Website Design and Its Impact on the Audience Free Essay Example, 2000 words

Moreover, it also seeks to explain the outcomes of the situation as well as propose some linguistically based and IT-oriented methods to solve such a problem, as well as to increase recall and precision in the process of information retrieval. The article is written in an understandable and easy, albeit formal, way from the abstract to the conclusion; it concentrates on the designers or maintainers of websites. The writer highlights how to design webliographies along with explaining the step-by-step process to be followed by the website designer. The writer also inserted a brief review of the past theoretical text on webliographies, through which we can better understand this topic. In terms of the structure, the writer does a very good job of stating his arguments which are made to the point. Finally, from a reader s point of view, I consider this article interesting and easy to read as the content is organized, well developed and clearly expressed. The fifth article is written by Andrew LaPointe with the title What color is your website? This article discusses color, which he states is an important feature in the designing of a website as it can affect and influence the mood of the reader. We will write a custom essay sample on Website Design and Its Impact on the Audience or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/page In the article, the writer listed the three primary colors yellow, red and blue as well as three secondary colors orange, green and purple both sets of colors evoking a broad array of emotions influencing a visitor s sentiments about the website.

Comparison Of James Scott s And Michel Foucault s...

Compare and contrast James Scott’s and Michel Foucault’s theories of power and resistance. In this essay I shall compare James Scott’s theory of power and resistance with Michel Foucault’s, as in what similarities do they share in their structure of theories; and contrast the difference as in their understanding of power, position they take to look for/into power, exercise of power and resistance in response. By contrasting the two approaches on the subject of power and resistance, I shall argue, if one wish to look for the powerful and the weak, Scott’s approach is the go to. But for now, I find Foucault’s idea more plausible that we are surrounded by or inescapable from power, and that by any means, are not necessarily forced to submission; rather as freedom the same time. Firstly, I shall compare the similarities the two idea shares. Both Scott and Foucault think power is more than being a form of coercion, that power is found in symbolic dimensions. Scott stated power and resistance can be spotted and take forms in language and discourse, that is conversation, statement, narratives made by the dominant and subordinates, in terms of what he purposes ‘public transcript’ and ‘hidden transcript’ accordingly. Similarly, Foucault see power as coextensive with language and discourse. However, Scott and Foucault has very different understanding of power. Scott thinks power is something that is externally imposed on mankind’s social life, whereas Foucault thinks power isShow MoreRelatedOrganisational Theory230255 Words   |  922 Pages. Organization Theory Challenges and Perspectives John McAuley, Joanne Duberley and Phil Johnson . This book is, to my knowledge, the most comprehensive and reliable guide to organisational theory currently available. What is needed is a text that will give a good idea of the breadth and complexity of this important subject, and this is precisely what McAuley, Duberley and Johnson have provided. They have done some sterling service in bringing together the very diverse strands of workRead MoreContemporary Issues in Management Accounting211377 Words   |  846 Pagesreflect on the contributions which Michael Bromwich has made. He played an important role in the diffusion of modern practices of capital investment appraisal in the United Kingdom. He has been constantly open to the insights which advances in economic theory can provide into the accounting art, in many areas pushing at the frontiers of international knowledge in his own quiet way. In the area of costing, Michael has undoubtedly deepened our understandings of both conceptual and practical issues, in recent

The Inexact Science of Climatology - 667 Words

Climatology is an inexact science to say the least. The only undisputed facts are: there are gases that are transparent to ultraviolet light but absorb infrared radiation, creating the ‘greenhouse effect’, and human activity has caused the accumulation of greenhouse gasses to increase across the world (McKibben Wilcoxen, 2002). The application of microeconomic principles can be used to address some of the fallout of the climate change caused by the greenhouse effect. In this paper we will take a look at three such measures and what their application can mean to the industry. The same way that there are various uncertain factors when accounting for climate change (clouds, ocean temperature, aerosols’ effect, etc.), there are various microeconomic principles that can be applied to help reduce emissions, with equally diverse results. One of the most limiting forms of creating clean emissions standards is a renewable portfolio standard (RPS) limited to renewable tech nology (Paul, Palmer Woerman, 2011). This is restrictive because of an unfair distribution of credits dependent upon which technology the RPS is being applied to. For example, an RPS that treats all renewables equally would highly encourage the low-cost renewables like bio-mass and wind, while high-cost renewables like solar would not be promoted as fairly (Paul, Palmer Woerman). Some states help address this disproportion allotment with ‘carve-outs’ or portions of the RPS that addresses separate renewables

Stratification Theorists Karl Marx and Max Weber Essay Example For Students

Stratification Theorists Karl Marx and Max Weber Essay The area of social stratification has been the starting point of many arguments about how and why societies are divided. Some societies will shout that they are classless whilst others will construct a whole culture around the divisions within. Individuals will vehemently point out that they are from one class when others have said differently. Some groups within society will inform other groups that they are in an especially disadvantaged position because of all the other groups advantaged position. In short, social stratification is a minefield waiting for the sociologist to jump into, backwards and blindfolded. However, even with this hostile environment, sociologists have tried to explain the reason why society is stratified. What follows is a brief analysis of the ideas of the two major stratification theorists, Karl Marx and Max Weber. For Marxists, class is a matter of economics, that is, how the individual fits into the pattern of modern capitalist society. Put simply, there are two main classes: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. The bourgeoisie consist of those individuals who own the means of production, property, factories, and etc, and exploit the proletariat who only own, or can sell their labour to the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie gain profit from the proletariat by extracting surplus value, that is, by paying them less than the product is worth. Marx argued that the whole of capitalist society was constructed in order to support this idea including the societys infrastructure. One of the most important support mechanisms for the bourgeoisie being the creation of a false class consciousness for the proletariat, by which individuals do not feel that they are exploited. Marx distinguished between a class in itself and a class for itself. A class in itself is simply a social group whose members share the same relationship to the means of production. He goes on to argue that a social group only fully becomes a class when it becomes a class for itself. At this stage its members have achieved class consciousness and class solidarity. Class consciousness means that false class consciousness has been replaced by full awareness of the true situation, members of the same class develop a common identity and recognise their shared interest, with the end result being unity and the insight that only collective action will overthrow the bourgeoisie. The important thing to remember is that for Marx and Marxists, class is all about conflict between economic groups. This conflict has the bourgeoisie (the minority) along with societys infrastructure (education, religion, bureaucracy etc) on the one side and the proletariat (the majority) on the other. All relations between the two classes are economic and therefore there will be little chance to move from one class to another. Weber, on the other hand, argued that social stratification was not about economics alone. Weber argues that classes develop in market economies in which individuals compete for economic gain. He defines a class as a group of individuals who share a similar position in a market economy, and by virtue of that fact receive similar economic rewards. Therefore, according to Weber, a persons class situation is basically their market situation. Their market situation will directly affect their chances of obtaining those things defined as desirable in society, for example access to higher education, good quality housing and health care. Like Marx, Weber argues that the major class division is between those who own the means of production and those who do not. However, Weber sees important differences in the market situation of the propertyless groups in society, that is, different occupations and skills are judged as having different market values. Therefore factors other than ownership can affect social stratification. Weber identifies several other factors which can determine group formation and the stratification of society. While economic class forms one possible basis for group formation, collective action and the acquisition of political power, Weber argues that there are other bases for these activities. .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2 , .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2 .postImageUrl , .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2 .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2 , .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2:hover , .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2:visited , .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2:active { border:0!important; } .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2 .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2 { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2:active , .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2 .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2 .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2 .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2 .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2 .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2 .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u75b9663649578d36c80d5b898c66e5f2:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Early History Of The Celts Essay In particular, groups form because their members share a similar status situation. Whereas class refers to the unequal distribution of economic rewards, status refers to unequal distribution of social honor. Occupations, ethnic and religious groups, and, most importantly, lifestyles are accorded differing degrees of prestige or esteem by members of society. This status is maintained through group/social closure whereby said groups make in difficult for individuals to join (a simple example would be that you can not become a recognised tradesman unless you undergo the official training recommended by said trades official body). In modern societies, class and status are closely linked. Weber, however, identifies another important factor in determining social stratification, that of party. Weber defines parties as groups which are specifically concerned with influencing policies and making decisions in the interest of their membership that is, they are concerned with the acquisition of social power. Parties include a variety of local and global associations, national political parties and a range of pressure groups and trade unions. Parties can represent interests determined by either/or class and status situation. At the end of the day the individuals stratified position is determined by their economic class, their occupational status and their access to the polity of their society. Webers analysis of classes, status groups and parties suggest that no single theory can point and explain social stratification. The interplay of class, status and party in the formation of social groups is complex and variable and must be examined in an historical and cultural context. Marx attempted to reduce all forms inequality to social class and argued that classes formed the only significant groups in society. Weber argued that there exists a more complex interaction of factors when it comes to determining social stratification. It is important to realise that there have been many attempts at explaining social stratification since both Marx and Weber formulated their work. There is not, however, space does not permit me to enlarge upon my discussion. Both Marx and Weber were instrumental in starting the ongoing and increasingly fractured debate concerning social stratification. Contemporary writings have used their writings as a basis for understanding modern social divisions. Both the analysis of gender divisions and race divisions have taken on the views of the above classic theorists, thus trying to undermine the generally accepted view that class and other social divisions are a functional necessity in modern western societies, a false view which ascribes degrees of success via a reward system based upon ones occupational achievements. As I pointed out in the introduction to this essay, the study of social divisions is a minefield through which sociologists must trample, but to a large degree both Marx and Weber handed us the tools to make mine detection easier.