Renata Salcel: Paradox Of Choice

Today’s media (news) plays an enormous role in the lives of people in directing a specific perception of the world around them. Most often media conduct's a subconscious effect upon its spectators in which the upshots are deliberately or illdeliberatly towards a particular topic.

Due to the fact that these political advertisements and the media manipulate political perspectives, this truly is an insult to the idea of free elections because as the government through advertising is now shaping Americans’ beliefs there are no longer unaltered political views. The people are no longer making their own decisions but rather having choices placed in front of them. The system of democracy is substantially degraded when citizens’ outlook on politics

The Unbearable lightness of choosing “Because you are in control of your life. Don't ever forget that. You are what you are because of the conscious and subconscious choices you have made.” -Barbara Hall, A Summons to New Orleans, 2000 I personally agree with the writer Jon Spayde on all the aspects he has mentioned in this paper. The writer has discoursed various facets regarding the importance of alternatives in one’s life. But, a very significant point mentioned in this article is, that when a certain individual is in a position to make his own choices or take his own decisions he must keep in mind that he alone will not be the one to face the consequences, but many people will be a part of his decisions. So one must give a serious thought when making a choice, which may have an impact not just on one life but, on the lives of many others. Mr. Spayde points out the fact, that having a choice is the luxury of the privileged class. The unprivileged class cannot afford the luxury of choice. Now the situation is not that bad but we all know that they have limited choices and this lack of choice causes a problem for them in certain situations. According to my own experience, though the lack of choices may cause hurdles at times, still, there deficiency is sometimes ‘a blessing in disguise’. When a person is confined to a certain number of options he has no other way out, but to choose amongst them. This might be the making of an individual. Like we consider an example of a

Choices, the story writen by Susan Kerslake is about how the choices that we make everyday affect who we are and how our life can change by making the wrong decission. But is it always a bad decission? is it always our fault?

The high-profile case that I chose was regarding a lady name Jodi Arias. Arias who was convicted on first degree murder. Jodi Arias killed her salesman ex- boyfriend Travis Victor Alexander on October 4, 2008 in his home in Mesa, Arizona. She was convicted on May 8, 2013, and was sentenced to life in prison. Jodi stabbed Travis multiple times with a knife, cut his throat, and then shot Travis in the head. Arias killed her ex-boyfriend Travis in the shower, after have a romantic time with him. While Travis was in the shower, and his cell phone rung and he had an incoming message and Jodi went through his phone. In regards to this after seeing the incoming message was another female; she then reacted in a violent outrage. Arias proclaimed to

People believe that they make every decision themselves using their own thoughts and ideas, but this is not entirely true. Whether it is an ad on TV for a burger or a political speech talking about the future of the country, the goal of these is to persuade people one way or the other. They do this because humans are easily manipulated by ads, propaganda, and false facts. George Orwell’s Animal Farm is an allegory based on communist Soviet Union before and during Joseph Stalin’s time as leader. Orwell showed, using pigs and other animals, how easy it is to manipulate someone into believing something. The pigs manipulated the other animals on the farm by effectively using rhetoric like logos, ethos, and pathos in their speeches.

During this project, my class and I learned many examples of choices and consequences made by people throughout every day life. One specific character in the book, Erik Fisher, made choices that not only affected himself, but everyone around him negatively. Fortunately enough, as bad as these choices were; they did cause a few good outcomes.

The notion of choice in an individual’s life is subject to constant questioning. We have what we like to call the freedom of decision-making, but often it simply seems like a facade. Many believe that one’s morals and ethics are solely responsible for the decisions they make, major or minor. Others attribute the external pressures surrounding them and societal factors as the facilitator of choices. Unquestionably, both personal characteristics and societal factors influence the the majority of choices of individuals everywhere. We must consider, however, that one plats more of a role than the other. Pieces of writing such as Christopher Browning’s Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland, Michael Bess’ Choices Under Fire: Moral Dimensions of World War II, and Milton Mayer’s No Time to Think explore the idea of both influential aspects. Nonetheless, more influence can be attributed to societal factors and this idea is supported throughout all of the pieces of writing. Societal factors, for the most part, are composed of a plethora of external pressures that we either actively acquiesce to or subconsciously conform to. Societal factors play a much larger role for the average individual in regards to decision-making and this goes for individuals of all backgrounds and beliefs. This is shown in the lives of the Chambonnais, the Reserve Police Battalion, and the two famous experiments known as the Milgram Experiment and the Stanford Prison

Having choices can sometime leave a negative result that could affect others. Because of some individuals who could have caused problems for society,or because of strict individuals working for the government, choices are sometimes limited to the privileged. But it can cause problems for individuals who need the ability to make their own choices for their own sake.

The general argument made by author Julia Maskivker in her work, Lesser of Two Evils, is that as a voter, you should vote for a lesser evil candidate rather than your candidate of choice. More specifically, Maskivker argues that society will not vote for your candidate, so you should should vote for the evil you like best so that the greater evil isn’t elected. She writes, “We cannot expect others to act on society’s behalf if we will not do so ourselves. Thus, voting for the lesser evil is not a lesser action. Morally, it is the right thing to do.” In this passage, Maskivker is suggesting that because we can’t predict others actions, we should do what we want others to do. The catch, however is that Maskivker claims the best way to do this

Choices are an important part of everyone’s lives and the choices we make can reflex who we are as individuals. Choice and the ability to choose are excellent and can represent a sense of freedom. Schwartz’s and Iyengard’s analysis on choice focused on the effects of choice in people and how people react and deal with it. Schwartz’s Official Dogma and explanation of how Americans act in response to choice making is the most relatable to individuals and clearly chows the consequences of too much choice. His analysis can assist to people realize that maybe because we have more choice doesn’t necessarily mean we will make us happier or the best decision will be made. Understanding the consequences of too much choice can possibly make individuals improve the negative effects it can have and make us happier with our

Julie Foudy is a retired American soccer midfielder. She has achieved two FIFA Women's world cup. Alongside that achievement she is an Olympic gold medalist. In 2007 the medalist was finally inducted in the National Soccer Hall Of Fame with former partner but current friend Mia Mamm. But her sport career is still going on as a interviewer for women's telecast on ESPN. Alongside all her achievements she is now a author and wrote her new book “Choose to matter” which goes over her life and much more. What makes the book a must read is the inspiration and her story. She teaches us values of being a great sport and good characteristics. She does a segment with her former soccer players that participated and won the olympics. But the interview

The central claim of the Agenda Setting Theory explains why people with similar media exposure place importance on the same issues. Although different people may feel

Agenda-setting is one of the most important factors in shaping public opinion. Agenda-setting can be defined as the ability of the media to direct public attentions toward the issues they believe are important to the public. But whose choice is it that determines which issues are more important over others? The news media can set an agenda-setting by focus attention on selected issues on which the public will form opinions from (McCombs). The media can paint a memory in your head by repeatedly repeating the issues on different media sources as Internet, network televisions, newspapers, etc. Since these sources are the cheapest and easiest to access, the information can be view by vast number of audiences. As quoted in a 1922 classic called “Public Opinion” by Walter Lippmann,

Too often, people do not question or challenge the views media presents to us and simply accept the views at face value. Politicians rely on this during campaign elections. The popularity of negative advertisements depreciating opposition parties has grown tremendously over the years because they are often successful. The public embraces the negative media messages, then votes accordingly. Oftentimes, people do not even know they have been acted-upon by the media.