The Writer's Face-To-Face Interview

“Is Tom Brady the greatest QB of all time”? The question a 13 year old boy had asked his father asked as they sat down to watch the Bills VS Patriots game after the two had arrived home from a basketball game. “Almost everybody around New England think’s so”.The father answered . As they watched the game they constantly talked about how well he was playing. Just making players that everybody said are “An amazing player” appear as idiots.

Paul Haggis directed an Oscar winning film in 2004 called “Crash”, this movie basically talks about racism and the impact it has on the lives of people in Los Angeles. This movie got a good response from the viewers, as it concentrated on some real harsh realities of racism and asked some hard questions which are generally avoided in movies. This movie clearly promotes the a very delicate issue, and hence requires some detailed assessment. I personally feel the movie was good and it portrayed some very common events of racism, I think “Crash” shows realities, but in a not-so-realistic way.

The articles weakness was when they explained his childhood and his experiences as a boy and a teenager. The information was too brief and didn't have a lot to work with but it still gave a enough for the

The author creates in his literary device a conflict that isn’t really a problem by using facts manipulated to make people think something happened in a way that didn’t really happen. He wants us to see it in his point of view. “An Asian-American sportscaster named Robert Lee was recently yanked by the sports channel ESPN from broadcasting

His intentions in using satire were clear and straightforward. He dealt with realistic issues and the reader can clearly tell that his satiric tone is mocking and serious. This makes his argument very persuasive and successfully results in delivering Taylor’s message. Although The Baby in the Airmail Box also delivered its satirical message well, it’s unrealistic and humorous plot aren’t as persuasive. This makes the delivery of Taylor’s message more powerful in general.

The effectiveness of this example is that it is shockingly realistic. Although, using this as an argument isn’t as credible as it should be, it forces the audience to use sound judgement to agree with him.

The entire narrative focused around a single experience a Mexican illegal immigrant had when crashing his car into a white man. Right when this happened I felt as if the white man would display racial hatred towards the Mexican, but much to my surprise the man wasn’t as hostile as I expected. The white man insisted that he inform the police just to make sure his company

As I bounced along in the saddle, holding onto Dogger as if my life depended on it, he pristinely sat perched upon the saddle with ease as if we weren’t galloping at lightning speed across the field. The wind blew across my face as I pondered how to tell Dr. Liveseys all that had happened that night. About midnight, while the moon was straight up above us, I could see the shadow of the other men who had accompanied Dogger in his rescuing of me and my mother. I looked to my right and recognized the shopkeeper Mr. Tressler; I gave him a friendly wave and he nodded in return. I looked over to my left and was surprised to see a chestnut colored horse carrying the newest inhabitant of our town, a man who had identified himself as Barry. I looked

The video was a very effective introduction to the experiences of prejudice. Jane Elliot's approach allowed the students, who had been friends, to put each other into a category. The children began to turn on one another because of their eye color and in the long run this resulted in one child hitting another, bad attitudes, and hurt feelings. Once the experiment was over the children and adults had realized that discrimmination is real and it can affect every aspect of someones life.

This scenario was very effective because it made them realize the meaning of discrimination and how everyone should be treated equally. Also, i think that this video was very helpful in describing how different diversities could

The overall flow of the podcast made no sense to the audience. The intro was unclear and could of been condensed to make it purely the relevant details. The connection between the ideas seemed scattered and didn’t flow effectively, creating a disruptive order for the audience. An example of this is when Robert Stickgold said “That howlong answer is what a Harvard Professor says instead of I don't know” The ending was too unclear and left the audience confused of what was said. A strong ending that addressed the question and the answers discovered would of left the audience fulfilled rather than lost. Overall, the conclusion did not wrap the topic up and tie all the connections and studies together. As well, the voice used throughout the podcast was unappealing and took away from the intellectual side. The voice used was disappointing, the hosts were too sarcastic with a failed attempt at humour. This is demonstrated when they said “I hate it when people tell me their dreams, I hate it, I want to stab my eye with a fork” “Well I’m never going to tell you about my dreams again” This seemed out of context and took away from the scientific aspect and actual seriousness involved with the topic. Furthermore, the side humour and sarcastic comments did not work constructively and overall made it hard to listen

I didn't detect any particular biases from the film makers. The film was based on the book written by Woodward and Bernstein and therefore the movie was written from their perspectives.

It makes us question if a white person would view a black subject differently or if a gay subject would act differently in the presences of a straight observer. Her conclusion that is that it has no impact is something that I don’t 100% agree with as I believe that we all have intersectional biases that can, perhaps even subconsciously, influence our interactions and how we understand them.

Each scene brought us closer to a climax and built anxiety as well. I was tuned in the whole time and excited to hear what the next piece of dialogue would be. I felt like someone who was a part of the play and I was feeling all the affects of each character and even the employees who were going to lose their jobs. I did not know which side I should defend. Each character played their role to perfection and each one was believable. The one female made it a bit obvious that she was looking behind the audience for either support, a timing signal or cadence, or possibly reading her script from a projected screen that was not visible to the audience. During the play I was able to identify with Seth the most. Time and time again I find myself having to persuade someone to agree with my opinion because I believe my opinion toward a decision is always the best option but unlike Seth I am a bit more open. I have never been faced with a decision as strategic as Seth’s but the ones I have faced in my lifetime have put me in predicaments where I have to back up my opinion with facts to add some credibility to my

I did not detect any biases, as Mr. Deshpande explains what the problem is and includes various examples, compares it to industries that have been successful, as well as pointing out the new challenges that countries, such as Venezuela, are facing. He is looking at the problem from different experiences and offering various alternative solutions.