Archive for date: June 15th, 2016

Before these readings I had never thought about how valuable society’s attention can be to media or when discussed by Goldhaber, he would call it “the money industry economy.” Due to the overwhelming about of information that our society gets easily lost in, attention from society is crucial in regards to media. Specifically, throughout Lankshear and Knobel’s article, “Attention Economy,” I learned about the importance of attention and the need for media to gain attention from its audience. Furthering this idea, Goldhaber writes:

 

“The energies set free by the success […] the money-industrial economy go more and more in the direction of obtaining attention. And that leads to growing competition for what is increasingly scarce, which is of attention. It sets up an unending scramble, a scramble that also increases the demands on each of us to pay what scarce attention we can” (Goldhaber 199, n.p.).

 

This quotes from Goldhaber is arguing that societies attention is limited because of the overwhelming amount of information available. From this I find that I am able to be in agreeance with Goldhaber, due to the fact that my attention is easily grabbed from things in media regarding beauty and/or animals; which, might not grab others attention. Thus, media has to attempt others attention, such as it did mine, through different topics and by possibly targeting specific gender, age, culture or ethnicity. A quote that stood out to me, such as that of Goldhaber, was from Adler’s reading. Adler stated that, “advertising is a domain of human practice with a strong stake in the economics of attention: the ‘first challenge for every advertiser is to capture and hold the attention of the intended audience’” (Adler 1997, p. 5). Overall, this quote assisted me in having a better understanding of Adler’s article because I was able to relate it to what Lankshear and Knobel were arguing throughout their article as well. Without societies attention, media will not be able to succeed nor profit from their advertisement. I find that this is why media advertisements use the techniques that were presented my Hausman, because those who are not media-literate are unaware to look deeper into the advertisement and see how the advertisement is lying to them.

 

When reading Neil deMause and Steve Rendell’s article, “The Poor Will Always Be with Us,” I was surprised to find out that, “According to the most recent U.S. Census Bureau data, 37 million Americans – one in eight – lived below the federal poverty line in 2005, defined as an annual income of $19,971 for a family of four.” This shocked me because with payments, taxes, etc., it seems nearly impossible to survive off of an annual income of less than $20,000, especially for a family of four. Further they mention that the news does not cover or bring attention to poverty stricken towns nor people, unless a natural disaster occurs, such as their example of Hurricane Katrina. They then go on to states that the news channels, ABC, CBS, and NBC only mentioned the poverty stricken towns affected by Hurricane Katrina a very select amount of times. DeMause and Rendell stated that, “during the more than three years studied, there were just 58 stories about poverty on the three network newscasts, including just 191 quoted sources.” This shows that media does not want to bring attention to the ugly truth of poverty within America. They also share that when those who are poverty stricken are brought to attention in the news, they are portrayed through someone whom is not nearly close to being considered poor. Thus, benefiting and bringing attention to those who brought the poverty to attention, rather than those who are suffering from the poverty. From this I began to go through the diary, “Global Food Disparity Photo Diary.” In the beginning of this article they discussed that, “if you look closely at the types of food being purchased you can see the difference between ‘eating to live’ and ‘living to eat’”. I thought this to be a great quote because some families are struggling to get enough food to survive, where other families have more than enough food. This diary enabled me to see the difference of those “eating to live” and those “living to eat”. This was extremely impactful to me because it showed the ugly truth of poverty stricken families compared to those whom are not.

 

From the previous articles, I then went on to read Shannon Ridgeway’s, “4 Problems with the Way the Media Depicts Poor People.” When discussing problem number one, Ridgeway uses the word, “escapism”, which is very real and something most people experience in their everyday life. Secondly, she addressing the problem of “the poor as statistics”, which she states are facts and/or rates that do not show them as human beings, but merely as statistics. She discussed that this problem makes people that do live in poverty feel as though they do not matter. The third problem she addresses is, “The Poor as Poor Due to Their Own Life Choices”, which is a false assumption. Some become stuck in a cycle of poverty stricken generations, due to the possibility of mental illness, medical costs, etc. the final problem that she discusses is “The Poor as Temporarily ‘Down on Their Luck’”, by this she means that people believe there is a way out of poverty because, going back to problem three, people believe being poor is a choice or just bad luck. Overall, this article saddened me because it brought my attention to the ugly truth of ignorant ways people view those who are poverty stricken.

 

Lastly, I read Sternheimer’s chapter 5. Specifically, I focused on her discussion on poverty, as it related to the readings and videos. Specifically, she brought to attention, “For most of those interviewed, poverty and neighborhood violence were overwhelming influences in their lives, shaping their interactions and their understanding of their futures” (Sternheimer, p.127). I find this to be true because dependent on where and whom you are raised from and with, greatly impacts who you are as a person and the future whom you will become. Sternheimer further gives statistics on how children are asked or even forced to become a part of a gang and how many children have been exposed to a shooting. From this, she discusses the struggle that these kids face because of where they live due to their impoverished family. This brought me back to the video, “Child Poverty” because those children suffered due to their family’s impoverishment.

 

In conclusion, I am now aware of how media greatly impacts people suffering from poverty. As Ridgeway stated, “poor people are invisible”, which is sadly true because society does not like to hear about poverty, thus, it is not brought to attention within media. Those who are media literate are able to see this sad truth, but those whom are not overlook poverty, which leaves it unaddressed and causes those affected by it to continue to suffer.

When I started this week’s readings, I noticed “Attention” was the theme. I did not know what to expect with the readings from this week. This week’s readings and YouTube videos, like my other classmates, struck a chord with me. They were powerful and left the audience thinking about the issues that came up with them.

I will start with the child poverty topic, rather than separate by each individual reading. I started this week by analyzing the photo collection by Fricat in 2008. I grew up poor; there were days I could not eat or take a proper bath because bills were not paid on time. My mother and I were never on welfare checks, but we ate (what she called) Poorman’s Dishes. Looking at the photo collection I was reminded of those dishes. My mother was able to make a large meal with a little bit of food. I think my favorite was Frito Pie: Fritos, beans, cheese, and meat. Looking at this photo collection allowed me to look at different Poorman’s Dishes.

I continued onto the YouTube videos about poverty (can you tell that I did not want to read, just yet?) and was floored with the media’s attention to detail (or lack thereof) of poverty. Edelman reported on  (the video came from Children’s Defense Fund) the costs of getting children out of poverty and locking up criminals for small misdemeanors and felonies. I was infuriated with this report; the government is willing to spend more on small time criminals than poor children? I can’t respond to this, my whole reflection will be an infuriated rant on this, and I still have other videos and readings to tackle. Children’s Defense Fund released another video on the children’s perspective of living in poverty. I was instantly in tears when the first boy started singing. This video provided a perspective that often goes unnoticed. This video needs to become viral, so there is more attention on the matter. I think paying attention to the suffering children will cause a larger movement to start; no one wants to see children suffer.

To go on a quick tangent: the attention economy that Lanksheer and Knobel explained in 2001. “Attention, unlike information, is inherently scarce. This, says Goldhaber (1998b:  n.p.), is because ‘each of us has only so much of it to give, and [attention] can only  come from us‐not machines, computers or anywhere else’.” (Lanksheer & Knobel, 2) This quote accurately describes what I was hinting at when I stated that the children’s perspectives on poverty should become viral. We, as humans, are paying more attention to the government and putting small time criminals away for ridiculous amounts of time, than we are to children in poverty. If we invested more time into paying attention to issues like child poverty, then we would see a change.

Back on track! Some of my classmates were highly upset about how the media portrays poverty. I agree with their distaste and anger towards the media for portraying poverty in such a terrible light. (Kuper, 2013) (Ridgeway, 2013) Some cases though, poverty is not even mentioned at all. (DeMause, 2007) Poverty is not something that can be romanticized. Not eating dinner some nights, power going out randomly, not being able to have hot water, none of these things are “less than ideal,” These things are more than “less than ideal”; they are humiliating and heartbreaking. We need to invest our attention into issues like these to see a change. None of us want to live in poverty ridden conditions, but why are we willing to watch someone else suffer?

Onto the final topic of violence and media literacy. Like my other classmates, I am a gamer. I was inufruated by the results; I have seen many studies linking video games to child violence. I have seen all the negative comments regarding this issue. Sternheimer was a devil’s advocate in this situation and posed a lot of questions that debunked said studies and negative comments. My classmate, Audriana Moore said something that I completely agree with: “I believe that the claim that depictions of violence in video games and other sources of media create and encourage young children to go out and become deadly imitators of what they see is completely off the mark. I think that factors such as economic, social, and family relationships are a more decisive factor on a child’s aggressive tendencies, as does Sternheimer. (Sternheimer, 2013)” I think she worded this idea wonderfully. Responsibility of child violence does not lie with the creator of the video games. I think responsibility lies with the child itself. Biological and environmental factors come into play, and although it is a child, there is still agency in decisions that are being made. Starting at a young age, children know what is right and wrong.

This weeks readings and assignments were eyeopening and brought up some interesting ideas that my classmates and I acknowledged and analyzed.

The readings for Module 3 were so powerful, and rightfully so. The topics we engaged in this week revolved around the ideas of visibility, attention, representation, critical media literacy, inverting visibility, information and attention economies, all of which are crucial to the building up of media literacy.

I want to start out with our textbook readings, because they struck a more personal cord with me. In chapter 5 of our textbook, Sternheimer brings into question the ideas of violence in younger children in relation to depictions of violence in certain media; particularly that of video games and movies. (Sternheimer, 2013) As a gamer myself, it was almost painful to read about all of the negative view points that many people still hold towards video games. Sternheimer was a saving grace though, as she tears down the numerous claims with rhetorical questions that were poised to question the legitimacy of these so called studies that seemed to be aggressively targeting children, while neglecting to create a more thorough study by including the behaviors and reactions of adults as well. I’ve met many other “gamers” in my lifetime; some are very aggressive, and others wouldn’t hurt a fly. However, we all had in common one thing: we played nearly the same games, many of which would be considered violent, at young ages. I believe that the claim that depictions of violence in video games and other sources of media create and encourage young children to go out and become deadly imitators of what they see is completely off the mark. I think that factors such as economic, social, and family relationships are a more decisive factor on a child’s aggressive tendencies, as does Sternheimer. (Sternheimer, 2013) I one day would like to join or create a non-profit that actually uses video games to help under privileged children, who come from low income areas, or may be disabled in some way, to help these children develop not only the basic literacy’s, but also critical thinking, spatial development, and social abilities. Studies that show only half the truth, and depend on the correlation/causation concepts to mislead the public into believing that video games are bad influences really hinder my dream. Little by little I hope to bring awareness of the multitude of benefits that video games can bring, and instead shift the focus from video games to the more pressing factors of violence.

In thinking about the ideas of poverty, and contributing factors leading to certain problems in development; I found the many sources in our readings and assignments in this module to be inspiring in a way. As I said in the above paragraph, my goal in life is to help under privileged children. I had researched information on poverty for previous research projects, but it’s extremely interesting to make connections between poverty and media literacy, and certain concepts such as attention, power, and the ideas of inverting visibility. It was heartbreaking watching the YouTube video about Child Poverty, where several children recollect their experiences with poverty. (Children’s Defense Fund, 2015) The second video by the Children’s Defense Fund, where  Edelman gave a report on the poverty of children of America was especially infuriating. As she listed off the cost to help lift millions of children and families out of food insecurities, it was shocking that the government would spend more money on things like locking people up for the smallest of things, than they would to help bring food security and poverty relief. (Marian Edelman, 2015)

I was also very upset when reading about the way that those living in less than ideal conditions are portrayed in the media (Kuper, 2013) (Ridgeway, 2013), or the fact that they aren’t even portrayed at all most of the time. (DeMause, 2007) It’s so disheartening that instead of trying to create a positive, engaging atmosphere, media corporations instead choose to knock minorities down even further with these negative, often stereotyped depictions. It’s downright irresponsible for corporations with such immense power with capabilities to change the opinions of individuals with little to no literacy skills [which a majority happen to be those living in poverty] to continue ignoring the problem and pretend it isn’t a real problem. It’s not just the media at fault though, all they want is viewers and so they will continue to display whatever gets them the most viewers. In my opinion, the largest fault lies in the failure of our Country to ensure that as the great slogan states “no child is left behind.” Instead of investing in the futures of all children, the rich would rather nickel and dime and ensure maximum profits, while they ensure that their children are sent to the best schools. Meanwhile, those at the bottom are struggling to ensure that their children can even eat that day. Without the backing of the government to set in motion changes that ensure children in at-risk areas can receive the same education that children of wealthy families are able to afford, we will always have issues with not just poverty, but also with media literacy, with exploitation, with attention issues in the classroom, and so much more.

In closing my reflection, I’d like to end with the ideas of the two economies we learned about in this module, and relating them to the ideas of media education. In our Voice Thread on making ideology visible, I really enjoyed making the connections on attention and applying it to the ideas of turning attention, and in turn, information, into something that we can use and build upon. Lanham (Lankshear & Knobel, 2001) identified 3 types of information. In my Voice Thread post, I explained that I see these types of information as building upon the previous. Attention is at the center for building up this “information.” With such a heavy reliance on attention to engage our critical thinking, and build up our data up into “wisdom,” we, as a society, really need to shift our focus in figuring out how to eliminate the problem of lack of attention, especially in our schools. I personally attribute the lack of attention to the standardizing of many of the aspects in our schools. As we learned earlier in this module, we try to standardize as many aspects of learning as we can, to create measurable statistics on something that innately cannot be measured. This had led to a lot of interaction, and customization being thrown out the window in regards to the learning environment. I think it’s a shame that a lot of blame is being put on students for the short comings of the school systems they are a part of. I think a great example to illustrate my opinion is the ideas of dress codes. Many schools have implemented outrageous dress codes on the basis that they wish to limit the “distractions” associated with potentially problematic clothes. Of course, I know that some students would wholly take advantage if these rules were not in place, but take for example some recent school dress code violations that were taken too far. One student attending a High School in Texas was sent home for violating the schools dress code for wearing leggings as pants. Now, had this girl worn leggings and a crop top I would understand a violation, but this girl in particular was wearing a very modest oversized t-shirt that covered everything all the way down to her mid-upper thigh, and was completely opaque. How can we create advances in media literacy when students are having to put more mental energy into what they can or cannot wear to school, than they are in creating connections to what they learn in school? Instead of being sensible, schools are sending children home because of their very appropriate clothing, and these children are missing class time over something so stupid. What is even worse is that many of the dress code violations are made towards female students. Yet no one will bat an eye if a male student shows up in a white tank top.

Lankshear & Knobel’s (2001) three dimensions of literacy are a great example of what our school system should be focusing on, and implementing into the curriculum. Our school systems already have the first dimension on lock down with the in my opinion, overly emphasized importance of basic literacies. Now need to start implementing the next two dimensions. I would bet my life on it that if schools started to implement the other two dimensions, attention issues would nearly cease to exist. We would finally be able to identify the students with the real attention issues, and not just label every student who gives the teacher a hard time “ADD” or “ADHD.” (Lankshear & Knobel, 2001) As a student myself, I can say with certainty that we all want to be engaged. There is nothing that kills my ability to pay attention faster than having to sit through a lecture focusing on an issue that has been used to death, all because it’s a safe topic, and it’s easy to teach to a class of 40 through an un-engaging lecture. If we start to include topics such as the one in the Voice Thread about violence towards women being depicted in popular culture, that will get to engage many students, instead of focusing on “safe” topics as mentioned before, attention wouldn’t be nearly as much as an issue.

As I started this week’s module, with the “Attention Economy” article I began to ask myself what the majority of my attention goes to. Sadly, the answer to that question was materialistic things that don’t deserve a thing of such scarcity such as my attention. As the week went on, I began to pay attention to what my peers were giving their attention to. Like myself, they were giving their attention to undeserving things. Unfortunately, it takes eye opening/tragic experiences like what happened this weekend in Orlando to shake us up, and awaken ourselves to what is important in life.

The first topic that is covered in this weeks module in the article titled, “Attention Economy” is the idea that our society, which was originally driven by the need for information, is now driven by attention. An attention economy has become the most dominant in today’s society, with everyone seeking desiring attention. According to the article, information economies are based on what is desirable and most scarce. Goldhaber claims that “attention, unlike information is inherently scarce”(Lankshear, 2001). This is proven because Goldhaber then makes the point that “each of us only has so much to give, and can only come from us, not machines or computers” (Lankshear, 2001). I found this articles point to be extremely eye opening, and fascinatingly true. As a society, generally once our needs are met (food, shelter) we go to our desires. Such as things that gain us attention, and meaning. We have become a society seeking for others approval, doing anything to gain attention at all costs. Examples such as celebrities are used, to describe the term “attention rich/wealthy”. Which means to be as open as possible with ones life, and to get more attention that putting out. This point was frightening to me; because it saddens me to see how much attention we give to celebrities and topics of their choosing instead of things such as poverty in America.

Sadly, our society has become one that pays attention to the wrong things. Such as the latest fad/trend, what is going on with sports or the recent hot celebrity. All the while, child hunger and poverty has become one of America’s leading problems. It is a problem that affects a large number of the United States population, however they receive little to no attention among Americans. According to the article, “Poverty’s Poor Show In The Media”, “the media has always ignored the poor, even as the issue of poverty has grown”(Kuper, 2013). He states, this is because “poverty has never been sexy”(Kuper, 2013). This then leads to escapism in society, no one wants to hear it or see it. When the poor people do get media coverage, it was in a derogatory or negative way. Coverage of poverty/the poor in the media is slim to none. The article, “Poverty in the News” brought this to my attention. Prior to these readings, I did not understand the huge social problem we have in our society. FAIR’s three-year study on ABC, CBS, and NBC news networks proved the notion that the media ignores the poor to be true. I was astonished to learn that over the course of three years, between the three large news stations, they did only 58 stories on the issue of poverty in America. This ratio was very eye opening on the power that media has, on what society can pay attention to. The media is in complete control on how the information is spun, and if that information is even brought to our attention in the first place.

There are 72 million children in the United States, and represent 23% of the population, but makeup 33% of all people in poverty (Jiang, 2015). These percentages of children in low-income families vary by age, race/ethnicity, and parent’s nativity, all things that are completely out of the child’s control. These statistics took my breath away when I first read the article, “Facts About Low-Income Children”, partially because the media has never brought the gravity of this large epidemic to my attention. The article, “Four Problems with the Way Media Depict Poor People”,

Focuses on the importance of media being diverse and accurately representing society, which includes the poor. Ridgeway then explains the four ‘problems’ of the way media represents the poor. One, The Poor Are Invisible. Two, The Poor Are Statistics. Three, The Poor Are Poor As A Choice. Four, The Poor are “Down On Their Luck”. These four problems, diminishes their worth as humans, all the while reinforces the notion net worth represents our worth as humans.

One of my favorites, that stuck with me for the remainder of the module were the visuals that were provided. Such as the Youtube video, “The Child Poverty: In their own words”. This stuck with me, because us viewers got to see first hand the struggles and hardships that poverty brought to their lives. I think it is extremely important to see the faces that poverty touches, rather than read statistic and facts about them. Another visual that stuck with me was the photo diary, “Global Food Disparity”. I thought it was extremely interesting to see what each bought with the money weekly. Another thought that crossed my mind was that Coca-Cola products were in a lot of the pictures presented, and I thought Coca-Cola should use their networks to help with poverty around the world.

Prior to this module, and watching Bartholow’s video “Effects of Media Violence”, as well as Karen Sterheimer’s Chapter 5: From Screen to Crime Scene” I had the assumption violent media plays a crucial role towards aggression in children. Violence has been a part of entertainment since the beginning of entertainment. However, one might make the point that the violence shown in media today is much more graphic than the “Great Train Robbery” as compared in the video. The question that is constantly being asked is, “does media violence cause aggression?” According to Bartholomew, the answer of this question is a matter of perspective(level of violence). Such as mass violence, versus aggression.

Oh man! This week was overwhelming! There was so much to read and studying for the midterm was a lot on top of it. I guess that is what we get for signing up for a summer class though right? How did you all do on the midterm? I know the short essays and short answer questions still need grading, but on the rest of it? I thought I did way better than I really did. I was disappointed in my score so far. I feel like I am barely hanging on here :(. Anyone else having any difficulties?

This module was pretty interesting! My whole view on poverty has completely changed. The main focus of this module was on Attention. I started off reading the article by Lankshear and Knobel (2001). They start off by talking a lot about Goldhaber and his idea that our economy is an attention economy instead of an information economy. “Attention, unlike information, is inherently scarce.” (Goldhaber 1998, Lankshear and Knobel 2001 p. 2) This was a quote that really stood out to me. It made me think about how what we think and our perspectives/ views are unique to us. Our world is filled with all kinds of information. Where people choose to focus their attention to is what they are saying is scarce. They then go into explaining Goldhaber’s six points. I really liked how they talked about Goldhaber’s opinions on stars and fans. I never really thought about the fact that one has to pay attention in order to get attention. It makes sense though. They say that ” Stars and performers pay ‘illusory attention’ to fans and  audiences. They create the illusion that they are paying attention to each fan, to each  member of their audience. Attention involves an exchange. ” (Lankshear and Knobel 2001 p. 4) Stars depend on their fans attention in order to succeed. It is the same thing with media broadcasters.

Media broadcasters such as news channels, depend on peoples attention too. They need to show the stories that will get them the most views. I have never really noticed that poverty is not shown in the media often. I guess I have always had blinders on when it comes to that topic. I grew up in a middle class household. Sure, I have seen people who are homeless, but I have never thought it was strange that poverty was not mentioned in the media. It wasn’t until reading the rest of the assigned readings in this module that my eyes were opened. As Simon Kuper talks about  in the Poverty’s Poor Show in the Media article, people living in poverty are hardly ever shown in the media. He talks about how an actor by the name of Gerard Depardieu moved away from Belgium because the government tried to raise rich people’s taxes. Meanwhile, an unemployed father burned himself to death in despair of poverty. He says “guess which victim of the economic crisis got more publicity?” (Kuper 2013 p. 1) This article says that we do not see much poverty in the media because most journalists are upper- middle class folk. As humans, we like to interview people like us, this leaves people in poverty being left out from interviews. He also mentions that “Casting poor people as victims is boring.” (Kuper 2013 p.2) I really liked the last sentence of his article, “Morales aside: by ignoring the poor we are missing the economic story of the decade”. (Kuper 2013 p. 3) Just like I said my eyes have been open after all the readings we have done, I think this is something that everyone needs to do. Poverty has become a big issue. We don’t see it though due to the fact that the media doesn’t broadcast stories about poverty because it isn’t “popular” for them to do. The Fair Study article really proves this point. It summarizes how news stations fail to broadcast stories involving poverty. And the stories that they do broadcast do not use wisdom from people who live it first hand. They use information from “experts” and raw data mostly. It is sad that Michael Jackson received more coverage than stories about about poverty. There were just about 58 stories over the time length of 3 years on three network newscasts. Most of the media focuses on elderly people or in the armed forces, aka by The Fair Study as “deserving poor”. When in reality, they aren’t even the most at risk when it comes to living in poverty.

The Fair Study article says “The poorest age group is children, with more than one in six living in official poverty at any given time.”(Neil De Mause & Steve Rendall 2007 p1.) Yet, they rarely have reports done on them to show the big issue happening.  According to the Basic Facts about Low Income Children Fact Sheet, “Children under 18 years represent 23 percent of the population, but they comprise 33 percent of all people in poverty. Among all children, 44 percent live in low-income families and approximately one in every five (22 percent) live in poor families”. I think because there is such a lack of stories promoting the awareness of the amount of children living in low income or poverty is helping make the issue worse. I think that if people had more awareness they would be able to reach out and help more. A lot of people don’t want to help, but I think that is because they do not know how much these children are suffering. After watching Childhood Poverty (Children’s Defense Fund 2016) which was a video involving children living in poverty, I was heartbroken.   The video shows many different children telling their own experiences about how their family has suffered. One little girl talks about how her father left her family and her mother is on disability, so they have a hard time living. Another young girl talks about how they would not have food to eat and how she went from a size 5 waist to a size 0. That makes me feel so bad for these children. I couldn’t imagine going through that. Like I mentioned earlier in my writing, I never realized it was as big of an issue as it really is. My parents never informed me of the issues and I never opened up my eyes to witness it. I have been very privileged and lucky my whole life.

In our text book, we covered readings about violence being connected to video games. I always blamed video games for my little brother acting out. Have any of you found yourselves blaming media for issues going on? I think we are all a little guilty of that. I learned though, that there are many other risk factors that lead to violence other than violent video games. These risks include “substance use, overly authoritarian or lax parenting, delinquent peers, neighborhood violence, and weak ties to one’s family or community.” (Karen Sternheimer 2013 p. 108)  It is easy to blame violent video games for these behaviors. “When news accounts neglect to provide the full context, it appears as though media viollence is the most compelling explanatory factor.” (Karen Sternheimer 2013 p.114) This is just more proof that the newscasters don’t care to get the whole story. They often just get a story out there without researching or offering information and wisdom. Children who live in poverty are more likely to participate in violent acts because they are more exposed to the risk factors. We just rarely hear about it because it is more common. However, it it were to be a middle class white youth, the media would jump all over it because incidents in the middle class community are more rare. So when something happens it is a big deal.

Ending Childhood Poverty (Children’s Defense Fund 2016) was a good article with a lot of facts about what our society and government can do to help improve and put a stop to childhood poverty. I think that it is something that really needs to be focused on and the media should help make more apparent. I think the children are suffering a lot. Because they are the next generation, if they are suffering, that means our society is going to suffer.

Overall, I feel like I learned a lot in this module. I feel like I have a better understanding about the big issue of poverty. I am definitely more aware and I am going to do what I can to help out. I hope that as a future teacher, I am able to encourage my students to make a difference. I also hope that I will be able to reach out and help any of my students who live in poverty. Whether it be by helping with food or clothes or anything. I feel that as long as I can impact one child’s life, I will be making a difference- even if it is a little one.