And again during the 2010 Vancouver Olympics, the DTES neighbourhood was seemingly 'erased' from Vancouver. The eviction of residents in this community is described to be due to the 'influx of tourists' but it's much deeper and politically implicated: it shows how temporary these residents' housing arrangements really are, and how they don't even belong in their own spaces when foreigners come in.

Really surprised and appalled to hear that this man is paying $375 for a room of that quality and in the DTES. Just goes to show you how bad the housing crisis in Vancouver is.

I think this is an important reminder that the framing and publishing of news stories first and foremost serve the interests of news outlet organizations and reporters. This statement shows that there is a real institutionalized problem where the "norm" of news stories is something that ignores or undermines multiculturalism in Canada.

This reminds me of the Maclean's example we saw in class, where the visual portrayal of the 'average Canadian' left out ethnic minorities, a huge part of the Canadian population.

It is interesting to see political involvement divided into the paradigms of dutiful vs. actualizing citizenship. I think my generation can for the most part identify with the latter as digital natives. Personally, I see my involvement with politics as an identity-based involvement where I stay informed and involved with political dialogue in order to see where I belong in the world as an individual. I think that the emergence of actualizing citizenship in the digital age has allowed people to express their political views through the lens of their personal identity which has contributed to the emergence of dialogue surrounding marginalization, race and gender issues.

The "Harperization"of the Canadian government is an interesting example of how ubiquitous and subtle political branding can be. By merely shifting their wording, the conservatives are able to frame their party in association with the Canadian government. This change of wording appears to be subtle but can be very effective over time.

The fact that Facebook has the ability to supersede Californian privacy laws is really telling to the role they play in politics, and how that's dramatically grown in the past few years. The fact that this appeal was made undermines the authenticity of Zuckerberg's 'extensive apologies' and Facebook's privacy ad campaign mentioned later on in this article. I can't help but wonder when the next privacy stint is coming up.

The writing throughout this article, but especially in this paragraph, is filled with satire. Reminds me of our in-class discussion about how satire can be used to inform and involve the public in political matters. In this context, the author's use of satire is used to persuade the reader about the "ridiculousness" of dairy supply management. Its use of language such as the recurring referral to the DFC as the "dairy cartel" certainly sets the tone and a sense of urgency to the reader about the matter.

Also known as the "echo chamber" effect. This reminds me of the divisive problem that is prevalent in the United States where the left and right are so isolated. In theory, social media can be a place where these polarizing opinions can be discussed and negotiated, but I think it can actually have the opposite effect where certain interest groups within these platforms tend to stick to themselves, thus reinforcing their own opinions and ideologies. In the instance of Twitter, the people you choose to follow directly determines what shows up in your timeline.