Stage 7: Real News, Fake News, Red News, Blue News

Where people get their news likely determines their views. Two major news outlets, such as CNN and FOX, may report the same event with drastically contrasting tones. Ever since the phrase "fake news" took off, the media slid down a rabbit hole about what actually is fact and why facts matter at all. Of course, it's been an observable tendency for Americans to ignore reality, possibly by immersing themselves in reality TV shows or nursing one of the many options for addiction. Might the U.S. have an inferiority complex that enables deflections away from the truth? Living in delusion is less scary than facing the facts for many people who know the facts will turn their stomachs or force them to change. Watching the news should simply be an informative endeavor, not a persuasive buffet to nourish one's defense mechanisms. A person requires discernment in order to figure out what's happening in politics today without echoing some sponsored spokesperson's outcry about the new, hot thing to fear/worry. Regardless of party affiliation, widening the scope of news to include opposing opinions or attitudes will provide a reality more weighted in reality. The case for reality is that it combats ignorance. Ignorance leads to all sorts of human shenanigans that cause suffering. I've never met anyone who wants to suffer, but I've met quite a few who convince themselves that they're not. This unwillingness to recognize the facts inhibits healing on individual and national levels. 

The future of journalism from an outsider's perspective seems up in the air. Newspaper organizations are dropping like flies which decreases local news knowledge, and social media currently puts users at risk of consuming untrue headlines or being bombarded with whatever is most popular/trending at that moment. Hopefully, dedicated members of the press will not stoop to pandering or bribes. They will have to inform effectively to combat the fear-mongering that is all too common. They will report the facts even if it shines an unfortunate light on someone with an honorable reputation. 

The public must raise their standards as well and refuse to be mentally fed the nutritional equivalent of marshmallows. Look at multiple channels, sites, and papers. Read more than the headline or 140-character tweet. You determine what is and isn't fake news, not the news (or some government official being criminally investigated). 

Stage 5: Prioritizing Early Education

You could spend endless hours reading about what is wrong with the U.S. public school system and another eternity reading about how we should fix it. According to the Pew Research Center, U.S. students continually score in the "middle of the pack" internationally. We're used to being number one in most international competitions. From personal experience, watching the Olympics as an American is incredibly satisfying. Today, we hear the echoes from post World War II  of being the greatest country in the world. How do we have world-class universities, yet lag behind other developed countries in K-12 education?
I don't think the solution is to increase competitive incentives, and standardized testing isn't helping either. Like most governmental issues, there are multiple layers to the problem. Our nation's children need to be nurtured academically, socially, and healthily (meaning access to health care and proper nutrition). We need to start praising effort more than talent. Children's confidence in academics can be jumpstarted in Pre-K programs. Unfortunately, access to quality preschools is limited.
Cultivating a child's natural curiosity at a young age will set them up for a more holistic education and motivate them to pursue the joy of knowledge. This drive will ultimately push a society to evolve intelligently. Investing in early education prevents older kids from having low self esteem and playing a constant game of catch-up. Many kids get tired of this game.
If the people of the U.S.A wish to remain to be a leading society, focused efforts toward early education will hold up other pillars of American excellence.

Stage 6: Commenting on Mr. Cargile's Post on Climate Change Legislation

My fellow classmate, Clay Cargile, wrote about the threat of global warming and how the current EPA administration is not acting with the environment's best interest like their name would imply. His post, Change Is Needed, makes clear the "daunting truth" of business interests outweighing public health and environmental preservation. He informed me of Scott Pruitt's (Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency) decision to repeal The Clean Power Plan which "would cut carbon emissions by 32 percent over the next 25 years." Apparently, this Obama-era plan would "decrease premature deaths by 1,500 to 3,600." To the people who propose that regulating emissions hurts industry job growth and economic prosperity, do they simply not care about the health of themselves or their communities? The environment gives so much to humanity. Nobody is going to be around to contribute to these "energy" (oil/gas/coal--nonrenewable) businesses if they're all sick or running from natural disasters. The science is clear. We need to make renewable energy the dominant resource. Mr. Cargile makes a wonderful point: "If the EPA's sole goal is to protect the environment they would have never attempted to combat this legislation." Scott Pruitt is not the right person for the job, because he does not make the obvious prioritization of environmental health (which affects public health and the economy and the life of every American or foreign person) over the business sector. Thank you Clay for your work reminding us all of the urgency of climate change's influence and impact in the U.S.

Mocial Sedia

I read “Social Media is Corroding Our Democracy”, an editorial on Washington Monthly’s blog. Chayenne Polimedio wrote it. She writes about integrating “orchestrated chance encounters” and “unchosen experiences” into social media to guide people out of their bubbles. These ideas are pulled from Cass R. Sunstein’s #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. The intended audience would be general: anyone who uses social media. Polimedio lives in D.C. and is currently a research associate in the Political Reform program at New America (think tank/civic enterprise). She has a B.A. in Political Science and Government from Purdue University. The article’s title is more of an attention grabber than a preview of the contents. Polimedio relies heavily on Sunstein’s work. One might mistake the article for a book review. The author is clearly anti-echo chambers. She acknowledges that tackling them would easily infringe upon freedom of speech, though. She is simply adding to an already open discussion on the effects of social media/ tech on democracy. She doesn’t try to answer any questions definitively, but suggests that we at least try to strike a balance. I think Polimedio set an approachable tone, one that wouldn’t invoke defensiveness on either party side. Her job is to bridge differing ideas, promote tolerance, and depend on accurate information. She notes that adding opposing views into people’s newsfeeds or timeline or stream might not change anyone’s behavior. The potential if it did is quite enticing, and probably why she wrote the article: to offer a possible solution to biased/one-sided political views. 

"The Times They Are A Changin'"

Stephen Marche wrote Confederates, Columbus and everyone else: Let's justtear down all the public memorials to 'great' men, an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times. Marche writes a monthly column about “our culture” for Esquire, and has authored six books. I’m not sure who the intended audience is, or if there even was one.  This article appears less than two months after the Charlottesville protests, which amplified the debate over the removal of Confederate statues. Marche argues that ALL statues should come down.  He makes other leaps too, relying heavily on iconoclasm.  This article is mainly about how this Columbus Day “will be a confrontation with history.”

Marche quotes/disparages Thomas Carlyle’s reverence for the “Great Men” who’ve made history. Marche claims, “The notion that an individual, any individual, can embody human ideals is null and void.” We don’t know which human ideals he is referring to. We also don’t receive any proof as to why that notion is pointless. According to Human Rights Watch, Obama never genuinely prioritized human rights, so he left office “with many opportunities wasted.” The author thinks this is a perfectly sound reason to invalidate our former president’s other achievements. Only Malala Yousafzai could get away scotch free in Marche’s view, and he isn’t even sure about that. It reminds me of a Talladega Nights: “If you ain’t first, you’re last!”

The point at which I stopped taking the article seriously was when he advised “to take the worst thing a historical figure has ever said or done, establish it as their whole being and then make the destruction of their memory a collective benefit.” What a gigantic deadweight! He gives examples of iconoclasm in action, but not it’s effects or how it could be used to destroy precious history by certain religious groups. It’s like instead of cleaning the baking pan, you just throw the whole thing away and buy a new one. We can’t afford that, realistically. I like imagining a world where none of us are raised above the rest, being ‘accept’ional not exceptional. Though nature can be chaotic, as well as mass populations, politics should encourage steadiness and balance. Stark changes in governance may influence people to go to other extremes. Let us demonstrate caution before proceeding.

But seriously… get rid of Confederate statues, street names, etc.

Food for Thought (WARNING: sour and bitter flavor)

I found this article on campus sexual assault policy change to be worth noting: Trump administration rescinds Obama-era guidance on campus sexual assault

I wish we didn’t have to talk about it, hear about it, or read about it---Sexual assault is happening on our nation’s higher learning institutions, and we might want to pay attention for it could help protect many lives. Our new Education Secretary, Betsy DeVos, recently announced a policy change that would allow universities an easy way of dismissing allegations/cases. One of the reasons is to help “balance in protecting the rights of victims and the accused.” Some universities have already vowed to keep the Obama era policy of 2011, but time will tell which schools will turn their backs on students…

This isn’t ground breaking news, but it may provide insight and warnings. Give it a read and tell me what y’all think!

Okay, Ladies, Now Let's Get Information

Welcome!