Week 13 Concept Definition

Heath Nicholson

Exogenous Vs. Indigenous Media Productions

Exogenous vs. Indigenous Media Productions, to me, can be defined respectively as news stories created from an external source vs. news stories created from an internal or “local” source. The reason I highlight “local” is because I think if a news story is internal it can be either something produced within the same city, state, or country, depending on the story. For example, if the story being considered is the Green Bay Packers season, I would consider anything produced within Wisconsin an indigenous media production and anything outside of the Wisconsin an exogenous media production (especially Minnesota).

On the other hand, if I lived in Greece and the issue at hand was the stability of Greece’s Economy I would consider “Greece’s Only Option Is Default”, an article by Daniel Hanson in the Wall Street Journal produced outside of Greece, an exogenous media production while any media production created in Greece would be indigenous. It’s interesting how much the story may differ simply depending on where it is produced.

Greece’s Only Option Is Default: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324352004578133100503267698.html

Advertisements

Week 13 Concepts

By: Shelly F.

Exogenous vs. Indigenous Media Productions

According to merriam-webster.com, the definition of exogenous is “growing from or on the outside,” and the definition of indigenous is ”produced, growing, living, or occurring naturally in a particular region or environment.”  So exogenous media productions are mass produced communications outside of what is normally considered mass media that are about mass media, and indigenous media productions are mass produced communications that are a part of what is normally considered mass media that are about mass media.

My two opposing examples are the website http://www.brayincandy.com/id177.html for exogenous media and http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/26/tech/social-media/facebook-vote/index.html for indigenous media.  The former is not a well-established news source and its author sees him/herself as beyond corruption while stating repeatedly that the media itself is corrupt.  The latter is a very well established news source critiquing the stance of Facebook to vote on the right to vote about changes on the site.

Week 12 Concept Definition

Heath Nicholson

First Amendment Rights: 2001 U.S. Patriot Act

The Patriot Act was created and spurred just over a month after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. In a general sense, this act allows the United States government to delve much deeper than it previously could into our personal privacy in order to combat terrorism. While we might feel violated in some ways be the Patriot Act, many feel that it is quite necessary for the security of our country. But, is it constitutional? According the Supreme Court, most of it is. In an article I found on NBCNews.com part of the Patriot Act was deemed unconstitutional because it discards the need for probable cause when issuing search warrants. However, the remainder of the Patriot Act was extended until 2015 by President Obama.

I found something really interesting about the Patriot Act, formally known as the USA PATRIOT Act – you guys might have stumbled upon this if you used Wikipedia while researching. This stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001. I just thought that was pretty cool!

Article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20999950/ns/us_news-security/t/judge-rules-part-patriot-act-unconstitutional

 

Week 12 Concept Definition

First Amendment Rights: 2001 U.S. Patriot Act

The Patriot Act was a direct and sudden response to the terrorist attacks on the US in 2001.  It was a very fast process during which the act was written and passed as law.  Because of this hast many people feel that there were many violations of our First Amendment rights as citizens of the US.  Our first amendment rights are guaranteed to us no matter what simply because we are citizens of the US.  This is very important to people because as soon as one of these rights is altered or modified it opens the door to have many more opportunities to limit the right of the citizens of the US.  I found an article discussing how certain parts of the Patriot Act were ruled unconstitutional and I don’t think that they were intentionally put in the act as a way to limit our rights.  I believe that it was simply, in hast of our reaction to the attacks on our country the government put the security of our nation at a higher level than the rights of each individual.  Our first amendment rights are what define us as a country and will continue to be preserved as long as we are the United States of America.

Week 12 Concept

Rochelle Miller

Washington Post

First Amendment rights: 2001 U.S. Patriot Act

Background on The USA PATRIOT Act, it was created in response to the attacks of September 11 and became a law in less than two months after those attacks. The Act modified major U.S intelligence, communications, and privacy laws including:

However it is debated that the law violated numerous constitutional requirements. For example the “Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures and First Amendment freedoms of speech and association.”

Yet supporters rebutted that the law simply created a  proper balance between security and liberty in a dangerous world of international terrorism.

The Patriot Act  represents an abuse of government authority and still today the debate continues. The debate over the law and its extensions will continue, as Americans continue to struggle with how to protect both liberty and security.

An example of this concept is how it continues to be a controversial topic. In the previous campaigns (Tommy Thompson’s (R) vs. Tammy Baldwin (D)) Thompson launched an attacking campaign against Baldwin for voting against a 2006 bill commemorating the fifth anniversary of 9/11.

 

“Baldwin did, in fact, vote against the bill. But as her campaign noted Tuesday, it was because the bill also paid tribute to more controversial and contentious things like the Patriot Act — a piece of legislation that Baldwin and many Democrats opposed.”

For the entire article click here. 

Week 12 Concept

The U.S. Patriot Act and the U.S. Constitution

By: Shelly Fitzke

The U.S. Patriot Act is the subject of extreme debate as to whether or not certain aspects of it are Constitutional with respect to the First and Fourth Amendments.  Since this is a communications class, I focused on possible and proven First Amendment violations.  According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) the Patriot Act is unconstitutional in that “it violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech by prohibiting the recipients of search orders from telling others about those orders, even where there is no real need for secrecy” and also “by effectively authorizing the FBI to launch investigations of American citizens in part for exercising their freedom of speech (http://www.aclu.org/national-security/surveillance-under-usa-patriot-act).”  In the case of the American Academy of Religion v. Napolitano the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the “ideological exclusion” clause of the Patriot Act because it violated the freedom of speech clause of the First Amendment by not allowing certain scholars to share their views.  According to the ACLU the secrecy aspect is still permissible even in the case of leaked documentation although a redacted version may be released at some point (http://www.aclu.org/national-security/aclu-v-department-state).

My example is from the Albany Tribune (http://www.albanytribune.com/13112012-done-in-by-the-patriot-act-oped/#.UKpujGfEwdY) and it covers the CIA scandal surrounding David Petraeus.  Basically, it’s a civil right debate about how much power the Federal government has.