Tag: contrast

Get Professionally Written Papers From The Writing Experts

Original and non-plagiarized custom papers- Our writers develop their writing from scratch unless you request them to rewrite, edit or proofread your paper.
Timely Delivery- primewritersbay.com believes in beating the deadlines that our customers have imposed because we understand how important it is.
Customer satisfaction- Customer satisfaction. We have an outstanding customer care team that is always ready and willing to listen to you, collect your instructions and make sure that your custom writing needs are satisfied
Confidential- It’s secure to place an order at primewritersbay.com We won’t reveal your private information to anyone else.
Writing services provided by experts- Looking for expert essay writers, thesis and dissertation writers, personal statement writers, or writers to provide any other kind of custom writing service?
Enjoy Please Note-You have come to the most reliable academic writing site that will sort all assignments that that you could be having. We write essays, research papers, term papers, research proposals Compare & Contrast mobile applications vs websites

Green Order Now Button PNG Image | Transparent PNG Free Download on SeekPNG

Tags applications, compare, contrast, mobile, websites

Writers Solution

Compare and contrast the need and purpose of creating a project charter before creating a workflow redesign.

Post author By admin
Post date October 12, 2021
No Comments on Compare and contrast the need and purpose of creating a project charter before creating a workflow redesign.

This module begins with an introduction on the importance of using workflow redesign for quality improvement in a hospital setting that involves developing a project charter which includes twelve area and a workflow design. Workflow analysis is important as it has served nurse administrators well by identifying delays, redundant steps, and nonvalue activities within processes. Performance measures (e.g., turnaround times, process steps, cost per unit of service, and so on) can be trended on control charts for continuous quality improvement programs. Workflow analysis, conducted through interviews and standard flowcharts fails to capture the dynamic nature and interactive effects of interdependent processes in a complex system. Workflow charts provide a static map or snapshot of a process but are only the first step in understanding it.

Discussion Question:

Compare and contrast the need and purpose of creating a project charter before creating a workflow redesign.

350 words

GET SOLUTION BELOW

Get Professionally Written Papers From The Writing Experts

Original and non-plagiarized custom papers. Our writers develop their writing from scratch unless you request them to rewrite, edit or proofread your paper.
Timely Delivery. capitalessaywriting.com believes in beating the deadlines that our customers have imposed because we understand how important it is.
Customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction. We have an outstanding customer care team that is always ready and willing to listen to you, collect your instructions and make sure that your custom writing needs are satisfied
Privacy and safety. It’s secure to place an order at capitalessaywriting.com We won’t reveal your private information to anyone else.
Writing services provided by experts. Looking for expert essay writers, thesis and dissertation writers, personal statement writers, or writers to provide any other kind of custom writing service?
Enjoy our bonus services. You can make a free inquiry before placing and your order and paying this way, you know just how much you will pay. A verdict was rendered against three parent chaperones. How was the third parent included in the case?
Premium papers. We provide the highest quality papers in the writing industry. Our company only employs specialized professional writers who take pride in satisfying the needs of our huge client base by offering them premium writing services Compare and contrast the need and purpose of creating a project charter before creating a workflow redesign.

Tags before, charter, compare, contrast, creating, project, purpose

Writers Solution

Christian perspective of the nature of spirituality and ethics in contrast to the perspective of postmodern relativism within health care

write a reflection about worldview and respond to following:

In 250-300 words, explain the Christian perspective of the nature of spirituality and ethics in contrast to the perspective of postmodern relativism within health care.
In 250-300 words, explain what scientism is and describe two of the main arguments against it.
In 750-1,000 words, answer each of the worldview questions according to your own personal perspective and worldview:
1. What is ultimate reality?
2. What is the nature of the universe?
3. What is a human being?
4. What is knowledge?
5. What is your basis of ethics?
6. What is the purpose of your existence?

solid academic writing is expected, and documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines

GET SOLUTION BELOW

Get Professionally Written Papers From The Writing Experts

Original and non-plagiarized custom papers. Our writers develop their writing from scratch unless you request them to rewrite, edit or proofread your paper.
Timely Delivery. capitalessaywriting.com believes in beating the deadlines that our customers have imposed because we understand how important it is.
Customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction. We have an outstanding customer care team that is always ready and willing to listen to you, collect your instructions and make sure that your custom writing needs are satisfied
Privacy and safety. It’s secure to place an order at capitalessaywriting.com We won’t reveal your private information to anyone else.
Writing services provided by experts. Looking for expert essay writers, thesis and dissertation writers, personal statement writers, or writers to provide any other kind of custom writing service?
Enjoy our bonus services. You can make a free inquiry before placing and your order and paying this way, you know just how much you will pay. A verdict was rendered against three parent chaperones. How was the third parent included in the case?
Premium papers. We provide the highest quality papers in the writing industry. Our company only employs specialized professional writers who take pride in satisfying the needs of our huge client base by offering them premium writing services Christian perspective of the nature of spirituality and ethics in contrast to the perspective of postmodern relativism within health care

Tags christian, contrast, ethics, nature, perspective, spirituality

Writers Solution

President BushDavid Koehler Compare and contrast former President Bush’s claim that Iraq was a threat to world peace with David Koehler’s position on the issue.

At least 250 words

Read the various perspectives on going to war in Iraq.

President BushDavid Koehler Compare and contrast former President Bush’s claim that Iraq was a threat to world peace with David Koehler’s position on the issue. Which claims are valid? Which are based on fallacious reasoning (note instances)? Who has the stronger argument? Why?

GET SOLUTION FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT, Get Impressive Scores in Your Class

Get Professionally Written Papers From The Writing Experts

Original and non-plagiarized custom papers- Our writers develop their writing from scratch unless you request them to rewrite, edit or proofread your paper.
Timely Delivery– primewritersbay.com believes in beating the deadlines that our customers have imposed because we understand how important it is.
Customer satisfaction- Customer satisfaction. We have an outstanding customer care team that is always ready and willing to listen to you, collect your instructions and make sure that your custom writing needs are satisfied
Confidential- It’s secure to place an order at primewritersbay.com We won’t reveal your private information to anyone else.
Writing services provided by experts- Looking for expert essay writers, thesis and dissertation writers, personal statement writers, or writers to provide any other kind of custom writing service?
Enjoy Please Note-You have come to the most reliable academic writing site that will sort all assignments that that you could be having. We write essays, research papers, term papers, research proposals. President BushDavid Koehler Compare and contrast former President Bush’s claim that Iraq was a threat to world peace with David Koehler’s position on the issue.

Tags bushdavid, compare, contrast, former, koehler, president

Writers Solution

President BushDavid Koehler Compare and contrast former President Bush’s claim that Iraq was a threat to world peace with David Koehler’s position on the issue.

At least 250 words

Read the various perspectives on going to war in Iraq.

President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat
Remarks by the President on Iraq
Cincinnati Museum Center – Cincinnati Union Terminal
Cincinnati, Ohio

8:02 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all. Thank you for that very gracious and warm Cincinnati welcome. I’m honored to be here tonight; I appreciate you all coming.

Tonight I want to take a few minutes to discuss a grave threat to peace, and America’s determination to lead the world in confronting that threat.

The threat comes from Iraq. It arises directly from the Iraqi regime’s own actions — its history of aggression, and its drive toward an arsenal of terror. Eleven years ago, as a condition for ending the Persian Gulf War, the Iraqi regime was required to destroy its weapons of mass destruction, to cease all development of such weapons, and to stop all support for terrorist groups. The Iraqi regime has violated all of those obligations. It possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. It has given shelter and support to terrorism, and practices terror against its own people. The entire world has witnessed Iraq’s eleven-year history of defiance, deception and bad faith.

We also must never forget the most vivid events of recent history. On September the 11th, 2001, America felt its vulnerability — even to threats that gather on the other side of the earth. We resolved then, and we are resolved today, to confront every threat, from any source, that could bring sudden terror and suffering to America.

Members of the Congress of both political parties, and members of the United Nations Security Council, agree that Saddam Hussein is a threat to peace and must disarm. We agree that the Iraqi dictator must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons and diseases and gases and atomic weapons. Since we all agree on this goal, the issues is : how can we best achieve it?

Many Americans have raised legitimate questions: about the nature of the threat; about the urgency of action — why be concerned now; about the link between Iraq developing weapons of terror, and the wider war on terror. These are all issues we’ve discussed broadly and fully within my administration. And tonight, I want to share those discussions with you.

First, some ask why Iraq is different from other countries or regimes that also have terrible weapons. While there are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone — because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant who has already used chemical weapons to kill thousands of people. This same tyrant has tried to dominate the Middle East, has invaded and brutally occupied a small neighbor, has struck other nations without warning, and holds an unrelenting hostility toward the United States.

By its past and present actions, by its technological capabilities, by the merciless nature of its regime, Iraq is unique. As a former chief weapons inspector of the U.N. has said, “The fundamental problem with Iraq remains the nature of the regime, itself. Saddam Hussein is a homicidal dictator who is addicted to weapons of mass destruction.”

Some ask how urgent this danger is to America and the world. The danger is already significant, and it only grows worse with time. If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today — and we do — does it make any sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons?

In 1995, after several years of deceit by the Iraqi regime, the head of Iraq’s military industries defected. It was then that the regime was forced to admit that it had produced more than 30,000 liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents. The inspectors, however, concluded that Iraq had likely produced two to four times that amount. This is a massive stockpile of biological weapons that has never been accounted for, and capable of killing millions.

We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas. Saddam Hussein also has experience in using chemical weapons. He has ordered chemical attacks on Iran, and on more than forty villages in his own country. These actions killed or injured at least 20,000 people, more than six times the number of people who died in the attacks of September the 11th.

And surveillance photos reveal that the regime is rebuilding facilities that it had used to produce chemical and biological weapons. Every chemical and biological weapon that Iraq has or makes is a direct violation of the truce that ended the Persian Gulf War in 1991. Yet, Saddam Hussein has chosen to build and keep these weapons despite international sanctions, U.N. demands, and isolation from the civilized world.

Iraq possesses ballistic missiles with a likely range of hundreds of miles — far enough to strike Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey, and other nations — in a region where more than 135,000 American civilians and service members live and work. We’ve also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We’re concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVS for missions targeting the United States. And, of course, sophisticated delivery systems aren’t required for a chemical or biological attack; all that might be required are a small container and one terrorist or Iraqi intelligence operative to deliver it.

And that is the source of our urgent concern about Saddam Hussein’s links to international terrorist groups. Over the years, Iraq has provided safe haven to terrorists such as Abu Nidal, whose terror organization carried out more than 90 terrorist attacks in 20 countries that killed or injured nearly 900 people, including 12 Americans. Iraq has also provided safe haven to Abu Abbas, who was responsible for seizing the Achille Lauro and killing an American passenger. And we know that Iraq is continuing to finance terror and gives assistance to groups that use terrorism to undermine Middle East peace.

We know that Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy — the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We’ve learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases. And we know that after September the 11th, Saddam Hussein’s regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America.

Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints.

Some have argued that confronting the threat from Iraq could detract from the war against terror. To the contrary; confronting the threat posed by Iraq is crucial to winning the war on terror. When I spoke to Congress more than a year ago, I said that those who harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves. Saddam Hussein is harboring terrorists and the instruments of terror, the instruments of mass death and destruction. And he cannot be trusted. The risk is simply too great that he will use them, or provide them to a terror network.

Terror cells and outlaw regimes building weapons of mass destruction are different faces of the same evil. Our security requires that we confront both. And the United States military is capable of confronting both.

Many people have asked how close Saddam Hussein is to developing a nuclear weapon. Well, we don’t know exactly, and that’s the problem. Before the Gulf War, the best intelligence indicated that Iraq was eight to ten years away from developing a nuclear weapon. After the war, international inspectors learned that the regime has been much closer — the regime in Iraq would likely have possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993. The inspectors discovered that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a workable nuclear weapon, and was pursuing several different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb.

Before being barred from Iraq in 1998, the International Atomic Energy Agency dismantled extensive nuclear weapons-related facilities, including three uranium enrichment sites. That same year, information from a high-ranking Iraqi nuclear engineer who had defected revealed that despite his public promises, Saddam Hussein had ordered his nuclear program to continue.

The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his “nuclear mujahideen” — his nuclear holy warriors. Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past. Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons.

If the Iraqi regime is able to produce, buy, or steal an amount of highly enriched uranium a little larger than a single softball, it could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year. And if we allow that to happen, a terrible line would be crossed. Saddam Hussein would be in a position to blackmail anyone who opposes his aggression. He would be in a position to dominate the Middle East. He would be in a position to threaten America. And Saddam Hussein would be in a position to pass nuclear technology to terrorists.

Some citizens wonder, after 11 years of living with this problem, why do we need to confront it now? And there’s a reason. We’ve experienced the horror of September the 11th. We have seen that those who hate America are willing to crash airplanes into buildings full of innocent people. Our enemies would be no less willing, in fact, they would be eager, to use biological or chemical, or a nuclear weapon.

Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof — the smoking gun — that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud. As President Kennedy said in October of 1962, “Neither the United States of America, nor the world community of nations can tolerate deliberate deception and offensive threats on the part of any nation, large or small. We no longer live in a world,” he said, “where only the actual firing of weapons represents a sufficient challenge to a nations security to constitute maximum peril.”

Understanding the threats of our time, knowing the designs and deceptions of the Iraqi regime, we have every reason to assume the worst, and we have an urgent duty to prevent the worst from occurring.

Some believe we can address this danger by simply resuming the old approach to inspections, and applying diplomatic and economic pressure. Yet this is precisely what the world has tried to do since 1991. The U.N. inspections program was met with systematic deception. The Iraqi regime bugged hotel rooms and offices of inspectors to find where they were going next; they forged documents, destroyed evidence, and developed mobile weapons facilities to keep a step ahead of inspectors. Eight so-called presidential palaces were declared off-limits to unfettered inspections. These sites actually encompass twelve square miles, with hundreds of structures, both above and below the ground, where sensitive materials could be hidden.

The world has also tried economic sanctions — and watched Iraq use billions of dollars in illegal oil revenues to fund more weapons purchases, rather than providing for the needs of the Iraqi people.

The world has tried limited military strikes to destroy Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction capabilities — only to see them openly rebuilt, while the regime again denies they even exist.

The world has tried no-fly zones to keep Saddam from terrorizing his own people — and in the last year alone, the Iraqi military has fired upon American and British pilots more than 750 times.

After eleven years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon.

Clearly, to actually work, any new inspections, sanctions or enforcement mechanisms will have to be very different. America wants the U.N. to be an effective organization that helps keep the peace. And that is why we are urging the Security Council to adopt a new resolution setting out tough, immediate requirements. Among those requirements: the Iraqi regime must reveal and destroy, under U.N. supervision, all existing weapons of mass destruction. To ensure that we learn the truth, the regime must allow witnesses to its illegal activities to be interviewed outside the country — and these witnesses must be free to bring their families with them so they all beyond the reach of Saddam Hussein’s terror and murder. And inspectors must have access to any site, at any time, without pre-clearance, without delay, without exceptions.

The time for denying, deceiving, and delaying has come to an end. Saddam Hussein must disarm himself — or, for the sake of peace, we will lead a coalition to disarm him.

Many nations are joining us in insisting that Saddam Hussein’s regime be held accountable. They are committed to defending the international security that protects the lives of both our citizens and theirs. And that’s why America is challenging all nations to take the resolutions of the U.N. Security Council seriously.

And these resolutions are clear. In addition to declaring and destroying all of its weapons of mass destruction, Iraq must end its support for terrorism. It must cease the persecution of its civilian population. It must stop all illicit trade outside the Oil For Food program. It must release or account for all Gulf War personnel, including an American pilot, whose fate is still unknown.

By taking these steps, and by only taking these steps, the Iraqi regime has an opportunity to avoid conflict. Taking these steps would also change the nature of the Iraqi regime itself. America hopes the regime will make that choice. Unfortunately, at least so far, we have little reason to expect it. And that’s why two administrations — mine and President Clinton’s — have stated that regime change in Iraq is the only certain means of removing a great danger to our nation.

I hope this will not require military action, but it may. And military conflict could be difficult. An Iraqi regime faced with its own demise may attempt cruel and desperate measures. If Saddam Hussein orders such measures, his generals would be well advised to refuse those orders. If they do not refuse, they must understand that all war criminals will be pursued and punished. If we have to act, we will take every precaution that is possible. We will plan carefully; we will act with the full power of the United States military; we will act with allies at our side, and we will prevail. (Applause.)

There is no easy or risk-free course of action. Some have argued we should wait — and that’s an option. In my view, it’s the riskiest of all options, because the longer we wait, the stronger and bolder Saddam Hussein will become. We could wait and hope that Saddam does not give weapons to terrorists, or develop a nuclear weapon to blackmail the world. But I’m convinced that is a hope against all evidence. As Americans, we want peace — we work and sacrifice for peace. But there can be no peace if our security depends on the will and whims of a ruthless and aggressive dictator. I’m not willing to stake one American life on trusting Saddam Hussein.

Failure to act would embolden other tyrants, allow terrorists access to new weapons and new resources, and make blackmail a permanent feature of world events. The United Nations would betray the purpose of its founding, and prove irrelevant to the problems of our time. And through its inaction, the United States would resign itself to a future of fear.

That is not the America I know. That is not the America I serve. We refuse to live in fear. (Applause.) This nation, in world war and in Cold War, has never permitted the brutal and lawless to set history’s course. Now, as before, we will secure our nation, protect our freedom, and help others to find freedom of their own.

Some worry that a change of leadership in Iraq could create instability and make the situation worse. The situation could hardly get worse, for world security and for the people of Iraq. The lives of Iraqi citizens would improve dramatically if Saddam Hussein were no longer in power, just as the lives of Afghanistan’s citizens improved after the Taliban. The dictator of Iraq is a student of Stalin, using murder as a tool of terror and control, within his own cabinet, within his own army, and even within his own family.

On Saddam Hussein’s orders, opponents have been decapitated, wives and mothers of political opponents have been systematically raped as a method of intimidation, and political prisoners have been forced to watch their own children being tortured.

America believes that all people are entitled to hope and human rights, to the non-negotiable demands of human dignity. People everywhere prefer freedom to slavery; prosperity to squalor; self-government to the rule of terror and torture. America is a friend to the people of Iraq. Our demands are directed only at the regime that enslaves them and threatens us. When these demands are met, the first and greatest benefit will come to Iraqi men, women and children. The oppression of Kurds, Assyrians, Turkomans, Shi’a, Sunnis and others will be lifted. The long captivity of Iraq will end, and an era of new hope will begin.

Iraq is a land rich in culture, resources, and talent. Freed from the weight of oppression, Iraq’s people will be able to share in the progress and prosperity of our time. If military action is necessary, the United States and our allies will help the Iraqi people rebuild their economy, and create the institutions of liberty in a unified Iraq at peace with its neighbors.

Later this week, the United States Congress will vote on this matter. I have asked Congress to authorize the use of America’s military, if it proves necessary, to enforce U.N. Security Council demands. Approving this resolution does not mean that military action is imminent or unavoidable. The resolution will tell the United Nations, and all nations, that America speaks with one voice and is determined to make the demands of the civilized world mean something. Congress will also be sending a message to the dictator in Iraq: that his only chance — his only choice is full compliance, and the time remaining for that choice is limited.

Members of Congress are nearing an historic vote. I’m confident they will fully consider the facts, and their duties.

The attacks of September the 11th showed our country that vast oceans no longer protect us from danger. Before that tragic date, we had only hints of al Qaeda’s plans and designs. Today in Iraq, we see a threat whose outlines are far more clearly defined, and whose consequences could be far more deadly. Saddam Hussein’s actions have put us on notice, and there is no refuge from our responsibilities.

We did not ask for this present challenge, but we accept it. Like other generations of Americans, we will meet the responsibility of defending human liberty against violence and aggression. By our resolve, we will give strength to others. By our courage, we will give hope to others. And by our actions, we will secure the peace, and lead the world to a better day.

May God bless America. (Applause.)

END 8:31 P.M. EDT

GET SOLUTION FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT, Get Impressive Scores in Your Class

Get Professionally Written Papers From The Writing Experts

Original and non-plagiarized custom papers- Our writers develop their writing from scratch unless you request them to rewrite, edit or proofread your paper.
Timely Delivery– primewritersbay.com believes in beating the deadlines that our customers have imposed because we understand how important it is.
Customer satisfaction- Customer satisfaction. We have an outstanding customer care team that is always ready and willing to listen to you, collect your instructions and make sure that your custom writing needs are satisfied
Confidential- It’s secure to place an order at primewritersbay.com We won’t reveal your private information to anyone else.
Writing services provided by experts- Looking for expert essay writers, thesis and dissertation writers, personal statement writers, or writers to provide any other kind of custom writing service?
Enjoy Please Note-You have come to the most reliable academic writing site that will sort all assignments that that you could be having. We write essays, research papers, term papers, research proposals. President BushDavid Koehler Compare and contrast former President Bush’s claim that Iraq was a threat to world peace with David Koehler’s position on the issue.

Tags bushdavid, compare, contrast, former, koehler, president

Writers Solution

Compare and contrast major contemporary research debates in the fields of people management and development and business

Post author By admin
Post date July 18, 2021
No Comments on Compare and contrast major contemporary research debates in the fields of people management and development and business

People Management & Development in Business – Paper 3 (DUBAI)

SEEN CASE STUDY

Overleaf pp2-7

· carries 50% of the module assessment weighting and

· is scheduled for the JULY Examination period for January Start students in July 2021,

· is based on a seen case study to be released 3 weeks prior to the Examination Date

· is ‘open book’ i.e. approved resources will be available for use during the Exam

· 2.5 hrs duration ….PLUS 50% EXTRA TIME = TOTAL 3 ¾ to allow download of question paper beforehand and upload of completed answer paper to Turnitin

· with unseen questions.

The Learning Outcomes to be demonstrated via this paper were validated as:

1.Compare and contrast major contemporary research debates in the fields of people management and development and business;

2. Critically evaluate the changing employment and learning landscapes and their influence on people management and development and business;

3. Critically evaluate the strategic implications for leadership, people management and development in an ever changing competitive and market environment;

4. Apply a critical, reflective and integrated understanding of people management and development within a context of business sustainability, corporate social responsibility and authenticity.

5. Formulate cogent arguments of what it means to deliver organisational performance and growth through people as well as the practical constraints and difficulties in meeting multiple aims

Case Study Source 1

The British Broadcasting Company, as the BBC was originally called, was formed on 18 October 1922 by a group of leading wireless manufacturers including Marconi.[footnoteRef:1] [1: https://www.bbc.com/historyofthebbc/timelines/1920s#:~:text=The%20British%20Broadcasting%20Company%2C%20as,%2C%20on%20November%2014%2C%201922. ]

The BBC is a public service broadcaster established by Royal Charter. It’s funded by the licence fee paid by UK households. It provides ten national TV channels, regional TV programmes, an internet TV service (BBC Three), 10 national radio stations, 40 local radio stations and an extensive website. “Our mission is to act in the public interest, serving all audiences through the provision of impartial, high-quality and distinctive output and services which inform, educate and entertain. Our vision? To be the most creative organisation in the world.”[footnoteRef:2] [2: https://www.bbc.com/academy-guides/what-do-i-need-to-know-about-the-bbc ]

On the 14th May 2021, the Right Honourable Lord Dyson published a report (‘The Dyson Investigation’). The Executive Summary is copied here below[footnoteRef:3]: It is followed by an article in The Financial Times newspaper on 21stMay 2021. [3: http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/reports/reports/dyson-report-20-may-21.pdf ]

Executive Summary of the Report of The Right Honourable Lord Dyson

The interview with HRH Diana, Princess of Wales that was (shown on television) on 20 November 1995 was a sensational triumph for the BBC and Martin Bashir, both nationally and internationally. Whatever reservations she may have had about it later, Princess Diana was pleased with the interview at the time. By early to mid-August 1995 at the latest, she was keen on the idea of a television interview. She would probably have agreed to be interviewed by any experienced and reputable reporter in whom she had confidence even without the intervention of Mr Bashir.

In this Report, I describe in considerable detail the way in which Mr Bashir commissioned fake bank statements from Matt Wiessler. These documents purported to show payments by Penfolds Consultants and News International into the bank account of Alan Waller, a former employee of Earl Spencer, Princess Diana’s brother. Mr Bashir showed the documents to Earl Spencer on a date early in September 1995. Mr Wiessler is an entirely reputable graphic designer who did freelance work for the BBC. Nobody has criticised him for accepting the commission.

A few days later, probably on 14 September, Mr Bashir also produced to Earl Spencer other bank statements which, he (Bashir) said, showed payments into the account of Commander Patrick Jephson (Princess Diana’s Private Secretary) and Commander Richard Aylard (the Prince of Wales’ Private Secretary). It is likely that these statements were created by Mr Bashir and contained information that he had fabricated.

By showing Earl Spencer the fake Waller and Jephson/Aylard statements and informing him of their contents, Mr Bashir deceived and induced him to arrange a meeting with Princess Diana. By gaining access to Princess Diana in this way, Mr Bashir was able to persuade her to agree to give the 3 interview. This behaviour was in serious breach of the 1993 edition of the BBC’s Producer Guidelines on straight dealing.

On seeing the interview on screen, Mr Wiessler immediately made the connection between the Waller bank statements and the interview. He was concerned that he might have played a role in obtaining the interview by deception.

Acting responsibly and appropriately, he (Mr Wiessler) reported his concerns to the BBC. A detailed account of how the BBC responded is set out (in the full report). The matter was eventually referred to Tim Gardam (Head of Weekly Programmes in BBC News and Current Affairs). Mr Gardam’s investigation culminated in a meeting between himself (and two other senior BBC persons) and Mr Bashir. Mr Bashir gave them an account of the faking of the documents. Crucially, he told them that he had not shown them to anyone. They accepted that he was telling them the truth, but asked him to provide independent evidence that Princess Diana had not been shown the documents. Within a few hours, Mr Bashir obtained a note dated 22 December 1995, signed by her (Princess Diana) which supported what he had said. I (Lord Dyson) am satisfied that the Diana note is a genuine document.

Mr Gardam did not then know that Mr Bashir had lied when he said that he had not shown the documents to anyone and did not know that he had in fact shown them to Earl Spencer in September 1995. Mr Bashir was to repeat this lie twice in March 1996. It was only on 23 March 1996 that Mr Bashir admitted that he had lied.

Mr Gardam did not consider the possibility that Mr Bashir secured the interview with Princess Diana indirectly by showing the documents to Earl Spencer. In the light of what he (Mr Gardam) knew at the time (and in particular the Diana note), I (Lord Dyson) do not consider that it would be reasonable to criticise Mr Gardam for failing to ask Earl Spencer for his version of the facts. But Mr Gardam too readily accepted that Mr Bashir was telling the truth about the fake documents.

There were rumours in early 1996 that something had been amiss (i.e. wrong) about the interview. The Mail on Sunday took the lead in carrying out further investigations which led to Mr Bashir admitting to Mr Gardam that he had shown the fake Waller statements to Earl Spencer. The BBC now decided that it must find out the entire truth behind Mr Bashir’s activities.

Mr Bashir was interviewed by Tim Suter (Managing Director of Weekly Programmes in BBC News and Current Affairs) and Richard Peel (Head of Communications and Information) on 28 March 1996. The conclusions that were reached after this meeting were expressed in a letter to Mr Bashir dated 4 April 1996, which was drafted by Mr Suter and agreed by Tony Hall (now Lord Hall, then Managing Director of News and Current Affairs at the BBC) but probably not sent. One of their conclusions was that Mr Bashir’s dealings with Princess Diana in securing the interview were absolutely straight and fair; but that his use of some material in the early preparation of the programme was in breach of the BBC Producers’ Guidelines on straight dealing and justified a reprimand.

This conclusion was not justified, even on an interim basis. It was based in large part on the uncorroborated assertions of Mr Bashir. This error was compounded by their failure to approach Earl Spencer once they knew that Mr Bashir had shown the Waller statements to him.

In early April 1996, the press continued to ask searching questions about the methods used by Mr Bashir to secure the interview. The BBC gave evasive answers to these questions. On 7 April 1996, The Mail on Sunday published an article which asked whether Mr Bashir had intended to show the fake Waller statements to Earl Spencer and thereby convince him that he (Mr Bashir) was the right person to interview Princess Diana.

Suggestions by the press that the Princess Diana interview had been secured by deception persisted. Lord Hall recognised that it was important for the BBC to conduct a full inquiry into what Mr Bashir had done and why he had done it and to resolve the matter once and for all. To that end, he arranged to meet Mr Bashir together with Anne Sloman (successor to Mr Gardam). The meeting took place on 17 April 1996. Mr Bashir was unable or unwilling to give Lord Hall and Mrs Sloman any credible explanation of why he had commissioned the faking of the Waller statements and why he had shown them to Earl Spencer. 5 They did not approach Earl Spencer to ask him for his version of what had happened. They accepted the account that Mr Bashir gave them as truthful.

The investigation conducted by Lord Hall and Mrs Sloman was woefully ineffective for the following reasons:

(i) they failed to interview Earl Spencer: this was a big mistake and the points they (and Lord Birt, the former Director-General) have made to justify their not doing so are rejected;

(ii) they did not scrutinise Mr Bashir’s account with the necessary degree of scepticism and caution: they knew he had lied three times when he said that he had not shown the fake statements to Earl Spencer (these were serious lies for which he gave no explanation); they knew that he been unable to provide any credible explanation of why he had commissioned the fake statements (which was a serious breach of the BBC’s Producers’ Guidelines on straight dealing); and they knew that Mr Bashir’s account of what happened was largely uncorroborated; and

(iii) without knowing Earl Spencer’s version of the facts; without receiving from Mr Bashir a credible explanation of what he had done and why he had done it; and in the light of his serious and unexplained lies, Lord Hall could not reasonably have concluded, as he did, that Mr Bashir was an honest and honourable man.

Without justification, the BBC fell short of the high standards of integrity and transparency which are its hallmark by (i) covering up in its press logs (records) such facts as it had been able to establish about how Mr Bashir secured the interview and (ii) failing to mention Mr Bashir’s activities or the BBC investigations of them on any news programme.

End of Case Study Source 1 – Case Study Source 2 is on the next page Case Study Source 2

Diana interview inquiry sparks fresh crisis of trust for the BBC

Reporter Martin Bashir’s web of deceit and the cover up that followed has given ammunition to broadcaster’s enemies

The Financial Times, Alex Barker and Patricia Nilsson , 21st May 2021

Source: https://www.ft.com/content/ead2be61-d450-49ad-b853-705101df1f9d

Diana, Princess of Wales plunged the BBC into crisis even before her Panorama interview was aired, the lies and forged documents behind it were exposed, and the UK broadcaster was dragged, 25 years later, into yet another scandal over editorial standards and a cover-up culture.

Recorded on Guy Fawkes day in 1995 and secretly edited in an Eastbourne hotel, the super-scoop by the journalist Martin Bashir was, from its inception, understood to be a historic gamble for a public corporation whose existence depends on a royal charter, and the consent of licence fee payers and the government.

So sensitive was the decision that Lord John Birt, the director-general at the time, kept his own chair Marmaduke Hussey, an arch monarchist, in the dark until Diana had described her “crowded” marriage on tape. Birt faced calls for his resignation before 23m viewers had even tuned in to watch it. “I had the chilling sense that a few centuries earlier my head would literally have rolled for the crime committed,” he wrote in his memoirs.

His reasons for approving the interview — the need to move with audience demands in what Birt saw as a more democratic age — cut to the heart of the repercussions for the BBC today: the threat of losing audience support.

“Modern institutions in the end have to operate as the public would wish — and we did,” Birt told Robert Fellowes, the Queen’s then private secretary. “And they have no choice any longer but to be completely transparent. There are no long-lasting secrets at the BBC.”

A quarter century on, that proved true. An official inquiry finally laid bare Bashir’s web of deceit in securing the interview and the cover-up that followed, leaving the BBC facing a firestorm of criticism from Diana’s sons and ministers. Oliver Dowden, culture secretary, remarked on the “damning failings” potentially requiring a rethink of governance.

Dame Melanie Dawes, chief executive of media watchdog Ofcom, said Dyson’s report raised “important questions about the BBC’s transparency and accountability”. She added that the regulator would be discussing with the BBC “what further actions may be needed to ensure that this situation can never be repeated”.

Bashir resigned from the BBC last week on grounds of ill health and on Friday Tim Suter, a former BBC News executive who was involved in the original in-house investigation, stepped down from the Ofcom board.

The episode has left the BBC scrambling to retain the confidence of the public — who have watched the heir to the throne Prince William accuse it of betraying his parents and fuelling his mother’s “fear, paranoia and isolation”.

It leaves a dangerously open flank for the BBC’s enemies in Westminster and “Fleet Street”.

“In one sense, it’s 25 years ago and the BBC is a completely different place — it is already much more overseen by outside bodies, it has much less revenue — so the notion that the BBC is the same place as 25 years ago is wrong,” said Jean Seaton, the official BBC historian. “But it does undoubtedly give parts of the government — if they fail to see the importance of the BBC for the future — a case that moves the British public.”

The failings uncovered from 1995, and the “woefully ineffective” investigation that followed, are devastating — and have prompted apologies from all involved. The misconduct does not have the industrial scale of the UK’s tabloid phone hacking scandal, nor a chain of responsibility leading to individuals still serving at the top of the BBC’s news organisation.

But there is no doubt about the deep questions it raises for the BBC, which until last year was run by Lord Tony Hall, who led one of the most heavily criticised investigations into Bashir’s conduct in 1996. Despite being aware of the use of faked documents, he found him to be “honest and honourable” and, later as director-general, blessed Bashir’s return to the BBC in a senior reporting position.

“In most organisations they would have called the police and instantly dismissed Bashir for deceit,” said Mark Stephens, a prominent media lawyer at Howard Kennedy. “Instead the BBC made him their religious correspondent.” One former BBC executive of that era said: “The euphoria of landing the scoop of the century just blinded them.”

Hall’s departure last year means he is fighting an uphill battle to keep his job as chair of the National Gallery, rather than at the head of the BBC. One government insider noted his next meeting with the gallery’s patron — Prince Charles — might be “quite difficult”.

Rather than the leadership, the immediate threat to Tim Davie and the BBC he took charge of last June is more political and financial.

Since his appointment as Hall’s successor, Davie has smoothed relations with Boris Johnson’s Number 10, in part by embracing its priorities: pride in flags and impartiality in news coverage. The Bashir scandal may reawaken the debate about metropolitan bias, embolden critics, and potentially prompt the government to take a more aggressive approach.

Dowden is satisfied the overall structure of the BBC — with a revamped board and direct oversight by the media regulator Ofcom — has reduced the risks of another Bashir incident. But he is open to ideas for reform in the BBC’s upcoming mid-charter review.

Lord Michael Grade, the former BBC chair, suggested creating a new editorial board for journalistic standards, saying “platitudes” would not cut it this time. Johnson, prime minister, notably said on Friday it was “up to the BBC” to ensure nothing like the Bashir scandal happened again.

There are potentially financial repercussions too. Lawyers expect the BBC to face significant compensation claims from victims, who include members of the royal household who lost their jobs as a result of made-up allegations of spying on Diana.

Davie is also locked in negotiations with the government over the level of the licence fee, making the case for a bigger BBC budget over the next five years. Given it is essentially a plea for more taxpayer generosity, the timing of the Bashir scandal could hardly be worse.

“Of course this is a stick that critics of the BBC will use to beat it with,” said Pat Younge, a former BBC executive who chairs the British Broadcasting Challenge, a campaign group pressuring the government over its review of public service media. “And the BBC is also a world leader in beating itself up at times like this.”

GET SOLUTION FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT, Get Impressive Scores in Your Class

Get Professionally Written Papers From The Writing Experts

Original and non-plagiarized custom papers- Our writers develop their writing from scratch unless you request them to rewrite, edit or proofread your paper.
Timely Delivery- primewritersbay.com believes in beating the deadlines that our customers have imposed because we understand how important it is.
Customer satisfaction- Customer satisfaction. We have an outstanding customer care team that is always ready and willing to listen to you, collect your instructions and make sure that your custom writing needs are satisfied
Confidential- It’s secure to place an order at primewritersbay.com We won’t reveal your private information to anyone else.
Writing services provided by experts- Looking for expert essay writers, thesis and dissertation writers, personal statement writers, or writers to provide any other kind of custom writing service?
Enjoy Please Note-You have come to the most reliable academic writing site that will sort all assignments that that you could be having. We write essays, research papers, term papers, research proposals. LO1 Compare and contrast major contemporary research debates in the fields of people management and development and business

Tags compare, contemporary, contrast, debates, fields, major, research

Writers Solution

Compare and contrast the leadership and communication techniques of former al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden with those of one other terrorist leader

Instructions

We have been focusing upon how those at the top of terrorist groups perform leadership roles and influence various audiences (both within their organizations and to the world at large). For this research paper compare and contrast the leadership and communication techniques of former al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden with those of one other terrorist leader. Select one other terrorist leader from al Qaeda or affiliated groups such as Zawahiri, Baghdadi or Awlaki to compare and contrast with bin Laden’s leadership and communication approaches.

Ayman al-Zawahiri (al Qaeda successor of Osama bin Laden)

Gohel, S. M. (2017) Deciphering Ayman Al-Zawahiri and Al-Qaeda’s strategic and ideological imperatives. Perspectives on Terrorism, 11 (1). pp. 54-67. ISSN 2334-3745. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/86743/1/Gohel_Deciphering%20Al-Qaeda_2018.pdf

Ayman al-Zawahiri (2020). The Counter Extremist Project. https://www.counterextremism.com/extremists/ayman-al-zawahiri

Sude, B. (2015, September). Assessing Al-Qa`ida Central’s Resilience. https://ctc.usma.edu/assessing-al-qaida-centrals-resilience/

Council on Foreign Relations. (2011, July 14). Profile: Ayman al-Zawahiri. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/profile-ayman-al-zawahiri

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (former Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham [ISIS] leader)

McCants, W. (2015, September 1). The Believer. http://csweb.brookings.edu/content/research/essays/2015/thebeliever.html

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (2020). The Counter Extremist Project. https://www.counterextremism.com/extremists/abu-bakr-al-baghdadi

Atwan, A. B. (2015). A Portrait of Caliph Ibrahim. The Cato Review. https://www.thecairoreview.com/essays/a-portrait-of-caliph-ibrahim/

Anwar al-Awlaki (former al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula leader, online jihadist radicalizer)

Shane, S. (2017). The Enduring Influence of Anwar al-Awlaki in the Age of the Islamic State. https://ctc.usma.edu/the-enduring-influence-of-anwar-al-awlaki-in-the-age-of-the-islamic-state/

Anwar al-Awlaki (2020). The Counter Extremist Project. https://www.counterextremism.com/extremists/anwar-al-awlaki

Zimmerman, K. (2010, March 12). Militant Islam’s Global Preacher: The Radicalizing Effect of Sheikh Anwar al Awlaki. Critical Threats. https://www.criticalthreats.org/analysis/militant-islams-global-preacher-the-radicalizing-effect-of-sheikh-anwar-al-awlaki

Assignment Specifics:

The body of your report is to be at least FOUR FULL pages in length (not counting title page and references) and is to contain the following:
A brief introduction, with the topic and your thesis
A main body, containing the “meat” of the paper, where you provide the requested information supported by class readings and with your analysis
A conclusion, summarizing your information clearly and concisely

Technical Requirements

Your paper must be at a minimum of 4-6 pages (the Title and Reference pages do not count towards the minimum limit).
Scholarly and credible references should be used. A good rule of thumb is at least 2 scholarly sources per page of content.
Type in Times New Roman, 12 point and double space.
Students will follow the current APA Style as the sole citation and reference style used in written work submitted as part of coursework.
Points will be deducted for the use of Wikipedia or encyclopedic type sources. It is highly advised to utilize books, peer-reviewed journals, articles, archived documents, etc.
All submissions will be graded using the assignment rubric.

GET SOLUTION FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT, Get Impressive Scores in Your Class