I had my grant interview on Friday, March 13th (Friday the thirteenth. SPOOKY). I think it went pretty well. If I get the grant, I have no need for my Kick starter or indiegogo, which will save me a lot of time and money. I would love to become an Omprakash Ambassador. The idea of being responsible for all my actions and representing such a selfless team will induce a sense of respectfulness and leadership inside of me. The interviewers asked me how I would spread the word and work of Omprakash. I will ask UTD this week if they could consider adding the EdGE course as part of their curriculum. I will also ask the faculty members in my school to spread the word of the website and organization for future thesis students. Just through my thesis, I should be able to spread the word by mouth and media. I am creating an organization/website that will help perpetuate this process. After my ideas are concrete, I will present them to Steve Sclar, my thesis mentor, Kelly Rula, and my EdGE mentor, Barclay Martin. The Omprakash team has done plenty to help me out with my thesis and my personal progress.
EdGE Week 7
www.bbc.com/news/world-asia...
I am going to give a little background to this story. BBC made a documentary named "India's daughter" and was going to air the film on Women's Day. The documentary narrates the Delhi gang rape in 2012. There was a halt in the execution because India's politicians wanted to ban the film since it introduced a rapist and gave him a platform to speak on. It was aired in some European countries for a few hours, and it created a huge divide between leaders and common folks in India. The people for the ban think that it will tarnish India's name more than necessary and that the documentary portrays an untrue picture. "India's daughters" is a huge generalization and blame. The people against the ban agree that the horrendous night should be explained to people around the world. This could be related to two themes: "good intentions and unintended consequences" and "third sector forces." This documentary was made obviously with good intentions, I hope; however, there are so many ramifications that BBC missed. There are always two sides or two factions. Videos like this could invigorate parties from both sides and splits them even more instead of bringing them together. Women could hate men even more. However, this video wasn't made for women to start hating men. It was to raise awareness about this heinous incident. Not everyone sees it this way, and since media does not direct how the viewers should view the video, more problems could be made instead of solutions. However, there are many positive aspects at the same time. Media acts as a "third sector" force. It ties up the loose ends after things go through the public and private sector. These two sectors are more about business and money and distribution. Third sectors introduce a "human" aspect to their business or organization. They can bring more to the table than just financial profits. Sometimes an argument just suggests that the topic was important enough to even argue about. To get a whole country arguing means that the whole country cares or has opinions about this topic: women's rights. It is a good start. It gets gears turning. BBC acted as a third sector that introduced a debate that is healthy for India to develop. It gives another chance for the quiet ones to roar. It has been three years since the Delhi case; this ban revived the momenta. To me, banning or not banning the documentary is not the problem. Women's rights is. This documentary will not fix or worsen this issue because the issue is not so small that it can just tip over because of a mere video. People should not make the ban the issue. They should redirect the problem back to the true issue: "stripping basic rights from women."
EdGE Week 7
www.bbc.com/news/world-asia...
I am going to give a little background to this story. BBC made a documentary named "India's daughter" and was going to air the film on Women's Day. The documentary narrates the Delhi gang rape in 2012. There was a halt in the execution because India's politicians wanted to ban the film since it introduced a rapist and gave him a platform to speak on. It was aired in some European countries for a few hours, and it created a huge divide between leaders and common folks in India. The people for the ban think that it will tarnish India's name more than necessary and that the documentary portrays an untrue picture. "India's daughters" is a huge generalization and blame. The people against the ban agree that the horrendous night should be explained to people around the world. This could be related to two themes: "good intentions and unintended consequences" and "third sector forces." This documentary was made obviously with good intentions, I hope; however, there are so many ramifications that BBC missed. There are always two sides or two factions. Videos like this could invigorate parties from both sides and splits them even more instead of bringing them together. Women could hate men even more. However, this video wasn't made for women to start hating men. It was to raise awareness about this heinous incident. Not everyone sees it this way, and since media does not direct how the viewers should view the video, more problems could be made instead of solutions. However, there are many positive aspects at the same time. Media acts as a "third sector" force. It ties up the loose ends after things go through the public and private sector. These two sectors are more about business and money and distribution. Third sectors introduce a "human" aspect to their business or organization. They can bring more to the table than just financial profits. Sometimes an argument just suggests that the topic was important enough to even argue about. To get a whole country arguing means that the whole country cares or has opinions about this topic: women's rights. It is a good start. It gets gears turning. BBC acted as a third sector that introduced a debate that is healthy for India to develop. It gives another chance for the quiet ones to roar. It has been three years since the Delhi case; this ban revived the momenta. To me, banning or not banning the documentary is not the problem. Women's rights is. This documentary will not fix or worsen this issue because the issue is not so small that it can just tip over because of a mere video. People should not make the ban the issue. They should redirect the problem back to the true issue: "stripping basic rights from women."
No comments:
Post a Comment