Tag Archives: Politics

Presidential health and campaign news

Posted on by

By ANNETTE REID

Last Friday Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton attended a 9/11 memorial in New York. Everything seemed to be okay with her until she left the ceremony before it ended. In a video taken by a bystander, Clinton is seen having difficulty walking and then fainting just before getting into an SUV. People around her had to assist her getting into the vehicle.

This video has been shown across all forms of news media and has been analyzed by not only journalists but also health professionals. It was even a treading topic on Twitter.

It is no secret that Hillary has struggled with health issues as of late. Along the campaign trail she has experienced a few coughing fits and was diagnosed with pneumonia on the two days prior to the 9/11 ceremony incident. However it was not publicly known that she had been diagnosed until Sunday night.

Some news outlets have been criticizing Clinton for not being forthcoming with her current health status even going so far as to lessen her credibility as a politician by saying that she is not transparent with the general public. Due to the pressure being put on her by the media, Clinton revealed even more medical information by releasing a letter written by her doctor on Wednesday.

Her opposition, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, has questioned her health over the course of the election season as well. But this incident has made Trump reveal more about his own health as to not appear that he is hiding anything. He even went on the “Dr. Oz” show today and had Dr. Mehmet Oz analyze his doctor’s notes on TV.

The real question here is why some news organizations are pushing for presidential candidates to reveal such personal information instead of focusing on a nominee’s political views and how different today’s coverage of presidential elections have changed from those of the past. In the past, presidential nominees were not required to reveal their health status. Some of our most memorable presidents ran for office while suffering with serious health issues.

Franklin Roosevelt became ill with polio in 1921. Due to this he lost the ability to move his legs and then became paralyzed. In spite of that, he was elected as president in 1932 and ran for re-election in 1936, 1940 and 1944. However, his declining health during the re-election was never mentioned and after his doctor released a statement to the press saying that his health was okay reporters did not question it. Nevertheless, he died in office in 1945.

Another president who was elected to office while suffering health problems was John F. Kennedy. He had Addison’s disease and when confronted by his opponent over the matter, Kennedy simply had his doctors publicly declare that he was in good health. After that he was never questioned again.

As these examples show, former presidential candidates were not forced by the news media to reveal their health history so why is the press making such a big deal about it now?

A lot of it has to do with the news media’s tendency to attack politicians and want to show the public every presidential candidate’s weaknesses. However, forcing nominees to reveal every aspect of their health history might not be the right way to go about gathering information on them.

If the media wants to gather information on them they should focus on things that matter to public like where the candidates stand on issues. Instead of showing Hillary Clinton fainting multiple times per hour and over analyzing every second of the video, the focus should be about where she stands on issues so that come Election Day people can be well informed.

Networks reveal ideologies

Posted on by

By CLAUDIA BROWN

News networks and reporting are supposed to be neutral with no biases. But still, the general public can categorize each network and its reports as a Republican network or a Democratic network.

This is not due to the content that is covered because more or less, any news channel one can put on that is not your “local” news station will be reporting the same stories.

Fox News is a “Republican” news network, although its spokespersons will say otherwise.

“We are a news station that is neutral to both sides. We give the public the news as it is.  We have anchors, reporters, and writers who are from all political parties,” says a news reporter at the Fox 5 news station.

Seventy-eight percent of conservatives think news stations such as CBS, ABC, and NBC are biased toward those who are liberal.

Michelle Koenigsberg, 72, a Republican from Brooklyn, N.Y., says “I only watch Fox News because the other stations are so biased towards liberals, they don’t give a full story.  They lie to make their side look better than they are.”

According to The Washington Post, “a quarter of its audience is from Democrats and 9% from Independents.”

Sophie Browne 21, a Democrat from New York City, stated, “I never watch Fox, it’s way too conservatively biased and I honestly think it’s crap.”

So how and why is each news station able to be categorized to the public?  It seems to be a common belief that Republicans will feel that “Republican” networks and local stations are reporting the news as it really is with no bias, just as Democrats feel that way about the “Democratic” networks and stations.

The main reason for this seems to be the specific parts of a story that is being reported.  For example, the 2016 presidential campaign.

Both ABC and Fox News reported this week on the temperaments of both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

ABC stated “Clinton is poised when pointing out Trump’s contradictions and false claims.”

ABC also says “It’s clear that from his tone, Trump is judged on his temperament.”

Why is this? Each network knows its viewers and its rumored political side. The reporters’  jobs are to report the news “as it is” however, they still need to appeal to their audience.

Fox’s report on the temperaments this week revealed the biases that the news viewers feel.

“We’ve known that Clinton isn’t a great retail politician, but is an establishment candidate in a non- establishment year.  We’ve known that she has low ratings on honestly and trustworthiness exacerbated by the Clinton foundation mess,” Fox stated.

The way they portray Trump seems to be more positive than the way ABC does.

“Now that Donald Trump is stabilizing his campaign with more scripted speeches on military readiness,” an ABC story stated.

Although both ABC and Fox News are reporting on the same topic, they are emphasizing the parts of each story that please the viewers and “prove” their stereotyped political beliefs.

‘Trump’s New York’ on a ferry ride

Posted on by

By KATIE HOVAN

Philip Rucker of The Washington Post published an article Wednesday depicting Donald Trump’s New York supporters that were seated on a New York ferry during the evening rush hour to Staten Island.

Rucker describes several of the passengers through their jobs, appearance and background and he even juxtaposes a construction worker, a Hungarian immigrant, and a fashion model who all support the Republican candidate. The article is meant to be colorful and intimate, while shedding light on the different types of Trump followers and their reasons for supporting him.

Although it’s pleasing to read and I gained a greater perspective on the different types of people who support Trump and their reasons for doing so, I found that Rucker’s reporting itself is a bit too rightward leaning for my taste.

I feel that it’s important to be much more careful about how writers portray such a large group of people with so many different views. A Staten Island ferry ride may give a glimpse at Trump supporters, but it doesn’t speak for everyone.

I’ll admit that Rucker makes several attempts to express the voices of opposing New Yorkers, but the piece projects Staten Island, and New York, as a predominantly Republican area. The title itself gives the impression that most New York and Staten Island residents support Trump, and after reading the article, that’s is the idea that I was left with.

For me, it all boils down to perception. If I finish reading a piece and am left with a single idea about a large group of people, I consider it to be too predisposed.

I’m sure that my criticism is too harsh, given the fact that a writer can’t possibly listen to the individual opinions of all 8.4 million New York City residents, but I’d like to believe that there is a lot more diversity in opinion than those few people on the ferry who believe Donald Trump is representative of the typical New Yorker.

Paul Ryan rules out 2016 presidential bid

Posted on by

By MELISSA CABRAL

House Speaker Paul Ryan confirmed Tuesday that he will not be the Republican Party’s presidential candidate in 2016.

Recently, there had been widespread speculation regarding his 2016 ambitions to run for presidency but upon returning from the Middle East, he made the announcement during a speech in Capitol Hill.

“I want to put that to rest once and for all,” Ryan said. “Let me be clear. I do not want, not will I accept, the nomination for our party…. Count me out.”

Although Ryan has opted out of campaigning for presidency, he still wants to maintain his position as House Speaker.

During his speech, Ryan made a plea to delegates arguing that they should elect a candidate who actually ran in the primary.

“Let me speak directly to the delegates on this: If no candidate has a majority on the first ballot, I believe you should only choose a person who actually participated in the primary,” he said. “If you want to be the nominee — to be the president — you should actually run for it.”

When asked by CNN if he believes only one of the final three 2016 Republican candidates — business executive Donald Trump, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Ohio Gov. John Kasich — should be the nominee, Ryan would only say, “I’ll leave that up to the delegates.”

Nevertheless, the Wisconsin lawmaker promised to remain involved in the upcoming national debates that will help decide who will be elected as our next president.

NC enforces ‘bathroom bill’

Posted on by

By SIDNEY STERLING

This past week, North Carolina’s General Assembly proposed and passed the House Bill 2 which is also known as the “bathroom bill.” The HB2 Bill was signed and approved by Gov. Pat McCrory.

The HB2 Bill appealed the Charlotte ordinance and prohibited cities and local governments from expanding employment or public accommodations protection regarding sexual orientation or gender identity.

Due to the HB2 Bill, local governments are now prohibited from setting their own minimum wages and must comply to the state standard.

This new mandate affects the fashion industry in major ways. However, many chain brands that have stores in North Carolina are vowing to ignore this enforcement.

According to WWD.com, stores like Brooks Brothers and Hanesbrands are making bold statements against the HB2 Bill.

Screen Shot 2016-04-08 at 1.49.41 PMBrooks Brothers made a statement on social media stating, “North Carolina’s HB2 is inconsistent with our longstanding values of fairness, equality and respect for all.”

Hanesbrands also spoke out against HB2 through digital outlets by saying, “HB2 will have no effect on how we run our business and our very strong anti-discrimination policies and practices, including protection for sexual orientation and gender identity.”

This new bill will hinder North Carolina’s overall image and economy.

Screen Shot 2016-04-08 at 1.48.58 PM

Many fashion bloggers and tweeters are outraged and are unleashing their opinions through various mediums.

What does this mean for the fashion industry on a national scale? Do you agree with the HB2 Bill? Do you think North Carolina should flush this “bathroom bill?”

Clinton takes a ride on New York subway

Posted on by

By BREANA ROSS

The amount of times celebrities and politicians are deemed “newsworthy” for doing things that are completely normal, day-to-day actions is amusing. From attending baseball games to eating at a particular restaurant, anything politicians do that seems to remotely line up with the lives of “normal people” is attractive to the public.

Yesterday, Hillary Clinton made headlines for utilizing one of the most common forms of transportation in her home state: the New York subway.

Thursday morning, Democratic presidential candidate Clinton rode the train one stop from the Yankee Stadium at 167th Street up to 170th Street. News coverage included that Clinton’s metro card failed to work at first but she eventually was able to get into the station. She hopped onto the train, rode for one stop, hopped off, and proceeded to a nearby diner for dinner. Clinton’s experience is a normal, daily course of actions for many people. So why is it special that she is doing something that millions of Americans do everyday?

First of all, Clinton’s New York subway excursion was no accident or coincidence. Politicians pull stunts like this all of the time to show a sense of normality in their lives. They want to seem relatable to the average American. Clinton’s subway ride was not a spur-of-the-moment decision. It was a pry for publicity, a campaign stunt.

The media fell right into the trap. Clinton did something to portray that she is relatable to the American public and the news media was right there to cover it, as if someone riding the subway is “newsworthy.” Riding a New York subway still does not make Hillary Clinton relatable to the average person because if you or I were to take a ride on the train, there certainly would not be a team of news media there to capture the moment.

CNN explains the Panama Papers

Posted on by

By KATIE HOVAN

The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) leaked several documents Sunday citing illegal activity of an offshore Panamanian law firm called Mossack Fonseca. The papers are being referred to as the “Panama Papers” and allegedly exposes a tax haven used by some of the world’s wealthiest and most well-known individuals

Several current and former public officials have come under fire following the leak after the papers exposed their ties to the firm. Russian President Vladimir Putin and the prime minister of Iceland are two political leaders involved in the scandal.

The firm itself quickly responded to the papers shortly after their release, noting that the information is “inaccurate.”

While the investigation is still ongoing, CNN News Desk editor Jethro Mullen published “The Panama Papers: 7 things to know” to the site on Monday.

Over the years, I’ve seen several crash-course articles similar to Mullen’s on the CNN website and, at first, these types of articles struck me as unprofessional. The titles sound similar to articles posted on blogs or news and entertainment sites like Buzzfeed. Over time, however, I learned to appreciate this type of reporting.

Whenever I’m struggling to understand the details of a complex news story, I tend to look for articles similar to Mullen’s to break down the information piece by piece.

The average American does not have an extensive background in every subject that makes news. Breaking down the background of a story and its general information is a great way to help people understand a variety of important topics.

Though these stories may defy the standard inverted pyramid formula of news writing, I find them to be the most effective way to convey multifaceted stories to the general public. In retrospect, I probably would not have been able to right the first portion of this article without Mullen’s reporting.

Apple continues feud with FBI

Posted on by

By JEAN-PAUL AGUIRRE

On Monday, it was announced earlier this week that the U.S. government dropped its lawsuit against Apple over unlocking the iPhone of a San Bernardino terrorist.

Reports revealed that the FBI went overseas and had the cellphone hacked by a third-party, some are speculating that it was the Israeli firm, Cellebrite.

Now, there are rumblings that Apple is asking questions regarding how the information was retrieved by Cellebrite and are speaking with attorneys to see if it can take legal action to force the FBI to reveal how it unlocked the phone.

Once again, I’m beginning to sound like a broken record, the news media are paying close attention to the frenzy that the presidential election campaign.

So what has Donnie [Donald Trump] done now? Well, he got into a whose-wife-is-better-looking contest with Ted Cruz as they exchanged verbal insults to one another and debated the attractiveness of their wives.

I only remembered the Apple-vs.-FBI story because CNN spent a few minutes talking about it on their morning show.

Had I missed it, who knows when I would have found out about the news. Even as I mentioned it in my journalism-reporting class, Wednesday morning, most of my classmates had not heard about the news.

I am just saying I know Trump, Cruz and the rest of the presidential campaigns are ripe with news stories, but could we add more variety while we still can? I feel that this will continue until the election is over, and then we will have a new circus to focus on once this one leaves town.

Why Brazil hates its president

Posted on by

By ROBYN SHAPIRO

Brazil’s unemployment rate has increased from 7.6 percent in January to 8.1 percent in February with a climbing projected average of 8.2 percent this year. As the economy continues to decline and the government corruption surfaces, anti-government activists and the general public fill the streets of Brazil in protest.

President Dilma Rousseff has been publicly denounced for accepting bribes from the state-owned energy company Petrobras (a petroleum company) from 2003 to 2010.

Her approval ratings dropped exponentially in 2015 because of her increasing unemployment, economy digression, weak currency and rising inflation. While her original campaign stood on her allegiance to the poor Brazilians, many of them feel betrayed by her actions it has not reflected their interests.

In two recently published articles by The Guardian and The Washington Post, both presented her side of the story and gave many direct quotations of why she is choosing to not resign and her opinions on the protests. These articles present the information in an unbiased way, but do not provide background information to why the Brazilian people want to impeach their president.

BCC News covered the protests in a package called “Brazil protesters call for President Rouseff to resign” (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-35798875). In this package, protesters acknowledge the depth of the government corruption and how she has not helped Brazil’s plummeting economy.

While both sets of articles provide unbiased information, I believe it would be extremely beneficial to the outside public to have a brief description of the opposition before being presented the information. While no article was pro anti- government or pro-Rousseff, having a background prior to presenting one side of information in each article, would be beneficial for the audience in order to form an educated opinion.

Opening relations with Cuba

Posted on by

By ROBYN SHAPIRO

After President Obama traveled to Cuba a couple of days ago, the U.S. continued, as a country, to open relations with Cuba. It was the first presidential visit to Cuba in more than 90 years.

The “Rachel Maddow Show” did a 45 minute segment on how each Democratic president since John Kennedy (and including JFK) has tried to reopen relations with Cuba, but none have been successful until President Obama.

While many people see this as a positive progress into the future, many Cuban Americans would disagree.

Even though Marco Rubio dropped out of the campaign for the Republican presidential nomination, I felt that his opinion on Cuban relations had the most accurate representation on why Cuban Americans are against opening relations with Cuba.

“The policy (Obama’s) is based on the illusion that more commerce and access to money and goods will translate into political freedom for the Cuban people. This will not work: The Cuban people are not free because the regime — just as it does with every aspect of life — manipulates and controls to its own advantage all currency that flows into the island. More economic engagement with the U.S. means that the regime’s grip on power will be strengthened for decades to come, dashing the Cuban people’s hopes for freedom and democracy,” Rubio stated on his Web site.

The Miami area is a very unique part of the United States where the story of people escaping the Cuban regime is a common one.

In an interview I did with civil engineer Jose Vega in Coral Gables, he stated similar opinions to Rubio after explaining to me that his family fled Cuba when he was 13 years old. His parents decided to leave Cuba so that he could have a better life. He started in the United States very poor and built his own business, and he prides himself on being a successful representation of the American Dream. He knew that in Cuba he never would have had that opportunity.

While the rest of the United States cannot relate to his story and the story of many Cuban Americans, it is important to take into consideration the first-hand experience they’ve had while we make progress in international relations in the future.

While I have found the news media covers both sides of this opinion, the minority side (Cuban-American side), is less understood and therefore should have equal attention to the pro-Cuba relations side.

Obama juggles baseball, diplomacy

Posted on by

By VICTORIA DE CARDENAS

President Barack Obama made a historic journey to our neighboring island Cuba, making him the first president in 88 years to visit the island.

He started of this trip by tweeting to Cubans using the local slang.Screen Shot 2016-03-25 at 7.52.53 AM

The president had his daily scheduled filled, down the second, but many Miamians, including Miami-Dade County Mayor Carlos A. Gimenez, were not happy about it.

The thought of their president visiting a communist country who is responsible for the death of many fighting for freedom is what is troubling many Cuban-Americans.

“Mayor Gimenez does not believe the Cuban government has made any significant changes to respect human rights, free enterprise, free expression, or a free press, and therefore the government does not deserve the honor of a visit from the leader of the free world,” said Michael Hernandez, the mayor’s spokesperson.

Many believed he was on vacation, which is not the case. News outlets have been highlighting Obama’s attendance at the historic baseball game as if he should not be there. It seems that the general public along with news have forgotten that to make relations with anyone you must do something in common and get a general understanding of the other person.

The news media are scrutinizing Obama even further by asking how he could be attending a baseball game after the news of what happened in Brussels. But the news media should know better, he had a schedule to follow and gave it support with the Cuban people before the baseball game.

In my opinion, there is not much he can do from the Caribbean island other than send his condolences. Did they want him to go to a terrorized country and send his condolences?

It’s not like he knew this was going to happen and decided to go to Cuba to “vacation” anyway. The president made promises and intended to keep his promises but the news made it seem as if he was a heartless president. Specifically, local news made him seem like he couldn’t care less by showing protests in the streets of a heavily populated Cuban community.

I understand news is supposed to or is expected to show both sides but conversations seemed to be very one sided here in Miami.

The pain of being in the public eye

Posted on by

By BREANA ROSS

Constant public scrutiny should be added to the job description for the president of the United States. Part of being the face of the free world means being under the world’s microscope and subject to criticism for any little thing.

The latest criticism of President Obama from the news media stems from his choice to still go to a baseball game in Cuba, even as the Brussels attacks were happening.

Not long after bombs had blown up at an airport and subway station in Brussels, President Obama was enjoying a ballgame with his family and the President of Cuba, Raul Castro. The pictures of the president’s fun-filled day at the ballpark spurred controversy among Republican presidential candidates and within the news media. The main point of criticism is that President Obama should have returned home to help deal with the matter instead of continuing leisure in Cuba.

However, it is not like the president did not address the matter at all. President Obama made remarks about the terrorist attacks when he spoke in Havana on Tuesday. “What they can do is scare and make people afraid and disrupt our daily lives and divide us,” President Obama said as he explained his rationale for staying at the baseball game. “And as long as we don’t allow that to happen, we’re going to be okay.”

The real question is, what is it the critics wanted Obama to do in that moment? The attacks had already happened. There is nothing he could have done to change that and he addressed the matter through a speech, just as he would have done if he were home. There is really no reason for him to have been criticized, except that Americans need a scapegoat to criticize for everything. Being the president of the United States makes Barack Obama a perfect candidate.

The number of times President Obama’s face has appeared on the front of a magazine, newspaper, or website being criticized for doing something completely normal is infinite. The public eye is always watching and the news media always has something to say about the president’s behavior.

Obama reaches out to Cuba

Posted on by

By JEAN-PAUL AGUIRRE

It is difficult to avoid getting caught up in news sometimes, especially when you are so close to the situation being covered.

Living in Miami, almost everyone and their mother has been talking about the recent visit the president took to Cuba as he met with the nation’s current head-of-state Raul Castro.

Local television news stations sent crews to Havana and were chronicling the events that transpired each day President Obama was there, live, as they had their anchors report from familiar locations in Havana.

NPR broadcast President Obama’s speech live on March 22. Even ESPN had reporters in Cuba to cover the exhibition baseball game between the Cuban national team and the Tampa Bay Rays.

I felt like I was being bombarded by news about Cuba and there was no way to escape it, but maybe that was just because I live in Miami a place that will directly feel the impact from the negotiations that were being conducted.

Although I felt as though the news media was spending too much time on Cuba, maybe it was just the right amount for the rest of the country.

CNN and other national news networks would leave a few minutes to report anything important that was happening, but they did not spend an exorbitant amount of time over analyzing every exchange between President Obama and Raul Castro, although I am sure the urge was there to do so, and I am content by that decision.

Miami local news had to go there and cover what was going on or else they would have been left behind and would have suffered had they not gone. Network news stations only covered parts that were essential and had proponents and opponents debate on the effect this visit will have on both nations.

After separating myself from the situation, I believe that the way the news media covered the visit was predictable, yet appropriate.

Obama visits Cuba, meets with Castro

Posted on by

By MELISSA CABRAL

President Barack Obama made history on Sunday when he became the first president to visit Cuba in 90 years. The president was joined by his wife Michelle Obama, her mother, and daughters, Sasha and Malia.

Screen Shot 2016-03-22 at 9.00.19 PM

President Obama and his family arrive in Havana on Sunday (Photo courtesy of The White House).

Upon their arrival, they were greeted with a warm welcome by Cuba’s top officials with one important figure visibly missing, President Raul Castro.

The Cuban leader met Obama the following day at the Palace of the Revolution in Old Havana and shook hands and sat down for a meeting where major topics were discussed.

Obama’s visit is part of his effort to let go of the past and build a new, positive relationship with Cuba after decades of hostility between the island and the U.S.

Obama announced that he wants to take on the hard task of coming to an agreement with the Castro administration to improve the human rights system through out the country.

“Change is going to happen here and I think that Raul Castro understands that,” Obama said in an interview with ABC News taped Sunday night.

“Our intention has been to get the ball rolling, knowing that change wasn’t going to happen overnight,” Obama said. “Although we still have significant differences around human rights and individual liberties inside of Cuba, we felt that coming now would maximize our ability to prompt more change.”

Before their sit-down, as they walked through, Obama was overheard telling Castro that he enjoyed his tour of Havana Sunday night along with his family.

He toured the Cathedral of the Virgin Mary of the Immaculate Conception and met with Cardinal Jaime Ortega, a major key to improving the relationship between the U.S. and Cuba. Outside of the cathedral, thousands of Cuban residents gathered hoping to catch a quick glimpse of the American president and his family as they stepped out of the church.

With the newly relaxed restrictions on who can travel to Cuba, thousands of more Americans are expected to follow the Obamas’ footsteps and fly to Cuba. This will hopefully not only build a new dynamic between Cubans and Americans but also improve their economy.

The Cuban public was thrilled to have the American president setting foot in their country. The last U.S. president to visit Cuba was Calvin Coolidge in 1928.

Journalist denounces Obama’s visit

Posted on by

By KATIE HOVAN

This week, President Obama made a monumental trip to Havana, Cuba, a sign that the diplomatic relation between the U.S. and Cuba is gradually stabilizing.

Obama is the first sitting president to visit Cuba in almost 90 years, according to The Miami Herald. Officials have also said Obama plans to be very candid with Cuban president Raúl Castro about his hopes for the future of the Cuban people.

In a further effort to improve relations, the Tampa Bay Rays also took the field alongside Cuban baseball players in an exhibition game on Tuesday. Cuban baseball players will now have the opportunity to continue their careers with the MLB.

Unfortunately, many Cubans and Cuban-Americans have anything but positive feelings toward the baseball exhibition and Obama’s historic visit, especially within the Miami and South Florida area.

In a beautifully penned open column in The Miami Herald, sportswriter Dan Le Batard, who is of Cuban descent and a UM School of Communication alum, shed some light on the background of the political situation that is unfolding.

“Obama and Jeter and ESPN head toward communism like it is another cruise port, so many symbols of Americana descending on a rotting island stuck in the 1950s, and it doesn’t feel quite right back in Miami, like watching a funeral morph into a party,” he writes. “The history of my own people feels like it is either being ignored or trampled here, and I’m not quite sure which of those feels worse,” Le Batard wrote.

Le Batard speaks on behalf of countless Cubans with his article as he explains just how strange it feels to watch the U.S. praise small actions that are doing so little to compensate for Cuban injustice.

“Fidel Castro outlived my grandparents. His regime continues to haunt my old-exile parents. My pain might be borrowed. But, damn, as that sting returns to my eyes, I can assure you that it is real,” he continued.

While President Obama’s visit to Cuba is an historic one, I must side with Le Batard in this battle of responsible reporting.

Prior to reading Le Batard’s article, I had not understood the extent of the political turmoil that uprooted so many Cuban citizens. He provides his family history and the challenges they themselves experienced in the face of communism, an unlikely opinion with slim chances of survival amidst the conventional news stories.

With this new progress in the U.S.-Cuba relation, it’s even more important for the mainstream media to educate people on the history of the situation and the major changes that still need to be made in Cuba before any justified celebrations can take place.

Bias, opinions of political news coverage

Posted on by

By BREANA ROSS

Most news viewers are aware that different news stations have different political views that affect the way they report news. MSNBC tends to lean more towards liberal and Democratic views while Fox tends to support conservative and Republican views.

The news from these stations is reported in such a way that reflects these views. For example, one MSNBC talk show host had no problem sharing her political opinion as she discussed her analysis of Donald Trump’s recent violent rallies.

After a series of clashes between protestors and supporters at Trump’s rallies, Rachel Maddow decided to break down the events on her MSNBC show. The way Maddow chose to discuss and present the information was an interesting approach. Her overarching point was that Donald Trump’s rhetoric during his rallies led to the recent outbursts in Chicago and elsewhere. Maddow takes many pieces of factual information and connects them together to support her opinion.

First off, Maddow points out that the last three stops on Trump’s campaign trail, Chicago, Cleveland, and St. Louis, all contain a great deal of racial tension. This tension stems from the recent police killings of unarmed black teens in these areas.

Maddow points out that many of the recent instances of violence at Trump’s rallies seem to be racially charged. She then begins showing clips from Donald Trump’s speeches at his rallies, where he calls for “a tougher America” where protesters should face consequences, possibly violent ones.

Trump also mentions that he would pay the legal bills for anyone who beats up a protester. Maddow uses factual traces of racial tension and clips of Donald Trump’s speeches to convince viewers of her opinion that Donald Trump’s rhetoric has led to the violence that has erupted between his supporters and his opponents.

Although Rachel Maddow is a talk show host and is allowed to insert her opinion in discussions about politics, her presentation of the information is an example of how news stations can present biased news. Connecting facts to form what is ultimately an opinion is dangerous when presenting news to viewers.

Jones and Solo join the conversation

Posted on by

By JEAN-PAUL AGUIRRE

You probably did not know this about me, but I am a pretty big film fan / nerd. It was recently reported that Disney would be teaming up with Academy Award-winning director Steven Spielberg to develop a brand new “Indiana Jones” movie.

The report also stated that the series’s iconic star, Harrison Ford, would be returning to reprise his role as the titular character.

The character originated from the same studio that brought the “Star Wars” saga to our galaxy, Lucasfilm, which was recently purchased by Walt Disney Studios.

Other news involving another one of Ford’s characters, Han Solo, has been surfacing as well. Disney has released information regarding the casting of Solo for its new film, which would involve a young Solo and his adventures with Chewbacca.

To my surprise, I discovered this information as I was watching CNN.

It was a delightful change of pace from all the coverage surrounding the ongoing presidential election and the results of the March 15 primaries.

Seeing this kind of news make it to the mainstream news stations brought a smile to my face because, normally, in order to come across this information, I would have to go online and search through different news sites, such as Deadline or Variety.

The only reason I think the coverage over this news is appropriate is because of how iconic and famous these movies are. Had CNN stopped coverage of the primary results for an “Alvin and the Chipmunks” movie, I would have thought it to be misplaced and jarring to CNN’s audience.

I also believe the amount of time spent on this news was appropriate.

It was meant as a small buffer from the onslaught of political news that we hear everyday; it was an opportunity to step back and cleanse our pallets.

Brazil begins impeachment of president

Posted on by

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.

Humans of NY founder criticizes Trump

Posted on by

By KATIE HOVAN

Brandon Stanton, a photojournalist and blogger, is the brain behind the increasingly popular blog and book “Humans of New York” (HONY), which chronicles stories of ordinary passersby in New York City.

Stanton will post daily photos of the people he meets on the street along with a direct quote or short story, giving people a glimpse into the lives of ordinary people.

His work isn’t limited to New York City, though.

Stanton also occasionally photographs and posts stories from people he meets on international excursions, including people in places like the Middle East.

On Monday, however, the HONY founder posted something a little different online.

In an open editorial to Donald Trump, Stanton stated: “I realize now that there is no correct time to oppose violence and prejudice. The time is always now.”

Stanton continued, “Because along with millions of Americans, I’ve come to realize that opposing you is no longer a political decision. It is a moral one.”

Screen Shot 2016-03-15 at 12.33.42 PMStanton also referenced some of Trump’s most appalling comments regarding race and refugees. Stanton, referring to himself as a journalist whom has “conducted extensive interviews” with people from around the world, added: “I can confirm — the hateful one is you.”

Screen Shot 2016-03-15 at 12.33.59 PMWhile some may argue the HONY founder isn’t your typical journalist, he still claims to adhere to journalism’s ethical code, stating in the editorial that he refrains from being too “political.”

In this case, as unusual as it may seem, I commend him for taking a moment from his work to be “political.”

This year’s presidential race seems to have turned uncharacteristically hostile, and it’s alarming to think that the future of our country has become a form of twisted entertainment.

But the so-called entertainment reaches a point where it isn’t funny anymore. The future of the United States shouldn’t be taken lightly.

In my honest opinion, Stanton deserves the utmost praise for his editorial. Without powerful, well-known voices to speak out on behalf of the violent and unethical situation that is unfolding, what will the United States become?

After all, it’s hypocritical to promote anti-bullying in schools if it’s happening on the federal level every day.

Trump denies offering to pay legal fees

Posted on by

By MELISSA CABRAL

Donald Trump backpedalled his promise to pay the legal fees of his supporters who are turning violent at his rallies when the subject was brought up on his interview with ABC’s “Good Morning America” on Tuesday.

“By paying those fees, wouldn’t you be rewarding and encouraging violence?” asked host George Stephanopoulous.

At one of his recent rallies in February, Trump controversially told his supporters who became violent towards protesters: “Knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. OK? Just knock the hell — I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise.”

After the “Good Morning America” host continued to press him on the matter, Trump denied ever saying those words.

“No, no I didn’t say that. I haven’t looked at it yet, and nobody’s asked me to pay for fees, and somebody asked me a question and I haven’t even seen it, so I never said I was going to pay for fees,” the Republican presidential candidate said.

As recently as this past Sunday, Trump was still promising to monetarily take care of his supporters when it came to legal fees regarding violence.

In his interview on “Meet the Press,” which aired Sunday, Trump said that he had his staff “look into” covering the legal fees of one supporter in particular who punched a protester at his rally held in North Carolina last Wednesday.

“I’ve actually instructed my people to look into it, yes,” Trump replied when asked about paying the fees.

Tuesday’s interview had Trump conveniently retracting and even denying his previous statements. When asked if telling his supporters that he would cover their legal fees if they became violent towards his protesters would be encouraging negative behavior he seemed to have a change of heart.

“Well maybe so, and maybe that’s why I wouldn’t do it. I don’t condone violence at all, and you know I looked and I watched and I’m going to make a decision.”

This statement comes after intense criticism of his campaign after several of his rallies became chaotic and violent last week.