Recent Posts:

Archive for the ‘News’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

In Memoriam: Christopher Hitchens

Friday, December 16th, 2011

By Justin Krane

Christopher Hitchens–the contrarian essayist, formidable debater, self-described “anti-theist,” and steadfast provocateur–died early this morning, at the age of 62.  Hitchens was diagnosed, in the spring of 2010, with esophageal cancer.  Yet, despite a bleak prognosis and the intensive courses of chemotherapy which ensued, Hitchens maintained the same indefatigable and prolific journalistic output that had earned him both praise and scorn over the last four decades.

For more–both on and by–Christopher Hitchens:

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Culture Forum Blog, News | No Comments »

Occupy the Internet: the Grassroots Movement Against SOPA

Sunday, December 4th, 2011

By Kara Wallis

The intent behind the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) is evident by its name – it seeks  to stop ‘theft’ of material on the internet. Indeed, most of us believe that one should have ownership of the fruits of one’s labor and this is reflected in our legal system’s endorsement and enforcement of copyrights, trademarks, and intellectual property rights. However well-intended, SOPA has caused a major uproar among various internet companies, users, and artists recently because of the dangerous and ambiguous language contained in the Act. Basically, critics believe that if passed, SOPA opens the door for internet policing by giving government officials and major media corporations the authority to arbitrarily shutdown and blacklist a variety of websites and services for illicitly linking to or hosting copyrighted material. Moreover, SOPA would force internet search engines to filter out material and block users from accessing a variety of resources on the internet. I won’t bore you with a full list of problems with SOPA here, but if you’re interested, this is an interesting video that lays out the problems in SOPA pretty clearly.

The SOPA debate brings up many themes about law and our culture, but what I have found to be most interesting is the seemingly grass roots online opposition that has spread anti-SOPA messages and continues to inform the broader public about the dangers of censoring the internet. This online reaction to a piece of legislation is unprecedented. Facebook and twitter have been flooded with status updates and hashtags protesting and spreading the word about the potential censorship of the internet. YouTube is filled with a plethora of user-made videos about the dangers of SOPA. Most impressive though was the campaign that the blog-site Tumblr launched against SOPA, which produced almost 88,000 phone calls from users to their representative to voice their opposition to the proposed legislation. Moreover, the people who oppose SOPA go across the political spectrum. How often do we find something that the ACLU, American Library Association, and the Tea Party Patriots are all firmly against?

With such a public protest against SOPA, it is unlikely that it will survive the political process. However, the question still remains, if we can all agree with SOPA’s intent in that private property rights exist and should be protected, how do we stop piracy on the internet? This has been a question that media companies have been struggling with since the appearance of bit-torrents, user-to-user sharing sites, and even the creation of the CD burner. To date, major media corporations have solved this problem through expensive lawsuits and litigation, but this doesn’t seem to be enough for the media industry – it is quite likely that bills similar to SOPA will continue to be presented and backed by these corporations. However, given the limited tools at the legislator’s disposal, it seems that the law will not be able to catch up to the ever-growing complexities of internet and any attempts to stop piracy will either be ineffective or put forth unwarranted consequences like those found in SOPA. Media corporations don’t care about the ramifications that legislation to protect their material will have on the internet and its users. So, it is my hope that when bills like SOPA come along, we will continue to see the strong resistant and outcry that we have seen recently in response to SOPA.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Culture Forum Blog, Law and Cultural Policy, News | 1 Comment »

Justin Beiber and Occupy Wall Street

Friday, December 2nd, 2011

By Marc Switzer

I happen to read the following article, it recounts how Justin Bebier was stopped in Los Angeles while driving a 2012 Cadillac Coupe that had been customized to resemble the Batmobile.  For anyone who doesn’t know, the Batmobile is the mythical car driven by the crime fighter Batman made famous in the comics and movies.   Although the article itself is surprisingly entertaining for the sheer absurdity of a seventeen year old boy driving around in a Batmoible that costs well over six figures, I believed the article also indirectly stood for something much more meaningful—how this society is organized.

The ongoing Occupy Wall Street movement should have come as no shock to anyone, how could it after all, when millions of Americans are out of work and struggling just to make ends meet, then turn on their TV’s or computers and read/watch a seventeen year old boy, with no discernible talent, driving around in customized Batmobile worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.  It rightly causes people to lose their mind!  It also causes, perhaps dangerously, people to question fundamentally how this society is run (Occupy Wall Street).   Whether you agree with Occupy Wall Street or not it seems hard to argue that there is something just plain wrong about a seventeen year old boy’s ability to amass such wealth to himself that he can afford to drive a super car worth hundreds of thousands of dollars whilst simultaneously millions of Americans suffer such devastating economic hardship—many with university degrees and/or years of working experience.
Of course Justin Beiber did not cause himself the Occupy Wall Street movement, yet the article I think captures, in many ways, albeit indirectly what the movement is about, or should be anyways—the incredible disparity of wealth in this society, and the opportunities and/or the disadvantages that flow from it rightly or wrongly

Tags: , ,
Posted in Culture Forum Blog, Law and Cultural Policy, News | 10 Comments »

Something’s Fishy in the City of Syracuse

Friday, December 2nd, 2011

By Douglas Giombarrese

Weeks after the Penn State scandal involving coach Jerry Sandusky broke, another deeply troubling collegiate athletic child-abuse scandal was reported, involving (now former) Syracuse basketball assistant Bernie Fine. For those unfamiliar with the situation, two former ball boys alleged on ESPN that they were sexually abused by Fine during a period between the 1970s and 1990s. Later, a third person came forward claiming he was molested in 2002 while traveling with the Syracuse basketball team.

Both Fine and head coach Jim Boeheim immediately vehemently denied the allegations. Fine’s veracity in denial was understandable; it was Boeheim’s that caught the public eye, as he specifically claimed the accusers were lying in hopes of making money. The most damning evidence against Fine came when ESPN later revealed they had obtained in 2002 a recorded conversation between Fine’s wife Laurie and Bobby Davis, the first accuser, who set up the recording as a way of proving his case. During the conversation, it becomes apparent that Laurie Fine knew of the abuse, specifically acknowledging that her husband acted on sexual desires for Davis when he was a minor. Further, she made absolutely no effort to stop it.  Based off this information alone (and more is sure to come out), the initial moral crimes of both husband and wife are clear and undisputed.

Boeheim, for his part, made unnecessary and spiteful remarks about the accusers without any way of backing them up. However, unlike Joe Paterno and other Penn State administrators, no one has stated that Boeheim was made aware of the accusations. In this light, his defense of Fine can be seen as a reaction to incredibly serious accusations against a long time friend whom he knew to do no wrong.

Because of this, the media has limited the comparisons to the Penn State scandal. However, the key aspect of this whole story has been shockingly overlooked is ESPN’s role in all of this. After all, they obtained the tape of Laurie Fine and Davis in 2002 and failed to do anything. They may argue that Davis’s story was not corroborated by anyone. They may argue that Fine’s voice was only recently verified by a third party voice recognition expert. This still does not explain why they did not give the tape to either the police or Syracuse University, both of whom were capable of doing such things.

Instead, they held on to the tape for over eight years, allowing an alleged child molester to continue his work in the same capacity as before. Even worse, Syracuse had conducted their own investigation of Fine in 2005, but were unable to corroborate Davis’s story, perhaps because they were not aware of the tape. Journalistic integrity should not be placed above moral integrity, especially when involving allegations of this nature. In this way, perhaps comparisons to the Penn State scandal are more appropriate than is let on, with ESPN replacing Joe Paterno as the morally culpable ones.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Culture Forum Blog, Law and Cultural Policy, News | 5 Comments »

Protesters in Tehran and Collective Responsibility

Tuesday, November 29th, 2011

By Meghan Iorianni

On November 29, 2011, a group of Iranian student protestors stormed the British embassy in Tehran. These actions were reported to be in response to the recent financial sanctions Great Britain imposed on Iran. While the protest has since been quelled and all embassy personnel have been accounted for, the responses from major world leaders including representatives of the United States, Great Britain, and Russia have condemned both the protests and the Iranian government for not adequately protecting the embassy from such an uprising. Other nations, including France and Germany, have expressed that the poor response by Iranian authorities showed the Iranian regime’s lack of consideration not only for Great Britain but also for the international community as a whole.

In light of today’s attack, a number of Iranians have expressed disappointment in their fellow citizens and regret that the actions of a few have cast a shadow over the entire Iranian population. Is this fair? To a great extent, I would argue yes. Unless strong efforts are made to bring those responsible to justice, to publically denounce the actions of “the few,” and to implement effective safety measures so to prevent the progression of any further uprisings, the community should be held responsible for the actions of its individuals. The concept of collective responsibility echoes strongly in today’s events. Although the remaining members of the Iranian community in Tehran did not actively participate in the ransacking of the embassy, the burning of the British flag, and the destruction of the building, the community members stood by and tolerated the actions of their fellow citizens. Many national legal systems do not hold bystanders, or individuals of a population who choose not to act, responsible for the actions of others. However, the responses from the international community to this incident have proven that nations that condone their citizens’ wrongful actions by not providing adequate consequences will be held accountable in the international community. I would hope to see the Iranian regime take action against those responsible for today’s unrest and hopefully reestablish itself among its peers in the global community.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Culture Forum Blog, Law and Cultural Policy, News | 1 Comment »

Twitter, Brownback, and “The True Meaning of Free Speech” (#heblowsalot)

Monday, November 28th, 2011

By Joel LeVangia

By now you’ve probably seen that Kansas Governor Sam Brownback has blamed his “staff” for “overreacting” to a tweet written by a Kansas high school student that read: “Just made mean comments at gov. brownback and told him he sucked, in person (hash)heblowsalot.” Brownback proceeded to apologize for the “overreaction of his staff” saying, “Freedom of speech is among our most treasured freedoms.” And what do you know, Brownback? Freedom of speech IS one of our most treasured freedoms! What a wonderful opportunity for all of us to be informed of that! I am so glad your “staff” bullied some teenage girl so we could all be informed of something I’m pretty sure most Americans know already.

To be clear, the young lady in question, Emma Sullivan, was being lectured by Brownback when she sent the offending (to some) tweet. The governor’s “staff” which monitors social media for mentions of the present gubernatorial name “Brownback,” saw the tweet and contacted the Youth in Government program Ms. Sullivan was attending. This led to Ms. Sullivan allegedly spending an hour in a principal’s office being given various bullet points for an apology letter from her to the governor.

To her credit, Ms. Sullivan refused and was assisted by her elder sister Olivia, who exercised her freedom of speech and alerted the media. The media, in turn, exercised its freedom of speech and proceeded to beat Mssr. Brownback’s “staff” with the “freedom of speech” stick. This sequence of events culminated in the patronizing reminder from g. Brownback that “Freedom of speech is among our most treasured freedoms.” Although not before Ms. Sullivan’s school district issued a statement saying in part, “Whether and to whom any apologies are issued will be left to the individuals involved. The issue has resulted in many teachable moments concerning the use of social media. The district does not intend to take any further action on this matter.”

Regrettably, the district has not fully appreciated some of the “learnable” moments from the episode. They, like the governor, suffer from sort of a freedom of speech deficit disorder. If they were exercising their freedoms as they and all Americans should, their statements might have read:

Brownback: My staff, who I hired and am responsible for, took issue with a public statement by a citizen of the great state of Kansas and proceeded to contact her school to inform them of the comment. The likely intent of this communication was to harass, intimidate, and silence the citizen concerned. It is deeply wrong to manifestly and intentionally suppress dissent in a country founded on the same. I know this, my staff knows this, and our actions in response to the initial comment have been at least as immature and irresponsible as the comment itself. I apologize to all the citizens of Kansas and specifically to Miss Emma Sullivan for our lapse in judgment – which will not be repeated.

Shawnee Mission East School District: In response to a communication from Governor Sam Brownback’s office, the Shawnee Mission East School district and some of its employees made a bad situation worse. After being informed of a negative “tweet” from one of our high school seniors, we attempted to coerce a letter of apology out of the young lady to be sent to the governor’s office. This hypothetical letter could in no way affect the governor and was therefore merely to be a symbol of institutional control over an individual. The Shawnee Mission East School District and its employees must never forget that as a public American institution, it and they have a responsibility to inculcate the highest ideals of this country in its students. Those same students are bound to say dumb things on twitter, but the Shawnee Mission East School District must always respect their right to say them – particularly when they in no way reference the district itself. For this reason we apologize to Miss Emma Sullivan for intervening on the governor’s behalf against her freedom of speech. We promise to be more vigilant in the face of future temptations to pervert the paths of American public discourse.

To which Ms. Sullivan might reasonably reply: I am gratified by the statements issued by the governor and the school district. Although I was initially disappointed by the reaction to my tweet, which I consider merely a means of communicating to a large group of my “friends” or “twitter followers” at the same time, I am now satisfied that the appropriate attitudes have set in. I realize that things I publish on twitter have the potential to reflect more broadly than my own personal “circle of acquaintances” and in retrospect regret characterizing the governor as a person who “fellates often, frequently, or to a great degree,” as the hashtag I assigned to him indicates. However, we should all recognize that the restrictive nature of tweeting and the difficulty of fully expressing oneself in 140 characters can prevent the complete development of ideas. With this in mind, I would like to apologize to the governor for my crude expression and promise him that I will work to achieve at least as much publicity for the fully articulated reasons I disagree with his policies as this unfortunate episode has generated.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Culture Forum Blog, Law and Cultural Policy, News | 4 Comments »

What About the Victims?

Monday, November 14th, 2011

By Jessica Parra

America’s latest bout of high-profile political and celebrity scandals presents a disgusting trend growing more and more common in American society – our willingness to completely ignore the victim.

The words Herman Cain, Penn State, and even, heaven forbid, Angelina Jolie all invoke a sense of outrage from popular culture, but what exactly is the outrage?

With Herman Cain, we are obsessed with the fact that past allegations might and probably should completely derail his bid for the Republican presidential nomination. At every turn, he seemingly proves himself to be more and more dishonest and suspect, claiming in the first place not to know about any settlements. Then he acknowledged that he knew about the settlements, but in his own words, had never settled on sexual harassment claims “outside of the National Restaurant Association”….as if. Cain’s later admissions resulted in his own unintended waiver of confidentiality regarding these settlements, allowing the women in the settlements to come forward and speak in very specfic detail about what happened to them. One would think that this would be the focus of conversation about Cain – what, exactly, he allegedly did to these women. Instead, what we get is even more conversation about Cain and what a jerk he is and how he shouldn’t be president and how he is a sexist and bla bla bla. Do we even know the names of the victims? Do their names come up in our conversations? Do the details of their allegations get more than a soundbyte? Not usually.

With Penn State, we are obsessed with the way Joe Paterno was fired and how we feel about the reactions of the students who vehemently defend the coaches, the institution, and or the athletes. In the meantime, there are 8 children that were raped. Again – EIGHT CHILDREN were RAPED. Should we be talking about that? Or should we be talking about how sad it is that now Penn State students might have to be ashamed of their alma mater? Should we be obsessed with whether and how what happened to these children is going to affect them for the rest of their lives, and how the society that allowed this to happen to them is now even more responsible for doing everything it can to bring Sandusky to justice and, even more, to somehow try to make these children whole again, or at least less broken? Or should we be talking about how Joe Paterno is a great guy who “made a mistake”?

I mention Angelina Jolie because she has a movie coming out this winter about a love story between a Bosnian woman and a Serbian man during the Bosnian war and genocide. The details of the plot have been controversial – not in America of course because we would never criticize the queen of all celebrities – but in Bosnia, due to the fact that Bosnian war and genocide survivors, mostly female, have strongly objected to the story since, reportedly, the Bosnian woman in the film falls in love with her male Serbian rapist. Angelina Jolie urges us not to judge the film until we see it, and it’s unclear whether this is exactly what the film is about, but the Bosnian government revoked Jolie’s filming permit due to their offense at this alleged plot and Jolie was forced to film the rest of the movie in Budapest and stage it as Sarajevo. Now, if female Bosnian war survivors are objecting to a plot about a female Bosnian war survivor, it seems clear that the film is probably going to be horribly offensive and inaccurate as far as they are concerned. Will Americans flock to it anyways? Yes. Will Jolie be lambasted in American culture for what will potentially be a tasteless and exploitative portrayal of, as she explains it, “how human relationships and behavior are deeply affected by living inside a war?” No. Why? Because Americans couldn’t care less about the victims.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Culture Forum Blog, Law and Cultural Policy, Movie Review, News | 8 Comments »

Thane Rosenbaum on Penn State: The Moral Crime of a Silent Bystander

Monday, November 14th, 2011

By Patricia Chang

It’s hard to identify what exactly is the most shocking element of the Penn State tragedy. Jerry Sandusky’s repeated sexual assault of numerous minor boys is surely at the top of the list, but what about the graduate assistant, Mike McQueary, who witnessed the abuse first-hand and, instead of immediately calling the police, called his father? What about Joe Paterno, who was made aware of Sandusky’s actions and allowed it to continue? And what of the Penn State rioters who make Paterno out to be the victim?

Forum director Thane Rosenbaum shares his thoughts on the moral responsibilities of a bystander who has the ability to help — and the societal repercussions of one who fails to do so — in an article for the Daily Beast: Penn State’s Tragedy Enabled by Coaches and Others Who Looked Away.

In light of the recently disseminated Grand Jury report regarding Mike McQueary’s testimony, it is hard to fathom that Paterno, knowing what he knew, failed to act, and Sandusky was permitted to continue:

As the graduate assistant entered the locker room doors, he was surprised to find the lights and showers on. He then heard rhythmic slapping sounds. He believed the sounds to be those of sexual activity. As the graduate assistant put the sneakers in his locker, he looked into the shower.

He saw a naked boy, Victim 2, whose age he estimated to be ten years old, with his hands up against the wall, being subjected to anal intercourse by a naked Sandusky. The graduate assistant was shocked but noticed that both Victim 2 and Sandusky saw him.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Culture Forum Blog, Law and Cultural Policy, News | 4 Comments »

Tax Credit Veto

Saturday, November 12th, 2011

By H. Berman

Back in September, NJ Governor Chris Christie vetoed a tax credit of $420,000, which had been approved by the state’s Economic Development Authority for the production company of the reality show, “Jersey Shore.” The “Jersey Shore” tax credit, or as some are calling it, the “Snooki subsidy,” is part of a program that grants film and TV production companies a 20% tax credit on the money they spend in the state. It provides an incentive for tv and film production companies to film in the state.

Governor Christie, along with a lot of other angry New Jersey residents, hold the opinion that to allow such a tax credit would perpetuate negative stereotypes about the state and its residents. Shockingly, many New Jersey taxpayers were angered that the “Jersey Shore” tax credit would essentially mean they were subsidizing the cast members’ G-T-L (gym, tan, laundry).

According to an article in USA Today posted on September 16, 2011, initially, Christie’s spokesman, Michael Drewniak, indicated that the “Jersey Shore” production company met the requirements for the tax credit and that “[i]f the Legislature has buyer’s remorse, they are free to fix it.” Clearly, Christie changed his view a few weeks later.

Could the denial of the “Jersey Shore” tax credit actually leave the state of New Jersey vulnerable to a lawsuit? Questions have arisen as to whether Governor Christie’s decision to deny the “Jersey Shore” tax credit was proper, considering other tv shows and productions have received the benefit and the production company clearly did spend money in the state of New Jersey. Some have argued that Governor Christie is essentially acting as a censor in violation of the First Amendment. Governor Christie (and many New Jersey citizens) feel the show reflects poorly on the state. Even still, does this allow Christie to deny a tax credit for the show because he does not approve of the content?

Tags: , ,
Posted in Culture Forum Blog, Law and Cultural Policy, News | 1 Comment »

Herman Cain and His Accusers

Thursday, November 10th, 2011

By Chris F.

Four women have come forward and accused current GOP frontunner Herman Cain of inappropriate behavior. Two women allegedly accepted financial settlements in return for their silence, one claimed that Cain simply made inappropriate remarks and advances, and the fourth claimed that Cain had sexually assaulted her.

It is quite fascinating that the two women who accepted settlements have come forward despite their settlements. One has even dropped her anonymity. These women were willing to be silent when Herman Cain was head of the National Restaurant Association. They remained silent for years, and only now, when Mr. Cain has spent some time in the spotlight, have they come forward. Have they chosen to come forward because more people will listen? Has the money not helped them get over the event? Are they simply out for more money in exchange for exclusive interviews?

The fourth woman claimed that Mr. Cain shoved her head towards his private area and shoved his hand under her dress in the summer of 1997. She did not file any claim at the time, and did not reach a settlement with Mr. Cain. Many questions arise here too: Why has she chosen to come forward now?

By no means am I implying that these women are lying. In fact, I believe them. I just think it is very interesting that they choose to come forward now or give up their silence now. Why would they lie? Thus far, they have not given exclusive interviews for money, the right wing has harassed them, and many are slow to believe them.

Mr. Cain has said that he will not drop out of the GOP race. Politicians have resigned or dropped out of races because they had a child out of wedlock, sent inappropriate photos over the internet, or came out as homosexual men. None of those actions are illegal, and the only one which could possibly warrant a civil suit would be the illegitimate child (but only if the father did not support the child). Yet, sexual assault is a crime.

At the end, I think the events illustrate the problems inherent in legal settlements. The truth is buried for a price. What if some day you want to dig that truth up?

Tags: , ,
Posted in Culture Forum Blog, Law and Cultural Policy, News | 3 Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »