Political Correctness runs amuck yet again

Does that mean you can't explain a connection between the two?

Really? I blame this principal, and any other nitwit who imposes Orwellian free speech restrictions. How is it the media's fault? Aren't they just a convenient scapegoat, just like PCness?

Good way to phrase it. Hm. Let's see. I do dthink the pricipal was wrong doing this.. Tha much should be obvious from my posts. I also think she should be held responsible for her actions.. if that wasn't clear.

However, my gut tells me that she didn't come out of nowhere all by herself with this decision and action. As such, I looked for a "cause" or influencing factor. From what I can see in today's social-political-educational environment, where "illegal immigration" is a hot topic in the media, where the behavior of educators is under more and more public scruting, and where principals are being held accountable for/forced to accept behavior by students that wouldn't have been tolerated in times past... well, I think a major influence is the media.

Scapegoating the media here? I don't think so and I've explained why it's not scapegoating earlier in the thread.

T-y-p-i-n-g s-l-o-w-l-y.

The first comment refers to your "irony post".

The second, below the asterisks, is "moving on"... Where the initial post referenced one school, the below the asterisks link references a principal actively walking out with his students during the school day to protest. Tell me that that would not have happened were there not media coverage. By extension and referring back to the initial article, principals are being influenced in their decision making and policies by the media.

I can't be more explicit than that.

Maybe the devil made her do it, too?



But why, a thousand times why, the media? Congress is debating law changes, people are talking about it amongst themselves, people who push for change or resist change hold rallies. But somehow it is the media that is pulling all the strings?

You sure give them a lot of power.

OK, for the record, I am telling you: It *may* not have happened without media coverage. Or it may have. I'm not God and I don't know the motive. Apparently, you are God and you do.

Wow. Where did I say that? Quote me.. please.

OTOH, if you really want to study up on theories of media influence on society, I can probably dig up some links from my days as a graduate student in mass communications. Then again, would you accept those? Shrug.

But if you want a few "names" to look up yourself, try these..
Harold Lasswell, Harold Inis, Walter Ong. Those should get you started.

No. I presented a thesis and an argument which hasn't been refuted. Instead, I got attacked (no big deal) and the argument was essentially ignored not either dissected nor seriously countered by other theories.

So, there. I told you. R We "even"?

No, I've said several times now that media is one of many things that can influence people.

What it can't do is make someone do any particular thing.

People decide for themselves what to do or not do.

Blaming someone's actions on the media, the devil, a hard childhood, an uncaring spouse or anything else is a cop-out.

Grad student in mass communication? If I recall correctly from the "what are your credentials" thread, you drive a truck. I don't mean that as an offense against truck drivers (I married one), but that reinforces what a grad degree in communications gets you.

I have a degree in journalism so I live this stuff every day. And yes, that does give me certain biases, but it also gives me insight. I never "made" anyone do anything with any story I ever wrote. Hopefully, I gave them information they could use to make decisions. More often than not, I merely gave them kitty pan liner.

And for added fun, I'm applying to grad school to become a counselor. So, I'm not quite a dummy in that regard, either.

OK, it's been fun, but I'm done now. Frankly, I don't think it's fair to continue.

"Causes" and "motivating factors" are a part of all sane decisions - hopefully no decision comes out of nowhere. That doesn't remove the decision-maker from responsibility, however. In the end, the principal is entirely responsible for the decision, regardless of what else happened before she made them.

What is the behavior here of the students that isn't tolerable? It seems to me that it's the principal who's intolerable, not the students. No specific incidents were cited in the article that I read, so all we have that the students weren't merely concerned about illegal immigration is the principal's statement. I'd like to hear from students, faculty, and more parents before we rushed to a knee-jerk view of this.

I tell you Picabo, I have read the whole thread and I don't see a "thesis" or an argument at all.

In fact a couple of people have asked you to point out the connection between your assertions and the information links you are posting and you just say nothing.

Lorelei Patel just asked you (like three times ), to say what the connection was between the story you linked to and your assertion that the media influenced the principal. I didn't see a connection and I am thinking she didn't either.

This is a total communication breakdown if you ask me, not a failure of others to respond to your thesis. What exactly is your thesis?

PS - As for attacks, all I see is you making some questionable personal remarks about folks. I don't see anyone attacking you at all.

Huh? I DROVE a truck.. note the past tense? That didn't mean I stopped learning nor does it place where my education was in my lifetime, nor even if its completed, which it won't be until I die.

Since your journalism degree should have exposed you so at least some of the theories on media influence and society, I am surprised that you would "jump to its defense". If you don't think journalists HAVE influence, why are you in the profession?

You're "outta here"? Your choice. Could have been an interesting discussion.

So you know.. I note your name at the beginnig of a post and move directly on to the next one now. Don't waste your fingers posting to me.

I'm not posting to you, I am posting *at* you.

Cool. Do whatever is appropriate with regard to the principal and this specific action.

Now. Time, as societal members, to examine if this was aberrant, once in a lifetime, individual behavior or if it's part of a pattern, trend, change in norms, etc.

If it is not an individual behavior but representative of a change, is that change desirable? Why is it occuring, if not? Can the cause for the change be identified and dealt with so that things "revert to normal"? If not... and on and on. That was the initial thought projection which began this thread.

It seems to me that this is part of a pattern of behaviors and attitudes associated with political correctness and media influence. The two go together. The principal's behavior and her reasons for it - not the students' - is what I began the thread about. Obviously, I don't mean psycho-analysis of her motivation. More socio/cultural-psychology (for instance, Amazon tribesmen uninfluenced by media reports would not ban wearing clothes directly. It's more likely that they would work to bring back the "deviant" into the fold through less direct means of behavioral influence.).

The term "Black" is not an insult. The term "pig-fucker" is. No double standard there at all. There was no "personal attack" on your manners. I simply commented on your choosing not to use those manners in your post. The first seemed an over-reaction bordering on racism. There are many ways to say that without the use of the term "pig-fucker."

Adults can criticize posts without stooping to crass personal attacks. Of course, as an adult you can choose not to behave in a mature, reasonable manner. And as adults we get to judge you based on those actions. Freedom of speech applies to all of us. If you say something, I get to comment on it.

The term "Black" is not an insult. The term "pig-fucker" is. No double standard there at all. There was no "personal attack" on your manners. I simply commented on your choosing not to use those manners in your post. The first seemed an over-reaction bordering on racism. There are many ways to say that without the use of the term "pig-fucker."

Adults can criticize posts without stooping to crass personal attacks. Of course, as an adult you can choose not to behave in a mature, reasonable manner. And as adults we get to judge you based on those actions. Freedom of speech applies to all of us. If you say something, I get to comment on it.

And you deduced this from a few sentences in a single, short news article? I see a place for you in talk radio.

Many schools in Colorado have a policy already in place outlawing the wearing of gang colors. The idea is to defuse gang violence on school grounds. The gangs in this case appear to be trying to get around that by claiming "patriotism".

It's not if you are a pig.

Does that mean tomorrow we can have a well-mannered discussion about how much of a whore your mother may or may not be?

I respond in kind. I do so deliberately.

I look forward to your book on hosting dinner parties.

Notice the phrase "part of a pattern"? That should suggest to you that I was not basing the argument entirely on the initial article referenced. You HAVE heard of illustrating a point using examples, right? Of course, if you DO have a radio talk show job open for me... we can talk.