Freedom of Press Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Freedom of Press - Term Paper Example Indeed, the political rights, which encompass the right to participate freely in the political process, depend on how freely communication and expression through the electronic and printed media is guaranteed. Freedom of the press also makes political leaders and public office holders to be responsible and accountable to the citizens. Furthermore, the civil liberties that allow for freedom of expression and belief, associational and organizational rights, rule of law, and personal autonomy without government control are intrinsically linked to the degree of freedom of the press. Thus, the political stability of any state is strongly dependent on freedom of the press and as a result, freedom of the press is a politically relevant issue. The political rights, which include the right to vote and be voted for, depends on the degree of freedom of the press. The right to vote and be voted for is the distinguishing factor between democratic governments and their undemocratic counterparts. D emocracy involves free, fair and regular contestation for political offices and freedom of the press is an implicit requirement for free and fair elections (Sachs, 2007, 2). For an election to be free and fair, the electorate must communicate and express themselves freely without fear, favor, threats or domination from government and other parties of potential domination. Indeed, freedom of the press ensures free communication and expression that eventually leads to free and fair elections. It is noted that governments that suppress the media are notorious for conducting flaw elections. This was the case with the Iranian government. In fact, the Iranian government aggressively crackdown on the media in the wake of its flaw presidential elections. Furthermore, authoritarian states such as Russia and China notorious for their molestation of journalists in the bid to restricting the flow of information and thereby maintaining the political structure are also excellent examples of state s that conduct flaw elections (Karlekar, 2010, 1). In addition to promoting political rights, freedom of the press ensures that the elected government officials and other public office holders are responsible and accountable to the citizens. This is particularly true in states that have freedom of information legislation, an extension of the freedom of the press. Under this legislation, request can be made of government to make public, information otherwise classified as sensitive or secret. This promotes openness and responsibility on the part of government officials since they will be requested to provide information on how the government is run. Over 85 countries have implemented some form of the freedom of legislation. There is a good-to-excellent correlation between corrupt governments and countries that do not have this form of legislation. For instance, countries such as Sweden, Denmark, and Norway that have some form of the freedom of information legislation (Staples, 2007) have been consistently rated as the world most corrupt-free states. While African and Middle East countries that do not have forms of this legislation have consistently be rated as corrupt states. Thus,

Examining the different disciplines of forensic science

Examining the different disciplines of forensic science Forensic science provides a form of applied science contextualised with the law, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦inextricably in the service of the public.1 However, increasing publicity through visual media that glorifies and deceptively portrays the field as fool-proof, is having negative impacts in courts worldwide. These impacts are largely due to incorrect protocol and overstating of results beyond what the jury can comprehend. Mystery and awe has surrounded forensic science, captivating audiences with programmes such as CSI: Crime Scene Investigation. The series of forensic-related footage has enabled the field to become known widely, however understanding the complexities is being shown to be a serious constraint. The advantages have seen the industry receive large grants and funding in some areas, however the majority of juries misinterpret the strength of evidence, easily overestimating the weight it offers the court. This is significant as the jury is typically made up of everyday people, r ather than scientists. Therefore, further transparency is needed for the jury to interpret the weight to apply to various types of evidence. It is apparent that the multidisciplinary science of forensics is lacks the appropriate strength to govern the entire framework under a common model; forensic science. Whilst there have been huge amounts of research into the chemical , biological and physical sciences, many of the evidences, such as tool mark and fingerprint evidence, that are relied on to provide individualisation and uniqueness lack adequate funding and research to develop their validity, reliability and statistical significance. It is a flaw in the system that we are required to comprise the entire variety of disciplines that interpret forensic evidence under one umbrella-like concept. Encompassing the forensic disciplines under the one term is the result of rapid expansion in the field. It is appropriate to appreciate that some fields, particularly areas of DNA research, have received significant attention, where others have been neglected. Perhaps forensic science and its community are at a stage where disciplines can be distributed between what is forensic evidence and what is forensic intelligence. Or perhaps it is more suitable to divide on the basis of scientific / analytical based or expert interpreted. Forensic science as a whole needs to be thoroughly evaluated to determine an effective distinction for the legal system it is meant to benefit, where the absolute science can be provided solely on the condition that there is reliability, validity, and known uncertainties, while the interpretational evidence that cannot be substantiated with statistics and databases, yet can potentially be validated with further research to assist individual experience of so-c alled forensic experts. The National Research Council of the National Academies has identified in the United States the significance of the overestimation and misinterpretation regarding the forensic evidence that is being produced for the courts.2 Their report dissects the major disciplines, establishing recommendations for strengthening forensic science, including but not limited to establishing stringent protocols, better definition of expert witness phrases and implement and enforce better practices and standards for forensic science professionals and laboratories.2 This report will not examine in detail each discipline of forensic science. However, it is the poor attempt of classification of all forensic practices into the one structure of forensic science that will be the focus. Forensics and the CSI effect Forensic science evolved from the need to prosecute criminals more effectively. Criminal activity occurs in many facets, and can occur at any time.3 Illegal activity can also be promoted by drugs which is both dangerous for the criminal and people around them.3 Crime scenes, whether physical harm have occurred, or just simply theft, are usually rich in biological and physical information which, if interpreted correctly, can allude to the events that occurred.3 The processes and people whom this information was handled between, from the collection to analysis, to the use in court as evidence, is known as the chain of custody. If this chain of custody is not maintained with the highest integrity, the information gathered has no use in court. Often carelessness and poor decisions from handlers lead to potential evidence being reprimanded. Each time forensics fails in court, it adds to the pressure of sceptics who criticise the entire field because of the encompassing of all forensic sci ences under one domain. It is the Hollywood glamour that has given television programmes associated with forensic science an established excitement among viewers for their 60 minute showcases. The episodes make forensic science appear deceptively simple which invites illusionary expectations of analysis and value at trial. The CSI effect does not replicate the true intricacies of real forensics. Whilst the digitised world is a real thing, it is greatly overstated the power and graphical interfaces of the computer systems used, tapping into databases that are only dreamt about by certified forensic experts. It is then a false assumption that everyday forensic analysts are assisted with these capabilities. It is examples in these shows such as fingerprint comparisons that search through computer databases in minutes, and DNA samples that are analysed for STRs and specific loci by the time they arrive back from the crime scene. In reality, DNA analyses are backlogged in many cases because of the time it takes to analyse. In reality, simple PCR amplification can take the time that one episode of CSI establishes, develops and solves an entire case. The effect broadcasting has had in portraying the dramatic evolution of criminal cases also has confused the role individual forensic experts have, that is, to assist law enforcement in establishing a case, and then to assist the court to understand and interpret the evidence and their findings. The CSI effect has led people to believe they also take on the role police investigators, and even lawyers and counsellors in some instances. This CSI effect has extended into the court room where the jury are potentially faced with this expectation that the evidence that is going to be explained is decisive. Unless the expert makes it absolutely clear with the significance of the evidence, the jury can add substantial weight to the case, on some occasions be the fundamental basis of their decision. It is up to the defence to cross-examine expert witnesses and source potential mishandling that can question the evidence. Once questioned, the integrity of the case is in jeopardy due to misconduct. Many wrong convictions have been made on evidence that has been incorrectly examined and weighted. Every time forensic science fails in court, the pressure is placed back on the entire field to argue the truth behind the science. The problem extends not only from poor expert witness testimony skills, but an inadequate framework with which the system is explained. Strength of Forensic Science Encompassing the many disciplines that currently make up the forensics framework within one title lacks the fundamental strength that is needed to maintain the integrity of applied science for the benefit of the public. A model should essentially provide the basic theory for all disciplines it governs. This is not the case as we begin to dissect this concept. The first basis of which the current framework of forensic science does not adequately distinguish between the disciplines is the misperception of differing areas of science, being pure and applied. Science can be described as a body of à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truthsà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦concerned with the physical world and its phenonomen.4 With this understanding, it is clear that when combined with the context of forensics, the overall concept of science should be contextualised with the legal system.1 The variety of natural sciences, such as chemistry, biology, and physics have be around for decades and their theories, methods and techniques have been strongly developed. It is the disciplines that have evolved out of necessity for law enforcements requirement for further evidence, such as fingerprinting, tool mark impression and document examination, which do not have the established literature and research.8 James and Nordby (2003) consider th is, pointing out that natural sciences are based on theory and are controlled and certain, whilst forensic sciences are practical, applied, uncertain, and compromised. This view does not consider the human interface that science is controlled by, and that the flaws of science are generally the flaws in the procedure and protocol used. Whilst in many cases what James and Nordby (2003) observe is true, it is the professionalism that accompanies the process which determines whether the integrity is maintained. James and Nordby (2003) contradict themselves to agree with the above, noting that Good science, and good forensic science, produces reasoned opinions. This truth of this statement is derived from the procedures used by individual scientists to derive their opinions. The quality of the scientists analysis ensures the validity of their opinion, accounting for both natural and forensic sciences. A second delusion of the current framework has caused non-scientific evidence being cunningly used as trickery in the courtroom. It is dangerous that the courts, since admitting evidences such as CCTV footage, are leaving the defence to discredit the opinion evidence that has blatantly no scientific theory behind it. This report will not be used to argue the reasons other than that disciplines such as document examination, fingerprinting, profiling, and facial mapping are significant forensic intelligence for law enforcement, and are often used to establish a list of suspects. However their use is currently limited by the research and funding that has gone into their development, and until analytical and statistical significance is analysed for each discipline, they should be not collectively assigned within a broad forensic science framework. When evidence is presented in the courts, it is often seen that the applied sciences come undone from both the lack of foundation of the disci plines, and poor forensic expert testimony. Starrs (2003) is mindful of the relationship between lawyers and forensic practitioners, conscious that forensic scientists often struggle with the legality of the courts.11 To contrast this, lawyers are identified to narrow-mindedly focus on discrediting scientific opinion, due to their insufficient knowledge of science.11 Starrs (2003) comments that the contrasted view of science and the law requires experts reconciliation so that they can work in both amicably and advantageously. An example of the injustice that expert witness testimony is causing is demonstrated in the Atkins v The Queen trial. The facial mapping discipline is not a direct science. It has developed out of the need for visual identification from video and photographic evidence. However, because judges, jurors interpret faces of known and unknown people every day, there is a misconception that the area of expertise is more simple than uncommon knowledge, such as DNA analysis.5 Potential prejudice and miscarriages of impartiality due to underestimating the difficultly in establishing identification by facial mapping is now commonly evident in courtrooms due to the increasing footage of CCTV and other photographic material that is being submitted as evidence.5 In the example Atkins v The Queen trial, the expert witness that testifies only similarities between the exemplar and the captured footage of Dean Atkins failed to inform the discrepancies into their testimony.5 It is believed that the jurors understood the expert opinion as a positive identification. It is a known fallacy that jurors cannot weight appropriately the evidence that is given to them, and therefore it should be made clear what basis the opinion of the evidence is made. Also, there are ways to mislead the jury into thinking that there is science involved. Establishing scientific-like terms such as the Bromby scale, in the Atkins v The Queen case, should not be used as forensic evidence in the court room as the courts are not the place for experts to sit and testify indecisive opinions. The use of expert opinion established on experience rather than the science needs to be frowned upon, and should begin to discredit users from being professionals. An alternate example is the Brandon Mayfield case. Mayfield was arrested in March 2004 as a material witness in an investigation into the terrorist attack in Madrid, Spain, on commuter trains. It was found by the FBI using IAFIS that it was Mayfields fingerprints that were left on the bag of detonators. However, the Spanish National Police later informed the FBI that the fingerprints were in fact from an Algerian national as the source. The misidentification from the Brandon Mayfield case was due to many factors such as bias, prejudice, human error and insufficient methodology .6 While the automated approach to fingerprint analysis is mostly sufficient in establishing a collection of suspect fingerprints that have similar markers, it still requires human interpretation to establish which fingerprint has all the same individual characteristics as the sample print. For this reason, it is essential that if such evidence was to be admitted to court, the jury is aware of this, and other, types of error, and that the expert evidence should be used to aid other evidence. While fingerprint evidence does have noteworthy research it should still be considered by juries carefully. The technique relies of observation of markers from experts rather than analytical techniques that can be verified and thus, should be considered under an alternate framework. Fingerprint analysis is a discipline that has received more attention than facial recognition and many others, however, it is essential that a strategy is implemented to amend the framework strength that forensic science is lacking. At third concept that prompts further debate is the misuse of the term science in forensic science. It is observed that society perceives that science provides à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦hard facts, definite conclusions, and uncompromised objectivityà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ in every case.9 Due to the rapid expansion of forensic science, the definition has not adopted its use today, where research provides methodology. Then it is perceivable that forensic science is the use of these methodologies in the search for facts, although the result may not always provide the statistical significance. This is reported by Starrs (2003) to be the key issue with forensic science. Starrs (2003) observed the public portrayal of forensic science needs to capture à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦a more realistic scientific levelà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ so that juries wont measure up expert witnesses and their testimony based on expectations far beyond the scope of the forensic framework.11 It may be that forensic experts are struggling to keep pac e with the growth of forensics and public misunderstanding, and are expressing opinions that are greater than the significance of their results.11 As Inman and Rudin (2001) explained, in many cases science becomes a misused term, employed to gain credibility and legitimacy in society.9 It is important for the future of forensic science that the understanding of the science body is clarified, being that science provides process rather than truth.9 Clarification can be assisted by the observation of the continual evolution of science, where at any point of time a discovery enhances the knowledge we have, and refutes (or refines) what was once known to be true.9 Potential frameworks A framework is an à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦underlying set of ideasà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦that provide the basis or outline for something intended to be further developed at a later stage.7 To encompass all forensic disciplines, developed and undeveloped, under the one forensic science framework is misleading, particularly when justifying evidence in court. It has been discussed through auditing the strength of forensic science by the National Academy of Sciences, many forensic science methods have been developed due to the evidence that has been able to be collected from the crime scene.8 Whilst it is known that many disciplines, such as serology, forensic pathology, toxicology, fingerprint analysis, and chemical analysis have a solid backbone regarding their theories and methodologies, there are many facets that are not as well developed.8 These include pattern / impression analysis, firearms analysis, hair and fibre analysis, handwriting and document analysis, explosive and fire debris analysis, for ensic odontology, blood spatter pattern analysis, paints and coatings analysis and many more.8 Inman and Rudin (2001) agree with this concept, in that The realm of science can be divided into pureà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦and applied science.9 Their approach highlights the need for science disciplines to be distinguished. However there are potentially many errors is segregating on the basis of pure and applied sciences. For example, analysis of forensic analysis of crime scene evidence relies on the foundation on the pure or natural sciences. Therefore, at what point does an applied science be sufficient to be classed as a natural or pure science? Potentially, there are a number of possibilities that could divide disciplines adequately for the use of expert evidence weight in courts. Some of these include: Forensic evidence vs. forensic intelligence Analytical vs. interpretational Scientific vs. intuitive Objective vs. subjective In a forensic context, forensic evidence and forensic intelligence seem the obvious option. However, exploring into how each are defined establishes that much forensic evidence assists also as forensic intelligence and vice versa. More appropriately, objective and subjective establish the specificity required for absolute classifications. Forensic evidence with a scientific approach could be defined as the objective analysis while forensic evidence with an interpretational approach could be defined as the subjective analysis. Correlating this idea, Inman and Rudin (2001) suggested that objectivity of science is always being sought after, realistically, we must understand that human interpretation of evidence, à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦regardless of whether the items of interest are two fingerprints or two spectraà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦, places subjectivity into the equation.9 Whilst this is true in this day and age, the reality is that technology is developing exponentially to the point where automated systems will replace much of the bias that evidence is faced with. A framework that adheres to this objective and subjective system would be able to provide evidence weighting guidelines for the significance between these two types of forensic analysis. Potentially, jurors could then differentiate forensic evidence based on this system and already for-see pragmatic value for a fair trial. It must also be recognised here, that due to method and protocol refinement from continuous scientific research, it is important for regular auditing of each discipline to establish the type of analysis that fits best for the time. By having an appropriate framework employed, CCTV footage and other photographic medium that is being used as evidence, would shift the onus back upon the Crown to demonstrate evidential value. The Crown would then be required to demonstrate the convicting expert opinion has à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦probative valueà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ by exposing its reliability and validity.5

Violas Disguise in Twelfth Night :: Twelfth Night essays

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   As in most comedies, William Shakespeare's Twelfth Night extensively uses disguises, masks and mistaken identities to add to the comical nature of the play. Viola's disguise as Orsino's page, Cesario, becomes crucial to the action in the play. Without this important element, the action in the play would slow down dramatically, making the story much less intriguing. In addition to making the play less interesting, the disguise is also necessary to develop the storyline involving Sebastian, and the confusion that his return creates. It also is vital to the conflict between Olivia and Orsino, which depends on Viola's disguise to keep things exciting.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Viola's disguise becomes increasing more important as the events take place. The majority of the plot lines depend on the disguise. Without it, the main theme of the play would be the gulling of Malvolio. In a play where most of the characters fall in love with each other, blind to the gender and true identity of the objects of their desires, a disguise like Viola's becomes the center of the action, and causes almost all the of the important aspects of the play.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The confusion that Sebastian creates when he returns would not occur without Viola's disguise. Sir Andrew believes that the woman of his desires, Olivia, is spending too much time with Cesario, and challenges him to a duel. As he put it, Olivia was doing "more favors to the Count's servingman than ever she bestowed upon me." (3-2 l.5-7) At first, Viola is nearly forced into a battle, but is saved when the confused Antonio arrives. Later on, Sebastian and Andrew do get involved in a scuffle, for which Viola is unjustly blamed. Finally Sebastian and Viola are reunited, but only after they have already caused a large amount of chaos and have confused everyone. It is only then that everyone begins to discover the extent of Viola's trickery.      Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   More disorder is created when Olivia, who Orsino is hopelessly in love with, falls for Cesario, who is secretly in love with Orsino. Orsino sends Cesario to express his affection for Olivia, which Cesario/Viola is not thrilled with. As she puts it, "whoe'er I woo, myself would be his wife." (1-4 l.

Big Money Lies in Spotting Collectibles to Sell on eBay

If you've an eye for car booty, buy items cheaply at car boot sales, and sell them at a profit on eBay or other auction sites. Be sure to arrive early to beat other bargain hunters. The big money lies in spotting collectables to sell on, so research online first or (subtly) use your mobile phone's web browser. There's a quick way to glean a product's market value on eBay*. Fill in the search box and tick ‘completed items' on the left-hand grey bar. It'll come up with a list of prices similar auctions have already fetched.Then sort by â€Å"Price: lowest first†. If the price is red, it means no one bought it. Green means it sold. How much? The earning potential increases with your knowledge of rare items and collectable brands, and a little luck doesn't go amiss either. If you're in the right place at the right time, this could net you ElOOs extra a year. Find out more: Read other Moneysavers' top suggestions or add yours in the Spot & flog on eBay thread. More hints are in the eBay, Auctions, Car Boot & Jumble Sales board. Sell unwanted gold for CASH!TV, mags and billboard ads pulse with promises, yet rarely seem to live up to them. Get cash for old goldHowever, amid the scrap are shining examples – meaning El 5 per 9ct stud earrings and E85 per 18ct gold ring is possible. How much? Do it the right way and, depending on how much bling you unearth, it's possible to make Jaw-dropping sums, as Moneysaver Goochie did: â€Å"l sent off 32g of gold (old broken earrings and chains that I haven't worn for 20+ years) and 35g of silver yesterday afternoon by special delivery (by 1 pm), and got 272! â€Å"

Nike in Southeast Asia

Abstract Nike is the world leader in the manufacturing of sports wear and gear. So at first, Nike didn't pay attention to the criticism it was receiving because it was coming from a small group of activists, although later on, the social pressure became very high that Nike was forced to take some measures to quiet down the public who wanted to know what was going on. In this paper we will examine the various difficulties Nike faced as they tried to balance both, the company performance and good corporate citizenship. We will also discuss what I would have done if I was in that position.Summary Nike, was founded in 1964 by Phil Knight, Nike's business model was developed by Knight while attending Stanford Business School in the early 1960's. In 1998, Nike was the leader in the sports shoe industry, with annual sales of $9. 5 billion and a 40% share of the American sneaker market. It became a lightning rod for protest when alleged â€Å"sweatshop† conditions where happening in S outheast Asia. May 1998 is when Phil Knight, the founder and CEO, admitted that â€Å"the Nike product has became synonymous with slave wages, forced overtime, and arbitrary abuse. What people couldn’t understand was how Nike could get associated with deplorable labor practices. The strategy that Knight developed involved outsourcing all manufacturing to contractors in low wage countries and pouring the companies resources in high profile marketing. They where trying to take the blame off by saying that â€Å"We don’t know the first thing of manufacturing. We are marketers and designers. † They did manage to be marketing a lot by placing the Nike â€Å"swoosh† on the uniforms of athletes such as Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods.When manufacturing started it was done in Japan, but as wages rose, they transferred production to Korea and Taiwan. Later on, in 1982 more than 80% of Nike shoes where made in those two countries. But once again as wages went up th ey moved to Southeast Asia, by 1990 most production was based in Indonesia, Vietnam, and China. Young Indonesian woman who were working in Korean-owned plants under contract with Nike started at 15 cents an hour. Mandatory overtime was often imposed, and workers with experience might make $2 for an 11-hour day.In 1991 Indonesian wage went up from $1. 06 to $1. 24, only two cents above what the government calculated as necessary â€Å"minimum physical needs. † Workers often toiled in crowed, poorly ventilated factories, surrounded by machinery and toxic chemical all because the government was eager to attract foreign investment. Nike's initial response was to deny any responsibility for the practices of its contractors. They said that these were depended contractors from which Nike merely buys shoes from.That the workers are not Nike employees, and that their wages are above legal minimum and the prevailing market rate. When asked about labor strife in some factories supplying Nike, John Woodman, the Company's general manager for Indonesia said â€Å" I don’t know that I need to know. † he defended Nike by saying that yes they are low wages, but they have given jobs to thousands of people who wouldn’t be working otherwise. At the end of the case it says he might have added giving employment to Michael Jordan, whose reported $2 million fee in 1992 was larger than the payroll for that year in Indonesia.I don't agree with the way Nike handled this case, there where other ways of taking care of the situation not just by saying that they didn’t know and trying to wash their hands from the ongoing dilemma. If I was to be in their shoes I would have been looking into what was going on in the factories since they are handling our product. Yes they did save some money but at what cost, their name was tarnished for a while and having people that supposedly didn’t know what was going on didn’t help them at all.One of the fe w things that I would have done was gave the workers some sort of incentive since, I supposedly didn’t know what was going on in the factory. Yes you want to save money but you don’t want to lose your consumers for such a reason like this. That is where ethics comes in and they have to create a meeting and figure out a way to look like the good guys once again by helping solve the problem and prevent it from happening again, like setting up certain laws that their subcontractors should go by.Through reading this case study I became aware that many things go on with a product, behind the consumers eyes that sometimes aren’t very ethical of the company that is selling to the consumer. It also teaches that no matter what, when a company is trying to cut expenses and they push the envelope a little to much a big chaotic scene can happen. Which if not handled right away can lead to the falling of the company that might have taken many years to build up.