I have submitted your evaluation

I have submitted your evaluation :D

Final Project Revised

The Drinking age in the United States should be changed to eighteen. On July 17, 1984, the Uniform Drinking Age Act was formed, which states the legal drinking age to be declared to twenty-one from eighteen. This law was changed in an attempt to lower the amount of drunk driving accidents, but I am opposed to this solution. Just because someone is under the age of twenty-one, doesn't mean they will drink and drive. I believe that people who drink and drive will do so no matter what age. At eighteen years old, we are categorized as “adults” and yet we are restricted from doing certain things, for example, drinking alcohol. Although you must be twenty-one to drink, this law doesn't stop minors from drinking. Instead, people under twenty-one will just consume alcohol irresponsibly, because they feel as if it's a way to "rebel". In forcing this law of the drinking age as twenty-one, it is actually making the problems worse. Lowering the drinki

ng age can teach responsible drinking to those who drink alcoholic beverages. Eighteen year olds should be treated like the "adults" they are.

Many young people took advantage of their right to suffrage this past election. It seems to not make sense how the U.S. Government trusts eighteen year olds to contribute in making the decision of who runs our country, yet they cannot allow them to be responsible enough drink an alcoholic beverage. At eighteen you are able to get married, but not able to sip champagne at your wedding. We are able to fight and die for our country. On your eighteenth birthday, you can go get something drawn on your skin that will stay on your body forever, and afterwards go out to a bar where eighteen year olds are serving beer, but still cannot drink. At eighteen years old you can buy a gun, cigarettes, play poker, go to jail and even buy and smoke Salvia, which is a drug that has some of the same effects of LSD. With all these privileges or rights we get at eighteen, what makes twenty-one so special for drinking?

Recently, A small group of about 100 college presidents disagreed with our government. This group is called the Amethyst Initiative. They believe that restricting people under twenty one from drinking increases and encourages binge drinking. Binge drinking is drinking with the primary intention of becoming intoxicated by heavy consumption of alcohol in a short period of time. The law states that any state that wants to consider lowering its drinking age faces 10% deduction in highway funds. The Amethyst Initiative isn't necessarily trying to lower the drinking age, but just trying to open the discussion in congress.

Alcohol can make you feel really good, but if it is abused, it can impair your ability to operate some machinery and vehicles. About 185,000 people are killed each year in drunk driving accidents and 85,000 in alcohol-related situations. Kids always want what they can't have. If they are introduced to alcohol at a younger age they are more likely to be responsible about drinking. There is much more education now then when the drinking age used to be eighteen so the idea wouldn't be just to lower the age to eighteen, but have something called a "drinking license." Similar to a drivers license, you would have to go to school and be certified, just the way you would do to be able to drive a car. This would better inform eighteen year olds about the risks of being an irresponsible drinker.

Each year, a staggering 440,000 people die in the US from cigarette use. There are also 30,694 firearm deaths each year as well. The two statistics just stated involve items you can buy at the age of eighteen. What makes an eighteen year old mature enough to buy a gun and take a life, but not mature enough to have a drink? The governments concern is that 18-20 year olds are the main cause behind most drunk driving incidents today. If you need to be twenty-one to drink, maybe you should be twenty-one to smoke and purchase a firearm as well, considering the deaths caused by them are the same if not higher.

On September 16, 2004, Gordie Bailey, a freshmen at the University of Colorado, died of alcohol poisoning. He drank as part of a hazing to get into a fraternity. This is a huge example of why the drinking age should be lowered. Gordie Bailey died because it was illegal for him to be drinking, so the guys in the fraternity didn't take him to a hospital or call an ambulance because they were afraid. If it had been legal for him to drink, Gordie could have been saved. Considering that I am this age, I feel that it's wrong to call an eighteen year old an "adult" but at the same time not let them drink an alcoholic beverage.

Karuna's Evaluation

1. -drinking age -keeping it 21 -statistics -i think you should put a little less statistics regarding how many teenagers drink, but instead how many die from alcohol related deaths or how many turn into alcoholics.

2. -your arguments are hard to find because you state more of why teenagers drink, instead of why they shouldn't -the adolescence brain wants to take risks, so this can cause over-drinking causing danger

3. -alcohol is all around them -it could be in there genes

4. -the writers strongest point is stating why people under the age of 21 drink -the writers weakest point is not stating why teenagers shouldn't drink -yes they are organized good -how many people die from alcohol related deaths -at 18 a person is called a legalized adult and has many responsibilities but they cannot drink

5. - i think the thesis statement is perfect the way it is. straight and to the point.

6. -Increasing the minimum age might actually help save lives of people because when the age was risen to 21, estimated, from 700 to 1,000 lives were saved. So if the minimum age was increased it might help us save more lives. -Increasing the minimum age might help save lives. When the age was changed from 18 to 21, an estimated 700 to 1000 lives were saved. -There are many causes to which why adolescence drink alcohol. One type of factor that is most likely to cause underage drinking is the environment. -One reason why adolescence's drink alcohol is because the environment they are in.

Rough Draft

On July 17, 1984, the Uniform Drinking Age Act was formed, which states the legal drinking age to be declared to twenty-one from eighteen. This law was changed in an attempt to lower the amount of drunk driving accidents, but I am opposed to this solution. Just because someone is under the age of twenty-one, doesn't mean they will drink and drive. I believe that people who drink and drive will do so no matter what age. At eighteen years old, we are categorized as “adults” and yet we are restricted from doing certain things, for example, drinking alcohol. Although you must be twenty-one to drink, this law doesn't stop minors from drinking. Instead, people under twenty-one will just consume alcohol irresponsibly, because they feel as if it's a way to "rebel". In forcing this law of the drinking age as twenty-one, it is actually making the problems worse. Lowering the drinking age can teach responsible drinking to those who drink alcoholic beverages. Eighteen year olds should be treated like the "adults" they are.

 

At eighteen, were able to contribute in making the decision of who runs our country. It seems to not make sense how the U.S. Government trusts eighteen year olds with their votes, yet they cannot allow them to be responsible enough drink an alcoholic beverage. We are also able to get married, but not able to sip champagne at our wedding. We are able to fight and die for our country, but at the same time we cannot go to the bar and drink afterwards. At eighteen years old you can buy a gun, cigarettes, and even fly a plane. With all these privileges or rights we get at eighteen, what makes twenty-one so special for drinking?

 

Each year, a staggering 440,000 people die in the US from cigarette use. There are also 30,694 firearm deaths each year as well. The two statistics just stated involve items you can buy at the age of eighteen. What makes an eighteen year old mature enough to buy a gun, but not mature enough to have a drink? The governments concern is that 18-20 year olds are the main cause behind most drunk driving incidents today. If you need to be twenty-one to drink, maybe you should be twenty-one to smoke and purchase a firearm as well, considering the deaths caused by them are obviously very high also.

Considering that I am this age, I feel that it's wrong to call an eighteen year old an "adult" but at the same time not let them drink an alcoholic beverage. As a solution to this problem, I think that the government should install breathalyzer devices in every car, as well as more police checkpoints to control the situation. The government needs to realize that you can be any age to drink and drive, and thats its not just from eighteen to twenty-one years old.

Final Thesis Paragraph

On July 17, 1984, the Uniform Drinking Age Act was formed, which states the legal drinking age to be declared to twenty-one from eighteen. This law was changed in an attempt to lower the amount of drunk driving accidents, but I am opposed to this solution. Just because someone is under the age of twenty-one, doesn't mean they will drink and drive. I believe that people who drink and drive will do so no matter what age. It seems to not make sense how the U.S. Government trusts eighteen year olds with their votes, yet they cannot allow them to drink champagne at their wedding or go out to the bar after they just fought for our country. As an eighteen year old, I feel that it's impossible to call an eighteen year old an "adult" but at the same time not let them drink an alcoholic beverage. Although you must be twenty-one to drink, this law doesn't stop minors from drinking. Instead, people under twenty-one will just consume alcohol irresponsibly, because they feel as if it's a way to "rebel". In forcing this law of the drinking age as twenty-one, it is actually making the problems worse. Lowering the drinking age can teach responsible drinking to those who drink alcoholic beverages. As a solution to this problem, I think that the government should install breathalyzer devices in every car, as well as more police checkpoints to control the situation. Eighteen year olds should be treated like the "adults" they are.

On July 17, 1984, the Uniform Drinking Age Act was formed. The Uniform Drinking Age Act states the legal drinking age to be declared to 21 from 18. This law was changed in an attempt to lower the amount of drunk driving accidents, but I am opposed to this solution. People who drink and drive are going to drink and drive, no matter what age. It seems to not make sense how the U.S. Government trust's 18 year olds with their votes, yet the cannot allow them to drink champagne at their wedding or go out to the bar after they just fought for the country. As an 18 year old, I feel that it's impossible to call an 18 year old an "adult" but at the same time not let them drink an alcoholic beverage. Although you must be 21 to drink, this law doesn't stop minors from drinking. Instead, people under 21 will just consume alcohol irresponsibly, because they feel as if it's a way to "rebel". In forcing this law, it is actually making the problems worse. Lowering the drinking age can teach responsible drinking to those who drink alcoholic beverages. Eighteen year olds should be treated like the "adults" they are.

On July 17, 1984, the Uniform Drinking Age Act was formed. The Uniform Drinking Age Act states the legal drinking age to be declared to 21 from 18. This law was changed in an attempt to lower the amount of drunk driving accidents, but I am opposed to this solution. People who drink and drive are going to drink and drive, no matter what age. It seems to not make sense how the U.S. Government trust's 18 year olds with their votes, yet the cannot allow them to drink champagne at their wedding or go out to the bar after they just fought for the country. As an 18 year old, I feel that it's impossible to call an 18 year old an "adult" but at the same time not let them drink an alcoholic beverage.

Although you must be 21 to drink, this law doesn't stop minors from drinking. Instead, people under 21 will just consume alcohol irresponsibly, because they feel as if it's a way to "rebel". In forcing this law, it is actually making the problems worse. Lowering the drinking age can teach responsible drinking to those who drink alcoholic beverages. Eighteen year olds should be treated like the "adults" they are.

Clive Thompson On The New Literacy

In this article, Andrea Lunsford believes that "technology isn't killing our ability to write, but reviving it- and pushing our literacy in bold new directions." She states how young people today write far more then any generation before them. With all the social networking, instead of just writing in school back when computers weren't invented, kids now write when they are home as well. Lunsford's study showed that students these days almost always write for an audience which is why it showed they were less enthusiastic about in-class assignments. With in-class assignments, the students only audience is the professor. Also, according to one of Andrea Lunsford's examinations, out of all the first year students, she didn't find a single example of texting speak in a paper.

I agree with Andrea Lunsford to an extent. I believe that students are reading and writing a lot more since computers had been invented, but i also believe that their is a difference between "typing" and "writing". When a student is writing in school, they are forced to use proper grammar and spelling, but, when a student is typing online, they aren't forced to do anything. Also, if a student is reading online they never know if anything they read is actually true, and their could be grammar and spelling mistakes that they could unfortunately get used to and start to use themselves.

Questions

1.) What's the difference between "typing" and "writing"?

2.) Are social networking websites like Facebook and Twitter benefit ways of reading and writing?

3.) Do students actually write more online then for school?

Online, R U Really Reading?

In the article "Online, R U Really Reading?" by Motoko Rich, he states that reading online and reading from books are two totally different things, and they both have their advantages and disadvantages. He says that some argue that "the hours spent prowling on the Internet are the enemy of reading - diminishing literacy, wrecking attention spans and destroying a precious common culture that exists only through the reading of books.", while others say that "the Internet has created a new kinds of reading, one that schools and society should not discount." The article shows many good sides to reading on the Internet. Some children with learning difficulties find it more comfortable to read online. Some experts say that spending any time on the web entails reading text, and online reading skills will help children fare better when they begin looking for digital-age jobs. According to Zachary Sims, 18, he states that, "When you are reading online, you can read a lot of different things about a lot of different subjects in a short period of time, where as if you a reading a book you are only usually reading one subject." He believes its about the conversation and how reading online takes reading books a step further. The article also states many bad sides to the internet. Critics have warned the electronic media would destroy reading. Zachary Sims mother, Jane Sims, believes that reading enriches vocabulary and helps to lay the foundation for good writing skills, but has a problem with the social networking and iming. Her daughter, Nadia, reads online stories that have many spelling and grammar mistakes, that could effect Nadia's grammar and spelling in the future.

So, Online, Are You Really Reading? I believe that online a person isn't really reading. For me, I find it's a lot easier to read in a book. If I am trying to read something for school online, I find I become distracted by social networking and other websites. I can't focus on one thing while reading online. If I am reading an article, its likely that after the first paragraph I will become bored and move onto something else, rather then if I am reading from a book I can stay fully focused and finish it without being distracted. A person could never truly no if what they are reading is true or not. Also, if you are reading a blog or online stories, the grammar and spelling could be wrong, which I believe is not good for kids who are just starting to read and write. On the other hand, I do believe reading and writing online is good in some ways. It is much easier and quicker to find information on what you need to know. You can also read about numerous things at once, opposed to books when that is usually just about one thing. Another good thing about writing online is spell check and all informative websites. If you are stuck on a word you can just look it up on an online dictionary instead of having to spend time finding it in a regular dictionary. But, even with all of the good things about reading on the Internet, I still believe that reading in a book is better then reading online, for all school and learning purposes.

New Media and the Slow Death of the Written Word

I've never understood the importance of a newspaper. For as long as I could remember, I've watched my father sit in the kitchen, with his hot cup of coffee in one hand, and newspaper in the other. As I was growing up, the only time I ever looked in the newspaper was for the Sunday comics. I'd always see the Daily News sitting on the counter and never picked it up. By the time i was old enough to wonder what was going on in the world, I had everything right in front of me. If I ever needed to know something I'd either turn on my computer or the closest television. These days anything anyone would need to know could be found on the internet. Technology has greatly influenced this century and the way we communicate. In "New Media and the Slow Death of the Written Word" the author Mark Zeltner, explains how traditional print mediums have some serious problems that need to be addressed. He states that he has not given up his love for the written word, but he has become excited about the possibilities of new media. Although he loves all the things you can do with new media, he believes there was one thing missing, no rules. For this, Mark created ten rules for students learning to write for the new media.

Mark's first rule "Just the facts, or keep your writing tight, tight, tight.", states that there should be short paragraphs, simple active sentences, and every word should be treated as a valuable jewel. I agree with this rule. Every time i read a blog on the computer, I find i can get easily uninterested if there are no breaks in between long, lengthy paragraphs. To modify this rule, I think that for some instances a paragraph could be long, if it stays on topic. For example, If i was writing an essay, and the paragraph was a little long, but never took off topic, it should be acceptable.

The second rule is "Anything Over a Screenful is Wasted." This rule states that you shouldn't make the reader scroll too much. Scrolling is "hard on the eyes and lessons the readers ability to comprehend and understand what is written." The second part to this rule is how the author should make sure that they set up the view appropriately. This is to make sure that you don't create an "unnatural break" to scroll down during an exciting part of the text. I agree with this rule.

The third rule is "No Page is an Island." This rule states that you should "think in modules, preplan possible paths for your reader, and insure that important information is impossible to miss" You have to make sure a reader won't miss an important detail and not have to worry if they are not able to get back on track. The main point is to think about how you are going to organize a paragraph first before you write it.

"When to embed images and when to just write" is the fourth rule. This rule basically states how a picture could mean a thousand words, and when to use it-- or not to use it. The times when it's okay to use a picture is when the "picture can convey a meaning more effectively then written word." According to Zeltner, you shouldn't use pictures if they are just scattered in an article, because that can throw off and distract the reader. He also states that every computer is different, and what can work perfect on one computer can not even show up on another.

The fifth rule is "Did you hear that?" This rule is to see what times sound is more important then words. The sound of someone's voice can make it a lot easier to understand then just words. The pitch or tone can chance the whole view of a sentence. He also states how music can be put into the background of a website. I agree with this rule but I don't agree with the music on a website. For me, music is very distracting as I am trying to read something, so I believe that the music would distract a person, more then anything else.

"Did you see that?" is the sixth rule. This rule is for when video clips are more important then words. Zeltner states that videos are most effective when you are trying to show someone a mood, and words can describe it. Its kind of like one of those "you had to be there" moments. He says that videos should not be used when they are more then 3o seconds, because they can become tiresome and boring. I agree with this rule because I'm one of those people who need to see something to believe it, and having a video in an article can make the article so much more exciting, as long as the video isn't too long.

"When to use descriptions and definitions" is the seventh rule. It states that all footnotes should be linked back to the main page. I don't agree with this rule. I don't think that articles should have footnotes because I know from experience if I get distracted by something and click to another page, odds are that I'm not going back to the original page.

The eight rule is to use hyperlinks off your document sparingly and to gather your related links to the appendix of your document. In other words, hyperlinks can draw the reader away from your original document, but at the same time it can allow the writer to link other sites that support their information. I also don't agree with this rule. I don't think a writer should use hyperlinks at all, only at the very end of their article, all the way to the bottom so people don't go from the authors article to somebody else's article with all the same information.

The ninth rule is "Sidebars are an important part of every document." According to Mark, sidebars are an excellent way of taking advantage of  the non linear nature of new media documents without running the risk of exciting the reader away. A sidebar could add material that could stand alone. I agree with this because it's not too little and its not too much. It sights the websites you've used but at the same time it doesn't distract the reader.

The tenth and final rule states why content and form are so important. In other words, think about form and how it works with your content, don't distract but add to the mood and meaning of what your writing. The audience likes to read things they can relate to. For example, I'd rather read an article that has a lot of meaning put into it then an article that just has a lot of facts.

In conclusion, the written word is in fact not dead. We just cannot depend on words alone to carry on with life today. It's best to combine the two together to make things better and more interesting for the reader. The New Media is a huge step for the written word, and this can hopefully become better with the 10 rules of Mark Zeltner.

Research Paper Topics

In 2008, an estimated 11,773 people died in drunk driving crashes. According to the MADD website, about three in every ten Americans will be involved in an alcohol-related crash at some time in their life. This is a huge problem in America that has to be changed. Some automakers, including GM and Toyota believe that it should be necessary to have in-car breathalyzers in all vehicles, convicted drunk drivers or not. This step could prevent one of the most common reasons for death in America.

In 1984, the drinking age changed from 18 to 21. At 18 years old, many responsibilities are gained, such as being able to marry and go to war, but legally, an individual the age of 18 cannot have a glass of champaign at their wedding, or be able to drink at a bar after fighting for our country. How can one be considered an "adult" if they can't even have an alcoholic beverage? Other precautions should be issued like in-car breathalyzers if the government is concerned with drunk driving in teens, other then just changing the drinking age.

For many years, Marijuana has been a huge topic of controversy in the United States. A bill was passed which legalized a "medical" use of Marijuana, which shows a positive result of the substance. On the other hand, legal drugs, like alcohol and cigarettes show no positive results. Alcohol is the most life-threatening, mind altering, motor skill impairing substances in existence, while cigarettes cause many life threatening diseases. Yet, theses two substances are legal. There is no reason why the government can allow these two dangerous drugs, while at the same time banning a less dangerous substance, like Marijuana.

"Is Google Making Us Stupid?" by Guy Billout explains how our minds are changing due to the internet. He explains how he doesn't think the way he used to think, and how he can't read one thing without wondering on to something else. Instead of easily reading a lengthy article, he finds himself struggling reading things that just to come natural. He explains how he's more likely to just skim through an article, and read "key notes." I mostly agree with this article. I feel that the internet and articles on the internet have changed the way we think. I even found myself "skimming through" this article, finding that I couldn't focus on reading this either. He explains how Bruce Friedman, who blogs regularly about computers and medicine, says that he has "almost totally lost the ability to read and absorb a longish article on the web or in print." Guy Billout also talks about Google, and how "the ultimate speed engine is something as smart as people - or smarter." In some ways, I disagree with Guy Billout. I feel that for some people, the internet has made them smarter. If I don't know something, I could look it up on Google and find the answer in seconds, rather then going to the library or finding out from someone else. I believe that Google and the internet has definitely changed the way we think, but I also believe it's a better and easier way to find out information, and save time.

"The Internet Is No Substitute For The Dying Newspaper Industry" by Chris Hedges, he explains how the decline of newspaper is due to the rise of corporate state and the loss of civic and public responsibility, and not the use of internet. Chris believes that people rather watch the news on television then buy the newspaper and read it. I disagree with Chris' opinion. I believe that the decline of newspaper's is because of the internet. I don't understand why someone would go out and buy a newspaper if they can just look up whatever they want on the internet for free and in less time. Although, I do believe that television also has a lot to do with it, I think that it's mostly the internet that has changed people's minds. 

Rob Pattinson Hospitalized Hospital From Crazed Fan Attack

CALIFORNIA--  At approximatley 3:15 P.M., Saturday afternoon in San Diego, California, right outside local resturant, Rob Pattinson was attacked by a large group of teenage twilight fans.

"It was absolutely insane." said nearby witness. "They came out of no where in a very large group and wouldn't leave his [Robert's] side, it was like nothing I have ever seen."

After the attack Robert was complaining about a bruised rib and was reported looking very pale with a black eye. He was taken to a nearly h

ospital and is currently in critical condition.

More information 

will

 be released soon.

The Onion

I thought many of these articles were funny, but the ones i thought were the funniest were "DHS Sets Security Alert Level To Green For 8 Seconds" and "George W. Bush Chuckles To Self Upon Thinking About How He Was President Of The United States For Almost A Decade." The first one i find funny because it really shows how scared our country is of terrorist attacks, and how it hasn't been that low since September 11th. It shows our alert and how we always are on the safe side. They achieved their affect on the article by saying that they changed it for only 8 seconds and how it got changed back to red because a terrorist group drove a truck full of explosives into the Seattle Space Needle. They are mocking how the United States hasn't felt safe since September 11th. They are making serious funny by saying how it was only 8 seconds. The second story, "George W. Bush Chuckles To Self Upon Thinking About How He Was President Of The United States For Almost A Decade." is funny because it shows how people think President Bush was, and how he laughed things over and sounded stupid. The story achieved it's affect by stating how he kept saying that he couldn't believe it over and over again. Its mocking how George W. Bush spoke and acted. They are making serious funny by making jokes of how he talked and acted, without saying anything too serious.

Personal story turned news article.

July 13th, 2009, roughly two weeks after Lindenhurst Senior High School graduation, Christopher Fox was killed. Christopher happened to be one of the students who had graduated with the Lindenhurst class of 2009. On this tragic day, Chris was driving on his way home from the beach with a group of his friends in his 1993 volvo when he swerved off the road and crashed into a sand dune. Fox, who was not wearing his seatbelt was partly ejected from the vehicle, and partly drunk.

At Lindenhurst High School, there is a drunk driving program called Shattered Dreams. There is not many schools that have this program, so it is good to know the LHS takes this issue very seriously. This program has select senior students from the school participate in a fake drunk driving situation where they make a video of a fake party where everyone is drinking and pretend to have someone leave "drunk" with a bunch of people in the car and crash. When the video gets to the point after the crash, the assembly is taken outside, and then the select seniors act out the rest of the crash, while the rest of the seniors and juniors from the school watch. This assembly shows the crashed cars, the people injured, and the person who dies from the crash on the ground. The seniors act out how they would react, and the "drunk" driver gets arrested by a real police officer as the body is being taken away in an ambulance. After this, another video is shown of the funeral and what the drunk driver and the friends had to say. This is shown before prom so people think twice before driving drunk. Christopher Fox was one of the students watching this assembly, but unfortunately and ironically, a month after this was shown, he was killed by a drunk driving accident.

Although no one deserves something like this to happen to them, it seems to be a wake up call for all the kids who graduated with Chris. The memorial made for Chris on the way home from the beach reminds everyone to slow down and think before they get behind the wheel of a car after a couple drinks. Lindenhurst tries to help the kids of the town understand that they aren't invincible, and that it can happen to anyone. LHS wants everyone to feel that before they think "it will never happen to me", they should think again.

R.I.P. Christopher Fox

<3

May 27, 1991 - July 13, 2009

Lindenhurst teen dies in Ocean Parkway car crash

Police are investigating a fatal accident that killed one Lindenhurst teenage and caused three others in the vehicle minor injuries on Monday afternoon. Investigators believe that it was a combination of both speeding and alcohol. 

At about 4:11 p.m. Monday afternoon a 1993 Volvo went off the road and went into a sand dune, police said. Christopher Fox, driver, was not wearing a seatbelt and was partly ejected from the vehicle as the car overturned. Police are investigating if Fox was under the influence of alcohol.

State Police Sgt. Scott Crawford said Fox and the three other passengers in the vehicle were taken to Good Samaritan Hospital for treatment.

The cause for the accident is still being investigated.

Blogging

According to Michael Skube, blogging is "the loudest corner of the Internet, noisy with disputation, manifesto-like postings and an unbecoming hatred of enemies real and imagined." He states how blogging is now everywhere among us, and how they are happy to write for free. Some bloggers are very interested in political debate, as for others, like Markos Moulitsas Zuniga says, "We need to keep the media honest, but as an institution, it's important that they exist and do their job well." Bloggers can do whatever journalists can do, but with less restrictions. Skube believes that if there's anything bloggers want more then an audience, is knowing they are making a difference in politics. He said that important stories demand time and true facts, which is something that no regular blogger can do.

"The Blogging Revolution" and "Blogs: All The Noise That Fits" are in same in that they both believe that blogging has changed the way journalism is today in many ways. Although they both stand for something different in the blogging world, they both understand where the other is coming from in a way. They also know that blogging is here to stay, and its impossible to change that now.

I agree more with Andrew Sullivan. People should be able to write whatever they want, and it's good its free. I think its great that people could be able to write and sell their own book online through print-on-demand directly from their website. People should be able to write what they want without it getting edited. I like how blogging has that "personal touch" in which the person doesn't have to worry about upsetting someone else or offending someone. Blogging has formed a revolution on journalism.

Invincible

July 13th, 2009, roughly two weeks after Lindenhurst Senior High School graduation, Christopher Fox was killed. Christopher happened to be one of the students who had graduated with the Lindenhurst class of 2009. On this tragic day, Chris 

was driving on his way home from the beach with a group of his friends in his 1993 volvo when he swerved off the road and crashed into a sand dune. Fox, who was not wearing his seatbelt was partly ejected from the vehicle, and partly drunk.

At Lindenhurst High School, there is a drunk driving program called Shattered Dreams. There is not many schools that have this program, so it is good to know the LHS takes this issue very seriously. This program has select senior students from the school participate in a fake drunk driving situation where they make a video of a fake party where everyone is drinking and pretend to have someone leave "drunk" with a bunch of people in the car and crash. When the video gets to the point after the crash, the assembly is taken outside, and then the select seniors act out the rest of the crash, while the rest of the seniors and juniors from the school watch. This assembly shows the crashed cars, the people injured, and the person who dies from the crash on the ground. The seniors act out how they would react, and the "drunk" driver gets arrested by a real police officer as the body is being taken away in an ambulance. After this, another video is shown of the funeral and what the drunk driver and the friends had to say. This is shown before prom so people think twice before driving drunk. Christopher Fox was one of the students watching this assembly, but unfortunately and ironically, a month after this was shown, he was killed by a drunk driving accident.

Although no one deserves something like this to happen to them, it seems to be a wake up call for all the kids who graduated with Chris. The memorial made for Chris on the way home from the beach reminds everyone to slow down and think before they get behind the wheel of a car after a couple drinks. Lindenhurst tries to help the kids of the town understand that they aren't invincible, and that it can happen to anyone. LHS wants everyone to feel that before they think "it will never happen to me", they should think again.

R.I.P. Christopher Fox

<3

May 27, 1991 - July 13, 2009