SOCIAL MEDIA: A TOOL FOR MARKETING

KAYJATTA

According to Annie Greenberg, a web producer at Channel 41 (NBC), “social media is half marketing and half journalism”. Ms. Greenberg, during a speech to the reporting students at UMKC, underscored the importance of social media as a two way conversation for generating feedback, networking and public relations. Social media such as twitter and face-book help build a company’s brand by increasing its reach and influence, she said.

Defined as an interactive platform for individuals and communities to create and share information, social media is considered a key component in making today’s businesses relevant. When used as live tweets or face book posts, they may represent a personalized wire service for both the individual and the corporation. Unlike the traditional print media, social media is relatively inexpensive and immediately accessible. Therefore, social media is considered to have a decentralizing and democratizing effect on the way information is created and distributed. It is an increasingly important tool for those working in sales, public relations, human resource, and research and development.  Social media increases business exposure, increased traffic, and sales leads. The short headlines used in social media makes it especially suitable for marketing.

Ms. Greenberg also touched on the importance of social media in fighting crime, as well as the problems inherent in its use such as loss of privacy, defamation, copy right violations and credibility. She cited the Kansas City Police Department (KCPD) for utilizing social media, YouTube particularly, to apprehend criminals. The Courtney Love twitter defamation case was a landmark case that makes tweets (twitter posts) discoverable and admissible as evidence in a court of law. The rock star Courtney Love posted a negative comment on twitter about a fashion designer she had a dispute with. Those tweets were later admitted as evidence in a defamation case brought against the singer. Postings by individuals and corporations on social media may also be subject to copy right laws. However, postings on social media may lack the level of credibility that the traditional media forms such as print has.

Glacial striations in KCMO :

Following nature's trails: glacial striations from the last ice age (Pleistocene ) in Kansas City, Missouri

DOES RELIGIOUS BELIEF REQUIRE RATIONAL JUSTIFICATION?

DOES RELIGIOUS BELIEF REQUIRE RATIONAL JUSTIFICATION?

KayJATTA

INTRODUCTION:

Religious belief that lays claim to truth must require a rational argument for its justification. Rational arguments for justifying religious belief utilize objective scientific reasoning. In contrast, some religious beliefs or decisions may be dependent on personal nature and emotions rather than reasoning. In such cases, religious beliefs are not grounded in scientific objectivity or the intellect. Just like music, religious belief can be appreciated intellectually or emotional (personal nature).
This paper attempts to examine religious belief from a rational argumentative point of view. I will argue that one’s religious belief in God requires a rational argument for its
 justification. Lack of a rational prove of one’s religious belief defeats any purpose for such belief, in my view.

MAIN ARGUMENTS:

“It is wrong to belief in anything that is based on insufficient evidence”, said Alvin Plantinga. This argument appears inconsistent with revealed theology. Revealed theology as contained in the scriptures largely provides no rational justifications for what it claims. Since most religious beliefs are based on these scriptures, then religious belief invariably becomes a question of faith rather than rational proves.  Therefore, revealed theology about one’s belief that is not based on rational arguments is not justifiable.
 This position is also supported by classical foundationalism and evidentialism.  Classical foundationalism argues that a belief is justifiable if it is self evident, evident to the senses, and incorrigible. That is to say that a belief is justified if it is based on a basic belief.
Evidentialism on the other hand states that a belief is justified only if there is evidence to support it. Perhaps natural theology based on reasoning attempts to fill this evidential
 void in beliefs based on revealed theology. Therefore, St. Anselm's ontological argument and St. Aquina's teleological and cosmological arguments are not adequate
 justifications. David Hume, Liebniz, and John Leslie Mackie all dispute the compatibility of evil with the existence of an all-powerful and benevolent God. 
Therefore, St. Aquinas’ argument that the existence of God is self-evident because it exists naturally in us is not supported by evidentialism. Aquinas’ argument is a derivative of St. Anselm’s ontological argument which states that “something is self-evident if it is understood as soon as the terms are known”. It is important to note however that  Aquina's arguments are largely reactions to or re-positioning of an earlier Greek philosopher, Aristotle's postulations.
William James’ contention that “wherever there is willingness to
 act, there is some believing tendency” also touches on this ontological argument. James admits that “our passional and volitional nature (that is our nonintellectual nature) lay at the root of all our convictions and beliefs”. But Clifford perhaps countered that “belief is desecrated when given to unproved and unquestioned statements for the solace and private pleasure of the believer …”. Huxley may have said it more bluntly when he stood for “…not pretending to belief what one has no reason to belief”. Huxley's contention therefore refutes Alvin Plantinga's argument that "belief in God is a basic belief that requires no further justification".

Perhaps the greatest obstacle to justifying one’s religious belief is the “problems of evil and omnipotence”. The problem of God being all-knowing and all-merciful  and yet
 allowing so much evil in the world, presents a huge difficulty in rational justification of His existence. The presence of so much evil in the world appears to indicate a restriction on His powers. Is this the best He can do? Several scholars have approach this problem in different ways, however. There is a suggestion that "evil is a counterpart to good". That is to say that God could
 not have created good without creating evil alongside it. This argument itself limits Gods powers and undermines the attribute of omnipotence assigned to Him. Another
 argument to counter this contradiction in the existence and nature of God and once religious belief is that "evil is necessary as a means to good". This argument means that evil is not a counterpart of good, but rather a pathway to good. This idea  again conflicts with idea of an omnipotent God. It is also argued in Mackie (pg. 102) that the presence of evil is not about God at all, but rather human free will. Since God has enabled human beings with freewill, the presence of evil is a question of human choice between good and bad. Evil basically, according to this argument is a necessary consequence of freedom. These adequate and fallacious solutions to the problem of evil are far inadequate because they all place restrictions on God's omnipotence. We are still presented with the paradox of omnipotence. "Can an omnipotent God create things which he cannot subsequently control? Or Can an omnipotent God make rules which then bind him?", (Mackie, pg. 104). Therefore, according to John Leslie Mackie, unqualified omnipotence cannot be ascribed to anything that continues to exist through time and space. This appears to imply that the nature of existence itself contradicts the idea of omnipotence. 
 The question of the existence of an omnipotent God is very problematic, at least philosophically. And since one's religious belief invariably centers on this idea of omnipotent God, no one therefore can rationally justify his or her religious belief. Rational justification is however  necessary for any religious belief. Therefore Blaise Pascal's probabilistic argument in favor of the lack of rational prove for religious belief is both unethical and intellectually dishonest. This position is rejected by Clifford as already indicated above.
 
CONCLUSION:

In this paper, I have attempted to argue that one's religious belief  do require a rational arguments for its justification. I have presented a review of the literature concerning the
 philosophy of religion and developed my argument largely from there. I have examined the early theories about religious belief and its premises, particularly the
 existence of an all-powerful and all-knowing merciful God from St. Anselm, St. Aquinas ,and impliedly Descartes . I have also visited the British empiricist  David Hume; John Mackie; the rationalist philosopher, Liebniz; as well as Alvin Plantinga; and William James.
I have argued that the ontological, teleological, and cosmological arguments presented are far inadequate justifications for one's religious belief. I have also presented various
 argument for an against the" problem of evil" and the "problem  of omnipotence. I have disputed Pascal ,Plantinga ,and James's arguments for a rationally unjustified religious  belief. I have argued that rational argument for one's religious belief is absolutely necessary to justify such a belief to rational beings such as human beings. I have rejected Hume's Philo and instead somewhat embraced Cleanthes' humanistic view of the universe. I have largely agreed with Mackie's rejection of an unqualified omnipotent God.

KAYJATTA

PAGE ONE: THE DEMISE OF THE PRINT MEDIA

 

The print media has been in decline for the past several years, largely due to the emergence and growth of online (web) news. Major daily newspapers such as the Rocky Mountain News and the Philadelphia Daily have collapsed, some have filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, and others such as the New York Times have resorted to mass layoffs to stay afloat.

 A combination of technological advancement in communication, aggregation, and declining advertisement revenue are responsible for speeding up the crisis in the newspaper industry. With the internet and the proliferation of mobile devices such as the I-Phone, I-Pad, Notebook and Net book computers as well as social media such as Twitter and face book; dissemination and consumption of news has become greatly decentralized and diversified. The example of Brian Stelter, the twenty one year old at the New York Times is an epitome of the new direction the media is taking. With an increasing number of people being tech savvy and well connected socially, news generation, dissemination and accessibility is incredibly high. Many of these consumers of news turn to the convenience of the web for news; and for no surprise at all, the advertising dollars follow them there. “Brian Stelter is a robot assembled in the basement of the New York Times to destroy me”, said David Carr. While this statement may sound like a joke, it is a stark illustration of the confrontation between the old and the new media represented by Stelter and Carr respectively.

As the media technology changes, along with consumer preference for news, we are forced to reconsider the meaning and ethics of journalism. The cases of New York Times’ Judith Miller misinformation scandal over Weapons of Mass destruction in the run-up to the Iraq war, the Jason Blair (of the New York Times) scandal over plagiarism and stealing content from other newspapers, and the Wiki Leak scandals over the diplomatic cables have raised serious ethical questions about reporting and the role and nature of reporters. Wiki Leaks founder, Julian Assange, in answering a question from the New York Times’ Brian Stelter defined journalism as “a tool to a goal and that goal is justice”. But Assange, despite his long history of trouble with the law, is also believed to have stolen sensitive content for publication in Wiki Leaks. The Wiki Leak publications were not made with journalistic objectivity and good faith, but they also shattered that age-old power imbalance in the print media. The so-called “New York Times Effect” is suddenly under severe strain as news generation, dissemination and accessibility decentralizes.