A Critique

My classmate Julie Morales wrote on her blog of a few theories that could have gotten former FBI director Andrew McCabe fired on March 16, 2018. The blog is titled, “Was the underlining meaning of firing Andrew McCabe because President Trump didn’t get his way?” I know very little about this topic so I was interested to read about it. I want to include that this is a well thought out blog because the theories kept getting interesting but the only concern I have is that there are no sources included within it. The blog mentions 2 theories and connects them to Trump to answer the question posed in the title. Theories require sources in order to make people believe they are real, and if one or two sources were provided connecting your 2 theories with Trump, it would of been a stronger theory. I acknowledge your audience was not those that are unfamiliar with this topic, but even a little information about anything you’re talking about would help. For example, summarizing why you included certain tweets connecting Trump to the theory. I really do wish the theories would involve Trump’s side a little more as well, for example, explaining why Trump was so bothered with McCabe leading the Hillary and Russian investigations. A few sources there talking about how Trump felt about McCabe leading the investigations could help for a stronger theory. With all due respect this is just my opinion but otherwise these theories are really something to look into. Consider looking at the formulated opinions posted on national newspapers by the authors who work there.

The Citizenship Question Will Make For An Inaccurate Representation of The U.S.

The U.S. national government should not adopt the idea to include the citizenship question on the 2020 Census again. This is because the question will lead to an inaccurate representation of the United States. The Census accounts for many things: Demographics, federal aid, businesses, how the House and Senate are divided among the states, etc. To many, this may not seem important but let’s phrase it another way: The Census is an important national government evaluation because it is the reason we live the way that we do. It helps distinguish how much help we need for everyone. It is also here to make sure communities and districts are accurately represented.

What if you add another question that could potentially change the whole meaning of The Census? The question of citizenship can change the accuracy of The Census. The last time this question was used was in 1950. Using it can impose inaccurate data for the following years. For many, specially immigrants, this poses a potential danger for their stay in the United States. Without the participation of undocumented residents or those of mixed status, the whole community and district they live in is at stake. Because The Census happens every 10 years, the states with the most population can greatly decrease causing a dramatic change in the apportionment of congressional seats. That is, the data collected to determine the number of seats each state should have in the U.S. House of Representatives will change.

One thing that needs to be pointed out is that it’s not the non-participants fault. Even though The Census protects the privacy of those who participate in it, many will still fear of their information being used against them. Most of these people who fear this are immigrants and because of their abstentions, the demographics will be inaccurately represented. This can reduce help from the government towards it’s citizens and non-citizens.

So, why is this question still happening? It’s probably going to happen because Secretary Of Commerce Wilbur Ross said it should. He wrote an explanation on his decision saying that he acknowledged the advice of professional administrators to not reintroduce the question but that he would still do it. Ross wrote that there was no “empirical support” for their belief. Also, when the decision was being made there was no question for clarification in the White House when White House press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders mentioned that the question had already been used in 1965. The Census couldn’t have happened in 1965 because The Census only happens every ten years.

This imposes an idea that the whole purpose of The Census now, is to see who is legal or not. In order to run an accurate census on the year 2020, the administration needs to ensure the people that their information will be confidential and that their information will not be released to any immigration service because that’s the main reason why many won’t participate.

Russian Propaganda Is Spreading on Reddit

Melissa Ryan is an author at Media Matters For America and writes why it’s important for everyone to know about Russian Propaganda spreading on Reddit. The blog, titled “Russian propaganda is rampant on Reddit. Here’s why it matters”, is directed to everyone because she wrote “Here’s why it matters”. Even though she didn’t include a “you” in the title, she used third-person perspective to give that approach to readers.

Ryan starts her blog by writing that the CEO of Reddit, Steve Huffman, knew about Russian propagandists using Reddit. One big reason why this came to light was because, “...the Senate intelligence committee had expanded its Russian interference investigation to include Reddit and Tumblr”; Reddit responded by disclosing their efforts to do something about it. Ryan wrote Huffman admitted that Russian trolls had weaponized the platform and that the company cooperated with the investigations as asked. Huffman added that the misinformation would be difficult to solve because there was “a thousand shades of grey” between the truth and the fiction. Reddit now faced the same scrutiny as the other media platforms did such as Twitter, Facebook and Google.

Ryan also wrote that Reddit was a different targeted platform because, the volunteered moderators on the Russian propaganda page would generally respond to questions when an announcement was made. This means that the page was always in tact and active on the issue to strangers and to the known alike.

Ryan makes an important point by saying that a subreddit as close to the Russian Propaganda one is r/The_Donald. Ryan mentions that the subreddit has most of the site held hostage. Also, redditors claim the subreddit was invaded by Russian trolls and that the subreddit itself made it look like the platform wasn’t taking the Russian Propaganda seriously.

Huffman addressed the criticism by responding to comments saying that banning them won’t solve anything but that maybe, they’re own dysfunction will. Redditors didn’t respond so happily as they downvoted his comment in a record-breaking 6,000 times.

Ryan’s response was her saying that no matter what the issue is, tech platforms will not change unless it’s profitable or if the users put enough pressure for them to change. Ryan also mentions that Reddit works better to solve these type of media problems than others do. One reason is because there’s a public forum where users can speak directly to the company’s leadership which makes it easier for the media to boost the conversation.

Her conclusion focuses on the point that actions speak louder than words and that Reddit’s unique way of structuring the community can be the new “advocacy model” for other tech platforms to follow.

I believe her blog did bring importance into the issue of Russian propaganda spreading in Reddit because she used expert evidence to support her claim. She never went off topic and kept her points clear, short and didn’t include much bias in them. Ryan’s evidence was factual because it had direct links on them.

The Morality of Capital Punishment

Hanna Riley made her opinion visible on her article titled: Alabama Likely To Botch The Execution Of An Already Dying Man on the Huffington Post. She states that the death penalty fails to pass the test of constitutionality and logic. The man she bases her opinion on is Doyle Lee Hamm and was sentenced to death by lethal injection on February 22, 2018. The article is well constructed because every time she makes a point, she backs it up with factual evidence. I believe anyone can read this and in the end agree with her somewhat. In the beginning she gives the reader the medical condition of Hamm and her supporting evidence hyperlinked with it. She then goes on to talk about how unusual Hamm’s case is because even though he’s already dying of cranial and lymphatic cancer, he’s still being executed. With factual evidence she also states that because he’s terminally, ill it’ll be hard to find a vain to put the lethal injection in which will result in a “gruesome” death with “unnecessary pain”. This will cause his veins to rupture and to make for a disturbing and disastrous result. She uses factual evidence to support that lethal injections are a dangerous procedure to take as a form of execution because she compares Hamm’s case with previous botched executions using that same technique. She mentions the botched executions of Alva Campbell, Angel Diaz, and Clayton Lockett’s where they take more than 30 minutes to be pronounced dead. Death from a lethal injection usually occurs within 7 minutes but not being able to find a sustainable vein and instead injecting it into tissue, can result in a gruesome and painful death. Riley then provides a medical observation made before Hamm’s execution. It said that the only usable vein could even burst if the attempt were to happen. After writing about the potential dangerous of using a lethal injection, she then supports her opinion, about the death penalty being unconstitutional, with political implications. Riley mentions the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution-which indicates that we as humans have the right to “a life free of cruel and unusual punishment.” Riley also mentions that the Supreme Court has protected prisoners medical needs; in Estelle v. Gamble the court ruled, "ignoring serious medical needs of prisoners unconstitutional." With those two political implications, she showed that the system had failed Hamm. In her conclusion, Riley addresses that her point will always be debatable because people believe in the importance of retribution. I agree with her somewhat because I have my opinions about it as well. She structured it well because she put the disturbing and upsetting points in the beginning and her opinion at the end. She made her opinion look less important than the facts. Note that she works at the Southern Center for the Human Rights in Atlanta and has no relationship whatsoever with Doyle Lee Hamm or his legal team.

Overnight Government Shutdown

This is the second time the U.S. government shuts down the government. The first was for a strategy on immigration and now it was more of an “aimless drift” according to Time's What to Know About the Overnight Government Shutdown article. The goal of the shutdown this time was to seal a deal for “Dreamers” because their protection from deportation expired in March. This was a battle between the Democrats and the Republicans and instead of coming to an accord on that, the idea of shutting the government is what closed the deal. During the government shut down, a two-year $400 billion agreement is the only thing that senate leaders offered to support both parties. As you can see, the goal to help the “Dreamers” is nowhere in that bill. So, was the government shut down helpful?
This is worth reading because it educates readers on what happened during the government shutdown and tells us if it was worth it.

Hello