Streaming music services are killing the music industry. It may be more slowly than what file sharing services like Napster were doing 15 years ago, but just ask the artists; while they might be getting paid, it’s a pittance compared to real record sales.

It’s no secret that the music industry has changed a great deal since the early days of AM radio and Edison cylinders, but the last two decades have brought about some of the largest changes in the way that music is distributed and consumed as compared to any other. Most importantly, physical media sales have taken a nosedive, with CDs making up about 30% of the market that the format used to dominate.

Thanks to file-sharing, peer-to-peer services, like Napster, that came about in the early 2000s, consumers have come to expect cheaper (read: free) ways of acquiring the music they so desperately desire.

We can’t blame it all on Napster. The iPod, MP3 players, and growing hard drives all begged to be filled with files, and the internet has been happy to oblige.

Peer-to-peer software like Napster, Kazaa, Limewire and perhaps a dozen others all made one thing clear: people believed music was no longer worth paying for.

At a time when a compact disc was upwards of $15.99, file sharing allowed listeners to pick and choose what they downloaded at a reduced cost.

Now the world’s largest music marketplace, iTunes also pushed this new paradigm, virtually ending the era of buying albums when it pushed record distributors to allow users to download individual tracks, instead of the whole record.

This fundamental change cannot be understated: by breaking the album down piecemeal into individual songs, artists and labels were guaranteed a much smaller revenue than if the whole album had to be purchased.

Because of antiquated laws that could really only be enforced on terrestrial AM/FM radio stations and in physical stores, Apple and others were able to guarantee only a small portion of revenue to labels and artists.

Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Downloading Music on the Internet back in July of 2011, Lars Ulrich, founding drummer of metal band Metallica, said, “With Napster, every song by every artist is available for download at no cost. And, of course, with no payment to the artist, the songwriter, or the copyright-holder. If you are not fortunate enough to own a computer, there is only one way to assemble a music collection the equivalent of a Napster user, theft.”

A stinging review of the service for certain, and it brought plenty of backlash from fans and non-fans of the classic thrash metal act. Many fans professed their love for the artists that they downloaded on Napster, but said that when it came down to it, they felt they had spent enough on prior ticket, CD, and merch sales to warrant the free downloads.

Piracy will probably never truly die, but as various piracy software’s and services came and went, other changes in music distribution occurred after Napster ultimately ceased in 2001.

Technology is constantly advancing, and as flip phones gave way to smartphones and Wi-Fi spread into public spaces, it was only a matter of time before a new way of accessing music came about.

Enter streaming music services. In 2011, streaming radio service Pandora began offering users a personalized, customizable way of hearing some of their favorite music, on-demand, all for free.  You can choose an artist, song, or genre and Pandora will use your preferences to create a streaming playlist, but unlike making one yourself in iTunes, you can’t control what songs comes next. You simply hit a ‘thumbs up’ or ‘thumbs down’ button and Pandora’s software determines what to play next.

Free is definitely the biggest part of Pandora’s appeal. Users that do not pay for a subscription must endure a short ad every few songs, or they can pay about $5 a month to remove the ads. This is what is considered a “freemium” model: users can access the service at no cost, but with ads that generate revenue for Pandora, or they can upgrade to the ‘premium’ service that guarantees no ads.

Writing in The Independent, a national newspaper based in London, music industry and business journalist Hazel Sheffield said, “Music has always been a portfolio business. Digital downloaded music, played on iPods and phones, was thought to be the next big thing, but it is already in decline. In 37 global markets, including South Korea, Sweden and Mexico, streaming now generates more revenue than downloads.

As Sheffield points out, streaming has overtaken downloads in popularity. The juggernaut responsible for such a hostile takeover?

Spotify.

While Spotify had been around in Sweden and the rest of Europe since 2008, it took them several years and a lot of negotiating, along with several million dollars, to get American record labels on board so that they could launch their service in the US to any guaranteed success.

But succeed is just what Spotify did. According to their own website www.spotifyartists.com/spotify-explained, they are generating upwards of $3 billion dollars in royalties for the music industry, from a combined 75 million users in 58 markets worldwide.

Much like Pandora, Spotify is a freemium service. You can select an artist, their discography, or their album,  hit play and listen to entire albums or catalogs on shuffle, with an ad after every third or fourth song.

For $9.99 a month you get access to Spotify Premium, which removes ads, removes skip restrictions, and even allows users to save songs or albums for listening when they go offline.

One might think that $3,000,000,000 is a lot of money, and while it certainly is, it’s not like that money goes straight from Spotify right into the hands of the artists.

The chart lays it out in only relatively obscure terms: Spotify earns a monthly revenue, which is  then multiplied by the fraction of an artists streams over Spotify’s total monthly streams. Then this amount is further divided, with 70% going to the copyright holders. Finally, each artist has negotiated a royalty rate.

Current estimates place the average revenue per stream at 0.7¢. NYU songwriting professor Mike Errico clarifies in an article in The Independent that, “Spotify, the clear leader in the streaming space, pays after 30 seconds.” That means if your song is either under 30 seconds, or a user skips it before they hit the 30-second mark, the artist doesn’t get paid.

Artists have spoken out against the unfair pay scheme that Spotify employs, and other services mimic, in different ways. Worldwide pop superstar Taylor Swift famously placed an open letter to Spotify in the Wall Street Journal back in 2014 when she refused to allow her most recent album 1989 to be available to stream.

In the letter, Swift poignantly wrote “There are many (many) people who predict the downfall of music sales and the irrelevancy of the album as an economic entity. I am not one of them. In my opinion, the value of an album is, and will continue to be, based on the amount of heart and soul an artist has bled into a body of work, and the financial value that artists (and their labels) place on their music when it goes out into the marketplace. Piracy, file sharing and streaming have shrunk the numbers of paid album sales drastically, and every artist has handled this blow differently.”

Since then, she has embraced Apple Music and can even be seen in TV commercials for the streaming service.

Or take, for example, Adele. The singer-songwriter released 25 in November of last year and by years end had sold upwards of 8 million copies. The album was not and still is not available to stream.

Things get even trickier when you consider who must get paid before the artist gets their share. As Lars Ulrich had mentioned earlier, there’s a lot of people that make a recording possible, and now they’re relying on a cut of seven-tenths of a penny per 30-second or longer stream.

Kate Swanson, a grad student at Indiana University, summarized it nicely in an article in the Music & Entertainment Industry Educators Association Journal. “For sound recordings, artists receive a percentage of the wholesale price. Superstars can get 20 percent, but most get 12 percent to 14 percent. On a $10 CD, a musician or band could make $1.20 to $1.40. Divided evenly between four bandmates, that amounts to a grim 30 cents each. On a 99-cent download, a typical artist may earn 7 to 10 cents after deductions for the retailer, the record company, and the songwriter.”

The 70% that is shown going to master and publishing owners in the above chart is divvied up between performing rights organizations (PROs) and publishers. Each holds and protects a separate copyright: one for the recorded sound, and the other for the musical work (think of that as the actual notes and words on sheet music).

These laws have remained relatively unchanged since the 1980’s, long before even the CD was popular. Because of this, there is no set law on how much money a streaming service must pay out to a label or artist.

So the problem is clear: the legal arena hasn’t caught up with the cultural one. But the solution much murkier. Lawmakers, musicians, and industry pros are going to have to band together if they want to create the radical changes needed in music industry law to guarantee a fair royalty scheme for artists. Otherwise, artists will follow in the footsteps of Adele, Taylor Swift, and many others and attempt to get their fans to buy music once again.

1. My title, “Streaming Music: How Revenue Streams Are Trickling Out” is just about as thought provoking as I could come up and still keep things short. I believe it is informative enough without revealing the entire point of my article. The lede is short and to the point: streaming music is killing the music industry, albeit more slowly than piracy had been doing. It may not be the most clever lede, but it is very direct and leads the reader into my article.

2. I believe the introduction helps lead the reader through a modern history of why the music industry has been in decline. While I don’t get too much into streaming in the first few paragraphs, it places my controversy in a historical and temporal context, telling the reader how we got to where we are.

3. By placing my controversy in a temporal context, I provide plenty of support and a timely evolution of this problem. By providing the reader with a number of experts and external sources, and also tying the current problem of streaming music revenues with the same problems as discussed around the advent of piracy software, I show how things have really not changed and that the problem basically remains the same. Based on feedback to my unit 2 presentation, it would seem most of my classmates were not aware of this issue, so I feel like I’ve uncovered yet more that the average music fan would not be aware of.

4. By discussing the issue in a historical manner (from past to present) I believe I’ve kept my point clear. The presentation is unique that instead of tackling only the problem as it is today (low revenues from music streaming), I bring in some of what has lead up to the advent of music streaming. Most of the sources I used did not take into account the actions of Napster and others 15 years ago.

5. I feel that, by historicizing my topic, I have given the reader a straightforward, yet thought provoking piece. I am challenging the average music listener that may know little or nothing about the way that they procure music, and offering a younger generation background that they probably have only a surface level understanding of. I have kept everything in a temporal order that also helps outline the development of my main claim.

6. I’ve found a variety of sources from many different sorts of authors with different backgrounds that helps to illustrate how people across many fields are thinking about my topic of controversy. I bring their points together to form a cohesive argument that shows how important it is that the legal field catch up with modern technology so that the music industry might thrive once again.

7. I have several visual sources, primary research that delves into just what those graphs mean, and 6 secondary sources with 1 of them being a scholarly journal article.

8. The quotes I chose illustrate many points in ways that I could not say in any more certain terms. Lars Ulrich’s quote in front of the Senate committee is contextualized and conversed about in the piece, as are all of the other quotes I chose. No mic drops.

9. By taking quotes from those that people might not necessarily think of as sources of authority (Lars Ulrich, a drummer; and Taylor Swift, a singer), I provide insight into the controversy that shows that artists are fearful about more than just filling their own bank accounts. By showing that these musicians are also concerned about everyone else in the industry, from people at their level all the way down to engineers at studios, I feel that I can persuade many readers to dig deeper into the topic themselves and learn more about how the whole industry works.

10. The visuals I’ve chosen show very effectively how streaming and the digital age have effected the industry. By discussing them in the text directly, I use them in a meaningful way, and without them the reader would be left searching for said visual in the pages of the magazine.

11. My final draft was almost entirely different from the second draft, as by the second draft I had not yet decided how to incorporate many of my sources. Earlier drafts were more like the TED Talk… lots of background info but no incorporation of third parties that I allowed to speak for themselves.

12. I used a hyperlink for each new source I brought in, linking back to the original article or source. I believe the way I wrapped them around a sentence or section of a sentence and not just a sources name makes them stand out and gives the reader a better idea of what they are about to be linked to.

13. I edited on my own to the best of my ability. I found no major flaws in my writing, and always try to write as succinctly as possible. I kept most sentences short to avoid any run-on confusion. I believe my writing style to be appropriate for an NYT Magazine readership.

The Burden of Mental Illness: A stigmatism

In recent years there has been a rash of mass shootings and other gun related violence across America.

After a tragedy of this nature occurs the nation as well as its people often ask what could have possibly driven a person to commit such a heinous act, and what can be done in order to prevent future tragedies from unfolding in the future.

Before we dive into that I think that it’s important to consider what exactly a mass shooting is. Part of the problem is that so many organizations have different definitions of constitutes a mass shooting. For the sake of this article, we’ll go with the Federal Bureau of Investigation of mass shooting which is defined as “three or more killed”(FBI) in an incident of gun violence. In the 2015 calendar year there were 355 mass shootings(NY Times). Now this may seem like a lot, and may leave the average American wondering why they haven’t heard of all of those incidents, rather than the select few that most major media outlets covered.

  A map of mass shootings that occurred in 2015 within the United States(PBS)

For example most Americans are familiar with the events that unfolded at San Bernardino, California that resulted in the death of 14 civilians and the 2 perpetrators, due to the large media coverage dedicated to covering the tragedy. However, most Americans were not familiar of the events that transpired in Columbus, Ohio on November 23rd, 2015. On the early Monday evening a home invader entered a residential home and shot four family members before being gunned down by responding police officers(The Columbus Dispatch). Both of these events are technically considered mass shootings by definition, however, there is a significant difference between the amount of victims in each tragic occurrence.

Regardless of the number of victims that are claimed by these senseless outbreaks of violence people demand answers as to why such events took place. In the immediate aftermath of a mass shooting that garners national attention news agencies, law enforcement agencies, and the general public immediately begin to research the background of the perpetrator in order to gain clues as to what could have driven a person to commit such an act. Consequently the media tends to publish their immediate findings rather than checking the validity of what they are going to air on the nightly news broadcast. As a result of this misinformation the general public tends to jump to conclusions, which often stigmatize a group of people who share the same trait as the person who committed such a vile act. One group of people that tend to become stigmatized based on the actions of a few people are those who suffer from mental illness.

Though there have been instances of mass shootings throughout the history of the United States, few notable incidents have cemented that notion that people who suffer from mental illness are more prone to violent outbursts in the minds of the general public. The first incident that planted this thought was the horrific events that unfolded on the campus of Virginia Tech university on the morning of April 16th, 2007. On this day, a student at Virginia Tech, Seung-Hui Cho murdered two students in their dorm room, and then headed into an academic building and began firing indiscriminately at anyone who was in the building. His rampage claimed the lives of 32 people and wounded 23 others before he turned his guns on himself and committed suicide.

In the aftermath of the shooting, people began to examine the life of Seung-Hui Cho and his history. After some digging it was found that he suffered from severe depression, anxiety, and mutism. In addition to this, it was also found that he was recommended to undergo counseling and treatment for his mental conditions, however, records indicate that he never went to any of his counseling sessions with university mental health counselors. As a result of this, people blamed his mental illness for the cause of his outburst and soon got the ball rolling on the idea that the mentally ill are prone to outbursts of traumatic violence.

After a few years that resulted in a lack of media coverage of mass shootings, the idea that mental illness was the cause of gun violence was placed on the back burner of public thought and replaced with the controversial topic of gun control. However, the actions of James Holmes undid all the progress that was being made by the American public. At the midnight screening of “The Dark Knight Rises” on July 20, 2012, Holmes entered the theater and started firing on the moviegoers with an arsenal of weapons that included an assault rifle, shotgun, and handgun. Before police were able to apprehend him he claimed the lives of 12 people and injured 70 others. Once police began to look into his personal life, they were faced with an apartment booby trapped with scores of improvised explosive devices and a bevy of cryptic findings. After the clue began to unravel, and Holmes was brought in for trial, his mental condition was called into question, in regards to determine if he was capable to stand accountable for his actions. After being reviewed by multiple psychiatrist, it was found that he suffered from “schizoaffective disorder combined with a social anxiety disorder”(Reuters).

As a result of these findings, people made the assumption that his mental condition drove him to do such torrid actions. This in conjunction with the Virginia Tech massacre, led the majority of the general American public to believe that the mentally ill are more likely to commit horrendous acts of violence. Now we may never know what drove James Holmes to do what he did, but it cannot be used to stigmatize an entire group of people.

With America still shaken to its core about the events that unfolded in Aurora, Colorado, another senseless act of gun violence occurred a few short months away on December 14th, 2012. On this day Adam Lanza gained access to his mother’s Bushmaster assault rifle, murdered his mother in her sleep, and then drove to the Sandy Hook Elementary School. From there broke into the school and began firing indiscriminately in classrooms. His rampage cost the lives of 20 students who attended the elementary school, as well as 7 of its staff members before he took his own life. Much like the previously mentioned tragedies, Adam Lanza’s personal life began to be scrutinized by the media and law enforcement agencies. After examining his past and his personal actions, and it was found that he was diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome and Obsessive Compulsive Disorder(PBS). Though the authorities were able to find Adam Lanza’s medical records they were unable to find a clear motive as to what drove him to murder his sleeping mother and storm Sandy Hook Elementary School. The combination of these two led the general public to believe that his mental condition drove him to commit such an atrocity.

As a result of this, the media and the general public used this to reinforce the idea that those who suffer from some form of mental illness are more likely to commit horrible acts of violence on innocent people.

A survey released by the University of Texas asking what is to blame for mass shootings(Lubbock Online).

Now these are just notable examples of the mass shootings that occurred in America in recent years. After the findings by the authorities were released in each of these circumstances people began to notice a trend. That being; all of these tragedies were committed by those who suffered from some form of mental illness. People began to believe that the mentally ill were unstable people and prone to violent outburst of gun violence that leave a trail of bodies in its wake. Now for some they may find it fair to make this assumption, however what needs to be considered is what the definition of a mass shooting is, and more importantly the victim count that qualifies for term mass shooting. In order to determine if mental illness was actually the cause of all of these tragedies, the National Library of Health released a study that sheds light on the risks of gun violence and suicide linked to people with mental disorders. The study found that out of a one year population of instances of gun violence only “4%”(National Library of Health) were perpetrated by those who had a mental illness.

Now this statistic comes as a surprise to most Americans. The eye openingly low number goes to show the perception of the general public can be manipulated by the media. Due to the technicality of what constitutes a mass shooting and the instances of mass shootings that media agencies cover the American public has reached the conclusion that the mentally ill are responsible for most mass shootings and more prone to outbursts of violence. However, the findings of the National Library of Health show that those who suffer from a form of mental illness are only responsible for a fraction of mass shootings.

Yes there have been horrific outbursts of gun violence that have claimed the lives of many by those suffering from mental illness. However, an entire group of people, those being who suffer from mental illness, cannot be stigmatized and stereotyped based on the actions of a few people, nor can they be used as a scapegoat to justify the horrific actions of those responsible for committing them. Though the motives as to why these individuals did what they did may never have been found, it cannot be assumed that their mental state was the reason that they committed such unspeakable tragedies. Just because a person suffers from a mental illness doesn’t make them any less of a person, or more prone to outbursts of horrific gun violence.

Works Cited:

“A Study of Active Shooter Incidents Between 2000 and 2013.” Federal Bureau of Investigation. Department of Justice, n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2016.  

Follman, Mark. “How Many Mass Shootings Are There, Really?” The New York Times. The New York Times, 03 Dec. 2015. Web. 12 Apr. 2016.

Rinehart, Earl. “Family, Neighbors Wait for Answers after Hilltop Fatal Shootings.” The Columbus Dispatch. N.p., 25 Nov. 2015. Web. 12 Apr. 2016.

Coffman, Keith. “Second Psychiatrist Concludes Colorado Cinema Gunman Was Sane.” Reuters. N.p., 08 June 2015. Web. 16 Apr. 2016.

“Raising Adam Lanza.” PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 16 Apr. 2016

Swanson, Jeffrey W., E. Elizabeth McGinty, Seena Fazel, and Vickie M. Mays. “Mental Illness and Reduction of Gun Violence and Suicide: Bringing Epidemiologic Research to Policy.” Annals of Epidemiology. Elsevier, n.d. Web. 18 Apr. 2016..

“Here’s a Map of All the Mass Shootings in 2015.” PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2016

“Texas Tribune Poll: Texans Say Mental Health Top Cause of U.S. Mass Shootings.” Lubbock Online. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2016..

Reflection Questions:

1. The title attracts the reader by informing them of what the piece would be about and how so they are being marginalized, that being people who suffer from some form of a mental illness. The lede following my title attracts the reader by explaining what the particularly the piece will be about. The reader then uses these two to make the connection that the piece is about mental illness and gun violence. Though the lede isn’t necessarily all too creative, it delivers a sense of exigency through explaining that the subject of the piece will be about recent events taking place across the country.
2. As previously mentioned in the first question, the introductory section of my piece delivers a sense of exigency because it informs the reader that the events that will be mentioned in the piece took place recently across the United States. It then locates the problem of which the piece will be about, that being instances of mass shootings across the country and what could have potentially caused them. Followed by this is the rationale and base of my argument, being that the term “mass shooting” is vaguely defined, varies from organization to organization and is largely brought to the attention of the public based on the decision on whether or not to broadcast coverage of the event.
3. I offer a strong idea that requires analysis and support, that being that there is no link between mental illness and gun violence. The analysis part was accomplished by tracking the amount of mass shootings that occurred in the United States during a specific time period and what technically qualifies as a mass shootings. Then I cited specific instances that occurred outside of this timeframe, that people with the opposite viewpoint of me would use as their justification for their viewpoint. I then cited the findings of the National Public Library of Health that reinforced my point in order to effectively inform and persuade my audience. I choose to use the findings of this organization because their findings may not have been necessarily obvious to the average reader.
4. Clarity of thought is present in my article because it introduces the problem, examines the roots of said problem, examples of where the problem occurs, and how the problem got to where it is today. This coincides and reinforces with the writing style, historicised topics, and uniqueness of presentation that I utilized in my piece. My article demonstrates historicized topics by bringing up not only the instances of mass shootings in the year 2015, but also by the way that I brought up specific instances of mass shootings that occurred in previous years such as the Virginia Tech massacre, the Aurora Theater shooting, and the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.
5. I believe that I did refrain from developing a cliche argument, and in the process of doing so, I believe that my argument would not be considered vague. My argument is developed and sequenced logically by stating the problem, explaining the problem, taking a look at the root of the problem, analyzing the cause of the problem, offering a solution to the problem, and then explaining the rationale behind my solution. I also believe that the average reader of a New York Times article will find that the argument featured in my piece is not overgeneralized, underdeveloped, or poorly explained.
6. It’s no question that mental illness and gun violence is a controversial subject that most Americans would rather sweep under the rug than talk about and try to solve. It is clear that I researched this topic by not only analyzing the big picture of mass shootings in America, but also certain instances that could be utilized by both my side of the argument, and the opposing side of the argument. After informing the reader of these things, I then stated my side of the argument, that being that there is no link between mental illness and gun violence, but also the reasoning I used to arrive at that conclusion. I then joined the “debate” by stating that those who suffer from some form of mental illness cannot be stigmatized by the actions of a certain few people, as well as cannot be used as a scapegoat to justify the actions of others.
7. I believe that I, not only meet all of the research requirements, but also go above them. For example I used two visual sources instead of the required one. To elaborate on this, I provided a map of all the mass shootings that occurred in the United States during the calendar year of 2015. In conjunction with this, I also put the results of a poll released by the University of Texas regarding what the public was believed to be the cause of mass shootings. In regards to the primary research, I met that requirement by utilizing documents that were published by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the National Public Library of Health. The requirement for the amount of secondary sources was also met by citing six pieces of evidence that I believe qualify as secondary sources.
8. The focal points of my argument rest upon the integration of the primary and secondary sources that I used as evidence. The primary sources were integral into mentioning facts that based the rationale of my argument. Whereas the secondary sources were used to bring up specific instances that could be used to create a different facet of my argument so that those who may not have the same viewpoint as me could see in relation to the events that they may be using to develop their own point of view. By integrating both of these, I am able to create an in depth analysis into the problem at hand, and my viewpoint in regards to how I got it.
9. I feel that the rhetorical strategies that I employed in my piece are able to effectively persuade the audience about their stance on the issue of mental illness and gun violence. In order to appeal to their emotional needs I explained the instances of mass shootings by using words that invoke emotion such as “tragic”, “heinous”, “senseless”, and “massacre”. Though appealing to the emotional appeals of the reader is important, it is also important to consider the logical appeals of the reader. In order to do this, I evaluated the specific instances that I was using with details such as the weapon used during shooting, the casualties of each instance, and the mental condition that each perpetrator was in when they committed such act. On top of appealing to the emotional and logical appeals of the reader it also crucial to establish a sense of credibility. I was able to do so by getting the evidence to support my claims from highly credible institutions such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the National Public Library of Health. By utilizing all three of these rhetorical strategies, I feel that I am able to effectively persuade my audience to change their views from their pre-determined stance on the issue of mental illness and gun violence to my views.
10. In regards to my choices of visual displays, I believe that both of them are appropriate, interesting, and revealing. For example the map of mass shootings across the country is both interesting and revealing because most readers are not aware of the amount of mass shootings that take place across America during a certain time period due to the media only covering certain events. This contributes to my essay because it allows the audience to better visualize one of the focal points of my argument. The other visual that I used was the results of a survey that asked the subjects of it what they felt was the cause of instances of mass shootings. This is appropriate because it provides the thoughts of the general public. Both of these pieces of visual reinforcement contribute to the piece based on the content that they present, but also because of the placement of them throughout the piece.
11. The article displays that I have edited it throughout the revision process. For example, during the scrambled draft writing workshop, it was brought to my attention from one of my classmates that my piece did not have a lede. As a result of this exercise I was able to develop a lede for my piece. In addition to this, this exercise as well as others reading my draft that my paragraphs were too long and did not accurately resemble a New York Times article. With this being brought to my attention I reshaped the structure of my paragraph so that it would resemble a New York Times news article.
12. Hyperlinks are effectively used throughout my article because they link the sources that I am using to reinforce my claims to the website where I found them. I believe that this would qualify as an effective use because it provides the reader with links if they so choose to look further as to where I was getting the reasoning for my argument from.

13. After proofreading my work, I believe that there are no grammatical or spelling errors that can be found. In addition to this, the writing style and usage is appropriate for the context and message that I am conveying through this piece. By doing so, I am able to establish a sense of credibility by coming across as professional and well informed when it comes to talking about such a sensitive that is mental illness and gun violence.

Charlotte. A young, helpless girl who was thought to be a lost medical cause and a mother refusing to give up on her daughter’s life.

When it comes to uncomfortable situations, Americans seem to argue their opinions to the bone without pausing to notice the realities happening right outside their door. This becomes the issue with legalizing marijuana in this country. But how is that possible? According to Pew Research Center, 53 percent of Americans and 68 percent of millennials are in favor of the legalization of marijuana. To go even further, twenty-three states and the District of Columbia currently have laws legalizing marijuana. With such a high percentage and so many states already on board, how is it possible that it is not already written into legislation and being passed nationwide as we speak. But it dawned on me that it is possible, when people do not realize that there is so much more to this plant than just a sensation, but life saving agents hidden within as well.

Charlotte isn’t the figure we imagine when picturing the poster child for marijuana, but looks truly deceive as this little girl takes the legalizing world by storm. Her story has been not only an enlightenment, but a beacon of hope for many other families across the nation who have children suffering of untreatable illnesses. Charlotte’s illness is called Dravet Syndrome, a rare form of severe, intractable epilepsy. Intractable means the seizures are not controlled by medication and yet her mother Paige Figi refused to believe there was nothing they could do to help her daughter. She would not accept that her daughter was known, after years of medication, to be a lost cause. The Dravet Syndrome Foundation page didn’t even have any listed alternatives unless it be therapy or ketogenic diets (which Paige had already tried). But this would not be the end of her search for help.

Since Charlotte’s birth Paige was determined to find an answer. The first seizures with Charlotte came during her infancy. In the second year, only more seizures began to take hold, some seizures lasted more than 30 minutes, while others came in clusters, one after the other. No matter the treatment it seemed Charlotte would not be able to last going on like this. With over 300 seizures a week, Charlotte had become nearly catatonic.

With Charlotte’s condition only getting worse and options running slim to none in the medical world. Paige decided it would be time to search somewhere else, and that by some miracle, she would find a possible solution. With the help of her husband Matt, (and massive amounts of googling) they found the answer to their prayers. Paige was overjoyed the day they found information on what may be a miracle for their daughter “The day I gave up, I found this old data that the cannabis plant was a proven anti-convulsive.” Like many Americans before them Paige and Matt were not exactly for legalizing marijuana, but how that changed after Charlotte.

Like the Figi’s, the typical American does not think about the many positive effects that marijuana could bring about. Even today everyday people do not enjoy a discussion on the topic of marijuana because, like Trump and abortion, they are unspeakable and induce a heated fervor that many do not wish to deal with. This forms an enormous issue when speaking about marijuana because we lose focus on the pros and cons of the matter and begin to hone in more so on our own opinions brought on by sometimes untrustworthy sources.

Failing to look further than ones front door on the idea of marijuana is a mistake and allows those opposed to have a stronger voice than an agreeing majority. And once their arguments are framed, the outcome can be detrimental. Dr. Sanjay Gupta, both neurosurgeon and media reporter changed his own mind on the subject of legalizing marijuana. He interviewed the Figi family during his documentary “Weed” and came to realize the disheartening truth about marijuana in the media. “We’ve been systematically misled in this country for some time and I did part of that misleading. If you look at papers written in the U.S. on marijuana, the vast majority are on the harm. We fund studies on harm, we don’t fund studies on benefits.” This becomes such a terrible realization. Studies that could be done if the drug was made more available (legal) and save lives aren’t being done because certain entities do not want competition. When there is no funding, there can be no true progression and that should frighten us.

Once one delves a bit deeper, we can begin to see (that even though limited), the positive  medical studies on marijuana are there. Dr. Robert J. DeLorenzo, of the Virginia Commonwealth University, School of Medicine did a study on marijuana and how it could help epilepsy. By using the cannabinoid in marijuana plants, it can tackle frontal lobe epilepsy and bring regularity to the patient. To me this is an incredible breakthrough and yet it is overshadowed by studies that wish to combat its legislative success. How can we allow such wonderful news to be lost in the shadows? It is weak counterarguments and a plethora of funded government studies that mask these wonderful breakthroughs. But Paige didn’t have time  to wait for more studies to be taken and the info she found would have to be enough. At 5, Charlotte had reached bottom and something needed to be done.

This is when Paige decided to buy her own bag of high concentrated CBD (cannabinoid) in Denver, Colorado. She then went home and gave the first dose to Charlotte through her feeding tube, since she was no longer able to swallow. For an entire week with CBD, Charlotte had no seizures. 300 episodes had been averted. Charlotte was then able to begin her life. She began to speak, walk and learn. Charlotte was able to become the child she was meant to be because of a drug that had been so furiously refuted. Charlotte was able to live because of a drug that was supposed to help kill. Paige knew she couldn’t stop there and wanted to find a perfect strain that she could keep giving her daughter.

Once the breakthrough of CBD was found for Charlotte in that first week, Paige searched to see who would be able to produce a plant even higher in CBD and low enough in THC to deliver continuous effects. This is when she found the Stanley Brothers. They are marijuana growers in Colorado that bred hybrid plants to higher the CBD. At first they were called crazy and mocked for growing an ‘undesirable’ plant, but they had much larger plans for their business. Jesse Stanley spoke in an interview on how he and his brothers got started, “Before we met charlotte, before we met anybody, we had done our own reading and research on CBD that had shown that it stopped the metastasis of cancer, specifically breast and ovarian cancer.”

They hadn’t even met Charlotte and were already working towards strains that could help her cause. Paige reached out to the Stanley Brothers and they began to work on this strain for her daughter. The better Charlotte became the more they perfected the drug and they named it Charlotte’s Web, after its founding patient. After hearing about the amazing effects that Charlotte was having to the drug others wanted to see if this treatment could help their own children. In that year alone, 41 children in Colorado were treated with  Charlotte’s Web and all came back with great news. They had all undergone positive effects from the drug. Paige could see the amazing feats that the drug had now allowed for not only her own child, but others suffering.

Paige realized what a blessing it had been that she had run into the old data that led her to meet the Stanley Brothers. But what if Paige had never encountered this old data and it had stayed buried underneath all the negative studies that were meant to be seen? What would she have done then?

It’s difficult to look back and say what if, but sometimes it is necessary for progress. Charlotte would have never been able to grow and learn the same way she did without marijuana, and yet so many fight for it to remain illegal. What needs to be done is more studies and focus on what this incredible drug can do for others. With so much wonderful breakthroughs to be reached there should be nothing holding us back.

Charlotte’s story is a clear example of people going beyond the comforts they had once believed to find a cure they didn’t even know was possible. The Stanley Brothers ignored the mockery of those from the outside and were able to create something wonderful that could better the lives of so many. It had become so much more than just marijuana, it was a way to change lives, and for Charlotte and her family, it had changed everything. Paige would continue fighting for legalization of marijuana everywhere so others suffering could obtain the drug they so desperately need. She had experienced the miracle and wouldn’t settle until others were able to make the choice to use marijuana as a treatment as she had. Paige stated “a mistake was made during prohibition and I think we can fix it.”

1. The title “Why we need to revisit legalizing” pulls in the reader. They wonder what exactly needs to be legalized and why is it being revisited. It also shows that the article will have a spin and new info into why the process should be revisited. I also thought my subtitle ”Why raising awareness about the pros of marijuana use may just change the minds of skeptics everywhere” was great in supporting the main topic of my paper, which was looking to see all the positives that were being overshadowed on the subject of marijuana. The lede unlike my title focuses on my main example in the article, Charlotte. I think for those not so much interested in legalizing may be interested once they see how much is invested and that it has to do with so much more than ‘morals.’
2. I enjoy my opening paragraph because it gives the reader a little bit of everything. I included statistics that brought exigency and relevance, while also putting a professional, yet sarcastic flare to the article. It addresses my point on legalizing and eludes to Charlotte and her predicament. It gives background on how the controversy has been addressed and argues how it should be handled going forward.
3. I feel I did a sufficient job in bringing on evidence to support my argument. Unlike many other papers I constructed this article around Charlotte and I feel her story alongside important data is extremely important and effective. One truly feels for this family and their hardships, which wouldn’t always be captured by any article. The significance is seen through the real life effects taking place in the Figi’s lives.
4. I think I had a clear conception of how to execute my paper. I created a space that both gave hard facts and delivered a heart felt story. I think it was a unique approach because unlike articles that usually tackle one subject or another, I incorporated and meshed two styles to fit my cause. This combined topics from the past but then brought forth new information, creating my article style.
5. I avoided any vague or cliche points because readers of the NYT are usually proved to be more informed and educated on controversial/important topics. I had to make sure I didn’t just go the ‘we should legalize’ route, but rather the ‘we should look more in depth to what may be holding legalization back.’ This I felt made a great argument in this article and avoided issues. This also allowed for more specific detail on what needed to be written. I had to meld both topics of my paper (info and story) into one, creating a steady and organized flow.
6. I thoroughly researched the topic. It was by doing this that I was able to find so much supporting evidence that I found not only scholarly journals, but also documentaries and interviews. This not only made it more current and proved exigency but also proved the importance of the topic. I was able to delve deeply into research on why people did not want it legalized and many sources revealed that it was false evidence that swayed people to obtain this decision. By demonstrating not only the pros, but also showing real effects through photos, I was able to prove just how important this subject really is.
7. I took research and integrated it as the life of my paper. Without it I would not have the tools I needed to build my argument. Charlotte is my MAIN source. I feel the research on her fits both primary and secondary. The documentary I used to build data was important, but further research on CNN and “Weed” a documentary that comments on marijuana and about her situation are secondary. They compile together to form a great mix of sources. Then on top of this I added other important research that supported my argument and found reliable and genuine sources.
8. I think this is what my reflection was leading up to. This is essentially what my paper was. I integrated the story and the analytical and formed my argument. With both I was able not only to form an opinion to refute, but to support it with sufficient evidence to make it plausible and relevant. I then make it easy for the reader to bring about questions on the information by raising some in my paper and then answering them later on with data.
9. The coherence of my evidence with Charlotte’s story I feel truly has a way of persuading the audience. After learning about her story I wanted to go and scream legalize from the rooftops. It needed to be told so more people could understand and it sure persuades one to think twice. By including outside research and unbiased research such as Pew, i was able to tackle logos. When I brought Charlotte’s story I was able to hit the pathos of each reader. Then I brought it home by hyperlinking all the professionals in my paper so it would touch ethos and all my info would be helping one of these ideas.
10. The photos I chose were interesting and relevant because they hone in on the key points of my paper. I made sure to include them in areas in which related to each. I only chose 3 photos in my article because I felt that was all that was needed. One was a photo of Charlotte near catatonic in a chair, her as a healthy child, and the plant that saved her. This was all I feel was needed to get my point across. These photos are so powerful that there was no need for excess; they spoke for themselves.
11. At first I was going to go straight into Charlotte’s story. After a few edits, I realized by introducing my topic I would have more credibility or ethos if I brought them in with a lede, explained, and then jumped back. I wouldn’t have made this correction without a few read overs. Also being able to articulate both story and data was difficult and those edits became necessary when writing became less draft and more final cut. Also finding the main point to argue was a great step that we settled in class.
12. I think they are effective because they are only used when necessary. For instance, my hyperlinks are only connected to professionals in my paper or research facilities. I found this important just in case the reader wanted to learn more about the topic. Another hyperlink I made was Dravet syndrome. It is not a very common illness and I felt it was helpful to add something like that to aid the reader.
13. I edited this paper multiple times during the drafting process. I feel this allowed me to make sufficient grammatical and usage corrections. By doing so I was able to articulate my argument with ease and be able to work out kinks in the article. I made sure all of my transitions from data to story were smooth and didn’t leave the reader questioning or confused of what was going on. So in this sense I feel I did a good job in establishing not only my credibility, but producing a strong and hearty argument for the reader.

Don’t be afraid to seek help, they say. The suicide rate of college students have risen from five to seven percent in the past few years, and has increasingly been the reason for deaths among college students. On the outside, youths and young adults seem to have much to live for, and strive for goals only one can dream of achieving. However, suicide is now the second leading cause of death among college students, where the leading cause of death are vehicle accidents. Many would assume that college students have a higher chance of dying from alcohol related mishaps, but studies over the past few decades have shown that the suicide rate among college students have gradually risen over time, and the connection may be the education itself.

According to a research back in the 1960’s, over a course of 7 years, two researches, Micheal L. Peck Ph.D. and Albert Schrut M.D., have compiled data concerning suicidal behaviors among college students and non-college students. Of the statistics gathered from college students, Peck and Schrut “concluded that the rate of suicide was significantly higher than in students than non-students” (Peck and Schrut, 149), especially for those who were currently attending, at the time, prestigious universities, such as Harvard, Cornell, Berkley, as well as prominent British universities.

In order to prove the accuracy of their data, they “gathered statistical data from the Los Angeles County coroner’s office” which consisted of the data of college students who committed suicide between the years of 1960 and 1967. The data has shown in between those years, “78 college students have committed suicide”, which makes the suicide rate about 5.0~5.1 per 100,000 with minor fluctuations in between. Despite the research done and statistics collected, the suicide rate among non-students were higher than students at least in the county of Los Angeles, however, this could be an issue concerning the numbers in population.

Just in 4 years, the leading cause of death among college students rose from third to second. These students only have limited resources to safely guide themselves out of their depression and misery, but there is more fear in what others may think of them that engulfs their strength to seek help. Nevertheless, these students get advised to receive help; that seeking psychological help from counselors in their university is nothing to be ashamed of; to not be afraid to get help.

These words of support can only go so far in the legal state of mind of a counselor. There have been cases of students who have been suspended due to the counselor’s perspective of the student having high potential in harming themselves, or others, or that the student may be too clinically depressed for them to attend school at the moment. In the mind of a sane individual, medically dismissing a student from attending their university, even temporarily, will cause even more stress and depression, causing them to think that there is definitely something wrong with them. Arising issues like these situations cause students in the future to rethink about their decision to visit a counselor in their university.

As reported by Emory University, “every year, [about] 860,000 people attempt suicide”, which is about 1 person every 38 seconds. Nearly half of them are treated for self-inflicted injuries. If you do the math, according to the provided statistics, during a university lecture class that goes on for about 80 minutes, about 126 people attempt suicide, 28 of which are college students. In a year of an estimated suicide attempt of 860,000 people, roughly 12%, or 200,000, are college students. The biggest risk factor for suicidal behavior and attempts among college students may be stressful live events, family history, substances abuse, and exposure to other suicides.

Exposing themselves to other people, especially college students, is extremely dangerous for the eyes of a college student seeking a way out of their stressful life. Even today, we look up to leaders or powerful figures as our role model, and try to reach above the stars as they did. If a college student looks up and sees that another college student has hung himself, most would think that it would be a sad and tragic moment for that college student to have experienced such a traumatic sight. Though, in fact, it is very possible for that college student to see that if the college student who hung themselves found suicide as an answer, then they may influence others to seek for the same way out.

Back in 2006, a student in Goucher College in Baltimore, Maryland hung himself from a tree in the middle the campus for a student to walk by early one morning and start off their day with such an eerie sight. Although we have many concerning issues that are given to students during their college orientation, such as sexual assault or physical abuse, we rarely get note of suicidal behaviors and attempts. The topic of suicides in students is a “growing issue of concerns to colleges and universities with considerable controversy over colleges’ responsibility for preventing these deaths.”

The strange part of this suicide incident is that the victim was a popular athletic student with excellent grades, as well as in good standing with the student body. Many have blamed his girlfriend for breaking up with him before his suicide, but there was more to that story that we would never find out. The tree became a shrine for many of the victims’ friends and peers, which left gifts, flowers, pictures, and notes. Soon after, the college disallowed the students from leaving any more offerings to the shrine, because the college was afraid that other student may see the tree as an answer for their problems.

In 2004, a former George Washington University student, by the name of Jordan Nott due to his severe depression he revealed to his counselor, which then the counselor transferred that information over to the university administrators without the students consent. Due to this incident, Nott sued the school after his suspension, which was followed by his hospitalization for his mental health. Nott settled with the university, out of court, for an undisclosed amount, which could all have been avoided if the counselor did their job right. I don’t know about everyone else, but I believe it’s common sense to not depress a student even more after admitting his severe depression, while in the hope of seeking help from a, what it seemed to be, trustworthy counselor.

On the contrary, there are some counselors who aren’t doing enough for their students, brushing off their concerns even after consistent visits for a certain period of time. In 2000, Elizabeth Shin, an MIT student, set herself on fire in her dorm room. The victim’s parents sued the school for not protecting their daughter, even though she constantly visited the school counselor with multiple counseling sessions for her severe depression and suicidal thoughts for a year. Her parents made a settlement of $27.65 million with the university in 2006, but no amount of money can ever bring back a preventable death. This lawsuit was immediately noticed by other college administrative offices nationwide.

Under the federal law of the United States, all schools can legally remove mentally, or non-mentally, ill students for disruptive conduct, which can include harmful behaviors, suicidal thoughts, etc. Also, school counselors have the power to expose details of the student to parents, law enforcement’s, and school administrators if the student poses an imminent risk to themselves or others without risking liability.

All of these presented issues can be potentially prevented if the legal privileges of university counselors and psychologists have specific restraints based on the issue that is being handled. If students acknowledged even the slightest possibility of successfully receiving help and treatment, then it is very possible that they would choose the higher road than taking their own life. These students aren’t ignorant of the helpful resources that is offered to them in their university, but rather fear judgement and the possibility of the worst case scenario; getting suspended or expelled due to university counselor’s judgement of the students’ mental state.

We are told by our family, friends, and peers to not be afraid to receive help, and that seeking help is a normal thing; that everybody does it. To these people’s eyes, they believe it’s an easy step for depressed people to just simply agree that they’re right and expect them to immediately pick up the phone to make an appointment with a therapist.

Truth is, making that first step into believing that help will even be helpful at all is the biggest denial that they have to accept. Sometimes it’s hard to believe for these people with issues, that causes them to tip their mental stability, can even find the right therapist to effectively help them; and how long will that help take? Because of this, the quicker method of suicide triumphs the necessity to seek for advice on their own will.

Evaluation

1. Well, the title isn’t incredibly creative, but it shows a cause of issue of students, which points towards young adults between the ages of 18-30. My lede “Don’t be afraid to seek help, they say”. The part where it says “they say” implies that seeking help is actually wrong or the opposite of what you should do. It makes the reader think why the writer, myself, is disagreeing of seeking help because of it’s negative potential to stress or depress the students even more.
2. My introductory section of the article gives a glimpse of the statistics that will be more elaborated throughout the article, as well as showing how these young adults seem happy and perky on the outside, but in the inside, there are more issues than we assume there are. Since suicide is the second leading cause of death among college students, it shows that there is a big issue if students are taking their own life instead of poisoning their own liver to death. Rationally, we would think these young adults would stupidly or accidentally kill themselves through car accidents, partying, alcohol, fighting, etc., but the truth is college students are going through more than we believe if suicide has bumped up to 2^nd leading cause of death just in 4 years. Also, how university counselors aren’t doing their job well enough for these problems to consistently exist.
3. The entire fact of college students are having stress and depression issues with the education they’re receiving and the lack of help they’re not receiving is pretty much asking for support and evidence. No one can simply say that college students are going through or handling more than we believe, so that is something that is directly asking for evidence to support the article. I don’t believe this topic is very “obvious” to the readers; if anything they just know or heard of college students taking their own life here and there on the news.
4. The writer (myself) clarifies all form of information that needs back up evidence, such as statistics, professional input from trustworthy sources. The writer also orders each paragraph by what the writer believes is important to read in a specific order while the pictures show an idea of how the writer feels about what he’s writing. This isn’t necessary a historical topic, though it shows evidence of research from over 40-50 years back.
5. The audience of the NYT’s magazine may argue that it is necessary for counselors or therapists to do what they believe is right, such as letting the university administrators know the students information that is being told to the counselor in certain circumstances, but that is why I showed evidence of students being overestimate and underestimated of their mental stability. I do understand not all counselors and therapists are like this, but there are innocent students who simply looked for guidance and support, but got suspended for mental instability. I believe the order and sequence of this material isn’t exactly a “story” to make sense, but paragraphs of information that get more and more intense as the reader reads along.
6. I wanted to talk about a controversial issue by talking about my side of the issue so that others can attack me head on in this article to observe their view of this issue. I spoke poorly about counselors and therapist, about how they have too much power if they choose to, but I do know there are a good amount of counselors and therapists who won’t take extreme measures (speaking from personal experience).
7. I included 8 secondary sources, 2 primary sources, and multiple visual sources for readers to understand more than just words being written from left to right across the screen. There are two separate issues that need to be addressed here: the rise of college students suiciding, and university counselors unfairly suspending students and making them check their mental status from overestimating their mental stability.
8. As stated in the previous question, there were two separate issues that needed to be addressed that both tie into a similar topic. I introduced my argument by talking about various suicide cases and multiple cases of students being overestimate or underestimated of their mental stability. I believe I included enough evidence, statistics, and my argument to put my entire controversial issue in context, also enough for readers to come with an arguable debate.
9. I believe I effectively used the positions of authority (university counselors and therapists) to my own advantage, saying that some of these authority figures, that I specifically pointed out, can’t be trusted of their judgement. Just like not all teachers/professors aren’t qualified to teach/lecture, even if they’ve obtained a degree, I believe the same goes for university counselors. I successfully reached out to the audience using rhetorical tools by, hopefully, making them connect with these students who are involved in these stories.
10. I provided visuals, but not too much, for readers to establish a connection with the story as it’s being told. For people who think on a deeper perspective, they will visually understand what the visuals mean and how they connect with the article. I believe the visuals are very meaningful, not only to “brighten” up the article, but to not make the article look so plain. I don’t believe the article will be affected too much, because to a person of perspective like me, the content of the information is much more important than looking at visuals.
11. The article developed over time through peer reviews, teachers comments, and various drafts. The class exercise of scrambling the blog made me view the article in a different way and gave me an idea of another argument to include. Also, the way we included our “claim” helped me focus in on my argument more to make it precise and clear.
12. I included multiple hyperlinks by each story that supports my article on the name or main subject of that specific story. I believe it’s very effective for readers to click the link to look for back up evidence, and also very appropriately positioned.
13. I reviewed the article over and over again to check for grammar, check to make sure the style of the paragraphs are effectively separated for an article style, and the usage of hyperlinks, visuals, statistics, and factual stories helped make the article more credible. Especially because I used authority figures, such as university counselors, who can potentially have too much power, the readers will possibly have an epiphany that this may be true.

What lives in swampy water, leaves itchy red spots when it bites you, essentially invisible, weighs about 2.5 milligrams and buzzes at about 174Hz 3 times per second? You sure guessed it! It’s the pesky little mosquito. Summer is creeping up on us slowly but shortly, which means bad news for us, but good new for the Zika Virus.

The Zika Virus is spread through the aedes aegypti mosquito, and is more likely to spread through warm and humid nations just above and below the equator, for instance in Brazil.

While it seems that the Zika virus has erupted in Brazil, many avoid its potential in stirring up conflict beyond the clinical level. The Zika virus has done nothing but strike fear and panic in Brazil since its first appearance. The unfair rules placed on women put them at risk, with little support from higher authorities.

For anyone who is affected by the Zika virus, they may experience symptoms ranging from fever, rash, joint pain and red eyes. Effects are more extreme when the disease infects a pregnant woman. Pregnant women infected with the Zika Virus are at risk for giving birth to a diseased child. More than 4,000 babies in Brazil have been born with microcephaly. Infected mothers offspring are at a high risk for being affected with microcephaly, causing a stunt in the baby’s head growth, and also causing fatal brain damage. This crisis has led to the World Health Organization to declare the Zika Virus a worldwide public health emergency.

There are not many options that exist to aid the pregnant women who are infected with the Zika virus. The existing options she could choose between would be to have an abortion, or to just endure the burden of raising a child with a disease. Many women in Brazil are from low-income families who cannot afford contraceptives, and are now left with the cost of dealing with a baby with a disorder. However, the latter option is the only legal option these women can take.

Notwithstanding urgent requests from global leaders to loosen abortion penalties in Latin America due to the Zika Virus, officials in Brazil are moving in the other direction, and the wrong one too. In its place, conservatives in Brazil are working to increase penalties for women who have had an abortion. This intensely Catholic government would sentence women to nearly five years in jail if they abort the child with microcephaly.

“With the crisis that has hit our country, a feminist movement has tried to take advantage to change our abortion laws,’’ said Anderson Ferreira, a member of Brazil’s lower house from the Republic Party.

He also adds “this movement needs to be confronted. Everyone needs to realize the gravity of the crime that is abortion and that is not acceptable.”

This law was passed in 2012, to ensure that women are allowed to have contraceptives, and abort the baby when detected with the Zika Virus. However, Zika can usually only be detected in the third trimester of a pregnancy, and by then it is too late.

Officials in Columbia advised women to put off getting pregnant this year. In El Salvador, officials are telling women to put off getting pregnant until 2018. Many other Latin American countries are doing the same, where they are simply telling women to not get pregnant.
What about accidental pregnancies?

“The advice of some governments to women to delay getting pregnant, ignores the reality that many women and girls simply cannot exercise control over whether or when or under what circumstances they become pregnant, especially in an environment where sexual violence is so common,” said UN High Commissioner for Hunan Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein.

The pope even came out to speak about this issue. He suggested that women are now able to, and allowed to use contraceptives only to prevent the spread and contraction of the zika virus. However, for low-income families, contraceptives aren’t even prevalent.

When the pope was asked whether or not abortion or contraceptives would be a better choice, he states that contraceptives may be morally acceptable in fighting the Zika Virus, and abortion is a crime and an absolute evil.

Evil.

Women who are raped and did not want the baby, and are now stuck with a diseased baby and all she wants to do is abort it, is evil. But the rape was not?

A woman who will probably starve trying to pay medical bills, and wants to abort the baby to avoid the burden, is evil.

Women who are young, from remote or low income communities, and/or living in other vulnerable situations, disproportionately face multiple barriers when it comes to exercising meaningful decision-making power and control over their sexual and reproductive lives. In such context, a call for women to simple delay or avoid pregnancy is not only unrealistic but is also irresponsible and negligent.

Instead of putting laws on women and telling them to not get pregnant, we should start funding so we can help these women get what they need to live a happy and healthy life with their baby. If abortion is still going to be illegal, give these women all the resources and money they need to get check ups for the baby, and for themselves. We need to ensure universal access to a full range of high-quality, voluntary, and use-friendly contraceptive methods. We need to target both men and women in public health awareness campaigns. It takes two to get pregnant; it is not right to have the women carry the entire burden. We need to decriminalize abortion, and remove all legal and implementation barriers, so that we can expand and ensure access to save procedures for pregnancy termination. We need to support the women in Zika affected countries who decide to remain pregnant. This means we need to support their delivery, pre and post partum care and neo natal care services, as well as therapy and health and educational services.

Although many video games are sexist, many people focus on how they are sexist towards women and not how the sexism found in video games questions an individual’s femininity and masculinity in general. The idea surrounding that the world of gamers consists of only males was true years ago but as of recent studies, that idea has been entirely shattered due to a change in demographics. Despite this change in demographics, this idea still plagues our generations today. These changes in gaming demographics (specifically consoles, computer gaming included) will be a much needed push to develop more people friendly video games.

Games of many types are sexist and gendered. However, before I continue into why this topic grew into such an importance that it drove me to write about it, I suggest watching the video of four year old Riley on Marketing. Gender as a social construct had become so blatant that even a four year old was aware that she had a limited amount of options because of the gender norms tied to her sex. Sometimes it isn’t as conspicuous as colored coded toys assigned to each gender, but appear in more innocuous forms. For example, many people have played the games from Super Mario franchise. A harmless, animated game that a player can easily become engrossed in just playing the game and dodging shells and grabbing mushrooms that the object of the game which is to save the damsel in distress, Princess Peach becomes easily forgettable.

Though we may think World of Warcraft is for the man in his mother’s basement, that’s not true. At least not anymore. Games are—or at least should be—for everyone, but there are many games that undermine that sentiment. There’s a perception that those who own the gamer culture are straight, white men. This perception makes sense, seeing as video game companies have marketed to white males for decades now, and everything that they see in games says ‘women are here for your visual pleasure.’ Playing games is not gendered! But at some point during the earlier stages of gaming, it was lost and this space has since been marketed as a men’s space, and now that’s changing.

Grasping the sexism and gender inequality that exists in video games did not really sink into my brain until I was a teenager. I have   been a gamer since I was about six years old. I would watch my cousins and my older brother play their violent fighting games or first person shooter games without realizing any of the subtext within the game and its characters. At the time, if I wanted to play, I simply could without any hostile comments towards my gender.

As I got older and encountered the online platform of gaming through consoles, my gender became a problem and it was as my friends and I were harassed online that it truly clicked for me. Truth be told, I avoided the online platform just to avoid any kind of harassment from other players. Many women choose gender neutral usernames online or play with their headset off so that players cannot hear whether or not they are female. They try to avoid calling attention to themselves because what we will hear resembles comments like this, ‘get back in the kitchen,’ which compared to what most female users hear, is among some of the less harsh remarks.

Sexist depictions of women, objectification and lack of diversity of the female form as depicted in the previous images are just some of the abundant ways video games discriminate against women. Objectification, fetishism, a hostility toward female gamers, sexual harassment, gendered games, and the overall assumption that female gamers are incompetent and lack skill make the gaming world an unwelcoming place for females. It’s not hard to see why this is so after scrolling through the comments in Jenny Haniver’s website, looking at a couple of gameplays and game advertisements. Ubisoft, a game company goes as far as saying that “women are just too difficult to animate,” in response to questions regarding an abandoned attempt to provide a female character option for one of their most recent Assassin’s Creed games, Assassin’s Creed: Unity despite others coming out and saying that their claim was rather exaggerated. Ubisoft really enjoys holding onto their white, male protagonists.

The video game series of Grand Theft Auto.  Among many of the discriminatory choices you can execute, you can pick up a female sex worker and after vigorous love-making in your car, instead of the awkward one-night stand exit or if you cannot afford to pay her fee, you have the option of murdering her. Lollipop Chainsaw, another provocative example of sexism out of many, where even though there is a female protagonist, she has flat dialogue and fights zombies in a rather “aerodynamic” outfit (see first image). She’s the epitome of what people think many gamers want.

A survey from Pew Research Center that covers the issues around the gamer realm suggests that of the men surveyed, 50 % identified as gamers and of the women surveyed, 48 % identified as gamers. Super Data designed a gamer breakdown, their research cracked down on gaming  preferences for each gender. Some types of video games do not have much of a gap in interest at all while others are slightly dominated by one gender. However, while there are differences in taste, a balanced interest from both genders in gaming exists. The gap between genders that make video games out to be male dominated is an imagined one, or at least as of recent research. A study done by the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) shows that of the gamers studied, 53 % were male and 47% were female. The demographics have been changing and each time, the imagined chasm keeps closing and closing.

It’s important to note that video games do not exempt men from sexist portrayals. Characters like Duke Nukem depict negative, and hyper-masculine images. I mean, who would not want to be a brawny, muscular strapping man with his fabulously attired ladies? Hopefully no one, because this is a terrible depiction of masculinity. Unfortunately enough, many games avoid developing their male characters any further than the stereotypical white muscular male protagonist who is slightly rough around the edges. Companies like Ubisoft produce many games with the same recycled male protagonist where the hardest decision that burdens them is simply, to have facial hair or not? Many stereotypes exist for male characters and male gamers. Negative characteristics include, Misogyny, chauvinism, basement dwelling, hostility. These are only a few. This in turn stigmatizes the male demographic just as much as female gamers. It shortens the player pool so men who don’t specifically identify themselves with hyper masculinity feel intimidated. Therefore they become more transparent and irrelevant when it comes to designing games for male gamers.

On the bright side, game franchises like Mass Effect and Resident Evil are more inclusive and diverse. These games provide more customizable characters, choices, and promote more positive images especially the image of women. Bioware, is a company that produces Mass Effect and other people friendly games like Dragon Age. These games display women who are dressed appropriately for their action packed scenarios and their knowledge surpasses their physical attributes and use of a gun.  These women are leaders and of course, in games like Mass Effect you create the personality around your character depending on the decisions you have them make. Resident Evil: Code Veronica, obligates you to play the first half of the game as the character Claire Redfield until you find her brother Chris Redfield. Claire is entirely capable and not just there to be aesthetically pleasing, or temptation to the male protagonist. She has brains, sense and braveness. These are some examples of franchises and games that have responded and are continuing to respond to the demands for games with better content but there are still many improvements to be made.

Why does any of this matter?  Even though we’re talking about games, they affect us in real life. The way we treat each other and the way we treat sexism is not a game. Video games, like any other form of entertainment, influence our culture especially the younger generations and they help shape the people that they are going to become. Younger males are the primary audience of this platform of entertainment, and they’re given these types of games because that is what creators think they want but they are taught to desire content that demeans women, and defines masculinity in destructive ways.
No one is born wanting these things. Creating a ‘how to play’ guide and sliding it in between a variety of texts and forms of entertainment actually attributes how society relates to you and you to yourself. We can teach them to want better. We might think the games are a break from learning but they like, all other forms of entertainment, teach us something. We cannot think so little of people to imagine that they are not intelligent or empathetic enough to handle or desire forms of entertainment that handle the topic of gender in a positive and inclusive manner. We are truly missing out on a very good learning opportunity. Video games didn’t originate as “Gamer guys only” entertainment and were made with the intentions of being a source of entertainment for many people of many types. Somewhere along the way that has been lost and “no girls allowed” image was produced and swelled the gaming community. Games are and should be for everyone and we should work on bringing that back.

WRT 205/Spring 2016                         Grading Rubric: Unit III NYTs Magazine 

[1]  How well does the title provocatively focus the reader’s attention, as well as the lede? Is it thoughtful, creative, clever? Does it lead the reader into the text and provide some insight into the issue?

The title is quite provocative.  It gets right to the point of my article and what I discuss throughout the course of it.  My title is also somewhat controversial, considering the fact that it makes an assertion about Donald Trump that many people disagree with.  As a result, I feel like that makes it even more enticing for people to continue on reading.  In regards to my lead, it is both thoughtful and creative, and ties in personal experience during my life to the subject with which I am discussing.  I feel that it brings me closer to the reader and is characteristic of a blog article, rather than a research paper.

[2]  How well does the introductory section of the article invite the reader into the paper, as well as offer up exigency?  How does it locate a problem or controversy within a context that provides background and rationale?

My introduction does a marvelous job, in my opinion, of bringing the reader both closer to me, the writer, as well as the subject with which I will be discussing.  It gives a small amount of background on Donald Trump, the man who is discussed throughout the course of this paper, as well as gives the reader a problem or controversy, or rather a position that I am taking that will be proven throughout the article.

[3] How well does the writer offer up a strong ‘idea’ that requires analysis to support and evolve it, as well as offers some point about the significance of evidence that would not have been immediately obvious to readers.?

My idea or point that I am trying to prove becomes quite evident quickly throughout the course of this blog article.  I make it clear what I am trying to prove in my writing, and I use various analyses and examples in order to prove this point.  Because of the fact that this is a blog article, and not a research paper, I chose to leave out direct quotes and things that would have to be cited.  Instead, I did research and do have evidence that proves my point, but said things in my own words.  I felt that it would be more characteristic of a blog article.

[4] How well does the writer show clarity of thought; uniqueness of presentation; evidence of style; and historicized topics?

I like to think of myself as someone who can clearly articulate thoughts and put them down on paper in a coherent manner.  That definitely applies to this article.  I felt that my points were clear and well thought out, and that they specifically pertained to the subject I was referencing.  In addition, I had many historical examples of evidence to support my claims, as well as present day evidence.

[5]  How well does the writer recognize that a NYTs Magazine audience will challenge ideas that are overgeneralized or underdeveloped or poorly explained? (that is, did the writer avoid cliché and vagueness or address points/issues readers are likely to have?)  How well did the writer decide about how to develop, sequence, and organize material?

I felt that in my article, vagueness and generalizations were not used.  In fact, one of the points that I tried to hone in on throughout the course of this paper was that generalizations are bad and shouldn’t be used, so for me to use generalizations myself would be a contradiction.  In addition, clichés were not used here.  All of my points were valid and came up with on my own, and don’t speak to a talking point or something easy to discuss.  They all came from evidence I combed through.

[6]  How well does the writer research a controversy, develop a persuasive stance, utilize research about the topic,  and join the ‘debate’ by making an argument of importance?

I did much research before writing this article.  In addition to the plethora of sources I used during my TedTalk presentation, I felt that I did a good job of utilizing new evidence.  That being said, its important to recognize the fact that in a blog post, I felt that it would be more appropriate to avoid using direct quotations and citing of sources.  Instead, I looked at the evidence that I had found to support my claims and said them in my own words, which I felt was more appropriate for a blog article.

[7]  How well does the writer meet or exceed research expectations of assignment requirements (6 appropriate secondary sources, 1 visual source, (or more) and primary research? ).

Speaking for myself, I did find evidence and facts that were used throughout the course of this article in a variety of ways, and thus, I did meet or exceed the limit referred to above.  However, I can’t emphasize enough that I felt it would better suit my article to type those facts and present them in a way that made the reader feel as if they weren’t reading a Masters Degree thesis paper, but rather an article by someone who was speaking to them in a language that was easier to understand and more enjoyable to read.

[8]  How well does the writer integrate secondary and primary sources (that support and complicate the topic) effectively into the text, introducing and contextualizing them, and “conversing” (i.e. no drop-quoting) in ways that deepen and complicate the analysis?

Conversing was what I felt was the strongest part of my article, and it started from the very first word.  I felt that it was extremely important to have the reader feel a connection and an interest that would have them continue to read.  My anecdote at the beginning did just that, in my eyes.  In addition to that first paragraph, the entirety of the article speaks in a way that I believe allows the reader to feel as if its a conversation or a speech between two friends, rather than a dissertation that would bore them.

[9 How well does the writer persuade an audience to consider claims made from a particular position of authority on which you have built your research?  How strong and effective is the writer’s use of rhetorical tools (ethos, logos, pathos)?

The claims that I am making should persuade any reasonable person who is reading this article, because they are all facts.  Everything in my article that I have used as evidence to support my claim is a fact, not conjecture.  In addition, much of the evidence I use can be found if the reader wishes to do a little “googling” themselves, and as a result, they will see that my sources are reliable.

[10] How well does the writer select appropriate, interesting, revealing visual?  Has the writer placed a visual strategically in the essay and provided relevant commentary on and/or analysis of them?  Do the visuals contribute to the essay in meaningful ways (i.e. would the essay be affected if the writer took the visual away)?

The writer did not do a good job with providing visuals.  I dropped the ball in that manner, and take full responsibility for the fact that my article will not be as aesthetically pleasing as other peoples’.  

[11] How well does the writer show development of final article using various drafts, in-class peer editing and workshops, and/or teacher comments?

Based on the first draft and the outline that I conducted about 2 weeks ago in regards to this final paper, it has come a long way.  My evidence is much more effective and concise than it initially was, and in addition, my ability to converse with the reader and use anecdotes and my own voice to appeal to their senses has greatly improved.

[12]  How well does the writer use hyperlinks—are they effective/appropriate?

Hyperlinks were not used.  However, as stated in the question, the effectiveness or appropriateness of hyperlinks was brought into question.  As I have stated throughout the course of this reflection, I wanted and made sure to create an article that wasn’t overly intimidating or dense, but rather something that someone would enjoy reading.  I feel that when someone enjoys reading it, they are more likely to believe and take the claims one is making as factual.  Because of the fact that I didn’t use direct quotes, I felt that to use hyperlinks would be ineffective and not appropriate.  

[13]  How well did the writer edit for grammar, style, and usage effectively? Does the writer’s attention to sentence level issues help him/her establish authority or credibility on the issue?

I pride myself in making sure that grammar, style, sentence structure and flow are all perfect.  I double checked my article to make sure that in my mind, everything was top notch when it came to the way the article read.  In addition, I made sure that both spelling and grammar, and as stated above, style and sentence structure were all conducive to the reader having a pleasant experience delving into my article.

The New Jim Crow takes the form of mass incarceration.

You might think, “No, that can’t be!” But, how are we to know? When one thinks of slavery they think of the millions of African slaves that were beaten, dehumanized and tortured for 245 years in America. Slaves were considered property, had no rights and the women were often abused, raped, and exploited. How does prison compare? There are over 2 million incarcerated in the United States today and African Americans nearly constitute 1 million of that population. In the prison system you are nothing, you don’t have a name, you are an inmate. You are often forced to do things against your will. You are told when to eat and what you can eat, when you can go outside, when you can shower, you have no free will. Sounds like slavery to me. How did we get here? It began with Richard Nixon’s “War on Drugs” and this legacy continues on 40 years later with the cost of freedom for African American Males.

Since the launch of Nixon’s campaign public opinion has been shaped by news stories from popular media that depict certain minority groups as being associated with the use, transportation, and sale of illicit drugs, thus being responsible for the Nation’s drug problem. Print, television news media, negatively portray African Americans as being drug dealers and offenders reinforcing the exclusionary attitudes and practices targeted towards the group and contribute to the development of stringent policies that ultimately affect the group.

This system was designed to limit the freedom and opportunities of African Americans putting them back where they began, in a subordinate racial caste. In the words of Civil Rights advocate and writer, Michelle Alexander, “Since the nation’s founding, African Americans repeatedly have been controlled through systems of institutions such as slavery and Jim Crow, which appear to die, but then are reborn in a new form tailored to the needs and constraints of the time”. The “war on drugs,” the campaign started by Richard Nixon on June 18^th, 1971, has become the newest tool used to disrupt communities and generate today’s slaves, prisoners.

More than 300 years ago, many African males and women were shipped from their native home land and brought to European colonies as slaves. While slavery was “abolished” in 1865 by Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation that freedom provided an illusion. Constitutional amendments guaranteeing African Americans “equal protection of the laws” proved obsolete once a white backlash sparked during the Reconstruction era. African Americans once again found themselves powerless, as the Jim Crow system of segregation emerged.

According to political economist John Flateau, “Metaphorically, the criminal justice pipeline is like a slave ship, transporting human cargo along interstate triangular trade routes from Black and Brown communities; through the middle passage of police precincts, holding pens, detention centers and courtrooms; to downstate jails or upstate prisons; back to communities as rehabilitated escapees; and back to prison or jail in a vicious recidivist cycle”.

Beginning in the 1960’s the crime rate in the United States rose for a period of 10 years. Reasons for this spark in crime rates can be explained by the “baby boomer” generation, which is responsible for the spike in the number of young men in the fifteen-to-twenty-four age group. The media failed to mention the economic and demographic factors contributing to the crime rate. The surge of young men in the population was occurring at the same time that the unemployment rate for black men was rising significantly. Barry Goldwater laid the foundation for the “get tough on crime” movement in his 1964 presidential campaign. He expressed his fear of riots and black crime, ultimately dismissing Civil Rights activists concerns of the uprisings being directly related to the widespread police harassment and abuse. This in turn caused many black advocates to join the calls for “law and order” and expressed support for the same law makers who attempted and succeeded at depicting African Americans as disobedient criminals.

The Rockefeller drugs laws were enacted in 1973 when then Governor of New York Nelson Rockefeller decided to get tough on drugs. Under these laws, the penalty for selling two ounces (57 g) or more of heroine, morphine, raw or unprepared opium, cocaine, or cannabis or procession four ounces (113g) or more of the same substance, was a minimum of 15 years to life in prison and a maximum of 25 years to life.

Disproportionate arrest feeds the mistaken assumption that African American use drugs at higher rates than whites and this continues to serve as justification for racial profiling. Contrary to belief, “the typical cocaine user is white, male, a high school graduate employed full time and living in a small metropolitan area or suburb”. According to the government’s count, more than 24 million Americans, mostly whites, have used marijuana, cocaine, or some other illicit drug. Rising drug and crime rates in areas such as Harlem, led black activists to call for what would become known as the Rockefeller laws.

Racial Disparities

Both former presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton played a vital role in the rise of mass incarceration. Prior to Reagan’s Anti-Abuse Act, was the introduction of crack to New York City. According to retired DEA special Agent, Robert Stutman, “With cocaine, the high usually onsets in three to six minutes, depending on the person. Crack’s high onsets in about ten to twenty seconds. It is also a far more intense high”. He also states that the crack organization was street based and New York drug peddlers mass merchandized cocaine.

Four years later, in 1986 Ronald Reagan signed The Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which created the mandatory minimum penalties for drug offenses. Sentencing for drugs were as followed, possession of at least one kilogram (1000g) of heroin or five kilograms (5000g) of cocaine became punishable by at least ten years in prison. The sale of five grams (.005kg) of crack led to a mandatory five year sentence as a response to the crack epidemic. These laws aggravated racial disparities in the prison population based off the fact that the drug offenders sentenced under the crack cocaine provisions were African American. The portion of African Americans in state prisons grew from 7 to 25% within the first 5 years of the 1986 act.

The Sentencing Project first alerted the public of the growing incarceration rate and disparities in 1990. It revealed that almost one in four black men between the ages of twenty to twenty-nine belonged to the criminal justice system, either in prison, probation, or parole. Although whites have a higher rate of illegal drug use, 60% of drug offenders sent to prison for drug charges in 1988 were African American. In the 1990’s drug offenses accounted for 27% of the increase in the number of blacks in state prisons, compared to a 14% increase for whites.

In 1994, Bill Clinton he signed the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which offered states billions in funding for new prisons if they reduced prisoners’ eligibility for parole. The law also established mandatory life sentences for those convicted of a third violent felony. According to Brennan Center for Justice, “By the end of Clinton’s presidency, the number of people in America’s prisons rose by nearly 60%”.

By 1995, The Sentencing Project reported that the rate for black men between the ages of twenty to twenty nine belonging to the criminal justice system had risen to one in three. While female incarceration rate remain lower than men, the fastest growing segment of the prison population is African American women.

Poor black men and women tend to live in economically segregated neighborhoods where the exit and reentry of inmates is geographically concentrated. As many as 1 in 8 of the male adults of these urban areas are sent to prison each year, while 1 in 3 can be sent to prison any given day.

Incarceration rates remained high or intensified by 1996 in neighborhoods around New York City that had the highest rates in 1990. Analysis from Professor of Law at Columbia Law School, Jeffrey Fagan, Associate Professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, Valerie West, and staff associate at Columbia University, Jan Holland concludes that incarceration is concentrated in New York City’s poorest neighborhoods and because of this they receive more intensive and punitive police enforcement as well as parole surveillance.

From 1980 to 2008, the number of people incarcerated in U.S prisons rose from 500,000 to roughly 2.3 million. Today the US holds 5% of the world’s population and 25% of world prisoners. African Americans constitute nearly 1 million of the total 2.3 million people incarcerated. Blacks are about eight times more likely to spend time behind bars than whites. Nationwide African Americans represent 26% of juvenile arrest, 44% of youth who are detained, 46% of the youth who are judicially waived to criminal court, and 58% of the youth admitted to state prison.

About 14 million whites and 2.6 African Americans report using an illicit drug. African Americans represent 12% of the total population of drug users, while 38% are arrested for drug offenses, and 59% are in state prisons for drug offenses. African Americans serve as much time in prison for a drug offense (58.7 months) as whites do for a violent offense (61.7 months).

Relevancy

While President Obama attempted to reverse drug laws that were put in place by former President this is not enough for the black communities. Many in the low income areas result to drugs, crime and violence because that is all that they have. Most drug dealers come from low income areas and often do not possess the simple skills or education to carry out a city or government job. Drug offenders are labeled as felons upon release from prison, which limits their ability to get a job and possibly change their lives. What is left for them to do? They often repeat this cycle of selling drugs because it is their only way to survive. The cycle will continue as citizens of low income areas struggle to find means to survive with low wages and the lack of education.

Reflection

1. Both the title and lede hint at the same thing. From reading both one could tell that the piece is going to be about prison and slavery. I would not argue that the title is creative or clever but more thoughtful and insightful. Being that this topic is very relevant and personal there was not much room for creativity, I felt that being straight forward would be best for this particular piece. It definitely leads the reader into the text while drawing comparisons and providing insight.
2. The introduction first plays on the readers thoughts by asking questions then goes into the comparisons between prison and slavery. In the introduction I attempt to locate the problem by comparing the two, while this does not prove how prison is the new form of slavery, it offers up room for readers to question the two institutions.
3. I believe I offer up a strong idea that can only be proved by evidence. My evidence relies heavily on history because it allows one to see the pattern that started with slavery and evolved into mass incarceration. For years systems have been put into place to limit the opportunities of African Americans starting with chattel slavery, expanding to the Jim Crow Era and segregation to today’s prison system.
4. I think all of the work is clear and it is all there one just needs to read and understand without being biased and passing judgment. I believe that is one of the main reasons why this issue is overlooked because many believe that it may be justified, but to the oppressed this issue is highly significant. As far as uniqueness I believe the work lacks that because again this is an extremely sensitive and relevant topic so I thought getting straight to the point would really drive the point home. I’m not sure what evidence of style means exactly but there is plenty of evidence there to support my claims.
5. NYT articles in my opinion are always informative. Depending on the issue being discussed, the written article can take many forms. If someone from the NYT were to write an article on this topic, and I am sure they have, I think their structure would be similar to mine. I was not able to just jump right into it I had to give the history of institutions that were designed to keep blacks down in order for the pattern to become clear. Some may still raise questions because I do not talk about every single thing relating to the issue I chose to focus on the more important issues. Overall, I think readers will get a clear sense of what I am talking about and will see the point I was trying to prove.
6. This topic is definitely a controversy. Many black activists focus on this issue for obvious reasons but, even president Obama reformed prison sentencing and (I’m not 100% sure if he did) reduce sentences of some current prison inmates. I believe my persuasive stance is clear in my lede and gets even further developed in my introduction.
7. I believe I met the expectations of the assignment. I may have had 5 secondary sources though.
8. Some direct quotes are integrated while other information from sources is included into the piece and credited after. Primary sources, which were statistics are directly stated and credited. I felt it was better to do it that way because there were so many stats that built on each other so it just made sense to list them all and credit the source after.
9. I think I used more ethos in this piece than anymore because it was important to me and I think my voice really comes out in my writing, especially in the last portion of the article
10. The first visual I chose was interesting at least to me. It shows chattel slavery, the Jim Crow Era and a young black inmate. This visual was perfect for my piece because all the institutions are relevant to the piece. The second visual was more focused on incarceration rates, which also furthers and backs up my claim.
11. My final article differs from previous versions and I owe that to the scrambling drafts workshop. I decided to keep the order that my partner put together.
12. I think the hyperlinks are appropriate and effective.
13. I may have lacked in the grammar area I proof read but I may have missed some things. I think the style was pretty basis: I started with history and brought it to the present. I think the incorporation of my sources provide credibility. I would not have been able to write this on my own.

(AIDS Memorial Quilt displayed on the National Mall in Washington, DC for XIX World AIDS Conference”)

“People don’t always think in the heat of passion, they just dive on in and deal with consequences later”. These are just a few words Paul Watson wrote on his blog submission to “My Prep Experience” as he goes into depth about his own struggles with having safe sex and his encounter with the new drug Prep. Paul who lives in Cape Town South Africa is just one of many who have shared their sexual experiences. Afraid of contracting Aids/HIV, Paul ventured throughout his life wondering when the day would come where he’d fall to the virus. He wasn’t one to wear condoms at all sexual occasions. Whether with one partner or an orgy, that fear always lingered but he pushed through it. That’s whom he was, and he wasn’t about to change.

His condom use was at roughly 50%. Through his ups and downs he was graced with luck each time he was tested. Yet each time something would eat him up inside. He viewed the people he slept with not for the virus they could carry but for the human beings they were. So why did this fear overtake him? Maybe just maybe it was because there shouldn’t be fear against those with the virus, because there is a possibility of having full protection. This is when he came across Truvada, which is also known as Prep. It changed his life for the better. So now with the use of a condom alongside his daily dosage of the drug, Paul no longer has to worry and he can appreciate those around him.So what does this all mean, are we all Paul? Or does each person have a different story?

It’s the 21^st century and we’ve come a long way. We’ve discovered antibiotics, contraceptives, and treatments for certain STIs. So what do all of these discoveries have in common? They are all preventive measures to keep us safe from diseases or critical consequences. For the past century there has been a decline in HIV contraction according to the CDC. This could be due to the fact that the world has begun to truly understand that safe sex is the best sex. Although we have things such as antibiotics and treatments, one of the main preventatives that’s well known for controlling the spread of STI’s and other diseases and that is a condom.

However this winning streak seems to be declining in the past year, not only due to sex education still being considered taboo in certain parts of the united states but also because many Americans still have this belief that certain miracle drugs such as antibiotics can solve all of their problems and because of this, they become careless. That is where the topic of Prep comes to play. Prep is considered to be a new form of HIV preventative. It has come into play for the past two years and has tackled the sphere of sexual activity very quickly. This is due to Prep’s high preventative rate.

Remember Paul and his story? He was one of the lucky few who in the end no longer feared engaging in sex because of his use of both condoms and Prep. Not everyone tends to be Paul unfortunately.

This is what causes a possible breach in the safety we’ve been advocating for in the past decade. Most people would argue that Prep is all you need to have safe sex without a condom. This couldn’t be further from the truth.   Prep only has a 90% preventative rate for HIV. That leaves a 10% gap that should be covered if one uses a condom. There are also many other STI’s and diseases that can still be caught that are just as life threatening as HIV.

There are plenty of stories of the positive outcomes Prep has bestowed upon those who struggle with dating someone who’s HIV positive or those who have very sexual lives. As well as certain television shows such as “How to Get Away With Murder” that also advocate for the use of Prep.

While How to Get Away with Murder may have hit the nail right on the head with Prep advocacy as well as showing the struggle of HIV. Some personal stories on the blog My Prep Experience varies when it comes to the Prep and HIV experience. Although many argue that Prep has allowed them to be sexually active without fear again, there are some who blatantly disregard the fact that they aren’t being as safe as they can be. This is where the controversy can be found. What happens when a herd mentality is introduced into an already stigmatized situation?

Safety is threatened and could all but dissipate. To truly achieve the possibility of preventing HIV and stopping a repetition of the “Aids outbreak” in the 80’s we as a people must be progressive as how we view safe sex. It’s not just one pill that will make a difference. There are many steps we’ve yet to achieve and it’s been estimated that for us to really get to the goal of wiping away the epidemic that the HIV virus has caused will be around 2030. Most people from the 80’s will have aged and gone on with their lives. New generations will be ushered through and it’s up to them to take initiative and educate themselves on all of the ways to prevent infection and not just solely rely on one.

(UNAIDS graph on preventatives and targets to reach the end of the AIDS epidemic.)

“Don’t worry I’m on Prep” is a phrase that has taken many communities by storm and unfortunately the more it trends the less progress we can make. Whether it is at a club, bar, at a university, or even at home. Wherever and whoever you have sex with. Being 100% safe is advocating for progression. Believing prep is the answer to an epidemic that has rooted itself into the lives of so many is irresponsible. I would know, I’ve been subjected to it myself. I’ve had people tell me “put down the condom it’s 2016”. In return I’ve had them leave with a lecture and a new date: 2030.

So the next time you hear that phrase or consider taking Truvada, remember to be progressive. Recall all of the things that truly go into being safe. As Paul from my prep experience puts it “For the first time in years, here is something other than a condom that can prevent HIV infection. Use the two together and you could almost swim in HIV body fluids and still be safe (ok maybe not really, but it was a thought).”

WRT 205/Spring 2016                                                                           Grading Rubric: Unit III NYTs Magazine

[1] I believe my title hones in on the two issues at hand. HIV awareness and the use of Prep. The lede grabs the user by introducing a piece of someone’s personal story (Paul): People don’t always think in the heat of passion, they just dive on in and deal with consequences later”.

[2]  My intro is once again based on the personal experience of Paul and his struggle with HIV awareness and Prep use. It really addresses the controversy of my topic while at the same time exhibiting exigency and showing how dire the issue is.

[3] Exploring the statistics behind HIV and also who advocates for it were ideas that I thought required further analysis and I came up with a lot of information that the typical person would not know about if they didn’t look it up.

[4 My argument is very straight forward yet the issue itself is a complex one. My use of primary research with personal stories as well as secondary research such as CDC statistics and referencing shows that advocate for my issue all tie together and help push the uniqueness and evidence IN style.

[5]  I of course discussed the issue of well why shouldn’t people use Prep. I made it clear that Prep is a great advance in HIV prevention but that the issue at hand is how people are using it irresponsibly and how that deters from its purpose.

[6]     I believe you can see my research and persuasive stance from looking over the other questions I’ve answered. I even went as far as to include my own experience with the topic.

[7]  I used many visual sources, primary research was based around personal stories, and my secondary research spanned from tv shows to the cdc, and other aids advocacy programs.

[8I pushed the research I made alongside the personal stories aspect of my article showing how both go hand on hand but also complicate one another.

9 The use of personal stories (including my own) as well as reaching out to the reader that this too affects them even if they don’t know it I believe shows how persuasive my article is as well as my use of rhetorical tools.

[10 I used examples of the tv show I mentioned, graphs and tables that addressed some of the statistics. Some of my visuals were meant to tug at your heart. Especially the gif of oliver crying because he’s positive with HIV.

[11 I truly wanted to hone in on how HIV was still important and how the advocacy behind it isn’t as relevant anymore. I also wanted to really address Prep use in a more constructive way as my peers suggested I needed to add more content to that issue and expand upon who uses it and who advocates for it.

[12]  How well does the writer use hyperlinks—are they effective/appropriate? I hyperlinked each and every one of my sources.

[13   My grammar is always edited twice before I submit my work in all of my classes. My style flows well and uses the research at hand in a practical way.