A Blogs@Baruch site
I am having an issue uploading my video to YouTube because I am currently staying at my Grandmother’s house to take care of her. Her wifi upload speed is extremely slow and I unfortunately didn’t realize this until a late time, because I’ve never tried to upload on it before.
Youtube has given me a link for the video, but it isn’t finished uploading yet.
When the video is available, it will be viewable through HERE
My apologies for the lateness.
Our artifact this week is Vice President Pence Delivers Remarks at Naturalization Ceremony. In this Video, as the title suggests, Vice President Pence is delivering a speech at a naturalization ceremony. This type of thing doesn’t happen for everyone who becomes a citizen of the United States, but it does happen sometimes. Vice President Pence describes the country as the “American Family” and he says things that make everything seem perfect. He even tells anecdotes about people he knows who have come to the country and accomplished much. I think he does this because of the position he is in. As the Vice President, making a speech at a naturalization ceremony, it would be very out of place to present the United States in anything but a positive light.
“Today we have with us a small business owner, Human Resources executive, a hairstylist, a student…”
– VP Pence
I like that VP Pence was highlighting the accomplishments of the people who were in the audience. It does make the people seem like more that a bunch of people who are trying to become citizens. It shows that they each have their own individual lives, and aspirations.
“You joined the ranks of the freest and most prosperous nation…”
– VP Pence
I do feel as if this quote is a bit ignorant of the fact that many immigrants (documented or not) are discriminated against. People become citizens and are still not completely “free” as VP Pence would like to present.
My views of becoming a citizen slightly match Pence’s, because I do believe that there are great opportunities in our country. Of course, people are on different playing fields (unfortunately), but I think our country presents a great place for people to seek new horizons and a better life. Both of my parents migrated from Jamaica so that my brothers and I could have a better life. My parents aren’t millionaires, and they are of course subject to racial discrimination, but I think our country has given them a great opportunity to create a great life for us. I am thankful for that.
Grade: 4/5
The first two artifacts that we had to analyze this week were music pieces. The first of the two was “American Land” by Bruce Springsteen. The second was “Follow Me” by Moxie Raia. Both of these pieces addressed different reasons for immigration, but I found American Land to have a much more positive tone to it. It more celebrated the possibilities that immigrants have when coming to the United States — or the possibilities they should have, rather.
“There’s treasure for the taking, for any hard working man who will make his home in the American Land”
– American Land
I found that this quote from American Land took on a much happier tone than anything that can be discussed about Follow Me. Here, Bruce Springsteen is describing a rose colored lens view of America. It’s a very fantastical imaginative view of what life could be like here, and it’s very idealistic.
“Momma said there’s a war outside, only the strong survive”
– Follow Me
This quote from Follow Me shows a completely different point of view regarding immigration. I am not positive if this particular line was describing life in the United States or if it was describing living conditions for people before they come here. However, the enter song was more written from the point of view of refugees. This, of course, paints a much darker picture of migration than American Land. I am happy that both of these songs exist, because they tell multiple reasons for people migrating. Some were forced here by slavery. Some were political refugees. Some were impoverished and seeking a better life for their family. Both pieces give a broader view of real life.
The third artifact for this week was “Favianna Rodriguez” by CultureBank. It is an article written about Favianna, a woman who has started a nonprofit business focused on getting under-represented artists exposed to the stories of immigrants so that they may be told through art form. She also has a for-profit business, and that is also culturally focused. It was important to Favianna that immigrants are able to tell their own stories, because if they don’t the media will be able to paint any picture of them that they want. The limitations seem to mainly be financial. Not many corporations and investors are willing to invest in these people that tell these stories that appear to be niche. However, Favianna has her own website where she displays and sells the art pieces, so it was able to give her more freedom to work with the artists.
Grade: 4/5
This week’s material included Sarah Bishop’s “An International Analysis of Governmental Media Campaigns to Deter Asylum Seekers” as well as three videos: “No Way” by the Australian Government, “Stricter Asylum Regulations in Norway” and “Know The Facts” by Gil Kerlikowske. These three artifacts all focused on international media campaigns that are targeted at deterring immigrants from entering any given country in order to seek asylum, or for any other reason.
An International Analysis of Governmental Media Campaigns to Deter Asylum Seekers breaks down the international plan to have deterrence campaigns aimed at immigrants. It was very insightful, as it gives a good overview of the fact that more research needs to be done about these deterrence campaigns. However, Prof. Bishop was able to give us a good idea of a few listed concepts. First was the possible foundations of these campaigns. They find their foundations in the ‘governmentality’ of Nations and and actors trying to gain reach. Sarah Bishop also breaks down the Methods by which these campaigns are distributed. They are primarily distributed through the internet, due to the low cost of just posting a video online or buying a domain, rather than paying for a billboard in another country. Some are distributed through posters but a big one seemed to be the internet. One that stuck out to me in particular was Norway’s “Stricter Asylum Regulations in Norway” campaign because this one was shown on national television. The effects of this on immigrants’ psyche could be catastrophic. The Professor’s analysis also included who was at risk in these campaigns. The Norway campaign in particular was one that showed how much of a negative impact these campaigns can have, not only on migrants, but on in-nation citizens. Within days of this campaign being released to the public, the citizens of Norway began commenting very explicit things about and directed at migrants. I don’t personally see what more I would add to Professor Bishop’s narrative analysis of the artifacts, seeing as each one was thoroughly covered and assessed. There was a clear breakdown of each one, which gave me an even broader understanding of it in a grand scheme.
Australia’s “No Way” campaign video features an Australian man standing in front of a green-screened ocean with a boat in it. This Australian man, who is dressed in military clothing, is seen stating that migrants should “not believe the lies of people-smugglers” because they will steal their money and put their families at risk for nothing. In a strange way, I am not completely against this video by itself, because it doesn’t look racially charged or like it has any bias. Depending on the laws of Australia, immigrants might actually be putting a lot at risk by trying to come in illegally. It does, however severely deter those who might just be trying to seek asylum and they have no other choice.
“Stricter Asylum Regulations” by the Norwegian government starts with a quote that says “Are you leaving your country in search of a job?” I found this particular question to be a bit patronizing but also necessary. I see the objective of the Norwegian government in trying to create this campaign video. Many people might actually be mislead in what they believe seeking asylum is. It honestly would be a tragedy if people packed up their entire families because they were looking for better financial opportunities and they thought that was legitimate reason for seeking asylum. They would be turned away at the border. However, this video in tandem with other forms of rhetoric could easily be taken as simply patronizing and anti-immigrant.
In the “Know The Facts” campaign, the video started off with Gil talking about the shortcomings of the border patrol in past years and how they are attempting to do better that before. I liked the fact that Gil was asked about what message was being sent from this campaign. Gil responded in a logical way and stated that he believes the message that was intended to be sent is actually being received now. What he sounds like he wants people to see is that they can incur great loss by attempting to illegally cross the border. I don’t think what he said was particularly malicious inherently, but he did say “You will be returned” as if that would 100% be the case. That is not the case all the time, and that should not always be the case. That was a bit of dangerous wording.
Grade: 4/5
The “1951 Convention Relating to The Status of Refugees” is a document from the Universal Declaration of Human rights that covers both the definition of a refugee and how to deal with refugees.
“someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.”
-Definition of Refugee
People who are not included in this definition would be those who are being persecuted due to their sexual orientation. Seeing as this convention was held in 1951, it almost makes sense why they were not considered, but it should be amended. I can’t recall the exact time when the United States has called people from the LGBTQ community refugees, but I have seen it happen. This would not serve a specific purpose to the United States. However, there have also been times when the United States has called a certain group of people refugees instead of illegal immigrants. The exact reasons for this are unclear, but it does make the general public view that particular group in a more pitiful light as opposed to a criminal light. I have seen the media refer to Syrians as refugees, but Mexicans are always referred to as “illegals.” It is possible that the DOJ has been pushing those words because we have a larger influx of immigrants coming from our southern border that other places. I don’t know that for a fact, but that is the only possible reason I could think of, which would be sick. Just because there’s a larger number, doesn’t mean that the group should be criminalized.
Define American’s “Words Matter” was a very good video and article, because I believe it addressed something that so many people struggle with today — labels. In today’s United States, the media is putting a label on every possible group. Humans tend to do that throughout history as a whole, but we’ve found that labels have had such negative connotations in today’s age. Words Matter aims to educate people on referring to humans as “Illegals” or “Illegal Immigrants” because that phrasing makes it seem as if the persons themselves are illegal and not the act they might have done. This is especially dangerous because in most cases what they’ve done isn’t even illegal. I learned from this video that overstaying your visa in the United States isn’t even a crime, it’s a civil offense. The way people are being rounded up in droves and pushed out of the country as if they are a virus really makes them out to be felons. The highest charge for illegally entering the United States is actually a misdemeanor. More light needs to be shined on this issue of labelling, because so many people (myself included) are uninformed.
“Justice Department: Use ‘illegal aliens,’ not ‘undocumented’” was a difficult piece to read, especially after watching/reading the Words Matter article and video. This one went staunchly against calling people un-hurtful and derogatory remarks, as the Justice Department implored its employees to refer to immigrants as “illegals.” This is a dangerous rhetoric because it does the exact opposite of what the creators of Words Matter were trying to do, which is diffuse a situation. This document and email only adds fuel to a fire of people who view immigrants as less than human.
Grade: 4/5
This week’s reading, watching and listening materials consisted of “A House Divided By Immigration Status” by National Public Radio, “Baby Constantin” from The New York Times and by Caitlin Dickerson, as well as “Separating Children… Breaks My Heart” by Laura Bush.
A House Divided By Immigration Status focused on the Gonzalez family. The Gonzalez family consists of three children and their parents of course. However, the story primarily covers the children and their immigration status in combination with complications surrounding the suspension of DACA — a law that would allowed immigrants to stay in the U.S. and pursue higher education. There are two sisters and one brother, with the brother being the youngest of the three. Their youngest brother is the only naturalized citizen of the three, and as such he has a great deal of responsibility to do everything right in order to succeed in school, get a good job and support his parents in their immigration status. The radio show focused a lot on Jose’s (The youngest brother) older sister, Abigail because she was dealing with the suspension of DACA and having to think about college options at the time. However, I feel that Jose’s story is really the most impressionable because he, as a young kid, is required to be nearly perfect in order to someday support his family, whether he likes it or not. It shows the great deal of pressure that some immigrant families are forced to deal with when they enter the U.S.
“There’s so much pressure on me. So I feel like all the eyes are on me and the family. Oh, I’m just waiting for you to get – turn 21 so you can have papers. But now that we have Trump, I feel like it’s going to be hard to be able to fix them.”
– Joseventura
The video on Baby Constantin followed a family who are from Romania. This family was being persecuted in their homeland and looking to seek asylum in the United States. The way that they went about it was legal, seeing as they had passports. But, the father and youngest child, Constantin (four months at the time), were both apprehended at the border because they were looking to seek asylum. They were treated as most immigrants at the southern border are treated — as if they are enemies of the country. Constantin was separated from his father at the age of four, and his father was sent back to Romania. Constantin remained in the United States for a number of months, in the foster care system. This situation shows a how little care the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is showing when handling these immigration cases. People are heartlessly being pulled away from their children and forced into prison-like holding areas for months on end. I feel that the author’s approach in using baby Constantin to shine a light on the broader view of immigration as a whole is very smart and useful. The author used Baby Constantin on purpose because he was the youngest child to be separated from their parents at the boarder. This draws the reader in because it is such a drastic case. It was a great idea to focus on Constantin because it is able to garner the attention of anyone who has compassion for other human beings and children.
“I started crying because I didn’t know what to do. I fainted.”
-Vasile (Constantin’s Father), on when they took Constantin from him.
Separating Children… Breaks My Heart is the opinion of Laura Bush, and is written in The Washington Post. It covers Laura Bush’s opinion on the “No Tolerance” policy that the Trump administration has enacted at the United States border. Under this No Tolerance policy, the crime of illegally crossing the border has become a much more severe offense, and one of the main things that the border agents are sort-of required to do is separate children from their parents. The problem with this separation is the fact that children are practically being held at concentration camps. They are help in tents and they live in conditions that no child should ever have to experience. On top of this, the U.S. government isn’t keeping a good track of which children belong to which parents. Laura Bush expresses her disdain for these policies, especially considering the fact that the children are completely innocent parties in this equation. I completely agree with her. Laura Bush’s op-ed reveals that our entire society isn’t siding with those who want to separate children from their parents at the border. There are those on the ‘inside’ who don’t agree with the rhetoric being spewed from our sitting President. Her op-ed shows humanitarian values and sides with the families affected.
“can we not as a nation find a kinder, more compassionate and more moral answer to this current crisis? I, for one, believe we can.”
-Laura Bush
When it comes to my family, My siblings and I are first generation Americans. Both of our parents were born to poorer families in Jamaica. My father was more of a farm boy from the country-side. My mother was from a less rural area, but her family didn’t come from any type of money at all. Neither of my parents were able to afford much as young people. In fact, my father’s younger sister passed away due to complications with asthma which my father says “wouldn’t even nearly be an issue for a family which had even a little bit of money.” My parents saw greater things for themselves in the future and decided to work extremely hard in order to put themselves through school, high school and multiple levels of higher education. I feel that, currently, that’s a standard that will persist for my brothers and I. We are expected to continue working hard and to never stop until we are stable in our careers and able to support ourselves. I wouldn’t say that the story of our immigration is preserved or being passed down per-say, but we were always reminded of the luxuries that we are currently afforded, that my parents didn’t have when they were younger in Jamaica. I do feel as if I will never stop being grateful for what I have because of that. The part of our story that is left out is how exactly our ancestors ended up in Jamaica in the first place. I will never truly know my family’s African origins due to slavery. The farthest back I can trace things are about two or three generations. Things get very foggy after that.
Grade: 4.5/5
For this week’s assignment, we were required to watch “Immigration Nation” Episode 1 on Netflix. In general, I found this documentary to be very insightful, as it gives viewers a look into what happens behind closed doors when it comes to ICE and immigration reform. This particular episode of the documentary showed things from the point of view of ICE officers mainly. However, I found that that doesn’t mean the producers were biased towards the ICE organization. The documentary showed the harsh treatment of illegal immigrants, shady practices of ICE officers and sometimes disregard for human life.
“He wanted to know if it was okay for collaterals.”
– ICE officer referring to detaining unintended targets, while conducting a raid and smiling.
The second video for this week’s assignment was “Think You Know ICE?” — a video created by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. This video was short. It was primarily an advert and informational video about the purposes and responsibilities of ICE as an organization. I found that this video had a much more positive outlook on ICE officers, as opposed to the Netflix Documentary. It more portrayed the officers as heroes, even down to the music. It sounds like something from a Marvel or DC movie.
“Protecting Children from Sex Crimes”
– ICE Advertisement
For obvious reasons, the “Think You Know ICE” advert had to have a much lighter tone than “Immigration Nation.” At the end of the day, the informational created by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is exactly that — an advert created by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. It is in the interest of the government to present themselves in a way that doesn’t seem evil and tyrannical. Simply, because why would you do that?
The Lighting in these two forms of media were vastly different. In the documentary, it took on a much darker tone, versus the advert which was very well lit and had a much happier tone to it.
Because “Immigration Nation” is a documentary, I can’t reasonably expect it to be fast paced and super heroic. But I have to state that it was totally on the opposite side of the spectrum; it was slow paced, methodical, and intentional in every aspect that it presented. I do feel like it gave more of an accurate depiction of ICE. “Think You Know ICE” was edited in such a way that it came off as a fast paced super hero movie. The name of the documentary alone implies that the creator is under the impression that people don’t know much about the organization and is taking this opportunity to create their own narrative.
In the advertisement, there was much narration at all. What you primarily hear is super exciting music. I believe this was done purposely, to make an impression on the viewer. Along with showing all the positives that ICE does, music is a powerful tool to affect the mood. After watching a full hour of “Immigration Nation” and feeling like shouting “Abolish ICE” in my own living room, this two minute advert nearly swayed me in the opposite direction. These two forms of media are both necessary, in my opinion so the public doesn’t have a biased opinion, however.
Grade: 5/5
The first reading assigned for this week was “How Coronavirus Could Make People Move” by Paragraphed Khanna and Kailash K. Prasad. This reading challenged the reader to consider the different reasons people may find to migrate during or following the COVID pandemic. The authors illuminated the idea that many profession individuals might not opt to move into wealthy cities, due to how they handled the pandemic.
“Milan, Madrid, Tokyo and Seattle are other wealthy, modern cities that have nonetheless become virus hot spots. Their appeal to professionals may diminish given their high cost of living and potential under-preparedness for the next virus wave.”
The Covid-19 pandemic is leaving people with the mindset of weighing their options and considering multiple variables. In the case of wealthy cities, like the authors said, professional won’t only consider how they handled the pandemic — it might also lead them to consider how much they’d be paying to live in a place that also can’t handle a pandemic properly.
“America’s smaller second-tier cities and towns might be less dangerous if you’re worried about a pandemic spreading, but they don’t offer better medical care than wealthier cities.”
Here, the authors were highlighting another issue that migrators may run into:
“The many awakenings the coronavirus has brought may well inspire millions of people to eye Earth’s bounteous and uninhabited places as ideal for a fresh start.”
The second reading for this week was “The Importance of Effective Communication While Working from Home” by Charlotte Arnold. This article focused on the lives of two individuals — one who was used to working from home but was faced with new challenges thanks to the pandemic, and another who wasn’t used to working from home at all.
“Normally, he would have a quiet space with monitors, but working from home during the pandemic means that his kids and spouse are home as well.”
The first person, Joseph Rix, has worked from home before. His main problem now is that he doesn’t have his working space (home) to himself anymore. He needs to learn how to coexist with everyone else while being able to get his work done.
I personally can empathize with Joseph Rix, because learning how to handle coursework at home has been quite a task, while coexisting with others in my house who I’m not used to seeing while I work.
“She said that working remotely was a difficult adjustment at first because her job is events-based. She is still planning events but changing the format of in-person events to virtual platforms.”
The second person, Ella Barton, is not used to working from home at all, as she’s an event coordinator. This of course presents a huge issue for her.
I can personally understand this because I’ve had to attend many events (Job, Clubs, Church, Parties) over Zoom and it isn’t the same effect as being in person. I can only imagine how it is for someone with a job like Ella’s
I wouldn’t personally say that we’ve had many positives when it comes to daily migration in New York City if anyone were to ask me. However, one of the largest benefits that NYC in particular has taken from this pandemic has been a greater interest in general cleanliness of our public transportation system. The fact that our metro system hasn’t taken a dedicated cleaning break in decades is pure insanity. I’m very glad we were able to get that. I am not sure if that counts as “Migration” instead of regular transportation, but that has been great.
As far as people migrating, I like the ideas presented in the first reading; that people will begin to consider a wider array of areas to live in during and after the pandemic. Urban population density can lead to much lower living conditions with great disparities between rich and poor.
Now, unfortunately many people will be displaced on a daily basis because of people moving in and out of their communities and constant housing pricing hikes and dips. That might be the largest disadvantage we have.
Being home this much has made me develop much different patterns
I would say the largest problem with social interaction I’ve had has been the lack of interaction with classmates. Not being able to study together, talk and discuss things in person has been difficult. Students try to start group chats with entires classes so that we can stay connected, but it ends up turning into a chat with test answers — effectively making the group chat a crime. These things weren’t as prevalent beforehand.
Grade: 5/5
Narrative Analysis is a type of analysis where individuals dissect a story that is told by way of a variety of mediums. It could be through pictures, verbal story telling, a lecture, documentary or etc. Through narrative analysis, the analyser attempts to discover the motives, values and story that is being conveyed by the story teller. Sonja Foss’ “Narrative Criticism” goes over different techniques that viewers and listeners can use to be more critical of the stories and media that they consume.
Sonja Foss defines a narrative as something with multiple characteristics. One of these being an artifact. An artifact is the means by which the narrative I being portrayed. The narrative must contain multiple components:
Reading Ross’ excerpt before reading “Narrative Analysis Guidelines” document, I wasn’t really comprehending what Narrative Analysis and Artifacts were. The guidelines gave me a better idea of what everything meant.
By searching the term “Migration” on BBC’s website, I was directed to this thread of news reports:
https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/cz4pr2gdg1et/migration
Those are a few examples of artifacts that I could conduct a narrative analysis of.
The Artifact about seesaws at the U.S-Mexican border stood out to me and the following are my questions and answers to it:
Does the narrative encourage a particular interpretation of a situation? – Yes, it gives an impression that the lives affected by the U.S.-Mexican border are completely innocent in this situation. It primarily shows adolescents.
Does the narrative embody and advocate any values? – Not necessarily, because it doesn’t explicitly promote or demote the border or the people involved.
What does the narrative reveal about the culture in which it appears? What does this culture value and/or repress? – It shows that the children who affected by this situation are still adolescent at heart and want to live regular lives of children.
My questions about this week’s theme:
Grade: 4.5/5
The portions of this podcast which mostly impacted me would be the parts where the immigrants are giving their personal stories.
The first of these was a story of a woman who was staying at a migrants camp, right outside the US/Mexico border. The narrator told of the horrid living conditions that the people had in that camp — thousands of people living in that camp with little to no access to running water. Many of the people there take baths in a nearby river or lake. However, the problem is that people travel up into the mountains and forest areas to urinate and defecate. When it rains, the water washes all the bodily waste into the only water sources that these people have, causing anyone who gets in contact with it to get horribly sick. This is reoccurring because they have no choice but to bathe and drink to survive. The woman who was talking about all of this also mentioned that some women get contraceptives to keep on their person, just in case they get sexually assaulted. That way, they can at least ask the assaulter to wear it. I can’t imagine sexual abuse and rape being to prevalent to the point where it becomes common place among everyone and it becomes normal behavior for women to bring contraceptives with them FOR their abusers.
The story about David and his son’s kidnapping with also stick with me forever. It was very alarming that they departed from the US border and within hours they were kidnapped in Nuevo Laredo. The kidnapping problem seems to be extremely commonplace as well. The men who run these kidnapping “organizations” run them like legitimate businesses. They keep track of everyone that they kidnap, how much their families have paid, their pictures and who they’ve released. It has become such a huge issue that the United States seems to turn a blind eye to.
I think they let listeners hear the Spanish speaking individuals for authenticity purposes. These stories seem so extremely outlandish, that many wouldn’t believe what was being told, unless they heard it straight from the mouths of the victims. It is also to capture the real emotions of these victims. Although I don’t speak any Spanish, I am still able to pick up on the tones that these victims speak with, and it gives me a better idea of how dreadful the situation currently is.
I think they won the Pulitzer Prize because they weren’t afraid to tell the true unabridged stories of these people. This is something that is so easily covered up by our government, but they were able to give people a glimpse into the truth.