Proto-Miob Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Proto-Miob - Essay Example Herein, both sides of the arguments will be considered with the intention of proving to the reader that the removing the smoking ban is a better option than maintaining it. According to Singleton, a spokesman for Reynolds American, it should be the decision of the establishment owners to decide if they want to uphold the rules on the environment (Winslow). The anti-smoking ban group â€Å"NYC Clash, Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment† stated after the ban was upheld by as new york judge that these laws are vague and infringe the smokers’ rights by violating the 1st and 14th amendments. It denies them the freedom to choose how they live since smoking is a personal choice and since the smokers are aware of the risks; the government has no business dictating how and when they smoke. Furthermore, according to Winslow, several thousand nonsmokers die due to conditions attributed to second hand smoke hence giving credence to the argument that cigarette smoking harms not just the smokers but their neighbors. Statistics show that bans on cigarette smoking have caused drastic reductions on the levels of cancer by an average 17% with the greatest drop being witnessed in nonsmokers (Winslow 2009). This is ample evidence that smoker do not only jeopardize their health but that of those who do not smoke hence the need for a ban. Notwithstanding, many people claim that smoking is their right, and any attempts to ban them from engaging are tantamount to infringing their freedom because they believe they should be able to move anywhere they want, more so in public, and restrictions on this are unconstitutional. Smokers hence claim that, banning smoking in public is an infringement on their freedom. However, proponents of the ban argue in the opposite direction they hold that it the rights of nonsmokers which will be infringed upon if they smoke bans are disallowed they will lose their right to live in a clean and healthy environment due to the dangerous effects of secondhand smoke. In addition, the city health officer, Thomas Friedman argued that, the â€Å"Smoke Free Air Act† was intended to protect the city resident’s health from the effect of secondhand smoke. To this effect, arguments have been made to prove that workers in bars and restaurants are vulnerable to the effects the many cigarettes being smoked in the premises. Therefore, as a potential health hazard in the workplace, the ban on public smoking is very much justified. Cigarettes pose a health threat not only because of the diseases they can cause but also as a fire hazard, since poor disposal of glowing butts can lead to fires resulting in the destruction of life and property (Dillenberger 1). On the other hand, several NYC claim that smokers’ personal lives are private, and the government has no right to interfere with it. Those in support of this argument state that people who are banned from public smoking are being marginalized by these bans. They state that it is wrong for the government to interfere with liberty and personal freedom of an individual all in the name of protecting the health of the public when many nonsmokers do even worse to their own bodies’ every day through other activities (Saulny 2004). In addition, the other argument against public

Triumph of The Will - film by Leni Riefenstahl Research Paper

Triumph of The Will - film by Leni Riefenstahl - Research Paper Example The film that was purportedly made under Hitler’s instructions (his name appears in the titles) contains extracts of speeches delivered by the  Nazi leaders  and includes speeches by  Hitler that are intermixed with footage of the gathered supporters. The main theme of this documentary was to instill a belief amongst the viewers that Germany  would return as  a super power under Hitler’s able leadership. Despite the director Riefenstahl’s claims that the film was a documentary, after its release in 1935, it was held as more of propaganda  film and was considered as one of the best propaganda films made in the history of cinematography.2 The techniques used in the movie like creating distorted images using a long focus lens, moving cameras, use of  aerial photography, and the innovative mix of cinematography with music (a new and revolutionary concept at that time) turned it into one of the  greatest films ever made.3 The film won many awards in Ge rmany and in other parts of the world, the US,  and it continues to influence documentaries and films even in the twenty-first century.4 This research paper explores the various facets of the movie, examines the concepts of art, documentary and propaganda, and analyses what transforms a documentary into a propaganda film. It will review various available literatures to derive that this film, despite claims by the director, is a documentary propaganda that attempted at portraying the Third Reich in a positive light. Discussion Films used as a popular medium for propaganda Propaganda manifests itself in various ways and during the years prior to WWII (1930s) its shape was framed by the place where it occurred, that is, Germany or the UK (the two main powers during the WW era). This is evident in the movies Night Mail by Harry Watt and Basil Wright, and Triumph of the Will by Leni Riefenstahl that revealed various ways in which propaganda can be used to influence viewers. Propaganda has a negative outlook from an overall perspective, given its adverse effect on mass viewers as well as individual audiences, which is evinced even in the 21st century. The term by itself tends to carry a disagreeable connotation; however, propaganda (under any conditions) can be classified as good or unpleasant depending on the benefits of the cause being portrayed through it and the degree of correctness of the information that is being relayed. In this context, it is interesting to note what Barnays wrote in his essay, â€Å"In itself, the word â€Å"propaganda† has certain technical meanings which, like most things in this world, are ‘neither good nor bad but custom makes them so.’†5 He defined the process as â€Å"a consistent, enduring effort to create or shape events to influence the relations of the public to an enterprise, idea or group†¦This practice of creating circumstances and of creating pictures in tem minds of people is very commonâ⠂¬ ¦Sometimes the effect on the public is created by a professional propagandist, sometimes by an amateur deputed for the job. The important thing is that it is universal and continuous; and in its sum total it is regimenting the public mind every bit as much as an army regiments the bodies of its soldiers.†6 Propaganda, which through the different eras were used to "to produce and spread fertile messages that, once sown, will germinate in large human cultures,†   took in a new form in 20th century, where propaganda were used mainly by the ruling political orders and desire to pass information that would â€Å"sway relevant groups of people in order to accommodate their agendas.†7After the Lumiere brothers (1896) successfully used a film for propaganda, it became a popular tool for the various state governments and other non-state actors