Millennial’s redefining ‘breaking news’

By GRACE BERNARD

Early Tuesday morning, ISIS carried out three attacks in Brussels, Belgium. Immediately after, the news media began reporting on the details showing the world how the term “breaking news” is being redefined.

It’s no secret that the technological advances in the last 10 years have had groundbreaking effects on how news outlets function. And it’s even less of a secret that Millennials are glued to their phones.

The news media took note of this fact. And with sales of print news outlets declining, they responded with an increase in revolutionary websites and apps that can be accessed almost anywhere.

The effects of this new industry are obvious. A Millennial myself, I check my phone as soon as I wake up. This morning, I instantly noticed eight CNN notifications on my screen, an immediate signal that a major news story had broken.

At 3:29 a.m., 8:29 a.m. Brussels time, the first notification of a suspected terrorist attack was sent out by CNN to it’s mobile-app subscribers: “There are reports of two explosions at the airport in Brussels, Belgium, according to CNN affiliate VTM.”

According to a TIME report, the attacks occurred around 8 a.m. In less than 30 minutes, the entire world was notified of the actions of one terrorist group.

The live updates didn’t stop there. A number of my mobile notifications were less than one hour apart.

Furthermore, all major news outlets were also reporting on live updates, on-site pictures, videos and interviews to report on the attacks in more detail.

Magazines not typically associated with reporting on serious news stories like Vogue and People made use of the unlimited space offered on the Internet. Both had articles featuring updates of the situation in Brussels.

Social media outlets like Instagram, Twitter, Facebook and Tumblr showed similar responses to those seen in the aftermath of the Paris attacks last year. Most notably, Facebook’s Safety Check feature was once again activated.

The reason that all of these advances in both the immediacy and participation in the notion of breaking news are possible is because of widespread usage and dependence on technology.

Millennials are too often criticized for their dependence on their smartphones and social media. But without these markets they’ve created, these advances would’ve never been made. There simply would’ve been no need.

SeaWorld changes whales policy

By SARAH BRANDT

When the documentary “Blackfish” was released in 2013, SeaWorld had received a lot of negative attention about the safety and health of its orcas. Back then, a lot of news media coverage has been focused on Sea World in a very negative way. An orca had just recently killed trainer Dawn Brancheau in 2010.

“SeaWorld has received a lot of content and negativity from all over the world. It has been ignoring all the criticism it received. PETA had campaigned hard and today there is a payoff for future generations of orcas,” PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk said in a statement.

All the animals — orcas, dolphins, beluga whales, seals and lot of others — have suffered living in confinement at SeaWorld. The business model of Sea World changed, which is truly meaningful. Because of all the news media attention that they have received they have decided to re brand themselves, which has not worked. The news media and public had their opinion and their new management team decided to listen to them. This has resulted in a new way of thinking for SeaWorld.

Thanks to all the attention that SeaWorld has gotten from the news media, it has finally decided to end its captive breeding program of orcas.

Brazil begins impeachment of president

By MARIA LUIZA LAGO

Brazil is falling apart in its current political scenario. Illustrated in an article in the Wall Street Journal, thousands of people gathered in almost each capital of the country for the impeachment of the current President Dilma Rousseff, who spread a corrupted government through her ruling years and now her trial has already begun.

After discoveries of Operação Lava Jato, a federal operation that is investigating money deviation from the Brazilian oil company Petrobras, one of the biggest of the country, the reputation of President Rousseff went downhill. The ex-president of Brazil, Lula Inácio da Silva was taken by the police on March 4 to tell them what he knew about the Petrobras scandal after the police found proof that he was involved in the scheme. Mr. Silva is from the same party of President Rousseff and has supported her through all her governing years.

The events that happened in Brazil last Sunday were the biggest since April 1984, when the citizens were protesting against the dictatorship that ruled the country. Now Brazil is stuck in a corruption dictatorship and the protests are just one of the ways to change this scenario and aim for a better future.

The good thing about WSJ coverage is that the article was written along with two Brazilian reporters, Luciana Magalhaes and Paulo Trevisani, and gave better insight into what is going on in Brazil and how people are feeling towards Ms. Rousseff’s government. The article, “Protests Demand Impeachment of Brazilian Leader,” also highlighted that organizers and police estimated that the Sunday manifestation was the largest once since President Rousseff started her government in 2011.

The news coverage of the protests in Brazil is receiving an international attention, especially when new facts start to emerge. For example, the fact that President Rousseff gave ex-president Lula a cabinet post as chief of staff of Rousseff’s party so he wouldn’t be arrested under the Brazillian law. It is very satisfying to see newspapers worldwide reporting this issue and giving voice to the Brazilian people and informing citizens all around the world of what is going on.

News media fuel Trump’s campaign fire

By BREANA ROSS

Donald Trump’s campaign for president started out as a mere joke to some, but not for him. People laughed and took a shot at guessing how long it would be until the radical billionaire would drop out of the election. It was even a joke to the news media, which made it a point to cover Donald Trump’s latest offensive comment or outlandish statement every single week.

Whether it was negative publicity or not, Donald Trump was getting publicity. Publicity that would seem to have discouraged voters from supporting Trump actually helped to build his popularity. Now here we are, just days after Super Tuesday, and it appears as though Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee for president of the United States.

From name-calling to false accusations, Donald Trump made his way into the news media spotlight right from the beginning of the campaign. At the beginning, it was his comment calling Mexicans “rapists” that sent the news media into an uproar. Then it was his statements on his plans to require Muslim-Americans to register with a government database and carry around identification cards that brought him to the center of media attention.

While the Trump’s constant news media coverage seemed to just point out his extreme views and that he was unfit to be president, it actually helped him in the long run. Trump was getting attention and publicity that no other Republican candidate was receiving. When you turned on your television to a news station, chances are Trump was the first face you saw.

The news media actually helped increase Trump’s popularity by covering him so much.

Now, as the campaign gets down to the wire, the news media have switched their approach with coverage of Trump. The news media are starting to portray Trump as a true presidential contender and focus more on the Republican Party’s plan to stop Trump from getting the nomination. Information about Republican senators’ ideas on how to stop Trump from getting the nomination are starting to surface. It is becoming a reality that Trump could actually be the Republican nominee.

In retrospect, Donald Trump’s case shows how crucial the news media are when it comes to swaying the public. When the news media constantly cover someone, it forces people to pay attention to them and form an opinion about them. Donald Trump’s case is also a prime example of the popular phrase, “No publicity is bad publicity.”

‘Devil’s drug’ needs media attention

By GRACE BERNARD

Since 2014, the designer drug flakka has silently terrorized the streets of South Florida. With the number of users rising throughout the U.S., flakka needs national media attention now more than ever.

Flakka is a highly addictive synthetic drug. According to drugsabuse.gov, side effects include paranoia, hyperstimulation, and hallucinations that can lead to “violent aggression and self-injury. The drug has been linked to deaths by suicide and heart attack.”

Other side effects include super-human strength, a likely result of an adrenaline rush. Also users are known to strip naked due to a massive rise in body temperatures associated with the drugs consumption.

Flakka’s biggest threat is that the U.S. population is under the assumption that the drug’s usage is contained to South Florida, where it is by far the most concentrated. Because of this, news media coverage has been vastly limited to local South Florida news organizations such as The Miami Herald, The Palm Beach Post, and The Sun Sentinel.

Flakka usage is spreading quickly and the lack of media coverage leaves many people in danger, particularly young people in poor urban neighborhoods. Flakka is particularly accessible to this group because it’s so cheap. Without any education from the national press, thousands of people are in danger. According to Forbes.com, flakka usage has spread to Chicago, Texas, Kentucky and Ohio. The drug is only growing more popular, especially with the lack of education nationwide.

One example of the grave disparities in flakka’s news media coverage compared to other drugs was in early 2014 when the DEA officially categorized it as a Schedule 1 drug. Despite the importance of this, the news did not make any major national headlines.

Less traditional forms of media have been more prominent in the coverage of the drug. YouTube has a variety of videos about flakka. Some videos were educational, while the majority were recordings of people high on the drug. These videos had thousands of views, with some of them even having millions. The population clearly has an interest in flakka and is seeking out more information.

The need for public education about flakka is evident. While flakka is not a nationwide issue yet, it is already well on its way. The duty is on the news media to provide coverage about this silent killer because they’re the best equipped to handle the potential crisis.

Retired Army horses seeking a home

By KATIE HOVAN

The Miami Herald featured an article on Sunday to create awareness about free, retired Army horses that are seeking new homes.

The animals, 15-year-old Kennedy and 11-year-old Quincy, both served tours as caisson horses in the Army’s Old Guard at the Arlington National Cemetery.

Caisson horses are responsible for the pulling coffins of military officials who were killed in action to their burial sites. As one of the most distinctive ceremonies in the military, it requires extraordinary skill and accuracy from the horses.

Pfc. Kris Loudner, a cassion rider who knows the horses well, said, “I think one of the reasons to own a horse like Quincy or Kennedy is to have a piece in this mission. In a way, you’re tending to a horse that has honored America’s service members.”

In the “News” section of the Miami Herald website, the article about Kennedy and Quincy was one of the first trending articles, and it stood out from the usual political reporting and crime-related articles.

Quite frankly, I have to commend The Miami Herald for featuring a story about the horses because, as a reader, it’s refreshing to hear positive, lighthearted news when most information that is deemed newsworthy centers on something negative.

The horses may not be important to very many people in the South Florida area, but this story is uplifting compared to the content most readers consume on daily basis. It’s a beautiful, feel-good article that is creating awareness along the way.

Too little, too late for radiation

By JEAN-PAUL AGUIRRE

On Thursday afternoon, Feb. 18, 2016, as CNN was covering the Republican Presidential Town Hall, news broke that highly radioactive materials in Iraq had been stolen.

Reports have gone on to say that the device, which uses the radioactive material, Iridium-192, was reported stolen from an oil services company back in November.

Iridium-192 has a half-life of about 74 days, which means that by now the material has all ready decayed by half. Analysts on news stations are clarifying that these types of situations happen more frequently than they are reported on the news. Also, they believe it is highly unlikely that the material would be used in a terrorist attack and if it were used in a “dirty bomb,” it is likely that the explosion from the bomb would cause more harm than the Iridium-192.

What I am concerned about is why this news is being reported now? If the Iridium was stolen from an oil company in Iraq, in November, why should we care?

From what the online reports and analysts are leading onto, the repercussions of this incident alone will not be severe, yet they mention the possibility of radioactive materials being the next step in chemical warfare due to the availability of such materials around the world and the rising number of cases of stolen materials.

It seems to me that this news was reported too late. Now the nation is focused on the South Carolina primaries, an incident of stolen radioactive materials from November is not as important. I believe the mindset audiences have now is “Nothing has happened yet, so why should we care.”

If the news media were to have made this a bigger issue when it happened— instead of three months later— it would have garnered more attention and certainly would have been a talking point at the debates we have seen in the past months.

Rolling Stone’s Grammy moments

By MARIA LUIZA LAGO

The 58th annual Grammy Awards was full of good performances and tributes to great artists, like David Bowie and Lionel Richie. The Rolling Stone magazine did a review of the 20 best and worst moments but overlooked certain important aspects of some performances, like criticizing Adele for a minor sound issue and putting as the “worst” moment the non-attendance of Rihanna, even knowing she was sick and couldn’t sing.

The magazine analyzed important parts like the performance of Lady Gaga in honor of David Bowie: “her nods to Bowie’s performances showed a true obsessive, what made Gaga’s performance perfect was the way she captured the spirit of the man’s work throughout his career”; and the “notable solo performance” of the artist The Weekend, as well as other great performances of Taylor Swift, The Eagles and Stevie Wonder with the Pentatonix group.

The worst moments, however, were in part understandable. Others weren’t. The tribute to Lionel Richie performed by John Legend, Demi Lovato, Luke Bryan, Meghan Trainor and Tyrese Gibson was good until John Legend stopped singing. Even Lionel Richie, who was at the event, stopped cheering as he listened to his own work being sung by the other performers, as Rolling Stone pointed out.

Another worst moment was the duet of singers Tori Kelly and James Bay that seemed out of pace when both tried to sing both of their singles on the same time, and the music and scenarios were not good enough compared to the other performances.

What I think Rolling Stone may have exaggerated was the fact that one of the “worst” moments was the fact that, in Adele’s performance, the piano microphones fell into the piano strings, making the sound dissonant and, as noted by the magazine, “sounded like a fork on a guitar and a volume drop that nearly silenced the singer.” I think despite the audio trouble, Adele’s performance was good, there was no problem with her voice or whatsoever and I wouldn’t judge as a bad performance someone that wears a “messy bob” as being the worst part of the Grammys.

Also, Rihanna didn’t show up at the event due to bronchitis. Her doctor told her not to sing and the magazine also pointed that out, but still, “Rihanna bails.” Her performance was not even judged as good or bad and her condition forbid her to perform.

Giuliani criticizes halftime show

By JEAN-PAUL AGUIRRE

This past Monday, Rudy Giuliani stirred up some controversy over the Super Bowl halftime performance by Coldplay, which featured Bruno Mars and Beyoncé.

The portion of the performance by Beyoncé referenced ongoing social issues being confronted in the U.S., such as the Black Lives Matter movement, while also celebrating the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Black Panthers.

The performance proved to be quite divisive as both proponents and opponents advocated their positions on the various platforms, from online-opinion articles to morning shows on national news networks.

The former mayor of New York, Giuliani, expressed his deep offense by Beyoncé’s performance on “Fox and Friends” on Monday morning. He said that it was “outrageous” and that it was an attack on law enforcement.

The story has not made major waves in the form of newsworthy topics on local or national news stations. I feel that it is appropriate that news stations have not blown the story up to extreme proportions, as they have been known to do recently. I feel that it may be worth mentioning as a tidbit during segments, but the nation should not concern itself with an insignificant feud.

The nation is immersed in the presidential campaign, especially now with the presidential primaries and caucuses in New Hampshire and other states. Following the campaign to try and figure out which of the candidates might take the lead in the race for the White House is more important.

This is one instance where I feel the media took the right approach with covering the Beyoncé-Giuliani story. It contains the news element of prominence, which would permit it to receive some attention, but not enough to allot more time than is necessary — like what we have seen lately with some stories, such as the woman who pulled over the police officer, or if you watch ESPN, the ongoing saga with the Cleveland Browns and Johnny Manziel.

Zika virus: Fearing the unknown

By ROBYN SHAPIRO

Every news station, newspaper and social media network alike has been fixated over Zika.

Zika is a virus, native to Africa and found in South America, that has wildly spread to Latin America, the Caribbean and some places in the United States. While the side effects aren’t life threatening (flu-like symptoms, pink eye and fever) the virus is most dangerous to pregnant women.

If women are infected with the virus while pregnant, their child has a high likelihood of being born with microcephaly. Microcephaly stunts head growth early on in fetal development, causing the child to be born with an abnormally small head and metal disabilities.

The World Health Organization has advised pregnant women not to travel to Latin American countries. They have also advised women who live in Latin American or South American countries not to get pregnant for at least two years.

Recently it was reported in Texas that the disease can be sexually transmitted, which exponentially increases the spread of the viral epidemic.

As a young person, student and someone who cares about my future health, the media have refrained from answering what I think is the most important question: If I am infected with the Zika virus and I want to have children in the future, will they be born with this defect? I know a virus’s symptoms run their course, but will the effects of the virus affect future children?

Do we fear this virus because it is new or because of how it could affect us?

All the news reports are the same and, as informed citizens, the media should make efforts to report on different aspects of the same topic rather than reiterate the well-known facts.

While it is understandable that we do not know enough about the spreading virus, the media should make serious efforts to investigate the case and report information about the disease as fast as possible.

Questions remain unanswered in murder

By GRACE BERNARD

This week, all major news outlets have kept audiences closely following the case of 13-year-old Nicole Lovell. The story made national headlines after two Virginia Tech students were charged with her murder on Jan. 29.

When the story broke, media focused on college athlete David Eisenhauer due to his immaculate record, school involvement, and young age. Eisenhauer, 18, is now charged with kidnapping and first-degree murder after Lovell’s body was found after an apparent stabbing earlier this week.

The press has focused increasingly less on Eisenhauer’s accomplice, 19-year-old Natalie Keepers, as the story develops. Instead, the media have turned their attention to the alleged romantic relationship between Eisenhauer and Lovell.

But both law enforcement officials and prosecutors on the case have remained firm in their decision to withhold details of the case to the media, especially in regards to the pair’s relationship.

According to theguardian.com, in order to protect the integrity of the investigation, the prosecutor’s office would release no “additional factual information outside of the courtroom.”

The most likely reason for the withholding of details is out of respect for Lovell’s age. But today, messenger app Kik became involved after announcing that the company turned over information to the FBI. The announcement launched a new field of questions that the media have been unable to provide answers to.

Kik is suspected to be how Lovell met her “boyfriend” and alleged murderer Eisenhauer around Jan. 4, according to The Chicago Tribune.

Kik’s involvement has created speculation among audiences in terms of a motive for the killing. Some believe that Lovell was planning to reveal her relationship with Eisenhauer, thus leading to her death.

As the case develops, the public is left wondering critical questions such as Eisenhauer’s motive, details about the victim’s relationship with Eisenhauer, and what led Lovell to sneak out of her room that night.

While new questions are being raised everyday, the amount left unanswered will only continue to grow. Now that the basic information surrounding the murder have been released, it appears as though officials will continue with the trend and only slow the amount information being published.

UM inches closer to ending diabetes

By JEAN-PAUL AGUIRRE

As a type 1 diabetic, any news of treatments to serious diseases or improvements in healthcare catches my attention. However, it also heightens my skepticism on news coverage.

This past weekend my mother handed me a magazine that is designed to assist diabetics through their daily routines. There was a story documenting a breakthrough treatment — and possible cure — of type 1 diabetes that was discovered at the University of Miami Diabetes Research Institute.

The treatment involved a surgery that transplanted islet cells into the body of a woman, Wendy Peacock, after decades of suffering from type 1 diabetes.

Islet cells are responsible for producing insulin in the body; type 1 diabetics suffer from their body’s immune system destroying these cells, which regulate blood sugar.

This surgery has relieved the patient from having to inject herself with insulin everyday, multiple times a day.

Since this is a breakthrough that can lead to the possible end of a disease that affects around 1.25 million Americans and countless others across the world, I figured that there would be more publicity surrounding it. Well, as far as I can tell, there have been a few articles from The Miami Herald and other medical websites that I have seen online, and some local news channels, like Local 10 News and Channel 7 News, but it has not made its way into mainstream media and news.

Maybe it is old news and that is the reason why I am not seeing the being covered more, but its important news and I think the bigger problem is that news organizations need to broaden their definition of what is considered “newsworthy” because we are saturated with the same information that is being re-circulated for days until another piece of information is released and then the process repeats itself.

Most of the news we are receiving now on TV is about the results of the Iowa caucuses and speculation on the upcoming New Hampshire caucuses. Or on Spanish television, like Telemundo, they are constantly talking about the actress, Kate del Castillo, who is allegedly involved with Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán.

I am beginning to feel that news organizations are becoming more and more fueled by entertainment and ratings, rather than content and getting new, useful information to the public. Before it turns into an uncontrollable circus act, news organizations need to diversify their stories and give their audiences different types of information to process.

Rice murder ‘objectively reasonable’

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.

Students arrested for threats in Missouri

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

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.

‘Offend America Again’ Trump on SNL

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?

Instagram star quits social media

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.

Raven-Symone: The saga continues

By ELAYNA PAULK

To follow up my earlier blog regarding the coverage of of Raven-Symone and the series of unfortunate events that came with it.

Raven Symone has struck a chord with us all — again, but this time it’s not without serious consequences. After her statement on the young girl in South Carolina that got brutally assaulted by a police offer, which blamed the young girl for being “on her phone” during class, there has been a petition to remove Raven Symone from “The View.”

The Washington Times, Huffington Post, NBC, as well as many other news outlets, have since reported on the petition, on Change.org that addresses the petition to Barbara Walters, that says:

“Raven Symone has been spouting her ignorant and self hating spiel on the view for long enough, from stating that she wouldn’t hire somebody for having a ghetto name, to openly complaining about reverse racism, the final straw was her comment about the recent viral video of the school police officer assaulting the student, where Raven Symone said “get off your phone in school then.” African Americans and black people around the diaspora need a voice representative of their views and not a voice representative of what white people want us to say. We need strong black role models in prominent positions on television an Raven Symone cannot provide that. That is why I ask that we petition to remove her from The View.”

The news media coverage has played a major role in the success of this petition, which currently has 106,185 out of the 150,000 signature goal. The coverage of issues, such as these, and the persistent conversations on social media outlets can finally put an end to the disaster that is Raven-Symone.

Where did the news go?

By ISABELLA MESQUITA

Access to news has increased significantly worldwide as new, high technology devices and social media became the main platform for news dissemination. Not only is it a current and immediate news outlet, it allows its users to become aware of the latest global events in a matter of seconds.

However, does all of this speed live up the the news’ worth?

As The New York Times posted in its latest Opinion section, the news media are sliding toward thinner coverage and ever-shorter “news-nuggets” of information. Despite the increase in number and variety of news platforms, all of them are characterized by small and impacting headlines that try to summarize the latest news in a few words — that is, as long as it fits on one’s phone screen.

Sadly to newspapers and to those passionate about journalism and the beauty of unveiling the truth, news, in the 21st century, is being summed up to 10 word tweets and quick Facebook posts.

Development and growth depends on informed, critical individuals who seek information and aren’t “in a rush” to scroll down to the next post. Knowledge comes from content, however how can it prevail if the interests have shifted and news is being trimmed to devote more time and space to pop culture, celebrity gossip, and the latest trends?

Maybe what we know as “news” is changing. Maybe its time to re-define our roles as journalists, or at least, time to figure out a new place where the role of “informants” truly meets people’s needs. Whatever it is, where did news go?

Myanmar elections and social media

By MEREDITH SLOAN

An opposition candidate in Myanmar is recovering after being attacked by men at a campaign rally.

The National League for Democracy (NLD) candidate Naing Ngan Lin was rushed to hospital with head and hand injuries from wielding knives and swords, but the party said his life was not in danger.

The Myanmar government rules its nation through authoritative practices. Since the late eighties, many Myanmar citizens have expressed extreme distaste in the violence and censorship of media.

Myanmar has fallen behind the rest of the world with new technology. The government, however, refuses to adapt to technology since it maintains a stronghold on all information relevant to the elections.

Cell phones and social media have recently become somewhat accessible for wealthy citizens of Myanmar. This allows for virtual communication among individuals, universities, governments and everything in-between.

Mobile phones pose a risk to the Myanmar government during election time because the government will lose authoritative control over content posted.

The upcoming election has the potential to drastically change Myanmar’s participation socially, politically and economically in modern-day society. If Myanmar citizens use social media, other countries will pay closer attention to what the people want.

I plan on closely following the election coverage from Myanmar from news outlets, but more importantly, social media.