Mostrando postagens com marcador events happy hour gathering free conversation. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador events happy hour gathering free conversation. Mostrar todas as postagens

sexta-feira, 27 de novembro de 2009

Extended College Education: Free Conversation Gathering

A cycle of 3 Free Conversation Gathering Event will be held at your college on a monthly basis, upon the following topics, on a monthly basis (free event):

Love and Relationship in a Postmodern Society
Internet and Cultural Freedom
The First African-American President

Hosts:

Sergio Machado


Conversation expert graduated from Florida Institute of Technology in 1981. Additional courses include Advanced English Grammar, Bachelor of Law from PUC Sao Paulo.
Teaching English language since 1983 at institutes such as Berlitz, Mine Language Center and Cel-Lep. In-company consultant for translation and support in English. Postmodern Pop culture scholar, especially Western music culture. Developed and produced radio programs for Eldorado FM, featuring stories of various artists and bands having also interviewed celebrities such as Winton Marsalis, Buddy Guy, John Mayall, Annie Haslam (Renaissance), Steve Winwood, Chuck Leavell (The Rolling Stones keyboard player) among others.

Yugo Kabeya
Translator and language scholar graduated in Political Science BA at Sophia University, specializing in international politics, history and general Asian culture.
Having worked for Sony Corporation as language director, Yugo Kabeya was also Far Eastern foreign correspondent. Founding member and director of the Support Committee for Latin American Workers.
He has also participated in research project concerning financing and environmental impact by Greenpeace, and contributed to AMPO journal at Asia-Pacific Research Center as an English editor, interpreter and translator. He has also worked as a translator for the United Nations University in Tokyo.

Pre-requisite: Upper Intermediate English

quinta-feira, 26 de novembro de 2009

The Obama effect: Researchers Cite President's Role in Reducing Racism



President Obama spurred a dramatic change in the way whites think about African-Americans before he had even set foot in the Oval Office, according to a new study.

Florida State University Psychology Professor E. Ashby Plant and University of Wisconsin-Madison Professor Patricia Devine have documented a decrease in racial prejudice during the Fall 2008 period between the Democratic Party's nomination of Barack Obama and the Nov. 4 election. They call it the Obama Effect.

"The unprecedented drop in implicit bias observed in our studies indicates that the impact of Obama's historic campaign went beyond his winning the election," the researchers wrote in a paper outlining the study's results that has not yet been published. "It appears to have produced a fundamental change in at least the minds of the American public. Although the full impact of this historic election will play out over time, we are encouraged by the early returns."

About 300 non-black (white, Asian or Hispanic) college students in Wisconsin and Florida participated in a variety of experiments and surveys designed to measure stereotyping and implicit prejudice — that is, the kind of prejudice that is typically described as "automatic" or "knee-jerk" and, although not directly stated, can influence people's behavior. The researchers found that 51 percent of the participants demonstrated automatic preferences for white people. The others had no preference or preferred blacks.

This is significant because previous research, even Plant's own studies conducted on the same college campuses, typically has found that about 80 percent of white people demonstrate an automatic preference for other whites.

The researchers suspected that the dramatic change could be attributed to exposure to Obama during his presidential campaign and sought to find out if there was indeed, a connection. To do so, they asked participants what comes to mind when they think  of African-Americans and what they anticipated would come to mind for others when they think of African-Americans. Participants listed a range of responses, including traits, physical characteristics, food items and people. Almost 22 percent listed Obama on at least one list, and 50 percent named at least one other positive exemplar such as Martin Luther King Jr.

"The fact that close to a quarter of our participants listed Obama indicates that he had permeated many people's consciousness to the point that he was highly accessible," Plant said. "We were able to demonstrate that the accessibility of positive exemplars in people's minds was related to their degree of implicit bias."

What's more: Those who had low levels of implicit prejudice were quick to make an association between race and government — a connection the researchers believe is directly attributable to Obama. In this experiment, participants were exposed to the word "black" on a computer screen for 55 milliseconds. Although the exposure was too brief for conscious processing, these participants quickly selected government-related words such as president, election or senator rather than neutral words in a lexical decision task.

Although researchers found a decrease in stereotyping of blacks, it is still notable that 51 percent demonstrated a bias against blacks, Plant said.

"Our findings suggest that these people are less likely to have positive exemplars and words related to Obama's campaign come to mind when they think of black people," Plant said. "However, it is not clear why they responded this way. It is possible they were less exposed to the campaign media blitz. Alternatively, the strength and stability of their racial attitudes may have resulted in a resistance to change."

The researchers noted that the longevity of the effects is unclear, and it's also not known whether the positive impact of the exposure to Obama will continue. The success of his presidency may have implications for his future role as an exemplar.

"If his presidency is highly successful, he would activate positive traits, thoughts and feelings for most people," the researchers said. "However, the result may be less positive should his presidency prove to be less successful."

Plant and Devine's research team included FSU doctoral students Corey Columb, Saul L. Miller, Joanna Goplen and B. Michelle Peruche and UW-Madison doctoral student William T.L. Cox. The study was funded in part by a National Science Foundation grant.

By

Jill Elish

Via:

www.fsu.edu

sexta-feira, 20 de novembro de 2009

The Internet and Cultural Feedom


Allen Ginsberg (American Poet, 1926-97) said: “Whoever controls the media, the images, controls the culture.”

The word Media can be described as “the main means of mass communication (esp. television, radio, newspapers, and the Internet)”.

Here lies the problem: Fewer organizations control the media than ever before. There are essentially 5 big media organization. To see what they own, go to the following website: Who controls the media at Nowfoundation.org (note: this relates to American media).

After research you will quickly realize that there are only a few large organizations controlling media output. The top 5 media organizations are: General Electric, Time Warner, Disney, Viacom and News Corporation. Perhaps it’s natural that some media companies would dominate over others, after all, we live in a free market where the strongest will grow and absorb competition. However, this may be to our own detriment. The current arrangement, where only a few global corporations dominate media output, could have negative consequence for cultural development. In his book, Free Culture, author Lawrence Lessig says: “Never in our history have fewer had a legal right to control more of the development of our culture than now”. In other words, the mass media is produced by only a few incredibly influential and powerful organizations. The problem with only having a few very powerful media organizations is that all media is filtered and controlled by the few. If we as a society actively elected these organizations to filter and control the media available to us, like democratically elected media channels, we could be said to be in control of media output. The problem lies in the fact that we do not elect these media organizations, yet whenever we read a newspaper, or watch TV, it is almost certain we are absorbing the media of the top 5 media organizations.

This is why the Internet is a breakthrough in cultural freedom. For the first time, people have mass access to the voices of millions of people sharing information. For example, we are no longer required to read published newspapers for second hand accounts of the latest war horrors, we are able to read about them first hand from the people who are actually involved, in the form of text, images or video. Text, images and video presented by magazines, newspapers and television channels were once the most reliable sources of media available, now these mediums hold less importance than ever, because access to websites like Flickr and blogging tools like Wordpress allow real people to tell their stories first hand, without the restrictions of company ideology.

For these reasons we should strive to prevent freedom being taken away from the Internet in any shape or form. Organizations under threat from new technology (think: record labels and p2p music file sharing), should adapt and work with these new systems, not stifle and restrict them with potentially damaging laws. Groups such as the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) bullying tactics should no longer be tolerated. Why? because it leads to the restriction of freedom of information.

Source:

www.chrismakesmusic.com