Facebook and Twitter's brainchildren in a brawl

- Dipo Doherty

Facebook, a company renowned for its innovation and revolution, brought about a new era to the world: the era of social communication. The company is headed by the far from charismatic founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who in the light of it all was able to convince the general public to ride on the S.S. Facebook. Fast forward a few years later. Twitter, a company with a different approach to social communication, showed the world that if you force people to do things your way (140 character restriction) and get a celebrity to frantically endorse your product, you just might be successful.

There comes a time in any company’s life cycle where the need for innovation is overshadowed by an overpowering need for growth. And as we can clearly see, both companies are approaching this peak. Just like any weary father, who is looking to protect his family’s lineage, they find worthy suitors to join the family.

Facebook made the jaw breaking bargain to acquire the new movie star on the block (Instagram) for over a billion big ones. A bargain which left some confounded as to the logic of spending so much on an app that hasn’t been able to make profits. Now we can keep arguing as to the real impact of Instagram has on Facebook, but we know its a done deal. Twitter seized a good opportunity, to acquire their latest weapon in their arsenal: Vine, a year before they launched. Vine incorporated some of twitter’s core values (restrict people even more and give them an opportunity to be creative), and this philosophy seemed to work.

At around 2pm on June 20th, Mark Zuckerberg and Kevin Systrom presented a new feature to the world, in a move to innovate and raise optimism for shareholders. This update featured the new and innovative Facebook video on Instagram. This new feature lets users of Instagram take 15 second video clips and share them with your friends. You could also apply a new palette of filters to these video bites, which seemed quite similar to the photo filters we’ve grown to love but thats fine. But here is the issue, doing this has put them in the boxing ring with Twitter’s Vine which does the same thing minus 8 seconds and the filters. Now I know a lot of critics have called this a cheap shot on Facebook’s part, a less than innovative way to join the video market. Lets cut it and go straight to the point, Instagram just pulled… continue reading 

A Look into the Modern Family

- Shamira Azlan

The twenty-first century American family has undoubtedly transformed to become undefinable. The inability to fit these new family dynamics into neat little boxes is in no way negative, but rather it represents new opportunities to erase established stereotypes and put in place new ideas of the modern family: a family not based on racial or even social factors, but on love and community. This progression is evident today, with most media outlet highlighting these new values in television shows, movies and even in modern art.

If we look back to the 1970’s, we can see sitcoms and television shows such as the Brady Brunch and Diff’rent Strokes representing the different family dynamics that were deemed as relatable at the time. Twenty years later we see the laughable, yet dysfunctional American family in shows such as Married with Children. Their dysfunctional dynamic was more relatable than the typical overplayed stepford family allusion that had been previously deemed as “ideal”. Fast forward to the late 90’s and the early 2000’s we see shows like Will and Grace and Queer as Folk showing an alternate lifestyle, representing the gay and lesbian community. Other shows that represented different families during the time included My Wife and Kids, Gilmore Girls and Everybody Hates Chris. Presently, family-focused television shows such as Modern Family- a sitcom focusing on the very different lives of three families- and Two and a Half Men, the dysfunctional makeshift family, has joined the myriad of shows that depict family lives in our community. These sitcoms and televisions shows are mere representations of stereotypes of what families are today and it is up to the public to deem which shows are relatable.

In addition to sitcoms, we have seen another genre emerge to tell stories of the American family: reality television. Today we see many reality television shows showing the lives of very different families, families most of us would probably have never encountered. Granted, some aspects of it are skewed to please the masses and increase ratings but… continue reading 

Organ Donation Dilemmas

- Kerry Hughes 

Organ donation is a topic that is rarely discussed, except when one is in need of one. However, they the topic is currently back in the news, particularly in the case of a 10 year old little girl, Sarah Murnaghan. Sarah has cystic fibrosis and is in need of both a lung and liver transplant.

Due to the organization of the transplant list, there are two separate lists: one for children under 12 and one for adults. Sarah would be on the under 12 list. The idea of separating the lists came from the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, which has handled transplant policy for the federal government since 2005. The reasoning for needing two lists was that children are smaller, so they need smaller organs.

Now, with two lists, adults and children can be sure to receive appropriately-sized organs. It is important to note, however, that children only receive organs after they have been offered to the adult list or in minimal numbers through their own transplant list. The fact is there are far more transplantable organs available for adults than children: 1,700 transplantable lungs were on the list last year, but only 20 came from donors under 11. 

Sarah’s parents and a PA congressman, Lou Barletta, petitioned the courts to allow Murnaghan to be exempt from the rule that places her on the list for under 12 year olds. Some transplant specialists stated that these guidelines have become outdated and that there is no medical reason not to transplant a matched organ, based on blood type and size. Appeals were made to the Health and Human Services Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, but she chose not to intervene in this case.

In related news, there has been growing concern from the medical community that the courts are making medical decision instead of doctors. The worry is that a risky precedent is…continue reading 

The Morning After

- Kerry Hughes

The morning after pill will now be made readily available for women without a prescription in drug stores in the United States. The government has decided to stop trying to block availability of the pill based on age. Now a woman can walk into a pharmacy and purchase the pill without age restrictions. The Food and Drug Administration approved the lifting of age restrictions in 2011, but secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, overturned it. This limited the sale to people over the age of 17.

Due to Sebelius’s change to the FDA’s recommendation, there was a lawsuit filed by Women’s Reproductive Rights Groups. Judge Edward Korman ruled that two types of emergency contraception should be made available without restriction, age or prescriptions, but the court decided to wait and see if the ruling had ‘merit’. On Monday, June 10, 2013, the Justice Department and Obama Administration decided to allow Judge Korman’s ruling to go into effect. The Justice Department realized that the case may be lost in the appeals courts, which would then elevate the case to the level of the Supreme Court if pursued, and therefore the Department decided to drop its obstruction to the availability of the birth control.

Consequently, Plan B as well as other generic forms of the morning after pill will be available over the counter without a prescription. Judge Korman had ruled that the pills should be made available on drugstore shelves next to condoms and tampons. The FDA plans to drop its appeal of Korman’s ruling, as the administration has instead asked the Plan B manufacturers to submit an application for approval of an one-pill application. The type of morning after pill that is an EC or two pills containing hormones to prevent pregnancy will be made available over the counter immediately.

The move by the secretary to overrule the FDA and change its recommendations for the restrictions on morning after pills was seen as… continue reading 

Lingual Olympics

- Temitope Olofintuyi 

While delivering one of my favorite rap lyrics, I was quickly interrupted by a friend who asserted that I must never feel the need to utter those words again. I felt disappointed in myself—that I could not code-switch into African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) as smoothly as I would have liked. Yet I have always felt discouraged from using AAVE, as it is thought to be an inferior, constricting, and a rather invalid form of communication. I wonder, however, what makes one form of communication more legitimate than the other? After all, at times, where I have failed in communication with Standard English (the existence of which is questionable), I have succeeded with AAVE.

It’s a question well worth the exploration from various perspectives, though personally, understanding the function of code-switching required me to take an even more individualistic approach. Within my social parameters are many Nigerians, most of whom are of Yoruba descent. As an individual who was born in Nigeria, but grew up in the US, it is not uncommon when greeting relatives (all of whom we call aunties or uncles) or friends of parents to hear the perpetual joke about my inability to speak Yoruba fluently and I find myself only getting by with a rough mix of half Yoruba/half English. The joking never fails to remind me of an undeniable truth: without better command of the language, I am further from understanding the complex cultural roots and significance that define the ethnic group I identify with. The original ideas and experiences once/formally existed in full validity without the need for any operative- now standard- English. Accordingly, Yoruba cannot be denied full entitlement to its legitimacy as an effective form of communication, particularly within the group of people who share the common experiences that call its use into relevance.

Likewise, the experience that predicated AAVE cannot be... continue reading 

Keeping the DREAM Alive

- Shamira Azlan

Like most immigration reform acts, the DREAM (Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors) Act remains a controversial legislation. The bill essentially would create a path to citizenship for the undocumented youth residing in the United States. This would allow these youth- who may have been brought here as children- attend college in the United States. The DREAM Act is in no way comprehensive, but it does provide a stepping stone for future immigration reform.

What is stopping the bill from being passed in Congress? There are a multitude of reasons, but the root of the negative criticism is simply ignorance. People are naturally defensive against new ideas and changes they don't understand or can't relate to, and most don't understand the need for immigration reform. These people's opinions are in no way invalidated, it is just going to take skillful advocates to guide the population on the path of empathizing for the undocumented youth. Empathy and general care for the people in your community can go a long way. If hearing the gut-wrenching stories of struggling youth doesn't convince the masses (and sometimes it doesn't), the projected economic growth which will occur if the DREAM Act is put into action should. The bill will help the undocumented youth further their education and thus promote innovation and creativity. In some cases, it can also lead to educated youths serving in the military.

The negative criticisms that the DREAM Act has received are in no way unique. They have been used to oppose immigration reform throughout the world. The arguments against this specific immigration reform bill include opportunities for current American students being taken away, unfair monetary benefits, and opposition to the DREAM Act providing amnesty. Advocates for the DREAM Act work to... continue reading 

China Kindergarten Poisoning

Kerry Hughes | 06.04.13

Kindergarten is all fun and games, right? Learning how to read, how to socialize, maybe with a built-in nap time? This may be a familiar picture, but in rural China, the picture of Kindergarten is changing rapidly due to the new emerging competitive market for profit private kindergartens.

This cut-throat environment framed the poisoning of two children in Lianghe. Cousins Ren Xinyi and Ren Zhaoning found a plastic bag on the way to school that contained a yogurt drink laced with rat poison. The two shared the drink, but Zhaoning consumed more and passed away due to the effects of the poison.

After investigation, a shocking and disheartening conclusion was found: one of the two perpetrators was the principal of a rival kindergarten (Pingan school), whose intention was to damage the reputation of her rival school, according to the official New China News Agency. The poisoned children attended Lianghe Central, and currently Pingan and Central have been shut down.

It was unusual that the town of Lianghe had two kindergartens for its size with a population of 2,000. Clear rivals, both schools charged about the same tuition- $16.25 a month- which is not much compared to the rates of urban private kindergartens at $500 a month per pupil. However, rural kindergartens can make hefty profits with higher enrollment. Pingan, with an enrollment of 56, lagged behind Lianghe Central’s enrollment of 217. In a world where profit depends on enrollment and reputation, there is much competition; especially because the Chinese government has started taking more interest in preschool education.

Furthermore, the increased in standard of living has had a direct impact on awareness of kindergartens and early education. This, in turn, has increased the level of competition between kindergartens…. continue reading