Inspired #1: Sound Bites and the Degradation of Culture

These events at Penn State have created a stirring in the nation that might have opened a Pandora's box of sorts. A coach at Syracuse has been accused of committing sexual acts against a minor just like Jerry Sandusky. What really bothers me is how the media has spun the Penn State scandal into air time for ESPN rather than sparking activism against actions like these taken against children. I recall watching the football game that lead to JoePa's 409th win, and that night came across an article discussing Sandusky. The closeness of the story breakout and this milestone was odd to me, but nonetheless it spread like wildfire. It began with the truth of a former defensive coordinator with 40 counts of child abuse, and it quickly turned into a talk about Joe Paterno. Never mind the District Attorney abandoning the case four years prior, despite have confessions by Sandusky.

Immediately, the media changed the tide of the story to forever envelope the former Penn State coach. Now, I personally think sentiments will soften over time, but still this incident right at the twilight of his career will forever tarnish his old school clean record. In hindsight, it is clear that he should have said something, but to throw the weight of this case on him is wrong. Sound bites to patronage Joe's connection undermines the crimes themselves and shove the victims into a dark corner with no regard given to their plight.

Borschgrave at CSIS remembered how back in 1949 there was a 49 word limit until they were to break into the meat of their news story, showing how journalism began to favor quick news even back then. However,

the proliferation of 24 hour media and especially online media has watered down any real investigative reporting to a mere cloud of speculation and opinions by famous people such as ThtDude342, xOgirlevery1<3xOx, or the insightful Rambo77.

Will news have any meaning in the future? There are many sides to any story, but the news stations filter out only the flashy parts and further add a bias beyond ethical practice. Then they package it in a pretty twenty word highlight reel story at the bottom ticker of the screen. Has our society sped up to the point where people would rather have gossip to speak about than more accurate accounts? Stories like Sandusky's atrocities will not progress true awareness about child abuse, but instead progress the story as Joe's folly. Victims swept under the rug for the sake of TV ratings money and ad revenue. How sad.

Around the Boardroom Table: CSIS

Kicking back and listening to people who work in the areas of national policy helped to clarify some things, create questions about other things, and overall create a summary of what has been discussed throughout the semester. The experience itself of being, in a way, in the shoes of these researchers was nonetheless a change of perspective from the trek of normal college town life. The Seven Revolutions presentation gave a quick summary of primary factors that may influence the future. The broadness of the topics such as "Economics", "The Nature and Mode of Security", and the "Challenge of Governance" not only allow for many specific issues, but the interesting thing I find is how so many things are a big player in how things will turn out.

The aging population will be a drag on change in the near future. The presentation by Arnaud de Borchgrave hinted at the possible collapse of social programs like Medicare due to the "insolvency" of governments. Not only will this encounter huge backlash from senior voters, but it will also create a new world where expectations of health care will change. According to Senior Journal, the amount of younger people who actually vote are far below those who need Medicare now or those who will need it by the 2020s.

This creates a potentially disastrous pitfall in the budget. Quite frankly, I am not expecting any form of government assistance with my health since relying on others to pad your back is naive. While there may be a universal system by the time our generation hits that age, I still think it is best to prepare for the worst case scenario. However, many upcoming seniors have been boggled down by widening income vs expenses disparity and have little money for retirement, so they will fight tooth and nail to keep programs that may drag on any financial recovery. Solutions to gracefully moving out of a collapsing Medicare program must be started now.

However, another thing we learned from hearing the speakers is their belief that the legislators are incompetent at trying to enact needed change until the issue becomes urgent. While this is to be expected of lawmakers paying dues to their donors while trying to keep their voters happy for the upcoming election, this political deadlock I believe has to be dissolved ideally (or at least dimmed a tad) to ensure that medical problems are addressed.

Cybersecurity is a topic that has been exhausted at this point, but I still want to comment on the irony that we did a simulation of a foreign cyber attack in Illinois, only to have one occur the next day in Illinois. Apparently, the one former IST 445H student we met had parts of her policy brief appear in future policy on Africa. Is the simulation a test to gather student input on upcoming policy issues, like ones that occur the next day? Perhaps, but most likely it's just a coincidence. It turns out that the cyber attack in Illinois on a water pump wasn't a cyber attack after all, but caused by a plant contractor traveling in Russia, not some foreign attack. So apparently, the Department of Homeland Security, which monitors cyber control systems, and the FBI don't believe in any Russian connection. Nevertheless, the timing of this potential cyber attack underscores how probable a future cyber assault is.

Despite the melancholic tone that has been swept through this blog entry and some of the lectures, I believe it will all come to pass. At any point in history, there has been the talk of impending doom, Armageddon, and the general attitude of "dang..where do we go from here?". Yet, after some bruising, people have emerged. Humans lack consistent quality reasoning abilities and have a plethora of emotional responses to events, so that does inevitably cause issues to boil the pot. However, there still is the basic idea of holding onto life that enables our societies to emerge from every problem, no matter how much we changed. The world is in flux always, and there will be always be ups and downs. Enjoy the ride and see the waves of time keep ebbing on.

Online Identity: Transparent or Anonymous?

     The Internet began as a frontier akin to the Wild West where the borders were not defined, the horizon clear, and the possibilities were endless. Today, there is the movement toward a more monitored Internet with horizons defined by country locations such as .us, .eu, .ca, etc. The possibilities though continue to expand and will become more prevalent as cloud computing begins to dominate. Think of pressing a touch screen in your kitchen to turn on your oven and monitor heat levels and perhaps even just working your can opener. While one could argue that the technology dependence may be getting too high, it is inevitable that most people will adopt these conveniences as they become more affordable. The main question is: will you be safe both from attacks and will your personal data be secure?

Obama back in 2009 stated the following:


"None of this progress would be possible, and none of these 21st century challenges can be fully met without American's digital infrastructure, the backbone that underpins a prosperous economy and strong military and an open and efficient government. Without that foundation, we can't get the job done.

This goes along with the discussions on cyber security in class. The government sees national security on the cyber front of such importance that, according to a New York Times article,

"A fact sheet released by the White House also promised that the United States would respond to attempted hacking “as we would to any other threat to our country." The one paper in class argued that it will be treated similar to a utility where protection of consumers is emphasized. Here, Internet Service Providers may be required to protect its consumers and businesses will be required to report hackings, but we see how that will be hard to do with the prevalence of lawsuits.

     However, I do not believe that this is not just a utility. Personal data online can include your accounts for those utilities, your banks, and perhaps the appliances in your house. Thus, it can be more dangerous. Alright, may not more than a nuclear meltdown, but stick with me on this one. Full transparency of this online identity, save important personal information, can enable everyone to know who is saying what, what they're doing, and create a safety net as people are less likely to cause trouble if they are "out in the open" in the cyber world. Despite this, it can also lead to stifling creativity and expression of true thoughts. It will also take away the ability to maintain multiple independent circles of contacts such as one account is for a music group, another is for sports, and so on.

     What can be the best solution? I agree that there has to be some regulation because the proliferation of getting viruses through any download is tiring. The endless ads are another nuisance, and companies should not be able to monitor your online habit. It's sad to think the ISP knows when someone's infected, but they let it slide by. As with most things in life, the solution has to be midway. Complete transparency could create an oppressed society because the ones with the fiber optic cables can still hide those in power if need be. ISPs and governments should be able to catch malware running across networks, but only after it has been confirmed as so and is listed on a public website, subject to scrutiny. However, intrusions into your personal life without your permission should not be allowed unless if suspected hackings occurred by you or someone else. There should be a strong judicial base in dealing with offenses to such infiltrations. So, overall transparency online should only be for safety reasons while allowing people to create anonymous accounts because "privacy means preserving the original sense of unlimited opportunity the Internet seemed to offer, as an unconstrained space for individual action."

Peace Through Threads?

     Yes, it has happened. Digital communication has far eclipse other forms of communication that even our State Department's diplomacy efforts have been reduced down to mere threads. Not only that, but they go right out and identify themselves on websites in countries that are suspicious of our every move. According to Nikos Christodoulides of the University of North Carolina:

    "The Internet can be considered by governments as a unique diplomatic instrument; through its proper use they can “advertise” not only their positions on different issues, but also promote their ideas worldwide. Such a function, if used in the right way, helps the embassy, and as a result the country that it represents, to create a positive image in the host country." (UNC Source)

     Ultimately, the question arises whether this was the "right" way. Based on the statistics from  Rachel's presentation, the image of the national had a negative disapproval rate of 68% after the Digital Outreach Team's efforts following President Obama's Cairo speech, which was done in order to reach out to the Arab world. Both failed. While the Outreach Team surmised that the conversation would steer toward Afghanistan, Pakistan, or Islamic groups, the natives of other countries instead fumed over U.S. imperialism in addition to the United States' support of Israel. 

     Does this mean that the efforts of the group were not effective? I would have to think so based off their inability to sway the rigid stances the Arab world to the U.S. How then can we possibly reach out? The sentiment toward our government is so negative that pigs will fly before they change their minds by talking with people with the State Department logo under their name. I am that sure that I used a cliche caricature to illustrate my view. For now, on a digital level, the Digital Outreach Team should a more covert tactic and reach out anonymously while providing truthful information. The kicker though is that they have to bridge gaps and appear to other readers that it is an Arab guy with a mild objection, not a government suit. 

    
     I believe that our actions have to change in order for there to be a shift in attitude. Personally, if I were a resident of the countries we attacked, I too would think that the U.S. is coming over to their country to change their culture and government, based on their ensuing actions. And now we are trying to mend the wound by building schools and nice little groceries stores. We should shift to more of a trade-only policy and stop going to war with them, or else they will naturally be hostile toward us whether you are willing to accept this statement or not. If someone, say China, attacked U.S. soil and attempted to replace forks with chopsticks, I am sure that there would be a strong and stubborn rebellion by us. International relations are akin to relationships where if someone hurt the other, there will be a time period before things return to normal. There is no quick fix for international relationships that we are accustomed to. Instead of bringing chocolate right away, leave them alone for a little bit, and then try your corny confectionery tactic.