed the image of violence being associated with the drug user. Additionally, his article looks at how politicians such as Harry Anslinger built their career off these violence and drug narratives without statistical evidence. Furthermore, Craig Reinarman and Cere Duskin explain further how society can be fooled by

The United States’ new claim in today’s world of propaganda and mind-warping media is that The War on Terrorism = The War on Drugs. Recently simple anti-drug slogans have been manipulated into aggressively and often erroneously exaggerated media assaults. (planetpapers.com) The United States claims that each person can help fight terrorism by choosing not to buy or use illicit drugs, and the government itself can help fight terrorism by implementing a more effective War on Drugs throughout the country. They claim that illicit drugs are the major monetary support of terrorist groups throughout the world, which in some respects is correct. Due to this claim, teenagers and drug