Essay Draft Chapter 1-rewrite#1

Crystal Ainardi
Eng 101
Bleck
Essay Draft 1

Spin to Un-Spun

Everyday we buy into the world of “Spin”, deceived by the media, ads, and our politics. “Spin” is another word for deception, according to the authors of the book Un-Spun finding facts in a world of [disinformation], Brooks Jackson and Kathleen Hall Jamieson. In Chapter one they explain the different ways we the public have bitten into the dishonesty being fed to us, sometimes as harmless “as a jar of beauty cream or as deadly serious as cancer.” (pviii) We need to open our eyes find the facts and read the fine print before we get caught off into the “Spin”. We the public are constantly exposed to lying and deceit that goes unacknowledged by those set to protect us and those to inform us, and no one is doing a thing about it.

More than a hundred years ago there was a salesman nicknamed “Rattlesnake King” sold a “cure all product” that he called Snake Oil Liniment. The “cure all product” turned to be an absolute fraud. In 1915 when the federal Pure Food and Drug tested the product they found it contained no snake oil as it claimed. (p4) From snake-oil, to emu-oil false advertising is typical of beauty products. Like wrinkle creams; in 2006 Jackson and Jamieson found a product called “Deception Wrinkle-Cheating Cream” which the company said was better than botox. Yet, there was no study done on this cream and no studies were done comparing it to botox. (p5) Another lie within the advertisements is some of our over the counter medications. Prescription-Strength Malarky, headache medications comparing themselves to “Prescription Strength Relief without a Prescription” which they are not when looked at in study. (p6)

Product promotion “spin” is not quite as deceptive as the political “spin” the public is exposed to. Political Snake oil George Bush promising to the public he could get us “energy independent” in the 2004 campaign, pretending to have an easy solution to a big problem. Something the advertisers and politicians have been onto for a while is how to manipulate the public with fear and insecurity. Many large companies and well- known brands have built their way to the top with their false advertising. Listerine’s sales exploded in the 1920s giving outrageous claims to cure not only bad breath, but sore throats, help prevent colds, and if rubbed on scalp could cure dandruff. (p9) Even in extreme cases commercial lying is costing the public's lives. A Canadian company was selling home HIV kits which they said were 99.4% accurate, but later when tested by the U.S centers of disease control it was found they were 59.3 inaccurate with results. There is no estimate of how many people were given false diagnosis or how many delayed treatment because of poor results (p11) The profits of disinformation is highly profitable to the unproven and un-tested, worthless weightless products that millions buy into yearly. The public buys into the insecurities expelled across these advertisements and the public gives into the products.

This is just the beginning of deception in our lives. In the 2004 campaign election’s many of the TV ads were misleading that lacked real hard evidence in the end. Accusations flew from Bush in 2004 that claimed Kerry’s tax increases would hit “900,000 small business owners.” When in fact further analysis showed the number of small business who would be affected was barely more than half the numbers the bush ad had claimed. (p12) Then again voters were deceived after seeing a Bush ad implying Kerry cuts funds for intelligence spending, which was in fact untrue. (p15) Polls showed the ads had an overall impact on the way people had voted. Movies have even deceived us to believe otherwise then the truth according to Jackson and Jamieson in a poll conducted by them; they found more than half of the public found from watching a movie that most people believed that the Bin Laden family had been allowed to leave when air flights were still closed down after September 11th. Which had been false. Everywhere you turn it is non-stop deception; political deception does not stop when the elections are over, TV, ads, posters on the lawns, internet, and constant bombardment. Jackson and Jamieson conclude the fact is, we the public as voters and consumers must learn to become more of “sticklers” and demand more respect not accept these “tall tales.” (pg 21)

Jackson and Jamieson’s book even surprised me. I was dismayed to read the dishonesty Listerine had used to get its way to be one of the top brands on the market. Yet, it made sense. Listerine sales started to explode in the 1920s with the ad’s exclaiming “Prevents colds”, “helps sore throats”, if rubbed on scalp could cure “dandruff” and cured “halitosis”. We today know this is untrue. “Mouthwashes are generally cosmetic and do not have long-lasting effect on bad breath.”(p9) This did make me think of the impact it had on the generation it influenced, our Grand-parents. This generation still swears by the product, my own grandmother always has a bottle or two in her medicine cabinet. She was fed by the ad’s this was a “cure” for her ailments, when it does nothing but cover up the smell of the breath and Listerine’s 90 year lies. The political “Spins” are no different four years later then they were when Jackson and Jamison wrote this book. The political ads blare on TV, from Obama and McCain. The latest on FactCheck.org showed another argument over taxes that were originally displayed to the public as misleading, not broken down nor explained. Just as it was when Bush and Kerry were running in 04’. The truth was there, but no one bothered looking, nor did the media care to explain. The truth is in the somewhere, but rarely are we shown the true evidence.

The fact of the matter is; the government won’t protect us, it takes months, even years before they get the smell of a false ad, and the courts rarely sue politicians because they give candidates the full benefit of “free-speech” (p22) you may ask why they don’t stop these dubious ads. We are protected somewhat with commercial advertising, but many get through to the TV anyways. As for politicians, there is no federal law requiring truth in their political ads. Why would they want to tell the truth, anyhow? The advertisement companies make millions off the public with us buying into their products, and the politicians are laughing on their way to the bank with all the votes landed on lies. They win. Just as Jackson and Jamieson have said in Chapter 1 we must learn to inform ourselves more, ask questions, and learn to read between the lines.

Jackson, Brooks, and Kathleen Hall Jamieson. Un-Spun finding facts in a world of [disinformation].New York: Random House, Inc. 2007.

for crystal

The intro gets off to a pretty good start but would benefit from a clearer claim that will guide the response. See if you can express the point of the response, why it might be of interest or importance to your reader so as to guide the development of the response.

The summary works pretty well, but I think it may be important to include as a major detail the example of Alex Guerro and his scam. A sentence or two is all that's needed. Look at the material I posted on the front page of the class site to be sure the map is complete.

The response points work pretty well also. I'd like to see the second point illustrated with an example as specific as the first. What was the argument the two candidates were/are making over taxes? What did each say? What did factcheck.org say was true, kinda true and a lie about each ad? This is the sort of thing that can be used to fill out the point. If you also round up a contemporary ad for listerine, you can use that information to better fill out that point, seeing whatever claims they are making and how they present the product and the information so you can look at why it remains such an appealing product. Do this and there won't be, shouldn't be, any need for a third example.

Bradley

Corrected Response

Intro- I don't see any problems-you named the author, stated what the book is about, and gave a thesis.

Clearly Reflects Text- You covered the 1st Chapter pretty well, though it seems like there's a lot of info in the second paragraph. It kind of feels like the facts are being listed. This would probably be fixed just by splitting the paragraph into two.

Presents Student's View- Good job w/ the examples. But I'm just not liking the way the last half of your last sentence ends. I think it might sound better like; The truth is in the somewhere, we just have to look for it. (Just me though)

Conclusion- It ties in w/ your thesis

Paragraphs- The only thing I thought to change was shorten your second paragraph.

Grammar- I think in the 2nd paragraph after "cure all product" there should be an "an" before absolute. Also in the 3rd paragraph, 4th sentence, business, should be businesses, and in that same sentence, was barely, should be were barely. Oh and maybe spell out 1 in your last sentence.

Comment on Crystalainardi's Essay

I believe that I would take paragraph 2 and make it into two by cutting it off after the (p6). You are moving from advertising to politics. It seemed to me a natural breaking point.
I see with the title of the book you used underline. I tried to use italics but see that it didn't come out on the blog. I'll have to fix mine. Thank you for the idea.

Teri
Keep Smiling, makes people wonder whay you have been up to.

please respond using prompt

Have a look at the response rubric and respond to the points addressed there so as to better help the writer and yourself. Thanks. Bradley

Past to Present

This is really hard to critique someone you don't know and possibly hurt their feelings so please take this as constructive and I will do the same if you critique mine, since that is what Mr. Bleck is asking for.
I would go through your essay and see if the things you are writing still pertain or whether they existed in the past. For example "This is just the beginning of the deception in our lives" What is? Or did you mean "that was just the beginning...."
"The latest on Factcheck.org showed...." Well, if it's the "latest" it probably still "shows". So I would say "the latest on www.factcheck.org shows that ....." Also, there are some spelling errors through the assignment. I am ABSOLUTELY horrible at Math so my husband checks my math and he's horrible at spelling so I check his work. I would ask someone to proofread your paper for those things that spellcheck won't pick up like "there, their, they're"

I hope you find this helpful, and again, I hope that you don't take this personally.

Mary

Mary B

please follow the response guide

Have a look at the response rubric and respond to the points addressed there so as to better help the writer and yourself. Thanks. Bradley

No I don't take it personal

My last English class I had said take it as a gift when we have peer's going over our papers. I am horrible at spelling and I know it. So I try to use spell checkers and such.

Thanks for the input on my word choices, I didn't catch that with those two different sentences.

Well written, the one thing

Well written, the one thing that popped up for me was your second paragraph seemed a bit long. Maybe break in two right before talking about George Bush and the oil. I think that would make it easier on the reader, and go smoother. You did a good job.

Jackie

please respond using prompt

Have a look at the response rubric and respond to the points addressed there so as to better help the writer and yourself. Thanks. Bradley

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.