I find the idea of being trusted enough by my government to have a say in what they do amazing. Not only that, but I take into account all of the men and women who made this event possible. I am a young woman of color that can vote. That can make her voice be heard, along with countless others, about how the institutions of her state and federal governments should be run.
Having registered to vote and realizing how I can make a difference has put me on alert to the upcoming presidential election and how news and information about the potential presidential candidates is presented to me. This brings me to what I want to talk about today: primary and secondary sources.
What exactly is a primary source?
A primary source, in regards to humanities subject of study, is either the original account or an account made soon after an event.
To begin my search of understanding of today's politics and issues, I went to the center of the Unites States' political center: Washington D.C.
I watched President Obama's Final State of the Union Address in order to gain a feel of where America and her politics are at the moment. From watching this address, I came to learn that President Obama intends to focus on four aspects in his time remaining in office:
- A New Economy that Works for All
- The Spirit of Innovation
- U.S. Leadership in the World
- A Politics of Hope
For any who wish to hear the address or learn more themselves about President Obama's intentions, they can watch the address HERE.
A secondary source is a second hand account of an event, usually with an interpretive or analytical lens.
I participated in hearing what secondary sources had to say about the political future of the United States through a debate series held at the University of California in Irvine titled "Which Presidential Candidate is Best for the U.S.?" In this debate, four teams of two answered questions about the candidates (Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Marco Rubio, and Rand Paul) they believe should be the next president.
Since the four candidates where not actually there in person to debate, the answers I was hearing where interpretive responses made about the candidates as perceived by the college students.
Beginning to dive into the political debates and information about political figures, I am starting to critically analyze where I receive my information. Whether it is a primary or secondary source of information and who exactly is presenting it.
You have developed a definite style with your blogs, if I were to just look at the entry alone without a name I would now be able to tell it is your blog because of the organization you use. You always pose a question and break down the parts of your argument or discussion and there is always bullet points and numbered lists that make reading your blog easy to process. I've actually learned quite a bit- I'm an eighteen year old guilty of disinterest in politics but seeing your enthusiasm in this entry is inspiring.
ReplyDeleteOnce again you are able to immediately capture the reader's attention in the beginning of your blog post. This post proved to be interesting and engaging. It presented present day conversations and makes the reader question the authenticity of every piece he or she has read. I think you should elaborate more on how individuals can distinguish whether or not something is a scholarly source. Reading your blog has sparked a bit of curiosity in me, who are YOU voting for? And Why?
ReplyDeleteThis is an amazing informative blog. You did a really great job in distinguishing the differences between primary sources and secondary sources. You have a detailed explanation of what both of these sources are while at the same time conveying your interests to the readers. I am very impressed with your ability to merge personal experiences with information that may otherwise seem academic and dull.
ReplyDelete