This blogspot is exclusive to Mrs.Griffin's students. All blogs are related to class discussion for learning purposes only.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
I just thought this was really...interesting.
Controversy #5 Bruno Mars and Cocaine. Shocker? I know.
Controversy #5:
Bruno Mars and cocaine possession
Title of Article: Bruno Mars taking plea deal in Vegas cocaine case
http://new.music.yahoo.com/bruno-mars/news/bruno-mars-taking-plea-deal-in-vegas-cocaine-case--62005578
Author: PST
Date of Publication: January 28, 2011
Time Accessed: 10:22 PM
We were all led on by his beautiful mellifluous voice. We all sing his songs. We all love him. Similarly, were all cheated. Yes: cheated. Why did Bruno Mars have to ruin the fantasy he engendered in the minds of millions of female diehards? I’m sure we all shared the initial thoughts that generally held a strong sense of denial and rage at the very accusation that Mars would attempt such a change of heart. After reading and digesting the evidence and how Mars was caught with 2.6 grams of cocaine, I couldn’t avoid the rush of disappointment and the feeling of betrayal that lodged itself in my throat. It was stated in the article that Mars claimed that “he'd never used drugs before.” Yep, like the authorities haven’t heard that one before. That was a fabulous attempt to lighten the already burdensome problem you strapped on yourself Mars.
Although I am a fan of his music, I have to confess that the plea deal that he was given was too generous. Cocaine possession is a serious offense and letting a celebrity off with nothing but a slap on the wrist and a “don’t do that again” lecture makes me realize sadly at how our government has degraded throughout the years. The article stated quite nonchalantly. “Mars' real name is Peter Hernandez. Defense lawyers David Chesnoff and Blair Berk said that if he pays a $2,000 fine, performs 200 hours of community service, completes drug counseling and stays out of trouble for a year, no conviction will remain on his record. I was hurt that his name was another lie (even though that was naturally a given in the music industry); nonetheless, I still felt another wave of sorrow pierce my soul. Through all the evidence that proved that yes, Mars is an excellent manipulator of emotions; yes, Mars is an awesome artist; yes, Mars has resorted to drugs and a pansy plea deal, It all comes down to this: I strongly assert that there must’ve been something dreadfully wrong which forced Mars to resort to such demeaning actions, but further measures must be taken to assure the public that celebrities won’t be given leniency from the law because they’re U.S. citizens just like me. Moreover, correct me if I’m wrong, but I remember that “all men are created equal,” but that’s for another controversy.
Controversy #4
Controversy #4:
Man fired for wearing Green Bay Packers Tie
Title of Article: “Chicago man wears Packers tie to work, is promptly fired”
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Chicago-man-wears-Packers-tie-to-work-is-prompt?urn=nfl-311976
Author: MJD
Date of Publication: January 25, 2011
Time Accessed: 10:03 pm
Date Accessed: January 25, 2011
After reading and accessing the article I’ve read and watching the video that came with the article, I sat a moment to think over what I had just learned. One thing I was educated on in AP American Government is that the media is always biased. Where is the relevance between knowing that the media is biased and this man getting fired over wearing a Green Bay Packers tie? The article I read did not further supply its readers with more information regarding
John Stone (the man fired) and his background information. Even though the article almost lured me into its deceptive clutches, I knew better than to walk right into believing everything that the media says because, like I said: the media is always biased. After realizing that I had no idea what John Stone’s “work ethic” was, I had no right to ridiculously point fingers of who made a fault in judgment here. Maybe John Stone was already on the precipice of receiving that ineluctably horrific pink slip, or maybe the general manager of the car dealership, Jerry Roberts unjustly fired John Stone just because the dealership supported the rival of the Green Bay Packers, who, after some degree of research on my part, happen to be the Chicago Bears. Roberts boldly claims, “I don't feel that it was appropriate for him to go directly in contrast with an advertising campaign that we spent a lot of money on.” The question remains: was it just to fire a man because he was wearing a tie that your dealership disapproved of? I assert strongly that not enough information is given to justify any of my assertion fairly.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Controversy of the Week Essay #3: Teen pregnancy perpetuates D.C. poverty
The Washington Post
by Colbert I. King
Published: Saturday, January 8, 2011