It was known to be a concert for climate crisis. Organised by the ex-vice president of America, Al Gore, he aims to promote awareness of the recent climate problems around the world through mass scale concerts. It was featured in 9 countries which starred many artists ranging from solo musicians to heavy metal rock bands, the programme was throughout the entire day. Advertisements was aired constantly to remind people and using musicians, the aim was to move and encourage the mass public to act against the climate problems.
Firstly, I would find the concerts very useful. It was a very important tool of mass communication. Understanding the fact that people do have a liking for their musician idols, they would more likely tend to listen to their calls and pleas through music. Thus, this is very useful.
However, it is not useful too. This concert pose a contradictory statement to the mass public. They want people to save the environment and yet they are wasting alot of energy at the cost of the holding of the concerts. Is this the messgae which the organisers want to convey? I don think so. Yet many people are already getting this contradictory statement.
Even though there might be some problems, I feel that the ultimate aim of this concert is still soley for the purpose of convery the urgent message that the earth climate is under threat. People should not turn a blind eye to this problem anymore, they should act quickly and effectively. To counter the argument that wasting alot of electricity for the concert is wrong, I want to mention that it is worth a sacrifice to be made. If in the future, many people do heed the strong advices pose during the concert, then surely the huge sacrifice is worth it. It means that in the future the climate problem would be significantly reduced. Otherwise, if no sacrifices are willing to be undertaken, how could they expect people to follow their advices in the future? The organisers want people to understand that what they are doing currently is to get the necessary attention from the people, by doing this large scale event, they are trying their best. People will be moved by such actions and will follow their cause. Therefore, I feel that such mass activity is very useful and effective even though it poses several contradictory problems.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Blog Commentary
Its been so long since my last entry! Today I shall do a blog commentary on my classmate Geng Yuan's blog, http://harangueing.blogspot.com/.
After reading through the entries he posted, I have decided to comment on his entry entitled "Internet censorship grows worldwide"
I agree with him as he agrees that internet censorship has grown worldwide. Giving the examples of the Middle East where governments do not want those ideas which are in contrary to Islamic teachings, thus having censorship in the information provided to the public. Also the example of communist China where the government stops information opposing the idea of communism eg. democracy, censorship has taken place. These two examples are strong enough to say that censorship has grown worldwide.
Further on, he mentions about the point of propoganda where it is derived when censorship has occurred. I agree with him as this is a form of how government spread the information which they want and discarding those that they do not want. This is propoganda where the public only gets to see what the government has already chosen for them and not the other side of the information which is discarded, soon, the people will be like what the government wants.
However, I do not quite agree with him too. Censorship and propoganda is also unrelated. Censorship refers to the discarding of undesired information like pornography, terrorism teachings etc. But propoganda refers to the selection of information. These two terms cannot be related to each other and be refered as the cause and effect.
Also, I feel that the example he gave is strong but not of much relevance to the main topic of internet censorship. Does the people in the Middle East use internet daily or depend on internet strongly? I think their means of obtaining information would most likely be from newspapers, radios, television programmes and seldom from the internet.
After reading through the entries he posted, I have decided to comment on his entry entitled "Internet censorship grows worldwide"
I agree with him as he agrees that internet censorship has grown worldwide. Giving the examples of the Middle East where governments do not want those ideas which are in contrary to Islamic teachings, thus having censorship in the information provided to the public. Also the example of communist China where the government stops information opposing the idea of communism eg. democracy, censorship has taken place. These two examples are strong enough to say that censorship has grown worldwide.
Further on, he mentions about the point of propoganda where it is derived when censorship has occurred. I agree with him as this is a form of how government spread the information which they want and discarding those that they do not want. This is propoganda where the public only gets to see what the government has already chosen for them and not the other side of the information which is discarded, soon, the people will be like what the government wants.
However, I do not quite agree with him too. Censorship and propoganda is also unrelated. Censorship refers to the discarding of undesired information like pornography, terrorism teachings etc. But propoganda refers to the selection of information. These two terms cannot be related to each other and be refered as the cause and effect.
Also, I feel that the example he gave is strong but not of much relevance to the main topic of internet censorship. Does the people in the Middle East use internet daily or depend on internet strongly? I think their means of obtaining information would most likely be from newspapers, radios, television programmes and seldom from the internet.
Friday, May 18, 2007
F1 race in Singapore
Yo guys! I am back! Surely you have heard of the recent news of the holding of F1 formula race in Singapore as a form of street circuit race. Yes i agree that it is indeed a hot topic and might proved more advantages than disadvantages. Thus, in this entry, I shall weigh the pros and cons of holding a street race in Singapore.
Firstly, I shall touch on the advantages. The holding of F1 formula race here would surely boost the tourism industry, there will be a large scale movement of tourists from globally to Singapore. Tourists include those fans of F1 formula drivers, business leaders who invest on the race, other curious tourists who want to watch th race so on. Thus, there will be a surge in the number of tourists and indirectly, Singapore will earn more revenue through tourism industry. For example, governments can earn money from hotels, tourist attractions which some tourists will visit while on the stay here, food and beverages outlets so on. This, on the whole, will make
Singapore more wealthier and more stable as a country and people will become wealthier too.
Also, this golden opportunity enables Singapore to showcase what it is capable of to the entire global community. As Singapore is known as a small country with limited resources, there will be some tendency when bigger and more powerful countries overlook us. This will prove them wrong as in the sense that even how small Singapore is, it could still organise a large scale event. And this defintely improves the reputation of Singapore and earns it a place among the core in the world. It is necessary as countries are getting more competitive and Singapore, with limited resources has already lose out, if she did not add new features, there might be a situation where Singapore will be kicked out.
Now, I shall talk about the disadvantages. As I presume we all know that Malaysia, our neighbour and ally, has also an internation F1 race circuit in Sepang. I feared that this F1 race in Singapore could create unnecessary competition between both countries as they fight for the majority of the tourists. Indirectly, this will cause tension between both countries and might result in international conflict. Countries would nto want to lose out in terms of economic gains, furthermore, Malaysia was the original country which has the F1 circuit first and now Singapore is going to have one. To them, it might be unfair as a competition for economic gains.Yo guys! I am back! Surely you have heard of the recent news of the holding of F1 formula race in Singapore as a form of street circuit race. Yes i agree that it is indeed a hot topic and might proved more advantages than disadvantages. Thus, in this entry, I shall weigh the pros and cons of holding a street race in Singapore.
Firstly, I shall touch on the advantages. The holding of F1 formula race here would surely boost the tourism industry, there will be a large scale movement of tourists from globally to Singapore. Tourists include those fans of F1 formula drivers, business leaders who invest on the race, other curious tourists who want to watch th race so on. Thus, there will be a surge in the number of tourists and indirectly, Singapore will earn more revenue through tourism industry. For example, governments can earn money from hotels, tourist attractions which some tourists will visit while on the stay here, food and beverages outlets so on. This, on the whole, will make
Singapore more wealthier and more stable as a country and people will become wealthier too.
Also, this golden opportunity enables Singapore to showcase what it is capable of to the entire global community. As Singapore is known as a small country with limited resources, there will be some tendency when bigger and more powerful countries overlook us. This will prove them wrong as in the sense that even how small Singapore is, it could still organise a large scale event. And this defintely improves the reputation of Singapore and earns it a place among the core in the world. It is necessary as countries are getting more competitive and Singapore, with limited resources has already lose out, if she did not add new features, there might be a situation where Singapore will be kicked out.
Now, I shall talk about the disadvantages. As I presume we all know that Malaysia, our neighbour and ally, has also an internation F1 race circuit in Sepang. I feared that this F1 race in Singapore could create unnecessary competition between both countries as they fight for the majority of the tourists. Indirectly, this will cause tension between both countries and might result in international conflict. Countries would nto want to lose out in terms of economic gains, furthermore, Malaysia was the original country which has the F1 circuit first and now Singapore is going to have one. To them, it might be unfair as a competition for economic gains.
To solve this problem, I suggest that both countries come up with a consensus or agreement. To my relief, I have read news about governments taking action. This could prevent a snowball fo event leading to worse conflict. Thus, it is necessary for countries to agree with one another first before Singapore carry on with the development of F1 race. This is important as I feel diplomancy is more important in this case.
In conclusion, i totally agree that Singapore should develop a F1 race as it will benefit us in many ways as I have mentioned in the above paragraphs. Nevertheless, relevant authorities should exercise responsbility in sense that they do not cause unhappiness and tension with another country as it could create more conflicts. It is better for every party to be satisfied and contented.
Firstly, I shall touch on the advantages. The holding of F1 formula race here would surely boost the tourism industry, there will be a large scale movement of tourists from globally to Singapore. Tourists include those fans of F1 formula drivers, business leaders who invest on the race, other curious tourists who want to watch th race so on. Thus, there will be a surge in the number of tourists and indirectly, Singapore will earn more revenue through tourism industry. For example, governments can earn money from hotels, tourist attractions which some tourists will visit while on the stay here, food and beverages outlets so on. This, on the whole, will make
Singapore more wealthier and more stable as a country and people will become wealthier too.
Also, this golden opportunity enables Singapore to showcase what it is capable of to the entire global community. As Singapore is known as a small country with limited resources, there will be some tendency when bigger and more powerful countries overlook us. This will prove them wrong as in the sense that even how small Singapore is, it could still organise a large scale event. And this defintely improves the reputation of Singapore and earns it a place among the core in the world. It is necessary as countries are getting more competitive and Singapore, with limited resources has already lose out, if she did not add new features, there might be a situation where Singapore will be kicked out.
Now, I shall talk about the disadvantages. As I presume we all know that Malaysia, our neighbour and ally, has also an internation F1 race circuit in Sepang. I feared that this F1 race in Singapore could create unnecessary competition between both countries as they fight for the majority of the tourists. Indirectly, this will cause tension between both countries and might result in international conflict. Countries would nto want to lose out in terms of economic gains, furthermore, Malaysia was the original country which has the F1 circuit first and now Singapore is going to have one. To them, it might be unfair as a competition for economic gains.Yo guys! I am back! Surely you have heard of the recent news of the holding of F1 formula race in Singapore as a form of street circuit race. Yes i agree that it is indeed a hot topic and might proved more advantages than disadvantages. Thus, in this entry, I shall weigh the pros and cons of holding a street race in Singapore.
Firstly, I shall touch on the advantages. The holding of F1 formula race here would surely boost the tourism industry, there will be a large scale movement of tourists from globally to Singapore. Tourists include those fans of F1 formula drivers, business leaders who invest on the race, other curious tourists who want to watch th race so on. Thus, there will be a surge in the number of tourists and indirectly, Singapore will earn more revenue through tourism industry. For example, governments can earn money from hotels, tourist attractions which some tourists will visit while on the stay here, food and beverages outlets so on. This, on the whole, will make
Singapore more wealthier and more stable as a country and people will become wealthier too.
Also, this golden opportunity enables Singapore to showcase what it is capable of to the entire global community. As Singapore is known as a small country with limited resources, there will be some tendency when bigger and more powerful countries overlook us. This will prove them wrong as in the sense that even how small Singapore is, it could still organise a large scale event. And this defintely improves the reputation of Singapore and earns it a place among the core in the world. It is necessary as countries are getting more competitive and Singapore, with limited resources has already lose out, if she did not add new features, there might be a situation where Singapore will be kicked out.
Now, I shall talk about the disadvantages. As I presume we all know that Malaysia, our neighbour and ally, has also an internation F1 race circuit in Sepang. I feared that this F1 race in Singapore could create unnecessary competition between both countries as they fight for the majority of the tourists. Indirectly, this will cause tension between both countries and might result in international conflict. Countries would nto want to lose out in terms of economic gains, furthermore, Malaysia was the original country which has the F1 circuit first and now Singapore is going to have one. To them, it might be unfair as a competition for economic gains.
To solve this problem, I suggest that both countries come up with a consensus or agreement. To my relief, I have read news about governments taking action. This could prevent a snowball fo event leading to worse conflict. Thus, it is necessary for countries to agree with one another first before Singapore carry on with the development of F1 race. This is important as I feel diplomancy is more important in this case.
In conclusion, i totally agree that Singapore should develop a F1 race as it will benefit us in many ways as I have mentioned in the above paragraphs. Nevertheless, relevant authorities should exercise responsbility in sense that they do not cause unhappiness and tension with another country as it could create more conflicts. It is better for every party to be satisfied and contented.
Saturday, May 12, 2007
Chinese Language In Singapore
Good day! In this entry, I will be focusing on the topic of the use of chinese language in Singapore.
Since the applications of chinese language into the education system, many people have been debating about the usefulness of it in the Singaporean context and many people have questioned whether Singaporeans really practice the language.
Firstly, I feel that many students practised the language. In school, I can hear many conversations which are conducted in Chinese. There are also many activities which are held in Chinese, like dramas, plays and they have attracted many audiences who enjoy and learn through such activities. Some of my friends enjoy chinese lessons and say they benefited much of it. This rising culture could be due to the rise in Mandarin pop culture in th recent times, where pop icons coming from chinese speaking countries have captured the attention of our young here. Thus they want to follow their idols and learn from them, one way is through mastering the chinese language. Also, some mature youngsters understand the rise in China's economy status from the past, they realise the need to catch up with chinese people and if not, they will lose out to them in the future.
From the above paragraph, I have pointed the reasons for why many students practised chinese language. Although there might be some instances where students dislike chinese, but these are the minorities. I hope that through education, peer and family influences, it will change their opinon of chinese language and try their very best to improve their language skill.
Since the applications of chinese language into the education system, many people have been debating about the usefulness of it in the Singaporean context and many people have questioned whether Singaporeans really practice the language.
Firstly, I feel that many students practised the language. In school, I can hear many conversations which are conducted in Chinese. There are also many activities which are held in Chinese, like dramas, plays and they have attracted many audiences who enjoy and learn through such activities. Some of my friends enjoy chinese lessons and say they benefited much of it. This rising culture could be due to the rise in Mandarin pop culture in th recent times, where pop icons coming from chinese speaking countries have captured the attention of our young here. Thus they want to follow their idols and learn from them, one way is through mastering the chinese language. Also, some mature youngsters understand the rise in China's economy status from the past, they realise the need to catch up with chinese people and if not, they will lose out to them in the future.
From the above paragraph, I have pointed the reasons for why many students practised chinese language. Although there might be some instances where students dislike chinese, but these are the minorities. I hope that through education, peer and family influences, it will change their opinon of chinese language and try their very best to improve their language skill.
Saturday, May 5, 2007
Should homosexuals be allowed?
I am back! In this week entry, I will be touching on the issue of whether to allow homosexuals in Singapore society. Firstly, I would like to state my stand. I feel strongly that we should allow. The following paragraphs will illustrate my stand.
Firstly, I feel that homosexuals are just another human being even though they might be different from a normal one. They eat, sleep, do work, except that they have the liking for the same gender. For that difference, I feel they should not be discounted into the society. Majority of them have tried their best fitting into society yet still the public does not accept them. I guess those homosexuals do not want to have the liking for the same gender as well, but it is probably due to innate thinking where it is inborn within them. They cannot help it but like the same gender. For that reason, I feel we should empathize with them and accept them.
Secondly, many countries around the world have also widely accepted the idea of homosexualism. Countries like US, Britain have laws protecting the rights of homosexualism. If a small country like Singapore does not accept it, what would other countries think of us? Will we lose out? This is partially due to the fact of global influence and increasing competitiveness among countries. Every single factor is as important to determine the country's stability and power in the world.
Lastly, I feel that homosexuals should be given the chance to be contributing to the society. And this is especially in a small country like Singapore where labour is limited, every single manpower is cherished. We should not ostracize them beacuse of the special differences, for we are forgoing necessary and important manpower.
In conclusion, I feel homosexuals should be accepted by public in Singapore.
Firstly, I feel that homosexuals are just another human being even though they might be different from a normal one. They eat, sleep, do work, except that they have the liking for the same gender. For that difference, I feel they should not be discounted into the society. Majority of them have tried their best fitting into society yet still the public does not accept them. I guess those homosexuals do not want to have the liking for the same gender as well, but it is probably due to innate thinking where it is inborn within them. They cannot help it but like the same gender. For that reason, I feel we should empathize with them and accept them.
Secondly, many countries around the world have also widely accepted the idea of homosexualism. Countries like US, Britain have laws protecting the rights of homosexualism. If a small country like Singapore does not accept it, what would other countries think of us? Will we lose out? This is partially due to the fact of global influence and increasing competitiveness among countries. Every single factor is as important to determine the country's stability and power in the world.
Lastly, I feel that homosexuals should be given the chance to be contributing to the society. And this is especially in a small country like Singapore where labour is limited, every single manpower is cherished. We should not ostracize them beacuse of the special differences, for we are forgoing necessary and important manpower.
In conclusion, I feel homosexuals should be accepted by public in Singapore.
Saturday, April 28, 2007
The Mental Youngs
Hi again! Recently, there has been a sensational news which shook the entire world, a South Korean murdered 32 people with his guns and later committed suicide in a university in America. The effects are devastating, innocent lives are lost and it brought about many harmful chain effects to the community living there and around America. Students were afraid to attend school for fear of facing the same situation, parents are paranoid when sending their children to school.
In this entry, I shall discuss on the signs of a mental child. The South Korean man was clearly not in his right state of mind to take the lives of people. There was evidence since the past few years and yet people surrounding him ignored it and some continue to alienate him, resulting his problems to snowball into the recent event. This is a good wake up call to schools and communities around the world to take action and improvise to help these mental students.
Furthermore, I also feel that he, along with those he killed, is a victim. He has suffered so much pain and agony and yet nobody is around to understand his problems and lend a shoulder for support. What happened is partly because of the influence of the surroundings on him, examples are the class he is in, the school he is in etc. From what I have read, I know that he is much isolated in his school and many people dislike him. This is also partially their fault, how could they treat him unequally and show him disrespect like any other human beings? Is this fair to him? Would they be responsible if he one day has his revenge on them? Of course a normal human being would feel infuriated and want to get back on those people. Therefore I feel that they are partially responsible.
However, I feel that he is responsible for his own plight too. He did not want to seek help from the school councilors and teachers and kept everything to himself. He thought that no one was there for him but he did not know that his teachers were very much willing to help. If he has turned to help, this situation will cease to exist.
Sadly, whats done cannot be undone. What we can do now is to learn from the past mistakes and correct them so that this would not happen in the future again.
In this entry, I shall discuss on the signs of a mental child. The South Korean man was clearly not in his right state of mind to take the lives of people. There was evidence since the past few years and yet people surrounding him ignored it and some continue to alienate him, resulting his problems to snowball into the recent event. This is a good wake up call to schools and communities around the world to take action and improvise to help these mental students.
Furthermore, I also feel that he, along with those he killed, is a victim. He has suffered so much pain and agony and yet nobody is around to understand his problems and lend a shoulder for support. What happened is partly because of the influence of the surroundings on him, examples are the class he is in, the school he is in etc. From what I have read, I know that he is much isolated in his school and many people dislike him. This is also partially their fault, how could they treat him unequally and show him disrespect like any other human beings? Is this fair to him? Would they be responsible if he one day has his revenge on them? Of course a normal human being would feel infuriated and want to get back on those people. Therefore I feel that they are partially responsible.
However, I feel that he is responsible for his own plight too. He did not want to seek help from the school councilors and teachers and kept everything to himself. He thought that no one was there for him but he did not know that his teachers were very much willing to help. If he has turned to help, this situation will cease to exist.
Sadly, whats done cannot be undone. What we can do now is to learn from the past mistakes and correct them so that this would not happen in the future again.
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Is the use of torture ever justified in dealing with criminals and terrorists?
After reading the articles from TIME online, I feel that the use of torture is not really justified in dealing with criminals and terrorists. From the first article, the writer questions the real purpose in moving the detainees to other US base in Guantánamo Bay. He also states that there are not enough evidence to bring them to court and feels that the US government has a lot of hidden transparencies in the job of questioning detainees. They do a lot of cover up for their unknown real intentions. This will undermine the moral and real purpose of committing such acts which is to find justice for those innocent victims. The writer states that the government is using it to fulfil its desire for more power in the region and also for control.
Secondly, the writer also mentions that the use of torture is too harsh. Citing evidence from the article, the 9/11 planner Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (K.S.M.), who, according to senior intelligence officials, was told his children would be hurt if he didn't cooperate. Furthermore, some detainees really could not provide answers and yet the interrogators continued to pursue methods of harsh torture. This is unfair to the other party even though they have committed heinous crimes. Prior to this, I feel that governments should revise their way of interrogating detainees, some leeway should be granted even though the detainees were culprits. However, I stress that no leniency should be given to them when meting out the punishment. They certainly deserve their punishment for the wrong doings.
Also, in public sense, I hope they could have a better understanding of the whole picture instead of a narrow view. They could ask questions about the intentions of government organizations and pressured them into providing them with more transparencies and answers so that they know what they are supporting for is morally right.
Secondly, the writer also mentions that the use of torture is too harsh. Citing evidence from the article, the 9/11 planner Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (K.S.M.), who, according to senior intelligence officials, was told his children would be hurt if he didn't cooperate. Furthermore, some detainees really could not provide answers and yet the interrogators continued to pursue methods of harsh torture. This is unfair to the other party even though they have committed heinous crimes. Prior to this, I feel that governments should revise their way of interrogating detainees, some leeway should be granted even though the detainees were culprits. However, I stress that no leniency should be given to them when meting out the punishment. They certainly deserve their punishment for the wrong doings.
Also, in public sense, I hope they could have a better understanding of the whole picture instead of a narrow view. They could ask questions about the intentions of government organizations and pressured them into providing them with more transparencies and answers so that they know what they are supporting for is morally right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)