A Look at Media That is Close to Home

This week I would like to take a look at a news media source that many of us are exposed to on at a weekly, if not daily basis, Kennesaw State University's very own Sentinel. The latest issue of The Sentinel boasted a front page headline of "Commons Receives 80 on Health Inspection: Caught Off Guard During Lunch Rush". For many, I am sure this came as a shock and prompted immediate concern as well as other initial reactions that were spurred by a fairly surprising headline, as I am sure many of us eat at the Commons on a regular basis. As a student of political science, with particular reference to a course in Mass Media and Politics, I think it is of utmost importance to look a little deeper into the headline, article, and information that was presented through them.

Much of the course referenced focuses on analyzing and discussing how mass media operates and how this plays into public perception of important issues. While this post does not necessarily pertain specifically to politics, in my opinion it is still an issue that affects students on a daily basis and therefore needs to be looked at a little more closely than just a shocking headline. For example, many media outlets, especially those that are free, aim for an approach that merely maximizes exposure to the public, not necessarily focusing on the truth. The Sentinel, being a college publication is quite the opposite. While still lacking in some details, as one commenter points out on the online version of the article, looking at even just the headline tells the consumer perhaps why the low rating was issued to the Commons. Another noteworthy aspect of this article is the feedback from other students. While I am of the opinion that a more wide demographic should have been reached out to, such as older students, considering that both student testimonials mentioned in the article were from freshman, these are still valid viewpoints to be considered.

The point I am trying to make is that while the headline and content may be slightly unsettling for some, there is a bigger picture to take into consideration. The material is genuine and fact based, unlike many media sources that are available to the public today. So the next time someone out there is scrolling through their Facebook news feed and taking everything from The Huffington Post for face value, please remember that sources such as these are aiming for clicks, while sources such as the Sentinel are a tool for media students that hold the intent of informing the public.

Check out the article here: http://www.ksusentinel.com/2013/11/19/commons-receives-80-on-health-inspection-caught-off-guard-during-lunch-rush/

Another Observance of Media Negligence

As a student of the Integrated Studies program at Kennesaw State, with concentrations in Political Science and Geography, I see the utmost importance of geography in regards to politics. With that being said, this week I have found an article from "The Gazette" which has been "Serving Colorado Springs & the Pikes Peak region since 1872", pertaining to the use of medical Marijuana oil and its effects on children suffering from severe neurological disorders. The reason that I chose this article to discuss is because of the relevance of geography in correspondence with media coverage over the public stigma of the legalization of medical marijuana.

The process of creating oil that can be used to treat conditions in children involves a detailed and complex procedure to ensure the removal of any THC from the marijuana plant. THC, or tetrahydrocannabinol, is the main constituent in marijuana that induces a feeling of being "high" or under the influence by the consumer. The process includes soaking marijuana leaves in alcohol, which extracts cannabidiol oils from the leaves, the alcohol is then boiled leaving only the oils behind with the beneficial compounds. The public stigma stems from the use of marijuana as a medicinal resource over its common use as a recreational drug, while this stigma is valid by some definitions there are clearly other uses for the plant.

I find the geographic relevancy of this issue's coverage pretty profound. Every month or so we see new legislation passing all over the United States regarding otherwise controversial issues such as medical marijuana, or gay marriage as an example. Yet, in Georgia I honestly feel as though it will be a very long time before coverage of even the positive benefits of marijuana would ever be aired or put forth as public information.

Read more http://gazette.com/families-looking-to-cure-epileptic-children-find-first-dose-of-hope-with-special-colorado-marijuana-oil/article/1508731

Fast Food and Leaping Impact Muckraking

A classic example of what could be described as Leaping Impact Muckraking, and by some standards Truncated Muckraking is that of the woman in 1992 who sued McDonalds over her spilling their hot coffee. Most people who have heard of this lawsuit immediately identify McDonalds as the victim as it was ruled in court for the woman to be awarded over $2.5 million dollars. What the media failed to disclose were the details and complexity of the lawsuit, and what exactly Mrs. Liebeck was looking to achieve in her suing of McDonalds.

            The New York Time’s 16^th “Retro Report” tells the story of Stella Liebeck, the 79 year old woman from Albuquerque, New Mexico who, in 1992 spilled eight ounces of McDonalds’ hot coffee into her lap. According to Liebeck, her daughter, and her attorney, this spill resulted in severe burns on 16% of her body and a week’s stay in the hospital, complete with skin grafts and a $10,000 hospital bill. Upon her release from the hospital, Stella wrote to McDonalds with two requests. First of which being compensation for her medical bills, secondly for the fast food chain to reduce the holding temperature of their coffee from 190 to 180 degrees. As Stella herself states, “She just didn’t want anyone to have to go through what she had to”. McDonalds sent her a payment of about $500, so Mrs. Liebeck brought them to court. After a long trial and arduous trial, the jury decided that McDonalds was to award Mrs. Liebeck of $2.7 million, although in the media amounts ranged from $2.5 to $2.7. The fact of the matter is that the media took the story, only to pick and choose what information they wanted to air to the public. The story became so popular and satirical that it can still be found in modern television and music.

            The reason that this story could be classified in some instances as either Leaping Impact Muckraking or Truncated Muckraking is because of the way the occurrence and trial played out and what the results were. By the end of the trial and the ruling in favor of Liebeck, there wasn’t necessarily and new legislation that restaurants were required to label their coffee as hot, but it did result in restaurants and other establishments providing this label. This labeling is in an effort to avoid a similar lawsuit such as that put forth by Lieback. Another result of the media coverage and muckraking over this lawsuit was the negative light that was cast onto Stella Liebeck, if the media had reported over the full story and not just taken it for face value, perhaps the public would understand the whole story between McDonalds and the 79 year old woman who spilt their coffee in her lap.

I highly recommend watching the short (12 minute) video in the attached link, I found it to be quite informative and enlightening to such a famous lawsuit:
Scalded by Coffee, Then by News Media

Media's Explanation of Chemical Weapons (Or lack thereof)

In the wake of the Syrian government's release of toxic, chemical gas on it's citizens, there has been much coverage over how/if the United States is going to retaliate, what this means for global security, and why did this happen. Yet, there seems to be little coverage or insight into HOW could this have happened? In 1925, the Geneva protocol banned the use of chemical weapons in war, however ironically enough, the protocol did not ban the further creation of such weapons. In the late 20th and 21st century, primary concerns of national and global security have revolved around the possession and whereabouts of weapons of mass destruction, including the stockpiling and refining of Uranium and Plutonium. Yet, when attacks such as those that were inflicted on the people of Syria, the media is left with their hands in the air and unable to explain where these weapons came from, and how an attack to this degree could not have been prevented.

Even if the media was to report over the creation and consequential use of chemical weapons, in Syria or anywhere for that matter, what they fail to report is the history of such weapons. Even after the Geneva Convention, what happens to the chemical weapons that were already created? Unbeknownst the to American people, chemical weapons are either buried, burned, or even dumped into the ocean all along the perimeter of the country. Great for the environment and the health of the American people. Yet the media, in an effort not to sacrifice the "spin", would rather report on whether or not there are boots on the ground in Syria as opposed to the overall well-being of the American people.

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-koehler/poison-values_b_3996673.html?utm_hp_ref=politics