Skip to main content

Home/ contemporary issues in public policy/ Group items tagged heuristics

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Mike Frieda

Question on "The Persauders" Film - 8 views

Discuss the different ways the advertising groups made use of framing to sell their products. In what ways do the methods of Frank Luntz differ? How does Luntz use framing to alter public opinion ...

framing heuristics film

started by Mike Frieda on 28 Sep 11 no follow-up yet
Mangala Kanayson

Question on "How to Cheat at Everything" - 18 views

No more than a parent cons a child into good behavior so Santa will bring the child gifts. People con each other all the time, especially on dates and in business settings. We only seem to call it...

framing heuristics cheat

started by Mike Frieda on 28 Sep 11 7 follow-ups, last by Mangala Kanayson on 04 Dec 11
Quang Chu

http://frameworksinstitute.org/assets/files/iyengarinterview2009.pdf - 8 views

frameworksinstitute.org/...iyengarinterview2009.pdf

shared by Quang Chu on 29 Sep 11 - No Cached
    • georgenasr
      georgenasr on 04 Oct 12
       
      It seems that priming and framing have a lot in common. I can tell though that from the information I get from this article, framing is more about molding your opinion over time while priming is more about getting a one time reaction from a person. 
    • madison taylor
      madison taylor on 08 Oct 12
       
      I can see how framing would definitely work to sway peoples opinions one way or the other, and i also think its true that it can effect educated and uneducated people alike, and it was a very good point to raise.
    • Justina Cooney
      Justina Cooney on 08 Oct 12
       
      I thought this was a great article. I wish that more people understood some of these concepts that seem like common sense. For example the article talked about putting a face to a problem and how this was a ridiculous concept. Many Americans want to blame say the president or the former present for what shape this country is in today but in reality they do not even hold enough power to make significant changes, more likely it is much deeper issues that are creating all of the issues that we see.
    • Sean McCarthy
      Sean McCarthy on 08 Oct 12
       
      It is semi-obvious that the average voter isn't rational, but I found it interesting that this article believes that even a voter who's largely filled out their schema (threw a new new vocab term in there.. pretty nice, i know) can be influenced by the way a situation is framed.
    • Shannon Wirawan
      Shannon Wirawan on 08 Oct 12
       
      I agree. Like yeah presidents have used some framing techniques to sway our thoughts on certain issues, but it's solely a person's responsibility to think for themselves and make their own decisions based on how they view things and how they want the country run, with politics and other issues that arise on our daily basis.
    • Cameron Schroeck
      Cameron Schroeck on 07 Oct 12
       
      I agree with Iyengar's statement that American society assumes that one believes that individuals should be held responsible due to the country's cherished concept of individualism. Since there is so much appreciation for individuality in the U.S., one automatically concludes that individuals must be held responsible for the workings of society. However, we also need to understand the importance of policies and those that put the policies into place to better comprehend the American system. 
    • Caitlin Scott
      Caitlin Scott on 08 Oct 12
       
      I also think that instead of blaming someone, people should looks towards the options of how to get out of the situation.  If someone failed instead of continually blaming them, find a way to get out of the problem.  When you sit around blaming people you are not going to accomplish anything.  
    • Courtney Sabile
      Courtney Sabile on 08 Oct 12
       
      I agree with Caitlin. Voters should be looking for what the party has to offer, not what the other is blaming for. Finding a solution to issues is important to fix society.
    • Devin Milligan
      Devin Milligan on 07 Oct 12
       
      I agree with the statement, "...people behaved differently when outcomes were framed wither as potential gains or potential losses." The outcome of an event depends on the outlook of a certain individual. If they believe the outcome will be good, it will be good, and vise versa. Your outcome can be what you make of it.
    • Devon Meredith
      Devon Meredith on 08 Oct 12
       
      I completely agree with Devin on this statement. If you have a bad attitude, things will not get better and you will be constantly stuck in rut you currently find yourself in. But if you turn things around with a positive spin, your odds are much better. When someone is persuaded a certain way, then yes their outcomes will also be framed that way. Framing really does influence a citizens understanding of public issues. 
    • Nicolas Bianchi
      Nicolas Bianchi on 08 Oct 12
       
      I agree with Devin as well. Pessimism or Optimism plays a major factor in the outcome of an event. If someone goes into something with a poor outlook, the chances of it coming out super positive is unlikely and if one is optimistic, they have a better chance of making the best out of the situation.
    • Kim H
      Kim H on 08 Oct 12
       
      It's all about the power of positive thought. Mind over matter and all that. It reminds me of a few articles I've read in the past about how people can make themselves physically ill solely because they are stressed or worry too much. When a story is framed in a positive way, people tend to believe that everything will turn out okay. But when stories are framed in a negative way, this can lead people to worry and stress unnecessarily, especially because news is often exaggerated to make headlines. 
  • ...8 more annotations...
    • Erick Sandoval
      Erick Sandoval on 07 Oct 12
       
      Some view the issue of poverty as "a consequence of human laziness or lack of initiative", but for the most part, that's looking at the issue from a wealthy person's point of view. If you ask someone who really is living in poverty they might argue that they are not given enough resources to progress or to one day be living a middle class life. On one side, people in poverty are being blamed, on the other side the people in poverty are blaming the government for their lack of support. 
    • Tatiana McCuaig
      Tatiana McCuaig on 08 Oct 12
       
      By putting faces on these problems, they are giving the problem an embodiment. This can be detrimental because the face that can be given can later become a stereotype, and give that problem a specific face from a specific group, that later can be discriminated against because it is seen as the living embodiment of that problem.
    • Ashley Mehrens
      Ashley Mehrens on 08 Oct 12
       
      I think that by putting faces on problems, society can efficiently blame someone else for something they knew they could help. For example all of the propositions that people are upset with after elections, they blame on politicians. In actuality they know they could have put their say into the election and then the face would no longer be necessary. Faces are very useful for passive aggressiveness, but don't really help the situation in most cases.
    • Brandon White
      Brandon White on 08 Oct 12
       
      For some reason Diigo won't let me respond to a certain passage. However, I am responding to the passage that deals with poverty. The idea in this passage is that people, given no external factors, tend to blame poverty on the individual and as something that results from being lazy and non dedicated. However, when exposed to footage of poverty, people are more likely to blame politicians and  forces that are outside of the control of the impoverished.  Naturally, people like to think that they are better than most others. So when they hear of people being poor, it must be just because they didn't have the same motivation as you, right? However, when people in poverty are humanized, we tend to be less critical of them and more critical of those who support such a system of poverty.  Visual stimulus can do wonders for inciting action in a person. If I told you "there are sick dogs in America" most people would not have much a reaction. However, if they are shown a 2 minute commercial showing sad and dying dogs, they may be more likely to take action to help the animals.  We are visual creatures. The ways in which visual stimulus frames our mode of thought is incredible. 
    • Tori Mayeda
      Tori Mayeda on 08 Oct 12
       
      I can understand why people's decisions could be swayed by the framing. Differences in the way you present something can definitely influence how strong or weak your point comes across. I also agree that it can affect both informed and uninformed people.  
    • Karina DaSilva
      Karina DaSilva on 08 Oct 12
       
      I find this very interesting. I think this is a tactic used by various sources (politicians, media) in order to distract people from the issue at hand. What is more sensational will grab our attention much faster than keeping account of what is going on. 
    • haakonasker
      haakonasker on 08 Oct 12
       
      This article is very interesting. I Agree with Karina, I think people all around the world use this method to get peoples attention and focus it on something they want. When media focus on something special to sell more papers or magazines and presidents focus on something to get liked more.
    • chelseaedgerley
      chelseaedgerley on 08 Oct 12
       
      yeah totally, propaganda is used constantly. Tv stations and new papers only show what they want or need in roder to sell a person, such as obama. They will emphasize what they want, especially with the election. Because its more divided than ever many people stick with their own kind and will watch fox news rather than CNN, if their voting republican.There really aren't any neutral sources anymore.The big issue is people being able to evaluate the truth and whats in their best interests like the article says.
    • Ryan Hamilton
      Ryan Hamilton on 08 Oct 12
       
      This article goes hand in hand with the events that are going on right now. The election is coming up and we are seeing the 'framing' of issues from two different perspectives. The problem is when someone who is trying to make rational decisions on the election is fed biased and 'framed' information from the media. The facts are not complete, and the context of events and policies are not fully fledged out. We are left with shells of ideas that we must process in order to make decisions. For most people that is good enough and these debates and biased news sources only confirm their personal bias. Such a large percent of the population already knows who they are voting for before they get information. For the smaller population of people that want to make a rational informed decision they are left with sorting through the rubbish.
    • Brandon Weger
      Brandon Weger on 08 Oct 12
       
      It's interesting to see that the effects of framing can be so broad, but that really is what everyone sees, we have a tendency to assume faults for other people. I just like that they're pointing out real common behaviors of people
    • Quang Chu
      Quang Chu on 08 Oct 12
       
      This is very interesting to me because it shows how people's decision could be framed. The politicians can control or use media as their tool to get people's attention. And i think that people should stand up and solve their problem on their own instead of blaming on the society and government which will not help them that much
  • Lauren Dudley on 05 Oct 12
     
    From my understanding of the article, thematic framing is better as it gives a broader sense to the audience and allows them to see the actual underlying issues. While, with episodic framing, it just focuses on the incident at hand and kind of puts a face/individual for the cause of the incident. Thematic framing should be used more in that we can see where society needs to be fixed, and what politicians are helping or not helping. The people need more understanding in order to help weave out the bad officials or politicians in our society. Also, people definitely base their opinion off of judgement of character here in America, when we really need to see how they work and their actions are affecting our society, especially now. Americans cannot take shortcuts with the news and facts about politics as we can sometimes be pointed in the wrong direction.
  • ...4 more comments...
  • Emily Shandorf on 07 Oct 12
     
    I find interesting the fact how they say that Americans are found very uninformed about politics. They use this kind of "information shortcuts". They also use heuristics for understanding and creating and a political opinion. People are just relaying on economists or other experts as sources and this way it doesn't give many opportunities to other people that have stores to continue and be successful.
  • Finn Sukkestad on 08 Oct 12
     
    I think that framing is sort of a problem in politics, its like faking it almost. Focusing on the little things that people for some reason notice and care about like how you dress and carry yourself but don't really know the positions of the people running. This must have become much more of a problem when the television came out and all of a sudden it wasn't just what was said on the radio any more, it became a celebrity contest. It is like that video clip we watched with gore trying to intimidate Bush, he was trying to frame himself as someone he isn't rather than just voicing his opinions and stances on political issues and letting this speak for themselves to the voters.
  • Tyler Schnorf on 08 Oct 12
     
    Framing is a problem because it draws the focuss of the poeple to areas they should not be concerned with; however, it is necessary for the candidates in elections. They have to make sure the people see what they want them to see. There do not give the people wrong information, but present it in a manner that benefits them. Every president has used the framing technique, but it is up to the people to look passed how things are presented to them and make educated decisions regaurding politics with all things aside.
  • Kelsey Fratello on 08 Oct 12
     
    I agree with Shanto Iyengar that it all depends on which type of framing that people are exposed to that determine who they hold accountable, society or individuals. The people that are exposed to episodic framing on issues like poverty and crime, hold individuals accountable. On the hand, the people that are exposed to thematic frames, they held societal and political figures responsible for things going on. I also found it interesting that they felt Americans are uniformed when it comes to politics, but how they are not ignorant.
  • gina Hogrefe on 10 Oct 12
     
    I felt that this articles underlying objective is know who is broadcasting your news and do not trust the media. In our information age something like fifty percent of all the media is controlled by only six corporations.
  • Amanda Garcia on 14 Oct 12
     
    It's really unfortunate that the human mind will overlook facts and good arguments for shortcuts that they can understand quicker and that appeal more emotionally to them. It's a great metal development in other areas of our lives, but when it is important that we understand more than just the basics of something, it is not to our benefit that we can allow ourselves to be convinced without question the information that is conveyed to us from any political sphere. Any leader can portray him/herself as a genuine person in the media, but that is just acting for the sake of a few more votes. Framing gives the public an idea of what to think before they've even began to think.
madison taylor

PublicAffairs Books: THE POLITICAL BRAIN - 8 views

www.publicaffairsbooks.com/...display

shared by madison taylor on 01 Oct 11 - Cached
  • The first goal transcends any given candidate: to define the party and its principles in a way that is emotionally compelling and tells a coherent story of what its members believe in—and to define the other party and its values in ways that undermine its capacity to resonate emotionally with voters.
    • Xochitl Cruz
      Xochitl Cruz on 01 Oct 11
       
      This part of this article reminds me of the past article about the con artist. Basically candidates are getting people to believe in their cause. The candidates have to be "emotionally compelling" to draw people in. It was the same way with the con artist because he played to the victims' emotions in order to get his reward. So in order to appeal to people candidates have to be a bit sneaky.
    • nsamuelian
      nsamuelian on 02 Oct 11
       
      i agree with the previous statement. i also thought of the previous article and how they must play mindgames with society. it is basically stating that they need to live a life that isnt them for people to "like" them or vote for them. this makes you think twice about everything anyone does, from politics to just daily life conversations.
    • Mike Frieda
      Mike Frieda on 02 Oct 11
       
      I must agree that this paragraph is very reminiscent of the Framing articles. It suggest in-group cohesion, using emotion to convince of value, and implies irrationality. 
    • Justina Cooney
      Justina Cooney on 09 Oct 12
       
      Although I thought the exert was good, I didn't find it to be eye opening or thought provoking. I didn't think that anything in it was truly groundbreaking. Wasn't this all common knowledge? I think that everyone is aware (concisely or not) that how we vote is majorly based on emotions. But I also think that this article gives too much credit to many voters. So many people get so stuck on party lines that it almost seems irrelevant who the candidates are and how people feel about them. Many voters that I have talked to could not be convinced out of voting for their parties candidate even if he or she was completely unqualified.
    • khampton44
      khampton44 on 10 Oct 12
       
      I agree with Justina, The article gives too much credit to many voters. I feel like I learned a lot of this when I was in high school government. We know why people vote one way or the other. And the thing about playing the victim was not suprising people are more likely to vote based on their emotions even if it is not the better canidate.
    • Sean McCarthy
      Sean McCarthy on 10 Oct 12
       
      That seems to be what most politicians are these days, con artists. They play on these 4 attack points and people will vote for them even if they're inept and not properly representing the American people. That's a reason I didn't like the last paragraph, because it tells voters those are the four things they should look at, as opposed to the issues.
    • chelseaedgerley
      chelseaedgerley on 10 Oct 12
       
      Everyone hates the political system, and yes its totally flawed and bias but candidates do what they need to put across points and portray emotions. But yes too much credit is given to voters. their lack of political knowledge is their fault. People are so passionate about politics yet they don't teach themselves enough to actually know about issues. anyways yes most of the article was common sense, for most of us anyways.
    • Luke Gheta
      Luke Gheta on 10 Oct 12
       
      We are emotional creatures. It makes sense that political figures define principles based upon emotion. Both parties are selling a story to the voter. Within the content, emotional issues, such as religion, are used to persuade voters to commit to there political cause. I want to be a person who is factually persuaded, but I'm human. I dictate a political policy based upon my own moral compass. The book mentions that we are emotionally bound to political issues. Additionally, this topic can also mesh with a future article. Is there a need for political scientist if the majority( not all but most) of people vote on issue based upon moral judgment. I find this interesting, because when I here about politic issues from the public I almost laugh on how factually incorrect they are. Is there even a need for statistics if we chose to dismiss the facts. My view is that we need facts, fact are important but politicians on both parties need to stop appealing to voters emotionally and express statistical content of there political ideologies. Example, The first presidential debate between Obama and Romney was a good debate in my opinion because there appeared to steer away from religion (Despite civil religion)and focused on issues.
    • haakonasker
      haakonasker on 10 Oct 12
       
      I partly agree with Justina Cooney. To much credit is given to the voters. I do think that a lot of people is aware of that how we vote is based on emotions, I do also think on the other hand that a lot of people is not aware of that. They do not think that it is emotions that lead them to vote for a specific candidate, even though it is.
    • Phillip Delgado
      Phillip Delgado on 11 Oct 12
       
      The four things voters need to decide are not concrete by any stretch of the imagination. All of these ideas change once the representative takes office. If you expected the president to measure up to these for ideas, than every president would fail. Voting for any president is taking a huge risk. It's like gamboling in Vegas. I believe the better way to decide who to vote for is to look at former president's terms. A far right republican has a great chance of becoming moderate once in office.
  • an effective campaign is to maximize positive and minimize negative feelings toward its own candidate, and to encourage the opposite set of feelings toward his or her opponent
    • Xochitl Cruz
      Xochitl Cruz on 01 Oct 11
       
      During class, when the Rick Perry campaign video was mentioned, I got curious. So I watched it, and this is the definition of what Perry is trying to do. He is trying to encourage negative feelings towards Obama, through his campaign.
    • Kaitlyn Guilbeaux
      Kaitlyn Guilbeaux on 03 Oct 11
       
      Good point Xochitl, I think that is what most (if not all) political compaign ads try to do.
    • Valencia Hamilto
      Valencia Hamilto on 03 Oct 11
       
      I believe that almost every Politician incorporates this mechanism into their campaign. For them to be successful and have supporters they have to state what makes them better than the next Politician and the best way to do that is to express the positive qualities they have and at the same time point out the negative qualities in their opponents.
    • Joette Carini
      Joette Carini on 03 Oct 11
       
      In addition to what Valencia says every Politician needs to do, (going back to last classes discussion) they also manipulate and con people into thinking that they are better than the other candidates. They make promises they can't keep and say things they don't mean in an attempt to get us to vote one way or the other. 
    • Devin Milligan
      Devin Milligan on 10 Oct 12
       
      i think this is a key concept because all candidates want to sway their voters to their side. They need to make themselves look better and the other candidate look not as qualified for the job. This is how a candidate will win peoples votes and an election.
  • can't possibly keep up with all the data required to know which aspects of which bills are likely to yield results conducive to their values and interests and which
    • Xochitl Cruz
      Xochitl Cruz on 01 Oct 11
       
      This goes back to the idea that citizens take shortcuts, and are not ignorant.
    • Mike Frieda
      Mike Frieda on 02 Oct 11
       
      Xochitl, I agree that heuristics play a role in our actions  but I must say the majority of people are ignorant and rely on those shortcuts for all political decision making. 
  • ...22 more annotations...
  • The most important feelings are gut-level feelings,
    • alyssa Scheer
      alyssa Scheer on 03 Oct 11
       
      i agree with this statement. Most important feelings can be your gut feelings. They are your instincts acting for you and usually are right. The candidates have a better chance of getting the position if they have a good "vibe" about them
    • magen sanders
      magen sanders on 03 Oct 11
       
      i do agree, instincts are everything, we rely on them for any decision we make but when it comes to politics we may have a first instinct about a candidate or a policy and make a judgement based on a first impression or glimpse because our "guts" tell us to, shouldnt we make more of an informed decision when it comes to the future of our government? with any issue in politics you cant simply go with your gut we need to make an educated deision
    • Lauren Dudley
      Lauren Dudley on 09 Oct 12
       
      I kind of agree with this statement as yes people need to have a good feeling about their politicians and everything, but politicians can be very sly sometimes in the way they present themselves. Sometimes we cannot tell that a person is being a fake, so that first gut feeling is great and everything, but not always reliable. Especially with politics as the statement above said because we need good people in office, so we need to make decisions with more information than gut feelings.
    • Tori Mayeda
      Tori Mayeda on 10 Oct 12
       
      I agree that the feelings play a big part in which side you choose. I don't think many people will side with you if you're giving off a bad vibe. This is how many people make decisions regarding everyday issues as well. 
    • Kelsey Fratello
      Kelsey Fratello on 10 Oct 12
       
      I agree. People are going to vote for the candidate that has persuaded their gut feeling that they are the right choice. But I also agree with Lauren that politicians can come off as being able to change our future for the better, but in the end may not follow through after they have been elected as president. We can't always know that our gut feeling is going to be the right one. 
  • Trickle-up politics is as valid as trickle-down economics.
    • Mike Frieda
      Mike Frieda on 02 Oct 11
       
      *tee hee hee*
  • and to define the other party and its values in ways that undermine its capacity to resonate emotionally with voters
    • Gaby Ramirez Castorena
      Gaby Ramirez Castorena on 02 Oct 11
       
      so basically what they try to do is bring themselves up by putting the other political party down...which when you think about it, comes to be very immoral
  • Although the media tend to be disinclined to play much of an educative role in elections (other than to inform voters of who's winning or losing at any particular point in time),
    • Gaby Ramirez Castorena
      Gaby Ramirez Castorena on 02 Oct 11
       
      i partly disagree with this statement. There are certain TV channels which tend to "attack" certain political parties/candidates, and this can prove fatal for those viewers who do not quite know how to decifer it.
    • Joshua Gray
      Joshua Gray on 03 Oct 11
       
      I do agree that certain networks attack candidates or parties but that doesn't mean the networks are educating the public about policies... Only attacking the opposition and occasionally using their policies to do it.
  • This is the first goal of any campaign because the way voters experience the party is the first influence on the way they will experience the candidate.
    • Tavish Dunn
      Tavish Dunn on 02 Oct 11
       
      This illustrates the idea that people take shortcuts when making political decisions. Most voters will not look into the arguments for a candidate's stance on issues with detail but will have their opinions shaped at least partially by their preconceptions of the party.
    • Jacqueline Ramsay
      Jacqueline Ramsay on 03 Oct 11
       
      I agree with this statement; political parties are the dominating drive of individuals to vote for a candidate, regardless of the candidate's personal stance. Since the party itself has the greatest influence over voters, most efforts are spent focused on the party. 
    • Kevin Olive
      Kevin Olive on 10 Oct 12
       
      I also agree with this statement because being a candidate is a physical representation on what that specific party is all about. Despite the candidate's personal opinions he/she must represents the parties views as best he/she can.
    • Nancy Camarillo
      Nancy Camarillo on 03 Oct 11
       
      This is interesting as we see it in play every day in politics. In order to gain the approval of the voters we see politicians, in a sense, giving the polis what they want. They tend to shape their ideologies and views on certain issues, in the moment to capture their intended audience. If you can get the polis to relate to you then you can in essence "win their vote."
  • Both men, as challengers, associated themselves with hope.
    • Eric Arbuckle
      Eric Arbuckle on 03 Oct 11
       
      Interesting because "hope" is a word that has many definitions. Everyone, or mostly everyone, would define "hope" differently and display very mixed understandings of what "hope" is really pertaining to. I feel both candidates used "hope" because as Americans we understand "hope" to be a very Americanized way of thinking, for instance, "American Hope." Very much the same as Obama used "change."
  • government is smaller.
    • Eric Arbuckle
      Eric Arbuckle on 03 Oct 11
       
      Interesting because this is the basis of the Republican Party in today's campaigns.
    • jeffrey hernandez
      jeffrey hernandez on 10 Oct 12
       
      I agree the democratic party has changed their platform significantly since 1996. 
    • John Buchanan
      John Buchanan on 03 Oct 11
       
      This is the kind of thing that makes me kinda sick about politics. The ambiguity of it all, and how the candidates try to pick the brains of their constituents dance these fine lines.  If a candidate would just stand up there and tell the American people what he thought was right and what was wrong, and why, it would be so refreshing.  The problem is, those kind of people don't get elected...
  • managing positive and negative feelings should be the primary goals of a political campaign
    • steve santos
      steve santos on 03 Oct 11
       
      This is how I always felt of the ideal means of a reform to the process of choosing a candidate and a general approach to issues of policy in america.  Its more of what they stand for to how they stand for the people rather than presenting that yes, they will have agreeing terms within the people of their political party but presenting that there is not one main means of appeal for all. coming from different faiths, economic situations and nationalities, the appeal to all is not realistic and in the awareness of that more compromise can be made and the retrospective of the state of affairs can be seen for people to be complacent with any step, minuscule or otherwise, towards a policy that works to accommodate all and be okay knowing in order to all share part of the policy "pie" people need to take cuts to divide it evenly as many would rally to include as many as possible. Rather it'd be best to know that it will not be full to what people request and a means to manage that is just as vital as enacting any one particular policy
  • create an overall judgment of the expected utility of electing one candidate or the other
    • georgenasr
      georgenasr on 08 Oct 12
       
      So is this trying to suggest that as more people vote for a particular candidate it changes the ethos of the candidate and the way people look at them?
  • In general, the goal is to convince voters that your candidate is trustworthy, competent, empathic, and capable of strong leadership, and to raise doubts about the opposition along one or more of these dimensions
    • Lauren Dudley
      Lauren Dudley on 09 Oct 12
       
      I know that this is an important goal and everything as campaigning is about strategy to make your candidate look the best, but can't we see politicians actually just come striaght out with no hidden agenda or goals like this... Just focus on the issues, and actually say what they think will truly help this country, not just what they think the people want to hear.
    • Erick Sandoval
      Erick Sandoval on 10 Oct 12
       
      This tactic makes it so the voters view a candidate as an ideal one who is trustworthy while at the same time, attacks the opponent by raising doubts. Many factors come in to play when looking at a candidate's personal characteristics such as appearance.
    • chelseaedgerley
      chelseaedgerley on 10 Oct 12
       
      despite our debt Americans want real hope. By displaying confidence, honesty, and a presidential look, it eases americans fear.
  • associations tend to hold more sway with voters than judgments about a candidate's particular traits (as
  • The second goal of an effective campaign is to maximize positive and minimize negative feelings toward its own candidate, and to encourage the opposite set of feelings toward his or her opponent.
    • Kayla Sawoski
      Kayla Sawoski on 10 Oct 12
       
      If a candidate is overly negative towards another candidate they could lose a lot of followers. Others would look at that and wonder they are being so disrespectful to each other. They would lose interest in the candidate. Nobody likes to be around an overly negative person. It just ends  up bringing themselves down. I personally, would rather have a positive candidate who is uplifting and kind. 
  • This is the first goal of any campaign because the way voters experience the party is the first influence on the way they will experience the candidate.
    • Sarah Marroquin
      Sarah Marroquin on 10 Oct 12
       
      I think that the first goal of any political campaign is to lay the facts straight; tell the people exactly what you plan to do then follow through. I think more people should think about which option is more beneficial to the whole community instead of making decisions solely based on part affiliation.
    • Kayla Sawoski
      Kayla Sawoski on 10 Oct 12
       
      Positive feelings toward a candidate can benefit the other candidate a lot. If they are respectful towards each other they can gain followers. If they are not kind to each other they can lose support from others which will have terrible results. 
    • Devon Meredith
      Devon Meredith on 10 Oct 12
       
      The Presidential Debate was a good example of how true this statement is. When Romney made a claim that Obama did not agree with, Obama would pucker his lips in disgust, and then try to fight back with a bigger statement. Having respect for the other candidate shows a lot about your character. 
    • chelseaedgerley
      chelseaedgerley on 10 Oct 12
       
      Totally agree. Small things like that show your character. When both candidates show that they are working towards the good of the country, it  brings us together rather than divides us even more.
    • Meghann Ellis
      Meghann Ellis on 10 Oct 12
       
      Agreeing with what you have to say, when the small things like having good character during a political race is more effective then stabbing one another back and forth with statements. The citizens want to see that both candidates are running a honest, positive race. For at least it is nice to see when the candidates respect eachother
  • It's fine to engage on the issues and offer specific policies. There is plenty of time for that in a campaign. But candidates should use policy positions to illustrate their principles, not the other way around.
    • Karina DaSilva
      Karina DaSilva on 10 Oct 12
       
      This actually makes a lot of sense. People tend to be pretty emotional beings, so to associate oneself with a positive attribute and one's opponent with a negative one is logical.  Not everyone understands politics, not everyone has the patience to understand politics. But they like feeling good. They like hope. By giving people what they want in this area, you're forming a rather strong foundation.
    • Brandon Weger
      Brandon Weger on 10 Oct 12
       
      I agree with Karina, we never like to view an opponent similar to ourselves, we think of them as your strict opposite. As far as politics, there are plenty of people that just treat it like a popularity contest more than wanting to be informed and take that time from other activities. They just want that feeling of safety.
    • Kim H
      Kim H on 10 Oct 12
       
      I think the four things  a voter needs to know really boil down to just one: will this person represent ME, what I want and what I would do?
  • it is higher still than the more "rational" goal of presenting voters with cogent arguments for a set of policy prescriptions
    • Hayley Jensen
      Hayley Jensen on 10 Oct 12
       
      In a democratic society, it would seem that this goal would be more in the forefront of the main goals of a campaign. This is the reason many people steer away from politics, because its...politics. There are too many strings attached. It is as if the government is scared of people being well informed because that means that people's opinions aren't as easy to "sway" or "control" or convince. Many would agree that knowledge is power for an individual. In the eyes of a leader in the government, if the people under the government have knowledge, the power is stripped from the government. As much as a candidate wants voters to feel like he/she is on the same level as them by trying to emotionally relate and be likable by the voters, he/she frames themselves by withholding potentially, mind-changing knowledge. This is how a candidate/ government official hold power, is by withholding knowledge from the people. 
    • Kristi Kniest
      Kristi Kniest on 10 Oct 12
       
      Everything that Drew Westen states in this excerpt is extremely true.  I have heard my parents discuss the different candidates' views on issues and debating how much they agree or not.  The way that candidates present themselves and their views will heavily influence whether or not a voter votes for them.  They need to relate the best they can to the voters to ensure their votes. 
    • mgarciag
      mgarciag on 10 Oct 12
       
      Whether we think it or not, the way we vote trickles down to our gut-level feelings. People tend to rely on their gut feeling more than they think.  Whether it is something as small as not walking down a dark alley or or whether to go all in in a poker hand, it all goes down to what our "gut feels."   The way we vote is no different, if one does not agree with a parties principles, than they will not vote for that person.  If we feel some way about a candidate, ew will not vote for them.  We can do all of this research about a candidat, but if something does not fit or does not feel right, we are more likely to vote for the other candidate
    • madison taylor
      madison taylor on 10 Oct 12
       
      I feel like these are all pretty obvious ideas, everyone wants to generate positive feelings about their party and its goals.
  • Lauren Petta on 03 Oct 11
     
    This reminds me of what we were talking about with framing and how things such as emotions and values contribute to people's choices and mind-sets. I would agree with mike in saying that it does imply irrationality to some extent.
  • Mitchell Burris on 05 Oct 11
     
    I appreciated the last part of the article where it laid out how the things voters should consider about a candidate before going to the voting booth. It seems a reasonable way to approach the quagmire of issues and clutter that surround politics and political races. I also appreciate what John Buchanan above was saying. I wish we had candidates like that as well.
  • gina Hogrefe on 10 Oct 12
     
    Ron Paul 2012.
Sean McCarthy

Uzodinma Iweala - Stop Trying To 'Save' Africa - 3 views

www.washingtonpost.com/...AR2007071301714.html

shared by Sean McCarthy on 04 Oct 11 - Cached
  • Why do the media frequently refer to African countries as having been "granted independence from their colonial masters," as opposed to having fought and shed blood for their freedom? Why do Angelina Jolie and Bono receive overwhelming attention for their work in Africa while Nwankwo Kanu or Dikembe Mutombo, Africans both, are hardly ever mentioned?
    • Felecia Russell
      Felecia Russell on 04 Oct 11
       
      Now this is the question. It is not about why Americans are helping Africa, but it is about who are being highlighted as the faces of saving Africa. This is partly the media's fault, but it is also a guilt trip of Americans becasue of previous slavery and racism towards African Americans. Highlighting these people is a way to show reparations and the new and improve America. To show how white people are helping the poor Africans. However, this is unfortunate because some of these people do these things out of the kindness of their heart and not for the public hype. There is nothing wrong with helping those in a less fortunate space. Personally, I LOVE brangelina :)..Nevertheless, they are not the only ones helping those in Africa and Africans are not the only people who need help.
    • Matt Nolan
      Matt Nolan on 04 Oct 11
       
      In today's society everything is about celebrities and what they do for the world. Bono and Angelina Jolie are an example of white people helping the poor Africans. I completely agree with Felicia on this one, people don't want to see someone of the same race who is just as poor trying to help someone, people want to see rich celebrities giving a helping hand because it motivates the people of the United States and around the world to try and help anyway they can. The celebrities are symbols of peace and bring the people together.
    • Kaitlyn Guilbeaux
      Kaitlyn Guilbeaux on 04 Oct 11
       
      I agree with Felecia that subconsciously, perhaps the media is placing the spotlight, and the 'halo', upon Bono and Angelina as a way to make up for the way that white people in the past have treated African Americans.
    • Tavish Dunn
      Tavish Dunn on 05 Oct 11
       
      I agree with Felecia's statement. Celebrities are highlighted as the ones trying to "save" Africa as a way of generating hype for the issue, whether they are helping out of kindness or the desire for more fame. In addition to using this as a way for people to get rid of their feelings of guilt, people are motivated to give because they have placed celebrities on a pedestal. Many people give to a specific cause because they want to be like the celebrities they idolize and follow a trend rather than showing feelings of true kindness.
    • Eric Arbuckle
      Eric Arbuckle on 05 Oct 11
       
      I agree with Felecia too!
    • Xochitl Cruz
      Xochitl Cruz on 05 Oct 11
       
      I agree with you Felicia. I feel that the focus is on people who are not African helping out, for the reasons you and others have pointed out. These famous celebrities get all this media for doing something with a country in need. However, the people who pay out of their own salaries to help everyone else around them, gets nothing, those people I feel are the ones really doing this for personal gain
    • anonymous
      anonymous on 05 Oct 11
       
      Felicia definitely hit the nail on the head here. I agree, and I find it a little bit unfortunate that Africa has gained the image of this disease ridden poverty stricken place due to the focus on celebrities and what they've done for this country. The media has a huge impact upon any movement or form of popular culture today, and I think the author makes a good point at the end when he states that Africa is framed as this place that needs "saving." Others feel sorry for Africa because of it, and a big deal is made of helping and being Africa's hero really, communication and maybe some alliances with other countries would be much more effective in helping Africa to come out of the vicious cycle of poverty it's been in since apartheid.
    • steve santos
      steve santos on 05 Oct 11
       
      The framing heuristics of the hype of the celebrity influence of thinking celebrities are the vital sense of sincerity in actually trying to help where marketing typically is a guilt trip to advocate a cause for the sake of sales wether than the ideal is truly advocated. The severity of the heart of africa is drawn to be black and diseased where there are certain aspects of civility that africa actually has but is undermined to the sense of racial diversity.
    • chelseaedgerley
      chelseaedgerley on 12 Oct 12
       
      Honestly its all part of politics.For decades the USA had gone back and forth on US policy and whether or not to intervene. Its unfortunate that Africans have this stigma attached to them as dying, and unable to help themselves at all. However stars and other white people have raised/donated mission to help them. I understand that white are portraying them a certain way but a lot of good have been done for those people.Media driven or not, I believe their is a true passion in most people to help people in Africa. Some intention may be dishonest but you can focus on the negative when trying to save lives.
  • It seems that these days, wracked by guilt at the humanitarian crisis it has created in the Middle East, the West has turned to Africa for redemption.
    • Mike Frieda
      Mike Frieda on 04 Oct 11
       
      Oh, how much I love this statement! Truly selflessness is a flag we all fly, as we shout out about our altruism, in order to fulfill the selfish desire for recognition, and in this case, rectification.
    • Eric Henderson
      Eric Henderson on 05 Oct 11
       
      This is truely a good statement, since I do believe that this is very true. Westernized countries just plain feel guilty about the situation in the Middle East, therefore they took to trying to "save" Africa to clear their guilt.
    • Sarah McKee
      Sarah McKee on 05 Oct 11
       
      I do think a lot of people just do things like this to make themselves feel better but I think it's more related to them trying to justify the way they live. How much we have compared to others. I've never really thought of it in relation to the Middle East, I don't think I see the connection.
    • Joette Carini
      Joette Carini on 05 Oct 11
       
      I think that this could be attributed to a general trait that Western societies have in general... people need to help other people in order to, essentially, feel good about themselves. Yes, people may feel guilty about other situations, but I think that generally people need to do something to make themselves feel better, and that something, in this situation, tends to be "saving" Africa.
    • Eric Arbuckle
      Eric Arbuckle on 05 Oct 11
       
      I have to comment, though it humors me you believe we are responsible for the middle east situation, I am not surprised. What is the "situation" in the middle east? How did we get there? What kind of beliefs do the radical Muslims have? And if we "messed" up the middle east and if it's our place to feel guilty, what was it like before?
    • Eric Arbuckle
      Eric Arbuckle on 05 Oct 11
       
      I have to agree with Sarah and Joette on this.
    • Tyler Coville
      Tyler Coville on 05 Oct 11
       
      If we are reasonable for the situation in the middle east who says we are not responsible for the situation in africa. We have continued to pour more money to dictators to get resources like diamonds. Which they use to buy more weapons to repress the people. We then give money for aid to these communities but they have to either go through the dictator or the dictator himself just posts a heavy tax when the currency is converted to the local currency (which he has a law in place to require)
    • sahalfarah
      sahalfarah on 12 Oct 12
       
      This statement speaks so true to all Americans because even they can honestly say that we're all guilty of this. Whether it is the government or us as individuals, people do good things to feel good about themselves. 
    • Alexa Datuin
      Alexa Datuin on 12 Oct 12
       
      This is the epitome of what America had become. Actions to "help" others are taken out of personal guilt. The reasoning behind helping others, especially others, has lost meaning. It's as though people justify lending hand to others is because it's what they are supposed to do, rather than really wanting to.
    • Karina DaSilva
      Karina DaSilva on 12 Oct 12
       
      I think this is also an example of the "white savior" mentality that a lot of people have, without even knowing.  Africa and its inhabitants are not seen as equals, but as things that could be saved with westernization. It's racism in a very subtle, but real, form. 
    • Devin Milligan
      Devin Milligan on 12 Oct 12
       
      Everyone wants to help save africa, but there are so many other problems in other countries too. Like the drug war in mexico. Africa is not the only country in need. In fact there is still a lot to do in our own country to help others.
  • as emaciated as those they want to help.
    • Mike Frieda
      Mike Frieda on 04 Oct 11
       
      Couldn't help but giggle at this.
    • Eric Henderson
      Eric Henderson on 05 Oct 11
       
      haha me too, very interesting statement
  • ...20 more annotations...
  • The relationship between the West and Africa is no longer based on openly racist beliefs, but such articles are reminiscent of reports from the heyday of European colonialism, when missionaries were sent to Africa to introduce us to education, Jesus Christ and "civilization."
    • Mike Frieda
      Mike Frieda on 04 Oct 11
       
      It is sad really. The West feels that it needs to industrialize, modernize, and stabilize developing nations - a goal which is objectively not plausible - and there is a definet focus on Africa. While many other developing nations receive aid, African countries are singled out and lumped into one group of "african", where s south east asian countries for example would be listed by their specific names. Africa is a large continent with a VAST array of cultures, languages, races, and governments. The nations of Africa differ greatly in their levels of modernity, and to assume that the governments of Africa are corrupt or unable to fix their domestic problems, is in a subtle way, racist and ethnocentric.
  • Every time a Hollywood director shoots a film about Africa that features a Western protagonist, I shake my head -- because Africans, real people though we may be, are used as props in the West's fantasy of itself
    • Jonathan Omokawa
      Jonathan Omokawa on 05 Oct 11
       
      There is no doubt that Hollywood does tend to exploit people. But then again, what flashy business doesn't?
    • Courtney Sabile
      Courtney Sabile on 12 Oct 12
       
      I agree with this statement. The issues pressing onto Africa with starvation and warfare are used as simply entertainment background for cinema. Sure there is always a message with topics like this. Aid is important, but the pop culture attention drawing to Africa makes it seems like nothing is being solved at all.
  • There is no African, myself included, who does not appreciate the help of the wider world, but we do question whether aid is genuine or given in the spirit of affirming one's cultural superiority. My mood is dampened every time I attend a benefit whose host runs through a litany of African disasters before presenting a (usually) wealthy, white person, who often proceeds to list the things he or she has done for the poor, starving Africans.
    • nsamuelian
      nsamuelian on 05 Oct 11
       
      Every time i see an ad or commercial about the white celebrities trying to "help Africa" a thought like this goes through my mind. I highly doubt that a celebrity with such high ratings in today's society truly wants to save Africa's poverty or starving people. I feel as if they do it more for the social attention and positive reputation rather than for their souls and well being.
    • Jonathan Omokawa
      Jonathan Omokawa on 05 Oct 11
       
      I would not go so far as to say that all celebrities vie for attention by doing the "help Africa" stuff, but I would agree that a large majority do it. I don't really feel it is asserting cultural superiority or dominance as just being selfish in their own right.
    • Alexis Schomer
      Alexis Schomer on 11 Oct 12
       
      I think it's really interesting how charity has become a social appeal. People don't donate because they want to help out, they donate because other people will think higher of them. A point this article is trying to make is that the publicity of "helping" is so overwhelming it almost takes away from the action itself. 
    • khampton44
      khampton44 on 12 Oct 12
       
      I really agree with the above statement that people help now because they feel like everyone is and not because they are really into the cause and want to help. I think this is also why so many stars have their own foundation, they feel like more people have them then people who do not.
    • Kevin Olive
      Kevin Olive on 12 Oct 12
       
      Does it really matter what inspires the help? As long as the people that need help get help that's what is most important. Help is help no matter how you look at it or the reasons behind it. 
    • Tori Mayeda
      Tori Mayeda on 12 Oct 12
       
      i think that it does matter. I don't think the people want others to pity them. Yes, they are receiving help but it is demeaning if people are going to help and have no passion for it. "here, take this because it will make me look good and i want to follow the trend." i don't think anyone would feel very good about getting that. 
    • Brandon White
      Brandon White on 12 Oct 12
       
      The basic premise that the author appears to be making is that of the egoism that we as "first-worlders" have in regards to Africa. The author feels that we do not help Africa typically out of genuine want to see good happen. but out of our own want to feel good about ourselves and have other perceive us as good people. Sometimes even when I do "good" things, I wonder if this is the case. Especially when I was applying for college. Did I do 200 hours of community service out of the goodness of my heart, or the want to get into a good college? The truth may lie somewhere in-between. 
    • Nicolas Bianchi
      Nicolas Bianchi on 12 Oct 12
       
      It is obviously a bit of both but I think how the media plays it, it leads us to lean towards the cultural superiority
    • Benjamin Chavez II
      Benjamin Chavez II on 12 Oct 12
       
      I understand how his "mood is dampened".  I can't stand when people feel they must talk about how amazing they are and what they have done. Whenever people do that it becomes evident that the reason they did whatever they did was to acquire more attention from others. "You have to speak to be heard, but sometimes you have to be silent to be appreciated".
  • True to form, the Western media reported on the violence but not on the humanitarian work the state and local governments -- without much international help -- did for the survivors. Social workers spent their time and in many cases their own salaries to care for their compatriots. These are the people saving Africa, and others like them across the continent get no credit for their work.
    • Gaby Ramirez Castorena
      Gaby Ramirez Castorena on 05 Oct 11
       
      I think this is the main point of the article
    • Sarah McKee
      Sarah McKee on 05 Oct 11
       
      But isn't that the point, these people are helping just to help and the other people are often helping to gain media attention.
    • Lauren Dudley
      Lauren Dudley on 11 Oct 12
       
      I would have to agree with this point of the article as the media will portray what they want the people to focus on. If the media does not believe that certain aspects of a situation will grab the people's attention then they will not show it, even though that point could be significant in pointing out the true heroes and their actions. I find this unfortunate as the article mentioned earlier that the media portrays celebrities that help, but why not the ordinary people, especially those of Africa. The media should really get to focus on the true aspects of a situation.
    • Mark Drach-Meinel
      Mark Drach-Meinel on 05 Oct 11
       
      I think it's important to note that all the media cares about is the bad things that happen. They only report how Africa needs to be saved but there is no information of all the good that is being done right now.
    • magen sanders
      magen sanders on 05 Oct 11
       
      i agree that the media only focuses on what they want us to see, not everything in africa is as terrible as the media may portray it to be. yes situations in other countries are extremely hostile but the media tends to focus and just the negative to gain sympathy and attention to that subject. the opinions are then skewed.
  • a sexy,
    • georgenasr
      georgenasr on 11 Oct 12
       
      Something about using this word doesn't seem appropriate in the context of people who are active. Whenever a writer uses this word, depending on its context, I usually think less of the author. 
    • Caitlin Fransen
      Caitlin Fransen on 12 Oct 12
       
      I dont understand why this word is used in this article, it doesn't seem to fit. I agree with the above person it makes me think less of the author. 
    • Shannon Wirawan
      Shannon Wirawan on 12 Oct 12
       
      I feel like this word was used in this article to represent the current generation. Our current generation is basically to the extent that sex sells. So the author was just probably trying to make it known. I think the word, 'sexy' also had to do with the fact that the author was talking about celebrities in relation to the main topic.
    • Sean McCarthy
      Sean McCarthy on 12 Oct 12
       
      I also agree that this was a reasonable use of the word. The lovely irrational citizens of America are much more likely to get behind something that's trendy and "sexy". And that's exactly what the author is calling us out on. Many people arent (perhaps subconsciously) 'helping' out Africa out of humanitarian love, but because it has become trendy lately. you see "sexy" people helping out kids in Africa, and you want to be "sexy" like them.. I've done a terrible job explaining the use of this word, but hopefully y'all get what I'm trying to get at.
  • stereotype of Africa as a black hole of disease and death.
    • georgenasr
      georgenasr on 11 Oct 12
       
      See, this is one of the problems with widepread media campaigns... they often give people the wrong idea about what is really happening and what is the real state of people. It won't be easy to integrate into campaigns, but people need to be aware of the big picture, not just segments of it. 
    • Caitlin Fransen
      Caitlin Fransen on 12 Oct 12
       
      I sometime catch myself falling into this trap as well, I get convinced by the media campaigns that africa is just filled with disease and starving people. 
    • Nicolas Bianchi
      Nicolas Bianchi on 12 Oct 12
       
      This is definitely a problem with media.  Obviously not all of Africa is as bad as we make it and it leads all of us to believe that everyone needs help.  It paints a different picture than what is actually going on.
    • Meghann Ellis
      Meghann Ellis on 12 Oct 12
       
      Media blinds us from seeing the actual problem going on in Africa. I do find myself believing that these campaigns are true. The only focus on certain things that attract us to think the worst. This is a major problem in the social media campaigns
    • Ashley Mehrens
      Ashley Mehrens on 12 Oct 12
       
      I think that the major problem with these ad campaigns is that they only show poor run down villages. The towns that have actual success in their businesses are never shown. The play to society's emotions to raise revenues, which may or may not be helping. Although I'm sure there is corruption in Africa, the West may be trying a bit too hard to fix the problems. Social media leads society into believing they need to make a change radically, when a gradual change is probably going to help more. 
  • Africa wants the world to acknowledge that through fair partnerships with other members of the global community, we ourselves are capable of unprecedented growth.
    • Lauren Dudley
      Lauren Dudley on 11 Oct 12
       
      This statement could very well be true and if our country, along with others do not give them a chance how will we ever know if they can stand by themselves with good relations. I believe that it is just hard for us Americans to realize this point because we are a country that is used to helping when we believe someone needs it and it is hard to back off if you have seen they are in trouble.
    • Tatiana McCuaig
      Tatiana McCuaig on 11 Oct 12
       
      I see where African is coming from, with all progress the western world sees as coming from powerful nations, when really there is quality work being done from the people of the nation themselves. If the western world keeps on crediting themselves for the progress made, it makes them feel like they have done all the work and makes them feel better about themselves for doing such quality humanitarian work. Though humanitarian work is absolutely helpful, more note should be taken to the work being done by the people themselves. 
    • Hayley Jensen
      Hayley Jensen on 12 Oct 12
       
      This is an interesting point. Maybe instead of trying to emulate the suffering of Africans, we can talk about the power they possess. By empowering the population, by providing life-sustaining support but not expecting glory in return, and by identifying African citizens as capable citizens of the world instead of a helpless population reliant on our generosity, the world will gain a bigger respect for Africa and its citizens will tap into this unprecedented growth.
  • pick out children to adopt in much the same way my friends and I in New York take the subway to the pound to adopt stray dogs.
    • Finn Sukkestad
      Finn Sukkestad on 11 Oct 12
       
      This really illustrates the majority of the college liberals who say they want to save africa, I think that if we just gave the same sympathy that we give to africa to the destitute in our own country then more people would help because it would  bring that same fame and self fulfillment as someone who is making a difference for someone.
    • Sarah Marroquin
      Sarah Marroquin on 12 Oct 12
       
      I don't think that this statement is really appropriate for the author to say. I also think that if they are trying to help those that need help then that should be respected.
    • Erick Sandoval
      Erick Sandoval on 12 Oct 12
       
      We already have a picture in our mind that Africa is not the safest place to live but of course blood usually sells over the good things that happen over there. 
    • madison taylor
      madison taylor on 12 Oct 12
       
      should it really matter what the motives are for people who are giving money and aid to Africa as long as it is helping and trying to make a difference?
    • Caitlin Scott
      Caitlin Scott on 12 Oct 12
       
      I don't think it should, but I think that what this author is trying to say is that people are trying to make a difference but it may not actually be helping the African cause.  However, this author is asking something of the media that they do not do in regards to other things besides Africa.  They don't ever report good things that people do, it's always about the bad, so the media isn't targeting Africa, they are targeting everything.
  • Africa wants the world to acknowledge that through fair partnerships with other members of the global community, we ourselves are capable of unprecedented growth.
    • Kayla Sawoski
      Kayla Sawoski on 12 Oct 12
       
      Just because parts of Africa are in poverty, doesn't mean that all areas are. Those people should still be acknowledged and recognized for the hard work they are doing. Some parts of Africa are actually capable of going far and are going to be very successful. People there still have the opportunity to make a change. 
  • News reports constantly focus on the continent's corrupt leaders, warlords, "tribal" conflicts, child laborers, and women disfigured by abuse and genital mutilation.
    • Dana Sacca
      Dana Sacca on 12 Oct 12
       
      I never really understood why news does this. Why do you focus on the negative? I feel like society has become increasingly negative. But the negativity makes sense because when things become frustrating you get discouraged and give up. There needs to be a balance between negative and positive. When there is positive it is up lifting and gives people hope. The news shouldn't focus on just negative because that contributes to the discouraging factor.
  • ad campaign features portraits of primarily white, Western celebrities with painted "tribal markings" on their faces above "I AM AFRICAN" in bold letters.
    • sahalfarah
      sahalfarah on 12 Oct 12
       
      A classic ad company ploy..
    • Brandon Weger
      Brandon Weger on 12 Oct 12
       
      I like the last line, "we ourselves are capable of unprecedented growth." It's nice to think about ourselves in that light, and its an optimistic picture for the future, but what are we actually accomplishing and what are we falling short on?? Words can only go so far, sorry to be sort of hypocritical, but action must be taken if change is your goal.
  • magazine spreads with celebrities pictured in the foreground, forlorn Africans in the back.
    • jeffrey hernandez
      jeffrey hernandez on 12 Oct 12
       
      In some cases celebrities are using the struggles of people in Africa and their help they are giving them as a publicity stunt. 
    • Ryan Hamilton
      Ryan Hamilton on 12 Oct 12
       
      Stuff like this bothers me. I am all for people wanting to help out in places that need it even if it is for self gratification and all of that. But the situations are much more complicated than the media leads people to believe. There are religious clashes in many of the central African countries and in the Northern African countries like Mali we are seeing Al-Qaeda and similar organizations set up Islamic radicalism. Feeding the poor and helping the people that are displaced by these things is not fixing the problem. And for the people who are saying the the US is just sending money to these countries and their 'corrupt dictators' is just wrong. We are trying to do much more than that. We have US Special Forces in many of these countries like Somalia, Mali, and many of the other central African countries. The US is putting some of our best soldiers in there to help the people. The media does not cover that part, they rather highlight the Pitt's and Clooney's. 
    • Kim H
      Kim H on 12 Oct 12
       
      I think part of the reason we only hear about what celebrities are doing is because we feel more connected to them than to people we have never heard of. Because we feel connected to them, publicists feel that we are more likely to respond to pleas for help from people we feel more connected to. 
  • Africa doesn't want to be saved
    • Sean McCarthy
      Sean McCarthy on 12 Oct 12
       
      African citizens just want to be seen as individuals that are equal to us, who have simply been born into more difficult circumstances, as opposed to some diseased animal that can only survive out of the goodness of some person's heart.. it's very similar to people who are crippled and are treated as less than human. this is kind of a reminder that we need to treat everyone as equally human, because we don't know what they're going through, we just know that they're people who deserve their same God-given rights.
  • shane paulson on 05 Oct 11
     
    I completely agree with Felicia. The media is the greatest influence on why these celebrity figures are the ones being spotlighted for the force behind helping out Africa. I think in many ways it is the media attempting to save these reputations of celebrities in order to keep the population of readers and listeners interested. People tend to be drawn to stories that they are familiar with or that they can relate to.
  • Edmund Garrett on 12 Oct 12
     
    Well, I do agree it is nice to give aid to Africa and the reason does matter. People that simply give money just to have his or her name announced that they did so is not the morally correct reason. You should just give cuz it's the right thing to do but nevertheless I would not stop sending money because of ill reasons. The reasons don't matter that much. We are saving people and if the ends outweigh the means then who cares.
1 - 5 of 5
Showing 20▼ items per page