No talking

Not talking for a day isn't as bad as I anticipated it to be. There were a few times I slipped up; like when I ran into some random kid in the hallway... I wasnt about to depict my apology or he'd think I'm a bigger freak than he already did for running right into him. And a few classes I was in had almost all AP language students in it, like Spanish 3 and getting things finished was complicated for us and for Mrs. Remy. Overall it wasn't too bad but not being able to speak does interrupt with the point someone is trying to get acrossed.

Postman's Interview

One situation that Postman parallels in this interview to his book "Amusing Ourselves to Death" is the fact that media is taking over. People believed that all the technology would not be able to transform into the new millenium without getting messed up somehow. All of this was believe simply because the media portrayed it as a bigger deal than necessary. People don't think things through on their own anymore, simply because they do not have to. The media "thinks through" situations for society and tells them what they ought to believe on that subject or circumstance. Our opinions are beginning to be controlled by the media and can't even recognize it.
A second point that Postman makes in his interview is that "humans will become the pets of their computers." He is continuing to make the point that he made in his book that humans are being controlled by technology and are losing touch with resources that could be much more beneficial even if they are not at fast, colorful, or exciting. We are losing contact with individuality and formulating our own opinions to listening to what we are being told and following it.

Civility Not Censorship

1)Chavez' intent with her first six words is to show the validity of the side that she is ultimately going to be disagreeing with.

2)Chavez used the word bellicose in her column to somewhat agree with the opposing side that the metaphors being made can be harsh and aggressive, however they are common and not necessarily wrong.

3A)Chavez is trying to persuade the reader that the idea of using harsh terms, although can be offensive, aren't completely wrong and have been blown out of proportion.
B) When she backs her point up with history and how the words "gay" and "queer" were not intentionally supposed to be negative terms but ended up being twisted when people used them in negative senses.

I agree with Chavez that these simple words and phrases are being blown up because apparently people don't have enough to talk about. They are meant to be effective in persuading and arguing politically and not to offend or make others react in a violent and unnecessary way.