Hello all ---
Pursuant to class requests, I'm posting some responses to current events and class readings to see whether it makes posting easier.
BTW, the comments we've gotten are good, but do remember that students can make new posts also.
I suspect those who want me to write here are more interested in my opening a topic than in my particular opinions about any one thing, so let's see ----
What about the coverage of these fires? Is it better than coverage of foreign policy or elections? If so, how so, and why do you suppose that might be the case?
1 comment:
I think the fires are a good coverage since it is affecting us on a local level. Our friends, even families may have been affected by it. Local commuting routes may have been closed due to the fires. Our sky and air almost looks like the red/pink sky of Mars. The coverage is important because it affects us Americans on a more local level. Elections on the latest chariman of some international society would not be as important to someone who has to pick up her kids near a disaster area. The coverage is just fine. The elections are paving the way for our future. The current president is the only one who can and did offer federal aid to those who were affected by the monsterous fires.
Also in this case the media offered tips on how to donate to the victims and how to avoid ones that are a fraud.
The T.V. is proably offers the most comprehensive coverage of the fires. The average person without cable has 12 basic channels with news to choose from with coverage. The radios express concern and as much up to date details as they can.
So overall I think the coverage is more than just enough regarding the fires as opposed to elections and/or international policies.
Post a Comment