... and end poverty.
After reading and responding to Chapter 5 "How Bill Clinton Cured Homelessness", read the Star article under "Links".
1. Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
2. Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
3. How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
After reading and responding to Chapter 5 "How Bill Clinton Cured Homelessness", read the Star article under "Links".
1. Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
2. Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
3. How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
28 comments:
(1)This article was written by Rob Rainer an executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization based in Ottawa. He is a homeless Lobbyist. I am doubtful about this article because of Rob position. I don't believe the numbers of homeless people mentioned in the article because the media always have this tendency of increasing numbers to get the attention of the public.
(2) According to Rob, the Liberals are the good guys. The in betweenies are the Green and NDP. The bad guys are the Conservatives. it appears R0b favors the Liberal party. He opposes the Conservatives.
(3) This article relates to chapter 5 in terms of their (homeless activist) cliamed that majority of homeless are average people who do not have jobs and do not have money to afford houses. the article cliamed that minority of people with addiction, mental illness, single mothers and disabled. Chapter 5 opposes to the notion that majority of homeless people are drug and alcohol abusers and mentally ill. the media and homeless activist are duping and manipulating the public on this issue.
1. The writer of the article is not a journalist.Mt.Rob Rainer, an executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization based in Ottawa,is in fact a lobbyist.Like any activist NGO, its main task is to get more funding to sustain.He raises the issue just before the federal election indirectly supporting the party who has common agenda on poverty issue and draw the public attention.The author wants Taxpayer's money to save homeless and end poverty.And as usual, using Toronto Star as their media partner in doing so.
2.The author depicts liberals as good guys.The liberals made welcome pre-election goals of reducing in five years the number of Canadians living in poverty by 30 per cent and the number of children living in poverty by 50 per cent.NDP and the Green party are in between.The Harper's government is bad guy as the writer could not find any thing on poverty in Conservatives pre-election agenda.
3.To grow sympathy to those who are in poverty by raising the issue just before federal election. Using leading newspaper as media partner to support a political party with declared agenda on poverty.The portrait of real homeless people is same as Bernard Goldberg describes in chapter 5- alcohol addicted and mentally ill.The Poverty Industry activists hide the number of people who are lazy to work and earn for life in behind the deserving poor because the fake higher numbers expand their domains and inflates the crisis.
1) This news article was written by a man named Rob Rainer, whom of which is the director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization. The only doubt in which I have circulates around the fact that the money that we as people pay in taxes can be used in supporting homelessness, which once again is done through dramatizing situations, therefore leading to grabbing the interest of viewers.
2) The people that Rainer discusses in this article consist of the Liberals,
Conservatives and the NDP parties. It is without that Rob shows favouritism for the Liberal party, as he refers to them as the “good guys”. While the NDP’s are referred to as the “in betweenies”, and the Conservatives are the bad guys, more less meaning he resists them.
3) Chapter 5 (How Bill Clinton Cured Homelessness) relates to the contents discussed in the article (Which parties are putting poverty on their agenda?). My rationale for this is because the issues which are raised within the article compare to what Goldberg discusses, in the respect of how average people, are the people that are homeless. This is shown by example in the paragraph that mentions who exactly homeless people are: single parents, people who suffer from substance addiction, and people of disability/illness. Thus, this goes onto prove just how misleading the press, and media sources are, and will continue to be.
1. Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
The Toronto Star article was written by the National Anti-Poverty Organization’s Executive Director, Rob Rainer. Seeing as the federal election is approaching, it seems to me that Rainer is taking the opportunity to sway people’s votes. Therefore it does make me doubtful of the arguments that he is raising in this article.
2. Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
Rainer identifies the “good guys” as the Liberals. Whereas, the “bad guys” are the Conservatives and those who are “in between” are the NDP and Green parties. According to Rainer’s research, he found that the Liberals took the initiative in taking their stance on poverty in Canada unlike the other parties who apparently do not mention the word “poverty” on their websites. Though he does not specifically mention that he supports the Liberals, he does so by providing mostly positive facts about it.
3. How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
I find that Rainer’s article relates similarly to Chapter 5 in Golberg’s book Bias in terms of the media’s political contribution mentioned in the chapter. As I have mentioned before, the election is drawing very near and so the MSM here in Canada is taking the initiative in swaying the public’s votes.
Also Rainer identifies that the homeless people here in Canada are those “among the most vulnerable of our nation’s poor”. These include the Aboriginals, coloured individuals who have recently immigrated to the country, single women who have young children, the disabled and those who have addictions and mental illnesses. In other words, there are MANY homeless people here in Canada and, according to Rainer, most of the political parties are doing absolutely nothing about it. However, as we all know, this may not even be a real fact at all.
1. Rob Rainer is the Executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization based in Ottawa, who wrote this article. In this article, it is mentioned the type of people who are homeless and also gives a huge number of those that sleep in shelters and on the streets. This number and the type of people seem to be a little drastic after reading chapter 5.
2. Mr. Rain Rainer, indicates the good guys to be the Liberals whereas the NDP are portrayed to be the bad guys and the Greens are in between. He favors the Liberals and opposes the NDP.
3. After reading chapter 5, I noticed they emphasize on who homeless people are for example, drug addicts, mental illness etc.. this is not true as in chapter 5, we see that homeless people could be anyone which is not mentioned in the article. This is very misleading and miss informs people of the truth.
1. Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
-The article “Which parties are putting poverty on their agenda?” was written by Rob Rainer, executive director of the national Anti- Poverty Organization based in Ottawa. From personal point of view and experience, I would say that I am doubtful about the article. I know there are a lot of homeless people in Canada from volunteer experience but not as many as the article say it is. Also, because of the position and status Mr. Rainer is, he is more of a homeless lobbyist trying to get support from the public.
2. Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
-Mr. Rainer is referring to the liberal being the good guys since some action or plan if in place to help the poverty situation. Conservatives is the bad guys and they are focuses on other stuff and not making poverty as a central issue. But then, these are the facts he found under the website. The green party and NDP are put in the middle where nothing has been done yet but MAYBE done later.
3. How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
-After reading chapter 5 in BIAS and the article, I found that the most common relationship is the political issue. Both the book and the article have issue on politics. In BIAS, Goldberg discussed on how homeless was very high at one time when the republican was in control and when Bill Clinton was in control, it was not a problem. Now in this article, poverty issue is being bought to public attention just before election. What do u think is going to happen and why the MSM decided to do this?
1.Rob Rainer is the one who wrote the article. His position is the one that brings doubts to the accuracy of the story; he is executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization based in Ottawa and homeless lobbyist himself.
2.Due to Rob’s bias point of view, Liberals are good, and bad is mixed between Greens and Conservative party. Liberals are good for Rob because that are in his favour.
3.The story once again mentions that homeless people are absolutely average normal people, like you and me. This is written by the author, because he is homeless lobbyist himself. If the author would be anti-homeless activist, information would be changed to the opposite side.
1. The article was written by Rob Rainer, executive director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization based in Ottawa. I am doubtful of his figures that 150,000 to 300,000 sleeps on Canada's streets, if he was from a different organization with nothing to gain on the issue I might believe him,"might" but from an anti-poverty lobbyist,I question the credibility and accuracy of this article.Mr. Rainer, may or has exaggerated the figures so as to gain public attention and influence the people on who to vote. I could sense the bias half mile away. Further, research is required!!!
2.Mr. Rainer is implying that the liberals are close to being good guys category, the NDP and Green party somewhat in between the issue and the conservatives are the bad guys.I think Mr. Rainer dislike the conservative and his more in favor with the liberals.
3. Funny because in Rob Rainer's article the homeless guy was a former telecommunications manager, twice divorce,I wonder why?Was he a drug dependent,an alcoholic,why was he homeless?Also,Mr. Rainer talks about recent immigrants as susceptible to being homeless that is absurd,only the losers are susceptible for one thing immigrants are not losers,they have ambitions,theyre motivated to succeed.Immigrants have high esteem to succeed,they don't give up, if Mr. Rainer knows the immigrants, he will realized that immigrants sacrifice so much to be in this country and no problem such as homelessness will deter them to live a better life, to succeed in this country.
Mr. Rainer is a typicalhomeless advocate,same as in chapter 5 who mislead the public on who are really the homeless and the homeless are the people who are drug addicts, alcoholics and people who have will to succeed.Homeless people are people who don't want to work,lazy people; who what I call social parasites.If these people don't want to be homeless they can easily find work in this country. People like Mr. Rainer think that distorting facts and exaggerating the issue still works, well Mr.Rainer think again because we are not stupid.
Correction to the statement #3 line 14, the homeless as the people....... instead of have will to succeed, should have been "no will to succeed".
Sorry for the mistake.
1. Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
The article "Which parties are putting poverty on their agenda?" is written by Rob Rainer, who is the Executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization based in Ottawa. I have doubt in one think that he published this article in the Toronto Star, which is one of the main news media to get more attention of the people. As well as, I recognized some partiality for the political party.
2. Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
In this article, writer mentioned Liberals as "good guys", NDP parties as in-betweenies and Conservative party as "bad guys". And he favour most Liberal Party and I think opposed in Conservative party.
3. How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
Both of the articles are about homelessness and also we found some political issues. In this article writer, Rob Rainer and Bernard Goldberg provides information about homeless people, who are basically aboriginal people, recent immigrants , single parents with young children, the disabled, and addicted or mental illness.
1.Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
The Toronto Star article was written by the National Anti-Poverty Organization’s Executive Director, Rob Rainer. The article might affect the public vote for the liberal election. Before liberal election, activists or lobbyists just draw more attention from the public. The article possibly change people’s tendency of the election.
2.Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
Rainer identifies the “good guys” as the Liberals. Whereas, the “bad guys” are the Conservatives, and the NDP and Green parties stay in-between. Apparently, Rainer supports Liberals. He point out the conservatives didn’t mention any poverty about their pre agenda.
3.How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
This issue was presented before the liberal election in order to let liberals get more votes from the public. The media was played by the political parties. Stories of the homeless will gain the sympathy from public. Solution of poverty which was declared on the agenda of selection clearly increases the liberals’ credit and reputation. What caused the number of the homeless is not significant. It is crucial that the issue will dramatically attract the public and support politicians .
1. Personally, I don't think this article is objective enough as the writer ot this article is Rob Rainer, who is the Executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization. As he is the homeless activist, I can hardly expect this article includes the whole truth about the homeless issue.
2. According to Rob, the Liberals are the good guys as they concern some issues related with the poverty. The Conservatives are bad guys as they don't mention about the poverty at all. NDP and the Green are in between.
3. As the writer of this article is apparently the homeless activist, he argues average people can be homeless people even though that's not true. Also, this is related with political issue as it was presented before the federal election and he mentioned about the pre-agendas of the four main federalist parties.
1. Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
- Rob Rainer, an executive director of the national anti-poverty organization based in Ottawa wrote the article. The only thing that I find doubtful is that someone with his status as executive director would be writing for the Toronto star.
2. Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
- It seems to me, for the issue of poverty he favors the Green party for their bold plans, and the NDP is in between. Next, he seems somewhat opposed to the Liberals with the fact that they are not making the issue of poverty a priority, and also the Conservatives who don’t even mention the word “poverty” on their webpage.
3. How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
- This relates to what I’ve read in chapter 5 because it’s all about homelessness. In regards to who they are is different; in the chapter Goldberg says that drug addicts were the only real homeless people, but the article identifies the homeless as aboriginal people, new immigrants, single parents with children, the disabled, and people with addictions and mental problems. I find that the differences are understandable because the times were very different and the problems may not have been 100% known, the chapter was about the 1980s and the article is in the 20th century.
1. Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
The name of the author who wrote this article is Rob Rainer. He is the executive director of the national anti-poverty organization based in Ottawa. This article is definitely very doubtful since he is part of the anti-poverty group so he wants to see more political parties ‘curing’ poverty. He wants political party to take notice of the number of homeless people on the streets.
2. Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
The good guys are the Liberals and the bad guys are the Conservatives. The in-betweenies are the green party and NDP. The writer favours the Liberals even if they haven’t made a point about poverty yet, whereas – they oppose to the Conservatives for not finding anything about poverty on their campaign website.
3. How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
This article is similar to chapter 5 because of what the media say about the political parties. The author both seem to favour one political group over the other. For example, when Ronald Reagan (Republic) was elected the number of homeless people were surprisingly high whereas when Bill Clinton (Democrat) was elected the numbers dropped very low. The same goes for when George Bush was elected as well. Most importantly, the author of the article identifies who the homeless people include such as aboriginal people, recent immigrants, and single parents with young children, people with disability and those with some sort of addiction or those who are mentally ill. Bernard Goldberg states almost the same type of people who is in poverty.
1. Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
The author of the article is none other than Rob Rainer, Executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization based in Ottawa. Mr. Rainer’s title says it all, he is a homeless lobbyists. From what I have seen and read, the whole article is biased and might be full of exaggerations. Basically, everything Mr. Rainer stated is doubtful as he is trying to cause awareness and gain support for the homeless through the up coming election.
2. Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
Mr. Rainer favours the Liberals as they have plans to reduce poverty in the up coming years for their election campaign. However, he is not fully supportive of the Liberals because they have yet to make tackling poverty their top priority. So the Liberals would be the good guys in his point of view. In this case, the Greens and NDP would definitely be the in-betweens. Both parties have no major focus on solving poverty, however, both parties in some way are making commitments to try to reduce poverty. This leaves the Conservatives, which Mr. Rainer depicts as the bad guys. The Conservatives have absolutely nothing for poverty and it doesn’t plan on to make any commitments to it.
3. How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
This article relates to Chapter 5 of bias as Mr. Rainer is doing the same work as the homeless lobbyists are doing in the book. In both cases, the homeless lobbies are trying to cause awareness and gain support through the media with misleading information and exaggerations. Both cases are very one sided and only favours those political parties that favours their cause.
1. Rob Rainer is the author of this the article, who is also the director of the national anti-poverty organization. Due to this fact his arguments are biased since he bent on getting rid of poverty. Even so it could be an actually problem, more research would have to done based on facts to determine this.
2. Rob Rainer is favoring the NDP, and the green parties since the liberal and conservative parties haven’t according to him been doing anything productive towards the combat of homelessness in Canada.
3. Rob Rainer uses a “55-year old former telecommunications manager”, which relates to chapter 5 of Bias where it says that the media used people that seem like the general public to give a, it could happen to you effect. Rob Rainer’s states that the most common people in “poverty include aboriginal people, recent immigrants (notably those of color), single parents (particularly women) with young children, the disabled, and those with addictions and/or mental illness”. This, in my view, is prettifying reality since he does not give any reasons as to why there are possibly 300,000 people that are homeless, and he shows uses a person who had a job to present homeless people.
1. Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
-Rob Rainer is the Executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization based in Ottawa. This is a definitely a biased article. Since Rob is the director of anti-poverty organization (homless activist or lobbyist), hes trying convince readers and attract more attentions.
2. Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
the good guys will be the liberal,because they promote the issue of proverty.
NDP and GREEN are in between. Conservative are the bad guys, on their website, there is no sight of the word "proverty" or any related information.
3. How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
In the article, Rob Rainer only interviewed one "ordinary" homeless people, people just anyone of us. Rainer played the same role as the media in chapter 5. They both declared that addicts and criminals are just small portion of homeless people, but the true is vice-versa. Also MSM favoring some political parties, because they provide endless stories for the media.
- 1 - The person who wrote this article is Rob Rainer of the Executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization. Yes, I do see something doubtful about this. I see an activist trying to further his own agenda. Just like with the global warming scam, and the aids scam, there is someone who is trying to get his message out, by feeding the public only one side of the story. Since he is who he is, this article is completely meaningless to me, its as if there is no truth to it, that is in till I do my own research.
- 2 - Like I said in my chapter 5 summary opinion piece, it seems that the media is always favoring the liberals, or the democrats because they are "loving and caring", the good guys. The guys in between are the Green, and NDP parties. And like always, the bad guys are the conservatives, these are the people he opposes.
- 3 - This relates to chapter 5 because like in chapter 5, Rainer says that the homeless are regular people just like us. When he says "this 55-year old former telecommunications manager..twice-divorced father of two". Though this may not be every regular person, it does sound like someone we may know, who perhaps is even our neighbor! (The Killer next door).
1. Rob Rainer the executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization wrote the article. It is unfortunate that articles makes us doubtful since in the past we have learned how the media can skew facts and figures to catch our attention, and w/ numbers constantly being altered we have a hard time believing what Rob may want us to believe.
2. "The Good Guys" - would be the Liberals because they had somewhat mentioned in their plan ti help out poverty.
"The Bad Guys" - Conservatives such as the NDP because they didnt emphasize poverty as a central concern and instead are focusing on other beliefs.
"The in betweens" - The Green Parties
Rob Rainer is obviously in favour of the Liberals because they are somewhat concerned about poverty.
3. The articles compares to Chapter 5 in Bias when they both mention that average people are the homeless people. They both stress that drug addicts, people of mental illnesses and single parents with young children to be under the same category. Both the article and the chapter provide misleading facts and figures to support and cause awareness when it comes to homelessness. Like any other msm the writer of the article srtives ti gain attention about poverty right before the elections and by targeting the Toronto Star are their main source seems like a pretty good idea, no?
1. Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
=>The article is written by Rob Rainer, who is an executive director of the national anti-poverty organization .From his class, we can know he is a homeless activist.
2. Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
=>In his article, he mentioned the Liberal Party is a good guy, the Conservative Party is a bad guy and the NDP and the Green Party are in betweens. He favors the Liberal Party and opposes the Conservative Party.
3. How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
=> As Chapter 5, Rob Rainer is reluctant to say the right information and conceal the truth. When he mentions who are homelessness, he post addicted and mental illness people at the last. There are no exact information about surveys and homeless people numbers. This article comes right before federal election to grow sympathy to the public and to raise the issue. The author shows his political favors and doesn’t hesitate to criticize the Conservative Party. Like chapter5, this article is related to his political color and the “prettifying of realty.”
1. Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
This article is written by Rob Rainer who is the Executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization based in Ottawa. First of all, I am doubtful about his position which seems homeless or poverty lobbyist. Second thing is timing when he took out of the homeless issue before Election Day. Moreover he acts as spokesman for homeless, but I think he traded on poor homeless guy story for his business.
2. Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
According to this article, Liberal who is dealing with poverty on their website is “good guys”. NDP and Greens who little bit mention about poverty on their website is “ betweenies”. Conservative who do not mention about any poverty issue is “bad guys”. That means he favors Liberal while he opposes Conservative.
3. How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
As we read chapter 5, advocates portrayed homeless issue as worse same as Rob talked about homeless guy story and poverty issue. Both of them were willing to go along homeless lobby. Also, we know who homeless people are but Rob talked to public that Geoff who is a poor homeless guy is suffering with poverty without government support.
1) The news article was written by Rob Rainer, he works with the national anti-poverty organization in Ottawa. He is a homeless lobbyist himself.
2) After reading what Rob thinks, it looks like he thinks the good guys are the liberals, the inbetweenies are NDP and Green party, and his outlook on the bad guys are the conservatives. He went searching and found that the conservatives had no mention about poverty and that is why he put these people in different groups.
3) I believe this relates to Chapter 5 because Rob himself exaggerates on the numbers that he gives to how many homeless people are on the streets. Rob states that the homeless are the most vulnerable of our nation’s poor, which means the numbers that are given to us are not just homeless people, but poor people, single parents, etc. Rob made the article seem like we should all really pay more attention to the homeless, and fund money for them, which after reading chapter 5 is something that the media lied to us about, so why should we listen to Rob?
1. The article was written by Ron Rainer who Executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization based in Ottawa. I am doubtful about this article because he is position which is working for NAO and writing article for mainstream newspaper. He is homelessness lobbyist which gets attention from the society.
2. In the article, the Conservative is bad guys because they mention not at all. The Liberals are good guys because they are interested in poverty. The Green and New Democrat are in between because they are making commitment to reduce the growing gap between rich and poor. However, the problem is not central concern.
3. I think the article and the chapter 5 mean same thing because they show same problem and give misleading facts and truth which is uncorrect homelessness number. Also, they are both support form MSM and lobbyist.
The person who wrote this article is Rob Rainer an executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization. I do see a lot of doubtful topics about it, it seems to me that he is only making his issue of his organization big. I feel that he’s concern is towards the homeless, I think its about getting funding and a publicity stunt for the media and for another thing to add to the list for our leaders to put on to seem more active and knowly. I feel that if a party doesn’t know about they don’t know about it. Being judge through an article like this one is not the best way to communicate our environment issues. Yes, it is important, but I think its everyone’s duty to help change this. My example is that if a whole community cares as a whole others will follow. Putting bribery into play without knowing the true facts is an act of ignorance and carelessness. To me Rob is unreasonable and he’s care it pointed at the wrong direction. In our society everyone has turns of who is good and who is bad. I don’t personally think that anyone intends to be bad, but what I do how is that it gets straighten out, straight to the point. I don’t think it fair that 2 weeks before voters go to poll that they should dish out any thing to make it seem important and a priority. A true leader looks out for others then himself and its in that order. If this was really serious then why we do wait until a name is drawn out of a hat and think that this individual will automatically do what we think, and say. People who care just care; they don’t put others down to feel superior. This relates to chapter 5 because homeless activist, what is being said in the chapter is miss interpreted in the article. What the article states are the worst of the worst and could positively talking about those who are drug users, alcohol abusers and the ill, the whole purpose is to help save lives like Goeff. The whole point to help people that are like him, who want to find a better way of living but find it impossible. The media is hurting those who are less fortunate and a telling lies, things like these end up being in the news again stating that our homeless individual are being treated with less respect that they deserve. I wonder sometimes why people are the way that they are, and why they sometimes get treated like this, or why terrorism even exist. Why? Because its those type of people like Rob, that sets the wrong idea and when people confront him they back off without responsibility.
(1 )The author of this article is Bob Rainer, an executive director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization. He is actually a homeless advocate. So I doubted what he said. The number of the homeless people may be exaggerated. His intention is to attract people’s attention and get more founding.
(2)According to his article, Liberal party is good guy because poverty is their major concern.
NDP did a little for poverty so they are in bet weenies.
Conservatives is bad guy because they focus on something else but poverty.
(3)Bob Rainer and the advocate in Chapter5 both portray the homeless people as normal people who don’t have jobs, can’t afford house mortgage. Actually , the majority homeless people are drug addicts or schizophrenics.
One another thing they have in common is both issue is mixed with politics. In chapter 5, it shows that the media favor democrat, so when democrat president Bill Clinton was president, they don’t report this issue anymore. Likewise, in this article, homeless issue was raised before election. Obviously, they have some political intension
1. This article is written by Rob Rainer who is the executive director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization based in Ottawa. The thing I doubt is that I don’t think any of the political parties would put more effort on the homeless again.
2. Apparently the author doesn’t in favor of any political parties about the poverty issue. I believe this issue has been phased out. Political parties are more focus on the other issue. I’m surprised that we can’t find anything directly concern to the homeless people. It is such a bad news for those real homeless. So the good guys I would say it the author who reports the truth to the public. The political parties are pretending that they try to do a lot for the society but it’s not gonna happen till they governed.
3. This article somehow related chapter 5 about the homeless, who they were same as us. Like Geoff he used to be the manager, just like some of us. Some reason caused them become homeless like alcohol abuse which we can find in this article as well “With a hint of alcohol on his breath” (Rainer).
1. Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
This news article was written by Rob Rainer an Executive Director of the National Anti-Poverty Organization based in Ottawa. He is a homeless lobbyist. The article is doubtful because the truth is probably expanded, so he can make his point clear about homeless people.
2. Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
The good guys are the Liberals. The in between are the Green Party and NDP. The bad guys are the Conservatives. It seem he favors the Liberal party and opposes the Conservatives. Funny how the article was published around the election time to get more people thinking about the issue of homeless, thus helping the author in raising awareness about the parties and his issue.
3. How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
Homeless people are around us and are just like us. The homeless interviewed by the author was a well-educated manager. this is the exact tactic described by ch 5 “prettifying of reality”
1)Who wrote this 'news' article? See anything doubtful about that?
Rob Rainer wrote this article, who is the executive director of the national anti-poverty organization based in Ottawa. In fact, he is an environmental activitist. In his position, his opinion to homelessness must be extreme.
2)Who are the good guys, bad guys, and in-betweenies according to this writer. That is which of Canada's political parties does he favor/oppose?
In this article it is said the liberals are the good guys. For sure the conservatives are the bad. the Green and NDP are those in between. he favours Liberal.
3)How does this relate to anything you've read in Chapter 5? For example, pay attention to the paragraph in which the writer identifies who the homeless are.
I find something in common is that the media all play an important role. and both of them mentioned the poverty , and related the homeless to the election,political events.
Post a Comment