I’ve heard the same issues about Wikipedia that everybody seems familiar with (“not a valid source,” etc.), but, in 2007, I conducted a project very similar to the current program and proved the skeptics wrong.

Background

I attended Oregon State University from 2003 to 2008 and wrote my undergraduate thesis under guidance of Associate Professor Andrea Marks. It was an amazing adventure. My written thesis demonstrated three key points…

1. The common American public education model had grown from several cultural and technological revolutions^[6][7]
2. The effectiveness and equality of American public education has suffered during the cultural and technological progress of the 1980s and 1990s^{[figure 1][18][19]}
3. The shift in cultural norms that have come with the Millennial Generation and the advancement of technology that has related to the Web 2.0 movement should be embraced and integrated into instructional models to improve education (but be bold and do it correctly)^{[28][32][34][37]}

Lawrence Lessig’s Free Culture arguments are well summarized by his 2006 lecture, “The Withering Of The Net” < http://www.archive.org/details/igovernance_rawfootage_l2a >

My favorite part of the thesis was an adventure in which I expressed my frustrations and then showed the legitimacy of our new techno-cultural frontier. I cited Wikipedia (using the proper URLs), YouTube^[40], television news^[35] and dramas^[14], a public email list^[34] and various lectures from distinguished academics^[27][39][41]. It felt good to supplant the cultural symbols of my contemporaries into the academic rigor of an accredited, four-year professional degree program; it felt good to write out my thoughts; and it felt great to get full credit for my thesis and graduate with cum laude honors.

Proof of concept

After writing the thesis, I was required to perform three projects that proved or explored its findings and arguments. For one of the projects, I contributed to the Wikimedia Foundation’s various projects and explored their collaborative merits and cultural functions. In total, I have logged 3189 edits since April 14, 2007.

I told my classmates how to use wikis, how to evaluate Wikipedia’s articles for accuracy and completeness (follow through on those references!), and how to take important terms from articles and references and find scholarly books and articles in the amazing databases of our university.

I participated in mild edit wars on contentious articles and silly nitpicks over the appropriateness of “slaughter” versus “kill,” when used to describe humans.

The Secret Service watches your Wikimedia contributions

I combed through my previous years of illustrations, photographs, scans and saved photos and released a lot of my work into the public domain. I worked for the library at the time and went rogue (like Carl Malamud) to “free” many high-resolution public domain images from the university’s archives. I even caught the ire (OTRS #2007110910016335) of the US Secret Service by uploading 24 megapixel scans of the US Dollar in denominations of $1, $5, $10, $20, $50 and $100 bills (they’re public domain!).

Since my thesis, I have fully reorganized the categories relating to printing technologies, written a few articles about new construction in Portland, Oregon, corrected various typos, and contributed many sources and statements to articles that interest me.

Reflection

I interacted with two people holding doctorates, a notoriously mysterious contributor, several users who ended up banned (one directly by Jimmy Wales, himself!), and various unknown-to-me usernames and IP addresses. The work was at the hours and pace that fit my schedule (although, there was a lot of pressure to meet course deadlines), and from the comfort of my own office in the urban apartment I shared with three other students.

Throughout my interactions with the Wikimedia Foundation, I have learned that Wikipedia and the cultural commons are only as good as we make them—and they are generally pretty darn amazing. My goal was to push the boundaries of my university, the roles of Wikipedia and the legitimacy of my generation’s norms. I found that my writing skills greatly improved as I synthesized texts together to form sophisticated articles. My reading comprehension skills grew by leaps and bounds after pouring through several hundred books, thousands of journal articles and dozens of web projects.

Lastly, I found the courage to stand up to the Old Garde and let them know that the internet and its collaborative technologies are transforming the world—whether or not they join us in this new frontier.

Introduced Feb. 4, sponsors include Sens. Rick Metsger and Ben Westlund and Reps. Deborah Boone, Jean Cowan, Arnie Roblan and Brad Witt. Both the Senate and House were unanimous with “aye” votes.

During this three-week special session, the Legislature also debated other — more divisive — bills, including driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants, increased prison sentences for property crimes and whether health care is a right.

The monument bill, effective July 1, requires state officials to consult with the Commission on Indian Services and all nine of the federally-recognized Tribal governments within the state — Burns Paiute Tribe, Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua & Siuslaw, Coquille Indian Tribe, Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Indians, Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde, Klamath Tribes, Confederated Tribes of Siletz, Confederated Tribes of Umatilla Indian Reservation, Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs.

The bill also mandates private, not state, funds be raised for these efforts.

Funding and labor should not only create a monument, but make its messages visible to all people — Oregonians and beyond.

These voices should be heard in Oregon schools, National Endowment for the Arts grants, performing arts, festivals, historical societies, the recently announced Oregon Encyclopedia Project and especially in our homes.

The 2000 Oregon census recorded 45,211 Native Americans — 1.6 percent of the population.

There are records of indigenous people living in what is now called Oregon for at least 10,000 years, according to the Legislative Commission on Indian Services.

The state and all nine tribes can use this opportunity to not only reflect upon the past, but define the future with these monuments.

Without a doubt, it will be difficult to find one monument, one quote or one image to tell the entire history of indigenous people.

However, we hope one can be found that accurately and honestly reflects all of their stories.

Just as the state will recognize tradition and wisdom borne from local history, we can be inspired by OSU alumnus Linus Pauling, who “always wanted to know as much as possible about the world,” as quoted in Barbara Marinacci’s 1995 book, “Linus Pauling in his Own Words.”

Originally written for and published in The Daily Barometer.Â

The attendees came with stories they have personally experienced and have witnessed.

Just as participants of the other forums did — they laughed at the absurdity of some examples, rolled their eyes at others and frequently exclaimed the pervasiveness of the problems.

What was most clear from the participants is they are all — no matter what race or ethnicity — affected by racism and they are tired of it.

The forum also made it clear that media reveals inequalities that exist deep within our society.

Participants shared specific examples of violence, miscommunication, psychological damage, economic inequalities, disenfranchisement and an incredible administrative burdens (but worth it) of facilitating change and responding to discrimination.

During the forum, five common occurrences of racism in media were discussed and critiqued:

1. Mug shots and newsworthiness determined by race,
2. Racial differences in sports coverage,
3. Stereotypical roles — by race — in movie and TV plots,
4. Inadequate coverage of environmental racism,
5. Racial imbalances within newsroom demographics.

With the first common occurrence — newsworthiness assigned by race — journalists legitimize institutional inequalities and irrational views.

During preparation for the forum an example came up about covering crimes. Like, journalists being much more likely to publish mug shots of black suspects than they are for white suspects.

During the coverage of Hurricane Katrina, even the captions associated with news photos showed differential treatment by race (Blacks “looting” stores, Whites “finding” in stores).

With the second common occurrence — racial narratives in sports — journalists perpetuate inaccurate, insulting views.

When profiling white athletes, the narrative frequently focuses on how hard they work and train.

With black athletes, however, stereotypical narratives of “natural talent” have problematic associations with antiquated views of Blacks as “savage” people.

With the third common occurrence — racial trends in entertainment media — stereotypes and unequal values run rampant.

In countless horror films, black characters fail to live through to the final credits, according to Terryl Ross, Director of Community and Diversity.

When films require Asian actors, casting calls have been placed for “very Asian men,” which was discussed at the Hate Speech forum sponsored by the Asian Pacific Cultural Center.

With the fourth common occurrence — white and green-washing of American institutions — media failures further inequalities of representation, voice and justice.

As Americans have seen with the current global warming debate, well-funded interests are frequently heard over others.

When placement of waste sites, prisons, highways and other public services are discussed, media coverage of the “not in my backyard” (NIMBY) response appears to greatly favor white people.

In the journalistic pursuit of balance for arguments, giving weight to the “economic growth before people’s health” arguments may not be entirely ethical.

With the fifth common occurrence — media processes centering on the white male perspective — the institution clearly fails to represent all of the world’s interests.

With historical narratives of, “white upper class males drive society,” society is quick to blame ills on non-white people, according to Lani Roberts, Ph.D., professor of philosophy.

Courses in the new media communications department discuss American newsroom demographics that, at one count, have been 98 percent white.

Showing problems both within media interview processes and public institutions themselves, white males frequently are interview sources.

With each of these five cases, the forum clearly saw the differences between the cultural values assigned to races in media.

When it comes to solutions for racism, however, the forum was less conclusive; while public awareness of the problem creates opportunity for change, the media profession itself must act to change.

Furthermore, as pointed out by Shannon Warren, senior in ethnic studies, racism exists within every individual. People must understand the history of this problem, and apologize.

The best path for change, according to Larry Roper, Ph.D., Vice Provost for student affairs, is approaching this issue from a respectful, emotionally aware and mutually dependent understanding between all races. Roper also insists on the importance of providing effective time and places for reflection, recalling the findings of his doctoral studies.

Just as the problem is complicated, solutions within media have their barriers — the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics is voluntary and unenforced. SPJ, as we have stated before, “encourage(s) fellow journalists and the public to hold news reports and commentary up to ethical scrutiny.”

While the best journalists will uphold standards to seek truth, minimize harm, act independently and to be accountable, the SPJ acknowledges these all are “a balancing act” without rules on a slippery-slope.

As we attempt to bring truth and equality to cultural values, definitions of truth, harm, independence and accountability will change as well.

Solutions to the first case require clear, authoritative documentation of news coverage by race. Many advocacy groups exist to critique media, but the institution itself must join the cause.

Just as Bill Clinton’s 1994 executive order to address environmental racism mandated change from the top-down, media conglomerates must stand up to do the same.

The first case also requires a readjustment of views and priorities, ensuring society views the problems of one group as a problem for all.

Solutions to the second case — just as it was said during the Feb. 19 sexism forum — should encourage non-traditional media outlets to deliver engaging, non-archetypical stories of athletes.

Just as people had strongly denounced Don Imus’ remarks about the Rutgers University women’s basketball team, Americans should ensure the Web 2.0 revolution welcomes such critiques.

The third case should implore media, film and creative writing industries to denounce inequalities and pursue honest narratives that reflect all sides of the human condition.

Just as movies like Harold and Kumar, comedians like Sarah Silverman and shows like The Colbert Report point out the ridiculousness of stereotypes, entertainment should continue to deliver biting critiques and directly engage skeptics.

The fourth case should require more transparency within the media industry to reduce corporate censorship and conflict of interest. Society needs access to (accurate) information to fully understand issues.

Balance does not always mean both sides of an issue but should reflect cultural values and effects on individuals — equally for all impacted.

Finally, the fifth case of racism discussed in the forum points out the value of affirmative action.

This is not reverse inequality but instead brings more backgrounds and perspectives to the media institution.

As the current media landscape of regulatory failures has decreased the number of voices heard, alternative media is of ultimate importance for democracy.

What becomes clear, then, is an informed and empowered public must speak up to ask for change. Journalists must be open to critique and understand where it comes from and what it can provide.

Racism in media limits our perspective and prevents the real stories from being heard. Working together as equals — open and honest — all people will gain.

The forums will not stop here. Expect more conversations — classism and ableism, among others — next term.

Originally written for and published in The Daily Barometer.Â

LAUREN L. DILLARD | THE DAILY BAROMETER

Friends and critics of the Barometer were quick to point out the incongruency of alcoholism on the list of discussion topics, asking, “was this a joke?”

While the discussion was truly about all forms of alcohol consumption — from holiday dinners to high-risk parties — “alcoholism” was an inadequate reduction in language.

Alcoholism is a disease, and an individual’s problem (affecting many others along the way), that is treatable. Institutionalized oppression based on identity (like racism and sexism) are disgusting behaviors of privileged people; the victims cannot easily find treatment.

While the forum did not attempt to equate the two, alcohol was chosen as a discussion topic for its prevalence within college life. Just as all -isms are interconnected, alcohol consumption can be connected to many -isms.

Borrowing Marilyn Frye’s “birdcage” analogy of oppression, alcohol issues may be seen as a bar of that cage.

Participants shared specific examples of either witnessing or directly dealing with alcohol poisoning, vomit in elevators, waking up to noise at 2 a.m., drunkards fighting and the incredible enforcement expense of responding to alcohol-related incidents.

In the forum on Feb. 26, three common topics of alcohol(ism) in media were discussed and critiqued:

1. Inaccurate social norms in advertisements selling alcohol,
2. News coverage of alcohol-related crimes,
3. Alcohol stories in pop culture as entertainment unto themselves.

With the first common occurrence — advertisements selling alcohol — marketers frequently further stereotypes and misunderstandings (with media as monetary beneficiary).

When sexuality is used to sell, it is incorrectly portrayed as a game, an act of conquest and always of the heterosexual perspective.

When social gains are used to sell, alcohol is portrayed as inseparable from celebratory, classy events.

With the second common occurrence — news coverage of alcohol — journalists only tell part of the story.

When crimes are committed by intoxicated individuals, their state of intoxication is often discussed as if it were an excuse or a cause of the crime.

In coverage of MIPs, DUIIs and supplying to minors charges, the legal system is portrayed as an “out to get you” institution.

With the third common occurrence — alcohol in entertainment media — media outlets fail to accurately portray the real story of alcohol.

With movies like “Superbad,” “Beerfest” and “Old School,” the moral of the story is largely overwhelmed by the humorous antics.

In celebrity gossip, pursuit of stories to damage a public persona’s reputation are top priority.

With each of these three cases, the forum saw clear differences between media stereotypes and alcohol realities.

When it came to solutions for alcohol misperceptions, however, the forum was less conclusive; while public awareness of the problem creates opportunity for change, the media profession itself must act to change.

The U.S. alcohol trade group is currently self-regulating for advertising standards. Citizens and advocacy groups must speak up to hold them accountable.

The marketing exists (of course) because demand exists for alcohol. Alcohol, celebration and class are inseparable; this requires us all to be positive influences, especially to our closest friends and family.

The recently released report from Gov. Kulongoski’s office, stating Oregon has one of the highest youth drinking rates, should be cause for alarm.

When crimes occur involving intoxicated people, the ultimate truth is that their decisions are to blame, beginning with the decision to drink, and the behavioral mind set that follows.

Lt. Lanz encouraged the forum participants to act with health and safety as the ultimate priority, there are worse things that could happen than an MIP. Now, it is time for society to tell stories of individuals courageous enough to protect others’ health, despite their legal risks.

Lastly, within this era of electronic media, a power vacuum of family values has emerged. We all must rise up to challenge ourselves and others to act responsibly. Bringing back family dinners is a great beginning — this is where meaningful conversation can occur.

Today, Mar. 4, in the Barometer conference room, Snell 120, the community forum continues with a discussion on racism.

Originally written for and published in The Daily Barometer.

Response to ‘-ism’ column.

Wright, an active gamer during his college years, decided that creating games would be his perfect outlet and career. His first game, Raid on Bungeling Bay (1984), found inspiration from architects and urban theorists Christopher Alexander and Jay Forrester. The two stressed spatial relationships, systems, processes, and “the grammar of design” in their writings. While design theories played a role in Bungleing Bay’s gameplay and organization, it was not until his 1989 release of SimCity that systems, processes, and design theory — all dependent on worldviews — would become the centerpoint of a game and ultimately, an entire genre, movement, and generation.

Wright’s cultural impact

The simulation, or “god game” genre is largely Wright’s creation, starting with SimCity. A smash hit, the game received approximately 20 awards in 1989 and 1990, according to its publisher. With so many awards and such commercial success, a whole suite of Sim-games was released, with Wright designing SimEarth, SimCopter, SimAnt, SimLife, The Sims, and the upcoming Spore. His publisher and co-founded company, Maxis, designed SimIsle, SimTower, SimPark, SimSafari, SimFarm, SimTown, and Streets of SimCity. While newer versions of SimCity have continued to make top-10 lists for sales and reviews, The Sims has been particularly notable, selling 70 million copies (the best-selling computer game of all time) and receiving frequent mention in mainstream media.

KURAFIRE | CC

Impacting the majority of gamers in the past 20 years, Wright has brought creative problem solving, design theory, and systems thinking to millions. In a more pragmatic sense, as well, he has confronted many with moral dilemmas, ethical quandaries, and the basics of socio-political thought. Wright draws inspiration from his successful experiences in Montessori schools, in comparison to the uninspired, dogmatic mainstream pedagogical model. Whether they realize it or not, Wright’s audiences are an enlightened, creative, and active group.

Deconstructing SimCity

Though likely for technical reasons, in this simplified model of our world the details both included and ignored are equally telling. Players construct cities (and later, regions with multiple cities) to balance the needs of residents, commerce, and industry.

While the game provides moral and ethical appeals to look after citizens, it implies western, egocentric (though, bordering on homocentric at times) values on people; the goal is clearly the greatest good for the greatest number. Economic classes comprise three levels — low, middle, and high. The lower class in this game are often found in areas of lesser education, higher crime rates, and/or higher pollution. While the real world has a myriad of links between cause and effect — many of them evidence of systems of oppression (devaluation of nature and women, capitalism’s unequal wealth distribution) — the world of SimCity is invariably from a Newtonian worldview that, tragically, reinforces poverty with social and environmental injustices by linking them, intrinsically.

The environment itself may possibly present the most problematic reductions. All but water and steep slopes are available for constructing civilization. Land that does not produce tax revenue has no other value and is wasted space. The world’s geographical and geological variations are reduced to forests, hills, and grasslands of the American east and midwest. Oceans, rivers, forests, and grasslands are devoid of life and represented only by several tints and shades of the basic hues of our earth — brown, green, and blue. Of what Merchant outlines as the heart of our ecological crisis — air, water, soils, and biota — only air and water receive the most cursory of treatments in each game in this series. The solution to exploiting each, reflects a techno-optimistic perspective; constructing parks and trees from the blood money of capitalism (though, it is never presented in that way) will apparently buy salvation for the atmosphere, while a water treatment plant or two can solve any aquatic discoloration.

In this Newtonian sandbox, land is parceled into its basic units of perfect squares. Without civilization, nature is a boring and worthless entity. As players build this civilization, pollution effects are localized and only spread proportional to the distance from the source. As each individual’s wellbeing is improved, the society as a whole improves by default. Power and water are infinitely sustainable, so long as the state can siphon enough money from its capitalist society. Both in SimCity and the western world, the Newtonian worldview and egocentric ethic allow little worry for the resource base because, with everything divided into seemingly perfect parts, aggregating the whole as a system becomes computationally impossible.

Deconstructing The Sims

Inspired by Wright’s experience in the Oakland fire of 1991, this “digital dollhouse” game condenses human cognitive science, psychology, philosophy, spirituality, and material culture into a concise and reasonably tasteful (ESRB “Teen” rating) package. Players control the lives, surroundings, and relationships of their Sims from cradle to grave.

Where SimCity blurs the difficult connections between privilege and injustice, The Sims facilitates the misconception that standard of living equates with quality of life. The Sims’ egocentric ethic and Newtonian worldview requires the player to steer their character up the ranks of society, largely by aquiring wealth — materially and socially.

Three basic arenas of life — relationships, careers, and housing — determine the mood of a character. While relationship happiness is obtained through both quantity and quality of interactions with other characters, a player will learn nothing about interpersonal relationships and treat other characters instrumentally. The only indicator of career happiness is level of advancement, requiring players to accept and conform to ideas that each career field accepts only a prescribed set of skills, behaviors, and qualities. Housing happiness in The Sims is the most easily critiqued, for it is obtained through buying more stuff and more expensive stuff.

Whether intentional or not, the Newtonian worldview of The Sims represents many of the more obvious injustices within society. Clearly, though, as a best-selling title, many people hold egocentric ethics and find simulating success to be a worthy use of their time.

Conclusion

Merchant identifies that, while education is central to increasing quality of life, the proper subjects of education receive far too little attention. Just as it is socially acceptable within the real world to proffer, “because you can do something, it doesn’t mean you should,” it should be equally acceptable to do so for the digital, virtual worlds we construct. While simulation allows experimentation with less resource use, the power to affect cultural and social change should require simulation to act within an ethical philosophical framework. Furthermore, in simulations that involve culture and society (and most of them do), an understanding of the many different environmental ethics and worldviews is necessary to bring social and environmental justice. Lastly, that the media of video games are now a mainstream cultural product simulating morality, ethics, problem solving, community, and creativity as the grammar of their design, the ethical and moral frameworks of society should compel game developers to act responsibly. While fanciful, creative, and engaging, simulation games both reinforce our ills and create them anew.

Self-critique

This author apologizes for focusing on a topic that may be awkwardly narrow and disconnected from academia but intends for the analogies and philosophical models to remain true. He hopes that their application has been fair.

This is a reaction to Wright’s legacy, within the context of Merchant’s insights into environmental ethics and worldviews. Authored by a follower of Wright’s games, this is not an attempt at character assassination but certainly reflects frustration of an ignorant, misguided past. Ultimately, this holds hope for an enlightened and polycentric future of social and
environmental justice.

Bibliography

• Kelly, Kevin. “Will Wright. The Mayor of Sim City.” Wired, 1994.
• Merchant, Carolyn. “Radical Ecology: The Search for a Livable World.” Second Edition. Routledge, 2005. Chapters 2 and 3.
• Seabrook, John. “Game Master,” The New Yorker, November 6, 2006.
• “Sim-ply a genius.” The Sun, December 30, 2005.
• Thompson, Bob. “Guys and Digital Dolls,” Washington Post, April 14, 2002; Page W08.
• Wright, Will. “SimCity.” Maxis, 1989.
• Wright, Will. “SimCity 2000.” Maxis, 1993.
• Wright, Will. “SimCity 3000.” Electronic Arts, 1999.
• Wright, Will. “SimCity 4.” Electronic Arts, 2003.
• Wright, Will. “Spore.” Electronic Arts, 2008.
• Wright, Will. “The Sims.” Electronic Arts, 2000.
• Wright, Will. “The Sims 2.” Electronic Arts, 2004.
• Yi, Matthew. “PROFILE: Will Wright: Unsimulated success.” San Francisco Chronicle. November 3, 2003.

This is the first part of the forum series, which is about “-isms” in media. The series addresses the media’s involvement in legitimizing and spreading issues within our culture and communities.

The attendees came with stories of articles they read, people they know, advertisements they see and of theories they discuss.

They laughed at some, rolled their eyes at others and frequently exclaimed the pervasiveness of the problems.

What was most clear from the participants is they are all — whether they identify as male, female or other — affected by sexism and they are tired of it.

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs was offered as evidence of these problems affecting everybody — disadvantaged groups struggle to fulfill the bottom of the pyramid (physiological and security needs) while those in privilege fail to reach self-actualization.

Participants shared specific examples of sexual and domestic violence, distorted body ideals, psychological and behavioral problems, communication errors, distorted goals and roles of power, condoned or ignored social ills, economic struggles, reduced job opportunities and a loss or devaluation of specialized knowledge.

In the forum on Feb. 19, four common topics of sexism in media were discussed and critiqued:

1. Women who are in headlines for their sensational, atypical gender behavior,
2. Editorial decisions of newsworthiness for gender-specific news,
3. Photos and/or quotes that fit gender stereotypes,
4. The process of sports reporting and the gender-specific contents of sports reports.

With the first common occurrence — identifying gender as a key aspect of a story — journalists may create a “survivor and victim” duality.

When crimes are committed against men, they are frequently portrayed as survivors (“Man recovers from attack”). Women, however, are frequently portrayed as victims (“Woman hospitalized after attack”).

With the second common occurrence — assigning different newsworthiness to gender-specific stories — journalists create irrational differences between special and general interest news.

When covering workplace and school shootings — crimes largely committed by middle class white males — the stories are presented as the problem of a whole society. News centering on women, however, is typically presented as only a woman’s issue (“Women paying more for birth control”).

With the third common occurrence — photos and/or quotes that fit gender stereotypes — journalists only receive part of the story.

When crime, war or conflict occur, men are typically used in news coverage to report facts and figures. In these same stories, women are frequently relied on for sensational, emotional reactions.

With the fourth common occurrence — different men’s and women’s sports coverage — journalists glorify ideals that harm each gender.

In coverage of men’s sports, the traditional themes are of speed, strength and attitude. For women’s sports, journalists’ praise seek different values — beauty, endurance and balance.

In biographical personal profiles, male athletes are frequently photographed in uniform, portrayed as stoic and powerful. Women are typically in dressy attire, often with a partner, their children or pets at their side.

With each of these four cases, the forum clearly saw the differences between the ways males and females are portrayed in the media. When it comes to solutions for sexism, however, the forum was less conclusive; while public awareness of the problem creates opportunity for change, the media profession itself must act to change.

Complicating the solution, the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics is voluntary. SPJ “encourage(s) fellow journalists and the public to hold news reports and commentary up to ethical scrutiny.”

While the best journalists will uphold standards to seek truth, minimize harm, act independently and to be accountable, the SPJ acknowledges these all are “a balancing act” without rules on a slippery-slope.

KAITLIN EMMERLING | THE DAILY BAROMETER

Solutions to the first case require journalists to tread lightly. Gender identification should be for specific purposes and not to sensationalize. Gender neutral terms, however, may mask some problems.
Overall, journalists should tell stories of crime for what they are — an individual’s failures to uphold the standards of their community and family.

Solutions to the second sexism case are largely a matter of re-framing our views of health. While health issues from behavioral exposure may be an individual’s fault, environmental and genetic problems should be the concern of everybody.

Just as reproductive responsibility is shared between the sexes, the emotional burden of individual health is shared by families — nuclear and nontraditional. Journalists who pretend we are not all affected are shortsighted.

Our third case of sexism demands a change in processes. Journalists must ask equal questions of each gender. Editors must demand this and ensure it happens.

Finally, our fourth case of sexism may find solutions in the fringe of the marketplace. Media outlets that are able to deliver engaging, non-archetypical stories of athletes, whatever their gender may be, are clearly going to find success.

What becomes clear, then, is an informed and empowered public must speak up to ask for change. Journalists must be open to critique and understand where it comes from and what it can provide.
Sexism in media limits our perspective and prevents the real stories from being heard. Working together as equals — open and honest — each gender will gain.

This Tuesday, Feb. 26, in the Barometer Conference room, Snell 120, the community forum continues with a discussion on alcoholism and community livability. Lt. Jeff Lanz from the Oregon State Police will contribute.

Originally written for and published in The Daily Barometer.

Chronicling teens’ use of the Internet as a communication, information and social networking tool, Frontline interlaces personal stories with the insights of various experts. Presenting two New Jersey high schools as Anytown, U.S.A., “Growing Up” includes stories of gaming addicts’ all-night binges, a 14-year-old’s MySpace alter-ego, a mother’s battles for control, communities of anorexics furthering their diseases and even a case of cyber bullying gone wrong.

Though Frontline debunks the moral panic over pedophiles and predators, the response inadequately shows the Internet’s cultural impacts in growing up today. The Internet’s positive potential — for decentralization of power, an increase in self-empowerment and the spread of knowledge — is instead presented as problematic for health, communication, attention spans and even the core of our very society.

Rather than highlighting the latest generation gap, Frontline could have confronted the very forces which are making this gap worse.

In their efforts to show kids tethered to YouTube, they overlooked the amazing Do-It-Yourself cultural revolution that challenges the war over intellectual properties. While powerful lobbyists representing the film, music and television conglomerates restrict the use of any and all IP — even within the realm of Fair Use and non-commercial culture — WGBH, this bastion of the free, public media, fails to stand up for independence.

In their efforts to portray young students as cheaters and indifferent to the western classics, Frontline overlooked the fact that 22 percent of America’s public teachers will retire between 2005 and 2010 according to the National Center for Education Information. Without any incentive for continuing education or job security, should we really expect these veteran teachers to engage students?

Frontline’s intent with “Growing Up Online” was to educate parents about their kids’ behaviors. Did they sensationalize the Internet’s cultural revolution and vacuum of power to gain viewership? While browsing YouTube, did they overlook the amazing presentations of Michael Wesch, Kansas State University professor, about the power of Web 2.0?

Finally, did WGBH producers expect to discuss these kids abstractly, that their hopes, desires, wants and dreams were not every bit as fanciful as theirs had been, years ago?

“As we see what this technology can do, we…can’t kill the instinct [it] produces, we can only criminalize it. We can’t stop our kids from using it, we can only drive it underground. We can’t make our kids passive again, we can only make them ‘pirates.’ And is that good?… In a democracy, we ought to be able to do better.”

—Lawrence Lessig, TED 2007.

Originally written for and published in The Daily Barometer.

Correction: the percent of public school teachers planning to retire between 2005 and 2010 now correctly reads 22 percent. The source for this figure had previously reported an incorrect number.

The currently-suspended law would provide domestic partners with similar legal protection as married couples.

Nine other states — California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Vermont and Washington — have laws affording varying protection.

The legal complaint, brought forth by the Alliance Defense Fund’s Senior Counsel Austin Nimocks, a Mississippi lawyer, challenges the signature-verifying methods of Oregon Secretary of State Bill Bradbury.

Two arguments are central to this hearing, and there are no clear-cut answers — yet.

One argument: Should the State of Oregon expend as much effort verifying petition signatures as it currently does for ballot signatures?

The other: Should a federal court be able to alter a state’s referendum process?

Answering the first question requires weighing the cost of verification with the benefit of fraud reduction.

The second question is a matter of states’ rights.

Despite the legal claim of voter disenfranchisement, social positions clearly guide this debate. Such arguments include choice, morality and health.

Throughout courses in OSU’s Bacc Core, it is repeatedly argued that Nimocks’ social argument is misguided.

In the words of philosopher Val Plumwood, Nimocks (as opined on his Sept. 2007 Townhall.com column) is using the “Five Logics of Othering” to dismiss the wants and needs of the LGBT community.

First, Nimocks uses “radical exclusion” to portray homosexuality as a complex and confusing lifestyle obsessed over cruising (anonymous, public sex).

Second, not only are homosexuals excluded from normal society, but he stereotypes them with terms like “the homosexual agenda.”

Furthermore, Nimocks denies and “backgrounds” the lasting, committed LGBT relationships with his data points on cruising. Need we mention how successful heterosexual marriages are known to be?

Fourth, all critiques of the homosexual community asserts heterosexuality as the norm — the comparative basis — asserting its righteousness.

Finally, Nimocks “instrumentalizes” homosexuals, insisting they live a sex-crazed and dangerous lifestyle filled with uncertainties.

On Friday, we hope that, in the words of Senator Ron Wyden, Judge Mosman will “show his commitment to equal rights for all Americans.”

Originally written for and published in The Daily Barometer.

The First Amendment — freedom of speech — protects our rights to discuss and critique issues affecting us all, and transparency enables us to do this — if we have the access. Americans have long held this to be true and are increasingly decentralizing these efforts. In Jan. 2007, Trendwatching.com reported transparency as one of five top trends for 2007.

As said on Trendwatching.com, the effects of transparency on the market have already been significant — effects such as prices, brand power and purchase decisions, which the group says is, “scaring the s— out of [the] non-performing.” As any business class would show, perfect competition requires informed decision-making.

Blogging and multimedia platforms, through so-called “citizen journalism,” have already shown their power to catch crooks, expose flawed products and embarrass celebrities.

Nationally, projects such as FedSpending.org and Opensecrets.org aim to expose the inner financial details of the government and those who run it, in addition to donors of political campaigns.

Even pop-critic Perez Hilton has joined in reporting donations made to candidates by celebrities.

Adequate local transparency, however, has not yet been established. Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski stated in a Jan. 16 press release that transparency and oversight are guiding principles for economic and environmental sustainability.

Defending his position, Kulongoski said, “These issues are regional, non-partisan, long-term and critical to our economy, environment and quality of life.”

On Jan. 4, the Oregon University System Board passed a proposal to increase transparency in fees and tuition.

Discussing similar topics during a Jan. 23 forum, President Ed Ray answered questions from students.
The Editorial Board has learned of ASOSU’s desire to publish information about university fees.

The State of Oregon, OUS, OSU administration and ASOSU have seen the opportunity to greater serve their public. We encourage them to act quickly and make the information accessible. Since technological advancements have reduced the burden of publication and dissemination, little is needed to encourage these efforts.

Greater access to information not only exposes mistakes and criminal actions, but provides the opportunity for greater trust in oft-maligned institutions. Americans’ First Amendment rights provide an excellent framework for effective, free communication and decision-making, but now, to advance our democracy, we require accurate, honest disclosure.

Originally written for and published in The Daily Barometer.

For the typical OSU student—busy and broke—Thanksgiving is a welcome relief, eating a home-cooked meal, watching football and seeing their older, grayer, wrinklier and smellier (we’re looking at you, Grandpa) loved ones. If this applies to you next week, take a moment to survey their health. How healthy is your family? How affordable is your family’s health care? What situations have helped or hurt your family? This isn’t an argument for socialized medicine or universal health care, but of the universal human condition—we all want to be healthy. As supported by reports from the Centers for Disease Control, American Journal of Public Health, World Health Organization, State University of New York at Potsdam and the U.S. Census Bureau, Euro-Americans are disproportionately affected by suicide, liver disease and heart disease; African-Americans are disproportionately affected by diabetes, infant mortality and homicide.

In 2004, African-Americans faced a greater deficit proportionally than Euro-Americans toward achieving adequate, preventative health care.

While African-Americans alone faced a deficit of $46 billion toward achieving health care base standards, Euro-Americans spent nearly $108 billion on “sin” goods like tobacco.

While these statistics are unfortunate, we hope to bring humility. It is surrounding us: many OSU students will be the first in their families to graduate college. Though many OSU students come from privilege, we all will enter society as the educated class with the power to change the world and the instruments to make these changes happen.

Though Americans certainly have the right to consume what they please (within the law), and individuals ought to bear the financial burden for their own health needs, the reality is that each ethnicity is hurt from their respective situations. Is there a positive outcome for both sides? Are we as students listening as the Baccalaureate Core encourages us to make these changes? Just as the typical feel-good movies of the holiday season will tell you, family and love are the most powerful things we have. Health is not only a matter of treating disease, but quality of life and prevention. Of the countless marketing messages we hear every day—especially in the coming month—remember your own identity and where it comes from: the heart.

Now, pass the gravy and turn up the tube—John Madden has some riveting analysis for us. Well, not really. Happy Thanksgiving!

Originally written for and published in The Daily Barometer.