New report on antibiotics in meat

Posted on September 18, 2015 by Brittany Chandani

By BRITTANY CHANDANI

Fast food chains claim to be actively improving the quality of food through their suppliers. While some are actually progressing, many well known and loved restaurant chains scored low ratings in a new report on the use of antibiotics in meat and poultry supplies. Some of these chains are found on campus.

Friends of Earth’s new report on the largest 25 fast food chains’ use of antibiotics, called “Chain Reaction,” attributes grades based on a restaurant’s antibiotic use policies and its application to which types of meat, the implementation and transparency of these policies to the public, and the actual amount of meat produced without antibiotics.

The two chains that received A grades were Chipotle and Panera Bread. These restaurants serve a majority of their meat without regular antibiotic use and have been doing so for a while, hoping to establish a precedent for other restaurant chains.

Chick-fil-A received a grade of B, while Dunkin’ Donuts and McDonald’s received Cs.

Subway, Wendy’s, Burger King, Denny’s, Domino’s and Starbucks all received Fs, earning one out of 36 possible points established in the report.

Olive Garden, Papa John’s, Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, KFC, Applebee’s Sonic, Chili’s, Dairy Queen, and IHOP received F’s with no points at all, among other fast food restaurants.

The report brings the question to light: what have these low-scoring restaurants actually done to improve meat quality compared to their claims of progress?

Papa Johns’ slogan, “Better Ingredients, Better Pizza,” seems false since their low grade was released. However, the company claims to eliminate artificial ingredients and additives and offer antibiotic-free chicken on their pizza by the first half of 2016.

Dunkin’ Donuts has a policy to improve meat quality, but no timeline for implementation, while Panera and Chipotle publicly affirm their meat standards without antibiotics.

The public holds a strong voice, being the sole consumers of these products. Since all of those restaurants hold Twitter and Facebook accounts in order to connect more with its customers, consumers have power to end harmful additives in our foods and raise awareness for our collective health.

By posting messages which not only contact the company, but can be seen by other social media users, ending the use of antibiotics starts with a direct approach towards these restaurant chains. Journalists can also use social media to attain commentary from the restaurants for their articles.

Teen’s arrest reveals Islamaphobia

Posted on September 18, 2015 by Briana Scott

By BRIANA SCOTT

On the heels of the 14^th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, a 14-year-old Texas high school student, Ahmed Mohamed, was arrested for bringing a home-made clock to school. He was arrested by five police officers and interrogated for more than an hour. During the interrogation, Mohamed was not allowed to call his parents.

Police and officials state that Mohamed was pulled out of class and arrested because they believed his home-made clock was actually a bomb. However, as this story begins to gather more attention from the media and the public, doubts are surfacing in regards to the motives of the police and school officials.

Casting the most doubt for most people is the fact that if police and school officials truly believed that Mohamed had a bomb, why didn’t they evacuate the school? Why didn’t they call the bomb squad?

Mohamed’s parents immigrated from Sudan and are Muslims. Mohamed’s parents believe that their son was targeted due to his race and religion. And people on social media agree as well. After Mohmaed’s arrest, the hashtags #IStandWithAhmed and #EngineersForAhmed were retweeted and included in hundreds of thousands of posts and tweets.

Adding more flames to the fire, at a rally held by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, one of his supporters stated that the current president, Barack Obama, is Muslim. Instead of correcting or disputing the supporter’s claim, Trump only shook his head in agreement. The supporter then went on to perpetuate negative stereotypes against people practicing the religion stating that there are Muslim people building camps to kill us all.

Negative sentiments against those who practice Islam and are of Middle-Eastern or African descent cannot be traced to one source. However, for most Americans, Islamophobia (dislike of or prejudice against Islam or Muslims) stemmed from the 9/11 attacks in 2001. And the fear of Muslims is still being propagated and perpetuated among several news organizations. With the rise of ISIS, fear-mongering has increased on several news platforms, in particular Fox News.

As journalists, we have a responsibility to report what is going on in our world. However, I believe that several news organizations have crossed the line between objective reporting and fear-mongering. Inaccurate coverage of terrorism has lead people to fear all Muslims, which is a detriment to society. Mohamed is a bright young man who has the potential to contribute something great to our country. Yet instead of embracing his talents, we assumed that because he is Muslim, he must also be a terrorist because of what we have been programmed to believe.

Third-wave feminism and human rights

Posted on September 11, 2015 by Madeleine Trtan

By MADELEINE TRTAN

Feminism was implemented into my life the day I was born. My grandmother, an eccentric, liberal, go-getter, always assured me to feel empowered, feel important and feel unashamed to be a woman. My grandfather, a hometown hero, state title holding high school football coach, was the most pro-woman man I had ever met. He encouraged me to pursue a career in journalism and he backed my cousin to follow a political path, he always taught us to fight for what was right and never to fall short of “the man.” Although women were not accurately represented throughout history, they were the backbone of the world.

Third-wave feminism was the byproduct of second-wave feminism after negative backlash from the movement in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. Third-wave feminism is equality. It focuses on eradicating stereotypes and gender roles for both men and women, on the LGBTQ community in addition to women of all races. Intersectionality is a major concept of third-wave feminism, it opens doors to rights, support and empowerment to all women, not just white, cis-gender women.

A feminism that does not support intersectional equality is hypocritical; if there is a fight for equality it must be universal. Third-wave feminism challenges modern conflicts. It fights for equal job opportunities, equal pay for equal work, equal education and equal rights. It’s not a man-hating movement, it is quite the opposite. This feminism aims to eliminate the patriarchy which ultimately hurts self-actualization for men. It encourages men not to follow patriarchal values such as “men cannot cry,” “men have to provide for their family,” “men have to be strong and tough.” When these values are demolished, it gives women the opportunity not to feel inferior by the negative connotations of “throw like a girl.”
Feminism today is enormous, it’s growing rapidly.

As Gloria Steinem has said, “Feminism is the only movement that gets stronger with age.” As a society we are finally acknowledging that rape is real and that it is not ok. I didn’t find third-wave feminism until college, apparently I grew up believing these values were basic human rights. Third-wave feminism is much more complex and broad. If society would adopt some of these core values women and men would feel much safer and appreciated.

Camerawoman kicks fleeing refugees

Posted on September 11, 2015 by Briana Scott

By BRIANA SCOTT

As the refugee crisis in Europe continues to gain attention in the international and national news, a Hungarian camerawoman has also entered in the spotlight for her cruel actions captured on camera.

At a relocation camp in Roske, Hungary (near the Hungarian-Serbian border), hundreds of migrants, frustrated with conditions of the camp, pushed through police lines attempting to cross the border into Serbia.

As crowds of migrants began fleeing the police, a Hungarian camerawoman, identified as Petra Laszlo, began intentionally kicking and tripping people. The first video to emerge displayed Laszlo tripping a man as he ran while carrying his child. After being tripped, the man fell unto the ground and on top of his child. All the while, Laszlo recorded the entire thing.

Soon after the first, a second video emerged capturing Laszlo forcefully kick a young woman and other men as they fled from police.

U.S. news organizations picked up the story after videos and pictures of Laszlo’s behavior had been circulated through social media.

After reaching national and international news coverage, Laszlo’s employer, N1TV issued a statement denouncing Laszlo’s behavior as unacceptable and that her employment had been terminated.

Laszlo’s actions elicited anger and disappointment from social media users all around the world, which is completely understandable and expected.

After watching the videos and watching the coverage on the news, I was also outraged at her behavior. But now, the only thing I would like to know is why?

Why did Laszlo begin kicking and tripping people? In the first video, where Laszlo trips the man carrying his child, she makes sure to aim the camera directly on the man and his child as she trips them and as they fall to the ground.

This leads me to wonder if Laszlo did all of this just to create the “perfect shot.” Some reporters have been known to “stretch the truth” or flat-out lie to make a story seem more exciting or dangerous. The acts of sensationalizing stories and fear mongering the public are all too common in news today.

Although unfair, Laszlo’s actions reflected poorly on every professional in the journalism industry. From this point on, any video coverage of the migrant crisis in Europe will be viewed with a critical and eye from the public.

Images of refugees in Europe unsettling

Posted on September 10, 2015 by Samantha Cohen

By SAMANTHA COHEN

For the past week, news organizations around the world have been covering the ongoing Syrian refugee crisis in Europe, all of which are highlighting the differences among countries who either welcome these desperate migrants or those who don’t. More recent news stories have been covering the somber deaths and despair of these refugees. These stories have brought up the issue as to whether or not the U.S. should be doing more in its efforts during this European crisis.

What I found most interesting about this coverage is that, it lies parallel to the ongoing issues our country is debating at the present time during the 2016 political campaign. I’m talking about the controversial issue of the Mexico and U.S. border. News coverage has been all over this issue but we are seeing that the biggest migrant crisis is not happening in the U.S., but the European Union.

One story in particular drew attention to the migrant crisis in Europe not only for me but the entire country. Images of a 3-year-old refugee washed ashore lifeless. I found it inhumane to post these images for the world to see. While others had hoped that the images of the boy would be a turning point in the debate over how to help during this crisis.

This issue brings up the debate on what one will do in order to send a message. This crisis has spurred a variety of responses throughout its coverage. Many news organizations from The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal has been debating on whether or not to use the jarring images. Its editors opted to go for a less jarring image, but one that was powerful and brings enormity to the tragedy. This has been and issue for news publications since the beginning. How far can you go for a story without it being offensive, yet will create an impact and emotion? We will continue to see more images and news on this crisis. It will be interesting to see the different opinions on this issue in the coming weeks.

Women as stereotypes in media

Posted on April 10, 2015 by Hanya ALKhamis

By HANYA ALKHAMIS

After studying for my test in CEM 102, I was amazed after I was struck with reality of how media presents stereotypes such as those about women.

Women are seen to be fragile and sensitive human beings, who are easily hurt. Reading about stereotypes, the book stated that women who are single are presented in movies and in TV shows to being superior, sexy and in control of any situation. While on the other hand, women who are mothers are seen to be nurturing and caring.

Why?

Why make women into a stereotype? We are presented in many shapes and figures and we grow to the realization that we are actually what the media wants us to be. Why are the women who are in a relationship always miserable and always in doubt? Why are women presented to be fragile and sensitive?

Independent Women

The media have all the power to shape our beliefs and values. We are always surrounded by messages by how we are supposed to look like and act.

As a teenager, I am always self-conscious about my body and my outer image. Why? Well because the media around me influence the way I see myself as a woman. If you are not skinny and tall you are not worthy of being a woman.

You are not fully beautiful without makeup on. You are not fully dressed until you put on that bright red lipstick. Why do media try to change our image? Are we not good enough? Should we all be models?

We are all strong women regardless of our social and economic status. We are all worthy of attention. Whether you are single and ready to mingle or married with five children we should all be seen the same way: strong and sexy. We should not allow the media to shape an ideal image of how a woman is supposed to look like and act. We are all beautiful in our own way.

Implications of a reporting assignment

Posted on April 6, 2015 by Diya Vasudevan

By DIYA VASUDEVAN

A couple of weeks ago we received an in-depth assignment. Everyone in our class was given an address of a house and we were told to find out everything about the people who owned the house without contacting them or entering their property. This was my first time experiencing hands-on investigative work and it was thrilling and surprisingly easy.

Why do I say thrilling? Because, as I drove by the house while munching on my Publix sub, I felt like a CIA agent. Why do I say surprisingly easy? Because the ease at which I could find private information about strangers without any legal restrictions surprised me.

As a person who studied theory of knowledge, the implications of the task I had just completed dawned on me and reminded me of George Orwell’s famous 1984 quote “Big Brother is Watching You.” During my day of investgative work I had the opportunity to access all kinds of public records information, like someone’s criminal record, marriage certificate, birthday, legal involvement, the day they registered as a voter, who they were married to, if they were divorced and if they had kids.

Our information is everywhere and, as Orwell appropriately summarized, “If you want to keep a secret, you must also hide it from yourself.” With Facebook documenting our every move socially and LinkedIn documenting our every move in the workforce, there is not much we can hide from the public and, more importantly, the government.

As citizens of this country, we have the right to access all of this information, refusing to hand over certain information that we request is against the law. In regards to public records, even voter registration is a public record in the U.S. The only two areas that maintain restrictions is a person’s Social Security number and their driver’s license number.

Why should media cover Ultra?

Posted on March 30, 2015 by Shakira Molet

By SHAKIRA MOLET

Every year, Ultra Musical Festival invades downtown Miami during the month of March, bringing with it celebrity DJs, crazy parties at South Beach, neon costumes and, of course, electronic/dance music.

But why do news outlets bother covering this three-day musical festival at all? Well let’s look at what else Ultra brings with it other than a good time.

One major complaint residents always have when it comes to Ultra, besides the loud music, is the chaos of downtown traffic. Major streets are blocked off so that Bayfront Park can accommodate the 80,000+ people that attend Ultra, which causes in a drastic increase in traffic for the duration of the festival.

In addition to traffic, Ultra Music Festival also brings safety concerns. Last year, a security guard working at the festival was trampled and was immediately sent to urgent care after receiving severe injuries all over body, especially her head.

On top of that, many attendees find themselves in need of medical care every year during the festival, resulting in hundreds of fire rescue calls.

It is because of this that Miami-Dade and residents made efforts to prohibit Ultra from returning the following year; however, their efforts proved to be a waste of time when a public uproar convinced officials otherwise.

Like it or not, Ultra has been bringing millions of tourism dollars for years. Though it is true that hosting the music festival costs Miami quite a lot of money and festival organizers pay for much of it, it seems that Ultra, at least for now, will be returning every March as long as those in charge of the event continue to take safety measures and pay for various operating costs.

Though all these issues are indeed worthy of coverage, there is another surprising reason why the media covers Ultra as well as any other musical festival and that is because it gives the public an inside look of today’s youth. For obvious reasons, the media is obsessed with what interests today’s young adults and how this generation continues to change. In response to this, some news and media outlets decide that it is necessary to report what goes on.

Ultra Musical Festival has made Miami its home for 17 years now and with no definite end in sight, it looks like we will be seeing it, and the resulting coverage, for years to come.

Women in media: Where are you?

Posted on March 28, 2015 by Chelsey Sellars

By CHELSEY SELLARS

Don’t get me wrong, Anderson Cooper is one of my favorite players in the news game, but where are the female reporters?

In the studies conducted by the Women’s Media Center, there was a huge lack of representation of women in the United States media industry in 2014.

“The American media have exceedingly more distance to travel on the road to gender-blind parity,” said Julie Burton, president of Women’s Media Center.

The studies included all aspects of media: newspapers/magazines, TV/digital news, sports journalism, and entertainment/film to name a few.

Amongst all categories, men ruled the media. More specifically, white men were the largest represented demographic.

Gender representation in a newspaper newsroom, years 1999-2013

As an Hispanic, female reporter, what does that mean for me? I already have two strikes placed upon me; right off the bat, I’m at a disadvantage.

Gender disparity in journalism leads to a loss in content quality. For a media company to best serve its audience, it needs to appeal to the public with a variety of voices and topics.

An article on the winged-eyeliner or ailments to menstrual cramps just doesn’t seem as credible coming from a male than a female.

The way a news story comes together is also heavily affected by the gender of the reporter. For example, the University of Nevada at Las Vegas analyzed how many front page stories of The New York Times included female sources in January and February 2013. A whopping 19% of the sources came from females. Nothing shocking here; with such a high volume of men in the media, it only seems natural that they would gravitate towards a male source.

So, to put this in perspective, imagine a headline about a treatment for hair loss. If all the sources for this headline are male, how will this article appeal to women? This privation of women sources can lead to bias in the media; as if there wasn’t enough already.

Media get us closer to social causes

Posted on March 22, 2015 by Diya Vasudevan

By DIYA VASUDEVAN

I am a Feminist. It is not something that just happened, I think I was a Feminist for a long time and just didn’t have a word to express how I felt until very recently. In September 2014 Emma Watson gave her famous speech for the United Nations ‘He For She’ campaign.

HeforShe event sponsored by UN Women with Goodwill ambasador Emma Watson
New York, USA -20/09/2014/SIPA_SIPA837.01/Credit:UN Photo/SIPA/SIPA/1409230856 (Newscom TagID: sfphotos325055.jpg) [Photo via Newscom]

She defined Feminism as “The belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities. It is the theory of the political, economic and social equality of the sexes.”

She gave light to a very misunderstood word, opening it up to males and not just females, to her Feminism was equality for both sexes not just women.

Since then I have actively kept up with the facts, stories, events regarding a cause I feel so strongly about and there has been no shortage of ways in which to access this information. There are not only numerous organizations supporting this cause but also multiple ways in which you can recieve information whether it is through Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat etc.

I even had the opportunity to see Secretary Hillary Clinton and her daughter Chelsea Clinton speak on the issue of women’s rights on our campus for the Clinton Global Intiative University less than one month ago.

Chelsea Clinton introduced a newly created website that held all the data possible on issues pertaining to women’s rights. It covered statistics on the number of rape cases in the United States and countries across the world like India as well as the pay gap across the world between men and women. Aptly named No Ceilings the website has all the information you can get your hands on, whether you wish to talk about the data or act on it.

In addition to having all these platforms, Facebook collaborated with ‘He For She’ campaign and planned a live chat with Watson, that was held on March 8th ‘Women’s Day’. Comments posted and questions sent had a chance of being asked during the course of the conversation.

Not only is it becoming easier to access the information we require, it is becoming easier to engage with the information we are receiving, and that is exactly how media is changing the world.