Animals For Testing And Research Studies

Animals For Testing And Research Studies This report is based on the Literature Review about ethical dilemma that arises over the controversy of using Animals for Testing and Research Studies. We have tried to explain in brief about Animal Testing and discussed broadly with the Ethical Theories that support and argue about the Use of Animals. We have also tried to relate all the ethical dilemma with respect to PG, who over the past decade has been constantly facing the allegations over the use of Animal Testing to ensure that their consumers get Safe Products. We have tried to come to a conclusion on how Animal Testing can be reduced, if not completely eradicated. At the same time we have voiced our opinions on the use of various alternatives to Animal Testing. Overview of Animal Testing The Use of Animals for test observations and Experimentations for the greater understanding of reactions from a particular substance or raw material that goes into some goods or medicines that we consumers consume can be termed as Animal Testing. Or you can say the use of non-human animals experimentations to prevent pain and sufferings to human beings A number of companies that produced goods for personal and hygiene care have emerged from the mid to late nineteenth century and this resulted in the number of animal tests and experiments to grow exponentially. The main reasons for those tests were medical research, to cure illness and test chemical compounds used to develop new products. Those tests were conducted in medical schools, pharmaceutical companies, and even farms. The vast amounts of animals that are being tested on are mice, monkeys, cats, dogs and guinea pigs. However, certain types of animals are used for different types of research for instance mice for cancer research, dogs for transplant surgery and cats for psychological experiments. Moreover, most of those animals that are being tested on are purposely-bred and supplied by the specialists companies, others usually come from the pound or are just caught in the wild. Over 100 million animals in North America alone will be killed in animal tests this year. Animal testing has been going on for years, a lot of companies test their products on animals, some of these tests consist of restraining animals and dropping chemicals into their eyes, the scientists also forcefully pump the chemicals into the animals stomach though a tube to see how it reacts to the chemical. These experiments are sometimes carried without anesthesia which makes it extremely painful for the animal. After observing the reactions for a number of days the animal is either destroyed or re-used in other experiments, most experiments consist of burning, stabbing and drugging animals. The thing is that animals react to drugs differently than we do so the results cant accurately be applied to humans so why do scientists do it? Since we cannot legally conduct tests on ourselves as humans, we look at the creatures that are right below us, animals. However, some of us dont seem to notice animals have feelings and can experience pain just as we would. As Jeremy Bentham would ask, The question is not, Can they reason? Nor, Can they talk? But can they suffer? Testing Animal Testing and Ethical Dilemma Introduction The rise in the consumer dominance has led the organizations to adopt the use of various artificially derived chemicals for use in production of Personal and Hygiene Goods. At the same time, medical advances and pharmaceutical companies acknowledge the use of animals for research studies and experimentation. This has raised various doubts about our ethics. Testing on Animals for chemical substance reactions to ensure consumer safety and drive innovative techniques is believed to be inhumane by some, while others agree that Animal Testing saves LIFE. This research paper evaluates the ethical dilemma borne by us. Animal Testing Define The obvious questions that are raised here are about the whole concept of Animal Testing and why is it necessary? Most of us are made to believe that Animal Testing is simply the torture of animals, striping them of their rights and cruel treatment of animals. This Definition of Animal Testing might have derived from various organizations that do not support the idea of Animal Research Studies as a whole and demand ethical treatment of animals through unjust terrifying acts of demonstrations and protests. These are the organizations who believe Animals have RIGHTS. It was argued upon by Robert Goldberg (1990) at the Washington conference of Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal with top dignitaries of the Humane Society about the issue of euthanizing millions of stray animals in public interest, and why the ruckus of using the same animals for the use in lab-testing. It was also argued upon at the conference over how activists have been indulged in terrorist like activities, as demonstrated by various raids at numerous labs conducting experiments on animals. The irony is, we as humans, will never be willing to come up and accept the fact that if we dont test the substances on Us, Animals are the next best alternatives to ensure Safety. There has always been an argument that animal testing results are inaccurate and also it is expensive to perform tests, secondly, animal testing is inhumane, and thirdly, there are alternatives to animal testing. According to former scientific executive of Huntingdon Life Sciences, animal tests and human results agree only 5%-25% of the time. Then looking at Tony Pages Vivisection Unveiled it states that less than 2% of human illnesses (1.16%) are ever seen in animals. In the tests of LD/50 short for Lethal Dose 50 per cent, a test wherein the animals receive a continuous dose of a dangerous chemical until half of them die , the Humane Society of the United States states that LD/50 tests do not yield enough data on the following: the poisonous doses of a chemical or substance, the prediction of poisoning signs and symptoms, the prevention or correction of over doses, and the specific cause of death in laboratory animals. Finally, looking at PETAs fact sheets, they argue that In many cases, animal studies do not just hurt animals and waste money; they harm and kill people, too. The drugs thalidomide, Zomax and DES were all tested on animals and judged safe but had devastating consequences fo r the humans who used them. The cost of animal testing is about $136 billion each year. Ethical Dilemma : Corporate Assessment PG Despite the fact that reliable modern humane tests are available in these days, Procter and Gamble insist on testing on animals claiming that this is the last resort that makes sure of their products safety. Whether it is ethical or unethical for Procter and Gamble to test on helpless animals is the question raised in this ethical dilemma. The case is analyzed and ethically evaluated based on: Deontological Theories Teleological Theories Casuist Theory All of these ethical theories aim at a common set of goals which are the ethical principles and that includes Beneficence, Least Harm, Respect for autonomy, and Justice. Deontological Theories: Deontological theories focus mainly on duties, obligations and rights. One of the most common deontological theories is the Kantianism which is known of its two formulations the Categorical Imperative I and the Categorical Imperative II. PRO ANIMAL TESTING: A scientist at Procter and Gamble would raise the question: is it right for humans to test on animals to save human lives? The proposed rule would be that humans can and have the right to test on animals in order to save human lives. So if we universalize the rule: it is accepted for humans to test and experiments with animals in order to save human lives. Furthermore, According to Immanuel Kant- the German philosopher- the only thing with any basic value is a good will. Since animals have no wills at all, they cannot have good will; they therefore do not have any basic value. Hence, it is ethical to test on animals because it saves humans lives. Procter and Gambles scientist would argue that moral rights and principles of justice apply only to human beings. Morality is a creation of social processes in which animals do not participate. Moral rights and moral principles apply only to those who are part of the moral community created by these social processes. Since animals are not part of this moral community, we have no obligations toward them. But we do have moral obligations to our fellow human beings, which include the duty to reduce and prevent needless human suffering and untimely deaths, which, in turn, may require the painful experimentation on animals. CON ANIMAL TESTING: A scientist working at Body Shop raise the question: Can Procter and Gamble mistreat and torture an animal claiming that this is the only way to make sure of their products safety? The proposed rule would be that organizations and companies can torture animals and demonstrate hideous experiments on them just because they believe that human beings are superiors to animals by being rational and intelligent. So if we universalize the rule, then a person can apply scientific experiments on any irrational unintelligent creature. Hence, that would include babies and people with mental difficulties and this would definitely be considered immoral and unethical on so many levels. That leads to the fact that although animals are irrational creatures, they feel the pain and the torture exercised on them. Thus, Procter and Gambles testing on animals can be termed unethical. Categorical Imperative II implies that individuals should act in a way that leads to a mutual benefit, treating both parties as ends in themselves. According to the case, animals are being misused in a way that is only considered beneficial for the human kind by Procter and Gamble. In other words, animals are being used as means to an end. Therefore, Procter and Gambles actions towards animals are unethical. Other deontological theories focus on the rights rather than duties and obligations. This leads to the controversial question: Do animals have rights? Even though there is no law that clearly states that animal rights are equal to human rights, animal rights campaigners have stated that animals have the right to live free from human exploitation, whether in the name of science or sport, exhibition or service, food or fashion. Animals have the right to live in harmony with their nature rather than according to human desires. Injecting chemical substances into a rabbits eye for seven days to produce a Head and Shoulders shampoo deprive him from any of these rights. Applying cancer and toxicity tests on rats and mice of optical brighteners and other laundry detergent ingredients leave them with no rights as well. These are just examples of the various experiments applied on animals in Procter and Gambles laboratories. Thus, testing on animals is unethical. Teleological Theories: Teleological theories focus on the consequences and the results of an action. Both of the Utilitarianism theories are perfect examples of such theories. An Act Utilitarians main objective is to take the action or the decision that would maximize the benefits for most people regardless of constraints such as law. On the other hand, a Rule Utilitarian takes into consideration justice and fairness as well as beneficence for most people. PRO ANIMAL TESTNG: Those who argue for the continuation of painful experimentation on animals state that society has an obligation to act in ways that will minimize harm and maximize benefits. Halting or curtailing painful experimentation on animals would have harmful consequences to society. Indeed, pain is an evil to be minimized, and scientists at Procter and Gamble do work to minimize pain when possible. Contrary to sensationalistic reports of animal rights activists, Procter and Gambles scientists are not a society of crazed, cruel, curiosity seekers. But there are instances when the use of alternatives, such as painkillers, would interfere with research that promises to vastly improve the quality and duration of human lives. Animal research has been the basis for new vaccines, new cancer therapies, artificial limbs and organs, new surgical techniques, and the development of hundreds of useful products and materials. These benefits to humans far outweigh the costs in suffering that relatively few animals have had to endure. Society has an obligation to maximize the opportunities to produce such beneficial consequences, even at the cost of inflicting some pain on animals. CON ANIMAL TESTING: From an Act Utilitarian point of view, Procter and Gambles animal testing does not only harm the whole animal kingdom; it is harming the human race and the environment as well. Animal testing is one of the main reasons of having various animals such as chimpanzees, macaques and white rhinos under threat, the threat of extinction. And as clarified earlier, animal testing is not the adequate way to save human lives. On the contrary, it is putting their lives in danger as well. A Rule Utilitarian who takes into account fairness and justice would add to the previous points that there is neither justice nor fairness applied when human beings use animals as disposable machines claiming that this is the only way to save as much human lives as possible (which is of course not true). Thus, According to the Act and Rule Utilitarianism theories animal testing held by Procter and Gamble is unethical. Casuist Theory: The casuist theory compares a current ethical dilemma with examples of similar ethical and their outcomes. PRO ANIMAL TESTING: Comparing our current ethical dilemma of Animal Testing and contrast the same with use of Canines as human companions, or use of animals for human safety would raise more doubts about our sincerity and perseverance to the issues raised in our society. Do we fail to conceptualize the degree of our social environment that would create a clear ethical ground that justifies why we do what we do. Although most of the training is under acceptable standards, some safety patrol dogs need rigorous training which can be brutal and inhumane. CON ANIMAL TESTING: Looking at the issue from a casuistic point of view, a perfect similar ethical dilemma would be of human slavery. Caucasians used to believe that they are superior to others and therefore used to slave Africans and treat them in a very inhuman way claiming that by doing so they are maximizing the benefits for the whole world. This was considered one of the norms back in those dark times. Nowadays it is considered immoral, unethical and completely unacceptable in every nation and society to treat another human being in an inferior way. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights clearly states now that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights and that everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. Peoples awareness for human rights has been increasing throughout the years and this was the reason behind this Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Unfortunately, scientists at Procter and Gamble are still unaware of the fact that animals are entitled to have their own rights. They are oblivious to the fact that we as human beings have no right to mistreat animals. They have no right as human beings to capture them, torture them and kill them with no mercy under the veil of saving human lives. On the contrary, animals should have the right to live peacefully with their nature and we as the rational creatures on this earth are obligated to defend the helpless kingdom and protect them from any harm. Thus, animal testing at Procter and Gambles laboratories can be simply ceased by declaring it unethical. Consumers First Looking at the whole idea from PGs point of view. According to PGs Human Safety Brochure and Sustainability (2009) overview, we have to first realize the fact that on an average about 4 billion people in the world use PG products every single day. This makes it their utmost priority that they reduce the risk of any type to the end-user. It has been for this very fact, that PG has been indulged in Animal Testing. The underlying factor here is that, we, as Humans, would be biased over the fact that if a particular product is tested on animals, and is guaranteed not to harm us or our children, we instantly change our opinion about the use of Animal Testing. According to Davis and Donald, we cannot have the ultimate assurance of the safety in the products we buy and use independent of animal testing. They specifically quote with present day technology, if the cost of achieving such assurance mandates the sacrifice of an occasional hairless mouse or rabbit or laboratory rat, then it is a price that we are prepared to pay. It is a delusion and a sham at this point to say we can achieve one without the other. Although the Ban on animal testing in various countries have given rise to various companies that are not indulged in Animal Testing, the Body Shop was one company that started off even before the ban with one view in mind Cruelty Free products. Many Researchers and Authors like Goldemberg and Robert (1992), believe that although a companys final product may not be tested on animals, but there is always a chance that down the line, some of the ingredients used were tested on animals by its suppliers or somebody else in the industry. Conclusion Medical Advances such as various vaccines, Insulin, treatment for kidney through dialysis, etc. Has been possible as a result of animal testing. At the same the use of various personal care products such has shampoos and cosmetics have been certified safe for human consumption as a result of constant development through Animal testing and research. During this journey, we have failed on many occasions to successfully justify animal testing when researches have gone wrong and caused harm and in certain cases death to Humans. Although we understand that Animal Testing has resulted in numerous data and statistics that would help generate computer simulation models and prove as a bench mark for further research, we can never stop Animal Testing as whole as it is fueled by our hunger for innovation. There is always room for efficiency and least harm. This can be achieved by the 3Rs theory developed by British zoologists William Russel and Rex Burch in 1959. The theory focuses on Replacement, Reduction and Refinement of animal testing and experimentations.

Internet and Information Essay

Having quick access to information can make life quite easy! I say this, because not all information you find on digital media sources can be trusted. The one way you can assess the value of the information is to perform research on the information offered or cross-reference the information you find. Since anyone can post anything on the Internet, it is best to identify the author and research the author’s credentials. This week I was researching information on the Internet about the digital divide. The search pulled up more than 50 pages of web links multiplied by 13 web links per page. Most of the populated information, was outdated, not that out dated information is not useful; however, I was able to find 10 web links that were dated recently enough for me to use. Over the years, I have become more literate regarding digital media and been able to distinguish the difference between blog, chat room, substantive and opinionated sites. Understanding how to identify bias statements and identify the facts as it relates, is one way to look at the information provided with a critical eye. Some websites the author, tries to influence their readers by taking a bias approach to persuade the reader’s thoughts on a particular subject, in these instances you are not receiving a balanced viewpoint, however; this is not always bad, especially when it comes to researching on personal viewpoints. Understanding the reliability and credibility of information might be as simple as knowing the domain. Domains can clue you in on the type of information and where the information originated. For instance, if I am looking for information on taxes, I would find correct answers on IRS. gov instead of IRS. com. It is safe to assume that IRS. gov is a reliable website as the government is the creator, on the other hand, IRS. com shows me similar information, however, it contains advertisements and a direct link to the IRS official’s website. Although both websites look familiar and offer alike information I find it better to get the answers straight from the horse’s mouth. To find and tilize the information, I need to use a critical eye and cross-reference the information found. Another instance is watching the different news stations on TV and understanding the affiliation they may have with other TV stations. For example, I may be watching a national news program MSNBC stock’s banner, which mentions how Comcast’s stocks are on the rise; this might be to persuade viewers to invest in their stock; however, I am also aware that Comcast recently purchased NBC and its affiliated stations. Now that I understand the possible bias approach, I am more inclined to research the fact prior to purchase their stock. The next time you walk into your local food store, view the magazines and newspapers. You should already be aware of the tabloids that give a reader inaccurate information and normally lack the author’s bio or credentials. The Internet can be like a magazine stand! Because of net neutrality, the lack of restrictions enables anyone to upload any kind of information, whether is true or false. We find ourselves arguing the two extremes! On one hand if a private enterprise wants to control the Internet, we would find that information would be shared for a price which limits free speech, however, if we allow the government to control what is shared on the Internet we may be left with what the government finds deem able. Both extremes limit our freedom when it comes to the Internet! As to your last question concerning the digital divide; it means the gap between those who have access to this media and those who do not. This divide affects many Americans whom either have no access to digital and media social websites or chooses not to have any involvement with it. They lack the basic understanding of digital media, and/or how to utilize the information. To bridge the gap, we have already started by providing free Internet access in our schools and libraries. This would allow for people with limited resources to become media literate. I believe that this free service can help bridge the gap to help the illiterate understand the differences between facts vs. propaganda. Because of the misuse on the Internet and the increased marketing from companies, I would find these classes useful for those with limited understanding of the Internet.

Asignment Performance Management Essay

Weiss and Hartle (1997) â€Å"A process for establishing a shared understanding about what is to be achieved and how it is to be achieved, and an approach to managing people that increases the probability of achieving success† * In my experience performance management means different things the different people. In the company I currently work for performance management is thought of in the negative as being a process by which managers are able to take employees to task over bad performance and ultimately get rid of them. This may seem archaic and it is the most negative example I have come across in my work life so far, however, even in more forward thinking companies’ employees are often skeptical and suspicious of the performance management process. Conversely I have been fortunate to see performance management at its best. For me performance management is all about taking the core goals of the organisation and ensuring that departmental, team and individuals tasks and behaviors link to and support these goals. In this way employees understand what is expected of them, why the work is important and how it links into the overall performance of the organisation. They are engaged and feel confident in their work knowing that they are contributing to the success of the company. Performance management assists oganisations in motivating and empowering their employees by setting clear goals and rewarding them not only for what they achieve but also the way in which they achieve. In doing this organisations can focus on what is really important to the success of the business. They can recruit and retain the best employees, and motivate and develop by training and challenging the workforce. Performance management allows succession planning so that job roles can be filled with skilled, motivated, experienced employees. Components of Performance Management Performance management is a cyclical process involving a number different components. Goal setting is a key component of the Performance Management process. The organisation’s overall goals should start the chain and depending of the size and structure of the organization these goals. The process should start with the organisational goals which are designed to ensure the performance of the organisation leads to successful business. These goals cascade down to business areas, departments, teams and individuals. For individual employees their job description and the team’s  goals will form the basis of their individual goals. It is important that they understand how their own goals link into those of the organisation, why the work they are doing is important and how it contributes to the overall success of the organisation. There must be agreement on individual goals if they are to be embraced by the individual and they must be SMART if they are to be effective. Specific Measureable Achievable Results Orientated (Relevant) Time bound It is important that individuals are clear on what is expected of them, that they feel the goals can be achieved and that they that they are challenging and interesting. Key to the achievement of goals is regular communication. Communication may be formal or informal but can include updates from the individuals, feedback from colleagues, managers and clients, one to ones or team meetings. This communication is invaluable in employees on track to achieving their goals and making changes when necessary. Performance appraisals are another important component of performance management. These events are often undertaken annually and provide a formal appraisal of the individual’s competence in their role. Individuals and their managers have the opportunity to discuss, provide feedback and evidence of the individual’s achievements (against goals) and, in some organisations, the way in which those achievements were met (behaviours). Some companies also undertake half yearly reviews or appraisals with the view to making sure that that performance stays on track between annual appraisals. This is also an opportunity to review existing goals and set new ones. Performance improvement or development planning is another part of performance management. Areas for improvement or development may be identified at any time during the performance management process but typically come out of appraisal discussions. As with goals it is important that there is agreement on development plans and that activities to develop individuals are varied and effective. If employees are going to achieve their goals and develop their skills, knowledge and delivery within their role they must have access to the appropriate training and coaching. Whether employees require  development because they do not meet their current performance requirements or in order to progress to the next level, training and coaching are also key elements within a comprehensive performance management process. Motivation and performance Management This relationship between motivation and performance management can be complex and individual to each employee. There are numerous motivational theories all of which have elements of authenticity to them. I have looked at two motivational theories, McGregor and Vroom. Douglas McGregor’s theory ‘details two contrasting models of workforce motivation’ ** Theory X suggests that the average person is basically lazy and don’t like work. They prefer to be told what to do and don’t want responsibility. As such there needs to be tight control of the individual and threats of loss or punishment are the best ways to motivate them. Theory Y is the opposite, assuming that most people enjoy work, that they are happy to take responsibility under the right circumstances and that they can be self-motivated to do a good job. This motivation can be enhanced when managers are able to appreciate the employee and develop their trust. Victor Harold Vroom’s theory, to me, has links to the ‘Y Theory’, the theory suggests that factors such as personality, skills, knowledge, experience and abilities drive an individual’s performance. It proposes that employees are motivated by what they expect to receive in return for their effort and what that expected reward means to the employee. This is referred to as ‘Expectancy theory’ and links together in the following way: Expectancy: Does the individual feel the effort they put in will lead to high performance. What is their levels of confidence in what they are capable of doing? Do they have the appropriate resources, knowledge and training to carry out their role? Instrumentality: If the individual achieves a high level of performance is there reward for their efforts and can they be sure they will receive it. Employees must be able to trust that they will. Valence: Is the reward offered/expected one that the individual values. For the reward to motivate it must have importance for the individual, be it financial, recognition, promotion and so on. For me the key to Vroom’s theory and its success in motivating employees is that every individual is different, each has their own needs, wants, expectations and values based on the individuals frame of reference. Management must know and respect the individual and what they want. Reward within Performance management: I have already discussed reward in relation to motivation and how the reward on offer may need to bespoke to the individual in order to be effective. There is, however, a far wider aspect to reward with a performance management process. Reward to attract and to motivate Pay is usually the first thought when talking about reward in employment. It is important that a realistic but attractive salary is offered initially when recruiting new employees. Pay continues to be important for most individuals throughout their employment, however it is not the only way in way employees can be rewarded. Within my current organization pay is only increased annually, across the board, which has little to do with performance except for acknowledging that employees are rewarded for working for the company in line with cost of living rises. Currently there is no performance management process within my organization other than dealing with poor performance in a ‘theory X’ style, employees are serviced with a notice of improvement linked to termination of their contact. Outside of the annual pay increase financial reward is only given if a good employee threatens to leave. Practice is known to all employees via the grapevine and acts to demotivates those who don’t wish to take this approach. I have, however, worked within another organization where annual increases were calculated on performance throughout the year based on a truly robust appraisal system. Engaged and motivated employees were encouraged to collect factual evidence of their achievements and to present and rate this evidence at their appraisal. Ratings were discussed and agreed and then, then to ensure fairness, underwent cross calibration at departmental level. Employees felt they were treated fairly and rewarded not just for their efforts over the year but for their ownership of managing their own performance. Another type of reward for performance, which is being rolled out currently by my employer, is to provide opportunity for high performing  individuals to their knowledge of the business through a shadowing scheme. This has raised employee’s morale as they feel they will be able to perform more effectively and this could, in turn, lead to better opportunities and perhaps promotion. It has also encouraged other individuals to improve their performance in order to be able participate in the scheme. As I have discussed an employee’ perception of the value of reward will vary from one to another. values The need to provide a variety of rewards in line with employee’s expectations and personal preference is supported in the concept of Total Reward schemes. These scheme look at all the rewards and benefits that are or could be provided to employees recognition work/life balance company culture employee development environment, including job design and the physical workspace. *Management and Motivation, Vroom, V.H., Deci, E.L., Penguin 1983 (first published 1970) ** Wikipedia 3 x components of total reward system 1 of which should b non financial Weiss and Hartle (1997)

Mistakes and Misquotes on Memorials and Statues

Designing a building or memorial is hard enough. What happens when the work also includes words? Suddenly the focus shifts from visual to verbal as the artist and architect agonize over typography—making language visible. Words, quotations, and lists of names and dates must convey information and, ideally, flow seamlessly with the design. Hopefully the words will also be historically accurate. How do architects grapple with the challenge? Do the words to be inscribed influence the overall design? Or, do the demands of the design alter the text? Here are some examples of this design challenge. Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial: The 1997 memorial dedicated to the life, times, and words of Americas 32nd president incorporates over 20 quotes into its design. From March 15, 1941, inscribed in stone behind a seated FDR and his dog, Fala, are these words: They (who) seek to establish systems of government based on the regimentation of all human beings by a handful of individual rulers...call this a new order. It is not new and it is not order. The inscription is accurate, although an English teacher may frown on using all capital letters and using parentheses when square brackets are more appropriate. Accurate inscriptions, however, did not save the FDR Memorial from sins of omission. Most noticeable, Roosevelts disability from polio was initially disguised until a wheelchair was eventually added. Less noticeable, however, was the omission of one of FDRs most famous lines: Yesterday, December 7, 1941—a date that will live in infamy.... is a line not found within the 7.5 acre park in Washington, DC. Inscriptions at the Martin Luther King Jr. National Memorial: According to some critics, architect Dr. Ed Jackson, Jr. ran afoul of the truth when he helped design the Martin Luther King Jr. National Memorial in Washington, DC. The 2011 Memorial included words from Dr. Kings 1968 sermon known as The Drum Major Instinct. Toward the end of that rousing sermon, King said: Yes, if you want to say that I was a drum major, say that I was a drum major for justice. (Amen) Say that I was a drum major for peace. (Yes) I was a drum major for righteousness. And all of the other shallow things will not matter. (Amen!). However these were not the words engraved on one side of Dr. Kings statue. The architect had agreed to shorten the quote so it would fit in the space that the sculptor had allotted. Dr. Kings words became: I was a drum major for justice, peace and righteousness. Poet Maya Angelou, who was a member of the Council of Historians for the Memorial, expressed outrage. She asked why the words of the slain civil rights leader had been paraphrased. Other critics joined her in saying that the the shortened quote alters its meaning and makes Martin Luther King appear arrogant. Dr. Jackson argued that designing a beautiful monument required abbreviating some of Kings words. For him, aesthetics trumped authenticity. After some resistance, officials eventually decided to remove the historical inaccuracies from the Memorial. The National Park Service had sculptor Lei Yixin fix the disputed quote. Inscriptions at the Jefferson Memorial: Architects John Russell Pope, Daniel P. Higgins, and Otto R. Eggers faced a design challenge similar to the MLK Memorial. For the 1940s-era Jefferson Memorial, how could the prolific writings of Thomas Jefferson be fairly represented under one dome? Like the architects of other memorials, they opted to edit famous quotes from Jefferson. Panel 3 of the Jefferson Memorial reads: Commerce between master and slave is despotism. But, according to the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello.org, Jefferson originally wrote: The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. Indeed, some of the inscriptions carved in stone at the Jefferson Memorial are composites created by patching different documents together. Inscriptions at the Lincoln Memorial: When architect Henry Bacon designed the 1922 Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC, he combined a mammoth 19-foot statue by Chester French with historically accurate inscriptions of speeches written by Lincoln. Imagine, however, if Bacon had taken short cuts. What if Lincolns famous words With malice toward none, with charity for all became, With malice...for all? Would the shortened version change our perception of Abraham Lincoln? The opposite wall of the Memorial contains the entire, unedited text of Lincolns Gettysburg Address. If the architect had desired to save wall space, he might have shortened the speech to: that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not. What story would the revised quote tell about the great leader? Inscriptions at the US Supreme Court Building: Supposing that architect Cass Gilbert had been cramped for space when he designed the 1935 U.S. Supreme Court building. Imagine if he wanted to avoid the wordy balance and scale metaphors. Couldn’t he simply remove the word Equal from Equal Justice Under Law? Does the meaning change by simply saying Justice Under Law? Inscriptions at the 9/11 National Memorial: The 2011 National 9/11 Memorial in New York City took nearly a decade to construct. The project might have been completed more quickly if the architects Michael Arad and Peter Walker hadnt spent so long on the arrangement of nearly 3,000 names around the fountain parapet. Could they have left out a few? Would editorializing change the memorials meaning and impact? Inscriptions at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial: Maya Lin, designer of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, felt that politics had eclipsed the veterans, their service, and their lives. She kept the memorial design elegantly simple so that attention could focus on the names of the men and women who died. Over fifty-eight thousand names are arranged in the chronological order of their deaths or MIA status from the Vietnam conflict. The height of the stone slowly rises and falls, as does any story of conflict. At first, few die. Then escalation. Then withdrawal. The story of the Vietnam conflict is gracefully and visually told in stone with room enough for each citizen soldier. Questions For Designers: Was poet Maya Angelo correct to condemn architect Ed Jackson, Jr.? Or, do architects and artists have the right to change the wording in historical documents? How important are written words in the language of architecture? Some would argue that architects who are inarticulate with words also might be inarticulate with design.