Homeless hero gets his funds

Posted on September 7, 2018 by Noa Israel

By NOA ISRAEL

Many have been following the story of Johnny Bobbit Jr., a homeless ex-Marine that saved a stranded girl by giving her his last $20 for gas last October. Soon after the encounter, the girl, Kate McClure, started a GoFundMe Campaign— “Paying it Forward”— in order to raise money for Bobbit as a thank you gesture. The campaign went viral.

Within a few months, more than 10,000 people had donated to the campaign and raised more than $400,000 for Bobbit. It seemed as though the story had come to a happy end. However, as the money came funneling in, problems began to arise between McClure, her boyfriend, Mark D’Amico, and Bobbit.

“The money has been in dispute, and Bobbitt is suing the couple, accusing them of fraud. Bobbitt’s attorney says his client has only seen about $75,000 of that money and should have gotten about $300,000 more after GoFundMe’s fees,” CNN reported.

The couple refused to give Bobbit his campaign donations, claiming it was because of his drug addiction— feeling he would spend it all recklessly. Bobbitt and his lawyer disputed this and claimed the couple was using the money for their own necessities.

After a legal battle, the couple is now being ordered to hand over the money to Bobbit and a search warrant has been issued for their home to see what and how the money they received was handled. The mass amounts of news media attention on social media and the news surrounding Bobbit’s story contributed to his recovery of his deserved money quickly and smoothly.

Bobbit plans to use his new found fortune to find a place to live, pay rent and other necessities. He also plans to participate in a rehabilitation program in order to target his drug addiction problem.

California bans animal testing

Posted on September 7, 2018 by Anabella Zambrano

By ANABELLA ZAMBRANO

California is now first in line to pass the “Cruelty Free Cosmetics Act” which will make it illegal for any products tested on animals to be sold in the state. These products include make up brands, house cleaning detergents, medicine, air refreshers and even food.

Companies like Maybelline, NARS, Benefit Cosmetics and cleaning detergent TIDE are among the hundreds of companies who test on animals but will not make a direct statement admitting it. Even though they don’t test on animals within the U.S., they still are guilty of these practices because they still sell in mainland China.

By law, China requires animal testing for foreign cosmetics companies. Make up brand NARS was cruelty-free until last year, in 2017, when it decided to sell in China to expand its brand and raise sales.

These testing procedures range from injecting the product in a rabbit’s eye with no pain killers, beagle puppies forced to inhale toxic chemicals or rats eating certain products and study how they react. It is illegal for people to take pictures of these procedures or even document them. Lack of coverage or news reports have prevented this bill to be passed.

According to VegNews.com, The California Cruelty-Free Cosmetics Act (SB 1249) was unanimously passed with a vote of 80-0 in the state assembly. Sen. Cathleen Galliani sponsored the bill and it will officially become law on Jan. 1, 2020.

“I’m proud of California lawmakers for moving science, industry, and ethics forward today,” Galliani said.

The cruelty-free controversy would not even be happening if it wasn’t for social media. Through Instagram, Twitter and Facebook groups numerous animal activists and animal lovers are the one’s who brought this problem to the public eye.

Animal testing is something that is highly protected by powerful make up brands and they have tried to hide their animal practices to the consumer.

Kaepernick news causes more tension

Posted on September 7, 2018 by Andrew Frattaroli

By ANDREW FRATTAROLI

Nike recently announced that Colin Kaepernick, the former San Francisco 49ers’ quarterback, would be the face of its new advertising campaign. This has blown up on social media and caused withdrawn support for the company due to his decision to kneel during the national anthem at NFL games.

Out of all the national news media coverage it has received, I chose to look at the article that CNN published, titled, “Nike’s support for Colin Kaepernick protest has some destroying their shoes” written by James Masters and Gianluca Mezzofiore. As CNN is a liberal news media outlet, I wanted to see if they could look at this issue objectively, as this has become a liberal vs conservative debate. They tried (sort of), but ultimately failed.

CNN decided to choose three clips of men from Twitter who did not give their opinion on the matter, but rather just showed video clips of them burning their gear. One of the videos was a high school student who was laughing and playing the national anthem in the background. At no point in this story, did the reporters get someone who fully describes their point of view towards the company, and on the matter as a whole.

If they had done further research, they would have found that people are not solely upset that Nike is affiliating themselves with a former athlete, who many believe disrespected the flag and the military by kneeling. What a lot of people are upset about, is the slogan. The slogan says, “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything.”

It is referring to the fact that Kaepernick is no longer an NFL quarterback due to his decision to kneel during the anthem. However, Kaepernick has had multiple job offers in other professional areas since 2016, and many believe that he has not been signed to a team because of his poor quarterback performance. He is currently suing many NFL owners, accusing them of conspiring to keep him off a professional roster.

Additionally, Kaepernick is set to make millions with his Nike deal, possibly more than he would have made in the NFL, which causes people to question the legitimacy of the ad campaign and his willingness to “sacrifice everything.”

CNN could have made its point more efficiently if it chose its content to show the ideas on the other side of the debate, rather than three videos of people who are a terrible generalization of the people who are offended by this move by Nike. CNN kept the information at the surface level and added additional tensions between the general public by not trying to understand and present both sides of the argument.

The liberal side has a very good reason for supporting Kaepernick as he highlights racial injustice in America; an issue that there is no hiding from and needs to be worked on by all Americans. However, by pointing fingers, and showing a poor depiction of the opposing argument, they throw away any possibility of a meaningful conversation between both the left and the right.

Mass shooters seek media coverage

Posted on June 20, 2018 by Carolina Perez

By CAROLINA PEREZ

Today, an article published by Vox caught my eye. The headline was The Trenton, New Jersey, mass shooting isn’t getting much national attention. After reading the article, I asked myself, do mass shootings even need to be getting attention more attention than they already are?

Mass shootings, although tragic and heartbreaking, are seen as gold (in terms of content) for news media outlets. It is their gateway to all subjects controversial— gun control, mental health, and so forth. This is an outlet’s chance to use a national event to lure readers and viewers in-a chance to inform the public.

Yes- it is the news media’s role to cover all things newsworthy, but journalists don’t always understand the repercussions that come with this task.

Readers seek detail and that’s what journalists want to provide because, if not, then they’ll lack an audience. But sometimes, that depth can be seen as invasive and counter-productive.

When I say invasive, I speak for those whose parents are forced to mourn their lost child, or whose brother must suffer the loss of a sister.

But when I speak of counter-productivity, it is that very detailed reporting that enhances the recurring mass shootings our country faces.

In a way, the extensive coverage of mass shootings brings fame and recognition to the perpetrator. Presenting these shooters’ names in headlines, publishing their photos and sharing information about their personal lives is almost commemorating them for their actions. These people don’t deserve to be talked about but the coverage creates popularity by exposing them as a household name.

For this type of event, I believe news reports should keep the victims, their families and the perpetrators anonymous. It is important for the people of our country to know what is happening and where but anonymity could help others who want the same attention from following the same footsteps.

When you give that person (in this case the shooter) attention, you are feeding into their desperate need to be known and talked about.

An example I can think of is the uni-bomber (which I will not name) in the 1980s. After the FBI printed his manuscripts, which contained his thoughts and ideas, there were many who agreed with his views and created a fan base. With the Columbine shooting, many outcasts also praised the shooters and created a cult known as The Columbiners.

These people should not be recognized for the mere issue that attention leads to popularity, and popularity leads to a following. Unfortunately, the news media know the more they give, the more people will listen and read. Censorship of any kind is difficult for journalists especially when they are committed to reporting the full truth— but at what expense are they doing so?

The Rock latest celeb to talk depression

Posted on April 3, 2018 by Justin Sobelman

By JUSTIN SOBELMAN

Continuing a movement that has seen a huge amount of growth in the past few months, Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson became the latest prominent male figure to publicly share his experiences with depression.

Got tons of responses to this. Thank you. We all go thru the sludge/shit and depression never discriminates. Took me a long time to realize it but the key is to not be afraid to open up. Especially us dudes have a tendency to keep it in. You’re not alone

https://t.co/ADHjYtGe3k

— Dwayne Johnson (@TheRock) April 2, 2018

Johnson is one of the most famous celebrities in the world and one of the most beloved (and a University of Miami alum to boot). He’s also famously strong and muscular, playing the hardened, badass character in many of the movies in which he stars.

Some people may see this news and say, “Who cares? Boo hoo. A multimillionaire is crying on his yacht, am I supposed to feel bad?” This misses the point entirely. Mental health is not based on one’s bank account and despite what some may believe, celebrities have an enormous impact on the public, especially young people. Johnson is an activist, philanthropist, and general good guy, so there are worse options for kids to mimic.

What Johnson’s story does is continue the conversation, allowing mental health to be discussed openly and without shame, not something that gets bottled up and ignored. The fact that he is a man, and a non-white man at that, is even more important.

Generally, famous women are the ones who share their stories about battling mental health, and in movies and television its usually women who deal with these issues. Of course, that’s perfectly fine, but as Johnson says himself, men have more trouble discussing their emotions and mental states. The social norm is for men to not show their emotions, and women typically are much more emotionally healthy as a result. Johnson shows that you can be a tough guy and have emotions, they aren’t mutually exclusive.

You? You of all people had depression? Heh, well props for being able to keep it hidden away.

But, man, if The Rock of all people can have depression and still be The Rock, maybe I'm not doomed.

— Max Of Few Trades (@MaxOfFewTrades) April 2, 2018

DeMar DeRozan, the Toronto Raptors All-Star guard, really got the ball rolling when he opened up about his own ongoing battle with depression, and he expressed support for Johnson. If an NBA All-Star and a world-famous actor can thrive in their field even with depression, that helps others realize that you can still be successful while dealing with a mental health issue.

Many of the responses to Johnson were like the one displayed earlier, expressing surprise that Johnson dealt with depression and happiness that they weren’t alone. Many news outlets covered this story, which helps to spread Johnson’s message even further. Hopefully, guys like DeRozan and Johnson become the rule, not the exception, and help us move toward a future where we can talk about our problems and heal them, not just hide them and let them eat away from within.

Ice cream name offends religious groups

Posted on April 2, 2018 by Kate Johnson

By KATE JOHNSON

Canadian ice cream chain “Sweet Jesus” is being boycotted by Christians as it tries to expand across the United States. Some Christians claim the chain is blasphemous, uses the Lord’s name in vain and mocks the Christian faith.

A petition has been made on Change.org to urge the Toronto-based company’s founder Andrew Richmond to change the name of the ice cream chain. It has more than 7,600 signatures.

“We, as Christians, are deeply offended by the name of a new ice cream chain of stores calling themselves ‘Sweet Jesus.’ This is a mockery of taking the Lord’s name in vain and also highly offensive to Christians,” reads the petition.

The ice cream chain uses upside down crosses on the labels of the ice cream cups and various ads for the company use well-known Christian symbols and language.

“One ad on the company’s website shows a Nativity scene, but instead of Baby Jesus, there’s an ice cream cone,” reads the online petition. “Many of their ads are replete with cherished Christian and Catholic symbols that are used to mock faith, including a rosary, a crucifix with a corpus, and angels.”

One ad for the ice cream company reads: “Thou shalt not take the Lord’s name in vain, but God [expletive] that’s delicious.”

Two Sweet Jesus advertisements (Photo courtesy of vigilantcitizen.com).

The ice cream company has 19 locations in Canada. The company has a store at the Baltimore-Washington International Airport and is planning to open in other U.S. locations, such as the Mall of America in Minnesota, according to LifeSiteNews.

In covering the controversy, the Christian Post wrote an article condemning the ice cream chain and advocating for the cause of the petitioners. Their article included multiple quotes from various petitions calling for a name change.

“If anything could qualify as ‘hate speech,’ this is it! . . . Even if this were some innocent faux-pas, it would still be unacceptable! However, this is anything but a mere mistake. Both in their promotional materials and menu selection, it is plain to see that [owners] Richmond and Todai have every intention of mocking Christ and Christianity,” reads another petition on the Canadian site CitizenGo.

The Christian Post does not give equal coverage to both sides of the story. LifeSiteNews, another Christian news outlet, even launched its own petition condemning the company and demanding a name change. The end of the article includes contact information for the Sweet Jesus company founders.

“Faithful Christians follow the Second Commandment about not taking the name of God in vain. This means that God’s name should be used respectfully, as in prayer or in blessing. Anything else is misusing his name. Christians believe that Jesus is God and his name is holy. St. Paul in his letter to the Philippians put it this way: ‘At the name of Jesus, every knee shall bow,’” wrote Dorothy Cummings McLean and Pete Baklinski for LifeSiteNews.

“I wonder what might have happened had the company been named ‘Sweet Muhammad’ and employed the same kind of plays on Islamic religious symbols as it does on Christian ones. Mohammed Mud Pie anyone? It would never have been tolerated.”

Secular news outlets have given much more equal coverage of the story. The Toronto Star provided mainly facts in their article about who was opposing the ice cream chain and why.

“There are few things that feel more care-free than enjoying an ice cream cone, and Toronto-based chain Sweet Jesus servers up gigantic, Instagram-worthy soft serve cones – or blasphemy, depending on who you ask,” wrote Jenna Moon for the Toronto Star.

Along with several fiery quotes from petitioners against the company, the Toronto Star article also included the disclaimer issued on the Sweet Jesus’ company website.

“Our name was created from the popular phrase that people use as an expression of enjoyment, surprise or disbelief. Our aim is not to offer commentary on anyone’s religion or belief systems, our own organization is made up of amazing people that represent a wide range of cultural and religious beliefs.”

CBC News, another Canadian news organization, wrote a short Web article that included many of the main quotes from the online petitions that the other stories have used.

Like the Toronto Star, CBC gave a very factual and much more equal account of the controversy surrounding the company name and advertisements. CBC reached out to Richmond for a statement.

“We are conscious of the fact that, to some, our name can be off-putting,” Richmond told CBC. “That fact is something we struggle with, because we sincerely do not wish to give offense or show disrespect in any way toward anyone’s personal beliefs.”

“After a lot of thought, we have decided that we will not make a change. Sweet Jesus is an honest reflection of our experiences and that of our customers and how they react when they try our product. In our experience, the majority of people understand that we’re not trying to make a statement about religion.”

The Huffington Post article about the petitions against Sweet Jesus focused on the variety of reasons the company was facing backlash. They included quotations from many online petitioners, religious groups and YouTubers that spoke out against the company.

Sweet Jesus ad poster (Photo courtesy of LifeSiteNews).

“The first S in the word Jesus is a lightning strike, reminiscent of the Nazi style used by the SS, and the T in ‘SWEET’ is often shown as an inverted Cross on the company’s various products . . . We cannot remain silent while Our Lord is blasphemed,” wrote the Christian site Return To Order.

The Huffington Post also mentioned some non-religious reasons the company is facing condemnation and controversy.

“Others took issue with one of Sweet Jesus’ advertisements, because the child posing with ice cream running down her face looks similar to Jonbenét Ramsey, a child beauty pageant contestant who was murdered at age 6,” wrote Emma Paling for the Huffington Post.

Cosby begins retrial for sexual assault

Posted on April 2, 2018 by Abby Lloyd

By ABBY LLOYD

Bill Cosby, the comic legend and “America’s Dad,” begins his retrial on sexual assault charges today, Monday, April 2 in Norristown, Pa.

Cosby’s first trial ended with a mistrial on the charges of drugging and sexually assaulting Andrea Constand, former director of operations for Temple University women’s basketball team. After the mistrial on June 17, District Attorney Kevin Steele announced that he would, without a doubt, retry Cosby.

In the first trial, Judge Steve T. O’Neill only allowed one accuser to testify– Andrea Constand. This was just one of the many women who came forward. However, in the second trial, the judge will allow up to five previous accusers to testify. This will increase the likeliness that Cosby will be guilty.

According to The Washington Post, there is a legal term called “Doctrine of Chances” that basically says the more times someone is accused of the same type of crime under the same circumstances, the less likely they were innocently involved in those situations.

Jury selection begins today for the process of picking 12 jurors to partake in this trial. During the first trial, after more than 52 hours of jury discussion for more than six days, Judge O’Neill declared a mistrial.

More than 60 women confirmed they were drugged and molested by Cosby. According to CNN, Cosby admitted he bought the now banned sedative, Quaaludes, to give to women he wanted to have sex with. Almost a year ago, Cosby confirmed in court documents that, “I meet Ms. [name redacted] in Las Vegas, and she met me backstage. I give her Quaaludes. We then have sex.”

We will soon see what the verdict will be for the second trial.

This story is covered on almost every small and large news station, from CNN and The Washington Post to People and WGAL-TV.

Stephon Clark shooting sparks outrage

Posted on March 29, 2018 by Sophia Constantino

By SOPHIA CONSTANTINO

The March 18, 2018, police shooting of unarmed Stephon Clark has sparked outrage throughout Sacramento, Calif.

Earlier this month, a 22-year-old black man, Stephon Clark, was shot and killed by two Sacramento police officers in his grandmother’s lawn. The officers approached Clark regarding a call about breaking car windows. They proceeded to shoot him with no less than 20 bullets, killing him at the scene, according to The Washington Post. The police claim they thought Clark had a gun, only a cell phone was found at the scene. A video capturing the incident can be viewed on CNN.com.

The shooting has since sparked protest, demonstrations and calls for prosecution of the officers responsible. In a meeting on Tuesday set to discuss the incident, residents packed Sacramento City Hall. The meeting lasted 2.5 hours, as it was continually interrupted by chants and emotional demonstrations of outrage. In a CNN.com video, Clark’s brother, Stevante Clark, can be seen standing on the information desk and beginning a chant of “Stephon Clark,” during the meeting.

In a now viral demonstration, activist Berry Accius held up his cell phone in similar fashion to Clark, encouraging the council meeting attendees to do the same. He demanded of Mayor Darrell Steinberg, “Does this look like a gun?”

Body camera footage shows the officer’s yelling “gun,” in response to their allegedly thinking Clark held a gun, though footage shows that the officers failed to declare themselves as police before firing 10 lethal shots each at Clark. According to The Washington Post, more than five minutes passed before police called for medical attention, allowing Clark to die on the scene.

The California Department of Justice announced Tuesday that it will oversee a police investigation into the shooting, while Steinberg stated, “A 22-year-old man should not have died that way,” according to The Washington Post.

News media are still trying to piece together the details of the incident, releasing updated content as promptly as new details come to light. As the case progresses, news media attention shifts to the suspicious delay in calling for medical attention. On a national level, it brings the Black Lives Matter movement back to the media forefront.

Celebrities reveal mental health battles

Posted on March 7, 2018 by Justin Sobelman

By JUSTIN SOBELMAN

The term “mental health” has been a big buzzword in the last few weeks. Mainly it has been used in reference to the ongoing discussion of gun control as a major talking point for a population that shouldn’t have access to guns. At the same time, some of the rhetoric coming from people in power is scary.

President Trump has floated the idea of reopening mental health institutions and being able to place potential risks in them involuntarily. Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel, who has completed a rapid arc from sympathetic figure to total buffoon, stated in a CNN town hall two weeks ago that he believes that police should have the power to pluck people that they deem a mental health concern and put them somewhere to protect the rest of society.

Yes, their ideas and the similar thoughts that other prominent figures have issued, are noble in their intention, but the reality that changes like this would create is downright terrifying.

What makes a person a risk? Is it depression? Bipolar disorder? Panic disorder? What a lot of people don’t seem to understand is that diagnosis isn’t as simple as: “You are depressed.” Every single diagnosis (and there are dozens) has many different symptoms, and a person can have experience some of them that are potentially dangerous. Do you need to be diagnosed to be a threat to others’ safety?

So, do we take people away from their lives without their consent? Do we want to be a country that abducts people off the street and puts them in an institution, which by the way are generally ineffective in treating mental health disorders? I know I’m asking a lot of questions, and I certainly don’t have the answers to most of them, but these are things that must be discussed when people like our own president are suggesting plans this extreme.

In our culture and in many other cultures, it’s an unspoken rule not to talk about our problems, especially if you’re a man. However, in recent years, many celebrities have opened up about mental health disorders from which they have suffered. In the past week, two NBA All-Stars, DeMar DeRozan and Kevin Love, have written their own stories and participated in interviews in which they have discussed their battles with depression and dealing with a panic attack, respectively (https://www.thestar.com/sports/raptors/2018/02/25/raptors-derozan-hopes-honest-talk-on-depression-helps-others.html).

Both had the same core idea: they spent years not talking about their problems but decided to publicize them now because they know that almost everybody has gone through something. Maybe looking at someone who is rich, talented and successful and still deals with a form of mental illness could inspire a person who looks up to them to seek help of their own, and give them a person to point to and say, “I’m not alone.”

I love that they did this and I believe that the more people like DeRozan and Love who talk about mental health aid the fight against the negative stigma associated with it.

DeRozan’s story is especially powerful in my opinion. DeRozan is from Compton, Calif., an area notorious for being the epicenter of rap and gang violence in the 1980s and 1990s. For a black NBA star who hails from an area that would lead many to assume he is tough-as-nails and hardened to reveal that he is battling depression must be eye-opening for people, especially young black kids.

You just don’t see people like DeRozan talk about depression and I hope his bravery and inspire others to do the same. Opening the conversation will only help people get the help they need, and maybe we can treat people before they resort to violence.

Times compares nations’ gun rules

Posted on March 6, 2018 by Allie Simon

By ALLIE SIMON

The New York Times just published an article titled “How to Buy a Gun in 15 Countries” highlighting the different ways a person can buy a gun in 15 countries. The article by Audrey Carlsen and Sahil Chinoy passively emphasizes the lack of gun restrictions in place for Americans to buy guns.

The article is in a list format in which the steps for how to obtain a gun in each of the 15 countries mentioned are laid out in numerical order. Among the 15 different countries, the authors highlight the 13-step-process to get a gun in Japan.

The very first step is joining a hunting or shooting club, while the second to last step is allowing police to inspect a personal gun storage unit. Japan’s restrictions include obtaining doctors notes, permits, personal history and opinion of friends and family in order to reach the possibility of owning a gun. These elaborate rules have created one of the lowest gun violence rates in the world in Japan.

Carsen and Chinoy put the U.S. gun restrictions at the top of the article, presumably to show how easily obtainable a gun is in America. According to the article, “roughly a third of American gun owners buy guns without a background check, which federal law does not require when buying directly from a private seller.”

While Carsen and Chinoy do not offer any commentary in the article, the format in which the United States lack of gun restrictions is at the top speaks for itself in showing how much harder it is to obtain a gun in the majority of countries that proceed the U.S. in the list.

According to the article, only Yemen, one of the poorest Middle Eastern countries and a country that has been war-stricken since 2015, has slightly less gun restrictions than the U.S. The authors want readers to see the scary reality that the United States is not far from becoming a country controlled by violence and terror.

There is middle ground when it comes to gun restrictions. In America, we often are torn between wanting heavy restrictions in which it would be hard for almost anyone to obtain gun, to extremely lenient restrictions in which most people could obtain a gun. After mass shootings, much like the one that occurred less than a month ago in Parkland, Fla., the country polarizes and our government often enters into a gridlock when it comes to changing gun laws.

What this article stresses most, without even saying it, is that there are so many alternatives to creating suitable gun restrictions without making them too tight or too lose. In almost every country mentioned in the article, including India, Canada, Austria, and Australia, a person must have proper storage for the gun. While this small regulation seems simple, in America, many school shooters are kids who have easy access to a weapon.

The article does not say how American gun laws should change, but merely shows that in other countries with less gun violence, there are regulations in place that protect and save the lives of civilians.

Carlsen and Chinoy present this list as considerations for our law makers. The article can be read in the New York Times at https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/02/world/international-gun-laws.html.

UM probes sorority hazing allegations

Posted on March 5, 2018 by Kristian Del Rosario

By KRISTIAN DEL ROSARIO

The University of Miami’s Delta Gamma Beta Tau chapter was put on cease and desist last week due to hazing allegations. The president of the organization, Emily Gerstein, sent an email out on Feb. 27 to all members saying to cease all meetings, recruitment activities, social functions, educational programs, formals, community service/philanthropy, and involvement in intramurals.

The Miami Hurricane was the first news outlet to report it and the newspaper did not state the right facts. The story first said that videos of DG sisters were sent by Delta Phi Epsilon, a few days after this story appeared, officials from the group’s advisory board denied the allegations.

Abby Washer, Panhellenic president and a former sister of DG, made it clear to them that the cease and desist had nothing to do with videos because deans did not have videos in the first place. Washer also said the Greek community was informed only of “general allegations” against DG.

At first, The Miami Hurricane made assumptions regarding the allegations by not generalizing them, this was only changed due to Washer contacting them.

In the end, the truth is that the deans put the sorority under these guidelines in order to conduct a proper investigation on the matter. Since this was announced other news outlets such as The Miami Herald, Local 10 News, NBC Miami and others have reported on the issue.

Although, the news media have not done a great job reporting the matter because they have made it seem as if the chapter has been “shut down,” which is not the case. The cease and desist just temporarily prohibits the chapter from all activities.

There have been no new updates, but members of the sorority have been very disappointed with the way the matter has been reported due to the lack of facts and respect.

Father of 13 wins paternity rights

Posted on February 28, 2018 by Allie Simon

By ALLIE SIMON

In Bangkok, Thailand, Mitsutoki Shigeta, a Japanese man nicknamed the “baby factory,” has won the paternity rights to 13 of the babies he has fathered via Thai surrogate mothers.

In 2014, Shigeta revealed to have fathered 16 babies through surrogacy. He won the paternity rights of three of the children in a 2015 trial.

According to strong research by BBC News South East Asia correspondent Jonathan Head, an airport security photo from more than three years ago that showed Shigeta holding a baby as he was leaving Thailand, caused concern about his motives for leaving the country. Shigeta was investigated by Thai police for possible human trafficking, as he had already taken some of his children to Cambodia.

Further investigation by the Japanese government and a statement from Shigeta’s lawyer has since revealed that he is the son of a wealthy entrepreneur and is merely looking to expand his family.

Details about Shigeta’s life are very secretive and there is hardly any information about him that is public, besides for the fact that he owns several companies and has set up trust funds for his children. BBC shares that according to several “sources,” Shigeta has been moving around through Asia frequently and could have even fathered children in India and Ukraine.

Mitsutoki Shigeta, father of 16 surrogate babies.

BBC does not convince the audience that Shigeta should have won the paternity rights, but merely shines a light on the kind of questionable activity that Asian authorities are letting occur.

According to BBC, Shigeta’s Bangkok apartment was raided during a crackdown on commercial surrogacy and nine surrogate babies, nannies, and a pregnant surrogate mother were found. The Thai police seized Shigeta’s 13 children, leading to an investigation and Shigeta filing for sole custody.

According to Thailand’s Central Juvenile and Family Court, Shigeta earns the American equivalent of more than $3 million a year and has enough caretakers and resources to take care of his 16 children.

The reporting on this case is questionable, as is the decision to let Shigeta have sole custody of his 16 children. Despite this, the Thai government has found evidence that he should have paternal rights of the children, according to BBC.

FBI’s NCAA probe receives backlash

Posted on February 27, 2018 by Brennan Prusak

By BRENNAN PRUSAK

Yahoo Sports published documents on Friday containing information from the FBI’s probe into college basketball’s corruption and it could alter the future of the sport itself.

With big name programs like Duke, North Carolina, Kentucky, and others being listed for potential impermissible benefits and preferential treatment for players and families, college basketball is under a microscope with nowhere to hide. What’s interesting is that coverage has not been scrutinizing these teams for breaking the rules, but has instead been looking at the rules themselves and the NCAA.

The NCAA and its members are essentially a brand that makes money off of college kids, but doesn’t pay them. Meanwhile, these same kids aren’t allowed to make any money themselves off of their talents. While the NCAA and its members are making billions of dollars off of college basketball players, they are quick to turn around and deem them ineligible to play if they receive any benefits.

While the violations range from an agent buying Duke star Wendell Carter Jr dinner to Deandre Ayton receiving about $100,000 to play for Arizona, it doesn’t really matter whether a player receives a dollar or a million. College athletes can’t get paid for their talents and services, nor can they market them in any way.

While the FBI is punishing schools and players for breaking the rules set by the NCAA, it is interesting to see former and current players along with college and professional analysts side with the young athletes. A common theme is rising to the surface as more and more voices weigh in, and it’s becoming evident that the real villain in this story is the NCAA, and that it is almost laughable that the players see no return from the profit that they are responsible for.

“Don’t play in the NCAA tournament,” Jalen Rose, a former NBA player and current NBA Reporter, said. “Send a message young fellas … go for the money.”

Perhaps the best course of action is to go right after the NCAA where it hurts them the most; their pockets. If the players can’t make any money, than neither can the NCAA, who deem it fair that they should be able to keep every penny of the $10.8 billion that the TV deal for march madness will bring them during the next 14 years. But the players, who are the sole reason for the tournament’s popularity, will see none of it, and be deemed ineligible to play if they want to sell their own autographs.

ACLU sues to challenge Ohio law

Posted on February 26, 2018 by Katherine Ceravolo

By KATHERINE CERAVOLO

The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio and ACLU Foundation have stepped in on Ohio’s recent law. This law bans abortions if the fetal diagnosis is Down syndrome. This law came into place to put a stop against discrimination and pay more attention to the protection of people with disabilities. Pretty much, Ohio wants to ban abortion and can only move further by making ridiculous regulations.

ACLU said this law is “unconstitutional” and has nothing to do with discrimination. By March 22, this law will come into play.

Anti-abortion groups went so far into making their point that they called ACLU hypocrites and said the union wasn’t truly looking out for individual rights. Of course, it should be a black or white viewpoint: you either support abortion or don’t. However, us humans like to make things difficult.

These “Right to Life” supporters and anti-abortion groups use disabilities to fight for their rights. So now that the fetal diagnosis is Down syndrome, ACLU should fight for this law? It makes no sense.

Along with the Planned Parenthood funding issues continuing to rise, there seems to never be a middle ground when it comes to this topic. Why should ACLU be shamed and criticized when the union hasn’t changed their viewpoints at all? The point is simple: How can the fetal diagnosis change abortion regulations?

The point of abortion and national teen pregnancy programs is to assist women who are in a financial, emotional and physical disposition. Certain freedoms are given to women to ensure not only their safety but also the safety of what’s going on inside them. With the lack of sex education and health information worldwide, teens are not given the accessibility to learn about the seriousness of this issue.

Reproduction, birth control, safety and health care seem like another world to many teens, and it should be the influencers of our country to protect their innocence and inform them.

Laws like this are what stop progress in America. To take away the licenses of physicians to perform their duties on the basis of their patient is the unconstitutionality here. ACLU is only being seen as a union full of hypocrisy and violations against freedom. Pro-life groups need to speak up and show support for the issues arising in Ohio that interfere with the freedom of choice women have been given until now.

Vigil at UM honors Parkland victims

Posted on February 22, 2018 by Andrea Illan

By ANDREA ILLAN

After the shooting massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School (MSD) that took place on Feb. 14, the University of Miami organized a candle light vigil on Feb. 20 to honor the 17 victims.

This took place at the Rock Plaza at the Coral Gables campus and according to The Miami Hurricane, “hundreds” attended the event.

During the ceremony, UM students and faculty gathered to listen to different student speakers speak on the matter. Additionally, attendees were encouraged to write letters to the school and the families affected as well as sign a banner that will be sent to the High School on UM’s behalf.

The Miami Hurricane’s coverage of the event focuses on UM’s strong connection to the Parkland tragedy. Not only is MSD geographically close to Coral Gables, but many UM students attended the high school. Some of these students, who also lost family members last Wednesday, spoke out during the vigil.

The article highlights the words by sophomore Ally Rosenberg, who lost her cousin, Alex Schachter at the shooting. Rosenberg spoke to the attendees about the hardships this has created for her family, but also used her platform to advocate change in gun control laws.

The article also makes note of UM senior Matthew Labkovski, who also lost his cousin, Meadow Pollack. It also mentions the loss of UM’s own alumnus, Scott Beigel, who was a teacher at MSD.

Additionally, the article mentions that 128 MSD students have attended UM since 2006 and that the school has 27 currently pursuing their education.

By taking this focus, The Miami Hurricane not only reports on this vigil but also demonstrates the toll that this tragedy has taken on this campus. This coverage shows that events like the ones at MSD can happen to anyone in this country and further demonstrates the importance of policy change when it comes to firearms.

The article can be found here: http://www.themiamihurricane.com/2018/02/21/please-let-your-voice-be-heard-a-call-for-change-as-hundreds-gather-for-campus-vigil/