Political violence has become a common problem in all parts of the world, especially in the United States of America. Political violence may include civil war, rioting, revolution, rebellion, and terrorism. For instance, after Joseph Biden won the US presidency, the followers of his opponent Trump stormed a central building in the town Centre. The leading cause of radicalization and extreme political violence in the United States is the greed for power among the leaders. The leaders want to satisfy their personal needs using leadership. This makes an aspirant commits all forms of crimes to ensure that they won. This concept has triggered violence in society.
As citizens, we should be very free to move against any mobilization by the greedy aspirants of political seats to commits all forms of violence. From extensive research, people become radicalized when they disagree with a government policy leading to riots, when society doesn’t value you, stressing moments, and feeling lonely. Domestic violence can be brought about by several reasons: social inequality, poverty, and exclusion. However, the main reason that causes domestic violence social inequality, where some people are looked down upon and discriminated against in some social services. The leading cause of radicalization and terrorism in modern society is greed for power. The right-wing explain the extremes of radicalization in detail—the causes of radicalizations on social media how society listens to your voice. Radicalization also depends on protectiveness and how society is vulnerable to those. The right-wing acts on radicalization support egalitarianism and ensure that the members of the society are equal.
Required : Need to work on the below assignment
Background: In Discussion #1 you discussed the roots of political violence and a contemporary example of a radicalized group (white nationalists). I want to deepen that discussion by exploring the way this issue is covered in the media. Remember that the modern media tends to present issues in a particular way, often with an ideological or sensationalist bias. How does this impact the coverage of political violence or violent protest? NOTE: You don’t have to use the white nationalism example. Any discussion that illustrates media coverage of political violence in America will be fine.
Objectives(s): The objective is to identify the polarized interpretations of political violence/protest, its causes, or a specific radicalized group. How do some outlets interpret this versus others?
Instructions: For each student, this is a three-part assignment. You should do the following:
1. RESEARCH: Find an online source that discusses political violence/protest, its causes, or a radicalized group (can be text or video, up to you). Some guidelines:
a. The media outlet you use must be listed on this bias chart (advice: use a computer, the chart doesn’t look good on a phone): https://www.adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart-2/
b. Your source should be from the OPPOSITE side of your view of the issue. If you think right-wing violence is a bigger problem, pick from the right. If you think left-wing violence is a bigger problem, pick from the left. If you’re unsure or confused, just pick any source you.
c. INSIDER TIP: Discussing your source will be easier if you pick one that falls significantly to the left or right.
2. POST #1 (10 points): Once you have found and read/watched a source, create your first post. In 250 words or more, cover the following points:
a. First, provide a link to the source and tell us which side of the chart it is from.
b. Discuss your source’s coverage of the issue. How does it frame the issue or the people involved? Are some people framed as “good” and others “bad”?
c. What information or reasoning do they use in their presentation of the issue?
d. Is the ideological bias of the outlet clearly on display? Explain how/why.
e. Why is the source right/wrong? If it has made you rethink your view, explain why (it’s okay if it hasn’t, you can explain that too).