Ben Carson compared terrorists trying to sneak into the country to a roaming around dog. Carson has said these refugees are as if a dog were to be walking around your neighborhood without an owner, which obviously would never be seen as a good thing. Carson said obviously any normal parent’s job would be to protect their family against this stray dog and hide the kids and try to get help from an animal care program. This roaming dog is said to be the same thing as allowing these refugees into the country without a space for them. It could also be very dangerous as they could be up to no good and want nothing other than to come into our country and destroy us. According to Carson, the security and safety of the American people should be the number one priority and therefore careful screening should be done to all those entering the United States. This is similar to a roaming dog that would not be willingly adopted by most families, where they are not sure of the well-being of that animal.

Despite all the elections that have taken place throughout the years, I never really took the time to really think about people classifying certain states as “battleground states.”  It just so happens that I started noticing these little things when I became old enough to vote.  The more you think about it, the more it makes sense for these states to be classified as a battleground.  More often than not, many states are already pretty decided as to which parties they’ll belong to, but for some, its less clear.  Assuming that every party gets each state that they should get, one’s hopes for president is put in the hands of these select states.  Of course, this is the case for when both parties have already decided on their candidate.  In this case, these individuals are vying for the democratic bid in the coming presidential election.

You can not really classify a battle as truly being a battle if it were not a hard fought one.  Just as how both candidates are looking to lock up what would be a huge step in the right direction for them,  a battle between two parties is fought to ensure that their side gets what they desire.  A campaign is no different than a battle.  No matter how high the stakes,  a county can be just as much as a “battleground” as any state.

Due to the inconvenience of not being to post last night, I was able to find an appropo article on the front page of the Wall Street Journal this morning (Wednesday, February 10, 2016). The headline reads “Trump, Sanders Roll in N.H.” When we think of a metaphor like this, there are many words that can replace the word “roll.” We can state that they slipped by, surpassed rivals or charged on among others. The word “roll” can be associated with a steamroller to help aid readers in understanding that Sanders beat Clinton by a 60% to 39% margin or that Trump (34%) had more than double his nearest rival, Kasich (16%), and the rest of the field came up with 12% or less.

Another image that popped into my head when thinking of the word “roll” is a ball on a hill. It starts off slow but then gains speed and momentum and will not stop unless hindered by another object. This portrays to readers how their respectives campaigns are going and what you may expect for next week in the South Carolina primary. I find it extremely interesting to see what metaphors the press uses explaining certain conditions and what impact they try to have on the reader.

This article accurately emphasizes how Tesla Motor Company will have to showcase and convince investors that even with the declining stock market since the start of the new year, it will still be able to compete with many other traditional automobile companies. As many people know, the Tesla Model S was the first full-sized fully electric car released, which is an extremely significant technological accomplishment. Tesla shares have gone down by 33% since August and now Tesla must convince the “bears” of the stock market that their company is still profitable and changes are being made. This metaphor is used exceptionally well because it compares with the war like metaphor discussed by Lakoff and Johnson, as Tesla Motor Company is ready to go to war with investors. 

Amazon’s Coming After Game Companies

This headline is a great example of metaphors playing into our lives. Amazon isn’t literally coming after gaming companies, in fact, it is most definitely ahead of the gaming companies. But figuratively- Amazon is “coming after” gaming companies. It is chasing them, attempting to attack them, and most importantly, passing them. This metaphor helps show the competition of this market. It is not simply two, or multiple, companies producing multiple products. The market is a fast paced, attack filled, race. And in this particular case, by creating a new interface/product for gamers and gaming purposes, Amazon is figuratively “coming after” game companies. I thought that this headline was a great use of metaphors in real life- and showing how the use of this language actually impacts the way we view this concept in the world.

At Viacom Inc., an international media conglomerate, profits have been falling sharply, raising fresh concerns from investors over leadership roles. Recently, CEO Phillipe Dauman has needed to “Defend His Leadership,” according to the Wall Street Journal. Lakoff and Johnson would smirk if they read this news title. What a prime example of the metaphorical concept “Argument Is War.”

When a business is struggling, and performing below expectations, arguments will arise at the top. Freshly stoked concerns from major investors will need to be relieved, or taken head on. Therefore, Mr. Dauman had to defend his position at the top of the company, realizing those concerns, and assuring others he is the right man for the job.

The significance of using this title explains how the human mind categorizes all occurrences into different realms, such as argument, and then verbally explains it as war. A war where one needs to defend some position that is likely highly valuable, as in the case of CEO. The news reporter might have been thinking for a provoking title to draw attention to his article, but he did not realize why he thought of argument in that light, and the diction we therefore use due to that way of thought.

NY Times Article, February 9, 2016

“A Three-Ring Circus in Finland: Soldiers, ‘Loldiers’ and Asylum Seekers,” written by Richard Martyn-Hemphill, describes the recent events regarding refugees taking place in areas across Finland. This title plays on two meanings of “three-ring circus”, which, according to Webster Dicitonary, is defined as “1:  a circus with simultaneous performances in three rings” and “2:  something wild, confusing, engrossing, or entertaining.”

According to the New York Times article, the recent asylum-seekers in Finland have been facing dual-ended welcomings upon their entrance into the country. In an attempt at “protection” against the political refugees and the uncertainness that they bring for current inhabitants of Finland, a patrol group of “soldiers” has formed, tracing the more dangerous neighborhoods of their cities and watching out for the safety of their fellow citizens. In response to such a formation has come the rise of another group, calling themselves “Loldiers.” Dancing around in clown costumes and making noise, the members of this group attempt to mock and rile-up their strict counterparts. What a sight this must be!

Both parties go to a bit of an extreme to rest their cases; “the clowns declined to break character to give interviews, though the clown who was arrested at the demonstration said afterward that he had made the police laugh when he was taken to the station,” while, “soldiers emerged… over the past few weeks, playing off resentment of the elite, distrust of the Finnish news media, frustration over growing unemployment and fear prompted by a sudden influx of foreigners — all coming alongside accompanying reports of sexual assaults and terrorist attacks across the Continent in 2015.” I feel it would be interesting to witness how the two opposing groups interact, as it seems so far for each to be their own form of non-violent protest. The specific actions then bring into question the activity of each side. Who has a stronger argument? Which act of protest is more effective? Do the clowns accurately symbolize or portray the ridiculousness of their opponent’s’ extremist action? Are the clowns a bit far-fetched themselves?

The third group, of course, being the asylum-seekers themselves, feel despite the two intense opinions of some Finn extremists, they have “nonetheless been made to feel welcome by volunteers and instances of local hospitality.” Good thing, because, of course, there will always be extreme actions taken by those of strong opinion. It’s just funny to see the actual clowns emerge as the chosen mockery of a formal political protest. As the quirky title suggests, this situation is both pretty crazy and entertaining. Obviously not an actual circus, this title does accurately describe the striking events at hand and the interconnected rings in which the three sides have developed: the soldiers, the loldiers, and the asylum-seekers in one. 

Emily Weiss

02.09.2016

The New York Times article, “As Flint Fought to Be Heard, Virginia Tech Team Sounded Alarm,” compared Virginia Tech’s discoveries with Flint’s tap water to an “alarm.” The research team at Virginia Tech initially began investigating Flint’s problems after a professor, Marc Edwards, received a complaint from an associate that lives there. The Flint resident complained about the dirty tap water coming from the sinks and the city’s lack of action. Shocked to hear this, the professor and his team sent out several test kits to examine water samples. The team’s finding were shocking to say the least, they found hazardous levels of lead and other harmful findings. Now armed with this information they sounded the “alarms” metaphorically by publishing the data and spreading the word. This metaphor is important because it helps us understand how much it took for the City of Flint to actually step up and recognize the  problem it had under it’s nose. It’s very shocking that the city refused to take action and stop its residents from getting lead poisoning until this issue become known nationwide. Although it’s taking major steps in working with Virginia Tech University to try and fix the water problem, clearly Flint’s municipality needs some reform, since it takes a University to sound the “alarms” for it to fix serious issues.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/us/as-flint-fought-to-be-heard-virginia-tech-team-sounded-alarm.html?mabReward=A4

“Coming out of the closet” has often been a metaphor for when one reveals his homosexuality. “Being in the closet implies hiding from the outside world, and the act of coming out of it implies the will to stop hiding.” When the Supreme Court legalized same sex marriage last year, many people “came out of the closet” including celebrities such as Ellen Page and Matt Bomer. Even Apple CEO Tim Cook. It is unclear exactly when gay people started using the closet metaphor, but “it may have been used initially because many men who remained ‘covert’ thought of their homosexuality as a sort of ‘skeleton in the closet.'”

In the article, Timothy Kierstead criticized Marco Rubio for his anti-same sex marriage policies. Kierstead pointedly asked “Why do you want to put me back in the closet?” to which Rubio replied “No, I just believe marriage is between one man and one woman.” What he Rubio is implying is that he will not recognize same-sex couples. He will deny them rights and benefits that are entitled to a married couple. Rubio continued: “I think that’s what the law should be. And if you don’t agree you should have the law changed by a legislature.” The law encourages people to come out of the closet. Marcio Rubio wants to put them back.

http://theweek.com/articles/464753/where-did-phrase-come-closet-come-from

After reading the few chapters about Metaphors, and consequently realizing how prevalent they are in our language and minds, I found it pretty easy to find an article that used metaphorical language– its almost everywhere! I think using metaphorical language in newspaper titles is extremely essential in peaking reader’s interests. Certain words may, subconsciously, evoke different feelings that may ring a chord in a potential reader’s emotions. Reading an article that includes the verb “battle”, allows the reader to quickly understand that there was some sort of argument. But the clever use of the word battle evokes more feelings than another word, such as argue, might. Battle makes it sound more serious, and therefor may make someone even MORE inclined to read the paper and find out who? what? where? when? and why? Metaphorical language is extremely decisive and I think its very interesting to realize how prevalent it is all around us.

The headline “Yorkville is Chugging Along” by Kathleen Lucadamo describes a concept that may have some similar characteristics, but not identical. First of all, the article is about a new train station opening on Second Avenue in the Upper East Side. Yorkville runs from 79^th to 96^th Street between East River and Third Avenue. This got people excited that even investors from overseas are buying the properties near the neighborhood. For a long time, residents have complained about the poor transportation in the area. Residents cannot wait for the opening of stores and restaurants. There are even apartment bidding wars. The prices of apartments are rising as well, comparing to 2013 from $1.88 million to $1.95 million.

The phrase “chugging” is usually a train terminology. “Chugging” is a rhythmic engine sound. However, Lucadamo made a twist to it by saying Yorkville is “chugging along”. When I think of “chugging along”, I think of moving forward and being up to speed. In this case, chugging along in a metaphorical sense is making progress when it is not referring to the train. The two ideas are Yorkville and trains chugging. Literally, there will be trains on Second Avenue. At the same time, Yorkville is prospering due to the subway station.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/yorkville-is-chugging-along-1454108366

As many Americans got ready to watch the Superbowl with friends and family, the Broncos and the Panthers were getting ready to play the football game of the year. Who would be the star quarterback in the game, Newton or Manning? Will Manning retire after this? Both questions circulated as the game was set to play, as well as while it was happening. Some felt as though Newton was unstoppable after the season he has had and others thought that the Broncos would be the one to win with their strong defense.

The title of the article “A Storybook Finish Falls Into Peyton Manning’s Lap” has a fitting metaphor in it. The metaphor says that the finish fell into his lap, allowing readers to get a sense of what the article is about and allows speculation into Manning’s future. The way the title starts off by saying “A Storybook Finish”  is most likely alluding to the end of Manning’s career in football. I think the metaphor plays a significant role in this article because of its location, the title, it may interest others to read it and also allows viewers to get a feel for what the article will be centered on. In this case the article was centered on Peyton Manning and the Broncos Superbowl win, as well as what was supposedly to come next for Manning. Is it a storybook finish that fell into his lap or is his story not finished yet?

http://www.wsj.com/articles/peyton-manning-gets-perfect-finish-but-defense-is-star-1454907455?cb=logged0.5024105159100145

People often complain about the media overdramatizing stories.  Every time there is a virus going around the media ponders whether this is the start of the apocalypse and whether we’re not all better off just living the rest of our lives permanently indoors.  The other day, I came across a great, although not immediately apparent, example of an overdramatized news story.  The headline read: “Bush aims to just survive New Hampshire.”

Let’s pretend for a moment that the title of this article is literally true.  Jeb Bush is in New Hampshire right now, and he may die within the next 24 hours depending on how the voters cast their ballots.  You can imagine Jeb taking on a Bear Grylls-like survivalist persona as he fights for his life in suburban New Hampshire.  The article points out that many people do not expect Jeb Bush to survive this ordeal, but Jeb is defiant and insists he will make it out alive against all odds, saying “You don’t have to listen to the pundits.”

All humor aside, this article is interesting for what it tells us about how we view campaigns.  We think of the candidates as gladiator-like warriors brawling in an arena while the country attentively watches.  People cheer for their respective fighter and are always entertained by a particularly dirty fight.  Carl von Clausewitz said “war is merely the continuation of politics by other means.”  Maybe it’s just as true to say “politics is merely the continuation of war by other means”

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/jeb-bush-new-hampshire-primary-218919

The article “Facebook Loses a Battle in India Over Its Free Basics Program” discusses Mark Zuckerberg’s roadblock in his vision of “connecting the whole world”. Zuckerberg, creator of Facebook, has linked over a billion people all over the world. His effort to reach the poor and not-so technology-savy people of India through his Free Basics program was “shot down” by the regulations imposed by the Indian government. The Free Basics program is described as a “no-fee access to a text-only mobile version of the Facebook social network, as well as to certain news, health, job and other services”. Although Facebook claims that its goal is simply to provide access to the internet all over the world, the people of India began to question its true intentions as the program was mostly focused on promoting itself rather than the coalition of telecommunications firms  that were supporting the effort.

The title of the article is a metaphor in itself. Facebook did not get into a physical altercation with anyone, especially not a battle. It was a simple disagreement that fit the metaphor simply because there were conflicting opinions. The title of the article shows our overuse of war terms in daily life. A battle is not a battle anymore, with guns and armies, but a simple dispute.

The second part of the headline, “but See No Escape,” of the New York Times article, “Many Flint Residents Are Desperate to Leave, but See No Escape,” creates a metaphor for prison. Flint residents are figuratively behind bars without an escape from the lead-contaminated city. Desperately wanting to move out, those living in Flint, Michigan face serious obstacles because of their inability leave their hometown. It is virtually impossible for Flint residents to sell their homes because no one is willing to purchase a house that has lead contamination and a poor water system. Similarly, banks are unwilling to give out loans for such houses. Thus, the residents are not able to escape—much like a prisoners confined in cells. It is almost as if they are being held captive by government and private “bars.” The significance of this comparison lies in the fact that the government put these residents in such a horrible situation that is detrimental to their health, and private industries make it impossible to leave this lead-contaminated city. This metaphor is significant because when a group of people have their liberty, autonomy, and freedom restricted, a parallel can be drawn to imprisonment, where the same happens. Realistically, the Flint residents can just walk out of the city; however, on a deeper and more reasonable level, their financial situations and familial relations do not permit them to do so. They are confined to an environment that is dangerous for their health and safety, but do not have any other feasible option.

Roughly about 114 million people saw the Super bowl on Sunday. The two main names that were mentioned were, Cam Newton the quarterback for the Carolina Panthers and Peyton Manning the quarterback for the Denver Broncos. Mostly everyone was watching the game and many people placed bets whether it was a small or large bet, everyone had a team to cheer for.  Unfortunately, the Panthers lost and right after members from the team would have to come out and talk to the press about the game. The media was focused towards Cam. They wanted to know what was happening in his mind during and after the game. As the article mentions, Cam wasn’t too pleased that he had lost the game. He gave out small worded answers as journalists asked questions. At one point, he just left the room. I think it is understand that he wasn’t too happy but at the same he is a professional athletic, so he shouldn’t have just left the room with his other team members and coaches behind.

The metaphor that fits perfectly to this article is “time is money.” Time was a big factor for the Panthers to score some touchdowns against the Broncos. Money was the second factor because not only would the Panthers win the main game but money as well. Each player would receive a large amount of money to win the game. In every sport I think that this metaphor, “time is money” is often used for a good reason.

The article talks about the testimony of rookie Officer Peter Liang who testifies on his role in the tragedy of man shot in the heart. Officer Peter Liang was doing a routine police patrol that simply went wrong. Officer Peter Liang explained that the area was statistically a high-crime rate area, so he held his gun unholstered. Officer Peter Liang claims that something went by to his left, maybe it did, and fired his gun. Officers are required to report any gun shots, but Officer Liang and his partner did not do so. It was only until a cry was heard that they knew somebody was dead.

The metaphor “breaks down” is used to describe the emotional state of Officer Peter Liang. He is a top graduate of the Police Academy. Perhaps down the line of his future, it would’ve been bright. But at the start of his career, an incident like this happens and he became anxious. During his testimony, Officer Liang squirmed. One look at the victim’s family caused tears to stream down his face. His mental state was broken down–his mind couldn’t stay strong any longer. It’s as if he was kicked in the back of his knees and he just crumbled.

Since early 2015 when Donald Trump announced his candidacy for president of the United States of America, he has been mocked and highlighted in the media as a financial mogul who trying to spread propaganda for the Trump named-brand. His name became famous all over the world, and infamously so, after his own idiotic and narrow-minded views on important topics. However, he developed a following, disciples. The title of this article, “CRUZ-IFIED”, published in the New York Post on February 2, 2016 compared Trump’s defeat in Des Moines, Iowa to Jesus’s crucifixion due to the overwhelming, and utterly surprising, defeat in the caucuses. Jesus was once a popular man among the people, had disciples; he restored faith and healed broken-hearted and rallies all over the land of Jerusalem to preach the message of God. He was later challenged by The King of the Roman Empire and sentenced to a public crucifix. Much like Mr. Trump who campaigned and rallies the people who needed change. Trump lost a major caucus to Ted Cruz; henceforth, being “CRUZ-IFIED”.

http://www.businessinsider.com/daily-news-ny-post-donald-trump-iowa-2016-2