HUM101 Colorado State University Media Bias and Propaganda Essay
So again, this is the hardest
professor I have ever had and gave me an 80% on a previous paper that I
could find no mistakes in. For reference I have pretty close to a 100%
in all of my classes but his. it is a 100 level class with 500 level
expectations. not only does the content need to follow the rubric
exactly but he expects MFA quality style writing. This project is worth 100 points or almost 25% of my grade, let me know what you think is reasonable or if you have any specific questions please.Thanks again!Option #1: Media Bias and Propaganda
Directions: Using the concepts learned through
the readings and lecture pages, select a social issue or ethical dilemma
in the news. Find three recent articles from three different media
sources on the issue and then answer the following questions: *What assumptions do you make about these articles before reading them? How is your mind already “at work”? *What
evidence of bias can you find in the articles selected? *What is the
point of view expressed (if there is one) by the article? *How do the stories favor privileged views? *What is a peer-reviewed source? What peer-reviewed sources did you find that helped in thinking critically about your issue?Requirements:Cite all claims and ideas using scholarly sources. While it is
acceptable to write in the first person, be sure to cite your sources to
support your inferences.Include at least one or two scholarly sources that are not required or recommended readings for this course. The CSU-Global Library (Links to an external site.) is a good place to find these sources.Your paper should be four to five pages in length and formatted according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing & APA (Links to an external site.).Papers should be double-spaced, 12-point font Times New Roman. Include the following in your essay: a brief introduction (Links to an external site.), a conclusion, and a reference page formatted according to CSU-Global APA requirements.Option #2: Historical and Contemporary Examples of Media Bias and Propaganda
Directions: The required readings this week
include historical and contemporary examples of media bias and
propaganda from a range of times, cultures, and countries (the United
States, China, Iraq, Rwanda, etc.). Using these required readings,
address the following prompts and questions:Compare and contrast the propaganda and bias emerging from jihadist fighters
(Klausen, 2015) and the Chinese state (King, Pan, & Roberts, 2017).
What similarities do you detect? Differences? How can propaganda and
bias be used to further different aims?Describe two historical examples of propaganda from Murphy and White
(2007) that show how governments use propaganda and the media to
achieve their ends?What suggestions do Murphy and White (2007) offer in terms of how
the U.S. government should use information? What criticisms or critiques
do you have of their approach?Requirements:Cite all claims and ideas using scholarly sources. While it is
acceptable to write in the first person, be sure to cite your sources to
support your inferences.Include at least one or two scholarly sources that are not required or recommended readings for this course. The CSU-Global Library (Links to an external site.) is a good place to find these sources.Your paper should be four to five pages in length and formatted according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing & APA (Links to an external site.).Papers should be double-spaced, 12-point font Times New Roman. Include the following in your essay: a brief introduction (Links to an external site.), a conclusion, and a reference page formatted according to CSU-Global APA requirements.RequiredChapter 12 in Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life (3rd ed.). King, G., Pan, J., & Roberts, M. E. (2017). How the Chinese government fabricates social media posts for strategic distraction, not engaged argument. The American Political Science Review, 111(3), 484-501. Klausen, J. (2015). Tweeting the Jihad: Social media networks of Western foreign fighters in Syria and Iraq. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 38(1), 1-22. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1057610X.2014.974948?scroll=top&needAccess=trueMurphy, D. M., & White, J. F. (2007). Propaganda: Can a word decide a war? Parameters, 37(3), 15.RecommendedYanagizawa-Drott, D. (2014). Propaganda and conflict: Evidence from the Rwandan genocide. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129(4), 1947-1994. Rubric
HUM101 Mod 5 CT
HUM101 Mod 5 CT
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Requirements
10.0
to >8.0 pts
Meets ExpectationIncludes all of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
8.0
to >6.0 pts
Approaches ExpectationIncludes most of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
6.0
to >4.0 pts
Below ExpectationIncludes some of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
4.0
to >0 pts
Limited EvidenceIncludes few of the required components, as specified in the assignment.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Content
10.0
to >8.0 pts
Meets ExpectationDemonstrates strong or adequate knowledge of the materials; correctly represents knowledge from the readings and sources.
8.0
to >6.0 pts
Approaches ExpectationSome significant but not major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge.
6.0
to >4.0 pts
Below ExpectationMajor errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge.
4.0
to >0 pts
Limited EvidenceFails to demonstrate knowledge of the materials.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Critical Thinking
25.0
to >20.0 pts
Meets ExpectationDemonstrates strong or adequate critical thinking.
20.0
to >15.0 pts
Approaches ExpectationSome significant but not major errors or omissions in critical thinking.
15.0
to >10.0 pts
Below ExpectationMajor errors or omissions in critical thinking.
10.0
to >0 pts
Limited EvidenceFails to demonstrate critical thinking.
25.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Critical Analysis
25.0
to >20.0 pts
Meets ExpectationDemonstrates strong or adequate critical analysis of intellectual thinking and reasoning.
20.0
to >15.0 pts
Approaches ExpectationSome significant but not major errors or omissions in critical analysis of intellectual thinking and reasoning.
15.0
to >10.0 pts
Below ExpectationMajor errors or omissions in critical analysis of intellectual thinking and reasoning.
10.0
to >0 pts
Limited EvidenceFails to demonstrate critical analysis of intellectual thinking and reasoning.
25.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Sources / Examples
10.0
to >8.0 pts
Meets ExpectationSources
or examples meet required criteria and are well chosen to provide
substance and perspectives on the issue under examination.
8.0
to >6.0 pts
Approaches ExpectationSources
or examples meet required criteria but are less than adequately chosen
to provide substance and perspectives on the issue under examination.
6.0
to >4.0 pts
Below ExpectationSources
or examples meet required criteria and are poorly chosen to provide
substance and perspectives on the issue under examination.
4.0
to >0 pts
Limited EvidenceSource or example selection and integration of knowledge from the course is clearly deficient.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Demonstrates college-level proficiency in organization, grammar and style.
10.0
to >8.0 pts
Meets ExpectationProject
is clearly organized, well written, and in proper format, as outlined
in the assignment. Strong sentence and paragraph structure; few errors
in grammar and spelling.
8.0
to >6.0 pts
Approaches ExpectationProject
is fairly well organized and written and is in proper format, as
outlined in the assignment. Reasonably good sentence and paragraph
structure; significant number of errors in grammar and spelling.
6.0
to >4.0 pts
Below ExpectationProject
is poorly organized; does not follow proper paper format. Inconsistent
to inadequate sentence and paragraph development; numerous errors in
grammar and spelling.
4.0
to >0 pts
Limited EvidenceProject
is not organized or well written and is not in proper paper format.
Poor quality work; unacceptable in terms of grammar and spelling.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome
Demonstrates proper use of APA style
10.0
to >8.0 pts
Meets ExpectationProject
contains proper APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to
Writing and APA, with no more than one significant error.
8.0
to >6.0 pts
Approaches ExpectationFew
errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing
and APA, with no more than two to three significant errors.
6.0
to >4.0 pts
Below ExpectationSignificant
errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing
and APA, with four to five significant errors.
4.0
to >0 pts
Limited EvidenceNumerous errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA, with more than five significant errors.
10.0 pts
Total Points:
100.0
19 mins ago