Censorship And Right To Free Speech And Expression Philosophy Essay

Censorship And Right To Free Speech And Expression Philosophy Essay Right of free speech, one of the fundamental building blocks of a liberal democracy, has often been at odds with the hindrance posed by censorship to the unabated exercise of such right. While the use of censorship as a weapon to stifle counter opinions has indeed been granted socio-political legitimacy in regimes authoritarian as well as liberal, nonetheless, the intrinsic importance of the role played by censorship as a shield rather than a sword can hardly be neglected. In course of this paper, the author intends to emphasize that the very divergent nature of social mores in different jurisdictions and across different regimes worldwide strengthens the necessity for existence of censorship, albeit in varying degrees to suit the differing requirements of the aforesaid regimes. Any attempt to evolve a universalistic practice has scarce little options other than to turn into more of a farcical legitimization of Super Power Hegemonies, owing to the blatant disregard of the said inhere nt diversities that such universalism is likely to enforce. I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. Evelyn Beatrice Hall  [1]   Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If youre in favor of free speech, then youre in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise. Otherwise, youre not in favor of free speech. Noam Chomsky  [2]   When compared with the suppression of anarchy every other question sinks into insignificance. The anarchist is the enemy of humanity, the enemy of all mankind, and his is a deeper degree of criminality than any other. No immigrant is allowed to come to our shores if he is an anarchist; and no paper published here or abroad should be permitted circulation in this country if it propagates anarchist opinions. Theodore Roosevelt  [3]   Free Speech and Censorship A Brief Introduction Free Speech is one of the constitutional guarantees of a liberal democracy a right recognized by all International Human Rights Documents. It is an amalgamation of the Right to Freedom of Conscience, Thought, Choice and the ultimate expression, without being subjected to arbitrary blocks on its enjoyment, in the form of Censorship. Censorship, on the other hand, is the process of imposing checks, direct or indirect, governmental or otherwise, on the exercise of ones Right to Free Speech. Apparently, this phenomenon can be perceived as a blunt curb on ones basic Right to Liberty, but on another plane, it can be looked at in the form of a necessary evil a limitation on ones Human Rights in order to uphold the Communitys Human Rights. The broad social purposes of censorship can be laid down as to ensure that ordinary members of the community are not affronted by the display of material to which a majority of reasonable adults would object, to maintain a level of public decency, and to avoid the undesirable social effects which may flow from the normalisation, by its use in entertainment or other dissemination, of undesirable material.  [4]   This paper aims to look at the interconnected nature of the two, keeping in mind the inherent diversities in different socio-political systems, and varied constructions of the two phenomena ultimately leading to the unmistakable impressions about the questions of Democracy, Politics and Power. In course of this article, the author has accepted as a foundational hypothesis the fact that throughout history and across jurisdictions, it has been noted that Censorship has been more often than not used to suppress counter-opinions be it political or religious; this practice has been conferred political and legal legitimacy in jurisdictions alike, be it the most Authoritarian or the most Democratic of regimes. Suffice to say that more often than not, Censorship has been used as a sword rather than as a shield. However, this does not take away the intrinsic value of the check. Indeed, the need for Censorship is evident from the divergent nature of the social mores, albeit differently in different jurisdictions trying to evolve a universalistic practice would thus disregard these inherent diversities, and would be more of a farcical legitimization of super power hegemonies. Categories of Censorship Paul O Higgins distinguishes Censorship into the following types  [5]  : Autonomous Self-censorship brought about by conscious or unconscious motives, which makes an individual wither to refrain from expressing his or her views or alter the same. Social Discouragement of the expression of certain ideas, either through socialization or sanctions, which lead to the emergence of taboos. Legal Enforcement of restraint by legal institutions such as the government, police and the courts prior censorship or penal censorship. Extra-legal Telephone Tapping, d-notices, limited release of information about defendant at trial. Voluntary When an institution with shared common beliefs lays down upon constituents limitations on what they should or should not say or do, without sanctions Press Council norms, etc. Subterranean When an individual or institution uses powers set aside for another purpose to impose censorship without direct government involvement political censorship. Free Speech and Censorship An International Human Rights Recognition Free Speech is an internationally guaranteed Civil and Political Right. However, this Right is subject to Reasonable Restrictions in the form of Censorship in most Human Rights Treaties and Systems. The main reason that can be attributed to such restraint is the requirement of public policy the apprehensions about the abhorrent effects that an unbridled exercise of this Right may produce. Given below is a list of the provisions from different Human Rights Treaties both International and Regional, which deal with the Human Right to Free Speech, and the operation of Censorship upon it. Article 19, Universal Declaration of Human Rights Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Article 19, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1) Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference. (2) Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice. (3) The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary: (a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; (b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. General Comment No. 10 (29/06/83): Paragraph 1 requires protection of the right to hold opinions without interference. This is a right to which the Covenant permits no exception or restriction. Paragraph 2 requires protection of the right to freedom of expression, which includes not only freedom to impart information and ideas of all kinds, but also freedom to seek and receive them regardless of frontiers and in whatever medium, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice. Paragraph 3 expressly stresses that the exercise of the right to freedom of expression carries with it special duties and responsibilities and for this reason certain restrictions on the right are permitted which may relate either to the interests of other persons or to those of the community as a whole. Article 10, European Convention on Human Rights (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises. (2) The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary. Article 13, Inter-American Convention on Human Rights (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of thought and expression. This right includes freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing, in print, in the form of art, or through any other medium of ones choice. (2)  The exercise of the right provided for in the foregoing paragraph shall not be subject to prior censorship but shall be subject to subsequent imposition of liability, which shall be expressly established by law to the extent necessary to ensure: (a)  respect for the rights or reputations of others; or (b) the protection of national security, public order, or public health or morals. (3) The right of expression may not be restricted by indirect methods or means, such as the abuse of government or private controls over newsprint, radio broadcasting frequencies, or equipment used in the dissemination of information, or by any other means tending to impede the communication and circulation of ideas and opinions. (4) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 2 above, public entertainments may be subject by law to prior censorship for the sole purpose of regulating access to them for the moral protection of childhood and adolescence. (5) Any propaganda for war and any advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitute incitements to lawless violence or to any other similar action against any person or group of persons on any grounds including those of race, color, religion, language, or national origin shall be considered as offenses punishable by law. Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression Freedom of expression in all its forms and manifestations is a fundamental and inalienable right of all individuals. Additionally, it is an indispensable requirement for the very existence of a democratic societyà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ Every person has the right to seek, receive and impart information and opinions freely under terms set forth in Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights. All people should be afforded equal opportunities to receive, seek and impart information by any means of communication without any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinions, national or social origin, economic status, birth or any other social conditionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Prior censorship, direct or indirect interference in or pressure exerted upon any expression, opinion or information transmitted through any means of oral, written, artistic, visual or electronic communication must be prohibited by law. Restrictions to the free circulation of ideas and opinions, as well as the arbitrary imposition of information and the imposition of obstacles to the free flow of information violate the right to freedom of expressionà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦Prior conditioning of expressions, such as truthfulness, timeliness or impartiality, is incompatible with the right to freedom of expression recognized in international instruments. These inherent variations in the level and nature of governmental control over Freedom of Expression also accounted for in the National Constitutions, Statutes and Judicial Decisions collectively constitute the subject-matter of an interesting study, especially in light of the fact that they are also indicative of the extent of democratization and totalitarianism inherent in these countries. Thus, the First Amendment to the US Constitution  [6]  and the Glavlit System of Pre-Censorship existent in former USSR and many East European Countries  [7]  , throw light on two different ends of the spectrum. Somewhere in the middle lies the Brit-ECHR system of giving a bag full of Rights, and then putting sufficient, and very often, more than sufficient, restrictions on their enjoyment. These variations are the results of the systems of governance and the Historical Evolution of Free Speech in these national jurisdictions inasmuch as they account for an enormous blow upon those who tend to argue about the Universalistic Nature of International Human Rights. Censorship and Free Speech A Nexus with Questions of Power, Authority, Liberty and Democracy: A Comparative Critique of World Systems and Disputes of Theories John Locke, one of the Founding Fathers of the Liberal View, advocated a Minimalist State intervention regime in his Life, Liberty and Property, which, according to him, were inalienable rights.  [8]  John Stuart Mills Theory of Marketplace of Ideas stated that if we suppress an opinion, it may turn out to be true. To assume otherwise is to assume that we are infallible, which is not the case  [9]  . According to O.W. Holmes, the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried outà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ in Abrams v. U.S.  [10]  where, in his dissenting judgement, he also laid down that a governmental regulation on Free Speech is only justified where it is used to dispel a clear and immiment danger. Otherwise, the market should be left to determine the veracity of the assertion. This opinion of Holmes was later accepted by the US Supreme Court whe n it overturned Abrams  [11]  and upheld Holmes Clear and Imminent Danger Theory in Brandanburg v. Ohio  [12]  during the Vietnam War. According to Prof. Rodney O. Smolla  [13]  , Free Speech Serves Five Purposes in a Democracy: (a) As a means of participation, (a) Serving the purpose of Truth, (c) Facilitating majority rule, (d) Providing Restraint on Tyranny and Corruption by keeping the Government in Check, and (e) ensuring stability by allowing minority voices to be heard.  [14]   However, the Marketplace of Ideas rationale for Freedom of Speech has been criticized by scholars on the grounds that it is wrong to assume the assertion that all ideas will enter the marketplace of ideas, and even if they do, some ideas may drown out others merely because they enjoy dissemination through superior resources. The marketplace is also criticized for its assumption that truth will necessarily triumph over falsehood. It is visible throughout history that people may be swayed by emotion rather than reason, and even if truth ultimately prevails, enormous harm can occur in the interim. Alan Haworth, in his book Free Speech (1998)  [15]  , has suggested that the metaphor of a marketplace of ideas is misleading. He opines that Mills classic defence of free speech does not develop the idea of a market (as later suggested by Holmes) but essentially argues for the freedom to develop and discuss ideas in the search for truth or understanding. In developing this argument, Hawor th says, Mill pictured society not as a marketplace of ideas, but as something more like a large-scale academic seminar. This implies the need for tacit standards of conduct and interaction, including some degree of mutual respect. That may well limit the kinds of speech that are justifiably protected. Political Extremism and Censorship This is an issue that is very essential and relevant in the contemporary world the question whether one should allow a platform for Fundamentalist and Extremist Organizations like the Al Qaida to propagate freely their views through their Private Television the Al Jazeera TV, or ought there be governmental curbs on such broadcasting. An interesting debate on this subject had been voiced in the May, 1994 issue of The Guardian  [16]  , where two noted columnists argued on a similar issue related to providing a platform to the extremist British Nationalist Party. According to Seamus Milne  [17]  , who advocated a curb on the BNPs Right to Free Speech, the BNP necessarily violates the Human Rights of a large section of the population, and, by doing so, it has justified the abridgement of their Right to Freedom of Speech. The oxygen of publicity, if given to them, would help the spread of racism. On the other hand, Polly Toynbee  [18]  argued that the banning of a particular group may set a precedent by which any group that does not conform to a norm is rendered prone to a similar ban. According to him, Free Speech is not absolute but we must be free to speak our political minds, and listen to political opinions of others, however nasty.  [19]  This statement of his has an uncanny resemblance to the Marketplace of Ideas Theory, thereby highlighting its relevance in the contemporary world. Use of Offensive Language on College Campuses The issue was the imposition of a Speech Code banning the use of offensive language at Stanford University. According to Gerald Gunther  [20]  , Speech should not and cannot be banned simply because it is offensive to substantial parts of, or a majority of, a community. The refusal to suppress offensive speech is one of the most difficult obligations the free speech principle imposes upon all of us; yet it is also one of the First Amendments greatest glories indeed, it is a central test of a communitys commitment to free speech. However, Charles Lawrence  [21]  opined that restrictions reflected genuine demands from students from minority ethnic groups, who had through harassment been denied the Right to Equality of Education. Being a supporter of the Hobbesian Principle of a Right for a Citizen to expect from the State Security of Person, Lawrence was thus advocating the same guarantee from a Welfare State, be it at the cost of restricting the offensive operation of some others unrestricted Right. Pornography, Sexuality and Obscenity an analysis of the Changing Voices This is an area where views and opinions have a range encompassing a whole spectrum. For some, pornography is a threat to a moral order, whereas for others, it is a mark of emancipation from bondages. The Libertarians seek to uphold individual freedoms and oppose state interference. According to then, States authority to make laws is only pertaining to the Public Sphere and not on the individual choices and preferences in the Private Sphere (The First Amendment Assertion has been illustrated by Justice Thurgood Marshall in Stanley v. Georgia  [22]  where he says that if First Amendment means anything at all, it means that a state has no business telling a man, sitting alone in his own house, what books he must read or what films he must watch. This liberal fundament was also supported by the Wolfendon Committee Report in the UK. (H.L.A. Hart had also been a known supporter of a similar view and had argued for a separation of the private and the public spheres  [23]  ). Sexual repression is itself more damaging than sexual openness, according to the Libertarian view. However, according to Conservatives, Pornography is a threat to moral order and stability, and the material itself is disgusting and unworthy of publicity. Moreover, the Conservatives believe that State is empowered to pass laws controlling both Public and Private activities, as has been evident from Devlins dissent to the findings of the Wolfendon Committee  [24]  . If one looks at the Feminist Movements, and the jurisprudence emerging there from, history shows changes and evolutions at every stage. Traditionally, feminists have supported the liberal cause, celebrating the need to discover the body and sexuality as a tool of emancipation from bondages. In the 1970s, Realist feminists stressed that pornography was not only damaging to womens status in society, but also dangerous to their safety. Thus, pornography not only provides the foundations for, but also is, violence against women.  [25]  Hence, according to the Liberal Feminists, pornography is not essentially a question of mere censorship, but a question of the womens Human Rights as a whole.  [26]  However, the 1990s have seen a shift in the trend. Avedon Carol  [27]  has claimed that women are suppressed not because of pornography but because of censorship. Wendy McElroy  [28]  has warned that anti-pornography legislations might result in a backlash against Feminism. Jea n Seaton  [29]  has suggested that the Realist feminists run the risk of losing touch with the roots of feminism, in the Civil Liberties and emancipatory movements. Melissa Benn  [30]  argues that the problem is one of structural sexism, and censoring pornography would not solve the problem. Instead, anti-sexist laws need to be established. The underlining philosophy behind the divergent philosophies is the fact that while one looks at the issue of censorship, one can look at it from two distinct planes the Moralist plane, identifying the evils contained in what needs or needs not to be censored; and a Causalist plane  [31]  , which would need to look at the effects of the commission or omission of Censorship. The decades of the Feminist Movement indicated drastic shifts in views, from the Moralist Plane to the Causalist Plane, and vice versa thereby leading to the wide divergence in opinions. The Use or Non-Use of Censorship in Different Regimes This section is a skeletal overview of the existing politico-judicial approaches towards Free Speech and Censorship on select issues in the US, UK, former USSR and India, which would adequately throw light on the kind of governance and degrees of guarantee of Human Rights in the individual regimes. Interesting to note, the instances referred to would be more of acts of a Subterranean Censorship imposition of Censorship through means not directly aimed at doing so. Issue USA UK Former USSR India Speech that may lead to Rioting, i.e. localized violence Edwards v. South Carolina  [32]  : Clear and Present Danger Test. New York Times v. US  [33]  : Prior Restraints on Speech and Press are constitutionally very suspect. Wise v. Dunning  [34]  : Anyone who utters something that is likely to lead to violence can be punished. Street Corner Orator? Anti State Speeches? Unheard of. Reports about Soviet Police disallowing observance of Human Rights Dayà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦tells a taleà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ A/19 (2): Public Order a ground for imposing restrictions. S/144, CrPC a tool for imposing preemptive indirect censorship. Counter Doctrines and Subversive Groups Anti-Communist Activities in the 40s supported by legislations like the Smith Act and Supreme Court Decisions like Dennis v. US  [35]  where the evil produced by such Speech was Grave and not Improbable. However, situations changed post-Brandanberg. Concept of seditious libel R v. Aldred  [36]  . Any incitement to use force against State was seditious libel. Soviet Criminal Code punished Agitation or propaganda carried out with the purpose of subverting or weakening the Soviet Regimeà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ essentially, anti-Communist Campaigns. Preventive Detention Act, s/124A of the IPC and, on a broader political plane, imposition of A/356 on grounds of Breakdown of Constitutional Machinery. Criticism of the Government and Public Officials New York Times v. Sullivan  [37]  : No punishment if actual malice cannot be proved. Initially, strong Contempt of Court Jurisdiction, even in case of Fair Criticisms of Judicial procedures and decisions R v. Editor of New Statesman  [38]  . However, standards of stringency notably lower now. No difference between criticism and subversion hence, repression was the result. Sullivan standards not followed. Contempt and Privilege very strong tools in the hands of the State. Moreover, imposition of MISA and Repressive Press Laws during Emergency. Sexually Oriented Materials Miller Test  [39]   liberal standards. Hicklin Test  [40]   Rigidity. Strict pre-Censorship of Pornographic Material by the Glavlit. Largely influenced by Hicklin gradual liberalization post Bandit Queen. The obvious conclusion that emerges out of an analysis of this Table is that the US is the Country which, through the Constitutional Assertion of the First Amendment and a liberal, yet vigilant judiciary, and a Democratic Governance system, been the highest protectors of the Free Speech Rights. Admitted that the events of 9/11 have forced the US to make more stringent laws often aiming to curb Personal Liberties, but still, it has been a guiding light in the direction ahead, at least it seems so. But, how true is this assertion? Is it, like much other propaganda, only an ideological and hegemonic whitewash of the only surviving superpower? The list of incidents below, which deals with Governmental acts of subversion of the voice of conscience in the US and other Western Countries is self-explanatory  [41]  : Voice of America, a federally supported international broadcasting organization, decided not to air a story that included parts of a rare interview with the leader of Afghanistans ruling Taliban, Mullah Mohammed Omar. Those who deny that the military occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip by Israel, its use of extrajudicial executions against Palestinian gunmen, the Israeli gunning down of schoolboy stone-throwers, the wholesale theft of Arab land to build homes for Jews, is in some way wrong would like all criticism of Israel to be labeled as anti-Semitic thus branding the critics statements as heinous and unworthy of consideration. Military autopsy reports provide indisputable proof that detainees are being tortured to death while in US military custody. Yet the US corporate media are covering it up. Dr. Elsebeth Baumgartner currently faces up to 109 years in prison in the U.S. state of Ohio for her criticism of, and accusations of corruption against, government officials in Ohio. In Canada, school teachers have limited freedom of speech, both on and off the job, regarding certain issues (e.g., homosexuality). Chris Kempling was suspended without pay for writing letters, on his own time, to a local newspaper to object to LGBT-related material being introduced into public schools. Kempling pursued the freedom of speech issue all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada without success. By the Official Secrets Act, the London government has the power, throughout the UK, to order that certain subjects are abs

What aspects of Charlotte Brontes Essay -- English Literature:

What aspects of Charlotte Bronte's What aspects of Charlotte Bronte's depiction and use of the character of Bertha Mason are most clearly illuminated by Jean Rhys' depiction and use of her parallel character of Antoinette? In Wide Sargasso Sea, written by Jean Rhys in the 1960’s, is a radical critique of the context of English Imperialism and male dominated society within which Charlotte Bronte wrote Jane Eyre. In order to both expose and oppose the parallels inherent in Jane Eyre, Rhys intertwines in her novel the two reading positions of feminist and postcolonialist criticism. Rhys demonstrates how both social and narrative conventions mandate that certain categories of women must be devalued if other categories of women are to assume importance. She does this by exposing to the reader how Charlotte Bronte in Jane Eyre, in order for her reader to give Jane an assumed importance, devalued by the Creole character Bertha; showing her to be made and giving us Jane’s description of her as â€Å"[she] seemed†¦a woman†¦ [she] reminded me†¦ [of] the foul German Spectre – the vampire† and Rochester’s comment that â€Å"the lunatic is both cunning and malignant.† Rhys, it seems was politically inspired to rewrite Jane Eyre and write back to the empire. Wide Sargasso Sea is a prequel to Jane Eyre which was written British Empire was at its peak. Jane Eyre was a representation of England to the English. Rhys decided to write back, because of being of white West Indian descent herself, she was offended by the representation of the mad Creole in the novel. Although Rhys says that she is not a conscious feminist her novels are always written from a female perspective and in Wide Sargasso Sea, the male character is exposed... ... express and put forward quite assertively. Christophine in particular, is not afraid to tell Antoinette’s husband exactly how she feels towards him/ On page 132 for example, Christophine says ‘I tell her so’†¦always it don’t work for beke. Always it bring trouble†¦so you send me away and you keep all her money. And what you do with her?† and later on further exposes and questions assumptions and values that Antoinette’s husband when she tells him â€Å"Read and write I don’t know. Other things I know.† So we can see the many ways in which Rhys uses the intersections of feminist and postcolonialist reading positions and criticism to expose certain aspects of character. Whether it be through two narrators, leaving one unnamed, showing many different sides to a story and emphasising and exposing the otherness of each are amongst many other narrative strategies.

Business Com

Once I had gone to visit a friend in the next town which is along a major highway and stretched about km. He asked me to a light at the second bus stop In the town. When the bus I took got closer to the town, I Informed the bus conductor where I will alight. He gave a node amidst a loud music from the stereo In the bus. About an hour later, I called the conductor to find out If we had reached the second bus stop. He Immediately asked the driver to stop for me to alight after apologizing to me.He said e never heard the request I made earlier therefore we had passed the second bus stop about half an hour ago. I had to get down at that point and find away to my friend's house. Unfortunately the ‘second bus stop' my friend meant was at the eastern side of the town, which was close to my town. Unfortunately I entered the town through the western side since I was corning from a trip In the western part of the country. This was explain to me by a Taxi driver who drove me for additiona l 2 hours to the right â€Å"Second bus top† to meet my friend who had waited all day.Apart from the loud music from the stereo, the bus was overloaded therefore noise was in the car. After analyzing my experience there are some points I found which could be barrier for healthy communication and analysis of which are needed before coming up with ways to eliminate or minimize them. These barriers may be classified as follows – 1. Environmental Barriers – This is similar to physical noise, and could be in the form of disturbing sounds, an overcrowded bus, poor services and acoustics, all f which may hamper the ability to pay attention to and understand the message.When I made a request to alight, the conductor did not hear me because of the loud noise from the stereo and how congested the bus was. This barrier can be eliminated by bringing down the volume of the stereo in the bus to the tolerable level to facilitate healthy communication between conductor, driver and passengers. Secondly overloading can be avoided in buses to prevent distraction and create a serene atmosphere where one can freely commune with one another. 2.Individual Barriers – A major barrier to interpersonal communication is a tendency to judge, evaluates, approve or disapprove of the views of another person. This happens particularly in situations where we have strong feelings about something. In such cases, we tend to block out the communication and form our own viewpoints. When I Inform my friend about visiting him, he Immediately assumed I will be coming through the eastern entrance of the town. Secondly when the conductor nodded I concluded It was a sign of having had my request to alight.This barrier can be eliminated If we can take objective Instead of subjective stand when communicating with people. We can do this by asking few additional or open-end questions and allow people to express themselves and also listen to them rather than Interrupt their speech or complete sentences for them for example. Feedback can also help to confirm If those we are communicating with actually got our Intended meanings attached to the message. Business Com By bendy Q. L Describe Any Situation In Your Experience Where The Communication Went Wrong.Analyze The Situation By Pointing Out The Type Of Barrier To Communication stretched about km. He asked me to a light at the second bus stop in the town. When the bus I took got closer to the town, I informed the bus conductor where I will alight. He gave a node amidst a loud music from the stereo in the bus. About an hour later, I called the conductor to find out if we had reached the second bus stop. He immediately asked the driver to stop for me to alight after apologizing to me. He said friend's house.Unfortunately the ‘second bus stop' my friend meant was at the own through the western side since I was coming from a trip in the western part of Barriers – A major barrier to interpersonal commun ication is a tendency to Judge, inform my friend about visiting him, he immediately assumed I will be coming concluded it was a sign of having had my request to alight. This barrier can be eliminated if we can take objective instead of subjective stand when communicating allow people to express themselves and also listen to them rather than interrupt confirm if those we are communicating with actually got our intended meanings

The Great Gatsby †Unchained Love

The Great Gatsby – Unchained Love Free Online Research Papers Imagine being lost into a relationship where you could not truly show your love for someone due to their prior engagement. Now think of that same relationship if it were mostly non existent and just remained a figment of what could happen. In F. Scott Fitzgeralds The Great Gatsby, a man builds his life, his meaning, and his value as a person for the name of an unchained love for a married woman. The story itself shows symbolism of the corruption of marriage rather then the structure of love. Jay Gatsby is a man who knows right from wrong but teeters on the line of each. Rising from poverty to a life of wealth, he makes it into a lavish lifestyle from the production and selling of alcohol as well as other organized crime acts. But with his drive for riches comes a deeper drive for love. Jay has a deep infatuation, almost an obsession, with a woman he met as a young soldier named Daisy. In order to get better acquainted with Daisy, Gatsby lies about his past, his family, and his upbringing in order to win her name. She promises him that upon his return from World War I that she will marry him, only to in turn Tom Buchanan. Now before the actual plotline of The Great Gatsby begins, conflict has already risen. Jay Gatsby has created an illusion for himself to project unto his character, to only be put into a second place position behind another man. The thin line that Gatsby stands on is now consumed more so by doing wrong as his lies persuade him into a life of crime. Gatsbys life spirals into a series of fortune as his falling for crime and love make deepen his riches. What has arisen now is the potential question of if the love he had for Daisy is what drove Gatsby to crime, lies, or success. Perhaps in some hidden meaning, his love drove him to all three and maybe even a quarter of madness. His passion for Daisy sparked a relationship that could have been, but hi s willingness to get her back perhaps is what completely develops the focus point of the story thus calling for a symbol of ironic love in the hands of fortune. He stretched out his arms toward the dark water in a curious way, and far as I was from him I could have sworn he was trembling. Involuntarily I glanced seawardand distinguished nothing except a single green light,minute and far away, that might have been the end of a dock.(Fitzgerald 26) The color green is heavily emphasized in the story for many reasons. Green is well known as the color of envy. The character of the abusive Tom Buchanan would display an envious nature during the rightful suspicion of his wife Daisy and Jay Gatsbys possible infidelity. Toms green with envy nature drives him to convince Mr.Wilson to wrongfully kill Gatsby after the death of his wife Myrtle. Green would also be known as a symbol for greed in this story. In some format the greed of Jay is what allows him to be put in a predicament of danger leading to his ultimate downfall. Had he been more reasonable with his relationship with Daisy then much of the turn of events in the story would have been different and possibly lead to his dream of being with Daisy. Green is also known as a color of healing. Reflecting for Daisy, she could possibly be healing from a disasterous relationship with Tom or could be healing from the relationship that once was with Jay Gatsby. In either scenario,she is seen as not willing to have much of a stand on either as she is driven by others decisions and allow them to reflect her own thoughts and values. In conclusion, the belief system that love is what forever produces happiness shows fault in The Great Gatsby. A mans truly driven obsession for a woman drives him into disowning his family, a life of crime, as well as his own death. The woman in turn is somewhat allowed to live happily ever after with her husband. In hinesight as both Daisy and Tom lost the people they were unfaithful with, perhaps it is seen as a bridging of their own relationship and what was burroughed to make it into a potential harness of a lost willingness to feel open and honest with the other partner.As all three characters own troubling natures eventually draw their own conclusions, a corrupted marriage allows the love of Jay Gatsby and Daisy Buchanan to arise, only to be driven down into a peridox of envy,hardships, and a cruel twist of fate. Research Papers on The Great Gatsby - Unchained LoveThe Masque of the Red Death Room meaningsHonest Iagos Truth through DeceptionCapital PunishmentComparison: Letter from Birmingham and CritoMind TravelWhere Wild and West MeetAnalysis Of A Cosmetics Advertisement19 Century Society: A Deeply Divided EraThe Spring and AutumnThe Effects of Illegal Immigration

Tibetan Silver

Tibetan Silver Tibetan Silver is the name given to the metal used in some jewelry available online, such as on eBay or via Amazon. These items typically ship from China. Have you ever wondered how much silver is in Tibetan Silver or about the chemical composition of Tibetan Silver? Would you be surprised to learn that this metal can be dangerous? Tibetan Silver is a silver-colored alloy consisting of copper with tin or nickel. Some items described as Tibetan Silver are cast iron that has been plated with the silver-colored metal. Most Tibetan Silver is copper with tin rather than copper with nickel because nickel causes skin reactions in many people. Health Hazards Ironically, the metal often contains other elements that are much more toxic than nickel. It is inadvisable for pregnant women or children to wear items made with Tibetan Silver because some of the items contain high levels of dangerous metals, including lead and arsenic. eBay issued a buyer warning so that bidders would be aware of the metallurgical testing conducted on Tibetan Silver items and the possible toxicity of these items. In six of seven items that were analyzed using x-ray fluorescence, the primary metals in the Tibetan Silver were actually nickel, copper, and zinc. One item contained 1.3% arsenic and extremely high lead content of 54%. A separate sampling of items revealed comparable compositions, with trace amounts of chromium, aluminum, tin, gold, and lead, although in that study, all of the samples contained acceptable levels of lead. Note that not all items contain toxic levels of heavy metals. The warning for pregnant women and children is intended to prevent accidental poisonings. Other Names Sometimes comparable metallurgical compositions have been called Nepalese silver, white metal, pewter, lead-free pewter, base metal, or simply tin alloy. In the past, there was an alloy called Tibetan Silver that actually did contain the element silver. Some vintage Tibetan silver is sterling silver, which is 92.5% silver. The remaining percent could be any combination of other metals, although usually, it is copper or tin.

GENSTAT Linear Statistical Modelling Math Problem

GENSTAT Linear Statistical Modelling - Math Problem Example The histogram for the folate levels appears also to satisfy the assumption of normality. However, the variances for the three groups do not satisfy the assumption of homogeneity. The variance of Group I is very large compared to the variances of Group II and III. (c) Regardless of what you concluded about the assumptions for analysis of variance, use the GENSTAT analysis of variance commands to test the hypothesis that ventilation treatment has no effect on mean red cell folate level. Include appropriate GENSTAT printout to support your conclusions. ***** Analysis of variance ***** Variate: folate Source of variation d.f. s.s. m.s. v.r. F pr. ventil 2 15516. 7758. 3.71 0.044 Residual 19 39716. 2090. Total 21 55232. ***** Tables of means ***** Variate: folate Grand mean 283.2 ventil I II III 316.6 256.4 278.0 rep. 8 9 5 *** Standard errors of differences of means *** Table ventil rep. unequal d.f. 19 s.e.d. 28.92X min.rep 25.50 max-min 21.55X max.rep (No comparisons in categories where s.e.d. marked with an X) The results of ANOVA test show that there is a significant difference between the three groups. Ventilation has an effect on mean red cell folate levels. Furthermore, the probability of F was 0.044, which is less than the alpha level, 0.05. (d) (e) Produce appropriate residual plots to check further the appropriateness of the analysis of variance model. Comment, in the light of these plots, on the adequacy of the model. ANSWER: The histogram...The measures were independent of the researcher's judgment. The histogram for the folate levels appears also to satisfy the assumption of normality. However, the variances for the three groups do not satisfy the assumption of homogeneity. The variance of Group I is very large compared to the variances of Group II and III. (c) Regardless of what you concluded about the assumptions for analysis of variance, use the GENSTAT analysis of variance commands to test the hypothesis that ventilation treatment has no effect on mean red cell folate level. Include appropriate GENSTAT printout to support your conclusions. The results of ANOVA test show that there is a significant difference between the three groups. Ventilation has an effect on mean red cell folate levels. Furthermore, the probability of F was 0.044, which is less than the alpha level, 0.05. The histogram shows that the residuals are not normally distributed. Also, the normal plot shows that the residuals do not fit a straight line. In the light of these observations, it can be said the model is not adequate. The assumptions for the use ANOVA are violated. The model included only 4 of the original 9 variables. It discarded the other 5 explanatory variables. With these 4 variables, the equation can account for the observed data. This is shown by the fact that the mean of the residuals for the model is 0.

Discussion Question Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Discussion Question - Term Paper Example He will surely give you some solid data to prove his point that overpopulation is the main cause of all the problems of the third world. He will emphasize that because of the use of scientific methods the death rate among the adult has reduced and the mortality rate of the new born is also lowered down thus increasing the number of the inhabitants of the earth dramatically. He is worried as his calculation tells him that if population continues to grow on the same speed there will be no space on earth to stand. He thinks all the problems that he is facing like price hike or unemployment is the direct result of the overpopulation. On the other hand Sudanese student is not worried about the population of the world. He has some immediate problems to attend. He thinks that his country has a lot of resources but the incompetent rulers are not using them wisely and justly. The political instability is playing with his country. He thinks that on personal level, on national level and on inte rnational level we are losing contentment. We want to have more and more and we don’t share with our poor neighbors.