Marijuana legalization will likely result in increased marijuana consumption with uncertain social and health impacts. This thesis looks to share user perspectives on marijuana, specifically addressing how users represent marijuana risks, benefits, and uncertain or unknown dangers. Data were collected from an online social-media forum that initiated the discussion by prompting readers to reflect on marijuana risks in a context of growing accolades concerning its benefits. Grounded theory and thematic analysis were both utilized to identify consistent themes or patterns across user comments. It was found that users identified both benefits and risks of marijuana, while some users had disputes about certain known risks (such as impaired driving) or uncertain or unknown dangers (such as reduced dream activity). Despite disagreements about the degree of risk associated with a particular activity (such as driving and dreaming), this thesis found risks and benefits were discussed in relatively narrow ways that suggest more education is needed around the full spectrum of the effects of various strains, including benefits, risks, and uncertainties.

The economic crisis in 2008 triggered a global financial shockwave that left many wondering about the origins of the crisis. Similarly, in the early twentieth century, Wall Street faced catastrophic losses that set the stage for the Great Depression, which resulted in a decade of economic depression, leaving millions of people out of work. Using discourse analysis to understand how economic crisis is framed through the mainstream press, this research project analyzed the stock market crash of 1929-1932 and the mortgage-backed financial crisis of 2007-2009 through the lens of two mainstream publications, The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. Comparative analysis focused on explanations for the causes of the crises, attributions of blame, culprits, and proposed solutions emerging in news coverage of the 1929 panic and the 2007-2009 financial crises. Mainstream media accounts of the 2007-2009 crisis are then compared with `alternative media' accounts of crisis causes, culprits, and solutions. These comparative analyses are contextualized historically within economic paradigms of thought, beginning with the classical economists led by Adam Smith and transitioning to the Chicago School.

Research literature and popular press articles were reviewed to uncover the influences and viewer pleasures received from watching reality television. A close semiotic analysis of the reality television program, Teen Mom, was conducted. The semiotic analysis looked at the characters, the structure of the show, and the show's use of graphics and audio to understand the show's influences on viewers. An analysis of the Teen Mom website and online forum was also conducted. Seventy-one viewer posts and 403 viewer responses were analyzed to uncover viewer reactions to the show. The results were significant in three ways. First, the producers of the show claim the show is meant to educate viewers on the effects of teen pregnancy. The analysis found that while the show sends educational messages, it also contradicts itself by glamorizing teen pregnancy. Second, the analysis of the online forum revealed the formation of close online communities among Teen Mom viewers. Third, the website analysis provided evidence of viewer pleasure resulting from voyeuristic and social comparison tendencies. It is plausible that Teen Mom viewers engage with the show for the opportunity to observe parts of other people's lives they would not normally be permitted to see. At the same time, viewers evaluate themselves in comparison to the Teen Mom cast members.

ABSTRACT The goal of this study is to use neoclassical realist methodology to add to the growing body of literature explaining why America is failing so horribly in its media war with militant Islamists. The general argument being conveyed is that inconsistencies in America's ostensibly liberal diplomacy strategy leaves it open to criticism and deprives it of the credibility necessary to muster an adequate rebuttal. To accomplish its aim, the analysis begins with an investigation into the origins of America's current liberal rhetorical approach. It is believed that with this sort look beneath the surface of the idealistic romanticism U.S. citizens have been continually conditioned to embrace, it becomes apparent that the grandiose pronouncements made by America's national political elite are actually based on rather dubious foundations. The evaluation then turns to a more focused rhetorical examination, which spans from the start of the so-called Arab Spring uprisings on December 18, 2010 to the delivery of President Obama's highly publicized State Department address regarding these demonstrations on May 19, 2011, in order to go behind the White House's official statements and uncover what truly motivated its policy decision making. The belief here is that a close review of the administration's abysmal performance during this historic period assists in making the inadequacy of America's current rhetorical narrative all the more evident. Finally, once the contradictory nature of contemporary American liberalism has been fully demonstrated, the last section concludes with an effort to explain why replacing America's liberal strategy with a straightforward realist stance is best for both American's relations with the Muslim world and America's overall security.