I saw the news from the CNN. In the news there was interview with Trump for firing Comey. Trump said that he actually thought when he made that decision he also got a very, very strong recommendation from the Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein. And CNN said Rosenstein's recommendation is used for pretense and the real reason why Trump fired Comey is Because he didn't like him.
For that reason, what CNN guessing is "Comey's ongoing push by investigation that Russia meddle in the US election"
The news from the FOX, there was a same story that Rosenstein recommend to fire comey and Trump fired him.
However, FOX said that the real reason for firing is just his incompetence. And, Rosenstein's recommendation is his own opinon.
In my opinion, Why Trump firing Comey is to disturb the FBI investigation. Because the time when Comey fired is progressing of the investigation.
In summary, the news from the both is similar except for one that point of view of Rosenstein's recommendation.
In my opinion, the CNN is left-leaning and the FOX is right-leaning so the difference comes from the inclination.
The most news i see in Korea about president Trump is reflective of the NYT. but, the reflection of the CNN and FOX is not that little.
In summary, the news from the both is similar except for one that point of view of Rosenstein's recommendation. -> In summary, the news from the both is similar except for some point of view about real reason and Rosenstein's recommendation.
There are different view between Fox and Cnn clearly I link one video that shows different between Fox and Cnn's point of view
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yullSsrClk
It is about 911 terror. They treated the same case as different point of view so judging which news is the fact is difficult. Comparing different channel can be a way i think and it is important. Because as you said many news channels leaned to one point of view ordinarily.
Mr. Trump explained the firing by citing Mr. Comey’s handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, even though the president was widely seen to have benefited politically from that inquiry. But in his letter to Mr. Comey, released to reporters by the White House, the president betrayed his focus on the continuing inquiry into Russia and his aides. Senator Dick Durbin said on the Senate floor that the firing of Mr Comey raises questions as to whether the Russian interference in the last presidential election will also be investigated by the FBI.
I think in this matter, left and right side have to make a same voice. It is clearly that Trump wants to withdraw investigation against his secretary. It is clearly he disturb the law of U.S. and should be investigated immediately. When if president Trump is involved with this matter he need to be impeached.
In the recent news about United Air incident involving an Asian man being dragged out of the seat of the air plane, both Korean news and American news reported basically same views. Some news reported that United Air dragged the man out because of the overbooking, and the others reported that it was because some crew members should on board. The Asian man was a doctor originally from Vietnam. As he refused to get off the plane voluntarily, the crew called the police and they dragged him out of the seat.
Not all of the Korean news reported the incident as racism and same with the American news. But both imply the possibility of racism. There are clear instructions of who to remove from overbooked flights according to Joseph Lamonaca, an aviation attorney and airline transport pilot. So United Air’s insist that they chose 4 passengers randomly leaves all the doubts of fairness in the process of selecting 4 passengers. Unfairness in the process implies the possibility of racism.
But I think this was not racism. Definition of racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. Since there is no evidence that United Air specifically selected an Asian man and also there is no way to prove their belief, it’s hard to say that was racism. Only doubts and possibilities are making the Asians get angry.
Whether it was about overbooking or not it is not important. I can't accept the way about treating the passenger. If the way to select 4 passengers were random United Air should prove it.
And I think it can be racism. We have to check the precedent about the same treatment to caucasian. If the Asian man was not a Asian United air would not treat him like that.
Although there are no proofs that United Airlines really randomly choose an Asian man, or whatnot, the actions they took is considered as racism. Lot of people wondered what if the United Airlines 'randomly chose' an African-American or a white lady? They would not have treated the same as they treated David Dao. The United Airlines likely thought that just because he was Asian, he would be compliant.
All things aside, the one thing United Airlines have no excuse for is beating the passenger. Overbooking is one thing, and racism shouldn't happen either, but the fact that flight attendants beat up passenger can not be accepted in anyway. At least not without irresistible force such as crimes or terrorism. However, this was simply United Airline's mistake for not preparing enough seats for their crew, using forces when it was not needed at all, and tried to overlook this incident in total. In this case, I think racism is in the bottom of the list of what United Airlines did wrong. Meaning this should be considered not racism, but more as "anti-human" behavior.
Thanks for your replies. First of all, I don't think it was an overbooking. Overbooking is when they don't have enough seats for the passengers who reserved their tickets. But in this case, they 'randomly chosen' 4 people to give the seats to their crew members. And second, I also agree with the fact that David Dao was treated unhumanly and that should be blamed. And I also doubt that the United Airline didn't chose 4 people randomly. But as I said, there is no evidence to call this incident racism. So as a Asian, I also feel bad for him and feel anger to the United Airline but I think it's hard to say that it was racism. Last, it was not the United Airlines flight attendance who had beaten David Dao. It was the police. It was not appropriate to call the police to make David off the plane and the attendances also treated him badly but it was the police who actually beat him and dragged him off. So I think we should blame on the United Airlines and also the police. But not for the racism but for the unhumane action they both had.
Well I major in Tourism Management and I had a class about air line company. In U.S. there is a LCC air line company called South West airline. South West Airline gives best service for lower cost. So other airline company wants to cut there prices to compete with them. But when they cut their cost their service quality goes really bad. So that is why they made that mistake.
Tucker carlson show is a Tv program that aired on Fox channel. I watched the show that covered sex issue. The guest was Zach petkanas DNC senior advisor. The show is started by floating the issue of bathroom and locker room. The last Obama administration announced a new rule requiring every public school in the country to let transgender students use whichever bathroom or locker room match their gender identity. But Trump administration retracted that rule. And Zach petkanas object the Trump's policy.
Then Tucker carlson suggest to discuss the core issue. Biology. Because the Obama's policy was related to the biology problem. The rule implied that the man is someone who says he's a man and a woman is someone who says she's a woman. It means that we can decide our sex . Not decided by genes. Is it correct? Is it possible? It can't be but Zach petkanas supported the idea and Tucker carlson rebutted the Zach petkanas's opinion
Tucker carlson asked Zach how we know someone is man or female? Zach said something but it was just thinking. Don't have any reason. Zach said one gender identity is enough to show what gender they are and if we are confused about that it is related to our enlightment. It is not a science. So Tucker carlson said it is not moral status. And asked question again. "I can play at woman sports team when I say I am woman. Am i right?" like this. Then Zach said someting different from the question. He didn't answer the qusstion. Then Tucker carlson asked question again. "If your sex is what you say it is then what prevents me from playing on a woman's field hockey team and demanding go to woman's prison?" Zach said it is absurd. But he didn't suggest the reason. Then Tucker Carlson suggest more examples. About woman's college and loan for woman owned business. Zach said this is a matter of civil rights. And Zach even lied. He said it is settled science! After saying that lie Tucker Carlson punched Zach. He used Zach's logic. "Could I change my race too? What's the different between sex and race?" Zach couldn't answer. He said something but it wasn't effective. He said "it is silly and right-wing pseudoscience". It is scientific problem but Zach said something about political. Tucker carlson finished the debate by saying this. "I'll give you a Thousand of dollars if you can find any scientist who support your idea"
Different opinion between Tucker carlson and Zach petkanas occured from their position. Tucker carlson and fox tv are leaned to conservative. On the other hand Zach petkanas and DNC(Democratic National Committee) are leaned to liberal. Liberal aim big government and conservative aim small government. So Zach's opinion is that government should make a safe zone for vulnerable people. Tucker carlson's opinion is that government don't have to do this. Ok , their can be different opinion in the world. But Zach didn't give us acceptable reason. On the other hand Tucker carlson gave us acceptable reason. He suggested so many examples about the problem caused by Zach's opinion. The best scene I think is Tucker carlson's reuse of Zach's logic. By zach's logic , we can determine our races too but Zach couldn't answer about the question. Throughout the debate Zach avoided the question, talked nonsense, and didn't offer reasonable, logical reason. Because his opinion is rubbish.
Nevertheless Zach's attitude was shameless. He said something very fightingly but there are no acceptable reason inside his opinion and logic. The problem is that there is a possibility that people who are emotional and children can trust it. Without checking the Fact and Reasons. There are so many nonsense opinions in the world. So we have to confirm the opinion in detail. Is it reasonable? Logical? Isn't it false truth? This is very important.
When this issue became a hot topic in America, I got curious and looked up some articles and editorials. I really think this is a interesting thing to talk since this both talks about biology and gender issues. After seeing the podcast, I think you're spot on with Tucker and Zach's perspectives. Zach lacked supports for his reasoning, and Tucker pinpointed major issues like how it can cause big problems. I think it was a nice podcast overall and good topic that's worth discussing in the future as well.
I agree with Tucker carlson. We cannot decide our gender on our own. But I don't think it is relative to the Zach's or Tucker's political position. Because I don't think all the people who supports liberal think like Zach. In our class, June also mentioned the problems occured in the women's prison. I think it is very important to protect the rights of minor people, but it is more important not to infringe other people's rights(for example not wanting to share bathroom with people biologically men or women) and not to make better condition to commit sexual crime.
신경모 201333466 I would talk about America's withdrawal from Paris Climate Change Accord. I compared the opinion part of 6 press companies. Most of presses expressed negative comment. "국민일보" used expression "American Egoism" adding that "The American president made decision that is counter to universal value of humankind, in contrast to the formers". and commented that "World's scientist are worrying that America's withdrawal will cause extreme increase of earth's temperature". In case of "한겨레", they criticize Trump's protection of employment in heavy industry as "Employment in heavy industry is losing their own added value". What I found in those several critic views is the truth that there is no statistical and scientific analysis. Just opinion with emotion. They believe that carbon dioxide increases earth's temperature and concludes that those who do not participate in reduction of carbon dioxide disrupts ecological humanism. And then, I read article in "한국경제", which was somewhat different from the others. The press said that "the reason Trump's declaration includes that issue of relation between carbon dioxide and increase of earth's temperature", adding that "Including Prof. Ivar Giaever, many scientist already conclude that there is no relation between carbon dioxide and increase of earth's temperature" and commented that "There is view of loosening actual difficulty of Certified Emission Reduction to companies". The part of "no relation between carbon dioxide and increase of earth's temperature" has many scientific analysis. (Here's some links : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aPW53d3AJE , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3-wztmaxbw , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uuozy0Hm46w) So they can support their article these scientific analysis. and most of all, they did not expose any emotional expression. They just wrote about existence of 'other's view'. What we can learn in this case is, many newspaper companies in Korea are still not free from mass psychology and stereotypes.
I think this shows another interesting thing about some Korean press. There are many articles and news posts that are almost "Anti-Trump", without strong reasoning but only emotions. This is harmful to readers of articles because they only get to see one part of the story, not in full perspective. Even if one is against certain policies that certain politicians made, one needs to know what exactly the policies are before you jump into conclusions. This is something many press seem to forget, thus causing misconception of the "happening".
The researching about the relation between carbon dioxide and the earth temperature is on going . The opinon(there is no relation between carbon dioxide and increase of earth's temperature) is just one of the theory. So Trump's withdrawal can't be accepted. And the Paris Climate Change Accord was concluded very hardly. Many countries especially China and American's different view was compromised dramatically. Also it is agreement between world's nation. I think Trump's attitude is not desirable. It is not directly related to the news but just comment. For this decision Trump can be in danger. Unvisible war between America and Europe can be occured.
In my personal opinion, I think there is some relation between carbon dioxide and increase of the Earth's temperature but I don't think it is all beacuse of human being that causing the global warming. There are many researches going on right now so of course I cannot be so sure. But still, I kind of have similar idea with Trump. So I think he made very reasonable decision. I agree with the fact that we all should make effort to save energy or whatever to do good for the Earth. But we don't need to spend huge amount of money on something that we are not sure of. And Trump clearly said that he will going to believe there is global warming if someone brought him proof.
Trump's attitude states that US government announce greenhouse effect as false information. However, more than 190 parties still haven't proclaimed greenhouse effect is false. US, as one of the countries that emits the largest amount of carbon dioxide, have to be certain that greenhouse effect is false or else US would be responsible for causing greenhouse effect.
All this past years U.S and Europe is clearly used most of fossil energy. So that is why we are having greenhouse effect. I think President Trump's decision might make America Great Again but it will not make Planet Great Again.
President Moon started his regime, but he face a disobedience from The Ministry of Defense. When they report to president Moon they intentionally drop out information about additional deploy of THAAD missile system. And president Moon found that information through the news report. And he ordered investigate why they drop out that information when they report to president. The investigation is now ongoing and mid report said that Ministry of Defense intentionally drop out the information. When this news is showed up many comments is coming out from reporters, politicians and other people made a report, news, comment about this news. And divided into two major opinion. One is blaming the ministry of defense for not reporting about that news, and that opinion is majorly coming from left wing side. The other opinion is blaming president Moon for taking less care of current situation and insist that president wants to withdraw the deploy of THAAD system, and this opinion is coming from right wing side. And all the media is divided into two side and blaming each other. I think this conflict is because of the political position of media. Right wing media is owned by someone who is related to billionaire of this country. And president Moon is not friendly with super riches. He published some policies like increasing taxation to the upper-class. And when this policy passed at the congress, their profit will be reduced. So billionaires don’t like president Moon, that is why they are using right wing side media as their weapon against president Moon. However leftwing side media is owned by their own reporters who has been fired by right wing side media. So it is their nature to be critic against right wing side media. And they don’t like billionaire who owns right wing side media. They are friendly to president Moon’s policy. So left wing sided media is naturally friendly to president Moon. So I think the owner of media’s influence the news of media. Media wants to show what they want to show. So we need to be aware of that situation.
I think this sums up the state of Korean press right now. As you mentioned, there exists "left wing media" and "right wing media", and how they fight each other. Not only the actual articles or news, sometimes they hire "part-time-comment-writer", where they pay some people to write supporting comments, regardless of the article being fact or not. This can cause problems in the long run, where people won't be able to know which story you need to believe. Worst case scenario would be that everyone sees news what they only want to believe. I think it's not a small matter.
I had read a peice of writting. It is not exactly but the crude contants is like that. For news producer, neutral is not beneficial. Because people want to see what they want. So right wing people just watch the right wing media and left wing people just watch the left media. If news producer wants to make more money, they have to be one position. Conflict has good point. It can improve both side by competiton. But distortion must not be happened. Fact is important for news i think
It's kind of sad to see the media show bias especially in political fields. And I think it's important to compare different news media and think critically to see if the news are not biased.
It is well known in Korea that newspapers such as Hankyoreh and the newspapers such as Chosun, Central, and Donga Ilbo have a difference even if the same article is written. For a balanced perspective, it seems that one should not only listen to one's opinions but also accept them well.
About the United Airlines incident, the person who was dragged off the flight was named David Dao, a doctor who studied at a medical school in Saigon, Vietnam. There were lot of arguments on why he, particularly, was chosen to be dragged out. Many people assumed that he was chosen because he was Asian. Famous blogger, Phil Yu, better known as Angry Asian Man, said Dao was selected, without a doubt, because United staff assumed that as an Asian, he would be compliant. However, the airline said its system for selecting David Dao and the three others is an IT algorithm that takes into account issues like disabilities and connecting flights. This means there's no real evidence of racial bias. But if the 'randomly selected' passenger had been a blonde white lady, and she refused to give her seat, there's absolutely no way that these cops would have dragged her out, said Yu. So in this point of view, even if David Dao was randomly chosen, it's still a racism and even a sexism to literally drag a bleeding man out of his seats.
I do not think it is racism. I think that the seats are just overbooked, and in the process, the Asian people have been picked out by chance. The pilot had to run for the other passengers and he would have to kick it out. But in the process, I think it may have been controversial to be taken away with bloodshed, but I do not think it is racism.
I think we should blame the behavior of the United Airlines not racism. It could happened to anyone and the United Airlines should have handled the situation more delicately. If it happened to an American, United Airlines would be blamed for their violence not racism.
i'm also think this case is not about racism. 4 days later after this incident happen, another passenger also have been kicked out from United Airline. engaged couple from Houston, Texas who are traveling to Costa Rica to attend their wedding ceremony were removed from a United Airlines flight due to seating issue. this is also really serious issue because shares in United Airlines slipped by just over 1% Tuesday as the company scrambled to address a video showing a passenger being forcibly dragged off from flight. it is serious than racism. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ual-passenger-couple-idUSKBN17J05Q http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/11/investing/united-airlines-stock-passenger-flight-video/index.html
In March 3, 2017, there was a big controversy regarding relationship between South Korea and China. China had banned Chinese from visiting Korea for tourism purpose. This was mainly caused by South Korea deploying THAAD missile system. Most people speculate that the reason China did this as an act of retaliation to Korea. This caused a uproar to South Koreans because most of the tourists coming to Korean consisted of Chinese people. Obviously after this happening lots of articles came out. So I searched both Korean portal sites and foreign sites.
In Korean sites most of the search results were about how it will cause negative effects on Korea. They focused on emotional concerns and aftereffects. Most frequent phrases mentioned in articles were "a harm to Korean tourism", and "tourists greatly reduced". It seemed like Korean press paid more attention to not the actual policies of China or reasoning behind them, but rather on what happens after. Maybe it's because Korean press assumed that all Koreans already knew about THAAD deployment and thought we didn't need to know the whole procedure.
In foreign sites such as Google and Bing however, they focused more on the whole process and the backstory behind the China's policy. It was natural since most foreign people other than Koreans and Chinese would know about this incident in detail. In result, most articles concentrated on facts regarding policies and details of the incident itself, instead of aftereffects or things like, "what will happen after".
The search results depending on the region were what to be expected. Most Korean articles talked about Korean tourism losses and relationship with China. We thought that they were more important than the backstory itself or the actual China's policy. However in foreign search engine, they kept the articles as neutral as possible, because they needed to tell the story to everyone in the world, not just Koreans. So this shows that search results of the topic can be varied depending where you search from.
Links to the articles: Korean: http://www.jejusori.net/?mod=news&act=articleView&idxno=191528 http://www.newsis.com/view/?id=NISX20170528_0014924670&cID=10402&pID=13000 http://www.sedaily.com/NewsView/1OG0CPRS1L
I agree with you that there's no real evidence of racism. But United Airlines were accumulating people's anger for their attitude towards clients. They say it was quite common to see the flight attendance calling the police to deal with the problems they have. So nobody can say that they will not treat the client as bad as David Dao even if the client were a white woman, I think.
On the surface of it, it may be hard to understand Beijing's anger with THAAD. For one thing, it's a purely defensive system. THAAD systems don't carry warheads, relying on the force of the “interceptor” to destroy the incoming missile rather than a detonation. But China believes that the system could be used to intercept Chinese ballistic missiles, and questioned if U.S is truly doing it to protect South Korea from the North, or they want to radar China. In this point of view, it is a bit understandable why China is so sensitive about arranging THAAD in Korea.
China already have Missile system and radar system cover Korea peninsular. And we are trying to depend our country against nuclear threat of North Korea. China is biggest ally of North Korea and have a great influence to North Korea. China fails to control nuclear situation of North Korea so we need to act against it. So i think it is clearly China is trying to give a influence to us.
It's true that China have huge econimic influence on Korea ,but I think it is better to tell stories about the future than what has already happened. Rather than talking and holding on to things that are already happening and difficult to revert,I think it would be better to talk about details and preparation rather than saying same things.
I've conducted an experiment on some famous newspaper publishing companies by searching THAAD. The companies were JoongAng Ilbo, Chosun Ilbo,The Hangyeore Shinmun and Kyunghyang Shinmun. The two previous companies are famous for conservative press and other two companies are famous for liberal press.
As I searched THAAD on JoongAng Ilbo and Chosun Ilbo, almost all the result were columns and articles criticizing the postponement of the THAAD deployment and articles suggesting the importance of THAAD deployment. Their main logic is that the THAAD deployment is necessary to prevent our main enemy North Korea’s nuclear missiles.
On the other hand, Hangyeore Shinmun and Kyunghyang Shinmun showed quite different results. The articles and columns were usually about environmental and social problems caused by the THAAD deployment and requiring clarification of the 4 THAADs those were brought in secret.
I also did some reserch on the owners of those 4 companies. They were 방상훈(Chosun Ilbo), 홍석현(JoongAng Ilbo), 정영무(Hangyeore Shinmun) and 이동현(Kyunghyang Shinmun). Strangely, 방상훈 is famous for his conservative thoughts, but 홍석현 doesn’t seem to be that conservative. He made a TV station named JTBC, and it’s famous for liberal press. This is strange because JoongAng Ilbo, which is owned by 홍석현 is famous for conservative press. I was curious about this fact so I did some more reserch and I found out why. JTBC was just before the damn day because of it’s poor viewer ratings. So, 홍석현 made JTBC as a liberal press because viewer ratings are better for liberal presses.
I wanted to find out more about the two owners of he Hangyeore Shinmun and Kyunghyang Shinmun, but I couldn’t find much information. All I found was an interview of 이동현 the owner of Kyunghyang Shinmun, talking about a change. According to him, “Political power, business, and everyone talk about change. But change does not come from the outside.”
Even the same article shows opinions in different directions according to the proprietor or propensity of the company. Do not blind unconditionally. I think it is good to judge what is right and wrong by looking at articles of various media.
I've searched about Moon June-yong, president Moon's son. It is suspected that he have received employment preference.
The suspicions were that he had shortened the period of employment announcement when he filed a job application with the Korea Employment Information Service, and that the submitted documents were withdrawn after the application deadline. And there is also the suspicion that he was unqualified but hired and there was only one applicant (Moon June-Yong) in his field.
I had searched 5-6 news portals and could see articles from different perspectives. In Cho-sun ilbo, they said somel the problems were clarified and there were still suspicions. Korean Kyung-jae and JTBC said some suspicions have been resolved, but there are still some suspicions. In Seoul Kyung-Jae, said there is no debatable issue anymore and all suspicions have been verified. The Hankyore said that the evidence that raised the allegations was manipulated. MBN news said there was solid evidence.
The Chosun Ilbo reported for the first time the MIR Foundation, which had begun the impeachment of former President Park Geun-hye, and JTBC played a major role in impeachment. I seem to be writing the article carefully. The Hankyoreh seems to have written a favorable article for the Democratic Party and President Moon.
http://news.joins.com/article/21438622 중앙 일보 https://www.newdaily.co.kr/news/article.html?no=343767 뉴데일리 http://news.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2017/03/27/2017032702369.html 조선일보 http://news.jtbc.joins.com/article/article.aspx?news_id=NB11449964 JTBC http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/politics/assembly/793686.html 한겨레 http://h21.hani.co.kr/arti/special/special_general/43444.html 한겨레 http://mbn.mk.co.kr/pages/news/newsView.php?category=mbn00006&news_seq_no=3215350 MBN
We all know Facebook is owned by Mark Zuckerberg that was founded in 2004, but many of us didn’t know what his belief in politics. As a founder of big SNS, his speech would be affect many people if he revealed it. But he wasn’t doing that. Mark Zuckerberg said he's neither a Democrat nor a Republican. And the Facebook co-founder and his company's political-action committee have given tens of thousands of dollars to political candidates of both parties in recent years. The billionaire’s spending on campaigns does not tell much about his political affiliation. But once, he has critic about Trump’s executive orders on immigration policy in a lengthy post on his Facebook page. One of the saying that; “Like many of you, I'm concerned about the impact of the recent executive orders signed by President Trump,’’ This speech shown that he might not stand with president Trump, but in another hand, he has spoken with the president multiple times by phone since the election, Zuckerberg revealed that he's talked with Trump during a surprise dinner with the Moore family in Newton. So it is hard to define which presidential elections did he chose as if he revealed everything, this speculation might be getting serious among Facebook users. As a rigid user, I see Facebook is filtering base on our activity and what are we interest with in Facebook. Well known as most popular SNS, Facebook has more than 1.94 billion monthly active users around the world. So in process to filtering the fakes news might get hard as system can’t justify weather a billion news is true or fake. Alternatively, Facebook gave us a power to control all the news. Then who ultimately controls the information that we're given? It is us. We got a user power to filtering the news. We can share the news if it’s true, or report it if it’s fake. That is how Facebook news feed works. It is still not a perfect system to solve the problem, but he wrote, "Facebook is a work in progress, and we are dedicated to learning and improving,". For me, I’m still using Facebook as it is the platform that gave us freedom of speech. Source: http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-bashes-donald-trumps-orders-on-immigration-2017-1 http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg-spoke-with-trump-multiple-times-2017-5 http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/16/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg-on-trump-era.html https://www.thoughtco.com/members-of-congress-supported-by-facebook-3367615
I saw the news from the CNN.
ReplyDeleteIn the news there was interview with Trump for firing Comey.
Trump said that he actually thought when he made that decision
he also got a very, very strong recommendation
from the Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein.
And CNN said
Rosenstein's recommendation is used for pretense
and the real reason why Trump fired Comey is Because he didn't like him.
For that reason, what CNN guessing is
"Comey's ongoing push by investigation
that Russia meddle in the US election"
The news from the FOX,
there was a same story that
Rosenstein recommend to fire comey and Trump fired him.
However, FOX said that the real reason for firing is just his incompetence.
And, Rosenstein's recommendation is his own opinon.
In my opinion, Why Trump firing Comey is to disturb the FBI investigation.
Because the time when Comey fired is progressing of the investigation.
In summary, the news from the both is similar except for one that
point of view of Rosenstein's recommendation.
In my opinion, the CNN is left-leaning and the FOX is right-leaning
so the difference comes from the inclination.
The most news i see in Korea about president Trump is reflective of the NYT.
but, the reflection of the CNN and FOX is not that little.
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/05/11/donald-trump-nbc-intv-sot.cnn/video/playlists/president-donald-trump/
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/10/opinions/comey-should-have-been-fired-not-now-coates-opinion/
http://video.foxnews.com/v/5428970767001/?#sp=show-clips
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/11/rod-rosenstein-at-center-storm-after-comey-firing.html
In summary, the news from the both is similar except for one that
Deletepoint of view of Rosenstein's recommendation.
->
In summary, the news from the both is similar except for some point of view about real reason and Rosenstein's recommendation.
There are different view between Fox and Cnn clearly
DeleteI link one video that shows different between Fox and Cnn's point of view
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yullSsrClk
It is about 911 terror.
They treated the same case as different point of view so judging which news is the fact is difficult.
Comparing different channel can be a way i think and it is important.
Because as you said many news channels leaned to one point of view ordinarily.
Mr. Trump explained the firing by citing Mr. Comey’s handling of the investigation into
DeleteHillary Clinton’s use of a private email server, even though the president was widely
seen to have benefited politically from that inquiry.
But in his letter to Mr. Comey, released to reporters by the White House, the president
betrayed his focus on the continuing inquiry into Russia and his aides.
Senator Dick Durbin said on the Senate floor that the firing of Mr Comey raises
questions as to whether the Russian interference in the last presidential election will
also be investigated by the FBI.
I think in this matter, left and right side have to make a same voice. It is clearly that Trump wants to withdraw investigation against his secretary. It is clearly he disturb the law of U.S. and should be investigated immediately. When if president Trump is involved with this matter he need to be impeached.
DeleteIt is tragic to watch such news on korea and America both countries. When will a upright president who would bring peace and prosperity appear?
DeleteIn the recent news about United Air incident involving an Asian man being dragged out of the seat of the air plane, both Korean news and American news reported basically same views. Some news reported that United Air dragged the man out because of the overbooking, and the others reported that it was because some crew members should on board. The Asian man was a doctor originally from Vietnam. As he refused to get off the plane voluntarily, the crew called the police and they dragged him out of the seat.
ReplyDeleteNot all of the Korean news reported the incident as racism and same with the American news. But both imply the possibility of racism. There are clear instructions of who to remove from overbooked flights according to Joseph Lamonaca, an aviation attorney and airline transport pilot. So United Air’s insist that they chose 4 passengers randomly leaves all the doubts of fairness in the process of selecting 4 passengers. Unfairness in the process implies the possibility of racism.
But I think this was not racism. Definition of racism is prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. Since there is no evidence that United Air specifically selected an Asian man and also there is no way to prove their belief, it’s hard to say that was racism. Only doubts and possibilities are making the Asians get angry.
http://video.foxnews.com/v/5395402869001/?#sp=show-clips
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/united-fiasco-how-do-airlines-select-who-remove-overbooked-flights-n746331
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/04/11/was-that-doctor-dragged-off-the-united-airlines-flight-because-he-was-asian-many-in-china-think-so/?utm_term=.9356aee67b04
http://www.ytn.co.kr/_ln/0104_201704121257391208
http://news.heraldcorp.com/view.php?ud=20170418000078
I think that was the overbooking.
DeleteAccording to the circumstances,
It is very similar with overbooking.
However, the way of treating was seriously bad.
As i know, when that happens in korea,
airline staffs treat that very politely.
Whether it was about overbooking or not it is not important.
DeleteI can't accept the way about treating the passenger.
If the way to select 4 passengers were random United Air should prove it.
And I think it can be racism.
We have to check the precedent about the same treatment to caucasian.
If the Asian man was not a Asian United air would not treat him like that.
Although there are no proofs that United Airlines really randomly choose an
DeleteAsian man, or whatnot, the actions they took is considered as racism. Lot of
people wondered what if the United Airlines 'randomly chose' an African-American
or a white lady? They would not have treated the same as they treated David Dao.
The United Airlines likely thought that just because he was Asian, he would be compliant.
All things aside, the one thing United Airlines have no excuse for is beating the passenger.
DeleteOverbooking is one thing, and racism shouldn't happen either, but the fact that flight attendants beat up passenger can not be accepted in anyway. At least not without irresistible force such as crimes or terrorism.
However, this was simply United Airline's mistake for not preparing enough seats for their crew, using forces when it was not needed at all, and tried to overlook this incident in total.
In this case, I think racism is in the bottom of the list of what United Airlines did wrong. Meaning this should be considered not racism, but more as "anti-human" behavior.
Thanks for your replies.
DeleteFirst of all, I don't think it was an overbooking. Overbooking is when they don't have enough seats for the passengers who reserved their tickets. But in this case, they 'randomly chosen' 4 people to give the seats to their crew members.
And second, I also agree with the fact that David Dao was treated unhumanly and that should be blamed. And I also doubt that the United Airline didn't chose 4 people randomly. But as I said, there is no evidence to call this incident racism. So as a Asian, I also feel bad for him and feel anger to the United Airline but I think it's hard to say that it was racism.
Last, it was not the United Airlines flight attendance who had beaten David Dao. It was the police. It was not appropriate to call the police to make David off the plane and the attendances also treated him badly but it was the police who actually beat him and dragged him off.
So I think we should blame on the United Airlines and also the police. But not for the racism but for the unhumane action they both had.
Well I major in Tourism Management and I had a class about air line company. In U.S. there is a LCC air line company called South West airline. South West Airline gives best service for lower cost. So other airline company wants to cut there prices to compete with them. But when they cut their cost their service quality goes really bad. So that is why they made that mistake.
DeleteI agree. It could have happened to anyone. The United Airlines should be questioned for their violence not racism.
Delete박창현 201233607
ReplyDeleteTucker carlson show is a Tv program that aired on Fox channel.
I watched the show that covered sex issue. The guest was Zach petkanas DNC senior advisor. The show is started by floating the issue of bathroom and locker room. The last Obama administration announced a new rule requiring every public school in the country to let transgender students use whichever bathroom or locker room match their gender identity. But Trump administration retracted that rule. And Zach petkanas object the Trump's policy.
Then Tucker carlson suggest to discuss the core issue. Biology. Because the Obama's policy was related to the biology problem. The rule implied that the man is someone who says he's a man and a woman is someone who says she's a woman. It means that we can decide our sex . Not decided by genes. Is it correct? Is it possible? It can't be but Zach petkanas supported the idea and Tucker carlson rebutted the Zach petkanas's opinion
Tucker carlson asked Zach how we know someone is man or female? Zach said something but it was just thinking. Don't have any reason. Zach said one gender identity is enough to show what gender they are and if we are confused about that it is related to our enlightment. It is not a science. So Tucker carlson said it is not moral status. And asked question again. "I can play at woman sports team when I say I am woman. Am i right?" like this. Then Zach said someting different from the question. He didn't answer the qusstion. Then Tucker carlson asked question again. "If your sex is what you say it is then what prevents me from playing on a woman's field hockey team and demanding go to woman's prison?" Zach said it is absurd. But he didn't suggest the reason. Then Tucker Carlson suggest more examples. About woman's college and loan for woman owned business. Zach said this is a matter of civil rights. And Zach even lied. He said it is settled science! After saying that lie Tucker Carlson punched Zach. He used Zach's logic. "Could I change my race too? What's the different between sex and race?" Zach couldn't answer. He said something but it wasn't effective. He said "it is silly and right-wing pseudoscience". It is scientific problem but Zach said something about political. Tucker carlson finished the debate by saying this. "I'll give you a Thousand of dollars if you can find any scientist who support your idea"
Different opinion between Tucker carlson and Zach petkanas occured from their position. Tucker carlson and fox tv are leaned to conservative. On the other hand Zach petkanas and DNC(Democratic National Committee) are leaned to liberal. Liberal aim big government and conservative aim small government. So Zach's opinion is that government should make a safe zone for vulnerable people. Tucker carlson's opinion is that government don't have to do this. Ok , their can be different opinion in the world. But Zach didn't give us acceptable reason. On the other hand Tucker carlson gave us acceptable reason. He suggested so many examples about the problem caused by Zach's opinion. The best scene I think is Tucker carlson's reuse of Zach's logic. By zach's logic , we can determine our races too but Zach couldn't answer about the question. Throughout the debate Zach avoided the question, talked nonsense, and didn't offer reasonable, logical reason. Because his opinion is rubbish.
Nevertheless Zach's attitude was shameless. He said something very fightingly but there are no acceptable reason inside his opinion and logic. The problem is that there is a possibility that people who are emotional and children can trust it.
Without checking the Fact and Reasons. There are so many nonsense opinions in the world. So we have to confirm the opinion in detail. Is it reasonable? Logical? Isn't it false truth? This is very important.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJxtN66MOR0
I also agree with Tucker carlson's logic.
DeleteBecause, when the rule is floating,
there is a possibility that crime rate rises.
When this issue occurs in korea, we should consider a possibility seriously.
Because of increasing sex crime rate.
When this issue became a hot topic in America, I got curious and looked up some articles and editorials.
DeleteI really think this is a interesting thing to talk since this both talks about biology and gender issues.
After seeing the podcast, I think you're spot on with Tucker and Zach's perspectives.
Zach lacked supports for his reasoning, and Tucker pinpointed major issues like how it can cause big problems.
I think it was a nice podcast overall and good topic that's worth discussing in the future as well.
I agree with Tucker carlson. We cannot decide our gender on our own. But I don't think it is relative to the Zach's or Tucker's political position. Because I don't think all the people who supports liberal think like Zach. In our class, June also mentioned the problems occured in the women's prison. I think it is very important to protect the rights of minor people, but it is more important not to infringe other people's rights(for example not wanting to share bathroom with people biologically men or women) and not to make better condition to commit sexual crime.
Deleteㄴㄴㄴ
ReplyDeleteIt was mistake. Please forget about it.
Delete신경모 201333466
ReplyDeleteI would talk about America's withdrawal from Paris Climate Change Accord.
I compared the opinion part of 6 press companies. Most of presses expressed negative comment. "국민일보" used expression "American Egoism" adding that "The American president made decision that is counter to universal value of humankind, in contrast to the formers". and commented that "World's scientist are worrying that America's withdrawal will cause extreme increase of earth's temperature". In case of "한겨레", they criticize Trump's protection of employment in heavy industry as "Employment in heavy industry is losing their own added value". What I found in those several critic views is the truth that there is no statistical and scientific analysis. Just opinion with emotion. They believe that carbon dioxide increases earth's temperature and concludes that those who do not participate in reduction of carbon dioxide disrupts ecological humanism.
And then, I read article in "한국경제", which was somewhat different from the others. The press said that "the reason Trump's declaration includes that issue of relation between carbon dioxide and increase of earth's temperature", adding that "Including Prof. Ivar Giaever, many scientist already conclude that there is no relation between carbon dioxide and increase of earth's temperature" and commented that "There is view of loosening actual difficulty of Certified Emission Reduction to companies". The part of "no relation between carbon dioxide and increase of earth's temperature" has many scientific analysis. (Here's some links : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aPW53d3AJE , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3-wztmaxbw , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uuozy0Hm46w) So they can support their article these scientific analysis. and most of all, they did not expose any emotional expression. They just wrote about existence of 'other's view'.
What we can learn in this case is, many newspaper companies in Korea are still not free from mass psychology and stereotypes.
I think this shows another interesting thing about some Korean press.
DeleteThere are many articles and news posts that are almost "Anti-Trump", without strong reasoning but only emotions.
This is harmful to readers of articles because they only get to see one part of the story, not in full perspective.
Even if one is against certain policies that certain politicians made, one needs to know what exactly the policies are before you jump into conclusions.
This is something many press seem to forget, thus causing misconception of the "happening".
The researching about the relation between carbon dioxide and the earth temperature is on going .
DeleteThe opinon(there is no relation between carbon dioxide and increase of earth's temperature) is just one of the theory. So Trump's withdrawal can't be accepted.
And the Paris Climate Change Accord was concluded very hardly. Many countries especially China and American's different view was compromised dramatically. Also it is agreement between world's nation.
I think Trump's attitude is not desirable.
It is not directly related to the news but just comment.
For this decision Trump can be in danger. Unvisible war between America and Europe can be occured.
In my personal opinion, I think there is some relation between carbon dioxide and increase of the Earth's temperature but I don't think it is all beacuse of human being that causing the global warming. There are many researches going on right now so of course I cannot be so sure. But still, I kind of have similar idea with Trump. So I think he made very reasonable decision. I agree with the fact that we all should make effort to save energy or whatever to do good for the Earth. But we don't need to spend huge amount of money on something that we are not sure of. And Trump clearly said that he will going to believe there is global warming if someone brought him proof.
DeleteTrump's attitude states that US government announce greenhouse effect as false information. However, more than 190 parties still haven't proclaimed greenhouse effect is false. US, as one of the countries that emits the largest amount of carbon dioxide, have to be certain that greenhouse effect is false or else US would be responsible for causing greenhouse effect.
DeleteAll this past years U.S and Europe is clearly used most of fossil energy. So that is why we are having greenhouse effect. I think President Trump's decision might make America Great Again but it will not make Planet Great Again.
Delete정이수 201331564
ReplyDeletePresident Moon started his regime, but he face a disobedience from The Ministry of Defense. When they report to president Moon they intentionally drop out information about additional deploy of THAAD missile system. And president Moon found that information through the news report. And he ordered investigate why they drop out that information when they report to president. The investigation is now ongoing and mid report said that Ministry of Defense intentionally drop out the information.
When this news is showed up many comments is coming out from reporters, politicians and other people made a report, news, comment about this news. And divided into two major opinion. One is blaming the ministry of defense for not reporting about that news, and that opinion is majorly coming from left wing side. The other opinion is blaming president Moon for taking less care of current situation and insist that president wants to withdraw the deploy of THAAD system, and this opinion is coming from right wing side.
And all the media is divided into two side and blaming each other. I think this conflict is because of the political position of media. Right wing media is owned by someone who is related to billionaire of this country. And president Moon is not friendly with super riches. He published some policies like increasing taxation to the upper-class. And when this policy passed at the congress, their profit will be reduced. So billionaires don’t like president Moon, that is why they are using right wing side media as their weapon against president Moon.
However leftwing side media is owned by their own reporters who has been fired by right wing side media. So it is their nature to be critic against right wing side media. And they don’t like billionaire who owns right wing side media. They are friendly to president Moon’s policy. So left wing sided media is naturally friendly to president Moon.
So I think the owner of media’s influence the news of media. Media wants to show what they want to show. So we need to be aware of that situation.
I think this sums up the state of Korean press right now.
DeleteAs you mentioned, there exists "left wing media" and "right wing media", and how they fight each other.
Not only the actual articles or news, sometimes they hire "part-time-comment-writer", where they pay some people to write supporting comments, regardless of the article being fact or not.
This can cause problems in the long run, where people won't be able to know which story you need to believe. Worst case scenario would be that everyone sees news what they only want to believe. I think it's not a small matter.
I had read a peice of writting.
DeleteIt is not exactly but the crude contants is like that.
For news producer, neutral is not beneficial. Because people want to see what they want.
So right wing people just watch the right wing media and left wing people just watch the left media.
If news producer wants to make more money, they have to be one position.
Conflict has good point. It can improve both side by competiton.
But distortion must not be happened.
Fact is important for news i think
It's kind of sad to see the media show bias especially in political fields.
DeleteAnd I think it's important to compare different news media and think critically to see if the news are not biased.
It is well known in Korea that newspapers such as Hankyoreh and the newspapers such as Chosun, Central, and Donga Ilbo have a difference even if the same article is written. For a balanced perspective, it seems that one should not only listen to one's opinions but also accept them well.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete김민성 201231870
About the United Airlines incident, the person who was dragged off the flight was named David Dao,
a doctor who studied at a medical school in Saigon, Vietnam.
There were lot of arguments on why he, particularly, was chosen to be dragged out. Many people
assumed that he was chosen because he was Asian. Famous blogger, Phil Yu, better known as Angry
Asian Man, said Dao was selected, without a doubt, because United staff assumed that as an Asian,
he would be compliant. However, the airline said its system for selecting David Dao and the three
others is an IT algorithm that takes into account issues like disabilities and connecting flights.
This means there's no real evidence of racial bias.
But if the 'randomly selected' passenger had been a blonde white lady, and she refused to give her
seat, there's absolutely no way that these cops would have dragged her out, said Yu. So in this point
of view, even if David Dao was randomly chosen, it's still a racism and even a sexism to literally
drag a bleeding man out of his seats.
I do not think it is racism. I think that the seats are just overbooked, and in the process, the Asian people have been picked out by chance.
DeleteThe pilot had to run for the other passengers and he would have to kick it out. But in the process, I think it may have been controversial to be taken away with bloodshed, but I do not think it is racism.
I think we should blame the behavior of the United Airlines not racism. It could happened to anyone and the United Airlines should have handled the situation more delicately. If it happened to an American, United Airlines would be blamed for their violence not racism.
Deletei'm also think this case is not about racism. 4 days later after this incident happen, another passenger also have been kicked out from United Airline. engaged couple from Houston, Texas who are traveling to Costa Rica to attend their wedding ceremony were removed from a United Airlines flight due to seating issue. this is also really serious issue because shares in United Airlines slipped by just over 1% Tuesday as the company scrambled to address a video showing a passenger being forcibly dragged off from flight. it is serious than racism.
Deletehttp://www.reuters.com/article/us-ual-passenger-couple-idUSKBN17J05Q
http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/11/investing/united-airlines-stock-passenger-flight-video/index.html
In March 3, 2017, there was a big controversy regarding relationship between South Korea and China.
ReplyDeleteChina had banned Chinese from visiting Korea for tourism purpose. This was mainly caused by South Korea deploying THAAD missile system.
Most people speculate that the reason China did this as an act of retaliation to Korea. This caused a uproar to South Koreans because
most of the tourists coming to Korean consisted of Chinese people. Obviously after this happening lots of articles came out. So I searched both Korean portal sites and foreign sites.
In Korean sites most of the search results were about how it will cause negative effects on Korea. They focused on emotional concerns and aftereffects. Most frequent phrases mentioned in articles were "a harm to Korean tourism", and "tourists greatly reduced".
It seemed like Korean press paid more attention to not the actual policies of China or reasoning behind them, but rather on what happens after.
Maybe it's because Korean press assumed that all Koreans already knew about THAAD deployment and thought we didn't need to know the whole procedure.
In foreign sites such as Google and Bing however, they focused more on the whole process and the backstory behind the China's policy. It was natural since most foreign people other than Koreans and Chinese would know about this incident in detail. In result, most articles concentrated on facts regarding policies and details of the incident itself, instead of aftereffects or things like, "what will happen after".
The search results depending on the region were what to be expected. Most Korean articles talked about Korean tourism losses and relationship with China. We thought that they were more important than the backstory itself or the actual China's policy. However in foreign search engine, they kept the articles as neutral as possible, because they needed to tell the story to everyone in the world, not just Koreans. So this shows that search results of the topic can be varied depending where you search from.
Links to the articles:
DeleteKorean:
http://www.jejusori.net/?mod=news&act=articleView&idxno=191528
http://www.newsis.com/view/?id=NISX20170528_0014924670&cID=10402&pID=13000
http://www.sedaily.com/NewsView/1OG0CPRS1L
English:
https://www.ft.com/content/9fc4b1b4-ffb1-11e6-96f8-3700c5664d30
https://jingdaily.com/chinas-south-korea-travel-ban-what-you-need-to-know/
https://www.rt.com/news/379395-china-korea-thaad-tourism/
I agree with you that there's no real evidence of racism. But United Airlines were accumulating people's anger for their attitude towards clients. They say it was quite common to see the flight attendance calling the police to deal with the problems they have. So nobody can say that they will not treat the client as bad as David Dao even if the client were a white woman, I think.
DeleteOn the surface of it, it may be hard to understand Beijing's anger with THAAD. For one thing, it's a purely defensive system. THAAD systems don't carry warheads, relying on the force of the “interceptor” to destroy the incoming missile rather than a detonation. But China believes that the system could be used to intercept Chinese ballistic missiles, and questioned if U.S is truly doing it to protect South Korea from the North, or they want to radar China. In this point of view, it is a bit understandable why China is so sensitive about arranging THAAD in Korea.
DeleteChina already have Missile system and radar system cover Korea peninsular. And we are trying to depend our country against nuclear threat of North Korea. China is biggest ally of North Korea and have a great influence to North Korea. China fails to control nuclear situation of North Korea so we need to act against it. So i think it is clearly China is trying to give a influence to us.
Delete
DeleteIt's true that China have huge econimic influence on Korea ,but I think it is better to tell stories about the future than what has already happened. Rather than talking and holding on to things that are already happening and difficult to revert,I think it would be better to talk about details and preparation rather than saying same things.
I've conducted an experiment on some famous newspaper publishing companies by searching THAAD. The companies were JoongAng Ilbo, Chosun Ilbo,The Hangyeore Shinmun and Kyunghyang Shinmun. The two previous companies are famous for conservative press and other two companies are famous for liberal press.
ReplyDeleteAs I searched THAAD on JoongAng Ilbo and Chosun Ilbo, almost all the result were columns and articles criticizing the postponement of the THAAD deployment and articles suggesting the importance of THAAD deployment. Their main logic is that the THAAD deployment is necessary to prevent our main enemy North Korea’s nuclear missiles.
On the other hand, Hangyeore Shinmun and Kyunghyang Shinmun showed quite different results. The articles and columns were usually about environmental and social problems caused by the THAAD deployment and requiring clarification of the 4 THAADs those were brought in secret.
I also did some reserch on the owners of those 4 companies. They were 방상훈(Chosun Ilbo), 홍석현(JoongAng Ilbo), 정영무(Hangyeore Shinmun) and 이동현(Kyunghyang Shinmun). Strangely, 방상훈 is famous for his conservative thoughts, but 홍석현 doesn’t seem to be that conservative. He made a TV station named JTBC, and it’s famous for liberal press. This is strange because JoongAng Ilbo, which is owned by 홍석현 is famous for conservative press. I was curious about this fact so I did some more reserch and I found out why. JTBC was just before the damn day because of it’s poor viewer ratings. So, 홍석현 made JTBC as a liberal press because viewer ratings are better for liberal presses.
I wanted to find out more about the two owners of he Hangyeore Shinmun and Kyunghyang Shinmun, but I couldn’t find much information. All I found was an interview of 이동현 the owner of Kyunghyang Shinmun, talking about a change. According to him, “Political power, business, and everyone talk about change. But change does not come from the outside.”
http://news.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2017/06/08/2017060800249.html
http://news.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2017/06/06/2017060602116.html
http://news.joins.com/article/21649073
http://news.joins.com/issue/10965
http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/opinion/editorial/796900.html
http://news.khan.co.kr/kh_news/khan_art_view.html?code=910302&artid=201702272224035
http://www.journalist.or.kr/news/article.html?no=40731
DeleteEven the same article shows opinions in different directions according to the proprietor or propensity of the company. Do not blind unconditionally.
I think it is good to judge what is right and wrong by looking at articles of various media.
I've searched about Moon June-yong, president Moon's son. It is suspected that he have received employment preference.
ReplyDeleteThe suspicions were that he had shortened the period of employment announcement when he filed a job application with the Korea Employment Information Service,
and that the submitted documents were withdrawn after the application deadline. And there is also the suspicion that he was unqualified but hired and there was only one applicant (Moon June-Yong) in his field.
I had searched 5-6 news portals and could see articles from different perspectives. In Cho-sun ilbo, they said somel the problems were clarified and there were still suspicions. Korean Kyung-jae and JTBC said some suspicions have been resolved, but there are still some suspicions.
In Seoul Kyung-Jae, said there is no debatable issue anymore and all suspicions have been verified.
The Hankyore said that the evidence that raised the allegations was manipulated.
MBN news said there was solid evidence.
The Chosun Ilbo reported for the first time the MIR Foundation, which had begun the impeachment of former President Park Geun-hye, and JTBC played a major role in impeachment.
I seem to be writing the article carefully. The Hankyoreh seems to have written a favorable article for the Democratic Party and President Moon.
http://news.joins.com/article/21438622 중앙 일보
https://www.newdaily.co.kr/news/article.html?no=343767 뉴데일리
http://news.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2017/03/27/2017032702369.html 조선일보
http://news.jtbc.joins.com/article/article.aspx?news_id=NB11449964 JTBC
http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/politics/assembly/793686.html 한겨레
http://h21.hani.co.kr/arti/special/special_general/43444.html 한겨레
http://mbn.mk.co.kr/pages/news/newsView.php?category=mbn00006&news_seq_no=3215350 MBN
We all know Facebook is owned by Mark Zuckerberg that was founded in 2004, but many of us didn’t know what his belief in politics. As a founder of big SNS, his speech would be affect many people if he revealed it. But he wasn’t doing that. Mark Zuckerberg said he's neither a Democrat nor a Republican. And the Facebook co-founder and his company's political-action committee have given tens of thousands of dollars to political candidates of both parties in recent years. The billionaire’s spending on campaigns does not tell much about his political affiliation. But once, he has critic about Trump’s executive orders on immigration policy in a lengthy post on his Facebook page. One of the saying that; “Like many of you, I'm concerned about the impact of the recent executive orders signed by President Trump,’’
ReplyDeleteThis speech shown that he might not stand with president Trump, but in another hand, he has spoken with the president multiple times by phone since the election, Zuckerberg revealed that he's talked with Trump during a surprise dinner with the Moore family in Newton. So it is hard to define which presidential elections did he chose as if he revealed everything, this speculation might be getting serious among Facebook users.
As a rigid user, I see Facebook is filtering base on our activity and what are we interest with in Facebook. Well known as most popular SNS, Facebook has more than 1.94 billion monthly active users around the world. So in process to filtering the fakes news might get hard as system can’t justify weather a billion news is true or fake. Alternatively, Facebook gave us a power to control all the news. Then who ultimately controls the information that we're given? It is us. We got a user power to filtering the news. We can share the news if it’s true, or report it if it’s fake. That is how Facebook news feed works. It is still not a perfect system to solve the problem, but he wrote, "Facebook is a work in progress, and we are dedicated to learning and improving,". For me, I’m still using Facebook as it is the platform that gave us freedom of speech.
Source:
http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-bashes-donald-trumps-orders-on-immigration-2017-1
http://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg-spoke-with-trump-multiple-times-2017-5
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/16/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg-on-trump-era.html
https://www.thoughtco.com/members-of-congress-supported-by-facebook-3367615