The government would control what the newspaper prints, what social media shows and what television news reports, as the government gains control of these three media channels, they gain control over what we can see and can’t see. E.g. if a bad event is happening inside the country that the government doesn’t want its people to find out about then the government would forbid news channels and sites from reporting on it or showing it on their channels.
Around true world the amount of control the government has on the media and right of free speech differs; however, personally I believe that with the invention of the smart phone with a camera and social media, the government may face more control issues now than before because people can record anything and post it on social media and it could go viral within 24 hours or even 2 hours. Therefore, for example if the US government didn’t want people knowing about the California wildfires then they would try their best to limit the entrance of news channel representatives, newspaper reporters, etc.; however the government might not be able to stop a civilian in California, close to the wildfires, from taking videos of the wildfires and posting them on social media for everyone to see and share around therefore spreading the word that the government was trying to hide. Those videos could go viral and the US government would have failed from containing the news of the wildfires because someone posted a video of the wildfires, using his/her phone, on social media.
Answer:
The reason why the Declaration of Independence is so persuasive is that Jefferson uses deductive arguments, which includes examples of Britain’s wrong doings, which gives the person reading the document a chance to see exactly why they are breaking from Great Britain. One of the strongest deductive arguments in the declaration is, “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men”. This means that any legitimate government is created to protect peoples’ rights such as, “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness”. Throughout the declaration Jefferson shows how Great Britain is not protecting their rights, but interfering with them. For example, he states how the king keeps sending over soldiers and expects the people to house and feed them. How would you feel if the government just placed a stranger in your home and told you he could eat your hard-earned food? These soldiers were also allowed to disobey the laws in the colonies and not be punished for them. This is not what you call protecting peoples’ rights; it is more like invading them. Another very strong deductive argument in this document is, “deriving their just power from the consent of the governed”. This means any power or authority that a government has is given to them by the consent of the people, but this right like many others was abused too. For instants, Jefferson wrote that they have “Petitioned for redress” repeatedly, meaning they sent many petitions to the king about many unfair problems in the colonies, wanting to come to some type of agreement. Nevertheless, the king does not answer them but continues to hurt them. This shows that the king did not care about the peoples’ consent; therefore, he is not implicating a just government and they have the right to break free from Great Britain.
Answer:
As for all financial crises, a number of factors explain the GFC and its severity and care in its lending decisions because they did not expect to bear any losses consisting of thousands of individual mortgage loans of varying quality. The Global Financial Crisis (GFC) refers to the period of extreme stress in global terms.
Explanation:
