Y07006

Books VS Cell phones and Computers

            

There are pros and cons to Books vs Cell phones and Computers.

Cell phones and computers are better in some ways because, they are easier to carry than books. They are better for people with busy life styles because you can find more information in the same time as searching one book. You can use cell phones and computers to message people. They take up less space than books. You can use them in the dark because of the lighted screen and keys.

Cell phones and computers have down sides because, you have to pay hundreds for them before you can access information on them, on top of that cost you have to pay for internet (computers) and internet/texts/calls (cell phones) then you can search for information or message people. The computers and cell phones have to have a charged battery or be plugged into a power cable/charger to be able to use them. If you get a flat battery or power outage you can not use them. If you get them wet they will short out and you will have to pay more money to get a new one.

Books are better in some ways because, you do not have to pay hundreds for something before you can read anything out of it. You do not have to rely on it working it always will. Books give people a more in-depth feeling than cell phones and computers. They are easier to access at school. They are better for your mind.

Books downsides are if they get wet the pages will go soggy and the ink will run, pages will stick together and the book will be ruined. They are bulky and heavy to carry around. A book you have to search harder to find the equivalent or less information than you could get at one website from a computer. You can not message/ring people like you can on cell phones.

My honest opinion on the subject books vs. cell phones and computers is that if you are doing something like an assignment for example, most people would use a computer rather than a book because its faster and easier but if you wanted to read something, go for a book because they are easier to read than computer screens and better for your eyes. I recommend using both things equally, because if you rely on computers and cell phones to much one day they will crash and we will have to go back to the basics while they are being repaired.

By Brendan Allan

Y07042

AS. 1.5A        

Why are schools not digital?

Schools should go digital. We are in the digital age and technology is changing. Laptops and other portable devices are getting smaller, lighter, more compact and they can be used for multiple years levels and classes. They also minimize waste and can be more efficient.

In 2011 we are in the digital age and technology is getting smaller, lighter faster and more user friendly. The old style books (printed) are getting less popular as they are expensive. But digital readers cost approximately $150 and the books are as cheap as $20. This is lot cheaper and in the long run can reduce the cost of studying.

Another advantage of a digital book or laptop is that they could be used in ways which minimize waste. If a school went digital there would be no need for lots of photocoping. Everything in a document could be sent by email or Bluetooth almost instantly and for free. Another advantage is that they could be used in the years to follow instead of binning them at the end of the year like you would with most books.

Many people can type faster than they can write by hand; it may be that they have moterskill problems or that they are just slow. For that reason using a digital device could also be faster. With the availability of operating systems like Windows 7 and programs like OneNote searching is also more efficient. For example if I was to type something into the search bar the computer will automatically search the right places and display results, and in office 2010 hyperlinking is very easy.

One thing that you can not do with books is back them up quickly and for free. On a digital device if you have the right hardware you can make multiple copies of any document almost instantly and for free. Because most documents are small you can fit hundreds into a 1GB pen drive, and with the availability of SD cards, pen drives, external hard drives and networking you can backup file almost anywhere even into cyberspace.

So in conclusion text books are more expensive than digital devices in the long run, they can not be backed up without buying another copy and they can be wasteful. So why should schools not go digital?

Y09204

BATTLE OF THE CENTERS

Picking backs for the rugby world cup will be difficult this year as a wide range of players halved preformed consistently well in the super 15 seasons. A lot of new names that has popped up time and time again we are constantly hearing of these youngster playing out of there skins. These players are proving they are just as good as the senior players. Vie chosen to write about to very well known names that have appeared a lot this season. Robbie  Fruean and Richard kahui have both proven why they should pick for the All Blacks this year.  These players have very similar all round stats but different attributes for example Robbie Freuan is a very explosive ball runner and is very good at ruining angles of Sunny Bill Williams and is good at finding gaps but Richard is a show stopper with his on the spot tackles he has the ability to lift his teams intensity which has the effect to determined the outcome of the game.

One thing  Robbie Freuan lacks in is test match experience he has not proven he can perform his best at top level rugby he has been critcised that he is not constant I fell sympathetic for him as he hasn’t had a chance to prove these sports show host but still they look past this and are very pathetic his name is been highlighted as a stand out in the super rugby season with his blistering speed in my words “he rips up the opposition back line”.But personally I rate Robbie as one of the stand out players in the crusaders outfit.Richard Kahui has played a reasonable amount of test rugby but has not proved that he is consastintly at top grade football.

Y09204

P07076

Mining in New Zealands National Parks should not be allowed

New Zealand, a clean green country with scenery to die for. All over the world New Zealand is be marketed as 100% pure, or is it? In 2010 the New Zealand Government proposed exploration in conservation land for valuable minerals that would boost our economy. Would the Government tarnish our clean green image just to have a bit of money in its backpocket. Or does the voice of the people mean more than money in a modern day Democracy?

Tourism is a major part of the New Zealand economy and many tourists come for the picturesque views that our beautiful national parks offer. The tourism industry is worth 21.7 billion dollars compared to the mining industry which brought 2 billion dollars to the New Zealand economy in 2010. Minister of Energy and Resources Mr Gerry Brownlie stated that if the “7058ha went a head it could give New Zealand an estimated 194 billion dollars worth of minerals”. This would give the New Zealand economy a major boost. But if the proposal went ahead would the tourism industry be affected by New Zealand going back on their laurels of not being clean and green? In a TV One Colmar Brunton 48% of people questioned said they didn’t want mining on conservation land, this shows us that the New Zealand truly care about how they are percieved. “ Despite the public backlash” Prime Minister John Key still wanted to subsidise $4 million of prospecting in our protected areas. Would the Government be prepared to gamble in the Mininig Industry and damage their image and suffer in the Tourism Industry?

A reason why many tourists come back and spread the word about New Zealand is our natural beauty in our national parks. All seven sites proposed are protected by the Schedule 4 law. The land that is protected in Schedule 4 is owned by the state and mining is forbidden. But the thoughts of the National led Government are completely different as quoted by Mr Brownlie “ we National implemented that the whole concept of Schedule 4 would disappear”. In the Coromandal alone there is believed to be $18 million of minerals that would be removed from Schedule 4 land. But with high reward there is always high risk, such as scarring the landscape, destroying native forest or even harm our endangered native birds which are all things that money will never be able to buy. Would the Government be prepared to destroy priceless land and animals for a few extra bucks?

Its not all a disaster if the mining Schedule 4 land went ahead. Apart from the obvious of boosting the New Zealand economy their would be job opportunities created which is a positive in this time with the recession and not many jobs available. This could stem the flow of many Kiwis going to Australia who move for better opportunites in mines in a land rich in minerals. This would give some of these people a choice to stay close to their family and get similar amount of pay. Also there is an estimated value of $140 billion worth of minerals underground. This would allow the mines to be constructed underground out of the view of the eye. The land above would not be destroyed and many native animals would be able to stay in their natural habitat. Mr Key has stated that “ There will be mining on conservation area” so if the proposal did go ahead there would be benefits. If the 7058ha was a success the Government would be open to survey an extra 12400ha which would be considered for mining.

Critics believe that in the debate about the mining of Conservation land the negatives outweigh the positives. To think the New Zealand Government would even consider to touch our National Parks which defines the words of natural beauty is unbelieveiable. Our National Parks are a major asset and should be admired rather than dug up and create a massive eyesore. The people of New Zealand have made their thoughts loud and clear, leave our protected land alone.

By James Larsen

P07053

P 07053

Media Coverage of Minority Sports

I love sport.  I have played many forms and species of sport and have succeeded at many of them.  However, only a few of these various sports are covered by the media.  Therefore, I think that minority sports need more media coverage.  There are some important links between the media coverage that a sport receives and other factors of the sport.  One link is the ability for participants in the sport to view the skills on television or other forms of media and learn them through osmosis.  Another is the participation and interest levels in the sport.  By not receiving media coverage the sport therefore cannot obtain more participants and the money that comes with them.  These are the things that a sport needs to effectively develop its players and grow as a community organization.

An important element of modern day sport is its ability to invent and develop new skills.  One of the easiest and best ways to acquire new skills is to watch other people do it and then copy it.  Obviously to watch someone perform the skill on television or the internet would be the most successful way of showing the world and dispersing the knowledge of the skill.  But if you view a program on television then there needs to be media coverage and this is the first and biggest boundary for minority sports.  When so many people know about the skill many will feel the necessity to develop it so that they have their own individual talent and this will slowly develop that skill to its full potential.  It is also far more straightforward to watch and follow role models if people can view them on television.  It can also be very motivational to watch our national representatives compete on the world stage which could inspire young people to play more sport.  If minority sports could become popular among young people then that generation would comprise of a massive change in the attitude and popularity of minority sports.  But at this time when our national sport channels such as SKY SPORT and other sport highlight shows predominantly focus on major sports such as rugby union and league, basketball, soccer, golf, netball, cricket, and motorsport there will be no such change.

Another important link between sport and its media coverage is the link between the media coverage a sport receives and its participation and interest.  These can be clearly shown in the statistics found in a survey conducted by NZ Govt.  These are just a few of the results found by the investigation on sport participation and interest which surveyed 1704 males aged 12-17 years.

Rugby Union: Participation = 33%, Interest = 55%, Difference = 22

Rugby League: Participation = 14%, Interest = 46%, Difference = 32

Mountain Biking: Participation = 17%, Interest = 31%, Difference = 14

This shows how media coverage can effect the participation and interest in a sport.  Rugby Union and Rugby League are major sports.  The participation and interest in Rugby Union is huge while Rugby League has low participation and high interest.  These are two sports which receive high media coverage and will continue to develop and grow.  However Mountain Biking which receives little to no media coverage has average participation but low interest.  This means that it will be more difficult for the sport to develop and grow.  Even though Rugby League has less participation than Mountain Biking right now, in time it will have more participation than Mountain Biking because of the huge interest that it has. This clearly shows the link between media coverage and a sports participation and interest and shows that a well developed sport has a lot of media coverage.

One of the most important factors of high media coverage is the participants and the money that comes with them.  The statistics stated before show that sports which have high media coverage also have high interest.  High interest in a sport is very important as this is what brings young people and other participants.  These people are needed because they pay registration fees and help with fundraising.  The money they receive from this is often the only money they can use to get better playing fields, equipment and most importantly coaches.  Therefore high media coverage is vital for a sports existence in the community.  Rugby Union is a strong example of this.  It has huge amounts of media coverage and because of this it is immense in the community and is great at developing its players.  However, many sports with small amounts of media coverage cannot start the process of this development and struggle to become known in the community.  This is the most important factor of high media coverage and is the best way in developing the sport to great success.

There are many great sports to be played.  But only a few of the many are covered by the media.  Therefore in order to clean the slate and develop other sports there needs to be more media coverage on minority sports so that they receive something closer to an even amount.  This will develop minority sports in New Zealand so that we could hopefully become the leader in many not just a few.