Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever. - Gandhi

Monday, April 19, 2010

Peer Response for Laura's Blog

Laura explains the effective endorsement of beer by super stud, Lance Armstrong. She explains how he is a great celebrity to endorse anything, because he has a reputation of being physically fit and many people supported his “Livestrong” campaign. The beer he advertises is Michelob Ultra Light Beer. Laura quotes Lance’s opinion of the beer and how he honestly likes to drink it on occasion, therefore, is proud to support it. Lance portrays the image of a healthy, well rounded human being, which is why his endorsement for a light beer seems believable.

I enjoyed Laura’s post on Lance Armstrong’s alcoholic endorsement. I find it amusing and odd for a professional athlete to sign a market deal with an alcoholic beverage company. She chose a very interesting topic and supported it well with her link to www.nysportsjournalism.com. The article on this webpage explains in detail about Armstrong’s endorsement of the alcoholic beverage. It begins by explaining how it may seem unusual that an athlete as popular as Armstrong would promote alcohol. It also explains how the NFL, NBA, and Major League Baseball do not allow their athletes to sign marketing deals with alcoholic beverage companies. I can understand why this is, because I know that these pro sports represent total fitness and wellbeing: and alcohol is not something that most people would think of as healthy. However, this article explains that Michelob Ultra stresses the point that its beer is so light in calories, that it is the perfect choice for people who are into health and fitness. Michelob is honored to have Armstrong as their spokesman, because he has dominated in his sport for years and he can relate to people who are active but do enjoy a nice cold beer once in a while.

Sunday, April 18, 2010

Sexual Education

Should sex ed. be taught in schools?

Jessalyn is in favor of sex education in schools. She understands why some people may oppose the idea, however, she realizes that most parents are not equipped enough to be able to scientifically explain everything there is to know about sex. Jessalyn acknowledges the fact that some parents may not know what to do or say when their children begin their stressful teenage years. This may not apply to all parents, however. Some parents know exactly what to say to their children about sex, but the kids are so preoccupied with their own lives that they would rather not talk to mom and dad about the touchy subject.

Alycia, however, is in opposition of sex education in schools. She believes that parents should teach their children about sex, because they have control of the learning environment. She argues that topics relating to sex, like human anatomy, diseases, and human relationships, should be taught in separate, specific, classes. Her belief is that exposing children to sex education will lead to misinformation and/or higher risk of sexual activity of their own.

I believe that Jessalyn’s article is more convincing, because she acknowledges the opposing viewpoints and relates to more people with her argument. Alycia’s article seems very judgmental and criticizing of others; it just felt like she was trying so hard to lay her personal beliefs on everyone. After reading these articles, my opinion of this topic has not changed (probably because the article supporting my opinion seemed more convincing than the other). I believe that sexual education in schools is very important. I understand that parents have a great role in teaching their children about sex; however, there are always opportunities for the kids to learn something else in another environment.