Rolls 4 Re Surch Righting

Synthesizer of Current Best Thinking on a Problem.

What is the current view of experts on the causes of bisexuality/homosexuality?
What is the current view of experts on the solution/acceptance of bisexuality/homosexuality?

How is your topic research so far? It is wonderful, thank you for asking.

So far I have been a little disappointed in finding sources that focus on the "both" issue involved with bisexuality and more so had luck with "either/or." The genetics and bisexuality is very interesting though, and leading me to a lot of interesting conclusions so far. It seems like most articles have to do with someone coming out or the issue of inborn/choice. I hope I can find more articles about why and how people embrace their bisexuality and what makes them bisexual.
Overall my research is interesting on how today's culture effects bisexuality, and how bisexuality effects culture.
The focus needs to continue to be maintained as to what causes this choice in modern society and if it can be "cured," as seeing that many individuals see it as a disease or deformity.

BI BI BI BI BI BI BI BI BI BI

http://www.glbtss.colostate.edu/faqs/might-be-bisexual.asp

http://www.dailycal.org/sharticle.php?id=19110

http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2006/yax-544.htm

http://www.geneticarchaeology.com/Research/The_Genetics_of_Bisexuality.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation

Secruos Laitnetop

Ask.com has showed some particularly good results for websites that show both sides on the issue of sexuality. I have a friend at DePaul University who is gay who might be able to help me understand his views on sexuality. I know he would be willing to complete a survey or list of questions. I have yet to visit the library, but I am sure that they have books related to sexuality and how culture may effect a persons decision to be gay, staight, or bisexual. The key terms are...
Sexuality
Bisexual
Genetics
Choice vs. Inborn (in terms of bisexuality, both)
It is important to remember that bisexuality is not either/or but a combination of both to create an acceptance of loving man and woman compared to man OR woman. Another important issue that can be remembered is that bisexuality has a long history. As far back as Ancient Greece, and possibly further back, there has been illustrations of sex between men and woman alike. This is not a new issue, just one that is still not fully understood. Genetics play another important role involved in sexuality. Scientists have descovered many chromasomal variants between gay, straight, and bisexual. Religion can also play a role in what is seen as acceptable. Many individuals make decisions based on their religion or even how they will be viewed by their community. Is bisexuality determined by genetics, religion, hormones, choice, social factors, or could it be a combination of all of these and more?

Research Topic Audience

An essay about this topic can be read by anyone. I think any person interested in sexuality or sexual preference would find this paper interesting.

The purpose of this paper is to educate readers the argument of bisexuality and sexuality. It will help the reader understand whether or not genetics are involved in the decision making process of sexuality.

1. Do people choose to be bisexual or is it inborn?
2. One of my friends is bisexual. Plus, I have heard from certain people that are bi that it is inborn and from others that it is their choice.
3. I think that some people choose to do it, but for certain individuals it is inborn and they feel as if they don't have a choice.
4.The reason I am interested about this topic is because I don't know much about it other than maybe seeing an episode of Oprah focused on it. I am also interested in how genetics may be connected to bisexuality.
5. I think one major aspect will be biology. The other will be religion/morals.
6. I might be able to interview someone who is bisexual.

Do people choose to be bisexual or is it inborn?

Answer these questions three.

Should unapproved drugs be made available as a last resort to patients with conditions for which conventional treatments are known to be ineffective?

Do firearms have an impact on the suicide rate in the United States?

Does the Internet make markets more competitive?

Do people choose to be bisexual or is it inborn?

Title

Tyler Matz
9/18/07
English 106-03
Dr. O’Rourke
Behind the Music: Should Downloading Music Be Free?
Sure, downloading music without paying for it is illegal, but everybody does it! Most people see not paying for music like a white lie, something not to be talked about and no difficulties will ever arise from it. Plus, do the artists really need you to pay $.99 for every song? According to Professor Felix Oberholzer-Gee, recent statistics have shown that file-sharing programs have yet to affect the music industry negatively. But just because the industry hasn’t shown a large fluctuation yet doesn’t discard the argument of whether or not file sharing is right or wrong. Legally, it is a basic copyright infringement and not debatable in the judicial system. Artists have the right to charge money for their music, or give it out completely free. So does file-sharing violate the law and steal money from recording artists, or does it have a positive effect on the outcome of records sold?
In most studies, file-sharing programs have been found to benefit the record industry. According to Oberholzer-Gee’s studies, “file sharing actually boosts sales.” Popular songs that are downloaded frequently actually have seen an increase in record sales. A study in 2002, according to David McGuire, showed that people who use file-sharing programs are “75 percent more likely than average online music fans to spend more money on music.” This is because most users rip music only as a sample, to tell whether they like the CD. After being able to sample and test the new music, users are more likely to purchase the record from a store or sister downloading site.
On the other hand, music that is less mainstream has lost sales. For albums that appeal to a smaller audience, “the Internet may contribute to declining sales” (McGuire). This is a major issue with many people who are involved in the underground or new age music scene. As an artist or band tries to make a name for itself, it is hard to find profits from a recording if listeners are able to download their music illegally. Not to mention, “the singles market has been virtually annihilated” (Boorstin 16). Now that users frequently download popular radio singles, the industry for album singles has literally fallen apart. It has become impossible for record companies to sell singles in recent years, and that is a contributing factor why total music business sales has decreased.
Believe it or not, technology has actually induced a scare in the music world prior to the Internet. Now a common source of entertainment, broadcast in HD, and streaming new music, the radio produced similar concerns when it first entered the airwaves. The radio became a way for record companies to introduce new and exciting music and influence the listener to purchase the music they are listening to. Now that large companies control radio, as Boorstin says, “there is a perception that new music has no chance unless it is backed by a major label that already has a good relationship with the stations, and has the obvious widespread appeal needed by a corporation spanning many markets.” Since the radio has been accepted as a widespread technological breakthrough, the exact opposite of what was hypothesized has actually happened. The radio is now used more so as a device to help filter, control, and ultimately boost sales for the music industry. The same opportunity is presented with file sharing programs. New bands have the ability to easily spread their music for absolutely no cost. File sharing also promotes certain singles and genres of music. Individuals become engaged in the music and respect the artists through file sharing, just as they have learned to do with the radio.
Now even though units of merchandise and dollars of merchandise shipped have seen a large decline in recent years, there are many reasons for the decrease. Boorstin believes that people think “CD prices are too high.” He believes that part of the decline in recent music business sales is from markups in compact disc pricing. This could be another reason that users are turning to file-sharing programs, because they do not want to spend $18 on a CD unless they know they like it.

Some people like it ROUGH!

This is a rough, very rough copy of my sythesis paper.

Sure, downloading music without paying for it is illegal, but everybody does it! Most people see not paying for music like a white lie, something not to be talked about and no difficulties will ever arise from it. Plus, do the artists really need you to pay $.99 for every song? According to Professor Felix Oberholzer-Gee, recent statistics have shown that file sharing programs have yet to affect the music industry negatively. But just because the industry hasn’t shown a large fluctuation yet doesn’t discard the argument of whether or not file sharing is right or wrong. Legally, it is a basic copyright infringement and not debatable in the judicial system. Artists have the right to charge money for their music, or give it out completely free.
In most studies, file sharing programs have actually benefited the record industry. According to Oberholzer-Gee’s studies, “file sharing actually boosts sales.” Popular songs that are downloaded frequently actually have seen an increase in record sales. A study in 2002, conducted by Jupiter, showed that people who use file sharing programs are “75 percent more likely than average online music fans to spend more money on music.”
On the other hand, music that is less mainstream has lost sales. For albums that appeal to a smaller audience, “the Internet may contribute to declining sales” (McGuire). Not to mention, “the singles market has been virtually annihilated” (Boorstin 16).
Believe it or not, technology has actually induced a scare into the music world previously to the internet. Now a common source of entertainment, broadcast in HD, and streaming new music, the radio produced similar concerns when it first entered the airwaves. The radio became a way for record companies to introduce new and exciting music and influence the listener to purchase the music they are listening to. Now that large companies control radio, as Boorstin says, “there is a perception that new music has no chance unless it is backed by a major label that already has a good relationship with the stations, and has the obvious widespread appeal needed by a corporation spanning many markets.” Since the radio has been accepted as a widespread technological breakthrough, the exact opposite of what was hypothesized has actually happened. The radio is now used more so as a device to help filter, control, and ultimately boost sales for the music industry. The same opportunity is presented with file sharing programs. New bands have the ability to easily spread their music for absolutely no cost. File sharing also promotes certain singles and genres of music. Individuals become engaged in the music and respect the artists through file sharing, just as they have learned to do with the radio.
Now even though units of merchandise and dollars of merchandise shipped have seen a large decline in recent years, there are many reasons for the decrease.

Summary? Indeed.

http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~felten/boorstin-thesis.pdf

Many people believe that file sharing has completely changed the face of the music industry, and much of the entertainment business for that matter. Many people are also correct. The apparent change is not arguable, but what the change has done for the music industry certainly is. Eric S. Boorstin, a student of Princeton University, shows both arguments in his essay Music Sales in the Age of File Sharing. Boorstin gives a brief introduction of the music industry and the technology involved. File sharing, now a common part of Internet society, is a fairly new program that allows users to swap program files; most often these files are shared without any fees. As early as 1999, Napster had created a program specifically designed to chare music. Within a year, the record companies began lawsuits of copyright infringement. Nowadays, most programs associated with file sharing either cost money or are illegal. But was it necessarily bad that the file sharing program came about legally, or did it only wreck the music industry? Statistics support both sides. Some believe that file sharing increases popularity and makes it easier to get music to the general public. It is also a way to cheaply distribute songs, instead of handing out cds. Since these programs became readily available, the "singles" market has ceased to exist. And not only has the "singles" market died, but "total album shipments and total sale of music products peaked in 1999 and declined through 2003." But Boorstin also argues that the entire economy has been down in recent years, especially since September 11th, 2001. He also contests that the real dollar amount spent on music merchandise had a greated decline from 1978 to 1982 than it has since 1999. There is also the issue of music genres and a gradual change in popularity. More than ever, adults over the age of 35 have reported that they are less interested in current music than ever before. Boorstin also states that as music has become more portable, cassettes and cds have continuelly declined in demand. Overall, Boorstin shows both side of the argument, stating mostly statistics and quotations from other people's opinions.

Some sources...

http://tecom.cox.smu.edu/esnir/SnirRecordIndustry.pdf

http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~felten/boorstin-thesis.pdf

http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/800000/792707/p107-bhattacharjee.html?key1=792707&key2=2485521911&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE,ACM&CFID=37162275&CFTOKEN=94392876

Propose a topic

How has file sharing programs effected the music industry?