Some people are more wrong to win than others

Jonathan Chait wrote an article entitled "The case against awards; Why the wrong person always wins". The article expressed his frustration and argument on why he felt that the prizes were always not given out to the most deserving person. He gave examples from past experiences from his private life to mainstream high profile awards like the MTV awards, Nobel Peace Prize and the U.S. Presidential Medal of Freedom.

I cannot fully agree with his stand, and find him rather unconvincing.

The author tried to impose the notion that the "nature of the awards" was such that undeserving recipients were awarded the prizes more than the deserving ones in the second paragraph. This point was hardly backed up. Although he failed to convince me that all awards were as such, it was successful in showing that he was truly fed up with all the 'rubbish'.

Subsequently he criticized NASA for selecting a teacher, whom he found silly and quirky, as a finalist for a trip on a space shuttle. He mocked NASA by comparing the teacher to the rocket scientists within the organization, whom he supposed were involved in the selection process. Herein lies a critical overlook by the author - NASA is a very big organization with different departments and specialties; surely the selection panel did not compose of the rocket scientists and engineers, but of employees at the administrative departments instead! Perhaps the author knew about this, but his angst blurred his critical analysis of the situation; or perhaps the author just wanted to make a joke out of the whole situation.

The author brought across the topic of subjectivity in giving out prizes. He substantiated this by quoting a finding about the random distribution of prizes in wine, and giving an example of determining the best ice cream flavour. This should be taken with a pinch of salt. No doubt there would always be subjectivity introduced whenever taste is concerned, there would always be some which were generally more preferred to the others. For example, a vomit-flavoured ice cream would definitely not fare well in the market. Also, not all prizes hold subjective components, for certainly recognitions like the Dean's List are definitely entirely objective! I found the author easily generalizing in his favour.

Though I do not fully with what the author is trying to convey, I enjoyed this piece of article because this article has exposed me to some of the many recognitions which are more "grey" than other, and it has shown me some of the various frustrations held by many people who have entangled their emotions to the prizes.

The article where Islam is the biggest star

Gooch wrote an article on New York Times entitled "A Reality Show where Islam is the Biggest Star", which described a reality show promoting Islam in Malaysia. I liked how the author's smart use of words and choice of content captivated me. No doubt most of the glorification of Islam was done by the reality show instead of the author, it was apparent that the author had the same agenda as the producers of the show. The show and religion were glorified. This could be easily seen from the author's decision to include the highlights of the prizes and the fact that it was the "most-watched show ever" on a Malaysian television channel. The author also managed to make religion - a sacred belief to be fearful of - seemed approachable by including soft elements like "hugging competitors" amidst the magnificent like "crisp, dark suits".

I believe that the article is successful in conveying the author’s message.