Hearst :: Essays Papers

Hearst INTRODUCTION American journalism and mass media were both profoundly influenced by a very dominating figure. In the last decade of the 19th century up until the end of the first half of the 20th century, William Randolph Hearst was a mega-force to be reckoned with. Hearst was a famous American publisher who built up the nation’s largest chain of newspapers. He was also a political figure and one of the leading figures during the Spanish-American War period. In his newspapers, he introduced a sensational journalistic style of writing and spent millions of dollars to fascinate and captivate readers. This kind of journalism was described by critics as â€Å"Yellow Journalism.† During his lifetime, even up until today, he has been respected, feared, loathed and envied by his friends and enemies alike. A man in his position was capable of being the greatest constructor or the most destructive evil of the Nation. BIOGRAPHY On 29th day of April 1863, in San Francisco, California, Phoebe Apperson Hearst, in great torment, gave birth to a boy in her bedroom. The boy was named William Randolph Hearst. William Randolph Hearst was the only child of George and Phoebe Hearst. His father, George Hearst ( 1820-1891 ), was not born into a rich and wealthy family. He did his share of the labor at a lead mine near his home. Mining had always fascinated him even from his childhood years. He later earned the nickname the â€Å"Boy-That-Earth-Talked-To† from the miners he was working with. With tremendous luck, hard working and blessings, he worked his way to become a multimillionaire miner and had also become a United States Senator from California ( 1886-1891 ). His mother, Phoebe Apperson Hearst ( 1842-1919 ), was a philanthropist and a school teacher from Missouri. She had gained national fame for her gifts to needy students and educational institutions. While Hearst was a boy, his father traveled throughout the West, from Mexico to Alaska, becoming a partner in three of the largest mining discoveries ever recorded in American history: the Comstock ( silver ) Lode in Nevada, the Homestake ( gold ) Mine in South Dakota and the Anaconda (copper) Mine in Montana.

Jose Aquino

Sure we have gone a very long way to back in the days Of Martin Luther King J. R. , Blacks/Minorities are not so bluntly discriminated but now in days its as if this new form of subliminally resentful actions are being brought to this day and age. Examples like the recent tragedies regarding Mike Brown and Erick Gardner make my argument even more clear to understand and to prove. Of course there are a few people who believe that the actions the police officers took were necessary. Perhaps they might say, ‘ ‘They asked for it,† â€Å"They Resisted arrest,† they had it coming. Y to them that events such as the police killings are a nexus where white racial resentment and white supremacy are made to confront black/ minority pain, reasonable hurt, and the righteous anger. Why is it that the media has always showed the â€Å"gang member† as a Black or Hispanic male? These are subjects we should be asking ourselves and realize how that can be crucial to some ones perception about a group of people and think about the repercussions all this can have to future generations. Just recently released to the public was data that disappointingly proves the Boston Police department has used racially biased policing.Researchers concluded that police targeted Blacks in 63. 3% of encounters, while Blacks make up less than a quarter of Boson's population. This racial disparity cannot be explained. They also found that Blacks were more likely than whites to be subjected to repeat police/civilian encounters and to be frisked or searched. The bottom line is that race was a significant factor driving the BED'S stop and frisk practices. Those on the opposing side would become speechless to this information. These people who were randomly targeted ere minding there business and going about there day.But because of this current view that society has emplace they were boxed in to this stereotypical box, leading to them being victimized. How do we put an end to all of this? First we need to know our own conscious and unconscious feelings. Perhaps think about what stereotypes we may have and ways we might eliminate these believes or figure out why these ideas have been introduced and of course find the ROOT of this. But perhaps the most important but most difficult is to educate ourselves well enough to hanged the way people think and work within the system so that new ideas and change can be accomplished.The simple fact is that racism both personal, institutional, and structural remains a force in American life. It impacts the lives of everyone, whites included because the result of tension , and shapes the broad material circumstances of minorities in countless negative ways. Yes, there are many ways in which we've made progress, and we should celebrate them. But just because we don't face the racism of the past doesn't mean we've solved the problem.

Locke and Shakespeare

It is important to note that Locke’s â€Å"Second Treatise on Government† is fully rooted on something ideological and taking parts of it can be considered inappropriate, specially, because the circumstances Locke laid on his work varies form that of Richard II.   Knowing this, Richard II can only be analyzed with reference to some concepts found on Locke’s philosophy rather than an actual application or portrayal of such. Following the flow of Locke’s work, I will start with his concept of the â€Å"state of war.†Ã‚   Locke indicated that a state of war is in contrast with the natural tendency of men to preserve life.   On the other hand, there are certain factors that may threaten a person and may lead him to war or destruction, but never license him to do so.   He supposes that proper implementation of the law and punishment can prevent war. During the onset of the play, it is clear that Richard II has made an erroneous error in not being able to settle and rule a fair judgement on the dispute between Bolingbroke and Mowbray.   When there is a clear indication that law has been broken and that punishment has no basis or bearing and thus, altered, questions will arise and later bring forth war. More of this can be discussed when I go into the detail of political and civil society and the dissolution of the government later in this paper.   My point here is that Richard II’s mercy of reducing Bolingbroke’s sentence to 6 years, no matter how justified, is an act outside of the law that he, himself, should inculcate and practice.   Not to add that the trial by combat that was set for Bolingbroke and Mowbray did not take place upon the king’s discretion. I understand that at the time this play was written, the King is someone ordained by Heaven to rule and so, has the right to grant mercy, create laws, wage war, etc†¦ I believe, on the other hand, perhaps, in one way, or another, similar to Locke, that power is a gift that should never be abused and should always be used for the benefit of the â€Å"natural man.†   A state of nature has existed and can never be repelled from.   In a lawful stage, at this time, that seems very unlikely, and so it does, in Richard II, and so, the next turn of events. The next is Locke’s concept on property.   He pre-supposes that man’s right on land came from the fact that he needs it to survive and he will work to own and maintain it for himself.   Knowing that there was a lot of land for everyone, he assumes that each can be afforded an equal share and that people are not supposed to take more than needed.   He discussed that the value attributed to land, i.e. gold, silver or diamonds is nothing compared to the main purpose – survival. The application of this concept is obvious in consideration of the fact that during the time the play was written; colonization and acquisition of land, in the name of the King was like a trend.   My point in mentioning this though is that improper allocation of funds, seizure of property as well as the war to Ireland are all part of the picture that led Richard II to his tragic ending. While the priorities of the king is largely different from that of the common man, the main truth in surrendering one’s fate to the king is for reasons of survival.   Locke has discussed that a man’s title for property is his own labor.   The king however, thinks otherwise.   I think that a king believes that everything under his â€Å"kingdom† is considered his possession. In the ideal sense, this is true because knowing that the king holds the title to everything means the king has to protect, nurture and make sure that his â€Å"kingdom† is living the good life.   In Richard II’s case, it seems different.   Well, maybe, for that entire period, expanding the land and winning over governance is the main aim of the king.   The bottom line is that while the king is busy making sure he owns and rules a larger â€Å"kingdom,† the people are busy criticizing what the king should do. Moving on, Locke’s discussion on the political and civil society and the dissolution of government is the main theme of Richard II as well as of this assignment.   Locke primarily said that a government exists when people decides to resign their individual rights to the government.   He however, explicitly points out that there is no place for absolute monarchy in a civil society.   This is because having the rights of all depend on one or few people means that judgement is overseen. Knowing that the ruler is also the maker and implementer of laws mean that the ruler is not subjected to any judge – the ruler cannot judge himself, perhaps only by conscience, but seemingly, the ruler becomes above of everything he has set.   And so, such may lead to anarchy, rebellion and the disintegration of the government. The type of government alone is already a subject of discussion for if Locke doesn’t believe in monarchy, then the governance of Richard II is already considered a true government.   Perhaps that was the reason why anarchy, as Locke has discussed, took place later on. Earlier in this paper, I’ve mentioned that the king’s priorities are different from the common man.   It is important to note that even Locke agrees that the common man will not understand this.   The common man’s concern is simply his/her survival – it doesn’t matter how, where, when, as long as they have the right to land and live well, then all should be well. I think this is where Richard II failed as a king.   He understands the need for war (land), the ways (funds) and even the need for strong governance (resolving conflict and â€Å"politics†) but he did not see things in a bigger picture, he did not use Locke’s simple interpretation of things.   He didn’t listen to the needs of the people and focused only on his needs as king. The way the play has progressed revealed how all of Locke’s descriptions and/or principles come into perfect merge with the eventual ending.   As I have discussed with his principles on the state of war and of property, it is clear that Richard II has brought his fate upon himself when he acted upon his assumptions.   If he hasn’t ordered the death of the Duke of Gloucester, Henry wouldn’t have had the opportunity to accuse Mowbray with treason (diversion of funds and the Duke’s death). If he has chosen to let the law decide on the fate of both, he wouldn’t have faced the dilemma of banishment.   Perhaps it was guilt, for Henry’s accusation was true, perhaps, it was because he failed to foresee the course of evens and thought that banishing Henry will be a good-of-a-solution to keep his popularity with the commoners from increasing, or perhaps, it was simply because he was just a weak king. Locke also discussed that the dissolution of the government as a result of rebellion does not necessarily mean that the government will cease to exist.   It means that change is needed and a new governance is required.   Perhaps, this is why Richard II chose to step down without the need for violence and allowed Henry to rule.   Come to think of it, if he didn’t step down, he wouldn’t have had enough power and manpower to protect him anyway, for even his own army was easily swayed with rumor that he was dead. It is on that change of governance that Locke finished his discussion.   The play however progressed further into the tragedy it is known for – the murder of Richard II.   I think this part can be associated to Locke’s early discussion on man’s state of nature.   It is quite funny that in spite of the fact that a political and civil society (at least if we are to forego the fact that it’s a monarchy) already exists in Richard II, man’s state of nature – where he believes that he has power over someone weak and/or has the right to subject someone who has offended him – will always be part of it. And so, Sir Pierce killed Richard II, thinking it is what Henry desires, which is actually true, but in any case, has caused his banishment.   This simply proves that man – no matter what state he or she is, will always be man, just as Locke attempted to base when he discussed his theory. If you’ll come to think of it, this last scenario is not so much different with the onset of the play where Mowbray was accused of murder and was banished.   The irony of such similarity may simply mean that unless the government is changed, the process will repeat.   

Death of a Salesman – Write a critical appreciation of the Requiem

In Death of a Salesman Miller fuses the realist and expressionist styles with an ultimately realist purpose. Throughout the course of the play, we see the scenes of Willy Loman's last two days of life intertwined and overlapped with those of his memories and fantasies. This use of â€Å"daydream† scenes is an expressionistic device. However, it is not only these memory scenes which can be said to be expressionistic, as some of the expressionistic scenes in the play take place in the present, when Willy is not even there, and therefore cannot be said to be a result of his troubled mind. One of these scenes is the Requiem, when the characters break the wall lines to come downstage, and the apron represents the graveyard. As Willy is already dead, this cannot be thought of as a â€Å"distortion of his mind. † This extension of expressionistic devices to non-memory scenes seems to suggest that we the audience see them through Willy's eyes. Brian Parker suggests that this technique â€Å"forces the audience to become Willy Loman's for the duration of the play. † We see in the requiem scene how Willy's dream of a large funeral, like Dave Singleman's, to prove to his boys how well-liked he was, proves to be just another false dream. Above all, Willy seems to prize the emotional appeal of being popular, like Singleman, and it seems to be social standing that really motivates him. His prediction that his funeral would be well attended by all those who liked and respected him was a false hope and the belief that he was respected is clearly unfounded. Both of the boys feel his death was unnecessary. Happy's feeling that he could have â€Å"helped† Willy is just another empty Loman speech, devoid of any real meaning. We see during the course of the play that Happy neglects to give Willy any help whatsoever, he abandons his father in the restaurant and as Linda points out in Act Two: – â€Å"Not one, not another living soul would have had the cruelty to walk out on that man in a restaurant. † Biff does not see his father as a failure, he realises that Willy â€Å"had the wrong dreams. All, all wrong. † While both boys have absorbed their father's ideas, Happy lives them and is determined to â€Å"beat that racket,† Biff has now realised that he doesn't have to conform to a society which measures people in terms of popularity and material wealth. Biff's declaration, â€Å"I know who I am,† proves to us that he has realised his father's limitations, while Happy seems to have inherited his father's trait of self-delusion. Miller's characters speak with realism, as American people of this era actually did, and do not have long articulate speeches about their innermost feelings. At such an emotional time Charley's remark that Willy was † a happy man with a batch of cement† may seem inappropriate but we have to take into account that ordinary people do not speak in poetic language. Charley's speech in this scene is one of the most memorable passages in the play. It serves as a kind of eulogy, which removes blame from Willy as an individual by explaining the gruelling demands and high expectations of his profession. Charley's admiration and respect for Willy is evident in the line â€Å"Nobody dast blame this man,† and his speech demands that we should admire Willy for his drive and dream. Charley observes that a salesman's life is a constant upward struggle to sell himself and he supports his dreams on the power of his own image â€Å"riding on a smile and a shoeshine. What started out as a tribute to Willy becomes a generalisation towards all salesmen, Miller points out that there are many â€Å"low-men. † Charley points out that when the salesman's advertising self-image fails to inspire smiles from customers, he is â€Å"finished† – in Willy's case this was psychologically, emotionally and physically as well as his career. According to Charley â€Å"a salesman is got to dream,† this substitution of â€Å"is† for â€Å"has† seems to indicate a necessity for a salesman. Miller suggests that the salesman is â€Å"literally begotten with the sole purpose of dreaming†. Many writers of this era were concerned at the increasing emphasis on materialism and consumerism, such as Steinbeck. In many ways Willy has done everything that the American Dream â€Å"of unrestrained individualism and assured material success† outlines as the path to success. He has a home and a range of modern appliances; he has raised a family and journeyed forth into the business world full of hope and ambition. In spite of all this Willy has failed to receive the gains that the American Dream promises. Miller's contempt for a society in which a man is worth more dead than alive is obvious. Death of a Salesman condemns the American Capitalist society, which throws people on the scrap heap as soon as they are unable to contribute to the financial gain of others. On the opening night of this play Miller recalls a woman angrily describing the play as a â€Å"time-bomb under American Capitalism. † We see how the Requiem does not allow this, that the Loman's are â€Å"free. † Miller rejects the view that this is a play designed to overthrow the social system of America. He claims that aims rather to destroy â€Å"this pseudo life that thought to touch the clouds by standing on top of a refrigerator. † The American Dream and the way in which capitalist society measures people in terms of material success is once again condemned in Charley's line â€Å"No man only needs a little salary,† suggesting that no man can live on money and materiality alone without an emotional or spiritual life to provide meaning. Linda's feeling that Willy is just â€Å"on another trip† suggests that Willy's hope for Biff to succeed with the insurance money will not be fulfilled. One could even wonder whether or not the family received the insurance money as no mention is made of it, although this could also be interpreted as the money is of no real importance to them. It is bitterly ironic that a man, who kills himself because he feels a failure, fails in death. Linda's comment also seems to strip Willy's death of any of it's imagined dignity; the â€Å"trip† Willy has now undertaken, will end just as fruitlessly as the â€Å"trip† from which he has just returned from as the play opens. Linda's statement â€Å"we're free† which is repeated three ways can be interpreted in three different ways, Willy is now free from earthly unhappiness. The couple are free from the need to earn money for the mortgage and, in another sense, the family is free to act without the pressure of Willy's dreams. In this scene we see no more of Willy's memories, there are no expressionistic devices such as Ben, who represents Willy's desire for success. Ben's absence suggests that Willy has finally achieved the success that he so desperately wanted in life but could never realize. The expressionistic device of the flute motif that opens the play also ends it; we see how Miller parallels the structure of the play throughout. The haunting flute music, which symbolises Willy's pursuit of the American Dream of freedom and success, and the visual imprint of the â€Å"solid vault of apartment house†, seem to suggest that nothing has really changed and Willy dies just as deluded as he lived.

Greed and Evil Canterbury Tales Geoffrey Chaucher Essay

In Chaucers section of the Canterbury Tales, The Pardoners Tale various literary elements occur. He displays personification, and makes death a character, giving him life. He includes a moral to his tale which is greed is the root of all evil(Bible) and gives the story meaning. Chaucers plot is another key part to the story, because it proved greed can bring evil. Chaucer wrote the Pardoners Tale with the theme greed is the root of all evil he was able to show this by using various literary elementsThe moral, greed is the root of all evil(Bible), is displayed through the greediness of the three characters. When the youngest leaves, his mind was able to devise an evil plan caused by greed. His selfishness caused him to do the following, And deftly poured the poison into two. He kept the third one clean, as well he might, For his own drink, meaning to work all night(Chaucer 217-218). The youngest was tempted by greed to commit an evil action. Chaucer wanted the reader to realize money and greed are problems with society. They cause people to commit evil acts. Killing someone for money shows Chaucer wanted one to read this tale and recognize the problems of greed. The Characters are essential to this tale also. Chaucer displays death as a character giving him human traits and personifying him. This personification of death adds a sense of doom and gives a slight fear. Death adds these qualities because dying is like a journey to the unknown, and it naturally scares people to think about it. When Chaucer writes, There came a privy thief, they call him Death, Who kills us all round here(Chaucer 15-16) he attempts to add a sense of fear and terror by saying there is a person who goes around and kills everyone. It is far scarier then using death as a thing that happens instead of using death as a person. Chaucers personification of death improved the story by creating suspense, and terror. The plot of the story is the most important, and uses irony to gives entertainment. The three men went looking for death, and find it to be a heap of gold. The irony of this was that the characters ended up getting killed themselves and on their search for death they met their own death, which was the heap of gold. This ironic occurrence is almost comedic when all three men plan to kill one another and all three men succeed in doing  this. Chaucer writes Thus these two murderers received their due, so did the treacherous young poisoner too.(Chaucer 237-238). The irony here also criticizes greed in humans. It makes fun of the fact that greed really is the root of all evil. Chaucer created this irony for both entertainment and to make a point about greed. In conclusion Chaucer wrote his story with the theme greed is the root of all evil (Bible) and used the literary elements of plot, moral, and characters to achieve this. Chaucer struck fear and added suspense when he personified death. Without personifying death Chaucers story would have been less exciting. Chaucer was ironic with his plot and those who were looking for death found it. This comedic addition also criticized humans and their tendency to be greedy. Chaucer was successful in creating a story which explained how greed is the root of all evil(Bible). Geoffrey Chaucer, The Canterbury Tales, ed. Larry D. Benson (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2000). New Testament in Paul’s first epistle to Timothy (1 Timothy 6:10).

Tattos Descriptive

Ana Castillo Mrs. Elliott English 11 9 October 2012 Descriptive Essay: Tattoos Tattoos are created by inserting colored materials beneath the skins surface. The skin is penetrated with a sharp too. Today colored ink and an electric needle are the material and instrument of choice. Today the practice is popular with a vast cross section of the population. Within the United States, tattoos can be found on anybody from gang members to fashion models. The word tattoo comes from the Tahitian word â€Å"tatu† which means â€Å"to mark something†. www. designboom. com) It is arguably claimed that tattooing has existed since 12,000 years BC. Around the year 1981, the first electric tattoo machine was registered by its inventor,Samual O’Reilly, at the United States Patent (it was based on a machine patented by Thomas Edison, but rather than using the tool as a means to embroider fabric, which Edison did, O’Reilly’s tattoo machine as meant to â€Å"embroider † skin). When O’Reilly invested this new machine he didn’t know the whirlwind he would help create in the next years (www. reillytattoo. com). Youth and adolescence is one of the most, significant and influential moments in everyone’s life, when the youth are seeking to identify who they are. Tattooing and body piercing are one of the many ways through which young people express their own unique identity. They are symbolic representations of how they are perceived. When you are young you are trying to find your identity. Most adolescents go through several transitions one of those is more than likely trying to be the cool guy/girl.But it is quite the opposite, because a piercing or tattoo is signifying certain changes in one’s life. It symbolizes adulthood, because you have to be 18 to get pierced or tattooed, or that appearing to be more grown up because you were able to make this life changing decision or just because you’re of the legal ag e and just randomly decided you wanted to get pierced or tattooed. Many people think that tattooing is dangerous. Part of this is because people don’t think that the tattoo artist sterilize their materials.Others believe that tattoos have a high risk of infection. And the most commonly reported problem are allergic reactions. Others feel as though the pain factor is too immense. Although these fears are common they are easily prevented. Most of the people who believe these things aren’t fully informed with information. The sterilization process for the materials used is extremely important. This reduces risks of several things including infection and disease.When people think of sterilization and risk factors concerning tattoos they have more concerns with disease then infection. This is because of the many myths that contracting AIDS or hepatitis B virus is likely. Many people do not know that there has been an actual reported case of contracting the aids virus is abo ut two drops, which is too much compare to the amount of blood on a non-sterilized needle. So, basically the odd of contracting aids is very rare (tattotemple. hk).Society has a tendency of negatively judging those who have tattoos or piercings. They are often stereotyped as bad people or even criminals. They are seen as lower than â€Å"clean† skin people even though you cannot judge someone’s inside based on their outside appearance. When people see an individual with â€Å"full sleeves† meaning someone with both or one arm fully tatted, a common comment that you might hear is, â€Å"I wonder what he/she works as, I bet you it’s a low wage paying job† or something similar.But next time you in for a visit with your doctor think about what you may not be able to see. They might have a tattoo, but you cannot see underneath their lab coat. Tattoos are simply a visual way of expressing your freedom of speech. Works Cited â€Å"A Brief History of Tatt oos† (2000-2010) http://www. designboom. com/history/tattoo_history. html Pang, Joey â€Å"Study At the Temple: Masterpiece Library† http://tattootemple. hk/history-of-tattooing O’Reilly, Samuels â€Å"Beginning Times† () http://www. oreillystattoo. com/OReillys_Tattoo_Parlour/Home. html

Business Law - S 18 of the Australian Consumer Law within the Essay - 2

Business Law - S 18 of the Australian Consumer Law within the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (ACL) - Essay Example The ACL also presents several consumer guarantees within the terms of sale of goods (Morandin & Smith, 2011). Under it, suppliers have rights of selling any goods of their preference while such goods are accompanied by clear titles. The consumers will embrace undisturbed possession for the goods purchased and that such goods remain free from any undisclosed securities, encumbrances, or charges. The goods are to be of acceptable quality meaning that they will be safe, free from defects, and durable. They will have acceptable appearances and finishes as well as fitness for the purposes that they are supplied. The goods are to be reasonably fit to all disclosed purposes meaning that such goods continue performing the function for which consumers was informed they would (Carter, 2011). The goods will have to instil a correspondence with their description and the demonstration model or sample in terms of quality, condition, and state. The manufacturers will induce reasonably available facilities regarding repair of such goods as well as parts for goods. Lastly, the goods will have to be compliant with express warranties made or given, such as extra promises presented. This aspect draws together key elements of the components in relation to the business interactions. It also draws much attention towards the extensive overlapping of deceptive conduct or misleading provisions through the vast forms of federal statutes. Currently, there are practical dangers that various business engagements such as green washing as it deter the consumers through the selection or purchase of green services or products (Mitchell & Greco, 2011). It is because most of them they feel an inability to trust assertions placed forth by retailers and manufacturers on the products and services. It could cause stifle across marketing and development opportunities for the companies that are genuinely green. The