Gas Guzzlers: gaining consumer interest????

This month gas prices are a dollar lower than how they were a year ago. Some experts say that the gas prices will climb extensively as soon as the government starts to work economic recovery. And because of this delayed lowering in gas prices, people are ignoring compact and sub compact cars, to a buy limited edition vehicle like the Jaguar XJL-a car that costs $105,000. This 470 horse power car puts out seventeen miles per gallon and they are being sold out in a matter of minutes in special online sales. People who fancy Ford F-Series trucks are taking advantage of these online sales as well. In September of last year there was a three percent increase in the number F-Series trucks being sold. Other companies have seen huge bumps in their SUV sales by 23 percent in that same year.

Because of the lowering gas prices, consumers seem to have forgotten that gas was at an all time high in 2008. I feel there’s no need to have a clunker now, you’re going to have to pay more money to keep the SUV maintained, than what you would with a regular compact car. For example, I paid $2,000 for a used 94’ Mercury Sable and it averages about 25 miles per gallon, so at the pump I would pay $22 for gas. Yet These dumb people are buying cars that are over $80,000, and half of the time their too scared to drive it.

At the moment these SUV’s are very attractive, but due to the current economic state that the country is in now, buying these types of vehicles makes no sense. Its proven that once the economy shows signs of improvement, those huge SUV’s will start to lose its appeal from consumers- because they are some of the most fuel thirsty vehicles out there. The Obama administration has focused on encouraging fuel efficiency despite lowering gas prices. Stephan Gallon from R.L Polk & Co. reported that the government has invested 2.4 billion dollars for car companies to develop hybrid cars. That legislation requires the car companies to create a vehicle that averages 35.5 miles to the gallon by 2016.

Fuel efficient cars, like hybrids are more environmentally friendly and a great investment for consumers. Automakers are striving toward improving vehicle performance with the development of the “leaf” by Nissan. With it every full battery charge can take you 100 miles with the leaf. Although this is foreign company, this just shows how American inventors are behind. But with the new legislation by President Obama that will change.

Can we trust in the media anymore?

The purpose of the media is to announce news and also to educate the public on events happening now. In today’s media, reporters will do what they must in order to get their names out there. And if they have to make themselves look like a jack ass to gain popularity they will. A reporter’s main purpose is to gain an audience. If they can get a few followers to start an argument over a certain topic the can profit form it immensely. Radio show host who would display this type of behavior is a man by the name of Rush Limbaugh. On his show, the conservative radio host attempts undermine the Democratic Party with crude statements about President Obama and his cabinet.

On October 9th, the president was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts in strengthening international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. He declared in a speech that same morning, saying that he was completely shocked to hear that he was awarded the Nobel Prize. The president went on further to say that “I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of the many transformative figures that have been honored by this award” (shown in the first video at the bottom). This man tries his best to serve the country well on both sides, but there are a lot of conservative jerks out there that would love to see him fail, similar to Mr. Limbaugh. But my point is: If the president fails wouldn’t the country fail as well? This is why we have to be careful of the types of media influences we let govern our moral judgment.

After the president’s speech Limbaugh told his audience that the president is “destroying his country as a super power” because of his efforts in attaining world peace. And he believes the only reason why the Nobel committee even considered giving him that award is because those committee members are part a European world power. And they, like some the terrorist organizations in Afghanistan, want him think that everything is fine and he doesn’t have to worry about the war in Afghanistan anymore because they are giving him such a prestigious award (shown in second video clip, skip to 2:10). To me, that completely makes no sense.

But apparently Rush’s audience loves listen to crap like that and he has profited tremendously. In an interview with Jamie Gangel, a national correspondent for NBC News asks Rush, who is he doing his show for? Rush replies with “I am doing my radio show for my audience! For ratings! He says “I want the largest audience I could get. So I could charge the highest advertising rates and what else do I want, MONEY (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/33273166#33243084)!!!! In that interview, Jamie has reported that Rush is achieving that goal, because he had just signed a contract worth four hundred million dollars (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/33276211#33276211).

After reading that, could you really believe in what the media reports anymore? When I saw the video, I was really turned off by some of the comments that Limbaugh made. I understand where he is coming from, because all media reporters want to become successful. Is that a good enough excuse for aggravating a group of people who tend to not research anything? So I encourage you to leave a comment and tell me how you feel about this.

Should the print media be kept alive?

I feel that print media should be kept alive for the sheer purpose of time. So that in another fifty years we can look back and reflect on some of the things that have occurred over time. Some people say it would be nice to have everything digitalized because you would have easier access to important facts and dates. But sometimes having easy access to everything isn’t the best method in attaining information. Certain websites like wikipedia and google translate allow their users to update the information on the site, if they feel it’s necessary. But that doesn’t necessarily mean the information that you receive is accurate or even beneficial you.

In 2005 John Seigenthaler, a former editor of the Nashville Tennessean Newspaper, discovered that his own biographical article on wikipedia was altered by one of its users. The biography falsely claimed that Seigenthaler played a part in the Kennedy assassinations. Eventually investigators caught the person who posted Seigenthaler’s false biography and corrected it. He claimed it was a joke. Ever since then Seigenthaler and other figures in the media continue to criticize Wikipedia’s open editing policy, calling the website a provider of inaccurate information.

There has been countless times where I have used google translate for my Spanish class to provide a full translation of what I had written down in English. When I got my assignments back from the teacher, there all these comments from her wondering where my information came from. Sadly, the grade on my report decreased because of improper use of the site, and as a result of that I stopped using those sites as a reference indefinitely because I wasn’t benefiting from it at all. It has inspired me to research more, and go deeper into the subject by reading the books that are required for that topic.

That’s why I believe print media should remain as one of the main sources of information because written word cannot be changed. It is ephemeral, a permanent moment in history where the ideas and views of that time cannot be altered. The electronic media is definitely a more efficient and environmentally healthy method to receive news. We also find that the internet can make life a lot easier when it comes to finding facts. But unlike print media, electronic media constantly changes making the information found vulnerable to deletion. Fifty years from now, I want to be able to show my grand kids the newspaper clippings from the 2008 presidential elections or the biography of Nelson Mandela.

What is your prediction about print media? Should it be left alone? Or has electronic media become too prominently known for print media to make a come back?