Search

Internet English

Students from Espoon yhteislyseo Upper Secondary School explore English on the Internet

Category

2011-2015 Archives

Letter to the editor

Dear Sir/ Madam

I think that Facebook, Twitter and other social media is a good thing for people. Especially for people who are isolated. Trough the social media you can socialize with other people all over the world. you can learn new things and learn about different culture.It’s a good thing. For example Facebook it’s a good social media page to communicate or find  your family members or friends you haven’t seen for ages.

On the other hand social media might not quit be save. Because when you meet people on the internet, you usually  don’t know exactly who you are communicating with.You will come across strange people, it can be anybody.

In conclusion  I think that people should be more careful on the on the internet, Because anything can happen there it’s not quit a save place. And people should think twice before they post thinks ,because the thinks that you post might affect you in the future.

Sincerely yours,

Binty

Advertisements

A LETTER TO THE EDITOR!

Sir,

I think social media Twitter amongst them are a great way to prevent people from getting isolated. People can just go there, discuss and make friends.
It’s great to see that the powerless people are able to collaborate and give their opinions, as you said in your article ”Small Change: Why the revolution will not be tweeted”. Like for example people in Iran were able to stand up for freedom and democracy because of Twitter. On the other hand before posting anything on the internet, you need to be sure it’s reasonable to publish whatever you’re about to post, since you can end up getting in trouble if you post something that’s against the law or might hurt someones feelings.
It’s nice to hear that simple websites like Facebook are able to give the U.S a huge advantage over terrorists such as Al Qaeda. Nevertheless I think social media is nowadays a solid way to stand up for something.

sincerely, Jesé Hélmínén

Letter to the editor

Sir.

I agree with you. Social media have a great power among the people. Nowadays it is pity that many governments uses the media as a weapon. In my opinion the media is greatest weapon of all time. Like Malcolm X said “The  media’s the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power. Because they control the minds of the masses.”

Still I think that we don’t need media to understand that we are oppressed. If we do need then it is meaning that there is some one behind the scene, who benefits from all of it. For example, USA and Great Brittain started massive propaganda against Saddam Hussein claiming that he had WMD’s (weapons of mass destruction). Also what they didn’t tell was that there was crimes against humanity in Iraq, not made by Saddam but made by USA and Brittain. The question is that, who benefitted from all of this? Was there any WMD’s? Did the people of Iraq have been liberated as they told us in the news? After all the crimes that these two super powers did, was there any prosecution? No.

I belive in that man can himself separate that is he oppressed or not. If there is something that we have to change, it will start from the people, it will be ended by the people,

for the people and for no one else.

Letter to the editor

Dear Sir,

There will be no real revolution through social media. Social activism is more common in countries that needs revolution rather than western industrialized countries. I would guess that by now almost everyone has some kind of gadgets to use social media except for the third world countries who use their time to something more important, like surviving.  I can’t see a reasonable matter to have a revolution by Facebook or Twitter. Those might come in handy with organizing but if revolution is needed I wouldn’t be worrying about social media. A country will need actions for revolution, no dictator will be thrown out of his throne without proper agitator. Agitator might use social media, but who really catches out with him in real revolution, are the inhabitants waiting on their phones when comes the next tweet? Or maybe, just maybe, they would swell the roads like black people did in sixties and really had an impact on everyone lives. Social media might have an influence in certain things, like changing opinions in individuals. A while ago, a mother punished her daughter for internet bullying which reached many viewers in social media. It might have affected on some, but I see things like these fading away in time. Social media is more about what’s happening now rather than what’s going to happen. That said Facebook or Twitter will not get Nobel Peace Price in near future, hopefully.

Sincerely yours,

SoMe Hoax

A Letter to editor

Sir,

I think Facebook and other social media are sometimes good for people. People can get a friends on Facebook and people can follow the people on Twitter. On Facebook, people can talk if they want in chats.

On one hand, social media is great. On the other hand, Facebook and other social media aren’t good for people because there people can say something which hurts people. Also there are people who bully other people on the internet. They don’t think about how it feels when people are bullied. On the internet everybody has to be careful about what they say on the internet. When someone sees something horrible, they can be hurt.

In conclusion, I think everybody has to be careful on the internet because no one has know what happen on the social media. If people want to kept up himself, you won’t worthwhile accept any friends obsecrations. And follow any people or company if you don’t know who it is or what it is do.

Sincerely yours,

NH

Letter to the editor

Sir,

I found the article by Malcolm Gladwell, published in the New Yorker  (OCTOBER 4, 2010) very intriguing. The article was about how in the US in the sixties a small group of four started a protest that without Twitter or something similar, that swell into a seventy thousand head-strong protest through counties. It was also about how basically people nowadays need social media of some sorts to get their stand on something heard. In my opinion the kids in the US were a perfect example of how you can be socially active without social media.

On one hand, social media does come in handy. For example: via Twitter it’s easier to form a protest of any size in a matter of hours. You can also skip the ”let’s go down to the city hall and protest” part and just protest online. The problem with this is that does it really have the same kind of effect? Do we really need to march down to city hall (or anywhere, depending on the case in hand) and show that we are serious? I believe yes.

On the other hand, I believe that people these days use too much Twitter, Facebook and other means of social media to keep in touch with each other and therefore people seem to forget how to actually be social in person. Too much time used in the social media also has bad effects on our bodies and for example school.

In conclusion, I think we should reduce the amount of social media that we use. By our own actions, we have made social media into the most powerful weapon there is. I believe we should make the kids in the US serve as an example. They started a Civil Rights Movement without Twitter. To me this is very impressive.

Sincerely yours,
A person who would have liked to been born somewhere between 1800 and 1960.

A letter to the editor.

Sir,

First I think that Twitter and other social media is good for people who are isolated from the outside world. They can get friends from Facebook, or discuss about something in some kind of chats. Secondly in my opinion you should not use too much social media to meet your friends. By meeting in real life you can do much more things than in internet.

Social media and WorldWideWeb itself could be very dangerous too if you’re not careful enough. If we are talking about protests, it is easier to arrange those in social media. You can find all kinds of stuff in internet. For example, instructions for building a bomb is possible to find in internet. You can do almost everything there nowadays.

In conclusion I may say that everybody should be very careful in internet, especially in social media. You never know what kind of people there are. So take these advises: don’t accept friends, in Facebook, who you don’t know, and be careful with your privacy.

Sincerely yours, Janne.

My Letter To The Editor

   Sir.

Everyone nowadays is using social media as a tool to share their opinion or just simply trying to stay in contact with friends. I use twitter daily of course my parents see this highly anti-social but actually I’m having a chat with a friend across the sea. Without social media how should we communicate then? We could send physical letters but it would take ages to letter to reach its destination. I think that social media is important tool for humans development.

Social Media has a great impact among people, every one of us see at least one article in Facebook, twitter, newspaper and hear them from others. Sharing your opinion is important moreover expressing yourself in your comment is even more important. If you’re not allowed to be you in social media, that is not social media where you are. Social media is not only expressing yourself it also tells us good news and bad news from all over the world, although people seem to be more interested in celebrities mistakes then listen how millions of children are starving. But on the contrary there are people who are ready to listen and fight for the cause.

All things considered, people need enlightenment what is important in social media and what is not. As an illustration let us have Justin Bieber’s drunk driving situation, that is not important, A family that is fighting against starvation in Afrika, that is important. In conclusion we need to stop posting meaningless news and tell people what is really going on in the world, that’s why Social media is important. We can tell people what is going on in the world.

Revolutionist

Subtitling Rooubert

Rush Limbaugh has repeatedly warned his listeners to go out and buy guns before President Obama outlaws them all. The result, in November 2008 the month Mr.Obama was elected, there was a 42% spike in gun background checks as compared to the same month the year before. The countrys largest anti-gun lobby is called the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence named for James Brady, President Reagans press secretary who was shot in the head during John Hinckleys assassination attempt on the 40th President. The Brady Organization gives grades to elected officials based on their record in  leadership with regard to gun legaslation with an A being the most anti-gun and so on. Despite guvernor Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh  and the director of NRA telling us infaticly that Barack Obama has a secret plan to get our guns, heres the report coming, background checks:F, Gun trafficking:f, Guns in Public: F, Federal Assault Weapons Ban:F, Standing up to the Gun Lobby: F. Not only has no attempt whatsoever been made to dismantle a second amendment a during Barack Obama’s two years in office. The President has signed in to law more repeals of federal gun policys than George W Bush did during his entire 8 years in the white house. In fact these grades would indicate that President Obama is the best friend the NRA has ever had in elected office to say nothing of the Oval office. Why are Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and the head of the NRA so colossaly lying to you. Idont know, but i know when they do, ratings go up, political contributions go up, membership in the NRA goes up, the presidents approval rating goes down, and gun sales go thru the freaking roof. Well be back.

Rush Limbaugh on monesti kehoittanut kuuntelijoitaan menemään ja ostamaan aseet, ennen kuin Presidentti Obama kieltää ne. Tuloksena, Marraskuussa 2008, kuukausi jona Obama valittiin oli 48 prosentin nousu aseiden ostajien taustatarkistuksissa verratuna edellisen vuoden Marraskuuhun.  Valtion suurin aseiden lobbaamisen vastainen kampanja on Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, joka on nimetty James Bradyn mukaan. Hän oli presidentti Reaganin lehdistö-sihteeri, jota ammuttiin päähän John Hinckleyn 40nennen presidentin salamurhayrityksen aikana. Brady organisaatio antaa luokituksen valituille virkamiehille, joka perustuu heidän ase lainsäädäntö johtamisen maineeseen, jossa A on eniten aseiden vastainen jne. Huolimatta kuvernööri Palinin, Glenn Beckin, Rush Limbaughin ja NRA:n johtajan kertomusten mukaan Barack Obaman aikomukset ottaa meiltä aseet pois, tässä tulee raportti, taustatarkistukset:F, asekaupan:F, julkinen asieden kanto:f, Federal Assault Weapon Ban: F, aseiden lobbaajien vastustaminen:F. Ei ainoastaan ole mitään yritetty tehdä aseenkanto lain poistamisen eteen Barack Obaman kahtena vuotena presidenttinä.  Presidentti on vahvistanut enemmän aseiden myötäisiä lakeja kuin George W Bush hänen koko 8 vuoden aikana. Tosiaan nämä luvut kertovat että Presidentti Obama on NRA:n paras ystävä joka on valittu puhumattakaan Oval officesta.

. . . . .

Harry

facebook harry

Jennifer Lawrence

Jennifer Lawrence

Charlie Sheen

charliesheeeen

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑