Child shootings occur daily in America

Posted on November 10, 2017 by Veronica Spagna

By VERONICA SPAGNA

We already must be concerned with protecting the children in America from attackers, drugs and numerous of the other constant dangers in the world. Just last week last Sunday, eight children were killed, a part of the biggest mass shooting in Texas history. But children should not be presented with danger just because of an adult’s irresponsibility.

Thursday afternoon, a 2-year-old toddler shot himself in the head and was found dead in a basement of a home in Philadelphia’s Olney neighborhood. The police recovered the handgun, but have still not shared the identity of the owner.

Just in 2016, 318 incidents occurred where someone under the age of 18 had access to a firearm. A total of 21 adults were shot by kids and 121 kids were killed by self-inflicted wounds or were shot by another kid.

As of this month, the data of children unintentionally pulling the trigger and shooting themselves, other children and other adults is shocking and just disgraceful. A total of 116 kids have already been killed this year by another child or by a self-inflicted wound.

A new study on gun violence with the objective to examine fatal and nonfatal firearm injuries among children aged infant to 17 in the United States was published in the Journal of Pediatrics. This study was conducted by statisticians at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the University of Texas. With results showing that 19 children are shot every single day in the United States.

This means that an average of 3.5 children is killed by guns each day.

A part of America believes that guns are needed for safety, although they seem to be a constant danger. If adults make the decision to possess firearms for their own safety, as they believe it is their right as written in the constitution, then they should also have the decency to be responsible with its power. It is not fair that children who can grow and live a life, are unable to because of their own curiosity and an adult’s carelessness.

Long-term efforts aren’t supported

Posted on November 10, 2017 by Nate Derrenbacher

By NATE DERRENBACHER

This week, storm-ravaged Puerto Rico faced another widespread power outage. A little more than a month ago, Puerto Rico was hit by Hurricane Maria – one of the most powerful storms to hit the island in modern history.

Following Maria, the entire island of Puerto Rico was without power, there was widespread flooding, extensive damage and a significant lack of resources for recovery. The 2017 hurricane season has been one of the most active with many large, named storms making landfall in the Caribbean and the United States.

And the response was initially unparalleled. Celebrities, public figures, politicians and everyone in between reached out to help those impacted by storms with an outpouring of monetary donations, volunteering on-site and organizing events around the country to gather supplies to donate to the impacted areas.

This response was possible because of continued coverage on major news outlets and social media. In times of disaster people come together, but sometimes that isn’t always the case for people who aren’t directly impacted. This year, this was not the case. Almost everyone showed their support for storm victims in any way that they could, but something else came to light as a result.

It seems that storm relief is not sustained long-term. In today’s business and social climate, it is understanding that news organizations can only cover a story for so long without any new information. But, social media and the internet are new tools for people to connect, engage and support other groups of people that they may not have had access to otherwise.

This can also be a powerful tool for the opposite impact. In order for countries like Puerto Rico to not only rebuild, but repair its infrastructure to reduce the number of power outages, citizens need help. While initially an overwhelming support, much of the world, and media, has moved on to other stories.

What’s next, America?

Posted on November 10, 2017 by Kayla Foster

By KAYLA FOSTER

It feels like we are in a constant cycle of tragedy. From mass shooting to sexual harassment scandals, it’s as if we have become numb to the cycle. Something bad happens, we mourn, have little discussion, then move on to the next sad thing. There’s little to no solution being discussed, as we feed off of the next thing that makes the news.

Earlier this week we mourned the lives of innocent people in Texas, in yet another mass shooting. Simultaneously, the list continues to grow, in Hollywood, of high profile men making sexual advances and misconduct in the workplace. So far names like Kevin Spacey, Ed Westwick, and recently Louis C.K, are making headlines as more and more are speaking up against the harassment.

As we hear about all the tragedies that are happening, maybe instead of asking what’s next, we ask what can we do next?

In an article by Vox.com, since more people are speaking out, acknowledgement of sexual harassment in the workplace has become more prominent and therefore easier to stop. People are become more comfortable and accepting of speaking out, especially if it means it might help the next person.

However, unless like the little progress made in workplace harassment, nothing has been done with gun control in America.

In an article by TIME, many have noticed the lack of action to prevent tragedies like Los Vegas and Texas. Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin told TIME, “It just strikes me that we see tragedy after tragedy and no action….”

It is the news media’s job to bring attention to and shift talking topics, but so far no one is talking about the cycle we constantly find ourselves in. Maybe we are too focused on reporting the next tragedy instead of doing something to prevent one from happening.

Air Force racist slur graffiti hoaxed

Posted on November 10, 2017 by Danny LaRose

By DANNY LAROSE

The news media and those on social media jumped all over a story from the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs of five black students reporting racial slurs posted outside their dormitory rooms.

Air Force Academy Superintendent Lt. Gen. Jay Silveria’s speech to cadets denouncing racism then received incredible enthusiasm and went viral. And yet, the circumstances that generated the passionate speech have been proven fabricated.

The Air Force Academy said on Tuesday that one of the cadets who was targeted by the racist remarks was in fact the perpetrator of the act.

While hoaxes of racist bigotry may be few and far between, they are certainly energized by the mainstream media who more often than not jumps all over stories like this one. When the media sees an opportunity like the one at the Air Force Academy, they latch on and ride it for days. They utilize the story to revamp attention on a supposedly racist America and divide people by their ideologies and cultural backgrounds.

The news media is obsessed with racial division.

Especially in this case, but certainly in other cases of hoaxed racism, the news media is complicit in failing to allow the truth to surface. If news media outlets had allowed a proper investigation of the situation by Air Force Academy administration before hyping up this story, the embarrassing turnaround here would only be on the perpetrator, not the news media as well. But they didn’t.

Like so many cases like this one, especially the rare hoaxes, news media hype and plain excitement to rile up this sense of American division and white vs. black is obvious.

It is unfortunate that people feel the need to post racist remarks directed at their own race in order to raise attention to a cause or simply garner pity. It is equally unfortunate when the news media encourages this and seeks to generate excess division.

Why have mass shootings increased?

Posted on November 9, 2017 by Anael Gavizon

By ANAEL GAVIZON

After the Texas shooting last week, many of us kept wondering what is going on in the country. Why are the shootings in the U.S. gradually becoming more deadly ? All we have seen in the news lately include shootings, injured and people killed.

During the week, I read two different articles that somehow tried to address the issue with a lot of facts, information and in an appealing way. Both, The New York Times and BBC News, wrote an article on their websites titled: Why are U.S. mass shootings getting more deadly? Why U.S. mass shootings?

It seemed really interesting to me as a reader not only for the timing of the subject but also because it is such a controversial, broad topic about which it is hard to write .

The article in the NYT explains how America is different to any other country when the issue involves a gun and gun policy. The article stated that one of the main reasons the mass killings in the U.S. have been constant is because of the gun regulations. Although the newspaper explains fairly enough how it reached that conclusion, statistics and facts are presented vaguely. In my opinion, the story and analysis is really good but the newspaper could have presented the data more effectively using more than two simple graphics. Moreover, the newspaper fails to include multiple sources and just uses information provided by Adam Lankford, a professor from the University of Alabama.

On the other hand, BBC News did a similar piece in which it explained how the frequency of mass shootings has increased during the years. The news network gives us a little background to each of the shootings in modern history and dismantles factors that have changed during time. For this article, BBC News engages the attention of the reader in any way possible. The BBC offers various facts and information through explanatory videos, graphs, videos of each event, etc. Readers can even keep listening to the videos while they see other pictures or read the article. The network offers a really good analysis and provided evidence and visuals that help the viewer imagine the full context.

Helpful Links:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html?rref=collection%2Fbyline%2Fmax-fisher&action=click&contentCollection=undefined&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=collection – What Explains U.S. Mass Shootings? International Comparisons Suggest an Answer- By Max Fisher and Josh Keller
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41890277 – Why are US mass shootings getting more deadly? By Tara McKelvey

Sex scandals, accusations continue

Posted on November 9, 2017 by Ben Ezzy

By BEN EZZY

It has been a month filled with accusations of sexual misconduct for many high-profile individuals in the entertainment industry, with multiple scandals emerging. Victims seemed to gain the confidence and will to speak out about the abuses they endured, following a New York Times piece that followed the misconduct of Harvey Weinstein. The article cataloged his trail of abuses and paying off victims for decades, with clear supporting evidence. Weinstein was later removed from his own company, following a public scandal in the wake of the devastating story.

Next came an accusation against Kevin Spacey, star of Netflix’s breakout original series, House of Cards. Actor Anthony Rapp accused Spacey of assaulting him 31 years ago, when Rapp was only 14 years of age. Spacey denied any recollection of the alleged event, releasing an apology for what he says, “would have been deeply inappropriate drunken behavior.” Spacey went on to publicly come out as gay, vowing to live “honestly and openly” and to examine his behavior.

Netflix suspended the star from his show, ultimately deciding to suspend production of the show indefinitely. Since the initial report, multiple men have also come forward against Spacey. Just yesterday, Heather Unruh, a former TV news anchor in Boston, accused Spacey of assaulting her son in 2016, when he was 18.

In the most recent of the scandals, five women are accusing Louis C.K. of various separate incidents of sexual misconduct during the past several years. All of the allegations revolve around the comedian masturbating without their consent, whether over the phone or in person. C.K. or his publicist have not yet commented publicly on the issue, and this story has yet to fully develop.

News media outlets have done a good job covering these delicate issues, being careful with language choices so as not to paint an inaccurate picture of the allegations. The New York Times, in particular, has done an outstanding job keeping information straight and making sure to remain unbiased in the handling of these complex situations.

Media help spread incitement of terror

Posted on November 3, 2017 by Nate Derrenbacher

By NATE DERRENBACHER

This week, another vehicular terror attack occurred in New York City, killing eight people. The suspect, identified as an Uzbekistan native, claimed allegiance to ISIS, the Islamic terrorist group that has lost some of its reign over the past few months.

Following any major attack in which people are intentionally killed, ISIS almost always claims responsibility, whether the attacker was really acting on behalf of ISIS or not. But the terror attack that occurred on Oct. 31 may have been different.

Law enforcement and investigators are claiming that they have found hundreds of pictures and material linked to ISIS on the suspect’s cellphone. This comes after ISIS released statements encouraging its supporters to carry out local attacks such as this one.

So, why are these types of attacks on the rise? Well, in short, the increased accessibility to ISIS and other terror inciting materials on the internet and mass media. People can now see and interact with terror inciting materials on a more regular basis and, as a result, can sometimes become desensitized to the to the scale of these horrific attacks.

The media have been covering this story with constant updates since ever since the initial reports of the attacks. Some news outlets continue to share images of the suspect, while others share pictures of the truck in which he carried out the attack and maps of where the attack happened.

This is not a story that is going away any time soon. Unfortunately, news outlets have had to continue to cover stories such as these, including a mass shooting in Las Vegas last month and the multiple vehicular attacks that have been carried out in London.

The accessibility to mass media has bridged the gap of reach for terrorist organizations, and as a result, the frequency of attacks has been on a steady rise.

Trump releases JFK documents

Posted on October 27, 2017 by Nate Derrenbacher

By NATE DERRENBACHER

After numerous tweets and pushback in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 26, President Donald Trump released approximately 2,800 records on the assassination of former President John F. Kennedy.

Today, people are in a unique position that allows them to care about this information more than some may have in the past. Because of the widespread use of the internet, almost everyone now has access to these documents. These documents can help solve some mysteries for Americans concerning the death of JFK, and students alike to help them learn more about the history and outcome of the assassination.

But, JFK was assassinated on Nov. 22, 1963, which raises the question: after nearly 54 years, why do we care to learn more? The answer can be quite simple – accessibility.

Until recently, people would only have access to the information that was provided to them on traditional TV news, radio, magazines and newspapers. As a result, people could only follow a story as long as a predominant news outlet was continuing to cover the story. Today, however, that is no longer the case.

People have more access to information as a result of the mass use of the internet and data sharing.

President Trump has remained as unconventional as promised during his 2016 campaign trail. And while this case is no exception, it marks a new shift in data sharing that hasn’t been seen before.

Throughout modern history, the JFK assassination documents were held confidential within the federal government for a variety of reasons, most notably, for national security. As a result, none of these classified documents were either shared, nor discussed with the general public.

Trump broke this boundary, but he did something more – he allowed the news media to open a new dialogue and new platform for research. Because of the internet, people can not only engage and view these documents, but they can simultaneously conduct outside research from the comfort of their own laptop computers.

The release of these documents came as a surprise to many, but it showed how, as an online culture, people have shifted, and allowed themselves to be interested in topics that aren’t just breaking news stories or stories which only directly impact them.

In today’s news reporting, most people view these stories online. Through this new medium of sharing content, news organizations are able to include different types of news media such as videos, interactive photos and hyperlinks to outside sources – none of which are able to be included in traditional print publications.

When reading the news about the JFK documents, readers are able to click on a link leading them directly to the documents. This is something that, even 10 years ago, was not widely available or used.

Halloween decorations draw police

Posted on October 27, 2017 by Veronica Spagna

By VERONICA SPAGNA

Halloween is coming soon, meaning that American homes are decorated with pumpkins, ghosts and other original decorations, ready for trick-or-treaters to come on the night of Oct. 31.

This year, just as every year, some homes seemed to have crossed the line using controversial decorations that terrified and profoundly offended viewers. Making us question when do we know when we cross a line? How objective is this issue?

This year, in New Jersey, Kevin and Krysten Negrotto displayed in their front yard a white Toyota all covered in blood. The car was pinning a body against a tree, surrounded with police tape showing a bloody crime scene.

The neighbors of this couple find the display so disturbing that they think it should be considered a crime. The cops showed up at the Negrotto house, with complaints received about the set up from the neighbors who requested its removal.

Kyrsten Negrotto, 27, posted on Facebook saying the officers “LOVED” the display and encouraged them to add more to it. Kyrsten wrote “It’s a free country! … stop wasting these officers’ time on stupid complaints over our HALLOWEEN decor when they could be out saving real lives! It’s all about zombies. It’s about HALLOWEEN.”

The couple has a 5-year-old son, and claimed that it is just for fun and they didn’t mean any harm. Kyrsten Negrotto told a news source “We don’t mean to offend anyone. We do it for the love of Halloween. We just want kids to enjoy like we did as kids.”

Just as the Negrotto family, numerous other homes around the country received criticism, where the police had to intervene by receiving complaints on neighbors for having insulting displays. Many “offensive” decorations went viral and shared on social media. Numerous decorations targeted by angry viewers were not just the ones considered gory, but also displays considered racially and culturally insulting.

In Parishville, N.Y., Michelle Cross displayed a figure forming a circle made from white bedsheets, surrounding a dark-face gorilla hung with a rope around his neck. A passenger took a photo of Cross’s yard and posted it on social media. By the next day, the photo was shared numerous times and had many comments. The comments suggested that the arrangement had racial connotations, as the circle of ghosts was perceived to represent the gathering of the Ku Klux Klan.

Michelle Cross took the gorilla down and just left the ghosts, out of respect to her community. Cross said, “I took it down because a few people in the neighborhood thought it was offensive for some reason,” and added, just like Kyrsten Negrotto “It is simply Halloween.”

The news media covered the stories on Halloween displays well, by including social media comments on the opinion of viewers and the displayers of the decor. One important area the reporters did not cover in the articles is the opinion of political public figures on the issue, which should also be present to address people on their freedom of expression.

The issue of offensive Halloween decorations is a very controversial topic. Displays, such as Michelle Cross’s, are open to interpretation and the fact that some people viewed it as a racial overturn is demonstrating their own subjective truth and negative view of the world. I do feel like people have the right to display whatever they think is appropriate for Halloween. If the neighbors or passersby have an issue with the display, then they can simply not look at it instead of calling the police.

Sexual harassment no longer tolerated

Posted on October 25, 2017 by Vivianna Onorato

By VIVIANNA ONORATO

At the start of October, there was one man whom was in the news for his lewd acts towards women. Harvey Weinstein, a man that used his position of power in the movie business to pressure women towards providing him sexual favors, saw his throne collapse when so many people, both men and women, came out and simultaneously accused him of his acts.

Since then, there has been something of a domino effect, with women from all walks of life coming out to accuse him. This led to his company removing him from his position of power. Now, however, there’s someone else who’s suffering from the same situation: Terry Richardson.

A photographer known for his sexual, sometimes near-pornographic shoots, Richardson has been accused of abuse during his shoots, often using his position to solicit sexual acts from his models. In fact, he himself has appeared nude alongside his subjects, perhaps as a further show of his position of power, with many of these stories publicly known since 2001. While Richardson has insisted that many of these acts have all been consensual in nature, the fact is that he is a man in a position of power over these women and is abusing the trust that they have toward him in order to receive a benefit that was not agreed upon in their contracts.

It’s worth noting that while these accusations were an open secret in the industry, it’s only recently that Richardson has been fired from his position. As a result, we can see that there has been significant effort towards removing abusive men from positions of power, and returning power towards women. More importantly, it’s a return to form for the industry, an implicit threat that establishes that women will no longer put up with sexual harassment, regardless of who carries it out.

Vegan documentary released on Netflix

Posted on October 25, 2017 by Vivianna Onorato

By VIVIANNA ONORATO

The recently released pro-vegan Netflix documentary, “What the Health,” has come to the attention of many health experts. The film, co-directed by Kip Andersen and Keegan Kuhn, has been criticized by some health professionals for exaggerating data, as well as misrepresenting science to promote a diet that avoids all animal foods, rather than one that strikes a balance between the various kinds of foods.

Throughout the video, the directors talk about the presence of processed foods in our diets, as well as the prevalence of chemicals that are used in their creation. Preservatives, flavor enhancers, and other items are often pumped into these foods with little to no regard for safety.

This is all in spite of the negative effect that it has in the human body, which often leads to unhealthy foods becoming a natural part of our diets. The documentary itself frequently offers facts and research studies to support their research, including papers that determine that diabetes and heart disease is the No. 1 cause of death in the U.S., all of which is directly tied into our diets.

As expected, the film is skewed towards a low-fat vegan diet. In the opening, Kip Anderson, a film producer by trade, describes his qualifications as a “recovering hypochondriac.” The film advocates for a vegan diet and an expert on the panel states there is no room for “moderation.” The word “terrifying” is used when describing food, as though to foster action against the meat industry. The documentary itself also frequently uses scare-tactic approaches to push its agenda of persuading viewers to a low-fat vegan diet, rather than arguing about the balance of foods, in addition to justifying the body’s need for meat.

Anderson tries many times to contact many representatives of nutrition associations and it was seen that many of them were unable to answer questions via phone. He repeatedly calls or shows up personally to major organizations, such as the American Diabetes Association and American Cancer Society, asking why certain foods are recommended on their websites. However, many of them declined to show their information; in fact, Dr. Robert Ratner of the American Diabetes Association refused to discuss the role of diet and diabetes citing that there are too many different types of diets possible to recommend one specific diet.

What the documentary is good at doing is showing how the diets affect a person’s well-being and health. A lot of food affects our well-being, including our health and aesthetics. However, the documentary does not go deep enough into advocating the differences in bodies and diets and, instead, chooses to lean into a one-size-fits-all approach to dieting.

The day that media took Weinstein down

Posted on October 20, 2017 by Regina Sánchez Jiménez

By REGINA SÁNCHEZ JIMÉNEZ

The news story that has most shocked in Hollywood lately has been coveeage of Harvey Weinstein’s harassment.

It was The New York Times that published an article with statements and letters of women that have been harassed by Weinstein on Oct. 5. Journalists Megan Twohey and Jodi Kantor authored the story.

After that, a succession of publications reporting the same crime appeared. For example, Ronan Farrow published in The New Yorker an investigation of 13 sexual harassment instances and three rapes by Harvey Weinstein. The New York Times issued another report with the statement of celebrities, as Angelina Jolie and Gwyneth Paltrow claimed have been harassed as well.

The question that I wondered was: How had something that has been happening for so long not gone public before? Why does everybody want to speak now?

The answer was easy. As articles about more harassment cases were showing up, also other journalists reported that they tried to publish that information before but they were blocked. In some cases, professional colleagues as Matt Damon and Ben Affleck, were involved.

You want to play let's play #ROSEARMY pic.twitter.com/uqd26Z78gc

— rose mcgowan (@rosemcgowan) October 10, 2017

Thanks to an article, actresses are denouncing Harvey Weinstein, Los Angeles police are investigating Weinstein and the truth has come to light.

#LAPD Robbery Homicide Div has interviewed a potential sexual assault victim involving Harvey Weinstein in 2013. Investigation ongoing

— LAPD HQ (@LAPDHQ) October 19, 2017

Again, we can see the important role that news media play in the world. A newspaper, in this case, The New York Times, could uncover a crime and encourage victims to report it. If it hadn’t happened, as the other articles that were censored, a criminal would be still unpunished, victims muted, the world would ignore the truth, and there could be no justice.

So, that’s why news media have to be independent of external pressures. Because this is the way that they can do their work and function as a “watchdog” in society.

UF hosts Richard Spencer appearance

Posted on October 20, 2017 by Nate Derrenbacher

By NATE DERRENBACHER

On Oct. 19, the University of Florida Gainesville campus hosted self-proclaimed alt-right white nationalist, Richard Spencer – the first college appearance for Spencer since the violent events that unfolded in Charlottesville, Va., in August.

This comes after the university originally tried to block Spencer from speaking on its campus but the decision was later appealed because UF is a public institution. Therefore, the university could not prevent someone from speaking because of his or her specific topic or beliefs.

The decision, however, was not met without great controversy. In the days leading to the event, Florida Gov. Rick Scott declared a State of Emergency for the county where UF’s main campus is located. Law enforcement officials from across the state have been on high-alert since Monday, Oct. 16 and Scott said he was also going to have the National Guard on standby for the event.

Once Spencer arrived on campus, there was almost immediate protest among the UF community, with many students showing their opposition to the infamous speaker. During his speech, many students stood and began shouting “black lives matter,” and “go home Spencer.”

This story received a lot of news media attention throughout the day, but some of the best coverage came from students who were right in the middle of the protests. Students began sharing short videos and photos on social media and news outlets such as CNN began sharing similar content.

For many college students, Twitter is a great tool for news coverage and this situation was no exception. Social media give people the opportunity to connect with other like-minded people, along with getting more diverse information in a timely matter.

But social media are not the only platform that was able to cover this story with a relatable point-of-view. In today’s social environment, people are quick to share their opinions, even in the news media.

Thankfully, this has paved the way for more “relatable” platforms and reporting for many. During the coverage of Spencer’s speech, the conversation in the news and online began to discuss the larger issues at hand than just Spencer’s speech, and the groups he represents.

Modern news media coverage has lead to a new dialogue for reporting and has allowed many to feel a personal connection to any given story – starting the conversation and sometimes leading to new inspirations for change.

Opioid deaths continue to rise

Posted on October 20, 2017 by Izabella Felpeto

By IZABELLA FELPETO

Opioids, which are among the deadliest drugs in American history, continue to concern public health officials, as the number of drug-related American deaths rise.

An opioid is a drug derived from opium, which is a narcotic that has served as a base to produce other drugs with similar “pain reducing” effects like heroine and morphine.

Approximately two million Americans have a problem with opioids. Although it is a necessary medical advancement because of its continual aid for chronic pain and cancer patients; it is also a highly addictive drug that has increased the amount of deaths in the past years.

The problem began in the 1980s, when scholarly articles, which were popular among doctors, began easing the fear of prescribing opioids for chronic pain. Its effectiveness among patients began an uprising demand for pain killers. By the 1990s the pharmaceutical companies caught on. Shortly after, they began marketing drugs of this type and helped the industry for pharmaceutical narcotics grow.

Among the contributors to these fatalities is Fentanyl, a synthetic, cheaper, and more potent version of the narcotic, that has become more popular among drug users in the recent years.

According to the Office of the Special Narcotics Prosecutor for the City of New York, “Heroin has become much cheaper in recent years as the supply in the United States has grown.”

Residents are becoming concerned about the high number of overdoses, especially in places with a more common vulnerability to drugs, like The Bronx, in New York City.

“Especially in the South Bronx, you have so many people in housing who overdose, says The Bronx native Terrell Jones.

This is not only a social issue in The Bronx, but also among areas where drugs are easily accessible. People are overdosing by the numbers and it seems to see no end.

Digital changes news consumption

Posted on October 19, 2017 by Anael Gavizon

By ANAEL GAVIZON

This week, we are discussing in class how to create news stories that make use of media. Learning this skills is a new way to use technology tools to the journalist’s advantage incorporating more and new information to our online pieces. It is not only a way to make what we are writing about more visual, but it is also what catches “the eyeballs” of our consumers nowadays.

Digital content is the journalist’s last spicy touch to each of his stories, what makes the whole recipe complete. It is the pictures, videos and social media that sometimes make the articles are more appealing for people, especially younger generations.

The Internet and ,more recently, social media have been shaping the news landscape in many ways. People currently consume news and receive information in strikingly different ways than previous generations. The paths to a discovery of information are more nuanced and varied, one click away in a variety of devices.

News stories are woven into ways readers are connected to the world generally, mixing it with social connection, social action, and entertainment. Social media have also evolved a lot, now it’s about a lot of sharing articles, sharing of videos, sharing campaigns, and so forth. These companies are exposing users to more news than they initially would search for, making this mix of random and intentional learning greater.

Despite the fact that there is a lot of controversy and opinions on which news consumption method is the best and why I think one of the strongest points of getting your news from social media is the immediateness.

I spent last summer in Venezuela, where most of the news media outlets are owned by the government or they are banned. CNN in Spanish vanished from the channel list among many other channels that informed and reported the truth of the situation in the country. The only way people could get another point of view was through YouTube and more information about protests and attacks through Twitter. It is a really extreme example because Venezuelans are living in a dictatorship. However, is a different example of how a population can use social media for news consumption.

Free college tuition okayed in California

Posted on October 18, 2017 by Veronica Spagna

By VERONICA SPAGNA

Last Friday, California became the latest state to help students reduce their college costs. Gov. Jerry Brown signed the bill that will allow students in public colleges to have free tuition for their first year of college, creating the “California College Promise.” This bill is different and more forward then the other few free college plans in the United States.

California already had one of the most affordable tuitions in public colleges in the nation. Since 1986, low-income students had to pay a $5 fee per credit and other residents $46 per credit. The new bill is expanded to all students, not just the ones with low income, allowing all residents to have a free first year of classes. But it does offer money to students with who cannot afford to pay for additional expenses.

There are 114 community colleges in California. This is supposed to encourage enrollment and higher education. This will make the idea of college not just an option to many people.

Other additions that make this bill so forward-thinking is the fact that the plan is not just applicable for students who finished high school, every resident of any age is eligible.

What also makes it unlike other plans in other states, is the fact that you do not need to be a full- time student, which means you do not have to pursue a degree and you can apply for just one class if you want.

The plan requires the students to be residents and they must be in their first year of college. No matter how old you are, if it’s your first time on campus you are eligible for a free year.

The number of students that will be eligible for the waiver is estimated to be 19,000 per year, which means that it will cost the state around $31 million per year. Of course, if more people will enroll in the plan it will cost taxpayers more.

The plan includes the payment for classes, but for many, it will not include other college fees, such as health insurance, Internet, books, place of residence and more. College books can be very expensive but making the cost of classes free will help students pursue their careers.

Different articles reported different dates concerning the time in which the plan will come into effect. Some reported fall 2018, but others admitted in lacking the certainty of when the bill will come into effect, as at the current moment, the state funding is still lacking.

The “California College Promise” is a very appealing plan and it encourages many futures but it will simultaneously require a decent amount of tax money to come into effect. Reports and news articles fail to talk about what taxpayers think about this bill.

The response of residents to the plan should be reported, especially because, in recent months there has been damage in the state caused by wildfires. These fires have not been extinguished yet and continue to damage areas. Forty thousand people were evacuated and 5,700 buildings were destroyed, including homes and businesses. This natural tragedy is bound to have an impact on California’s state funding. Reports should take into consideration the recent events and their impact on residents and taxes and the effect on the progress of the bill, if any.

‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ banned … again

Posted on October 18, 2017 by Andres Arenas Grayeb

By ANDRES ARENAS GRAYEB

The Biloxi School District of Mississippi has chosen to remove the controversial “To Kill a Mockingbird” novel from the eighth grade curriculum. The move was done after the county received complaints about the book’s language being uncomfortable and inappropriate for a classroom setting.

In response, several acclaimed writers and literature enthusiasts took to Twitter to express their disdain. They upheld that the book’s primary purpose was to make the reader uncomfortable: only then would the book’s setting and culture (1930s in the deep south of the United States) be significant and impactful. Quotes supporting this idea include:

“If to Kill a Mockingbird makes you uncomfortable you may want to contemplate your life & search your soul.” (@marybschneider)

“If To Kill a Mockingbird makes you uncomfortable, you are the target audience” (@WIBC_StanLehr)

“If we are going to solve the racial problems we have in our county now, we have to confront the truth of how we got to where we are.” (Barbara Shoup, novelist)

USA Today did well to cover both the event and the outcry over it on Twitter. Its coverage provided details of the event and the book’s controversial history, for those unaware that the book had been banned before. They also gave a basic synopsis of the book and why it was unsettling to some, which was a good transition to the public response to this kind of reaction.

The Twitter outcry provided good insight as to why many believe the book is important and should be taught in schools, so including a variety of tweets in the story was wise of the USA Today writer (Shari Rudavsky). It gave readers a decent understanding of the other side of the debate, providing them with plenty of room to form their own opinion on the complicated matter.

Power comes from many voices

Posted on October 13, 2017 by Nate Derrenbacher

By NATE DERRENBACHER

Hollywood scandals are nothing new. In today’s society, the attitude of people quickly calling anything “corrupt” is on the rise, and Hollywood has been the subject for conversation about corruption for years.

It seems that every few weeks, a new case of an alleged sexual harassment by news media executives seems to surface. As these stories develop, more people come forward to speak out about their alleged abusers – sometimes exposing misconduct from years in the past.

This has never been more relevant than recently. As seen through the Harvey Weinstein allegations, new platforms allow people to come forward without fear.

The news media have been following the Harvey Weinstein story almost nonstop since the initial announcement. Since the original claim of misconduct by the Hollywood film mogul, many people have come forward describing how they were abused by Weinstein, and many have condemned his actions.

But the media has done something else that wasn’t possible in the past that helps victims expose their abusers and hold them accountable – everyone is able to join the conversation. This open coverage gives people from all backgrounds, everyone from Hollywood A-listers to interns, the ability to enter a “safe-space” online and on-air to share their experiences and have a community to help them through their situation.

The news media have helped victims tell their stories and connect appropriate people to condemn abusers’ actions. A few major actions have influenced this change: social media, more focus on entertainment and opinion TV and the openness of society to engage with strangers.

This engagement can range anywhere from random arguments to a complete support system by a set of strangers. Because of this type of new media and focuses within the media, there are more opportunities to share and expose stories that may have traditionally been kept “behind closed doors.”