Just a Link - Analyzing Avatar

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1lr4WkOIvbFeB3gRa5ZBaNPdlokVS4oYSCFsTGGnaIkI/edit?usp=sharing

Plastic Overdose

Plastic Overdose

Plastic is everywhere. It is so widespread that it has been found deep in the ocean, in arctic ice, and even in people’s bloodstream. Peaking in usage after World War III it is already in to-go boxes, cups and utensils, childrens’ toys, clothes, virtually any packaging and the list goes on. Plastic is made from fossil fuels and contributes to global greenhouse gas emissions through every part of its life cycle. Although traditional plastic continues to be ubiquitous in the 21st century, its elimination is important for sustainable living. 

Most plastic is produced from fossil fuels, primarily crude oil and natural gas. The dangers associated with crude oil are widely known, such as oil spills, and destruction of land. And some might think natural gas is a better alternative, but fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is the most common method in which it is obtained. There is a lot of environmental disturbance and pollution, including earthquakes, groundwater and surface water contamination involved in the extraction and transportation process of fossil fuels and derivative products as well. It requires a lot of energy to drill that deep into the ground and not to mention the amount of water that is wasted being pumped into the ground. Ethylene is a gas that is released when either substance is processed (Frienkel). The process to obtain ethylene, from steam cracker plants, is extremely energy intensive, and produces the most greenhouse gas emissions out of the whole plastic life cycle (Laville). Shell and ExxonMobil are both trying to build themselves one new cracker plant each. It has been found that, “Annual emissions from just these two new facilities would be equal to adding almost 800,000 new cars to the road” (Hamilton). Not only are these steam cracker plants costly to the environment, they are also costly to human health since the carcinogen benzene, volatile organic compounds and other toxic chemicals are emitted in this process (Plastic).  It may be difficult for people working in this fossil fuel refining industry to see how it makes sense to bring an end to that field of work, but done with good organization and leadership the workers could be retrained without any cost to them, during which period the plastic tap would turn off. They could then work in a safer environment with solar, windmills or dams that do not expose workers to the same toxins fossil fuels do, and help build a better society for everyone else. If governments around the world, including the United States, prioritize this switch then the transfer over will feel easy and there will be one fewer massive contributor to climate change phased out for good. In the United States the oil sector is still heavily subsidized and renewable energy receives only a fraction of the oil sector’s sum. Removing oil subsidies and providing more subsidies for renewable energy would be a good first step in the right direction. 

Once plastic has been turned into a product and is brought into people's homes it continues to present a risk to human health. Because people are so surrounded by plastics and use them, wearing them down, people “produce” microplastics that usually get washed away into our water, polluting our drinking water and contaminating the marine creatures people eat because the creatures eat the plastics first which accumulate up the food chain. Microplastics are plastics that have been broken down to less than 5 mm in length. Nanoplastics are truly microscopic plastics which are the result of microplastics breaking down further. Sometimes humans might ingest plastics directly when babies nibble on plastic toys or, more commonly, polluted drinking water and foods like shellfish. Fine plastic particles can also enter the system through breathing.

 In fact, every day it is estimated that a person ingests the equivalent of one credit card worth of plastic per week, and in ten years this can add up to 2.5 kilograms (Al-Youm) . Having them enter our body in any way no matter how small exposes us to toxins that like to attach to little bits of plastic or toxins that leech directly from the plastics or microplastics themselves. Microplastics are not harmless to people because of their size “Exposure to [plastics’] toxic chemicals is linked to cancers, birth defects, impaired immunity, endocrine disruption and other ailments” (“For Health’s Sake…”).... Overall there have been very few studies done regarding the effects of plastic once ingested, but in mice plastic has been shown to accumulate in the liver, kidneys and intestines. The presence of plastics was even shown to increase the level something might be toxic to the brain (Robertson). BPA, bisphenol A, is also a known health risk. Now it is very popular to not use it, and in the United States is only officially illegal with the food packaging of baby products, but other bisphenols have replaced it. And studies have shown the effects of these new but similar bisphenols have effects similar to BPA in mice (Hunt).

Plastic is cheap and packages most of people's on-the-go wants and needs. Imagine someone going to Starbucks for their morning coffee and bagel with cream cheese. Their coffee, hot or cold will come in plastic. Obviously both have plastic lids, but yes the paper cup also has plastic lining the inside of it as well. The paper and the plastic are fused together making them very difficult, if not impossible, to separate, and certainly very costly. The other part of this, is the plastic that can more easily be recycled, most of the time is not, 91% of plastic in the world is not recycled (Dufour). These paper cups can only be sent to the landfill, a primary methane producer, or to be incinerated which emits a whole host of other toxins, and likely the plastic cups along with them. And often plastics do not even make it to, or stay in those waste management streams which is why so much of it is found in the ocean. The benefit to plastic and the reason it is used so much is because it is so cheap. This is because the price does not include the environmental cost. 

Once in the ocean, plastic continues to endanger life. In animals the risks of microplastics can already be seen. Consuming too much plastic can cause them to die of starvation (Hoare).  Or they may accumulate plastics in their system and then be eaten by a bigger fish or human (Rochman). Plastics also get into our water and the ocean via our laundry machines in which we wash our clothes that are made out of plastic like nylon and polyester. Not all plastic has become a microplastic before it gets to the ocean, much plastic in the ocean sits on the surface for everyone to see. There are several garbage patches that cover the oceans: The Great Pacific garbage patch, the South Pacific garbage, the Indian Ocean garbage patch, and the North Atlantic garbage patch. The size of just the Great Pacific garbage patch is already three times the size of France. Once plastic is in the ocean, all sizes of it are harmful to the ecosystem. The oceans are vast but they are not big enough to hold all of human’s plastic waste and still have marine life and people living with minimal ramifications. Too many animals are already being strangled to death and starved to death by plastic. Not to mention, humans who pump millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the air need the oceans to help offset these emissions because it is known how dangerous air pollution is, but plastic is interfering with the ocean’s ability to be a carbon sink by affecting the growth of and inhibiting photosynthesis of certain ocean bacteria (Hollenbeck).

The shift modern societies have made into convenience culture will make it difficult to completely do away with plastics. That is why plastic alternatives are being created that will allow people to retain their culture without contributing to the negative consequences the planet now faces. There are of course items that do not need to be packaged in any kind of plastic at all because glass or aluminum will do just fine or because people bring their own containers to stores, but still it is unlikely this malleable wonder will disappear. Convenience culture is unlikely to go away, so switching to sustainable plant-based plastic alternatives is the way to go. The most promising plant-based plastics would either be composable in a municipal facility or at home. In either case there would need to be implementation of compost bins, infrastructure, and education even though home compostable items do not need the extreme heat of municipal facilities and can degrade in the natural environment. There is also the possibility of making these planet-safe plastics from food waste and would therefore not interfere with how cropland is allocated. More research and lifecycle analysis of these new plastics still needs to be done (Hamilton), but the dangers of fossil-fuel-based plastics have been made abundantly clear. For the sake of health, traditional plastic production must end. 

Plastic as it is made is not a natural substance and it is irresponsible for people to believe they know how to live in its overbearing presence. People need the oceans and the land and the fruitful resources they contain to thrive. There is no world in which one species can suppress the whole ecosystem in which they live and still expect to survive. The Native Americans had a culture of nurturing their land and the land provided for them in turn. The interconnectedness of the world means an excess of waste will bring about a wasteland, and nurture and care will bring a nurturing land. How one touches the earth is how one leaves the earth, so be careful. 

Refer to: The Connection Between Fracking and Plastic from NowThis Earth for more info.

Works Cited

Hollenbeck, Amanda. "Plastic Pollution Effects Bacteria that Aids in Oxygen Production." Laboratory Equipment, 2019. ProQuest, http://ezproxy.canyons.edu:2048/login?url=https://ezproxy.canyons.edu:2457/docview/2227311459?accountid=38295.

Hamilton, Lisa Anne, et al. “Plastic & Climate The Hidden Costs Of A Plastic Planet.” Center of International Environmental Law, 2019, www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Plastic-and-Climate-FINAL-2019.pdf.

Dufour, Fred. “A Whopping 91% of Plastic Isn't Recycled.” National Geographic, 20 Dec. 2018, www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2017/07/plastic-produced-recycling-waste-ocean-trash-debris-environment/.

"For Health's Sake, Stop using Plastic." Business Mirror, May 02, 2019. ProQuest, http://ezproxy.canyons.edu:2048/login?url=https://ezproxy.canyons.edu:2457/docview/2218188775?accountid=38295.

Al-Youm, Al. "Researchers Say we could be Ingesting ‘credit Card’ Worth of Plastic Every Week." Egypt Independent, Jan 03, 2020. ProQuest, http://ezproxy.canyons.edu:2048/login?url=https://ezproxy.canyons.edu:2457/docview/2332011657?accountid=38295.

Laville, Sandra. “Single-Use Plastics a Serious Climate Change Hazard, Study Warns.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 15 May 2019, www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/15/single-use-plastics-a-serious-climate-change-hazard-study-warns.

Wei-Haas, Maya. “Why 'BPA Free' May Not Mean a Plastic Product Is Safe.” National Geographic, 13 Sept. 2018, www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2018/09/news-BPA-free-plastic-safety-chemicals-health/.

Robertson, Ruairi. “Are Microplastics in Food a Threat to Your Health?” Healthline, 9 May 2018, www.healthline.com/nutrition/microplastics#what-they-are.

Freinkel, Susan. Plastic: A Toxic Love Story. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2011.

Patricia, Hunt, et al. “Replacement Bisphenols Adversely Affect Mouse Gametogensis with Consequences for Subsequent Generations.” Current Biology, 13 Sept. 2018, www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(18)30861-3?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0960982218308613%3Fshowall%3Dtrue.

Plastic Pollution Coalition. “Report: Plastic Threatens Human Health at a Global Scale.” Plastic Pollution Coalition, Plastic Pollution Coalition, 20 Feb. 2019, www.plasticpollutioncoalition.org/blog/2019/2/20/report-plastic-threatens-human-health-at-a-global-scale.

Hoare, P. (2014, Sep 25). A PLANET drowning in PLASTIC: A floating pacific 'garbage' patch the size of wales. seabirds and whales dying horrible deaths. how our addiction to plastic is turning the oceans toxic. Daily Mail Retrieved from http://ezproxy.canyons.edu:2048/login?url=https://ezproxy.canyons.edu:2457/docview/1564558211?accountid=38295

Rochman, C. M., Hoh, E., Kurobe, T., & Teh, S. J. (2013). Ingested plastic transfers hazardous chemicals to fish and induces hepatic stress. Scientific Reports (Nature Publisher Group), 3, 3263. doi:http://ezproxy.canyons.edu:2069/10.1038/srep03263

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cruise Ships vs. Planes - Value Speech

 Cruise Ships vs. Planes

GP: to persuade

SP: to persuade my audience about how cruise ships are worse than planes

CI: The waste produced, the lack of regulations, and their limited airflow, and impact on the locals are all traits that make cruise ships more dangerous and inferior than planes.

Introduction

(Attention Getter)

1. Have you considered traveling after this coronavirus pandemic lockdown passes over? Perhaps on a cruise ship because the tickets will be wildly cheap? Or are you looking at flights? Or how flights might compare to cruise ships? 

(Relate Topic to the Audience)

2. As college students we are all trying to make our way in the world along with most everyone else and likely even aspire to create change for the better along the way, therefore, it is important to look at how major forms of transportation directly affect the health of those who are on board and those who are not as well as the environment. 

(Credibility)

3. I’m fascinated by the world, no matter the times the possibilities of what one could create or find or learn are always endless, so I want to travel, but I want to do so while being conscious of the lives of others - human or not. 

(CI)

4.  The waste produced, the lack of regulations, their limited airflow, and impact on the locals, are all traits that make cruise ships more dangerous and inferior to planes.

Transition: The most obvious comparison to make is based on their respective energy consumption and emissions. 

Body

1. It takes a lot of energy to transport hundreds or thousands of people around the world. 

1. Cruise ships are most likely the most inefficient modes of transportation in the world, especially because they are more like floating cities than anything else. 

1. They require an extremely large amount of energy to operate; one month at sea could power 77,000 American homes (Umbra), while the largest cruise ship by Royal Caribbean contains only 2,759 staterooms (“Symphony…”).   

2. And in order to provide this energy to the people on board, a cruise ship burns tar-like fuel.

1. This fuel is called heavy fuel oil, it is the dirtiest type of oil, because it is a by-product of the crude oil refining process, therefore contains a lot of contaminants and impurities, and when used on ships (because of its cheapness) must be kept on high heat during both storage and use (“What Is…). 

2. Along with carbon dioxide, they emit nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, and diesel particulate matter, microscopic soot that is very damaging to human health (Ombellini), with the emissions reaching the equivalent of 1 million cars a day (Morgan).

2. Planes, on the other hand, are more efficient. 

1. Jet fuel, or kerosene, is more refined than crude oil and can actually be used in cars with diesel engines. 

1. In some cases biofuel is used, so the input is not fossil fuels despite still creating carbon emissions (English).

2. And recently a short-distance battery electric commercial plane has debuted in Canada (staff).

2. Planes also carry fewer people (which means less weight), providing only seating and a couple shared bathrooms, for the duration of the flight. 

Transition: It is also important to take into consideration the regulations the two are incentivized to abide by. 

2. The regulations cruise ships and planes abide by are different. 

1. Cruise ships have limited to no regulations once they are in international waters.

1. This enables them to dump both fuel and sewage directly into the ocean.  

1. Scrubbers which are now used on ships to clean fuel, have their waste pollutants dumped directly into the ocean (Laville). 

2. Many cruise ships also dump sewage, in 2014 about one billion gallons were dumped (Spross), leading to concentrated nitrogen and phosphorus in the ocean causing algal blooms that remove oxygen from the water and suffocate marine life- including coral reefs (Part). 

2. And on the civil side of things, they can register in any country they choose for the purpose of getting the labor laws they prefer, and as a result crew members end up working most hours of the day for a few months up to a year on end often with no enforced minimum wage (PolyMatter). 

2. Planes, however, are more regulated depending on a country’s laws either from the country it is registered or the air space it is in.                               

1. But no matter the country, the fuel quality and waste disposal process is all pretty similar.  

1. No scrubbing is needed, the fuel is already highly purified.

2. And they hold onto their sewage until after they have landed, whereupon it is taken to a local wastewater treatment plant. 

2. Labor laws are not so willy-nilly.

Transition: (Finally,) People on board also have differing access to hygienic conditions.

3. Airflow is drastically different and this has the ability of affecting the health of everybody on board.

1. Cruise ships have limited airflow.

1. The air is cycled throughout the entire ship, so that everyone is sharing their air with everyone else (in their close quarters).

2. This creates an enabling environment for the spread of infectious diseases.

2. Planes instead have the cabin air mixed with outside air, which is sterile from high altitude, before recirculating.

1. The air filters are also like that from an operating room. 

2. Making it so that the likelihood of infection is highest within two seats of the diseased person, and transmission falls the further away one is from them, otherwise most people are relatively unaffected (Tobin). 

Transition: Finally, at the destination, how are the local people affected?

4. The tourism cruise ships bring do not help the locals much at all, some might argue they do more harm than good. 

1. Cruise ships have everything prepaid.

1. So locals benefit minimally.

2. They also pollute while docked because they often keep the engine running rather than turn it off and plug into the local power grid, this can affect local air quality tremendously; in Marseilles about 10% of air pollution is estimated to come from shipping (Chrisafis).  

2. But planes allow people to get to their destination then stay there.

1. People take a flight to get to their destination, it is not a vacation destination itself, so they are not necessarily supporting major corporations by staying on their floating city, they have the option of supporting local and small businesses and more likely to truly immerse themselves in another culture and/or location

2. With planes it is possible to visit places in the world that do not just reside on the coast. 

Transition: To conclude, cruise ships are not nearly as supportive of the well-being of humans or other creatures as planes are. 

Conclusion

(recap main points/thesis)

1. Cruise ships use non-refined heavy fuel oil causing vastly more pollution compared to planes that use kerosene. 

2. Cruise ships abide by more slack regulations compared to planes, so they dump more waste directly into the oceans and often overwork crew members.

3. The air quality on cruise ships is far more enabling for the spread of infectious diseases than on planes.

4. The tourism cruise ships bring is less beneficial to locals than planes. 

(bang)

5. I’ll leave you with a quote from the author of Diet for a Small Planet, Frances Moore Lappé: “Every aspect of our lives is, in a sense, a vote for the kind of world we want to live in.”

Works Cited 

Chrisafis, Angelique. “'I Don't Want Ships to Kill Me': Marseille Fights Cruise Liner Pollution.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 6 July 2018, www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/06/i-dont-want-ships-to-kill-me-marseille-fights-cruise-liner-pollution.

English, Trevor. “What's the Difference Between Jet Fuel and Gasoline ?” Interesting Engineering, Interesting Engineering, 27 May 2019, interestingengineering.com/whats-the-difference-between-jet-fuel-and-gasoline.

Laville, Sandra. “Thousands of Ships Could Dump Pollutants at Sea to Avoid Dirty Fuel Ban.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 29 Oct. 2018, www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/29/thousands-of-ships-could-dump-pollutants-at-sea-to-avoid-dirty-fuel-ban.

Morgan, Sam. “Daily Emissions of Cruise Ships Same as One Million Cars.” Www.euractiv.com, EURACTIV.com, 10 July 2017, www.euractiv.com/section/air-pollution/news/daily-emissions-of-cruise-ships-same-as-one-million-cars/.

Ombellini, Silvia. “How Do Cruise Ships Impact on the Environment.” Ecobnb, Ecobnb, 1 Aug. 2018, ecobnb.com/blog/2013/07/how-does-cruise-ships-impact-on-the-environment/.

Part, Take. “Watch a Cruise Ship Pollute as Much as 13 Million Cars - in One Day.” YouTube, 27 Apr. 2015, www.youtube.com/watch?v=2N9JHYtAzVk&list=PLogDUhtBbbNMg88zHGL9yQTUQDGvZJH20&index=16&t=0s.

PolyMatter. “How Cruise Ships Work.” YouTube, 6 Apr. 2018, www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZY1BFv8qEeM.

Spross, Jeff. “Here's What Happens To Sewage On Cruise Lines.” ThinkProgress, 4 Dec. 2014, archive.thinkprogress.org/heres-what-happens-to-sewage-on-cruise-lines-333d026c8481/.

staff, Guardian. “World's First Fully Electric Commercial Aircraft Takes Flight in Canada.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 11 Dec. 2019, www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/11/worlds-first-fully-electric-commercial-aircraft-takes-flight-in-canada.

“Symphony of the Seas.” Royal Caribbean Press Center RSS, 2020, www.royalcaribbeanpresscenter.com/fact-sheet/31/symphony-of-the-seas/.

Tobin, Meaghan. “Why Cruise Ships Are the Worst Places to Be during a Virus Outbreak.” South China Morning Post, 22 Feb. 2020, www.scmp.com/week-asia/health-environment/article/3051844/worse-aeroplane-how-being-confined-cruise-ship-fuelled.

Umbra®, Ask. “You Thought Planes Burned a Lot of Carbon? Say Hello to Cruise Ships.” Grist, Grist, 9 June 2016, grist.org/living/you-thought-planes-burned-a-lot-of-carbon-say-hello-to-cruise-ships/.

“What Is Heavy Fuel Oil Used For?” Bright Hub Engineering, 7 June 2010, www.brighthubengineering.com/marine-engines-machinery/73473-properties-of-heavy-fuel-oil/.

Fake News

 Misleading Information on the Internet 

“Rush Limbaugh: ‘The coronavirus is an effort to get Trump,’” is an article that consists of a transcript from The Rush Limbaugh Show that contains many trigger words, sensationalism, and straw man and faulty cause and effect fallacies regarding the topic of the novel coronavirus. Limbaugh considers COVID-19 as harmful as the common cold or the flu, and inaccurately uses these terms interchangeably (CDC 2019). Then he proceeds to compare how its existence is being reported on to Russian weaponized opioids (he says fentanyl, but he is describing carfentanil (Little)). He discusses how the reporting has caused the Dow to drop and make Trump look bad in an effort to bring him down. And adds communist buzzwords to the origin of this novel coronavirus, claiming it came from Communist China where they were trying to create a weapon like the Russians had. Assuring it did not come from America, it was just a communist and American media conspiracy (Staff 2020 “Rush Limbaugh...”). The media is the most hated subject in his dialogue because he considers it a source of false and hyped information. When comparing the facts and strategies he uses and the ones mainstream media uses, this type of statement is one of projection. The article attempts to get any person to click on it with its provoking title, and the transcript within uses claims that people want to hear and believe without providing facts or interpretation for comparison, which can lead viewers astray if they do not take the time to fact-check the information themselves. 

Although this article was posted by Media Matters for America, a progressive news outlet, a clickbait title, “Rush Limbaugh: ‘The coronavirus is an effort to get Trump,’” is provided with no further commentary within the subtitle or the article itself. It encourages people to click whether they're thinking “Great, the media has found another way to create an attack on Trump,” or “Wow, that’s absurd.” The subtitle also includes quotes that would be provocative for a reader no matter their political affiliation, further drawing in the reader. Upon further inspection, Media Matters for America considers themselves a progressive research center that corrects misinformation in conservative media, so that makes it even more odd that the article would have no commentary from their team. Anyone who knows this organization’s reputation would expect that. Rush Limbaugh's diction, that they quote, is triggering to anyone and only further grounds people to their pre-existing bias, and this “progressive” media outlet does nothing to counter, fact-check or comment on the transcript which could potentially make the article less biased or at least less misleading. The title they provide this article, or transcript rather, is quite accurate, however, without any fact-checking information, it looks like they are either creating a database without declaring it or they are taking someone else’s sensationalism and making it their own clickbait.

If an article has no commentary, people are more likely to head towards the comment section, either to look at what other readers are saying or to leave a comment themselves. For this page it only becomes clear that the article was posted by a left-leaning website because of what is written in the comments. Many of them are opinionated and littered with insulting or sarcastic diction directed toward Limbaugh and/or Trump. There are a couple comments that stand out in being wrong and misleading regarding who was at fault for the coronavirus hysteria (vs. Ebola) and how coronavirus is hyped in the media. And some of the comments are basically unrelated and are people just attacking each other. The comments are not monitored and end up being the voice of response to this transcript instead of someone more credible and well-spoken.

This article was created by Media Matters for America (MMfA) and simply contains a transcript of Rush Limbaugh’s radio show without additional commentary from the research and information center. Therefore, it is important to consider both MMfA and Rush Limbaugh as authors to this article (Haglund). 

Media Matters for America considers itself progressive and dedicated to correcting conservative misinformation and is strategic in not calling itself a news organization (Staff 2020 “About Us”). While most reliable news organizations naturally express some bias, it is not responsible to pass as a news organization when the goal is to target a certain group of people. News is about holding those in power accountable and presenting the whole picture of facts with the least amount of bias possible. If they decide to go after conservative bias to correct misleading or false information that may have been created, then they ought to also go after liberal and establishment bias. Extremist viewpoints, no matter where they come from are likely to create dangerous and false information. It appears that the conservative media has a disproportionate amount of lies compared to liberal or mainstream media, perhaps due to their consumers’ susceptibility to it and likelihood to share it (Hern), but this should not mean that they are the only group targeted. Media Matters for America consider themselves progressive when that should not have anything to do with it. They are fact-checkers of conservative media.

However, the article discussed here does not even include any fact-checking commentary or a declaration that this was only a transcript or source of wrong and misleading information in the title or at the top of the article. The author who compiled this piece is not made transparent either, they are simply called “Media Matters Staff.” The responsibility is on the company instead. The first tenet in the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, under “Seek Truth and Report It” states, “Take responsibility for the accuracy of their work. Verify information before releasing it. Use original sources whenever possible” (Walsh). The author does not take responsibility for their work and they do not bother to verify or disprove Limbaugh’s statements for the sake of their readership. And utilizing the CRAAP test, authority is murky, and the accuracy and purpose have the likeness of propaganda especially because the transcript was not reviewed (Meriam Library).

Rush Limbaugh’s voice takes over the page. Limbaugh is a famous American radio personality that many consider a conservative political opinion leader. It is difficult to find why people consider Limbaugh a credible and trustworthy source because that reason is not based on his educational or political involvement credentials besides providing a controversial and sensationalist radio show on AM, FM and Armed Forces Radio Network. He graduated from high school in 1969 and left Southeast Missouri State University after two semesters and a summer session (Trey). He already had some experience in radio from his high school career, and spent many years thereafter pursuing a radio career. In 1984, Limbaugh was hired by KFBK radio station replacing Morton Downey Jr. who was considered wild and often offensive. And in 1988 he struck gold when he was signed by EFM Media Management and The Rush Limbaugh Show debuted August first, and within five years became the most popular radio talk show (Augustyn). This indicates his popularity and power comes from the listener's pre-existing bias being reaffirmed on his channel. His works were relatable to millions of Americans who were too afraid to speak their opinion in public, so his channel quickly became a place people felt understood. 

It is frightening how much false and misleading information Limbaugh creates that many consider unbiased. Especially his statements regarding coronavirus being like the flu and coronavirus being made in a Chinese lab so now the media is weaponizing its existence by hyping it up in order to say, “Trump and capitalism are destroying the world.” Coronavirus is not like the flu because, as stated by the CDC, “A novel coronavirus is a new coronavirus that has not been previously identified. The virus causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is not the same as the coronaviruses that commonly circulate among humans and cause mild illness, like the common cold” (CDC 2020). The media is not “weaponizing” the coronavirus, the facts Limbaugh denies because they would not sit right with him and his audience do not make them less true. And there may be people who simply distrust the CDC due to their changing position, such as their recommendations regarding face masks, however, their overall message regarding social distancing and the severity of the outbreak has remained consistent. COVID-19 is new territory for everyone, therefore as scientists gather more data updates will occur. Is it not better to change with facts rather than to remain consistent with disproven data? 

There is evidence indicating China’s attempt to downplay the disease at the start of the outbreak, that may to some look like an expression of guilt, but no evidence suggests the virus was made in a lab. A CNN clip quotes 27 public health scientists who wrote a letter in the journal Lancid, in which they, “overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife, as have so many other emerging pathogens” (Griffin). The virus most likely originated from bats infecting farmed or wild animals that were brought alive, crowded and in cages, to market. And although China had a slow response, they cannot take the blame for the United States’ level of suffering. The head of the CDC in China burst into tears telling the US CDC director how bad the virus was on January 1st. As of January 20th, the first case in the US was detected in Washington state (Favreau). The numbers in the US are not fake, in fact, they are greatly undercount due to the lack of initiative to test. It is unfortunate that Limbaugh considers this is just communism spreading its tentacles across the world to promote hysteria as the “fake” numbers rise in news reporting.  

It is important that people are equipped with the tools that will allow them to be cautious when consuming information, from the internet, or anywhere. These days there is a drive towards news that gives us an emotional reaction and reaffirms our beliefs because people have become so accustomed to instant gratification. Our society thrives off convenience in many industries including food and entertainment. This causes a severe disconnect from our environment, how goods originate, as well as from other people who are all vital to the makeup of how our society functions. Everyone ends up living in a bubble, and if they follow the path of least resistance people will continue to be fooled by misleading and disinformation spread through every type of media. It appears there are some who follow these inaccuracies with a fervor resembling what one might have for religion, however, for those who feel lost in this void of information it is vital for them to learn how to tell the difference. It is dangerous to live in a world of lies, believing what other people want you to believe, committing to loyalties rather than facts, and not attempting to hold the most powerful few accountable, it leads to a type of government the United States has never had before: authoritarianism.  

Works Cited  

Augustyn, Adam, et al. “Rush Limbaugh.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 5 Feb. 2020, www.britannica.com/biography/Rush-Limbaugh. 

CDC. “Cold Versus Flu.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 30 Dec. 2019, www.cdc.gov/flu/symptoms/coldflu.htm. 

CDC. “Frequently Asked Questions.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4 Apr. 2020, www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/faq.html. 

Favreau, Jon, et al., directors. How Did This Get So Bad. Pod Save America, Crooked Media on Snapchat, 1 Apr. 2020, www.snapchat.com/discover/Pod_Save_America/3307186281. Season 3, Episode 64 

Griffin, Drew. “Virus Hunters Look for a Culprit - CNN Video.” CNN, Cable News Network, 6 Apr. 2020, www.cnn.com/videos/us/2020/04/06/coronavirus-origins-drew-griffin-lead-pkg-vpx.cnn.

Haglund, Kim. “Recording #4.” YouTube, 24 Mar. 2020, www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mkEnrgwFvU. 

Hern, Alex. “Fake News Sharing in US Is a Rightwing Thing, Says Study.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 6 Feb. 2018, www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/feb/06/sharing-fake-news-us-rightwing-study-trump-university-of-oxford. 

Little, Becky. “How Opioids Were Used as Weapons During the Moscow Theater Hostage Crisis.” History, 22 Aug. 2018, https://www.history.com/news/opioid-chemical-weapons-moscow-theater-hostage-crisis.

Meriam Library. Evaluating Information - Applying the CRAAP Test. Evaluating Information - Applying the CRAAP Test, California State University, Chico, 2010. 

Staff, Media Matters. “About Us.” Media Matters for America, 2020, www.mediamatters.org/about-us. 

Staff, Written by Media Matters. “Rush Limbaugh: ‘The Coronavirus Is an Effort to Get Trump.’” Media Matters for America, 24 Feb. 2020, www.mediamatters.org/rush-limbaugh/rush-limbaugh-coronavirus-effort-get-trump. 

Trey. “Rush Limbaugh's Education Background.” Educational News & Tips - EDUInreview.com Blog, 9 Aug. 2018, www.eduinreview.com/blog/2011/04/rush-limbaughs-education-background/. 

Walsh, Lynn, et al. “SPJ Code of Ethics - Society of Professional Journalists.” Society of Professional Journalists - Improving and Protecting Journalism since 1909, 6 Sept. 2014, www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp.