Out of Print; the death and life of the American newspaper
By Eric Alterman March 31, 2008
The New Yorker
My parents still read the newspaper daily, but over in America these people are a dying race. In this article Eric Alterman discusses the dying American news papers. Huffington post is an online news paper, like the kind that is taking over the traditional news papers. They get most of their stories from the reader and allow people to comment on the articles. Even though the site is really popular due to their inter activeness, it happens often enough that untruthful articles appear on their site, due to their Mullet Strategy, which simply means that the professional editors create the front page and the rest is open to the reader. They are often criticized by mainstream media, which has lead to one of most heated debates of the American 20th century. Two main players in this debate are Lippmann and Dewey. The main discussion though is between the mainstream, traditional media and the new web based media; traditional media says that web based media recycles their news, which web based media says they find the flaws in traditional media. The fact though is that newspapers are dying; it is shown in their economic status, their reader status and the overall amount of newspapers, only the big players will survive. Maybe in a few years time, my parents will also be sitting with their laptop at the breakfast table reading the news.
Sunday 30 November 2008
Wednesday 12 November 2008
Bibliography PETA and KFCruelty
Bibliography PETA & KFCruelty by Lisa der Weduwe
"7 things you didn't know about PETA." Consumer freedom 28 January 2007 <>.
A great article that clearly states all the things you didn’t know about PETA yet. This article summarizes the dirty secrets of PETA in an effective and simple way. Yet the article also has some bias involved. The center for consumer freedom is a company that works together with restaurants and food companies, and PETA has had many protests and campaigns again restaurants and food companies. The center for consumer freedom therefore had an anti-PETA bias when writing the piece. The piece is backed up by several sites and there are many other articles about these “secrets.” This article is of use because it summarizes all the things PETA does wrong and backs it up with examples and statistics. It shows the dirty side that I need for the presentation.
"Animal Scam; the truth about PETA and other animal-rights extremists". Animal Scam.
This is a main base for the people against PETA. It is a site created by the Center for Consumer Freedom, which puts together all the news on what PETA is really about. The bias is to be found in the group that created the site; the Center for Consumer Freedom, who have had many clashes with PETA. Everything that can be used against PETA is put on this site, and this is why it is such a good source. It has articles from different places, news, debates and quotes which all work against PETA and other animal-rights extremists. It’s all the dirt put together in one site, providing all the juice things I need for my presentation.
"Better business bureau report for people for the ethical treatment of animals." Better Business Bureau 2008 <http://charityreports.bbb.org/Public/Report.aspx?CharityID=1160.>
A source that isn’t all about what PETA does right or wrong. This is a financial report on PETA; how much they raise and how much they spend. The bias that this site has, is that it looks for the amount of standards for charity accountability it doesn’t meet and states each of them clearly, while they just say the amount of standards they do meet up to. It also doesn’t state where they got their information from. Nevertheless it is a great source for my presentation, because it is an up to date (2008) review of the financial status of PETA; it shows the amount of money they get, how they get it and how much they spend on certain programs.
Field, Chris. "PETA's dirty little secret." Human Events 13 June 2005
The irony behind PETA is great. This article goes into depth on how PETA has been killing animals at its shelters. They talk about the site petakillsanimals.com by the Center for Consumer Freedom. The article has some bias in it though; the site which posted the article is ‘leading the conservative movement,’ and conservatives don’t like the actions of PETA and their advertisement of not eating animals. They also relate back to the Center for Consumer Freedom, who also don’t like PETA since it goes against the eating of animals. Nevertheless, this site gives good detail on how PETA kills animals and shows what the people at the Center of Consumer Freedom think of PETA.
Galkin, Matthew. "I Am An Animal (the story of Ingrid Newkirk and PETA)." PETA 17 November 2007.
A great documentary that takes a peak into the life of PETA’s Ingrid Newkirk. This documentary shows how Ingrid Newkirk runs PETA and what PETA is all about, with lots of visuals and interviews. The fact that the documentary was made by PETA shows its bias. They are only going to show the good side of PETA and how they are helping all the poor animals in this world. Nevertheless the documentary is of good use because it gives a good look into the person behind PETA, and has many useful quotes.
Grant, Catharine . The no-nonsense guide to animal right. Oxford, UK: New Internationalist Publications Ltd, 2006.
A small book with a lot of content; definitely no nonsense. The book gives a good description of animal rights, and puts PETA in the places where it stands out. Even though there are so many negatives sides that could also be discussed about animal rights, all that is in this book is for animal rights and encourages people to make a change. This bias can also be found in the source list, which only contains pro-animal rights sources. The book is of good use though, because it gives some good information on the topic of animal rights and includes PETA in a way that isn’t negative, as many of the sources I have are biased anti-PETA. This source really shows the good side of PETA, and what it initially stands for.
Jay Nordlinger "Peta vs. KFC: a dirty war against the Colonel". National Review 23 December 2003 <http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_24_55/ai_n13606711/>.
“Her group has promised that the company is in for a long battle.” This article discusses the ongoing battle between PETA and KFC. After having challenged several fast food chains, PETA has now found its new victim KFC. They are fighting for the humane killing of chickens which are supplied to the company. The article gives a detailed account of what has been happening between the two. The article tries to look at the situation from both sides, yet it seems to lean more towards the side of KFC, giving lots of critics on PETA. Yet the site is a useful source because it talks about the KFCruelty campaign of PETA, which is a focus point of the presentation, in great detail and states many of the things that have been revolving around the situation.
"Kentucky Fried Cruelty". PETA. <http://www.kentuckyfriedcruelty.com/>.
The site is an extension point of PETA; one of its many weapons in its fight against animal cruelty. On this site PETA specifically talks about their campaign against KFC. The bias of this site is really easy to figure, as it is a site created by PETA, so all that you are going to read on this site is against KFC. Even though biased and at times over-exaggerated, the things that they have to say about KFC can’t be denied. The site is of good use for my presentation, because it shows the reasoning behind PETA’s campaign against KFC, it has everything that you need to know from their side. It also has the opinions of several celebrities, which is also pretty interesting for my presentation.
"KFCruelty." Kentucky Fried Cruelty; PETA.
A short yet straight forward video that grosses you out. This short documentary by KFCruelty shows behind the scenes at KFC and why PETA put up this group. Gross and cruel imagery show throughout the video. The bias from this video comes from the fact that it is created by an animal rights group against KFC; when they were creating it they already had their opinion ready. The video is backed up because it shows actual film footage and the support of many people and articles. This documentary is of use because it clearly shows and talks about KFCruelty and what the reason behind it is.
Major, Meg. "Animal rights- and wrongs ." Progressive grocer 01 January 2002
PETA’s greatest victims give their share. In this article PETA is introduced through its greatest victims; the food industry. The bias from this article in found in its author who works for the Progressive Grocer. Even though they are not necessarily against PETA, they do what is best for the food retail industry and all the campaigns from PETA against major food chains and companies is not what they like. Nevertheless the article is of good use for my presentation because it also has some quotes from different people from the food industry on PETA and its demands.
Michael Specter. "The Extremist." The New Yorker 14 April 2003
An great article that gives a deep inside on the brains behind PETA. In this article many interviews and correspondences with Ingrid Newkirk are put together, to give a peek into the mind of the head of PETA. The bias from this article comes from the fact that the article is created through what is said in interviews with Newkirk, and even though he brings up bad things every now and then, most of what is said is for PETA. The article is of good use for my presentation because it shows a good portrait of Newkirk, with a lot of quotes and details about her life. Almost like a biography in short.
Monagie, Katie. "Are animals equal?" Scholastic Update 16 april 1993
A powerful article, which has puts a lot together in a small text. This article looks at the people for and against animal rights, and the progression of animal rights. If the author of this article has a bias when writing this piece, it hardly shows. It talks about both people for and against animal rights, different levels of extremism and it considers the question “are all animals equal?” without forcing a certain answer on the reader. The only sense of bias that can be found is in the pictures, since they are not necessarily pleasant and really create empathy for the animals and therefore support for the animal-rights activists. The article is of good use because it shows the growth of animal rights (and PETA) really well, backing it up by statistics.
Osorio , Ivan and Iain Murray. "PETA: cruel and unusual." Humane Event 18 January 2006
An extension point from the Humane Event article “PETA’s dirty little secret.”Unlike the article PETA’s dirty little secret, it talks more about the organization and later then focuses on them killing animals using the Cook and Hinkle case. The site is the ‘leading the conservative movement,’ and the ideas of PETA are not what the conservatives like to see. It is a good article for my presentation though because it uses an actual case to show how PETA kills animals, and leads to PETA’s idea that an animal is better off dead than being put through suffering and humiliation.
Owen , Marna. Animal Rights; yes or no?. Minneapolis, USA: Lerner Publications Company, 1993.
A book that tries to figure out the good and the bad of animal rights, bringing in PETA many times. The book tries to be as unbiased as possible, but by looking at the bibliography you can conclude that most of its sources are pro-animal rights. The great thing about this book is that as it talks about different animal rights issues and brings in different organization for the matter, placing in PETA many times. This gives a good opportunity to compare PETA to other animal rights groups and most of the times PETA comes out being the most extreme one.
Penn & Teller, "BULLSHIT! PETA." 2004.
PETA is BULLSHIT is the simple message of this documentary. Penn & Teller show you the hypocrisy behind the organization, ending with the focus of all the lives that animal research has saved. The bias comes from the series of Penn & Teller; Bullshit, in which they discuss things they find idiotic. This documentary was made only to prove the hypocrisy behind PETA. Penn & Teller talk to several people (from PETA supporters to scientists) about animal rights. They take quotes which come from the mouths of PETA supports, which go against PETA’s ideals. The documentary is of use for my presentation because it takes the dirt of PETA, gives some hard proof for it and makes sure that by the end of the video you agree that PETA is bullshit.
"People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals." Activist Cash
This site is a treasure chest full of information on PETA. This section of the site activist cash provides information on every part of PETA. Most of the information provided is negative though and most of the sources are linked to or from the Center for Consumer Freedom; this is the source of bias. Yet all the information which is given is backed up by several sources and official documents. The page is of great value for my presentation because it has a bit of information on everything (basic information, history, financial status, what they spend their money on and dirt).
"People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals." Wikipedia.
Wikipedia may not be the most reliable source, but it has all the basics that you need to know. In this article on PETA they give you a simple overview of the organization. It is hard to find bias in a site as Wikipedia, but by looking at their bibliography you can conclude that most of what they say is more in favor of PETA’s side, but it’s not that biased. Also the only external link they have is peta.org, yet the article has many different sources and notes. It is of good use for my presentation because it talks about the organization, its history and its actions in a simple way, giving me all the basics that I need.
"PETA". People for the Ethical Treatment of Animal. <http://www.peta.org/>.
This site is PETA’s main base on the web, where it is able to spread its ideas. It talks about all the great things PETA does, all the good feedback it gets from the media and what its goal is. For the bias behind this site you don’t need to look far, the PETA logo is all over the place. It is a site created by the members of the organization, so you can’t expect anything against it to be found there. Yet the site has all the latest news on what is going on within the organization and shows the way of working and thinking behind PETA. It can give me all the good stuff that I need on the organization, and will be of good use for my presentation.
"PETA kills animals". PETA kills animals. <http://www.petakillsanimals.com/>.
The anti-“food police” strikes again. On this site the Center for Consumer Freedom goes in to depth about the animals PETA kills which are under its care. The Center for Consumer Freedom can be seen as PETA’s biggest rival, as it seems that all they worry about it is to find more ways to make PETA look bad. This bias is spread all over the site. Yet fact that PETA kills animals under its care is well known, and this site provides detailed information about the amount of animals PETA kills, backed-up by several reports and files of the Virginia department of agriculture and consumer services. The site provides the perfect information on the irony of PETA that I need.
"7 things you didn't know about PETA." Consumer freedom 28 January 2007 <>.
A great article that clearly states all the things you didn’t know about PETA yet. This article summarizes the dirty secrets of PETA in an effective and simple way. Yet the article also has some bias involved. The center for consumer freedom is a company that works together with restaurants and food companies, and PETA has had many protests and campaigns again restaurants and food companies. The center for consumer freedom therefore had an anti-PETA bias when writing the piece. The piece is backed up by several sites and there are many other articles about these “secrets.” This article is of use because it summarizes all the things PETA does wrong and backs it up with examples and statistics. It shows the dirty side that I need for the presentation.
"Animal Scam; the truth about PETA and other animal-rights extremists". Animal Scam.
This is a main base for the people against PETA. It is a site created by the Center for Consumer Freedom, which puts together all the news on what PETA is really about. The bias is to be found in the group that created the site; the Center for Consumer Freedom, who have had many clashes with PETA. Everything that can be used against PETA is put on this site, and this is why it is such a good source. It has articles from different places, news, debates and quotes which all work against PETA and other animal-rights extremists. It’s all the dirt put together in one site, providing all the juice things I need for my presentation.
"Better business bureau report for people for the ethical treatment of animals." Better Business Bureau 2008 <http://charityreports.bbb.org/Public/Report.aspx?CharityID=1160.>
A source that isn’t all about what PETA does right or wrong. This is a financial report on PETA; how much they raise and how much they spend. The bias that this site has, is that it looks for the amount of standards for charity accountability it doesn’t meet and states each of them clearly, while they just say the amount of standards they do meet up to. It also doesn’t state where they got their information from. Nevertheless it is a great source for my presentation, because it is an up to date (2008) review of the financial status of PETA; it shows the amount of money they get, how they get it and how much they spend on certain programs.
Field, Chris. "PETA's dirty little secret." Human Events 13 June 2005
The irony behind PETA is great. This article goes into depth on how PETA has been killing animals at its shelters. They talk about the site petakillsanimals.com by the Center for Consumer Freedom. The article has some bias in it though; the site which posted the article is ‘leading the conservative movement,’ and conservatives don’t like the actions of PETA and their advertisement of not eating animals. They also relate back to the Center for Consumer Freedom, who also don’t like PETA since it goes against the eating of animals. Nevertheless, this site gives good detail on how PETA kills animals and shows what the people at the Center of Consumer Freedom think of PETA.
Galkin, Matthew. "I Am An Animal (the story of Ingrid Newkirk and PETA)." PETA 17 November 2007
A great documentary that takes a peak into the life of PETA’s Ingrid Newkirk. This documentary shows how Ingrid Newkirk runs PETA and what PETA is all about, with lots of visuals and interviews. The fact that the documentary was made by PETA shows its bias. They are only going to show the good side of PETA and how they are helping all the poor animals in this world. Nevertheless the documentary is of good use because it gives a good look into the person behind PETA, and has many useful quotes.
Grant, Catharine . The no-nonsense guide to animal right. Oxford, UK: New Internationalist Publications Ltd, 2006.
A small book with a lot of content; definitely no nonsense. The book gives a good description of animal rights, and puts PETA in the places where it stands out. Even though there are so many negatives sides that could also be discussed about animal rights, all that is in this book is for animal rights and encourages people to make a change. This bias can also be found in the source list, which only contains pro-animal rights sources. The book is of good use though, because it gives some good information on the topic of animal rights and includes PETA in a way that isn’t negative, as many of the sources I have are biased anti-PETA. This source really shows the good side of PETA, and what it initially stands for.
Jay Nordlinger "Peta vs. KFC: a dirty war against the Colonel". National Review 23 December 2003 <http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_24_55/ai_n13606711/>.
“Her group has promised that the company is in for a long battle.” This article discusses the ongoing battle between PETA and KFC. After having challenged several fast food chains, PETA has now found its new victim KFC. They are fighting for the humane killing of chickens which are supplied to the company. The article gives a detailed account of what has been happening between the two. The article tries to look at the situation from both sides, yet it seems to lean more towards the side of KFC, giving lots of critics on PETA. Yet the site is a useful source because it talks about the KFCruelty campaign of PETA, which is a focus point of the presentation, in great detail and states many of the things that have been revolving around the situation.
"Kentucky Fried Cruelty". PETA. <http://www.kentuckyfriedcruelty.com/>.
The site is an extension point of PETA; one of its many weapons in its fight against animal cruelty. On this site PETA specifically talks about their campaign against KFC. The bias of this site is really easy to figure, as it is a site created by PETA, so all that you are going to read on this site is against KFC. Even though biased and at times over-exaggerated, the things that they have to say about KFC can’t be denied. The site is of good use for my presentation, because it shows the reasoning behind PETA’s campaign against KFC, it has everything that you need to know from their side. It also has the opinions of several celebrities, which is also pretty interesting for my presentation.
"KFCruelty." Kentucky Fried Cruelty; PETA
A short yet straight forward video that grosses you out. This short documentary by KFCruelty shows behind the scenes at KFC and why PETA put up this group. Gross and cruel imagery show throughout the video. The bias from this video comes from the fact that it is created by an animal rights group against KFC; when they were creating it they already had their opinion ready. The video is backed up because it shows actual film footage and the support of many people and articles. This documentary is of use because it clearly shows and talks about KFCruelty and what the reason behind it is.
Major, Meg. "Animal rights- and wrongs ." Progressive grocer 01 January 2002
PETA’s greatest victims give their share. In this article PETA is introduced through its greatest victims; the food industry. The bias from this article in found in its author who works for the Progressive Grocer. Even though they are not necessarily against PETA, they do what is best for the food retail industry and all the campaigns from PETA against major food chains and companies is not what they like. Nevertheless the article is of good use for my presentation because it also has some quotes from different people from the food industry on PETA and its demands.
Michael Specter. "The Extremist." The New Yorker 14 April 2003
An great article that gives a deep inside on the brains behind PETA. In this article many interviews and correspondences with Ingrid Newkirk are put together, to give a peek into the mind of the head of PETA. The bias from this article comes from the fact that the article is created through what is said in interviews with Newkirk, and even though he brings up bad things every now and then, most of what is said is for PETA. The article is of good use for my presentation because it shows a good portrait of Newkirk, with a lot of quotes and details about her life. Almost like a biography in short.
Monagie, Katie. "Are animals equal?" Scholastic Update 16 april 1993
A powerful article, which has puts a lot together in a small text. This article looks at the people for and against animal rights, and the progression of animal rights. If the author of this article has a bias when writing this piece, it hardly shows. It talks about both people for and against animal rights, different levels of extremism and it considers the question “are all animals equal?” without forcing a certain answer on the reader. The only sense of bias that can be found is in the pictures, since they are not necessarily pleasant and really create empathy for the animals and therefore support for the animal-rights activists. The article is of good use because it shows the growth of animal rights (and PETA) really well, backing it up by statistics.
Osorio , Ivan and Iain Murray. "PETA: cruel and unusual." Humane Event 18 January 2006
An extension point from the Humane Event article “PETA’s dirty little secret.”Unlike the article PETA’s dirty little secret, it talks more about the organization and later then focuses on them killing animals using the Cook and Hinkle case. The site is the ‘leading the conservative movement,’ and the ideas of PETA are not what the conservatives like to see. It is a good article for my presentation though because it uses an actual case to show how PETA kills animals, and leads to PETA’s idea that an animal is better off dead than being put through suffering and humiliation.
Owen , Marna. Animal Rights; yes or no?. Minneapolis, USA: Lerner Publications Company, 1993.
A book that tries to figure out the good and the bad of animal rights, bringing in PETA many times. The book tries to be as unbiased as possible, but by looking at the bibliography you can conclude that most of its sources are pro-animal rights. The great thing about this book is that as it talks about different animal rights issues and brings in different organization for the matter, placing in PETA many times. This gives a good opportunity to compare PETA to other animal rights groups and most of the times PETA comes out being the most extreme one.
Penn & Teller, "BULLSHIT! PETA." 2004
PETA is BULLSHIT is the simple message of this documentary. Penn & Teller show you the hypocrisy behind the organization, ending with the focus of all the lives that animal research has saved. The bias comes from the series of Penn & Teller; Bullshit, in which they discuss things they find idiotic. This documentary was made only to prove the hypocrisy behind PETA. Penn & Teller talk to several people (from PETA supporters to scientists) about animal rights. They take quotes which come from the mouths of PETA supports, which go against PETA’s ideals. The documentary is of use for my presentation because it takes the dirt of PETA, gives some hard proof for it and makes sure that by the end of the video you agree that PETA is bullshit.
"People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals." Activist Cash
This site is a treasure chest full of information on PETA. This section of the site activist cash provides information on every part of PETA. Most of the information provided is negative though and most of the sources are linked to or from the Center for Consumer Freedom; this is the source of bias. Yet all the information which is given is backed up by several sources and official documents. The page is of great value for my presentation because it has a bit of information on everything (basic information, history, financial status, what they spend their money on and dirt).
"People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals." Wikipedia.
Wikipedia may not be the most reliable source, but it has all the basics that you need to know. In this article on PETA they give you a simple overview of the organization. It is hard to find bias in a site as Wikipedia, but by looking at their bibliography you can conclude that most of what they say is more in favor of PETA’s side, but it’s not that biased. Also the only external link they have is peta.org, yet the article has many different sources and notes. It is of good use for my presentation because it talks about the organization, its history and its actions in a simple way, giving me all the basics that I need.
"PETA". People for the Ethical Treatment of Animal. <http://www.peta.org/>.
This site is PETA’s main base on the web, where it is able to spread its ideas. It talks about all the great things PETA does, all the good feedback it gets from the media and what its goal is. For the bias behind this site you don’t need to look far, the PETA logo is all over the place. It is a site created by the members of the organization, so you can’t expect anything against it to be found there. Yet the site has all the latest news on what is going on within the organization and shows the way of working and thinking behind PETA. It can give me all the good stuff that I need on the organization, and will be of good use for my presentation.
"PETA kills animals". PETA kills animals. <http://www.petakillsanimals.com/>.
The anti-“food police” strikes again. On this site the Center for Consumer Freedom goes in to depth about the animals PETA kills which are under its care. The Center for Consumer Freedom can be seen as PETA’s biggest rival, as it seems that all they worry about it is to find more ways to make PETA look bad. This bias is spread all over the site. Yet fact that PETA kills animals under its care is well known, and this site provides detailed information about the amount of animals PETA kills, backed-up by several reports and files of the Virginia department of agriculture and consumer services. The site provides the perfect information on the irony of PETA that I need.
Saturday 1 November 2008
Can the record labels survive the internet?
The financial page; Can the record labels survive the internet?
By James Surowiecki
June 5, 2000
The new yorker
Many people download music for free from the internet every day, something that is costing record labels money. Napster is one of the sites that allow people to download songs on the internet for free. Some people call this stealing, but this is seen as the future of music? Many sites followed Napster and are causing problems for record labels, which are still doing it ‘old school.’ Record labels seem to be holding on to their high priced CD’s. A survey by Napster has shown that people using Napster are willing to pay a monthly fee to download the music; this shows that people are still willing to pay for music as long as it is affordable. In order for the record labels to keep up with the rapid growth in technology, they need to reinvent themselves. James Suwowiecki suggests a partnership between record labels to create a site from which people can download all their music, in high quality (which site like Napster don’t always have) for a monthly fee. It would bring with it the advantage of losing the costs of producing and distributing goods, but if a change will actually occur is the change. Whatever the record labels might decide to do, in order to survive they need to change, and maybe within a couple of years we will be downloading our CD’s in a way that also benefits the record labels.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)