Man Trapped in Elevator

I recently watched a series of videos on YouTube.com published by Nick Nerv about his unfortunate experience in an elevator.

This story was brought to my attention by a news sight Sourcefed.com.
http://sourcefed.com/guy-gets-stuck-in-elevator-with-crazy-person/

The videos depict a distressed man in his early twenties sitting in the corner of the elevator while the other man who was trapped in there with him appears to be going crazy. The Sourcefed article refers to the other man as Mr. Crazy in the following quote from the article, "I really hope Mr. Crazy gets recognized everywhere as an insane person from here on out"

Now I have two problems with this article and the situation entirely. Number 1 is the negative words used against this so called 'crazy' man in this article. Number 2 is the way in which the situation was handled and the fact that it took over an hour for the building to even call the authorities, let alone release them from the elevator.

When I first began reading the article (before watching the videos) I had expected the man to be acting unreasonably, or potentially hurting someone within the elevator, but what the video depicted was a much different story. Although the man clearly was not in a standard state of mind, it was fairly apparent that he had some type of learning disability or perhaps psychological impairments. But then again, I cannot exactly say I would be in a perfect state of mind if trapped in an elevator either.

I believe there is a problem in media today portraying people as 'crazy' or 'insane' which I believe draws a line in society. Reading article headlines and stories about 'crazy' people, sets a negative tone for people who suffer from mental disorders. Was the man saying strange things and cursing a lot? Sure. That is clear in the video. But, saying that he is insane and should be regarded as such, I believe, oversteps the bounds of the viewer. Nick (who was filming) began exhibiting symptoms of an asthma attack due to the stuffy air they had been sharing for such a long period of time. The other man in the elevator opened the elevator door, allowing for fresh air to flow from the elevator shaft, as well as defend Nick to the clerks answering the emergency line within the elevator when he found it hard to breathe and had to sit down, unable to get to an inhaler.

Now to the issue of "protocol" during the emergency situation. The two men waited an hour before anyone outside of the building was contacted. They spoke to a woman at a reception desk multiple time, and she was informed of his asthma condition, yet no one was contacted. I believe this to be an issue simply because it was unsafe to have them waiting that long. Although there have been times in the past where people have been trapped for up to 41 hours at a time, there needs to be better ways to monitor elevators and be able to retrieve trapped passengers. I hope that building gets sued and sets a standard in hopes of preventing this situation.

Meet the Author xD

Intro?

Hello whoever is reading this, I am Conner. Some of you may know me, some of you may not. I would like to start out by saying this about my blog; sometimes I don't necessarily take the "right" side of an argument just for the sake of arguing the topic from a different angle. I am always open to discuss anything with anyone and for the most part I am an open book. So feel free to email, comment, and respond to any of my writings, but try not to judge me before you actually get to know me and things will be just fine :).

Here is a little about me.

I was born in San Diego in 1998. My father was in the military so we moved around quite a bit. I have been here at Mira Mesa since January when I moved here at semester. I'm a pretty social outgoing guy who loves to talk and hang out. This is my 9th school and my 15th or 16th house, I don't even remember. 

I like to think I am more "worldly" having been and lived all over the US unlike a lot of you who have lived in the same place your whole life. By no means do I think I'm better because of this, in all honesty I'm kind of jealous of you guys. Moving all over, having to make new friends every year, constantly being the 'new kid' sucks. But heck I've made it this far! Feel free to ask me questions or really do anything with my blog. I might make a few videos or something even outside of the regular assignments, who knows. Stick around and I guess we'll just have to find out together ;) well goodnight people, and have a wonderful rest of you day or night or whatever it may be.

                                                                                                                         -Conner

Assignment 1

Response to NY Times' Article: "Exposing Hidden Bias at Google"

http://tinyurl.com/om23oql

On September 24th, 2014, The New York Times posted an article claiming gender bias in the workplace in the worlds leading tech company and search engine, Google. 

Everyone and their grandmother knows about "www.Google.com" and I think its safe to say that they are a very important, successful, and influential business in the tech world and our transition as a planet and country, into more technological times.

I do consider myself a "Google bias" person, but that's because they've successfully earned my respect for their company by what they put into the world and the good they do, and heck do they do a good job.

One of my personal favorites as a comparison to Google is its close competitor Yahoo. Statistics by comScore show that Google is the #1 search engine in the US while Yahoo is only #2. Google has a diversity of 7 to 3 (men to women), while Yahoo, with its female C.E.O. has a diversity of 31 to 19 (men to women). As stated in the very same NY Times article.

What the article failed to state were the financial differences between the two companies who started out at relatively the same time, Yahoo starting 3 years prior to Google. According to VentureHarbour,com, last year Google made signicantly more money than both Yahoo and Bing combined (more than 7 and a half more than both companies combined).

Although Google and Yahoo have been around for the same amount of time, Google continues to strive and grow while Yahoo seemingly exists in it's large shadow. One of my favorite philosophies to withhold in the work place is the classic "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Now that I am finished spouting off the facts to which I will use to defend my opinions about sexism in the workplace and such.

So I would like to begin by asking you, the reader, a simple question, if that is alright with you; What is the main priority of any business? The media, as well as some of these companies, may lead you to believe that answer to that question is 'to be economically diverse' but the truth is, that is, in it's entirety, a lie. The main goal of any successful company is to be successful, to make money, and to make decisions best fit for the company and its long lasting superiority.

Although Yahoo may be more 'diverse' they are by a long shot less successful. Now  I am most certainly not telling you they are less successful because they have more women in their work place, but back to my quote, if the workplace is thriving and doing well with a male dominated environment, then why try and change that for the potential risk of the company. There also becomes the difference between sexual bias, and an excuse. In my opinion, people who hide behind the things that set them apart (race, gender, sexual orientation) are just holding themselves back. People who let themselves become victimized by what sets them apart in this world may not work nearly as hard as someone who is "of the Norm" yet they think its that difference that didn't get them the job, when all reality the other person was much more qualified for the position.

Google is a very successful tech company and I think it is ridiculous to try and judge them on their "diversity". Their job is not to be diverse. It is to be a reliable search engine, and supply its consumers with their technological needs. We waste so much time on the little things and get tied up in the technicalities when in reality its simple, they're a tech company, not the HR for the country. And this confuses people.