Hate SPEECH in the MEDIA: Is it a direct affect on our culture?

           Hate speech can be interpreted in many different ways. It can be taken as slander,speaking your mind, or stating facts. The first amendment in the Constitution in the Bill of Rights guarantees freedom of speech but does not allow a context for hate speech. Defining hate speech seems to be the hardest thing for our society to do.
           Hate speech can be seen as disdain for other people. The problem with that is you can not slander someone solely because of disdain for the person. There has to be some fact for it. The other issue is that less harmful forms of hate speech are hidden throughout different entities in our society. The blatant forms of hate speech are the ones that are openly prosecuted and scrutinized.
            The authors choose to pinpoint the hidden forms of hate speech throughout this particular passage because it is an obviously an issue because this means that people are unable to identify what exactly hate speech is. It is almost as bad as trying to get a mass consensus on what the terrorism means. Some of the main forms of hate speech described in this passage are the forms of hate speech that occur when there is disdain for a particular racial, ethnic, religious, and gender groups. These forms of freedom of speech are able to be exercised.
         

Informed in an Information Society? Instant Gratification VS Library AGE

The yes argument is backed by a 16 month survey of Internet users that ranged from ages ten to eighteen in low-income homes. Their survey showed that youth who used the Internet had higher scores on the standardized tests of reading achievement and higher GPA’s. This study is able to support the positive views and energy surrounding internet use for educational balance.

            The no argument slanders the youth and generalizes the behaviors. He lumps the youth into one category. The no argument’s intent is to say that the youth is so used to instant gratification that they do not understand the value of hard work and taking your time because everything is at their fingertips. The only problem with this argument is that there are no facts to back this argument up.

Should this generation be offended by the no argument's point of view? I wouldn't go as far as to say "know nothings". What I will say is that this generation doesn't often realize how long preparation for say a research paper may have taken before the inventions of google etc. But to go as far as to say "know nothings" is derogatory. I think the author of the no argument should do some real research before throwing out such slander against this generation.

Marijuana Video (Thea and Rhea)