Cause And Effect Essay Misinformation In The Internet Age

A cause and effect essay is a type of essay that seeks to explore a phenomenon through the factors that caused it and the impact it has on society. This type of essay is often used to discuss topics that are considered issues. For more advanced researchers, the cause and effect essay is often a starting point for recommendations on how to solve or prevent an issue.Here is an example of a cause and effect essay:The fabrication of falsehoods as a way to manipulate the public is not a new phenomenon. Authoritarian regimes have taken advantage of their authority to control the news that their citizens receive and how each piece of information is received. Some years ago, our society was hopeful that the coming of the Internet age will democratize information. Instead, we find ourselves in the post-truth era.In this post-truth era, the Internet acts as the instant source of information. Facts are presented along with opinions, conspiracy theories, and so on, making it difficult to determi ne which are facts or truth and which are fake. The rise of misinformation is due partly to the human affinity for confirmation bias and partly to the algorithm of social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter that complements each other. As a result, misinformation has become a monster which, despite not having a head, has begun to move on its own.Causes of MisinformationA survey by the Pew Research Center in 2018 confirmed that social networking sites are the primary source of news by most. Sixty-eight percent get news from social media, despite the fact that 57% of these users consider news from these outlets to be largely inaccurate. It appears that majority of social networking site users are skeptical of the news they encounter, yet there is a high rate of misinformation now. It is thus necessary to examine how people assess the credibility of information they encounter online.Human natureA study by Massberg et al. revealed that the readability of an item has a positive ef fect on the subjective assessment of the credibility of its source. A person may perceive a source or an article as credible if it matches their reading skill level and background. The easier the reader understands the content of an article, the better the cognitive engagement or the more involved the reader becomes, the more time they will spend reading the article, the easier they can be persuaded. These factors, as well as aesthetics of the article and novelty of the content, lead the unsophisticated reader to misinformation.Humans affinity for confirmation bias aggravates the situation. A survey revealed that people are more likely to accept at face value information that confirms their already-existing beliefs and questions those that conflict with their beliefs (Mele et al, 2017). This is true even in the face of facts. In contrast with easy acceptance of any information that is aligned with ones beliefs, people tend to question information, even hard facts, if it goes against their beliefs.Thus, individuals who favor their bias in searching for news are more likely to be attracted to misleading sources. The unsophisticated reader get preyed on by misleading sources by matching their content with the said readers reading ability, aesthetics, and beliefs. Once these readers find each other in a forum or a comments section, it can evolve into groupthink in a matter of seconds.The role of social mediaBefore the emergence of social media, traditional print media is, or was, easier to navigate. Publishers had to protect themselves and their brands from libel cases by conducting intensive fact-checking. Biases were not non-existent, but they were usually well-known. The media was run by an oligarchythere are two or three newspapers or brands that are considered the authorities when it comes to the news. Today, there are numerous outlets that allow most anyone to publish unverified information or straight up fake news and propaganda. Sometimes, all that someone needs is a social media account.Facebook and Twitters algorithms heighten the speed in which misinformation travels. Both websites display posts and tweets based on their relevance, which, in turn, is determined by peer engagement. Thus, tweets that have been retweeted, mentioned, and favorite-d are more likely to appear on peoples timelines. This algorithm with the theory of confirmation bias is a deadly combination.Due to the deluge of information, majority of peoples trust on news outlets has broken down. According to Pews study, 10% of Democrats and 70% of Republicans have stopped reading news from certain outlets due to perceived fake news. What the study failed to certify is the type of source the participants cut off. Less politically aware people are 20% more likely to reduce their overall news consumption than their politically aware peers. This demonstrates that people with staunch beliefs are more likely to cut off information they dont like or dont align with their beli efs, while people who are getting the least information are getting even less, making them even more susceptible to false information.Effects of misinformationExperts have long accepted the notion that facts wont change peoples minds. Even as studies are published proving the dangerous prevalence of misinformation and its effects, the chances that people and institutions will act to minimize misinformation is improbable. As explained by one executive consultant from North America interviewed by Pew Research [t]here is no market for truth. The public isnt motivated to seek out verified, vetted information. They are happy hearing what confirms their views. And people can gain more creating fake information (both monetary and in notoriety) than they can keeping it from occurring.Currently, falsehoods have pushed people further away and into their political or religious beliefs. For every social justice movement fighting for the rights of minorities, a hate group is formed. Following th e relative success of the Black Lives Movements Black Lives Matter campaign, a counter movement was started, the All Lives Matter movement. Likewise, a straight pride was petitioned by three men in response to Pride Parade.The divide between communities is wider than ever. Not only that, more people are empowered to speak out what they believe is the truth. Arguments have started to seem futile as people filter what they hear. One side only listens to find flaws in the opposite sides arguments and amplifies it, all while neglecting flaws in their own logic. As a result, there seems to be more socio-cultural hate and violence.ConclusionMisinformation has already taken over our society. Technology, or social media, however, is not the only factor to blame. Humans are as much as fault. Flaws in humans psyche and the flexibility of social media were taken advantage of by those with malicious intent. The effort then needs to come from all sides if misinformation is to be subdued. Individ uals need to be aware and wary of their tendencies to passively agree and engage with information and opinions that align with theirs. On the other hand, social media sites like Facebook and Twitter, need to take responsibility for the content that they allow in their sites so that they dont become venues for the proliferation of falsehoods and hate.Essay writing service for studentsCause and effect essays like this one are sure to impress professors. Write a similarly impressive cause and effect essay with the help of . We have been on the market since 2006, and since then, weve garnered the support of many students like you. Our academic help may just be what you need, and we can do more than your cause and effect essays! Our services range from custom essays, custom research papers, and even custom dissertations.

Incineration as an Energy Source Research Paper - 2475 Words

Incineration as an Energy Source (Research Paper Sample) Content: Incineration as an Energy SourceAuthorInstitutionAbstractThis paper talks about incineration as a method of producing energy. The incineration sector in the country is also analyzed in the paper. The benefits that are associated with the method of incineration are outlined clearly and the costs and effects incurred as a result of incineration are also outlined.Incineration as an energy source; the pros and consIncineration is a waste treatment technology that encompasses burning waste and transforming it into energy (Denilson et al., 1996). The wastes that are subjected to the process of burning can include residential, hazardous and commercial wastes (Denilson et al., 1996). The wastes are burnt in an incinerator which is a large furnace designed for that work. Incineration converts the materials deemed as wastes including paper, metals, plastics and food scraps into fly ash, bottom ash, combustion gases and heat (Denilson et al., 1996). In some instances the heat pr oduced by incineration can be used to create electric power.In the United States there are a total of 113 incinerators that are working and out of these, 86 are used to produce electricity (Brebbia et al., 2014). The last incinerator in US was built in the year 1997 and ever since there has been no new incinerator built (Brebbia et al., 2014). The reasons for the halt in building incinerators in US was due to the public opposition regarding the costs of building, identified health risks and environmental pollution it causes and the increase of other practices like composting and recycling (Brebbia et al., 2014). Incineration is a very effective method in eliminating the wastes that would have been deposited on land and creating energy that can be used in various sectors like electricity generation.In as much incineration is used as a source of energy making, it poses great risk to the health of the citizens and also degradation of the natural environment due to the emission of thous ands of pollutants that contaminate the air, soil and water (Brebbia et al., 2014). This contamination has adverse effects on the environment and this can lead to death of sea animals due to the pollution of the water. The citizens can contract respiratory related problem due to the contaminated air and also the forest cover and other plants can die and be eroded due to the soil contamination by the pollutants from incineration (Brebbia et al., 2014). Other energy conservation methods like recycling should be preferred to incineration when it comes to analyzing the effects that the method has on the environment (Habib et al., 2013). Incineration has both pros and cons that are associated with it as will be analyzed in this paper.Pros of incinerationIncineration greatly reduces the volume of waste materials that are supposed to be to fill plots (Denilson et al., 1996). The wastes will instead be taken to the incinerators where they will undergo the processes of burning to produce oth er forms of energy. In this scenario the land that was to be set aside as fill plots will be saved and be used other purposes that are constructive and will be beneficial to the citizens. The reduction in wastes also means reduction in land fill treatment fee; the money saved will be channeled to other important sectors and projects (Denilson et al., 1996). When there are small wastes available at the landfills then it automatically translates to less risks of generation of toxic substances that come out of landfills that have a lot of wastes (Denilson et al., 1996). The toxic substances often pollute the air and also the soil and this contamination is harmful to the citizens and environment in general.Incineration plants can be located in close proximity to the areas of service which will make it cost effective for the transportation of the wastes up to the plants (Morris et al., 1996). This will greatly be economical and the time and money that would have been wasted could be chan neled in other areas for conservation of the environment. Incineration plants can also operate 24 hours a day and this now signifies that the amount of wastes disposed in a day is very large and this minimizes the pilling of wastes awaiting disposal (Morris et al., 1996). The pilling of wastes is very costly since they have to be treated in order not to produce toxic substances that pollute the environment. Incineration is advantageous because the plants can operate in any weather so there is no shut down or halt to the process when there is bad weather (Morris et al., 1996). This makes it a very effective method of getting rid of the wastes.Incineration generates electricity and heat. The size of electricity made from an archetypal 100,000tpa facility would be roughly the same to the electricity consumption of 20,000 households and would be exported to the national grid (Brebbia et al., 2014). The heat produced by the plant could be used in industrial heating schemes and this would greatly save the industries the cost of generating heat using other costly methods (Brebbia et al., 2014). The country can also earn revenue from the sale of electricity and heat that is produced from the incineration plants. The country will sell the electricity and heat to the countries that have difficulties in producing energy (Brebbia et al., 2014).Majority of the incinerators reach temperatures which can completely destroy very harmful pathogens and chemicals which cannot be destroyed with other methods (Habib et al., 2013). This is the main reason incineration is the procedure used in dealing with clinical wastes (Habib et al., 2013). There are minimal accidents that occur in the plant during the process of incineration and this is due to the safety precautions that were taken during the building of the incinerators. In terms of the safety and health of workers onsite, incineration is the best alternative compared to other methods (Denilson et al., 1996).Cons of Incineration All incinerators pose considerable risk to the health and environment of the neighboring communities where they are located as well as the general population (Habib et al., 2013). Incinerators release thousands of pollutants that contaminate the soil, air and water (Habib et al., 2013). Majority of these pollutants enter the food supply and concentrate through the food chain and this causes a great risk to the health of the citizens who consume the food (Brebbia et al., 2014). People living near incinerators are always at high risk of exposure to dioxins and other contaminants from air pollution (Brebbia et al., 2014). This will cause the citizens to develop respiratory diseases due to inhalation of the contaminated air. The New York Department of Conservation found that the Stateà ¢Ã¢â€š ¬s incinerators emit up to 14 times mercury as compared to the coal-fired power plants (Brebbia et al., 2014). This shows that the incinerators are very hazardous to the environment as mercury is known to be a very deadly product which can result to complications on the body systems of the people who breathe and take it in their bodies (Habib et al., 2013). A portion of the mercury that goes into the soil will cause to suffocation of plants and trees and this can erode the green cover of the country and this will impact negatively on the environment at large.Incineration is the most expensive method to generate energy and handle waste, while it also creates significant economic burdens to the country (Brebbia et al., 2014). According to research carried out, the projected capitals cost of creating a new waste incinerator facility is twice the amount used in creating a coal-fired power and 60% more than the cost used in creating a nuclear energy plant (Brebbia et al., 2014). This shows the strain that the country will undergo in creating the incinerator and the vast amount of money the tax payer will have to pay for the construction of an incinerator plant. The cost of maint enance and operations for an incinerator plant is ten times more than the coal-fired and four times that of a nuclear plant (Brebbia et al., 2014). The establishment and smooth operations of the incinerator plants is quite costly and this is one great limitation that it is attached to it and makes other methods preferred to it.The incineration plant brings many problems to the city where it is located. There will always be increased traffic in the city and this is because of the transportation of wastes into the plant (Brebbia et al., 2014). The City is always associated with unpleasant smells which make life there very difficult (Brebbia et al., 2014). This actually causes revolt from the residents where an incinerator is located as many of them always want the plants relocated to another locality. The environment that the incinerator causes can scare away investors from the City or even scare away the people and cause massive migration and this will affect the development of the C ity where the incinerator is built.Incineration always leads to the wastage of important natural resources which can be of beneficial use to the country (Habib et al., 2013). The natural resources always end up in smoke or end up as part of the resultant ash that is produced as a result of incineration (Habib et al., 2013). The important resources are metals, glass and plastics that are always burnt during the process of incineration (Habib et al., 2013). The wastage of such resources will cause a very negative and adverse effect on the environment in the ways like increased mining to substitute the lost resources and increased energy expenditure to process and construct new resources (Habib et al., 2013). Increased mining leads to more land pollution and degradation of the environment (Habib et al., 2013). During mining, particulate matter which can be composed of materials such as lead and cadmium are released into the air and this release will cont...