White Girls Club?

White Girls Club might sound like something that would have been around before the civil rights movement, not a club started in 2013 by high school girls from New Jersey. I was appalled by the use of social media to spread racially heated messages between club members at Franklin High School. The fascinating sociological aspect to this hate tweeting group bearing the tag #wgc, is that they went public with messages that are incriminating in a high school setting. Fortunately a growing number of schools and counselors including Franklin, are required to create policies dictating social media use. The girls that formed the club and several other students linked to the group were investigated for counts of bullying and intimidation and found guilty. All students involved were required to go to counseling and their parents were encouraged to attend as well. Cases like this reinforce the need to be absolutely clear when creating social media policy. Propaganda of this nature will then be penalized and hopefully the repercussions will involve educating those creating such abuses and holding them accountable for their actions.

After reading this article I wondered about the general racist attitude towards African Americans that these students have developed. I am personally concerned about how our hyper connected world and evident stereotyping in the media trickles down from new sources to parents to their children. Stereotyping happens to every race and ethnic background if you look for it and at the same time it seems that media influences these perceptions faster then ever and potentially for longer, as you can still Google things long after they have been "forgotten." In the case of the #wgc, we  will not know if media had a big influence in these girls actions as we are not privy to what will be discussed with these students in their counseling sessions. We may not hear what happens when they return to school and how they interact with students of different ethnic backgrounds after their individual therapy sessions. I am reminded that I have the power in how I use social media to speak up against discussion that negatively focuses on race and stereotyping against any group of people. Those girls from Jersey can flip their three fingers over from a W to make the letter M. Standing for maybe they should have that about this a little more.

Al-Qaeda's Resurgence--Article from the Economist

The Economist had a striking cover today, a skull and crossbones filled with names of terrorist related terms. What struck me about this article was that it mentions President Obama stating that al-Qaeda was "on the path to defeat," and yet we see it is growing in tactics, technologies and training power.

The article cover caught my eye but the story stood out as it gives a solid account of how the al-Qaeda is growing and  a shocking fact it gave was that "...Syrian Free Army has been progressively displaced by better-organised and better-funded jihadist groups that have direct links with al-Qaeda. Western intelligence estimates reckon such groups now represent as much as 80% of the effective rebel fighting force."

The question in my mind is not whether or not we react to this mounting terrorist resurgence, but how will we respond that will allow for empathy building and finding commonalities that might end such radical hateful ideology. Is it supporting troops in other countries and giving them technologies to fight al-Qaeda as this article discusses? How do we find commonalities in any war that allow for dialogue, empathy and understanding as the basis for fighting terrorism without fighting at all? It is more of an empathic question and less military focused. I believe radical propaganda needs to be replaced with grassroots groups that open dialogue between nations. I don't know exactly what this approach looks like, but I hope as we become even more globally connected we become just that, more connected.


See the article here:
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21586832-west-thought-it-was-winning-battle-against-jihadist-terrorism-it-should-think-again

Jefferson and Lippmann Free Press Advocates

"Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost." -- Thomas Jefferson



"Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." -- Thomas Jefferson

"There can be no higher law in journalism than to tell the truth and to shame the devil." -- Walter Lippmann

I believe what Jefferson was saying in these quotes is that to remain free independent thinkers we rely on the press to gather and accurately present information relating to government and world issues so that we can make informed decisions on how we want to be governed. This is true today regardless of the media platform. The press must systematically gather and check information before releasing it and informing public opinion. Without freedom of the press we are left with propaganda and dictatorship a far cry from the freedoms we are privileged to.

Lippmann was a prolific voice in journalism purveying the truth above all else, even to the later detriment of his journalism career. He believed in skepticism of fact, in trustworthy and relevant information to be delivered to the people to form their own beliefs through fair unbiased media. This is relevant today, however the advent of mass media and citizen journalism translates to a constant stream of media that quite often does not go through the analysis and review necessary to ensure its reliability, resulting in muddied information that at times can be the devil in the details. We are at a crossroads in journalism as we sift through information from a multitude of outlets to determine what is true as opposed to what is allegedly true in order to be accountable to the people and empower truth, democracy and equality. Although there is excessive exploitation in a multitude of forms in the media, I believe there are many more stories from people that through their journalistic endeavors take great care in how they impact public opinion, as did Lippmann. Public opinion should not be based on propaganda ideas, the devil Lippmann spoke of in addition to calling out the wrong doings of those in higher places of society and government.

Whistleblowers

I believe when we look at cases involving national security and whistle blowers such as Snowden and Wikileaks, the bigger issue is not the leak but what is going on that necessitated the leak to begin with. We as a society have a right to know how our goverment is operating and that means knowing whether or not we are being unecessarily policed, our very bill of rights defines and protects us from such abuses in power by the government. We are protected against searches in the manner in which the phone companies participated and whistleblowers help us shed light on ways our rights are being violated. Be it journalist or employee, we need those willing to speak the truth to blow that whistle of informity and transparency to hold government accountable to its citizens. Quite simply, "Whistle-blowing is the moral response to immoral activity by those in power." 1

The concern for our nation is not if we are over policed but how. 2 Since the release of the Complete Pentagon Papers, and Wikileaks and Snowden and a host of other cases our attitudes around whistle blowers have changed. The very things each case represents is our rights and liberties as citizens and how those are being violated. New laws have been created like The Whistleblowers Act, and yet people involved in such cases of liberty abuse have faced very steep sentences protecting our rights. In order to protect democracy I feel we need to do a better job protecting those willing to risk dire consequences to protect it for us whether you believe they are traitors or heroes, whistle blowers have a place in protecting democracy.











1. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/what-we-dont-know-about-spying-on-citizens-scarier-than-what-we-know/276607/

2. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/22/daniel-ellsberg-bradley-manning_n_3793199.html

HBO's The Newsroom--- Make Existential Truth A Priority

After watching HBO's The Newsroom, I felt that the news anchor was played exceptionally well by Jeff Daniels. I was not offended nor was I in complete acceptance or in agreement with the information he presented. I absolutely do not agree that this is the worst time to be born, perhaps because I strive to be informed and I choose to believe that examining the context of events in the larger media landscape is what is important. The answers inform how we can improve as a nation, and I believe we have the power to change and grow as does every nation with better or worse numbers in varying categories of societal well being.

The sorority girl asks, "What makes the US the greatest country in the world?" I don't believe there is such a thing. I believe that when we look at "greatness" there are a lot of factors to be considered, and the college student clearly didn't define any criteria. I feel that there are ideals each country can strive for, and this is where journalism has a hand. It informs us on how we are evolving and living in our globally connected world. Journalism informs the public and we inform democracy whether locally, nationally or internationally. We have a say in how we want our government to engage with the world, and as the anchor suggested, we can't scare so easy. It is one thing to be informed, it is another to demand appropriate action. Greatness comes from having an informed voice.

When we have data on rates of crime, poverty, education and infant mortality and those figures are not where we want them to be, we as citizens can demand action from government to improve on those categories of health. Journalism is supposed to be the voice of the people and representative of the change we seek. Journalism has succeeded in regurgitating facts and the anchor is able to report on those numbers because technological advances we have made allow him to obtain the information readily. The bigger question the anchor is alluding to is why are we satisfied with those numbers and how have we allowed them to get where they are? His answer is that we are not as informed as we once were nor are we demanding change.

We have entered into an age of journalism that is bombarded by government and corporate entities and we now identify ourselves by categories such as our political affiliations. The anchor says, "I voted for candidates run by both major political parties." He is doing his best to avoid influencing his viewing audience and is making a point that he votes on whom he feels will best represent the country not on which party the candidate represents. The anchor wants people to strive for their own understanding of an existential truth, not just what is happening in the moment but how stories we read about matter in the world and at home in our country. The anchor throws out a lot of numbers on how the US compares to other countries and reminds us that we used to "strive for intelligence."  If we want to improve the quality of life for ourselves and for others in the world we have to remember it's not about the numbers it's what the numbers and the information mean in the larger context of how we live and navigate our relations with neighbors and nations.

 Robert Manoff of the Department of Journalism at NYU, speaks to the desires of the anchor from the News Room, he reminds us to look at how and why we report news and the impact journalists have on society. "Perhaps "To Whose Benefit?" should always be on the agenda, with answers to be shaped by concern for the vigor of republican subjecthood and the vitality of the public sphere. Finally, as should be obvious... I would expect that journalists will be taught to ask, always, "What Does It Mean?," with existential concerns uppermost in their minds when doing so."1


1. Robert Manoff, Department of Journalism NYU, Director of Center for War, Peace and News Media. Democratic Journalism and the Republican Subject: Or the Real American Dream and What Journalism Educators Can Do About It. Original Post Online 09/16/2002. Online 9/20/13.
http://journalism.nyu.edu/publishing/archives/debate/forum.1.essay.manoff.html

Ethiopia Gives Awards to Families Having Fewer Children

The Ethiopian Government is concerned about family size and its affects on the economy and resources and is tackling the issue through peer driven family planning education called "community talks." In small villages across the country nurses are educating women about the risks of multiple births without proper spacing for both mother and child, in addition to the financial burdens the family will face.

The world population is in the billions and it begs the question how much life can the planet harbor? Perhaps in countries with high birth rates like Niger, Mali, Uganda and Burkina Faso, "community talks" may positively impact birth rates, health of mothers, children and environment. We are beginning to globally address family planning and peer mentoring may prove effective in helping families decide how many children they want to have while retaining their freedom to choose.

See story here:
http://www.pri.org/stories/healthglobal-health/ethiopia-rethinks-the-model-family.html

Fracking Bill Friends to Foes

Gov. Jerry Brown (D) will sign California bill SB4, regulating hydraulic fracturing into law in the weeks ahead.

Initially environmental groups were  positive about regulations set forth in the bill. Several amendments later,  leading groups withdrew support of SB4 because loopholes still allow for circumstances that pose great risk to human and environmental health.

Whether you reside in California or Canada, this bill will set a precedence for regulating the fracking industry. We need to understand the loopholes SB4 has and how we can improve legislation  to    address the myriad of health and environmental threats we all face from future fracking.