MPP Part Three: It's Only You In There

Memo: Major Analysis Project

Title: It's Only You in There

Genre: Poster

Publication: Physically posted; published in a magazine, newspaper, online, or on a commercial.

Audience: My audience is very broad. My target audience is anyone of voting age and anyone who actively votes, but I would not limit it to that.

Brief Analysis: Once again, my goal was to do something provocative that would make people think. I wanted to remind my audience that it is their vote, no one elses, not their friends, their pastors, or whomever they watch or listen to.

I paired it with a faux organization and mission statement. My organization is the Coalition for Non-Partisan Politics. I want to encourage citizens to look at the facts and raw data. Too many times people automatically dismiss issues because there is a party name attached. My organizations goal is to discourage that and to encourage people to be more objective, especially with new issues.

MPP Part Two: Interview Questions with Roberta Combs

Interview Questions: Roberta Combs, President, Christian Coalition of America

Q: Can you tell me about how the Christian Coalition of America began?

Q: What core issues was the organization founded on?

Q: How have these issues evolved over the years?

Q: Why do you believe it is important for Christians to be involved in the political process?

Q: Are there any issues that are less of a priority because of modernization?

Q: The Moral Majority opposed legislation that would further the rights of women. You're a woman and the president of the this powerful coalition, what do you think of this?

Q: Why does the Christian Coalition of America partner with the GOP?

Q: Is your partnership solely based on social issues?

Q: What about fiscal issues? What is the relationship to the Bible?

Q: Concerning fiscal issues, the Bible teaches control but also teaches generosity and humility, especially when money and riches are concerned. Fiscally speaking only, what is the relationship between religion and the two political parties?

Q: Your organization is opposed to the current healthcare package. Can you explain this to me?

Q: They took abortion funding out of the package, why are you still opposed?

Q: How is the opposition Biblically supported?

Q: The Bible teaches readers to take care of the poor and their neighbors? Can you explain this?

Q: Do you think that healthcare is a right?

Q: What do you think of our current healthcare system?

Q: Why do you think politics has become so divided?
Q: How do you feel about this and how does it factor into your coalition's goals?

Q: What are the most important issues to you?

Q: Are they your bottom line?

Q: Why?

Q: Which issues take precedent above all else?

Q: Does that making choosing a candidate harder or easier?

Q: What if someone is highly qualified and stands for 80% of what you stand for, but votes against a couple of your key issues, then what?

Q: What kind of America do you see in the future?


Memo: Major Analysis Project

Title: Interview Questions for Roberta Combs, President of the Christian Coalition of America

Genre: interview

Publication: it could be for any newspaper or magazine

Audience: Even though I was attempting to be objective, I think my opinion still came through. Once again, my audience is broad, say the same audience of a major daily.

Brief Analysis: I wanted to ask her questions that got at the heart of the matter. I want to know why a religious organization would somewhat permanently associate themselves with one party. I wanted to know why the coalition was formed and what principles they governed by, and how that has changed or not changed over the years. That is why I asked her about women's rights, especially since she is in a role that a man is usually in.

I understand that people will unite based on certain issues, but I wanted to ask her questions about other issues, issues that have more to do with politics than religion. I asked her about healthcare because of this.

MPP Part One: Be Your Own Citizen

Memo: Major Analysis Project

Title: Be Your Own Citizen

Genre: Political Poster

Publication: Physically posted; in magazines; possibly part of a commercial

Audience: My audience is pretty broad: citizens. I wanted to target people who watched all the major news networks, like MSNBC, CNN, and FoxNews. I tried to put every political pundit I could think of on my poster, and a fair amount of them as well. I didn't want to exclude anyone in my audience.

Brief Analysis: My goal was to encourage people to think. Think about why they care about certain political issues. Is it because they really feel that way? Or is it because they are so absorbed in the media? I tried to make poster provocative. I wanted all the pundits to look like talking heads that just produced a lot of the same noise. I chose a white silhouette of a person because I wanted to convey the idea that someone was walking out of or away from all the media chatter. They were choosing to be an individual and make independent choices, no matter what party they fell in line with.

Youth and Reckless Driving

The Ad Council Youth and Reckless Driving video shows three teens plus another "teen" played by a comedian in a car. The driver begins to drive and the "teen" in the back says, "Don't you want to slow down." This implies that speed is one of the factors of reckless driving. The fact that all the passengers are males also implies that their demographic is more likely to drive recklessly and speed.

He then proceeds to pull out a video camera and ask the passenger sitting next to him to give his last words. He is more explicit about what will happen if the teen doesn't slow down: someone will get hurt. The ad is simple and brief. I think this is to its advantage and makes a simple message more powerful.

Cause and Effect

I have decided that I want to build and maintain a personal food blog, encompassing my two passions. I have been apprehensive about doing this because I am a perfectionist and I want my blog to look and sound a certain way, but I have come to the conclusion that I just need to take the plunge and do it.

Cooking and writing about food makes me feel alive. It is a catharsis and it is when my skills are at their best. Committing to a food blog would give me much needed personal accountability and help me sharpen my writing skills. I have also discovered that the majority of food writers in Seattle are not only freelance writers, but also got their start with their own personal food blogs. By doing my own, I would be taking the first step towards what I want to do.

Weekly Writing #7

Part I:
I think that I can establish myself as a credible resource concerning my topic for a variety of reasons. I genuinely want to engage and have others engage in a discussion about the interconnections between religion and politics. My agenda is selfless in the sense that I want my audience to understand the history of the topic, look at what they are passionate about objectively, and then make independent political choices.

Additionally, I understand both sides because I grew up in a religious politically conservative home, and while I currently lean more to the left, I am still a Christian. My upbringing and knowledge of the Bible and politics helps me to be objective and use sensible judgment when sifting through information. My goal is to decipher the difference between sincere political conviction and that which has been polluted by political advancement and manipulation.

Part II:
I decided to look at the comments on one of the Youtube videos I used as a resource. The film was produced by the History channel and it examines the conception of the Moral Majority and their entrance into politics. The comments were extremely frustrating for me to read and they are exactly why I want to discuss the issue. The majority of comments are illogical and extreme. One reader equates evangelism with Hitler. Giving voice to other side and chastises former President Carter for trying to find peace between Palestine and Israel. The commenter thinks that Carter's intentions are not Biblical.

"Mr. Carter if you really believe Jesus is important in your life, then WHY did you force Israel to give away land at camp david?? Read your bible!!!"

Everyone's comments are highly emotional and polarizing, leaving no room for discussion and only producing a tit-for-tat "dialogue" where nothing is accomplished or understood.

Susan Klebold Letter for "O"

Oprah commented that Susan Klebold's letter was chilling. I would add that as much as it is chilling it is complex and confusing at times.

Right from the beginning Susan strikes an emotional chord. She describes the paralyzing panic and fear that can encompass a parent when they believe their child is in trouble. She paints a vivid picture of her and her family's anguish before they knew what had happened. Her letter is filled with strong emotion and personal confusion. I believe that many readers would sympathize with her initial feelings because of the shock of such a terrible massacre.

Unfortunately, as the letter progresses and Susan describes Dylan's childhood, adolescence and what she perceived to be his "home life," it seems as though a large part of her is still in denial about him. She writes for pages, narrating her journey of discovery, but I think what is frustrating and where she begins to lose authority is when she begins drawing seemingly shallow conclusions about her obviously very deeply disturbed teenager. This is reflected in her skirting of blame for not seeing some of the red flags about Dylan, such as his tortuous and morbid writings. I found this incredibly frustrating. Yes, she may have not seen his school essay that drew attention from faculty, but if a person in your home is writing things like that, public or private, chances are there are blaring behavioral signs to be discussed. She says he was mopey, awkward, and didn't like high school. I find these conclusions to be incredibly shallow and generic. Many teenagers feel awkward and confused. These behaviors and feelings are not unique.

She then abruptly makes a jump to discussing what she believes to be the root of the issue: suicide prevention. I believe that this is an integral part of the massacre, but there is still something, something huge, missing from her letter. I think this is summed up in her statement, "In loving memory of Dylan." To me, that statement reflects a deep denial that she still has yet to reconcile.