No Where Is Safe: Does Airport Security Actually Help? (Assignment date: 6-29-16)

          During these troubled times, terrorists can strike anywhere, at any moment. One common type of facility in particular is a favorite target to attack: airports. In an article written in response to the terrorist attack at Ataturk Airport in Istanbul this past Tuesday, the author states how the attack shows that, "Subjecting passengers to more security before they board a plane doesn't necessarily deter terrorists." The author's main argument for this statement is that no matter how tight the security, terrorists will still launch an attack if they really want to, as evident in the Istanbul attack, where the security at Ataturk Airport is more extensive than in U.S. airports. While this may be partly true, these security measures most likely do deter a large portion of would-be attackers from opening fire in a heavily secured airport, since most would-be attackers are likely to not be smart enough to plan around the tight security. However, this enhanced security does relatively little to prevent an attack from prepared terrorists that have "done their homework", per se.
          The best solution is presented at the very end of the article by Professor Mark Stewart. He suggests that spying and intelligence work be conducted in order to prevent terrorist attacks before the terrorists even make it to the airports. Even though this is clearly the best and most reliable solution, it has also been proven to fail in the past in the prevention failure of terrorist attacks. A prime example of this is the Boston Bombings conducted by the Tsarnaev brothers in 2013. Evidence has been released to the public that the United States was warned of the pair by the Russian government in advance, but the government failed to take any preventative action, and lower levels of law enforcement also received no word of them at all. This inaction resulted in a bombing that rocked the nation. Unless the government could freely cooperate with lower levels of law enforcement to actually prevent terrorist attacks, or take action themselves, then the use of intelligence to foil terrorist attacks is null and void.

Article Link: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/07/01/world/airport-security-around-the-world.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

Nothing's Perfect: Self-Driving Cars' First Casualty (Assignment date: 6-20-16)

          As technology has progressed so rapidly over the last several decades, it has been proven time and time again that no technology is perfect. A newly released article from the New York Times yesterday talked about a fatal car crash involving a self-driven Tesla Model S in Williston, Florida. It happened when a tractor trailer appeared suddenly around the corner and the car failed to put on its brakes, leading to a full speed crash. This incident is the first of its kind, and most likely the first of many as this technology slowly integrates itself into society. In Tesla's press release, they stated that the circumstances of the crash involved a light reflection that prevented the car's sensors from noticing the vehicle and brake in time. At the very tail end of the article, the author slips in at the last moment that Tesla has also elaborated that their self-driving technology is still new and requires that people view it as such. In the very last sentence of the article, it is stated that when the autopilot feature is activated, a box pops up in a digital display that explains that at this point in time the auto pilot is merely an assisting feature that still requires two hands to be on the steering wheel.
          No technology is perfect, especially the unfinished prototype self driving technology implemented in the Tesla Model S. This accident was a combination of both driver and vehicle failure. While the vehicle did fail to sense the tractor trailer in front of it, the driver of the vehicle also failed to follow the instructions provided by the system. The article also mentions how he had taken several videos of himself in his Model S while it was in self drive mode, with neither hand on the wheel, so it can be assumed that he most likely did not have his hands on the wheel at the time of the accident, it is also likely that he was not paying attention to the road as well in his confidence in the self-driving technology. While there are most definitely measures that can be taken to improve the technology, which most certainly is not far off, there will always be some sort of flaw in a technology that leads to possibly fatal consequences. However, as long as it reduces the overall number of car accidents in America, then the technology is worth investing in and using properly, which includes following all given directions.

Article Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/business/self-driving-tesla-fatal-crash-investigation.html?ref=technology

The Iraq War From the View of A Veteran (Assignment date: 7-1-16)

           In a guest OP-ED column from 2013, as a part of a six part series for the anniversary of the end of the war in Iraq, veterans sent in pictures and their stories of the war to the column and they were compiled in a series of short stories. The one that was perhaps the most intriguing was one titled "War is Over" by a veteran named Perry O'Brien. He started off by talking about a particular night at a clinic in Kandahar that he remembered well. It was the night he decided that the war was not worth it and saw no reason for he and his company to be going through the battle against themselves. He says this because, at the time, more soldiers were being treated for friendly fire wounds than wounds from enemy fire. While his whole company was sitting idle in the desert fighting off inner demons, the media still portrayed the same old war footage of night time bombings and tanks in formation. He then talked about how when he got home in 2004, while some of his other comrades went on other tours in Afghanistan, he filled out the paper work to become a conscientious objector to the war and be honorably discharged from the military. Only two years later, he ends up at a funeral for a sergeant from his old company. He notes that some of his former comrades are in civilian clothes, as uncomfortable as he is at the event, while the rest are in uniform, back on American soil from multiple tours of combat overseas. Then he jumps to 2011, the end of the war. He talks about how it is all over magazines that end up on the ground, trampled and in the mud, but for as much talk about the war that they contain, there was no mention of Kandahar or the soldiers that were injured from friendly fire and accidents.
            This absence of what actually happened overseas is a huge issue that is all too prevalent within the mass media. Instead of reporting on what was actually going on overseas, they only reported on the big exciting events where U.S. forces were actively clashing with enemy forces. This is because the media wants to prolong citizen interest in overseas conflict so that they can bring in readers and revenue, a consequence of the profit model of media companies. If the media reported on what was actually happening on a daily basis in Iraq and Afghanistan, the anti war movement would grow and discourage readers from reading news stories about the wars in the Middle East.

Article Link: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/21/a-war-before-and-after-part-6/#more-141766

Military Reforms: Transgender Members of the Military (Assignment date: 6-22-16)

         In an editorial titled "Transgender Troops Protected at Last," the author discussed the lifting of the ban on transgender people from serving in the military that took place recently, announced in a speech by the Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter. During his speech, he stated "We have to have access to 100 percent of America's population for our all-volunteer force to be able to recruit from among them the most highly qualified - and to retain them." This is a landmark step for the mainstream cultural inclusion of another population in American society, at the governmental level at least. While the measure does not do anything for acceptance at a personal level between members of the military, the lift of this ban is crucial to aid that sort of acceptance between peers that has the potential to cause massive problems if absent.
          Besides being a large step forward for the military, the lifting of the transgender ban has not come without its own set of problems. Currently the requirement for transgender civilians to join the military is to have been in their new gender for a year and a half at minimum, and have all of their transition procedures finished. This requirement is extremely high and demanding due to the fact that it often takes years for a transgender person to make the personal decisions pertaining to their medical operations. These often range from hormone replacements to miscellaneous surgeries. Because of this, the article argues that they "should be forced to affirm that they have completed a medical transition before enlisting if they are healthy and fit for the strenuous requirements of military life." While this criticism is valid, and has been confirmed to be taken into account for the revising of the guidelines for transgender people to join the military within the next two years, having a mid-transition transgender person in the military does have the possibility to cause issues within the ranks of the military. Transgender people who are midway through their transitions should be able to serve, but there should be a limitation to prevent any possible medical problems. What the Department of Defense will most likely come up with is to allow them to serve, but only if they can prove they are medically able to serve without risk at their current transition phase. That way all medical liabilities are eliminated while allowing the maximum number of volunteer recruits.

Article Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/opinion/transgender-troops-protected-at-last.html?ref=opinion&_r=0

You Can Rest Now Mr. James, You Won (Assignment date: 6-17-16)

          As the Cleveland Cavaliers took the NBA championship on Sunday, June 19th, LeBron James truly established himself as a basketball legend, bringing Cleveland it's first Championship title in over fifty years. According to an article called "The Arc of the LeBron James Story Reaches Its Climax" by Marc Tracy, "his legacy had definitely been chiseled." This is because, even though he won the MVP award in the NBA four times, won two championships with the Miami Heat, played on the U.S. Olympic basketball team, and seven finals appearances, his latest feat brought his career to a fantastic climax.

          The article talked about James' career with varying detail, and took to using the word "bildungsroman" to describe his career. It is a German word that roughly means "novel of development," in reference to James's time in the NBA, going from Cleveland to Miami, and then back to Cleveland again. As his time as a free agent came in 2010, James made the decision to play for Miami and leave behind his home. This decision left him branded as a traitor to Cleveland and he was unfairly slandered as "The Whore of Akron" by a book. While this massive backlash against James was completely unreasonable, due to the fact that, like all other players, as a free agent, he was free to go anywhere he wanted to, James realized after four years with the Heat that he wanted to go play for his home team once more.

             In the end, it was necessary for him to go and play with a different team and gain new experiences and opportunities to better himself as a basketball player. With the experience of two championships under his belt, James was welcomed back with open arms at the end of the 2014 season when he came back to the Cavaliers. With the fact that he was one of the best in the NBA long confirmed, his next goal was to do the impossible, win a championship for the Cavaliers, and more importantly, for Cleveland. It was a goal that only The King could accomplish. Within one season, this goal nearly became a reality, only to be squashed by the Golden State Warriors in the 2015 championships. The very next year, 2016, the Cavaliers faced the Warriors once again in a grudge match. However, this time, the Warriors lost and James had done the impossible. He led the Cavaliers to their first NBA Championship victory in 52 years. This is truly the climax of James' career simply because the feat was so monumental. As said in the article, anything after this event is merely an epilogue, or a prelude to the retirement of yet another legend simply because anything else just pales in comparison.

Article Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/22/sports/basketball/lebron-james-nba-title-cleveland.html?ref=basketball

Texit? Really? (Assignment date: 6-24-16)

          In response to the world-shaking Brexit vote last week, according to an article on the Times website by Reuters, a movement in the U.S. state of Texas has claimed to gain steam. It goes by the name of Texit, an obvious copy of the same play on words used in Brexit. This movement is geared towards the secession of Texas from the United States of America and claims to have approximately 250,000 backers. While the state does have an extremely large economy and could most likely survive on its own, this movement is nothing more than an immature imitation that, while not wholly spawned from Brexit, was highly motivated by it. On top of that, States are not allowed to simply secede from the United States, it goes directly against the constitution. As seen in the Civil War, simply seceding and becoming an independent nation does not bode well for the defector, especially in an age like today, where killing power is enhanced tenfold. While the governor of Texas has stepped forward to publicly speak in his disdain and lack of support for the movement, the fact that it has made as much publicity as it has gotten is an insult to the nation it once clamored to become a part of. Even though there are smaller secession movements all across the United States, none of them have come close to the supposed size of the Texit movement, but nevertheless it will suffer the same fate as all the other movements. Texit will go nowhere and eventually fizzle out simply because it is a useless and time-wasting movement.

Article link: http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2016/06/24/world/europe/24reuters-britain-eu-usa-secession.html

McCombs 7 & 8: The Power of the Mass Media (Assignment date: 6-15-16)

          After reading chapters 7 and 8 of The News and Public Opinion by Max McCombs, it is made clear (with plenty of justification to boot) that the mass media can dictate public opinions and affect political races to a moderate to large extent. A presented example of this is a media theory/practice called priming. In this theory, an issue that a person believes is more important than others will be used as a determining factor for their view on a particular figure. The media can sway the direction that the priming takes by putting out stories pertaining to an issue of the media's choosing. This can be seen in the current 2016 elections in the form of immigration policy. Because of his ludicrous wall proposal, Donald Trump not only managed to garner nation wide publicity, but he also gathered a large following of (albeit heavily uneducated) voters. These voters were, as a matter of fact, concerned about the flaws in the U.S. immigration policy, or at least wanted to make all Mexicans leave the country to "protect jobs." This stands in stark contrast to his primary competitor Hillary Clinton, who plans to put in place a citizenship program for illegal Mexican aliens, and also stand by President Obama's affirmative action immigration plan, which was recently ruled unconstitutional by the supreme court. As a result, she has not gotten nearly as many voters from her stances on immigration as Donald Trump has.

            Chapter 8 touches on news coverage of candidates in a political race. It presents the conclusion that the public opinion of a candidate can be swayed by not only the amount of coverage provided by the media, but also by the tone in which the coverage is presented. In the case of a news agency having a particular agenda, or a bias in favor of a particular candidate, it can lend more coverage towards said favored candidate in a positive light. In contrast, it can also reduce the coverage of the opposing candidate, and then when coverage is done on them, the company can talk about them in a negative tone, therefore attempting to sway the viewing population in the way the media company wants. An example of this can be found in the New York Times in the form of an extreme bias in favor of Hillary Clinton, and against Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. Many commenters have actually dared to call out the Times for their lack of coverage on Senator Sanders, while the coverage on Donald Trump is almost always negative.