Policymaking Domain and National Rifle Association Discussion

November 28, 2022

Policymaking Domain and National Rifle Association Discussion

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Policymaking Domain and National Rifle Association Discussion

[Order Now]

1) Think of an insider claimsmaker — they/it can be an individual, institution, or an organization. What characteristics make them an insider claimsmaker? How have they used their power and influence in the policymaking domain, in the media domain, and/or to sway popular opinion? A useful example is found in lecture 8 focusing on the National Rifle Association (NRA) and their influence on policy with the Dickey Amendment. (Links to an external site.)

2) In a past lecture, we learned that the structure of a claim has grounds, warrants, and conclusions. Grounds can include typifying examples, naming of a problem, and statistics. Yet, I noted that naming a problem is not the same as defining it (see lecture 3). We have many useful examples of this from history. For example, the Spanish Influenza did not originate in Spain but was named that because Spain was one of the few countries reporting on the outbreak at the time (Links to an external site.). Spain, in 1918, was not censoring news like other war-time countries were at the time. (Interestingly, the Spanish called the disease the “French Flu” because they believed it started in France.) Think of a troubling condition/social problem that had a name that did not quite suit the definition of that troubling condition/problem. Tell us how that name came to be and why it gained widespread traction. In what ways was the naming of the problem not the same as defining it?

Instructions: Please review the two discussion questions below, provide a response for one of them. Response posts should be 2-3 paragraphs. After you post your response, please reply to a post written by your fellow peers (you can provide more than one reply if you wish). You may have to log on at a later time to post your reply to another student’s post. Please be considerate in your posts and replies.

REPLY TO:

An insider claims maker that comes to mind immediately would be the president of the United States. Because the President is backed by the US Government, they are going to receive information before the general public does. With that, the information they receive is going to automatically be credible because the president only deals with the highest appointed positions in the government.

I personally would argue that their use of power shifts throughout the different time periods of their term. During the election process it is pretty clear that the only power they are using is for their attempt to sway popular opinion, this initially gets them into office. That is where I would say that this changes to using their power to influence policymaking as well as the media. No presidents want to leave a negative legacy when their term is up therefore they are going to use their power to put out a positive image to the media in order to grow their support

For this weeks discussion post I am going to be talking about two individuals connected to FOX Business News. The two individuals I will be talking about today are Eleanor Terrett and Charles Gasparino. To give a short summary of they are and what they are doing currently, they both are news reporters for FOX Business and are currently covering a story of what I believe to be one of the biggest financial lawsuits in the history of the United States (Ripple Labs vs SEC).

So what makes them insiders? First we have to define what an insider claimsmaker is and that is somebody that has easy access to publicity as well as people in power. When talking about the two news reporters mentioned above they have both of these qualities. Both Charles and Eleanor have easy access to publicity given that they are news reporters. In addition, they have connections to people in power that can give them insights on pending litigations or whatever story they are covering at the time.

[Order Now]

With these powers behind them, the two individuals have used there voice and connections to shed light on the ongoing litigation case between the SEC and Ripple Labs. They have used “sources” that have predicted certain outcomes of the lawsuit as well as their platform to spread opinions on the case itself. Given the pure size of their platform, they have definitely swayed a lot of people one way. They use their platform to call on the potential corruption going on at the SEC and to call for the government agency to be investigated.

Policymaking Domain and National Rifle Association Discussion

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.