New folderChipotle Ad IRI.docx2Student NameWR 121Te.docx

New folder/Chipotle Ad IRI.docx
2
Student Name
WR 121
Teacher
Date
The Organic Food Fad
Industrial farm animal productions (IFAP) have been the
reason why meat is as inexpensive as it is. They are able to
produce mass amounts of meat while keeping costs low. The
industry has gone unquestioned for many years, until now. Why
is that? Restaurants and food products now add “organic” or
“cruelty-free” on their labels and consumers buy it despite the
higher price. This new age of food consumption has gotten
people to think about where their food comes from and how it is
treated before it is shelved in the grocery store then placed on
their plate. With animal activists spreading horror stories of the
animal industry through news and social media, it is hard to
ignore this once overlooked problem. Is affordable meat worth
what IFAP put animals through? IFAP causes harm to the
human population, the environment, and animals leaving its
continuation to be both unnecessary and damaging and yet it is
difficult to eliminate.
One corporation that is capitalizing on the organic and
natural food trend is Chipotle Mexican Grill. They have
released many advertisements that promote their food and their
campaign towards sustainable food systems. One commercial in
particular, “Back to the Start”, portrays a farmer and his family
going out of business due to factory farming. The pigs going
through the factory are pumped with antibiotics, packed and
then shipped off all while the factory pollutes the surrounding

air and bodies of water. Playing in the background is a cover by
Willie Nelson of Coldplay’s song “The Scientist”. The narrator
“was just guessing at the numbers and figures pulling the
puzzles apart” much like how the American population was
unsure of the effects IFAP caused (Nelson, 2011). Eventually,
the population began to question the industry once they learned
more and put the puzzle pieces together. The next line says
“science and progress do not speak as loud as my heart”
(Nelson, 2011). This mimics the feelings of the audience as they
know factory farming is not sustainable nor healthy but those
faults are not as prominent as how morally wrong industrial
farming is. The song directly corresponds to how Chipotle
wants to make their audience, and potential new customers,
feel. To top it off, the song is sung by someone with those exact
feelings. To the casual listener, this cover is soothing and
motivational, but Willie Nelson was not chosen at random.
Nelson is actually an animal rights activist and supporter of
family farming.
With companies such as Chipotle beginning to point out
inadequacies within IFAP, more people have begun to look
deeper into the industry and have shared the information they
uncovered. Two of those people are John Rossi and Samual
Garner who have written an extensive critique of IFAP by
reviewing the industry in five steps to ‘[show] that from any
reasonable moral perspective, IFAP is not morally
defensible”(Rossi & Garner, 2014). Arguments defending and
going against the IFAP have been spreading, making it difficult
to come to a conclusive answer that also encompasses
individual morals. With no way to please everyone, Rossi and
Garner have broken down both sides.
IFAP have been found to facilitate animal-product rich
diets that “contribute significantly to our growing burden of
chronic disease and preventable death”(Rossi & Garner, 2014).
Compared to those who consume minimal to no animal
products, people who consume high amounts of animal products
have a much higher risk of obesity, cardiovascular disease,

diabetes, and several types of cancer (Rossi & Garner, 2014). It
is hard to avoid animal products. IFAP has made these products
inexpensive and accessible. Though vegetarians and vegans
must take extra supplements to ensure their intake of essential
micronutrients, that is not a difficult task to accomplish in a
developed country. Animals also have their own diseases that
can be spread to humans. Facilities that house farm animals tend
to be small. Animals are kept close to one another making it
very easy for a disease to infect others. Pandemics such as the
avian influenza or the H1N1 influenza are examples of how an
outbreak in one area can erupt into a widespread problem.
Environmental health problems are another drawback to
IFAP. Seen in the Chipotle commercial is the factory releasing
fumes in the air and dumping pollutants into a lake.
In their research, Rossi and Garner found that about 87% of
United States water resources are used by the agriculture
industry which has caused water shortages and depletions. Also,
the animal industry contributes 15-51% of greenhouse gas
emissions (Rossi & Garner, 2014). This supports Chipotle’s
portrayal of factory farms. Factory farming contributes to many
environmental problems. It is no longer possible to overlook
this fact. The IFAP creates health concerns not only for the
environment and human population, but for the animals as well.
Animal welfare is a moral issue that is noted in the
commercial. The pigs are on a conveyor belt going through the
factory to get their shots of antibiotics and to be packaged.
Though raising animals to be slaughtered and eaten is
continuously debated, what can be said is that there are some
animal product producers who treat their animals poorly and
cause them distress. Some reported abuses at slaughterhouses
include “ramming animals with forklifts, beating them with
pipes, chasing them into scalding tanks, stomping on them, or
holding electric prods in their eyes” (Rossi & Garner, 2014). It
is important to recognize that not all production and slaughter
sites mistreat the animals. Yet there have been too many
reported instances to say the laws and regulations are being

enforced. Cramped enclosures, disease and deformities along
with limited veterinary care prevent factory animals to live a
comfortable life. Oddly enough, humans have a history of
interfering with the lives of animals.
In his article “Industrial Farming is One of the Worst
Crimes in History”, Yuval Noah Harari chronicles the history
homosapians have in causing the “extinction of about 50% of all
the large terrestrial mammals on the planet” and all before they
domesticated animals (Harari, 2015). He then compares the life
of a wild animal to its domesticated counterpart. One searches
everyday for food, water, and shelter while humans provide
those things to the other. They live differently but both have the
same fate. Harari says “what makes the existence of
domesticated farm animals particularly cruel is not just the way
in which they die but above all how they live” (Harari, 2015).
Though the survival and reproduction of the animal is ensured,
domesticated animals still have instinctual needs leftover from
their wild ancestors (Harari, 2015). Animals have “ physical,
emotional and social needs that are redundant in farms” that are
ignored (Harari, 2015). This reduces the quality of the animal’s
life. Human care will allow the animal to survive but it leaves
animal's instinctual needs unfulfilled causing the animal to
suffer. This problem lies in the farms at the industrial level.
Family farmers, such as the one in the Chipotle commercial,
seem to be the ones who can raise animals well enough so
animal consumers do not feel guilty. These are the farmers who
would be against IFAP, but not all are.
Curt Zingula grew up on a crop and livestock farm and has
been a farmer for almost forty years. He describes how
industrial farming has allowed 99% of Americans to “participate
in manufacturing or service industries” instead of agriculture
(Zingula, 2014). Zingula brings up the critics’ argument that the
nation would benefit from “farming the way great-grandpa
farmed back in the 1940s” (Zingula, 2014). The difference
between now and the 1940s is the population. U.S. farmers have
to produce food for over twice as many people which includes

the American population and other countries. Zingula also
argues that the environment has not been damaged by modern
farming. He claims it was “the use of repeated tillage, instead of
herbicides for weed control [which] led to severe erosion and
filthy waterways” (Zingula, 2014). He also says that confined
animal facilities are necessary to keep manure from
contaminating bodies of water. Despite being a farmer, he
agrees that organic food is costly and that many people prefer
the price industrial farms offer. He ends his article by saying
that “‘factory farms’ deserve our appreciation” for all they have
accomplished in feeding the population at an affordable price
(Zingula, 2014).
A constant flow of differing opinions on this topic leaves
the future of factory farming up in the air. The dependency the
American population has on IFAP prevents it from ceasing
production. Should there be stricter regulations on IFAP, or
should it be stopped all together? No matter what the solution
is, the problem will not be solved for a long time. In the last
scene of the chipotle commercial, the farmer and his wife are
now elderly and their older son looks to be taking over the
family farm. It may take a lifetime before anything is done to
IFAP. Their current fate may be unknown, but with all the harm
IFAP causes, it would be no surprise if a drastic change in the
American mindset occurs where animals are friends, not food.
Works Cited
Chipotle Mexican Grill. "Back to the Start." YouTube. Youtube,
25 Aug. 20
Harari, Yuval Noah. “Industrial Farming Is One of the Worst
Crimes in History.” The Guardian.
Guardian News and Media, 25 Sept. 2015 Web. 16 Apr.
2016.
Nelson, Willie. By Chris Martin. The Scientist. Willie Nelson.
Buddy Cannon, 2011. Web.
Rossi, John, and Samuel A. Garner. “Industrial Farm Animal
Production: A Comprehensive
Moral Critique.” Journal of Agriculture and Environmental

Ethics 27.3(2014): 479-522.
OSU Library Databases. Web. 16 Apr. 2016.
Zingula, Curt. “Appreciate ‘Factory Farms’” The Gazette. 1
Apr. 2014. Web. 16 Apr. 2016.
New folder/coldplay_IRI.docx
student 1
student 2
student 3
Student
Instructor
Date
WR121
Engage then Detach
Various perspectives and opinions can be extracted from,
the famous British band, Coldplay's music video for “The
Scientist.” When analyzing this video, simply from the images
displayed, it seems to be sectioned off into three different
components based off the pathos present within it. Put simply,
throughout the video the audience experiences relaxation,
followed by confusion, and ending with shock. After a more
thorough examination of the broader cultural message, however,
this video can arguably be sectioned off into various parts based
off the thought process of the videos main character and lead
singer of Coldplay, Chris Martin.
The initial sense of relaxation, established at the beginning
of the video, quickly fades when Martin's body begins to jostle.
A minor moment of intensity takes place when the singer is
flung from a mattress. The sudden movement seems unnatural
and creates curiosity among viewers. Later in this scene,
however, the director quenches the viewers curiosity and
appeals to pathos when a biker travels backwards out of the
camera view. This simple act leads to the conclusion that the

video is of a man moving backwards through his day. Once
again the director is throwing the viewers back into a state of
curiosity. Why is the man moving backwards? This question
lingers throughout the course of the video until the end when
the scene of a car accident is displayed. This action of moving
backwards could be a display of guilt. In a discussion on the
differences between shame and guilt, Nita Lutwak, Joseph R.
Ferrarib, and Jonathan M. Cheek lay out the components of
guilt. Lutwak, Ferrarib, and Cheek claim:
Feelings of guilt involve a sense of remorse and regret over
some specific behavior performed, or not performed, by the
actor. People often report obsessively thinking about the
specific transgression act and wishing they had behaved
differently or could somehow ‘undo’ the deed. Guilt emotions
may motivate acts that in some way undo the harm caused to the
target (Lutwak).
The act of Chris Martin continuously walking backwards
throughout his day symbolizes this “obsessive thinking” about
something that occurred within his life(Lutwak). It is
essentially him replaying the day over in his head. People are
continuously making decisions and performing actions.
Oftentimes, we perform these actions and never think,
afterward, about what we did and why we did it. When,
however, a mistake is made, people continuously revisit the
thoughts, actions, and outcomes that correlate to the
blunder(Lutwak). Walking backwards through his day
exemplifies Martin's thinking about what happened and why it
happened. The stoic expression, maintained up until the
moments before the accident, give a glimpse into the emotions
of the singer. It appears he is detached and emotionless from an
outside viewers perspective. The appearance of disengagement
reoccurs throughout the course of the video. For example,
Martin walks past a group of men playing basketball and shows
total disinterest in the actions around him. A few scenes earlier,
the audience watches Martin look the other direction when a
woman in a wheelchair is pushed past him. Coldplay titled their

song “The Scientist.” Oftentimes, science is viewedas the mean
of disengagement from humanity. It is the fear that once one
becomes a scientist, he or she begins to look at the world as a
display of science and no longer the stage for emotion and
common thoughts. Therefore, the title of this song could be
accusing a man of detachment from others.But why did the
singer disengage? Was he always unaffected by others or was
this state a product of an event? The singer revisits the brief
moments leading up to the car accident. Does Martin wish he
could have “behaved differently(Lutwak)?” Just moments before
the car accident Chris Martin was smiling and laughing, giving
the audience the idea that the singer was content, but rapidly
turns expressionless after getting out of the car, giving a
glimpse into the guilt he experiences. Maybe Chris Martin saw
the world as filled with passion and love before the accident,
but turns calculative once he continues to rethink what
happened and how things could have ended differently, showing
the negative impact of guilt and the change from what used to
be a passionate man into “a scientist.”
If trying to “undo” what has occurred is characteristic of
guilt, then what is actively avoiding the central
problem(Lutwak)? After the car accident, Chris Martin walks
right past the woman that only moments before was sitting and
laughing in his car. The singer gives no indication of caring for,
what the audience is pushed to assume was, the woman he had
feelings for. The ethos of Chris Martin is decreased in this
scene. The audience experiences empathy for the woman but a
sense of dislike for the man walking past like she was
insignificant and not worthy of attention. This could be
interpreted as another form of guilt Martin is experiencing, but
there is the possibility of the singer feeling shame. In the
article, “Shame, guilt, and identity in men and women: the role
of identity orientation and processing style in moral
affects,”Nita Lutwak, Joseph R. Ferrarib, and Jonathan M.
Cheek also define shame. The three state, “Guilt may promote
reparative action; shame, instead, may prompt a desire to hide

the defective self—‘to sink in the floor and disappear’”
(Lutwak). The desire to hide due to shame can be seen as a
possible reason for Martin leaving the woman without facing
her limp body(Lutwak). Maybe, to the singer, the act of going
to her felt like a display of a faulted man(Lutwak). The
directors appeal to logos when Martin leaves the woman behind
in shame because it brings the viewer back to the beginning
scene of the video. What was the first moment of intensity, the
singer being thrown from the mattress, can also be seen as him
falling down when the singers day is played forward. Like
Lutwak, Ferrarib, and Cheek state, Chris Martin essentially
“sink[s] in the floor” through falling into the mattress, showing
more evidence of his shame(Lutwak). This desire to disappear,
correlated with his shame, drives him to retreat to the dark
woods after the accident(Lutwak). Once hidden by the full pine
branches, Martin removes his nice black jacket.
The removal of this high-quality, black jacket is one of the
scenes where the viewers see Chris Martin's struggle with his
social status. Throughout the video, the audience is presented
with evidence of a difference in social status between the man
and the women. The connection, however, between the evidence
and the conclusion about this social status divide can not be
connected until the car accident scene is presented.As the video
rewinds to the moments leading to the crash, the girl reaches
into the back of the car to put back her jacket, revealing a pink
shirt. According to "The Social Psychology of Class and
Classism"by Bernice Lott, lower class workers take on specific
titles. Lott states, “Working-class and low-income workers
include those who receive wages at union or nonunion jobs,
those who work at blue- or pink-collar jobs” (Lott 651). Perhaps
the pink shirt the woman was wearing was not simply to portray
contrast between herself and the other people in this video, but
instead to implicitly indicate her class. In addition, higher class
workers are given the title of “white-collar” workers. The
directors choice to have Chris Martin wear a white shirt furthers
the argument that the colors the two main characters are

wearing do not seem unintentional but rather a piece of
evidence towards their social status identity.
It seems Martin comes from the more financially
privileged society, while the women comes from the rugged part
of town.Throughout the majority of the video, Chris Martin is
traveling back through various places. Two of the scenes
comprise of the singer walking through a street. The first street
depicted seems to be for the more financially privileged, while
the other is tailored towards the lower class. The financial state
of these two areas can be seen through the clothes people are
wearing. In the more privileged streets, black suit jackets and
collared shirts pass by. While in the less privileged area, t-
shirts, a vest, and a red jacket with a front zipper can be spotted
passing the laundry mat. In order for Chris Martin to move
between these two distinctly different areas he must simply
jump over a wall. In taking a closer look at this rapid change in
life’s luxuries, the audience may pose the question “what does
the brick wall represent?” Social, economic, self-imposed or
culturally established barriers are all possible meanings of the
wall, but why are they important?
The forming of these “walls” between people greatly
affects the relationships between them. When these obstacles
begin to dominate in a relationship, two people can not truly
connect with one another. Chris Martin crossing the brick wall
can be interpreted as an attempt to understand the world the
woman came from. It is important, however, to remember the
video works backwards. Therefore, Martin is jumping from her
less financially-fortunate world back into his privileged
community. In fact, when examining the rest of video, the
viewer can identify Martin's continuous changing between the
two worlds. After the car accident, Martin leaves his jacket, that
all the other higher class men can be seen wearing, in the
woods. He then enters a train station, which can be interpreted
as furthering himself in her world, because trains are a form of
mass transportation which are generally utilized by the lower-
class, while the upper-class generally owns personal vehicles.

In the next scene, however, Martin is walking along a nice fence
with vines hanging down. There is an absence of graffiti on the
fences, which is a form of frequency within the more fortunate
areas throughout the video. In an article discussing social
hierarchies, authors Emily M. Zitek and Tiedens Z.
Larissaargue, “relationships with more hierarchical organization
are easier to see, understand, learn, and remember”(Zitek 98).
Therefore, the viewer can claim Martin has entered back into
his higher-class world because that hierarchy is simple and
engrained due to it's nature of being easy to remember(Zitek
98). Move further back and the singer is walking under a
graffiti laden bridge, where a group of men are playing
basketball, and then through the streets of a less fortunate part
of town. This leads the singer to the brick wall that he jumps
over and lands in the affluent area. The place the singer ends,
however, is laying on a mattress on a yellowish-brown, tiled
floor with graffiti plastered all around. Chris Martin seems to
be playing a man trying to understand a different social class
but oftentimes falls back into the comforts of his own social
status.

Works Cited
Lott, Bernice. "The Social Psychology of Class and
Classism."American Psychological Association 67.8 (2012):
650-658. PsycARTICLES. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.
<http://psycnet.apa.org.ezproxy.proxy.library.oregonstate.edu/jo
urnals/amp/67/8/650.pdf>.
Lutwak, Nita, Joseph R. Ferrari, and Jonathan M. Cheek.
"Shame, guilt, and identity in men and women: the role of
identity orientation and processing style in moral
affects."Personality and Individual Differences 25.6 (1998):
1027–1036. ScienceDirect. Web. 28 Apr. 2016.
<http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy.proxy.library.oregonstat
e.edu/science/article/pii/S0191886998000671>
Zitek, Emily M., and Larissa Z. Tiedens. "The fluency of social
hierarchy: The ease with which hierarchical relationships are
seen, remembered, learned, and liked."Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology 102.1 (2012): 98-115. APA PsycNET.
Web. 19 Apr. 2016.
<http://psycnet.apa.org.ezproxy.proxy.library.oregonstate.edu/jo
urnals/psp/102/1/98>.
New folder/Cultural Artifact.jpg
New folder/Cultural-Artifact-Analysis edited.docx
Artifact:1968 Black Power Salute
The artifact that I have chosen represents one of the most
powerful political gestures in the sporting history. It is referred

to as the Black Power Salute of the 1968 Olympics. The image
shows two African-American athletes standing on the podium
while receiving their respective medals. Both of them can be
seen raising their fists as a symbol of solidarity with their
community. The context of time at which this picture was taken
plays a crucial role as well. A time when racism was still at its
peak in United States of America, the image captures what is
the essence of being an oppressed minority and how that ends
up shaping your worldview regarding others and your own
identity. It speaks volumes about the anxieties that plague the
minds of any oppressed or subjugated group.
Having won the gold and bronze medals in the 200
meter running event, the US athletes turned on the podium to
face their flags, and to listen to the national anthem. Both
athletes have raised a black-gloved fist, and kept them raised
until the anthem had finished. Although it cannot be seen in the
picture, both US athletes received their medals shoeless.
However, wore black socks, symbolizing black poverty. Smith,
the gold winner, wore a black scarf around his neck which
represents black pride.
Carlos had his tracksuit top unzipped to show solidarity with
all blue collar workers in the US and wore a necklace of beads
which he described "were for those individuals that were
lynched, or killed and that no-one said a prayer for, that were
hung and tarred. It was for those thrown off the side of the
boats in the Middle Passage.”
Each athlete’s jacket, has a human rights badge, pinned on their
chests - even the Australian silver medalist, Peter Norman,
partook.
The ethos presented in the picture, is remarkably conspicuous,
their aspirations, the spirit of the era, and their beliefs,
succinctly manifested in this simple gesture. One cannot help
but feel the gravity of the poignancy, one cannot help but share
the pathos.
The question of owns identity is the main theme of this image.
As these athletes who were out there representing their nation,

still thought and actively decided that their identity as people of
color at that time, trumped any other identity they could have
associated with. Smith later during an interview said, “If I win I
am an American, not a black American. But if I did something
bad then they would say 'a Negro'. We are black and we are
proud of being black. Black America will understand what we
did tonight."[footnoteRef:1] This quote portrays that how these
athletes more than anything else, were just commodities that
were performing for the will of their oppressors. The most
important part of this quote which really stands out is, “Black
America will understand.” And this statement was not totally
off target as the athletes were received as heroes by their
communities when they went back home. [1: 1968: Black
Athletes make silent protest: bbc.co.uk]
What the image shows is what has become a symbol for civil
rights movement, although what it fails to encapsulate is the
massive and immediate backlash that these athletes had to face
due to their radical actions. This can somehow be seen as a
means of disassociating the guilt of culprits of that era. The vast
majority would prefer to call this an action of great bravery
today, but few will talk about their suspension from national
team and the shaming they received for their political stand.
This goes on to show how the narrative is controlled, and even
at times how the narrative of the victim is molded according to
the comfort of the oppressors. Also what is to be noted is that
the Australian athlete who is seen in the picture didn’t make any
political gesture, but fully supported the actions of these young
athletes. In the image he looks like just a silent spectator.
Although out there on the field his role was much more than
articulated in this image. And hence he has been a part of many
tributes that have been paid to these humanitarians.
One last aspect that I would like to focus upon is what can be
seen as the ‘politics of naming’. The salute has been dubbed as
the ‘black power salute’ in popular culture; however, Smith
during an interview categorically used the word ‘humanitarian

salute’ for his actions. It raises the question that how our
understanding of artifacts might be corrupted in a manner that
we are not able to fully understand what the author or creator
wanted to truly exhibit, but merely our own interpretations of
what we want to see and how our perception is affected by the
popular information that is available to us.
New folder/Initial Research Integration Grade Guide.docx
Initial research integration Grade guide | Randy
Magnuson
OBJECTIVE
Evaluation
Comments
Analysis
» shows evolution and advancement from Initial Artifact
Analysis, extending and deepening the overall analysis;
» is more nuanced in its claims;
» is more effective in presenting evidence to support claims;
» is more thorough in the reasoning that connects claims to
evidence;
» situates the artifact and its analysis into a larger cultural
conversation effectively and articulately.
Exceptional
Reasonable
Minimal
Insufficient
(quality and quantity of analysis)
30%

Research
integration
» includes quality sources that are credible and relevant to the
issues raised by the artifact and its analysis;
» uses research to extend and deepen analysis, using sources to
support, complicate, challenge and/or contextualize;
» effectively introduces others’ voices through summary and
proper quotation, using appropriate signal phrases.
Exceptional
Reasonable
Minimal
Insufficient
50%

organization, style & Format
» crafts paragraphs that cohere and are organized effectively;
» demonstrates word choice that is precise and varied, and
exhibits a tone appropriate to academic genres;
» contains very few grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors;
» is formatted correctly according to MLA standards.
» meets the 4–5 page length requirement
Exceptional
Reasonable
Minimal
Insufficient
20%
Grade: ___/100
New folder/Initital Research Integration.docx
Black Power Salute, 1968
On the morning of 16th of October, 1968, two African-

American Olympic sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos
stood atop the podium in Mexico City to receive their medals.
In their honor, the organizers played the national anthem “The
Star-Spangled Banner” of their home country, America. As soon
as the anthem started the two athletes bowed their heads and
raised their black-gloved fists, in solidarity with the struggles
of their fellow African Americans back home. Smith and Carlos
received their medals without any shoes to symbolize black
poverty. Smith wore a black scarf to represent black pride,
while Carlos unzipped the top of his tracksuit to show solidarity
with the blue-collar workers in the U.S. He also wore a necklace
of beads which he described “were for those individuals that
were lynched, or killed and that no-one said a prayer for, that
were hung and tarred. It was for those thrown off the side of the
boats in the middle passage.” The athletes wore badges
indicating their support for the Olympic Project for Human
Rights (OPHR) to stress upon the atrocities against the African
Americans as being directly contradictory to the Human Rights
charter around the world. Peter Norman an Australian on the
podium, who did not agree with policies of Australian
government towards the indigenous communities in Australia,
too agreed to wear the badge in solidarity with his fellow
sprinters.
Not surprisingly many of the Americans witnessing the
ceremony at home were outraged. They saw this act as a
disrespect to the American spirit, done in order to express their
discontentment with their home country. Both, Smith and Carlos
(national heroes for winning the medals) were criticized at
home for doing the protest. This criticism was not limited to
scathing articles in the press but also resulted in their
suspension from the U.S team. However, this wasn’t the end of
their troubles. Both men and their families started receiving
grave death threats upon their return to America despite the
positions scored. The Time magazine on the 25th of October,
1968 summarised the general attitude towards these athletes and
wrote, ““Faster, Higher, Stronger” is the motto of the Olympic

Games. “Angrier, nastier, uglier” better describes the scene in
Mexico City last week”. Peter Norman, their Australian
counterpart, was criticized by the Australian media. He was
rejected a position in the 1972 Summer Olympics, despite
having qualified 13 times over. But this behavior did not deter
the athletes, they refused to apologize for the salute, as the
conduct showed by their countrymen only solidified their
stance. Understanding and empathising with their community,
millions of American understood their gesture and acted as a
shield for the two sprinters, protecting them against the
conservatives with their support.
The struggle for civil rights in the US did not start in the
sixties, it thrived since the independence of the US. However,
1960s was the start of a more concentrated effort in the struggle
of achieving civil rights. They highlighted the civil rights
movement and the struggles of its participants in a manner
which was much more effective than anything seen before, and
especially in the year 1968. The Black Power Salute served as
the perfect complement to the evergrowing resentment against
the current sociological order. The king assassination, the JFK
assassination and urban riots showed America as a land which
was plagued by unrest and injustice. All of this unrest in the US
political sphere inevitably spilled over into the apolitical world
of sports with the initiation of the black power salute. NPR
reflected on this event,“The Black Power demonstration on top
of the victory stand in Mexico City in 1968 by several African-
American athletes was one of the great political moments in the
history of the Olympic movement," Hoberman says. "This was a
way of saying, at the end of the 1960s ... that the African-
Americans had had enough of domestic racism and that here was
an opportunity to express their feelings about that."
The characteristics of the stage that the protest was orchestrated
on carries equal importance when gauging the depth of the
matter and its impact. Traditionally, the Olympics is held every
four year and it is used as an international platform by athletes
to present their many different sporting abilities from athletics

in various manners. On paper, Olympics are supposed to
politically neutral, free from any political bias and are only
meant as a sporting event, where athletes compete with each
other for recognition. Olympics being an international sporting
event, is often regarded as a platform fit to forward politically-
motivated issues. However, the competition has been
increasingly acknowledged as a platform to voice international
concerns for a larger audience. Therefore, the Olympics have
not been a stranger to political controversy and politically
motivated protests; 1936 in Berlin, 1968 in Mexico City, 1972
Munich, 1980 Moscow, and 1984 Los Angeles are all
monumental protests that proved necessary for bringing social
and political problems to the forefront. Irrespective of the
jeering crowd, disqualifications and death threats, the statement
made by the two athletes were successfully highlighted,
acquainting the world with the struggles of the average African
American. No matter how the officials tried to mitigate the
effect of the silent protest, the iconic image continued
circulating in newspapers and propping up in conversations
around the world; the international reach and impact of the
Salute, therefore, has to a great extent be attributed to the
platform it was played out on.
Works Cited
"On This Day: Tommie Smith and John Carlos Give Black
Power Salute on Olympic Podium." On This Day: Tommie
Smith and John Carlos Give Black Power Salute on Olympic
Podium. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Salute, 1968 Olympics Black Power. "1968 Olympics Black
Power Salute." 1968 Olympics Black Power Salute. N.p., 01
Jan. 1970. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
"The Black Power Salute That Rocked the 1968 Olympics."
Time. Time, n.d. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.
Younge, Gary. "The Man Who Raised a Black Power Salute at
the 1968 Olympic Games." The Guardian. Guardian News and
Media, 30 Mar. 2012. Web. 27 Oct. 2016.

New folder/Political Cartoon IRI.docx
1
5
Student Name
WR 121
Teacher Name
Date:
In today's political climate, and specifically around the issues of
inequality based on ethnicity and race in the united states, every
citizen of this country is a stakeholder. This idea doesn't seem
to be commonplace in many of the voices emanating from this
emotional and too often violent debate. University campuses are
a unique reflection of society, in that they often thrust many
different groups into a highly diverse environment where
interaction and the exchange of ideas is both encouraged and
necessary. This presents many challenges, and many
opportunities for learning and for growth, but also for conflict
and pain, sometimes unintended, sometimes deliberate, and
unfortunately often inflicted by institutions. Why are we all so
emotional around this discussion? How have we come to fear
that which is not like us? It isn't hard to imagine why people of
color are emotional: they are the most directly hurt by any form
of discrimination whether by an institution or by individuals,
but we are all hurt when one group has to work harder to
achieve the same results, we are all hurt when ignorance is
tolerated, and we are all hurt when (justified) anger does not
move to positive energy. How do emotions and notions of
power and privilege affect the outcomes in conflict resolution?
Where does freedom of speech fit in when words can be a
violent weapon? This discussion should aim to separate the
notions of aggression and microaggression by drawing a line
between intent, and error or misconception, not to absolve the
ignorant party of any responsibility, but to foster an
environment in which learning is cultivated, and where initial
emotional responses are acknowledged then redirected to fuel

growth and mutual understanding. Finally, this idea that we are
all stakeholders must be explored further. The balance of power
is a source of friction, and the idea that power is a zero-sum
resource is perhaps one of the many deep roots of the problem.
In essence we all gain, and none of us have anything to lose, by
moving this discussion further down the path of peaceful
resolution.
In the academic world, and specifically around the issues of
antiracism, Ali Michael proposes that “a critical piece of the
inquiry model of learning is that it cannot be based solely on
our own existing understanding” (Michael 29). She further
suggests the Johari Window as a model for examining how to
gain deeper understanding over our own shortcomings.
Specifically, over that which we don’t know we don’t know.
This is important. A well-meaning student may directly offend
another, or indirectly perpetuate the institutional nature of
discrimination that exists today. What she means to say is that
the notion of colorblindness that is popular among white
millennials is counterproductive since it does not account for
the fact that it is simply ignorant, literally, of the complex
dimensions of racial identity. She is then correct in asserting
that “we also have to act in ways that are intentionally anti-
racist to explicitly eliminate racist impact on students” (Michael
66). Finding ways to explore what our identities have in
common, may be just as important as asserting our identities’
uniqueness. Perhaps considering what it means to be white in
earnest self-reflection may shed some light on the nature of
privilege.
Racial identity is extremely relative, and communication around
it has a deep relational aspect. This is due to the environment in
which we grow up either as white, or as a person of color.
Joshua Miller and Ann Marie Garran agree when they state that
“people of color will be more aware of the salience of their race
and how this can threaten their well-being in a racist society,”
they add that “white people will encounter less dissonance
between their race and their social world and experience less

disequilibrium so they likely will not have to be conscious of
their race constantly” (Miller and Garran 88-89). At this
intersection we begin to discern the notions of privilege and
power as major players in this conflict. They simplify matters
by assigning responsibility broadly when they say that “the
persistence of racism relies on collusion of the majority of
white people in the United States, a form of by-standing that
allows existing racial privileges for whites and the web of
racism for people of color to remain unchallenged” (Miller and
Garran 276). We must not ignore that causing harm, even
unintentionally, has very real consequences for the victim. A
thought reflected by Miller and Garran who propose that simply
“having the courage to move beyond our comfort zones,
extending that compassion to others through our actions” is a
solid place to start (Miller and Garran 277). In other words, we
must recognize our shortcomings, our negative emotions, such
as fear, and redirect our energy in a more productive manner.
In the same way that fear affects white people’s ability to move
the conflict forward in a positive way, anger, even justified, has
the same effect on the abilities of people of color to do the
same. Evelyn Lindner states that “our emotions affect conflict
and conflict affects our emotions” (Lindner 268) This is
reminiscent of the tendency of closed loop systems to entropy.
Without new energy, there is a loss of momentum; a new
challenge then, according to Peter Coleman who forewarns that
“significant changes in the status quo of the balance of power
between parties can affect experiences of relative deprivation
and increase conflict aspirations.” (Coleman 133) In other
words, the zero-sum notion of power seen as two sides of the
same scale is largely responsible for engendering conflict. We,
as American college students of all ethnic backgrounds, need to
shift our understanding to something perhaps more counter-
intuitive, where the two sides of the scale may never move in
opposite directions, where if one side gains, then so does the
other and vice-versa. Peter Coleman agrees when he states that
“cooperative interdependence in conflict leads to orientation of

gaining “power with” others” (Coleman 136). That is, “power
with” others as opposed to “power over” them. This argument is
corroborated by Lindner’s concluding thought that “for complex
long-term problems, we need to entertain superordinate
regulatory loops in our higher brain structures [and] slow down
our thinking processes so we can assess them” (Lindner 285). In
essence, this simply means that progress, understanding, and
eventually resolution can only happen when rational thought is
driven by a controlled release of the energy fueled by emotion,
all parties are equally invested, all parties are equally
represented, and all parties see themselves and each other as
equal stakeholders.
There is hope, and much work to do. Ruth Sidel states that
“administrators, teachers, and students then face the critical
task of finding new ways to facilitate communication among
disparate groups, of helping people from different backgrounds
live together, and of creating a sense of connectedness in the
outside world” (Sidel 9). It is hard to elaborate on her clear
suggestion. Perhaps it may help to juxtapose this with her
assessment that “among many barriers that many students have
had to face in recent years are virtually continuous clashes
stemming from prejudice, ethnocentrism and fear” and that “at
the root of these clashes are entitlement and power” (Sidel 79).
She implies that all of these clashes have been a result of
deliberately malicious actions meant to elevate the status of one
group above that of another. That is certainly at least partially
true, but it is not the whole issue; it does however, run parallel
to my argument that ignorance and apathy are at least as much
responsible as fear and prejudice, or entitlement and power.
Lindner inversely reflects my argument when she explains why
we might experience anger such as “when we deem that the
person who hurts us has sufficient control over the situation to
avoid harming us” (Lindner 275). Sidel, in contrast, paints a
cynical picture of the college student. She also contradicts her
earlier assessment that students are “complex, sometimes
conflicted players in a drama that is not, for the most part, of

their making, but is nonetheless one for which many of them
feel genuine concern and a sense of responsibility” (Sidel 9).
This directly reflects my motives for exploring this thorny
issue.
Finally, we must acknowledge the overarching issue of the
institution as the main perpetuator of racism and inequality. It
is not the scope of this discussion to review the history of
racism at the hands of the United States government, though it
is essential to acknowledge the heavy influence of the past on
our present policy, and their inherent bias. Coleman specifically
addresses this issue, reminding us that “the powerful also
largely determine what is considered to be important, fair, and
just in most settings and thus shape and control many methods
of resolution” (Coleman 121). The convergence of these ideas
of race, of power and government, and the deeply entrenched
bias in the identity of our nation, resonates with Michael
Ramirez’ cartoon criticizing the Obama administration for
carrying-on with failed policy, to appease the population, and
quiet our fear of change. Ramirez, let us be frank, mocks the
American people for being blind and resting easy in the illusion
of safety, rather than stepping outside of our comfort zones, and
demanding real progress (Ramirez).
The unique opportunity presented by the nature of college
campuses, that is, the high concentration of diverse and
disparate groups, creates in us a responsibility or a duty to
educate ourselves, and each other, in good faith and with
compassionate intention, about what makes us different and
what makes us the same, so that we may finally design ways to
not only coexist, but to cooperate in making all of our lives
better and safer in a world that rejects all notions of inequality
as acceptable traits of our society. How much idealism is too
much? How much is too little? Can we begin at the level of
personal responsibility for our thoughts, our emotions and our
actions, and push out and up through institutions and
communities? Who holds the proverbial key? Is it the
government, the people as whole, Millennials, or the next

generation? Peaceful protest in the names of prosperity, and
equal opportunity for all stakeholders is vital, and aggressive
campaigns to reform policies which hold inherent bias must be
once more de rigueur, and our prejudice must be turned away
from each other and instead, to the very entity that separates us
based on the color of our skin, our economic status, or any other
differentiating factor. This cannot be the sole responsibility of
the oppressed, and ignorance can no longer be condoned as a
viable solution. Stop being colorblind when color is often the
sole criteria on which institutionalized racism rests on. How do
we bring stakeholders to the conversation? Who decides what is
acceptable to say and what is not? There is no simple way to
balance the importance of freedom of speech and the damaging
nature of hate speech, since the lines are impossible to draw
clearly. Can we improve the landscape of this conflict by adding
more policy? As a nation, we seem to hold firm onto our
constitution, against which all laws are meant to be weighed.
Let us not forget that the document was written by wealthy
white men a long time ago, in a world where slavery was a legal
business, and neither slave nor woman had a vote. Isn't then our
constitution the ultimate failed policy? Do we not need laws
that better represent the interests of all people equally? Finally,
we must look for those who gain the most by perpetuating the
culture of racist oppression. The question is: why is someone
still allowed to profit from it.
Works Cited
Coleman, Peter T. "Power and Conflict." Deutsch, Morton, Peter
T Coleman and Eric C Marcus. The Handbook of Conflict
Resolution. San Francisco,CA: Jossey-Bass, 2006. 120-143.
Print.
Lindner, Evelyn G. "Emotion and Conflict: Why it is Important
to Understand How Emotions Affect Conflict and How Conflict
Affects Emotions." Deutsch, Morton, Peter T Coleman and Eric
C Marcus. The Handbook of Conflict Resolution. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass, 2006. 268-293. Print.
Michael, Ali. Raising Race Questions. New York, NY: Teachers

College Press, 2015. Print.
Miller, Joshua and Ann Marie Garran. Racism in the United
States. Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole, 2008. Print.
Ramirez, Michael. Untitled. Investors Business Daily. 2015.
Web.
Sidel, Ruth. Battling Bias. New York, NY: Viking, 1994. Print.
1
CS 170 ‐ Computer Applications for Business
Fall 2016 ‐ Assignment 7
JavaScript Event-Driven Programming
Due Date Before 11:00 PM - Friday, October 28th, 2016
Accept Until Before 11:00 PM - Friday, November 4th, 2016
Evaluation 15 points
Submit to Sakai Assignment7_answers.html file
To get credit for this assignment:
Upload and submit the Assignment7_answers.html file through
Sakai.

Learning Objectives:
This assignment is designed to practice:
1. Understand the basic input and output mechanisms of
dynamic web applications from
the code perspective
2. Implement JavaScript code which will handle user events
3. Display feedback of said processed interactions back to the
user
4. Practice your understanding of basic JavaScript from the
prior Assignment
a variables, including;
i The declaration, initialization and assignment processes
b Use of the conditional if statements
c Use of arithmetic and logic operators
d Use of comments
Directions:
You are provided an HTML program. Your responsibility is to
insert the HTML tags with the
appropriate JavaScript statements that will solve the problem
discussed below, and to

comment the html file with the requested information per the
requirements. The problem
description and HTML program provided are slightly different
from Assignment 6. Be sure to
start fresh.
2
Problem to solve:
The Serendipity Booksellers has a book club that awards points
to its customers based on the
number of books purchased each month. The points are awarded
as follows:
ks, they earn 16 points
additional 7 points on top of
the 16 points for each book above 3.

Serendipity Booksellers also awards points based on the dollar
value spent on non-book
merchandise. Four (4) points are awarded for every $10 spent.
Partial awards are not provided.
For example, 4 points will be awarded for spending $10.00 up
to $10.99. No points are awarded
for less than $10.
Preferred Customers receive a bonus of double award points.
The Serendipity Booksellers website needs to be updated to ask
the customer to enter the
number of books purchased last month, the dollars spent on
non-book merchandise, confirm if
they are a Preferred Customer, and then calculate and display
the number of award points
earned.
Requirements:
For this assignment;
1. Your program will calculate the award points as described
above.
2. You will generate HTML comments to add your name,
section and TA name. Each on a

separate line within the <Head> tags. This will (should) NOT be
visible in the document
on the web browser).
3. Utilize a <form> tag
4. You will then add the HTML tags with the proper JavaScript
code to produce:
a. A textbox to solicit the number of books purchased
b. A textbox to solicit the dollars of non-book merchandise
c. Grouped radio buttons to determine Preferred Customer
membership
d. A button to calculate the number of points awarded
e. A readonly textbox to display the result the calculation
5. Utilize JavaScript comments to explain the steps you are
preforming within your code. A
JavaScript comment’s form is:
/* Place your comment between the stars */
3
6. Variable names should be descriptive. For example, if a
program is calculating the total
charge for a bill at a restaurant, it may have a variable named
tipAmount.
7. Utilize at least one if/else statement. Consider using the
if/else in determining the

bonus points.
A sample of what your webpage could look like:
Additional Information:
Since the contents of a textbox, is going to be used in
mathematical operations. Textboxes
sometimes treat input as Strings. Use the function parseInt() to
convert the String text to a
number. Otherwise your calculation operations will not perform
as expected.
JavaScript provides several math utilities. The Math.floor()
method rounds a number
DOWNWARDS to the nearest integer, and returns the result.
References:
Fluency 6 - Chapter 17 - Fundamental Concepts Expressed in
JavaScript
- Chapter 18 – A JavaScript Program
w3schools.com - http://www.w3schools.com/js/default.asp
Firefox Tools - https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
US/docs/Tools/Debugger

Lectures’ slides and examples
Recitation Week 6
Recitation Week 7
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Tools/Debugger

New folderChipotle Ad IRI.docx2Student NameWR 121Te.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from curwenmichaela

More from curwenmichaela (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

New folderChipotle Ad IRI.docx2Student NameWR 121Te.docx