Видео

A tenured professor in the US in the field of Media, Communications, and Visual Arts is giving a lecture to her students using RSF's Press Freedom Index. In this ranking, Hong Kong, Pakistan, and Afghanistan have been ranked better. Don't know if the learned professor has read the sub-text, i.e., what has been written about how the media is treated by the governments there. Actually, one need not even read anything at this point, for, the moment one sees those three countries ranked better than India, it must raise red flags immediately. Then, when one goes into the details, it would become obvious that the rankings just don't make sense. And, anyone who uses BBC as a source, that itself is quite revealing. To Prof. Pantic's students: if you want to know more, not only must you read the report, but also try to find more to see if there is any credibility to a report than ranks Hong Kong, the Islamic Republic of Pakistand, and Afghanistan better than India. You should also listen to, "Let's find out from Dr Salvatore what India can do to be better than Afghanistan for press freedom" (05-May-2023) to better underastand such rankings. India does poorly in most world rankings, and there is a reason for it. And it is not what you would think on the face of it. Please listen to what Prof. Salvatore Babones has to say on the topic of India's position in various ranking indices (one can very easily find out more by merely searching for "Salvatore Babones" and "India" as search phrases; you'll actually get more than what you bargained for 🙂) Any teacher who has done just a superficial reading and presents only one side of the story, and that too without applying critical thinking, is failing the most basic principles of teaching. I wonder what other "knowledge" she is imparting her students in some of her other courses. BTW, either RUclips will delete this comment or the channel owner will. Now, _that's_ real freedom in action 🤣

I'm watching this because I take BA in Comm Research from the PUP Manila, Philippines .

Bravo 🎉 🎉🎉 Amazing and funny story !!!

A good leader I thought of would be President Franklin D. Roosevelt. This is because of his famous fireside chats that he would deliver during the Great Depression and WWII. He was an effective and reassuring leader for the American people because of his communication skills and relatable demeanor. He helped many Americans overcome fear and uncertainty during difficult times by keeping them well informed about the governments actions.

Ryan C. - A good leader I thought of first was Abraham Lincoln, but at the same time he is not a perfect leader. He is a complex figure, and during his presidency there was also a difference between what he said and what he did. " ...histories affirm that Lincoln abhorred slavery but felt bound by the Constitution not to interfere with it where it existed; never- theless, the president attacked slavery whenever politics and the prejudice of Union soldiers allowed. For example, he urged the border states to adopt a plan of gradual emancipation from the beginning of his administration. In November of 1861 he drafted two bills for compensated emancipation in tion in Delaware." (Wilson, 2000. Pg 17) However, "...while Lincoln was drafting the Emancipation Proclamation he told a black delegation that they would attain true freedom only after they had emigrated to a distant shore. A minority, often composed of graduate students and students of color, is convinced of Lincoln's racism despite a letter supporting black suffrage dated March" (Wilson, 2000. PG 15) Lincoln was a pragmatist whose words did not match his actions when it suited his objectives. Lincoln "restricted civil liberties, including First Amendment press freedoms and other freedoms of expression," but did so in his earnest attempt to save the union. Lincoln is not perfect, but he was the right man in the right place for America, to end slavery and to restore the union. References: Baracskay, D. (2009). Abraham Lincoln. Mtsu.Edu. www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1425/abraham-lincoln Wilson, K. (2000). The Paradox of Lincoln's Rhetorical Leadership. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 3(1), 15-32. Retrieved February 4, 2021, from www.jstor.org/stable/41940196

The second type is harder to identify. Especially when it is non-verbal. If you have text at least you can prove yourself. If the offensive behavior happened on the bus, subway, or workplace. The criminal would put pressure on the victim from the environment and people barely notice those. It is always hard to speak up about this topic in public areas.

I strongly think that people are reluctant when it comes to accepting new technologies at work, as it induces a change in the workplace. As a species, our mental consciousness has been wired to reject changes, which is directly proportional to the age of an individual. It is a personality trait that has been witnessed in other areas as well be it any socio-economic changes or cultural changes.

I think most people are reluctant to accept new technologies at work because that means change. From my personal work experience with older generations such as the Baby Boomers and Millennials I have found many, if not most to be extremely resistant to any sort of change.

I have always felt that the way one dresses is really important in the professional sphere. Whenever I went for interviews I made sure I was dressed formally, shirt, formal pants, shoes, and stuff. While I was working as a journalist in a financial daily newspaper, my mentor told me that to stay ahead of your peers and your competitors, you must seriously think about what are you wearing while going to an office or even meeting someone outside of it. The way one dresses up is truly the first non-verbal communication you will have with any individual, in fact, it's the first form of any sort of communication. I always made sure that I was dressed up properly and formally for all of my meetings and interviews and I have to say that was one of the best advice I have ever got in my professional life. Interestingly this is also the first thing I notice about my professors as well, the way they dress and how they carry themselves.

I find the question, "Would you give a job to a person who did not dress appropriately for the job interview?" interesting. I have participated in conducting interviews within my current team and it was really surprising how many people would come to the interview dressed very casually -- some even wearing jeans or flip flops. It was always the first comment that was made once the person left the interview. With the job market being so competitive, why risk coming to the interview not dressed professionally? If there are two equal candidates and one is dressed professionally and the other candidate is dressed casually, I think the person dressed more formally for the interview would be the tie breaker.

I am not a big fun of errors but I am an advocate of transparency. Hence, there is an error I need to address at 26:46. It should be "Sensual Seduction" not "Sexual." I apologize for the error. I made this correction in the PowerPoint and you'll see the corrected version posted on Blackboard.

There is an error I need to address at 32:16. It should be "He appealed to the Supreme Court which unanimously ruled..." It is unanimously, not anonymously. I apologize for the error. I made this correction in the PowerPoint as soon as I detected the error and you'll see the corrected version posted on Blackboard.