Category Archives: Uncategorized

North Korea’s threats are still up in the air. No one still really doesn’t know, when or who exactly will be affected if N. Korea’s threats do pull through. Some of the things I noticed while looking through international sources especially the ones from Asia are that the articles are relatively short.

In The Daily Yomiuri, which is a Japan newspaper, you can tell that they take the relationship they have with the U.S very seriously. In the article I read it talks about U.S Secretary of State John Kerry’s visit to Asia and how well the visit went with Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Both Abe and Kerry agreed that their countries would never allow Pyongyang to possess nuclear weapons. Both countries also agreed that they would continue to cooperate against North Korea. Again in this article you see the relationship Japan and the U.S have, but they do not however speak wrong of North Korea, instead they speak of how they can all agree to denuclearization and disarmament of N. Korea.

According to Aljazeera, North Korea has offered the U.S and South Korea a list of conditions on Thursday, which includes disarmament and lifting of UN sanctions. Compared to The Daily Yomiuri, there is no mention of such offer that N. Korea has put down.

Both in Aljazeera and BBC new articles, there is talk about two ballistic missiles that have been moved to N. Korea’s east coast. There is also a similarity in the ongoing threats that have been occurring towards South Korea, Japan and US bases in the region. Another thing in common is the fact that with April 25 could be a possible date for a missile launch due to the fact that it’s the founding anniversary of the North’s military.

BBC news was the one outlet that I found an article about the letter threat that was sent to S. Korea’s minister. In this letter it accused Mr. Kim Kwan-jin of  “war-mongering” and “infringing the highest dignity of North Korea.” The letter also mentioned that he would be punished for it. There are thoughts that some one from the North could have sent this, as there is one video in the North that showed army dogs attacking mannequins with Mr. Kim’s face.

Again, the articles written in Asia are short from what I have seen. Central news agency article focuses on an interview done on Taiwan’s security and intelligence chief. Tsai Teh-sheng explains as much as he knows about N. Korea and verifies the fact that N. Korea is very unpredictable.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia-pacific/2013/04/201342144159989996.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22260144

http://global.factiva.com/redir/default.aspx?P=sa&an=YOMSHI0020130415e94g00003&cat=a&ep=ASE

http://global.factiva.com/redir/default.aspx?P=sa&an=CNAENG0020130415e94f0005n&cat=a&ep=ASE

By Earl Mays

Nigeria is being plagued by civil unrest as Islamic extremist group Boko Haram continues to stage attacks against the Nigerian military. The latest attack in the city of Baga has caused there to be numerous reports differing on who is to blame for the deaths of about 180 civilians. In reviewing the coverage, a look needs be taken of The New York Times, The Associated Press, Voice of America, Nigerian Tribune, and PM News.

The Associated Press provided the best coverage of the story because it provided information from a number of sources. The reports were able to compile information from the Baga citizens along with statements from military personnel, human rights activist and the United Nations. The second best report was The New York Times article containing sources from a political official, military personnel and Baga citizens.  The third best report was the Voice of America article because it contained multiple sources as well from two University of Abuja professors in Nigeria and the Nigerian U. S. ambassador. The Nigerian news publications were the worst because they only referenced one source. The PM News ran the better story out of the two because it contained statements from the National Public Secretary in Nigeria which provided a fair look as to what took place by addressing the Nigerian military’s wrong doings.

The A. P. provided the best story showing that the military is likely responsible for the death of civilians reportedly using them as “human shields.” This was obtained by interviewing the people in Baga. The New York Times followed in the A.P.’s footsteps in getting lay testimony to match what the military was saying which was “the commander said that contrary to media speculation that hundreds of houses were burnt, it was the explosion from the Boko Haram terrorists bombs that triggered the fire that torched 30 thatched houses in the predominantly fishing community.” This statement was made by a Nigerian Military official General Edokpaye and was taken out of the Nigerian Tribune. The Tribune provided the worst coverage because they only used the quote from the general. This is proven by the other publications to be incorrect from severals sources such as Gov. Kashim Shettima of Borno State, the people, human rights activist, and the Nigerian U.S. Ambassador who claim the Nigerian military set fire to civilian homes and used them as shields which resulted in casualties. The sources also mutually blame both groups for the death toll.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/world/africa/in-nigeria-clash-with-militants-kills-scores.html?ref=africa&_r=0

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/04/24/accusations-against-nigeria-soldiers-in-village-attack-recalls-other-military/

http://www.voanews.com/content/nigerian-violence-escalates/1648704.html

http://www.tribune.com.ng/news2013/index.php/en/component/k2/item/10348-baga-massacre-why-we-struck-jtf

http://pmnewsnigeria.com/2013/04/25/baga-massacre-acn-holds-jonathan-culpable-alerts-icc/

As we know, the use of drone strikes by the US government against overseas enemies has been an ongoing issue within our own borders. We’ve heard politicians and citizens argue over whether or not the process of using the machines is ethical, and if it’s legal or not. We saw debates, a filibuster, and constant articles on the issue. However, what we have seen little of is what is happening to those who are closest to the drone strikes. Domestic news sources for the United States rarely mentioned what drones are doing to civilians of the nations we are bombing. On the other hand, when I took a look at international sources, with a focus on Middle Eastern publications, I found them to be writing much more about the plight of those caught between the US and their enemies.

United Press International (UPI) is an international news publication that is based in the US but serves countries all over the world. In an article about the drone strikes and how they’re affecting relations between the United States and civilians of the attack areas, the publication explains how a once pro-American neighborhood turned against the country because of the drone strikes that happened within their community. They felt as though they were being threatened, and they felt unsafe within their homes, causing opposition to the US for making them feel this way. This firsthand information of foreign civilians’ feelings against the US is something we do not normally receive from our domestic news sources.

This is most likely because they do not want to tarnish the US’s image, or harm national security by releasing the information. This is brought up in another one of my sources, Al Jazeera. One article goes in depth about how publications in the US, specifically the NY Times and Washington Post, waited to break the story about a secret base, which the US used to carry out its unmanned drone warfare, for a long time before publishing it because of national security risks. Al Jazeera criticizes the US newspapers for being irresponsible with information that could have helped those affected by the strikes sooner. They felt as though the publications have the duty to inform over what the government tells them to do.

The Pakistani publication Dawn has been highly critical of the Obama administration and their use of drone strikes. They have run numerous articles detailing their criticism. Of their issues with the strikes, the senseless murder of countless civilians caused by the drones is their number one priority in stopping. As I’ve previously mentioned, they ran an article criticizing President Obama for crying for the Sandy Hook children, but ignoring schoolchildren that were killed during a drone strike in Pakistan. This is the kind of reporting we will only see if we turn to international sources. It is good to see our issues from another perspective, and how our government and its policies directly affect civilians in other countries.

Looking at the international sources that I could find that spoke on immigration reforms were interesting, mainly because none of them went in as much details and analyses of creating a reform in the United States immigration system.

The international sources I researched that really took a stab at discussing immigration legislation were: Jamaican Observer, Business Standard (India),  and the Guardian (UK).

What I found interesting but not that surprising is that foreign sources discuss immigration reforms more from the perspective of the people of their nation more so than, a general reform conversation for all immigrants from different nations. For example, an article in the Jamaican Observer, “Those Proposed Changes to U.S. Immigration Law,” focuses on the part of immigration legislation that would eliminate family visas which would tremendously impact Jamaican families.  It does not make mention of the elimination of family visas for other countries, that would essentially have the same exact impact for those families. “Currently two-thirds of visas are issued for family reasons. Only 14 per cent are issued for employment reasons. By eliminating family visas, at one stroke the migration route for many Jamaicans will disappear. Senators are planning to eliminate the family categories, partly to help clear a backlog of 4.3 million family visa applications, but also making it easier for some foreign workers to enter the country. Those family members could still apply for visas. But they would need other qualifications such as work skills and English proficiency to increase their chances.”

Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/columns/Those-proposed-changes-to-US-immigration-law_13917884#ixzz2RLHxn6zT

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/J-cans-eagerly-await-immigration-reform-in-US_13363373

Compared to the NYT, for example, Jamaican Observer lacks an in-depth look at the entire immigration overhaul proposed by the Senate “Gang of Eight” in terms of its effects on American communities and businesses.

The Business Standard offers business news from cities around India. Its immigration reform news, obviously, centers more on the impacts of an immigration bill on businesses in India.  The article, “US Immigration Reforms to Give Fillip to Indian Start-Ups” states,   “However, leaked information based on the outline the bipartisan lawmakers had released to the media reveal Indian IT companies have to pay a much higher price in order to avail visas, once the proposals becomes a law.” Meanwhile, another similar article titled, “Active Lobbying to Make Immigration Bill More Practical: Premji” says, “The bill also has also proposed certain changes in the H-1B visa norms which are widely believed to affect the Indian IT services companies. For example, it says that if an employer has more than 50 employees or more than 50% of their employees on H-1B or L-1 visas, it must pay a $10,000 fee per additional worker”  So here we have two articles that discusses immigration reform only from two important standpoints: its effects on 1)BUSINESS, mainly the IT industry in different regions of 2)INDIA.  Once again another source is writing only behalf of the people of its nation.

http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/active-lobbying-to-make-immigration-bill-more-practical-premji-113041901067_1.html

http://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/us-immigration-reforms-to-give-fillip-to-indian-start-ups-113041600550_1.html

The Guardian is the only exception here. It does not discuss the lives and futures of immigrants from the U.K. or even that from neighboring European countries.  It does more  of what the NYT, Huffington Post, and Fox News does, which is laying out all the elements of the U.S. immigration reform bill whereby dissecting each part by further analyzing and making sense of it.  The article “Giving Immigrants A Path to Citizenship is Key to US Economic Growth, ” points out that, “The “gang of eight”, a bipartisan contingent of US senators, has just released an outline of their long awaited comprehensive immigration reform bill. The bill concentrates on three broad components: a pathway to citizenship for unauthorized migrants, border security, and America’s outdated visa allocation system. The most important component of the bill removes the threat of deportation for most of the 11 million unauthorized migrants presently in the country.”  Similarly to American news sources, the Guardian fashions its articles to reiterate  a lot of arguments around the parts of the bill and what it will do for Americans and the nation moving forward as well as immigrants and their relatives moving forward in the American system.  In addition what kind of support the bill would receive from Congress and the rest of the nation.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/18/immigration-reform-plan-conservative-support?INTCMP=SRCH

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/17/immigration-reform-bipartisan-path-citizenship?INTCMP=SRCH

Sources: Fox News, WSJ, Huff Post, NYTimes, ABC News

With the recent news of the “Monsanto Protection Act” and supermarket chain Whole Foods announcing their push to display transparent food labels, there has been some debate about genetically modified foods.

On March 26th, President Obama signed into law H.R. 933, the “Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013,”  which includes the Agricultural Appropriations Bill, and will expire on September 30th, 2013. Many food activists have protested and called the provision the Monstanto Protection Act. They have found that it protects biotech companies against lawsuits, even if there is a need to stop GMO distribution because of possible public health issues. Also, Whole Foods has decided to require the labeling of GMOs from suppliers. This makes the supermarket chain the first in the nation to mandate this type of labeling.

While an op-ed in Wall Street Journal presented GMOs as more of a benefit to the public, an op-ed in the New York Times discussed the dangers of allowing companies the freedom to produce GMOs. THe WSJ piece explained why people should not be too concerned with genetically modified food because the FDA and various researchers claim there are no harmful risks. It also describes how it can help poorer nations that need modified supplements  The NYTimes piece discusses that GMOs can have the potential to become hazardous. I found it interesting that Fox News used a photo from 2008 depicting signs from Greenpeace activists that showed “angry or “evil” corn. In the article, they discuss the disapproval of President Obama signing the spending bill. A story in ABC News discusses the controversy over GMOs. The report explains how scientists are developing hypo-allergenic apples. They present a mostly unbiased story, which states both sides of the issue.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/30/obama-signs-bill-that-protects-makers-genetically-engineered-crops-from-federal/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324105204578380872639718046.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/scientists-developing-hypo-allergenic-apples/story?id=18782570#.UW9ukCt34eE

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/02/monsanto-protection-act-tea-party-partiots_n_3000073.html

How would you say coverage on the war in Vietnamn differs from coverage in the Middle East? Do you feel that technology has a factor? Do you feel that location has a factor?

Do you feel that coverage on war is as accurate from writers that have not been involved in a war prior, or do you feel that veterans such as yourself can better cover war?

At the end of your paper you address the existence of posttraumatic stress. What exactly is “the damage, and the danger, lie in wait,” that is not being addressed by the military and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs are failing to address?

You mention The Iliad as being “the greatest work of art centering on war,” Do you still feel this way? What are some tactics you suggest writers take to accurately cover war?

1) Your essay mostly recalls the horror and negative aspects of the Vietnam War. This made me think of how I have heard many current Military men called their service time as some of the best times of their lives. Do you agree with this at all? Could this possibly be a recruiting tactic?

2) If given the chance, would you ever go back to see Vietnam today?

-James Kelly

In your paper Everyday Danger, you clearly highlighted the many negative daily aspects of war.

1) Is there one positive experience you can recall from your time out there on the carriers?

2) Also what was your greatest takeaway from your time spent in Vietnam?

Sophia Williams