Final Post - Technological World

Futurama

Above is the Futurama ride in New York.

At the 1964 World’s Fair in New York, there was a famous display called Futurama. It predicted a world in which technology would be our savior. Technology would save us; technology would comfort us; technology would solve all of our problems; technology would be the key to our heavenly utopia. The ride gave visitors a glimpse at what America may look like in the “future”—they weren’t wrong about these technological advancements. The narrator of the ride talks about what to expect out of future cities: “plazas of urban living rise over freeways, vehicles electronically-paced travel routes remarkably safe, swift, and efficient.” With these developments in technology, there is new beauty and strength in the “city of tomorrow.” A whole new world of answers is discovered in order to fulfill the needs of man. These newfound technological advancements support many individuals and lead to a domino effect of even more discoveries. The latest goods and materials are said to bring prosperity to the world. Technology is leading the adventure to a future of “limitless promise.” A course that frees the mind and the spirit as it improves the well-being of mankind. These innovations don’t just include public transportation and other businesses, but also medical advancements, which is definitely needed at a time like today.

Mad World 

Above is a screenshot from the Mad World Remix of Moby.

This “Mad World Remix of Moby” depicts the world centered around technology. People rather live in a virtual world full of color than reality in black and white. Even though these advancements in technology have improved communication and have been an outlet of endless information, it has drastically damaged people’s wellbeing. People are abusing and overusing technology, which has negative consequences. In the video, the main character is surrounded by people that are glued to their phones. He gets trampled over and is continuously ignored, which makes him upset that no one is paying attention to him. People are putting all their attention to their devices that they aren’t paying attention to the world around them. With that being said, they fall into a sewer hole and even fall off a cliff at the end of the video. The remix video includes current trends in the media such as selfies, texting, people taking pictures of their food, and even dating apps. Another issue this video emphasizes is cyberbullying. For example, a video was posted on social media of a girl dancing and people were making fun of her. This harassment pushed the girl into taking her own life. Social media and other digital media platforms can be very damaging to people’s wellbeing and self-esteem. Technology has its advantages and disadvantages; however, we must balance out our usage of technology to be physically and mentally healthy. 

MAN

Above are screenshots from the video MAN; evolution of man.

This video looks at “man’s relationship with the natural world.” It starts at 500,000 years ago until today. As man goes through time, it is evident in the decrease of animals and trees that man becomes less environmentally friendly. Man first kills a fly and then goes on to make products out of nature and animals. For example, man created new advancements such as snake boots, basketballs, fur coats, and pianos, just to name a few small products. These advancements have killed sea life and other wildlife in order for man and the rest of the world to prosper. The biggest destruction man has made was cutting down trees and animals’ homes in order to build corporations and other businesses. In these businesses, animals are being tested and treated as lab rats in order for humans to find cures or other things that will become products for us humans. With all that being said, man is constantly changing, and technology is constantly adapting to growing generations and its increase use in these technological devices. We live in a landfill of technology. These advancements are not all advantageous and the killing of animals and their homes are a disadvantage to these developments.

Related Articles:

Futurama Video

Futurama Info

Mad World Remix Video

MAN Video

MAN Info

Sherman Anti-Trust Act

The Sherman Anti-Trust Act was the first legislation enacted by the United States Congress, in 1890, in order to curb concentrations of power that interfere with trade and reduce economic competition. Several states had passed similar laws, but they were limited to intrastate businesses. This act was based on the constitutional power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce. It especially targeted big corporations operating in multiple states. The Sherman Anti-Trust Act was created to help workers and smaller businessmen by encouraging competition. While it did assist these two groups, the act eventually hindered workers in attaining better working conditions.

Above is a picture of John Sherman.

The Sherman Anti-Trust Act was named after US Senator John Sherman of Ohio, who was an expert on the regulation of commerce. The Sherman Anti-Trust Act passed the Senate by a vote of 51 – 1 on April 8, 1890, and the House of Representatives by a unanimous vote of 242 – 0 on June 20, 1890. President Benjamin Harrison signed the bill into law on July 2, 1890. The legislation was passed at a time of extreme public hostility towards large corporations like Standard Oil and the American Railway Union, which were seen to be unfairly monopolizing certain industries. The act signaled a shift in American regulatory strategy towards business and markets, which made competition more strict.

One of the act’s main provisions outlaws all combinations that restrain trade between states or with foreign nations. A second key provision makes illegal all attempts to monopolize any part of trade or commerce in the US. These two provisions, which constitute the heart of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, are enforceable by the US Department of Justice through litigation in the federal courts. If one where to violate the provisions of this act, the resulting punishments would be fines and imprisonment. 

The first enforcement of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act occurred during the administration of US President Theodore Roosevelt’s term from 1901 to 1909. Congress passed two legislative measures that provided support for the Sherman Act: the Clayton Anti-Trust Act and the Federal Trade Commission.

Today, the Sherman Anti-Trust Act means a financial relationship in which one party gives another the right to hold property or assets for a third party. In 2019, the Justice Department began a broad review of potentially anticompetitive behavior by “market-leading online platforms,” including Google and Facebook, and a coalition of attorneys general from 48 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico announced coordinated antitrust investigations into alleged monopolistic practices by Google.

Related Articles:

Britannica

www.ourdocuments.gov

Investopedia

Ohio History Central

Mediasphere

Mediasphere is the collective ecology of the world’s media, including newspapers, journals, television, radio, books, novels, advertising, press releases, publicity, and the blogosphere (what we do each week). In simpler terms, it is any and all media both broadcast and published. Newspapers became a political force in the campaign for American independence. The First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees freedom of the press because the creators recognized the importance of keeping government and its officials accountable. Information is important to maintaining the balance of power in this nation. 

MSM refers collectively to the various large mass news media that influence people, and reflect and shape prevailing thoughts. An example of an MSM is The Walt Disney Company, which owns the ABC television networks. These mainstream networks and publications cater to the majority of the population. MSM is the contrast to alternative media, which may contain content with more dissenting thoughts at variance. Alternative media is a source of information and publications that fall outside of MSM. FOX started out as a form of alternative media; however, its growing viewership resulted it being labeled mainstream media. The criteria for determining whether a news source counts as alternative media is based on these questions: Is it corporate owned? What is its content (news that is either repressed or misreported by the mainstream media)? How is it produced and distributed (the internet is the most popular outlet for alternative media)? Does it seek some kind of political or social change? Is it intended to generate profit? Alternative media is considered tabloids or to be full of conspiracy theories. 

An echo chamber is an environment where a person only encounters information or opinions that reflect and reinforce their own. They can spread false information and distort a person’s perspective, and are driven by confirmation bias, which favors information that reinforces existing beliefs. Echo chambers can happen anywhere and everywhere information is shared. In order to recognize echo chambers, think of these questions: Do they tend to only give one perspective on an issue? Is that viewpoint mainly supported by rumor or incomplete evidence? Are facts ignored whenever they go against that viewpoint?

A whistleblower is a person who discloses information to the public about any wrongdoing, which could be fraud, corruption, etc. There are specific laws that protect whistleblowers such as False Claims Act, Dodd-Frank Act, and the Whistleblower Protection Act. Whistleblowers experience retaliation for doing the right thing, and anonymity is crucial to whistleblowing. If whistleblowing turns to leaking classified information, then the whistleblower could be charged with crime. All in all, the person needs to know the rules and the consequences before whistleblowing. 

Citizen journalism involves amateur individuals generating and sharing their own news by collecting, reporting, analyzing, and publicizing information. Social media plays a huge role in citizen journalism because people have 24/7 access to technology. Not all citizen journalisms are reliable sources because the writers are not professionals. They may not fact check, which could threaten professional journalism.

Related Articles:

Whidbey News-Times

Chron

GCF Global

The Economic Times

National Whistleblower Center

Thought Co

Privacy, Online and Off

The problem with maintaining privacy online is how the information we voluntarily share is being used by companies like Facebook. Technology is valuable – until it turns against us. When you discover your privacy has been violated, it can feel frightening and unfortunately, with today’s advancements in technology, it enables people, corporations, and governments to violate our privacy on a massive scale…whenever and wherever. With an increase in people tuning into technology to hear news about the coronavirus, who knows how involved the government and other surreptitious spies are listening into conversations. 

Your Online Life, Permanent as a Tattoo

Tattoos say a lot, so you don’t how to. What if a social media network turned out to be electronic tattoos? What if they provide as much information about who you are, just like a tattoo? Electronic tattoos are much more serious nowadays because we can take a picture and get facial recognition of almost anyone in the picture, and then retrieve information about them. Our electronic tattoos make us immortal because our information will remain online forever. The Greeks thought about when God, humans, and immortality mix. That time is now. An example from the Greeks was that Atalanta was the greatest runner and would challenge anybody. If you won, she would marry you and if you lost, you died. Hippomenes challenged and beat her. He won because he had all these little golden apples, and Atalanta would run ahead, and he’d roll a little golden apple, which distracted her and allowed him to win the race. All these little golden apples come and reach you, and want to post about them. We must be careful with what we publish online because we can’t undo it. The advantages of technology distracts us from the disadvantages it has. An example from Latin America about God, humans, and immortality combining was from the poet Jorge Luis Borges. He was threatened by the Argentine military junta, and asked “how else can one threaten, other than with death?” The answer is with immortality, which is what we are threatened with due to our electronic tattoos.

Juan Enriquez giving his TED Talk about Your Online Life, Permanent as a Tattoo.

The Small and Surprisingly Dangerous Detail the Police Track About You

NSA-style mass surveillance is enabling local police departments to gather vast quantities of personal information about anyone and everyone, which was never possible in the past. With these advancements, the government can observe the location of individuals and how private citizens interact. Also, local police departments make decisions about who they think you are based on the information the government obtains. A key technology to mass location tracking is “the innocuous-sounding Automatic License Plate Reader.” This technology captures images of every passing car and put into a list of cars wanted for wrongdoing. This Reader includes the date, time, and location the police department had captured the cars as well as where they were going and who they were with. Why is it okay for the government to collect this information? The reason it’s happening is because they think someday it may be useful. The government is using and abusing their power over individuals, and it is happening not just in the United States, but all over the world. These License Plate Reader’s aren’t the only tracking devices law enforcement agents have available to them. For example, they can use a device called StingRay to send tracking signals inside homes in order to identify the cell phones located there. People are even saying that smart home devices may be the governments way of listening in on domestic conversations. 

How to Avoid Surveillance…With the Phone in Your Pocket

Telephone companies have provided wiretapping assistance to governments. Surveillance used to take place manually and wires were connected by hand and recorded by tape; however, technological advancements allowed companies to put surveillance features into the core of their networks. When you are on the phone having a personal conversation, the government, another government, or even another party/person could be listening in. Apple and WhatsApp have built strong encryption technology into their product, allowing people to communicate without an authoritarian figurehead wiretapping our messages. Governments are mad because tech companies have democratized these encryption to the default setting. Government officials believe all communications should be available to them, and encryption is making that difficult. Although tapping into terrorists, hackers, drug dealers, etc. communication services would be beneficial, “when you build a backdoor into a communications network or piece of technology, you have no way of controlling who’s going to go through it.”

Related Articles:

Juan Enriquez - TED Talk

Catherine Crump - TED Talk

Christopher Soghoian - TED Talk

My Online Presence

With an unspecified end to quarantine, we remain inside and connected to technology. I am online every day for classes as well as keeping myself entertained with watching movies and tv shows. I am also up to date on social media in order to stay in touch with my friends and family in different parts of the world. Normally I don’t have much of a large online footprint. I don’t have a personal website other than this blog for class. I am on social media; however, I go on Snapchat at night, I sometimes go on Instagram, and I never really check Facebook. On snapchat, I usually send one picture to my friends and family at night just to keep my streaks. On Instagram, I post pictures of big events or even pictures of my friends and family. The only time I used Facebook was for one of my classes to comment on Nido Qubein School of Communication posts. The big footprint I have when it comes to technology is for schoolwork, messaging my family when I’m away at college, and LinkedIn. The information that a visitor could glean about me, even indirectly, by visiting my pages on social media would be my name, where I go to school, what state I live in, who my family and friends are, and what events I am involved in, just to name a few things they would discover. The private information I have voluntarily given out when applying to social media sites like Snapchat, Instagram, and Facebook was my phone number, e-mail address, and birthday. The private information I voluntarily given out to LinkedIn was my phone number, e-mail, and state in which I reside in. I gave my private information out to these sites because it was required to include this information in order to set up an account. 

In a recent article in Fast Company, a 14-year-old girl “unplugged” from social media.  Sonia Bokhari wasn’t really interested in social media, and since she didn’t have a smartphone and wasn’t allowed to join any sites at all until she was 13, it wasn’t much of an issue for her to not be connected. When she finally got connected to social media, she disappointingly saw that her mother and sister posted embarrassing photos from her childhood for all their followers to see. She thought she was beginning her public online life; however, there were already hundreds of pictures and stories of her online that she didn’t have control over. She felt like her privacy was violated. I understand why she feels that way considering her mother quoted her and posted many embarrassing photos; however, her mother may have thought she was capturing a memorable moment of her child and wanted to share it with the world. As stated in the article, we shouldn’t post negative or inappropriate pictures because it could affect our school life and future job opportunities. A big mistake Bokhari made with social media was that they were all public. Unlike Bokhari, all my accounts are private, and I only follow people that I know. 

Not many people know how Facebook actually works and how it makes its money, profiting from invading our online privacy. “Facebook uses information about their behaviors and friendships to deduce a constantly updating list of their interests” (Madrigal, 2019). If it knows what people are interested in, it can put ads in front of them to encourage them to purchase the product. About 50% of Americans would feel uncomfortable with Facebook’s business practices. I don’t really use Facebook, so I haven’t stopped to think too much about what I have on the social media network and what information I’ve given the company. The only information that they could get about me is the personal information I had to put in when setting up an account. Facebook and occasionally other social media networks make me feel that our personal information and privacy is not taken into consideration because companies will do whatever it takes to make a profit. “Two publicly accessible caches of Facebook user data created third-party applications that connected to the Facebook platform” (Gallagher, 2019). With that being said, Facebook asked some users for their email address and email password in order to register accounts. This makes people wonder about the lack of safety and privacy violations that Facebook has committed. 

Related Articles:
Fast Company
The Atlantic
ars technica

Does Coronavirus Measures Violate Civil Rights?

The coronavirus is taking the United States by storm. It is controlling our lives and it is very hard to get rid of due to major increases in patients with the virus and not a lot of tests or doctors to treat them right away. State governors have banned public gatherings, like church, and declares orders for isolation to decrease the spread of the coronavirus across the United States.

These declarations to ban large gatherings help shape how public health officials can respond at the state and local level, allowing them to act fast while instituting forms of social distancing. Officials usually have to go through legal processes to close an establishment or shut down public gatherings, but with states from California to North Carolina being under a state of emergency, everything is expedited. 

When someone chooses to ignore high recommendations to remain inside their home, public health authorities can seek a court order mandating their compliance. These measures aren’t undertaken without due process, which is fair treatment through the normal judicial system. 

People seem rather okay with undermining core civil liberties in order to fight the pandemic. The measures taken to decrease the number of patients with COVID-19 limit individual freedom and may violate rights guaranteed by national constitutions. The threat by leaders of Newark, New Jersey, to prosecute people who spread false information about the virus, could violate the First Amendment. Even the U.S. Department of Justice “has quietly asked Congress for the ability to ask chief judges to detain people indefinitely without trial during emergencies.”

In the picture above is Dr. Li Wenliang. He was the first doctor to speak out about the coronavirus before he passed away from it. 

In the first few weeks of discovering this new virus, China implemented social media censorship, which concerned the failures of China’s leadership in controlling the outbreak. Since this is a new virus and China didn’t have access to information about it when if first broke out, they didn’t know how to take precautions. This censorship on social media prevented the world from preparing to avoid getting the coronavirus. Now that the virus is spread nationally, we must take action and listen to officials in order to eliminate or even decrease our chances of getting it. Although COVID-19 is very powerful, there are ways to diminish it. We must stay inside and continuously wash our hands.

COVID-19 is probably the most talked about concern in the news right now. I feel that more than ever people are tuning into technology to see these daily updates about it. Through these updates, we are told that COVID-19 is dictating people’s lives because once you catch the virus, the incubation period is long and dreadful.

Related Articles:

The Sacramento Bee

The Atlantic

The Fire

Promoting Tolerance

Tolerance Theory:

It has been argued that freedom of speech, especially through our  practice of extending protection to speech that we find hateful or personally upsetting, teaches us to become more tolerant in other aspects of life — and that a more tolerant society is a better society. Somewhat counter-intuitive, the First Amendment protects hate speech because society learns valuable lessons from, including why it is hateful and worthy of condemnation. It’s how we spread norms about acceptable behavior.

The tolerance theory is the belief that promoting expressive freedoms will make individuals and institutions more open to ideas than they would be otherwise. John Stuart Mill and Lee Bollinger promoted the tolerance theory. According to Mill, the free exchange of ideas should be encouraged to promote the discovery of the truth. As argued by Bollinger, he endorses a standpoint of tolerance in favor of protecting extremist speech, which provides a shield for more mainstream political discourse. 

I feel that of the eight values, tolerance theory is an important value because it allows individuals to express their social, economic, and political viewpoints. This theory is inspiring to individuals and institutions because they have become more open to ideas and beliefs of others. This theory is underrated in that Bollinger argues this theory to protect extremist speech; I didn’t know this theory existed, let alone protects extremist speech or even hate speech. This theory is meaningful to me because I am able to see all viewpoints in order to understand the norms about acceptable behavior.

Tolerance was turned into a theory for the First Amendment jurisprudence and for judicial review. Tolerance of jurisprudence suggests that Nazis should be permitted to parade down the streets of Illinois, as in Collin v. Smith (1978), even though the community is populated with survivors of the German Holocaust. The rational is that protecting the speech of the Nazi group protects other forms of political expression. Tolerance of judicial review suggests that courts protect the First Amendment from censorship laws, which are laws that suppress speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that it is considered harmful.

Collin v. Smith (1978):

In March 1977, Collin and the National Socialist Party of America publicly announced plans to hold assembly in Skokie Village Hall. Skokie Village has a population of approximately 70,000 people, with a majority of them being Jewish, and a big portion of the Jewish population being survivors of World War II persecution. On May 2, the village enacted three ordinances. The first established a permit system for parades and public assemblies and required public liability and damage insurance. The second prohibited the broadcasting of material that incited racial or religious hatred. The third prohibited public demonstrations by members of political parties while wearing military-style uniforms. Collin applied for a permit; however, he was denied. The courts stuck firm to the First Amendment principle and the tolerance theory that unpopular groups must be allowed to express their political opinions. With that being said, the court decision in the Collin v. Smith case was that Skokie could not prevent the Nazis from marching.

Related Articles:

The First Amendment Encyclopedia

Encyclopedia.com

Justia

Anti-Trust Investigations and Fake News

Facebook is being hit with antitrust investigations by eight states and DC. Also, 48 US states are launching an antitrust investigation into Google. Antitrust laws, also referred to as competition laws, are regulations that monitor the distribution of economic power in business, making sure that healthy competition is allowed to flourish and economies can grow. 

These investigations on Google will focus on whether Google is overly dominant in online advertising and in internet searches. One outcome of these investigations might be forcing Google to spin off search as a separate company. Google is being accused of driving out smaller advertising companies. Many smaller advertisers have argued that Google has such a stranglehold on the market that it becomes a system of whatever Google says, goes because the alternative could be not reaching customers. Google holds a lot of power in setting rates and favoring their own services over others; however, Google states that their business is large and provides useful and beneficial services to their customers. Google has the power to make it inefficient and inconvenient for advertisers to use any other platform. They get too pick winners and losers because the system is rigged in their favor. 

The investigation on Facebook is expected to focus on the apps impact on advertising prices, data and consumer privacy and the company’s previous acquisitions, including Instagram and WhatsApp. Facebook is even getting backlash for fake news being spread. Facebook has taken steps in order to kill the backlash by updating its policies; however, there is a new loophole where you can spread fake news through groups and private messaging. Facebook has been promoting groups feature throughout the platform. The problem is that it also attracts private groups to spread disinformation. People don’t know what is truth and what is fake news!

Related Articles:

CBS News

CNN

Mashable

The Invention of the Emoticon

Above is Scott Fahlman who created emoticons.

In September 1982, a computer scientist named Scott Fahlman suggested to Carnegie Mellon University that :) and :( could be used to distinguish jokes from statements online. The first emoticon was the smiley face and the second was the sad face. Fahlman suggested that the smiley face could indicate humorous posts on a message and a sad face could indicate serious posts. The emoticon translates to the contraction emotional icon. Emoticons are created with type and add to the ability of translating tone and emotion over text. Text based messages are a convenient way to communicate with people, but it lacks the intonation that we use with face-to-face communication. The emoticon was created as an ultimate solution to the problem of translating emotion via text. They were used to replace the non-verbal elements of communication that would normally indicate tone that are missing in written communication.

Above is Shigetaka Kurita who created emojis.

Technology since then has been continuously evolving. Emoticons have been updated to emojis. In contrast to the creation of the emoticon, emojis were created in the late 1990s by a Japanese communication firm. The name is a contraction of the words e and moji, which roughly translates to pictograph. Emojis are created with actual images and show more of an expression of how someone is feeling. Emoticons were invented to portray emotion in environments where nothing, but basic text is available. Emojis were extensions to the character set used by most operating systems today. Our emojis have become politically correct with the inclusion of anti-heteronormative kisses and multi-racial emojis.

Related Article:

Britannica

The Guardian

Mind Mannered Alter Ego

Creation of the Compact Disc

The compact disc was invented by James Russell in the late 1960s, but was later finalized in 1980 when Sony and Philips created the “Red Book” standard, which was a series of documents that outlined a 120mm diameter disc bearing music at a resolution of 16bit/44.1kHz. That resolution is the minimum rate needed to replicate all frequencies humans can theoretically hear. The first commercially available CD player, Sony CDP-101, was first offered in Japan in 1982. Nearly 100 years after the first phonograph player was established, the CDP-101 made its way to the US in 1983 and was priced as high as $1,000. 

The creation of the compact disc affected the public positively and negatively. The positives were that compact discs revolutionized the way people listened to music. The compact discs were almost indestructible, and the sound was as good on the 1,000^th hearing as it was on the first hearing. The discs could store nearly 75 minutes of music, which was far more than a conventional album as well as a vinyl record. 

The negatives were that compact discs killed the record industry. Since nothing but light touches the compact disc, the listener doesn’t hear the hissing, crackling, and distortion that often accompanies the playing of vinyl records. Another negative was that the money that compact disc’s sales have brought companies began to fade away because of growing apps like Apple Music, Spotify, Pandora, etc. With compact discs, in order for people to listen to music, they would have to be put in a boom box, a computer, or any place with a CD insertion. People are buying less compact discs because they can listen to music at their own convenience; they can pull their phone out of their pocket, press play, and they get instant music. 

I remember listening to music on a boom box, then an MP3 player, an iPod touch, an iPod, and now I have an iPhone where I can buy songs on iTunes or other music streaming apps. Technology is continuously adapting. The first invention that allowed people to listen to music was the phonograph, then the gramophone, LP’s, multitrack recording, cassette tapes, a cassette tape player (also known as a Walkman), and then the compact disc. The technology used to listen to music continued to evolve after the creation of the compact disc to the discman, recordable CD’s, the MP3 player, NAPSTER, the iPod, iTunes, and now other music streaming apps such as Apple Music, Spotify, and Pandora. I believe that technology needs to constantly be updated in order for people to purchase the products and for companies to make money. 

Related Articles:

ProQuest

Digital Trends

Timeline

Property that Should Allow Public Use

A Lieutenant at the York County Prison stopped a man from filming the facility while standing on the public sidewalk. The man said he intended to educate people about the First Amendment, which grants people freedom from religion, freedom of religion; freedom of speech, freedom of the press; and freedom of assembly.

Tom Shirey, the man who was stopped from filming the prison, said he goes to public areas and films to see if he gets challenged. A quote that Shirey stated that resonates with me is “if you don’t use your rights, you tend to lose them” (Scolforo, 2020). Like this instance, Shirey is using his rights in order to see the response he gets from the police. Not many people use their rights the way he does; moreover, the police are probably not used to seeing this. Although this is not ordinary, the police should be cognizant of what the First Amendment institutionalizes and what Shirey can and can’t do in the area surrounding the prison. 

Since the sidewalk is public property, Shirey has the right to film the prison from that location. This public forum is protected for free speech activities, as long as they remain peaceful.

Above is the video of a Lieutenant stopping Shirey

Speaking of public forums, there are ‘free speech zones’ at public universities in order for students to express their rights. These zones started around the time of the Vietnam War because universities had to contain anti-war protests. Some states and universities are eliminating these zones, and states such as North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arizona restrict the use of free speech zones.

I feel that we shouldn’t need these free speech zones in order for students to express their beliefs. We are allowed to speak our minds; however, if someone were to speak of attempting violence, then that is when something should be done to stop them. 

Related Articles:

York Dispatch

National Constitution Center

Dangers of Technology

As technology becomes more advanced, I believe it has become much easier for the government to stalk us. In China, the government is establishing surveillance of facial recognition, fingerprints, etc. to scrutinize billions of citizens. Obama and Trump insisted Apple create a way in which they could see everyone’s data on encrypted iPhones. Facebook even had an unsecured cloud server leak user’s phone numbers and their name to the world. This exposed data put these users at risk of scam phone calls and attempts of identity fraud. 

We are ignorant to what information gets leaked to the government; however, most people are so obsessed with technology that they don’t care. Apps such as Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube could save your picture in a database for when cops need to identify you. All cops have to do is take a photo and it will be matched to a photo found on your social media page. 

Social media has a pivotal role in the increase of stalking, and the scarier thing is that we don’t know when we are being stalked. Anything you put out on social media is with you forever. Even though it may disappear, as in Snapchat or an Instagram story, these postings will virtually remain in the social media stratosphere. 

In California, police arrested a man for breaking into a 13-year-old girl’s house, whose address he found by observing her posts on social media. We don’t stop to think about someone stalking our social media to track us down because people live busy lives; however, as seen in the show You, some people make it their profession to stalk. 

Related Articles:

NY Times

USC News

Forbes

cnet

Behind the Scenes of the Supreme Court

As addressed in this video, “the Supreme Court of the US remains the most powerful judicial body on the earth” (Stephens, 0:56-0:59). Supreme Court Justices are appointed by the elected President at the time and will continue in the Court even when the President finishes their term. “They deliberate and reach their decisions in private”(Stephens, 1:02), “but their power rests on public faith” (Stephens, 1:17). There are hundreds of Supreme Court Justices that uphold and decipher the 200-year-old Constitution. Even though the Constitution has never changed in the past 200 years, people are treated more equally now than in the past. A Supreme Court Justice stated that no matter who or where someone petitions, everyone gets the same individual consideration. Every Supreme Court Justice shakes hands when they meet before presenting their thoughts on a case because they are “less likely to hold a grudge” (Stephens, 12:20), which I found very interesting. 

"We the People" provide the government with powers. Without the people, the United States Constitution would not have been able to become the standards we must uphold.

Controversy is inevitable in the Supreme Court. The biggest controversies in history have been the Marbury v. Madison Case and the Dred Scott Case. In the Marbury v. Madison Case, it gave the Supreme Court judicial rule to review all actions of the government and deem them constitutional or not. For the Dred Scott Case, the judicial branch ruled that no African American, such as Dred Scott, is a US citizen, which sparked the Civil War. When the Supreme Court speaks, the public obeys. A quote from the video that I found very important when it comes to the law is that “if the Court disobeys or people stop listening, then one of the treasures that make this the freest nation in the world will cease to exist’ (Stephens, 8:47-8:57) and ‘the power of the Court is the power of trust earned—the trust of the American people” (Stephens, 9:48-9:53). With that being said, the Supreme Court continues to function because of the publics involvement in politics.

Related Articles and Videos: 

Marbury v. Madison

Dred Scott

Supreme Court, Part 1

Supreme Court, Part 2

Freedom of Speech on Social Media

Kevin Hart, a stand up-comedian and actor, dominated the headlines in 2018 due to his homophobic tweets. He was announced as the host for the 2019 Academy Awards, but ultimately had to turn it down because he was met with backlash from the public. People were reposting his hurtful tweets, saying that he had never apologized for his homophobic jokes; therefore, he should not be allowed to host at the Oscars. 

Image that Kevin Hart posted when he was announced as the host for the 2019 Academy Awards.

As the Riverdale Press states, we are never free of consequence for speaking how we really feel. We should not criticize others for their opinions. We should listen to what others have to say, even if their opinion won’t change our beliefs. 

Similar to Kevin Hart, J.B. Brager posted a comment on Twitter about an opinion A. Kayum Ahmed made in front of high schoolers. Brager spoke out against Israel’s reported treatment of Palestinians. Brager could have had this conversation with the school’s administration; however, he took it upon himself to post his beliefs on social media. This ultimately led to him losing his job.

Freedom of speech is not the same as freedom of rebuttal or freedom of consequence. Freedom of speech does not incite actions that would harm others, which is why Hart was met with backlash until he apologized about his comments and why Brager was fired from his job. 

Related Articles:

Billboard

Riverdale Press