The Mass Media

Man has always looked up to others who are smarter, wealthier, or more important than he is for a guide on how to live. In modern times these roles are often thrown into the laps of celebrities. Since the understanding of celebrities come from the productions they endorse, man 's trust is now in the hands of fictional characters. Because he is so impressionable, an ignorant man can easily become an imitation of the people he watches everyday. There are many messages conveyed in the media, good and evil. Sometimes, one can gain insights from the things he allows to enter his mind, but this is a rare phenomena because of how secularized the modern media is. When every show aimed at young, impressionable girls features 'models, ' it can easily be assumed that these girls will then want to mimic that same look. This situation does not cause immediate harm to the girl, but overtime will teach her that having the looks of those models and nothing but that will bring her beauty. This is also true for the push of sex into almost every tv show or movie. It is extremely rare to find a top-ranked movie without sex appeal. Sex is then portrayed as a trivial act of maturity. The Mindy Project on the CW reveals the life of a young, Indian OB/GYN in New York City. The main character, Mindy Lahiri, is constantly battling problems in her relationships. The Mindy Project can benefit viewers through her message of self-acceptance, but can also damage them by showing the idea of casual sex as

In Jeanne Fahnestock’s (1998) article “Accommodating Science: the rhetorical life of scientific facts”, she observes the distortions that occur when attempting to accommodate scientific discourse for a popular audience. Fahnestock cautions that although accommodating has its place in conveying scientific discoveries to the public, it is vital to evaluate how accommodating methods affect the accuracy of interpreting such discoveries. Through assessing the shift in genre, the shift in information and classical stasis theory, Fahnestock examines how scientific writings are altered through the process of accommodating.

In research, there is a wide variety of ways in which researchers and journalists go about presenting their, or others, findings. Because many of these findings have the possibility to have significant impact on the general populace, it is important to know the context from which this information is being published, as many findings may be influenced by source, representation, bias, outside funding or goals, and many other extraneous factors. In this case, the Lillienfeld et al (2014) article and The Telegraph article are both presented in vastly differing ways, both with their own advantages and disadvantages. These two articles bring to the forefront many differences in the ways that scholarly and popular media formats address findings.

Closing, the writer is successful in making his opinion and perspective towards scientific research through the use of logos, pathos, and ethos. The overall analysis brought me to the conclusion that the John M. Barry portray scientific research as the chief ingredient to putting together answers and information. Yet still, doesn’t deny the complexity of scientific research and that’s its not straightforward as a scientist wishes it could be. Nevertheless, the benefits scientific research has brought along we see them everyday because of our overall advancement as a world. Didn’t I say knowledge is our most powerful weapon? Well observe, for it has destroyed the slow and premature society humans once used to live in and created a beautiful, diverse, and intelligent culture

John M. Barry uses the various different types of rhetorical strategies to characterize scientific research by comparing the opposites of both certainty and uncertainty, by referring to life in the woods as a metaphor towards the mind and creation of science, and a series of rhetorical questions that shows the process and mind of the scientists portrayed in John M Barry’s essay.

In news journalism, bias is meant to be minimized with the intent of conveying the most accurate message to the readers and viewers. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the beginning, middle, and end of the space race through three different media sources. One of these sources will lean left, one will lean right, and the other neutral. The goal is to determine which source is more trustworthy by assessing and comparing the amount of bias in each article. Thesis Overview of Issue:

Grinnell explains that when scientists make a discovery, they cannot claim it as a scientific fact until they have convinced the scientific community of its legitimacy; therefore, a discovery that has not entered the second conversation of Grinnell’s cyclical model is only a proto-scientific claim. This distinction is an extension of Grinnell’s argument regarding subjectivity and inter-subjectivity. Furthermore, when a scientist make a discovery, it is deemed as proto-scientific since its interpretation could have been influenced by the scientist’s subjective experience; however, once the scientific community inter-subjectively agrees on the legitimacy of the claim, it becomes scientific. Credibility is the process by which this transformation

At some point in your life you will be asked to refer back to an article, or source of information. This could be for a science project in high school, an essay in college, or even for research in your own career. It is important to know which form of article or discourse is appropriate to use, depending on the assignment. Should you choose a popular discourse or an academic discourse to use in your assignment or research? You must first know the differences between the two discourses. There are several differences between the two discourses falling under the purpose of the article and the presentation of the article. This paper will be unveiling the true differences between popular and academic discourses using the popular news article “Daytime

2. I agree that journalism and policies must give all viewpoints the chance to be shared with the public, but I do not support the false balance of scientific legitimacy being granted to all viewpoints. It is important for the public to be informed of current scientific issues, without a doubt; however, I think the public should hear more about the viewpoint that the majority of the scientific community supports. In the process of weighing the evidence, it is true that the less legitimate viewpoints must also be considered. However, the false balance of viewpoints in journalism and policies makes it harder for the general public, especially the non-scientifically trained, to recognize the viewpoint

The Scientific Studies: Last Tonight with John Oliver (HBO) explains why the media report false information when it comes to science and how some studies by researchers are actually incomplete but are being reported as if they were complete. There are so many studies in science that they seem to contradict each other to an extent. John Oliver explains studies can be either misunderstood by the media as a result of the media just reading the press releases, leaving out important information about the research such as the sample size, or reporting on studies that may have not been completed yet. All studies are completed differently and if the public is not aware of this then they believe what the media are reporting. Oliver also mentions that

If I was a history teacher and told you women were more dominant than men, would you believe me ? With news media false repressing scientific studies, John Oliver a British tries to exploit the dilemma on his talk show. John Oliver, a British comedian host of Last Week Tonight spoke about all the bazaar claims of scientific studies on one of his shows. Oliver introduces videos, scientific facts, break news etc. Oliver states that scientist sometimes reveals falsely represented criteria to speed up the studies process. He tells the audience that it is not just the scientist that spreads the false information but also the news media.

In the episode “Scientific Studies” on the tv show “Last Week Tonight with John Oliver”, he employs a plethora of rhetorical strategies to depict his point that not all “science” is necessarily science as most might assume; and how we as a people have become blinded and misled because these scientists are contradicting each other's’ findings. He does so by using humor, making comments that some people might be able to relate to, and by presenting basic logic and common knowledge.

minus the fellow scientist Bishop talked about are close-minded to any and every thought that science has been or could be helpful. I do believe that this approach can lead to a negative outcome, but it makes Bishops argument superior to the conflicting one. There is a chance that the audience will do more research, and that they will change their views, but from the position Bishop chose the amount of room for argument is a small portion because he addressed the argument brought to him so thoroughly. Although, I put my trust into Bishop’s argument and have faith in the credit he presented in the author’s note mainly because of his calm, compassionate, and factual based article. Also, I found no error or hesitation in his writing that would

“Deadly Star Ate My Hamster” (The Sun) is a catchy headline but due to science, most can infer that this obviously not true. After all, how hard can it be to spot fake news? But what about “FBI Agent Found Dead After Releasing Hillary’s Emails” found in The National Report? Many would immediately rush to share an article with this headline anywhere they can, like their social media, or just showing it to co-workers and friends, because it seems realistic enough and many will accept anything to confirm their suspicions and beliefs. This headline, however, is absolutely false along with the entire story as admitted by the owner of The National Report, and Denver Guardian Jestin Coler, in an interview with National Public Radio (NPR) (Sydell). Of course a person would not know that unless they put in research into the

Repeatable observations and testable ideas are used by scientists to work on challenging problems such as climate change and the impact humans have on Earth. They take aspects of biology, chemistry, physics, and mathematics and combine them with their studies of Earth’s geology. Investigations bring about evidence from field work or analytical, theoretical, experimental and modeling studies. Indirect methods such as seismic waves, magnetic fields, radar, sonar, and laboratory experiments must be used at times because direct observations are not possible. Also, the “Earth Science Literacy framework must be a living document that grows along with our changing ideas and concepts.”(BIG Idea 1) For example Pluto was once considered a planet, but technology allowed scientists to determine the size and location in space and determined that it is not a planet. However, now that we have recently been able to project a