On the Air with Campus Community Connection - Assignment Example

Part A: On the Air with Campus Community Connection Evaluate the accuracy or presence of factual information. While listening to the debate in this video, one thing is very clear that the two persons involved in the debate are highly educated, high profile and experienced. So whatever information they are sharing is very sensible and factual. Weiss puts forward a case study, where the discrimination was done by American law to a couple just because they were cohabitants and not married. While attacking the psyche of American people as well as legislative provisions related to domestic partners, it is unjust according to Weiss. He further produces facts about the updated laws of Germany and Netherlands that preserve individual rights. Dr. Stern proposes opposite view by advocating the marriage institute. She delivers authentic reports from reliable sources Such as Harris polls report. Both of them are very much accurate in providing factual information about traditional and non-traditional marriages in America. 2. Distinguish between observations and inferences. Observation comes under the category of qualitative research whereas inference is more associated with quantitative research. Both of their points have a strong platform of observations and inferences. The observation of Prof. Weiss is presented through the example of Adam & Rachael, a couple living together without marriage. The insurance company denied combined policy to them just because they were not married couple. Weiss advocates the theory of individualism with this example, and further points out the same traditional values applied in changing circumstances. The inference is presented by him with legal system of America, Germany and Netherlands. When Dr. Stern propagates her viewpoints, her arguments also are supported by strong evidences and observations. Through her observations she talks about the adverse effect of domestic partnership of society. She also gives the authentic report of Harris Poll about same sex marriages. (57% Americans are against same sex marriage) 3. Distinguish between first and second person observation. First person is Prof. Weiss. His observation is based on the case study of a couple living together without marriage and how the law and social system do not legalize their relationship. Second persons observation is naturalistic which is based on the behavioural pattern of individual in natural context. 4. Analyze the types of arguments and proofs presented by the speakers. The arguments propounded by both speakers come under deductive arguments. A deductive argument is intended by the arguer to be valid. It provides an assurance of truth in its conclusion. The conclusion made by the two speakers is very strong which has a strong base of evidences of observations and inferences. Prof. Weiss has an individualistic approach and does not care much about the traditional norms, whereas Dr. Stern gives importance to the social fabric which is structured with some values and laws and which needs to be protected. Both speakers think that their argument is valid and to make it more valid they have give strong evidences. 5. Who do you think won the debate? Why? I personally do not think that any one of them wins and the other loses. It was because of their way of advocating their thoughts. Prof. Weiss is more liberal while Dr. Stern seems to be socially inclined and gives importance to community than individual. At a point Prof. Weiss becomes aggressive a little bit, but Dr. Stern is all the time very rational, precise and professional in her approach. Part B: You Look Great 1. How does nonverbal communication contribute to Claire and Rachel’s perceptions of sexual harassment? Rachel and Claire both have suffered from sexual harassment. In Gym, during their workout, they meet each other. Claire points out that a guy is gazing at Rachel weirdly. It is a typical male gaze, which is the major kind of non-verbal communication. Rachel gets irritated because of his gaze and the topic goes further regarding their experiences of sexual harassment at their workplace. Rachel tells Claire last weeks incident, when she enters the cabin of her boss to resolve a work related matter. Her boss immediately gets out of his chair and sits on the other side of the table, very close to Rachel, leaning and gazing her. He makes sex related comment when she uses the word I am hot. She talks about her anger and he takes it as a sexual comment. These acts of her boss make her very uncomfortable. She tries to keep distance from him but he comes close to her and touches her shoulder. The touch was not normal but indicating sexual signal. His eyes, facial expressions accompanied by certain words were indicating his sexual demand from her. Claire also tells her own sexual harassment at her workplace. When she enters the cabin of her boss, first he makes her happy with the news that she has been appreciated for her performance and liable for promotion. Then he offers hug to her. His hug was not kind and clear and candid but very much embarrassing. After hugging he stared at her breast. He also touches her neck asking about necklace. She is trying to keep him at distance and he comes close to her, touching her shoulder and hair. She loses her temper and warns him harshly not to touch her. His tone is deceitful and cunning with spreading his hands he tries to plead her. All these signs of non-verbal communication clearly signify that the person is demanding sex from the lady. 2. How does the communication setting—the workplace vs. the workout room—influence the meanings attributed to various nonverbal behaviours? At workout room, Claire and Rachel are quite open and comfortable. To indicate the nice shape body of Claire, Rachel actually draws the shape of a lady in the air by using her two hands. In the end when Ted arrived both of them are impressed by Teds body and fitness. They are actually giving a typical gaze which shows that they are trying to court him. Claire presses his muscles and Rachel was staring at him. It indicates that they were flirting with him. 3. What would you do if sexual harassment occurred in your work place? I very well know that sexual harassment is an offense. I had to experience same problem at my workplace some years back. That time I was working as an assistant professor for mass communication in a very prestigious institution of my town. My director many times used to call me in his cabin, appreciate me by using nice and pleasant words, and drag me close to him. One day he offered me credit of something and literary hugged me. I was so much embarrassed. Some days passed and that day he directly asked me for sex. I lost my temper and rushed out of his cabin. I communicated it with my colleague, who was the coordinator. She took me to the admin director and informed him about the behaviour and demand of my director. The admin director called my director and fired him. My director was very hurt and in the next day he called me in his cabin and forced me to resign or accept his proposal. I immediately resigned and after my departure from the institution, he was also dismissed from his job. Part C: Where There’s Smoke There is a discussion on smoking ban policy of Government. Mike is a smoker so naturally he opposes the ban of government on smoking. Claire also agrees with Mike. She is aggressive on this issue and she calls government crazy for banning smoking. She further gives example of ban imposed by French Government on Burka. Both of them think that it is the attack on individual rights. Further Mike says that if someone wants to keep himself/herself away from smoking they can do it, the why ban should be there. But at the same time Mike is sensible and always takes care whether the people around him are not getting trouble because of his smoking. Vema is a bar tender so obviously she also does not support the ban that much. She says that her non-smoker customer have no issue with the smokers in the bars. They do not have any complaint about the smokers. The only person who does not support smoking habit is Enrique. Enrique used to be a smoker in past, but now he has left it. He fully supports the decision of Government. According to him it is not healthy for the active smokers as well as passive smokers around us. Part D: Sams Graduation Party 1. Communication behaviour is a way of expressing your thoughts without actually speaking them out loud but through your behaviour and feelings. Many examples can be given from this clip regarding this concept. Sam’s mother was not a very effective communicator here as she was basically trying to gain attention. No one, not even her own daughter and son wished to speak to her or share their thoughts and problems. Her husband preferred to talk with Professor Stern as she was very approachable and showed deep interest in communication. She is a good listener having effective body language, gesture and facial expressions. The smoker girl’s indifferent approach is also hindrance to the communication process. 2. Who was the most effective communicator at the party? Dr. Paula Stern was the most effective communicator at the party. It is due to the following reasons: a. A pleasant smile on her face b. Enthusiasm towards other people and her genuineness c. Her way of greeting and overall approach d. Her knowledge and maturity level e. Her self confidence and the way to respect other people f. Her language, diction and cracking of jokes in the conversation. 3. What does this clip teach you about the complexity of human communication? Human communication is a very complex process as it contains various aspects such as emotions, feelings, likes, dislikes, personalities, cultural, social, and educational matter. In this clip for example the feelings such as insecurity, jealousy, and self-attentiveness are the major obstacles in case of Sam’s mother, who is not able to communicate properly with anyone in the party. She is harsh and sometimes rude in her comments. The smoker is alone, rather wants to be alone. She seems to be insensible towards society and she is behaving as if she wants to retaliate against other people around her. Sam’s father is also not comfortable in speaking to his wife but he is quite comfortable with Dr. Stern. Part E: Interview: The Script – Part 1 Opening: I would like to thank you for letting me interview you. My topic is the benefits of vegetarianism. I will begin with questions about you. Personal: 1) Are you married madam? 2) Do you have child/children? 3) Are you vegetarian by birth? 4) Are you the member of any vegetarian community? 5) What motivated you to be vegetarian? 6) Tell me something about your diet schedule. 7) Do you think you are missing lot of things by being vegetarian? 8) Is your family vegetarian too? Technical: 1. How do you manage to be vegetarian if you travel to a country where the vegetarian food is not available? 2. Will you eat non-veg food in that country or find another option of vegetarian food? 3. Do you think that during pregnancy and after delivery, the mother and the baby can survive just on vegetarian food? 4. What vegetables and food items do you like to taste? 5. Do you prepare food for yourself? 6. What is the difference between the vegetarian food you get in foreign country and your country? 7. How do you justify vegetarianism? Other Questions: 1. Do you like to experiment with new vegetarian dishes in your kitchen? 2. What different vegetarian dishes do you prepared to tune yourself to changing seasons? 3. What food is vegetarian and what is non vegetarian in your country? It is because every country has a different perception about vegetarian food. 4. If someone is having non-veg food on the same table with you, may be your friend, does it irritate you? 5. Is your vegetarian approach associated with any religious practice? 6. What message would you like to deliver to the people about vegetarianism? Closing: Thank you. I appreciate the time you spent with me to explain about much sought-after topic for debate. I think you have taken a fantastic decision of being vegetarian. Interview Part II: a.) Ms. Meghana Joshi Professor of English and Communication Foreign Language Department Friday. February 28 at her college Phone: b.) I chose the topic because I am completing my diploma course in diet and nutrition. I want to do a research on vegetarian diet and its benefits. Ms. Meghana Joshi is my friend from India. Basically you find maximum variety of vegetarian dishes in India only. She is completely vegetarian. So I thought she would be the right person to be interviewed. I told her about my research topic and she was very enthusiastic. She is the staunch follower of vegetarian food. Though there was a Geographical distance, I took her interview on skype. 2. I used some mirror questions such as “Do you think that during pregnancy and after delivery, the mother and the baby can survive just on vegetarian food?” When I asked the closed-ended question “Do you think you are missing lot of things by being vegetarian?” firstly the answer was just no. Then I continued with probing questions such as why do you think so? 3. I used all the questions prepared in my questionnaire. Plus some additional questions also were asked on the spot, which was related to the main question. I asked some hypothetical questions will you eat non-veg food in that country or find another option of vegetarian food. 4. Ms. Joshis approach was very positive and she answered every question rationally. When I asked her about the vegetarian dishes, she told me that you get numerous food options in vegetarian food. She further informs me that if you add spices in vegetables their flavour makes your dishes so delicious. One major thing I came to know was that she uses spices in every dish. Rather in Indian cuisine, without spices, one cannot prepare any dish. To my surprise, she never had tasted non-vegetarian food in her life so according to her, there is no question of missing anything. 5. While justifying vegetarianism she reveals some scientific facts that man doesnt have sharp teeth or sharp nails like carnivores but on the contrary our teeth are blunt like cows, buffalo. She further gave me very interesting information about human intestine. She gave reference to steve pavlina.com that “carnivorous animals have intestinal tracts that are 3-6x their body length, while herbivores have intestinal tracts 10-12x their body length. Human beings have the same intestinal tract ratio as herbivores. That is the reason by nature man is herbivores.” 6. When asked question about her flexibility to eat non-veg food if veg food is not available, she said that she is not flexible at all. She will try to survive on fruits salad, steam rice. 7. When asked about her definition of vegetarian food, she said that in India basically all vegetables, fruits, pulses cereals, cow buffalo and goat milk come under the category of vegetarian food. There are variety of vegetables, fruits, pulses, cereals, and spices available in India. In some country egg and fish are regarded as vegetarian food but in India they are not. All that contains flesh of animal or bird is non vegetarian. 8. While stating the religious connection of vegetarianism, she said that in Hinduism and Jainism eating flesh is regarded as non-religious. Yet there are some communities in India, especially in coastal area, who offer the sea food to their family deity. 9. It was amazing facts which changed the total perception of vegetarianism. It cleared many misconceptions such as vegetarian food is not useful for accumulating energy and other such misconceptions. 10. the most interesting part of this assignment was I learnt how to take interview and how to form questionnaire for the interview. Read More