Sunday, April 27, 2008

10:33 AM

Do you agree with the author that there is always a tendency to confuse punishment with revenge?

In society, we are assured of justice, carried out by the judiciary system. We see this happening in our daily lives, when criminals are imprisoned or given the death sentence. Criminals are punished under the judiciary system as a penalty for infringement of law. Revenge, on the other hand, is not carried out lawfully. Instead, it is unjust punishment given by the person involved (or on the behalf of the person involved) due to injustice done to that person, “generally the result of hatred rather than justice”. I agree with the author that there is always a tendency to confuse punishment with revenge.

There are two types of revenge, one of which happens due to a person seeking who feel that what he is doing is giving punishment due to a hurt inflicted on him. It is a form of retaliation, similar to the concept of “an eye for an eye”. Although the person has sufficient reason to take vengeance, he or she might even break the law in their bid to do so, resulting in themselves being convicted. In this case, revenge is personal, unlike punishment by authorities, where there is a certain set of procedures to follow. Both ideas have a common goal, which is to seek retribution.

The second type of revenge would be harder to differentiate from punishment. It is when revenge is not carried out by the person involved, but rather, by those permitted to exact punishment, who may also do so unconsciously. Judges may met out more severe punishments due to their own perception or personal experiences. One judge might think that the punishment given is what the criminal deserve while another may feel that is too light. The boundaries between justified punishment and unjust punishment cannot be clearly defined. In other words, revenge is subjective, justice is objective.

Humans are generally rational creatures, however there are exceptions: when anger triggers irrational behaviour as response to being hurt, or when past experiences clouds our judgement. It is inevitable then, that there is a tendency to confuse revenge with punishment.

How effective are harsh methods when dealing with criminals?

I personally feel that harsh methods are only effective to a certain extent. In my opinion, the effectiveness of harsh methods is due to the motive behind this punishment in the first place.

Harsh methods may include death, torture, life imprisonment or other forms of punishment such as extended prison sentence. As mentioned above, the effectiveness of harsh methods when dealing with criminals is evaluated by the objective of the punishment. For instance in capital punishment, where the objective of such a decision is to ensure that a criminal does not cause harm to the society, it is largely effective, as a dead person certainly can no longer commit crimes.

When the objective of harsh methods when dealing with criminal is that of deterrence, it would be much more difficult to evaluate its effectiveness.

People would rationally weigh the benefits of committing a crime against the effects of the punishments, so in theory, harsh methods are effective in deterring would-be criminals. However, even though the knowledge of harsh methods may cause a criminal to think twice before committing the same crime, it cannot extinguish the thought completely. Harsh methods would then only have limited effectiveness.

Moreover in real life, the case would not be that simple. Serious crimes such as murder are often committed in a fit of rage, where a spur of the moment irrational behaviour might cause them to commit crimes they would regret after the initial anger has wore off. Understandably, the knowledge of harsh methods they would face if they commit the crime would not occur to them at that moment. By the time they ponder the consequence of their action, it may be too late. The objective of deterrence dealing with crime would not be met.

In conclusion, I feel that the effectiveness of harsh method when dealing with criminals is subjected to many other factors and not something easily proven or tracked. Hence, the effectiveness of harsh methods used is only to some extent.

kiawoon

0 comments
Saturday, April 26, 2008

3:15 PM

Application Question 1-Torture

For much of history torture was used quite commonly. Civilizations such as the Egyptians, Persians, the Greeks and the Romans all used torture. Torture involves deliberately inflicting physical or mental on a person without legal cause or threats to family members or loved ones. Incidents of torture can be seen in prisons such as Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib Prison. Torture may seem cruel as it is against humanity, but on further thinking, I feel that the use of torture is justified in dealing with criminals and terrorists depending on the severity of crimes.

I agree that torture should be used on criminals (e.g. serial killers or rapists) and terrorists (e.g. masterminds of bombings) in order to ensure the security of the state. If u look at the case of the 9/11 bombings, many Americans will not disagree on using torture on terrorists. Torture is necessary as the US state have to ensure that the terrorists confess to their crimes and also try to gain information from their confession, such as naming of other accomplices or location of headquarters. All this information is very important as it will hopefully uncover hidden plots of similar terrorist attacks and thus reduce the damage and causalities that might result. Torture can be used as a punishment on criminals, so that it actually acts as deterrence by intimidating would-be criminals from committing crimes.

However, torture is prohibited under international criminal law as it is an inhumane act which causes severe pain or suffering, serious injury to the body and or to mental or physical health. Torture is an effective interrogation tool. Not all information extracted from torturing criminals is true. Torture may well produce false information because under torture a prisoner will eventually say anything to stop the pain-regardless of whether it is true. Hence the interrogator will never be “sure” that they are getting the truth and will never know when to stop. Torture should not be used on criminals unless there is sufficient evidence. At the end of the day the criminal will be deeply traumatized if he is found to be innocent and released. Sometimes, authorities who are pressed by higher authorities or the public to solve crimes resort to using torture to make the suspected criminal confess so that they can close the case quickly. Cases like this can be found in China, especially in rural areas. There are also more effective methods of interrogation that do not involve torture. A poll in 2006 shows that 72% of Britons oppose torture in any circumstances-even where its use would save lives.

Therefore, in conclusion, I stand by my point of view that although torture is cruel, it should be applied on criminals and terrorists depending on the situation.

Jessie:0

0 comments

12:43 PM

Effects of delay, uncertainty on crime and ignorance on crime and the perception of justice

The effects of uncertainty can be seen that a crime will be more likely to be carried out in cases such that if a robber is uncertain about the odds he will not be caught by the police, (e.g. a low rate of at least ten to one that the police will not catch a robber) and also the odds that he will not land up in prison if he is caught by the police unless he has a long record. (e.g. on the average, no more than three felonies out of a hundred result in imprisonment.

The effects of delay can be seen that a crime will be more likely to be carried out if penalties imposed on crimes come only after a long delay after the convict is caught. (For e.g. in some jurisdictions, a year or more might be needed before a trial awaits the convict.)

The effects of ignorance can be seen such that a crime will be more likely to be carried out if the criminal, especially young ones, are ignorant of how the world works, and think that the odds against being caught are even greater than they are, or that delays in the court proceedings might result in a reduction or avoidance of punishment.

The effects of degree and uncertainty can be solved to a certain extent if there is an increase in the amount of likelihood arrest, probability and severity of prison sentences for criminals caught. However, this is not a feasible solution as all the above solutions cannot be done to a drastic extent (e.g. long jail terms for robbers). The prison might not be able to house all the criminals if such measures are taken. The effects of ignorance are hard to be solved as different people have different abilities of accessing the risks of crime. Some may think that the odds of chances of being caught and punished are higher.

My perception of justice is such that the justice system must not be corrupt. There should not be bribery which results in criminals escaping scot-free. (E.g. In china, many businessman and criminals bribe the Communist Party and government officials for crimes they have committed.) It must also be efficient, with ample courts, judges and magistrates. Prisons must also be large enough to house all criminals. (e.g. In North Dakota, US, prisons in Bismarck and Jamestown are full.) It should not come to a point where criminals are released because there is a lack of prison space to house them.

JESSIE :)

0 comments
Thursday, April 24, 2008

4:37 PM

Capital punishment- Application Question 2

For or against death penalty? That’s a difficult choice which many are torn in between. Yet, I have decided not to sit on the fence. I am a supporter of the death penalty, but only in certain unique contexts. I believe that death penalty should be meted out only after considering the circumstances and situation in which the crime is committed.

For example, murder can be classified into two groups, homicide and premeditated murder. In the case of homicide, the murders are usually unintentional and accidental. It is most likely the pressing situation in which the person is placed in that causes him to make such a decision. As we all know, people break under pressure. Thus, it is understandable that people commit murders under pressure, but of course, this is not totally justifiable. One common situation which leads to homicide is that the life of the murderer is a stake. This signals to us that the murder was commitd on basis of self-defense. If so, we cannot penalize the person for trying to safeguard his own life. Hence, I feel that in such cases, death penalty should not be the punishment. In this context, rehabilitation would be more appropriate as it would help the criminal learn how to deal with pressure and extreme situations, as well as how to control their emotions. This way, the criminal can once again integrate into the society. Like what is stated in article 2, ‘punishment should not only be retributive, but should also try to rehabilitate the criminal, enabling him to live in society again.’ Since their intention of murder was not premeditated, I believe they should be given a chance to live again.

This brings me to my next point, and that is premeditated or planned murder should not be tolerated. In these cases, the death penalty is justifiable because the murder already had a motive from the beginning, and that is to kill. This reflects the unsound mindset of the murderer. If allowed back into the society, or even if kept alive, they would pose a gregarious threat. With a higher probability of committing crimes again, I am strongly against them being allowed back into the society, as they may incur even more harm to the innocent. Article 1 stated that, ‘if the execution of one saves three other innocent lives, or even two, it would still be an attractive trade-off and a persuasive benefit-cost ratio’. In addition, article 3 states that ‘if no death penalty is imposed, then most criminals would face life imprisonment without parole’. This might further aggravate the situation as life imprisonment without parole would mean that prisoners would have no aim with nothing to look forward to. When this happens, they would be emboldened and spurred to commit more murders as there end result would still be the same- life imprisonment. Thus, death penalty is an effective deterrence against potential criminals.

In conclusion, death penalty can bring about positive benefits if implemented in the right context. Many would argue that that would be a breach of human rights. However, what right does the criminal have in taking away the lives of others? If they do not respect the human rights that their victims have, then why then should the same liberty be extended to them?

0 comments

4:33 PM

The Philosophy of Crime Sentencing

Modern sentencing practices are influenced by 5 goals, namely retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, rehabilitation and restoration. However, we should not take these goals solely at face value. Even though retribution is based upon the need for vengeance, its main aim is actually to make the criminal face up and be responsible for their actions by bearing the consequences. Under retribution, criminals are punished according to the type and severity of their crime. Thus, it helps us to realize the impact their crime has caused and allow them to reflect upon their atrocities committed while suffering their punishment. Retribution and incapacitation are linked because in today’s society, the common privilege of every single person is freedom. Taking away the freedom of criminals via incapacitation is equivalent to taking away their most basic yet important right. By making them lose their freedom, they lose their right to make decisions, to choose and to come and go freely. Some people may equate that to ‘no life at all’. Thus, incapacitation fulfils the aim of retribution by making the person suffer the consequences of losing his freedom, giving him time to reflect on his actions.

Deterrence, rehabilitation and restoration should also work hand-in-hand as rehabilitation leads to deterrence and restoration. Rehabilitation is effective as it does not use the ‘iron fist’ to reform criminals, but uses education and psychological treatment instead. This is crucial in today’s society as people are less likely to succumb to force rather than in the past. This might be due to rising affluence, making people more arrogant and prideful. Education and psychological treatment also addresses the root of the problem, while using force might only make the person give in temporarily. It cannot be sustained in the long run. Rehabilitation leads to deterrence because with increased awareness of their wrongdoings and its effects, criminals are more likely to come to terms with the negative effects they have caused, allowing them to repent. It is only through true repentance can criminals totally eradicate the urge and desire to commit the crime again. In addition, if criminals are given a platform to share their rehabilitation experiences, I believe it would serve as an effective deterrence to the public.

One success story of rehabilitation is an inmate’s experience after receiving a ‘Way to Happiness’ booklet, which is the rehabilitation programme of Crimnion Inc. He mentioned that “This course has made me realize where I have gone wrong in my life. It has re-established my self-esteem and self-identity. I wish that I could have had access to this course before I got into trouble with the law. These things I learned from the lessons I can and will be able to apply to my living on the inside as well as the outside. I will walk with more dignity and integrity once again”. This shows us that rehabilitation can indeed change a person’s perspective, make him value his life more, and deter him from committing crimes again.

Rehabilitation also addresses restoration as it is only with education can criminals realize their follies. Only when they have come to know the impacts they have caused on their victims’ lives, will they go about trying to make amends, and what other ways would be best than through restoration. Restoration encompasses restitution, community work service, victim-offender mediation and so on, which helps to bridge the gap between criminals and their victims.

Thus, the 5 goals should work together by first introducing incapacitation which brings about the idea of retribution. Following this, rehabilitation should be carried out to ensure deterrence and restoration, making the criminal’s road to reform more meaningful.

Melissa :)

0 comments
Saturday, April 12, 2008

6:16 PM

New Media-Power to the people or threat to stability?

The New Media is an essential tool in people’s lives nowadays. Many people post their comments on the Internet, which is also called the social media, on platforms such as blogs, message boards, forums, pod casts, online communities and wikis. The effects can be deemed as beneficial or harmful, depending on the nature of the article.

The New media can be considered as a power to the people as it is the only platform where people can voice out their opinions can concerns freely without fear of leading to implications. In the first article, it states that some bloggers expose mistakes and biases in the MSM within hours or even minutes of an article’s release. This is actually beneficial as the power of the people’s freedom of expression can help to correct people’s errors.

It must be noted that there are certain blogs that advertise products. The Internet is a superb advertising tool as products can be advertised globally due to its large platform. People have used this power by advertising on blogs and forums, ranging from food blogs to health blogs.
The Internet has proved invaluable as a way for concerned citizens to offer support to each other, and to act together for political and social change. Take for example, the recent issue about Egypt bloggers preparing for a second strike on the regime. Egypt bloggers, who rarely conceal their real identity, have taken on the role of bridging the gap between civil society’s desire for democracy and worker’s demand for better pay and working conditions. Youtube has allowed the outside world to know about the disastrous casualties of the demonstrations in Tibet through footages taken in Tibet which was being covered up by China’s attempt to minimize the actual losses. Many concerned citizens voice out their concerns and sympathy for Tibet and lambast China’s actions online.

However, new media can also spirals the harmful threat to stability, such as the latest arrest of three young men under the Internal Security Act for their terror-related activities that signal the threat of self-radicalisation which is stated in article 2. The pervasive spread of extreme ideas on the Internet is a great concern for authorities and communities, especially Singapore which is extremely vulnerable due to its multi-racial community. As an open society, Singapore will continue to be exposed to this source of radicalisation. Terrorists have previously been exploiting the Internet for fund-raising, training and planning purposes. For now, they have realized that the Internet is the best and direct way to gain access to their audiences, from spreading radicalisation to recruitment purposes. It must be ensured that the new media will not be used as propaganda to endanger a regime’s stability.

In conclusion, I feel that the new media has brought a new power to the people by giving them a platform to voice their opinions freely, but it must be ensured that this platform will not be abused to such an extent that it threatens stability. New media is therefore important and should be protected so that it can be put to good use.

http://digital.asiaone.com/Digital/News/Story/A1Story20080408-58610.html

Comments on previous entry: New Media by Kia Woon

I agree with Kia Woon’s view that new media will be a complement to primary reports by professional journalists instead of completely taking over the role of mainstream media. Since most bloggers do not have the professional training as journalists, some of the posts they made are just filled with nonsense and are not constructive. In contrast, the mainstream media reports more factual news which are at least 80% true. Therefore, more trust should be placed on reports made by the mainstream media and not by comments and opinions of the new media. Occasionally, comments of the new media can be used to supplement the loop holes of the mainstream media so that actual news reports can be reported to the audiences in a clearer and more truthful way.

Jessie:)

0 comments

2:24 PM

New Media: Power to the people or threat to stability?

As can be seen from the two articles, new media is redefining freedom of speech. Nowadays, you do not need a printing press or have to be a hot shot journalist to have your views announced to the world. All you simply need is a computer with internet connection, type in your thoughts, and everyone, from America to Africa, can read and comment on what you have written.

I feel that new media is both beneficial and damaging, depending on the motives of the author. Yes, it does bring power to the common person like you and me, but it can also bring threats to stability, as quoted from the article “The pervasive spread of extreme ideas on the Internet has become a great concern for the authorities and community here in Singapore” and “The Internet plays a significant role in the radicalisation process “.

New media provides a platform for citizens to publish their views on any subject, and citizen journalism is becoming commonplace. Take the example of STOMP, an interactive portal with parent newspaper being The Straits Times, Singapore. It is probably the most popular website for citizen journalists, shown by its phenomenal growth since its debut in 2006. Practically all the articles on STOMP is posted by its users comprising of common Singaporeans. The Straits Times gradually added reports and photos posted on the website its print version. Reports by citizens are followed up by authorities and citizens, for once, have the power to affect changes.

It cannot be denied that citizen journalism-based websites such as STOMP have improved the efficiency of authority’s responses to citizen feedback, but it seems that some users are nitpicking, slamming authorities for minor incidents. They too, provide biased views, based on their preferences and own experiences. Therefore, I feel that it is not just mainstream media (MSM) that is biased; articles by citizen journalists might include propaganda too. Readers should judge for themselves which articles are factual and which are merely prejudiced comments dressed up.

New media at the same time is a threat to stability, as freedom of speech allows common citizens to make comments that create animosity among different races and religions. Or in more serious cases, as featured in the second article, new media is being manipulated by extremists who recruit and influence youths in their jihadi movement. Because such websites can be set up and viewed by anyone, this poses a huge threat in the multi-racial Singapore society.

There are legal implications for these individuals, as in the 2005 case of 3 bloggers who faced prosecution due to their racists comments, and 3 extremists who were detained or put under a Restriction Order for their potential terrorist danger. This proves that the authorities are wise to the new outlets employed by extremists and will act on it if necessary. However, there is a limit on how many websites authorities can monitor, and also, many such websites might not be created in Singapore, so it is difficult for the government to clamp down on such activities.

Referring back to the benefits of new media, the internet “has proved invaluable as a way for concerned citizens to offer support to each other, and to act together for political and social change.” Amongst articles that may be untrue, there are some citizen journalists out there who strive to bring the most unprejudiced reports to their audiences.

New media is set to stay, and I believe that it will not completely take over the role of mainstream media, instead act as a complement to primary reports by professional journalists.

http://www.sph.com.sg/news/latest/press_070607_001.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_journalism

Comments on previous entry: New Media by Melissa

I agree with Melissa’s views that discernment is a must. With so many differing comments on the internet, readers should not simply believe in all they read. Without filtering biased comments and personal opinions, readers would be susceptible to unsavoury information and be manipulated like puppets by the authors.

kiawoon

0 comments
Thursday, April 10, 2008

11:46 PM

New Media- Power to people, or threat to stability

All of us use the new media today. However, how often does the effects and impact of the new media cross our minds? This phenomenon arises from the fact that new media is so widespread that we tend to take it for granted. In my opinion, the new media equips people with power, and yet, is a threat to stability at the same time, depending on the context it is used in.

For instance, the new media allows people to voice their opinions openly on the internet through the use of blogs and forums. This is the spark that instills boldness in people and encourages them to stand up for what they believe in. These mediums have such a great impact that it gives people a platform to effect a change in issues such as legislation and human rights. Gone are the days where people could only hope for change by writing letters to the government or organizations. Often, their letters are ignored and are kept private. With blogs, people of the same cause can aggregate together to push for their stand. Given that these blogs can be viewed by the public, the relevant authorities are pressured to take action, or face the music. Many a times, it is the platform on which citizens support one another and act together for a political or social change.

You may ask what about mainstream media? The growing trend is that people are starting to break away from mainstream media. This is due to the fact that its views and reports are sometimes skewed and biased, often based on the needs to safeguard the interest of external factors. People are turning to alternatives such as blogs to get their dose of real and unrestrained perspectives. Bloggers are usually individuals that stand for themselves and thus have no ulterior motives they hope to achieve through their articles. To many, this is the basis on which they can make informed choices.

The desire and need for openness is what drives freedom of expression today. In fact, it is freedom of expression in the new media that gives people the power- the power to decide for themselves.

However, the new media is not just a bed of roses. It can be a threat to stability as well. For example, irresponsible and unjustified claims, articles and advertisements on the internet could mislead people. This is seen in the blogosphere whereby people blog on what they feel without thinking about its rationale and consequences of their actions. Their infactual views could sometimes lead people to make the wrong inference. For example, criticizing another religion on blogs could lead to controversies. If serious, it could evolve to riots and killings. Is it worth it to give up lives in the name of new media? Definitely not.

The new media is also very vulnerable to abuse. Terrorist groups have been known to exploit the new media for purposes like fundraising, radicalization, recruitment, and the planning and preparing for terrorists attacks. The new media allows them to break away from traditional methods which are increasingly unstable. The new media is like the sustenance of the terrorists, giving them a medium to further their movement. People can also use it for their personal or organization’s interest. The new media aids in the spread of propaganda which plays on the fragility of the human minds. People may not realize, but their mentalities are being swayed every time they choose to simply believe in what they see on the internet without going through critical analysis. This may lead to ill-informed choices which threaten stability as people tend to flock as a herd, often in the wrong direction.

Not only does it promote propaganda, it also inculcates radicalism. This is one of the most aggravating factors because detection of radicalism is difficult. It is only when people take actions, for example through terrorist attacks, can these people be identified. By then, it might be too late to reverse the negative impact it has on our world. It also allows messages to be targeted at a certain audience, making the impact of negative movements more alarming. For instance, youths are sought out by the jihads through the use of flashy, well-designed websites and visually arresting graphic content. This certainly is a call for concern since the youths today has such a huge influence on the people around them. Even delegates in the US presidential election are swayed by views of their children!

As such, I feel that the new media gives power to people, yet threatens stability at the same time. People need to learn how to exercise their new found power cautiously, or they may soon find themselves being the lackeys of groups and organizations that aim to destabilize the country, without even knowing that they are a part of it. In the new media, discernment is a must.

Melissa

0 comments
Saturday, April 5, 2008

11:39 PM

10 Ideas that are Changing the World

#2 The End of Customer Service

Technology is the key in the evolution of customer service. Without technology, there would be no “self service” as we know it; no ATMs (automated teller machines), no conveyer-belt sushi at Japanese restaurants, and certainly no such convenience like booking flight tickets online.

Convenience: yet another key idea in diminishing human service. It cannot be denied that the relative ease and simplicity of using self service facilities attributed in its popularity. Logically speaking, it benefits both producers and consumers. For producers, say a restaurant, they no longer have to hire five waitresses; one is probably more than enough. All they need is the installation of ordering screens linked to the kitchen, as was mentioned in the article. In the long term, this means additional revenue for the restaurant, since they can save on the cost of labour, more can be spent on, say, furnishing the interior, hence attracting more customers. For consumers, self service favours them too. Now, they can order at their own leisure, with having to wait for their turn to have their orders taken. It’s a win-win situation. Machines are fast taking over the jobs of humans, and it is poised to be even more so in the future.

Does this mean the end of service industry? From my viewpoint, this is certainly not the downfall of human service. As I have pointed out, technology is what drives this idea that is changing the world. It is also this very factor that hinders machines from completely taking over human service, reducing service to no more than talking machines and “invisible salespersons”. Yes, the merits of technology bring unbelievable wonders, yet glitches are aplenty. Take for example the recent chaos and confusion happening at Terminal five of Heathrow Airport, UK. Recently opened (27 March 2008), Terminal five touted a mechanized, state-of-the-art baggage handling system, automated check-ins and the like. However, technology breakdowns led to misplacement of 28,000 bags, and loss of 16 billion pounds- by no means a small figure. This is one instance in which human service triumphs self service.

I believe that there will always be a need for human interaction. No way will consumers, whether present or future, take sole responsibility for collection of goods and services. Consumers may be playing along in the game of self service, but there are many services which simply cannot be substituted with machines and automated service, and consumers understand that. It winds down to something very basic: all humans enjoy the attention of another human being, a warm smile when taking your orders, or genuine concern over how a defective product is affecting you. This personal touch is what differentiates one shop from another, making a difference between purchasing a good or not.

Moreover, I disagree with the author that customer service has come to an end. Simply recall how often you hear complains about Singapore’s lousy customer service, about how the service industry cannot be compared to other countries. It can be seen that consumers are still receptive to customer service; it is not fading into oblivion just because there are alternatives in the way your goods and services are collected.

In conclusion, I feel that technology should be employed as a complement to customer service, not to take over such that the only service you get is self service. This is something, I personally think, should never change, no matter how advancement of technology leads to greater inventions in the league of self service.

kiawoon

0 comments

11:07 PM

Sports events have gain popularity among television viewers recently. Below are the five most watched sporting events of 2007. 1)Super Bowl, 2) Brazilian Grand Prix, 3) UEFA Champions League final, 4) Rugby World Cup, 5) World Athletics Championship. Sports is successfully invoking passion and loyalty of devoted fans. In addition, sports programmes consists of intense actions that thrill the viewers. Sports marketers and advertisers have realised that sports is the perfect synthesis of money and motion. However, although most of the world's globalised events, for example, the Olympics and World Cups attract millions of audiences worldwide, they are not held regularly and happen only every few years. Hence, i agree with the author's views of constant coverage of global sporting events happening in the future. As commerce and tastes become more global, sport marketers and advertisers are inevitably looking for ways to attract worldwide audiences on a regular basis.

Sport bosses, marketers and advertisers have an ulterior motive which is to make more money. Realising that the number of audiences viewing sporting events on television are multiplying at an alarming rate, sport bosses have used this fact to increase subscription fee of sports programmes. Take for example, England's Barclays Premier League, which attracts millions of viewers from countries worldwide. Due to its overwhelming popularity, companies have been fighting for the television rights to host the various sporting events, which inevitably result in consumers paying amuch higher cost of subscription fee to watch the Premier League. The constant exposure of stadiums, teams and players to the world have resulted in sport marketers and advertisers placing billboards around grandstands, painting slogans on the fields and plastering players with logos, hoping that their products would get more exposure. Nevertheless, the constant TV coverage of global sporting events have inspired many various unknown or unpopular sports in various countries to form new leagues and hold constant exhibition games. Sports is therefore brought to a higher level of awareness among individuals. For example, India's new multi billion-dollar cricket league has attracted some of the best players to new teams in India. In addition, the right to host major sporting events have also resulted in healthy competitions between bidding countries, such as the final competition between Russia and Singapore for the right to host the Youth Olympics (Singapore won the bid in the end). Winning countries of the bids will have a chance to host the sport events. Constant TV coverage will increase the global image of the host country and bring in revenue. Citizens of China are learning and improving their English and new rules are imposed to reduce pollution so that China will be projected as a litter-free country with cultured citizens when the 2008 Olympics is held at Beijing.

Future developments include the proposal of the English Premier League to start holding an extra weekend's worth of soccer games in five cities outside England by Richard Scudamore, the chief executive of England Premier League. There could also be developments by the National Basketball Association, such as having franchises in cities outside the US and Canada. Football and basketball leagues may be created in India in the future.

Jessie :)

0 comments

12:00 AM

Aging gracefully is not an easy feat. It requires commitment. However, I feel that with determination, everyone should be able to achieve it. I believe that old does not equate to useless and incompetent. Many people feel that once a person is old, they would be unable to contribute to the society and would only put a strain on the younger generation. However, I beg to differ. The elderly are the ones equipped with rich and fulfilling life experiences that could be applied to many issues today. For example, the author mentioned that her granny, at the age of 92, still dabbles in real estate and politics. This is concrete evidence that shows that the elderly has the ability to impact the society and to determine the developments they wish to see. In a society that focuses on personal achievements, I feel that humility is of utmost importance. It is only when we learn to humble ourselves and learn from the elderly, can we be exposed to broader perspectives, allowing us to make more informed choices.

One other significant fact is that the elderly are the ones with considerable spending power. This is most likely because their children have all grown up and are now able to survive independently. It is also due to the fact that they may have paid up their mortgages and debts over the years, and hence, have built up a reserve of money for their retirement. It has been observed that the elderly are spending more as well, injecting money to the economy, helping it to flourish. The notion of retires being poor and idle should be eradicated in this time and age.

On the other hand, in the article, the author mentioned that even though taking care of the elderly and frail will incur huge costs, stretching already overburdened pension and health-care systems, it is not detrimental. He feels that this can be overcome if the elderly continue to contribute productively to the society. I feel that this is an understatement. Many elderly are plagued with chronic sicknesses that limit their thinking and actions. If this is so then how would they contribute to our society? Their hearts might be willing, but their bodies, not. As such, the expenditure spent on health care would far exceed what the elderly can give back to the society. In addition, the worsening of environmental conditions such as air pollution, and global warming is bound to take a toll on people’s health, particularly the elderly who are most susceptible. This would further add to the health care expenditure.

Well, so what are the implications of all these? I feel that this growing demographic trend may soon change the mechanics of our world. There might be schools set up specially to target the elderly group, allowing them to enrich themselves after retirement. Conversely, we might also find that the bulk of people doing community service might not be the youths, but the elderly! This is another way that the elderly can ensure that they are not draining our country’s resources without return.

In conclusion, I feel that it is time that we change our mindset on the elderly. It is time we uproot the misconception that the elderly are the leeches of the society. In actual fact, they have much to offer us. If we take the time to understand them better, we would be able to see them in a whole new light- we would be able to see them as one who drives the economy, one who has invaluable insights and the agents of change in our world today.

Melissa

0 comments