The Mulsim Show

Clarence Page discusses the extreme criticism of a new show on TLC featuring a typical "All-American Muslim" family in Michigan. Numerous protesters have boycotted the show as well as a past sponsor: Lowe's. The opposition states that the show lacks the true nature of Muslims as "the show leaves out: The violence that Muslim fanatics have committed in the name of Islam." which is absurd and unrealistic, as Page expresses. Page isn't as openly bias compared to other articles, yet in this article he is simply more informative of a serious social problem of those less educated and open-minded. Page diminishes the protestors criticism through syntax as well as expression of absurdity; for example," The move touched off protests joined by music mogul Russell Simmons and actor Kal Penn, among other celebrities, and a second boycott campaign — against Lowe's." Page also reflects on a widely understood and past problem with African Americans. By referring to the past, Page is able to let the reader compare and conclude who the "bad guy" truly is.

NASCAR

Clarence Page comments on the government's decision to send Michelle Obama and Jill Biden-the vice president's wife, to a NASCAR race to endorse Joining Forces, an initiative to support military families.The women were terribly booed by the crowd, yet many, including Page, don't criticize the public's political correctness. Rather, Page criticizes such "unnecessary" travels across the countries. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-1127-page-20111127,0,4080411.column Page is clearly bias in this article as he consistently bashes the government's use of the hard-earned money of the people. As he describes the details of the event, he constantly reminds the reader of how wasteful the government is being. However, Page supports his position on this matter with a possible reason for why the crowd booed the first lady: "expressing their resentment at 'paying millions of dollars" for the first family's vacations.'" Page personally adds afterwards: "Somehow I don't think the White House travel budget was on their minds." This additional explanation for the boos gives Page credibility. However, his strong bias comments which are irrelevant to the topic (for example " Last February he went personal in attacking her campaign against childhood obesity with, 'it doesn't look like Michelle Obama follows her own nutritionary, dietary advice.' Ha! Look who's talking.") loses his credibility as it seems as if he is bashing more than reporting.

Opposition Image

Would Daugherty consider this as Animal Cruelty? Why eat meat?

When Daugherty writes about the cruel actions done to animals, she ultimately hold one party responsible, while supporting her side with venerable people. This can be seen in the first post about the running of the bulls as she uses the governor's worries about the event to prove its irrationality. Similarly, in the horse post, she uses a video which was made" by Donny Moss, filmmaker and winner of a 2009 Genesis award for BLINDERS, his documentary on the horse-carriage industry in New York and the inhumane conditions under which the horses work and live". Daugherty also depicts her opposition as illogical: "There’s nothing wrong with eating dogs. If they’re farmed in an inhumane fashion, then go after the farmers. No need to ban dog meat altogether". Here Daugherty is showing her audience how senseless and callous her opposition is. In a way, Daugherty challenges the responsiveness an responsibility of those in power as they fail to deal with such situations. She criticizes the dormancy of such controversies and ultimately blames those who don't really do anything about it.

Hunting

Daugherty implores everyone to watch a youtube video called "Making Hunting a Thing of the Past", in order for it to win an award and ultimately be able to be seen worldwide. After emphasizing this importance, she goes into the background of fox hunting, portraying its cruelty . She depicts how "Fox hunting involves the tracking, chasing and killing of a helpless, terrorized fox--traditionally a red fox—by a pack of trained foxhounds and a group of hunters".

Poor Horsies :/

BLINDERS, a documentary on the horse carriage industry on in New York and the inhumane conditions under which the horses work and live, provoked a large number of activists and animal lovers. He primarily targets the ASPCA and NY City Hall, " which he claims have failed repeatedly to act to stop a tradition that has no place in contemporary NY streets with bumper-to-bumper traffic and recurrent injuries that maim and kill the horses". Both the benefits to the city and the cruelty to the horses are considered and analyzed as this dispute goes about. Daugherty emphasizes the animal cruelty as she solely focuses on how the horses have to work hard in the rain, snow, sleet, everything. She does not support the opposition; when she does, she suggests their selfish and irrational excuses.

Dog-Meat Festival Controversy

The 2011 dog-meat festival in China ( which has been executed since 1389) was stopped by tens of thousands online protests. This tradition is a commemoration of a local military victory. The dogs in the city were killed so that they wouldn't bark and warn the enemy their presence. As a matter of fact, currently, some butcher's cut the dog's live to ensure it's freshness. However, not all of China agrees with this holiday; 91% of China (according to polls) say NO to this carnival. Daugherty alternates with different views on the ban of this festival as she mentions many who approve of this action and then one opposition who believes, " There’s nothing wrong with eating dogs. If they’re farmed in an inhumane fashion, then go after the farmers. No need to ban dog meat altogether".

Columnist Phyllis Daugherty

1) In Cave Creek, Arizona, a running of bulls took place October 15-16. 2) One major issue was that the person responsible, Immordino, for the event had not obtained the 3 million dollar insurance policy he promised. 3) Animal activists perceived this as animal abuse and urged the town to stop this event. 4) The mayor is neutral to this issue as he agrees it's dangerous, yet claims the town is feisty and is fit for this.

This image very well portrays the issues occuring at the moment. One can distinguish government from the people as the soldiers are perfectly lined up in contrast with the chaotic protesters cramped and hanging from the wall. However, the image answers the question of "who's boss" as the protesters are seen on the wall, almost being admired by the witnesses as they look up to them. With the protesters having a bigger authority compared to the tiny soldiers, it can be assumed that the protesters are stronger in will and power. Also, in the photograph, the long wall stretches long and tall to seem incapable of being climbed upon. There is also a horizontal bar separating the protesters from the soldiers; indicating a misunderstanding or an opposition.

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Editorials/Article.aspx?id=237564


This editorial focuses on the reaction of the Egyptians as a result of this event. The paper suggests that Egyptians should worry about the future rather than complain about the present and blame the opponent. The editorial explains a few events, like the tearing of the Israeli flag and the accidental killing of three or five Egyptian men, which increased the tensions between Israel and Egypt even more. The Editorial strongly encourages Egypt to focus on the transition to the post-Mubarak era.