2.10 Course Reflection

            What I found most useful about this course was that it forced me to read the newspaper and to stay current with the news, a habit that I will likely continue after this course. We talked about the news, debated about the news, wrote about it, and also compared different news sources. I now regularly check the Huffington Post and the New York times online as opposed to just getting my news from Yahoo. I feel that I am a more informed citizen and that I will definitely be ready to cast my vote for the next presidential election. I also think my knowledge and desire to be informed of current events will definitely help in my future, especially in interviews. Also, the amount of writing we completed in this course has improved my writing process tremendously. I no longer fear writing six page papers because this course has almost made writing fun, key word being almost. I liked how for the most part we were able to choose our topics to write about, especially for the longer essays. I find it incredibly difficult to write six pages about a topic that has no interest or connection to my own life. 

Extended Essay 2 Final

Meara Stack

Writing 1122

Eric Leake

5 March 2012

A Look Inside the Fear Factory

            It is no secret that Apple is one of the world’s most successful companies. As of 2011, Apple’s net worth was 302.47 billion dollars and continues to grow. Apple products are instantly recognized worldwide and especially in the United States it is uncommon to not own an Apple product. Whether it is an iPhone, iPod, iPad, Mac, or Apple TV, people cannot get enough of Apple. This company had total worldwide sales of 65.23 billion dollars in 2011 and this number will continue to grow as Apple continues to release new technology. Until recently, Apple dominated the news each time former CEO Steve Jobs released the latest version iPhone to the public in highly anticipated and publicized event. When new Apple products are released, those crazed Apple fanatics go gaga and start drooling over them desperately wanting to own one, even though their iPhone 3S still works perfectly. However, after recent explosions and suicides in the Apple manufactory in China called Foxconn, Apple has been receiving quite a bit of negative press.

            The spark of this negative attention happened several months ago when it was reported that about one dozen Foxconn employees committed suicide in addition to several in-factory explosions due to dust build up. Naturally, people became curious about what actual happens inside the factory where their iPhones and iPads are made and as a profiting company, Apple dislikes any negative press. In an effort to turn the news about their company from negative to positive, Apple granted ABC’s Nightline reporter Billy Weir full access to every machine and employee inside the factory.

             In a preview to his investigation, Weir wrote that he believes the reason he was finally granted access inside Foxconn was a result of the recent explosions inside the factory and suicides committed by Foxconn employees. Not only did Apple invite Weir and his camera crew inside, but also members of the Fair Labor Association (FLA). The FLA assessed the working conditions and mental conditions of the workers. Their report and analysis will be released sometime in March hopefully extending to the original story. I would expect more articles to be produced once these reports are released in an effort to extend and spread news relating to Apple.

            I first heard about this story through Yahoo News one day when I was browsing for something interesting to read. I watched the three-minute preview clip aimed at grabbing people’s attention so they would watch the full story the next night and it definitely caught my interest. Then I proceeded to read Billy Weir’s introduction and background story about why he was doing this news story. At the time I was unaware of the explosions and suicides that brought the negative attention to Apple. Like many of my peers, I assume, I was also unaware of Foxconn and the mass production of Apple products that take place there. I knew the production of these products had to be taking place in China like most of the products I consume on a regular basis but I did not realize to what scale and magnitude. Nor did I know that most of the production is completed by hand, not by machine.

            With my interest spiked, I sat down and watched ABC’s Nightline special title “Inside Apple” not knowing what exactly to expect. What I saw was row after row after row of young Chinese workers doing the same mindless task over and over and over. One worker will insert the tiny camera into the iPad while another with dust off the touch screen and another will package the finish product. Thousands hands are required to make one iPad and they must repeat this process for twelve long hours a day to keep up with demands. They are paid on average $1.75 an hour and most employees live in dorms attached to the factory where rent is cheap. The most common complaints among workers when interviewed were low wages, crowded living conditions, tiredness, and boredom. When Weir addressed the recent suicides with the boss at Foxconn, he said his company’s suicide rate is lower than the national average in China and that Apple executives took measures to ensure the workers are mentally stable. Giant nets now hang on the sides of the buildings to prevent people from jumping out of the windows and workers now take surveys (on iPads, ironic?) to assess their mental conditions.

            Although there was no striking evidence that the factory workers were severally mistreated, I was curious to find out what other people thought. I thought that this news story might spark some sort of nation wide debate about being informed consumers and how big American companies treat their workers in China. Unfortunately, the big debate I was hoping for never happened. But the story did not go completely unnoticed. I did find some reputable sources talking about it the next day.

            While it did not make the headlines, the New York Times and the Huffington Post acknowledged this story. The Huffington Post mostly summarized the episode of Nightline, which did not help me in my quest to find the next great debate. However, the New York Times went deeper into the story. With the title reading “Pressure, Chinese and Foreign Drive Change at Foxconn,” the article discusses why cameras were allowed inside the factory and how it will impact Apple in the future.

            That great debate that I was looking for, well I found it, from one hundred passionate and opinionated people leaving comments online. Comments range from bitterly sarcastic to aggressively angry. I view these comments as countering not only the authors of this article, but also Apple as a company. Some people argue that outsourcing will always exist due to cheap labor and heavy demand from the United States and others are outraged at the working conditions in the factory. Commenter A.M. Garrett was affected by the news story as he comments,

I still have the first iPhone. I remember being so happy to get one as a gift. Now I can't think of having that same feeling about buying a new one, knowing what I know now about how it's made. So I'll stick with the 3G. Why do we need new phones every few years anyway?

Garrett is upset with the way iPhones are made and finds consumption of every new model unnecessary. However, Troy from Utah disagrees and counters Garrett as he comments directly at Garrett, “I'm not sure I understand "knowing what I know now about how it's made". Having lived in China I can tell you that Foxconn is at the top of the heap of factory jobs.” Although reading comments is not a traditional source for news media, it is interesting, informative, and often funny to read what these commenters have to say.

            Another non-traditional news source that covered this story is The Daily Show. This show is a half hour news show satirizing current events, tradition news media, and political figures. Host Jon Stewart reports the story in a seven-minute segment calling Foxconn “Fear Factory.” The Daily Show and other shows similar to it are now becoming more popular, especially for my generation, and some of my classmates cite it as a major source where they get their news.

            Because we rely so heavily on the Internet in today’s society, the way in which we get news has changed drastically from the beginnings of the news. Jeff Jarvis compares the old press sphere to the new press sphere in several diagrams that make the differences quite obvious. Before, there was only the press reporting on the news and that is the only source people had for getting the news. However, now there is a multitude of sources people use such as online blogs, online newspapers, television shows, friends, and so on. I think the new press sphere is accurate and actually creates better-informed citizens because the news is now so easily accessible. Although there were not as many follow-up articles investigating Foxconn and Apple as I had hoped, there was quite a bit of discussion online. I think one reason this story did not get more attention was because the Nightline episode was not conclusive about if the workers are treated fairly or not.

            I continued my search for information and comments on this story and about two weeks after it first aired I did find some controversies. From the Tech section of the Huffington Post I found that there are reports stating that Foxconn hid some of their younger workers when the cameras where there. Venture Beat reports that Foxconn technically did not break any laws by simply relocating their youngest workers to different departments. The real issue becomes how those workers are treated when there are not cameras present. The Washington Post quoting an Apple representative stating, “A spokesperson said that the company insists on safety and respect for workers, and that… suppliers ‘must live up to (our) requirements if they want to keep doing business with Apple.”’ I believe this story will continue to be extended when the FLA reports are released and that those reports will ultimately determine if Apple mistreats its factory workers.

            As new reports continue to be released, this story will continue to grow and gain momentum until people are satisfied with the results. Due to the new press sphere and all of the debates online through blogs and commenting though, this story along with others may never truly have an end. The Internet makes it easy to forward, extend, and counter articles and story with just a few clicks of the mouse. For these reasons, the rate at which news is passed around and received is faster than ever and the depths of stories are thick. All it takes is a quick preview or catchy headline to attract readers who will follow a story from birth all the way through the end. I believe the Internet as revolutionized the way we receive the news and we are all better off and more informed because of it.

           

Bibliography

Barboza, David, and Charles Duhigg. "Pressure, Chinese and Foreign, Drive Change at

Foxconn." New York Times. 19 Feb. 2012. Web. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/20/technology/pressures-drive-change-at-chinas-electronics-giant-foxconn.html?_r=1&ref=technology>.

"Fear Factory." The Daily Show. Web. 01 Mar. 2012.

<http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-january-16-2012/fear-factory>.

Post, The Huffington. "Nightline Tours Apple Supplier Foxconn: Get An

Unprecedented Look At The Factory (VIDEO)." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 22 Feb. 2012. Web. 25 Feb. 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/22/nightline-apple-supplier-foxconn_n_1293393.html>.

Story, Watch The Video above for the Full. "Report: Foxconn Hid Teen Workers Before

Inspection (VIDEO)." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 23 Feb. 2012. Web. 06 Mar. 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/23/apples-foxconn-hid-teen-workers_n_1297515.html>.

Weir, Billy. "Inside Apple." ABC News. ABC News Network. Web. 06 Mar. 2012.

<http://abcnews.go.com/International/slideshow/inside-apples-factories-china-15750239>.

                       

rough draft #2

Meara Stack

Writing 1120

Eric Leake

28 February 2012

Title

            It is no secret that Apple is one of the world’s most successful companies. As of 2011, Apple’s net worth was 302.47 billion dollars and continues to grow. Apple products are instantly recognized worldwide and especially in the United States it is uncommon to not own an Apple product. Whether it is an iPhone, iPod, iPad, Mac, or Apple TV, people cannot get enough of Apple. This company had total worldwide sales of 65.23 billion dollars in 2011 and this number will continue to grow as Apple continues to release new technology. Until recently, Apple dominated the news each time former CEO Steve Jobs released the latest version iPhone to the public in highly anticipated and publicized event. Each unveiling of a new product reminds me of the part in the Lion King when baby Simba is held up majesty for all of the animal kingdom to praise and worship. When new Apple products are released, those crazed Apple fanatics go gaga and start drooling over them desperately wanting to own one, even though their iPhone 3S still works perfectly. However, after recent explosions and suicides in the Apple manufactory in China, Apple has been receiving quite a bit of negative press.

            Unknown or simply ignored by many Apple consumers, the production of these sleek technological masterpieces is just as important as their invention and design. With such an enormous and ever growing demand for these products, production is under more pressure than ever. Underneath the glamorous display in every Apple store, lies millions of young Chinese workers working relentlessly on the same small task day in and day out to make an iPhone or iPad.

            What exactly goes on in the Foxconn factories where Apple products are made used to be a mystery until ABC’s Nighline reporter, Billy Weir, was granted full camera access to every employee and machine inside. In a preview to his investigation, Weir wrote he believes the reason he was finally granted access inside the Foxconn was a result of the recent explosions inside the factory and suicides committed by Foxconn employees. Apple executives were not happy with the negative press they were receiving so not only did they invite Weir and his camera crew inside, but also members of the Fair Labor Association (FLA). The FLA assessed the working conditions and mental conditions of the workers. Their report and analysis will be released sometime in March. Maybe then we can truly conclude whether Apple treats their Foxconn factory workers fairly or not. But until those reports are released, we can make our own conclusions based on the evidence presented in Nightline’s thirty-minute broadcast.

            I first heard about this story through Yahooo! News one day when I was browsing for something interesting to read. I watched the three-minute preview clip aimed at grabbing people’s attention so they would watch the full story the next night and it definitely caught my interest. Then I proceeded to read Billy Weir’s introduction and background story about why he was doing this news story. At the time I was unaware of the explosions and suicides that brought the negative attention to Apple. Like many of my peers, I assume, I was also unaware of Foxconn and the mass production of Apple products that take place there. I knew the production of these products had to be taking place in China like most of the products I consume on a regular basis but I did not realize to what scale and magnitude. Nor did I know that most of the production is completed by hand, not by machine.

            With my interest spiked, I sat down and watched ABC’s Nightline special title “Inside Apple” not knowing what exactly to expect. What I saw was row after row after row of young Chinese workers doing the same mindless task over and over and over. One worker will insert the tiny camera into the iPad while another with dust off the touch screen and another will package the finish product. Thousands hands are required to make one iPad and they must repeat this process for twelve long hours a day to keep up with demands. They are paid on average $1.75 an hour and most employees live in dorms attached to the factory where rent is cheap. The most common complaints among workers when interviewed were low wages, crowded living conditions, tiredness, and boredom. When Weir addressed the recent suicides with the boss at Foxconn, he said his company’s suicide rate is lower than the national average in China and that Apple executives took measures to ensure the workers are mentally stable. Giant nets now hang on the sides of the buildings to prevent people from jumping out of the windows and workers now take surveys (on iPads, ironic?) to assess their mental conditions.

            Although there was no striking evidence that the factory workers were severally mistreated, I was curious to find out what other people thought. I thought that this news story might spark some sort of nation wide debate about being informed consumers and how big American companies treat their workers in China. Unfortunately, the big debate I was hoping for never happened. But the story did not go completely unnoticed. I did find some reputable sources talking about it the next day.

            While it did not make the headlines, the New York Times and the Huffington Post acknowledged this story. The Huffington Post mostly summarized the episode of Nightline, which did not help me in my quest to find the next great debate. However, the New York Times went deeper into the story. The end of the article raised questions raised if changes were actually going to be made not only inside the Faxconn factories, but also to China’s entire system of manufacturing by the billions. Big manufacturing companies such as Foxconn are worried young Chinese workers are becoming less willing to live and work in the factories. To compensate, Foxconn is now investing money in building robots to do some of the work. Will this solve the problem of workers unwilling to work for low wages or will it cause greater problems rising unemployment rates in an already struggling economy in China?

            I think it will be difficult to find all the answers to my questions. I believe the published reports from the FLA will help however, Americans will always have to demand for these products and therefore I believe consumers have to most power to make changes. Consumers need to be better informed about where all these products they purchase come from. If consumers protest how products are made and stop buying them, maybe then we will see changes in the way factory workers in China are treated. Now I know that is a lot to ask for and changes do not happen overnight, but judging by the comments I read to the article in the New York Times, it might be possible.

            That great debate that I was looking for, well I found it, from three hundred passionate people leaving comments online. Comments range from bitterly sarcastic to aggressively angry at anyone they can blame. Some people argue that outsourcing will always exist due to cheap labor and heavy demand from the United States and others are outraged at the working conditions in the factory.

            Time will tell if Apple makes any changes in favor of their factory workers in China. In addition to the extremely low wages, I believe the working conditions need to change as well. I hope that other large American companies will follow Apple’s example of at the very minimum of looking more closely at their factories in China. What Apple did, allowing unprecedented access into their factory, should encourage other companies to do the same and should make consumers more aware of where the products they buy come from. I look forward to reading the FLA’s report on the Foxconn workers and waiting for any type of change to take place in production factories in China.

           

P9 Taking an Approach

In the most simplistic definition, Harris defines “taking an approach” as “working in the mode of another writer” (Harris 74). When taking an approach it is necessary to change the way you think, you must transform your ideas. If you don’t, you are not correctly taking an approach; you are just “applying ideas to examples.” The idea of taking an approach is applying new ideas to an existing theory, which is sort of similar to forwarding, in that you are creating new ideas. However, one way these two methods differ is that taking an approach derives from an authors writing style or sense, not just the written text.

           

            Harris describes three methods to use the styles of other writers in your own writing, they are: acknowledging influences, turning an approach on itself, and reflexivity. Acknowledging influences is pretty self-explanatory that is, recognizing authors who you’ve model for your own writing. Turning an approach on itself means asking the same questions as the original author. I interpret reflexivity to mean recognizing the mode in which you have written in.

            The idea of taking an approach is rewriting because you are using something that is already there and making it your own, just like forwarding and countering. In this example, you are taking another writer’s mode or methods of writing and practicing them in your own writing.

            I think the idea of taking an approach is visible in the New York Times and Huffington Post by the way the newspaper and websites are modeled. The editors have done research and know what works visually and want people want to read. I’m sure they have looked at past newspapers and blogs and studied why one fails and another succeeds. They take the strategies of the successful ones and apply them to their own paper in hopes that they too will succeed. 

P8 Countering Myself

When I was looking back on all of the blogs I’ve written this quarter, I came across one that, after thinking about it, I would like to change. In other words, I would like to counter myself. It sounds kind of weird saying that; I am going against what I agreed with back in January. When Harris talks about countering I don’t think he meant for us to counter ourselves. However, I think countering ourselves, although strange, might be the best way to revise your own piece of writing. Looking at it so critically can make for excellent revisions.

            Anyway, back to the main topic, the blog that I am now going to counter is about Chris Hedges’s article titled “America the Illiterate.” Initially, I was upset over the staggering statistics about our country’s literacy rates. I was concerned for the future of our country and sadden by the huge percentage of the population that is illiterate. But a few weeks later I wrote an essay with the main point being that the definition of literacy is different for everyone. After I really thought about it, I was less upset about the just the numbers of our illiteracy rates, and more focused on the fact the Hedges failed to define what it means to be literate.

            So to revise my previous post, (P7 The Shocking Truth About Literacy in America) I would have to say I am still shocked about how high America’s illiteracy rates are and I still believe that is unacceptable but, I realize Hedges made faults in his article. He neglected to define the word “literacy.” All he did was scold us as a nation for becoming more stupid because of technology. He did not offer any ideas on how to change it or how to use technology to make positive changes. He also failed to mention all of the ways in which technology benefits us. His argument is one sided and he benefit from reading Harris’s chapter on countering. According to Harris, to counter effectively, one must acknowledge the other side of the argument and how your viewpoint differs. Hedges’s article just acknowledges one side, his side and at first I fell victim to believing everything he said until I looked at it more closely.  

P7 Countering

The way I see it, Harris defines “countering” as arguing your own ideas in a polite manner. Harris makes it clear that countering is not engaging in a fight to the death debate to find out who is right and who is wrong. Countering means to introduce a new idea into a conversation. According to Harris the goal of countering is “not to refute what has been said before, to bring the discussion to the end, but to respond to prior views in ways that move the conversation in new directions” (Harris 56).

            One method to countering Harris discusses is to take the original author’s words and acknowledge what the author is trying to convey before you can refute it. Harris writes “To identify what a text fails to do, you need to be clear about what it achieves…” (Harris 57). When countering a certain author, you must first make sense of what the author is trying to say, whether you agree with it or not. By coming to terms with the original text, you can write a more compelling counter argument.

            I think Harris defines countering not as being defensive or aggressive about a certain topic, but offering a critique of what another author has previously written.

           

            I see countering sometimes in the Huffington Post’s Healthy Living blog when bloggers take new research to debunk nutrition or health myths that have been around for a while. They take the ideas that already exist and put a new perspective on them. These new ideas are always more convincing when there is scientific to back them up. 

P6 Forwarding

After reading Harris’s chapter titled Forwarding, I feel like I really only needed to read the first five pages to understand what his definition of the word is. He described what his idea of forwarding meant, briefly described four types of forwarding, and then provided all of these confusing, drawn-out examples of each type. I lost interest and focus a few pages into what “Illustrating” means.

With that aside, I think I still have a pretty decent grasp on what “forwarding” a text means. One of Harris’s first points in this chapter is the metaphor that writing is a conversation. He says that the purpose of writing an essay is not to have the final say an in argument, but rather to continue the discussion of the topic or add more input to an ongoing discussion. Harris writes, “A dialogue is not a debate. You don’t win a conversation, you add to it, push it ahead, keep it going…” (Harris 36). I agree with this point Harris makes. Unless writing a persuasive essay, you don’t set out to write an essay to convince someone that your opinion or ideas are the best and correct. You write an essay to introduce new ideas or to put your own spin on a topic. The goal of an essay is to strengthen an idea you believe in and by doing so, inspire readers to investigate for themselves and come to their own conclusions.

Harris writes about four ways in which you can forward a text: illustrating, authorizing, borrowing, and extending. What I took away from reading about these four methods in detail is quite simple. If you are using another text as an example (whether by illustration, authorization, borrowing, or extending) don’t use an example just to use an example. You must use a relevant example to strengthen and reinforce what you already have.

I think blogs are an excellent example of forwarding texts. Usually, blogs are not the place people go to find breaking news that is the job of the news. However, a blogger will take a particular news story and use it to continue the conversation on that topic. A blog could potentially have more background to the story or will have an opinion on the matter. Another way blogs forward texts is that often blogs will have links you can click for additional information or related stories thus continuing that initial conversation that started it all.