Final Exam Study Guide

Revised Schedule October 23, 2025

Syllabus Fall 2025

Bluebook 1-10

Style vii – ix

College of Christian Studies Style Guide

Note: One great advantage to having this Style Guide in PDF form (in addition to the printed version in the CS) is that you can use the “find” feature to search the document for specific formatting examples and other information.

CHST Formatting Videos

In addition to the above files, below are links to several formatting videos that will be helpful to you as we progress throughout the semester. Your papers will be in Times New Roman instead of Courier New, but every other aspect of the videos should be correct. Here are the videos:

Gonzorella from Muppet Babies

Blue’s Clues Pride Parade

American Sniper Trailer

Below are links to all the materials we went through in class related to the media assignment you completed.  The first link is to the video of the Kyle Rittenhouse coverage that shows how so many in the media made false and inflammatory claims about Rittenhouse (despite their claims to be presenting the truth). The next video clip shows how Pfizer sponsors most (if not all) major media organizations, which serves as an example of the “no fly zones” problem discussed in your media assignment (where a network will not cover a sponsor in a way that puts the sponsor in a negative light, even if the public has an interest in knowing something about a sponsor’s harmful products, etc.). The next video is a brief clip that highlights how drug companies often do not have to release full data to show whether or not a drug is safe (many times regulators simply have to take the company’s word that the drug is safe). This clip also showed how Pfizer had paid the largest criminal fine in U.S. history.

Finally, the next video shows what happened in the shooting of Ma’Khia Bryant, the girl who was shot by police as she lunged at another girl with a knife. As we saw in the video (and as we discussed in class), the officer had a duty to shoot Bryant in order to save the other girl’s life, as the other girl would have been stabbed had the officer not intervened. However, the media coverage (tweets and articles linked below the video) failed to give any context that Bryant was shot because she was attacking another person with a knife; instead, these tweets and articles simply indicated that police had shot a young black girl. The point of this discussion was to further demonstrate that if most people are relying on mainstream media coverage or social media for their understanding of what happened, they will likely come to wrong conclusions about whether the officer was justified in shooting Ma’Khia Bryant. And if people have an incorrect understanding of the facts because of media distortions, they will be unable to achieve actual justice. As we’ve reiterated in class, truth is a prerequisite for justice. You cannot have justice apart from the truth.

If you have any questions, please let me know. Grateful for all of you!

Rittenhouse Media Distortions

“Brought to you by Pfizer”

Pfizer Corruption (and drug companies generally)

New NPR Chief Redefines Truth

Ma’Khia Bryant Shooting

Still Images Showing Knife

White House Comments on Ma’Khia Bryant Shooting

Tweet 1

Tweet 2

Tweet 3

Tweet 4

Tweet 5

NPR: “Police Shoot and Kill Black Teenage Girl”

Vox: SO MANY DISTORTIONS

NBC: “She was just a teenage girl.”

ABC “She was shot four times”

NY Times 1

NY Times 2

What could have happened if the officer did not shoot

Friends,

I am so grateful for every single one of you. Thank you so much for all your work and for your contributions to our class discussions. I look forward to seeing you for our paper meetings and for our class on Thursday, Lord-willing!

Assignment for Thursday

The scheduled reading you have for Thursday is pages 200-219 of the CS. In addition to completing the reading on these pages (and answering the questions on page 211 of the CS), you need to read one article (linked below) and then one Facebook post with a few comments. As you are reading the article, note anything you would like to discuss in class on Thursday. As to the FB post, please be sure to read all the comments and replies on the post and flag any comments (from me or anyone else) that you have questions or concerns about (or that you would like to discuss in class).  Make these notes on a sheet of paper prior to coming to class and then bring it with you on Thursday. You will answer one or two questions in class about the CS reading on the other side of this sheet.

Here’s the article you need to read:

Thinking Carefully about Ukraine

Here’s a PDF of the FB Post:

PDF of Post on Ukraine

Here’s a link to the actual post on FB if you would prefer to view it there:

Facebook Post on Ukraine

If you have any questions, please let me know. Have a great weekend!

Prof Styles

Below is the Tuesday’s  required assignment that I mentioned in class today. Remember that this assignment must be completed prior to our class on Tuesday. This assignment will be worth a 100 quiz grade just like the assignment you turned in today. Here’s what you need to do:

First, watch the video at the following link and then answer the questions below (be careful to number your responses). Note that the answers to the questions should appear in order as you watch the video, and I have given time stamps to a couple of the questions.  Also, I know there are a good number of questions, but they are very straightforward and can be easily answered by watching the video. You can start and stop the video as much as you need to answer the questions, but note that you CANNOT work with any other students on this assignment. The goal is to make sure you are comprehending what is being said in the video so we can discuss it when we return to class on Tuesday.  Here’s the video:

Vaccines and Autism?

And here are the questions:

(1) What is your impression of the little boy named Indiana at the beginning of the video?

(2) Can you tell a difference in this child as shown at the beginning of the video compared to the home video that is shown of him?  Describe those differences.

(3) How many weeks after the MMR vaccine did it take for the parents to observe these changes?   

(4) Correlation in time does not necessarily mean causation (in other words, the fact that these changes happened within two weeks does not automatically prove that the vaccine caused Indiana’s changes. But if there are no other changes in Indiana’s life (traumatic injury, dietary changes, family struggles, etc.), is it possible that the vaccine contributed to these changes?   

(5) If this is a possibility, should parents and doctors seek to explore that possibility to rule it out?   

(6) According to the video (around the 2:04 minute mark), how many parents believe that the MMR vaccine either contributed to or caused their children’s autism?    

(7) According to the video, why did Dr. Andrew Wakefield begin investigating whether there was a link between the MMR vaccine and autism?

(8) What medical journal accepted Dr. Wakefield’s article for publication?   

(9) The parents whose children reported adverse reactions to the MMR vaccine—were these parents anti-vaxxers?

(10) Beginning around the 3:07 mark of the video, another family is interviewed. Tell me something you observed about the two boys.

(11) When asked what happened to her boys, the mother answers that “we lost them.” What does she mean by this?

(12) In addition to the boys’ behavior changes, what other symptoms did these boys begin to display?

(13) Around the 4:16 mark, Dr. Wakefield gives his hypothesis for the link between the MMR vaccine and autism and other issues.  Briefly explain his hypothesis.   

(14) Next, another doctor (Dr. David Isaacs) states that Dr. Wakefield has “some theories, but absolutely no findings.” To clarify, did Dr. Wakefield claim with full certainty that MMR caused these conditions? Or did he say it is a hypothesis he and others were testing?

(15) If Dr. Wakefield has claimed he is seeking to test a hypothesis (i.e., a theory), why do you think the other doctor responds so aggressively to Dr. Wakefield seeking to test this theory?

(16) The interviewer asks Dr. Isaacs the question: “Can you categorically say there is no link between MMR and autism?” How does Dr. Isaacs respond?

(17) Did Dr. Isaacs directly answer the interviewer’s question?

(18) The interviewer then asks Dr. Wakefield if he can “prove” that the MMR vaccine causes autism.  How does Dr. Wakefield respond?

(19) Next, the interviewer brings in Dr. Salisbury, who says that Dr. Wakefield’s research has been reviewed by “independent experts.” What are your thoughts on this?

(20) Around the 6:17 mark, Dr. Wakefield explains the fundamental rule of clinical medicine. What is this rule?

(21) Does Dr. Wakefield blindly accept the parents’ conclusions regarding their children? Or does he say there should be a thorough investigation?

(22) According to Dr. Salisbury, are there any other doctors (or anyone else) who have put forward the hypothesis that MMR causes autism?

(23) Does Dr. Wakefield acknowledge that if measles returns, there will be deaths from measles?

(24) Around the 8:08 mark, Dr. Wakefield says that it would be a tragedy if children died because ______________ (fill in the blank).

(25) As a father of four, is Dr. Wakefield against all vaccinations?

(26) Is Dr. Wakefield completely opposed to vaccinating against measles?

(27) What does he suggest in place of the triple dose MMR?

(28) Dr. Salisbury disagrees with Dr. Wakefield’s proposal and says we are “chasing moonbeams.”  Why does he say Dr. Wakefield’s proposal is not a valid option?

(29) Dr. Isaacs has seen what MMR can do to young children, which is the reason he gives for advocating so heavily for MMR.  He then says it would be a “mixed message” to say that MMR is safe but then also give the option of individual doses.  Two-part question: (A) If the vaccine is not safe as Dr. Wakefield has expressed concern about, should the government not acknowledge this concern? (B) Is it better for children to not receive a vaccine for ANY of the diseases covered by MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella), or would it be better if some children at least received vaccines for one or two?

(30) In your opinion, who should determine what risks children should take when it comes to vaccination against illness?  Should it be the government? Doctors? The parents?

(31) Dr. Isaacs argues that the rate of autism is actually not going up in Australia. Instead, what does he say is happening?

(32) Many parents in this video talk about autism as a “loss”?  Some refer to their children as “zombies” or the “walking dead.” What are you feelings on this description? What do you think the parents mean to say?

(33) Dr. Isaacs makes the point that parents will look for a reason to explain their children’s autism.  This is undoubtedly true.  But does parents’ looking for reasons automatically mean that vaccines did not cause or contribute to their children’s autism?

(34) Share any additional thoughts or questions you have on this video.

(35) Spend about 5-10 minutes on Google or another search engine researching the question “Do vaccines cause autism?”  Record the first 5 results you see, including the website or organizations that appear first in the search results.

(36) Read or review at least one article or link that you find. According to this link/article, do vaccines cause autism? Be sure to list your source.

Thank you for taking the time to complete this assignment.  Just be sure to bring your responses with you to class on Tuesday and we will complete this discussion that day.

If you have any questions, please let me know!

Prof Styles

Below is the Tuesday’s  required assignment that I mentioned in class today. Remember that this assignment must be completed prior to our class on Tuesday. This assignment will be worth a 100 quiz grade just like the assignment you turned in today. Here’s what you need to do:

First, watch the video at the following link and then answer the questions below (be careful to number your responses). Note that the answers to the questions should appear in order as you watch the video, and I have given time stamps to a couple of the questions.  Also, I know there are a good number of questions, but they are very straightforward and can be easily answered by watching the video. You can start and stop the video as much as you need to answer the questions, but note that you CANNOT work with any other students on this assignment. The goal is to make sure you are comprehending what is being said in the video so we can discuss it when we return to class on Tuesday.  Here’s the video:

Vaccines and Autism?

And here are the questions:

(1) What is your impression of the little boy named Indiana at the beginning of the video?

(2) Can you tell a difference in this child as shown at the beginning of the video compared to the home video that is shown of him?  Describe those differences.

(3) How many weeks after the MMR vaccine did it take for the parents to observe these changes?   

(4) Correlation in time does not necessarily mean causation (in other words, the fact that these changes happened within two weeks does not automatically prove that the vaccine caused Indiana’s changes. But if there are no other changes in Indiana’s life (traumatic injury, dietary changes, family struggles, etc.), is it possible that the vaccine contributed to these changes?   

(5) If this is a possibility, should parents and doctors seek to explore that possibility to rule it out?   

(6) According to the video (around the 2:04 minute mark), how many parents believe that the MMR vaccine either contributed to or caused their children’s autism?    

(7) According to the video, why did Dr. Andrew Wakefield begin investigating whether there was a link between the MMR vaccine and autism?

(8) What medical journal accepted Dr. Wakefield’s article for publication?   

(9) The parents whose children reported adverse reactions to the MMR vaccine—were these parents anti-vaxxers?

(10) Beginning around the 3:07 mark of the video, another family is interviewed. Tell me something you observed about the two boys.

(11) When asked what happened to her boys, the mother answers that “we lost them.” What does she mean by this?

(12) In addition to the boys’ behavior changes, what other symptoms did these boys begin to display?

(13) Around the 4:16 mark, Dr. Wakefield gives his hypothesis for the link between the MMR vaccine and autism and other issues.  Briefly explain his hypothesis.   

(14) Next, another doctor (Dr. David Isaacs) states that Dr. Wakefield has “some theories, but absolutely no findings.” To clarify, did Dr. Wakefield claim with full certainty that MMR caused these conditions? Or did he say it is a hypothesis he and others were testing?

(15) If Dr. Wakefield has claimed he is seeking to test a hypothesis (i.e., a theory), why do you think the other doctor responds so aggressively to Dr. Wakefield seeking to test this theory?

(16) The interviewer asks Dr. Isaacs the question: “Can you categorically say there is no link between MMR and autism?” How does Dr. Isaacs respond?

(17) Did Dr. Isaacs directly answer the interviewer’s question?

(18) The interviewer then asks Dr. Wakefield if he can “prove” that the MMR vaccine causes autism.  How does Dr. Wakefield respond?

(19) Next, the interviewer brings in Dr. Salisbury, who says that Dr. Wakefield’s research has been reviewed by “independent experts.” What are your thoughts on this?

(20) Around the 6:17 mark, Dr. Wakefield explains the fundamental rule of clinical medicine. What is this rule?

(21) Does Dr. Wakefield blindly accept the parents’ conclusions regarding their children? Or does he say there should be a thorough investigation?

(22) According to Dr. Salisbury, are there any other doctors (or anyone else) who have put forward the hypothesis that MMR causes autism?

(23) Does Dr. Wakefield acknowledge that if measles returns, there will be deaths from measles?

(24) Around the 8:08 mark, Dr. Wakefield says that it would be a tragedy if children died because ______________ (fill in the blank).

(25) As a father of four, is Dr. Wakefield against all vaccinations?

(26) Is Dr. Wakefield completely opposed to vaccinating against measles?

(27) What does he suggest in place of the triple dose MMR?

(28) Dr. Salisbury disagrees with Dr. Wakefield’s proposal and says we are “chasing moonbeams.”  Why does he say Dr. Wakefield’s proposal is not a valid option?

(29) Dr. Isaacs has seen what MMR can do to young children, which is the reason he gives for advocating so heavily for MMR.  He then says it would be a “mixed message” to say that MMR is safe but then also give the option of individual doses.  Two-part question: (A) If the vaccine is not safe as Dr. Wakefield has expressed concern about, should the government not acknowledge this concern? (B) Is it better for children to not receive a vaccine for ANY of the diseases covered by MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella), or would it be better if some children at least received vaccines for one or two?

(30) In your opinion, who should determine what risks children should take when it comes to vaccination against illness?  Should it be the government? Doctors? The parents?

(31) Dr. Isaacs argues that the rate of autism is actually not going up in Australia. Instead, what does he say is happening?

(32) Many parents in this video talk about autism as a “loss”?  Some refer to their children as “zombies” or the “walking dead.” What are you feelings on this description? What do you think the parents mean to say?

(33) Dr. Isaacs makes the point that parents will look for a reason to explain their children’s autism.  This is undoubtedly true.  But does parents’ looking for reasons automatically mean that vaccines did not cause or contribute to their children’s autism?

(34) Share any additional thoughts or questions you have on this video.

(35) Spend about 5-10 minutes on Google or another search engine researching the question “Do vaccines cause autism?”  Record the first 5 results you see, including the website or organizations that appear first in the search results.

(36) Read or review at least one article or link that you find. According to this link/article, do vaccines cause autism? Be sure to list your source.

Thank you for taking the time to complete this assignment.  Just be sure to bring your responses with you to class on Tuesday and we will complete this discussion that day.

If you have any questions, please let me know!

Prof Styles

This assignment will briefly examine the state of the media in the United States and will demonstrate how most American media coverage distorts various issues, both by witholding context and by the use of misleading and slanted language. Specifically, this assignment (and our accompanying class discussion) will show how news networks often repeat accepted narratives instead of reporting the truth, leading to serious misunderstandings of important societal issues (think about some of what you read in Williams). How should we respond to these narratives? And how can we learn what is actually true? The following articles and materials will help us think through these questions.

Remember: This assignment is in addition to the second part of the critical thinking assignment on vaccines. If you complete the other critical thinking assignment that is due, completing this assignment will be worth 3 points extra credit on your final exam AND 3 points on your final paper! Note that you must complete both assignments to receive this credit.

To complete this assignment, read the articles at the links below and then answer the questions for each link. You will bring your answers with you to class on Tuesday, November 18th. In summary, you should bring your answers to the questions below AND your responses to the other critical thinking assignment to class on Tuesdsay. Here are the links and questions to this part of the assignment:

(1) First, take a look at the following “Media Bias Chart”:

Media Bias Chart

1A. Name three left-leaning media organizations listed on this chart.

1B. Name three right-leaning media organizations listed on this chart.

1C. Name three media organizations (left or right leaning) that “contain misleading info” or that contain “inaccurate/fabricated info” listed on the chart.

1D. Name three media organizations (left or right leaning) that are said to be “mostly analysis OR mix of fact reporting and analysis.”

1E. Name three media organizations (left or right leaning) that are said to be simply “fact reporting.”

1F. While it is certainly true that most media organizations will typically lean left or right, is there any other kind of bias that should be considered in addition to the left/right divide? In other words, are there any other factors besides left/right bias that could affect whether an organization is reporting the truth? (This information is not in the chart; simply share your thoughts about anything the chart could be missing).

(2) Second, briefly scroll through the following article, paying special attention to the images that show how a handful of large corporations own most of the media in the United States:

https://www.webfx.com/blog/internet/the-6-companies-that-own-almost-all-media-infographic/

After briefly scrolling through this article, answer the following questions:

2A. How many large corporations own most of the media in the United States?

2B. Do these corporations only own print newspapers? What other types of media do these companies own?

2C. Choose one of the large corporations that own many other companies. For this question, list the company name, the Owner/CEO, and how much the Owner/CEO makes.

2D. Do you think the news organizations owned by this corporation are primarily concerned with reporting the truth, with making money, or something else? Why?

2E. Share any other thoughts you have on this article.

(3) Read the following article (you do not need to watch the video or click on the interactive chart (the chart will be the next part of this assignment)):

33 Problems with the Media

3A. According to this article, what is the difference between explicit and implicit bias?

3B. According to this article, what are “no fly zones”?

3C. According to this article, what is the difference between misinformation and disinformation?

3D. What can happen when you strip videos or stories of their context?

3E. What is “churnalism”?

3F. What happens when news organizations publish articles directly from wire services (like the Associated Press) and public relations releases (from the government, companies, etc.) without vetting them? Is it possible that these news organizations will share content that is not true or accurate?

(4) Next, read the 33 problems chart at the top of the previous article.

4A. Did you read all 33 problems with media?

4B. Select five of the problems that stood out to you most / that you found to be most helpful. Briefly explain why you chose these 5.

(5) So how can we actually find what is true? Are “fact-checkers” the answer? Read the following article:

https://thefederalist.com/2021/12/13/facebook-quietly-admits-its-third-party-fact-checks-are-opinions/

5A. Facebook was recently sued because their “fact-checkers” allegedly lied about a journalist named John Stossel. In defense, what did Facebook claim about their fact-checks? Are they “facts” or “opinions”?

5B. If Facebook admits that their third-party “fact-checks” are “protected opinions,” how can Facebook label the journalist’s factual claims as “misleading” or “partly false”?

5C. Share any other thoughts or questions you have on this article.

***The following article is not required for this assignment, but for anyone who wants more in-depth research on how “fact-checking” organizations are not really checking facts, see the following article:

https://www.aier.org/article/who-fact-checks-the-fact-checkers-a-report-on-media-censorship/

(6) If we can’t trust “fact-checkers,” can we trust the pure “fact reporting” organizations listed on the media bias chart? Or the “mostly analysis” or “mix of fact reporting and analysis” organizations? Read the following article:

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/spies-journalists-and-info-ops-against-america/

6A. Which government agency is allegedly running an op against the American people?

6B. Which former CIA director explained bluntly that the agency influenced foreign media outlets ahead of elections in order to “change attitudes within the country”?

6C. What is the name of the program where the CIA used over 400 American journalists as direct assets?

6D. Have news organizations ever “independently confirmed” stories that were completely false?

6E. Re-read the following excerpt from the article:

“In each of those instances the handful of reporters who risked everything to tell the truth were held up as heroes. Seeing the Times fighting for its life, the Washington Post co-published the Pentagon Papers to force the government to make its case not just against a rival newspaper, but the 1A itself. Not today. Journalism is devoted to eliminating practitioners unwilling to play the game. Few have been targeted more than Glenn Greenwald (with Matt Taibbi as runner up.)”

What are your thoughts on this excerpt?

6F. Re-read this quote from the article: “Every journalist, even the most honest and careful, will get things wrong sometimes, and trustworthy journalists issue prompt corrections when they do. That behavior should be trust-building . . . But when media outlets continue to use the same reckless and deceitful tactics — such as claiming to have “independently confirmed” one another’s false stories when they have merely served as stenographers for the same anonymous security state agents while “confirming” nothing — that strongly suggests a complete indifference to the truth and, even more so, a willingness to serve as disinformation agents.”

What are your thoughts on this quote?

6G. Did you carefully read the entire article?

(7) Kyle Rittenhouse: An Example of False Reporting

Read the following article (NOTE: The tone of this article is more abrasive/sarcastic than I would normally share, but it concisely shows some of the inaccurate reporting about this case that we will discuss in class):

https://nypost.com/2021/11/17/10-debunked-heinous-lies-about-kyle-rittenhouse-devine/

7A. Did you read the full article?

7B. Prior to reading this article, what had you heard about the Kyle Rittenhouse case? (Briefly share in 1-2 sentences what you knew (if anything)).

7C. Had you ever heard that Rittenhouse “crossed state lines”?

(8) What about “conspiracy theories”? How should we think about those? Read the following article:

https://joshuastyles.substack.com/p/some-thoughts-on-conspiracy-theories

8A. What are the two main reasons given for not automatically dismissing “conspiracy theories”?

8B. What are two biblical examples of conspiracies discussed in the article?

8C. Re-read the following statement: “To be clear, I am not here saying that people close to us or people in positions of authority in the United States are necessarily carrying out great evils, but to dismiss so-called ‘conspiracy theories’ as impossible because ‘surely they would never do that’ or because ‘that can’t happen here’ is unwise for at least two reasons.” What are the two reasons given for why automatically dismissing such theories is unwise?

8D. Complete the following sentence from the article: “When someone is labeled a “conspiracy theorist,” or when a claim is referred to as a “conspiracy theory,” this is often a way of

_________________________________________________________________.

(9) Read the following brief follow-up article that addresses a “conspiracy theory” discussed by the online “fact-checking” website Snopes:

https://joshuastyles.substack.com/p/creationism-and-conspiracy-theories

9A. Did you read the article?

9B. What Christian belief (a belief that is actually supported by science) did Snopes label as a conspiracy theory?

9C. What percentage of American adults believe this so-called conspiracy theory?

(10) Finally, please read the following article (the “about” page of my Substack), as it discusses the difference between truth and narrative:

https://joshuastyles.substack.com/about

10A. The claim is made in the second paragraph that “people are actually living in two different realities: the Real World and the Narrative World.” Name one reason people may accept incomplete or inaccurate explanations for what’s happening in our world.

10B. According to the article, when did I begin to see that much of what I believed rested on wrong assumptions and faulty premises? (At what point in my life?)

10C. As the article explains, “[i]t was not just my faulty assumptions that held me in the Narrative World. The Narrative World also draws people in by appealing to some our most intense emotions.” Which two emotions draw many people in?

10D. Fill in the blanks for the following paragraph (you can simply type the words for your answers, or you can copy the question and then type in the correct words):

“In the Real World, people of all political persuasions understand that _________________. Guilt or innocence should only be determined after a _______________________ And public health policies should be implemented not on the basis of ____________________ or ________________ but after examining __________________________.”

10E. According to the article, what will we eventually find if we are actually willing to follow the evidence?

10F. Read the five disclaimers toward the bottom of the article. After reading them, choose two and briefly discuss. What thoughts or questions do you have on the two you selected?

10G. Share any additional thoughts or questions you have on the article.

For this assignment, you will watch the Cathy Newman interview that is referenced in the Williams book (this is the video that shows where “The Newman Effect” comes from). It’s a short interview (under 30 minutes), and I think you will find it to be very engaging. All you have to do is watch it fully and then bring a sheet of paper (hand written or typed) to class on Tuesday, September 30th, that (1) states that you fully watched the video and (2) that highlights three things you found helpful/interesting/etc. from the interview. If you bring this with you to class on this Tuesday, you will receive three (3) points extra credit on your final exam AND two (2) points on your final book review grade. Here’s the link:

Cathy Newman and Jordan Peterson Interview

If you have any questions about anything, please let me know!