…Insert creative title here…

Gianpiero Gamaleri wrote an article named Media Ecology, Neil Postman’s Legacy. This article focuses on the mapping of media ecology through the perspective of Dennis G. Cali. Although the main points of Media Ecology given by Marshall McLuhan are addressed, Cali had a different research method for this theory. Cali focused his research on “studying the balances that can make this change useful for the development of future humanity” (Gamaleri). Professor Cali breaks up media ecology into seven points. These points break up Media Ecology into different perspectives, such as looking at Media Ecology as a metaphor or as a theory of groups. By breaking up this theory you are able to gain different perspectives of the overall picture.

Media Ecology is a theory of mass communication that studies the “different personal and social environments created by the use of different communication technologies.”(310). In order to look into Media Ecology, the concepts of Symbolic Environment, Media, and Medium are explained. Although evaluating the different media ecologies can be challenging but are not impossible. You first must understand how the environments are created and how they affect the individuals using the technologies, or “human inventions that enhance communication”(311). These advancements in technology helped McLuhan assign historical eras based on the technology they used and their dominant sense receptors. Furthermore, Technology that further advances our communication abilities is known as media.  McLuhan wanted us to understand that the medium, or “a specific type of media, such as a book” is often overlooked; “for the content of a medium, is like the juicy piece of meat carried by a burglar to distract the watchdog of the mind”(310). This metaphor is important to understand because it shows how we focus so much on the content and tend to disregard the medium.

Right off the bat, we can draw similarities between Cali’s research and McLuhan’s. Cali Broke up media ecology with different concentrations. For example, when looking at Media Ecology as a study of environments there are tangents from McLuhan’s intuition of each medium, which inevitably would change the bigger picture of things. But when looking at Media Ecology as a Metaphor, it contributes to preserving and fixing the image of the world and how the image has been damaged. Overall the main definition of Media Ecology stays constant, how it is applied varies based on the interpretive lense that the other is wearing. Through both readings, the need for human interaction is evident. In addition to the advancements that were made, humanity was always the cause of the switch in historical eras. Although some scholars will argue that these technologies played major rules in history it can be concluded that the invention itself played a minor role but society itself influence the change. By understanding both the Media and the Medium people developed different perspectives and have the opportunity to reveal fallacies. By focusing on the content itself rather than the way it is communicated, part of the message is lost forever because the content means nothing outside of the medium or the way that the original message is delivered. This is seen in today’s society quite often. Living in the Digital age, we text and community though messages sent through technology. Yes, this is beneficial but it is easy t miss understand an individual because there are no emotions, nonverbals, or special delivery that can help shape the content. At the end of the day, “the content or message of any particular medium has about as much importance as the stenciling on the casing of an atomic bomb.”

Media Ecology, Neil Postman’s legacy

In the text, A First Look at Communication Theory, written by Em Griffin looks at the different theories and different approaches to building a theory. In chapter 5, the theory of self, more importantly, the “Looking-glass self” was addressed. Essentially this theory explains how we act based upon how others think about us. In more general terms, we judge ourselves based upon what we think others think about us. Sometimes these predictions are true and others can lead us down a path of lies. Although I have only been on this earth for Twenty two years, I have learned a good amount, but more importantly, I have reflected on the past chapters in my life to see what I have done and how I can improve myself. One of the most awkward times in anyone’s life is middle school. For me, Middle school was attempting to look cool for other people. A major part of this was physical but a lot was mental. I had an image of cool based on what my friends deemed were cool and I tried to follow it. I wore hightop Nikes and T-shirts that were two sizes too big because I thought that my friends thought it made me cool. My assumption of what others thought about me changed how I acted and communicated with others on a daily basis. As a direct result, I was focused on the me and disregarded the I factor in my own story.

The term Looking-glass self is defined as “the mental self-image that results from taking the role of the other.”(57) In this context, the other just means the other people around you. The looking-glass self has three steps, the first is how you appear to others, the second is what others think of you, and lastly how we tend to revise how we think about ourselves. This theory brings up thoughts about the self. The self is divided up into two categories; the I and the Me. The I is “the subjective self [or] the spontaneous, driving force that fosters all that its novel.”(57) In plain English the I is how you act without any pressures. It is just you being unpredictable and acting out. The Me is defined as ” the objective self… the image of self seem in the looking glass of other people reactions,” or the image that its seen when you take on the role of the other (57).

The Looking-glass self is an important theory to understand when attempting to establish yourself into a leadership role. With so much going on and so many factors influencing one another, it is crucial the right message gets across and you are real and open with the people you are leading. The looking glass self is the image that one assigns him/herself based on what they think others think about them. Therefore, if you are super harsh on someone who is working for you, but you are harsh because you see their potential and want to help them reach it, they might think you are harsh cause you don’t like them. Another way they could decipher this is you are harsh because they are not good at their job, which will inevitably lead them to hate coming into work and eventually moving onto the next opportunity. The I is difficult to find because when you are looking for it is disappears. The I is the spontaneous self that has no filter, nothing in the way of you just being you. I believe that the ‘Me’ is more important to understand when leading than the I. The I is great to understand but the ‘me’ is going to help you influence and understand people on a deeper level. When you are leading it is important to understand how the other sees you and how they think of you. By understanding the me, you can see yourself and understand why people act a certain way when addressing you.

In the text, A First Look at Communication Theory, written by Em Griffin capitalized on the different approaches to analyzing data. Essentially, in the second chapter, Griffin breaks down a commercial in two separate ways and addresses the situation how depending on which interpretive lenses you are wearing depends on the meaning of the commercial as a whole. With the two different ways to approach the topic, there are a number of outcomes. One deals with numbers, only one truth, and is very logical, while the other is more based on theory and assigning meaning to communicative texts. Both will lead to you the answer you are looking for. But what answer are you looking for? Right now the answer that I have been searching for is how to be a leader and not a boss. As seen, the boss delegates and tells people how things should be done regardless of they have done it before. A leader steps in front of the pack and works alongside their followers and makes sure the job gets done effectively and up to expectations. If you act more as a boss and tell people what to do they might listen, but their perception is going to be clouded. On the other side of the spectrum, if you lead by example and live your life in the front of the pack the vision is going to be clear. And these people are going to follow you to the ends of the earth.

While Griffin was explaining the objective approach or the assumption that there is only a singular truth that is based on a cause-and-effect basis, Griffin acknowledges that Swartz had a good perspective regarding how to send a persuasive message. The best way to influence and persuade people is to “evoke past experiences that create resonance between the message content and the person’s thoughts or feelings.”(14) This is a lot of big words that can be broken down into one simple sentence, memories of personal experiences persuade other individuals more than any argument could. Once we consider the most effective way to influence others the next best step is to see what others see, or walk a mile in their own shoes so we know we are not asking too much of them. Humanistic scholars study this or “what it’s like to be another person in a specific time or place.”(15) Lastly, when attempting to lead individuals it is important to understand where you stand on the age of question of choice. This question has remained unanswered since the begging of intellectual humans, the question of free will or heredity. Either you believe “Pleasure stamps in, pain stamps out” or “I am the master of my fate; I am the captain of my soul.” (17)

Finally, our journey through life is full of first experiences then later memories. Some scholars have concluded that immortality can actually be achieved through these memories. I believe Schartz was on the right track when he was talking about persuading people is easier when you involve their past emotions. At the end of the day, I see how my mom is moved y anything that resembles growth and leaving because to her she only thinks of her little boys growing up and leaving for college. Furthermore, this same feeling is crucial when leading individuals because you need to figure out what inspires them to be better and what motivates them to get out of bed every morning and grind. For some, money is the biggest motivator, and others the goal of one day reaching happiness. But as a leader, I believe it is your responsibility to understand and work with the situation you are given so your followers can achieve everything they want to achieve in life. After you understand what motivated people you need to decide what if the appropriate amount of work to expect them to do. After all one individual can only do so much work, so you need to step into their own shoes so you can understand how much they can manage without affecting the quality. The final step is to understand how choice works. Scholars have concluded that people tend to lean to the free choice and free will side of the spectrum. This makes it crucial to make them happy as their leader. If you do not follow the steps above they will not be happy and leave you for someone who is going to get them to where they want to be going.

 

Growing up with two brothers and a big family, I was taught some valuable lessons as a child. Being the young and ignorant child that I was, I already knew everything and no one else could teach me anything that I didn’t already know. But just as all of the other young children who once believed the same thing, I was proven wrong. My family taught me a lot about being a team player and always having other people’s interests in your mind when you are making decisions. This is important not only in a functional and healthy family but also in the real world. This idea of consideration for others eventually pushed me to the idea of leadership. Having other’s interests in mind when making decisions is one half of the battle, but making decisions and influencing the people who follow you is a much more admirable way to live. Around age 14, my Nonno “grandfather”, was in no shortage of wise words to say. In one of our conversations, he looks at me and said, “Meglio vivere un giorna da leone, che cueto anni da pecora.” This line has stuck with me my entire life and I refuse to forget it. One reason is that my Nonno was a huge influence on my life growing up, and the other reason is that it translates into “Its better to live one day as a lion, than a few years as a sheep.” 

Essentially, I don’t want to literally live like a lion for a day, but figuratively the lion represents courage, justice, strength, and even Leadership. Going back to when I was young, this idea of leadership just meant people would listen to you and follow you but know I understand that leadership means much more than just having a crew around you. I want to learn more about leadership in the upcoming chapters because it is crucial to leading and living a happy and successful life. Some scholars claim that leadership is born, while others believe great leaders are created, I believe that it is a combination of both. One must be born with the mentality to be a better person tomorrow than they were today, and have a constant drive. In my future career, leadership is an attribute everyone looks for, and when I learn everything I can about leadership and I can teach others how to lead effectively, then I have truly fulfilled my goal as a leader.

Over the minister of Summer 2020, the most irregular summer of the majority of the population lives, I studied leadership with Dr. Blair Browning. I went into the class with a very basic understanding of leadership. Being eager to learn how I can improve myself I dove into the class and soaked up every drop of knowledge I could. But, in the grand scheme of things, that was a four-week course, and when compared to our lifetime, it was only a fraction and I still have a lot to learn. I am eager to learn about leadership because it is something that you can not be an expert at, you are good or bad, knowledgeable, or not. I want to understand it on a deeper level so I can be the leader I was destined to be.

Just as quickly as this semester came, it has now passed. Over the time I have spent slaving over textbooks, procrastinating on assignments, and just making the deadline for the biggest assignment of the semester I have learned and have grown from this experience. At the beginning of the semester, I was very optimistic about what the semester is going to hold, I was reaching for the sky. But unlike usual I did not fall short of my goals and my expectations, I persevered and came through. I reached all of my goals as of right now. Once final grades come in then I can breathe and actually look back and see if I made all of them come true. So far my goal of getting a 3.5 GPA is still a possibility, I feel comfortable where I am standing going into finals, but then again that could change. My next goal was to get an internship in sales. Because of the current pandemic, I don’t know if that will happen. I have applied for many internships but the majority of them have been canceled. I have two possibilities remaining and I am keeping my fingers crossed. My last goal was to be a better person today than I was yesterday and I feel like I have done this.

My Goals were not impossible but they did require a lot of work. For example, I have never been a smart student, I have always had to work twice as hard just to pass the class but for some reason, everything finally clicked this semester. I buckled down and got my grades up and learned more about myself as well as my schooling. It required long hours of reading and writing my notes. I figured out that if I go to class, take good notes, and rewrite the notes while going through the chapter after class helped me study and be more prepared. For my internship I applied to every position I could find, I did not care whether I was not the perfect fit for the description, I still applied because the worst they can say is no. Therefore I got a lot of opportunities to interview, but sadly, the majority of my internship programs were canceled. I am now hoping one of the two remaining internships work out so I can gain real-world knowledge. Lastly, I wanted to be a better person today than I was the day before. This one was actually the most inspirational one. This is a line my grandfather used to preach to my family about but I never understood it until I got to where I am today. I have been helping out people who need help, and I have been more open to people. I have donated my time as well as my knowledge to help others who need it most.

Paragraph 3: How will these goals help you after our course concludes?  This can apply to Spring 2020 or goals that are farther into your future plans (i.e. future internship, job, or career path).

The goal hat I believe will help me the most was being a better person today than I was the day before. This will help me in every aspect of my life. I will be more approachable and more likable which in turn will open up more opportunities for me. This will also help me become a better person overall. My GPA goal was set because it was something I have never done before. It was something I knew was possible just never had the drive to get it done. Lastly, my internship will provide an experience that I need for the rest of my life. This course helped me understand the importance of appearance whether physical or in words and how just the smallest change in your appearance will make the difference. The knowledge I have learned from this course it will help me pursue my sales career.

In today’s society, people are busy and don’t have as much time as they need to do their own research on important current events. Because they can not read every article on what is happening in the political spectrum, the buying power of the dollar, and foreign relations they rely on media outlets to explain the importance of these issues. The media has gained influence by getting the information they deem important to the viewers. Some people in the world that are like me, don’t have time to do their research so the majority of the news they hear about is what the media tells them. This can be beneficial but also can leave the public blind to the actual important topics. In today’s politics, the term Fake News has been through around more than a ball in an elementary schoolyard. But I am not going to refer to it as Fake News, but instead opinionated news because the people who are writing the information typically have a bias. And this bias feeds the emotions of the public who can make rash decisions on topics they do not completely understand. For example, the free college tuition is a big one that a lot of my peers enjoy hearing about and sounds like a great idea, but where is the money going to come from. The answer is in your taxes, so instead of paying for your own college, you will be paying for everyones with your increase in taxes.

As a result of our busy lives and lack of brainpower, we all have a personal agenda. This personal agenda is essentially “a small set of issues that’s most important to you at the moment”(368). The media understand that we have a lack of attention so they do their best to keep the important topics in the headlines so you click and read on while the ‘lesser important’ topics are shoved in the corner. Because of this, the media agenda is decided based on the “importance that the news media assigns to issues at a given moment.”(369). As current events change so does the media coverage to best adapt to the changing tides. But the most important topic is Agenda-setting. This is a widely adopted hypothesis that “over time, the media shapes the public agenda… [through] telling us which issues to think about…which aspects of those issues are most important… [and] how different issues are connected to each other”(369). 

Being educated in politics and current events has never been more important than in today’s day and age. We are always making decisions that affect the entire world on a daily basis and yet it is controlled through the media. When the media tells you what issues to think about this is actually a beneficial side of media. They will do their best, to tell the truth about the topic as a whole. For instance, is a new bill is introduced into congress that affects the majority they will tell you the bill and what it does, but on some occasions, they do not mention the entirety of the bill. They are going to tell you all of the benefits, but they can also leave out some of the key drawbacks of the bill. One bog topic is a living minimum wage, which sounds like a good idea, but what the majority of media outlets leave out is this is how inflation is caused. As well as the possibility of losing a lot of jobs because the employers are now looking for more qualified workers or even replacing them with automated machines. This natural bias in media leaves the public feeling educated but in reality not truly understanding the depths of the topic. The media 

Marshall McLuhan was a philosopher who dedicated a lot of his time to study Media Ecology. His theories made me recognize that some of society’s failures are due to technological advancements. Today, if you go anywhere you ill see people buried on their phones. If you visit a college campus you are bound to see multiple people on their phones completely oblivious to what is going on around them. Believe it or not, the older generation is just as bad as the younger generation. Although advancements in technologies are what keep our society moving forward, they can also be the very thing holding us back. People tend to see the entire world through their one eye, the eye of the phone and do not value in-person communication or even do their own research on important topics. They get all of their information from social media and influencers.

Media ecology is “the study of different personal and social environments created by the use of different communication technologies”(311). Although evaluating the different media ecologies can be challenging but are not impossible. You first must understand how the environments are created and how they affect the individuals using the technologies. Mr. McLuhan loved to use metaphors when he was describing the influence of media and how they can be misleading he claimed that ” For the ‘content’ of a medium is like the juicy piece of meat carried by a burglar to distract the watchdog of the mind”(310). This is important to understand because “we focus on content and disregard the medium”(310). But when it comes down to understanding the content, it has “as much importance as the stenciling on the casing of an atomic bomb”(310).

To correctly understand Media Ecology and how technology affects society as a whole we must understand how it is used. Media is essentially anything that man has invented that aids in the speed, range, and communication process. A medium is any kind of media but it is broken down into one specific channel, such as a book or website. This is important because it provides different perspectives and also can reveal fallacies. When studying different people and the environment they interact via technology certain traits become evident. If you focus on today’s day and age, some individuals have concluded that we have lost our interpersonal abilities while others say that technology has improved it. Yes, some have lost the ability to hold an educated conversation, but we have gained the ability to communicate over long distances and even across the world thanks to technology. By focusing on the content itself rather than the way it is communicated, part of the message is lost because the content means nothing outside of the medium or the way it is delivered. In essence, the medium is just as important if not more important than the content itself. If the content has remained constant but the medium has changed over time you know have a completely different subject even though it seems similar. The content is just the icing that makes the cake (the medium) look pretty.

Before reading through Burke’s “The Rhetoric of Hitler’s “Battle” I never knew the dramatic parallels between Hitler’s rule over Germany and the Empires rule in Star Wars after the third episode. First and foremost they both are called stormtroopers. Then above them are the Imperial officers uniform that resembles German officers uniforms with tight-fitting shirts, big belt buckles, and lapel symbols to classify rank and awards. Next, we can look at the leadership, Senator Palpatine assumes the rule of chancellor before he becomes emperor just like like Hitler’s role as chancellor before he became a dictator. There is a striking similarity to ‘Order 66’, when the stormtroopers eliminate the Jedi, and the Holocaust when Nazis eliminated the non-germans. And lastly, both Hitler and Chancellor Palpatine used Projection Devices to get people on their side. Palpatine used the story of the Sith Lord who could save everyone’s life but his own to persuade Anakin to join the dark side, and Hitler used readings and teaching from the old testament to persuade people to join him.

In a translation of Hitler’s works, Hitler Claims “Preventing the division of the attention of a people, and always in concentrating it on a single enemy. The more uniformly the fighting of a people is put into action.”(193). For knowing what Hitler has did in his lifetime forces me to take all this reading with a grain of salt.  He then continues to say “It is part of the genius of a great leader to make adversaries of different fields appear as always belonging to one category only, because to weak and unstable characters the knowledge …[of] enemies will lead only too easily to incipient doubts.”(193). By assigning inhuman characteristics can make justifying his actions easier when he claims “attitude of primitive races towards their rules recalls a mechanism which is universally present in mental disturbances and openly revealed in… persecution”(214).

By all means, I am not agreeing with Hitler’s beliefs nor do I support him or his beliefs in any way shape or form, but I want to acknowledge his persuasive abilities. He was able to rise to power and gain support from his countryman based on his misconceptions and hard feelings after World War I. But once I looked deeper into his persuasive techniques it is very similar to Darth Vader’s. They both gained support by the use of force and fear inflicted on others. By inflicting this fear they were able to control their so-called “supporters”. The first quote I picked because it was interesting. By preventing people from deciding their attention and focusing it all on a single enemy was the best way for Hitler to gain his power. In essence, he unified the people to all belief one common goal, then strived to accomplish this goal. This is a lot like some problem-solving activities done in schools where a group of people works together for a common goal. Another persuasive tactic he uses is almost like an illusion were Hitler wants people to believe that the leaders are all from one group of people with similar backgrounds. The Empire does this by unifying its people with false hopes through empty promises of prosperity and power. Lastly, he downgrades his enemies to promote animal-like qualities amongst them, making them an easier target. By the association of “primitive races” makes them automatically seem as if they are not human and are below you based on their race.

Cialdini considers Liking to be one of his weapons of influence, at first I was puzzled but upon further thinking I understood how who we like and hang around us influence us the most. I have fallen victim to this persuasion technique when I was a young child. In elementary school, I would hang out with one of my friends who I considered to be cool. He was athletic, smart, and just overall a cool guy. With my young mind not knowing how to react, I started to do things the same way. It got to the point where I started to like the color pink solely because a couple of my friends did. I would go out of my way and buy pink shirts and color various crafts with pink and black markers because I thought it made me ‘cooler’. Little did I know I fell for one of the easiest ways to persuade someone. This form of persuasion was also prevalent in my high school, but not for being cool because everyone was doing it. This was Cutco Kitchen knives. They operated in a way that helped out the students by paying the students minimum wage, but also sucked them in by having their friends recommend you for certain positions. These pressures from friends are great for business but can also ruin friendships.

A woman who attended multiple Tupperware parties said it best when she stated, she had “enough containers… and could buy them cheaper at the store… But when a friend calls up, I feel like I have to go. And when I get there, I feel like I have to buy something” (168). By using our friends to suck us into a sale we automatically feel an obligation to help out our friend. In addition, Joe Girard found a way to sell five cars a day just by having people like him. Solely by “finding a salesman they like, plus the price; put them both together, and you get a deal” (170). This is just one other reason how liking the person can translate into persuasion. Lastly, it amazed me how Physical attractiveness, similarity, and compliments can persuade an individual into liking you. People tend to associate physical attraction with “Talent, kindness, honesty, and intelligence… and these assumptions that good looking equals good” (171).

In essence, by understanding who someone likes and who they are friends with can improve your chance of persuading them. For some, just mentioning a friend’s name can be enough to catch their interest and persuade them to buy what you are selling. For almost every situation, whether it is peer pressure, persuasion, or helping our a friend is as always hard to say no to those closest to you. In the example of Tupperware parties, people would attend because they like that friend and want to support them. This is also evident in pyramid schemes. If one of your friends falls into this trap, it is hard for them to get out and break even, and can also ruin a lot of friendships. How some of these work is they rely on your network of friends to sell goods. But what tends to happen if the friends you use to rely on break apart because whenever you get together with them they are preaching about this wonderful product they have. I can understand how this can be useful, but do the ends really justify the means? Mr. Girard had a unique system when selling cars. He believed and proved that people are more willing to work with people they like. Of course, this makes sense but how can you go about making an individual like you? Cialdini showed how society assigns traits of an individual who is physically attractive. People who are physically attractive can make better sales and can get out of situations unattractive people would not be able to. Along the same line, similarities between the seller and the buyer can promote good business. Furthermore, a person, no matter their intentions, always believe they are the best at everything. If you look at teachers, yes they are molding the minds of our young, but there is one sure way to pass all of your classes. A teacher is always the smartest in the room and if you regurgitate what they say they will believe you are a genius. This form of similarity creates a tie between the two individuals because we like people who are similar to us. Lastly, Humans are suckers for flattery and will make decisions based on this. Liking can promote business for a little but it is inevitable that their network of friends will slowly decline based on how often you fall upon them to buy your products.

“The Road to Auschwitz Wasn’t Paved With Indifference” is a moving article featuring people’s inability to walk on their own path and fall into social pressures. With the internet taking over the world, we have all seen a video of that one tired teenager in his class who happens to fall asleep during the lecture. Once the teacher notices he very quietly asks the other students to start clapping their hands. Once they all start clapping the sleeping student wakes up and starts clapping their hands. This is a great example of social proof. When your preception is everyone is doing it, that perception soon becomes your reality. I have fallen victim to this when I was looking for a good dessert place after a good dinner. I was walking around downtown San Francisco and saw a line that was out the door. Naturally, I waited because I thought it would be amazing. Little did I know that they just had slow service and were not the best dessert place.

When looking at different instances of social proofs influencing society, there is always an intense pressure to conform to society. Ms. Weinberg (Author of the article, and professor in philosophy) Claimed that “The road to Auschwitz was built by hate but it wasn’t paved with indifference. It was paved with collaboration” (1). Because Poland was highly anti-Semitic, there was greater collaboration between the people, the police and the enforces, leading to more people doing it. According to Raul Hilberg and Hannah Arendt, ” The correlation between local enthusiasm and the genocidal murder rate of the Holocaust is strong and stark” (1). Unlike in Italy and Bulgaria, which had lower amounts of anti-Semitics, “the populations didn’t cooperate with the murder of Jews”(1). Although there is a dramatic difference, this can be seen in today’s school children. We try to teach them the “Upstander ideology directs us to “stand up” to bullies and hate” but this is hard because not a lot of people are doing it. (2)

Lastly, this Idea of doing it because everyone else is doing it is not always the best angle to look at things but it can be hard to turn your back on. Since a young child, whenever I would get into trouble and would blame one of my friends my mother would say “If so and so jumped off a bridge would you follow?” And To this day I know I should say no but I understand why I would say yes. Given the dramatic difference in circumstances, I can understand why some good people broke due to the social pressures during the holocaust and fearing for their lives. Through collaboration, the word was spread about what was happening and the more evil minds that talked the more it seemed that everyone was doing it, which only made the social proof power stronger. This collaboration paved the way into a more ‘accepting’ society willing to do anything to fit in and avoid sure destruction. When looking at the individual countries, the tie between the number of Anti-semitic believers and the number of murders are directly correlated. The fewer believers the less it was talked about. The less it was talked about the less it seemed people were into it which lead to lighter social pressures from society resulting in fewer murders. This power of influence is also seen in less brutal events observed in the school playground. We all understand that hate and bullying is not good amongst society, and schools have lessons on how to react and what to do. I’m not going to say the schools are wasting their time because awareness is very important, but you can not teach someone to be a hero. The only way you can teach someone to be a hero is if everyone is doing it.