1) http://franhelpedmemakethis.blogspot.com/2008/03/d-worddrugs-shhh.html
2) http://gorillabull.blogspot.com/2008/05/liar-liar.html
3) http://ejtblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/fines.html
And My assingments -
This is my essay on smoking:
Tobacco Companies have long sought to deny that cigarette-smoking constitutes an addiction. What other strategies of denial can you identify in the exhibits 8, 9 and 10 on the lecture handout? Comment on their plausibility
In the three extracts we find denial in different forms. We have public denial, internal denial (within the tobacco corporations), denial on the health consequences of smoking, and of course, denial over the addictive nature of the habit.
Let us look first at the idea of smoking as a choice – not an addiction, and how this is driven both publicly and privately. The very first paragraph in the opening exhibit shows us the drive of the tobacco companies to create an inner atmosphere of belief in the product, “We are, then, in the business of selling nicotine, an addictive drug effective in the release of stress mechanisms”[1]. Although an admission of the addictive nature of smoking products, the implication is that it is the resultant effects that are addictive (the ‘stress relieving’ aspect), and this constitutes a mental, rather than physical addiction. Exhibit #9, a more contemporary source, and a public one, theoretically with years more research and public reaction behind it, still talks about the “pleasure of smoking”[2], and is reticent (interestingly in an article that does not want to debate semantics) to use the word addiction at first, going instead with, “difficult to quit”[3], an idea that attaches well on the idea of smoking as, first and foremost, a pleasurable activity, rather than an unpleasant addiction. The very last exhibit (exhibit #10), coming we would assume before further research into the effects of smoking and pregnancy, but when it was acknowledged that it caused a decrease in birth weight, argues that women might smoke because they wanted smaller babies – another argument that presents smoking as a choice with a positive outcome. Going back to exhibit #8 finally, we even have public flat denial, “I do not believe that nicotine is addictive”[4], from another modern, and theoretically informed source.
Another major form of denial here is something that is explicitly talked about as a tool in exhibit #8 – doubt. “Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the mind of the general public”[5]. We see a specific strategy to, if not deceive, then spread doubt in the validity of research to provide the consumer with a point of denial. This is shown in practice in the very next paragraph in exhibit #8, coming two years later in a public document from the same company, “…the statement ‘cigarettes cause cancer’ is not a statement of fact but merely an [sic] hypothesis”[6]. As is pointed out above, this may give the consumer a point of denial, which, from the viewpoint of the company, may well be just as effective as actual evidence to support smoking as a habit. Exhibit #9 also shows the effectiveness of this strategy, with, “the popular understanding today is that smoking is addictive”[7], which is a far cry from saying it is addictive, and sows the seeds of doubt.
How plausible can we say these strategies are? Well, in light of the ‘body of evidence’, to use a phrase from one of our sources, it seems that arguing the idea of smoking as non-addictive, or addictive only in light of it’s positive effects, is one that simply cannot prevail in the long run. However, as a stalling tactic, to retain customers, or one used in the strategy of spreading doubt, then if not scientifically plausible, it certainly seems to have been effective, and in the long run, that may be all the tobacco companies are looking for.
Bibliography
Ph1000 week 4 handout: Smoking – Exhibits #8, #9, #10
[1] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #8. Paragraph 1
[2] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #9.
[3] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #9
[4] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #8. Paragraph 4
[5] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #8. Paragraph 2
[6] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #8. Paragraph 3
[7] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #9
In the three extracts we find denial in different forms. We have public denial, internal denial (within the tobacco corporations), denial on the health consequences of smoking, and of course, denial over the addictive nature of the habit.
Let us look first at the idea of smoking as a choice – not an addiction, and how this is driven both publicly and privately. The very first paragraph in the opening exhibit shows us the drive of the tobacco companies to create an inner atmosphere of belief in the product, “We are, then, in the business of selling nicotine, an addictive drug effective in the release of stress mechanisms”[1]. Although an admission of the addictive nature of smoking products, the implication is that it is the resultant effects that are addictive (the ‘stress relieving’ aspect), and this constitutes a mental, rather than physical addiction. Exhibit #9, a more contemporary source, and a public one, theoretically with years more research and public reaction behind it, still talks about the “pleasure of smoking”[2], and is reticent (interestingly in an article that does not want to debate semantics) to use the word addiction at first, going instead with, “difficult to quit”[3], an idea that attaches well on the idea of smoking as, first and foremost, a pleasurable activity, rather than an unpleasant addiction. The very last exhibit (exhibit #10), coming we would assume before further research into the effects of smoking and pregnancy, but when it was acknowledged that it caused a decrease in birth weight, argues that women might smoke because they wanted smaller babies – another argument that presents smoking as a choice with a positive outcome. Going back to exhibit #8 finally, we even have public flat denial, “I do not believe that nicotine is addictive”[4], from another modern, and theoretically informed source.
Another major form of denial here is something that is explicitly talked about as a tool in exhibit #8 – doubt. “Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the ‘body of fact’ that exists in the mind of the general public”[5]. We see a specific strategy to, if not deceive, then spread doubt in the validity of research to provide the consumer with a point of denial. This is shown in practice in the very next paragraph in exhibit #8, coming two years later in a public document from the same company, “…the statement ‘cigarettes cause cancer’ is not a statement of fact but merely an [sic] hypothesis”[6]. As is pointed out above, this may give the consumer a point of denial, which, from the viewpoint of the company, may well be just as effective as actual evidence to support smoking as a habit. Exhibit #9 also shows the effectiveness of this strategy, with, “the popular understanding today is that smoking is addictive”[7], which is a far cry from saying it is addictive, and sows the seeds of doubt.
How plausible can we say these strategies are? Well, in light of the ‘body of evidence’, to use a phrase from one of our sources, it seems that arguing the idea of smoking as non-addictive, or addictive only in light of it’s positive effects, is one that simply cannot prevail in the long run. However, as a stalling tactic, to retain customers, or one used in the strategy of spreading doubt, then if not scientifically plausible, it certainly seems to have been effective, and in the long run, that may be all the tobacco companies are looking for.
Bibliography
Ph1000 week 4 handout: Smoking – Exhibits #8, #9, #10
[1] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #8. Paragraph 1
[2] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #9.
[3] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #9
[4] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #8. Paragraph 4
[5] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #8. Paragraph 2
[6] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #8. Paragraph 3
[7] PH1000 Handout – Exhibit #9
And this is my short story on Drugs -
“I think it’s starting to take effect. Look at them eyes!” I looked over at him, wondering how I was letting myself be goaded by someone who was missing that many teeth, and formulated my response.
“Fuck off”
“Not my fault now is it son? Manners don’ cost nothin’ do they? An’ a job’s a job, gotta keep meself entertained some ‘ow ent I?”
Glancing over at what he was gesturing to, I had to admit the eyes did look a little vacant.
“Still no’ used to it, are ye? Always takes you types a while, dun it? Anyway, best pay attention, don’t wanna miss ‘im fallin’ over.”
The figure we were looking at broke out laughing and stumbled forward, smashing into the table in front of him, and sent his now empty syringe flying over toward us. Flinching before I could catch myself, I scowled as my guide cackled at me.
“Can’t ‘urt you can it? Anyway, dun ‘e look like ‘e’s ‘aving a good time? Envious are ye?”
I looked at the eyes again. There was nothing there now, just oblivion. The fall had left him with a cut just above his left eye, and the blood was slowly trickling behind the lid. He didn’t blink. I had an overwhelming feeling that he wasn’t there, and that the unusually slow rise and fall of his chest were just hinting at life. He still wore the smile the laugh had faded into, but it was somehow grotesque without the animation behind it. I turned away.
“Can’t stomach it eh? What, you fink I bought you ‘ere to scare ye? Show ye a bad trip? Son, this is what ‘e wanted to get like. This is why he did it. An’ ‘e ain’t dead neither. Give ‘im a couple o’ ‘ours an’ he’ll be at it again. Glamorous life eh?
I closed my eyes. I didn’t have the energy to answer back, “Take me home. Please”.
I hesitated. “For fucks sake, just take me home!” Opening my eyes I wheeled as if to turn on my guide, and stared at the empty space. I glanced ‘round and realised the change.
“Fuck off”
“Not my fault now is it son? Manners don’ cost nothin’ do they? An’ a job’s a job, gotta keep meself entertained some ‘ow ent I?”
Glancing over at what he was gesturing to, I had to admit the eyes did look a little vacant.
“Still no’ used to it, are ye? Always takes you types a while, dun it? Anyway, best pay attention, don’t wanna miss ‘im fallin’ over.”
The figure we were looking at broke out laughing and stumbled forward, smashing into the table in front of him, and sent his now empty syringe flying over toward us. Flinching before I could catch myself, I scowled as my guide cackled at me.
“Can’t ‘urt you can it? Anyway, dun ‘e look like ‘e’s ‘aving a good time? Envious are ye?”
I looked at the eyes again. There was nothing there now, just oblivion. The fall had left him with a cut just above his left eye, and the blood was slowly trickling behind the lid. He didn’t blink. I had an overwhelming feeling that he wasn’t there, and that the unusually slow rise and fall of his chest were just hinting at life. He still wore the smile the laugh had faded into, but it was somehow grotesque without the animation behind it. I turned away.
“Can’t stomach it eh? What, you fink I bought you ‘ere to scare ye? Show ye a bad trip? Son, this is what ‘e wanted to get like. This is why he did it. An’ ‘e ain’t dead neither. Give ‘im a couple o’ ‘ours an’ he’ll be at it again. Glamorous life eh?
I closed my eyes. I didn’t have the energy to answer back, “Take me home. Please”.
I hesitated. “For fucks sake, just take me home!” Opening my eyes I wheeled as if to turn on my guide, and stared at the empty space. I glanced ‘round and realised the change.
Home.
I sighed, and looked toward the table at my feet. Syringe and spoon, lighter and smack.
I waited, just a second, and walked away.
Rationale
In terms of the content of my piece I decided early on that I wanted to carry on the debates I started in my blog: rather than the health implications of drugs, I’m interested in the consequences of complete escapism. As such, I’m using a first time heroin user confronted with the realities of taking heroin. The very thing that has driven him to the drug is the opportunity to escape the world, and yet it this aspect of escapism to the point of incapacitation that scares him the most when confronted by it. The fantasy aspect of it I think demonstrates the opportunity to always turn back from that brink, which is an important message when dealing with the bleak reality of hard drugs. These two aspects contribute to the debate by reaffirming the disturbing nature of withdrawal from the world and reinforcing the fact that serious drug abuse it is a tragedy.
The choice of a first person narrative was deliberate to try and engender sympathy for the character in the reader, which links to the point above. The secondary character that was introduced has three deliberate parts. Firstly, being unlikable (which I think he is for the most part), reinforces the idea that likability and right don’t necessarily go hand in hand: the unlikable can be right, and although not directly a comment on governments or schools or parents, it is that idea that the message should be listened to regardless of the medium. The second aspect to his use is the earthiness he brings to the plot. It is simple – the individual that was being watched was a mess, and he was never going to dodge that. Thirdly he acts as a foil to the thoughts of the main character, linking his internal monologue and pushing the narrative along. The piece is meant to challenge the reader – what would you do? How would you feel? It is not a guide to a moral, and though I hope that people will end up with the same view as my character, that is not the purpose.
In terms of how successful I feel the piece is, I believe it has been wholly appropriate to the topic, bringing up questions on the morality of drug taking and its affects, as I have mentioned. The only aspect to it which I think it hinges on is the likeability of my main character, and that unfortunately is out of my hands!
I sighed, and looked toward the table at my feet. Syringe and spoon, lighter and smack.
I waited, just a second, and walked away.
Rationale
In terms of the content of my piece I decided early on that I wanted to carry on the debates I started in my blog: rather than the health implications of drugs, I’m interested in the consequences of complete escapism. As such, I’m using a first time heroin user confronted with the realities of taking heroin. The very thing that has driven him to the drug is the opportunity to escape the world, and yet it this aspect of escapism to the point of incapacitation that scares him the most when confronted by it. The fantasy aspect of it I think demonstrates the opportunity to always turn back from that brink, which is an important message when dealing with the bleak reality of hard drugs. These two aspects contribute to the debate by reaffirming the disturbing nature of withdrawal from the world and reinforcing the fact that serious drug abuse it is a tragedy.
The choice of a first person narrative was deliberate to try and engender sympathy for the character in the reader, which links to the point above. The secondary character that was introduced has three deliberate parts. Firstly, being unlikable (which I think he is for the most part), reinforces the idea that likability and right don’t necessarily go hand in hand: the unlikable can be right, and although not directly a comment on governments or schools or parents, it is that idea that the message should be listened to regardless of the medium. The second aspect to his use is the earthiness he brings to the plot. It is simple – the individual that was being watched was a mess, and he was never going to dodge that. Thirdly he acts as a foil to the thoughts of the main character, linking his internal monologue and pushing the narrative along. The piece is meant to challenge the reader – what would you do? How would you feel? It is not a guide to a moral, and though I hope that people will end up with the same view as my character, that is not the purpose.
In terms of how successful I feel the piece is, I believe it has been wholly appropriate to the topic, bringing up questions on the morality of drug taking and its affects, as I have mentioned. The only aspect to it which I think it hinges on is the likeability of my main character, and that unfortunately is out of my hands!
No comments:
Post a Comment