Should the mass media always tell the truth?

The mass media is the media as we know it today. Theodore Roosevelt once commented on
the mass media and journalism specifically – “The power of the journalist is great, but he is
neither respected nor admired for it, unless it is used right.” The former president of the
United States aptly summed up what the mass media should aim to do: to tell the truth and
not abuse their power of massive influence. However, the recent spate of terrorist events
tailored for the media seems to propose that the media should not always tell the truth, and
that there are circumstances that do not require the whole and absolute truth. That,
however, does not imply lying, but instead the telling of a partial truth.

The mass media represents the specific body of the media envisioned for a large scale
dissemination of information. Therefore, it is understandable that the mass media wields
immense powers of influence over society. As it is, we depend on the media for coverage on
the events taking place around us and for information on important global events. As Senior
Minister Goh Chok Tong of Singapore once commented, the mass media has a “moral and
social responsibility”, and possesses powers of influence “greater than executives and
corporate leaders”. Therefore, the mass media has to wield its responsibility and use its
position of mass influence wisely – and this suggests a constant, steady, unwavering
adherence to the truth. The extent of the mass media’s influence means that it’s every
coverage of events would be eagerly lapped up and absorbed by members of the public, and
the media has a social responsibility to cover and report events in a truthful, forthcoming
light. Society depends on the mass media or factual reporting and unbiased recounts, and
the mass media should live up to this dependence and expectation, and be held
accountable.

Moreover, it is important for the media to tell the truth, especially when it pertains to a
nation’s welfare, or is in relation to important political affairs that concern a country’s well-
being. This function of the media in which it exposes misdeeds and misdemeanor is one that
clearly entails a telling of the truth. The media’s whistle-blowing and expose on the
Watergate scandal for example, shows the need for telling of the truth and journalistic
integrity despite possible opposition and backlash. The media is commonly regarded as the
fourth estate to judge a government’s efficiency, and there is therefore a significant reliance
of a nation on the media to check and report factually, the truth on affairs big and small.
Therefore, the media’s actions should always be guided by the truth as they have to live up
to a societal need for the truth, and non-slanted, unbiased and factual reporting.

Besides its ability to disseminate information on a large scale, the mass media also has the
power to shape mindsets, create opinions and mould thought processes. For example,
media coverage on the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky extramarital affair created widespread
disapproval of the former American president with females worldwide frowning on the
adultery of Clinton. The media therefore shaped an opinion on a global scale. Thus, the
media should adhere to the truth, as opinions and mindsets are governed and influenced by
the media’s coverage on events; dishonest or slanted and untruthful reporting would lead to
opinions and reactions based on lies. Not only is this socially harmful, it is also unfair to the
parties these lies are built upon.
However, there are instances in which the truth will not set one free, and there is a gap
between what society needs and what society should get. Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong
commented at Today newspaper’s anniversary celebration that a media’s interest should
converge with a nation’s goals of order and stability. Therefore, there are several
circumstances in which the media, in order to move in tandem with a nation’s goals, has to
avoid revealing the truth.

An obvious instance is when the phenomenon of terrorism is tailored for the media. Instead
of simply bombing an obscure enemy village without injecting widespread fear, terrorists
nowadays are known to specially tailor their terrorist actions for media coverage, so as to
fulfill the more insidious objective of sparking off panic, pandemonium and distress on a
large scale. This can be seen way back during the 1972 Munich Olympics in which Palestinian
terrorists massacred Israeli athletes. The Olympic event was specially selected by the
terrorists as there would be global coverage, and their acts of brutality and slaughter would
be broadcast on an international scale, injecting distress across not only one country – but
globally. Other instances include the execution of American Nick Berg and the 1995
Oklahoma City bombings. Terrorists who captured Nick Berg purposefully filmed the gory
and grotesque execution process and circulated it on the Internet to spark off distress to all
who chanced upon the film, using the large scale influential power of the Internet to
publicise their terrorist activities. In the Oklahoma City bombings, the bomber Timothy
McVeigh picked his bombing destinations as he knew it would be a good spot for maximum
coverage. During such deliberate, depraved acts of using the media, and exploiting its
influence, the media should not succumb or fall prey to such schemes, and should hide some
of the truth of the matter, in order to oppose this manipulation of the media.

Moreover, such terrorist acts purposefully attempt to spark off pandemonium using the
mass media, and by reporting the full unadulterated and undiluted truth, the media would
be a complicit in these acts of trying to destabilize and threaten the public. Therefore, this is
a significant instance in which the complete truth is not expected of the media. In the
aforementioned Nick Berg execution, media moguls CNBC, CNN and ABC refused to air the
execution videos to avoid causing distress to the public. By not fulfilling the supposed talk of
reporting the absolute truth, these media stations saved America from further panic and
pandemonium, allowing a quicker recovery from the attacks, and helping to salvage the
remnants of American national security. Another good example of how the media should be
allowed to not reveal the whole truth is the recent London Tube bombings. Instead of airing
unedited and therefore completely truthful footage of the bomb-scene, the news stations
decided to air edited still footage, to not further upset the already distressed nation.
Therefore, it is pivotal to acknowledge that in such instances, the media should cover up the
truth, in a bid to maintain stability and for the welfare of society, and to also prevent itself
from getting exploited due to the influence it holds.

At times, to not report the full truth in the interest of national stability is what the media has
to do. When Jemaah Islamiah terrorists were arrested in Singapore, the media had to have
the discernment and perspicacity to dilute certain information so as not to ignite racial
tensions in Singapore’s unique multi-racial social fabric. Therefore, this is another instance in
which the absolute truth would not be the necessary truth, in order to protect and maintain
a country’s welfare.

Therefore, the media should always tell the truth, but at times, it is required of the media to
tell half-truths in order to converge with the primary concerns of a country’s security and
stability. Although backers of complete press freedom and seekers of pure, unadulterated
truth like non-governmental organization “Reporters Without Borders” might say that half-
truths are equivalent to partial lies, I believe that “partial lies” are at times what is truly
required instead. It is far too absolute to say that the mass media should “always” tell the
truth, as there are precarious situations in our world that make truth-telling an amorphous
affair. Roosevelt’s quote on the power of the journalist and it being used right should
probably apply to telling “partial lies” for the greater good as well.
How far is recycling the answer to the problem of waste?

Recycling is the process of converting waste into reusable material. With the rise in world
population and consumption, the problem of waste has worsened. In our attempt to curb
this problem, solutions such as recycling, using of landfills and incinerators, educational
campaigns and regulations have been widely adopted. In my opinion, recycling is certainly
one of the answers to the problem of waste. However, inherent problems such as the high
cost of recycling and advanced technology have made recycling economically unfeasible
especially for the less developed countries. Nevertheless, recycling as compared to other
ways to minimize the problem of waste is much more environmentally friendlier and is least
objectionable. As such, I feel that recycling must be adopted and used in tandem with other
measures such as educational campaigns and laws. These solutions would then be able to
complement as well as supplement the limitations of recycling, making the approach to the
problem of waste a more effective one.

Recycling can be a feasible answer to the problem of waste but it is mainly targeted at
developed countries that possess the necessary advanced technology and are able to afford
the high costs associated with recycling. Despite the advancement in technology, recycling
today is still an expensive tool as compared to other measures like land filling and
incineration. Therefore to less developed nations, recycling is simply economically
unfeasible. According to the Genuine Progress Index, a research group that has spent a
decade monitoring the recycling programmes in Nova Scotia, recycling cost the province
US$18 million a year more as compared to throwing the waste into landfills. Similarly in
California and New Jersey, local public utilities authorities have reported that recycling cost
the country over half a million dollars more in 1995. Hence to the less developed countries,
recycling is simply beyond their reach due to the population’s generally low average income,
preventing them from affording recycling programmes in their budgets. Even though
recycling may be a feasible answer to the problem of waste to the developed countries, this
is certainly not the case for the less developed countries. In this light, technology must
improve to reduce the cost of recycling before it can be embraced even by less developed
countries.

Recycling can be a viable solution to the problem of waste in the environmental sense
because, relative to other methods, it creates less pollution and is more sustainable over a
longer period of time. Over the years, the magnitude of environmental degradation has
increased, and with global warming, recycling, a method that is environmentally friendly
seems least objectionable as compared to other conventional forms of waste treatment. For
example, incineration releases huge amounts of carbon dioxide as well as other toxic gases
into the atmosphere, accelerating global warming and adversely affecting our health.
Similarly, land filling can result in water pollution and affects the ecology negatively.
Greenpeace, a world environmental research group, discovered that the major wells in the
Philippines contained a high level of metal content beyond the safe drinking limits set by the
World Health Organisation. This unfortunate pollution would not have occurred if not for the
landfills situated near the wells. The metals buried in the landfills managed to dissolve and
seep into the ground water, causing water pollution. In this light, it is rather clear that
recycling is a much better tool to solve the problem of waste. This is because studies have
shown that for every ton of paper recycled, 17 small trees are saved and air pollution is
greatly reduced. An example to illustrate the environmental-friendliness of recycling can be
seen in the success of recycling programmes in the United States. The country managed to
save 1.3 million tons of iron ore, 8.2 million trees and successfully reduced greenhouse gas
emissions by two million metric tons in 2004 due to the nationwide recycling programmes
that the country implemented. Therefore, in my opinion, recycling is certainly a good answer
to the problem of waste especially in today’s world, where environmental conservation is
increasingly embraced by most countries.

Recycling is certainly one of the viable answers to the problem of waste in countries with
limited land. Recycling as compared to landfills takes up less space and is therefore suitable
for countries with a small land area. A good example to illustrate the influence of physical
factors on the choice of measures to the problem of waste is Singapore. Singapore has a
limited land area but an escalating quantity of waste. There was a 2.09 million tonnes
increase in the amount of waste from 1970 to 2005. To make things worse, the lifespan of
the Pulau Semakau landfill of Singapore is expected to last till only 2030, and this is provided
that the present generation does not generate more waste per capita. Hence the country
implemented the National Recycling Programme in 2001 to minimize the amount of waste
disposed to the limited landfills, prolonging the lifespan of the landfills. By 2004, the rate of
participation by households in this nationwide programme has more than tripled to 51%.
Therefore from the example of Singapore, it is evident that recycling is indeed a feasible
answer to the problem of waste since it occupies less space as compared to conventional
measures like landfills. Hence recycling is certainly one of the solutions to the problem of
waste in developed countries that has limited land area.

However, although recycling is one of the least objectionable answers to the problem of
waste, it has to be used in tandem with campaigns and laws that tackle the root of the
problem – the excessive wastage of resources. The over-consuming societies of the
developed world will continue to waste more resources excessively if recycling is not
encouraged, made more convenient or appealing as an option. In Singapore for instance, the
National Environment Agency (NEA) organizes road shows and puts up posters to encourage
recycling. In addition, NEA together with the Singapore Environment Council implemented
‘Bring Your Own Bag Day’ to further strengthen their activities. An additional 10 cents is
charged on these days for every plastic bag used, and the money collected is used for
environmental projects. Similarly in China, the government has taken a step further to ban
the use of disposable plastic bags nationwide due to the massive problem of accumulated
unbiodegradable waste caused by plastic bags. In the UK, the British government has passed
a bill indicating that charges would be imposed on single-use carrier bags unless retailers
take action voluntarily to cut down on the ballooning pollution caused by the use of plastic
bags. These are just some examples to illustrate the idea that in order for recycling to be
effective, consumers have to be educated and informed on the consequences of excessive
wastage of resources and how they can play a role to minimize the problem of waste.
Furthermore, law and regulations should also be introduced and passed to prevent the
problem of waste from intensifying. Other complementary measures would be to make
using reusable bags and the recycling of materials more attractive, such as saving costs on
bags or even making recycling bins more accessible. Hence while I agree that recycling is one
effective answer to the problem of waste, it has to be used simultaneously with educational
campaigns and regulations as that would complement recycling and mitigate its limitations.

Recycling is certainly a good solution to the problem of waste. However, we must

acknowledge that due to the high costs and advanced technology needed for recycling,
developed countries are therefore in a better position to embrace recycling as compared to
far less developed countries. Although recycling is suitable for small countries with small
land area and is more environmentally friendly, it does not eliminate the underlying cause to
the problem of waste. Hence recycling should be implemented together with educational
campaigns and regulations for it to be most effective.
Should the world’s focus be on promoting renewable energy sources?

Renewable is defined as the ability to be renewed and is a source that is not

depleted by use. Over the past few decades, renewable sources of energy have been looked
into as an alternative source of energy. Many countries such as Portugal and countries in
Europe have further developed the field of renewable energies. According to statistics,
approximately 45% of the energy produced in Portugal is generated from renewable energy
sources. Examples of renewable energies are solar energy, wind energy and bio-fuel. In my
point of view, I strongly believe that renewable energy sources should be further promoted
for the benefit of mankind.

The current energy sources are running low and an alternative energy source has to
be developed. Fossil fuel such as coal has and still is the major energy source used in most
countries. However, the reserve of the fossil fuels have been depleting at an alarming rate
over the years. Hence, renewable energy sources would be able to replace fossil fuels in the
future if proper efforts are put into this project. According to statistics, renewable energy
can reach up to 65% of global electricity production with the right government programmes
and incentives. Once a renewable energy source plant is established, problems of shortage
of electrical energy supply can be eliminated.

Besides that, renewable energy sources are environmentally friendly. The current
energy supply is derived from burning fossil fuels and has caused many environmental
problems. This process has caused excessive amount of carbon dioxide and other harmful
gases to be emitted into the atmosphere causing global warming and air pollution. On the
other hand, production of energy from renewable energy sources does not cause such harm
to the environment. For example, a solar panel traps sunlight and converts it into electrical
energy that could be utilized. Hence, with the increase in dependence on renewable energy
sources, issues such as global warming could greatly be reduced. Ergo, the usage of reusable
energy sources is able to serve the society’s needs and preserve the environment.

Furthermore, renewable energy once established is more dependable than the

present energy sources. Generally, renewable energy plants are less prone to scale failure
because they are distributed and modular rather than a fossil fuel power plant. Hence, a
severe weather event in one location will not cut off power to an entire region. Even if some
of the equipments in a system are damaged, the rest can typically continue to operate,
especially for wind and solar energy sources. For example, Hurricane Sandy damaged fossil
fuel dominated electric generating systems in New York and left millions of people without
power. In contrast, renewable energy projects in Northeast weathered Hurricane Sandy with
minimal disruption. To conclude, usage of renewable energy is more reliable than a fossil
fuel powered plant.

From another point of view, people may argue that setting up a renewable energy
plant could be very expensive. The cost required to install and built systems to generate
renewable energy source could drain a lot of funds. For example, in 2011, subsidies for
renewable energies amounted to $US 8.8 billion and it is believed that until year 2025,
authorities will need to increase the subsidies to $US 48 trillion. Hence, with this large sum
of money, many other great things could be done. For instance, reducing the problem of
poverty or using the money to further develop in technologies that could bring more
benefits to mankind. As a result, many countries are reluctant to pour money into promoting
the usage of renewable energies. As a conclusion, promoting renewable energy sources is an
expensive project and many are not worth the price.

To sum it all up, renewable energy sources has its future in the world. It is clear that
there has been much improvement in this industry over the past few decades. Many house
have now begun to install solar panels as heaters and this is an encouragement to the
industry. Thus, I believe in years to come, the world would shift from the present
dependence on fossil fuel energy source to renewable energy sources for the better of
mankind.
Books are better than movies. Discuss

Books are written or printed work consisting of pages glued or sewn together along one side
and bound in covers while movies are a recording of moving images that tells a story and
that people watch on a screen or television. Books are better than movies not only because
we can have in-depth understanding of the characters and the plot, but also because books
provide different experience to different people. Additionally, reading boosts our
confidence, and thus improve our personality. On the contrary, movies consume less time,
are easier to understand and are suitable for wider range of audience.

Books give different experience to different readers while movies are similar to almost
everyone. In other words, books let you be the director. While reading a person is creating
his or her own movie and he decides how the characters speak, what the surrounding looks
like and so on. This process of imagining and interpreting as a reader is a creative process
which makes every reader have dissimilar experience with the same book. For example:
while reading “the alchemist” my “Santiago” is different from everyone else’s Santiago and I
enjoy every plot in my own way. One the other hand, while watching a movie, we watch
through the perspective of director which is alike for everyone.

Understanding characters and plots is comprehensive and complete while reading a book. As
books are more narrative we can understand what is going on in characters’ head and the
overall action of the character. For instance, if we compare the Harry Potter book and the
movie we can see how the books are more descriptive and expressive. While converting the
books into movies a huge chunk of story and other details are removed which makes the
plot shallower.

In addition to that, good book is a good teacher and a friend. Reading books can help us
improve our writing skills as well as enhancing our personalities. Everything we read fills up
our head with every bit of information which makes us better-equipped to tackle any
challenges in life. Moreover, you are exposed to newer words which will inevitably make
their way to your everyday vocabulary. Being articulate and expressive is of great help in any
profession. Also, researches have shown that reading books improve our memory, analytical
thinking skills, focus and concentration. Thus, books can be of enormous help, like a good
friend, to boosts our self-esteem.

Nevertheless, movies are for everyone. Even the illiterate people and children can
understand movies. Moreover, a movies requires less time for viewing, whereas a book of
same plot takes more time for reading. Similarly, watching a movie is more appealing to the
mass whereas reading text can be daunting to many. Likewise, stories are more accessible to
larger number of people in movie form than in book form. Furthermore, movies provide
social opportunities while books deprives us of such opportunities, sometimes even making
us anti-social.

To sum up, books are better than movies in most cases because reading provides unique
experience to every audience, understanding the plots becomes deeper with books, and
they also improve our vocabulary and thus the overall personality. Movies, although have
their own appeals, fail to provide as much benefits a book can provide to its audience.
Newspapers are more concerned with profits than with the truth. Discuss this statement.

Newspaper is a print media concerned with publishing news events and important
information. However, because newspapers are business organizations, majority of their
decisions are directed by profit motive. Sometimes, this motive is so great that they prefer
this motive to truth. Although unethical, majority of newspapers are driven by their concern
for profits rather than exposing the truth in many of their decisions regarding, headlines,
front page news, different sections and sub-sections and so on.

Main news is placed in the FrontPage as headlines. This is intended to grab the attention of
the buyers so that they purchase the paper to read the news. Although, it is difficult to say
which news is more important and which one is less important, the perceived important
news gets better place in the paper. Such news could have been placed in the inner pages,
with the same level of coverage and focus especially by using big headlines and photographs
if available. However, it does not happen since the motive is to attract the buyers to get
them buy the paper.

Publishing of controversial materials, rumours, and the like also supports the theory that
newspapers’ concern is to sell more only. The news regarding the personal life of stars is a
good example. For example, if there is rumour of romantic relationship between two stars,
especially during the time of shooting when the stars have to work together, such rumours
show up as news in the paper. It is in no way news when a common person starts a
relationship or decides to get a divorce. Shouldn't that be same with the stars as well?
Especially, what they do outside their professional life shouldn't be made news until that is
really news. Making such trivial matters of personal life news is not justifiable. The stars also
have the right to privacy and the right to lead their personal life as they want. Dragging such
matters into the news is an unethical act, but because such news or rumours sell well, the
papers make such events news.

Almost all the major national dailies, also known as the mainstream media, place high
priority on political news, mainly because many people find political news interesting. Most
of the time, the political news are the only ones to hit the front-page. This is true even if
there are other important news events related to discovery, development, research, and so
forth. However, such intellectual things are not entertained much by the audience. Political
news stories, mainly the debatable ones, make the newspapers more profits.

Similarly, there are separate sections for sports, entertainment and economy in majority of
the mainstream media. These sections generally have the large audience, especially the
former two. Many people, especially the youths, are fans of sports like football, cricket,
basketball, baseball, tennis, golf, etcetera and the popular film stars and celebrities. There is
also huge interest among the people in movies. Therefore, these sections get special focus in
the newspaper. They are indeed news, but not of the significance they are given in the
paper, especially by placing one of these two sections at the last page so that they can be
viewed quickly and even from outside. Economy section also has big audience of
businessmen, job holders, scholars, analyst, brokers and speculators, which is why it is given
considerable focus.
Although the above discussed sections are somewhat justifiable, especially the economy and
sports, there is one sub-section in many papers, which doesn't serve any purpose of news,
that is, horoscope. Many people believe in luck and fate, and therefore, have concerns about
their zodiac sign. Although, it can be said with certainty that such prediction are incorrect
most of the times, given that different paper have their own versions of contradictory
predictions, people nonetheless cannot let go knowing how their day is going to be like. In
many societies, horoscope and traditional astrology is given high importance. In such
societies, the majority of newspapers have a sub-section for horoscope.

On the contrary, most of the real news events get focus in the newspaper. Such news
reports illuminate the truth behind the events they are covered. However, such news also
gets attention from public which is a good thing. Probably, this is why some newspapers
employ their journalists to investigate the interesting events deeply and expose the truth
behind the matter. Other newspapers encourage their journalists to find the ultimate truth,
so that they can stay ahead of their rivals. Whatever, the reasons behind it, quite often,
newspapers are concerned with the truth. At times, some papers have shown more concern
over truth than profits also.

Depending upon the types of newspapers, daily, weekly and so forth, they include some
materials, solely for the purpose of marketing rather than illuminating the truth. Selling is
also important because without selling well, the papers cannot run their operation, and
cannot spread their true news to a larger audience. Probably, because of this reason, the
newspapers mostly seem to be concerned more with profits than with the truth.
Assess the qualities to be found in a good advertisement.

Even though, it is difficult to assess the qualities necessary in a good advertisement, some
qualities are better had than not. The advertisements differ based upon the media, such as
textual and graphical advertisements used in newspaper and hoarding boards, and the
audio/visual and animated advertisements used in radio, television and internet advertising.
Even though different, they tend to have some qualities in common. Persuasive, aesthetic,
interesting, and contemporary are some of the qualities that can be ascribed to the good
advertisements.

Persuasive means convincing. Any kind of advertisement should be persuasive, that is, it
should convince the audience to buy the product or take the action prompted by it. The
advertisement should convert the viewers into customers in commercial advertisements. In
informative advertisements, like social awareness and campaign, the advertisement should
induce people to take the action. To persuade customers is the main purpose of
advertisement. Therefore, to fulfill their very core objectives, the advertisements must be
persuasive.

Another quality, that almost all types of advertisement must have, is aesthetics. They should
be attractive and eye-catching so that they capture the immediate attention of the viewers
and arouse interest in them. The main purpose of advertisement is to persuade. However,
that purpose cannot be accomplished without drawing the attention of the audience
towards the advertisement. Generally good-looking models, famous film stars and
celebrities are featured in the advertisements. Therefore, aesthetics and beauty are the
essential qualities of a good advertisement.

While eye-catching advertisements become successful in drawing the attention of people for
the first time, they cannot retain audience for long, especially if the advertisement is not
interesting. Interesting advertisements also tend to lose charm or luster as they become old,
or with time. Even in such cases, the interesting ads help to retain good faith and positive
attitude of the viewers. Such ads touch the heart of people and win their will and mind. In
the advertisement of “Good Knight”, a mosquito repellent liquid, an old man turns up with a
photo and tells his old wife, “Look! What I have found! It’s our first anniversary photo!”
However, the wife turns around and replies, “But the bet was placed to find a mosquito! Did
you find that?” Such advertisements are very amusing and can achieve their objectives
easily. In the end, interesting advertisements are the winners.

The advertisements should also be contemporary. They should reflect the current trends.
The same ad cannot remain good forever. The ads also tend to lose their relevance with time
since nothing is timeless. So, freshness with the spice of contemporary trend is a vital quality
of a good advertisement.

The advertisement should be suitable according to the media. The best considered
newspaper advertisement may become sloppy and boring if built using similar content for
television. Similarly, television ads many not convert well to suit the print media. Moreover,
the internet is changing the advertisement paradigm. Cost per Click (CPC), Cost per
Thousand Impression (CPMs), Flashy, and so many different types are advertisements are
being made and used in the internet. Such advertisements may not be fit for other media,
but they are changing the way people advertise in the World Wide Web.

To sum up, the qualities of good advertisements are many, including the ones discussed
above. To make a successful advertisement, all these qualities are not necessary, however.
Many advertisements have become successful, even with the combinations of only a few
qualities. Whatever the combinations be, most of the good advertisements are based upon a
very good concept which is executed well.
Assess the view that advertisements promise far more than they deliver.

In the current competitive world, we can see competition in everything and nowhere is this
competition as fierce as in the field of business. To take edge in business, it is extremely
essential to make compelling advertisements. They are the tools for business to
communicate their product related information persuasively to the potential customers.
Such commercials allure customers to purchase or consume more of a particular brand of
product or service. Varieties of media like television, radio, cinema, magazine, newspapers,
and the internet are used to deliver the advertisements. Advertising generally brings about
positive response from the customers. However, the common question facing all advertisers
is “will they be able to deliver what they have promised for in their advertisement?”

Advertisement expenses constitute a significant amount of a company’s expenditure which

pays off well too. This has resulted in increasing the demand of products or services from the
customers. Such demand is based upon the customers’ trust in the various promises made in
the form of advertisement. Nowadays, television has become the most prevalent medium
for advertisement. The TV advertisements are intended to grab the attention of the
audience, keeping them focused on the TV show so that they hopefully watch the
advertisement while waiting for the next segment of the show.

The advertisements generally exaggerate the quality of products. The advertisement of

“Vatika Anti-Dandruff” shampoo shows that the dandruff is removed after using it once or
twice, but in real life it does not happen to majority of people. Even after using it for
numerous times, the dandruff problem does not go away. Similarly, in the advertisement of
“Complan” a boy hangs in the school bus and upon seeing this, his friend suggests him to
take Complan to increase his height. However, when taking Complan with milk, we don’t
know which factor is responsible for the increase in height, since milk itself is a good source
of Calcium, Proteins and Vitamins. So, the question is whether the product complain is
cheating upon customers with its fascinating advertisements to make them believe into it as
the height grower when in fact the milk is doing the magic. This is mostly the case for
children who don’t drink milk without using any kind of sweetener. Nowadays,
advertisement of a similar product “Horlicks” have started saying, “Our product boosts the
milk’s nutritional value” to justify that product, which makes it even more likely that such
products are optional.

Researches indicate that many adolescent girls and boys are unduly influenced by the
standard of beauty given in advertisement. For instance , “Fair and Teen” is a facial cream
specially made for adolescent girls. It is intended to make their skin clear and bright.

However, after using it many girls develop an allergy in their face and need to take medical
treatment. Also, such advertisements claim that their products can make people better-
looking. However, good look does not primarily depend upon the tone of our skin, but upon
the facial structure, skin clarity, and people’s perception. Similarly, hair gels which promise a
shiny and stylish hair to boys have significant side-effects such as hair fall and damage which
are never talked about in the advertisements.
However, some advertisements deliver the promises they make. Once I bought Sony
Ericsson cell phone, which started malfunctioning within a few days. Upon complaining
about it at the service center, the staffs tried to mend it but were unsuccessful. As a result,
they provided a brand new phone, as per their guarantee scheme, to ensure customer
satisfaction. Similarly, an advertisement about a tooth paste teaches people to brush their
teeth daily and remain healthy, rather than promising something which cannot be fulfilled. It
is an example of advertisement which doesn't promise too much just to influence the
customers’ purchasing decision.

We often become victim of the fake promises that the advertisements make. In fact, we
should never trust the advertisements which promise more that what is really possible to
deliver. In many cases, with our general knowledge and experience, we can easily distinguish
such advertisements from the ones which seem reasonable.
Reading is a lost art. Discuss.

Reading is an activity that entails more than the mere following of words on a page. Indeed,
reading is an art: it involves the mental processing of plot, characterisation and how these
aspects come together to convey the intentions of the author. It is also an appreciation of
the power of language employed by the author, for language should complement the
thematic concerns of the writer. Further, crucial to the definition of reading as an art, is that
it must be a pleasurable event, for literature is by its very nature intellectually and
emotionally stimulating. Yet, in today’s context, perhaps reading is a lost art; when poetry
and the novel were at the height of their popularity, the reading of literature was considered
the norm. This is reflected by the titles that certain periods have been bestowed with, such
as the 17th century’s “Age of Reason” where wit was expressed through literature. “What
oft was thought, but ne’er so well expressed”, said Alexander Pope, a poet of the era. Yet
today, other forms of entertainment have replaced reading, such as television. Also, reading
has ceased to be an art as defined by the above criteria in modern society. Through an
examination of these two points, one can see to what extent has reading become a “lost
art”.

The advent of television, firstly, has very much displaced reading as a past-time. Unlike
literature, television does not require its viewers to undergo any mental thought process
pertaining to plot or character. The events in a television programme are fully explained
either through the simplistic dialogue or through the visual display of their occurrence. This
not only negates the power of language, it strips away the thought process as well as the
imagination that one would require if one were reading a novel. Ironically, despite this
stupefying effect of television, this is the very reason why reading has become a lost art, for
television represents a substitute that does not demand the mentally taxing requirements
that reading literature needs. The poet W. H. Auden’s words, “poetry makes nothing
happen”, would thus also be relevant to us today, for no one reads poetry, or any other
form of literature, with sufficient art to make anything happen.

Also, even if there are readers around who manage to process what they read with great
success, more often than not, reading is a task performed without pleasure. This is due to
the fact that the reading of literature, which should be an enjoyable event, has become
academised into another sterile erudite subject termed “English”. This is the complaint of
the late poet Philip Larkin, for such a process undermined the beatific and sublime qualities
of literature which are meant to evoke both thought and emotions, not either one or the
other. The other side of the coin is likewise demonstrative of how reading has become a lost
art: those who actually read and enjoy reading are unable to fully appreciate the technical
aspects of the novel or poem that emphasise its content. The irony is that this is the reason
for the aforementioned academisation of reading literature, to facilitate for the readers who
cannot comprehend authorial technique. The paradox here is frustrating, for how can
reading regain its former status of appreciation, given these conflicting scenarios? This
points to the truth of the statement, that indeed “reading is a lost art”.

Besides, people today are caught up with other everyday concerns that they deem either
more practical or more relevant to their lives. Office workers toiling from nine to five are
more concerned with meeting deadlines and promotions rather than reading. The hectic
urgency of today demands devotion to work in order to survive in a society where “money
talks”. There is no time for reading. Also, the youth of today do not regard reading literature
as relevant to them as there are other modes of relaxation they can greater identify with,
such as music. Music has become the art in sync with today’s youth (no pun intended): they
revere Carlos Santana for his guitar skills, admire Rage Against The Machine for its political
statements and daring to proclaim them. Skill and statement, two fundamental qualities of
good writing, meant to be appreciated by a reader. Yet, this is an art lost to a people who
are either work-driven, or who have found a substitute art to replace reading.

One cannot, however, make a generalised statement that the reading world is completely
devoid of anybody who can understand and feel for a piece of prose or verse that he or she
comes across. The appreciative skills of these people manifest themselves in the many
awards that are given out to notable and outstanding authors and poets, a few of which
include the Whitbread and Pulitzer prizes. However, these people are often termed as
“literary” by the general public, a titling that suggests a certain elitism, a difference from the
rest of the general population around them. This demonstrates that these “literary” persons
are merely the remnant who holds on to the art of reading, an anomaly rather than the
standard norm. They are holding the fort against the onslaught of modern culture, clinging
on to an art essentially lost or dying to the rest of the world.

In the light of these facts, one can conclude that reading is a lost art, or at best, an art that is
being eroded away by a variety of factors. Reading has been replaced by television and
music, the prestige it once held in centuries past now almost non-existent. Maybe in the
future, reading might undergo a revival as an art, or it might remain at its present status, an
action that no longer requires thought. The latter prediction is more probable given the
present circumstances; still, one might hope that the lost art of reading would not remain
lost forever.