Summitry Analysis and Diplomacy

Summitry Analysis and Diplomacy This essay represents the perfect and imperfect world of summitry and it also discusses on how summitry can be integrated as a constructive mode of diplomacy. Summitry has indeed changed the landscape of political interactions between states and political leaders across the globe over the past years. In respect to this, Churchill questioned the crowd during one of the House of Commons meeting in 1953, if there is not at the summit of the nations the wish to win the greatest prize of peace, where can men look for hope? (Churchill cited in Eban, 1983, p. 360). The idea behind Churchills statement is that, it explains on how summitry can be an instrument in getting states actors to gather at one place to discuss on international political issues among them (Dunn, 1996, p. 4). Ideally, summits not only have been used as a tool to break down intense barriers between nation states leaders, but it has also helped state leaders to be more focused in addressing issues of their concerns in the best possible way. Although, in the real world of summitry, this is not always the case. As Plischke argues in Modern Diplomacy: It should not be regarded as an instant elixir for the assuagement of crisesà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦to dissimulate relief from the realities of inter-governmental ailment (1979, p. 186). To begin with, this essay will discuss both on some of the possible strengths and flaws of the different types summits. It also argues on how summitry can be infused as a tool of a constructive means of diplomacy and it will also unearth some factors that could help determine the success of summits. The first part of this essay discusses on how summitry could be a tool in the engagement of public diplomacy and followed by with an insight on how timing is crucial in initiating a summit. Meanwhile, the second part of this essay details on how summitry could provide an opportunity for state leaders to administrate and show their capabilities in winning a summit. The perfect and imperfect world of Summitry Summits are designed in such a way where each and every one of them has various themes and different objectives to be fulfilled. One must be able to segregate the different types of summits and its goals in order to further the understanding on the roles of summits. For instance, bilateral, multilateral, regional and global summits. Now, this boils down to one question, how effective are these summitries in resolving the targeted issues? The answer to this is rather subjective. Since each summit has its different purpose, the measure of success would vary as well and therefore it is difficult to layout the positive and negative aspects of summitry in general (Melissen, 2003, p. 4). For instance, the Yalta summit in 1945 and the Paris Conference of Parties 21 (COP 21) in 2015 are seventy years apart and may have little significant in common. Hence, generalising summits into one big picture would be very difficult. Looking at the different types of summits, the Rio Earth Summit or also known as United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) was one of the largest intergovernmental global climate conference ever organised. It was represented by over one hundred and eighty countries and participated by over one hundred states and government leaders across the globes. It was indeed a media magnet event that catches the attention of the news and broadcasters from all over the world (Dunn, 1996, p. 220). This calls for an engagement in public diplomacy for state and government leaders. The purpose of the summit was to synthesise the global economic landscape or development towards a more forward looking context which takes into account on the preservation of the environment (The Editors of Encyclopà ¦dia Britannica, 1998). Dunn also mentioned in Diplomacy at the Highest Level: It was hoped that this serve as a blueprint for how the nations of the world could preserve the environment and achieve sustainable development in the twenty-first century (1996, p. 222). In relation to this, the Rio Earth Summit were seen to be a quite symbolic kind of summitry (Dunn, 1996, p. 249). This is due to the nature of the summit in which it possesses a propaganda value to it that could be either used for good purpose or just for the sake of winning the hearts of the domestic and general audiences through their participation. Not only it was the largest and the most costly climate change summit that was ever held, but it was also attended by hundreds of state leaders from all over the world. Hence, the opportunity to engage in public diplomacy was pretty massive (Palmer, 1992). To put it briefly, attending such an eventful summit was worth every moment of being noticed by the public considering the number of media coverage during that time was enormous. According to Dunn, attending the summit was very much an attestation to these state leaders in showing their relentless commitments towards the preservation of the environment regardless if they did not agree upon the discussed agendas during the meeting. They want to be perceived as a leader who cares about just everything and they wish to give an impression to the general public that they are trying to make some changes (1996, p. 249). This approach is often used as a form of public diplomacy and indeed, it can be considered as a constructive mode of diplomacy. For example, Bush used the opportunity to be seen as a good leader by attending the summit despite of the series of situations that was going on in the US during that time. His hands were tight with different kinds of issues including his upcoming re-election. Hence, to be seen under the limelight were one of the many ways for him to attain more credits from the domestic audiences (Dunn, 1996, p. 233). As stated by Hamilton and Langhorne in The Practice of Diplomacy, air travel and television cameras have made world statesmen of the humblest party hacks (1995, p. 221). Having said that, summit has not only been beneficial for s tate leaders but also for the politicians in hope to enhance their status in the public from meeting all these world leaders. In respect to this, symbolic summits are not just limited to this kind of agenda, but it could also exemplify the relations between nations through summits. To support this statement, as documented by Dunn in Diplomacy at the Highest Level: The handshake on the White House lawn between Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin in 1993 was equally important as an attempt to symbolize the new era of relations between Israel and the Palestinian people (1996, p. 248). On the other side of this coin, level of preparation process in terms of timing also matters in ensuring the success of a summit. Regardless of its positive strand in the engagement of public diplomacy, Rio Earth Summit was barely a mere success. For instance, Rio Earth Summit was not a perfect timing for countries like the US. Considering that US was perceived to be the paramount actor in this conference, but in the actual fact, the US delegations were really keeping their heads down throughout the meetings (Dunn, 1996, p. 233). How does timing has got anything to do with this? In the case of the US, the countrys economy was going through a recession and as mentioned earlier, President Bush was also due for his nearing re-election. One of his main concerns were also the risk of committing into any agreement on the sustainable developmental programmes that was discussed during the summit. The potential results from agreeing to any agreements from the summit were rather ambiguous as i t could jeopardise the USs employment level even further and also, his fear for losing the trust and his wealthy conservative supporters from both the political parties the US (Dunn, 1996, p. 233). Hence, this explains for the quiet actions from the US delegation at Rio Earth Summit. Therefore, the summit could have been more favourable if the US did not have to hold back due to their situations back home. In addition to this, US was not the only one who were torn in leading the conference, the EC (European Community) could have also done a greater job at it but of all the EC state members, only Germany was set on making an equitably significant amount of commitment towards the agreement. The rest of the other EC state members like Italy and France were on the same boat as the US due to their respective issues in their home countries (Dunn 1996, p. 233). As articulated by Weihmiller, Doder and Newsom in U.S.- Soviet Summits, that, timing of a summit has been seen as one of the criti cal factors in ensuring the success of a summit (1986, p. 98). In retrospect, the issue on timing were noticeably reflected during the Kennedy Khrushchev summit in 1961 at Vienna which severely affected the resolution to the root of the problem. It was too soon to be holding another summit as the Paris summit of the year before that were not settled yet and to top it all, the issues with Berlin previously has lead this summit to a total flop (Weihmiller et al., 1986, p. 99). In this context, when summit is initiated at a wrong time, it could lead to a waste of resources and also, affecting diplomatic relations between state leaders as the subject discussed during the conference remains unresolved. Therefore, it remains debateable to as whether or not if summitry can be an elixir or regarded as an effective mode of diplomacy. On a brighter side, summits could also provide room for state actors or non-state actors to show their capabilities in leading a summit especially on international level that could not be consummated on a lower level (Dunn, 1996, p. 251). This has been seen on some climate change conferences such as the recent Paris Agreement (COP 21), Kyoto Protocol (COP 3) or even Copenhagen Agreement (COP 15) in 2009. The European Union (EU) in particular. The EU has tremendously manifested the world with their pro-climate change leadership. What they are doing is an incontestably positive in attracting other state members to follow their footsteps. As Maljean-Dubois and Wemaera states in their journal, Carbon Climate Law Review, EU has always claimed a climate leadership role in the climate negotiations, leading by example with its ambitious climate policy (2016, p. 3). That said, summitry is not only impactful in terms of public diplomacy, but it is also a constructive method in improving diplo matic relations through positive movements by a bold leader such as the EU. Although to be fair, the United States were one of the first and the most powerful supporters of international climate change and environmental agreements. However, the limelight has shifted to the EU as the major leader in global environmental scene (Kelemen and Vogel, 2009). In light of this, summitry can also give a fair opportunity for leaders from small nations to represent themselves on the highest league table and hence, making them more noticeable in the global diplomatic arena. This was proven when the Small Island Developing states (SIDS) and the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) managed to turn the table at the COP 15 at Copenhagen in 2009 (de à gueda Corneloup and Mol, 2013). Climate change is a threat for small island nations especially those of which nations which are prone to extreme weather conditions. As stated by de à gueda Corneloup and Mol in International Environmental Agreemen ts, The raise of sea temperature threatens marine ecosystems, on which small island populations usually strongly depend (2013, p. 282). The SIDS were able to negotiate through the representative organisation, AOSIS and be heard by the rest of the other state members at COP 15. Being in a vulnerable position themselves, this has helped them to initiate action plans through several leadership skills and remained as significant as other state members at the summit. Their perseverance has lead them to some fairly successful negotiations especially on the 1.5 ÃÅ'Ã…  C target as it was finally embedded in the Copenhagen Accord (de à gueda Corneloup and Mol, 2013). However, summits on climate change are often being seen as highly sensitive area and often associated to the level of power that the state actors have. For instance, considering SIDS state members are seen to be on a weaker side as they have very little power on the international level, structural power of state actors is oft en regarded as a determining factor in any international negotiations (de à gueda Corneloup and Mol, 2013). As disclosed by Ambassador Dessima Williams of Grenada at the COP 15 summit: We went in, AOSIS fought for everything we could come out withà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦as you could see we didnt come out with much (Wasuka cited in de à gueda Corneloup and Mol, 2013, p. 291). To put it briefly, no matter how much effort has been pumped into these summits by these weaker states, level of structural power of state actors is still one of the major determinant in negotiation process on any international summits. Summit: yes or no? What can be concluded based on the arguments above is that, despite of its contestations on the effectiveness and its constructive role in diplomacy, summitry has become an indispensable means of convention both on regional and international level. As Dunn argues in Diplomacy at the highest level: Summitry has evolved considerably in the post-war period. From being an exceptional and therefore high-profile event, summitry has developed to become a frequent and routine instrument of international diplomacy (Dunn, 1996, p. 265). However, one cannot deny that summitry has its substantive risks particularly on how the timing matters in initiating a summit especially involving states from all across the globe. The aim of a summit is not to only discuss on the subject of interests, but also to produce a fair outcome by the end of the meetings. Or else, the effort of organising a summit will be in vain if nothing comes out of it. Hence, it is crucial to take into account timing as one of the important factors during the preparation period. Although to be fair, factors like economic recessions and political instability of other state members are something that is rather inevitable. In this respect, the power position of ones state has also been a major determinant in ensuring the success of reaching the summits objectives. On a lighter note, summitry has been proven to be an effective mechanism for some weaker states to be prominent in the global arena despite for its limited structural power. In addition to this, summitry also has a unique nature that it could be use as tool in promoting public diplomacy especially in a global scale summit. This has been utilised as a best practice by state leaders and diplomats in pursuit of grabbing the attention of the public eye including the media. Especially in an era of free flow of information, state leaders and diplomats find summits to be quite amusing as public opinions matters in todays world of politics. Regardless of the outcome of the summit, these leaders do not walk out of the conference with empty handed. Some walk out of the summit with pride and several accomplishments, but in many instances, most of them walk out with just one thing, a free publicity to themselves. Which how I would like to put it as, free-riding at its best.

Global Culture Essay

As time progresses, the world, in terms of business is rather contracting. There is growing communication, interaction and exchange between different parts of the world. Technologies that were once thought of as a far sighted notion are now being using like household commodities and communication mediums that were once considered luxuries available to few are now a necessities needed to prosper. The world is becoming more integrated by the day and countries are becoming more and more dependent on one another in terms of trade and business. This paper focus on how the culture and environment that a business operates in affects the organization. It will outline some constraints and will generally give a picture of how to cope with changing cultures as in today’s expanding work environments it is vital to understand the attitudes, values, perceptions of the regions. Also, the role of media and politics would be discussed. Discussion: It is now a well known and widespread phenomenon that the world is a ‘global village’. This means that globalization has taken its toll and the entire world is somewhat a unified society or community that needs to interact in order to get on. But what exactly is Globalization? Globalization is basically the term used to describe the integration of economic, political and . it refers to the greater freedom of movements of goods, capital and people around the world. this shrinking of the world is having a major impact on business activity especially from multi-nationals which are the business organizations that have their headquarters in one country but operating branches, factories and assembly plants in others. In recent years there have been moves to reduce the number and level of trade restrictions that limited the trade between countries. The free trade movement and the aid of information technology are reducing the differences that once existed between national markets, reducing the importance of national borders and making it easier for firms to trade with and locate in many countries. This is forcing firms, which were once protected by national governments to become internationally competitive (Stimpson, 2002). Globalization integrates people, companies and governments and effects the environment, culture and political systems as well as economic development and human physical well-being in societies all around the world. The focus here, however, is on how the culture of a society or region shapes the operations of multi-nations and globalization as a whole. Culture, most simply described, is the behaviors, beliefs, values, underlying assumptions and perceptions shared by a group of people with respect to their environment and societies. Many characteristics of human life are transmitted genetically, they are innate and are naturally present and then there are other qualities that are learned. Culture is the name for the body of learned behaviors common to a society that form as a template for shaping behavior, manners and conduct from generation to generation. Culture exists in businesses as well, it is the attitudes and behaviors that employees of an organization embrace as an affect of their working environment. Working culture of an organization has a great impact over how workers feel, behave and work. Hence, national culture similar to corporate culture is the values and attitudes shared by individuals from a specific country that shape their behavior and their beliefs about what is important. Culture has the characteristic of being learned as well as taught. Culture is something that evolves and is in a constant state of change. The basic indicators and manipulators of culture are the values, customs and beliefs that rest in the society. These factors carry on for generations and are manifested in individuals as they live according to the routine of their environment. Culture has a direct and deep association with these features as these values and customs are what combine together and form the basis of culture. Ethnocentricity is a dilemma faced by many societies when dealing with different regions and areas. Ethnocentrisms are the conviction that one has that his or her culture or ethnicity is most superior. Ethnocentricity is the belief that some people have which makes them consider other cultures with respect to their own and manifests a superiority which is indicated through their behavior and attitudes towards other cultures. It is noted that cultural ethnocentrism is becoming prominent and is one of the stronger motivators of people pulling away from other economies. Ethnocentricity has rather negative impacts on multi national companies, as it causes consumers to distrust the international brands which adversely affect the consumer purchasing behavior. Cultural openness and demographic variables are factors that affect the ethnocentrism that persists in a society. Companies can remove these barriers through promoting awareness of their brand as well as educating and informing people about internationalization of businesses. Maintaining a positive approach is a key to attracting ethnocentric societies. Also, by targeting markets considering their age, gender and their cultural background shows apathy and reduces ethnocentric behaviors. For a firm to operate internationally, it needs strategies that would help it create a market outside the home country. In order to create an awareness or better described as a competitive advantage, businesses need effective global strategies. Global strategies can take the form of reducing costs and increasing efficiency, taking risks, or creating brand identification and reputation. Whichever the strategy chosen, it is very important to understand the local cultures and environment before entering a market. Strategies can be of numerous forms but branding is considered as most efficient when it comes to entering a completely new market. Brand strategy focuses on influencing the perceptions of people in a way that they persuaded to act in a certain manner. In today’s highly competitive and expanding business markets, it is necessary to create a positive and lasting impression on the consumers through branding. When entering a new market, a company needs to analyze the culture of the region and adapt to it in a manner that it does not seem awkward or unnatural to the consumers. A global brand needs to pertain a relevant meaning and significance to people across multiple societies, the strategy needs to be diverse and devised in a fashion that blends well with the people, their experience and the society. Different societies have different mind frames, values and in simple words, a different culture as a whole. For example, animals such as a horse is recognized all over the world but it is perceived differently, in some societies it may be considered as a mode of transport, in some, a gambling opportunity while in some, it symbolizes independence. These differences must be acknowledged when formulating strategies. Cultural conventions determine how people in a society interact with each other, what their beliefs are, and what meanings do they attach to their representations. Cultures develop through experience and learning, they are not static (Baker, 2001). Strategies must be aware and on a look out of these cultural shifts that may create a booming opportunity to replace something that is losing its value. Therefore, Companies can follow their regular patterns of strategy formulation which integrates its overall objectives with its marketing and financial counterparts but when looking for a new market in a new region, the first consideration must be the analysis of the local market trends, customs, traditions and adopt these within the strategy. In general, a company must be aware of the societal beliefs and stand points of the cultural areas that it is catering to. No aspect of the product, branding or the company policies must collide with the cultures. Every culture is dissimilar to another and so are its values and characteristics. The concepts and perceptions towards the routine items such as leisure, work, family structures and religion are separate in every society or culture and may be at different priority levels. A culture that is based to moral values of responsibilities and independence may have more influence on working and exerting. While a culture that does not ingrain a sense of self-sufficiency may promote a lifestyle of leisure and relaxation. Family structures also differ, so do religious beliefs. These two factors are most important when framing a culture as they define the mode of life and the code of conduct of people that follow it. Therefore, different religions may impose different conditions and these conditions, with the passage of time, become a part of the society and culture. Communication is generally the sharing of information between two or more individuals or groups to reach a common understanding (Jones & George, 2007). Good communication is necessary for an organization to gain a competitive advantage. Good communication, within an organization, is vital for managers to learn about new technologies, implement them in their organization and train workers in how to use them. Culture plays a central role in the communication process. Perception, which is the process through which people select, organize, and interpret sensory input to give meaning and order to the world around them, affects the meaning of the message. Perceptual biases can hamper a company and its communication just like ethnocentricity. Perceptual biases pertaining in a culture can use information about the company in a way that could create inaccurate perceptions and thus have a negative effect. Communication is basic way through which a business can promote itself and its product across borders and so it is very important that this be done in the most efficient manner without causing and negative impact upon the consumers. Thorough analysis of culture is essential in order to for communication to be well understood in the way intended. For example, the details written on a product may have to be translated into the local language. Also, non-verbal messages such as images may have a different meaning from culture to culture and if not properly surveyed may end up displaying the wrong meaning and impression.

Comparative Commentary on Global Warming Essay

â€Å"Taking action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions† (â€Å"Text A†), an international newspaper advertisement from Exxon Mobil and â€Å"An Agenda for Climate Action† (Text B†), a speech by Eileen Claussen, the President of Pew Center on Global Climate Change were both written in 2006 with the focus on global warming. The author in both commentaries strives to bring out the message that as human beings, we must take action to stop the worsening of climate change. Text A is a published article by a company that emphasizes that everyone in the world should be able to take part in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and that illustrates the range of actions, in particular technological advances the company has taken to address the problem. As for Text B, it is a speech delivered to university students that identifies the ultimate cause of the problems of climatic change the world is facing now. Even though the message of the two texts is the same, the way th ey convey it differs, in terms of the structure and content, language usage, purpose, and narrative perspective. The structure and content of the two texts are very similar even though there are some obvious differences. First, the introduction of the two texts is very similar in terms of the message their text strives to bring out. Text A starts with â€Å"We’d like to use this space to share our thoughts on actions to address the risk of climate change† while Text B is slightly different as it opens with a courteous introduction first but what follows is this, â€Å"I am here today to talk about what climate change solutions might entail†. This clearly shows that even though the two introductions i.e. the words used and the focus area are not the exact same, but without doubts, they are intended for the same purpose, to persuade people to take action. As for the sentencing and paragraph style, both are written in small paragraphs with long sentences, each having a specific point to make. In Text A, the 4th paragraph is about the need to develop new approaches that are suitable for consumers and to improve the present economic situation and current living standard. The 7th paragraph is about the company improving energy efficiency and having reduced a lot of emission. In Text B, the 3rd paragraph states the major cause for climate change, which is environmentally unfriendly actions done by humans. In the 5th paragraph, it talks about how the rate of mountain glaciers melting is increasing rapidly. These examples show that each paragraph from the two texts has a specific point to make and is clearly structured. Differences can also be found due to the different nature of the texts, Text A being an international newspaper advertisement that promotes their company, Exxon Mobil while Text B is a speech by Eileen Clausen in the Yale University with the aim to raise awareness of global warming to ring the bell that everyone must come together and take a â€Å"comprehensive approach†. First, they use different ways to inform their audiences.†¯ Text A is presented with descriptions and actual statistics of the actions the company have been taking so as to promote their company while Text B is a speech that strives to deliver the message to the audience that climate change is a serious problem, so uses more examples and easy-to-understand facts and information such as how the natural phenomenon that are occurring now is just â€Å"the tip of an iceberg†. Second, the way they start differ. For instance, Text B starts with a sentence in the very beginning that Text A does not, which is â€Å"Thank you very much. †¯It is grate to be here at Yale University†. This is because Text B is a speech so it must show some kind of gratitude for being able to give out a speech. In contrary, Text A is only an advertisement, which does not need to show gratitude that way, however, it has more to do with tone. The tone of†¯Text A is very formal and serious but not demanding because they are trying to promote their company. Although the tone in Text B has a certain level of seriousness, it is more towards the friendly-conversation kind of feeling. It is presented like how close the audience and Eileen Clausen are, this is so that the audience would be more interested and take account of the global issues more. The data of the two texts are not the same. Text A talks about solutions to reduce green house gas emissions, â€Å"Working with vehicle manufacturers and engine makers on programmers that could improve fuel economy by as much as 30% while significantly reducing emissions† and â€Å"improving energy efficiency at our facilities Steps taken since 1999 resulted in CO2 emissions saving of 11 million tones in 2005†¦Ã¢â‚¬  In Text B†, it talks about the risks that human activities have brought upon climate change. For instance,† what they showed is that the second largest land-based ice sheet in the world is losing ice twice as fast† and â€Å"we know that hurricanes are becoming more intense, not just in the Atlantic which gave us Katrina and Rita†¦Ã¢â‚¬ The information used in each of the texts to convey its message is different. Since Text A is an advertisement for its own company, it would be very uncommon for it not to pressure its audience into buying its products. Exxon Mobile does this by firing all the actions it has taken to tackle the problem of climatic change, creating the impression that using or buying their products is one of the ways to save the planet. However, since Text B is only a speech with no special interest, it only needs to address the seriousness of the situation without pressuring the audience that â€Å"these, if I may say this, are just the tip of the melting iceberg†, implying that what was said is not all that there is to it, there are many more risks out there. With and without the pressure, it shows how different the texts are and their impacts on the audience. As between the two texts, one focuses on solutions while another one on risks. Text A focuses on the solutions the company has come up with while Text B talks about the risks caused by human activities. In addition to that, Text A focuses on economics solutions while Text B focuses on geographic problems. For instance, in â€Å"Text A†, phrases such as â€Å"allow continued economic growth and improvements in living standard. Technological advances will be critical†highlight the economic aspects and developing technology to improve living stand requires money, so it is indirectly asking its customers to use or buy the company’s products. In Text B, the risks talked about are all related to the changes geographically not economic risks, such as â€Å"loss of mountain glaciers†, â€Å"but in all oceans where hurricanes occur† and â€Å"One study found that 130 species-both plants and animals- have responded to earlier spring warming over the last 30 years.† In addition to that, Text A focuses on achievements while Text B on problem.†¯ In Text A, the sentence, â€Å"working with vehicle manufacturers and engine makers on programmes that could improve fuel economy by as much as 30% while significantly reducing emissions† shows an achievement because by working with other manufacturers and company, Exxon Mobile would be able to benefit the fuel economy as well as reduce emissions. In Text B, the sentence,† we also know that we are experiencing a worldwide loss of mountain glaciers, a trend that is accelerating. By mid-century, most mountain glaciers may be gone,† reveals a problem. Hence, the focus of each Text is different although they bring out the same message. Although both texts talks about reducing emissions, Text A, â€Å"Our scientists and engineers are working to reduce emissions today and in Text B, â€Å"We need to move from an economy based on burning of fossil fuels to one based on energy efficiency.† Text A is more prone to the side of benefiting their consumers â€Å" and Text B is prone to talk about the cause of global warming â€Å"The impacts of climate change across the globe are occurring in patters that can only explained by human activities and not by natural variations in regional climate.† The ultimate message that the two texts have differs, Text A if to promote their company and to persuade customers to do something therefore buy their product. Text B is to persuade people that we must take action to prevent the worsening of climatic change. This is shown by the conclusions which it also includes the use of technical words, even though both texts use 1st person as narrative perspective to express their information, at first in Text A, the use of â€Å"we† was to represent the whole Exxon Mobil â€Å"We’d like to use this space to share our thoughts on actions† but it changed to a â€Å"we†, which meant the society and themselves â€Å"We all have a role to play.† Initially, in Text A, the use of â€Å"I† was to represent the speaker, the president of Pew Center on Global Climate Change â€Å"I am here today to talk about what climate change solutions might entail† but it literally changed to â€Å"We†, again it includes everyone â€Å"We need to act now to cone up with ways to limit emissions growth without.† The switch of the technical words emphasizes the message that wants to be sent across so they make everyone as a whole, make them think they are involved and would have consideration on whether to act or not. The people targeted by each commentary are different. For Text A, since it is a published advertisement of a company, a profit-making company, to be specific, the targeted audience undeniably would be its customers (the public) in the sense that buying their products would amount to saving the planet. In contrast, â€Å"Text B† has a narrower focus on university students â€Å"It is great to be here at Yale University†, people of high intellect and education, so explanation is not needed, therefore the message are more straightforwardly expressed. However, on a more in-depth analysis of the content of their commentary as discussed above, it may be that Text B is able to reach a wider audience than Text A. The reason is that the language used in Text B is easier to understand, contains more common, day-to-day language, for example â€Å"The earth is warming; the impacts-once only predictions- are now upon us and are likely to worsen,† whereas almost half of the Text A in fact involves technical language, for example â€Å"Exxon Mobil is the lead sponsor and study areas include solar, hydrogen, biofuels and advanced transportation,† which can be thought to be targeting at people such as professors, university students, climate change ambassadors, engineers, surveyors, etc. In conclusion, Text A and Text B have many similarities and differences between the content and language usage, for example the ultimate message, talking about risks or solutions, geographical problems or economy problems, technical language and tone etc. There are also many other differences and similarities that haven’t been mentioned such as the Text A inform in present continuous, Text B is repetitive and does not patronize, scope (broad or limited, modern or historical) etc. Lastly, the two texts clearly convey the same theme through the description of solutions and risks, to take action for climate change.

Liza Dellaratta. Ms. Crouse . Us Gov. . 2/28/17. Congress

Liza Dellaratta Ms. Crouse US Gov. 2/28/17 Congress Quarter 3 Writing Assignment Part 1: What is Congress? A bicameral legislature is a legislature in which there are two houses where each house has a specific jobs to attend to. There are many reasons as to why a bicameral legislature exist, some of them include; historical, practical, and theoretical. The historical reasons are given to us by British Parliament who insisted on having a two house government dating back to the 1300s. The practical reasons came about through the framers. They embarked upon this decision when settling a conflict between two states. And finally, the theoretical reason possible, and the most important reason it was put to action was to prevent the federal†¦show more content†¦The federal government puts tax on everything, this allows them to take a percentage of our money away from us and use it for the country. Right now the US in debt and can’t afford to run this country alone. They use our money for several things everyday. However, there are limits to what the can tax such as; they can no t tax Church services because it goes against our first ammendment right. For most americans they experience this power in action every time they get payed. Working people that are paid in a paycheck form have dealt with this first hand. Every Time they get their paycheck a percentage of their money is deducted for federal taxes. Majority of the time it is a decent chunk of money that is being taken away from them to help this country survive. This is probably the most often used example of this power. Part 3: What is Impeachment? Impeachment is the act of bringing charges to someone that challenges their integrity and or validity. People in high authority with the government can be impeached for bribery, treason, other high crimes, or even misdemeanors. The House is given the power to impeach a person but it requires a majority vote. Then the Senate has the right to try the person that the charges are being brought on but for this to happen they need a â…” vote. This process has happened only twice in American history; once with Andrew Jackson and once