Organizational Behavior (Paraphrase) wall-mart Essay

Organizational Behavior (Paraphrase) wall-mart - Essay Example In accumulation, professionals have pointed out that in the core values of globalization; organizations are now going to deal with people from variant cultural, social and sociological backgrounds that have resulted in enhancement in the importance of organizational behavioral study. (RobbinsStephen P. Robbins (Author) †º Visit Amazon's Stephen P. Robbins Page Find all the books, read about the author, and more. See search results for this author Are you an author? Learn about Author Central & Judge, 2007, 523) Furthermore, readings have signified that there appears a continuing alteration and transformation in the inclinations of organizational behavior in the organizations owing to a number of factors, such as human resource diversity, internet oriented workplaces, employer- employee relations, etc. In order to comprehend the impact of organizational behavior, this paper will focus on the Wal-Mart. In the Wal-Mart, chief liability of work is on the managers that put labors to carry out work proficiently. Furthermore, the company has dual care tendency; of employees, along with the consumers by upholding and observing the MARS model that stresses primarily on four agreed factors of motivation i.e.: perception, ability, role and situational factors.

Shifting Power to Make a Difference Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Shifting Power to Make a Difference - Essay Example The problems that faces the institutions that handle international aid - whether they may be on the supply side or intermediaries- is how to best utilize the fund such that the intended improvements for the beneficiary are achieved. This has especially been a growing concern because even with the billions of dollars that have been donated and already consumed, much of the inequalities still remain and the gap seems to be growing. That is, the amount spent is not proportional to the benefits and development acquired whether it may be material or personal. As with all issues and problems, a number of perceived solutions especially from scholars have been forwarded to address the inefficiency of handling and utilizing international aid. Robert Chambers and Jethro Pettit are two such scholars with their composition entitled "Shifting Power to Make a Difference". In this essay, the concept of power to control and to decide as confined to the few is the reason blamed for the inadequacy and inappropriateness of handling international aid. For Chambers and Pettit, the orientation of organizations tends to be non-inclusive meaning the donors usually dictate how the aid is going to be used. This become problematic because the donors may take an inappropriate and even a skewed perspective. Even with the best of intentions, it is simply not the same as asking and considering the voice of the beneficiaries what their problems and perceived solutions are and having them take a participatory role and not just a passive role in a matter that will u ltimately be affecting their lives. The effect to the poor of confining decisions and implementations to the donor and intermediary is what Chambers and Pettit would call an "alien hand". The authors recognize that the problem is in the system and not some external factor. With power already confined to those in the upper echelons, the "norms and procedures combined with personal behavior, attitudes and beliefs, serve to reinforce these existing power relations." (p. 137) Chambers and Pettit identify four action domains that should address the problem with the system and personal behavior. They are the following: Understanding and Analyzing Power Within the mechanism involved in international aid lies the basic issue of who gets to decide and who gets to control. To effect change, we must first be aware of the power relations that exist and determine their impact on aid and development. Only thru awareness and understanding of these power relations can we get an idea of how to best acquire and use it. The authors point out that with knowledge of the implications of the power exercised by donor agencies can they realize the importance of sharing power such as encouraging beneficiaries to make a more proactive stance. The attitude of "I give therefore I decide" could be avoided by acknowledging that those who received are the ones ultimately affected and should therefore be given an opportunity to voice out their opinion. Narrowing the gaps between words and actions For Chamber and Pitt, the lingo used in international aid is problematic. As an example, they cite the use of the word "partnership" which "implies collegial equality and mutual reciprocity" but in reality, only those "who control the funding call the shots". What

Reading Summary 5 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Reading Summary 5 - Essay Example Most organizations, do not involve the shareholders and other directors in the policy making process. They are only involvement in the final output. For effective optimization of distribution channels, all the key stake holders should be involved from the time the company is drafting its distribution strategy (Kotler & Lee, 2007). A good distribution channel, should look at all the key sections of an organization that need to be looked at and questioned. For example, if the goods delivery time is delayed, what will impact will the effect have on the overall sales revenue? This type of questions need to be asked and answered by an organization in order to optimize of distribution channels (Kotler & Lee, 2007). One of the areas, which organizations give little attention is the inventory. The way a company manages its inventory, becomes more and more important. A company needs to know where and how it’s going to stock all the products (Kotler & Lee,

Globalization and the New World Order Assignment

Globalization and the New World Order - Assignment Example This has encouraged entrepreneurs to venture into business opportunities. Compared to the 50s, many economies have grown exponentially. For example, China has been a notable economy rising fast (OECD International Trade Statistics, 2010). The reason behind China’s rocketing economy is its investments in foreign direct investments (FDI). China has continued to make investments in other countries and is currently the leading country in terms of revenue from the foreign direct investments. So has globalization created a new world order? An individual needs to have the meaning of ‘new world order’ to answer the question. New world order generally refers to change in the global trend. New world order summarizes the numerous explanations of common human behavior across the entire world. Globalization has made it possible for people all across the world to communicate and share with each other (James, 2009). The fact that, majority of the people worldwide are affected by globalization, directly or indirectly, make globalization a trend setter or a common factor in the world. Hence to state that globalization has created a new world order makes complete sense. Globalization affects every economy in the world regardless of the economics’ strength and stability. Big economies have invested in other smaller economy. Developing nations have strengthened their economies due to the revenue gotten from international trade. The new world order has also improved on the living standards and lifestyles in the developing countries (James, 2009). One of the fundamental economic factor that globalization, or the new world order, has had a major influence is the creation or jobs. Ranging from countries based investments to multinational corporations; the job opportunities have life easy for ‘the worker’. Question 2; Globalization is Dead? Globalization can be the cultural, economic or social interaction between two or more people from different origins. To date, people travel globally as tourists to other counties. The major attraction in tourism is culture. People love to explore cultures in form of art like; music, paintings, dancing and publications (Norris, 2009). The mode of dressing has made the fashion industry boom to become a multi-billion industry. Artistic ideas continue to be exchanged all over the world. Due to the high levels of technology, one does not need to leave his motherland to experience this cultural interaction. One can simply access the internet and other sources of information media that are available to them. Economically, businesses still strive to find new markets. Both large scaled, and small scaled, businesses have and continue to be created due to the endless interaction of people. Investors from foreign countries invest in a country; hence, improving the individual’s lives. Ideas also borrowed from other countries also become successful ventures. Globalization continues to create bu siness and trade opportunities that help in develop any economy or the livelihood of any person (Keith, 2006). Socially globalization has made changes in the way of life. Some social occasions like sporting events promote the interaction of people from different origin. Olympics have over the years been a prominent sporting event that attracts athletes from all over the world. In some European and Latin countries, street festivals attract millions of tourists. Among the many globalization elements, socially, religion is the most spread among the world population. People have and continue to change their religious belief (Elliott, 2009). This is as a result of the infinite interaction of pe

War on Terror Essay Example for Free

War on Terror Essay The current war on terrorism raises a unique, formative innovation of American principles. It has now integrated the world of civilized countries united together in a massive ideological, as well as military, war to battle the common enemy of terrorism. In fact, this position with such a global coalition is what might be expected from America, a country that specializes in cultural pluralism. The disaster of 9/11 awakened the slumbering, decadence of a country taking itself for granted, unprotected, and living in Disneyland. There were warnings of terrorists’ threats in 1997 and 1998 (from China, Israel, and others). At that time, the U. S. government was too active developing a case against President Bill Clinton to pay attention to what was going on in the world beyond Washington, D. C. Had the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Central Intelligence Agency, and Congress been as possessed with detecting terrorism and threats to the United States (connecting the dots) as they were with connecting Clinton to Monica Lewinsky (they could connect one dot on a dress to the president), we all might feel safer today. As the rest of the world has struggled with home-front terrorism (e. g. , England, France, the Middle East, Russia, and Japan), America has been egoistic in its own vast materialistic bubble oblivious to outer threats of terror. We have purely assumed somebody else will take care of the rest of the world terrorism as we are safely secluded on either side by two gigantic bodies of water. Yet, these thousands of miles of ocean are suitably called ponds as they can be traversed by sophisticated commercial jets in a matter of hours. Though, some analysts differentiate between political terrorists with an identifiable goal and millenarian terrorists who are said to â€Å"have no political agenda and owe their allegiance †¦ to a higher authority in heaven† (New York Times for July 23 and 24, 2002). The Palestine Liberation Organization is said to be an instance of the former and Al-Qaeda of the latter. The effectiveness of this distinction is open to question, however. Who can confidently be said to be a â€Å"millenarian terrorist†? A reading of Al-Qaedas manifestos illustrates that it harbors goals short of a global Caliphate. At the same time, â€Å"political terrorists† are not inevitably candidates for negotiations. That a group has a restricted political goal does not mean that negotiation can be prolific. The PLOs repeated rejection of opportunities for agreement on the concern of a Palestinian state may mean, as conceivably a majority of Israelis now believe, that anything short of a state â€Å"from the river to the sea† will be deplorable to it. If so, negotiations would not be fruitful or even worth pursuing. And it does not matter if Al-Qaeda would be satisfied with just the barring of United States forces from the Middle East—a limited, identifiable goal—if Americans find that improper. In short, if peace agreements must always be reached with ones enemy, it must matter less who that enemy is than what he is willing to trade. The war on terrorism possesses features that influence Washington to operate in direct conflict of accepted norms of international law, and to ignore the deficiencies and the crimes of its cobelligerents. As portrayed by Washington, the new war is a messianic, apocalyptic struggle of irreproachable good against consummate evil. Its inspiration is not the real world with its shades of gray (and certainly, pertinent histories and grievances), but the type of struggles that used to play out in the cowboy movies. Little mention is made of the fact that the major enemy is religious, actually intensely so at times to the point of intolerance, racism, and terror, and not atheist as the previous enemy was. There is no need to try to recognize that this new enemy regards Israel as a state that practices state terrorism and that by supplying military and economic aid, Washington is an accomplice. Or to try to understand that this enemy supposes that Washington should cut off this aid and declare war on state terrorists as well as private ones. Those on â€Å"our side† are seen as being good, or at least considerably better than the enemy (John Gray, 2002). It is a war of no negotiations with the enemy, no summit meetings, no compromise, and surely no need to modify policies to accommodate the feelings and the strategies of the enemy, or examine any just grievances that the enemy might probably have. The enemys soldiers will not be given prisoner of war status and will be tried in special military courts. Similar to the enemies of the Cold War, the enemy in the new war is depicted as sinister, cunning and underhanded. This time—and it is no inconsequential difference—the enemy in fact struck mainland America on September 11 and before, and is expected to strike again. The fear is that the enemy will grow and use weapons of mass destruction against us—nuclear weapons, or more probable, radiological dispersion devices, also called â€Å"dirty bombs† (conformist bombs to which radioactive material has been added). This war too, Washington advises us openly and in advance, is a war of global proportions. It is an open-ended war with the world as its battleground. The enemy assumes two general forms. One part is visible, above ground, represented by evil governments and reminiscent of the old Soviet bloc. So far only four of the enemy governments in the new war have been recognized—the former governments in Afghanistan and Iraq, and two remain â€Å"axis of evil† governments in Iran and North Korea. The other enemy component is invisible, consisting, we are told, of cells in some 50 or 60 typically unnamed countries. These are not the cells of the communist party, but the underground organizations of what Washington chooses to call â€Å"terrorists†. Whatever its form, whether bearing the legality of government or existing underground, the enemy must be destroyed. To do this, we should sometimes act alone, unilaterally. Other times we can act with our allies (Michael Scott Doran, 2001). A Homeland Security agency was set up to fight terrorism at home, with a political friend of the president acting as its head and numerous agencies put under its jurisdiction. There is evidence that homeland security—whose reason is truly defensive rather than offensive—is under funded. For instance, port security has received only one-tenth the amount that the Coast Guard says is desired (New York Times, June 17, 2003, p. 27). I believe, a major weakness in home security is the distressed financial position of state and local governments. Impoverished by a slothful economy and the drying up of federal grants, they have been forced to lessen expenditures not only for education and welfare, but also for police and fire departments. The latter are the first line of defense against terrorism on mainland America, and their risky financial position is related to the federal tax cuts, preferred items in the domestic agenda of the Bush administration which favors tax breaks for the rich as a way of motivating the economy. In his first State of the Union Address, President Bush said â€Å"I will not wait on events, as danger gathers† (New York Times, January 30, 2002, p. A1). Later, he directed his top security aids to originate a fundamentally new national security doctrine and strategy called â€Å"preemption† (New York Times, January 30, 2002, p. A1). The doctrine and the strategy were formed for use against those chosen as terrorist groups â€Å"of global reach† and such states as Iraq that were accused of aiding terrorists and attempting to build up nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction. As explained by Condoleezza Rice, the National Security Adviser, preemption â€Å"means forestalling certain destructive acts against you by an adversary. † She added that there are times when you cannot wait to respond. What she evidently meant is that â€Å"you respond first, before your adversary strikes† (New York Times, January 30, 2002, p. A1). Put in more accurate English, you begin the violence, an act that traditionally has been called â€Å"aggression. † The war against terrorism thus consist of the preemptive strike, in which Washington â€Å"responds† before an adversary, or even a suspected antagonist, initiates an aggressive act. Ingenuously put, Washington seeks to express the notion that â€Å"the enemy† is so evil that aggression is an adequate strategy to be used against him. In the case of Iraq, the range of such strategies has run from attempts to assassinate Saddam Hussein to a full-scale incursion of Iraq. Preemption contrasts simply with the non-aggressive deterrence principle that served both Washington and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Preemption contrasts basically with the non-aggressive deterrence principle that served both Washington and the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War. Deterrence sought to avert an attack by an aggressor, particularly a nuclear attack, by threatening to retaliate. Washington built a mighty nuclear and conformist arsenal with the declared purpose of deterring the Soviets from striking the first blow. The arsenal was planned to be of such dimensions that a Soviet attack would not obliterate it and that Washington could retaliate with crushing nuclear force. The Soviets built what they judged to be a similar arsenal. The George W. Bush administration also abandoned non-proliferation as the way of averting the spread of nuclear weapons, i. e. of preventing their spread by peaceful means only. It has reserved for itself the right to attack those nations that it blames of seeking to develop nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass obliteration. Washington did engage in preventative attacks during the Cold War, two examples being Panama and the Dominican Republic. The disparity in the George W. Bush era is that aggression is now Washingtons announced overt policy. In both eras Washington sustained rightwing dictators who committed state terrorism. Popular support for military action in reaction to terrorism predates 9/11 but, contrary to common non-American perceptions of a belligerent, isolationist and nationalistic nation, mass responses sustained a multilateral approach to terrorism, international engagement, a stronger United Nations (UN) role and building goodwill towards America through humanitarian and development aid. The public also rejected the idea of a basic clash of cultures between Islam and the West. In short, US opinion was considerably closer to that of Europeans than much media coverage on both sides of the Atlantic suggested. Ninety-five percent of Americans, for instance, agreed that it was important for the war on terrorism to be seen by the world as an effort of numerous countries working together, not just a US effort. A Harris poll conducted over 19–24 September found 79 percent saying it was very and 16 percent somewhat important to build a strong international combination of many countries to support us. Eighty-eight percent agreed it was very or somewhat significant to get the support of as many Arab and Islamic countries as possible. Whilst 50 percent said military action must occur regardless, 45 percent held that America should take military action against terrorist organizations in other countries only if the UN Security Council authorizes it. (William Schneider, 2002) Almost all Americans favored dealing with terrorism through multilateral action. The majority preferred including other nations forces in the Afghan war regardless of America being constrained by having to make joint decisions. A strong majority supported using international legal bodies for terrorist trials with a plurality favoring trying bin Laden before an International Criminal Tribunal rather than a New York federal court. The public also showed at least as much support for non-military as military instruments (liquidating terrorist funds, enhancing intelligence, strengthening international law and building goodwill), holding non-military means to be more effective in preventing future terrorism. The majority Americans nonetheless agreed that failure to respond militarily to 9/11 would increase the viewpoint of future terrorist attacks (Michael Scott Doran, 2001). In legitimating Bush and easing – though not assuring – passage of his legislative agenda and judicial appointments for the 108th Congress (2003–4), the results however reflected and reinforced both the priority and preferences of the administration on foreign policy. The common UN Security Council vote in favor of a new resolution on Iraq passed on 8 November, subsequent the prior months terrorist attacks on Bali and Moscow, augmented not only the administrations warnings on the significance, scale and multifaceted nature of the threat of international terror but as well reinforced the Bush administrations faith in anticipatory actions against state as well as non-state actors – through coalitions if probable but unilaterally if necessary. Ironically, almost thirty years after Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. had destined the development of an imperial presidency under Johnson and Nixon, both the enhanced legal right of the president and the vast reach of American power abroad suggested that it had came out in an particularly potent form by 2003–4. Implicit in many European responses to 9/11 was the idea that if Americans would only learn more of the Middle East, Islam and global politics, US foreign policy would change in ways congenial to Europeans and others (the debate here is ultimately less one about extreme or insufficient internationalism but more whether US policies are the ones others favor – a unilateralist America devoted to enforcing stronger environmental safeguards than Kyoto and dispensing foreign aid to Baghdad and Pyonyang would doubtless win plaudits in Brussels and Berlin). But there is as much reason to deduce the opposite. 9/11 strongly reconfirmed the Bush teams approach: military strength as an essential but insufficient condition of assuring the national security of a unique nation, political system and people. Simply when clear and present dangers from state and non-state actors alike appear determinedly more muddied and distant is Americas taking part in global affairs likely to be shaped by anything other than the primacy of its own security. For the USA, after saving Europe twice and productively leading a worldwide anti-communist struggle, another global war is well in progress. References: Jennifer S. Holmes, Terrorism and Democratic Stability (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2001). New York Times for July 23 and 24, 2002 Michael Scott Doran, Somebody Elses Civil War: Ideology, Rage and the Assault on America, in James F. Hoge Jr. and Gideon Rose (eds. ), How Did This Happen? Terrorism and the New War (Oxford: Public Affairs Ltd, 2001), pp. 31–52. Michael Scott Doran, Somebody Elses Civil War: Ideology, Rage and the Assault on America, in James F. Hoge Jr. and Gideon Rose (eds. ), How Did This Happen? Terrorism and the New War (Oxford: Public Affairs Ltd, 2001), pp. 31–52. William Schneider, Long on Character, Short on Details, National Journal, 2 Feb. 2002, p. 350. New York Times, January 30, 2002, p. A1 New York Times, July 22, 2002, p. A1 New York Times, June 17, 2003, p. 27 John Gray, Why Terrorism is Unbeatable, New Statesman, 25 Feb. 2002, pp. 50–3.

Modern Society Mass Media Is Everywhere Media Essay

Modern Society Mass Media Is Everywhere Media Essay Mass media has three major effects on our society. First, it teaches us the signifiers of the culture; secondly, it puts issues into the agenda; thirdly, it offers solutions to binary oppositions and teaches us what behaviors [behaviours] are preferred or at least accepted within the dominant ideology. Thus values and behaviour of youths are strongly influenced by the mass media like newspapers, television, radio, video, and the Internet. Mass media is categorised into three groups, the print media (newspaper, journals, etc.), electronic media (television, radio) and the new-age media (the Internet, mobile phones, and computers). (Uttara, 2000) [5] In this essay, I will focus particularly on free-to-air television programme and the web, how they are not the main causes of moral decay in youths today. First, exposure to violence images through television programme does not cause violence in youths but decrease the probability of being aggressive. However, we often see public pushing blames towards the television programmes. Exposure to aggressive stimuli will increase physiological and emotional arousal, which will increase the probability of violence. (Dr. Mark, n.d.) [3] Thus it is often said that television is a good candidate for the cause of the increase in violence in the society. But, on the other hand, an online document, disagrees that exposure to violence images cause violence in youths and pointed out two theories; Reinforcement theory and Aggressive Cues theory. The Reinforcement theory explains that whether youths turn towards aggressive will depend on the background of the youth. If a youth is brought up in a nasty environment, then the youth is going to read violence images as real violence. The Aggressive Cues theory further point out that whether the youths get ne gatively influenced, all depends on how the media presents these images; if the violence is presented in a justifiable way, then youths can be lead to combative behaviour and vice versa. (Mass Media and Society, n.d.)Â  [7] However, the television programmes shown on television portray violence in an appropriate way. Take Point of Entry as an example; it portrays violence as a negative form for problem solving. William Triplett (2007). [9] agreed that exposure to violence does not cause moral decay in youths, [All babies are born with violent tendencies, which most kids learn to control as they grow older.] Thus exposure to violence scenes is not responsible for the moral decay in youths but depends on the way the youth is being brought up, where parents and guardians come into place. Secondly, with respect to how both television and the net not cause moral decay in youths. Easy accessibility to sexual images does not necessarily cause youths to be sexually arouse. However, through the internet, we often see sources stating society is degenerating because of the ready accessibility in pornography. (Dr. Mark, n.d.) [3] It is said that early exposure to pornography through the web causes youth early maturity, thus an increase in number of sexual activities at an earlier age. Why both the web and television does not cause decay in youths moral is because firstly, the reinforcement theory, a theory that implicates that whether a youth gets negatively or positively influenced depends on the youths background. Children who are sexually abused are going to read sexual signifiers differently than children whose parents demonstrate a loving, caring relationship and explain sexual behaviors [behaviours] to their children. (Dr. Mark, n.d.) [3] Thus the message that had been brought over to youths depends entirely on how the youth interpret it. Besides, having early exposure to sexual images not only prepare the youths with the basic knowledge of sex but also avoid impropriate action done on youths without them knowing that it is wrong. Therefore I conclude that both the web and television does not cause moral decay in youths but actually educates them and prepare them for the future. Thirdly, how television programme and web not cause moral decay in youths, like materialism. Materialism in youths is not caused by the advertisements from both the free-to-air programmes and the net. Through the web, often see people pointing fingers towards the television programmes and the Internet example, Richins Dawson (1992). [6] pointed out that [P]eople view material possessions as a symbol of success and the source of happiness in life. [1] Thus it is said that advertisements motivate consumers to spend unnecessarily; causing youths to be materialistic. However, it is neither the television nor the Internet that causes materialism in youths. It is due to both peer pressure and self-esteem. Many youths feel insecure with their look and status because they feel that they are not fashionable or look good enough as compared to their friends and thus need to depend on accessories to get acknowledged by peers and to feel secure. Deborah Roedder John, and co-author Lan Nguyen Cha plin, (Materialism in Kids and Adolescents linked to Self Esteem, n.d.) [8] have done two experiments with children and found out that the level of materialism is directly proportional to their self-esteem and this proper pride comes from among the peers. In the first experiment, they found that materialism rate increases from the age of 12 onwards but after which declines by the age of 16 to18 years old and this mirrors a patterns in the youths sense of pride. They continued with their second experiment to support materialism is not caused by the television and web. In the second experiment, positive feedbacks were given to the targeted youths from their peers; positive remarks about them, and after which, result shows that the level of materialism decreases simultaneously. Thus it is the peers around who are responsible for the increase in level of materialism and not the television programme or the net. Fourth, with respect to the misunderstanding, that both television and the Internet cause moral decay in youths. Parents and guardians are responsible for the moral decay in youths. A research had been done from the United States: 43 % of teens in the US have used drugs and alcohol at least once. Around 1 million teens have left their homes and half of them live as delinquent (naughty) boys and girls and the other half are drug users. About 2,000 teens from the age of 10 to 19 years old commit to suicide each year. Most of them come from wealthy families that are not harmonious. (Maxi, 2007) [4] From this result, it shows that family without parents or guardians love, care and concern will cause them to become ignorant. Without parents or guardians watch over, teens will be able to access any type of media content, and cause youths to get negatively influenced by the restricted sites or aggressive programmes. Thus parents should be responsible as they have the right and should watch over the programmes selected by the youths; prevent them from watching inappropriate videos and visiting restricted sites. Besides watching over the programmes selected, parents should also communicate more with their child and understands their need and enlighten them to avoid misinterpretation over the content from the programmes viewed. Thus, I conclude that parents and guardians are responsible for the cause moral decay in youths. With the appropriate guidance from young, youths will not misapprehend the message brought over to them from the images watched. Lastly why television and the Internet not cause moral decay is because both online resource and the television programmes provide youths with educational knowledge. In the past, most teachers conduct their lessons using either verbal communication or at most with additional notes. Although teachers are still using this method to teach in the class today, students are learning facts and values from the mass media especially through the net and television programs. (Bukhari, 2006, p.111) [1] In school, the time slot given to moral education is limited, foremost two hours each week, thus youths cannot learn much morals in school. In fact, with more time given for moral lessons do no help improve the morals in youths. According to Cheung (n.d.). [2] [[T]eachers find it difficult to teach values and attitudes while pupils find moral lessons boring.] and state that [TV [Television] has become childs third parent and a first teacher] [Exposed to media messages, pupils may be imperceptibly but strongly influenced by the values behind such media message.] (p.62) Between moral education in class and through virtual images, the web resources enhance youths interest in learning more. [This technological escalation has bestowed upon education proliferation of equipment and materials which can assist in the reorganization and redefinition of educational experiences.] (Bukhari, 2006, p.111) [1] Therefore I conclude that both the television programme and the Internet does not cause moral decay in youths but on the other hand teach them morals. In conclusion, both the Internet and free-to-air programmes plays an important role in shaping youths culture but not the main cause of moral decay in youths. The mass media is an amoral system; the existence of inappropriate media content is because of the supporting subscribers that sustains its survival. The medias responsibility is to bring happiness and satisfaction to the receivers. With the precise preference, youths will not get negatively affected by both the net and television. Moreover, if youths got in contact with these inappropriate shows, parents should explain the correct message behind the scene to avoid misapprehend of content. Both the Internet and television programmes provide educational visuals. Therefore I conclude that both the Internet and television are not the main cause of moral decay in youths.

Founding Fathers Of The Usa :: essays research papers

There are many people who can be considered the indirect founding fathers of The United States. Such people are The Christian Crusaders, Marco Polo, Cortez, Pizarro, and Martin Luther. The Crusades were a series of holy wars fought to win the holy land of Christianity from those who follow Mohammed. Even though these wars failed in the respect of winning the land back, they did triumph in another aspect. The crusaders introduced a lifestyle to the Europeans in the Holy Land that was more appealing than they knew before. Following the wars the Europeans returned and they created a market to deliver the desirable goods they came accustomed to in the Holy Land. This was one reason for the beginning of exploration, and ultimately led to the discovery of America. Marco Polo was a great explorer of his time. He wrote a manuscript on his voyage entitled, "The Voyage of Marco Polo." In this manuscript it said how the Kahn of China lived in riches, used fine china, decorated with gold, and used spices. When the manuscript reached the people of Europe they realized how life could better if they had the materials as did the Khan. This discovery encouraged people to find new places to find these riches. Cortez founded the city of Tenochtitlan, which was created by the Aztecs in central Mexico. He said how the people of this town lived with the riches of a Khan. They city was advanced further than any European had seen in the New World. The ruler of this land, Montezuma, lived in huge room filled with "jewels, precious stones, silver, and an astonishing amount of gold." Soon after his arrival the Aztecs rebelled. Cortez had Indian and Spanish allies and won the battle against the Aztecs. News of the conquest of Mexico created a rush of Spanish to America and led to further settling of the continent. Francisco Pizarro found the empire of the Incas in the Andes Mountains region. This empire, like the Aztec Empire, was advanced and rich in gold and silver. Inca, the head of the Empire and was considered a God, was killed by Pizarro. This lessened the spirit of the Incas and made it easier for Pizarro and his men to succeed among them. This success, again, encouraged the Europeans to settle their own area. One of the best known reformers, Martin Luther, can be considered a founding father of The United States. Luther tried to reform the Church of England, and rid it of Catholic ways.