The Future Of Modernization In The United States And The World

The following was a school paper.

This paper will explore modernization in the United States as well as the world. It will explore how modernization has manifested itself in the modern era, whether it is likely to continue, and whether it has become a world-wide trend. This paper will also take a look at the consequences of modernization and what needs to be done in order to minimize those consequences in the future if indeed anything can be done at all.

The Manifestation Of Modernization

According to Macionis J. J. (2006), Karl Marx believed that modernization manifested itself as an expanding economy based on capitalism. The “class society,” as Marx called it, is stained with inequality because the few rich own more than all of the poor combined. Thus, not everyone’s needs can be met. This class society alienates those who are not well off financially and makes them feel powerless. Social ties from small communities weaken because people become self-centered on opportunities to make money in order to make a living. In other words, the economy is controlled by capitalists and everyone else is left stuck in a rat race. People keep each other at arm’s length unless they feel that social contact benefits them personally because they are too focused on meeting their own needs. The class society theory best reflects the perceptions of the author of this paper because, like many in the modern world, he deals with this reality every day. Modernization has fostered a greedy society.

The Evironmental Consequences Of Modernization

As was discussed above, the rise of capitalism is one consequence of modernization that is far reaching. Modernization may have benefits. For instance, people no longer have to hunt for or grow their own food. We now have access to modern medicine, electricity, air conditioning, and automobiles that take us where we need to go faster than what were possible in the past. However, these modern luxuries come at a high price not only to us but to the environment as well. Pollution is a common consequence of modern societies. For instance, China, a developing nation, has had a problem with air pollution in recent years. Smog from air pollution in China has become a constant problem and is becoming a hazard to the population’s health. The “Smog Hung On For Beijing Olympics” section (2009) in the New Scientist Archive reports that China is trying to reduce the problem by cutting down on factory and traffic emissions. Like all nations that have developed in the modern world, China is dealing with the unforeseen consequence of pollution and have found themselves needing to deal with it before it gets out of control.

As nations grow, so too does their population and they use more and more resources to meet the needs of their people. This is a problem because the earth does not have an endless supply of resources and is slow to recover renewable ones. According to McManus R. (2002), the world’s population is consuming more natural resources than can be replenished by nature. What’s more disturbing is that this is not just a recent development. This has been going on for two decades now. Modern society started using more natural resources than the earth could replenish by the 1980s. By 1999, the earth’s population was using 125 percent of the earth’s capacity to replenish itself. If this trend continues, the earth’s ecological resources could be used up in a matter of generations.

Resources have already become hard to come by in the poorest of nations. According to Kingstone H. (1997), there has always been a shortage of water in the Middle East. However, the increasing population in the area has intensified the problem. Human beings need water to survive. Without an effort to control the population in the Middle East or a coordinated effort to introduce new water supplies to the region, many people in the Middle East may end up dying of thirst. War could even break out for control of what water is left in the region. If trends of modernization continue, the world could be plunged in to chaos as people vie for dwindling resources.

The Future Of Modernization

There are future consequences of modernization as well. Urban slums and sprawl also become a huge problem for many modernized nations. When most people think of urban sprawl, they think of places like New York City with traffic jams and hordes of people in tight subway systems. Modernization is likely to continue in the United States as well as elsewhere in the world with the development of so called “mega-regions.” According to the This Week: Mega Mess section (2010) in Building Design, the United Nations recently warned that the development of merging the world’s largest cities which are forming so called “mega-regions” could result in development that is unbalanced and uncontrollable. In other words, the urban sprawl of New York City could become a reality for vast regions across the United States as well as elsewhere in the world. If we do not learn from the mistakes that these cities have made, we will soon be dealing with traffic jams and crowded public transportation no matter where we live. More careful planning needs to take place in order to balance out the needs of modern societies versus the impacts of meeting those needs. The entire world could be plunged in to chaos if this problem is not taken care of.

Conclusion

Unless much is done to control modernization in America and elsewhere in the world, we will end up with more consequences than we have the resources to deal with. As we head in to the future, we must learn from past as well as present mistakes in order to make better decisions that could end up saving society from collapse. One of the major things holding back progress in this area is politics. There are many agendas in the world and not everyone sees things the same way. However, the reality of these situations cannot easily be ignored. Many are rallying for change and conservation. We are in a privileged time. The information age brought the world closer together. As more people have access to the Internet, we are seeing that we are all in a heap of trouble unless we work together to solve the world’s problems.

References

Macionis, J., J. (2006). Society: The Basics (8th ed.). Prentice-Hall.

Smog Hung On For Beijing Olympics. (2009). New Scientist Archive, 202(2707), 15. Retrieved April 28, 2010, from EBSCOhost database.

McManus, R. (2002). Using Up The Planet: Lay Of The Land. Sierra. Retrieved April 28, 2010, from Gale PowerSearch database.

Kingstone, H. (1997). Political Deep Water: Middle East; Water Supply. Spectator. Retrieved April 28, 2010, from Gale PowerSearch database.

This Week: Mega Mess. (2010). Building Design, 24. Retrieved April 28, 2010, from Gale PowerSearch database.

Ethical Issues In Mass Media

The following was a school paper.

According to Barney R. D. (2003), starting in the 1920s, news organizations sought to self regulate themselves by drafting ethical codes. These codes were enacted to ensure that journalism would become a notable profession much like that of a doctor or lawyer. These professions already had such ethical codes in place which protected the clients and patients as well as the professionals themselves. However, journalistic ethical codes have not always been easy for news organizations to abide by. During their careers, journalists are often pressured in to breaking their codes of ethics and conduct due to a number of reasons but it is usually a result of the pressure of competition. Ethical issues resulting from the pressure to compete are common in news rooms. However, violations of ethical codes can have severe consequences for news organizations, journalists, and the community which news organizations and journalists serve.

A common ethical issue faced by Gasparoli T. (2010) was whether or not to run or story that may create unwarranted hysteria. Gasparoli was faced with the decision of whether or not to run a story about a deceased invasive surgery doctor who was infected with the AIDS virus. The competition had already covered the story and the journalist was under pressure to match the competing news organizations story on the issue. However, the journalist eventually came to the conclusion that the story was not worth running. The journalist came to this conclusion due to the fact that the news organization that they worked for had already run an informative piece on surgical doctors with AIDS. Any further coverage of yet another incident of a surgical doctor with the AIDS virus would have just caused unwarranted hysteria and would not have informed the public about anything that they would have already known.

I agree with the journalist’s decision to not run the story of the surgical doctor with AIDS because I agree that this would have just caused unwarranted hysteria. As someone who keeps track of the news on his way to work, I do not appreciate having to worry about something that is in actuality unimportant and not worth worrying about. There is too much bad news in the world today as it is and more bad news only contributes to stress and anxiety. When news organizations run stories that only add to the stress of people’s lives, they are not acting in the public’s best interests but rather their own best interests. Thus, news organizations should choose stories carefully, even when they are under pressure to release a story to maintain status among competition and make profits for their news organizations.

The effect of the journalist’s decision to not run the story about the surgical doctor who had AIDS was that the journalist had lost the story even though they had put a great deal of work in to producing it. The time that the journalist put in to the story was wasted and the news organization was unable to profit from the story. However, the decision to ditch the story had the effect of not causing unwarranted hysteria in the community which outweighed the need for any short term profits or competitive gain. The journalist did great a service to the community by deciding not to run the story. If the journalist had chosen to go ahead with airing the story, the journalist would have not lost the story and their time would have not been wasted. The story would have likely given the news organization an upper hand over their competition as well as an initial monetary gain. However, the story would have also caused unwarranted hysteria in the community. The journalist would have done a disservice to the community if the journalist would have gone ahead and aired the story. The need to stay competitive and remain financially stable would have been placed over any ethical considerations and there would have been consequences that would have likely not been worth the airing of the story.

According to Rendall S. (2009), news organizations can potentially gain huge profits from airing stories that insight fear from the public and they often do air such stories out of fear of being left behind competitively or losing profits. However, these types of stories can have severe consequences for not only the news organizations but also the journalists and the community which they serve. The journalistic show Predator, which followed police operations as they tracked down and arrested online child predators, was often criticized for creating news to garner fear among the population rather than reporting on any hard facts. The show brought huge ratings for the network that carried it and was at first a financial success. However, the network ignored the criticism that was being brought up against the show until one of the assailants who was followed by the show’s production staff and a police unit killed himself in his home. The network ended up paying an out of court settlement for the incident but could have had a lengthy court battle on their hands. The show was finally scraped after it was revealed that many of the cases that were presented on the show were thrown out of court due to the operations of the show interfering with police evidence. Willfully causing unwarranted fear among the community may be profitable for journalists during a short while, but over the long run this practice does not pay out from both an ethical and a monetary standpoint. The effort that a news network may put in to fear mongering should instead be put in to informing the public with facts and rigorously following journalistic codes of ethics in order to retain professionalism and not be embarrassed by incidents such as these.

There may have also been another complication to airing the story. The fact of whether or not the surgical doctor had performed surgery while he was infected with the AIDS virus was unknown and an interview seemed to indicate that the surgical doctor was not infected with the AIDS virus while he was still performing surgeries. According to Vivian J. C. (2009), the news organization could have been subject to being sued for libel if the story had been aired. Writing false or negative things about an individual makes an individual or company who wrote and published the false and negative things responsible for any damages that were incurred by the victim as a result of the false or negative writings.

According to Baron S. S. (2000), libel lawsuits against news organization more often than not end in lengthy court battles and expensive damage awards. The law is not meant to protect public figures whose works are subject to criticism. However, the law would cover a medical doctor whose practice puts him in relative public scrutiny but otherwise is a private individual. If the doctor were alive, the story about his AIDS infection could have hurt his business, and he would likely have sued. Since he is not alive, the decision to sue would be on the hands of the still remaining hospital where the doctor performed surgery since the news would likely hurt the hospital’s reputation. The decision to not run the story of the surgical doctor who was infected with AIDS was not affected by libel law. However, the news organization would have been subject to being sued if the story had aired. In other words, the news organization would have likely been sued, and the journalist would have likely lost their job as a result of the suit.

Journalistic codes of ethics and conduct were put in place to distinguish journalism as a professional career in much the same way medical ethical codes distinguish doctors as being in a professional career. When journalistic ethical codes are broken, they can tarnish the reputation of a news organization and have severe consequences that can affect the news organization, journalists, and the community. The pressure for journalists to break their ethical codes is greater than ever with continued competition among news organizations and the demand for news organizations to break a story first or match the competition’s story. However, in order for journalism to remain a notable profession in the public’s eye, journalists must abide by their code of ethics and hold true to their own ethical values. Breaking journalistic ethical codes may be profitable at first, but the long term damage that breaking ethical codes can cause does not pay out over time.

References

Barney, R., D. (2003). Journalistic Codes Of Ethics And Conduct. Elsevier Science. Retrieved September 1, 2010, from Credo Reference database.

Rendall, S. (2009). The Online Predator Scare: Profiting From Panic. Counterpoise. 13(1/2). 39-40. Retrieved September 1, 2010, from ProQuest database.

Vivian, J., C. (2009). The Media Of Mass Communication (9th Ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

Baron, S., S. (2000). Law, The Media &...Libel: Old Concerns Renewed. Columbia Journalism Review. 39(3). 55-56. Retrieved September 1, 2010, from ProQuest database.

Website Structure

The following was a school paper.

According to Schneider and Evans (2006), there are three types of website structures that can be used to structure the order of web pages on a website. The first type is linear structure. In this type of structure, web pages have links to proceeding web pages. This type of structure is best used for web documents that follow a linear progression like the text of a book. The third type of structure is called hierarchical structure. In this type of structure, web pages are linked to in order of how specific the information becomes as you read your way through them. This type of structure is good for sites in which you would want to jump to more specific information about any of the website’s topics. The second type of structure is a mix of several different types of structures, for instance, linear and hierarchical structures. I prefer this structure most of all because it gives me more options for navigating the site. This usually makes things easier for the user. Two examples of this type of structure can be found at [http://www.howstuffworks.com] and [http://www.webmd.com]. The front page of these websites link to sources linearly but the sources themselves has links to more specific information. For example, on the front page of HowStuffWorks, Inc. (1998-2010), there is a navigation bar the links linearly to the different topics that the website covers. Once you find the specific topic that you were looking for, the topics page has links to more specific information about that topic.

According to Bos B. (2010), Cascading Style Sheets have the advantage of giving the web developer more control over the look and feel of a website. It gives the developer more control over fonts, colors, and other elements within the web page. CSS is used to create elements on a webpage that are more advanced than what Hyper Text Markup Language can create. It’s great for sites that maintain a template throughout every webpage. The pages themselves look more eye catching and more professional. HTML alone looks more archaic in comparison with a website that uses CSS elements.

References

Schneider, & Evans. (2006). New Perspectives On The Internet (5th ed.). Course Technology.

HowStuffWorks, Inc. (1998-2010). HowStuffWorks. Retrieved June 24, 2010, from http://www.howstuffworks.com

Bos, B. (2010). Cascading Style Sheets. W3C. Retrieved June 24, 2010, from http://www.w3.org

Energy Conservation Speech

The following is a school paper.

Welcome to the Home Owners’ Association meeting on energy conservation. According to Berg L. R. and Hager M. C. (2006), our society depends on energy for most of what we do throughout our day. In order for us to use electronics, remain cool in the winter, drive to and from work, and even have products such as food available at malls and other stores and outlets, we need to consume energy. However, that does not mean that we need to consume as much energy as we currently do. At this point in history, we rely on non-renewable energy resources in order to lead a comfortable and convenient way of life. Fortunately, renewable energy resources in place of non-renewable energy resources can make conserving energy much easier and may even one day break our dependence on non-renewable resources.

What are renewable resources? According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (2010), renewable energy resources are energy resources which can be replenished. These include biomass fuels and water geothermal, wind, and solar energy. What are non-renewable energy resources? Non-renewable resources are resources which cannot be replenished within a reasonable length of time. Non-renewable energy resources include oil, coal, natural gas energies, and uranium used in nuclear power plants.

Each and every member of the Home Owners’ Association can do their part to conserve energy. Turning out lights when not in use and especially turning off air conditioning units and heating units when they do not need to be on are obvious ways in which you can conserve energy. Also, carpooling to work our making your next car purchase a hybrid vehicle are also smart choices. You will not only help save the environment but will also see a significant reduction on your utility bills as well as save money on gasoline. If you use renewable energy resources in your home, you can even sell back energy to power companies and turn a profit. According to Gangemi J. (2006), homes and businesses are using renewable energy resources such as solar, wind, and even cow manure energy to power companies. One Philadelphia company makes a profit of $3,000 a year on top of producing the energy that the company needs.

Governments can also be involved. According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (2009), an energy conservation action plan can help conserve energy and lower levels of pollution within a community. The upfront investment costs of these plans me be daunting at first, but over time the energy saved from these conservation plans can cut costs within a community.

In conclusion, we all depend on energy to lead a comfortable and convenient way of life. There are two types of energy resources; renewable and non-renewable. Renewable energy resources can be replenished within a reasonable amount of time while non-renewable resources cannot. At the present, we depend on non-renewable energy resources. However, by conserving energy in simple ways while increasingly introducing renewable energy resources, home owners and businesses can help the environment and save on their energy costs and even earn a profit. The government can also help out by implementing an energy conservation action plan. One day, our reliance on non-renewable energy resources could very well be a thing of the past. However, action needs to be taken now in order to preserve our future.

References

Berg, L., R. & Hager, M., C. (2006).Visualizing Environmental Science (1st ed.). Wiley.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2010). Energy Sources. EIA Energy Kids. Retrieved September 2, 2010, from http://www.eia.doe.gov

Gangemi, J. (2006). Selling Power Back To The Grid. Bloomberg L.P.. Retrieved September 2, 2010, from http://www.businessweek.com

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2009).Energy Conservation Action Plan. Retrieved September 2, 2010 from http://www.epa.gov

In Network Television Dead In The Water?

This article was originally posted to the now defunct LockerGnome blogging network where it was a featured article.

It seems to happen time and time again. You get interested in a show only for it to be canceled some months later. Who makes the decision for a network television show to get the axe treatment? In many cases, it's not always the viewers. Geeks around the nation found this out the hard way when TechTV was sold. They watched helplessly as their favorite shows were turned in to freak shows or phased out, but from the ashes of TechTV emerged a new medium for providing and consuming content. This medium was made popular by the likes of the same TV hosts from TechTV. Tired of leaving their fates in the hands of television executives, they used the Internet to push out content and generate their own revenue.

Due to the Internet being a global medium, these past TV hosts have been able to reach more ears and eyeballs than they ever were able to with traditional media, but ask any layperson what TWiT or Revision3 is and they're likely to look at you funny. It's sad but true. Television isn't going anywhere soon.

The reality is that Cable TV reaches the masses in a way that new media doesn't. Ever hear someone quote a line at your place of employment from the latest South Park episode? Likely, the answer is yes to that. Ever here someone quote a line from the latest episode of an Internet show at your place of employment? Likely, the answer is no to that. This is because Internet shows have catered to a very niche audience. The audience may be large, but they're not the masses.

The TWiT network has been making strides to change this by making a deal with Roku to have their shows sent to people's television screens and they've recently been planning a morning show that will be designed to reach a broader audience. However, this isn't likely to have much of on affect on network television.

The network television model has been around for a long time. They may not "get" new media, but they know what they are doing in their own arena. Much like older forms of media, television will continue to exist. It may not exist as it did in it's glory, but take a look at radio and print media. They're still around and they will continue to be around for a long time to come.

What do you think? Feel free to sound off.

Console vs. Computer Gaming

This article originally appeared on the now defunct LockerGnome blogging network and was a featured article.

I've been a fan of console gaming since the Nintendo Entertainment System, but lately I've been playing games on my computer more.

I own a PS3. I've spent a lot of time on one of my friend's Xbox 360, but the only game that I found myself totally addicted to on that platform was Uno on Xbox Live. No games on the 360 really kept my interest. There have been some great games for the PS3, but it is in my opinion that they have been few and far between. The only game that I really truly loved for the console so far was Uncharted: Drake's Fortune. Similarly, there has not been that many great games for Nintendo's consoles. Most of what Nintendo offers these days has been gimmicky at best.

Back in the day, I used to be a huge Nintendo fan. I subscribed to Nintendo Power and everything. I spent countless hours playing The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time and Super Mario 64. To this day, I can still run through Mario 64 like it's nothing. The Nintendo 64 was truly my favorite console. It had something that no other Nintendo console has had before or since. There was something magical about that black box and the games that came out for it. I guess you could call it character.

Whatever you call it, that something has unfortunately been lost in this generation of consoles. I started to think that maybe I was just growing out of the "need" to play games, but that bubble was burst when I went back and played those classic games that I loved so much again. I couldn't even get in to the new Nintendo console games like I could those old classics. Could it be that I'm just stuck in the past and am addicted to that old nostalgic feel? Or is it something to do with the quality of console gaming today?

Seeing as I've had a blast lately playing such games as Team Fortress 2, Half Life 2, and the innovative Portal (all produced by the Valve team) on my PC, I'm going to have to go with the latter. I guess you could say that I have officially converted. I'm not getting rid of my PS3 just yet, though. If anything it's a good Blue-Ray movie player. I do still enjoy playing the occasional game on it. I'm just not in love with it. I hope it understands. I hope we can still be friends.