new posts in all blogs
Viewing: Blog Posts Tagged with: pastel stuffed animals, Most Recent at Top [Help]
Results 1 - 20 of 20
How to use this Page
You are viewing the most recent posts tagged with the words: pastel stuffed animals in the JacketFlap blog reader. What is a tag? Think of a tag as a keyword or category label. Tags can both help you find posts on JacketFlap.com as well as provide an easy way for you to "remember" and classify posts for later recall. Try adding a tag yourself by clicking "Add a tag" below a post's header. Scroll down through the list of Recent Posts in the left column and click on a post title that sounds interesting. You can view all posts from a specific blog by clicking the Blog name in the right column, or you can click a 'More Posts from this Blog' link in any individual post.
By: RachelM,
on 4/26/2015
Blog:
OUPblog
(
Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags:
Arts & Humanities,
David Shoemaker,
Responsibility from the Margins,
thought experiments,
Thought experiments in philosophy,
Books,
Philosophy,
agency,
responsibility,
Intuition,
*Featured,
Add a tag
Philosophers love thought experiments. Many of us deploy them as our version of the scientific method: They isolate some feature of our experience and evoke intuitions about it, and these revealed verdicts enable us to adjust relevant theories in light of what we find. Sometimes we appeal to these science fiction cases too quickly when there are plenty of real life cases all around us that are potentially more fruitful.
The post Thought experiments in philosophy appeared first on OUPblog.
I am learning…Many sensitive people carry too much. We’re the responsible type and have an inflated sense of what is our responsibility and what is not. Believe it or not, even though we care deeply for others, it is not our responsibility to make sure they are happy or their needs are met, it’s their job. (With the exclusion of the responsibility of taking care of children and animals). When we stand our ground and say what we need, and someone doesn’t like it, it’s not our responsibility. We need take care of ourselves. That’s our jobs. This morning a burst of guidance came through I wanted to share. I need to say this several times a day and let it sink in. :)
By: Alice,
on 3/4/2014
Blog:
OUPblog
(
Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags:
Books,
History,
Politics,
Current Affairs,
responsibility,
Europe,
voters,
parliament,
accountability,
sara,
European Union,
Governance,
*Featured,
Blaming Europe?,
Democratic accountability,
electoral accountabilit,
European Parliament,
eurozone crisis,
James Tilley,
Sara Hobolt,
hobolt,
tilley,
multilevel,
sanction,
Add a tag
By Sara B Hobolt and James Tilley
During November 2012 hundreds of thousands of people across Europe took to the streets. The protesters were, by and large, complaining about government policies that increased taxes and lowered government spending. This initially sounds like a familiar story of popular protests against government austerity programmes, but there is a twist to the tale. Many of the people protesting were not aiming their ire at the national governments making the cuts in spending, but rather at the European Union. In Portugal, people carried effigies of their prime minister on strings and claimed he was a ‘puppet of the EU’; in Greece people burned the EU flag and shouted ‘EU out’; and in Italy people threw stones at the European Parliament offices. It was, at least for some people on the streets, not the incumbent national politicians in Lisbon, Athens, and Rome who were to blame for the problem of the day, but rather politicians and bureaucrats thousands of miles away in Brussels.
The economic crisis in Europe has illustrated that citizens are increasingly blaming not just their national governments, but also ‘Europe’ for their woes. This raises the question of whether citizens can hold European politicians to account for the outcomes for which they are thought to be responsible. The notion of democratic accountability relies on the critical assumption that voters are able to assign responsibility for policy decisions and outcomes, and sanction the government in elections if it is responsible for outcomes not seen to be ‘in their best interest’. This process, however, is clearly complicated in the multilevel system of the European Union where responsibility is not only dispersed across multiple levels of government, but there are also multiple mechanisms for sanctioning governments.
Democratic accountability in multilevel systems can be viewed as a two-step process, where specific requirements need to be met at each step to allow voters to hold governments to account. The first step is one where voters decide which level of government, if any, is responsible for specific policy outcomes and decisions. This depends on the clarity of institutional divisions of powers across levels of government, and the information available about the responsibilities of these divisions. The second step is one where voters should be able to sanction the government in an election on the basis of performance. This depends on government clarity: that is the ability of voters to identify a cohesive political actor that they can sanction accordingly.
Both of these steps are important. Assignment of responsibility to a particular level of government is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to be able to punish an incumbent at the polls. To do so, voters also need to know which party or individual to vote for or against. Yet, the EU lacks a clear and identifiable government. Executive power is shared between the European Council and the European Commission, and legislative power is shared between the Council of the EU and the European Parliament. The primary mechanism through which citizens can hold EU institutions to account is via elections to the European Parliament. Unlike in national parliamentary systems, the majority in the European Parliament does not ‘elect’ the EU executive, however. Despite the formal powers of the European Parliament over the approval and dismissal of the European Commission there is only a tenuous link between the political majority in the Parliament and the policies of the Commission, not least since there is no clear government-opposition division in the Parliament. Despite current attempts to present rival candidates for the post of Commission president prior to the European Parliament elections in May, there is still no competition between candidates with competing policy agendas and different records at the EU level. Without this kind of politicised contest it is simply not possible for voters to identify which parties are responsible for the current policy outcomes and which parties offer an alternative.
As a consequence, the classic model of electoral accountability cannot be applied to European Parliament elections. Even if citizens think the EU is responsible for poor policy performance in an area, they find it difficult to identify which parties are ‘governing’ and punish, or reward, them at the ballot box. This has broader implications for trust and legitimacy. When people hold the EU responsible for poor performance, but cannot hold it accountable for that performance, they become less trusting of the EU institutions as a whole. Thus the danger for the EU is that every time the system fails to deliver — such as during the Eurozone crisis — the result is declining levels of trust and a crisis of confidence in the regime as a whole, because voters lack the opportunity to punish an incumbent and elect an alternative. In other words, the lack of mechanisms to hold EU policymakers to account may lead to a more fundamental legitimacy crisis in the European Union.
Sara Hobolt and James Tilley are co-authors of Blaming Europe? Responsibility without accountability in the European Union. Sara Hobolt is the Sutherland Chair in European Institutions at the European Institute of the London School of Economics and Political Science. James Tilley is a university lecturer at the Department of Politics and International m Relations at the University of Oxford and a fellow of Jesus College, Oxford.
Subscribe to the OUPblog via email or RSS.
Subscribe to only history articles on the OUPblog via email or RSS.
Image credit: Photo credit © European Union, 2014 via EC Audiovisual Service.
The post A crisis of European democracy? appeared first on OUPblog.
By: Alice,
on 12/19/2012
Blog:
OUPblog
(
Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags:
Psychology,
role model,
responsibility,
caring,
idealism,
empathy,
*Featured,
Science & Medicine,
ideal,
Kenneth Barish,
Pride and Joy,
Solving Family Problems,
Understanding Your Child’s Emotions,
mussen,
piliavin,
barish,
Add a tag
By Kenneth Barish
At this holiday season, I would like to offer a few thoughts on how we can help nurture in our children a spirit of generosity and concern for others. I cannot write this post, however, without first expressing my deepest condolences to the families of Newtown, Connecticut, for their unimaginable and unbearable loss.
Much of the year, parents are understandably concerned with their children’s achievement. We focus our daily attention on helping children develop the skills they will need to succeed in a competitive world.
Most parents, however, want more for their children than individual achievement. We also want them to be “good kids” — children who act with kindness and generosity toward their families, their friends, and their communities. These are universal values, shared by parents who are secular and religious, liberal and conservative.
How can we best accomplish these goals? How can we nurture a child’s feelings of empathy and concern for others, of appreciation and gratitude, and a desire for giving, not just getting.
Caring and Responsibility
Several years ago, psychologists Nancy Eisenberg and Paul Mussen presented a comprehensive review of research on the development of pro-social behavior (caring, sharing, and helping) in children. They concluded that pro-social behavior begins with a child’s empathy (her awareness of the feelings of others) and is then strengthened when children observe the caring behavior of admired adults and older children.
For young boys, a warm relationship with their father may be especially important. In one study, preschool boys who were generous toward other children portrayed their fathers as “nurturant and warm, as well as generous, sympathetic, and compassionate, whereas boys low in generosity seldom perceived their fathers in these ways.”
Eisenberg and Mussen also found that, across cultures, children who are given family responsibilities, including household chores and teaching younger children, show more helpful and supportive behavior toward their families and their peers.
In a more recent series of studies, psychologist Ross Thompson and his colleagues found that children’s moral understanding and pro-social behavior were also strengthened by a mother’s use of emotion language in conversation with her child. Mothers of children who were high in conscience used what Thompson labelled an “elaborative” conversational style and made frequent references to other people’s feelings.
Ideals and Idealism
In thinking about children’s moral development, we also need to remember the intangibles. Our children look up to us. They look up to us even when they are angry and defiant, or when they are defensive or withdrawn, and even when, as adolescents (or before), they challenge our ideas and rebel against our rules.
Because they look up to us, they want to be, and to become, like us. We can observe this, every day, in the admiring statements of young children, when first grade boys and girls tell their teacher, “I want to be fireman, like my daddy” or “I want to be a doctor and help people, like my mom.” Recall the looks on the faces of Scout and Jem when Atticus talks with them, or when he delivers his summation to the jury in To Kill a Mockingbird.
A child’s admiration of her parents is an important moral influence throughout childhood — a source of conscience, ideals, and long-term goals. When a child looks up to us — and in return, feels our genuine interest, warmth, and pride — we have strengthened an important pathway of healthy development, a pathway that leads toward commitment to ideals and a sense of purpose in life.
We also support our children’s idealism when we talk with them about people we admire, people who have inspired us and who we hope will inspire them. We need to let them know that there is so much good work to be done in the world, work that they will be able to do and can do, even now. And we should help them appreciate what others do for us. We should talk with them about heroes who may not be famous, heroes of everyday life: the people who build our cities, protect our safety, and save our lives.
Doing for Others
A growing body of scientific research now supports an important conclusion: Doing good for others is also good for us. Most of this research has been conducted with late adolescents and adults. My personal experience suggests that doing for others is also good for children.
In a recent review, psychologist Jane Piliavin concluded that community service (helping others as part of an institutional framework) leads to improved self-esteem, less frequent depression, better immune system functioning, even a longer life.
Piliavin found significant benefits when older elementary school students read to kindergartners or first graders. Good effects, including lower dropout rates, were also reported when middle school students were randomly assigned to tutor younger children, as little as 1 hour a week. An evaluation of student volunteering that involved 237 different locations and almost 4,000 students concluded that volunteering “led to increased intrinsic work values, the perceived importance of a career, and the importance of community involvement.”
I therefore now recommend that parents find some way, especially as a family, to make doing for others a regular, not just occasional, part of their children’s lives. Children learn from this work that they have something to offer and they experience the appreciation of others. They learn how good it feels, to themselves and to others, to do good work.
Kenneth Barish is the author of Pride and Joy: A Guide to Understanding Your Child’s Emotions and Solving Family Problems and Clinical Associate Professor of Psychology at Weill Medical College, Cornell University. He is also on the faculty of the Westchester Center for the Study of Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy and the William Alanson White Institute Child and Adolescent Psychotherapy Training Program. Read his previous blog posts on parenting.
Subscribe to the OUPblog via email or RSS.
Subscribe to only psychology articles on the OUPblog via email or RSS.
Image credit: Big sister sharing her books and showing little brother pictures. Photo by JLBarranco, iStockphoto.
The post Nurturing a spirit of caring and generosity in children appeared first on OUPblog.
By:
KidLitReviews,
on 10/16/2012
Blog:
Kid Lit Reviews
(
Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags:
relationships,
Middle Grade,
Favorites,
Leslie Bulion,
responsibility,
middle grade books,
Peachtree Publishers,
pie contests,
fairs,
Frank Dormer,
county fairs,
5stars,
Library Donated Books,
carnival games,
fair food,
amusement rides,
fair rides,
local festivals,
Add a tag
5 Stars The Universe of Fair Leslie Bulion Frank W. Dormer Peachtree No. Pages: 264 Ages: 8-12 ..................... Inside Jacket: For young science whiz Miller Sanford, an eagerly awaited day at the Fair turns into a wacky adventure with more twists and loops than the BlastoCoaster! Hopeful that this year his mom and dad will [...]
by Deren Hansen
With all the frustrations endemic to publishing, we generally do well to remember that it is a business and, whatever happens, we shouldn't take it personally. The form rejection your query received doesn't mean you're a bad person who should never be allowed to put pen to paper again. It only means that the agent wasn't compelled by your query.
But as with many things in the world that are more nuanced than black and white, there is another level at which you should take it personally.
Howard Yoon, in an interview at the Guide to Literary Agents blog, said:
Take everything personally. If you get rejected, take it personally. Do better. Find out ways to improve yourself so that you don’t get rejected again. Fix your cover letter or your proposal or your writing. Trash your concept and start over. Don’t blame the industry or the market or the system. Take it upon yourself to improve YOUR chances.
He also said: And when you get accepted, take it personally. Congratulate yourself. Treat yourself to a celebration. You earned it. You deserve it.
"But," you may ask, "isn't that completely contradictory? How can you both take rejection personally and not take it personally?"
Ah, herein lies another Zen riddle.
You must not take it personally in any debilitating sense: don't allow a rejection to make you query your worth as a writer--or a person. Don't let the agonizing lack of response dampen your dream.
At the same time, you must take it personally in a constructive sense. Don't comfort yourself with the thought that a rejection is evidence of an agent's lack of vision. Instead, take responsibility for the fact that your query didn't work and ask what you can do to make it better, or to do a better job of finding agents who are likely to be interested. Or perhaps your story isn't as compelling as it could be (or another might be more compelling). In the end, the only question that matters--and the only aspect of the process over which you have control--is the question, "What can you do?"
[And sometimes the answer--perhaps the most difficult answer--is, "stay the course and be more patient."]
Answers from Elena Ornig.
Are you depended or independent?
-” I am independent!”
If that is the case then you are like a Robinson Crusoe, or living in total seclusion under your own governance, but the majority of us are not in that position. In real life we depend on political, economical and social systems which are already in place depending on your geographical location. That simply means you are not as independent as you might wish to be. You are very dependent upon systems that restrict you according to its laws, rules and regulations.
Okay, you are physically dependent, but you are independent in your thoughts if not actions. Is that true? Those who are involved in the overwhelming production of mass media, advice and opinions that are easily broadcast and delivered to your door do not think so. If it were so, many commercial businesses and industries would be out of business. ...
Read the rest of this post
The midwest is digging out from one of the biggest snow storms in history. We have ample snow, we have mountains of snow and thankfully the winds have moved on to pester someone else. Many roads are still impassable, the temperature continues dipping lower and lower toward the 'really dangerous' zone. I only hope those who didn't heed the warnings before the blizzard hit, will prepare better this time for the cold snap we are entering.
Days before the blizzard newscasters warned us, "prepare, prepare, prepare! Bad weather is coming Tuesday afternoon." Most of us heeded the news. We listened to the advice; grocery stores were flooded with folks stocking up on food and other needs. Experts reminded folks how to prepare their vehicles, keep the gas tank full, the wipers in good repair and full of washer fluid, tires with the accurate amount of air. The advice went on for DAYS before the storm hit our area. Officials cautioned about driving on Lake Shore Drive. They warned folks to leave early and find alternate routes. They spoke of keeping children and the elderly indoors where they would be safe. In essence, we were asked to take responsibility for our own well being. Most of us did!
I woke Tuesday to high winds and snow blowing. By ten o'clock that morning our evergreen patch swayed in the wind like feathers. I knew then I wasn't going to work. As a matter of fact, I received dozens of e-mail posts from other northern Illinois libraries stating they were closing due to the blizzard approaching. High winds and severe snow fall was expected to hit the Chicago area by midafternoon. The TV newscasters sounded like a litany of warning, "prepare, prepare. Take shelter, driving will be severely restricted."
The storm hit hard. It hit pretty much when the meteorologists said it would. Lake Shore Drive disappeared into a hailstorm of blowing, drifting snow and severe whiteouts. It should have been deserted. But there are always those few who think the weather will wait for them, or claim it didn't seem that bad - at first! "I thought I could make it!" "I didn't realize it was this bad outside!"
Dozens of abandoned cars still litter Lake Shore Drive. Some folks sat in their cars for hours before they were rescued. I wonder if they could have a "do over" if they would chose a more responsible venture in getting home safely. Perhaps take heed to the warnings a bit sooner.
I thank the state troopers, national guard and others in the rescue business for accepting the responsiblity for those caught in the storm and seeing to their safety. I'm thankful they were prepared. I'm also thankful most of us did not need assistance because we took precautions to see to our own safety.
Til next time ~
DL Larson
According to new research released by the Royal Horticultural Society, children who garden are more engaged with their learning and do better at school.
At the Secret Seed Society we believe gardens are full of stories, mystery, adventure, and surprises, keeping young childrens’ minds playful and curious.
On the back of this research the Financial Times suggests: “If you want to help your children make the grade this summer, scrap the extra maths-with-Japanese coaching and get them to do the gardening!”
Little Jessica says: “Every night we go to our allotments at the bottom of our garden to see if there are caterpillars on the cabbages and then we tell our dad when he gets home.”
(This is cross-posted to THROUGH THE TOLLBOOTH, which is a writing craft blog by nine Vermont College graduates. If you go comment over there, you can win a Grover. Yes! A Grover!. Comments here don’t count though. Sorry. Oh! I’ll disable them.)
Part of our responsibility as children's book writers is remembering what is important.
Hint: It is not our own ego.
I was on a panel with this very cool writer guy once. I’m going to call him Writer F. He was clever and witty and a good writer. Then we became Facebook friends.
He’s gay.
That’s important to this story, I promise.
So, a month or so ago he posted on his status update that he thought he should give it up as a writer. Why? He wasn’t on a list on someone’s blog for books that were awesome and written by gay people or had gay themes. He’s been on all sorts of lists before. He gets to be on panels. I mean, this is a guy who is respected.
But he was really upset. He felt slighted. He felt like he kept getting overlooked. So, I told him a story of how I’d been at a meeting for gay/lesbian/bi/ trans and questioning teens, and since I’m a writer one of the kids told me about a book he’d read. The books was by Writer F.
The boy told me that he has never taken out a gay-themed book from the library because he didn’t want to out himself. He hadn't even outed himself fully to himself yet. He was incredibly depressed, was barely making it through the school days. He felt miserable and alone. His only salvation was books. Straight kid books, he'd said.
Writer F’s book is not contemporary gay teen fiction. It’s a genre. It’s a genre the boy liked. And when he looked at the cover he had no idea that the main character, the hero, was gay and that he’d fall in love with another guy and that he’d have to battle bigotry along with evil, less human, monsters.
The boy took out Writer F's book. He read it in a night. He reread it the next day. The book gave him courage. The book helped him find the strength to believe in himself at a time when he was right at the brink of suicide.
He didn’t go that route.
Why?
Because of Writer F’s words. Because Writer Fwrote the kind of book that made a difference. In that book, Writer F took responsibility for his craft and for the kids that were going to be his readers. He wrote a world so real and compelling that it helped one very bright, very awesome boy to survive.
So, when Writer F was having his public meltdown on Facebook about not being on a list, I told him the story of the boy who survived because of him. And you know what he said?
He said, “Whatever. If it wasn’t me, it would’ve been some other book.”
He kind of missed the point. And despite his very brilliant, very responsible, very honest first book, I think he’s missing the point of being a writer, too.
Being a writer, especially a writer for teens and kids, isn’t about being on lists or winning amazing awards or even getting fan mail. All these things are awesome though. So, is getting an advance and a royalty. But in our rush for fame or glory or recognition we can lose sight of the fact that our one book can help one person.
That’s always been my goal as a writer although I’ve occasionally been ridiculously self pitying about not getting on some list. Anyways, I always thought that helping one kid would be the greatest success.
Think of what one book can do:
One book helping one person.
A few months ago, a lot of you guys yelled at me for switching things up on you by saying that I wanted to be notified of an offer even if you'd only queried me. The rational (I believe) for why so many people were pissed at me was that so many agents want things different ways, and how on earth can you be expected to get it straight? (I still think that's lame, by the way.)
Well, today I was contemplating adding another form rejection (I have a few I use for different reasons) that would be sent to all queriers who seemed to have missed the boat on how to submit to us properly to begin with. But I am hedging on this one. Mostly because I'm not sure it's my job to do your work for you.
I think I'm part of a group of agents who goes ABOVE AND BEYOND the call of duty in terms of educating the writer community. We blog, we Twitter...we go to conferences galore. But is this good will or genuine responsibility? I think it's a little from Column A, a little from Column B, personally. More from Column A though.
So I am going to ask YOU, my faithful readers, and hopefully some not-so-faithful readers who like having opinions to answer the following questions:
- Whose responsibility is it to make sure you submit properly? Mine or yours?
- Where does my responsibility end?
- And more specifically: should I bother with an extra form rejection for Those Who Do Not Seem To Get It?
If you viewed the television show that debuted last night starring Chef Jamie Oliver you are probably as appalled as I am. I was shocked to see and hear what the FDA thinks our children should be eating everyday. It is time for us to "wakeup and smell the coffee".
If we are using our heads we know what healthy eating is and we don't need the government to decide what we should be eating or feeding our kids. Truly disturbing was the realization that we are raising a generation of children that can't even identify common vegetables. Have we handed over the job of raising healthy children to Fast food restaurants, food manufacturers, and government agencies? U.S. citizens were once fiercely independent and, though not always correct in everything they did at least, they didn't turn the health of their kids over to strangers.
Find out what is in the food your children are eating at school. Don't trust that the schools are doing the right thing, make sure they are feeding your children healthy foods. Make sure they are eating the food and not throwing it away. I use to believe the government and all of its agencies were looking out for our well being. I was very naive, and yes, gullible. Ordinarily I am not a rebel, blasting everything the government does, but in this case at least I must shout "PARENTS WAKEUP!". I am not a health nut, but I don't believe the twenty or so ingredients on most food labels that I don't recognize as food are good for us. I don't think our government knows what is healthy for us, if they did they wouldn't keep changing the food pyramid and altering the advice they have been giving us.
These days I find myself craving fresh, simple foods that don't come in a box and are not packed with chemicals, fats, sugars and salt. The goal of fast food restaurants and manufacturers is to fill their wallets not worry about our health. The proof of that is in television commercials that keep telling us that larger sizes and more fat are better even as we are hearing about an epidemic of obesity in this country. I urge parents, working or not, to take a look at what you are feeding your family. Unhealthy eating is shortening our children's lives. Fast food and packaged convenience foods are prepared in a way that will make them appeal to the taste buds and feed you quickly with little work or preparation on your part. We accept that because usually both parents are working and time is at a premium. But...
Fresh healthy foods should be a family affair. Let the first parent to arrive home start the dinner preparation. Enlist the help of the children in the preparation and table setting, etc. The second adult to arrive home should join in the
Lucky us that Bookavore has joined the ranks of booksellers and bloggers. She's kick-started a campaign I've been meaning to launch for ages:
Litblogs linking to indie bookstores.
It's long been a tenet of mine that bloggers and indie booksellers have a lot in common. We're the independent voice that's an alternative to corporate culture. We're beholden to no one but our own opinions of what's worth reading and recommending. We don't do it (just) for the money -- we do it for the love. So why shouldn't we support each other?
Now that indie bookstores have figured out that blogging and reading blogs is good for them, it's time for bloggers to return the favor. When discussing a beloved book, rather than linking to you-know-what behemoth of online retail, why not link to your local indie bookstore, or a network of indie bookstores, instead?
In the past, you could have linked to the book page of an indie store, but it would have involved a fair amount of HTML knowledge, and you wouldn't have gotten credit for the clicks that resulted. Then came the advent of IndieBound, and its wonderful affiliate program, which meant you could sign up to easily create links using text or book covers, and have the potential to make a little cash off of the resulting clicks. But your readers still had to go through another layer of clicking choices: once they clicked the book cover, they had to enter their zip code, then choose and indie store's website on which to view the books.
This was a decision the ABA, which runs these stores' e-commerce sites, had made in the past in order to avoid competition amongst its member stores -- a well-intentioned move that unfortunately made internet denizens less likely to click through to any store when they just wanted the information, and thus made bloggers less likely to use it.
But it's a whole new era now. IndieBound and its user-generated, responsive model means that we ask, we got. Now you can find a book on IndieBound (without having to first look up the ISBN) and create an affiliate link directly the book info page. When a reader of your blog clicks on the link, they get taken straight back to the book information page. Only when they decide they'd like to buy it do they need to choose a bookstore -- a much more logical path. This means that you can have a book cover image on your site that's a direct link to the publisher's information about the book, and you can get paid for it, and you can support an indie at the same time.
So there's no excuse anymore. Bloggers, you know you're indie. Step up and support your local bookstores by using IndieBound links in your book reviews. It's easier and better looking than ever. As President Obama, our first web-savvy commander-in-chief, observed, it's a new era of responsibility. If you care about having bookstores in your community, support them in the internet community.
I'm demonstrating and celebrating today with a link to my favorite contemporary novel, Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell. Click on it! Check it out! Then get over to IndieBound and start making your own links.
Shop Indie Bookstores
(Update: Okay, so it looks like when I create an affiliate link, it still asks for a zip code and wants you to choose a store. In the link below, I pasted the book page link into the code, which eliminates my affiliate ID but goes directly to the book info page. So it's still a work in progress. But the ABA and IndieBound deserve major kudos for taking these steps. Here's hoping for more to come -- and the more of us are using these features, the more likely they are to be adapted to our needs.)
Shop Indie Bookstores
By:
Karen Cioffi,
on 1/12/2009
Blog:
Writing for Children with Karen Cioffi
(
Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags:
news,
article,
responsibility,
papers,
gore,
compassionate,
shock,
incident,
writing information,
Add a tag
Within the last week I came across two local incidents and the papers' articles about them. They made me wonder what's happening to the world of writing, specifically writing and news.
The first incident occurred last week. A family in a borough of New York City were the victims of a home invasion. The family has 4 children who were fortunately asleep while the invasion took place. The intruders came to the door as police officers and once the door was opened, they pushed their way in. They bound the husband and wife and ransacked the house. While they were gathering what they wanted they repeatedly threatened to kill the family. The couple were left alone at times and the woman managed to untie herself and untied her husband. They were smart enough not to let the intruders know. When the intruders finally left, the husband chased them and called the police. The intruders were captured. This, you would think, is an amazing end to the story, but it isn't the end. The papers reported the incident and listed every article and it's value that was taken. This family happens to be well to do and the items and cash taken were substantial. Was this necessary? This family now has to worry about other criminals knowing exactly what they have in their home and where they live. In my opinion, the papers have put this family's safety in jeopardy. Shouldn't writers have a responsibility to ensure they are not the cause of further harm to the victims?
The second incident occurred a couple of days ago in my neighborhood. A 9-year-old boy was struck by a truck while running across a very large and busy intersection. While the story is graphic and disturbing, the pictures are worse. The front page shows the boy's body lying on the street in a body bag. The picture on the third page is of a man wiping the blood off the street with the boy's body in view. Are graphic words and especially graphic pictures of a 9-year-old's body and blood necessary to convey the story? The boy's friends and classmates will easily see this story and the pictures. And, I can't imagine how the family would feel if they see the paper – hopefully they never will. Again, shouldn't writers have a responsibility to ensure they are not the cause of further harm to the victims?
So, what's the reason reporters and photographers need to be so graphic and use words and pictures that are disturbing to the point of at times being sickening? I know papers are in the business of selling and it seems more and more it's the shock and gore effect that sells. The question is are the reporters leading readers down this path, or are the readers demanding it? Whichever is the case it is creating a world of desensitized people who need more and more horror and gore to get a reaction. When will it be enough? I'm not saying that writers shouldn't write the news; I'm saying there are many ways to tell a story and maybe the shock and gore should be replaced by compassionate and responsible news writing and reporting.
Just needed to vent.
Karen
Stammered, stoppered, stunned by the news. By headlines four inches high. By images of strangers—panicked. By the realities of a country that has lived far too long on borrowed time, in the haze of inflated ambitions, under the scourge of obfuscating mechanisms and tools.
What happens next isn't up to most of us, but I think this much is true: Responsibility, in the midst of this crisis, means living on. It means going about our days as we would have elsewise gone about our days—a little kinder, maybe, a little more clear with ourselves that every moment of abundance is a gift, every gesture of goodness is a salve. Anxiety can't help us now. Obsessively watching the news won't change the news.
Outside our windows, the world goes on. The rain comes, the flocks descend, the sun rises, a neighbor brings a puppy home, inexplicably, the sweet William once more blooms. Life's incidentals, but right now, this is what we have.
By: Rebecca,
on 7/14/2008
Blog:
OUPblog
(
Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags:
code,
intellectual,
speechwriter,
wesleyan,
rhetorical,
elvinlim,
detractors,
Politics,
Current Events,
talk,
election,
president,
words,
A-Featured,
A-Editor's Picks,
Media,
responsibility,
Obama,
McCain,
candidate,
reagan,
Add a tag
Elvim Lim is Assistant Professor of Government at Wesleyan University and author of The Anti-intellectual Presidency, which draws on interviews with more than 40 presidential speechwriters to investigate this relentless qualitative decline, over the course of 200 years, in our presidents’ ability to communicate with the public. He also blogs at www.elvinlim.com.
In recent weeks, some political commentators have observed that Senator Barack Obama is all talk, but no 
substance. Where his supporters see an orator of the highest order, his detractors see only a smooth talker.
Flash back to the 1980s, and we had the same bifurcated response to Ronald Reagan. Whereas some saw profundity and deep meaning in his speeches, Reagan’s detractors heard only vacuous platitudes. Indeed, Reagan’s supporters even used the same words as some liberals do today to describe Obama’s “soaring oratory.” How did Reagan score with the Reagan Democrats? By being all things to all people. The Obamacans in this year’s elections are being swayed by a parallel strategy. Talk a lot, but mean nothing.
Consider Obama’s response this week in Georgia when he addressed charges that he had been “flip flopping” between his positions : “I’m not just somebody who is talking about government as the solution to everything. I also believe in personal responsibility. I also believe in faith.” the Senator sagely declared.
But who doesn’t believe in faith? Such rhetoric misses the point, ending rather than initiating debate - a strategy consummately deployed by President Bush in selling “Operation Iraqi Freedom” by exploiting our universal and creedal belief in liberty. The question is how we should balance our respect for the identity and autonomy of religious charities with our belief in the separation of church and state. And the question is whether freedom in Iraq can and should be bought with the sacrifice of our freedoms at home and the suspension of some of our constitutional principles. By design, Obama’s and Bush’s words elided these difficult, but pressing questions.
“I also believe in personal responsibility” are also coded words Obama’s speechwriters designed to woo conservative audiences without explicitly repudiating the liberal point of view that governmental programs are the other side of the rhetorical equation that ought to have been addressed. Reverend Jesse Jackson was understandingly aggravated. Yet while Jackson has apologized for his crude verbal gaffe, we have yet to take Obama to task for his rhetorical sleight of hand because this is what we have come to expect from political candidates seeking the highest office of the land.
We are not going to face the complex problems of our time if our would-be leaders continue to take the rhetorical path of least resistance, to buy our assent without any content. To say nothing even when one talks a lot is to fulfill the rhetorical formula for, literally, empty promises. There were times in this election season when Obama rose above the anti-intellectual fray, just like there were times when Ronald Reagan and George Bush used the bully pulpit to educate rather than to merely seduce the American people. This year, when conservatives see in a liberal political candidate the same rhetorical flaws as what liberals saw in Reagan and George Bush, perhaps we will come closer to recognizing a systemic flaw in our political system, and it is the Anti-intellectual Presidency.
ShareThis
By: Rebecca,
on 5/12/2008
Blog:
OUPblog
(
Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags:
A-Featured,
Medical Mondays,
responsibility,
take action,
follow,
reform,
saving lives,
Shrader-Frechette,
social,
welfare,
argument,
mandates,
threats,
meaningful,
ethical,
prevent,
Health,
Add a tag
Dr. Kristin Shrader-Frechette is the O’Neill Family Endowed Professor in the Department of Biological Science and the Department of Philosophy at the University of Notre Dame. In her most recent book, Taking Action Saving Lives: Our Duties to Protect Environmental and Public Health, she shows how campaign contributions, lobbyists and their control of media, advertisements, and PR can all conspire to manipulate scientific information, withhold data, cover-up pollution-related disease and death, and “capture” regulators. To circumvent this mis-information she urges citizens to become the change they seek. In the excerpt below Shrader-Frechette looks at public citizens can push for reforms.
…The first step, getting information about public-health threats, is both the easiest and the hardest… It is the easiest because it may require nothing beyond reading and thinking, something people can do daily. It is the hardest because…special interests sometimes distort available information. In addition, many citizens receive their information only from limited and perhaps biased sources. Often people fail to get opinions and evidence from the greatest variety of people and groups possible. Many citizens likewise have not made the lifestyle commitments necessary to remain informed about public health. Instead, they may 
spend too much time on activities like television. As a result, citizens may have a false complacency that allows unscrupulous groups to “whitewash” or “greenwash” their behavior. Whitewash of course, can arise from any agenda-driven groups-environmental organizations, churches, labor unions, corporations, and even government agencies. The greater the group’s economic or social power, the greater their potential threat to legitimate information-as the recent coverup of sexual predators in the Roman Catholic Church reveals…Because corporate groups donate about 80 percent of U.S. campaign contributions and spend about 100 times more dollars on scientific research than do environmental groups, their greater power and potential for abuse suggests that their behavior out to receive proportionate scrutiny from those seeking reliable information.
Cooperating with others is the second step… Cooperation is difficult because people frequently recognize its necessity only when they see some threat before them. Yet often no threat is obvious until after people have already cooperated and thus gained public-health information…One health related NGO is Bread For the World. Promoting food assistance and child immunization in developing nations, it offers “action kits” that show citizens how to support its food and public-health programs. It is a valuable source of both health information and cooperation. As this example suggests, however, cooperatively working with such an NGO is not merely a matter o paying annual dues or reading a book. It involves keeping informed, helping to educate others, and supporting ongoing group activities and meetings. It involves commitments of both time and money-organizing, leafleting, educating, canvassing, and other activities characteristic of deliberative democracy. Without cooperation through a variety of focused groups, like Bread For the World, it is difficult for citizens to obtain accurate information, to evaluate conflicting viewpoints, to succeed in alleviating societal problems, or to sustain and motivate their own efforts to do good. The reason? If the social model of gaining knowledge…is correct, cooperation and cognitive division of labor are necessary to make much information readily available. The U.S. founding fathers and mothers recognized this point and organized New England town meetings…Such cooperative ideals identify deliberative democracy not with structures or institutions but instead with processes of wide communication among various people and social sectors. These processes are necessary both to build democratic consensus and to debate and amend conflicting social proposals.
A third step…is evaluating health threats and alternative solutions to them. This likewise is something best achieved through open interaction with a variety of other people and points of view. Yet most citizens associate only with certain groups of people and typically hear only a few points of view. As a result, their evaluations of social problems are often incomplete. To understand public-health threats, people need to hear a diversity of opinions about them. they also need emotive, narrative, and scientific or factual understanding, as well as ongoing evaluation-vigilance and criticism…One way of exercising such vigilance, at least in scientific evaluation, is to look for the characteristic errors of private-interest science…Another way is to avoid acting on the basis of unevaluated opinions that have not survived the testing and analysis…This means that people..need to aim at evaluation that is open, transparent, empirical, accessible to all, and democrative…
Evaluation is particularly necessary if citizens who hope to reform life-threatening social institutions find themselves at odds with at least some members of those institutions. If they are eventually forced into whistle-blowing…or into civil disobedience…their actions will require special evaluation…
Most ethicists believe that whistleblowing is justified only if four conditions, analogous to those for civil disobediance, are met. (1) The policy seriously threatens the public. (2) It cannot be overturned within a reasonable period of time through normal, internal channels. (3) Whistleblowing is likely to be effective in overturning the policy. (4) The whistleblowing will not violate any higher ethical obligations. Failure to meet any of these conditions typically makes whistleblowing unethical. Often this means it is unfair to the accused or endangers the whistleblower.
Organized action, the fourth step… is a natural response to the three previous steps…because individuals acting alone often can do little to help correct public-health problems, concerted and well-organized collective action usually is necessary. That is why the 50,000-member American Public Health Association (APHA) encourages “work in coalition,” including “advocacy and litigation.” Through organizations like “public-interest law groups” APHA says citizens can help exercise their “maximum responsiblity” for public health. Explaining its activities on its website, the APHA says it “has been influencing policies and setting priorities in public health for over 125 years.” It claims to serve the public not only “through its scientific practice programs” but also through its “advocacy efforts.” Showing how such advocacy and organized action can help overcome citizens’ feelings of fustration and powerlessness….organized action must build on small wins and on personal transformation-working to become virtuous onself, to become the change one seeks. Because it is so easy for advocates and any special interests to fall into bias, however, it is important to evaluate all collective actions from alternative points of view. This includes evalutating different proposed beliefs and actions, including doing nothing. In fact, organized and enlightened responses to the responsibility arguement require ongoing and iterative evaluation of alternative perspectices and actions. This continuing evaluation is important to help make oganized action less self-serving and more affirming to those who have been disenfranchised. As philosophers Hilary Putnam and John Dewey recognized, evaluation also is necessary to keep collective policies and actions inclusive, participative, and objective.
ShareThis
By:
Sondra Santos LaBrie,
on 4/23/2008
Blog:
Happy Healthy Hip Parenting
(
Login to Add to MyJacketFlap)
JacketFlap tags:
babies,
responsibility,
reading,
diversity,
articles,
education,
parenting,
racism,
money,
Add a tag
I hesitate to comment on these thought-provoking articles and yet...
Who Shares the Biggest Responsibility For Reading to your Children?
I'm all for equality when it comes to parenting, but if one parent is not setting a positive example in an area that the other parent feels important, this certainly has an effect on the other parent's "responsibilities," does it not?
Million Dollar Babies
I just have one word to say - Momcierge!
Diversity in the Classroom
Very disturbing that this type of racism is still being "taught" in our schools.
What are your thoughts?
.jpeg?picon=3496)
.jpeg?picon=3417)
Some people do the dumbest things, don't they?
Morgan Mandel
http://morganmandel.blogspot.com
Even here in central Texas, we're hunkered down.
I watch the news and see all the cars stuck on the highways up north and I wonder what those people are thinking. I know people have to work, but it just seems that they also have to set a limit and say this is the line I draw and won't venture over. But, being from the south, I'm not in their position, so ...
That's exactly what most of think and do!!! As my daughter, a physics safety expert at FermiLab, would say: SAFETY FIRST!!
We envy you down south where it is much, much warmer than here!!
Thanks for stopping by today ~