Marshall & Gordon Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Marshall & Gordon - Assignment Example Public Relations firms across the world provide a wide range of services that are aimed at improving and managing the reputation of a company’s brands, products, goods and services. However, public relations firm are currently facing lots of challenges as they carry on their work. Public relations consultants’ jobs were previously underestimated to be that of creating and issuing of press releases, whereby the PRs had the task of looking for connections with media personalities so that their articles could be placed well in articles. The main aim of doing this was to enhance and sell their products to the public well. This is not the case currently as firms are consolidating through mergers and acquisition; they are also working hard to develop global competencies and expertise to be able to serve clients who are multinational and the powerful social media. This has helped the PR firms to grow a lot and diversify into other extensions of PR services such as handling cas es of reputation management. The firms also seek to increase their annual growth to a significant digit. The main objective in writing this memo is analyzing the issues that are associated with the public relations industry using the case of Marshall& Gordon and the challenges its facing in implementing its compensation system. Introduction The Marshall& Gordon Company is an international organization that was founded out of a merger between Marshall, a firm based in Atlanta and Gordon based in New Orleans. The merged firm came into being in 1950s and made its strategic decisions regarding its focus on communications, branding of products and creation of portfolios, with its headquarters relocated to New York. In 1962, the Marshall& Gordon firm was acquired by PTG, an international firm that was widely recognized in its advertising proceeds, the way it carried out its public relations and its media companies. By 1999, the firm had gone international and got its offices in various co ntinents, with a great person famous for renowned implementation of media tools and innovation in public relations innovation as the CEO. She really helped the firm to grow a lot through her good prowess in the PR activities. The Marshall &Gordon PR has since then assisted other firms to grow especially where they have challenges and issues with the PR section. The company grows fast with its annual growth superseding that of former years in its advertising and branding of products. However, the company is currently facing several challenges which have turned out to be some of its weaknesses. The company’s strength lies in the prowess of the CEO, who has great skill in public relations hence can make decisions that will have great beneficial impact on the company’s reputations. She has also assisted other firms to grow in the decisions that she assists them to make, this has earned the company a lot of respect especially from other PR firms that recognize the company. The fact that the firm has several offices in other continents is a good sign that the company has grown and expanded its business activities; this is another strength and opportunity for the firm. The company’s early decisions to venture into public relations has made it get connections with other great firms from which it has benefited a lot. The company also has strong production, branding and selling of its products however, it has failed in the way it markets its products. The weakness of the firm is in its lateral hires of people who are neither mentoring on any of its associates nor developing any of its clients. The other thing regarding the marketing of its products is the issue of developing an effective compensation system for its clients and public relations consultants. The compensation sys

A Reflection Paper on Animal Minds Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

A Reflection Paper on Animal Minds - Essay Example I find this article very interesting and intellectually stimulating. As a human being, I often take for granted that animals respond to different external stimuli without really thinking. I hold the preconception that as opposed to humans, animals solely rely on their instinct and reflexes in order to survive. However, this article opens my mind into the possibility that maybe, at some points, animals also think and are conscious about their actions and emotions. The body of literature explored by the author appears very convincing that animals do share a level of consciousness even if it is largely limited compared to human beings. I agree with the claims that "some kind of mental activity is being attributed to animals: that is, there is considered to be some internal sifting and selection of information rather than simply the release of certain responses by a certain set of environmental conditions" (Griffin 10). This claim can be supported by human experiences and their interaction with animals. For instance, the argument that animals can process and retain information is evidenced by the fact that they can learn certain skills-parrots can be trained to speak specific words and dogs can be taught to perform funny tricks.

World Popuation in 1970 Essay Example for Free

World Popuation in 1970 Essay As the global population expanded at an unprecedented rate, humans fundamentally changed their relationship with the environment. Human’s population growth changed their relationship with the environment for the worse and did not change until environmental issues were realized and people realized they needed to do something to stop more environmental damage to the earth. Humans exploited and competed over the earth’s finite resources more intensely than ever before inhuman history. Also, global warming was a major consequence of the release of greenhouse gases and other pollutants into the atmosphere. However, in the 1970s governments took initiatives to preserve and protect the environment. As the world’s population increased so did the need for materials and goods. The growing population over looked environmental issues due to the need for goods which caused pollution, global warming, and the over use of our world’s natural resources. Pollution threatened the world’s supply of water and clean air because as human population increased so did the amount of trash and other pollutants we let infect our water and air. Rates of extinction of other species accelerated sharply due to human pollutants. Deforestation and desertification were continued consequences of the human impact on the environment because more and more humans used wood to build houses and buildings. Also, when we cut down the trees we did not replace them, which also caused deforestation and desertification. Rates of extinction of other species accelerated sharply. The increase in population also started global warming which is a major consequence of the release of greenhouse gases and other pollutants into the atmosphere. Humans also exploited and competed over the earth’s finite resources more intensely than ever before in human history. During this time period, which the increase in population came later on in this period an increase in environmental awareness, rose also. The governments of the United States, the Europe, and Japan took a number of initiatives to preserve and protect the environment in the 1970s. Environmental awareness spread by means of the media and grassroots political movements, and most nations in the developed world enforced strict antipollution laws and sponsored massive recycling efforts. Many of these efforts were made possible by new technology, which produced significant results. However, in the developing world, population pressures and weak governments were major obstacles to effective environmental policies. The unprecedented increase of the rate of human population caused a huge change in the way human’s relationship was with the environment. Humans over looked what they were doing to the environment because humans were more concerned with their needs rather then what was happening to the earth due to those needs. This did not change until the 1970s when governments put movements into place to help the environment.

The Critical Legal Studies Movement

The Critical Legal Studies Movement The Critical Legal Studies (CLS) movement came to the fore in the United States (US) in the 1970s. This movement is a body of like-minded thinkers who claim to attack the virtues that they say are proclaimed by the liberal legal system. It is a radical theoretical movement which rejects the distinction between law and politics and the notion that law can be neutral and value free. The movement proposes the integration of law and social theory. Since the Critical Legal Studies movement is relatively new, its value as a theory of law is still being assessed, but despite its continual development it has given much of interest to thinking about the law. Indeed, like other sceptical theories it may undermine the coherent world of law which legal academics and practitioners tend to portray. In Britain, the Critical Legal Conference was formed in 1984.  [1]   Although CLS has been largely a US movement, it was influenced to a great extent by European philosophers, such as nineteenth-century German social theorists Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and Max Weber; Max Horkheimer and Harberd Marcuse of the Frankfrut School German social philosophy; the Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci; and poststructuralist French thinkers Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida, representing respectively fields of history and literary theory. CLS has borrowed heavily from legal realism, the school of legal thought that flourished in the 1920s and 1930s. Like CLS scholars, legal realists rebelled against accepted legal theories of the day and urged more attention to the social context of the law. Among noted CLS scholars Roberto Mangabeira Unger, Robert W. Gordon, Mark Kelman, Peter Gabel, Morton J. Horwitz, Dunkan Kennedy and Katherine A. Mackinnon.  [2]   The founders of CLS found a yawning absence at the level of theory, fundamentally convinced that law and politics could not be separated. How could law be so tilted to favour the powerful, given the prevailing explanations of law as either democratically chosen or the result of impartial judicial reasoning from neutral principles? Yet how could law be a tool for social change, in the face of Marxist explanations of law as mere epiphenomenal outgrowths of the interests of the powerful? CLS scholars have influenced try to explain both why legal principles and doctrines do not yield determinate answers to specific disputes and how legal decisions reflect cultural and political values that shift over time. They focused from the start on the ways that law contributed to illegitimate social hierarchies, producing domination of women by men, nonwhites by whites, and the poor by the wealthy. They claim that apparently neutral language and institutions, operated through law, mask relationship s of power and control. The emphasis on individualism within the law similarly hides patterns of power relationships while making it more difficult to summon up a sense of community and human interconnection. Joining in their assault on these dimensions of law, CLS scholars have differed considerably in their particular methods and views.  [3]   One of the characteristic of CSL is that it has been rejected formalism. Formalism has tended to be the fall back position of liberal legal thinking when forced to confront the question: how can a legal system give the kinds of neutral decisions expected of it. Formalists, as CLS characterise them,  [4]  circumvent this problem by insisting that the judge is not imposing his or anyone elses values but merely interpreting the words of the law. By separating core and penumbra Hart could be taken to admit the problem by his indulgence that the judge had to have recourse to discretion in interpreting the penumbra of legal rules. CLS theorists also share the related view that the law is indeterminate. They have shown that using standard legal arguments, it is possible to reach sharply contrasting conclusions in individual cases. The conclusions reached in any case will have more to do with the social context in which they are argued and decided than with any overarching scheme of legal reasoning. Moreover, CLS scholars argue that the esoteric and convoluted nature of legal reasoning actually screens the laws indeterminacy. They have used the ideas of deconstruction to explore the ways in which legal texts are open to multiple interpretations. The CLS thesis refutes the claim that traditional legal scholarship produces rules and principles of law which guide human behaviour. Both legal formalism and positivism, which look upon law as a system of rules which are rationally made, are repudiated. Traditional legal scholarship treats the law as objective and neutral. The CLS claims that law can not be objective because human and social realities always manifest themselves in the legal discourses. Roberto Mangabeira Unger, who teaches at Harvard Law School and is widely regarded as the intellectual leader of the movement, now offers the public a short manifesto he describes as more a proposal than a description. It is an ambitious and impressive undertaking. It also defies summation. It is a carefully crafted statement with ideas interlocked like a chain-link fence that stretches as far as the eye can see. And the full purport of his message can only be appreciated by an attentive reading. Even so, five themes seem central to his argument. There were two distinct stages in the role of law in western societies before the modern era. First it served to establish and defend social hierarchies and social class divisions. Toward the end of the 18th century, however, it was put to the revolutionary task of protecting rights of individuals irrespective of their social rank or class. In this country the founding fathers relied on democracy (created by our public law, the Constitution) and the market (fostered by private law, notably contract) to give form and limits to those rights.  [5]   By the 20th century the context in which American law operated had drastically changed. Social arrangements sanctioned by law had come to include an array of hierarchies of economic power and pernicious social distinctions protected as rights by the very legal system created to establish individual freedom and equality. The politics of democracy and the blind forces of the market proved woefully inadequate to govern a society increasingly dominated by modern science and technology. Hence there is a compelling need to restructure our social order to make it compatible with freedom and equality. The way to accomplish this reconstruction, according to Roberto M. Unger, is not through classical revolution of the kind Marx advocated, brought about by an alliance between disaffected elites and the downtrodden. Rather law must be reinvented to give it a revolutionary new purpose: to lead the dismantling of the various hierarchies of power and privilege that through perversions of the legal process have come to threaten the higher values of our society.  [6]  Of property law, he says that it has its own inbuilt legal market which is a constitutional interest with its own legal structure in a democracy. According to him, the situation is fraught with ambiguity and indeterminacy, because of the abstract nature of the concept of rights. With respect to contract law, Unger explains that contract law allows freedom to contract, but that this is promptly contradicted by other principles which say that people can only bind themselves in contract for what the law allows. Unger present s an argument on formalism which states that every doctrine relies on some view of human associations which are right and realistic in social life. The lawyer needs a theory as his guiding vision, which prevents him from seeing legal reasoning as a game of analogies. To Unger, reliance on analogies leads to analogy-mongering, and this must stop. He claims that this received wisdom is challengeable as wrong, and to do this one should rely on a normative theory of a branch of law supplied by the CLS. This is Ungers deviation doctrine, which embellishes the CLSs nihilistic view of law. Mark G. Kelman examines the importance to criminal law of the stage that precedes legal analysis. His argument is that legal argument has two phases: interpretive construction and rational rhetoricism, and that the former, a vital step which undercuts the authority of the latter, goes virtually unexamined.  [7]  For example, the result of a case may depend on weather the defendants act is set in a board or narrow time frame. This issue has come to a head with a series of cases where battered women have murdered their husbands and the scope of the provocation defence has been tested.  [8]  If a broad time frame as been used she may have defences of provocation, even self-defence; in a narrow time frame she has committed murder. There is no meta-theory to determine the appropriate time frame; the decision accordingly is unreasonable. There are some techniques which the CLS have deployed in analyzing legal texts, namely Trashing, Deconstruction, Genealogy, etc. Leading CLS scholar Mark G. Kelman defends trashing against mainstream academic critics, claiming that the discrediting of accepted legal argument is good According to him the most frequently recurring theme in the attacks on our technique, the more-or-less hysterical counter-Revolution against Trashing. It is abundantly apparent that the vast preponderance of mainstream American legal academics were told (repeatedly) by their moms and dads, If you dont have anything nice or constructive to say, say nothing at all.  [9]   Again he stated that law-and-economics studies of private law rules have not actually analyzed the concrete implications of rule choices on particular occasions, pretensions of policy relevance to the contrary. Instead, they have again and again simply derived apologies for existing arrangements from a highly general and theoretical economic vision. There are two politically central insights of mainstream private law and economics scholarship: (1) In situations involving strangres (where markets cannot work because of transaction costs), proper legal rules that establish implicit fees for harming others can be applied to concrete cases so that parties who interact to create a joint cost will take all cost-justified, damage-averting precautions; and (2) in situations involving those in contractual relationships, competitive markets function in such a way that buyers inevitably get whatever they desire at the lowest possible price a [*308] price that is the sum of the production cost of the desired good and a normal profit sufficient to prevent industry exit. One goal, if not an inevitable effect, of trashing is to destabilize a variety of theoretical world views (and thus, one would hope, related [*328] commonsense world views) that imply the beneficence or inexorability of social life as we see it. Of course, asserting that there must be a causal connection between the high-level apologetics of the intelligentsia and the everyday mediating political ideals that help us organize and make sense of daily interactions would be patently ridiculous. But one can discern at least a close family resemblance between elaborate, mandarin apologetics and the more ordinary, complacency-inducing, commonsensical bits of wisdom without straining credulity.  [10]   According to Robert Gordon Decontruction is one of the CLS techniques best work is a familiar work kind of left-wing scholarship, unmasking the often unconscious ideological bias behind legal structures and procedures, which regularly makes it easy for business groups to organise collectively to pursue their economic and political interests but which makes it much more difficult for labour, poor people, civil rights groups to pursue theirs.  [11]   CLS claims that mainstream legal thought acts to reify; it does this by translating social practices into things. For example, the relation between employer and employee brings about a range of consequences and expectations for both parties. The terms confirm or foster an implicit hierarchy; both employer and employee will expect the latter to follow instructions and generally defer to the former. Another way to heighten awareness of the transitory, problematic, and manipulable ways legal discourses divide the world is to write their history under the Genealogy technique. Some critics charge that CLS work hampers progressive political movements by challenging the idea of the subject and human agency. Others view CLS work as unimportant or failing because of inadequate development of specific policies, strategies, or constructive direction. CLS is faulted for implying that simply changing how people think about law will change power relationships or constraints on social change, although a fair reading indicates that Crits simply treat changes in thought as a necessary but insufficient step for social change. Feminists and Critical Race Theorists object that conventional critical legal studies employ a critique of rights that neglects the concrete role of rights talk in the mobilization of oppressed and disadvantaged people. Robert Gordon has responded with a warning that even such mobilization efforts must be done with an experimental air and full knowledge that there are no deeper logics of historical necessity that can guarantee that what we do now will be justified later. Total Word Count: 2110.

Human Nature in The Prince by Machiavelli and Utopia by Thomas More :: Papers More Machiavelli Prince Utopia Essays

Human Nature in The Prince by Machiavelli and Utopia by Thomas More It is difficult to determine Niccolo Machiavelli?s and Thomas More?s view on human?s nature. Each took a different approach to the topic. Through Utopia, Thomas More attempted to change man?s thinking by creating an ideological society. Niccolo Machiavelli, through The Prince, attempted to teach man how to deal with human nature. With this in mind, Machiavelli?s concept is much more realistic than More?s; therefore Machiavelli better represents human nature. Machiavelli?s view of human nature in The Prince, presents, on the surface, a view of governing a state drastically different for his time. Machaivelli believed that the ruling Prince should be the sole authority determining every aspect of the state and put into effect a policy which would serve his best interests. With this, Machiavelli uses the prince as man, and the state as the man?s life. These interests were gaining, maintaining, and expanding his political power. Though in some cases Machiavelli may seem harsh and immoral , one must remember that his views were derived from concern of Italy?s unstable political condition in the 1500s. Machiavelli seems to be teaching the common man how to live his life so that their life is good and prosperous. Machiavelli generally distrusted citizens, stating that since men are a sorry lot and will not keep their promises to you, you likewise need not keep yours to them? (Machiavelli 651). Furthermore, ? a prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promises? when, ?such an observance of faith would be to his disadvantage; and when the reasons which made him promise are removed? (651). Machiavelli did not feel that a Prince should mistreat the citizens. This suggestion once again to serve the Prince?s best interests. If a Prince can not be both feared and loved, Machiavelli suggests, it would be better for him to be feared by the citizens within his own dogma. He makes the generalization that men are, ungrateful, fickle, simulators and deceivers, avoiders o f danger, greedy for gain; and while you work for their good they are yours? (649). He characterizes men as being self-centered and not willing to act in the best interest of the state,? and when it (danger) comes nearer to you they turn away? (649). Machiavelli reinforces the Prince?s need to be feared by stating: men are less hesitant about harming someone who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared?

Creative Story: The Dark House :: essays research papers

Creative Story: The Dark House by Tom-Inge Earlier today, John and I were taking a walk in the outskirts of the town, when we saw an old house on top of a hill. I wanted to take a closer look at it, but John looked a little spooked, and mumbled something about not wanting to go there. I convinced him that there was nothing to be afraid of, it's just an old house which haven't been occupied for a while, though I wasn't sure whether someone really was living there. We walked up the driveway, up to the house. It was huge. The place looked deserted, the grass wasn't mowed for ages, and everything was a mess. John chew nails like crazy, but I still wanted to check this place out. The door was made of wood, and looked like it could fall apart any minute. I tried to turn the door knob, but it fell off as soon as I touched it. The knob rolled down the steps and kept on rolling down the driveway, and stopped by the fence. That didn't make John feel any better at all. He looked like he had seen a ghost. I took a deep breath, and pushed the door. It wouldn't budge an inch.  « Help me out », I said, but John kept chewing his nails. God knows why, there was nothing to be scared of. Or was it? I took a step backwards, and then kicked the door. It slowly slid open, and I went inside.  «Wow! What a huge mansion we've got here! » John took a peek into the house, but didn't dare go inside. There was a huge hall in the middle of the house, with staircases to my left and right. I went right ahead, towards a glass door in front of me. It wasn't locked, so I carefully turned the knob, and the door opened. Suddenly I felt someone touch my shoulder. I turned around immediately to see, but there was nobody there.  «Probably just my imagination », I said to myself, and went on into the room. It was a lounge, with some impressive furniture, antiques and other objects. It was a lot to look at, and I yelled for John. He didn't reply, so I went to check on him. All I found outside the house was a shoe, and his necklace. I couldn't quite understand what was going on. If he'd run away, at least he'd taken his belongings with him. The door slammed shut behind me, and my heart stopped for a second or two. Creative Story: The Dark House :: essays research papers Creative Story: The Dark House by Tom-Inge Earlier today, John and I were taking a walk in the outskirts of the town, when we saw an old house on top of a hill. I wanted to take a closer look at it, but John looked a little spooked, and mumbled something about not wanting to go there. I convinced him that there was nothing to be afraid of, it's just an old house which haven't been occupied for a while, though I wasn't sure whether someone really was living there. We walked up the driveway, up to the house. It was huge. The place looked deserted, the grass wasn't mowed for ages, and everything was a mess. John chew nails like crazy, but I still wanted to check this place out. The door was made of wood, and looked like it could fall apart any minute. I tried to turn the door knob, but it fell off as soon as I touched it. The knob rolled down the steps and kept on rolling down the driveway, and stopped by the fence. That didn't make John feel any better at all. He looked like he had seen a ghost. I took a deep breath, and pushed the door. It wouldn't budge an inch.  « Help me out », I said, but John kept chewing his nails. God knows why, there was nothing to be scared of. Or was it? I took a step backwards, and then kicked the door. It slowly slid open, and I went inside.  «Wow! What a huge mansion we've got here! » John took a peek into the house, but didn't dare go inside. There was a huge hall in the middle of the house, with staircases to my left and right. I went right ahead, towards a glass door in front of me. It wasn't locked, so I carefully turned the knob, and the door opened. Suddenly I felt someone touch my shoulder. I turned around immediately to see, but there was nobody there.  «Probably just my imagination », I said to myself, and went on into the room. It was a lounge, with some impressive furniture, antiques and other objects. It was a lot to look at, and I yelled for John. He didn't reply, so I went to check on him. All I found outside the house was a shoe, and his necklace. I couldn't quite understand what was going on. If he'd run away, at least he'd taken his belongings with him. The door slammed shut behind me, and my heart stopped for a second or two.

First African-American in Baseball – “Jackie Robinson”

Jackie Robinson, the first African-American in Baseball, changed the face of sports for ever. Not only was he an outstanding athlete, but with the help of Branch Ricky, they worked for reforms in the sports community. There was work required, though, since many sacrifices were made. The face of not only segregation, but the face of sports was on his shoulders. Through his unique form of, Jackie Robinson was one of the greatest driving forces behind equality and helps to equalize many things most people Jack Roosevelt Robinson was born in January 31, 1919 in the town of Cairo, Georgia. Jackie, as most people called him, was stared in many sports through both High School and College. He stared in Baseball, Football, Track, and Basketball. He had many accomplishments, but one that stands out in his college years was when alongside Kenny Washington almost took UCLA to the Rose Bowl (â€Å"Jackie Robinson† 1). When Jackie's athletic eligibility ended he left UCLA and got a job with the National Youth Administration. While there he played football with the Honolulu Bears. When World War 2 broke out, the Army's Officers Candidate School accepted Jackie and ecame a second lieutenant. While stationed at Fort Riley in Kansas, Jackie was not allowed to play Baseball or Football (â€Å"Jackie Robinson† 1). Jackie, however, tried to play both Baseball and Football while stationed. When the Football team formed he was ordered to go home on leave. Then he was told to try out for the nonwhite baseball team, which he later discovered didn't exist. He was then sent Fort Hood. After a good deal of time, Jackie was court-martialed for breaking Jim Crow status. Although it he was found innocent, he was discharged on medical grounds, nd was given an honorable discharge (â€Å"Robinson, Jackie† 1). In 1945 Robinson signed a contract with the Kanas City Monarchs of the NAL (Negro American League) for four-hundred and fifty dollars a month (â€Å"Jackie Robinson† 1). Attention was brought to Jackie because of his great play. Branch Ricky, Brooklyn's General Manager, picked him as the most likely to overcome racism in sports In April 1945, ironically Jackie heard from the Boston Red Sox, who were the last to integrate the two leagues. On August 27, 1945 Robinson was brought to the Dodgers Office at 215 Montague Street. Jackie thought he was there for the Brown Dodgers, but on the contrary he was there to sign with the Montreal Royals. Ricky was really sure of Jackie but he wanted to see how he would put up with the pressure and abuse (â€Å"Jackie Robinson† 1). To test him, Ricky put him through several situations. One involved a white player hurling offensive racial slurs at Jackie and then punched him in the face. â€Å"Rickey took a mock swing at Robinson, and hollered, ‘What do you do know, Jackie? What do you do now? ‘ Robinson replied, ‘I get it, Mr. Rickey. I've got another cheek. I turn the other cheek'† (â€Å"Jackie Robinson† 1). That was all Rickey needed to hear and on October 23 he announced that Robinson had a contract with the Montreal Royals Jackie first appeared on April 18, 1946, for the first time in organized baseball. The house was packed and Jackie went four-for-five with one homer, four RBIs, four runs, and two stolen bases. As something of a trademark, Jackie danced away from the plate allowing Jersey City to commit two balks (â€Å"Jackie Robinson† 2). Rickey feared that resistance was soon to follow and it did. At Syracuse he was aunted, two Baltimore players protested, and Robinson's two black teammates that year washed out. He was a nervous wreak by the end of the season, but still he came out to be the International League's batting champion at . 349 (â€Å"Jackie Robinson† 2) Rickey decided that it was now time for Jackie to hit the major leagues, but he being very cautious. For Dodgers spring training in 1947, Rickey sent Jackie to Havana, but still keeping him on the Montreal roster. Rickey was being a cautious as he Could, trying to anticipate any countermove made against him. One move he may of issed was a number of players, including Dixie Walker, signed a petition against playing with ‘a black man'. One night Leo Durocher told them to take the petition and stuff it, after waking them up from sleeping. Rickey told them the same the next day Rickey had already thought this out, and he wanted Jackie's teammates not only to accept him but to want him. he scheduled seven exhibition games in order to show of what Jackie could do. He received an . 625 batting average, and that seem to turn some eyes in his direction. Rickey, although, didn't announce Jackie was on that seasons line p until three days before the first game. The news of this you would think would be headline, but it was overshadowed by the suspension of Durocher (â€Å"Jackie Robinson† 2). He played his first game at the age of 28. For several games he went hitless and he continued to struggle for most of the season. The behavior of other teams did not help though. Death threats were given in Cincinnati against both him and Reese, a long time friend and supporter. Problems continued and even the Cardinals almost went on strike until St. Louis management and National League President Ford Frick stopped it. â€Å"‘I do ot care if the league strikes,' Frick said, ‘those who do will encounter quick retribution. All will be suspended, and I don't care if it wreaks the National League for five years. This is the United States of America and one citizen has as much right to play as another. The National League will go down the line with Robinson, whatever the consequences'† Jackie had to stifle a lot because the verbal abuse, and the immense pressure continued, but through it all Rickey's experiment had worked. â€Å".. itcher Don Newcombe, ‘That's the one thing I didn't like about Jackie he always wanted to be right, and you an't be right all the time. You have to be wrong sometimes'† (â€Å"Jackie Robinson† 2). After a year or two of confusion Jackie was traded to the Giant for Dick Littlefield and thirty-thousand dollars. The Giants offered him sixty thousand to stay on, but the Dodgers accused him of saying something about retiring just to get a better and bigger contract. To prove him wrong Jackie retired and started busying himself with Financial games and such (â€Å"Jackie Robinson† 3). Once out of Baseball he got a position with a coffee company and then as board hairman of Freedom national Bank. Robinson grew ill with diabetes and died from a heart attack in his home in Stanford, Connecticut on October 24, 1972. The Dodgers retired his number 42, and he was elected into the hall of fame in 1962, the first year he was eligible. The National League Rookie of the year was renamed in his honor in 1986 Though most people now take segregation for granted, there where many people who helped change it. Jackie Robinson with the help of Branch Rickey worked to reform the major leagues of not only one sport but all of them.