Shaping the mind of the Gunman
I believe many people gasped in shock and terror when the news of the Gunman Cho Seung Hui was reported. Who would have guessed that a young adult of 23 years will take the lifes of 32 innocent people, followed by his own?
From the mouths of those who had interacted with Cho before, the readers understood that Cho had been some kind of loner even before he moved from South Korea to United States. His former classmate quoted him as “a loner obsessed with violence, and had serious personal problems”. Is being brought up in a family that is not so well-to-do the main reason for his loner character? I believe not, for there are many cases of successful figures who came from humble backgrounds.
The large streak of violence and rebellion in Cho might be due to the lack of concern from his family members. He himself lived on the Virginia Tech campus, away from his parents and sister. He was seldom mentioned by his father to his friends and relatives. Instead, his Princeton-graduated sister was the trophy of the family who was always boasted about. The alienation he experienced might have arisen because of the lack of communication between him and the community he had lived in.
Disturbing dark side to technology exhibited during murder
Cho had made use today’s advanced technology to record explanatory videos of why he killed in Virginia Tech. What is so disturbing is that improved technology has enabled Cho to record such videos, package them and mail them before continuing the massacre at Norris Hall.
The airing of the footage on television had made the media complicit in the bloodbath. A much dreaded effect of this is, many mindless people who want to gain ‘fame’ would follow in his bloody footsteps.
However, the internet was put to use while Cho’s bullets shot his victims to death. Chat rooms and emails were filled with rumors of the massacre as news get out. I trust that there should be quite a few students in the campus who received the mails not believing the news. To them, this might just be another one of the many silly pranks played by the many fools out there. This goes to show the level of trust and belief people put into the internet, and should set us into thinking. Should we trust what is passed around on the net in times of emergency or crisis?
27 April, 2007
15 April, 2007
Nowadays, the mass media do not report the news; they make the news.Discuss this with references to recent events.
The mass media exhibits a very influential role over people these days. Slimming advertisements states that only bamboo-thin bodies are beautiful, and most don’t dare to disagree, for pretty top models are indeed that skinny. With this influential power in hand, the media is able to change the mindsets of people, slowly, bit by bit hypnotize human beings into thinking what they want us to believe. Other than being a platform where news is released to the public, the media is slowly evolving into a factory that produces news.
What I world consider worthy news would be news that is of certain level of use to us. However, the variety of news now includes which celebrity has how many new girlfriends or boyfriends, or who has just broken up with whom. This kind of news is of little value to us, perhaps maybe for entertainment, yet may seriously intrude the privacy of the victim. Consider the this news
“Prince William breaks up with girlfriend” April 14, 2007
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/04/14/britain.william.reut/index.html
The poor ex-girlfriend of prince Williams has to cope with the possible harassing by reporters for juicy details while nursing a broken heart. Figures of authority, especially celebrities, have to tolerate the media intruding into their private lives, and making their daily life know to people around the world. Is this fair to them?
Think about this. A murder was committed, and the mother of the poor victim has to face similar harassment by reporters who bombarded her with numerous questions regarding the incident. Her grief was refreshed over and over again by insensitive human beings that did not care about her feelings. The whole incident was blown up, and was reported in the newspapers for days, if not weeks. The family of the suspect had to share the shame, humiliation and cold stares of the public who recognize them due to their photographs published in the papers. Is this not the consequences caused by the media? http://www.channelnewsasia.com/cgi-bin/search/search_7days.pl?status=&search=Huang+na&id=157756
Last year, a school appeared in the papers, but not for a glorious reason though. A female student had posted a video showing two boys trying to act as if they were in a fight. This video caused a stir, due to the media’s massive report on how school students are getting more violent nowadays. Although I do not agree with what the students did, I do not think the media should make such a big hoo-ha on what they had done in a moment of playfulness and foolishness. The school’s reputation suffered as a result of the news report, for it takes only a few naughty students in the news to portray a bad image of the institute. ‘They do not seem to be doing it for a video, but are captured anyway on film.’ The media’s sarcastic comment will definitely aggravate the situation. http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/printfriendly/0,4139,107194,00.html
Although I would say that the media do report news, they would also ‘accidentally’ add in some things, thus making them the news they ‘create’. Perhaps to them, this is inevitable as they need audiences, for that is also what the advertisers who pay them want. The incidents mentioned above may have happened up to two years ago, but the issues are still relevant, and so I would consider them recent and worth some thought to it.
What I world consider worthy news would be news that is of certain level of use to us. However, the variety of news now includes which celebrity has how many new girlfriends or boyfriends, or who has just broken up with whom. This kind of news is of little value to us, perhaps maybe for entertainment, yet may seriously intrude the privacy of the victim. Consider the this news
“Prince William breaks up with girlfriend” April 14, 2007
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/04/14/britain.william.reut/index.html
The poor ex-girlfriend of prince Williams has to cope with the possible harassing by reporters for juicy details while nursing a broken heart. Figures of authority, especially celebrities, have to tolerate the media intruding into their private lives, and making their daily life know to people around the world. Is this fair to them?
Think about this. A murder was committed, and the mother of the poor victim has to face similar harassment by reporters who bombarded her with numerous questions regarding the incident. Her grief was refreshed over and over again by insensitive human beings that did not care about her feelings. The whole incident was blown up, and was reported in the newspapers for days, if not weeks. The family of the suspect had to share the shame, humiliation and cold stares of the public who recognize them due to their photographs published in the papers. Is this not the consequences caused by the media? http://www.channelnewsasia.com/cgi-bin/search/search_7days.pl?status=&search=Huang+na&id=157756
Last year, a school appeared in the papers, but not for a glorious reason though. A female student had posted a video showing two boys trying to act as if they were in a fight. This video caused a stir, due to the media’s massive report on how school students are getting more violent nowadays. Although I do not agree with what the students did, I do not think the media should make such a big hoo-ha on what they had done in a moment of playfulness and foolishness. The school’s reputation suffered as a result of the news report, for it takes only a few naughty students in the news to portray a bad image of the institute. ‘They do not seem to be doing it for a video, but are captured anyway on film.’ The media’s sarcastic comment will definitely aggravate the situation. http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/printfriendly/0,4139,107194,00.html
Although I would say that the media do report news, they would also ‘accidentally’ add in some things, thus making them the news they ‘create’. Perhaps to them, this is inevitable as they need audiences, for that is also what the advertisers who pay them want. The incidents mentioned above may have happened up to two years ago, but the issues are still relevant, and so I would consider them recent and worth some thought to it.
08 April, 2007
YouTube
YouTube has become a convenient source of information for many, whether is it for work or leisure. In case you still do not know what YouTube is, it is actually a website where people post videos, or watch the videos people post. Each day an estimated 100 million videos are watched by people who visit YouTube, which was launched in February 2005. In my opinion, YouTube has the good and bad sides to it. We can only count on the audience to make the good out of it. However, I agree to a large extent that YouTube has no ethics, that it has been created for the sole purpose of entertainment and money.
Ethics are ‘the rules or standards governing the conduct of a person or the members of a profession’. The reason why I think YouTube has no ethics is because it has limited control over the contributors of the videos. Although there are cases whereby videos deemed extremely inappropriate are removed promptly, it is very difficult for YouTube to remove each and every such videos before they spread like wildfire among netizens.
It would be unfair to Youtube if we say it has been created for only two major purposes--for entertainment and money. Although it is true to a large extent that Youtube is a great form of entertainment to many, and an excellent source of revenue from advertisers due to the high viewership, it also serves as a convenient source for users to share useful information from all fields. For instance, a doctor in UK has posted videos on YouTube with nurses demonstrating how to sample blood sugar levels and use an inhaler. This is a case whereby educational and handy knowledge is conveyed to the audience.
However, there is one incident that strongly imposes upon us a very bad impression of YouTube. YouTube’s owner, Google had declined to remove a 44-second film showing graffiti over the Thai king's face. This film also shows a feet being placed over the Thai king's face - an offensive act to the Thais, who consider feet dirty. This issue led me into deep thoughts. Why does Google allow such a disrespectful video to be aired? Is it out to create something out of nothing? May I know of what use is the video to viewers?
The wide variety of funny, interesting, unique and unbelievable videos posted on Youtube provides a cheap source of entertainment (people only need to pay for internet and electricity charges) which in turn attracts millions of viewers daily. The founders of Youtube in turn get to earn lucrative incomes from advertisers that flock to them. Thus ,I agree to a large extent that “YouTube has no ethics, it's been created for the sole purpose of entertainment and money.”
Ethics are ‘the rules or standards governing the conduct of a person or the members of a profession’. The reason why I think YouTube has no ethics is because it has limited control over the contributors of the videos. Although there are cases whereby videos deemed extremely inappropriate are removed promptly, it is very difficult for YouTube to remove each and every such videos before they spread like wildfire among netizens.
It would be unfair to Youtube if we say it has been created for only two major purposes--for entertainment and money. Although it is true to a large extent that Youtube is a great form of entertainment to many, and an excellent source of revenue from advertisers due to the high viewership, it also serves as a convenient source for users to share useful information from all fields. For instance, a doctor in UK has posted videos on YouTube with nurses demonstrating how to sample blood sugar levels and use an inhaler. This is a case whereby educational and handy knowledge is conveyed to the audience.
However, there is one incident that strongly imposes upon us a very bad impression of YouTube. YouTube’s owner, Google had declined to remove a 44-second film showing graffiti over the Thai king's face. This film also shows a feet being placed over the Thai king's face - an offensive act to the Thais, who consider feet dirty. This issue led me into deep thoughts. Why does Google allow such a disrespectful video to be aired? Is it out to create something out of nothing? May I know of what use is the video to viewers?
The wide variety of funny, interesting, unique and unbelievable videos posted on Youtube provides a cheap source of entertainment (people only need to pay for internet and electricity charges) which in turn attracts millions of viewers daily. The founders of Youtube in turn get to earn lucrative incomes from advertisers that flock to them. Thus ,I agree to a large extent that “YouTube has no ethics, it's been created for the sole purpose of entertainment and money.”
01 April, 2007
‘The teenage years are the best years of one’s life.’ Would you agree with this view?
You can always hear parens telling their children, " Cherish the years you have being a student, where you only need to study and not worry about anything else. You will come to learn of how good it is to be a teenager, only when you enter the adult world and start working." Is that really true? I wonder. A lot of teenagers are always hoping to grow up almost instantly just to gain the freedom they yearned for. Other than the freedom adults get to enjoy, comes the many problems they have to face and solve. After much thought, I feel that the teenage years are indeed the best years of one's life.
Firstly, most of the teenagers, especially in Singapore, do not have to worry about financial troubles. We are well provided for by their parents, and receive a regular weekly or monthly allowance. If we can exercise thriftiness, we can even save up some money and buy something that we like once in a while to pamper ourselves. On the other hand, working adults have to constantly worry about receiving the dismissal letter, especially so in times of recession. There is tremendous stress for the adults to keep themselves employed in order to feed themselves, for it is deemed inappropriate for them to take money from their parents anymore when they are already grown-ups.
In addition, teenagers as students, get to enjoy long holidays. Although some of our weekends are to be spent doing the huge piles of homework, if we manage our time well, we can still reserve some time for funand joy with our family and friends. In the case of adults, even though they can do likewise, they do not get to enjoy the June and December holidays like students do! They only have around 10-20 days of leave that they can be use annually. During the December holidays, teenagers can let their hair down and enjoy their break thoroughly, without much homework to bind them down. Some fortunate kids can even earn themselves a vacation overseas if their end-of-year results are up to their parents’ expectations!
Although some parents hold a very tight rein over their children, most of them allow their children to enjoy some freedom, be it the wall colour of their bedroom or the clothes that should be sitting in their wardrobes. If we teenagers behave ourselves and choose our circle of frineds wisely, staying out late for a barbeque or having a sleep-over at a friend’s house once in a blue moon should not be a problem. Even when parents are overly protective of us children, we should understand as it is our safety that they care about. There are frequent reports in the papers about adults in their twenties getting involved in armed fights, speed driving or engaging themselves in illegal activities. This is what happens when their parents are ‘not allowed’ to have control over them, for they are officially adults at the age of 21. Isn’t it better to be teenagers, for our parents to care and protect us, giving us gentle reminders when we are going off the track?
Thus, I think that being a teenager has more boon than bane, and teenage hood is the time where we get a good balance between studies and play. All the more, teenagers should stop whining about wanting to become an adult and escape the ‘clutches’ of parents and teachers!
Firstly, most of the teenagers, especially in Singapore, do not have to worry about financial troubles. We are well provided for by their parents, and receive a regular weekly or monthly allowance. If we can exercise thriftiness, we can even save up some money and buy something that we like once in a while to pamper ourselves. On the other hand, working adults have to constantly worry about receiving the dismissal letter, especially so in times of recession. There is tremendous stress for the adults to keep themselves employed in order to feed themselves, for it is deemed inappropriate for them to take money from their parents anymore when they are already grown-ups.
In addition, teenagers as students, get to enjoy long holidays. Although some of our weekends are to be spent doing the huge piles of homework, if we manage our time well, we can still reserve some time for funand joy with our family and friends. In the case of adults, even though they can do likewise, they do not get to enjoy the June and December holidays like students do! They only have around 10-20 days of leave that they can be use annually. During the December holidays, teenagers can let their hair down and enjoy their break thoroughly, without much homework to bind them down. Some fortunate kids can even earn themselves a vacation overseas if their end-of-year results are up to their parents’ expectations!
Although some parents hold a very tight rein over their children, most of them allow their children to enjoy some freedom, be it the wall colour of their bedroom or the clothes that should be sitting in their wardrobes. If we teenagers behave ourselves and choose our circle of frineds wisely, staying out late for a barbeque or having a sleep-over at a friend’s house once in a blue moon should not be a problem. Even when parents are overly protective of us children, we should understand as it is our safety that they care about. There are frequent reports in the papers about adults in their twenties getting involved in armed fights, speed driving or engaging themselves in illegal activities. This is what happens when their parents are ‘not allowed’ to have control over them, for they are officially adults at the age of 21. Isn’t it better to be teenagers, for our parents to care and protect us, giving us gentle reminders when we are going off the track?
Thus, I think that being a teenager has more boon than bane, and teenage hood is the time where we get a good balance between studies and play. All the more, teenagers should stop whining about wanting to become an adult and escape the ‘clutches’ of parents and teachers!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)