India Today Essay Example for Free

India Today Essay Slowly, but surely, in the year 2000, India is beginning to erase the Nehruvian social contract that created the public sector and bound the employees to a corporate unit and the corporate unit to the nation. In the age of restructuring and re-engineering that this has ushered, employees are no longer valued resources but expendable commodities. And likewise, the employers are no longer demi-gods and fuedal lords in one. They are going to become one with a mind-boggling scenario of a private sector, where the growing manager with the corporate experience of a lifetime might suddenly be written off as hopelessly old fashioned; and replaced with a young nerd, who along with, maybe the new owners driver, will be sitting on a stack of stock-options valued in millions. Clearly it is time to think seriously about wealth and what it means to be wealthy in India today. The last time Indians thought self-cautiously about being rich through joint holdings with non blacks, was in the 19th Century when the East India Company revealed to the worldly wise Indians occupying crucial positions within the system, the plunder-potential of their land. They got busy right away. This continued for almost a century till historic events triggered off a freedom struggle under Gandhi over the equitable distribution and domestication of Indias wealth. The idealism lasted barely two decades. Political debates then were all about the baneful influence of capitalism and money. It was okay to generate jobs but not great wealth which could corrupt our most sacred institutions. Slowly some crusading investigative journalists and economists followed this logic and began to glean disturbing facts about the trumpeters of this brand of Hindu socialism. They made dark revelations repeatedly about questionable personal behaviour and financial chicanery that they had discovered among various political groups in power.

Genetically Modified and Organic Foods: Pros and Cons

Genetically Modified and Organic Foods: Pros and Cons Introduction Without modern food production methods, the world food shortage would be in even more of a crisis today. The controversial issue regarding organic and modern mass production methods such as genetic modification, chemical additives and irradiation is a big issue in the global food industry. The global food shortage crisis is gaining momentum as the world is exposed to environmental disasters and the devastating effects of global warming. A solution may come from the growing Genetically Modified (GM) food industry or are the long term effects of GM food too much of a risk. They are increasingly penetrating the market and are replacing the natural, organic foods. Technology has taken over our lives and lifestyles and GM foods are evidence of a desperate attempt to keep up with the crippling population growth worldwide and the lack of equal food dispersion thereof. The controversy of the issue is weighted by the reality of the global food shortage crisis. What are Organic Foods? Over the years the term has changed to accommodate the new species of crops and varieties of animals. The original definition would be food that has not been altered in any by the use of technology or man-made activities. The foods have been grown in naturally fertilised soil, meaning that there is an absence of chemicals such as pesticides or herbicides. The crops then grow naturally by photosynthesis and they are then harvested, processed (cleaning, etc.) packaged and distributed. There are very limited amount of chemical additives such as preservatives, colourants, flavourants despite popular beliefs but they are not exposed to irradiation or radurisation. In terms of livestock and animal produce, the animals are nurtured for in a natural environment such as one that resembles their natural habitat. They are free to roam around and salvage food such as free range chickens are allowed to roam and peck for food. The animal feed is not pumped with synthetic growth hormones or antibio tics or genetically modified organisms. Organic foods are supposed to be the biological, natural and traditional crops or animals that have been around since the dawn of time. Customary farming styles have changed but the organic principles have stayed the same. Fresh organic food This classifies food that has not been processed and is sold at produce store such as Everfresh, Fruit Veg City or small stales. The produce is bought from independent, small scale sellers that are usually the farmers of the produce. This usually categorises fresh fruit and vegetables but it can be used to classify fresh meat. However in todays technological society, fresh produce is not always organic. Loose fruit and vegetables are also in produce stores so the best way to identify organic produce is by reading labels. Another indication of organic produce is knowing what seasons the fruits or vegetables usually grow and are harvested. Price is also an additional indication. Organic produce is usually more expensive. Processed organic food These foods are found in grocery stores such as Spar or Woolworths. These foods have a high percentage of organic foods and do contain a limited amount of non artificial flavours or additives. The foods are preserved using natural preservatives such as high amounts of salt or sugar. They are also under strict restraints regarding their processing. They may also tend to be more expensive and have a shorter shelf life than non-organic processed products. Pros and cons of organic production The organic food industry has boomed by 70% worldwide and in some countries a higher percentage of people have tapped into the organic food industry due to health concerns and the alleged health benefits of organic food. The pros and cons are the issues that consumers are weighing every time they go shopping or order a meal or consume something. The organic food industry capitalise on the fact that their food is a lot healthier than GM foods or non-organic foods but that is not always the case. Pros of organic food production Organic food is generally good for the environment and our health but this varies according to the farm style, produce and scale of the farm. There are several reasons for this. Organic farms do not use synthetic fertilisers, pesticides, insecticides, herbicides or chemicals when farming. This means that the crops can develop their own natural photochemicals via photosynthesis and protect themselves from insects and weeds. This means that they are naturally fortified with antioxidants, minerals and macro and micro vitamins. They have to fight off their natural predators and this environmental stress ensures that we will consume crops with more vitamins and antioxidants without the health risk of chemical residues. The use of manure and compost is economical and completely natural. The lack or minuscule use of artificial chemicals means that there is a much lower risk of contracting illnesses introduced by the unnatural chemicals. For example pesticides are known to have detrimental effects on our health ranging from minor discomforts like headaches to breast cancer. The chemicals are also damaging to developing foetuses (as the pesticides cross the placenta and their immune system is undeveloped) and pregnant women (as their organs and body systems are already under stress). They can also cause Parkinsons disease. Antibiotics are not used in animal farming feeds meaning that their meat or produce do not contain the antibiotics but they use their natural immune systems to fight diseases. The antibiotics can cause long term health complications. The antibiotics used are very similar to ones used for human use thus means that the body will receive an over dose will cause harmful bacteria in our body to evolve and mute into a new drug resistant species. Growth hormones are not used in animal feeds or pumped into their bodies. This means that they will develop naturally and mature when they are biologically supposed to. The health effects of these can only be truly seen in the long term but some are evident today. Girls and boys are maturing before their time and there are more random hormonal, birth and growth defects than before. Additives and preservatives such as Monosodium Glutamate (MSG), hydrogenised fats, colourants and artificial sweeteners are not present in organic foods. They have been proven to be detrimental to human health. The lack of synthetic pesticides means that organic farming in not harmful to indigenous wildlife. It encourages vast range of biodiversity and a balanced ecosystem. Crop rotation promotes soil nutrition and a diversity of crops to grow. The nutrient demand varies according to the plant and this means that the soil has time to replenish itself or by the use of nitrifying plants or cover crops such as legumes and beans or clovers. They also introduce new, beneficial insects to the ecosystem to kill off pests. Crop rotation also promotes a stronger top soil therefore reducing soil erosion ad harmful chemicals from being washed into rivers and streams hence contaminating valuable drinking water and lower levels of heavy metals from polluting, clean drinking water. Animals are in a free range environment meaning that they will develop muscles and strong bones and immune systems and their natural diet will enable them to live healthy, normal lifestyles. Organic farms produce less waste and are more energy efficient and use less energy. Organic farms do not need highly skilled workers or very expensive equipment. Cons of organic food production Despite the numerous benefits there are some concerning problems with organic foods but they too vary according to the farm produce and the size of the farm. The shelf life of organic foods is much shorter than GM or mass produced products because the lack of additives and preservatives decreases their shelf life (especially fruit and vegetables). Organic foods are a lot more expensive than commercial or mass produced foods in some cases 50%-100% more expensive. The organic industry marketing is largely based on the health benefits of organic food so some products may claim to be organic but do not meet the standards and cheat people out of their money. The limited amounts of chemicals will still have detrimental effects in the long term. There is said to be no proven results that there is a substantial difference between nutritional benefits with organic foods and fortified commercial foods such as commercially grown cereals or juices. The natural manure used may contain harmful bacteria such as the E. coli bacterium which is fatal to human health if not treated. The farms also give off of gases (e.g. methane) that are harmful to the environment. Organic foods are not produced on a very big scale such as mass scale production so their yield is much lower and would not be able to keep up with high demand for food. Hence the expense. Organic foods may not look as appealing or appetising as commercially grown products or GM foods. Crop rotation is not subject to organic farming and it is not as energy efficient as it claims. No-till farming is a commercial farming technique and uses the least energy. (The process however uses herbicides to clear the land eliminating the need to till or manage the land.) The farming styles may be too outdated and need improvement to adapt to the changing environment. Organic farming may not ensure food security to a mass population or sustain food fashions or trends. It is heavily dependant on seasonal change and weather so supplies are inconstant. Organic farming is tedious and hard work and requires space. What chemicals are used to aid the production and supply foods? Additives and preservatives are used largely in mass production products. They are added to food products to enhance taste, colour, and texture or to preserve the food in order for it to have an increased shelf life. This makes the food more aesthetically appealing and or even taste better than usual. They are substances that are purposely added to food during the handling, processing or manufacturing stages of food. This is a selling gimmick but some additives are beneficial but they also have negative health effects. Examples of additives are Monosodium glutamate (MSG) is one of the most common additives in savoury foods and tartazine (E102) is a yellow colouring also used in a variety of products. They are known to cause or aggravate allergies or even respiratory problems like asthma. Functions that the chemicals perform MSG enhances the flavour and taste of savoury foods. It is a white crystalline substance that dissolves well into a variety of foods. It causes allergic reactions like swelling lips and vomiting. Tartazine (E102) is used to colour food yellow, like in margarine. It has been linked with asthma and hyperactivity in children. Additives generally: Are effective against combating a variety of microorganisms Are not toxic to humans and animals (if taken in the right dosage) Are Water soluble (dissolve well in water) Add nutrient value Are not damaged by temperature changes or bacteria Do not affect the natural components of food. (Flavour, aroma, etc.) Are economical What is genetic modification? Genetic modification is the process of technologically changing the genetic information of an organism to achieve a desired result. The biotechnology used or genetic engineering to create genetically modified crops or Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) entails extracting desirable genes from one organism and fusing them with another to create a new, improved breed or species of plant. The GM crops are then cultivated and introduced into the market. The traits make them more desirable and penetrate the market easily. They are therefore cheaper, last longer and have an enhanced nutritional value. In animals it enhances their productivity and quality of feed and produce (hormones, etc). Genetic modification is a complex practice laws need to be implemented such as the South African GMO Act (1997) that controls and monitors activity regarding GMOs. It is administrated by the National Department of Agriculture consisting of committee members from government bodies. GM was introduced to reach the high and strenuous demands for food because of the rapidly exploding global population. The food shortage crisis has however worsened over the years and people are turning more towards GM products as a faster and cheaper solution as opposed to conventional or organic products. There are concerns about health effects and are GM foods just as detrimental if not worse than commercial mass produced products. Is it the baddie that its reputation suggests? Despite the widespread support for GM foods there is a large community that strongly feels that they will cause more problems than solutions and that they are just prolonging the list of causes of human death. Arguments in favour of GM products: It is an advancement of traditional breeding to keep up with the increasing food demands. GM crops use fewer chemicals than commercially grown or mass produced crops making them just as health as organic foods. They have a high yield and their yield is constant. There is no sound evidence that GM production has an undesirable effect on the environment. Developing countries need the crops to feed their populations and are adopting the technology or receiving it as aid from first world or developed countries. It is quick, cheaper and less maintenance than wide scale farming or organic farming as it needs less space and fewer costs (chemicals, manure etc.) Arguments against GM products: There is a scarcity of scientific testing results of the short term or long term effects of GM products. There is not enough technology and funding in the world to sustain everybody in the long term. The GM foods may contain versatile toxins unknown to man at the present time. GM crops will lead to a lack of biodiversity and a decrease the indigenous crops or animals having a negative environmental effect. They could increase susceptibility to allergens. The alterations of genes could also alter genes in our own bodies and pass them on to further generations. There are major ethical issues regarding GM foods. It is unclear as to whether or not GM foods are as bad as they are said to be but they seem to be the only working solution so far to combat the food social shortage global crisis. The need for GM foods is clear but the risk of eating genetically altered food is too high. The luxury of eating new fruits like grapples is inviting but the price of future generations health is alarming. GM foods are becoming a hazard posing as a luxury but if their constraints are limited they could serve a beneficial purpose such as alleviating the food shortage crisis. Genetic modification could be a food fashion or fad but judging by its popularity it is here to stay. What is radurisation? Radurisaton, also known as irradiation is the treatment of food using very short light or radio waves. This improves the foods shelf life, safety and its suitability. Electromagnetic radiation is the umbrella term for the different types of waves used scientifically. The Gamma rays are the shortest waves in the electromagnetic spectrum and they are used to irradiate the food. The rays infiltrate deep into the food and kill bacteria or insects as their biological cells are sensitive to the radiation. The waves can also retard potatoes from sprouting. The waves are generated by a specially treated metal called Cobalt 60 that is encased between double layers of metal rods; because of the dangers of gamma rays the radurisation takes place under strictly controlled conditions. Different dosages are used according to the desired effect, if food is to be pasteurised than the dosage is less than equipment that needs to be sterilised. It is very popular and it is authorized by a number of international organisations such as the World Health Organisation (WHO), the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) and the American Medical Association. It is locally supported by The Department of Health. According to Act 54 of 1972 (in South Africa) all irradiated foodstuffs must be labelled properly showing the Radura symbol and only if approved by the Minister of Health or the Director General. The maximum dosage is 10 kiloGrey, exceeding this will be violating international regulations. The Radura Symbol What foods are irradiated? There are a variety of foods that are irradiated especially raw or highly sensitive foods that can be contaminated easily. They are divided into different classes starting from 1-11; the higher the class the more complex the application (the table attached illustrates this). A few of the common food stuffs are: Wheat Maize Spices and herbs Fruits (e.g. strawberries) Vegetables (e.g. cauliflower) Meat (raw or frozen) Poultry Fresh garlic Honey Tubers, bulbs and roots (e.g. potatoes) What are the pros and cons of irradiation? Pros of irradiation: It eliminates or reduces the amount of disease causing organisms in the food and other harmful bacteria. (e.g. salmonella, E. coli, listeria, etc.) It replaces the use of potentially harmful chemicals used to fumigate insects from crops. Irradiation meets international and national quarantine standards. It extends the shelf life of food especially raw fruit and vegetables, meat and poultry. It is a safe and effective method for treating food. The food does not become radioactive. Cons of irradiation: There is a minor reduction in vitamin content during irradiation. It cannot improve spoilt foods Foods with a high percentage of fat change colour when they are irradiated. It does not improve or enhance the taste or appearance of the food. It can cause unpleasant flavours in certain foods. Skilled workers can only work with the equipment The equipment is expensive and needs regular maintenance Analysis of results Who was interviewed? I tried to choose a spectrum of candidates raining in age hence affecting their lifestyle choices. I surveyed: Parents Scholars Friends Members of the Ballito community Children The results that I acquired are more or less what I had expected. There was an equal balance between the questions as to whether or not people agreed with the statement but I was surprised to see that 5out of the 15 people did not think that there was a global food shortage crisis. A lot of people did not have a vegetable garden which I had thought was a fad and more and more people felt safer when they ate their own produce. 10 out of the 15 people knew what genetic modification was and the same results were obtained when 10 out of the 15 people choose the correct definition for organic food. There is a trend regarding people being more aware of organic food and how influential food labels are and the effect on the environment. 10 out of 15 people were willing to spend more money on organic foods which is more evidence that organic food is becoming a big part of peoples lifestyle choices. 0 out of the 15 people did not know what the Radura symbol indicated so it shows that there is a lack of consumer knowledge. Ultimately the general result regarding the controversial issue of GM foods relieving the food shortage crisis was that people strongly supported this theory with 10 people choosing yes, 4 people choosing no and one person choosing not applicable. The following tables and graphs diagrammatically represent a few of the results from the survey: What are organic foods? What is Genetic modification? Number of people who choose the correct definition:Â  10 Number of people who choose the correct definition: 0 Number of people who choose the wrong definition:Â  5 Total:15 Do GM foods influence your food choice? Do organic foods influence your food choice? Number of people who choose: Yes 7 Number of people who choose: No 6 Number of people who choose: Not applicable 2 Total:Â  15 Are you willing to spend more money on organic foods? Number of people who choose: Yes 10 Number of people who choose: No 5 Number of people who choose: Not applicable 0 Total:Â  15 Do you have a vegetable garden? Number of people who choose: Yes 6 Number of people who choose: No 9 Number of people who choose: Not applicable 0 Total: 15 Do you think GM foods could alleviate the food shortage crisis? Number of people who choose: Yes Number of people who choose: No Number of people who choose: Not applicable Do you believe that there is a global food shortage crisis? Number of people who choose: Yes Number of people who choose: No Number of people who choose: Not applicable Personal opinion The information is reliable and valid as people answered the survey individually and they were anonymous and so they felt more flexible and honest with their answers. The results were bias in that all the candidates where from a similar financial background and had access to more consumer information. The survey results did match with the literature results that I obtained. They were the same in terms of the lack of consumer knowledge and the growing trend of people moving towards organic foods for supposed health reasons. A lot of people thought that the organic farms had a good environmental impact but they were wrong so the information given to the public is not always fact making it misleading. Suggestions on how to improve the investigation The investigation was extensive and needed a lot of detail. I would survey more people and a wider spectrum ranging from a bigger lifestyle differences and income background in order for the results to be more accurate. The length and content of my survey/ questionnaire would be more specified so as to have a fair and set standard of what results should be required from the public. I would use a better organisational method of my information by mapping it out before is started my investigation in order to clearly know what I have to do. My time management would also need improvement in order to have more time to thoroughly go through my work and not be rushed for time. I would research more information in order to have more arguments regarding the investigation. Conclusion There is evidence of a global food shortage crisis and it is clear that people have chosen to show a blind eye to the situation or actively combat it. The two major concerns as to whether or not they will alleviate the global food shortage crisis are clear; Organic or Commercial mass produced food. There are counter arguments that there is enough food supplied from the earth but misdistribution and greed have caused food to become scarce. The environment is also more versatile than it used to be due to global warming so extreme disasters and weather patterns are changing landscapes and available or potential farming land is becoming a scarcity. The growing population is also exceeding the environmental capacity to cater for it as there in not enough space to farm as it is cultivated for farming and there is a higher demand for food than there is a supply. The recent recession is also another reason threatening food security and increasing oil prices threaten the transport of foods. Without the technological advances that man has created to bring about mass produced foods is a solution but a temporary one as repercussions are not yet evident but they will curb the success of mass produced foods. Organic foods do not seem half as damaging but they too cannot sustain the booming population. The question remains as to whether or not to choose organic or GM food but for majority of the worlds population that is not an option so they have to rely on GM foods. The world would be in even more of a crisis if modern mass food productions but they need to refine their methods and strive to be as close to organic quality as possible, GM is not the answer, more needs to be done.

The Permanent Campaign :: essays research papers fc

'The Permanent Campaign'; was written by Norman J. Ornstein and Amy S. Mitchell. This article appeared first in The World & I, in January 1997.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Norman Ornstein is regarded as one of our nation's foremost experts on Congress. Mr. Ornstein received a Ph.D.. from the University of Michigan, he writes for the NewYork Times, USA Today, Washington Post, and he has a regular column in Roll Call newspaper called 'Congress Inside Out';. Mr. Ornstein is also an election analyst for CBS and appears frequently on television shows including the Today Show, Nightline and the Mac Neil/Lehre News Hour where he has been a consultant and contributor for fifteen years.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Mr. Ornstein is a Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research and is also an advisor and member of the Free TV for Straight Talk coalition. The coalition is a group of 80 leaders from the worlds of politics, corporations, broadcast journalism, the entertainment industry and public interest groups. They support giving political candidates free air time on TV to promote their political views without the media's input. He has authored or co-authored recent books such as How We Can Get Out of It, Debt and Taxes: How America Got Into Its Budget Mess, and Intensive Care: How Congress Shapes Health Policy.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Amy Mitchell is a journalist whom graduated from Georgetown University, she has written may articles concerning government and the media and was a congressional associate at the American Enterprise Institute for four years. She is now the staff director of the Committee of Concerned Journalists. The CCJ is an organization of editors, producers, reporters, and producers whom are concerned with the future of the media. They believe that right now is a crucial moment in American journalism and it is time to sit down and talk about the core principles and function of journalism.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Article 'The Permanent Campaign'; takes a look at the way the American political system has evolved over the years. When George Washington was president he did not campaign any before he was put in office. When he was in office he only made a few public appearances and when he did he didn't speak a word. During Washington's era political campaigning was considered undignified.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Now the whole philosophy has changed. Before the 1992 election was even over the Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report ran a story on the possible Republican hopefuls for the 1996 campaign. We have gone from a country who denounced campaigning to one in which candidates start campaigning for seats that haven't even been decided in the current elections.

quotes :: essays research papers

The world is a puzzle and we're two pieces that fit perfectly together. Within you, I lose myself, without you, I find myself, searching to be lost again Love is like an hourglass with the heart filling up as the brain empties Immature love says: "I love you because I need you." Mature love says: "I need you because I love you." I don't need to be wanted, I want to be needed. Love is when you've ran out of excuses for hating someone. When a young man complains that a young woman has no heart, it is a pretty sure sign that she has his Love is like pizza, when it's good, it's really good. When it's bad, It's still pretty good. Absence sharpens love, but presence strengthens it Devil, don't you know you are as beautiful as an Angel? G. Leopardi In any relationship in which two people become one, the end result is two half people If you're sweet and sincere, I'll call you my dear. If you're kind and funny, I'll call you my honey. If you're caring and smart, I'll call you my sweetheart. If you posess all of the above, then you are my true love. It's easy to fall in love, but it's hard to find someone to catch you Im sweet like suger, soft like suade, but unlike nintendo i never get played Why shed tears in the pond of life when you can make a splash? Thou art to me a delicious torment. My heart is ever at your service Kiss me and you will see stars; love me and I will give them to you. Bitterness imprisons life; love releases it. Bitterness paralyzes life; love empowers it. Bitterness sours life; love sweetens it. Bitterness sickens life; love heals it. Bitterness blinds life; love anoints its eyes. It is impossible to repent of love. The sin of love does not exist. I'm in the mood for love Simply because you're near me. Funny, but when you're near me I'm in the mood for love. A kiss is something you cannot give without taking and cannot take without giving. "Where should one use perfume?" a young woman asked. "Wherever one wants to be kissed," I said.-- Coco Chanel Where one drop of blood drains a castle of life, so one kiss can bring it alive again. Some people grumble because roses have thorns. I am thankful that thorns have roses. We are each of us angels with only one wing. And we can only fly embracing each other

How The Ending Of The Novel Manages To End Or Resolve The Novels Key :: essays research papers

â€Å"To Kill A Mockingbird† by Harper Lee is a classic novel that deals with two â€Å"mockingbirds† in Boo Radley and Tom Robinson. â€Å"They don’t do one thing but sing their hearts out for us. That’s why it’s a sin to kill a mockingbird,† says Atticus. Despite the stigma involved with such an action, Maycomb physically and socially kill two Mockingbirds. This theme and many more are resolved in the book’s ending. One of the first key themes dealt with in the ending of novel is that of the first mockingbird, Boo Radley. Throughout the novel Scout, Jem and Dill are preoccupied with one of Maycomb’s â€Å"monsters†, Boo Radley. Finally, Scout has the chance to meet him, after â€Å"He gave†¦. [Scout and Jem] [Their] lives. Scout, through standing on the Radley porch and â€Å"Standing in [Boo’s] shoes and walking around in them†, finally understands Boo Radley. Furthermore, when Scout says, â€Å"he was real nice†, Atticus replies back â€Å"most people are, Scout, when you finally see them†, thus resolving the readers and Scout’s doubts about Boo Radley. With the description of his hair as "feathery," Boo is immediately identified with the "mockingbird" idea, especially with his slight appearance and fluttery hand movements. He has finally become a real person, completing the progression from monster to human; meanwhile, Mr. Ewell's evilness has turned him into a human monster, whose bristling facial stubble felt by Scout suggests an animal-like appearance. Another key theme that is dealt with in depth, is that of the second mockingbird, Tom Robinson, the Negro who is killed trying to escape from jail after he is wrongfully accused and convicted for rape while helping a young woman. At the end of the book, the two mockingbirds collide, as Boo kills Bob Ewell, the young girl’s â€Å"white trash† father, in a scuffle between Bob and the Finch children. As Heck Tate says â€Å" There’s a black boy dead for no reason, and the man responsible for it’s dead. Let the dead bury the dead this time†¦Ã¢â‚¬ . During the course of this book, Harper Lee tries to show us people’s reactions when they have to choose between their prejudices and what is right. Tom Robinson is the recipient of unfair racial prejudice, as he finds out how a man’s false beliefs can override his better judgement. Boo Radley is also the victim of social prejudice. Just because he stays inside, people automatically hide their better judgement in the belief that Boo is actually a monster.

Effects of Gender on Communication Essay

Gender communication gap has long been a problem and source of misunderstanding between men and women. Common situations showed that the more talking of women greatly affect their communication with the opposite sex and expressing themselves create miscommunication and other problems rather than understanding among themselves. In Deborah Tannen’s You Just Don’t Understand: Woman and Men in Conversation however it was made to contrast the typical stereotype that women talk to much than men. It also that does not follow that talking more means saying more with sense. Women may be expressing themselves more but their talking is regarded as speaking in private nature and oftentimes downplayed in terms of significance when compared to men talking publicly. Factors such as the place and the nature of communication also contribute to the turn-out of the whole process between men and women. Tannen reconciled the difference between gender in private and public communication and supported this with the terms â€Å"Rapport-Talk and Report-Talk. † The gender difference in private speaking was showed in a way that a woman is talkative compared to a man who is of few words. This is where the language of rapport takes place wherein women regard every conversation with a personal touch and connection. Although this situation is very evident in the home set-up, the utilization of private communication by women can be extended to other venues where they feel comfortable and at home at all times. Private speaking by a woman may be characterized by discussion of any topic under the sun and it could be either under her official or personal function or could be both. Private communication focuses on the ability of women to express themselves more specially with men whom they are intimate with because talking with the opposite sex is so relaxing that women tend to continue with their flow of thoughts thinking that their men-partners willingly and interestingly understand and accept whatever they are saying. In private communication, women talk to men not only for information, exchange of ideas and opinion but also to establish a closer interaction and have a stronger relationship with their men. This is where consequences start because the more women talk in a private speaking set-up, the more men feel that the communication must end. In turn, women are offended when men start to become indifferent, inattentive and openly disagree. Complaints start to come in when women, with all their heart out and mind speaking sees nothing in exchange of their expression. Communication differences are indicated in cartoons where women openly and again, do much of the talking and complaining. Women in private communication feel that when they speak, men must reciprocate or share with them the same level of expression. For women, to have a rapport is to have a two-way communication where both gender exercise their parts and not just the other one doing much of the talking while the other just listen or worse, not bother at all and just want the talkative women to shut up. However, men caught in private communication oftentimes tend to just leave the flow of communication with the speaking of the women whom they see as the ones with a lot to say specially when the nature of the communication becomes personal. And when women start not only to talk much but to complain more, men resent the pressure and incline to insist that women are just demanding to much from them by wanting to be the center of communication and by presenting herself to be the more affected party. With this scenario, consequences grow because as the women are incline to personalize the conversation, men prefer to detach themselves from the process and unconsciously hurt the feelings and downplay the thoughts of the other gender. And even in the complaining part, women express more of their dissatisfaction than men and this result into misunderstanding. Enter now the blaming of each party because men and women will have to stress their own points and in doing so create more unsettled differences. Tannen’s perspective is true in the sense that gender dictates the flow and communication process in private speaking and when differences set in, the process and the people involved are greatly affected. I also agree with her idea that each gender has its own way of talking and if these different manners met and clash in a private communication set-up where the women do much of the talking, not only the women suffer the consequences but both. Although men and women have the same purpose of expressing themselves in a way acceptable to both of them, consequences and differences are inevitable and can only get worse if the different style of talking is foremost to be considered. While the private communication is the conventional way of speaking between men and women, this scenario is different in a public communication set-up. In this scenario, the gender switch roles as the men do more of the talking while the women fell silent. While men are mute in home scenarios and women tend to dominate the conversations in a private communication, men now start and want to be at the center of the conversation. The change in the setting of the conversation plays a big part in the turn-around of gender roles. Since women dominate the home-style private communication, men now overshadow them when they start to speak more publicly such as in meetings, conferences, official gatherings – all done outside the boundaries of home. Men now speak more freely and with authority and women take a back seat by merely listening and there may even come a time that they will just have to agree with men and be content with their reverse roles. Having a particular subject matter to discuss and not just the personalize topics that men and women talk inside their homes is one factor that affect the communication process in a public speaking set-up. In a public engagement, men as resource persons speak more of what they know with authority and they are now the ones dominating the floor. And just like in the private communication, communication differences occur in a public speaking set-up. A significant consequence is that women are perceive to be uninterested and less knowledgeable when men do much of the talking on a particular topic and they are just at the back seat. Tannen’s term of â€Å"Report-Talk† is very evident in a public communication wherein men play the big role to get attention. Unlike in private communication where women talk much to build stronger connection and relationship with men, public communication reverses this process. However, it may not be agreeable and acceptable that men do the talking in public because they know more and women cannot perform the role. This communication difference result in mislabeling of men as the more knowledgeable in public speaking and that women will just have to be silent. For all we know, women may just have to establish their own credibility and authority to be able to speak and talk more publicly. Establishing their thoughts and making sure of the things that they may say could be what women take first into consideration before engaging in public communication. A contradiction to Tannen’s gender hypothesis in public communication where men were perceived to be better in talking more publicly is evident in a Newsweek news story on US Presidential candidate, former First Lady and now Senator Hillary Clinton. The news story showed how Clinton is getting strength and taking advantage of the presidential race not because of her being the wife of former President Clinton but because of how she can speak well and more of her thoughts publicly. It is evident that Clinton did not limit her speaking ability within the boundaries of her home and with authority, she was able to stress her points and advancement by utilizing on a particular topic such as health care for the Americans. †¦ The New York senator has amassed strong support among crucial groups including female, older, less-educated and lower-income Democrats significant because women and older voters in particular have dominated these primaries and caucuses in the past. (Fram and Tompson, Newsweek) The same news story also showed how a woman can earn support and respect from men not just because of speaking her personal thoughts in a private speaking set-up but because of her willingness to express publicly her causes. Clinton was perceived as a woman who cannot just address domestic concerns but also issues such as Iraq and heath care thus gaining her the much needed support. A journal also claimed that men and women are so different that they comprise strikingly different â€Å"speech communities. † This is because of the fact that they are typically socialized in discrete speech communities. †¦ Numerous studies and reviews of research demonstrate that distinct gender cultures exist and that they differ systematically in some important respects. (Wood, 2000, p. 207) With the issues presented, it may now be clear that gender differences on private and public speakings have great effects on communication in such a way that men and women on the onset have their own and contradicting ways of talking making understanding and complementation of each other thoughts difficult. Notwithstanding the willingness and ability of both gender to comprehend each other, there will still be conflicting issues, concerns, expressions and thoughts to be settled. Efforts to settle gender differences on communication may be a long way to go but it is not impossible to achieve.

Abc Electronic Case Study

ABC Electronics Ltd. – A Wrong Analysis of Consumer Behavior ABC Electronics Ltd. was a company established in 1983 by Mr. Manoj Kumar and over the years had emerged as one of the leaders in the growing segment of the electronics and home appliances market in India. Currently it has a market share of 30% of the home appliances market. Its product strategy has been to offer a wide range, right from mono stereo, two in ones and sophisticated music systems to televisions, refrigerators, washing machines, ovens and microwave ovens.ABC’s marketing strategy also included offering the above products so as to match the needs and budget of the middle and upper middle classes. In 1991, Prasad, son of Mr. Manoj Kumar, took over as the Managing Director of the company. Seeing the intense competition in the post liberalization scenario, Prasad was keen to follow the principle that once you have decided on your target customer, you follow him/her relentlessly with attractive offering s. In 1994, he developed a well focused promotion and distribution strategy. The promotion strategy involved an advertising budget of Rs. 0 crores, a special training program for the sales force and offering freebies and various other sales promotion techniques. In terms of distribution, Prasad selected exclusive showrooms and franchisees to display their wide range of products. The location of the exclusive retail outlets was also selected so as to match the perceptions of the consumers as an â€Å"exclusive showroom† for them. However, even after two years of implementing the new promotion and distribution strategy, the sales of ABC Electronics did not pick up to the extent that the company thought it would.Prasad then directed the marketing manager to conduct a study of other retail outlets to know the trend. The results revealed that there was a change in consumers’ perceptions regarding purchasing consumer durables. There seemed to be a preference for purchasing g oods from multi brand, rather than from single brand outlets. Questions 1. Where do you think Prasad went wrong in his analysis of consumer behavior? 2. Discuss the change in the role of the consumer today, as compared to the consumer five years ago.M/s. Tufleather Ltd. – â€Å" Tufcom Shoes† For the last fifty years, M/s. Tufleather has been in the business of manufacturing and selling leather to companies which make leather shoes and other related products. In the post liberalization period, i. e. , from 1991 onwards, the company was contemplating entering the shoe manufacturing industry, primarily because the Government was giving substantial support to this industry, particularly to firms that were export oriented.With the intention of selling shoes, the company set up its own factory with R & D facilities in Hosur, Tamil Nadu. In 1993, the company’s R & D department developed a material â€Å"Tufcom†, which it claimed had properties of shoe material permeability, strength, flexibility and durability. The company also set up a sub unit to produce shoes with this new material and conducted test marketing to gauge the initial response. The pilot study indicated positive consumer response.Based on the test marketing results, the company set up a large plant with a huge investment and entered into tie ups with reputed shoe manufacturers to buy the new material and make attractive shoe models. They also planned to have an in-house trained team of sales people who would visit the shoe retail outlets and train their sales persons on how to sell shoes. Tufleather also helped the shoe manufacturing companies by providing point of purchase and advertising materials for a nationwide advertising campaign.The company developed a premium pricing strategy for the Tufcom material, based on the consumer perceptual process – the belief that high price is an indicator of high quality. They felt that Tufcom offered quality that was superior to leather in terms of durability and ease of care. After adopting a skimming pricing strategy, the company would later consider penetrating the lower priced shoe market segment. While the first year after the launch of Tufcom shoes showed positive results, sales began to fall drastically after that.Feedback from their sales team indicated that high price buyers did not get motivated by the factors emphasized by Tufleather, namely durability and ease of care. In addition, some complaints were received from buyers of Tufcom shoes that they found the shoes unusually warm. Questions 1. Where do you think the company went wrong in analyzing consumer shoe buying behavior? 2. Do you think the company should identify a new buyer market, namely the lower priced shoe market segment?