Self-assessment on my intercultural competence

Well, it’s already time to reflect on our learning process…I can’t believe that these months have passed so quickly!

First of all, dealing with the American and Italian political elections helped me learn a lot of things about politics as well as the socio-political situation in both countries. Following the news about the elections and comparing the way it was presented in different online newspapers helped me evaluate critically the quality of the information I came across, and see how difficult it is to find completely impartial information. Moreover, talking with the American peers about this issue made me aware that political leaders not only in Italy but also in America often make a bad use of mass media for their political propaganda, as we saw in the videos of the pd, pdl and that of Obama girl.

Communicating through Skype and taking part in the forum with the American peers helped me reflect on many aspects of my culture and country, such as the Italian political situation and its problems, in particular the phenomenon of immigration. Doing research on it made me aware that political measures towards immigrants are still too restrictive and they don’t enable regular immigrants to fully integrate in our society, for example denying them the right to vote. Moreover, our final wiki project helped me know more about this phenomenon in both countries as well as aroused my curiosity to study it in detail. In particular, analyzing the similarities and differences in both countries, I learned many things about the condition of undocumented immigrant women and what kind of discrimination they still face nowadays (See section "comparison US & Italy" of our wiki page).

As regards my research for the final wiki project, retrieving American documents was not so easy. First of all because Chiara and I had to search for similar documents, as our topics had to be as much parallel as possible. I must say that it was quite difficult to find the same kind of information on the great amount of sites and documents that there are on the Net about immigrant working women. In fact, the majority of the articles I found dealt with specific situations (e.g. about the condition of Hispano-American prostitutes in New York, or about providing housing services in Santa Barbara) and this happened to Chiara as well. This is one of the reasons why we decided to make our topic more general, changing it from “women immigrants and prostitution” to “women immigrants and forms of exploitation”, so that we could compare better the same aspects for both countries.

As far as interactive skills are concerned, during the Skype sessions with Chiara I didn’t feel uncomfortable in asking ‘difficult’ or controversial questions, as she has always proved to be open-minded and ready to explain to us what we want to know about American culture. For example, when we talked about immigration, she told us the difficult situation of poor and undocumented immigrants who cannot have access to medical care and social services.

Talking about misunderstandings, I remember that when we had to decide a common topic for the project each one of us had her own ideas and was determined to keep her own opinion, and it was not easy to come to a compromise. However, talking with each other and bearing in mind to respect each other’s opinions, we eventually managed to come to a solution. Then, I remember that Chiara wanted to talk about abortion, even though we said to her that we found difficulties linking it with our topic “women at work”. Explaining to her our point of view and helping her by giving some suggestions for her research we come to an eventual understanding. Working in group enabled me to always express my opinion, but at the same time to listen to what the others have to say as well as respect it.

As regards language skills, doing research for our tasks and wiki projects, I realized I’ve really improved my reading skills: now I I can select more easily and quickly the information I’m searching for among the wide range of documents that you can find on the Web. Moreover, my writing skills have improved as well: thanks to the various tasks and to peer feedback, I can write more fluently and I find no particular difficulties in adapting my writing to different contexts. Finally, communicating with native speakers through Skype I’ve improved my listening skills and my speaking skills: I've gained more confidence and fluency in the conversation and I learned a lot of new words and expressions as well.

Skype on our final project!

source

During our last lesson in the lab we (Group 1) did Skype with Chiara Olivi, an 18-year-old student from Dickinson college, who is collaborating with us in our wiki project. It was the first time I did Skype and it was really an amazing experience!! I never talked with Chiara before and I appreciated the fact that she is very interested in our language and in knowing more about our culture! :-) In our Skype conference we discussed the topics we'd like to talk about in our final project, but we realized that they were actually very different from each other... I must admit it was quite hard to find a common topic!

We started discussing Elena’s topic: she talked about abortion, focusing on the current debate which is now taking place in Italy. She said she'd to compare the related laws and the methods of abortion allowed in Italy and in the U.S.: Chiara really liked Elena’s suggestion and she said she would like to talk about the influence of religion on the woman’s right to decide. Moreover, Chiara would like to do some research on a particular aspect of this topic, i.e. on whether health care in the US covers abortion as well as on the widespread lack of information about contraceptive methods, which actually affects the public education system of the two countries.

Then, Elisa talked about her topic, i.e. the importance of music as an expression of multi-ethnic identities and how it could be related with the issue of immigration. I was interested in immigration as well: I talked about the difficulties that skilled immigrants encounter at work and I said I’d like to compare their condition in the two countries. Chiara suggested that we can discuss the situation of Latin Americans, in particular Mexicans, who represent the majority of the immigrants in the U.S.

Finally, Silvia Lovato discussed women’s discrimination at work, in particular in the world of politics: she’d like to talk about ‘quote rosa’ and whether this measure actually promotes women’s career. Chiara appreciated this topic a lot and said that as regards politics the situation in the US is very similar to ours: male candidates constitute the overwhelming majority in the US government with the result that women don’t have equal opportunities in asserting their political platforms.

As our topics differ a lot from each other, we eventually decided to talk about women’s issue; however, since it was too general, we chose to analyze the condition of women at work. In our opinion, it can be subdivided into 5 subtopics, so that each one of us can deal with a specific aspect. So, Elena is going to discuss the condition of stay-at-home mums vs. working mothers; Elisa is going to talk about working mother’s rights; Silvia Lovato is going to discuss women in politics; I’m going to deal with the condition of immigrant women.

About immigration

Immigration in Italy is quite a recent phenomenon with respect to other European countries; during the XIX century it was in fact mainly considered a country of emigration as thousands of Italians left their country due to the lack of work. The phenomenon of immigration has particularly increased from the 80s and in only ten years immigrants with a regular residence permit became almost 600.000-700.000. According to Caritas, in the last two years their number has further increased by 3.7 millions, with an annual rate of about 700.000 immigrants.

During the last decade, lots of things in the bureaucratic procedures for the admittance of immigrants have changed, and many of these policies were designed to limit the illegal flow of immigrants: the law "Bossi-Fini", for example, among other restrictive measures, provides that any immigrant who applies for a regular residence permit must leave his/her fingerprints. Even though such measures enable the identification of the immigrant, I think that on the other hand it leads to classify him/her as a potentially dangerous person or a criminal. Moreover, mass media talk about immigrants almost only when serious offences of organized crime happen, in such a way that they are often considered the ‘problem’ of our society.

Many are in fact the obstacles that immigrants have to face to integrate in our society: among these, certainly the mastery of the Italian language and the knowledge of Italian traditions. One of the main factors that make it difficult for them is that colleagues and friends frequently talk with each other using dialect, this way excluding the possibility for the immigrant to fully integrate in the society. In order to overcome this problem, I think it is necessary to promote more policies which enables him/her to live as a citizen with his rights and duties, also with regard to the right to vote: I think that every person who live and regularly work in our country must have the right to decide which candidate they want to govern, otherwise it will be very difficult for them to identify themselves with our society and institutions. Therefore, I think that more clear procedures for achieving such rights are the basis of a concrete and farsighted policy aimed at eliminating prejudices and reducing social disparities.

Reflecting on the topic for the final paper...

Well, thinking about the topic for my final project I’d like to discuss about the difficulties that immigrants face when they have to apply for a job in Italy, and I think that it would be very interesting to compare the situation in both the U.S and Italy as regards this aspect of immigration. For example, in Italy it frequently happens that immigrants are exploited and far less paid than Italians having the same job and they are often forced to do jobs Italians refuse to do, such as assistance for older people or people with disabilities. In particular, I’d like to focus on the problems that skilled immigrants (i.e. those who achieved a university degree and/or have had a high professional experience in their country) encounter in finding the job for which they studied because in most cases their academic and professional qualifications are not or only in part recognized.

In Italy they represent 53% of the immigrants but only 1/3 of them can effectively find fulfilment in their job. I would be interesting to know how is their condition in the US (e.g. who these immigrants are, where they come from, why they migrate from their countries, which are their credentials and how effectively they are taken into consideration etc.) and compare it with their condition in Italy. Moreover, it would be interesting to see to what extent the “Brain drain” phenomenon has spread during the last few years both in Italy and in the U.S.

The latest news about the elections...

source

As in the last weeks I read above all the news about the right-wing candidates, for this task I decided to focus my attention on what’s going on in the current political debate between the Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Reading through the articles I found in the websites of the Washington Post and of The Times, I decided to focus my attention on the news about Hillary Clinton’s speech on her trip to Bosnia. It was interesting to see how different is the way in which the news is presented in these two online newspapers…

The first difference I noticed is that in the news of The Times Online “Hillary Clinton backtracks over 'misleading' Bosnia sniper story”, the video about her visit to Bosnia in 1996 appears in a central position and before the article itself, whereas in the article of the WaPo website "Hillary Clinton calls Bosnia sniper story a mistake" you can see it only at the end, by clicking on a link. What is more, this is not the same video: in The Times Online comments of the journalists are added, making Hillary’s speech seem a big lie (e.g. when the journalist introduces it saying that “this video is supposed to be an example of Hillary Clinton’s babble tested experience”). On the other hand, in the article of The WaPo the video only shows the fact without adding any further comments.

Further in the article, the journalist of The Times Online tends to report only the comments of Hillary's opponents, such as: “[…] But Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, argued that the claim was not simply a slip of the tongue as it was made in prepared remarks during the Iraq speech.“

In the related article by Gerard Baker “Hillary Clinton; fibber in chief”, right from the title the journalist openly considers her speech about her visit to Bosnia prepared and intentional, aiming at gaining more admiration for her experience in foreign policy. He criticizes her husband Clinton’s policy as well: “In fact the facility with which the Clintons misspeak is so pronounced that it is quite possible they have genuinely forgotten how to tell the plain truth. There was no real need for Mrs Clinton to make the claim about landing in sniper fire. But the compulsion to embroider, to dissemble and to dissimulate is now so entrenched in the synapses of the Clinton brain that it came to her as naturally as the truth would to a slow-witted innocent. The comments of the people are incisive as well:"[...] since she says millions of words a day maybe she should take her own advice that WORDS MATTER.”

On the contrary, in the article of The Wapo website the journalist wants us to understand that the Bosnia sniper story might also be a simple mistake due to her intensive work "I went to 80 countries, you know. I gave contemporaneous accounts […]". Moreover, he tends to justify her misstatement through her spokesman's words: "The important thing is that she was there. Our soldiers saw she was there and heard her and knew that our country cared about them and what they were doing,"
In the website of Il Giornale there wasn’t news concerning the US elections, therefore I went to read an article about Berlusconi which was about his current political platform. As usual, there is a big foto of him smiling in the foreground and raising his hands as if he already were the winner of the elections… In the article the journalist compares Berlusconi’s goals with those of Veltroni, always ridiculizing him: “Veltroni sogna il pareggio […]; …fa gli scongiuri politici, visto che tutti sondaggi danno nettamente indietro il Pd”.

Comparing online newspapers...

After having spent quite a while visiting various websites and reading through the news regarding the current elections, I decided to choose an online newspaper from America (The Washington Post, known as a left-leaning newspaper), one from the UK (The Times Online, moderately right-oriented) and one from Italy (Il Giornale center-right oriented) and focus once again my attention on the news regarding the right-wing candidates McCain and Berlusconi. As in the American and English websites I couldn’t find any recent news about Berlusconi, I decided to compare the news I found about McCain, which basically concern his foreign policy in Middle East and Europe and his uncertainty in choosing his running-mate.

As regards the news about his foreign policy, right from the title - John McCain visits Middle East and Europe - we can notice that in The Times Online the journalist appears to have a more neutral stance towards the facts than the journalist in the article of The Washington Post, in which the title sounds in fact slightly ironic - McCain on World stage on Mideast, Europe trip - using the word "stage", recalled later on in the article using the expressions "overseas audition" and "political theater aimed at voters in the United states". Then, reading both articles, you can see that in The Washington Post the journalist tends to criticize the candidate right from the start, at times using incisive words and expressions, such as: “But as a candidate, McCain has been, if anything, more bellicose than Bush on North Korea and Iran.[...] McCain's unwavering support for the Iraq war is well known across the continent; his aggressive rhetoric toward some of the world's nations. […] In early 2007, the continued violence in Iraq made his support for the policy seem naive. During his last visit in the country nearly a year ago, McCain was mocked for declaring an Iraqi marketplace safe while touring it under heavy military guard. […] Other times, he appeared to relish the use of force, as when he sang "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran […]"(Article by Shear.M, retrieved on Saturday, March 15, 2008).

This critical stance towards Conservatives is to be seen in the comments of the people as well, for example Bunkerhill wrote: "McCain has no answers other than continue down the Bush highway. This will take us to places like endless war, a broken economy, inflation, and more multi-trillion dollar deficits. Mix in torture, rendition, secret prisons, and the reputation of the US will sink even further with the rest of the world."

On the other hand, in the article of The Times Online “John McCain visits Middle East and Europe” more neutral information is presented, even though when you read the related articles, such as "Hillary Clinton's prodigal coalition" , you can see clearly that the journalist tends to praise McCain’s political campaign: "[...] Mr McCain said the Democrats would abrogate trade treaties, raise taxes and hurt American business. This is brave – and, it should be said, accurate – stuff. […] The odds on his succeeding are long, but then again the odds on his winning the Republican nomination were even longer six months ago”. (Article by Gerard Baker, retrieved on Sunday, March 16, 2008).

As regards the images used, we can notice that on the one hand The WaPo frequently uses hilarious and ironic cartoons of Obama vs. McCain (in which the final winner is Obama) and at times even photos in which McCain does not appear in the foreground (see this), even though he is the subject of the article. On the other hand, in The Times Online you can see that there are many photos of McCain smiling and together with his wife.

Overall, I think that such differences are basically due to the different political stance of the two newspapers (as I said above, The Times Online is center-right oriented, while The WaPo has more a left-leaning orientation).
Differences are to be noticed also in the location and the coverage of the news about McCain: in The Times Online it was quite hard to find it because it was located under the section News- world news – US & America's news - Latest news - Related links, and it covered only one page whereas in The Wapo it is located in the main page of the section ‘politics main’ and it covers two pages. Such a difference between the two is essentially due to the fact that in an English newspaper like The Times the US elections are treated as news of secondary importance as they don’t directly concern UK’s current affairs; on the other hand, being an US online newspaper, the Washington Post gives to them more relevance.
However, in The Times Online there is more information about US politics than in Il Giornale, as the UK has a stronger relationship with U.S. policy and culture than Italy has. In fact, on Il Giornale I couldn’t find any recent news concerning McCain since it mainly deals with Italian politics, therefore I decided to concentrate on the news I found today about Berlusconi, i.e. “Berlusconi avverte la sinistra:"Sì al dialogo, ma chi vince governa". Being a center-right oriented newspaper, the news about Berlusconi always have a central position on the main page of politics and a lot of space is left to the images as well: most of the times they are very big (like the one of the article, see above) and show him always in the foreground, smiling. Reading the article, we can notice that a lot of space is left to his current policy and his comments about the center-left platform, which are always aimed at criticism: "[...] ovvero presentarsi come un partito nuovo, mentre invece tra i suoi candidati, in posizione sicura, c’è il 70% dei ministri, viceministri e sottosegretari del governo uscente". Moreover, the journalist shows a cleary right-leaning stance in presenting the news: " [...] Un’abitudine, quella della sinistra a non mantenere le promesse fatte, che Berlusconi aveva dimostrato del resto anche in mattinata nel disastrato quartiere romano di Corviale".

John McCain and Berlusconi’s Electoral Campaigns 2008

Even though both Berlusconi and McCain have a leading role in the world of politics and share more or less the same political stance, I must say that comparing these two personalities was not so easy as it seemed..first of all because I didn’t know very much about the Presidential Elections that are now taking place in the U.S. and I was quite uninformed about what John McCain’s policy exactly consists in as well. The only thing I knew about him was that he is a conservative leader and that he recently won the Republican Party’s nomination against the other candidate Mike Huckabee. Therefore, to get a more precise idea of McCain’s current political campaign I went to visit his personal website and that of the NewYorkTimes and spent some time watching the videos of the most important speeches he gave in Arizona, Florida, Ohio etc. Then, I went to visit Berlusconi’s website as well and watched some videos of his latest political speeches and of some television interviews.

Reflecting on the things that the two political leaders have in common, I noticed that when addressing their audience they both have a great personal charisma and a lot of self-confidence stating the goals of their programs. When interacting with the public, most of the times both Berlusconi and McCain don’t answer directly to the questions but with lots of circumlocutions as well as they always tend to compare their policy with that of their opponents, often criticizing them. Berlusconi often does it with his usual sharp sense of humor and with slogans like this: “The Left has bent Italy. We say: Italy, rise up again!”

As regards their political beliefs, they both share the same ideals, i.e. patriotism, family, and religious faith, even though we can notice some differences in their way of thinking. For what concerns patriotism for example, McCain talks a lot about honor, courage, dedication and responsibility in defending the country, focusing on the importance and the proud of being American as part of a nation that throughout history has proved to be the world’s leading country. In fact, some of his most recurrent expressions are: “We are the captains of our fate"; "we're the world's leader"; "we make the future better than the past"; "we don't hide from history". We make history; "...my friends, stand up and fight for America”. Berlusconi as well talks a lot of love for the country and the importance of keeping Italian traditions; however, rather than talking of “defending the honor” and “serving the country” (MacCain's typical expressions), he focuses more on the importance of living in a free country, where people can achieve the right of individual freedom. In fact, some of his most typical expressions are: “I want to live like a free citizen in a free country”; “We believe in freedom and all its forms, from individual to freedom of speech, thought and association”.

I think that such differences in the viewpoints of the two leaders might be firstly due to the fact that the U.S. and Italy face very different sociopolitical situations, in particular that America has a much bigger commitment to the war in Iraq and Afghanistan than Italy has: in fact, according to McCain, honor and courage are essential to prevent and combat terrorism in all its forms. In addition, I think that the past experiences the two leaders had in their lives play a fundamental role in defining their policy: as a former naval aviator and prisoner in the Vietnam War, McCain praises above all courageous service as the only means to defend America and fight against Islamic extremism; on the other hand, as a former entrepreneur, Berlusconi primarily aims at giving more freedom to entrepreneurship, promoting in this way private economic enterprise; he talks about the Italian military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan only as a means to support America’s policy, certainly not as the primary aim of his program.