Tim Cook fights back in ABC interview

Posted on February 25, 2016 by Melissa Cabral

By MELISSA CABRAL

Apple CEO Tim Cook said Wednesday he’s prepared to take the controversial FBI vs. Apple dispute to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In an exclusive interview with ABC News, Cook said that it would be “bad for America” if Apple were to accept the FBI’s request and court order of unlocking an encrypted iPhone previously owned by one of the San Bernardino shooters.

Officials have said that they only need Apple’s assistance in unlocking certain security features on the iPhone which would help release information regarding the murders. Cook fought back saying that if they complied with the request it would put Apple’s customers in danger of having their information exposed, as iPhones would become more susceptible to hacking.

“Some things are hard and some things are right, and some things are both. This is one of those things,” Cook said. “I think the safety of the public is incredibly important.”

Cook showed sympathy for the families of the victims of the shooting and said that Apple sent out some of their own engineers to provide technical support to further the case in any way they can without creating the “backdoor” software the FBI is requesting.

Cook added, “If we knew a way to do this that would not expose hundreds of millions of other people to issues, we would obviously do it. But this is not about one phone, this is about the future.”

Although a meeting is not confirmed, Cook said that if he had to, he would make his case directly to President Obama in order to avoid going through with the court’s request.

Hundreds of millions of iPhones would be at risk in the process of creating a software to unlock the San Bernardino shooter’s iPhone and Cook stated that he will go to great lengths to protect the privacy of the company’s customers.

FBI Director James Comey argued that Apple simply has to unlock only one phone but Cook disagreed.

“If a court can ask us to write this piece of software, think about what else they could ask us to write,” Cook said. “Maybe it’s an operating system for surveillance. Maybe it’s the ability for law enforcement to turn on the camera. I mean I don’t know where this stops.”

Apple has until Friday to respond to the judge’s order.

‘Devil’s drug’ needs media attention

Posted on February 25, 2016 by Grace Bernard

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.

Personal stories are newsworthy, also

Posted on February 25, 2016 by Etty Grossman

By ETTY GROSSMAN

In our days, there’s a common thought about the lack of humanity among the news. People believe that the news media are only interested in breaking news about prominent or public figures. However, if we do a deep search we can find many news sites focused on real life stories about ordinary people.

CNN is one in many news channels that opens the door to its public to express themselves and share their stories, which are very interesting and touching.

In the case of CNN, there are established categories from which the person can choose to write about: Overcoming anxiety, your “Aha” weight-loss moment, how you found happiness or your journey to body acceptance.

At a first glance, the topics might seem a little controversial, but the way in which they are addressed tend to seek for social justice. The stories selected do not promote anorexia, unhealthy methods to lose weight or physical beauty as an important value; instead they ask people to tell their stories to help others to overcome this type of problems that were probably caused by societal pressures.

The assignments not only values people it also encourages them to serve as inspirational models.

Weight gain and obesity trends often make headlines, but many people have found a way to lose weight and get fit by healthy methods and this are the type of stories they are looking for.

Personally, I believe these testimonies are very useful and should be valued. We live in a world where instead of sleeping an extra hour per day, women decide to spend three hours and 19 minutes each week in front of the mirror. I’m pretty sure that it is not to enhance their beauty, but because they don’t feel comfortable with themselves.

Instead of reading about Kim Kardashian’s new surgery, stories such as “how one woman learned to love herself” should hit the front page of every news channel because they really teach us how to recover from daily problems by natural, real and accessible methods.

The bathroom bill problem

Posted on February 19, 2016 by Robyn Shapiro

By ROBYN SHAPIRO

The Senate of South Dakota has recently voted to approve a “bathroom bill.” The bathroom bill states that students would have to use the bathroom based on their “chromosomes and autonomy” at birth, rather than what they identify with now. This bill not only attacks the LGBT community, but also completely discriminates against transgender students.

State representative Fred Deutsch, who was in favor of the bill, stated this is necessary in order to protect the “bodily privacy rights” of “biologic boys and girls” and that if transgender students were uncomfortable with this, they could use private accommodations. He refused to do a follow-up interview with Time magazine on this statement.

Time provided a first-hand example of how this law could effect transgender students when they interviewed Rebecca Dodds, the mother of a transgender boy who had recently graduated high school in South Dakota.

Her son stated that the idea of using the girl’s rest room was so uncomfortable for him, he would avoid using the bathroom the entire day. Because of this, he contracted multiple urine infections and had other health-related issues throughout his high school career.

The identity struggle for transgender students is a difficult enough issue that having a law to further isolate them from normalcy would only contribute to their existing insecurities. While conservative America considers the sensitivity of the standardized “norm”, liberal America considers the sensitivity of all.

I believe Time magazine did an excellent job providing a non-biased, yet informative, opinion on this current issue. They provided opinions from both the pro and con sides, while further examining how this law would affect transgender people and the LGBT community outside of the school system.

While much of our American population is socially conservation, our younger generations are growing be more and more liberal. The media needs to continue to report these issues with sensitivity and compassion as our society progresses into acceptance.

Grammys bring race issues onto stage

Posted on February 17, 2016 by Breana Ross

By BREANA ROSS

Under the dim lights of the stage, multiple black figures immersed from the darkness in a straight line. As the figures became closer to center stage, it became apparent that they were shackled, chained together. Even closer, it became visible that the figures were dressed as inmates. They continued to walk in unison, closer and closer to full visibility, until the leader of the line reached the microphone that waited in the center of the stage. The head of the line was award-winning rapper Kendrick Lamar and he was about to deliver a controversial, political performance on one of the largest music stages in the world: the Grammys.

Lamar, a popular African American rapper known for his songs about the struggles within the black community, delivered a powerful performance with many messages about racial injustice, African American heritage, and self-hatred intertwined. The performance began with Lamar and his background dancers in chains and dressed as prisoners while he rapped his song “The Blacker the Berry” which discusses oppression issues surrounding the Trayvon Martin case. Lamar rapped, “You hate me, don’t you? You hate my people. Your plan is to terminate my culture,” among other lyrics.

As the mood of the performance shifts, Lamar and his dancers drop their chains and begin to dance. Lamar then walks on to another set on stage with African dancers around a fire and begins to sing, “We gon’ be alright,” a lyric form another one of his popular songs. He ends the performance alone on stage, once again, rapping about racial injustice and oppression towards African Americans as an image of the continent of Africa with the word “Compton” written inside appears on a screen behind him.

Any time an artist, politician, or anyone for that matter, has the courage to speak on an issue of race on such a large stage, it is a hit or miss with the news media. Some times the individual receives enormous praise in the media while other times there is major backlash. In this case, Kendrick Lamar’s Performance was raved about within the media.

USA Today and the Los Angeles Times called Lamar’s performance “the only one that mattered.” CNN and many other popular entertainment news outlets covered his performance, all in a positive light. However, this positive reaction by the news media is drastically different from the reactions spurred by Beyonce’s Super Bowl performance.

Beyonce’s Super Bowl performance was also an attempt to bring light to the struggles of African Americans, but using a different approach. Beyonce’s back-up dancers all sported “Black Panther” attire as their outfits for the performance. Although a subtle message, this sent the media into a frenzy over Beyonce’s intentions. Some claimed the bold move was racist and anti-police.

Others connected the Black Panther reference to support for the Black Live Matter movement. Regardless, the media picks and chooses which racial messages to accept and which to reject. When one decides to discuss the “race issue” on a world stage, there is a risk attached, one that can impact the favorability of the artist in the eyes of the media.

The Pacific solution: Paradise or prison?

Posted on February 11, 2016 by Grace Bernard

By GRACE BERNARD

This week, thousands of Americans were given a very personal look into controversial Australian detention centers that have kept hundreds of refuges from gaining asylum.

Hailed by the Australian government as the “Pacific Solution,” the detention centers opened in 2001. Located in Naru and Manus Island in Papa New Guinea, they were created as a response to the increasing number of people seeking asylum in Australia by crossing international waters.

From the beginning, controversy has surrounded the extremely isolated centers. While it is difficult for those held there to speak out, reports of beatings by officers, rape and violence between refuges continue to surface.

The United Nations, Human Rights Watch, and Australian citizens have all condemned the Australian policy due to what can best be called the camp conditions.

According to BuzzFeed News, in 2014 a report from the Australian Senate committee gathered overwhelming accounts of the horrible conditions including dead flies in the food, overflowing toilets, abuse by guards, and detainees suffering heatstroke while waiting for food.

With the influx of refugees becoming a powerful international issue, it’s surprising that both the American news media and public have devoted such little attention to the Australian policy. Little recent information can be found about the detention centers, especially not from major U.S. news outlets.

This comes as both especially surprising and disappointing since, as of Feb. 6, the company operate the centers, Broadspectrum, extended its contract for another year. With another five-year lease, this does not come as a hopeful development to those against the policy.

As debates about what the solution is for handling immigrants and fears of terrorism rise internationally, the detention centers show no signs of closing soon. Hopefully, the American public will identify with the cause before the situation worsens.

Media, society and transgender people

Posted on November 29, 2015 by Katherine Moore

By KATHERINE MOORE

At a time when transgender issues have become more accepting, from Laverne Cox on Netflix’s “Orange is the New Black,” and Caitlin Jenner, the movie released on Nov. 27, “The Danish Girl,” is bound to get a lot of public attention.

Director Tom Hooper and Producer Anne Harrison tackle a subject matter that hasn’t fully been explored in mainstream movies. The film tells the true story of Einar, a painter who struggles with his identity in Copenhagen, 1926. Over time Einar transforms into his female alter ego, Lili Elbe, a woman who he and his wife dreamed up. Einar learns that he prefers to be in her body and struggles to find a doctor to have her cured.

Lili Elbe is one of the first-known trans women to undergo gender confirmation surgery. Viewers see her transformation and the consequences that come with it. The audience will get a grasp on the realities and politics of the early 20^th century, when transgender people were considered abnormal or to have a medical condition.

Eddie Redmayne, the main character, had much difficulty getting into Lili’s role, as he wasn’t initially aware of the struggles of transgender people. The Los Angeles Times stated that he said, “In 31 states, you can still be fired for being transgender. The violence to trans women of color is confounding.”

In 2012, 53 percent of LGBT homicide victims were transgender women. The majority were transgender women of color, according to GLAAD, an organization that promotes cultural change. As Redmayne learned more about his role with the help of the transgender community, he realized the importance for the issue to be on the big-screen.

Critics in the LGBTQ community have complained about the lack of courage in having Lili’s role go to an actor who identifies with the gender assigned at birth. The Hollywood Reporter also complained by saying that people would have preferred a more adventurous approach to the story, especially since the “transgender representation has taken over from gay rights as the next equality frontier.”

Although some might argue the movie is coming out a little too late, I believe that it is the perfect time since the recent legalization of gay marriage and Jenner’s high-profile gender transition. The film will bring people an understanding of what the transgender transition process is like.

While the movie may be one step forward for the public to gain insight, I also believe that there should be other methods that people can learn about the community. If it weren’t for taking University of Miami’s gender studies course, I would not understand LGBTQ because I would only know about it from what I see on social media. The media mostly displays the physical transformation that people go through, causing viewers to misunderstand what happens psychologically.

The New Yorker stated that in a survey by the National Center for Transgender Equality and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, 41 percent of transgender respondents said they had attempted suicide. It is facts like these that should be brought to the public spotlight so people can learn from places other than celebrities and movies about the difficulties of being transgender.

UCLA’s Williams Institute estimates there are 700,000 transgender people in the United States. Yet according to a GLAAD’s poll, only 8 percent of Americans say they personally know someone who is transgender. As movies and media presence of trans people is advancing, it is time that policies and acceptance towards them are, too.

Hoverboard grows in popularity

Posted on November 28, 2015 by Katherine Moore

By KATHERINE MOORE

Hoverboards, Rideables, Swagways, no matter the name, they are a new rising fame.

The hands-free, two-wheel model is No. 1 on Amazon’s Best Sellers list. Most boards can be bought online for a cost ranging from $400 to $1,800.

Celebrities like Justin Bieber, Kendall Jenner and Jamie Foxx promote the boards on their social media. It’s the latest must-have gadget and people are riding them in malls, to classes and even on public roads.

The futuristic transportation device is favored by the younger generation, but as parents and retirees begin to show interest, more and more property owners are banning them. Now they are also becoming illegal in certain areas of the world.

The state of New York does not consider them motor vehicles so they cannot be registered. They are illegal, according to the New York City Police Department and the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles. People riding them in public can receive a fine that is up to $500.

The New York Times stated that the police department at the University of California, Los Angeles does not allow Hoverboards on walkways and hallways because people have complained about collisions.

California will have a new law effective on Jan. 1 The electric-powered boards will only be allowed on bike lanes and pathways. The law requires riders to be at least 15 and wear the same protection that is mandatory when riding a bike.

Customs and patrol officers at Los Angeles International Airport handcuffed the American rapper, Wiz Khalifa when he was riding his Hoverboard. On Twitter, he claimed that he was handcuffed because he refused to get off his transporter when zooming around in the airport.

British authorities also declared the boards illegal to ride in public. Legislation considers them vehicles that cannot be driven on sidewalks and the road. The BBC says that they are banned under section 72 of the Highway Act 1835 for use on public pavements and roads in the UK. The only place they are legal is on private property with the owner’s consent.

With Black Friday and Cyber Monday just around the corner, Target is reducing the price of the Hoverboard by $100. However, as more places ban where they can be ridden, will consumers continue to purchase this Christmas list must have?

Governors refuse Syrian refugees

Posted on November 19, 2015 by Meredith Sloan

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.

‘Baby Hitler’ goes viral on social media

Posted on November 13, 2015 by Xiao Lyu

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.

Give us chance to make it right

Posted on November 13, 2015 by Brittany Chandani

By BRITTANY CHANDANI

Over the past few weeks, the longstanding built-up pressure for racial equality and justice at the University of Missouri came to an explosive point. Through protests, hunger strikes, and a boycott by the football team, students are unifying to end the hurtful racial slurs at their educational home. Their president and chancellor resigned. Students from campuses across the country are teaming up with them, posting messages with the hashtag: #ConcernedStudent1950.

The Washington Post sent Tim Tai, a photographer, on campus to photograph the students’ safe space event. However, Tai was sent away by the students and not allowed on site. The Post’s article about this offense to Tai’s journalistic right provides the story of a journalist who was unjustly shunned from Mizzou’s campus because of the past, where journalists have earned a reputation of unfairly covering racial issues.

This is completely understandable, as black students have been pushed to such a brink that they had to create a safe space and anyone who feels like an intruder probably should not be there. Also, some past coverage of race issues, such as that of Ferguson, were shown to have bias against blacks and the pain that they feel. Even though the media has a bad reputation for covering race and having a lack of empathy for black issues, the only way for there to be change is to give journalists a chance to make it right.

Denying Tai access is yet another setback in the issue of the First Amendment and free speech on campuses. The First Amendment is there for a reason, and is undeniably important. Students need to respect the law that allows Tai to cover this issue, and change their focus from punishing those who are uneducated in racial equality to one that will give these ignorant people the knowledge to realize how backwards their actions are is and how hurtful it can be.

While racial slurs and inequality of any kind should not be continued, anywhere, there has to be another way to tackle this. There will always be people who lack the knowledge to understand how detrimental racism is to society, but there will also always be people who have the knowledge to understand that racism is wrong and hurtful. Perhaps if there were more unbiased coverage of black issues and a greater understanding altogether of the well established pain that blacks feel, this issue with Tai would not have occurred.

FAU students support guns on campus

Posted on November 13, 2015 by Charlotte MacKinnon

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.

An arduous Korea-Japan summit

Posted on November 6, 2015 by Xiao Lyu

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 November 6, 2015 by Isabella Mesquita

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?