Essay 2 rough draft

Monday May 2, 201, this date by itself seems like any other day, but knowing it is the day the US successfully killed Osama Bin Laden, makes it as an important day for the US and the war against al-Qaeda. The death of this prominent al-Qaeda member was taking unanimously as a success and something worthy of praise. The seal team given credit for the mission was idolized thought they remained anonymous, and the President’s decision to carry out the attack was not questioned. Later in 2011, another high-ranking official in an al-Qaeda affiliate was targeted and killed, but this killing created controversy over who the government was allowed to target. On September 30, 2011, Anwar al-Awlaki and several others were killed in a CIA led drone strike in Yemen. When first looking at this, there seems to be little room for controversy over the killing. Anwar al-Awlaki had been placed on the CIA “kill or capture” list in April 2010, and had been accused of assisting multiple terror attempts on US soil since September 11. The controversy comes with Anwar al-Awlaki citizenship, being both an United States and Yeman citizen. He was the first United States Citizen to be placed the kill or capture list, and the first to be targeted and killed in an American lead attack.
Anwar al-Awlaki was born in New Mexico in 1971, where is father studying agriculture. At the age of seven he moved to Yeman where he grew up. He returned to the US to receive and American education and received a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering and master’s degree in education (NY TIMES OFFICAL CITE LATER). He first attracted attention from the FBI in 1999 with allegations of contact with militants. At the time he was the vice president of an Islamic charity that was believed to be funneling money to terrorists. He also had connections with two of the hijackers from the September 11 attacks. They came to his mosque to pray prior to the attacks ( NY TIMES). His primary threats came with a website on online influence to reach a younger Islamic audience to convert them to Jihadist ways. He moved to London in 2002, but shortly after that returned to Yemen. In Yemen he was imprisoned for a short time and after being released his message became much more extreme and he gained more attention from the FBI and CIA.
Anwar al-Awlaki had communications with many terrorist caught in spoiled attack attempts. In December 2009, the “underwear bomber” plot was spoiled, when explosives did not detonate. Umar Abdulmutallab, the man responsible for the attempt, had been in contact with Anwar long before his attack. Similarily, Faisal Shazad who attempted to use a car bomb in Times Square and Nidal Hasan who went on a deadly shooting in Fort Hood, Texas, both were in contact with Anwar about their planned attacks. Anwar acknowledged contact with these men in early 2010, which subsequently led hid to be put on the CIA capture or kill list. Even with all these facts against him, and he clearly stated hate and desire to harm the US, he was still a citizen, so the legality of killing he comes to question.
Barrack Obama gave a statement on September 30, 2011 announcing the death of Anwar al-Awlaki calling it a major milestone in the fight against al-Qaeda and its affiliates. He said, “The death of Anwar is a major blow to al-Qaeda’s most active affiliate. He took the lead in planning and directing efforts to murder innocent Americans and he repeatedly called on individuals in the United States and around the globe to kill innocent men, women and children to advance a murderous agenda.” This statement given shortly after Anwar’s death was to inform American’s of what the President saw a something noteworthy. He belittled Anwar to the public through his announcement by stating Anwar’s goals of harming Americans. He presents all of Anwar’s goals, and failed terror plots to justify his death. Barrack Obama, though, never says that Anwar al-Awlaki was a US citizen. This is done, so initially his decision to have Anwar killed is not questioned. Unless a person was aware of Anwar prior to Obama’s speech, they would not have known he was a US citizen. Through the rapid spread of this event through online media, Anwar’s background was soon revealed and people began to question his killing.
--how do I cite Obama’s speech
It was brought to light that the killing of a US citizen violated many rights guaranteed to citizens through the constitution. The fourth and fifth amendments call for no unreasonable seizures by the government and the right to due process of the law. On top of these, murder is illegal and bans on assassinations. Initially, no justification was given for Anwar’s killing, and because of this activist groups and Anwar’s father filled papers to sue the US government over the killing (NPR). The suit was soon thrown out though because “it involved state secrets and raised questions that should be answered in congress, not the courts” (NPR). In addition to these activist groups calling for justification on Anwar’s “murder”, it cause a controversial issue for politicians to take sides on. Ron Paul had very strong opinions on the matter calling the death an “assassination” on the premises of Anwar’s citizenship and lack of trial.
In response to the uproar on legal justification, the Obama administration released a legal memorandum the offered the needed justification. It was written shortly after September 11, and gave legal justification for acting despite bans on assassinations, and laws against murder. Charlie Savage a writer at the New York Times wrote an in-depth article looking into the justifications from the memorandum. His major issue with it was that the document did not directly state that the actions were justified when carried out against an American citizen. This fact aside, he continues to question the justification. It is not “murder” when killing a wartime enemy. This being true Savage questioned if the missile was fired by a CIA official, who does not wear a uniform, and is not really “at war”. The document stated that when possible, the militant should be captured. Diplomatic issues with placing soldiers on Yemen soil and the risk to American commandos could have been reason that a capture was not feasible, but Salvage points out that both these issues were ignored in the raid on Osama’s complex. So in fact it may have been possible to plan and execute a capture.
Though salvage points out flaws in the justification, parts of it he finds reasonable and true. The document stated that citizens who had joined an enemy force “can be detained and prosecuted in a military court just like noncitizen enemies” (CITED). It also looked into Anwar’s location, since he was not in the “hot battlefield,” but since he still posed a threat to the US, the justification still applied. The final point Savage looked into was Yemen’s Sovereignty and firing a missile on their soil, but permission had secretly been granted to the US to carry out the attack. Savage shows mixed opinions on the justification on the killing, looking in depth and questioning all the justification given by the Obama administration.
Online letter to the editors on the New York Times article “ When the US Kills an American Citizen” offers some unique takes on the justification as well. Neil Mullen writes:
Without the rule of law, we are left with might makes right. In this decade, we are the mightiest and may deploy drones or Navy Seals to kill those deemed guilty without a trial and proven evidence. In some future decade, another country may deploy such measures, legitimized by such precedent, against targets on our soil.
Mullen offers a unique opinion about law and power. The US cannot just do as it pleases with its power. It needs to have certain legal justification to carry out military attacks. The US may be the largest world power today, but some day another country could be carrying out similar attack on US soil, which would not settle well with government officials. George Wolf an army veteran had a very different opinion. He writes, “I think that it’s a clear-cut case. Anwar al-Awlaki may have been a United States citizen, but the moment he became actively involved in a military campaign against the United States, he became an enemy our military was obligated to fight and kill.” Having faced war, he knows anything has to be done to stop threats against his country. Because of this he does not see Anwar as a fellow citizen but as any other enemy.

Revised Blog

I chose a blog from unit one discussing how I have seen blogging thus far through the class. Upon re-reading my blog, I feel I presented a very short discussion on what blogging has really done for me. Through revising it, I forward and counter multiple points I previously stated to present a stronger position on my opinion of blogging.

Writing has typically been something I have despised doing, but blogging has provided a new medium for writing, that for me, does not feel like traditional writing and therefore I seem to not despise it, but strangely enjoy it. Yes writing a 250-word response is easy to do for an article, and originally that’s all I did. But I have since started to expand my pieces beyond that, which I find surprising due to my mindset that I do not like writing. By no means are my lengthier blogs essays, which would be expected for a traditional writing class, but they have defiantly become more encompassing and in depth than my once bare minimum 240-250 word blogs. The original appeal to the blogs was that they could be short, but I now do not feel satisfied with just 250 words. Getting more in the mind set that blogging is conversational, my writing, which originally started as more formal writing in blogs, has become more relaxed and allowed to expand on ways I did not feel like I could in traditional writing. I originally stated that my attitude toward reading and writing on the web have remained unchanged, and I feel this was due to me not looking deep enough into what blogging has done for me. My opinion of writing on the web has improved through blogging. I feel it has advanced my writing in many ways, and provided a means of writing that I kind of enjoy reading (hard for me to believe I am actually saying that). Reading and writing are important for us to be doing, and while I have always believed that, before this class my writing on the web was minimal. I said they were things we cannot ignore, but for the longest time I was ignoring one of them. Now that I have personally seen the advantages to writing on the web, I feel I am in a better position to say they are important and advocate it to others. I had said that without knowing how to read and writing on the web we will fall on reading and writing standards. I can now say this is very true, and reading others blogs of classmates, some of whom are more experienced in writing on the web and in general, I can see how I have fallen behind on my ability to write on the web. It is important for everyone to read and write on the web so that they can stay connected to the world, and not be without the abilities to do both of these when needed.

"Taking an Approach

Harris’ idea of taking an approach is moving beyond a stereo typical school writing that often just adds additional to points already argued. One must transform and reshape the ideas, no merely replace them. Taking an approach can be similar to both forwarding and countering but one takes on a style of a writer. It has more to do with how the ideas are presented and how a conclusion is reached. He offers three main methods of position one’s work to take an approach; they are acknowledging influences, turning an approach on itself, and reflexivity. Acknowledging influences can be further broken down into defining concerns, characteristic methods and style. Defining concerns is identifying what problems the author presents and why those were chosen. Characteristic methods is how the author answers the problems and the style is looking at what qualities of the writing appeal to you. It is all about identifying which parts of an authors writing appeal to you, so you can approach your writing in a similar manor. Turning the approach on itself is asking the writer the same questions presented to the reader, using both the subject and method of analysis in your approach. Reflexivity is looking back on one’s own writing to make sure you are on the proper approach.
The Onion always takes a more “out there” approach because their stories are meant for entertainment. The Onion can report on current events, publishing a story partially based on facts. These facts can be twisted and turn in order to be entertaining, but they are still presented in a professional manor. Their approach mimics that of a trustworthy news site and because of this they have been mistakenly cited as one. In this approach the validity of the story is traded for entertainment, and the reader must recognize this. The New York Times can be seen “taking an approach” on political issues. The paper in general takes a liberal approach, which can cause a story to be slightly swayed and in favor of a liberal take on an issue. This makes it difficult for a fair, unbiased political story to be presented.

"Countering"

Countering a text is not simply proving that a certain text is wrong or has flaws in areas. Countering is adding to an argument in both its strengths and weaknesses. Harris’s view of countering is to offer a different way of thinking on a particular topic. A deep understanding and close attention is needed for successfully countering in order to properly expand and redirect arguments. The three main methods of countering Harris presents are: arguing the other side, uncovering values, and dissenting. Rarely is an argument completely wrong, arguing the other side addresses the need to look at the other argument to show what the author did well in order to expand on. This can also include looking for something the author may have left unclear. Your argument can be based off clarifying these vague areas in another argument. Uncovering values is looking at the definitions of all the words to see if the author was unclear on a definition or assumed a certain meaning for a word without stating it. Harris writes that noticing what a certain text fails to consider is not an easy task, but is a key to writing good criticism and to establish a good counter. Dissenting is understanding the limits of an idea, and being able to identify when an author has crossed those limits. With a shared idea, you can present how another argument is with in the limits of an idea, supporting yours while offering evidence against the other text.

The Onion counters many arguments presented through major news sources. The goal of the Onion is to provide entertainment and it does this by presenting news stories that are blown out of proportion or intended to show the ridiculousness of an actual news article. The Onion countered a fairly recent article about Peyton Manning posted around the web, notably on Sport Illustrated here. The articles states that Manning, who has had 3 neck surgeries in the past 19 months and vertebrae fused, has been cleared to play football again. The Onion presents a similar article, dissenting Manning’s real ability to play. The question that even though Manning’s neurosurgeon cleared him to play, with his history is it really best for him to continued to get beaten and clubbed. In the Onions satirical manor the article states Manning’s doctor has cleared him to be clubbed and thrown to the ground by 300-pound men. When first reading the article on Sports Illustrated one might think it’s a good thing for him to get back to playing, but realizing some of the truth presented in the Onion article, one might reconsider if it is smart for him to continue playing. The Onion provides some facts that might get over looked when not presented to the reader.

"Forwarding"

Harris describes forwarding as a way to extend texts. You are taking the ideas in one text to support or advance your own texts. The four main ways “forwarding” is done are: illustrating, authorizing, borrowing and extending. Illustrating allows the reader to visualize and see an example that supports the text. Illustrating can be seen as creating metaphors for the reader while also drawing in the readers’ attention more. Authorizing is using another person’s text, who is knowledgeable in their field, to support and back up your own text. Citing a person of authority or well versed in your subject can validate your argument or point. Borrowing is using an idea of a text to advance your process of thinking through a topic. One can borrow an idea without coming to terms with an author’s entire piece, but simply understanding and correctly applying the borrowed idea. Extending is similar to borrowing except it expands on a larger amount of a text. A characteristic marker of extending is a substitution of a tern in the authors idea to support your own. The most effective forwarding is using these methods in combination with each other.


The Onion often forwards major news events through its blog. The Onion borrows a major point in its article seen here. It is an article around Mit Romney’s win in the Florida primary. Since the Onion presents its news in a satirical manor, it borrows only a small idea from a major news story, which can be seen covered by the New York Times here. The small-borrowed piece provides people with a minimal amount of current news, while the Onion satirically expands this news into a false story about a rave Romney threw. Informing people on Romney’s win remains the same through the forwarding, but all other facts about the primary full results of the election is lost.

The New York Times and The Onion

The New York Times and The Onion very much function as a press sphere. The internet has allowed The Onion to join the press sphere. The Onion provides a unique presentation of stories people are interested in. Though the stories on The Onion may not be true and are presented in a satirical manor, but it still provides the reader with the news. It can sometimes be good to see some of the extremes in a story to better understand how some people may see something as a negative or how something may not even be plausible. At the same time, while The Onion may create false facts about a story to blow it out of proportion, this can interest the reader to find out a more factual account. The New York times then provide the reader with this factual account. They both generate interest in each other with one providing mostly entertainment about news stories and the other truthful stories. Without the traditional news bringing in new stories, The Onion would have little to write about because a majority of its stories are based off current events. These are only a couple of the endless sources in the press sphere. People still get to choose if these are the press sources they want to follow. They both provide very different presentations to many of the same stories that can spark different reactions and thinking about a news story. They both feed off each other, which was Jarvis’ idea of a news ecology.

Press Sphere

The press used to be the sole mediator to present the news to the public. All worldly affairs went through a news source, to be edited and neatly presented to the public. Now the “press” has expended any includes a multitude of sources. Stories can now be expended on because other people and sources can comment and provide information on stories. No longer is the press the center of news, but people are. People are able to look into stories on their own to get a broader scope of the story. Jarvis says the new news sphere does not allow stories to die anymore. The stories will always be accessible, continually be added to and can be linked and used for future stories. I feel the points he makes about news today are very true. I do not rely on the press for all my news. I hear news stories from friends, through social median, and mindless wandering through the internet. Also through reading online, stories can link to references and personal accounts of a story. I find this much more interesting than a single representation of a large story. News sources must also watch what they publish as well because sources are so readily available, one could easily find contradicting evidence or stories. I get to choose what I want to read into, I am not forced to read only what is presented to me through traditional press. This is what Jarvis said the press sphere has allowed for, people to control their media and news and be able to contribute and debate it.

Analysis of The Onion

Purpose: Provides a comedic and satirical take on current news stories both in US and around the world. Main purpose is to entertain by stretching stories, taking them out of context, and creating false stories.

Audience: Younger to middle aged newsreaders looking for entertainment not a truthful presentation of the news. Majority of it is presented online thus attracting a larger younger audience.

Author: No strong political connection, post articles about ridiculousness of both parties. They comment on articles from all points of view depending on what provides entertainment.

The Onion

I chose to follow The Onion because it provides comedic and satirical views of current news articles. It is easy to read because it is intended to entertain while also providing some reference to current worldly news. I am able to read more through an entertaining medium like The Onion and then if it is a current article that interests me i can search for related articles on other news sources for the true story.

The New York Times

I read the New York Times a couple times a week. It has yet to make it into my daily habit of checking the news and I think it is because I feel I have to check it more as homework rather than reading the news. My experience with the New York Times though has been a good one. I read mostly articles on current world or US events. With those though I rarely read political articles about the presidential candidates even though that is a lot of the news being reported recently. On top of world events, I read articles in the tech section. Many of these grab my attention because I am interested in new technology and articles explaining it. I know, because of my interests, I have missed a lot information about political candidates and the primaries going on and also a majority of the rioting, and movements happening in the middle east. There have been many large headline articles on these topics but I still chose to not even look over them. The New York Times has influenced my other reading habits because I do not visit it as often as other news sources and when I do I remember how selective I am in the news I read. Even though I realize this, I have yet to change my habits much on the news I read.  It also has showed me that even though it is just another news source, since it is “homework” I am less likely to visit it, which is surprising to me. 

How we get our news

Our class, surprisingly, had a big diversity on their sources of news. Still though, A majority of our class relies on the internet as their news sources. Facebook is surprisingly a prominent news sources for lots of us too on top of  news specific sites. The news sites we all visit vary from person to person but many of people visit at least one or two. These provide us with the quick satisfaction of seeing what is going on at any time of the day. I was shocked at how many other sources of news our class had. There were a couple who said they still read the paper, or previously read the paper when it was more readily available to them. I can see the appeal of this because I feel if I had a paper to read I would read into more articles on broader topics than I do on the internet.  On top this, the radio was mentioned a few times. I know for me personally, I try to skip all commercials if I have to listen to the radio so I have not really looked at it as a news source. TV also was a fairly common news source. Many people said they watched the Colbert Report or the Daily show for news.  Though these often done in a comedic fashion but still provide the relevant news of the day. Using the radio or TV for news also allows for a person to be multitasking, not necessarily focusing on the news, but paying attention when words of interest are mentioned. The appeal to this form of news is similar to that of the internet because people are able to get more done if they are not solely listening or reading the news, which many people find vital in our fast paced society. 

Extended Essay Final draft

Adam Clark

Writ 1122

Eric Leake

2/06/2012

Audience:

            My audience is one who is unaware, or do not believing that the internet provides benefits to both reading and writing. Though the audience may be unaware of the benefits they are familiar with the internet’s uses and have had some experience with it themselves. The paper presents the facts without a personal influence as to not say how the internet has affected a single person’s experience but a populations’ as a whole. The essay presents all the positive effects the internet can provide and shows how each thing can be seen in a positive light.

Reading and writing: Positively Influenced by the Internet

One reads in the mediums that they experience everyday. This may be through novels; magazines; newspapers; and, more recently, online through the Internet.  With this new source of information, the way people read is changing. An endless amount of information to read is at the hands of anyone who can get internet access. The internet also allows new information to become available at any time of the day, no longer do people have to wait for some new big news to be released through an article in the daily paper or magazine. Now that this new information can so readily become available to people, new information can also lose interest quickly by other new more important information. Because of this need to quickly satisfy a reader, the way people are writing is changing as well. Online writing needs to quickly get the readers attention and not be to long as it might bore the reader. The internet has also allowed reading and writing to come together more as it provides new opportunities to comment, criticize and question a writer. With this new source of media, society is adapting to maximize the potential it has to offer; these adaptations call for a change in how one reads and writes both on and off the web.

            The internet has allowed people to read and write more, through their daily lives, than ever before.  Since information can be so easily distributed, people are eager to read the latest news. Carr says “the net is becoming a universal medium, the conduit for most of the information the flows through my eyes and ears and into my mind” (Carr 1). Like Carr, people want to take in new information; and now that it is easily available, people want to continue reading to learn more. Carr also states “my mind now expects to take in information the way the net distributes it: in a swiftly moving stream of particle” (1). People expect to quickly go over large amounts of information, wanting to continue to take in as much information as possible. This has allowed for a new style of reading to emerge, adapted to the desires of people’s new reading goals. This style of reading stemmed from the internet, thus that being its intended medium to be used in; if one uses an internet reading style for all reading, he or she can lose the authors intent.

With people’s desire to read more, the need for more writing has become present. The internet has provided a multitude of new opportunities for professional and amateur writes alike. Thompson says the internet has provided many additional mediums for people to write in. “So much socialization takes place online, and it almost always involves text,” and though the text may not be long, well thought out pieces, it does keep people writing more often (Thompson 1). Similarly, Sullivan believes the internet has enticed more people to write. “Every writer since the printing press has longed for a means to publish himself and reach--instantly—any reader on earth,” since this is now possible, people are more likely to write because they know it can be distributed to people interested in reading it (Sullivan 3). The “average Joe” writer can now publish his pieces to world, something that had been previously reserved for mostly professional writers.  The internet has positively changed reading and writing habits in the sense that people read more because more information is available to them and write more because writing is more easily distributed to people.

            In addition to getting people to write more, the internet has changed the style of how people write. Writing on the internet has no editor, and is solely controlled by the writer. Since the internet makes writing available to anyone, it has forced writers to identify and write to an audience. Thompson said this was  “something virtually no one in my generation did” (Thompson 1). This was a vital change to writing because previously, a majority of writing was only presented to its intended audience so it was only read in its intended context. Since it is now presented to anyone through the web, the writer must know his intended audience in order to have effective writing. Not only are people more capable to write to a specific audience, that audience now has the possibility to comment and to question the writer about a piece. Sullivan says blogging is “at its best, a conversation rather than a production.” (Sullivan 4) For Sullivan, blogging becomes a conversation because readers are able to leave their comments and questions directly on his blog. He then has an opportunity to answer those questions, making his writing very conversational. Though not all-online writing allows readers to leave comments, a reader can still post his comments else where online to spark conversation with others. By enabling writing to become more conversational, it no longer leaves the writer in a position of dominance over his audience, but brings reading and writing together because both parties have the ability to speak about a piece.

            Online writing has become shorter than more traditional printed writing, and though this may seem like a negative effect; it is not. Sullivan sees that shorter writing, through his blogging, as something positive. He says, “on the web one sentence links are as legitimate as thousand word diatribes.” (Sullivan 4) Because he is able to link to sources through his blogging, his writing does not need to be as long. Sullivan is able to guide readers to his sources allowing them to read them first hand, eliminating the need for him to summarize his sources. With this new style of writing though, Sullivan says “the notion that blogging should some how replace traditional writing is as foolish as it is pernicious” (Sullivan 8).  One must be remembered that traditional writing will always have its place even as writing changes with new technology. A major issue seen with this shorter writing style is its effect on readers. With the fast-paced short writing on the internet, people may be less likely to read a longer article or print novel. Carr expresses concern with people tendencies to “power browse” instead of reading an entire article (Carr 2). Since so much information is available to people, they do not want to spend the time to read a lengthy article or novel anymore. Sullivan has a similar concern; but through saying “no one wants to read a 9,000 word treatise online,” he presents it similarly to his comment on blogging (Sullivan 4). His key point is through mentioning online. Reading on the internet will not replace traditional reading, but online people do not want to read a lengthy article. Online writing has adapted to peoples desire to quickly scan and read articles. People must not solely read online, online reading is important to the future of reading, but it cannot replace traditional reading. With two different writing styles for print and online media, one must not read them same. One must know how to read an article in its particular context and use an appropriate reading style, whether it is power browsing or in-depth reading. Likewise with writing, one should not write in the same style online and for a formal paper. It is a power to be able to read and write in both settings, but one must know when to use each power.

            This is not the first time reading and writing have gone through a big change. The invention of the printing press and typewriter, both had similar changes on the availability of information to the public. Without change, reading and writing would become tiresome, repetitive tasks and no longer interest people. Change allows them to adapt to peoples needs, to better suit and interest them. With new technology and the internet, people are able to distribute their writings to new audiences easily. Being able to publish ones own writing encourages more people to write because they know it will be read. Even if one is not posting his writings on the web, simply interacting with the web makes one write more than ever before. All this new writing, on top of previous writings, is now available to anyone at a click of a button. With the ability to easily access so much knowledge people are more eager to read on the web and search for articles of interest. The danger with this though, is people may become accustomed to short articles on the web, and then sometimes find it difficult to transition back to longer web and print readings. Internet reading should be an addition, not a replacement, of traditional reading. The internet has provided the means to expand ones reading and writing capabilities. People need to maximize the new potential the internet has provided for reading and writing by doing just that; spending more time using the web to write and read

Works Cited

Thompson, Clive. “Clive Thompson on the New Literacy”. Wired Magazine. 24 August 2009.

Carr, Nicholas. “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” The Atlantic July-Aug. 2008. The Atlantic. Web. 25 Jan 2012.

Sullivan, Andrew. "Why I Blog." The Atlantic Nov. 2008. The Atlantic. Web. 25 Jan. 2012.

Getting the News

I get a majority of my news online. I only look at print media for news on occasion when I am at home and I see a news paper laying around the house, but since I do not ever pick one up while I am at school I rely on the internet as my main source of news.  Occasionally, I will hear about something new from a friend while in class or just talking, and that normally results in a Google search about it once I have a chance and if I remember. For online news, I check either CNN or BBC at least once a day, but normally I try to look at both twice a day. Normally checking them once when I get up in the morning before class and once at night before I go to sleep.  Another source of new for me on the web is stumble upon. It can provide lots of more “random” news that what CNN or BBC reports on but it is still interesting to me and current breakthroughs or news.  I can spend a lot more time reading news on stumble upon because it always provides new random articles, and even if it shows two articles on the same “news” they are normally different points of view. This is nice to get a broader grasp on what really happened not just one persons account of it.