Tuesday, October 15, 2019
Porters Five Forces to Analyze the Competitive Environment in which Ryanair operates Bargaining Power of Suppliers - Essay Example The customers of Ryanair are putting on them a lot of collective pressure so that they can lower the travel expenses and improve the quality of their airline services. The customers associated with Ryanair are enjoying a higher bargaining power since switching to other airlines with better services is very easy with little or no costs. In the case of Ryanair, the substitutes for their transport systems include railways, sea transport, and road transport and any strategy by them poses a threat to Ryanair profitability. However, Ryanair is still able to operate at a lower cost, leading to lower cost of services that attract more customers. The threat of new entrants in this industry is relatively low due to high costs involved in the initial stages of the business set up that many cannot afford. Economics of scale can only be enjoyed by big players like Ryanair and this makes other possible investors be scared away (OÃ¢â¬â¢Cuilleannain, Falle, Sobokta, Kleinert, Chassart, Farrell, 2004). There is also difficulty in gaining access to distribution channels that poses a barrier to new entrants. Since the airline industry is highly fragmented, competition is very high leading to low returns. In order to survive, Ryanair is constantly coming up with unique business models in order to outweigh their competitors and make reasonable profits. Ryanair is luck since it is based in Europe whereby European Union is a complete stable political region that provides a good environment for business to thrive. The integration of the European Union has provided an opportunity for this airline industry to expand its operations very swiftly without hurdles (Muller, 2011). The operations of Ryanair are also affected by the OPEC since its an organization that determines the fuel prices that Ryanair operates on.
Entrepreneurial Finance Course Essay ICampus: download case study + 6 questions (9am to 6pm end) Doyen A015 to A023 : we have the locals: tell him what we want (we have to book the locals) Entrepreneurial finance Different case studies cover the four parts (follow the IPO of Facebook) Project assessment: some toughts on business plan case studies: the knots and cachet tehnologies Introduction All these elements fits together. Business plan has to be written. Not a real predictor for success. People: ask you some questions Deal: as you do for edocs. Introduction Key elements that predict success. * Team : you need good managers Not only a good team but a team that fits with the project * Are you able to defend or create a competitive advantage? Is it special? Are people ready to pay for it? =gt; KEY * You have to know the different steps * How to extract value? You should make money! ThatÃ¢â¬â¢s key. For example: Facebook: out of the market in 5 year? Maybe. Not succeeding on smartphones! Are they ready to make money? Extract money from your customers? * Context * Deals should have the rights incentives. You have to find the right partner who ad value not only funding. * .. People To success you need the right person. For example: cachet technologies: lack of management. Opportunity Market: what is the size of the market? The growth rate? Attractiveness of industry: obvious Customers: Selling price is not a production cost + margin. ItÃ¢â¬â¢s what your customer is ready to pay. When your able to produce this at a lower cost, you make a margin. What is the cost to acquire a new customer? Important. And how to retain a customer? Difficult or not? Competition: Very good market and customers BUT maybe the competition is very hard. Chance of success will be maybe very low. Pay attention. Graphical tools to understand a business model Sales forecast selling price cost =gt; makes you able to calculate the future cash flow. Usely it is like on the graph. Scenario 1 is what you expect but in real life itÃ¢â¬â¢s usely scenario two (more time to make money) or scenario three. When you negotiate you first funding, you know you will need a second round (scenario 2). (Give not to much right in the first round to the funding persons) WhatÃ¢â¬â¢s acceptable? Context * Legality? * Today is not the best market to raise money or to go to an IPO * Today? I believe smartphones is an opportunity. Deals Find the right partner! He may understand what you are doing. Everyone has to understand the terms. * Because you need the right incentives. The two parties have to be comfortable. * .. * .. * The right incentive: the profit of the entrepreneur is in line with the success of the company. He has to share the success of the company. Or to lose all his money in case of not success. * .. Case studies The Knot * We asked us these questions. No one had experience in retail services * Barriers for entry were very low so they need to create a brand. * .. * Internet was a very fast growing market. * 1997: a lot of venture capitalist were very active to spend their money on internet. Today? Two sectors. Biotechnology (here in LLN! ) amp; Green energy? (funding comes more from state etc. ) amp; applications on smart phones. * Basic principle: the source of value is cash flow! What is the capacity of this company to generate cash flow! You cannot value a company when you say we will have 1 million customers. Like Facebook 100 billion Where comes the value from? Not from the cash flow they are making today. They make 1 billion cash flow today You want to pay 100 times this They want to raise 10 billion in their IPO (22-28 Ã¢â ¬ per share) It could make sense if they will made a cash flow of 15 billion/year. Is Facebook capable? If you want to speculate, cash flow does not matter. But if you want to invest, look at the cash flows. (here, in the course, we think investors) Types of securities: the entrepreneur needs to share to company success. ItÃ¢â¬â¢s like an option. Preferred convertible. Founder: 100 VC: 100 If lt;100 all the money goes to the VC (they protect themselves) * Or you failed: the VC takes all te money and sell your company Or you succeed and the VC helps you with your IPO. There is not really a situation between the two. Cachet Technologies Main question: do we continue the project? Dilemma: Two options:
Monday, October 14, 2019
Nature Of Online Dating And Relationships Psychology Essay Early research on Internet self-efficacy focused on the performance of specific tasks such as entering World-Wide Web addresses, creating folders and bookmarks, mailing pages, using File Transfer Protocol (FTP) and telnet, constructing a hypertext index, and moving bookmarks (Nahl, 1996, 1997). Ren (1999) reported a measure of self-efficacy specific to searching for government information sources. Results were consistent with previous self-efficacy literature, with self-efficacy perceptions positively related to task performance (Nahl, 1996, 1997) and the amount of use (Ren, 1999). The prior studies did not yield a measure of self-efficacy suitable for studying overall Internet usage, and rerpoted no information about reliability and validity. In Nahl (1997), scale items confounded distinct behaviors; a single item asked about e-mail, hypertext mark-up language (HTML) scripting, telnet, and file transfer protocol. Nahls measure referred to specific subsidiary tasks (e.g., creating bookmarks) instead of overall attainments (e.g., obtaining useful information) and thus did not properly reflect the constructive definition of self-efficacy. Ren (1999) operationalized self-efficacy in a manner more consistent with its conceptual definition (e.g., search the Internet by yourself), but a single item measure was employed so its reliability could not be determined. Rens measure applied to a specific behavioral domain (i.e., seeking government information) rather than overall Internet use, limiting its future application. In an effort to further understand psychological aspects of the Digital Divide, the present study builds on past research to develop a new measure of Internet self-efficacy. It assesses reliability and analyzes the construct validity of Internet self-efficacy by comparing it to measures of other constructs thought to be positively related, negative related or unrelated on theoretical grounds (Anastasi, 1988). Nature of online dating and relationships Within the popular press and scholarly literature, online dating is referred to as cyber relationships (Joinson, 2003), online romantic relationships (Anderson,2005; Bonebrake, 2002; Levine, 2000), digital dating (Merkle Richardson, 2000) and Internet relationships (McCown, Fischer, Page Homant, 2001). Other terms include computer-mediated relationships (Scharlott Christ, 1995; Whitty Gavin, 2001), Internet dating (Hardey, 2002), online personals and mixed mode relationships (Ellison, Heino Gibbs, 2006; Gibbs, Ellison Heino, 2006) and personal relationships online (Parks Floyd, 1996). Looking at the myriad of terms referring to online dating or online relationships, it is fundamental to elucidate and define the latter. Traditional social psychological definitions and interpretations ofrelationships may contribute to the current understanding of online relationships. Schlenker (1984) believes that the existence of a relationship is a result of the interrelation of identities. M orespecifically, one develops a specific identity within each relationship with exclusive thought and behavioural patterns, which will, with relationship growth, lead to similarity and closeness. Contemporary research pertaining to online relationships presents several interpretations of online dating. First, online matchmaking defines both online dating and online dating service (Houran, 2006). Second, online dating pertains to relationships of a romantic or friendship nature formed online by using online communication (Whitty Gavin, 2002). Third, online relationships refer to relationships initiated and maintained online (Wright, 2004). Fourth, online relationships refer to mixed mode relationships, therefore online relationships develop and migrate to other environments such as the face-to-face environment (Ellison et al., 2006). Taken together, online dating pertains to an intentional, mediated search, meeting and relationship development with a preferred significant other using computer-mediated communication. Having defined online relationships, the focus of the following section is to consider the background of online dating. As noted earlier, conclusions about online relationships in the popular press and scholarly literature are ambiguous. As such, one can expect the same ambiguity pertaining to the nature of online relationships. This section provides a brief outline of the nature of online relationships rather than a comprehensive discussion. Researchers, theorists and academics are still pondering the nature of online dating. Two opposing schools of thought seem to have emerged: those deeming online relations as superficial, distant, unemotional and unsocial, and others classifying online relations as personal, unconventional, and a new alternative (Parks Floyd, 1996). For example, online dating has been referred to as an audition for a real date (Barnes, 2001) and a relevant platform for relationship formation, although insubstantial for online relations (Civin, 2000; Hardey, 2002; Hills Argyle, 2003; Utz, 2000). It is clear that the significance of online relationships is queried rather than the formation of online relationships. Evidence supporting such claims seems marginal. Opposing such claims, some researchers regard online relationships as interpersonal (Barnes, 2001; Ben-Zeev, 2004; Parks Floyd, 1996; Sherman, 2001; Walther, 1995), more significant (Parks Floyd, 1996; Wallace, 1999; Yum Hara, 2005), excitin g (Gwinnell, 1998) and real (Houran, 2006; Houran Lange, 2004; Yum Hara, 2005). Furthermore, online relationships are described as solid (Sherman, 2001) in which trust and commitment are commonly shared (Anderson Emmers-Sommer, 2006; Whitty Gavin, 2001). Subsequently, one can assume that interpersonal online relationships are interactive and personal relations between two individuals. Focussing on peoples expectations and self-presentation, Gibbs et al. (2006) propose a model of perceived success of online relationships in their investigation of online dating relationships that migrate to face-to-face contexts (figure 1 illustrates this model). Figure 1: Perception of successful online relationships model (Gibbs et al., 2006) This model proposes that the perceived success of online relationships depends on the successful use of certain self-presentation strategies online. Three interacting processes contribute to the success of an online relationship: (a) relationship goals these goals include growth and relationship migration (b) self-disclosure pertains to the quantity, the positive or negative nature thereof, future intention and honesty in revealing personal information, (c) online dating experience describes online dating behaviour in terms of the magnitude of relationships initiated online and learning ability (namely, a persons ability to learn from previous experiences and then draw on this information in future online relations). (d) Perception of success, Successful presentation of the self and strategic success. Thus, successful online relationships that migrate to a face-to-face context may be achieved by fostering long-term goals, deliberately disclosing positive and additional personal information, and learning form previous online dating experiences (Gibbs et al., 2006). Research suggests that online relationships are mostly heterogeneous with a romantic or friendship-like nature (Hardey, 2004; Parks Roberts, 1998; Whitty Gavin, 2002; Wolak, Mitchell Finkelhor, 2002; Yum Hara, 2005). Furthermore, online relationships typically progress to other environments such as telephone and face-to-face contact (McKenna et al., 2002; Parks et al., 1996; Sveningsson, 2002). More recently, Wright (2004)identified two types of online relationships, namely primarily Internet-based relationships, that is relationships that are initiated in a face-to-face setting and maintained online, and exclusively Internet-based relationships, referring to relationships initiated and maintained entirely online. Online relationships may migrate to other environments or remain and develop online. This may be an important consideration in investigating the online persona. Ben-Zeev (2004) explains the nature of online relations as contradictory, firstly because of the geographical distance between those involved versus the immediacy of online communication. Secondly, online communication is rich in meaning because of the high level of self-disclosure, but impoverished in terms of a lack of visual cues. Thirdly, despite the higher level of self-disclosure, participants stay anonymous. Fourthly, online relations are emotionally continuous and discontinuous because communication takes place with intervals at any time. Lastly, the intellectual and emotional input by far surpasses the physical effort. In summary, the broad characteristics of online relations include, but are not necessarily limited to, anonymity, self-disclosure and attraction, which include proximity and similarity. An understanding of these characteristics is needed to comprehend the online persona, which follows later. Because two people disclose and share personal information, build trust and interdependence, and develop emotional closeness prior to physical attraction, these online relationships seem interpersonal. Therefore, in uncovering the online dating persona it is important to consider online relationships, specifically their formation, maintenance and success. Subsequently, the discussion turns its focus to online relationship formation. Theoretical perspectives Face-to-face relationship formation has received a great deal of attention from theorists and researchers. In contrast, online relationship formation lacks empirical enquiry, with investigations into this field being very new and recent. This section reviews traditional and contemporary theories pertaining specifically to the formation of interpersonal relationships. In addition, this section examines contemporary research findings pertaining to online relationship formation compared to face-to-face relationships. To conceptualise the formation of close interpersonal relationships within a face-to-face environment, the approach of Chelune, Robison and Kommor (1984) seems comprehensive. This traditional approach regards close interpersonal relationship formation as a mutual process of development. First, this approach assumes that the increased disclosure of personal information facilitates learning about a significant other. Second, continued interaction permits the mutual sharing of personal information, resulting in an enhanced sense of familiarity between those interacting. Third, the reciprocal interrelation of dependence, support and understanding builds a structure of future dependency. Fourth, with the acceptance and anticipation of the indefinite continuation of the relationship, this structure allows for behaviour alterations and develops to include mutual care, affection and trust (Chelune et al., 1984). This approach assumes the stages of face-to-face relationship formation to be self-disclosure, followed by familiarity, interdependence and closeness. These stages mirror those in the formation of online relationships; however, the developmental sequence differs. The relational theory of development (Parks, 1997) is relevant in examining the formation of online relationships. Based on traditional social psychological theories pertaining to social relationships such as the social exchange theory and uncertainty reduction theory, Parks (1997) developed the relational theory of development. This theory specifically addresses online relationship formation with the premise that online relationships either grow or deteriorate on a continuum ranging from impersonal to personal dimensions (Parks Floyd, 1996). Below is a description of each dimension along this continuum (Parks Floyd, 1996): (a) Dimension 1: Interdependence pertains to the mutual influence that increases with relationship growth, thus building a relationship embedded in mutual trust; (b) Dimension 2: Breadth explicates the increasing frequency of communication and social interaction; (c) Dimension 3: Depth refers to the increasing level of self-disclosure that facilitates familiarity and closeness; (d) Dimension 4: Commitment concerns the future predictions regarding the success or failure of the online relationship in accordance with the individuals goals and attitude; (e) Dimension 5: Predictability and understanding pertains to the mutual agreement and understanding of a unique set of rules of preferred, acceptable and desired behaviour and interaction. (f) Dimension 6: Code change pertains to the development of a unique set of cultural and linguistic codes, referring to how the individuals express themselves and communicate, for example, with the use of emoticons. (g) Dimension 7: Online network convergence refersto the snowball effect of the social circle, whereby the relationship continuously expands to significant others and migrates to other communication channels such as telephonic communication. Evidently, this theory captures the core features of online relational formation as a progressive process from the initial meeting, to maintenance and termination or migration to other contexts. Several studies findings support the relational theory of development (e.g., Anderson, 2005; Gibbs et al., 2006; Soukup, 1999; Whitty Gavin, 2001; Wolak et al., 2002; Wright, 2004). 1. It is easy to be fooled by inaccurate signals online. According to Binazir (2011), there are several pitfalls in online dating. If one thinks of him/herself as beautiful. ? What most people call beauty is actually evolutions very thorough system of broadcasting our suitability as a mate. Clear skin, good posture, broad shoulders, sonorous voice, bright eyes, shiny hair, graceful movements, pleasant aroma, facial symmetry, articulate speech: evolution has engineered features such as these into us to signal health, fertility, strength and intelligence. When one goes online, instead of seeing a person up-close, hearing him speak and watching her move, what one gets is a blurry, postage-stamp size series of static photos which cannot be heard, felt, or smelt. Most important of the missing signals may very well be smell, which some scientists believe underlies most of male-female attraction what literally constitutes sexual chemistry. Studies show that we sense immune compatibility through smell one way in which evolution decides whether two people should have kids together or not. This compatibility is vital to the viability of offspring, so its bypassed at our peril. So when you go online, youre subverting a process that has worked just fine for propagating the human species for the past 3 million years. Add to that the fact that pictures can easily lie about age, complexion and physique, and youve got yourself a lot of inaccurate signals to go on (Binazir, 2011). 2. You can waste a lot of time online chasing what you dont want. Heres the timeline of a typical online courtship for a guy: He sees a profile of a woman he likes. He writes her. A day or two later, he gets a response. An online correspondence ensues. If shes receptive, the conversation moves to email after a few exchanges. Binazir (2011) succinctly put it thus, If her interest continues, they speak on the phone, and begin to plan a meeting. A week or two later, after anywhere from three to 10 or more points of online- and phone contact, they meet in person. And it turns out that she has bad skin (which didnt show in the flatteringly lit photos) or her butt is gigantic (which didnt show in her waist-up photos), or hes 6 inches shorter than advertised or some other insurmountable shortcoming that could have been ascertained in the first 30 milliseconds of an in-person encounter. In an instant, all those hours spent on witty emails, all of that effort to be charming on the phone, learning all about him or impressing her go whoosh! down the toilet. In short, it pays to stop chasing shadows. 3. Deception in online dating In an online dating context, users writing their profiles have competing motivations to present themselves as attractively as possible, in order to draw attention from potential dates, and to present themselves accurately, so that people who would find them attractive partners in real life can identify them as such online. Moreover, Fiore and Donath (2004) suggest that users might consider a certain amount of exaggeration necessary if they perceive, as per the popular conception, that everyone else is exaggerating already then they must exaggerate as well just to remain competitive. Stories of deception in online dating are common the date who turns out to be 20 years older or 30 pounds heavier in person than his picture suggested, or one whose verbal charms in email vanish in a face to face meeting (e.g., Epstein 2007, Mapes 2004). Although these stories might indicate willful deception, they could also reflect disappointment in the offline reality as compared to expectations developed online, where a combination of selective self-presentation i.e., strategic self-enhancement and heightened levels of affinity developed through a mediated channel, which Walthers (1996) theory of hyperpersonal interaction predicts, might lead users to see as a soul-mate someone who in fact would make at best a decent tennis partner. Thats not to say online daters dont tell some outright lies. Hancock and colleagues found that 81 percent of online dating users in their sample lied about their weight, height, or age. But many of these lies were small enough that it would be hard to detect the discrepancy between, e.g., claimed and actual weight face-to-face (Hancock et al. 2007). The participants in this study might have been engaging in strategic self enhancement, but nonetheless they kept their descriptions within a few percentage points of reality. Ellison et al. (2006) offer other explanations for why users feel that others are presenting themselves deceptively online. First, users might be viewing themselves through a foggy mirror that is, failing to perceive themselves accurately. Thus, if they report their own self-perceptions, they are not lying on purpose, even though these perceptions might not coincide with those of an outside observer. Second, users might either deliberately or subconsciously describe their ideal selves who they would like to be rather than their actual selves, making the self-presentation more aspirational than factual. As one interviewee put it: In their profile they write about their dreams as if they are reality (Ellison et al. 2006). Whether this is effective is uncertain, though; McKenna et al. (2002) found that those who were able to share their true selves online were more successful in forming close relationships through computer-mediated communication that carried over to the offline world. 4. Online sites present an unhelpful excess of choice. When one logs into a dating website, the site presents one with several faces of prospective clients seeking being patronized. This is referred to as pot of fish (POF). Schwartz (2003) in his book The Paradox of Choice: Why Less is More explained that more choice does not make us happier. More choice actually makes us more miserable. A typical online dating yields thousand of participants who seem to match our choice. Yet, it is not so easy to choose. One ends up been confused. 5. Irrelevant information presented out of context can pre-empt a good match. Binazir (2011) observed that since we are inundated with floods of people beckoning to us on a dating website with amorous smiles there is great chance that we keep up a dating game with a prospective lover with the readiness to do away such opportunity for another one at any flimsy excuse. 6. People online behave more rudely than they do in person. Have you noticed how much sheer hatred and incivility there is online? Under the mask of e-anonymity, people feel they can behave anyhow because to a great extent they are untouchable. As a result, it becomes easy to dismiss summarily a message that an admirer has invested time, effort and emotion to craft in fervent hopes of gaining your attention. A man who would never be ignored in person can be blown off hundreds of times online. And, as the authors of the book Freakonomics pointed out, over 90 percent of men on dating sites never end up meeting a woman. 7. Strangers with low accountability can get away with antisocial behavior. In his book The Tao of Dating: The Smart Womans Guide to Being Irresistible, Binazir (2011) emphasized that women should only date men who are embedded within their social network a friend of a friend at the very least. That social accountability reduces the chances of their being axe murderers or other ungentlemanly tendencies. When you go online, theres no guarantee of anyone having a back-connection into your social network. Especially in a big city, people will do bizarre, rude things under the cover of unaccountability. Stories abound about the girl who ordered everything on the menu at an expensive restaurant, or the guy who showed up to the date already drunk and proceeded to hit on the waitress or far worse. The statements above are straight from heart as the world is full of mentally deranged individuals who get thrilled with cyber stalking and playing on peoples emotion. There is need to extremely carefully. Even though they make great stories in retrospect, these are not experiences that you need to have even once per lifetime. Going out with people whom you implicitly know and trust keeps you safe and reduces the chances of weird shit happening to you.
Sunday, October 13, 2019
The book begins in the middle of the French and Indian War in upper New York State near the Hudson River and Lake Chaplain. General Webb has just gotten word from an Indian that Moncalm and the French are going to attack Fort William Henry and that Colonel Munro will not be ale to keep the fort because he only has one thousand men and that he (Webb) needs to send reinforcements immediately. Upon hearing this, he ordered fifteen hundred men to be ready to march at dawn and has Cora and Alice Munro sent to their father at Fort William Henry accompanied by Major Duncan Heyward on horseback. They went along an Indian path which was to get them to Fort William Henry faster and they were lead by an Indian runner, from the time they left Fort Edward the two sisters were suspicious of their Indian Guide, Le Renard Subtil. A little while into their trip, they meet the singing master David Gamut who asked to accompany them to Fort William Henry. Not to far away in the same forest, were an Indian and a White man talking about their raceÃ¢â¬â¢s existence in the "New World." The Indian was Chingachgook, the chief of the Mohicans, and the White man, Hawkeye; this was the name given to him by the Indians. They talk for a while and then decide to eat. Uncas kills them something for dinner and shortly after, The Party on itÃ¢â¬â¢s way to Fort William Henry runs into them along the path. They stop for a while and talk and then ask for directions to Fort William Henry. Hawkeye is suspicious of their guide and ask to see him to find out if he is an Iroquois, Hawkeye looks and discovers he is. Learning this, Duncan goes to keep their guide there so that Chingachgook and Uncas can do something about him. As Duncan was staling, Chingachgook and Uncas jumped out of the foliage and accidentally chased him away. They chase after him for a while and wound him but in the end, he is to fast for them and they return to Duncan and his party. Feeling that they were still not safe, Hawkeye offers to help them at no cost. They boarded HawkeyeÃ¢â¬â¢s canoe and they head for safety. Chingachgook and Uncas offered to lead the horses up stream to where the others were going by canoe. They go to and island at the foot of GlennÃ¢â¬â¢s Falls for safety. Once everyone was one the island torches were lit and they went down into a cavern. At the break of dawn, the Iroquois began their attack. The attack laste... ...uois and when that time came, they went to rescue Cora. They find out that Cora has been hidden in a cave on the side of a mountain so thatÃ¢â¬â¢s where they go. The Iroquois chief and two of his braves try to fight off Hawkeye, Duncan, and Uncas. The chief uses Cora as a shield. The chief then pulled out a knife and asked Cora if she wanted to die or be his wife. She didnÃ¢â¬â¢t answer so he killed her. Uncas froze in horror and the chief took this opportunity and killed him too. The chief then ran up the mountain. Hawkeye stopped and aimed his rifle at the murderer. Having gotten a good deal above Hawkeye and Heyward now the chief pushed a large rock down towards them from above and then attempted to jump to a ledge where he could not be reached. As he jumped, he fell short of his target and just managed to grab hold of a bush growing from the side of the mountain. Seeing this opportunity Hawkeye shot him and the chief fell to his death. There was a lot of mourning over Cor aÃ¢â¬â¢s and UncasÃ¢â¬â¢ death and there were funerals for both of them. For many years afterward, Hawkeye and Chingachgook prowled the forest together and never forgot the ties of brotherhood that had taken root on UncasÃ¢â¬â¢ grave.
Friday, October 11, 2019
The Manipulation of Prospero "Manipulation" means "to influence or manage shrewdly or deviously; to tamper with or falsify for personal gain." In William ShakespeareÃ¢â¬â¢s play, The Tempest, we meet an interesting, mysterious Prospero, a magician and the true Duke of Milan now living on a deserted island with his daughter Miranda. Prospero has the power to manipulate his own daughter and does this because he wants to protect her from danger. Prospero has an interesting relationship with his daughter. Prospero talks and Miranda listens unwillingly. She does not pay attention and Prospero always seems to inform her. "Dost Thou attend me?" (1.2. 77). Prospero exploits Miranda in any way that he can. First of all, for 12 years Prospero forgets to mention to Miranda that she is a princess: Thy father was the Duke of Milan and A prince of power. (1.2. 54) For 12 years Prospero manipulated Miranda by not telling Miranda her true identity. He left her with unanswered questions that bothered her for all those years. Prospero also upsets her with the tempest that he caus...
The scream rang through the trees. Pounding footsteps thudded their way through the wood. Twigs snapped and cracked like brittle bones. She slowed down to a trot, trying to make sense of where she was. Her ears pricked. Listening for following footsteps. Realising she had been holding her breath, she gasped and air flooded her body. Only half an hour before she had been sat perfectly happy with her boyfriend. Her vision glazed over as silent drops fell to the ground, remembering how Josh had got out of the car to investigate a noise they had heard. She sank down to the bottom of the tree, as she recalled how ten minutes later, when he hadnÃ¢â¬â¢t returned, she had got out, only to find his pale form hanging from the tree above. Blood stained the top of the car where it had spilt from his neck, draping down over his shoulder like a carpet of scarlet. Whoever done this mustnÃ¢â¬â¢t be too far away. They could be watching her, waiting for herÃ¢â¬ ¦ Ã¢â¬Å"The bodies of two teenagers have been found in Thornby Woods early this morning by a local dog walker. The bodies have been described as horrifically mutilated and the result of a brutal murder. At the moment police are investigating leads including the name Ã¢â¬Å"AidanÃ¢â¬ spelt in blood on the roof of the car. Hopefully this will bring the monster to justice.Ã¢â¬ Ã¢â¬Å"I canÃ¢â¬â¢t believe something like that could happen here, itÃ¢â¬â¢s just so unbelievableÃ¢â¬ , said Diana. The others nodded in agreement. The four were sat around a table in their local cafÃ ¯Ã ¿Ã ½. There was Diana, Jack and the twins, Kerry and Kevin. The twins with their unique coppery red hair and blue startling eyes, stood out from Diana and Jack with his plain name, and fairly plain features. Ã¢â¬Å"You know what this sounds likeÃ¢â¬ , said Jack then hesitated, Ã¢â¬Å"the urban legend about the guy in the car with his girlfriendÃ¢â¬ . The others looked at him. Ã¢â¬Å"But theyÃ¢â¬â¢re made up stories, they would never come trueÃ¢â¬ , argued Diana. The twins, who had a habit of speaking in unison, started speaking but then fell silent, as the television in the corner of the cafÃ ¯Ã ¿Ã ½ flashed on again and more about the murders was broadcast. Later that night, Kerry was sat in the library. The essay she was trying to write was starting to give her a headache. The ticking clock, mounted on the wall, showed her it was nearly midnight. As she stifled a yawn, she pulled the books shut and gathered up her stuff. Silently, she made her way down the deserted corridors and up the stairs to her room. When she arrived she turned the key slowly in the lock, so as not to wake her roommate, Stacie. She climbed into bed and her eyes shut as her head rested on the pillow. The next morning, sunlight streamed through the windows. It was a Monday morning and everyone was trying to stay in bed as long as possible. Suddenly, the silence was broken as a scream rose from KerryÃ¢â¬â¢s room. Kevin and Diana were first there. As they pushed the door open, they saw StacieÃ¢â¬â¢s dead body surrounded by bloodstained sheets. Kerry was whimpering softly, slouched against the bed. Kevin noticed the mirror out of the corner of his eye. Smeared across the glass in blood-red lipstick were the words, Ã¢â¬Å"Bet youÃ¢â¬â¢re glad you didnÃ¢â¬â¢t turn on the lightÃ¢â¬ . It was signed Ã¢â¬ËAidanÃ¢â¬â¢. Kevin rushed over to Kerry, trying to comfort her, glancing over his shoulder at Diana. She stood like a statue, a shocked expression spreading across her face. Jack came rushing into the room. Ã¢â¬Å"WhatÃ¢â¬â¢s happenedÃ¢â¬ ¦?Ã¢â¬ , he broke off. He had seen the body. The four friends sat bewildered, silently hugging each other. Kerry couldnÃ¢â¬â¢t concentrate. Everyone had thought it best if she went to her lessons and tried to forget about it, but she couldnÃ¢â¬â¢t. Her mind kept going back to that morning when she had opened her eyes. The first thing she had seen was the body. The bloody image flashed before her. Finally, after what had seemed like hours, the end of college bell rang. Kerry slowly made her way over to the cafÃ ¯Ã ¿Ã ½ where she was going to meet Jack and Kevin. When she arrived, no one else was there, so she pulled a magazine out of her bag. As she did so, a plain envelope came with it and dropped to the floor. Curiously, she tore it open and jerked the paper out. Ã¢â¬Å"YouÃ¢â¬â¢re nextÃ¢â¬ , it spelt out, in carefully cut out letters from a newspaper headline. Kerry crammed the paper back in the envelope, as Jack and Kevin came through the door. Ã¢â¬Å"You feeling any better?Ã¢â¬ asked Jack, concerned. Kerry nodded her head and had to force a smile. Ã¢â¬Å"You know, this murder also sounds like an urban legend, donÃ¢â¬â¢t you think?Ã¢â¬ Jack continued, ignoring KevinÃ¢â¬â¢s warning look. Ã¢â¬Å"Who do you suppose is behind it?Ã¢â¬ Drew, the class swot, came over. Ã¢â¬Å"Have you not heard? The police are looking for a man with the name Aidan, round about 20 years oldÃ¢â¬ , he recited, sounding like a news reporter. Ã¢â¬Å"Why?Ã¢â¬ asked Kerry, turning her head towards Drew. Ã¢â¬Å"The name has been found at both the murder scenes, so itÃ¢â¬â¢s likely it was left by the killerÃ¢â¬ Ã¢â¬Å"But I donÃ¢â¬â¢t know anyone called AidanÃ¢â¬ , said Kerry puzzled. Ã¢â¬Å"Could be an outside job, it doesnÃ¢â¬â¢t have to be anyone on campus. Do you know anyone that would do something that sick?Ã¢â¬ Ã¢â¬Å"I suppose it makes it more likely to be some lunatic,Ã¢â¬ half-whispered Kerry, but Drew had already turned away and had started telling the news to the table next to them. Ã¢â¬Å"Hey guys.Ã¢â¬ Their conversation was interrupted by DianaÃ¢â¬â¢s arrival, which was always noticeable. Her slim figure and blonde hair made her popular with the boys. She joined them at the table. Ã¢â¬Å"So has everyone has a nice day?Ã¢â¬ she said with a smile. The others just looked at her. Kerry looked as though she was about to cry. Ã¢â¬Å"Oh sorry, I forgot about this morning,Ã¢â¬ she answered cheerfully. KerryÃ¢â¬â¢s chair scraped back as she got up to go. She pulled her bag onto her shoulder and left without saying a word. Ã¢â¬Å"WhatÃ¢â¬â¢s up with her today?Ã¢â¬ questioned Diana. Ã¢â¬Å"Well maybe sheÃ¢â¬â¢s upset Ã¢â¬Ëcos one of her friends was murdered right underneath her nose and she found the body!Ã¢â¬ exclaimed Jack. Kerry had gone to the library. She couldnÃ¢â¬â¢t stand being in her room after what had happened. As she sat, staring at the open book infront of her, but not taking one word in, a voice called out her name. Turning sharply around, thinking it could easily be the killer, she saw, to her relief, it was Jack. Ã¢â¬Å"I just came to see if you were all right.Ã¢â¬ He muttered his apology for scaring her. Ã¢â¬Å"Yeah. IÃ¢â¬â¢m okayÃ¢â¬ ¦ well sort of,Ã¢â¬ she smiled back. Ã¢â¬Å"I just thought, well Diana wasnÃ¢â¬â¢t exactly being sympathetic before and when you walked out, you looked upset to me. I though someone had better come after you.Ã¢â¬ He paused and looked at her, Ã¢â¬Å"You sure youÃ¢â¬â¢re all right?Ã¢â¬ Kerry looked away and sighed. Ã¢â¬Å"Well not exactly, I got this letter, someone must have planted it in my bag.Ã¢â¬ She handed over the letter to Jack. His eyes scanned the letter and his expression turned into that of alarm. Ã¢â¬Å"You really should take this to the police,Ã¢â¬ he said, his eyes piercing her own with serious anxiety. She turned her head so she wouldnÃ¢â¬â¢t have to stare into his hazel eyes, so caring, so tender, soÃ¢â¬ ¦ Ã¢â¬Å"WhatÃ¢â¬â¢s the point?Ã¢â¬ her voice shuddered, Ã¢â¬Å"It doesnÃ¢â¬â¢t mean its necessarily from him. ItÃ¢â¬â¢s probably some dumb kid playing a sick joke to upset meÃ¢â¬ Ã¢â¬Å"Well, if youÃ¢â¬â¢re sure. But come on, donÃ¢â¬â¢t you think you should call it a day?Ã¢â¬ Jack said, standing up and taking KerryÃ¢â¬â¢s bag. Ã¢â¬Å"Where am I going to sleep? I mean, I donÃ¢â¬â¢t want to sleep in my room tonight,Ã¢â¬ she shivered. Ã¢â¬Å"IÃ¢â¬â¢m sure you can share DianaÃ¢â¬â¢s room. Come on weÃ¢â¬â¢ll go up there now.Ã¢â¬ Kerry followed Jack and together they walked up the three flights of stairs to DianaÃ¢â¬â¢s room. Ten minutes later, Kerry sat on the spare bed, while Jack said his good byes. Finally they were left alone. Ã¢â¬Å"Look IÃ¢â¬â¢m really sorry about before you know. I really shouldnÃ¢â¬â¢t have said that,Ã¢â¬ apologised Diana, humbly. Ã¢â¬Å"Its okay,Ã¢â¬ said Kerry smiling at her friend and laying back on the bed. A large sigh rose from her chest. She looked around the room, so much different from her own. The walls were a soft shade of purple with various famous prints dotted around. Cream curtains hung at the windows, drawn back gracefully, allowing the orange, golden sunlight to stream in. Her eyes moved around the room and stopped at the desk placed in the corner. There, lying on a pile of schoolbooks, was a newspaper, maybe a day or two old. Kerry could clearly see off-cuts and torn pages nestled on top. Ã¢â¬Å"Have you been working on a project?Ã¢â¬ she asked, the sarcasm stung her words. Ã¢â¬Å"What do you mean, projectÃ¢â¬ ¦?Ã¢â¬ DianaÃ¢â¬â¢s eyes followed her gaze. Her laugh rang through the room. Ã¢â¬Å"Yeah, itÃ¢â¬â¢s a project all right.Ã¢â¬ Kerry instantly sat up on the bed and turned to face Diana. Ã¢â¬Å"YouÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ she spat accusingly. Diana let out a jeering laugh. Ã¢â¬Å"I wondered how long it would take you to realise,Ã¢â¬ she half laughed, half spoke. Ã¢â¬Å"Realise what exactly? That you sent me that letter? How could you be so cruel?Ã¢â¬ cried Kerry, scrambling off the bed and onto her feet to face Diana. Ã¢â¬Å"Cruel? You donÃ¢â¬â¢t even know the meaning of the word, cruel!Ã¢â¬ Ã¢â¬Å"WhatÃ¢â¬ ¦What precisely do you mean?Ã¢â¬ questioned Kerry, her throat tightening. Ã¢â¬Å"When I saw that girl and boy in the car, I though that it was you and JackÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ Ã¢â¬Å"You mean, youÃ¢â¬ ¦you didnÃ¢â¬â¢t, did you?Ã¢â¬ Kerry stared in disbelief. Ã¢â¬Å"Yeah, I followed them, then killed them, if thatÃ¢â¬â¢s what youÃ¢â¬â¢re trying to say. The stupid thing was, I didnÃ¢â¬â¢t realise it wasnÃ¢â¬â¢t Jack until he was dead. And of course the girl had to go in case she saw anything,Ã¢â¬ sneered Diana, boasting about her serial killing. She quickly strode to the door and locked it before Kerry even had a chance to move. Kerry noticed for the first time, that even though Diana was pretty, she was tall, fit and could probably easily manage to hold someone in a struggle. Kerry caught her breath and inhaled deeply. Ã¢â¬Å"But why did you kill them because you thought they were Jack and I? Why did you want to kill us?Ã¢â¬ Diana hesitated. Ã¢â¬Å"You donÃ¢â¬â¢t understand anything? Do you? WellÃ¢â¬ ¦ I suppose we have a few minutes before I have to kill you.Ã¢â¬ Her hand rose from behind her back. The sharp point of the knife sparkled in the autumn light, sending spears of the reflected spark, dancing on the walls. With the knife poised, ready for action, she continued. Ã¢â¬Å"I thought I could have anyone I wanted. But I didnÃ¢â¬â¢t want anyone I wanted Jack.Ã¢â¬ Her eyes flashed, dangerously. The knife still held, itÃ¢â¬â¢s flickering gleam reflected into KerryÃ¢â¬â¢s eyes, dazzling her. Kerry swallowed, her heart beating faster, yearning to escape this torture. Ã¢â¬Å"I wanted Jack badly,Ã¢â¬ Diana continued, walking in circles around Kerry, as though she the predator and Kerry the prey. Ã¢â¬Å"But, he didnÃ¢â¬â¢t want me, did he? Oh no, he wanted you!Ã¢â¬ she hissed. Ã¢â¬Å"Me?Ã¢â¬ stammered Kerry, Ã¢â¬Å"I didnÃ¢â¬â¢t know.Ã¢â¬ Ã¢â¬Å"Of course, you, wouldnÃ¢â¬â¢t, spat Diana, Ã¢â¬Å"so I thought, well if I canÃ¢â¬â¢t have him, no one can. Especially you! So I came up with a nice, simple plan to kill you both. You could rot in hell together for all I cared.Ã¢â¬ Ã¢â¬Å"So when you killed Stacie, you thoughtÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ Ã¢â¬Å"I was killing you,Ã¢â¬ Diana finished. Ã¢â¬Å"Yeah! Stupid mistake really, but I made up for it by making it look like it was to scare you. Funny really how urban legends can come true, isnÃ¢â¬â¢t it.Ã¢â¬ By now Diana was stood face to face with Kerry. Ã¢â¬Å"Anyway, enough talk! Now you get whatÃ¢â¬â¢s been coming to you.Ã¢â¬ She laughed and thrust the knife down infront of her, ripping the air apart. Kerry stumbled backwards to the other side of the room. Her sweaty palms clambered at the door handle. Ã¢â¬Å"Looking for this?Ã¢â¬ taunted Diana holding the key out. Staring blindly around, Kerry picked up a chair and threw it at Diana. It narrowly missed her and smashed into the wall. Diana was moving forward, knowing that Kerry didnÃ¢â¬â¢t have anywhere to go. Only the bed stood between Kerry and her attacker. Diana drove the knife into the bed, ripping the duvet and shredding the sheets. In the commotion of feathers from the pillow, Kerry ran to the door and started banging and shouting for help. Surely someone would hear. In the meantime, Diana continued to pursue her. Kerry grabbed at anything; books, furniture, pens went flying. Some managed to hit Diana, obstructing her. Trying not to get injured by the knife, Kerry attempted to take it off Diana. Diana stood up, her eyes blazing like the fires of hell. Ã¢â¬Å"One thing I donÃ¢â¬â¢t understand,Ã¢â¬ said Kerry, trying to buy more time, Ã¢â¬Å"is why the name Ã¢â¬ËAidanÃ¢â¬â¢ was found at the murder scenes.Ã¢â¬ Ã¢â¬Å"Ever though of rearranging my name?Ã¢â¬ panted Diana, Ã¢â¬Å"Diana spells Ã¢â¬ËAidanÃ¢â¬â¢. No one was clever enough to guess that. It even managed to put the police off. Now stop this idle chit-chat and let me kill you, nice and slowly,Ã¢â¬ her voice cackled as she flew at Kerry, the knife close to her throat. Kerry tried to push her arm away. She couldnÃ¢â¬â¢t keep her off for much longer. She battled with Diana and they both lost their balance. Tumbling over Diana had the better position, holding the knife inches away from KerryÃ¢â¬â¢s neck. Ã¢â¬Å"Goodbye KerryÃ¢â¬ ¦Ã¢â¬ The door to the room flew open. The surprise stopped Diana as she looked up. Jack and Kevin stood gaping in horror at the scene. Rapidly, they ran over and pulled Diana off Kerry. The knife dropped to the floor with a clang. Five policemen were standing in the entrance and with KevinÃ¢â¬â¢s help, carried the screaming Diana away. Jack was left helping a very shaky Kerry to her feet. Ã¢â¬Å"I heard screaming,Ã¢â¬ he mumbled, Ã¢â¬Å"I rushed to help with Kevin.Ã¢â¬ Kerry didnÃ¢â¬â¢t say a word. Tears swept from her eyes, as she realised the terror was over, and she was still alive. A far away shriek disturbed the comforting silence surrounding Kerry and Jack. The wail of sirens echoed into the distance. Ã¢â¬Å"ItÃ¢â¬â¢s all over now, I promise you,Ã¢â¬ Jack, holding Kerry, Ã¢â¬Å"I promiseÃ¢â¬
Thursday, October 10, 2019
Ã¢â¬ËLiving in a multicultural society takes time.Ã¢â¬â¢ To what extend is this illustrated by the challenge of multicultural societies in the UK? (40) A multicultural society is the status of several different ethnic, racial, religious or cultural groups coexisting in harmony in the same society. From the early 19th century people have immigrated to England, developing its diversity. During World War 2 polish and Jewish people immigrated to the UK to escape fascism. Also as the UK is part of the European Union, free and fair movement between the 28 member states means that there are no limits on immigration between these countries. This has seen it compulsory for the UK to adapt and change in order to accommodate for these individuals. For different ethnic minorities to coexist in harmony time is imperative, groups of different people will never coexist harmoniously over night. This is evidenced by holiday and school timetables being altered for ethnic minority groups, opportuni ties for people to learn English for free and websites being available in other languages. The vast majority of immigrants to the UK have settled in the industrial cities and towns as there is a demand for workers. Consequently, councils then have to work to help integrate these ethnic minorities into the communities, limiting tensions that may occur as a result of groups of people lacking understanding of each other. For example, Birmingham city council has created a festival to promote and express culture within Birmingham. Using twitter and other social media they have emphasised Ã¢â¬Ëyour postracial is a myth #itooambirminghamÃ¢â¬â¢ this is the idea that no matter what ethnic group you originate from are equal and almost labelling Birmingham as an ethnic group with no specific image. This integrates ethnic minorities in to society and creates a sense of community by almost blurring the lines between people differences. The process of integration takes time, therefore supporting the statement. However, some councilÃ¢â¬â¢s are better than others at creating a sense of community and educating their population about different cultures; moreover councils are not literally able to force peo ple to be accepting of change. This issue can create racial tensions. In 2005 Riots started in Birmingham initially due to the alleged rape of a Jamaican girl. Violence erupted between gangs of Black and Asians; Isiah Young-Sam was stabbed and later died as a result. Even though Birmingham council have worked to create a sense of community between ethnic minorities, it did not stop gangs fighting for revenge. ThisÃ may suggest that councilÃ¢â¬â¢s efforts are rendered ineffective and ethnic groups in society will never coexist harmoniously, because these groups still see themselves as different and donÃ¢â¬â¢t completely understand each other which consequently cause tensions. This racial violence can then cause other ethnic groups to resent the groups that were involved because they are seen as unpleasant trouble makers causing more of a divide. Furthermore, political parties like UKIP and the BNP feed off this negative image created and demonstrate intolerance towards others. In times of crisis people may lo ok to more extreme parties and favour them as they believe government is ineffective. Another issue that the UK faces due to the development of multicultural societies is in education. Holiday patterns, school meals and school timetable may need to be altered for ethnic minorities groups. Religious holidays may demand time off school, the English school holiday is based on the Christian calendar, but people of different religions such as Islam celebrate at different times. For example schools in Tower Hamlet are now allowed two days off to celebrate Eid. School meals have to be altered for Muslims as they can only eat Halah meat and no pork so an alternative needs to be given. Furthermore, prayers occur on Friday afternoons, in Oxford Spire Academy in Oxfordshire pupils are allowed to travel to the mosque on Cowley road during lunch to attend prayers, if they are too young to travel alone there is a prayer room located onsite. The school adapting to changes in requirements shows they are accepting of a multicultural society, it has taken time to cater for these differing ethnic minorities. On the other hand, faith schools have developed in some areas to teach children according to a particular religion. Faith schools make up around a third of the education system. This limits choice for parents who do not want a religious education for their children, or do not share the faith of their local school. For example, in hackney Lubavitch Senior GirlsÃ¢â¬â¢ School is a strictly orthodox, small secondary school for girls only. Liberal secularists argue that faith schools have no place in a growing diverse population as they promote segregation. Children should be educated around others from all religions and cultures as it is a truer representation of society. Moreover, enclaves of ethnic minorities are likely to locate near a school of their own faith this demotes integration and interaction within the community, resulting in a lack of understanding of others which consequently can cause racial tensions. Conservative people would argue that parents should have the right to bring a child according to religion and they should be able to continue to practise the religion at school. Faith schools demote integration with others who do not share the same beliefs; this is evidence to show that as long as there is faith schools in the UK ethnic minorities will never coexist in harmony. In the 1970Ã¢â¬â¢s and 80Ã¢â¬â¢s ethnic minorities were subject to racial discrimination in the workplace. Racial discrimination is still present today but it is declining slowly, Of the Civil Service employees in March 2014 who declared their ethnicity, 10.1% were from an ethnic minority, an increase of 0.5 percentage points on March 2013. 7.5% of these people are of senior civil service. This suggests that the UK has changed and become more accepting of other ethnic minorities, giving them access to promotions and roles with more power. Some people would argue work places reflect society and there is still more work to do to protect ethnic minoritiesÃ¢â¬â¢ from discrimination and enable them to progress in their jobs. This slow change in decreasing racial discrimination has taken time and will continue to need help to completely abolish racial discrimination. Although, there are still incidents of worker exploitation and discrimination in the UK. A poultry farmer had to pay over Ã £5,000 in compensation to a Polish worker who also won a case of racial discrimination. The worker, who had not been paid the same as his British co-workers, was unreasonably criticised over his work and was not allowed to attend English classes. The Polish Embassy stated that number of Polish workers in Britain was between 500,000-600,000. The amount of polish migrants who have settled in the UK increased after Poland joined the European Union, as the minimum wage in Poland is half of the UK meaning workers are prepared to work for less and longer than a native British worker. This is appealing to an employerÃ¢â¬â¢s as low skilled jobs become cheap labour as the migrants are prepared to work for less, some companies then take advantage of this and there have been examples were breaks are not given or employees are being paid less than the minimum wage. This suggests that immigrants can be vulnerable and some donÃ¢â¬â¢t even realise that how they are being treated is wrong. It could be argued that ethnic groups will never live harmoniously as there will always be a way to exploit immigrants. On the other hand, if all immigrants were educated of their rights it wouldÃ make it a lot harder for employerÃ¢â¬â¢s to take advantage of them as the person would know right from wrong. Some UK-born people may completely disagree with the statement. This is because some unemployed may feel that the immigrants are Ã¢â¬Ëtaking their jobsÃ¢â¬â¢ as they are prepared to work for less than them and an employer favours this and not investing in our country as they may be sending money back to their families. However others may argue that they are just benefit tourists and they have only come to live off the state as the welfare system in their country is not as generous. In times of crisis (housing, economic) anti-immigration parties feed of the negative image painted for immigrants and the people which have these crisisÃ¢â¬â¢s hit them the hardest may decide to support them. Parties like UKIP and the English Defence league promote intolerance towards others this can influence people to stop trying to accept other ethnic minorities. In conclusion, I think there are many challenges of multicultural societies in the UK and some are easier to overcome than others. I strongly believe that living in a multicultural society harmoniously does and will still take time. People need time to accept change and some people will never accept it but as time goes on generations are taught to be tolerant of others. Councils holding events to educate everyone about the different religions, cultures and ethnicity can bring a sense of community and help ethnic groups understand each other. However, I feel as if there will always be obstacles such as faith schools and scapegoating different groups of people but it is the attitudes of society towards these obstacles that will allow for everyone to coexist harmoniously.