Research Paper Revisions

Original:

As previously stated, after the horrific acts that were witnessed during WWII the naitons of the world felt the need to address torture as a legal issue. Laws were set in place through the 1948 Universal Declaraction of Human Rights, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the 1984 Convention Against Torture. During these conventions torture was defined as:

"Severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental; is intentionally inflicted on a person; for such purposes as; obtaining from him/her or a third person information or a confession, punishing him/her for an act s/he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him/her or a third person" (Amnesty International USA).

However because of the vagueness of these laws torture still continues to be used in up to as many as 160 countries today. For example, Soviet and Chinese communist regimes in the second half of the century tortured political and religious dissdents. This is all possible because all these nations deny any claim of torture through either interperative denial, implicatory denial, or literal denial (Hajjar).


Revised:

During WWII the Allied nations watched as Germany and Japan tortured their prisoners of war for information. Once the war ended torture was addressed as a legal issue because it was seen as cruel and inhuman. Laws were set in place through the 1948 Universal Declaraction of Human Rights, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the 1984 Convention Against Torture. During these conventions torture was defined as:

"Severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental; is intentionally inflicted on a person; for such purposes as; obtaining from him/her or a third person information or a confession, punishing him/her for an act s/he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him/her or a third person" (Amnesty International USA).

Torture however, continued throughout the late 20th century. For example Soviet and Chinese communist regimes in the second half of the century tortured political and religious dissdents. This was possible because the definition of torture is vague. Countries use three distinct types of denial to evade punishment for using torture techniques; interperative denial, implicatory denial, and literal denial (Hajjar).

Journal 12: thesis statement

Since the 9/11 attacks on the U.S. actions that can be considered act of torture have been taking place on "terrorists." Though some of these actions violate international laws on torture it has been considered necessary to stop further terrorist acts. By comparing the modern methods of information retrival used by the U.S. to other countries', accessing the effectiveness of these methods and showing its importance of helping the United States win the war on terror moraly justifies the U.S. use of torture.

Revisions

Bad version:
From listening to the words of the students and seeing the rush to buy what was left of the shot glasses downtown it can be said that this decision really won’t help much of anything. A common reaction to the ban can be seen in a letter to the editor written after an article was posted in the Daily Collegian on the subject. In his letter Blaze Linette said “God knows the student body doesn’t need shot glasses with logos to consume 1.5 fl oz of liquor — plastic cups, drinking straight out of the bottle, or slurping it off the kitchen counter all work fine.” With this being the main consensus of the students it can be seen that this ban really isn’t doing anything to stop excessive student drinking. As Blaze also says in his letter, Penn State should address the actual issue of excessive drinking instead of trying to run away and separate themselves from it. However, Penn State has taken into consideration the amount their students drink and will continue to drink regardless of any bans set in place. With that consideration Penn State took some steps into improving the safety of their students by mandating an online education course. Those some students say the course was a waste of time it did force some other students who weren’t aware of some of the risks of alcohol to learn some new safety tips and facts. Though the online education course didn’t make a huge impact it at least forced student’s to know some of the general rules of alcohol safety. If Penn State truly wants to curve their image they should continue with perhaps a more interactive or improved online alcohol course. Also a since all students are required to take a first year seminar it would be helpful to offer an alcohol and general safety course. Though students may disagree with some of the things they hear they will be forced to learn about alcohol and how to drink responsibly, at least to some extent, to pass the course. Though this may be annoying for some they will have no real reason to lash out against it.

Revised version:

Students from Penn State had a very negative response to this ban. An example of this can be seen in a letter to the editor written after an article was posted in the Daily Collegian;

“God knows the student body doesn’t need shot glasses with logos to consume 1.5 fl oz of liquor — plastic cups, drinking straight out of the bottle, or slurping it off the kitchen counter all work fine” (Blaze Linette).

Many students feel the same way as Blaze. As Blaze also says in his letter, Penn State should address the actual issue of excessive drinking instead of running away and separating themselves from the problem. However, Penn State has taken into consideration the amount their students drink, and will continue to drink, regardless of any bans set in place. Because of that Penn State took some steps into improving the safety of their students by mandating an online education course. Some students say the course is a waste of time, but there were no real complaints made. The online education course may not have made a huge impact but it at least forced students to know some of the general rules of alcohol safety. If Penn State truly wants to change their image they should approach the issue through education.

This can be accomplished by Penn State having a more effective online alcohol course. Also since all students are required to take a first year seminar it would be helpful to offer an alcohol and general safety course. Though students may disagree with some of the things they hear they will be forced to learn about alcohol and how to drink responsibly, at least to some extent, to pass the course. Though this may be annoying for some they will have no real reason to lash out against it.

A Modest Proposal

I thought Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal was very clever and well written. Though sometimes I had trouble understanding what he was trying to say because I have problems comprehending things written in old english such as this. Swift starts out by painting the scene of a poor household in Dublin and introduces us to the problem that the entire paper revolves around; poverity in Dublin. He then goes into giving statistic and facts about how many people are in the kingdom and how many children there are who can not be cared for and asked the question; what should be done with these children? He then talks about how he met a man who told him that children taste delicious and in my opinion gets off topic for a couple paragraphs and rants about how children should be eaten, women should be bred, children's skin should be used as gloves and boots and even the elderly or executed should be sold and eaten. However he then gets back on topic and clearly states all the advantages to his proposal which is where I think, if the piece wasn't satirical, would be the important part of the paper. He explains how eating children will help by lowering the population of those who are not helping to bring income home, poor tenants would then have something valuable and marriages would improve, tavern food would improve, and there would be more money to circulate among less people. After giving his final arguments for his idea Swift then changes the attention to the ideas that others have offered and says they are no better than his idea of eating children. He also says he does not want to hear about other people's plans unless there is a realistic attempt to put them into action. He then again proposes his idea and ends the paper with painting an imagine of suffering children again. In my opinion the paper was very effective. I like his use of satire to insult the ideas of all others in Dublin and make the point that no real action is being taken and something needs to change. He also makes you feel sympathtic for the children that he is also proposing be eaten because they are worthless which takes a lot of talent to do.

Comparison of a Super Hero

Captain America (Bryan Hitch): Strong bold lines accentuate the muscles in this picture to show strength. Also the lines on his forehead show concentration and struggle. All things point to signs of a true super hero. The head tilted down and condensed image shows humility. The bright, bold colors bring out the intensity of the picture. Evoking conflicting emotions and making you feel for the figure who is hunched over in what seems to be pain and anger. Also the shield is a large part of the image which is Captain America's tell tale weapon and symbolizes his ability to protect America. This image portrays a true super hero full of strength, conflict and humility.


Captain America (Mark Behm): This image is made from soft lines and dull colors. The soft, curved lines portray a relaxed posture. This gives a feeling of laziness. The curve of the upturned chin makes the character seem cocky or arrogant. The proportions of the head to the body give the character a cartoonish look. The dull colors give a negative, dull mood. All these things characteristics give the image the opposite feelings of what a super hero is. In fact the person in the figure does not appear to be a super hero at all. Instead he seems like a normal man placed in a Captain America costume.

Investigative Report

My report is on the recent issue of Penn State banning shot glasses with Penn State logos in order to address the high-risk drinking that Penn State has become so famous for. Because of this it is difficult for me to pick a scene but after thinking about it my opening scene would be a description of the downtown stores which used to sell these shot glasses. On East College Avenue alone multiple stores such as Lion's Pride, the Student Bookstore and Mclanahan's all sold Penn State shot glasses both for their use in student drinking and novelty items. Shelves would be dedicated to all different types of shot glasses. These shot glasses had such things as the Penn State logo, the lion shrine, the Nittany lion and the university seal, all of which are banned now from appearing on shot glasses. When the announcement of banning shot glasses was made, these shops were flooded with students trying to get their hands on what could be some of the last ever made Penn State shot glasses. Now a shot glass with a Penn State logo can be found in almost every students' dorm or apartment. However most these shot glasses aren't being used in fear of breaking them. Most are displayed as a trophy on a ledge or desk for all future students who aren't lucky enough to own one to see.

So far I have only interviewed 4 freshmen students though tomorrow I intend to interview 2 seniors and a worker/senior Penn State student at McLanahan's. I've also found some quotes from Penn State's spokesman Bill Mahon, in the Daily Collegian, on the subject. My three favorite quotes I have were from 3 different students whose opinions varied greatly. The first student, Katie Meckler, fully supported the banning of shot glasses. The quote I chose from her is "I think it is a great idea that they banned them. School Spirit is not about taking as many shots as you can." The second quote is from Rachel Phares who disagrees with the banning of shot glasses. Her quote was "As soon as I saw in the Collegian that Penn State shot glasses were being banned I went down town to buy some. Honestly, drinking is part of Penn State so you have to have those shot glasses even if its just for memorabilia." My third quote is from Chris Behr who is strongly apposed to the shot glasses being banned and does not see how it will help Penn State's reputation. His quote is "I think that it is kind of ridiculous that Penn State thinks that if they ban the Penn State logo shot glasses that they will eliminate students desire to drink. I guess its an effort to silence alumni saying that Penn State does nothing to combat student drinking."

Most of the facts I found were from the Collegian. It was difficult to find facts online because most websites just contained negative feedback on the decision. Though the opinions from some of these sites were interesting and I've noted them to possibly use in my paper. One fact I found from a Collegian article was about the specifics on what exactly was banned from the shot glasses. "University logos include: the university seal, the Nittany Lion Shrine, the mascot, the university identity mark, the Intercolligate Athletics logo and Pride of the Lion designs, according to the Penn State licensing program's website." Another fact I found from this article was "the Penn State logo policy states that non references to drugs, alcohol or tobacco-related products may be used in conjunction with university symbols." This article can be found at http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2010/11/01/shots.aspx. I found another Collegian article which contained information on how students flooded to the Student Bookstore the Monday it was announced that the shot glasses were being banned. "One male student came in and bought $85 dollars worth of shot glasses." http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2010/11/02/shots_folo.aspx. I found a third article from the Collegian that talked about the reaction of Big Ten schools to the shot glass ban. The main fact I found here was that under this new policy Penn State logos can still be on beverage containers such as beer mugs and flasks because they can hold other liquids besides alcohol http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2010/11/03/shots_folo.aspx.

While interviewing students and reading articles the two most interesting thing I came across were the opinions of other schools and if question; is this really effective or will Penn State students ignore it and drink just as much? I intend to continue looking on online forums and other school newspapers along with interviewing some students from other schools to hear their opinions on the ban. I want to know if they feel like they are losing collectible opportunities and if they think Penn State is over reacting with this ban. I also intend to ask Penn State students if they believe that this ban will effect Penn State's drinking habits at all. I also intend to quote some websites I've found which have very negative feedback on this ban and state how they don't believe this will change Penn State in the slightest.

Journal 4

The first question in "What makes it an Investigative Report?" is; does the writer define the issue in terms that will make sense to the audience for the report? In the "#1 Party School" broadcast I felt that the issue was clearly defined in the opening scene by showing how drunk college students can be disrupting and damaging to people who live near the campus. This led into the main conflict of how drinking at Penn State can effect its students and the people who live in the area.

The second question is "What reasons are given for why the issue needs to be investigated immediately?" There were several reasons given. The first was that the drunken college kids damaged personal property and disturbed people's sleep. This then led to more serious problems like kids breaking into people's houses to find a comfortable place to sleep, fake I.D.'s, acceptable underage drinking and assaulting police officers due to the effect of alcohol. Finally they finished the reasons with most important reason which was that alcohol can result in death or injury for students.

The third question is "Are facts and details given to explain how the issue affects different groups that might have an interest in or connection to the issue?" Facts are presented in the forms of eye witness accounts through out the documentary. For example talking to people who have seen others pee in their yard along with going into a frat to see the environment and activities that take place in one. Also the documentary uses Dado's death as an example of how alcohol can injure student.

"Whom does the writer quote? Whose perspectives are represented in direct quotations? Whose perspectives are not represented through the use of quotations?" This documentary was heard from a large array of view points. People's whose perspectives were actually heard consisted of, a women who lived in University Park, a police officer from Penn State, various Penn State students going out to party and the friends of Dado. Various quotes from Graham Spanier's speeches on alcohol related problems at Penn State were also used. Student perspectives on the alcohol situation however were generalized. The document made it seem as if all Penn State students found drinking acceptable and did not want it to end on campus.

"What specific conclusion about the issue does the writer want readers to reach?" The main conclusion I felt was the fact that something had to be done about the drinking and partying that happens at Penn State because it is harmful. However the document acknowledged the fact that this was easier said then done because various steps which had been taken in the past to change the drinking habits of Penn State students weren't very effective.

I personally enjoyed the beginning of this broadcast because it was interesting for me to hear other people's perspectives on Penn State college students and their behaviors. Up until listening to this broadcast I had gotten so used to seeing some of the things downtown that I just accepted them as normal behavior until I heard them talked about. The progression of seriousness in this broadcast I felt was effective. It didn't start out immediately by saying drinking was bad and should be ended. It was taken from multiple perspectives, some saying the behaviors alcohol had caused was unacceptable while others talked about how they were glad that the students could have fun during thier free time. Mostly, I enjoyed listening to the cop talk and hearing his story and how he had to deal with Penn State students.