Killed black men portrayed negatively

By AUTUMN ROBERTSON

“He’s no saint!”

“He was always a trouble maker.”

These phrases were thrown around constantly as the stories of slain 17-year–old Trayvon Martin and 18-year-old Michael Brown developed.

When the news got out about their murders, the families did what was told: They both handed in pictures of their sons and told the media a brief message about how they did not deserve to die.

But as the story developed, the news media took their own spin on each story. They dug into their background and tried to find any sort of dirt that made the two dead men look unclean.

Martin, killed by neighborhood watch participant George Zimmerman, was suspended from school, and Brown, killed by Ferguson police officer Darrin Wilson, had handwritten raps showing that he was a “criminal and a thug.”

The media used different pictures as well. Martin’s sweet, smiling face was replaced with him in a black hoodie, straight faced as he stared into the camera. Brown’s cap and gown picture was replaced with him in more casual, “urban” clothing, looming over a stoop and holding up a peace sign, which many thought was a gang related.

This sudden change caused the popular opinion to change. These teenagers were now “thugs” that were “up to no good” before they were murdered. Is the goal to make black victims look more like villains?  Should their murders and image not be taken as seriously as others simply because of the color of their skin?

However, it seems that the media does the opposite to non-black murders.

James Holmes, the man who took 12 peoples’ lives in Aurora, Col., in 2012, was shown in the media as a man who not only shot up a movie theater, but a man with multiple degrees in neuroscience. The media even started to use his graduation picture instead of his mug shot.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, suspect of the Boston bombing terrorist attacks in 2013, was made out to be a great student with a good family. Rolling Stone even made his picture the cover of their issue, with him titled as “The Bomber.” The media showed him as an exception from other American terrorists.

These examples are night and day, but clearly show media’s objective. It seems as if no one wants to hear positive aspects about an unfairly murdered black man’s past.

49ers’ case tests new NFL policy

By SHAWNA KHALAFI

San Francisco 49ers defensive lineman Ray McDonald has been arrested on felony domestic violence charges following an incident at his 30th birthday party late on the night of Aug, 31.

McDonald allegedly assaulted his 10-week pregnant fiancé, leaving bruises on her neck and arms.

This incident occurred just three days after NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell modified The league’s personal conduct policy. The new policy carries a six-game suspension without pay for first-time domestic violence offenses and a life-time ban from the NFL for second offenses.

The policy also states that length of suspensions may be increased in the following cases: if the employee was involved in a prior incident before joining the NFL; violence involving a weapon; choking, repeated striking, or when the act is committed against a pregnant woman; or in the presence of a child.

If found guilty, McDonald could face even harsher punishments since his victim was pregnant. He is due in court Sept. 15. This is just one of several scandals in the NFL right now, as the Ray Rice video recently surfaced and star running back Adrian Peterson is  accused of child abuse in Texas.

Media exposes Ray Rice scandal

By MEAGHAN McCLURE

Social media play a huge role in the lives of everyone today. More importantly, when a breaking news story is released, it is almost impossible to not hear of it on Facebook, Twitter or any similar social media outlet, while everyone gives out their own opinions.

This is why social media played a key role in the termination of a football player’s contract and indefinite suspension from the NFL.

Ray Rice was caught on camera dragging his unconscious fiancee out of a casino elevator way back in February. So why did it take almost seven months to give him a punishment fit for his horrifying act?

When the first video was released and widely covered by news and sports media, there was public shock, but of a relatively small scale. People were disgusted, but forgot about it in due time, and Rice only suffered a two-game suspension.

It wasn’t until TMZ released a second video, making the attack more visual, that the NFL and Ravens alike stepped up Rice’s punishment.

What is the difference between the release of the two videos? Public backlash.

After the release of the first video, it was a trending story for no more than a few days, quick to be forgotten in a league where crimes like this aren’t that foreign. However, it has been a week since the second was released, and new developments in the story are coming out everyday.

The public became so outraged, it took to social media, making this story a trending topic on Twitter and Facebook for over a week. In a society where the average internet user’s attention span is minimal, this was a long time. The public influence concerning this story was strong enough to end a man’s career, and make NFL reconsider policies.

It is clear the effect social media and the public’s opinion had on this Ray Rice situation. What is not clear, however, is the reason why it took this high level of intensely bad publicity to make the NFL take appropriate measures in the punishment.

Although social media is a blessing, allowing powerful entities like the NFL to hear the voices of the public, it should not have been the driving force to ultimately force the NFL to suspend Rice indefinitely.

The NFL leadership claimed to not have seen the second video until Monday, although law enforcement officials confirm it was sent to the league office in April. Even still, everyone knew what had happened on that elevator and the NFL should have taken appropriate measures then, rather than wait to see if the situation would blow over.

With all these facts known, the NFL has portrayed itself in a horrible light and the influence and backlash of social media are not going to help the league out or lead people to forget about it anytime soon. Let’s just hope the league handles the next situation better than it did this one.

Responsibility for rising reporters

By GABRIELLA CANAL

Have you ever seen the way a piece of meat is cut? The shredding and vicious motion? It is with great disgust that I parallel that to the tragic decapitation of American-Israeli journalist, Steven Sotloff.

I, along with hundreds of other unprepared Americans, mistakenly clicked that play button on Sept. 2. The memory of it still haunts me.

The horror of it all, the stark reality of the video forced me to take a step back and gather my thoughts: what do I do now?

Three years in at the School of Communication at UM and I feel I am three years too deep to go back. More importantly, I have always known I’ve wanted to be a writer. I’ve always known I’ve wanted to shed light on truth and step out of my comfort zone. I didn’t always know I wanted to be a war correspondent, but I did know I wanted to be an international correspondent. And I’ve always known I’m not the only one.

To the millions of you who are drowning in story leads and paper cuts, who are declared journalism majors and aspiring writers, I ask you: What roles will we play in the war? (Should there still be a war when we’re working journalists, that is).

Will our allegiances lie with the American audience or the global audience? And how will we set our priorities?

Ernie Pyle, a journalist for Scripps Howard during World War II, was assigned six months overseas in North Africa. With the humor of Mark Twain and a voice similar to that of Ernest Hemingway, he wrote personal, relatable columns about the GIs he came to live with. Eventually, he died alongside those GIs after being hit by Japanese machine gun fire.

“The Writing 69th” were the first reporters ever to ride shotgun in a bomber through a bombing raid over Germany during World War II. Robert Post of The New York Times died on that fateful mission.

In more recent news, James Foley and Steven Sotloff were both freelance journalists during the Syrian civil war when they were abducted for ransom and eventually used as chess pieces in an upsetting power play. Pyle, Post, Foley and Sotloff are only four of the hundreds we do or do not know about.

For the longest time, the war correspondent has faced conflicting morals. The question of responsibility in wartime has always lied between wanting to swim against the tide of public opinion and wanting to talk about the heroes and the patriotic highlights.

Now, I believe, that question of responsibility has changed to wanting to find the next big conflict to report to a global audience and wanting to maintain self-preservation and safety.

Julian Reichelt, a freelance writer who was in the same area as Sotloff on the day he was taken in Aleppo, admits that “all journalists in war zones operate on the assumption that bad things are what happens to other people.”

How far will we go anymore and what fuels our crazed quest to throw ourselves into the midst of chaos? More importantly, who are we throwing ourselves in the flames for? The majority of the American reporters in the Middle East today appear to be freelance writers. Is it for their country, or an international audience, or is it perhaps for themselves?

NFL handles Ray Rice scandal poorly

By MICHELLE BERTRAN

Ray Rice, who was a running back for the Baltimore Ravens, has been banned from the National Football League because of an incident that happened in an elevator when he knocked out his then-fiancée. I would now like to address how poorly the NFL has handled this situation.

It is not certain yet, but supposedly, the video of Rice violently assaulting Janay Rice (now his wife), was given to someone in the NFL office back on April 9.

When the video was supposedly seen by this individual, not yet by the media, the NFL’s punishment to Ray Rice was only a two-game suspension. Then, as soon as the raw footage got released by TMZ on Monday,  the NFL banned Rice. Therefore, it is being speculated that the league went (or tried) to go under the table here.

In my opinion, banning Rice from the NFL is an extremely lenient punishment for what he did; he should be grateful he is not behind bars. The NFL is trying to clear the situation up and see who saw what and when, but NFL spokesman; Brian McCarthy released a statement to CNN on this speculation.

“We have no knowledge of this. We are not aware of anyone in our office who possessed or saw the video before it was made public on Monday. We will look into it,” McCarthy said.

It is not a coincidence to me that, then, Rice’s punishment was only a two-game suspension when the media had not gotten hold of the video, then as soon as the media gets the video and a huge controversy arises over this is when the NFL decides to make a bigger move.

If this is the case, it will only prove that the NFL is solely about its money and has no type of ethics. The NFL sets the example for many different groups of people, even children, and the example it is setting right now is sickening.

I would argue that the NFL is in need of new leadership that will handle these kinds of situations in a proper manner and how they deserve to be treated.

Venezuela needs the news media

By SOFIA ORTEGA

It has been more than one month since the protests in Venezuela began. The death toll has risen to 31, more than 461 people have been injured, and thousands are being detained.

The news media has been covering this story and even people from other countries have taken over social media to be the voice of Venezuela.

However, as protests continue, media coverage has declined.

Taking in consideration that in Venezuela the government controls the media, news stations around the world should keep covering the story.

Many Venezuelans have migrated to other countries due to their country’s situation, but most of them still wish to go back. For this reason, media around the world that believes in freedom of speech and in democracy should be the voice of Venezuela.

 

Websites push us to ‘pay attention’

By NICOLE HOOD

With the Olympic Games, world news has attracted a new sort of spotlight. Controversy over South Africa’s gold medal winner Oscar Pistorius’ murder trial has brought  Africa’s trial system into this spotlight and, subsequently, post-apartheid matters and conflict.

This is, by far, minor news compared to stories of dangerous protests and political meltdowns in Venezuela, Ukraine, Syria and Thailand. World news websites explicitly display videos and pictures of beaten protestors and tortured prisoners in an attempt to show, rather than tell, the horrors that are happening in parts of the world most people don’t ever really think about.

This takeover of news websites by world news gives me hope that the world today — all the people, consumed by day-to-day problems like bad drivers, test grades, piles of paperwork or long lines — will, in the midst of all the current international chaos, take a step back and at least acknowledge what is happening around the world.

Living in the United States, we have advantages that other countries don’t have: geographically, most countries have to cross the sea to get to us militarily; and the U.S. holds more than half of the entire world’s military power, keeping us safe and comfortable. Because of our strength and location, most of the younger generation in the United States do not even glance at the conflicts in European, Middle Eastern and Asian countries. The generation of our parents had to face the Cold War, but, as their children, we have not faced the immediate danger of an impending war and have no idea what the terrors of war could be like.

All of the sudden, though, front pages preview all kinds of internationally based stories: death, violence, and dangerous government reform protests in Ukraine, Venezuela, and Syria, Russia’s ‘declaration of war’ on Ukraine, North Korea’s missile launches, terrorist attacks in China, and radical groups dropping bombs in Nigeria. While not all of these attract the same amount of attention, the complete political meltdowns in Ukraine, Venezuela and Syria have attracted the gaze of those distracted American eyes.

Now, several writers on the Internet are calling on us to pay attention and help, saying that now there are so many conflicts that we cannot ignore them — saying that we have to take a stance on what’s happening. I believe that this is a growing trend and it has incredible potential. The younger generation is picking up on these articles and posting them on Facebook for their friends to notice. These articles call for my generation not only to take a stance but also to be passionate about it — to be passionate about it enough to at least educate others about the problem.

One article mentioned how my generation likes to liken itself to the generation of the 1960s, of Woodstock, peace and “flower power.” While we have our own form of Woodstock, while we carry the same “one love” attitude to these festivals, we are not them by any means. ‘They protested the Vietnam war, led a sexual revolution, fought for women’s rights and civil rights and changed the landscape of America for good.

We watch Netflix a lot and claim to be hipsters, but are okay with our alternative culture to be entirely superficial, free of substance or meaning. But we could be true hipsters, if we tried. There’s a lot that should be upsetting enough for us to integrate actual ideals and principles to our way of life beyond wearing boots in 80-degree weather and listening to music that sounds nothing like music.

I have one thing to say to these writers: preach on. Good luck, because in the midst of chaos, someone should be preaching about the problems that the world is facing. Maybe these articles on the Internet have more power than the writers think they do because they push for peaceful action, for standing up for what we say we do and for, at least, knowledge.

For more information, go to:

http://www.adolescentpress.com/2/post/2014/02/5-things-that-should-piss-every-teenager-off.html

Media versus Venezuela

The recent anti-government protests in Caracas, Venezuela, in direct protest of President Nicolas Maduro, have not only taken the country by storm, but social media as well.

Social media is uncovering the truths and lies behind what Venezuelans, and Americans, hear and see through mainstream broadcast news. Recently, former president Hugo Chavez forced a slant in media coverage, making Venezuelan broadcasters report biased and political propaganda-driven news.

This has caused the new generation of Venezuelans to take action—this time, not in a physical manner.

“I don’t trust our television and radio stations at all,” said Adriana Sanchez in a brief interview with USA Today in Caracas. “The government stations just run propaganda, while the few privately owned stations are afraid to broadcast the truth. What other options do we have?”

Many Venezuelans have resorted to Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram to stay informed and to understand the discrepancy between what they see on their television screens and what they read online. While both the government and the opposition are using social media to promote their own agendas, the truth is more readily available to citizens who need it most—including journalists.

According to the Venezuelan news website, panorama.com.ve, media outlets have been victimized by protesters and police harassing journalists on the streets.

CNN reported this week that its news crew had its cameras and transmission taken away at gunpoint.

This suppressive nature of news journalism has had a tremendous impact on what major news corporations and publications from around the world are reporting. While the chaos continues to unravel in Venezuela, news outlets such as CNN, The New York Times, BBC, and Al Jazeera English, have all had minimal coverage of Venezuela due to this lack of information.

Therefore, it has been up to Venezuelans to make a stand for their rights and their country without fighting fire with fire. From the Venezuelan-Americans of Miami to the new generation of Venezuelan descendants around the world, social media has provided more ways to uncover the truth than ever before.

Social media can provoke violence

By ADAM HENDEL

In one of my most recent blog posts, I discussed the importance of people posting videos of themselves doing acts of kindness. I proposed that we learn from the things we are seeing in the news and on social media, which can be used for good, but from today’s news, only half my claim was supported.

Headlines in numerous news sources today a concerning a new game/ fad called, “Knock-out”.

The purpose of the game is to try to knock a random stranger unconscious with one surprise punch to prove manliness. However, this so called game is leaving victims seriously injured and worse. There have been reports of these spontaneous assaults turning deadly in Chicago, St. Louis, New York and New Jersey.

Some reporters have said that there is no reason these kids are provoked but, according to several of the kids interviewed, it is a reason to show off and there is a likely source as to why this has become so popular. The new trends on social media and video sharing on vine has developed a category called “smack cam” where posters hit unsuspecting people in order to put out a funny video.

Popular trending websites, most specifically WorldStarHipHop.com, feature videos that showcase extreme violence and most specifically street fights that result in one person being knocked out. These videos that a huge population of our youth watch on these websites have clearly made an impact in their own decision-making.

The difference is that the videos are usually between friends staging a slap in the face for a short clip on vine, or a street fight caught on camera phones, but never has it occurred that elderly men and women are unnecessarily assaulted for fun.

Our youth will always try to raise the bar, but the popularity of shock value is clearly transpiring into kid’s lives. NBC has interviewed those behind the smack cam trend and has commented on several videos in particular that are truly cruel. A 21-year-old student named Max Isidor, the inventor of the #SmackCam, told NBC reporters he had no idea of the implications that would result from his viral trend.

Frank Farley, a professor of educational psychology at Temple University in Philadelphia, claims that social media are responsible for the spread of this trend. He believes the craving for risk taking and thrill seeking can be even more exercised by pulling these publicity stunts and sharing them on social media for all to see.

What is more shocking than a punch to the face?

I feel I was overly optimistic for hoping that social media could improve society, but instead the acts people are choosing to be influenced by are negative acts of violence and cruel humor.

Relentness bad news is difficult to take

By ADAM HENDEL

The news in general has always been obliged to tell the most relevant content by airing the hard news. Everyday when we turn on our television, we see stories of only serious crime and death because they are informative and attention getting.

After recent reports of the New Jersey mall shooting, a friend on Facebook wrote an interesting statement. The post said, “I can’t tell what is scarier: hearing about another mall shooting on the news first thing this morning, or the realization that over the past three months I’ve become totally desensitized to such news.”

It’s hard not to have similar feelings after watching the news day after day. I turned on CNN news today only to see giant headlines that read, “10,000 Feared Dead.” What a terrible thing to wake up to, but it is important to be informed.

As important as it is to keep up with today’s news, I believe watching the reports day in and day out takes a toll on one’s psyche. Constantly, we are reminded of the terrible things happening in the world and the next day is only a new set of harsh stories.

For online news, the approach to these intense stories can be approached in a less in your face way. For CNN and other network television news websites, the headlines are mostly the same as the television with the blunt presentation. The difference is that the websites do not have the time restraint, which allows for more stories and the ability for the web surfer to pick and choose the stories they want to read or watch.

Sites like yahoo are friendlier to the viewer because they try to weave in collaboration of pop culture, soft news and hard news that may not be featured on more serious sites and networks.

I am not suggesting that the news should stop telling us all the stories that are difficult to hear, but as a journalist or someone who is trying to stay relevant and informed, the constant reminder of negativity can be discouraging.

War zones dangerous for journalists

By SHAI FOX SAVARIAU

The bodies of two French journalists were returned to France on Tuesday. They had been kidnapped right after conducting an interview on Saturday in Mali.

Both reporters worked for Radio France International and they had been interviewing a Tuareg rebel near the town of Kidal.

Because of France’s decision to intervene in Mali, the French military secured the area around Kidal, which is why it was thought to be safe for the French journalists.

Both were shoved into a car by four men and were found dead soon after.

An Italian journalist was returned home safely recently after being abducted as well.

He is La Stampa’s war correspondent and entered Syria in April. He had been kidnapped for months before finally being released.

It has been reported that Syria is the most dangerous place in the world for journalists. The government has expressed their opposition towards professional journalists, citizen and international alike.

According the Committee to Protect Journalists, 32 journalists have been killed and at least 12 abducted in Syria in the past 12 months.

These kinds of things happen all the time with journalists. War zones are an extremely dangerous place in general, but journalists are at times targets. This can be traced back throughout history and it only seems to get worse.

With this being said, why do journalists continue to go overseas to these overly dangerous areas?

It is simply this: the world deserves to know what is going on in these war zones and it is a journalist’s job to do so.

Personally, I don’t know how these reporters do it though. I don’t think I could ever have the courage to do so.

Being that I would like to become a photographer after college, I have been asked if I would be interested in doing war photography. The answer is no because of these tragedies that occur in these countries with internal conflict.

Journalists have to be strong people in order to report about things of this nature, but actually having to go to the place and live there for long amounts of time in order to get the story takes a large amount of bravery.

I look up to the photographers who go over to these zones of conflict and take pictures of what’s going on and I have nothing but respect for the ones who have lost their lives.

Shooting at LA airport dominates news

By ALEXANDRA SILVER

Early this morning, Friday, Nov. 1, a lone gunman went on a shooting spree at the LAX Airport in Los Angeles. It dominated national news coverage throughout the day.

The gunman, currently unnamed, appeared in Terminal 3 at LAX with a black shoulder bag. He then proceeded to take out an assault rifle and started shooting near the screening area and in the airport.

It was noted that the airport police acted quickly and tracked down the shooter and took him into custody. Unfortunately one man who worked at the airport was killed while more than 10 others were wounded.

Witnesses said they heard more than 20 shots fired.

This story, once again, brings about the topic of gun control in America. To think that any one person has access to an assault rifle is terrifying, but not knowing whether or not an airport, move theater, or school is safe is debilitating.

Many Americans are living in constant fear or what might occur during their trips to the mall or movie theater and when these incidents continue to happen, this fear grows stronger and prevents us from doing certain activities.

In order to feel safe in our environment, it seems as if drastic safety measures must be taken, such as metal detectors and pat downs. This should not be the case and it is certainly not the best solution. 

There are numerous articles that have been written about random mass shootings that discuss simple measures to prevent these tragedies from occurring in our neighborhoods. Although these articles are helpful and useful, they should not be necessary.

The real concern is the issue with mental health, which I spoke about in my previous post. In order to prevent these mass shootings we must first understand where the motive comes from and start from there. Hopefully the real solution is found and people can stop living in fear.

School violence, media, stolen lives

By AXEL TURCIOS

In less than a week, two U.S. students are accused of murder and two teachers are dead.

Violence around the nation has spread inevitably leaving sorrow among families from both sides. The suspects’ families do not seem to understand why their kids dirty their hands with somebody’s blood. While the victims’ relatives look out for answers to help them build a clear explanation of what really occurred.

Monday, tragedy struck a middle school in Sparks, Nev. A 12-year-old boy opened fire against two other students and killing 45-year-old Michael Landsberry, a popular math teacher and member of the Nevada Air National Guard.

But the brutality does not stop there. Tuesday, two calls reporting two missing people, one a student and the other one a teacher, erupted a massive search. Wednesday morning Danvers Police Department in Massachusetts found the dead body of Colleen Ritzer, a 24-year-old math teacher. Philip Chism, a 14-year-old student remains behind bars accused of manslaughter for Ritzer’s death.

Why is there so much violence in our kids nowadays? How is it that young kids embed their minds with bloody thoughts? Does TV or other news media have an influence on them? Do video games make up a great part of the problem? Could a legislation aimed to restrict gun acquisition ease violence?

Believe as you are reading these questions to yourself, you must also be thinking that most of the answers should call a yes. But unfortunately, the solution does not depend only on us.

For instance, different gun legislation has been battled in the Senate and House of Representatives. However, legislators seem to not find a solution in which all of them agree with.

As a matter of fact, it is not just a legislation aiming for fire gun restrictions that would calm down the nation. It also depends on the parents who buy their kids brutal video games. Kids who are exposed to domestic violence at home are in danger of becoming bullies or bullied by somebody else. As you read this, many young people are still seeking for their inner entity and when they finally find it their parents would not be there.

Why? Ask yourself that question.