Obama's speech on Syria

President Obama's speech in reaction to global crisis came when the nation was so desperately needing it. The country has been divided about the issue of involvement in Syria, and Obama's press conference was to help unify and involve the public in the circumstances the nation is currently facing. President Obama stated that, "When dictators commit atrocities, they depend upon the world to look the other way until those horrifying pictures fade from memory.  But these things happened.  The facts cannot be denied. The question now is what the United States of America, and the international community, is prepared to do about it.  Because what happened to those people -- to those children -- is not only a violation of international law, it’s also a danger to our security." The President decided that for the time being, the nation will hold off on involvement. 
Sean Hannity believes that the President is doing nothing more than trying to pull the wool over the country's eyes. He thinks that the speech was the President spinning his wheels and speaking about nothing. Hannity does not believe the President is making any real decision, but no matter what decision the President makes, Hannity is likely to disagree with. The public seems to have not shifted on the issue of Syria whatsoever. It seems as though the country is completely divided, and the President's speech appeared to have little to no affect on the country as a whole. 

Horace Greeley

Horace Greeley is known as the “eccentric editor” because of his work on the New York Tribune. He was famous for dressing and acting unconventionally, and he was known to defend his ideals despite their unpopularity. Greeley served as editor for the weekly New-Yorker and he opened his own printing shop. His reform ideas and dedication to journalism make him a trailblazer in journalism. He used his paper as a political platform and to help him spread his ideas to the lower classes. Greeley felt responsibility for spurring on the Civil War because of a published headline encouraging the troops to move on to Richmond.

His contribution to the journalism field included making print news common among all people. During his time as an editor and owner of various publications in New York, he increased circulation of his daily paper to 65,000 and the Weekly Tribune to 250,000. He served on Congress and tried to continue political work. He lacked much education, and mostly taught himself, but he became the most influential editor of his time period. His desire to use his paper to spread his reformative ideas set the stage for a future of yellow journalism. Magazines and other published opinions were largely influenced by Greeley’s desire to print his opinions despite their obvious unpopularity.

Greeley’s work as an editor and journalist changed how the public perceived journalism, and his work is inspirational in his desire to spread his opinions and make journalism more popular. Circulation of his paper was huge. Greeley fought for his opinions despite how everyone else perceived them. He was inspirational in his hard work and dedication to his field. His legacy as the most famous editor lives on, as well as his erraticism and political agenda that criticized and changed the course of history during the civil war. 

Obama's speech on Syria

On September 10, President Barack Obama delivered a speech to the American public regarding the situation in Syria. He made many points, some compelling and noteworthy and some recycled and useless. One key point resonated with many Americans. President Obama made the issue feel like a situation that affects American security by saying, “If we fail to act, the Assad regime will see no reason to stop using chemical weapons. As the ban against these weapons erodes, other tyrants will have no reason to think twice about acquiring poison gas[es] and using them.” In stating this, Obama attempted to appeal to the left by differentiating this attack from the wars of Iraq and Afghanistan by showing a lack of action can cause harm to many other innocent nations and people.

Furthering elaborating on the aforementioned point, Obama continued, “Over time our troops would again face the prospect of chemical warfare on the battlefield, and it could be easier for terrorist organizations to obtain these weapons and use them to attack civilians.” By arguing that inaction could eventually harm our own troops and decrease the amount of safety we feel in our own nation, Obama made the issue one of homeland security and pro-military. These issues would help sway the political right to join in Obama’s cause.

Overall, the speech received mixed responses from many news sources.  In a Fox News article entitled, “My fellow members of Congress, let’s vote on a Syria strike and bring Obama back from Never Never Land”, Rep. Ted Poe argued that Obama’s arguments fell flat. He wrote, “An American strike will not guarantee that Assad will not use chemical weapons again. Chances are he did not empty out his chest the first time. What will we do if he goes for round two, strike again? Some reports say that he has chemical weapons at 50 different sites.” Still, many liberal leaning journalists supported the speech. In his article, “Ultimate Reason to Support Resolution Authorizing Use of Military Force to Stop Chemical Weapons in Syria: It's Working”, Robert Creamer argued that Obama’s decided course of action was the correct one. Creamer agrees with Obama, saying, “If the use of chemical weapons and other weapons of mass destruction can occur with impunity any where on our small planet, they will be used more and more frequently in military conflicts. And if they are, they pose a massive danger for human beings everywhere.”

The message effect I decided to focus on is the Attitudinal Effect. Those who already opposed president Obama were not swayed by his speech as “it is much easier to get people to form new opinions than to get them to change existing ones.” Thus, conservatives like Rep. Ted Poe were unmoved by Obama’s oration, whereas Robert Creamer, a liberal, found himself in agreement. 

Elias Boudinot

Elias Boudinot was born in 1804 in northwest Georgia. Boudinot was a formally educated Cherokee Indian who became the editor of the Cherokee Phoenix, the first Native American newspaper in 1828. At age 24, Boudinot's position as editor assured him a spot in Cherokee history as the voice of the Cherokee people to the European Americans. The Cherokee Phoenix was published in English and in the Cherokee language. However, most of the content was published in English to prove to the European Americans that they could sustain an admirable civilization. The newspaper also established Native Americans as insiders as oppose to outsiders of the news world.  

Boudinot thought that the best outcome for the Cherokee was to secure their rights through treaty before they were forced out. He and other treaty supporters signed the Treaty of New Echota despite a majority of the tribe's disapproval. The treaty served as a legal basis for the Native American's removal known as the Trail of Tears in 1835 as the tribe was forced to cede most of its lands in the Southeast, and move to the West.

After moving West, Boudinot was working with an old friend, Rev. Worcestor on translating the bible into Cherokee when he was assassinated by a group of Cherokee men. Three years prior, Boudinot predicted the legacy of his people by saying,  "The time will come ... when the few remnants of our once happy and improving Nation will be viewed by posterity with curious and gazing interest as relics of a brave and noble race... perhaps, only here and there a solitary being, walking, 'as a ghost over the ashes of his fathers,' to remind a stranger that such a race once existed."

Elias Boudinot is seen a journalistic hero to the Cherokee people, yet was killed by his own tribe because of his realistic notion of trying to negotiate with those who sought their removal. 

Outside sources - http://www.aboutnorthgeorgia.com/ang/Elias_Boudinot 

http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/history-archaeology/elias-boudinot-ca-1804-1839 

Philip Freneau

While the war with Britain slowly came to a close, a new war staring two National newspapers was just beginning. Philip Morin Freneau, the “poet of the American Revolution,” was an incredible person to read about. A poet, soldier, and above all, The Voice of The People during a confusing time in political news. 

Born in 1752 in New Jersey, Freneau was raised around literature, art, and attended only the best schools. While at college he befriended a key player in the rest of his life, James Madison. Years later, after writing poetry, satires bashing British rule, and working some minor editing jobs, Madison called upon the young writer to create a Republican-based National paper that would oppose Alexander Hamilton’s Gazette of the United States. He agreed, seeing as Hamilton’s ideas were following too closely to those of the despised British and monarchy rule. The paper supported Thomas Jefferson and became a great success sparking controversy and opening the public up to a different side of politics. 

Philip Freneau’s is an inspiration, his poetry and journalism displayed such passion and held such importance that he will forever go down in history as the man who “Saved the Constitution.” What he wrote meant something, the people of the newborn United States were informed because of him. As a future journalist I hope to report with Freneau’s ethic and drive in mind, always eager to produce the truth, always striving to inform the masses.