This podcast was recorded on YouTube as well as audio. The duration was 17 minutes with no advertising or interruptions. The owner has a routine of promoting his website for two minutes before getting into the gist of the episode. There is no profit motive or corporate interests involved.

A journalistic element is here because the subject was the controversial release of the movie “The Interview.” Harry Wilmington speaks about Sony getting hacked and threats of violence made towards American theaters. He then correlated the release of the movie to jealousy in dating. It sounds like a reach but makes sense.

People didn’t initially have freedom to see the movie. This in turn lead them to want to see the movie after being told they couldn’t have something. The same happens when jealous boyfriends put restrictions on girlfriends hanging out with other guys, girls, etc. The overcompensation actually pushes the girl towards the other guys by putting the idea in her head and by not giving her freedom to choose.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/stop-losing-women-podcast/id698728389?mt=2&i=375357509

Who Won the First Presidential Debate?

In this small article we can see different points of views  and  is like a summary of  alot of the things

that took place during the first debate of Hillary Clinton against Donald Trump . According  to

this article Trump arguably had his best moments in the opening section of the debate, which tends

to be its most-watched portion. From what I read on this website  the writer is stating  that  Hillary Clinton won.

”In the first and potentially most consequential presidential debate of 2016, the Democratic nominee presented

as composed and commanding, ticking through her policy prescriptions while landing a series of devastating blows

on Donald Trump’s record and readiness”. If I could edit something about this article it would be tittle because is

very common, and because I think that when it comes to a debate there is no winner or looser is all about people’s points

of view. I  don not think that nobody won the debate.

http://fortune.com/2016/09/26/presidential-debate-who-won/

“Stop-and-frisk isn’t just a form of policing for Trump; it’s a whole way of life.” -p. 3

American writer and essayist Adam Gopnik wrote this semi-satirical article, titled “The Problem with Trump isn’t his Debating Skills” for the Daily Comment Section of The New Yorker following Monday night’s first presidential debate.  It is comprised of three pages of text, one still image of Trump speaking at a podium (see above), and various links to related articles.

The piece is thorough, comprehensive, and assumes a decisive stance against the pervasive post-debate claim that Trump’s downfall was “lack of preparation”. He criticizes this argument on the basis that it is too normalizing, that you cannot simply chalk up a presidential candidate’s casual racism to “Oh, he just didn’t prepare!” Because even the most well-articulated racist is still a racist! The issue, then, runs much deeper.   Through striking comparisons and injections of basic common sense, Gopnik supports his thesis:  that (p. 4) “This wasn’t a question of preparation.  It was that the things he actually believes are themselves repellent even when coherently presented.”

One of the most disturbing moments during the debate was when Trump began defending the constitutionality and effectiveness of “stop-and-frisk”.  Another was, when confronted with the whole making-Obama-show-his-birth-certificate incident, Trump’s claim that this was “good for him (Obama).”  Gopnik extracts the common truth from these two statements when he says, “He (Trump) believes that as a rich white man, he had a right to stop and frisk the president of the United States and demand that the uppity black man show his papers.”

The analogy is extremely resonant, as it “snaps” its readers out of their nit-picky obsession with who studied harder , and back into the reality that preparation is besides the point, because it cannot change somebody’s core beliefs.

Choose ONE audio podcast series to examine and listen to at least 1 episode of it (Google… “(interest) + Podcast” / use iTUNES, etc. for ideas) CHOOSE A PODCAST TOPIC YOU ALREADY CARE ABOUT!

• 1.) Actively consume the podcast episode you’ve chosen – listen to the audio, read the text, read/post on the comments, etc.
• 2.) Answer this main question about the podcast episode you’ve chosen;
  “How is this podcast episode like or unlike traditional radio broadcasting?” Explain your answer with specifics
• 3.) Also share your general impressions and what you like and don’t like about the podcast episode in question
• 4.) Include a WORKING AND CLICKABLE link to the specific podcast/page hosting the specific podcast episode along with your work (for more information on making a link CLICKABLE in your post, click here)
• 5.) Post your work on the class blog as your own new post with “YOUR LAST NAME-Blog Assignment #3” as the title by midnight on 10/2 (for more information on how to make a new post see the screenshots below)

YOU WILL BE GRADED ON THE ABOVE 5 CRITERIA AT 20% PER INSTRUCTION – for instance, if you do not provide a working and clickable link to the story, you will lose 20% off your grade. If you do not title your post as directed, you will lose 20% off your grade, etc.

THINGS TO REMEMBER:

• Be thorough – the total word count for this assignment should be around 150
• WORKING LINKS AND PROPER BLOG TITLES ARE MANDATORY!
• Be prepared to share with class – DUE 10/2 BY MIDNIGHT

Please contact me via Blackboard messaging with any questions

Does being taxed equate to being stupid? or an abiding and contributing citizen?

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-09-28/hillary-clinton-pounds-away-at-donald-trump-s-mysterious-tax-record

     During the Presidential Debate on Monday, Hillary used to her advantage that Trump has yet to release his tax returns. As Hillary presented her case, she mentioned “…when he had to turn them [tax returns] over to state officials to get a casino license and they showed, he didn’t pay any federal income tax.” Trump immediately interjected with the comment “That makes me smart.” Hillary continued by saying “if he has paid zero, that means zero for troops, zero for vets, zero schools and health.”

     In addition to the video of the debate provided in the article outlining the issue, a follow-up question and comment from Hillary one day after the debate, captioned and underlined Trump’s remark about being smart. Hillary asked, “Now, if not paying taxes makes him smart, what does that make the rest of us?”

     I think the journalist, Sahil Kapur for Bloomberg.com, chose a topic and conveyed it in an effective and fair way. The follow-up question Hillary asked a day later is clever in its simplicity. Kapur enlarged this question within the article to emphasize its importance, and also to give everyone a chance to think about it. It’s captivating in and of itself and has the potential to grab your attention and encourage you to stop and read and or watch the video clip if one was browsing articles for coverage on the debate.

     As Hillary mentioned in the debate, Trump released his tax returns at some point in time when trying to acquire casino licenses. Although this was mentioned, there wasn’t a direct link to any previous reports to reinforce those comments. However, perhaps Kapur thought it wasn’t needed considering Trump’s reply.

     In terms of interactivity, a variety of print, audio, video was available, and the article also included options to share the story, find more related stories, and a link to the journalist’s twitter page.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/27/politics/winner-presidential-debate-takeaways/index.html

This article is an update of the six top recaps of the first presidential debate. Hillary and Trump went at back and forth about who should be the correct confidante, and why for a full 90 minutes. The purpose of this article is to reinforce some of the greatest moments during the debate. The article includes text, video, interactive links, and audio.

I think this is a really great example of interactive article. I don’t think there is much, or anything that I would personally change about the article. CNN completely gave the facts, the video behind the facts, and the audio about the facts. They kept the article clean, crisped, and organized.

I especially like how CNN broke the article up into segments of how the argument took place. I thought it was a great way to keep everything organized without the article becoming overbearing. However, I didn’t notice a comments section on the bottom of the article. I think that CNN particularly did that on purpose so that people wouldn’t post their strong political views, or have cyber wars on the CNN website. I thought that was a really great idea, especially when your writing about politics.

I also enjoyed how they included the audio part into the article. I think that is really important when you are writing about politics. Politicians are always quick to say what they did or did not say. Audio is a great way to prove what people did say, and it gives people a chance to form their own opinions without potential biases from a writer.

I definitely recommend this article to anyone who wants a recap of the first presidential debate.

This article recaps some of the highlights during the debate. It focuses on 6 issues highlighted by CNN. The article has a 2 minute video as the headliner as some of the important quotes and jabs said during the debate. CNN put a lot of hard work into the coverage of the debate. For each of the 6 highlights, there is a video describing the moment during the debate and what the topic was. Great way to capitalize coverage and to explain the quotes better. In this vast world of social media, Twitter was “blowing up” during the debate. Why? Well in 2012 Trump had a certain tweet about climate change blaming the Chinese. He was caught lying and during the debate it was the most retweeted tweets. For the most part, the article Trump was blamed for inexperience and rash behavior. Makes sense because he has never been involved with something with such importance. My one issue about this very opinionated article is at that the writer asks why Trump was not as aggressive as he has been in the past about Benghazi and the Clinton Foundation while briefly mentioning the emails. To me, no questions asked by Lester Holt seemed to focus on those issues. I cannot say if this debate was favored to either candidate because I feel that both of their weaknesses are themselves.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/27/politics/winner-presidential-debate-takeaways/

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/09/26/clinton-trump-first-debate-live-blog/91131998/

This article, titled “The first presidential debate: Catch up on what happened” on usatoday.com, covers what happened at the first presidential debate and includes what others thought about it on other forms of social media.

The article starts off with a video of the closing statements of both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.  The article goes on to share a link to another USA Today story titled, “Trump touts ‘winning’ temperament, calling it his ‘strongest asset’.  Then, the article lists the top 5 issues discussed on facebook after the debate.  Next, there are screen caps of tweets sharing the most discussed topics about the debate on twitter.  The article discusses each topic brought up at the debate in great detail, adding corresponding links and tweets about each subject, along with pictures and video.  The article concludes with a poll on the electoral votes: either total Democrat, total Republican, or a toss up.

I liked how this article used the top issues discussed from social media and the tweets posted by the people, because the opinion of one reporter is not always the most informational thing to read.  This way, whomever reads this article can really get an idea of what the American people really thought about the presidential debate.  Also, including video not only of the debate but also things like Trump supporters chanting asinine things and a video tweeted by Hillary Clinton created a larger atmosphere for this story. I also really liked the poll at the end because it gave me a slight idea of how this election would turn out, and that is all the reader wants to know.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/26/us/politics/presidential-debate.html?_r=0

Just in the presidential debate had concluded very questionably. Basically it states how Hillary Clinton came out on top over Donald Trump in their first debate. Trump however was more of a pushover by interrupting Clinton during some of her speeches. He even explains in the most dumfounded way on why never paying taxes is smart. Of course even after the debate, he explains in a post interview saying why most of what he said couldn’t be heard because his microphone was malfunctioning? Add to that he couldn’t even realize that he probably lost the first round in his verbal clash with Clinton. This article gives us about 17 highlights, 15 photos from the debate, and a video where Trump discusses taxes and Clinton’s emails.