Monthly Archives: November 2015

Generalizing galore in Paris aftermath

Posted on by

By COLIN DAVIS

I, like most people, have been deeply saddened by the recent terrorist attacks in Paris, Beirut, and saddened even more by the reaction from the news media and my friends.

Social networks like Facebook and Twitter were buzzing with everyone adding their two cents to the situation. In the past few days everyone has heard the sentiment, Americans need to calm down, be mature, level headed and stop generalizing all Muslims based on the actions of an extreme minority.

I agree with the sentiment of the statement, but the irony is palpable. The statement at its core conflicts with itself. It has turned into: Do not generalize Muslims based on the actions of a few, you giant collective of dumb Americans.

The United States has had an admirable reaction to the terrorist attacks. An outpouring of support for France and Beirut, and a constant reminder of how to appropriately react to the tragic events that have come to pass. While the media is focusing on the angrier, more visceral reactions, the majority of people are not generalizing or making bigoted remarks.

It is obvious that ISIS is attempting to splinter Europe and create a Muslims versus everyone else mentality. This is the only way they can make moderate Muslims feel alienated enough that they would want to join ISIS’ cause. Now more than ever it is important to stay unified and show solidarity among one another because that is truly more powerful than any weapon.

Outrage for the rest of the world?

Posted on by

By BRIANA SCOTT

Last week, late Friday night, reports of terrorist attacks in France killing more than 100 people. Every local, national and international news network covered the story from the moment the attacks happened and every update that has taken place since then.

It seemed as though all of my Facebook friends changed their profile pictures with the semi-transparent overlay of the French flag. Almost four million people, gathered to march in support of France. Several world leaders flew to France to show their support and speak on the issue and express their nation’s solidarity with France.

Support for France and the outcry against the attacks was expressed worldwide via social media, news coverage, and public marches. Many people raised the question: Where is the outcry for the attacks in Nigeria? Where is the support for the people of Syria? Where is the outcry for Lebanon?

In Nigeria, it is believed that Boko Haram orchestrated a terrorist attack killing 32 people and injuring more. Thousands of Syrians are fleeing from their own country in fear of ISIS. In Lebanon, 40 people were killed and left more than 200 wounded victims of bombs at the hands of ISIS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqYomFMhoq0

Where are the flags for these countries on people’s Facebook profile photos? Where is the international outcry for the victims of these attacks?

People on social media have called out several Western news networks for the biased coverage of terrorist attacks happening all around the world. In response to the claims presented on social media, CNN responded during a segment of their morning show “New Day.”

Michaela Pereira, a “New Day” co-host, raised the question if the West should be doing more to fight Boko Haram. One of the show’s guest speaker, James Marks (a military analyst and executive dean of the University of Phoenix), stated that the reason the West isn’t doing more or showing support to countries such as Nigeria or Lebanon is simply because, “they are not a priority.”

Marks also stated that, “The United States, unilaterally, could do anything it needed to do to root out Boko Haram. It would be a long-term effort, but it could be done. The U.S. has the capability…but it is not a priority—that’s the problem.

Marks went on to say, “‘Black’ West Africa is not a priority. If we were to see Boko Haram appear in ‘White Africa’, which is North Africa, we would be alarmed.”

But is the mass coverage of Paris in comparison to other countries simply a race issue? The Washington Post thinks so, but they also think several other factors are a part of the issue as indicated in their recent article, “This is why the Paris attacks have gotten more news coverage than other terrorist attacks.”

The Washington Post lists the following reasons contributing to why the attacks in Paris received mass coverage as opposed to other terrorist attacks.

  1. France is an unusual target.
  2. Paris is a top global tourist destination
  3. Random civilians were targeted using shocking tactics
  4. Are we seeing a new battleground for the Islamic State?
  5. This was a complex, coordinated attack. And that’s worrisome.

The Washington Post wrote, “The Paris attack shocked the world for many reasons. It’s true that terrorism in less-developed countries is worth our attention as well. Crises, such as the Syrian civil war, deserve much more media coverage and policy focus.”

To conclude, I agree with The Washington Post. There are several other reasons that contributed to the mass media coverage that the Paris attacks received, other than race and urbanization. However, I do believe that because France is not a Third World country, they received more coverage. The prioritization of what is considered to be news to the West is problematic, because one could conclude that the amount of coverage a nation receives indicates their level of importance and whether or not they, and their lives, matter.

Media coverage of ISIS stokes fear

Posted on by

By XIAO LYU

Terrorists live among us? According to CBS12, U.S. National Security officials said there are more than 900 active ISIS investigations in 50 states — including Florida. After the terrorist incident happened last week, news coverage was full of  ISIS’ s recent status, they said that they were in South Florid, in the Washington, D.C., in the Massachusetts.

“They are amongst us. Believe me, they are amongst us here in South Florida,” Chad Jenkins told CBS12. Jenkins is a former counterterrorism agent with the FBI and a former US Army Ranger who served in Iraq. He also said that the reason terrorists chose South Florida were the weather and international makeup.

Moreover, Emily Miller, the chief investigative reporter for Washington, D.C.’s Fox 5 publicized an internal police document about the Metro Transit Police Department (MTPD) seeking information on four men who appear to be Middle Eastern engaged in “suspicious activity” on D.C.’s rapid transit system on Nov. 18.

The news quickly spread and is drawn attention on internet about danger in the Washington, D.C., area. After then, the Metro Transit Police proved the police just did a routine check and the news sparked unnecessary concerns about danger.

“The kind of document is shared internally with law enforcement every day and that doesn’t necessarily mean there is anything of concern for the public and caution any reporter that the individuals here are not suspected of any criminal activity,” said Dan Stessel, chief spokesman for Washington’s Metro Transit Police.

The latest news from CNN said that new ISIS video warns of attack on United States and makes threats against New York. Mayor Bill de Blasio responded promptly that NYPD was prepared to respond to up to 24 incidents simultaneously and the people will not live in the fear. However, social media spread the attack and raised fear about an Islamist terror attack in D.C. and New York, and even made derogatory comments about Syrian refugees.

Stoking fear is the goal of terrorist organizations, however, some media coverage just abet it.

Governors refuse Syrian refugees

Posted on by

By MEREDITH SLOAN

According to ABC News, at least half of the country’s governors are refusing to take in Syrian refugees in their states amid heightened security concerns following last Friday’s terrorist attacks in Paris.

ISIS has claimed responsibility for the Paris terrorist attacks, in which 129 people were killed. Since Friday’s attacks, ISIS has threatened to attack Washington, D.C., and New York.

This chilling effect has influenced several United States governors to refuse Syrian refugees. Ultimately the federal government decides on matters of immigration, not the states.

Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas has taken to Twitter to express his opposition to allowing refugees.

This tweet caused a mostly negative reaction from his followers and media consumers alike.

An individual with the twitter handle @jonvox responded to Hutchinson’s tweet saying, “ You are a horrible man and make me embarrassed to be an Arkansan.”

Likewise, Facebook and YouTube have been flooded with political comics and videos that compare the current refugee crisis to World War II.

Those who support the relocation of refugees in the United States have compared the current government opposition specifically to the opposition towards Jewish refugees.

The dissenting opinion of the U.S. governors is less likely to be accepted by media consumers on social media because of the chilling effect of terrorism.

Newsworthy or racism?

Posted on by

By LINGYUE ZHENG

It was heartbreaking to hear the news that terrorists bombed a concert in Paris last Friday and killed more than a hundred people.

News media coverage instantaneously responded to the tragedy. The criticism of the terrorism, condolences from international leaders and follow-ups on Paris keeps popping up on different media. Soon many people on Facebook added a French flag on their Facebook profile as a way to demonstrate that they expressed their sorrow to France.

At the same time, many people criticized that news media are biased and racism because at around the same time Japan experienced a 7.0 earthquake and a subsequent tsunami but received almost zero media attention.

I think news media have their own standard of evaluating whether a piece of information is newsworthy or not. Audiences have heard about a lot of outrageous terrorist activities in the Middle East and are conditioned to associate the region with terrorism and get used to receiving this terrorism news from those places.

But in France, in Paris, which people fantasize as a place of romance and fashion not terrorism, was actually under attack of terrorists. The unexpectedness and rareness would attract more attention.

Japan is an island country that constantly under threats of earthquake and tsunami. It is reported that Japan would go through more than 10 earthquakes a year, ranging from some earthquake people may never feel about to some big ones that may trigger tsunami. Considering no casualty has been reported, the Japanese earthquake might not be equally newsworthy as the bombing in Paris.

‘Baby Hitler’ goes viral on social media

Posted on by

By XIAO LYU

Reuters reported on Tuesday that Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush said if he had the opportunity to kill Adolf Hitler when the German autocrat was an infant, he would. The White House later tweeted the article featuring his answer with a comment, “Gotta do it.”

In an interview with the Huffington Post series that covers the campaign trail with the candidates running for president, this former Florida governor’s responded “Hell yeah, I would!” to the question: if given the opportunity, would you go back in time to kill baby Adolf Hitler?

“The problem with going back in history and doing that, as we know from the series — what’s the name of the Michael Fox movies? It could have a dangerous effect on everything else. But I’d do it, Hitler,”said Bush.

This odd question was picked via the e-mail address that Bush distributes widely to public audiences, and in fact, it had already become a controversial question when The New York Times Magazine ran a poll over the weekend last month asking readers if they would go back in time and kill baby Hitler. The result showed that 42 percent of respondents said they would, 30 percent said they would not and the left respondents were not sure about it.

The response on social media to Bush’s comments and The New York Times Magazine went viral. Most of them were comical, but it is still a sensitive question involved an adult kill an infant. Therefore, on Wednesday, when Ben Carson was asked the similar question, but there was a slight difference. The question was whether or not he would “abort” a baby Hitler and he responded that he was not in favor of aborting anybody.

In that case, whatever the respond to that question is, it will lead a new roar on the internet.

Yik Yak gets wrong kind of use

Posted on by

By ISABELLA MESQUITA

Founded by two college grads in 2013, Yik Yak is an app commonly used by college students to post anonymous jokes and gossip that wouldn’t be shared otherwise. However, what was seen as a fun way to interact, actually turned out to be a mean of verbal abuse and threat to many.

This Tuesday, a student from the University of Missouri was arrested after posting threats and racist commentary on Yik Yak.

Nineteen-year-old Hunter M. Park said he was going to “stand (his) ground and shoot every black person he saw.” Consequentially University of Missouri was able to identify him through his device’s IP address and arrest him on the next day.

This is not the first time Yik Yak faces problems with threats and harassment.

Similar posts happened in the following universities:

  • Charleston Southern University – threats of mass shooting – November 2015
  • Emory University – threats of mass shooting – October 2015
  • American University – racist commentary – October 2015
  • Florida Atlantic University – threats of shooting – September 2015
  • Clemson University – racist commentary – January 2015
  • Kenyon College – threats of violence and sexual assault – October 2014

Whether the app is good or bad, lies on each person’s opinion, however something has to be done about the students that post such comments and what causes them to behave in such manner.

Removing the app from the market or banning from school areas will not decrease harassment, racism and threats. The problem is much greater and concerning than a mere phone app.

Something is wrong, and as bad as it may seem, Yik Yak actually help us realize that something has to be done. Be it good or not, Yik Yak will remain the same, what has to change are the users themselves.

Rice murder ‘objectively reasonable’

Posted on by

By ELAYNA PAULK

In November 2014, Tamir Rice, who was at a local park playing with a BB gun, was shot and killed by a Cleveland police officer after the officers assumed his toy gun was threatening. On Thursday afternoon, his murder was deemed “objectively reasonable” according to the third report from a Cuyahoga County prosecutor.

Newsweek, CNN, and other major news media outlets have since reported this issue.

What baffles me is that whenever someone is murdered by a civilian, that civilian is often found guilty after trial. However, when an innocent, young, black boy is murdered by government workers, society questions whether the boy’s actions warranted his murder and often times, the police officer(s) aren’t reprimanded for their behaviors.

How many Tamir Rices must die before we step in an admit that there is a problem with our justice system? How many incarcerated men need to protest before we actually do something about it?

The news media’s portrayal of black men in America doesn’t make this task any easier. The media is the reason why we assume the black man is the aggressor in any criminal case. Refer to the portrayal of recent high school graduate Mike Brown for instance, or the images of Trayvon Martin as a thug when he was murdered.

The media must stop painting negative images of black men and maybe, just maybe, we can begin to assess the real problem, the cold blooded murders of innocent people.

FAU students support guns on campus

Posted on by

By CHARLOTTE MACKINNON

I read a brief story on the NBC6 Miami website this morning that spiked a concern that has been resonating with American citizens for a long time, especially this past year. It relates back to the age-old issue of this nation’s gun laws.

Just last month, nine people were killed in a shooting at an Oregon community college. That incident was just one out of many tragic school shootings that have occurred in this country in the past decades, and it brought more attention to an already controversial issue.

This morning, I read that a bill is making its way through Florida state legislature that could legalize the carrying of guns on the campuses of public colleges. It is currently against the law, but the bill recently passed a Senate committee. I was shocked to see that Florida Atlantic University students are actually pushing in support of the bill, especially in the aftermath of the Oregon shooting.

Evidently, the mindset of those who are in support of legalizing the carrying of firearms is aligned with the idea that it will not impact the likelihood of another school shooting. Some students were saying that all the law would do is allow students who already have a concealed carry permit outside of campus to legally carry their guns on campus – and if one were to act violently with their weapons, it would happen regardless of the legality of the situation.

What I don’t understand is why it is necessary to have a firearm on campus in the first place. I do agree that the legality of having a gun on campus wouldn’t alone be a motivating cause for a school shooting – such incidents are completely and utterly senseless, and they occur regardless of what state legislature says.

My concern here can be reduced to one word: access. Having firearms present on a place like a college campus – in classroom buildings, dormitories, or fraternity and sorority houses – adds an immediate element of danger to the environment. We all know how easily things can be stolen or fall into the wrong hands and a college campus is a high-pressure environment. As unfortunate as it is, it’s not rare to see many students at any university struggle with mental health issues or develop violent behavior for whatever reason, and it can never be predicted what any one person is capable of.

Obviously, if a killer is set on shooting students or others on campus for whatever sick reason, they will find a way to make it happen regardless of whether or not guns may already be present on campus. I just think that it is completely unnecessary to approve a law that really has no benefits, yet has the potential to be extremely lethal.

Especially after the shooting in Oregon this year, and the shooting at FSU last year where three were shot, I find it absurd that students are pushing in favor of this law. I try not to be close-minded to anything, but I must say at this point in time I have a very firm position against the possibility of this bill being passed.

Students arrested for threats in Missouri

Posted on by

By MEREDITH SLOAN

According to USA Today, police arrested two college students in Missouri on Wednesday for making threats to black students that heightened tensions as the state’s flagship University of Missouri-Columbia campus.

Connor Stolettlemyre, 19, was arrested “on suspicion of making a terrorist threat after he allegedly posted a threat on Yik Yak that read ‘I’m going to shoot any black people tomorrow, so be ready’. He is a student at Northwest Missouri State University.

Another student, Hunter Park, of Lake St. Louis, Mo., was charged with “making the alleged terrorist threat on Yik Yak.”

635828379630407035-HunterPark

Yik Yak, the anonymous social media app, does more harm than good. It allows individuals to post on an open platform based on one’s location, creating an open forum where individuals can interact in their environment without their identity.

I think that Yik Yak is irresponsible, cowardly and dangerous. In situations like this, Yik Yak is perpetuating the racism across college campuses. Every individual that has the app is exposed to the feed, which has the potential to desensitize students to harmful content and hate speech.

If Yik Yak made users take ownership of their identity, there would be less harmful speech. I suggest that the University of Missouri closely monitor Yik Yak for more potential danger.

Starbucks’ cup sparks outrage

Posted on by

By BRIANA SCOTT

This past Saturday, Starbucks unveiled its new cup design for the holiday season—and it was met with hostile response from Starbucks drinkers.

CNN History of Starbucks CupsSocial media erupted in anger upon the release of the “minimalist” red cup, claiming that Starbucks (in addition to other large companies and corporations) was attacking Christmas and Christians by not celebrating the Christmas spirit on their cups.

In previous years, Starbucks’ cups have featured designs with snowflakes, reindeer and other seasonal symbols on its cups during the holiday season.

Many people are upset because they believe that Starbucks has become more “politically correct” and instead of changing the cups design in response to consumer demand, the change was made for political correctness.

There a large group of people on social media calling for the boycott of the company and they are gaining momentum. Even Republican Presidential Candidate, Donald Trump spoke on the controversial issue, comically being known as “Cupgate.”

“No more ‘Merry Christmas’ on Starbucks. No more,” Trump said at a speaking event in Springfield, Ill., this past Monday. “I wouldn’t buy … maybe we should boycott Starbucks — I don’t know.”

Honestly, I don’t think many people are surprised that Donald Trump would comment on this issue during a speaking event; bringing up “Cupgate” provided Trump with a moment of comedic relief and an opportunity to implicitly express his support of Christianity and the celebration of Christmas.

However, I am surprised by the amount of coverage that this story is getting from national news networks. CNN did a story today (and I’m guessing they’ve been covering it since “Cupgate” emerged), in which they actually went through the history of Starbucks’ holiday cups for the past 5 years.

CNN news anchor, Carol Costello, had to hold back moments of laughter as they covered the story—mirroring my exact sentiments. How is this newsworthy? Why is the design on a cup of coffee national news?

The triviality of the coverage was made strikingly clear, because as soon as the coverage of the coffee cup was over, CNN’s next segment was regarding a battle taking place in Iraq to reclaim a key city from ISIS. Yet we are discussing a coffee cup’s design.

And now, the story has gained even more momentum as Dunkin’ Donuts has come into play with the release of their more “festive” holiday cup featuring the word “Joy” in red script surrounded by green pine branches.

It goes without saying that ratings are important for any news organization—it is how they make money. But at what cost? I’m sure the coverage of the Starbucks “Cupgate” provided news networks with a bump in ratings, but was it worth it when there are so many other important topics and events the news should be covering? I think that the cup design is something worth talking about, but it should not be covered as national news.

Behind the ice-breaker meeting

Posted on by

By LINGYUE ZHENG

Chinese President Xi Jinping and Taiwan’s President Ma Ying-jeou shook hands ahead of an historic summit in Singapore last weekend. It is the first time since the Chinese Civil War ended and the nations split in 1949 that leaders from both sides have met.

Xi said the meeting “has opened a historic chapter in the cross-Strait relations, and history will remember today.” He also emphasized, “We (China and Taiwan) are one family.”

Relations between China and Taiwan have improved under Ma since he took office in 2008, with better economic ties, improving tourism links and a trade pack signed.

It is unfathomable why the meeting has taken place at this moment. From Ma’s side, there is a presidential election in Taiwan in January. Ma might take this meeting as an opportunity to give a boost to his party’s candidate, who is trailing in the polls. Also Ma built his presidency on his closer connection to China, so it is a good chance for him to meet Xi.

On Xi’s side, first, Xi wants to exert more of his political control over Taiwan. If he showed his favor in a certain party, in this case, the Nationalists, it might influence many Taiwanese voters’ decisions. If a Nationalists is elected as the upcoming president in Taiwan, it will maintain the policy of being close to China, which will be the ideal outcome for China.

We cannot foresee whether Xi’s meeting with Ma will boost the Nationalists or backfire. During the meeting, many Taiwanese protesters threw stones at the Taiwanese Parliament to demonstrate their anger on Ma’s intention of building a closer connection with China.

Interestingly enough, in Ma’s welcome address, he expressed his sincere hope for continually building peaceful and friendly relation between the strait.  Neither side put fingers on serious political conflicts and territory disputes. They both referred the other side as “sir” rather than his political titles. It is the first time ever in Chinese political reporting that no political titles were involved.

An arduous Korea-Japan summit

Posted on by

By XIAO LYU

South Korea President Park Geun-hye and Japan Prime Minister Shinzo Abe held the first high-level meeting in Seoul on Monday. The meeting was postponed for more than three years because of historical issues and territorial disputes between two nations.

Before this one-and-one-half hours meeting were the months of diplomatic negotiations. However, they produced no breakthrough. South Korean KBS reported that Korea-Japan summit mainly discussed the issue of so-called comfort women — tens of thousands of Korean and other Asian women sent to work at front-line brothels for Japan’s World War II military. Park asked Japan to give a sincerely apologize and compensate the comfort women before they left the world, while Abe claimed that all the problems from Japan’s often brutal colonization of Korea from 1910 to 1945 have been resolved in Treaty on Basic Relations Between Korean and Japan in 1965.

According to the Japanese reports, Abe told Japanese reporters that he agreed to try to find an “early solution” to the subject of comfort women. He said he did not want to “leave an obstacle for the future generations in building” relations with South Korea.

The news has triggered uproar among the social media in Japan and Korean. One of the interesting topics is the summit didn’t prepare a luncheon for Abe, so Abe and the Japanese ambassador went to eat barbecue in Seoul themselves.

Sankei Shimbun reports that, according to the shop, Abe ordered Korean beef tenderloin and spiced pork. The lunch also lasted one and a half hours and Abe finished all of his meal. Many Japanese netizens expressed their dissatisfaction with Park Geun-hye. They criticized Park Geun-hye, saying the leader had no common sense.

The meeting was a chance for both Park and Abe to save face, but both were in an awkward position. It is still unknown if the two countries can possibly reach a final agreement.

Censorship alive in the 21st century

Posted on by

By ISABELLA MESQUITA

“I don’t think there has been a worse time for freedom of expression in Spain since the death of Franco,” said Juan Pedro Velazquez-Gaztelu, former El País journalist.

Spanish newspapers and journalist have watched the industry restructure and shrink in the past years. As debts increase, Spain’s most established papers have lost their editorial independence and have watched advertising revenues decrease under the rule of a conservative government.

Known as the “gag law,” individuals who post videos of political protests or amateur videos of public officers will be severely penalized, and in the case of journalists or papers, fired or fined.

As government control increases and revenues decrease, freedom of expression in Spain has been questioned.

“Newspapers are no longer led by their editors, but by chief executives who are worried about accounts and trying to maintain good relationships with those in power,” said Pedro Ramirez, a journalist who was fired from El Mundo.

According to him, newspapers are no longer doing their job as watchdogs, and in turn are giving in to political pressure and editorial restriction.

To think that established journalists are being censored and kept from doing their job worried me. Not only because its what many of us in class aspire to do and become, but merely for the same of the news and truth.

As a matter of fact, our generation and modern society are defined by the fast flow of information, and highly educated and aware individuals — if not that, at least the easy access to news and information. Hence, how is it possible that in a first world country, journalists are being penalized for reporting the truth?

‘Offend America Again’ Trump on SNL

Posted on by

By ELAYNA PAULK

NBC is currently under fire for being the hosting network for “Saturday Night Live,” which has recently agreed to allow Donald Trump to be its most recent special guest.

Protesters argue that it is the values of Donald Trump that make his appearance on a comedy show “not funny” and “blatantly disrespectful”. American Actor, John Leguizamo has gone as far as boycotting the show and says that if Trump Hosts then “I won’t watch SNL anymore”.

“I’m all for freedom of speech, don’t get me wrong. I believe in freedom of speech,” Leguizamo said in a Yahoo News interview. “This is different … If he had said those things about any other ethnic group, he would not be on that SNL.”

Leguizamo continued, “I mean for him to go around saying that Mexican people are coming across the border are murders and rapists and all the horrible things he said is so dangerous,” Leguizamo said in the interview. “People have been hurt because of his words, because he incited. And he said, ‘well, my followers are very passionate,’ which is also his lack of sympathy and empathy is ridiculous.”

Media outlets such as ABC, Entertainment Weekly, Business Insider, and CNN Money have since reported the incident by remaining neutral. The issue remains though, if we keep using Donald Trump for comedic entertainment, can we trust him as a politician?

Little respect for small-market Raptors

Posted on by

By COLIN DAVIS

The Toronto Raptors and Golden State Warriors are the only two undefeated teams left in the NBA.

Truly at a unique place, the NBA has seen many small market teams see time in front of the national media. Everyone is familiar with Stephen Curry’s amazing shooting ability, how loud the Bay Area gets during their home games, so why then, as the only team representing all of Canada, can the Toronto Raptors still not get the attention they deserve?

On the home page of NBA.com there is one article mentioning the Raptors surprise success, and even then there is no mention of the Raptors in their top 10 stories. Coming off a great win against the championship contending Oklahoma City Thunder, one would think that the Raptors were finally going to get some attention. Yet the video highlights of the game primarily showed Thunder highlights with a few Raptors plays mixed in.

It is understandable that the majority of fans would rather hear about Kobe Bryant’s shooting woes than the stellar play of a team located in Toronto, but in today’s day and age of media being the ever present force it is, the coverage should not be so slanted.

Ultimately, the NBA is entertainment and wants to make money over all else, providing content that the majority of viewers want. In a perfect world, the teams playing the best get covered the most, but the current system does not look to be changing any time soon.

Instagram star quits social media

Posted on by

BY MEREDITH SLOAN

Australian model and Instagram star Essena O’Neill announced she was quitting social media this week via YouTube.

https://youtu.be/Xe1Qyks8QEM

According to ABC News, O’Neill, who had more than 700,00 followers on Instagram and 260,000 subscribers on YouTube, posted a shocking confession announcing that social media made her “miserable” and that online and mobile-sharing platforms can be unhealthy. She decided that she wanted to shut down all of her accounts.

 

According to CNN, O’Neill’s social media friends Nina and Randa Nelson published a YouTube video alleging she was doing this as a stunt to get more followers.

https://youtu.be/WB3HtCMfZic

All social media platforms have been exploding with both support and opposition for O’Neill’s stance. This debate has been a hot topic for news organizations alike.

 

I support O’Neill’s stance because her issue with social media is situational. She said that she didn’t like how the pressure to be perfect influenced her mental health. She also said that she wanted to set a good example for her younger sister and show her that she doesn’t have to be perfect and likeable online to be happy.

 

I do think that social media outlets are informative and necessary in this day and age for the spreading of information. Although, I don’t think that personal business accounts like O’Neill that promote unrealistic body images and clothing brands are necessary.

Carson: Fact-checking or dirt digging?

Posted on by

By BRIANA SCOTT

Despite Ben Carson’s quiet and often soft-spoken demeanor, according to his book “Gifted Hands,” he had a troubled and violent childhood growing up in the city of Detroit.

Recently several news organizations, including CNN, have begun “digging up dirt” on the Republican candidate, with Carson’s claim of a rough childhood at the center of the coverage.

As candidates are running for the highest and most powerful position in the United States and perhaps the world, it is expected that old skeletons will be hunted down and taken out of the candidates’ closets. But is there a point of going too far?

Despite Carson’s public claims of his troubled childhood, as well as those mentioned in his book, CNN has assigned a journalist to investigate Carson’s claims and has reached out to past neighbors and childhood friends of Carson in the hopes of either validating or invalidating Carson’s story.

Carson has often spoken about a particular incident during his childhood in which he tried to stab a friend with a knife over a disagreement about a radio.  The journalist assigned to investigate Carson’s story has been researching the candidate in regards to his claims for the past month and CNN has asked Carson to aid the network in finding witnesses who saw the stabbing attempt as well as the victim of the attack.

Carson has declined to provide CNN with these names and for some news reporters Carson’s unwillingness to help raises further suspicion of whether or not his claims of his childhood are true. Perhaps Carson is not willing to provide the names of witnesses or the victim of his attack, not to hide the truth, but to protect the lives and privacy of those involved.

Every candidate running for president has had their lives turned upside down and scrutinized from what they wear to what they wrote in their high school newspaper 30 years ago. I think Carson is making the right decision not to provide CNN with the names of witnesses or the victim to protect them from the harsh and often unforgiving spotlight of public opinion and news media.

Carson is not alone when it comes to news networks “digging up dirt” and publicly scrutinizing his past. Recently, several news organizations, in addition to Donald Trump, have called out Marco Rubio for his personal use of a credit card that was only to be used for political purposes relating to the Republican Party. CNN has went as far as to list out the date, location, and exact dollar amounts used for personal use.

I do think that this information is pertinent for the American public to be aware of as it pertains to Rubio’s misuse of a professionally provided credit card. However, as illustrated with Ben Carson, I do think that sometimes the media can cross the line between fact-checking and digging for dirt.

When you can have two

Posted on by

By LINGYUE ZHENG

Last Thursday, China lifted its one child policy that had applied to this country for three decades. Now, couples can choose to have a second child without fear for various punishments including fines and getting fired.

Loosening a previously tight policy for population control has attracted worldwide attention. The UK’s BBC ran a topic section for consecutive days focusing on termination of the one-child policy that tries to interpret the reason why government ceased this decades-long policy. The New York Times also writes about Chinese new policy change and how this policy had demographically shaped China.

The policy change also triggered heated debate within China. Some people argue that banning the one child policy foreshadows Chinese government’s failure of re-structuring its economic development mode. For decades, the Chinese government has devoted effort to reconstructing the Chinese economy from labor-driven to technology and service driven. Recently, the Chinese economy has slowed and many people attribute the sluggish economy to the scarcity of cheap labor.

Others point out that, though families can choose to have a second child, there are still some barriers preventing unmarried women to have their own children. Some articles even cite some important data to demonstrate that, even couples which have the choice to have a second child, a very small percentage of them will actually give birth to another child due to mounting pressure to raise a child because child birth and rearing require tremendous time and money commitments.

I think the new policy will bring some changes to China. At least for coming years, it will not be rare to see a child who has a sibling. Nevertheless, the change will slight, but not tremendously elevate the total amount of Chinese population. Nowadays more and more people are prioritizing quality over quantity.  If parents have fewer kids, they can better apply their limited money and time to cultivate their children and have some spare time to enjoy their own life, rather than strain their energy to feed many mouths and merely make ends meet.