Browse by Length

In the early 2000s, the oil giant British Petroleum (BP) popularized the concept of the carbon footprint, loosely defined as the amount of carbon emissions each person produces through their unique lifestyle.  BP even created a way for consumers to calculate their carbon footprint, and they heavily promoted the concept through a public relations campaign. Unfortunately, what this has effectively done is to individualize a social problem, thus turning attention away from corporate polluters and other structural factors fueling climate change. While the carbon footprint is appealing in an individualistic culture, and while individuals certainly bear some responsibility for climate change, the emphasis on carbon footprints primarily serves to distract us from more effective solutions to the climate crisis. This is not a new tactic for corporate polluters either. In fact, it mirrors the plastic industry’s emphasis on recycling as a solution to plastic waste.

Who bears the most responsibility for climate change? Where else do we see companies attempt to individualize the harm they create?  

From the video’s description: Everybody keeps telling us to cut our carbon footprints. So how guilty should I feel about my personal emissions? And what's Big Oil got to do with it?

2018 1h 25min

Available on Hulu

Hillbilly examines the history and continuation of disempowering rural stereotypes. Though the film is based around the 2016 election of Donald Trump, the content extends far beyond our current political landscape. It is also engaging to watch as it masterfully integrates media stereotypes from popular shows and movies. Some prominent sociological concepts evident in the film include othering, codeswitching, and cultural appropriation as hillbilly may have become the new hipster.

Focusing on the intersections between social class and race, the history of the hillbilly has lots of parallels to other racial stereotypes and controlling images. Even today it is rare to see rural people portrayed in complex ways as the media clings to the hillbilly stereotype. We learn that the stereotype was created to legitimize the dispossession of the Appalachian Mountains, thus facilitating environmental exploitation. The characterization of the people as poor, backward, and illiterate gave the impression they were not worth valuing, and as such, who would care if corporations trashed their environment? This stereotyping was perpetuated by businesses, the media, and politicians alike. For example, the war on poverty leads to publicity stunts where Appalachian poverty was visibly exploited for political gain, similar to the “poverty porn” utilized by some charity organizations today.

Overall, Hillbilly would be an interesting film for students in courses like race/ethnicity, the sociology of the media, and environmental sociology. It highlights agency and resistance among the population while encouraging the audience to abandon preconceived notions of rural communities.

Sociological themes include: Stereotypes, prejudice, social class, race/ethnicity, culture, the media, environmental exploitation…

High culture is often described as emulating the tastes of the upper classes and is distinguished by relative inaccessibility. A ticket to the opera, for example, may not only be more expensive than a regular concert ticket, but it requires carefully cultivated tastes to appreciate. This exclusivity is part of high culture’s appeal. Popular culture, on the other hand, often appeals to the lowest common denominator while purposefully marketing itself to as wide an audience as possible. This makes television shows and movies excellent examples of pop culture (whereas the theatre is more associated with high culture). Yet the line between high culture and popular culture is often blurred, especially when a high cultural institution (like a museum) features exhibits on mass media.

Perhaps we are witnessing an elevation of certain pop culture artifacts. This raises questions about which artifacts and franchises are being elevated. Thankfully the Smithsonian is intentionally making this a multicultural experience.

From the video’s description:  "Entertainment Nation/Nación del espectáculo," a new exhibition at the National Museum of American History in Washington, D.C., features artifacts from 150 years of music, sports and moving images. CBS News' John Dickerson gets a tour, and looks at how Prince, "The Wizard of Oz" and "Star Wars" helped define our national character.

The fossil fuel industry knew about climate change before it entered the public conversation, yet they shunned their own research and lobbied to weaken environmental legislation. This is now a widely-known story, but this video touches on how recent actions by this industry are furthering the problem. We learn about greenwashing, or when companies market themselves as eco-friendly despite perpetuating environmental harm and climate change. Similarly, fossil fuel companies are embracing “carbon footprint” calculators which are marketed as tools to help individuals reduce their carbon emissions. The problem is that this individualizes carbon emissions, taking responsibility off corporations and placing it on consumers. This would not be as problematic if these companies supported collective solutions (e.g., laws to reduce greenhouse gases or promote more solar energy). Yet fossil fuel companies are notorious for lobbying against any climate policies. In short, the carbon footprint rhetoric allows corporations to escape blame for the climate crisis while stifling more effective approaches.

From the video’s description: Fossil fuel companies knew about climate change decades ago. But instead of doing something about it, they spent millions to confuse the public and seed doubt. VICE World News explores their seedy tactics.

This fascinating video profiles the rise of philanthrocapitalism. As explained by sociologist Linsey McGoey, the idea is that one can merge the goals of capitalism and charity by making philanthropic organizations profitable. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is examined here as they have investments in GMO crops and mosquitos, both of which they are lobbying for use in Africa. The first claim is that Western agribusinesses can solve food scarcity in Africa through GMO cassava. While these businesses promise more resilient crops and greater yields, the way this is being implemented is reminiscent of the colonial era. There are concerns about existing farming traditions are being forcibly replaced while fostering dependency on GMO seeds and agrochemicals. As for mosquitos, there is limited evidence that GMO mosquitos can effectively reduce malaria, and some studies even suggest it makes the mosquito problem worse. This also raises concerns about why such experiments are being conducted in at-risk areas. In short, while philanthrocapitalism promises to help with pressing issues in the developing world, it has more potential to benefit Western companies (in which the Gate foundation has invested) if the solutions are adopted.

From the video’s description: Across Africa, lobbyists, philanthropists and businesspeople are working to open up the continent to GMOs. They argue that GMOs can provide a miracle solution to two of Africa’s biggest problems: famine and malaria. One of the main supporters of the movement is Bill Gates, one of the world’s wealthiest individuals and founder of the most powerful philanthropic foundation in history. The film shows how the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation became the main funder of genetic experiments underway on the continent. Discreetly and beyond the reach of critical voices, scientists are conducting research on the genetic modification of cassava plants and mosquitoes as a solution to the malaria problem. The role of the EU here is an ambiguous one: Whereas the bloc was initially skeptical about genetic engineering because of the potential risks to health and the environment, now the EU is working together with the Microsoft founder’s nonprofit conducting experiments that would be banned in Europe. Genetic modification in Africa is about power, but it is also about money. And this puts the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in the firing line: by financing genetic engineering experiments in Africa, the organization is playing into the hands of big western agribusiness. "Africa, GMOs and Western Interests” shines a light on the brave new world of philanthrocapitalism, where humanitarian aid has a stubborn aftertaste of business, famine programs are often a pretext to introduce GMOs and public investments can serve private interests.

The term gadgetbahn describes futuristic transportation proposals that are overly complex and impractical. While they look and sound appealing, they take attention and resources away from realistic solutions to transportation problems. This video uses Elon Musk’s various transportation proposals to exemplify the concept of gadgetbahn, yet other examples could include flying cars and hypersonic passenger airplanes. Another related concept explained in the video is that of elite projection. This occurs when influential people believe what they find convenient and attractive to be good for society as a whole. Yet as we see here, wealth can disconnect a person from the practical constraints of reality.  

What other transportation proposals could be described as gadgetbahn? If you could do one thing to improve transportation for the whole of your society, what would it be?

From the video’s description: Say what you will about Elon Musk, but the man has ideas. Loads of them. He has ideas about how to improve Twitter and colonize Mars. He has ideas about space tourism and the future of artificial intelligence. He has ideas about how to end the war in Ukraine and save children trapped in underground caves. But in the video above, Adam Kovacs, who runs the YouTube channel Adam Something, suggests that unrelenting bravado and tremendous wealth don’t necessarily make bad ideas good. Mr. Kovacs, who has developed a large following for his critiques of flawed urban planning and design, takes a close look at Mr. Musk’s proposals to revolutionize mass transit: the Hyperloop and the Boring Loop. Both ideas have generated much excitement and even investment, but as Mr. Kovacs explains, they are unnecessarily complicated and not designed for real people. There’s even a word for exciting but catastrophically flawed concepts like this: “gadgetbahn.” Mr. Musk, he says, “would rather pump millions of dollars into some made-up tech fantasy than doing something actually useful for us mortals.”

Ecofascism describes how environmental activism is used to promote a nativist agenda. It suggests that migration is a fundamental cause of environmental damage and climate change, essentially portraying immigrants as an “invasive species” responsible for all of a nation’s environmental problems. In short, they believe that racially-pure societies have a more harmonious relationship with nature.

This video provides an overview of the movement and how ecofascist rhetoric has been adopted by far-right groups around the world. They exploit concerns related to overpopulation and environmental degradation to advance anti-immigration sentiments. Moderate versions of this ideology have been embraced by conservative politics while extreme versions of the ideology have influenced mass shootings.

From the video’s description: Concerns surrounding the environment and the climate crisis are no longer just the focus of liberals and the left. Eco-fascism is a growing racist ideology on the extreme right, marrying the ideas of environmentalism with white supremacy and ethnonationalism. With the climate crisis worsening by the day, eco-fascist thought has deepened alongside it. Many modern eco-fascists blame overpopulation, immigration, and globalization for our current predicament. And they say the only way to stop a total climate catastrophe is to close borders and return to ethno-states.

This video helps dispel the myth of billionaire job creators. The share of income going to the top 1% of households has doubled since the 1980s while their collective investment in our society has been in decline. They are not using such gains to create jobs, raise wages, or uplift the lower classes more generally. Our taxation policies also allow billionaires to pay minimal taxes. While they may give to charities, their donations do not offset the damages they create by hoarding wealth. All of this is unfortunate for society and the economy as this increasing wealth inequality is associated with lower productivity.

How have the ultra-rich influenced social perceptions of social inequality as related to productivity? Would you support a wealth tax on the ultra-rich? What about other potential solutions?

From the video’s description: 60% of Americans polled think billionaires like Elon Musk are good for the economy, but the economic data reveals something very different. "These people become a black hole for the economy," says economist Gary Stevenson. WIRED spoke with Gary as well as Princeton economist Atif Mian to debunk some commonly held beliefs about this nation's ultra-rich.

CONTRIBUTED BY NOAH CARTER, CABRINI UNIVERSITY

During hot summers, wealthy people are more likely to live in cooler areas despite their lifestyle contributing more to climate change. This sounds like a rather absurd statement, but it is a jarring reality in Phoenix, Arizona. According to the video, the reason this phenomenon takes place is because of the focus on “beautification” in wealthy communities: specifically, the presence of trees. Trees are actually quite essential in reducing the amount of heat within a community. Unfortunately, at least in Phoenix, the burden of planting and caring for trees is placed on the homeowner. While wealthier homeowners can see this as an investment in their properties, it often leaves lower-income neighborhoods without a shady canopy. This is because most individuals in lower-income neighborhoods rent rather than own homes. Not only do they typically have fewer resources, but renters also relocate more often. Why would you spend scarce personal resources on something that will take decades to grow and benefit your landlord more than yourself? The video also shows how neighborhood heat levels correlate with levels of income. The lower one’s income, the hotter their place of residence often is. This is a social problem because it can result in more heat-related health issues in lower-income neighborhoods.

How else might this temperature gap stem from a wealth gap? What potential policies might increase shade trees in neighborhoods with many renters?   

From the video’s description: It’s time to stop looking at trees as a form of “beautification.” They are, instead, a living form of infrastructure, providing a variety of services that include stormwater management, air filtering, carbon sequestration, and, most importantly for a city like Phoenix, Arizona, they cool the environment around them. Trees can lower neighborhood temperatures in three ways: (1) Their shade prevents solar radiation from hitting paved surfaces like concrete and asphalt, which absorb energy and rerelease it into the air as heat. (2) Their leaves pull heat from the immediate area in order to evapotranspirate water that’s drawn from the soil. And, (3) If you’re standing under one, a tree protects your body directly from the sun’s rays. If you’ve ever made a summer visit to a dry, hot city like Phoenix, you’ll know how important shade is for making any outdoor experiences tolerable. As Phoenix deals with a rising frequency of extreme heat waves — which aren’t only deadly, but also cause worrisome spikes in energy demand — the city is looking to trees as part of its heat mitigation strategy. Phoenix isn’t devoid of trees, but they’re distributed unevenly across the city. A quick glance at a satellite image of the metro area reveals substantial green splotches in the north and east and brown ones in the south and west, where many lower-income neighborhoods are located. So Phoenix recently pledged to reach “tree equity” by 2030, under an agreement with American Forests, a national tree organization. I visited Phoenix recently to take a look at the current state of the city’s urban forest. In this video, we use drone imagery and thermal cameras to understand how the urban design of the city contributes to extreme heat, and what it can do to cool down.

If you were to tell your friends you were going to a water tasting, what would they think? Water tastings may be an example of conspicuous consumption and conspicuous leisure. The act of purchasing a $200 bottle of water certainly signifies a high social class status, and so too does devoting leisure time (and $75) to learn about the nuanced differences between various brands of bottled water. Keep in mind that all of this is occurring in a world where 1 in 4 people do not have access to clean drinking water.

As a side note, there is also a connection we can make to the snobbery associated with distinctive tastes. For example, criticizing purified water in a manner that mirrors criticisms of processed foods.

From the video’s description: Martin Riese is America's first certified water sommelier, who studies the subtle flavors of bottled water, and prepares menus pairing specific brands with foods. Correspondent Jonathan Vigliotti sits down with Riese to discuss his unique palate, and his thirst for spreading the word on water.

The environmentally friendly menstrual cup has been around for over 100 years, so why isn’t it used more widely? This video traces the ecological impacts of modern menstrual hygiene to social forces including capitalism and patriarchy. We also learn about period poverty, myths surrounding menstruation, and the sanitized images used to depict periods in our society. Ultimately, the stigmatization of periods often leads to limited choices and unequal access to menstruation products. It also creates a significant amount of plastic waste.

So why are reusable cups more popular than single-use methods, and what does gender inequality factor into this? How can we destigmatize menstruation?

From the video’s description: Menstrual products tell the story of the modern world – from capitalism and patriarchy to culture and environmental pollution. Here’s why we should be talking about them more.

Here we see an in-depth exploration of the negative impacts of 996 work culture in Culture. The phrase 996 is meant to describe working from 9am to 9pm, 6 days per week. Despite being illegal, it nonetheless appears to have become the standard expectation in many Chinese technology companies.

What social forces and pressures described in the video contribute to these arduous work expectations? Who benefits the most and least from these expectations? How might Western sociological concepts, like those from Karl Marx, be used to illuminate this phenomenon?

From the video’s description: "996" is a common term used by employees at China’s tech companies to describe their working life- starting work at 9am and leaving at 9pm, working six days a week. VICE World News looks at China’s hyper-competitive work culture and the costs to their personal and social lives.

There are many sociological connections in this video, but the concept of parasocial relationships is discussed here (starting around 12:35). Parasocial relationships are one-sided relationships where an individual projects friendship onto a stranger. The stranger is usually a celebrity who is often unaware of the other person’s existence. Basically, we feel as if we are best friends with a given celebrity because we know them so well, but they do not know anything about us. In the world of social media, there may even be an illusion of reciprocity as video content feels more authentic and personal.

What is really interesting here is how parasocial relationships can explain the “merch” phenomenon. Merch is a catch-all category for branded mass-produced items sold by streaming stars (clothing, stickers, dolls, mugs, etc.). This video hints at how we buy merch because it is one of the few forms of interaction available in a parasocial relationship. Aside from watching, liking, subscribing, and commenting, there is little more we can do to demonstrate our involvement in a virtual parasocial relationship. Buying merch provides another form of interaction for those who want to move the perceived relationship further.

From the video’s description: Celebrity stalking is an old problem. But it’s happening way more in the age of YouTube, Instagram and TikTok. Fans repeatedly show up at their favorite content creators’ homes and expect the stars to be as welcoming as they are in their videos (“heeeeey guys”). Why don’t these fans realize this is invasive? In part, because the influencers encourage it.

Here we see an example of compassion fatigue, or when our ability to empathize becomes exhausted. Similar to burnout, the concept describes how we can become cynical (or even hostile) through overusing our compassion skills and caring abilities. We see this as the COVID-19 pandemic continues to cause death and human suffering, and the fatigue we are experiencing is heightened by the fact most of this is preventable with vaccines. Hence this video explores the Herman Cain Award and the morbid humor found in ridiculing dead anti-vaxxers. All of this is facilitated by the anonymity and social distance the Internet provides.  

What do you think of this morbid humor? How might it reflect other social forces in our society?

From the video’s description: Predominantly white, Christian, and right-wing, dead anti-vaxxers are providing a source of morbid comedy for a growing audience that is just too burned out to care anymore. Dexter Thomas explores the phenomenon of America’s newest schadenfreude obsession.

A hilarious video where two passionate young men defend house parties in the Hollywood Hills. The city council was debating whether to ban house parties in wake of numerous complaints, but what would this mean for the invaluable social bonds these environments facilitate? Many sociological ideas can be applied here, including those related to leisure, socialization, solidarity, and interest groups. The video may also inspire your students to become advocates and get involved in local politics.

From the video’s description: The city of LA is trying to outlaw house parties in the Hollywood Hills so Chad and JT stepped in to thwart a potential disaster.

This video describes the concept of Veblen goods using expensive watches as a case study. Veblen goods are those where higher prices result in higher demand among members of the upper class. They are like status symbols on steroids and only obtainable by the super-wealthy. Hence, you will never see a Veblen good go on sale or be discounted as this would tarnish its exclusive appeal. They also appear to be immune from price drops or sales dips associated with economic recessions and depressions. Finally, the video mentions Thorstein Veblen as an economist, but he is also considered a sociologist and gave us the concept of conspicuous consumption.

What other examples of Veblen goods can you think of?

From the video’s description: Expensive materials, delicate craftsmanship, and an economic principle that turns the usual equation of supply and demand on its head. WSJ explains why some watchmakers can charge hundreds of thousands of dollars for a single timepiece.

Microaggressions describe subtle verbal and nonverbal cues that convey denigrating or dismissive messages. They are symptomatic of the underlying assumptions and prejudices held by people. Even if they are unintentional, microaggressions often make the recipient feel like second-class citizens, or different in a bad way. This short video exemplifies the concept of microaggressions with the analogy of mosquito bites. While both tend to be annoying but harmless in small quantities, they can become infuriating and harmful through repeated exposure.

What other examples of microaggressions can you think of that were not mentioned in the video?

From the video’s description: For people that still don't think microaggressions are a problem: just imagine that instead of being a stupid comment, a microaggression is a mosquito bite.

In an interview with Vice News, sociologist Jean Beaman offers insight into the growing trend of white people learning about Black history through popular media rather than formal educational settings. Indeed, we have recently seen many states outright ban discussions of race and critical race histories in schools. In this video, Dr. Beaman integrates Derek Bell’s concept of interest convergence which holds gains for minority communities will only come if whites (or privileged groups) benefit too. She also touches upon how the distinction between individual and structural views of racism.

From the video’s description: As debates around teaching Critical Race Theory in schools continues across the country, Hollywood has tackled exploring the conversation for decades. Science fiction is being used as a tool to tell stories of American history and a sociologist tells Krishna Andavolu that it may actually be effective.

While many issues impacting the lack of affordable homes are discussed in this video, the most prominent is exclusionary zoning, or the banning of certain types of construction developments in a given area. In many areas of the country, multi-family homes are illegal because of zoning ordinances. This makes constructing affordable homes near impossible in these areas as all homes must be spacious (i.e., expensive) single-family homes. Height restrictions, parking requirements, and minimum lot sizes accomplish similar ends and result in higher housing costs. Exclusionary zoning laws also have a racist history and still have racialized effects as well.

How does your town or city zone housing lots? Do they allow multi-family housing?

ACTIVITY IDEA: It may be good to pair an investigation of zoning rules with the Racial Dot Map to see if areas restricted to single-family homes are disproportionately white.

From the video’s description: Over the past year, housing prices in the US rose precipitously. Low interest rates and millennials’ entry into the market spiked demand across the nation, leading housing prices in some cities to increase by more than 20 percent in one year, and crushing the dreams of many would-be homeowners. But housing prices in the US were a problem long before 2020 — and while demand is a big part of the story, there’s an even bigger reason it’s increasingly difficult for Americans to find affordable housing: We don’t have enough houses. According to one estimate, the US is now facing a nearly four-million-home shortage. And the primary reason for that shortage is what’s called exclusionary zoning. Zoning laws are the local rules and regulations that decide what types of homes can be built where. These rules can sometimes have good intentions. But they also have a dark history in the United States as a tool to keep certain races, religions, and nationalities out of white neighborhoods. And while zoning laws in the US are no longer explicitly racist, their effect remains basically the same: to keep affordable housing, and the people who need it, away from the wealthiest Americans. Today, in the majority of the US, especially in cities with good jobs, it’s illegal to build many affordable types of housing. And it’s led to a widespread affordability crisis. Watch the video above for more.

Contributed by Noah Carter, Cabrini University

In an era of stark political polarization, COVID-related controversies, and growing distrust of authority figures, the nature of online conspiracy groups seems more and more equitable to cults. In this video, Dr. Janja Lalich, a sociologist and former member of a left-wing cult, explains that cults can manifest in any environment, whether that is religious, sexual, or as is most often the case today, political. Dr. Lalich provides a framework consisting of four tenants that all cults share, and she demonstrates how online conspiracy groups usually follow these tenants.

The first of these tenants is the “Transcendent Belief System,” which is the overarching ideology of the group that provides members with answers to their questions. Furthermore, answers are only valid if they suit the larger belief system. The second tenant is the “Systems of Control,” where members are controlled through various means which often result in a deconstruction of individuality. The third tenant involves the “Systems of Influence,” which are the forces that consistently and persistently draw people toward the ultimate message and goal of the cult or group. For online conspiracy groups, this is arguably the most potent means of control. Finally, Dr. Lalich details the fourth tenant, “The Charismatic Leader,” who is the one that brings all three previous tenants together. While said leader does not have to be inherently charismatic, followers grant the leader a type of charismatic authority which gives the charismatic leader the power to utilize all four of these tenants to exert control. Unlike cults, Dr. Lalich states that while online conspiracy groups often do not have one identifiable “leader,” there are usually multiple individuals who can take on leadership roles within the virtual community.

All in all, online conspiracy groups, when observed through Dr. Lalich’s four tenants, have a striking resemblance to the creation and sustainment of cults. Americans as a whole would be wise to exercise caution when following media that strikes toward the deep end of any political spectrum.

How else do conspiracy movements resemble cults? In our current era, which do you feel is more dangerous or alluring to people (online conspiracy groups or cults)?

From the video’s description: Dr. Janja Lalich, a sociologist who was formerly a part of a left-wing cult, talks about the cult-like nature of many online conspiracy theory groups. Dr. Lalich explains how people get caught up in groups like this, and what can be done to help those who have fallen further and further down the rabbit hole.

Tactical urbanism describes how individuals fix or resolve problems in their built environment, often without permission from the authorities. The movement is facilitated by the lack of resources and attention devoted to fixing, cleaning, and uplifting urban spaces. Many of the projects are meant to be temporary, but they can also spur cities to make permanent improvements. This video profiles the movement through a case study of Jersey City and bike lanes.

Where have you seen similar tactics in your area?

From the video’s description: From guerilla gardening to pop-up parks, tactical urbanism is catching the world by storm. The growing movement is characterized by the temporary altering of city infrastructure through citizen-led initiatives. When tactical urbanists see something wrong in their cities, they start dreaming up ways to fix it themselves. Their creative, inexpensive solutions allow for the faster completion of projects that bring immediate benefits to their community, such as safer roads. In Jersey City, this meant quickly setting up temporary bike lanes to reduce pedestrian fatalities. The result of this experiment in tactical urbanism was so successful that permanent designs were adopted by city officials within a year.

This video asks you to reflect upon your privacy comfort level, or how much you care about others knowing your personal information and browsing history. It speaks to the concept of surveillance society where we adjust our behavior because we know we could be being watched at any given time. The video raises a lot of ethical questions and potential problems that occur when a society has no privacy laws or data ownership provisions. The overall point is that a society of surveillance is a society of submission. Powerful entities have historically used technological surveillance as tools of control and suppression, and they will certainly continue to do so in the future. 

So what is your privacy comfort level, and has it been breached yet?

From the video’s description: The surveillance state is the stuff of dystopian novels and futuristic thrillers. Or, as revealed in the Video Op-Ed above, it’s here now. With ad trackers on our phones, facial recognition cameras on our streets and N.S.A. agents listening in on our phone calls, Big Brother is watching. Throughout 2019, The New York Times Opinion department’s Privacy Project has been trying to make the conversation about privacy a little less boring, a little less complicated and a lot more real. We keep hearing, “I’ve got nothing to hide” or “I can’t actually do anything about it.” But when the government fails to protect your privacy, it’s up to you to set your limits. It’s time to decide: Are you really O.K. with being watched?

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

This video raises questions about Oxford University’s racist and colonialist legacy. Many universities have a history rooted in racism, and many of these schools openly celebrate individuals with atrocious legacies because they donated money to the school. Students have demanded changes, and while there have been some changes, reforms have not gone far enough. Statues of racist individuals still remain, and their names are still on buildings. Indeed, the troublesome past of these universities will not be reconciled easily and many of them have not taken the right actions to remedy their histories. If these universities want to welcome BIPOC students, they should find a way to rectify their racist past as much as possible. This is also a time where BIPOC individuals are at the forefront of conversations about race and how to be an anti-racist. What actions can such institutions take to better uphold their commitment to BIPOC students? Do you think universities can ever redeem themselves from a history riddled with racism and colonialism?

From the video’s description: Zing Tsjeng visits Oxford to examine the ongoing controversy as universities across the UK reckon with their unsavoury connections to colonialism. People like slave owners, slave traders and white supremacists have historic connections to some of the UK’s finest universities. They don’t put that bit in the prospectus, but it’s the truth.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

The British Empire was one of the biggest drug pushers in history, and this video describes how the British Empire got the Chinese people addicted to opium. In the 1800s, the British were interested in selling more opium grown in colonized India, and their favorite way to do this was through smuggling it into China (even though emperors had banned opium for decades). This eventually resulted in an opium war, and even though the British were illegally trafficking narcotics into China, they demanded restitution from China for destroyed opium. Overall, this is an under-acknowledged part of history that should cause us to be critical of modern representations of drug cultivators, dealers, and the drug trade as a whole. Historically, white people seem to be at the forefront of the drug trade, but our society conveniently forgets this fact. How else might drug history, as well as our current drug problems, be whitewashed? 

From the video’s description: VICE World News host Zing Tsjeng delves into her own family history to remember that time the British Empire was one of the worst drug pushers in history and got China hooked on opium.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

This video details the role data plays in our understanding of racial inequalities in school discipline. We learn how Black students are more likely than white students to have disciplinary action taken against them. They are three times more likely to be suspended or expelled from their school. This results in higher dropout rates, the inability to secure a good job, and a higher likelihood of being incarcerated. Part of the problem are the implicit biases we hold related to race, where people with dark skin face more scrutiny and suspicion of doing bad things. Another part of the problem is that policies designed to help students end up perpetuating institutional racism. The old belief was the heavily punish minor infractions in hopes it would prevent criminal activity later in life. It had the opposite effect. So how might educational disciplinary systems be reformed?

From the video’s description: When it comes to who gets punished and removed from American classrooms, the US doesn’t treat all students equally. Black students get suspended and expelled far more frequently than their white classmates, and often for the same or similar offenses. And the weeks of school that Black kids miss each year can kick off a chain reaction that changes a child’s future. But the US education system gives the American president a tremendous amount of power over public schools. Whoever holds the Presidency decides how schools handle things like testing, class size, and discipline. During the Obama administration, the US Department of Education started to take the country’s school discipline problem seriously. They investigated the schools with significant racial gaps in punishment rates, and issued guidance on how to replace outdated policies with more effective ones. Then Betsy DeVos, President Trump’s education secretary, abandoned those efforts. Trump's administration stopped releasing discipline data, changed the standard of what constitutes racist outcomes, and scaled back efforts to fix or even acknowledge racial disparities in how we punish kids. In this video we explain the origins of this crisis, and how the 2020 election could change things.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

This is a video essay about the dark reality of being an NFL cheerleader. These athletes deal with strict rules, sexism, and a huge pay gap. Unlike NFL players, the cheerleaders are subject to rigid image requirements. They have to deal with their personal lives being questioned and having regulations set on their activities outside of work. They are also only being paid about $100 a game and have to pay for all of their required expenses, such as hair, nails, and gym memberships. Moreover, they have to deal with fans who are only focused on their appearance, not about their actual athletic skills. Overall, they are not treated as professions, but rather as something that should look pretty while they are dancing on the field. We also learn that cheerleading lost its prestige as it was transformed from a masculine activity to a feminine activity in the early Twentieth century. Overall, the video speaks well to sexism in sports, the devaluation of the feminine, and unequal pay practices. How can sports organizations reform the way they treat cheerleaders?

From the video’s description: On this episode of Shady, our host, Lexy Lebsack explores the dark side of NFL cheerleading that is often left out of the spotlight. She speaks with former cheerleaders who share their stories of verbal abuse, discrimination, and exploitation all at the hands of the NFL. Watch this shocking episode of Shady to get an honest look into the dark reality of NFL cheer!

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

This video is another exploration of the disparities Black people face in the American medical system. It chronicles the intersecting histories of race and medicine with a focus on the quality of care people of color receive. Indeed, medical racism may have resulted in higher rates of iatrophobia (fear of healers) in communities of color. We learn how medical science was largely used to support and justify slavery, as well as the often-forced experimentation on Black bodies. Anesthesia was rarely used due to the prevailing belief that people of color did not experience pain or anxiety. Unfortunately, as we learn in the video, this perverse belief lingers on today. The video also describes the eugenics movement and how women of color often had sterilization forced upon them using public funding. Moreover, people of color still face institutional racism when it comes to the medical field and the treatment that they get. How else might racism negatively impact the health of people of color? Should ethics be seen as historically contingent, as the video implies?

From the video’s description: Black women's history matters in medicine. Read ProPublica's feature piece on how the US is the most dangerous industrialized country in which to give birth, and racial disparities in maternal mortality make it even worse for women of color: https://www.propublica.org/article/no... And they're seeking your help in understanding the problem. If you nearly died during pregnancy or know someone who died due to childbirth-related causes, check out this page for more information: http://propub.li/2Ae5RMi.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

This is a video essay about the environmental damages of American burial customs. These expensive burials take up a lot of space, use lots of resources, and incorporate chemicals that could be harmful to the environment. An alternative is cremation, which is significantly less expensive but results in a large carbon footprint. Thankfully, alternative burial customs include liquid cremation, natural burials, and freeze-drying. Though some of these alternatives are not widely available, how can we change our death culture to make alternative options more appealing? Do you think that these alternatives will ever take off, or will we have to search for another alternative more fitting of American death norms?

From the video’s description: The modern way of burying a body, the "casket in the ground method" most of us are used to is horrible for the environment. It uses an incredible amount of resources, emits toxic pollutants into the air, and pumps the ground full of formaldehyde, which is known to cause cancer. It's also prohibitively expensive. The average cost of a modern funeral costs between $10,000 to $12,000. There are a number of greener options available though. Cremation uses less resources and requires less space than a traditional burial, but isn't perfect. There are more experimental methods on the horizon such as promession and alkaline hydrolysis. No matter which method we choose, it's clear that we need to reform how we bury the dead.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

QAnon is a new conspiracy theory group that believes Hollywood and the government are full of pedophiles who drink children's blood. Interestingly, this is essentially the same claim from the anti-Semitic book The Protocols of Zion, which portrayed wealthy Jewish families as controlling the world. With QAnon, anti-Semitism is replaced with hatred towards Hillary Clinton and other liberal elites. This video shows us how the Internet can breathe new life into absurd (and dangerous) ideas that have been around for centuries. It also demonstrates the great lengths people will go to when supporting an authoritarian regime whose claims are rarely grounded in truth. For when the truth is absent from the ranks of leadership, evil ideologies from our past more easily reemerge.

From the video’s description: The internet has been accused of wrecking many things over the years – print media, Blockbuster and privacy, for instance. One thing it definitely hasn’t killed, though, is the antisemitic conspiracy theory. In fact, the internet is breathing new life into ideas that have been doing the rounds – sometimes causing mass murder – for centuries. In this episode of Truth Hurts, we look at how today’s biggest conspiracy movements are just recycling the same old, evil lies.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

This video shows how religion can impact LGBT people and their families with a case study of how the Mormon faith ostracizes LGBT individuals. It highlights the often-conflicting intersection between sexual and religious identities. This video profiles Diane, a lifelong Mormon who left the church after her son came out as gay. Indeed, LGBT teen Mormon suicides are on the rise because the church is so against their sexual expression. In order to live their lives authentically, more and more LGBT Mormons (and their relatives) are leaving the church. There are now entire communities of LGBT ex-Mormons (or “refugees”, as one person describes it). Ideally, religion is something people can find solace in when they are experiencing hard times, but as we see in this video, it can also be a source of hard times.

From the video’s description: A schism is riling America’s conservative Christian denominations: The young and the old cannot agree on same-sex marriage. The disagreement is particularly apparent in the Mormon church. Although the church has softened its rhetoric opposing same-sex marriage since its support a decade ago for California’s Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriage, a majority of Mormons still oppose same-sex marriage. But younger Mormons, according to a Public Religion Research Institute poll last year, are generally more amenable to the idea of same-sex marriage. And some young Mormons and their families are choosing to leave the church over the issue. To help those Mormons with their crises of faith, a podcaster named John Dehlin runs workshops across the country that address the most difficult aspects of walking away from Mormonism: Marriages crumble, job opportunities disappear and families sometimes shun those who leave the church. But Dehlin hasn’t been a practicing Mormon since 2015, when church officials excommunicated him — after numerous warnings — because of his support for same-sex marriage. Despite the church labeling him an apostate, Dehlin still considers himself a Mormon.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

This is a fun, game-like video on the social construction of gender. It features Judith Butler and her theory of performativity. Gender is a script that society expects us to act, and this includes the expectations that accompany masculinity and femininity. This includes things such as mannerism, speech, and thoughts. Gender is essentially the narrative we ascribe to anatomy. Moreover, when we do not want to want to act according to these social scripts, the neat binary between men and women starts to fall apart. This brings up the question of should there be gender categories in the first place. It also causes us to ask, how else can we subvert gender and its perceived naturalness? 

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

 This is a video essay on the problematic ways interracial couples are portrayed in movies. Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner was a movie that depicted a white woman bringing her Black fiancé to meet her family. It is credited with opening up the media to the idea of showing interracial couples. This movie was made when interracial marriage was illegal in 16 states (though this changed two weeks after the film wrapped up production). However, this movie was primarily written for white audiences, and it set a standard that would be hard for other black people to attain. John Prentice, played by Sidney Poitier, was portrayed as perfect, meaning it was impossible for others to reach the expectations presented in the movie. Likewise, the film oversimplifies the complexities of racism in society, presenting it as an individual (or family) issue rather than a social problem.

Have depictions of interracial couples changed since this movie was released? What are some other tropes the media clings to when it comes to interracial couples?

From the video’s description: Films and TV shows have long used the onscreen interracial romance as a way to explore our own evolving relationships with racism. From I Love Lucy, to Jungle Fever, to The Big Sick, we’ve progressed from cautious depictions of interracial romance, to politically charged melodramas that confront them head on, to more modern tales where race is seen as just one of love’s many complexities. But even as movies and TV have increasingly normalized the interracial relationship, it remains a singular, and significant dynamic on screen—and an essential part of our cultural conversation. Here’s our Take on how all of these depictions of the interracial relationship bring something to the table, even if they come from different points of view.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

The Columbine shooting is one of the most influential events in modern American history. The shooting has also impacted pop culture, and there is a world of teenage obsessives who openly glamorize the gunmen. Indeed, many acts of gun violence committed in schools post-Columbine were committed by a gunman who cited Columbine as an inspiration (including the perpetrator of the Virginia Tech shooting).  

This video profiles people who glorify mass shooters and serial killers. It shows us how people can create fandoms or followings around anyone, even despicable people. The main focus here is the case of Sol Pais, a young woman who followed these communities until her self-inflicted death. Sociologist Jim Hawdon claims such groups legitimize violence by portraying it as a solution to personal problems. This includes violence against others and the self. Indeed, nearly 95% of mass shooters in schools are suicidal.

Why are people attracted to these dark fandoms? Is there a way to prevent fandoms from being made around violent people? What social interventions might prevent followers of these fandoms from committing violence?

From the video’s description: Shortly before the 20th anniversary of the Columbine school shooting, an 18-year-old named Sol Pais sent much of the United States into a panic. Without telling anyone her plans, Pais had flown from her home in Miami to Denver, where she bought a shotgun and then disappeared. When the FBI learned about her obsession with Columbine, it launched a manhunt involving more than 20 federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. Hundreds of schools closed, affecting more than 500,000 students. Pais’s picture was all over the news, which described her as “armed and dangerous." All of it — the manhunt, the school closures, the wall-to-wall coverage on local and national TV — was for naught. Law enforcement and the media had fundamentally misunderstood the story of Sol Pais: She never made any explicit threats, nor was there any indication that she intended to cause harm to others. That misunderstanding was based on a deeper failure to comprehend what drives young people to become fixated with the Columbine massacre — and what lies at the root of school shootings themselves.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

This video highlights how the white savior trope places white people at the center of anti-racist stories. In the wake of police brutality against George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and many others, people are starting to learn more and increasingly embracing anti-racism. In particular, many white people have turned to the 2011 movie The Help to learn about being an anti-racist. This movie, however, is awash with the “white savior trope” that is prevalent in many different narratives about racism. These movies typically feature a benevolent white protagonist who takes a stand against racism by challenging the system. Thus, white people in these stories are the ones credited for fixing problems related to racism.

This trope started during the Civil Rights Movement when it was believed white people would not understand (or consume) media featuring black people unless the plot also prominently featured a “good” white person. An early example of this trope is the 1962 movie adaptation of Harper Lee’s book To Kill A Mockingbird where Atticus Finch is tasked with defending a falsely accused Black man. Although Atticus did not win the case, it made him look like a hero to those in the black community. The problem with the white savior trope is that it inhibits the Black community from telling their own stories, effectively perpetuating white privilege in the media. Moreover, white actors who are given prominent roles in such movies often receive praise, but Black actors in the same film rarely receive as much attention and recognition as their white counterparts. This video also explains how racism is a complex issue in our country. Nonetheless, many white savior movies solve the racist problem by the end, perhaps making the viewer believe that racist problems are not as complex as they are in reality.

What do you think of the white savior trope? How can this be changed in cinema? Why else might white audiences enjoy these overly-simplified stories of racism with white saviors?

From the video’s description: Why do so many stories about racism revolve around the White Savior? In 2020, as the Movement for Black Lives grew in the wake of the killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and others, The Help experienced a resurgence in popularity, becoming one of the most-streamed movies on Netflix. The 2011 film about a white woman confronting racism may be well-intentioned, but—like Green Book, The Blind Side, and other White Savior movies before it—The Help centers its story on benevolent white characters, rather than on firsthand black perspectives. How did this trope become so persistent? Here’s our Take on the dangers of the White Savior, and how we can change our own narratives and conversations to become more anti-racist ourselves.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

Conspiracy theories are theories that cannot be proven wrong, and the belief in conspiracy theories is related to disbelief in actual science. The term was coined by Karl Popper, a philosopher of science who also coined the phrase “paradigm shift”. Unfortunately, conspiracy theories lead to many waves of fear and paranoia. Classic examples include how the Russian flu of 1898 was blamed on electric light bulbs, and “the killer steam train” which said if it went over a certain speed everyone on the train would melt and/or female passengers would have their uterus sucked out of their body.

Conspiracy theories can sound scientific because they mimic what scientists actually do which is question existing narratives in hopes of discovering the truth. Yet a cornerstone for conspiracy theorists is to call scientists liars. Scientific thinking relies on evidence, but conspiracy theories try to show that such evidence is a lie, and that the conspiracy theorist is the one with the real truth. In the process, they are undermining science without any evidence to support what they are saying. Hence conspiracy theories are un-falsifiable. There is no evidence, so there is no way for them to be proved wrong.

Currently, there is the conspiracy theory that 5G cellular towers caused the pandemic. When the COVID-19 pandemic started, people started to believe that it was an intentional biological attack using 5G broadband. Engineers were even verbally attacked in the streets and there were several masts burned down in the UK. Though this conspiracy theory is not real, it is a real example of a spurious relationship, a situation where two variables appear to be directly related but instead the relationship is attributable to a third intervening variable. In this case, the co-prevalence of COVID-19 and 5G can be easily explained by population size and density. The virus spreads most effectively in populated areas, and cellular companies introduce new technologies like 5G in the most populated (and profitable) areas first.

Why do you think that people believe in conspiracy theories? Do you think there is a way to stop conspiracy theorists? How have conspiracy theories change the way people think?

From the video’s description: It’s been well established that belief in conspiracy theories is related to a disbelief in actual science. The whole toxic frustration of conspiracy theorists is that they can never be proven wrong – all evidence against their ideas just becomes part of the conspiracy. This is largely why, even though they seem obsessed with science, they always get actual science so wrong. From the moon landing to flat earth to 5G, there has been a constant battle in modern times between science and conspiracy.

This video covers multiple examples of how algorithms reflect social biases, perhaps perpetuating social inequalities like racism. Image cropping algorithms routinely prioritize white faces over Black faces, many sensors perform poorly on darker skin, and beauty filters adjust facial features in ways that make them appear white(r). The lesson is that machine learning will ultimately reflect societal biases despite us believing otherwise.

Overall, we like to believe in the idea of “tech neutrality”, that our technology is free from bias and can help liberate our society from human subjectivities. Tech neutrality, however, is fiction… but since we believe it is real, we tend not to question it. This video dispels that belief by showing us the multitudes of human decisions that go into the creation of algorithms and other technologies. All of the choices we make when creating technology are potential opportunities for our biases to contaminate the resulting technology. Likewise, the data sets upon which our technology operate are saturated with white faces. There is also the problem of having algorithms make decisions based on data loaded with biases, like crime statistics and policing data. The way we label variables is also problematic, such as defining “high-risk patients” based on their consumption of health care resources (in other words, risk becomes a proxy for cost). The overarching pattern is that the biases within our technology benefit white people while harming people of color.

From the video’s description: Many of us assume that tech is neutral, and we have turned to tech as a way to root out racism, sexism, or other “isms” plaguing human decision-making. But as data-driven systems become a bigger and bigger part of our lives, we also notice more and more when they fail, and, more importantly, that they don’t fail on everyone equally. Glad You Asked host Joss Fong wants to know: Why do we think tech is neutral? How do algorithms become biased? And how can we fix these algorithms before they cause harm?

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

The British Empire has done many horrible things throughout its existence. One example is British Penal Code Section 377 which criminalized homosexuality, resulting in at least 30 former British colonies where it is still illegal to be gay. Yet this code has earlier roots. As the British colonized different parts of the world from the 16th century to the 19th century, they also exported the laws that they had in place when they took over. One of these laws was the Buggery Act of 1533 which banned male homosexuality and made gay sex punishable by death. Lesbianism, however, was not banned because women were not thought of as much at the time. Like many colonizers, the British wanted to enforce their ideas of morality onto the people that they are colonizing. As we learn in the video, many of the places the British colonized did not have a hateful culture towards or laws against homosexuality before they were made into colonies.

Though homosexuality was finally decriminalized in England and Wales in 1967, anti-homosexuality laws are still in the penal codes of many of their former colonies. LGBTQ people in Barbados, Pakistan, and many other countries still do not have equality today. From 2010 to 2014, there were almost 600 people who were prosecuted under Kenya’s anti-gay laws. Would these countries be different towards LGBTQ people if the British had not colonized them?

This video shows the lingering impacts that British colonization has on the countries that were colonized. The video also demonstrates the imposition of cultural sexism and androcentrism in that only male homosexuality was originally banned as the British did not want their soldiers and administrators to be having sex with each other. With women having a lower status in the British empire and excluded from military or government careers, lesbianism was not on the colonizer’s radar.  

Why else was there more of a focus on preventing same-sex relationships between men than women? Why do you think these laws have not been repealed in these countries?

From the video’s description: A set of laws known as the penal code was exported from Britain to its colonies and is still affecting LGBTQ politics to this very day. The penal code laws made being gay a criminal offense, and while Britain decriminalized homosexuality in 1967, it’s still illegal in over 30 former British colonies. These countries didn’t have a history of homophobia before Britain enforced their own ideas of morality, but thanks to the empire these laws mean many live in fear. VICE World News host Zing Tsjeng investigates how the legacy of the empire is still ruining lives to this day.

Here we see the fight for food justice in a neighborhood with one of the highest number of fast-food restaurants in the country (East New York). In addition to food deserts and the idea of food justice, we learn about food apartheid, a concept describing how unhealthy food systems (e.g., fast food) are often purposefully placed in communities of color. Even when controlling for income, these neighborhoods have more unhealthy food options and fewer grocery stores than white neighborhoods. This connects to America’s legacy of segregation as well as the cultural construction of healthy food as white, expensive, and unappealing. There’s also the unfortunate connection between healthy food options and gentrification. Yet here we see how community insiders are working to make healthy foods accessible and appealing.

From the video’s description: We take a look at systemic racism in America's food systems.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

Consider a world without money, without class divisions, where everyone gives according to their abilities and takes according to their needs. This sounds like a great world to live in, right? To Karl Marx, this communist utopia was not only possible, it was inevitable. This video discusses many of Marx’s ideas including the “march of history”, or how we are moving towards a communist state. We learn about the rise of economic systems, the creation of capital, and the advent of capitalism. Since the capitalist wants to maximize profit, they pay their workers little more than is necessary to survive. Marx believed that the economic system of capitalism thrives on exploitation and creates widespread unhappiness through what he calls “alienation”. In a capitalist society, we are alienated from (1) the fruits of our own labor, (2) the work itself, (3) our co-workers and fellow members of the proletariat, and (4) our human nature (or species being).

As time goes on, the gap between the working class (proletariat) and the capitalist class (bourgeoisie) will only get wider. Marx believed that frustrated workers will rise up and usher in a new society. This new society will have no private property and class divisions. The labor of the people will be for the common good and people will work according to their ability. This is known as communism.

What do think about Marx’s theory about communism? Do you believe that some of these ideas are still relevant to today’s capitalism? Have things become better or worse for workers overtime?

Sociologists know that zip codes are powerful predictors of life outcomes. This video explores the connections between racial segregation and social mobility. It uses the Opportunity Atlas (https://www.opportunityatlas.org/), and this tool can be easily used in sociology courses as well. The video also features sociologist Jacob Faber and his research on how segregation is intentionally designed. We learn about redlining and discriminatory lending practices which allowed white families to move to areas with better opportunities but confined Black families (and immigrant families) to areas in decline. Such policies and practices resulted in the institutionalization of segregation, the legacy of which still haunts us today. Even today, homes in Black communities are routinely underpriced, hampering the ability of Black families to build wealth. We also learn about housing testers, individuals who pretend to be looking for housing to examine how realtors treat clients of different racial backgrounds.     

From the video’s description: Housing policy in the United States has a long history of deepening segregation. Redlining, exclusionary lending, and targeted zoning laws have all played a role in isolating minority populations while simultaneously privileging white residents. Glad You Asked host Lee Adams wants to know how this happened, and what effect residential segregation has on your future.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

This satirical commercial features masculine makeup. Because makeup is strongly associated with women, an exaggerated form of masculinity is deployed to reclaim makeup as an acceptable product for men. The idea is men will only accept something that is considered feminine if it is hyper-masculinized. Even the term “makeup” is absent from the commercial because it is a word associated with femininity and women. Instead, “Man Stain” and “Guyshadow” are just for the guys, and “Double IPA Tinted Dude Fluid” helps block impurities in the skin. The packaging also appeals to hegemonic masculinity such as the Eye Dirt Pizza Compact and blush in a gun.

If this commercial were real, would it further stigmatize or destigmatize men wearing makeup? What other products have masculine versions with similar themes?

From the video’s description: In this Cut for Time sketch, a commercial advertises a line of male cosmetics that are absolutely not makeup.

This video examines environmental racism through the planned relocation of a scrap iron shredding facility. The facility has long operated in Chicago’s Lincoln Park neighborhood, which is predominantly white and wealthy. Yet because the facility has been continually cited and fined for pollution, it is being relocated to an area that already suffers from a disproportionate amount of pollution. The new site is on the southwest side of Chicago, an area among America’s top 10 percent most vulnerable neighborhoods in terms of fumes, cancer risk, and superfund sites. This triggered claims of environmental racism (and a hunger strike by local activists) because the area is predominantly Black and working class. Loosely defined, environmental racism describes how environmental risks (like polluting industries) are disproportionately placed in communities of color. While an investigation is ongoing into the civil rights of the Southside’s residents, the practice of concentrating polluting industries in minority communities is widespread.

How might environmental racism be evident in your area? What can be done to ensure the impacts of industry are equitable, both in terms of the benefits and consequences?

From the video’s description: A small group of activists in Chicago's Southeast side just finished a month-long hunger strike to protest the movement of a metal shredder to their neighborhood, saying it will cause dangerous pollution and make their community sick. They're calling it an environmental justice issue -- and they see it as life or death.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

Jack Johnson became the first Black man to win the heavyweight title in 1908. He defeated his white opponent, Tommy Burns, in front of a mostly white crowd of 20,000 people with new motion cameras that captured the event on film. The advent of filming these “prizefights” caused champions to be seen as heroes, and such fights were interpreted as ways for communities to show their strength. When it was an interracial fight, they were seen as a Darwinian struggle between the races. If a white man won, the fight reinforced ideas of white supremacy. If a Black man won, the fight could upend ideas of white supremacy, which is why Black men were not allowed to fight for the heavyweight title. This created something of a color line between Black boxers and white boxers. At the time, Jim Crow laws and overt racism were rampant. Johnson had held the title of “World Colored Heavyweight Champion” from 1903-1908 until Tommy Burns accepted his challenge for the World Heavyweight Champion.

White people were not happy about Jack Johnson’s victory as it challenged the prevailing idea of white supremacy. They wanted Johnson to fight against a previous world champion, James Jeffries, who had retired and gained some weight. When the fight was happening, people flocked to theaters to see who would win, and in the 15th round of the fight, Johnson knocked Jeffries down and out of the ring. Jeffries was put back into the ring where Johnson once again threw him down onto the mat. Though Johnson had defended his title, the powerful image of the victory caused white people to riot.

After violent riots broke out following the fight, the film was banned because of what we now call white fragility, a concept describing how white people feel discomfort when their racialized worldview is called into question. But by the time the film was banned, it had already been sent all around the world, cementing the legacy of Jack Johnson as a heavyweight champion and as someone who crushed the color line. He even inspired one of the most well-known boxers in American culture, Muhammed Ali.  

This video demonstrates how sports can serve as a proxy for societal issues, primarily the belief in a racial hierarchy that was rampant at this time (as well as racial tension and violence). Segregating boxers allowed this belief to go untested, thus allowing it to live on. White boxers at this time did not want to fight Black boxers because losing would make them appear weak as individuals in addition to falsifying the collective view of white supremacy.

How important is this video to the conversation of race today? Are the issues shown in the video still relevant to issues today that involve race? Do sports still serve as proxies for social issues related to race or other categories of inequality?

From the video’s description: On December 26, 1908, American boxer Jack Johnson became the first Black heavyweight champion of the world, after defeating defending champion Tommy Burns in a title fight in Sydney, Australia. Black fighters were typically denied the chance to win the heavyweight title, a de-facto line of segregation that was known as “the color line.” So when Burns accepted Johnson’s challenge and lost, the film that was distributed around the fight proved controversial. The white boxing world set out to find a white heavyweight to beat Johnson and take back the title. That white fighter ended up being James Jeffries, a former heavyweight champion who had retired undefeated. Their fight, hyped as the “Battle of the Century,” took place in Reno, Nevada, on July 4, 1910, in front of 20,000 mostly-white spectators and nine motion picture cameras. Throughout the nation, many thousands more listened to live telegram bulletins of each round. Johnson beat Jeffries easily, and, as a result, racist mob violence broke out across the country, and Black Americans celebrating Johnson’s win were attacked, and some were killed. The film of the fight became notorious worldwide and was the most talked-about motion picture of its time. Johnson lost the heavyweight title in 1915 after successfully defending it eight times, but remained an inspiration for many fighters to come.

Contributed by Mary Scafidi, Cabrini University

This video shows us how sports can intersect with social movements with a case study of race in the 1968 Olympics and the resulting iconic protest images. It also profiles the work of sociologist, educator, and former star athlete Dr. Harry Edwards. The video describes the historical context of a proposed boycott of the 1968 Olympics and how activists used any means possible to get society to pay attention to institutionalized racism. The boycott was controversial because participating in sports could be a powerful way to draw attention to the problem. Track stars Tommie Smith and John Carlos defied the boycott, won Olympic medals, and used their positions on the winner’s podium to protest. The video describes the many other symbolic items the athletes utilized in addition to the iconic raised fists. White people and the Olympic committee reacted negatively, and the athletes were stripped of their medals. Even today, Colin Kaepernick and many other black athletes are still protesting the issues that Smith and Carlos were fighting in 1968.

From the video’s description: The image of sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos raising their fists during a medal ceremony at the 1968 Olympics in Mexico City is an enduring image of silent protest. But the key to understanding it goes beyond the black-gloved fists. All three medal winners, including silver medalist Peter Norman of Australia, wore buttons that read “Olympic Project for Human Rights.” The Olympic Project for Human Rights (OPHR) was a coalition of prominent athletes formed in 1967 that threatened to boycott participating in the upcoming Olympic games, in order to draw attention to systemic racism in the United States. The group, led by Professor Harry Edwards, ultimately voted to compete in the games and hold their demonstrations there, which led to the now-iconic display on the medal stand following the men’s 200-meter final. This act got Smith and Carlos kicked off the team, but left a lasting legacy on making political statements through sport.

Here we see an example of the sexist double standard applied to clothing in the context of yearbook photos. The concept of the double standard describes how rules are differentially enforced depending on one’s gender or other group affiliations. Because our culture sexualizes the female body, the school district “edited” many girls’ yearbook photos to minimize the amount of visible skin. Yet in the same yearbook, boys are pictured in speedos.

How else does this double standard manifest in our society? While women are the clear victims here, what might this practice assume about men?

From the video’s description: Several students and their parents at one Florida high school are outraged after their yearbook photos were altered to cover up more of their chests. Riley O’Keefe’s original photo had a black bar digitally added to the top of her shirt. In total, 80 photos were deemed “inappropriate” by the school and digitally altered. All of them were girls. They say their school outside Jacksonville, Florida applied a double standard.

This video is an excellent case study of environmental racism, a concept describing how polluting infrastructure is often disproportionately placed in communities of color. Perhaps the most powerful image in this video is found at 2:02… It shows how the route of a proposed oil pipeline was made longer so it would not run through wealthier (likely whiter) communities. Instead of an easier and shorter direct route, the planners proposed a more complex route that runs through several historically Black communities. This decision will only increase the pollution-related health inequalities that are a hallmark of environmental racism. Indeed, polluting industries in this area of Memphis have a history of harming the health of local inhabitants. This video also shows us how these communities are mobilizing to resist the pipeline. Thankfully the local council acted against the pipeline, though the resulting dispute is likely to last for years.

How might environmental racism be evident in your area? What can be done to ensure the impacts of industry are equitable, both in terms of the benefits and consequences?

From the video’s description: The people of South Memphis stand to lose the land that their families have lived on for centuries to a new pipeline. The Byhalia Connection is set to be built above the Memphis aquifer and to snake through historically Black neighborhoods. VICE News Tonight goes to South Memphis to meet the people fighting for their future.

(Extra footage is shown from 11:28 to 14:20)

Native American women are nearly three times more likely to face sexual violence compared to white women, and homicide is the fourth leading cause of death for those under 20. Moreover, approximately half of all cases involving murdered indigenous women in Montana are misclassified as things like suicide, overdose, or exposure.

This video speaks to the power of data. Since there is no comprehensive data set on missing indigenous women, we do not know the scope of the problem. A related problem exists in the ethnic classification of these missing women. As Sociologist Desi Rodriguez-Lonebear explains, this is an effect of colonization and the erasure of Native American cultures.

The video also touches on the confusion created by having often-overlapping bureaucratic agencies investigating crimes. Depending on where a body is discovered or where a person is reported missing, responsibility can fall on tribal, state, or federal authorities, creating a “jurisdictional minefield”.

From the video’s description: There’s an epidemic of missing and murdered indigenous women, and Native communities have had enough.

An example of cultural appropriation—Three white women release an adaption of Mahjong (a traditional game in Asian cultures) and charge up to $425 per game set. They also changed the tiles which are reportedly a hallmark of the game. Moreover, as can be seen in a screenshot of a message in the video, the women claimed to have “refreshed” the game. Other examples mentioned in the video include appropriating Asian fashions and Chinese food. Of course, these are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to whites who profit from appropriating other cultures… What other examples can you think of? 

From the video’s description: Many Asian Americans were angered when “The Mahjong Line” went viral for their pricey mahjong sets, which some are calling cultural appropriation. “[It’s] this ownership and profiteering from Asian culture that white America loves to do,” Andrew Ti, of the podcast “Yo, Is This Racist?” told Inside Edition Digital. The founders have since apologized, but is that enough? Inside Edition’s Johanna Li explains.

NOTE: The main story ends at 11:07 and extra footage is shown afterward.

People of color face greater stress and trauma in a racist society, and at the same time, they are underserved by mental health services. This is partly due to a viewing help-seeking as a sign of weakness, but it is also important to keep in mind that mental health and related services are largely Western (i.e., white) constructions. For example, this video encourages us to think of white supremacy and capitalism as diseases that cause collective trauma to non-white groups of people. Mainstream mental health services work within a paradigm of treating the individual in light of their individual experiences, but as a consequence, they may be inadequate for dealing with the collective trauma of racism. 

Emotional emancipation circles are a product of black psychology where participants are urged to clean themselves of the oppressions they’ve internalized. These self-help programs operate outside of the Eurocentric white psychology establishment—Indeed, the organizers explicitly reject mainstream measures of legitimacy when evaluating the efficacy of these circles. Participants discuss their experiences with racial devaluation and are encouraged to imagine a world disconnected from the white power structure. This style of “spoken medicine” has historically happened in informal settings like faith groups, barber shops, and other black spaces. Black psychology works to provide therapeutic evidence and to formalize these powerful discussions.

From the video’s description: Alzo Slade participates in an “Emotional Emancipation Circle,” an Afrocentric support group created by the Community Healing Network and the Association of Black Psychologists. It’s a safe space for Black people to share personal experiences with racism and to process racial trauma. This is the latest episode of the VICE News Tonight series, "Trauma: Black Mental Health."

The pandemic has highlighted and widened social inequality in American society. A lack of response from the federal, state, and local levels has placed more burdens on parents when it comes to educating their children. The result has been called “opportunity hoarding”— Those with expendable resources tend to thrive, while everyone else is left behind, potentially widening the already-worrisome“achievement gap”.

Here we explore how educational inequality may widen with the advent of “learning pods”, the costliest of which involves hiring a teacher/tutor to educate small groupings of students. Meanwhile, some families cannot even afford basic child care services that have become necessary in areas where public schools are closed. Sociologist Dr. L’Heureux Lewis-McCoy points out how the overall uncertainty of the situation facilitates these pandemic pods. Yet while these pods create a more stable learning environment, they might also “supercharge” a child’s education. Instead of providing students with a life raft, they’re taking off in speed boats. Sociology forces us to consider how individual actions/choices can have societal-wide repercussions, so what might the implications of this be? Is there any way to make education in the pandemic era more equitable?

From the video’s description: VICE News explores the cost of handling the educational crisis through Pandemic Learning Pods.

How do voting laws make it harder to vote? This video is a case study on how the gutting of the Voting Rights Act (in 2013) has affected elections in the state of Georgia. Like some other states, Georgia has experienced demographic shifts where the population has become more diverse and for a variety of reasons, less likely to vote Republican. This has caused Republicans in the state to shift their strategy from attempting to sway people to vote for Republican candidates, to attempting to limit who can vote in the first place. The end result is a less democratic system where the white power structure is more easily maintained.

Georgia is the only state which practices every one of the five most common voter suppression tactics. These include voter ID laws, polling place closures, proof of citizenship requirements, voter roll purges, and cuts in early voting. Since there is little to no evidence of voter fraud, we need to ask why these policies are being implemented. The answer is apparent and can be seen in how all of these policies disproportionately affect minorities. Since other states are following Georgia’s lead (including some in the north), this case study can provide us with a glimpse of how unequal future elections will be.

From the video’s description: The first episode of our four-part series, Stressed Election, focuses on voter suppression in Georgia, where a growing Black and Latino population is on the precipice of exercising its political voice, if they get the chance to vote.

The Environmental Protection Agency estimates people of color are exposed to 1.5x more air pollution than white people. The reasons are complex but correlate strongly to residential segregation via housing discrimination and the legacy of slavery. Simply stated, many minority communities are confined to areas with significant air and water pollution. This video explains how the sharecropping system eventually gave way to toxic petrochemical corporations in Louisiana. The land once worked by black sharecroppers was sold to chemical companies by the white landowners. Decades later these areas would be deemed as “sacrifice zones” because the pollution was so bad. In other words, we see how historical oppressions result in poorer health for still-oppressed groups in our society. And when a deadly contagious virus enters the picture, the result can be catastrophic for these vulnerable communities. The same conditions associated with air pollution— heart and lung problems— make coronavirus much more dangerous for these individuals.

From the video’s description: Across the US, black people are dying from Covid-19 at disproportionately high rates. While there are many different factors at play behind the stark racial disparities — there’s one possible reason that’s been lurking in the air for decades: pollution. The long history of segregation and housing discrimination has long put black people at greater risk of living near chemical plants, factories and highways, exposing them to higher levels of air pollutants. These pollutants have had a chronically negative impact on health, leading to conditions like hypertension and asthma. Now, those same diseases are associated with severe cases of Covid-19, and showing that where you live can determine whether you survive from Covid-19.

This video is a short critique of a pervasive advertising strategy created during the pandemic. Commercials made in the time of COVID-19 are trying to frame consumption as a brave, patriotic act. These commercials also look and feel exactly the same, and surprisingly, are often void of the products or services being sold. Instead, the commercials exploit public sentiments surrounding essential workers despite how many of these ads come from corporations who do as little as possible to protect their workers. Amazon is a prime example, as are many food services businesses. Workers are presented as heroes (as are consumers) even though they aren’t paid a living wage and do not receive health care benefits. As such, these ads can be seen as an example of the false consciousness and as a general strategy to conceal class conflict.

From the video’s description: Our critic Amanda Hess looks at how brands are selling shopping as a noble act.

This video examines the intersections of race and gender inequality in hospital delivery rooms. It explores why there are higher rates of both mother and infant mortality in communities of color. We see how racial biases adversely impact the care pregnant black women receive, and how racism is a long term stress that can lead to poor health outcomes. We also learn the history of how racism impacted our understanding of patient needs where (white) doctors traditionally assumed people of color experienced less pain. This stems back to the time of slavery where it was common to use slaves in medical experiments. Unfortunately, this theme of using marginalized communities for deleterious medical research continues through our present era.  

What are some possible solutions to this issue? The history of black midwives is briefly explored as an alternative to biomedicalized deliveries, but transformations are also needed within traditional health care settings.

From the video’s description: On this episode of Shady, our host Danielle Cadet is looking to get to the bottom of the Black maternal and infant mortality rate in America. She consults experts and well as those affected by this nation-wide crisis. Watch Shady to get a better understanding of what needs to change.

In this fascinating critique of the corporate decision making behind emojis, we witness how the pictorial characters come to life through the Unicode Consortium. While emoji is often understood as a type of democratic global language, the individuals who control the technology are privileged representatives from the major technology corporations. As only a certain number of new emojis are approved each year, these individuals and their corporate overlords have the power to shape how billions of people communicate. No other language has evolved in such a top-down fashion, and it also goes against the principle of equity in the context of our modern globalized society. People outside of the developed world have little influence over the emoji language compared to those in wealthier countries. Not only are minority groups underrepresented at the Unicode Consortium, but the consortium’s focus is clearly directed towards those in countries with a high degree of technological consumption.

While critical of the Unicode Consortium, the video considers how some gatekeeping to the emoji world is necessary. For example, as symbols differ in their meanings across cultures, it is wise to prevent certain symbols from entering the platform if they would be deeply offensive to some groups. However, the consequence of this can be oppressive when the feelings of privileged groups are protected at the expense of others. We see this in the case of transgender rights activists who campaign for trans-specific symbols as well as in the case of nations who want their own flag emoji (e.g., the Palestinian flag was only added in 2018). These parties must compete for attention from the Unicode Consortium along with advocates for somewhat-less-important symbols, such as the ladies from the white wine lobby featured in the video (it’s a great example of social privileges too). The result is a non-offensive, corporate-friendly language that serves the interests of the global status quo.

Who benefits from, and who is harmed by, this non-democratic language? How else can sociology inform our understanding of the processes in this video? What are some possible solutions to this problem?

From the video’s description: Every day we send seven billion emojis worldwide. Although the colorful icons called emojis can no longer be ignored in our daily communication, little is known about it. Who has power over the emoji? Where are emojis coming from? There is one "High Council" of online communication that is difficult to access and has the power over our emoji selection on the keyboard: The Unicode Consortium. This group is difficult to access and meets four times a year on the west coast of the United States. This tech giants committee makes decisions about language and shapes the infrastructure of the online world. Representatives from Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Google, IBM, Netflix, Amazon, and Intel set the global standard for symbols, characters, and fonts in digital (visual) language so that all our devices can communicate with each other effortlessly. Part of Unicode is the twelve-member "Emoji Commission." Director Mea Dols de Jong got a foot in the door during the quarterly meeting at Microsoft's headquarters in Redmond, Seattle, but also ran into the shocking closedness of the tech sector. The deeper she delves into the world behind the seemingly little icons, the better she sees that this micro-world is a reflection of the "real" world. What does it take to get a new emoji on the phone's keyboard? Take a look at the campaign for a new white wine emoji. Why is the LGBTQI rainbow flag emoji in the keyboards, but not the one that stands for transgender people? Where lies the power to make such decisions?

Americans are largely fearful and avoidant of death and dying. This is partly a consequence of the professionalization of death care which removes and sanitizes death from everyday life. Embalming makes a corpse look life-like, but it is also terrible for the planet. Traditional cremations also require an unsustainable amount of resources while releasing pollution into the atmosphere. So, what can you do to not further damage the earth upon your death? “Water cremation” (being dissolved in a liquid with a high pH) is an eco-friendlier option and the technology is currently being further refined. The biggest challenge to this new technology, though, appears to be social acceptance. How might the American alienation from death coincide with damage to the environment? What can be done to shift our death culture into a more sustainable direction?

From the video’s description: Within the last few years, some funeral directors have invested in more eco-friendly alternatives to traditional burials and flame cremations. One of these methods is a process known as Alkaline Hydrolysis, or water cremation.

Introducing the credibility bookcase, a background that lends authority to your video interview. From a dramaturgical perspective, it can be seen as a form of sign equipment we display to others to enhance our front stage self. In other words, books and bookcases are intellectual accessories. But it’s not just books, though—Joe Biden’s carefully placed football delivers an all-American vibe, and the material of the bookcases can indicate socioeconomic status as seen with the fancy woods endemic in celebrity homes. This video also considers how intellectual authority has a specific and inflexible look. When someone deviates from the traditional dark suit (on a white man), their deviance may be sanctioned by enforcers of the status quo. Deviations in traditional professional attire may be scrutinized by the media or one’s colleagues, and as a result, less attention is paid to the substance of what was said by the individual.

How else might we theorize or analyze these bookcases? Sociologically, I think it would be interesting to analyze the details found within the various credibility bookcases. Perhaps the size of the bookcase and content vary by professional status, gender, age, or other variables. It would also be worthy to investigate individuals who defy the trend in their interviews. Would a non-bookcase background detract authority from what an expert has to say?   

From the video’s description: Our critic Amanda Hess looks at why scrutinizing a celebrity’s bookcase has become a pandemic parlor game.

How many Americans have died from COVID-19? This video explains why and how we have undercounted coronavirus fatalities. Aside from the inherent difficulty of pinpointing a precise cause of death, how a death gets reported can differ depending on where it happens. After all, official figures are the product of numerous bureaucratic decisions on “what counts” as a virus-related death. These decisions vary between states and institutions. For example, Florida only considers the deaths of residents in their official count, and for-profit institutions like nursing homes may be inclined to deflate numbers given to officials and the media. To make matters more complicated, statistics on the virus have become politicized in the polarized American political system. Perhaps the only thing we can be relatively sure of is that even the best official numbers are less than the reality of the situation.  

A satirical example of how social desirability bias manifests in sex research. Briefly described, this occurs when individuals lie in order to appear better, cooler, or more desirable than they actually are. We know that men commonly inflate their lifetime number of sexual partners since masculine norms emphasize sexual prowess. This bias can also be seen in self-report surveys regarding other sexual attributes (frequency of sex and organ size, for example). While comical, this brief video hints at the consequences of getting exaggerated information—when we have an erroneous understanding of a phenomenon, we may take ineffective or even harmful actions (overloading youth with sexual information, buying ill-fitting condoms, etc). Social desirability is certainly not limited to the area of sex either. People generally over-report good behaviors (e.g., exercising, charitable giving, time spent reading) and under-report bad behaviors (e.g., substance use, speeding, time spent watching television).

This video explains how and why COVID-19 cases are charted for international comparisons. This is not the only way to chart this data, but the video discusses the advantages of using a logarithmic scale over a linear scale, as well as what is concealed when we do this (like population size, for example). Regardless, the video raises some interesting points on what information is contained in and excluded from data visualizations on the novel coronavirus.

From the video’s description: Much of the data about the coronavirus epidemic and covid-19 is flawed. It is collected and reported in different ways by different countries, and almost certainly undercounts the number of cases and deaths. But organizations and journalists still need to report the available data to inform the public and help guide policymakers. Much of that data ends up in visualizations, like charts and maps, which can make it easier to understand and analyze. But it's important to know how the process of data visualization can shape our perception of the crisis. In this video, we deconstruct one particularly popular chart of covid-19 cases around the world which uses a logarithmic scale, and explain how to avoid being misled by it.

***SPOILER WARNING***

This video essay examines how the film Jojo Rabbit (2019) displays sociological concepts related to the construction of nations, communities, myth-making, and the self. It begins by distinguishing two ways we can define a nation (the primordial v. the constructivist), and then proceeds with the constructivist concept of imagined communities. The film humorously portrays these imagined communities by highlighting how character actions relate to shared expectations, at least until the film shifts gears. After Jojo is injured and forced to stay home, he loses the group influence of the Nazis but is slowly absorbed into a competing imagined community in WWII Germany—that of the resistance. The lesson is that our interpretation of reality is influence by the powers around us, but we also self-produce meanings as well. Other sociological concepts include national mythscapes, cultural appropriation, and discursive space.

Having seen the movie myself, I would also add that the film does a masterful job with lampooning stereotypes.

This video essay describes how the Gotham City presented in The Dark Knight (2008) lacks internal identity. While some residents believe in a common good, others are bent on maintaining anti-cohesive social chaos. Within this context, the character of Batman can be seen as embodying social order. He is emblematic of justice, morality, and order while the Joker signifies disruption and disorder. Indeed, “jokes are chaotic in nature… they are a corruption of order in the world”. One of the key differences between order and chaos is abiding by agreed-upon methods and rules. The Joker (wisely) utilizes chaos to destabilize the existing power structure which relies on methods and rules. He is able to escape being defined by the power structure, and as such, he is beyond the grasp of the political-legal system. In other words, the Joker is powerful because he lacks a stable identity. The only way to defeat the Joker is to temporarily abandon the moral dichotomy of good v evil, and Batman does in the film by embracing his shadow (although he clings to his one rule—do not kill).

From the video’s description: The character of Batman and the stories that revolve around him have always seemed to be substantiated on the symbiotic relationship between an individual, and the elements that encapsulate them. How do the ideas of society and the balance of good and evil mixed in with a little bit of chaos tell the story? Today we try to dissect and figure that out.

The United States is the only wealthy country that does not guarantee workers paid sick leave on a national level. As of 2019, about 34 million American workers (24% of the labor force) did not have sick leave offered through their employer or mandated by their state or local government. This causes sick workers to keep on working despite the chance of spreading their disease to others. It may be tempting to blame these individuals, but since the majority are underpaid and live paycheck to paycheck, missing work can have dire consequences.

This video explains the value of paid sick leave policies in the context of the novel coronavirus. It also describes the political history of these policies where corporations (especially Yum! Brands) lobbies governments to void locally-mandated leave policies. All in all, since sick leave is a rather privileged “benefit” in the United States, corporate greed has put all of us at greater risk of infectious diseases, especially during pandemics. If we really wanted to do all we can to flatten the curve of COVID-19 and pandemics of the future, perhaps it is time to reframe sick leave from a benefit to a right.

From the video’s description: In most developed countries, workers have the right to a certain number of paid sick days. It’s a policy that isn’t rooted in just generosity — during pandemics like the novel coronavirus, it can literally save lives. When workers have to choose between earning a living and staying home sick, it incentivizes them to come to work when they're ill, and potentially infect their colleagues and anyone else they come into contact with. That’s why public health officials are concerned that millions of American workers don’t have access to paid sick days. And a disproportionate share of those workers are concentrated in occupations like food service and hospitality, where there’s potential to infect the hundreds of customers many of them interact with every day.

Do children of African immigrants have different experiences than those who are the descendants of slaves? This nuanced video is an excellent example of the intersections between race, immigration/slave status, and social class oppression. The controversy here is that the actress hired to play Harriet Tubman should have been a person with family ties to American slavery. ADOS, or the American Descendants of Slavery, says those whose families immigrated to the US are the elites of the African American community. Statistics from the Pew Research Center (2015) support their argument. U.S.-born blacks have a lower median household income, lower education attainment, and less of a chance of being raised in two-parent households than black immigrants. As such, ADOS takes offense at casting African Americans from immigrant families to play slaves (and other iconic roles) in movies. It’s not just the movies, though, as black immigrants may also be benefiting from affirmative action policies designed to mitigate the generational disadvantage resulting from slavery.

This video should spark a vibrant discussion on the salience of immigration status and racial oppression. Other sociological themes include intersectionality, discrimination, caste systems, and perhaps xenophobia.

From the video’s description: ABC News’ Steve Osunsami addresses criticism behind Erivo's “blackness” related to her portrayal of Harriet Tubman, despite being a British actor.

Why does our society feel the need to “normalize” the genitalia of intersex infants? This video examines that question while advocating against the practice with the Intersex Justice Project. Such surgeries are one of the many examples of the harms associated with the gender binary. When an individual does not fit into that socially constructed system, we problematize the individual rather than the binary. This video also raises the controversy surrounding laws banning intersex surgery—would legal prohibition of the practice inhibit the “individualized care” so highly valued in our medical system? Likewise, since the child cannot consent, is it appropriate to assume the parents have their best interests in mind? These questions are not easy to answer in a society where the gender binary holds hegemonic power, and as such, perhaps deconstructing that binary would be a good place to start.

From the video’s description: Pidgeon Pagonis’ childhood memories include surgeries, hormone therapy, and repeated inspections of their genitals. When they turned 18 and got a copy of their medical records, they finally understood why. The first page had a handwritten note: “46 XY male pseudohermaphrodite.” The procedures that followed were also listed: a clitoral reduction, vaginoplasty, and surgery to remove undescended testes. For Pagonis, the results of some of these procedures have been both physically and psychologically damaging. “The surgeries left me with tons of scar tissue and nerve damage,” Pagonis told VICE news. Pagonis was born with an intersex condition called Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome. It’s one of more than 20 conditions that fall under the medical umbrella of “intersex.” There’s a wide range of diagnoses, but each includes an individual having combinations of chromosomes, gonads, and genitalia that place them between typical definitions of male and female. Surgeries are sometimes necessary to allow proper functioning or remove malignancies, but many of the procedures that Pagonis underwent as a child were cosmetic. Pagonis and other intersex rights advocates are pushing for a ban on cosmetic genital surgeries for infants born with intersex variations, saying they do irreparable harm and should be delayed until a child is old enough to give consent. Many pediatric urologists are staunchly against this growing movement, arguing that legislated delay on certain procedures is a one-size-fits-all approach that denies parents their right to decide on surgeries. Some former patients also oppose a ban, saying the procedures they received as infants were necessary to save them from physical pain and emotional distress. That battle is increasingly being waged in state legislatures. One of the most notable victories came last year, when the California State Senate passed a resolution condemning medically unnecessary surgeries. But that resolution was nonbinding, and intersex activists want a mechanism for enforcement. Since 2016, lawmakers in five states — Indiana, Nevada, Texas, Connecticut, and California — have introduced legislation that would ban surgeries deemed medically unnecessary. Some efforts failed, while others have stalled. But it’s still percolating in some of the biggest states in the country: a second California measure that would enforce its earlier resolution was deferred to the 2020 legislative session. In November, a New York state legislator announced his own plans to introduce a similar bill, also in 2020. “We're pushing for a shift in the way that intersex people are treated towards a first do no harm approach,” said Pagonis. “The surgeries can still happen, but the person can grow up and make a decision and have autonomy over their body. And that's huge. It's a human right.”

The legal cannabis industry in the United States is worth billions. It’s also an industry that arose after decades of racist drug enforcement policies (which are still with us today), so it is unfortunate that white men appear to be the primary beneficiaries of legalization. This video discusses the social justice aspect of cannabis reform and why minority-owned cannabis businesses are vital in a post-prohibition era. While some people are making millions in the legal market, many people of color remain behind bars for marijuana-related offenses. This video also has some disheartening statistics. For example, in 2017, 86% of those arrested for marijuana throughout the United States were people of color. Sociological themes include intersectionality, stereotypes, and racist drug enforcement practices.

How can we get more women and minorities as leaders in the emerging legal cannabis industry? It may be interesting to examine the “social equity” policies that exist in legal states. These provisions are designed to reduce some of the barriers for cannabis business owners victimized by the war on drugs… but are they working?

From the video’s description: On this episode of Truth Told, we dive into the world of women in the business of weed. With the marijuana industry becoming a booming one in the U.S., what does that mean for those who have been affected by the stigma surrounding it. Press play to uncover the reality of the marijuana industry in America.

It’s estimated that half of Filipinos have tried skin whitening products, and this video investigates the phenomenon with attention to oppressive Western beauty standards. These products are not seen as a way to become white or look like a white person, but rather as a way of lightening skin while preserving ethnic identity. Colonialism and Anglo-centric standards of beauty have caused people in the Philippines and many other countries to prize white skin, and these cultures also associate white skin with beauty and power. It is made clear in the video that people make a rational decision to use such products in hopes of receiving social and economic benefits. Sociologist Margaret Hunter says light skin is a form of racial capital: “These interventions highlight the fact that our bodies possess capital that can increase access to jobs, a spouse, or generalized social status… Racial capital is a resource drawn from the body that may include skin tone, facial features, body shape, or hair texture” (p.53). Unfortunately, there are harmful side effects to many of these products. Cheaper versions of skin whitening creams contain toxic substances like mercury, and buying into this light skin privilege serves to further devalue darker skin tones. Yet we should not criticize the individuals who use skin whitening products as they did not create this beauty standard and are merely trying to mitigate disadvantage in a world where white skin is the default. Instead, we should focus on how Western beauty standards operate in our global society and perhaps attempt to decouple skin tone and social status.

SOURCE: Hunter, Margaret. 2019. “Technologies of Racial Capital”. Contexts 18(4): 53-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536504219884073

From the video’s description: On this episode of Shady, our host, Lexy Lebsack travels to the Philippines to uncover the toxic reality of skin bleaching. This cultural trend is practicing world wide even with deadly side effects. Watch this week's Shady to understand the truth about skin bleaching.

Wedding vows are a ritual in marriage ceremonies. They are highly emotional but also filled with values, expectations, and traditions. This video examines how wedding vows have evolved to match our modern construction of loved-based marriages. Historically, marriage was an institution primarily characterized by continuing family lineage and economic security (especially for women). Yet as marriage transitioned into something based on love rather than necessity, vows changed to reflect the idea of a soul mate. Unfortunately, many modern vows seem ripped from social media feeds or formulaic to the point where the audience tunes out. Fortunately, you can hire a vow writing expert to make your vows appear more authentic and interesting. This video also emphasizes the imperfection of marriages and encourages us to be open to mishaps in our relationships. “Happily ever after” sounds nice, but being realistic may be more meaningful.

Why do professional vow-writers exist nowadays? How do you think vows will continue to evolve in the future? What other rituals are involved in marriage ceremonies?  

From the video’s description: The relationship expert Esther Perel, along with a professional wedding-vow writer, explains the evolution of vows, and why the best ones embrace marriage in all its imperfections.

People of color are largely absent from modern farming. Where they once made up roughly 14% of all farmers in the 1920s, a century of racist lending practices and land theft have caused some experts to say black farmers are facing extinction. Moreover, farms may be a reminder of slavery for many people of color. Perhaps this is why some young people of color are returning to farm work as a means of empowerment and resistance. This video highlights these trends while covering a project known as the Reparations Map. The project allows people to support black farmers and attempts to mitigate a historical wrong, so it is not so much a charity but an act of food justice. Visit this link to learn more about the Reparations Map for Black-Indigenous Farmers: http://www.soulfirefarm.org/get-involved/reparations/

From the video’s description: Kendrick Ransome started out farming a few years ago with just a hoe, a rake, and a shovel. He could have used support getting his hog and vegetable business off the ground, but he was wary of asking institutions for help. “My big brother told me, ‘Stay away from loans,’” said Ransome. In 1925, most farmers in his rural hometown of Edgecombe County, North Carolina, were black. But now, the 26-year-old is an anomaly. “When they did take out loans and they were unable to pay them back, you lose everything you got — that’s including your farm and your land for your family.” Ransome’s fear of institutions is based in the centuries of discrimination black farmers have faced across the country. But despite that history, he and other young black Americans are reclaiming the trade. The forces pushing black farmers off their land in the 20th century were manifold, and the impact was devastating. In 1920, there were more than 925,000 black farmers; by 2017, there were fewer than 46,000, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Is it still cultural appropriation when it is done by minority groups? This video features sociologist Ninochka McTaggart and unpacks the nuances surrounding the debate. Loosely defined, cultural appropriation occurs when the dominant group disrespectfully adopts elements from other cultures, and this is often done for personal profit (monetary gain, looking cool/fashionable, etc.). Furthermore, there is no consideration for the original meaning of the cultural element, and the original culture does not benefit from the appropriation. Cultural exchange, on the other hand, is non-exploitative and should ideally empower both cultures. How else might we delineate the two? What other examples of cultural appropriation can you think of? How about examples of non-appropriated cultural exchange?

From the video’s description: With a large number of Asian artists breaking into the hip hop scene, the conversation surrounding cultural appropriation has become more common. Model Salem Mitchell sits down with local LA rapper, Hollei Day to discuss Asians in Hip Hop, and the female rapper’s views on cultural appropriation. We explore the fine line between cultural appropriation and cultural exchange.

Do you think zombies stigmatize dead bodies? The media portrays death in highly exaggerated ways, often in ways that increase our fear surrounding dead bodies. This is partly amplified because we have outsourced death care— it’s done by paid professionals, not in the home as it was done for thousands of years, and many of us are alienated from death (and dead bodies). Yet death is inevitable and we can decrease our anxieties when we talk about death in a healthy, open way. More death positivity, and perhaps more contact with dead bodies, may ease our fears surrounding the subject. How else can death positivity be practiced?

From the video’s description: Death is a topic few people in the West care to discuss, and mortician Caitlin Doughty would like to change that. Doughty helps people confront the nuts and bolts of death on her YouTube channel, “Ask a Mortician.” “I think that people want to hear the information we're presenting,” she told InsideEdition.com “They want to hear somebody like me talk about death as if it's not strange.” She added, “People should not be afraid of death.”

If authorities had the ability to secretly search through your home every once in a while, would you be comfortable with that? Even if you have nothing to hide, face recognition technology is essentially the same thing, and it’s likely you are in a perpetual police line up right now. This video covers problems with how such technology is used, the inadequacies of the pictures in police databases, and how the system is biased. Since the databases are dominated by white images, the technology thinks people of color look more alike than white people, resulting in more errors when identifying people of color.

Would you support a temporary or permanent moratorium on face recognition by authorities? How can we balance the efficiency face recognition offers policing with a right to privacy? What might become of our society if the technology progresses without proper regulations?

From the video’s description: Face-recognition technology is the new norm. You may think, “I’ve got nothing to hide,” but we all should be concerned. It's being used to unlock phones, clear customs, identify immigrants and solve crimes. In the Video Op-Ed above, Clare Garvie demands the United States government hit pause on face recognition. She argues that while this convenient technology may seem benign to those who feel they have nothing to hide, face recognition is something we should all fear. Police databases now feature the faces of nearly half of Americans — most of whom have no idea their image is there. The invasive technology violates citizens’ constitutional rights and is subject to an alarming level of manipulation and bias. Our privacy, our right to anonymity in public and our right to free speech are in danger. Congress must declare a national moratorium on the use of face-recognition technology until legal restrictions limiting its use and scope can be developed. Without restrictions on face recognition, America’s future is closer to a Chinese-style surveillance state than we’d like to think.

Dolly Parton wrote 9 to 5 at a time where workplace sexual harassment was legal and where workers were demanding more rights. This video applies conflict theory a la Karl Marx to the song and features concepts like class exploitation, alienation, and more. They also examine Parton’s other songs, revealing she has a history of musically advocating for oppressed working people.

How else might Marx or other conflict theorists illuminate Parton’s 9 to 5? What other popular songs critique capitalism?

From the video’s description: Dolly Parton is an American icon. But she stands, perhaps most importantly, as a timeless ode to the foundation of this country: the working class. In the inaugural episode of Pop Americana, Sana Saeed explores the radical politics of Dolly Parton’s “9 to 5” - the song, the film and the album. We threw in some Marxist theory too.

“Why Moderate Drinking isn't Really Good for You” — Adam Ruins Everything, 2019, 2:32 — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdKlRYha_Yc

You may have heard before that non-drinkers have a higher mortality rate than moderate drinkers. This clip explains why such claims are misleading because the health problems among non-drinkers are not a result of their sobriety. For example, the category of “non-drinkers” includes people that suffer from medical conditions that prevent them from drinking, as well as people who are too poor to drink (and are also too poor to afford health insurance). Likewise, some non-drinkers are former drinkers who may have stopped due to medical concerns. When these groups are removed from the category of non-drinkers, the claim that moderate drinking is protective falls apart. In fact, the body of evidence suggests alcohol is nothing but harmful to your overall health.

As a side note, this example is similar to studies that find married people are happier than non-married people. After all, “non-married people” may include those who were married, hated it, and got divorced.

From the video’s description: There are zero health advantages to being a moderate drinker, and there's no conclusive evidence that antioxidants in wine do anything.

Why do we think blindingly-white teeth are beautiful? And how do standards for smiles disadvantage the lower classes?

Americans spend the most money on their teeth on a global basis. However, they do not have the healthiest teeth and do not even make the top-10 list of countries with the lowest average amount of dental fillings. Like many modern fashions, we have Hollywood to thank for the pressure to have perfect smiles and pearly-whites. Nevertheless, the high cost of dentistry has kept most Americans from receiving the oral care they need.

From the video’s description: Cosmetic dentistry has taken over the world. Having perfect teeth shouts success, but where did all begin? Well, Hollywood of course. In this episode of Then This Happened, learn about the one dentist who was more influential than any other in creating the movie star smile.

Some families record and broadcast nearly every waking moment of their lives. They are part of a new group of social media celebrities who rely on (illusionary) authenticity to attract millions of followers. This video turns a critical eye on the phenomenon of YouTubers who exploit their children for likes, shares, and subscribers. How “real” are these (public) family moments? What negative consequences can arise from a life consumed by impression management and emotional labor for followers? Should we regulate child streaming stars just like we do child film stars?

From the video’s description: YouTube family vlogs are remaking childhood itself to fit the algorithm. Here, cute videos are fine, but “baby fails” are even better.

Tax laws favoring the rich are often cited as a key factor in income and wealth inequality, but this video introduces us to another tool of social class oppression. Stock buybacks have become a popular means of raising a company’s stock price without the company actually doing anything better. Buybacks create artificial scarcity since there is less stock on the open market, and this raises the price of the stock. However, this practice has also reshaped the American economy and is a key factor in the growing productivity-pay gap. Why? This video claims companies use profits to buy back their stock instead of raising wages or reinvesting in the company. We can see the problem intensify when the Reagan administration loosened regulations in the 1980s. In 1982, companies spent an average of 0.5% of their profits on buybacks. By 2018, that figure had jumped to 65%. Companies also began linking CEO pay to the stock price, and as the easiest way to do this is through buybacks, they were less incentivized to boost wages or improve business. This is an American phenomenon as well since other nations have stricter regulations and different corporate cultures. As productivity and profit have risen over time, buybacks have prevented this new wealth from “trickling down” to the workers. The strategy obviously favors wealthy investors as they are the ones who hold stocks. Unfortunately, when the Trump administration cut the corporate tax rate, buybacks reached record numbers. How can we ensure that increases in productivity are beneficial to everyone?

From the video’s description: For a long time, it was off-limits for a corporation to buy back its own stock. Not anymore. American companies today spend billions on stock buybacks. So what does that mean for the US economy? And how did it help make American CEOs so unbelievably rich?

There are over 400 incidences of “SWATing” each year in the United States, some of which have resulted in injury or death. SWATing is a cruel prank where a fake hostage situation is reported to authorities (often done on gamers in the middle of a livestream). Moreover, our police force is becoming increasingly militarized via financial incentives from the war on drugs and access to used military equipment. Some estimates say that in 2014, SWAT teams were deployed more than 80,000 times (compared to 3,000 in 1980). SWAT teams were invented in the 1960s to deal with hostage situations and prison escapes. Nowadays, these situations only make up 7% of SWAT deployments as most of their time is spent on non-violent drug searches. Two-thirds of SWAT raids do not even result in discovering a weapon and 40% do not find drugs. New York City also estimates that 10% of no-knock SWAT teams bust into the wrong address. Why might this trend continue into the future? What can be done to stop this violent trend?

Medicine is perhaps the most respected profession in our society. However, for women and people of color, quality health care is hard to find in the male-dominated industry. This is a result of implicit biases and structural problems in medicine where the male body has traditionally been the default reference. In other words, most medical studies have been done on male bodies. Researchers even view female bodies as “male bodies with pesky hormones”. This is problematic for something like heart problems which manifest differently between female and male bodies. No wonder we have the highest rate of maternal mortality in the developed world.

Race bias is also endemic in medicine. There is a “mortality gap” between black and white men of roughly 83,000 excess deaths each year. Medical students are often taught there are biological differences between the races in terms of skin thickness, pain tolerance, and nerve endings. This results in pain being treated differently within patients of color, and the implicit biases on the part of doctors can cause patients to fear the system. The intersection of sex and race bias is particularly deadly for women of color who are often not believed by their physicians.

How can medical practitioners reduce sex and race bias? What other biases do you think manifest in medicine? Have you ever received inadequate care where you suspected bias?

Americans subscribe to the individualistic fantasy that hard work results in success, and the “American Dream” can loosely be interpreted as climbing the social ladder. Sociologists call that (upward) social mobility, a concept describing how individuals can change their socioeconomic status. While mobility is possible in open class systems, increasing structural inequalities are making this ever more difficult in the United States. We currently rank 16th out of 24 countries in terms of social mobility despite being the wealthiest country. As the upper class hordes more wealth than ever before, the lower classes find themselves stuck in a vicious cycle of financial difficulty. Tax cuts and the gutting of social services have benefitted the rich at the expense of everyone else, and 46% of Americans say they can’t afford a surprise bill of $400. Furthermore, being poor is expensive as you can't buy in bulk, face steep fees on credit and debt, and have less time for cost-saving measures like cooking your own meals. Many Americans inaccurately believe the poor are lazy, but most adults on public assistance work full time or more. The problem is not individual laziness or “poor choices”. Rather, the problem is elite greed and stagnated wages. Unfortunately, 70% of Americans believe poor people can make it out of poverty on their own. This makes us less willing to fund social programs which in turn increases inequality.

How else does individualism impact how we approach the problem of poverty? Why do we think of poor please as lazy when rich people take vacation after vacation? What could be done to restore social mobility in the United States?

Submitted by Chris Hardnack, Cal State University San Marcos. Twitter: @chrishardnack

In the popular Netflix show Ozark, Marty, played by Jason Bateman, is forced into a life of crime, laundering money for drug lords. His family knows about this and wrestles with the morality of this lifestyle. When Marty's son Jonah goes to school, he’s asked to sign a pledge that he will not use drugs. Jonah confronts the teacher with economic contributions or latent functions that the drug trade has for society. According to Robert Merton, manifest functions are the acknowledged consequences of an institution or behavior, but the latent functions are often unacknowledged consequences that contribute to the maintenance and reproduction of society. Unearthing the latent functions can be quite jarring, but as Merton reminds us, “The discovery of latent functions represents significant increments in sociological knowledge. There is another respect in which inquiry into latent functions represents a distinctive contribution of the social scientist. It is precisely the latent functions of a practice or belief which are not common knowledge, for these are unintended and generally unrecognized social and psychological consequences. As a result, findings concerning latent functions represent a greater increment in knowledge than findings concerning manifest functions” (quoted in Longhofer and Winchester's Social theory Re-Wired, 2016:72).

Keywords: Functionalism, Latent Functions, Drugs and Alcohol, Deviant Behavior…

Have you ever thought about the look and feel of the Internet? People who grew up before the 2000s probably have because early websites were much different than the professionalized digital landscape we have today. This videos explains how the early Internet was characterized by diversity and personalization. As time went on, it became more rationally organized, cleaner, and homogenized. Maybe we are seeing the “McDonaldsization” of the web where a single, optimized system replaces different ways of doing things. For example, website building services like Squarespace allow you to customize a site, but there’s no real aesthetic distinction between templates. Sure, you can pick different colors, font styles, and have HD images and videos, but even these artifacts contain formulaic principles.

How can we break free from these patterns and build a better interface? What do you think societies of the future will think of our current Internet? Do common aesthetic choices and site organization tell us something about our society?

From the video’s description: The early web looked different than it does today. In the 1990s, the internet was intimate and a bit amateur. Websites were made by everyday people on their personal computers, desktops, with very minimal knowledge of coding or HTML needed. Software becomes obsolete — Flash which made much of the early web run, will be shut down in 2020. People stop paying for domain names. Companies like Netscape or GeoCities or MySpace that host websites and online communities go out of business, or get sold (to Yahoo! for example). The internet is not forever, it can break and disappear. Olia Lialina and Dragan Espenschied are part of a growing group of people who preserve and archive our online digital history. They see the web from the 90s and 2000s as an artifact, at times, even, Net Art.

When and why did we start working ourselves to death? This video is about a “psychological” concept called workism, though I find it very similar to Max Weber’s theory of the Protestant Ethic. Either way, our culture tells us we can find our life’s purpose through work rather than other social institutions. The video pins this on the creation of bureaucracy (another Weberian classic) and the rise of work-related statuses like being an executive (Weber wrote a lot about that too). Unfortunately, most of our jobs are meaningless and designed to make other people wealthy. Yet we still cling to the idea that “hustling” will bring us happiness.

What can we do as a society to reduce or prevent burnout? How else can sociology inform the video’s argument? I’m not accusing the video of plagiarising a one of sociology’s founders, but it would have been nice to throw the discipline some credit instead of psychology. Another good question to ask is, what would max Weber say about our hustle culture?

From the video’s description: Should a job provide a paycheck or a purpose? Traditional religion lends some people meaning, community, and self-actualization. For many Americans, work has stepped in to fill that role. But this all-encompassing worship of work is setting us up for mass anxiety and inevitable burnout, says Atlantic staff writer Derek Thompson.

Online dating is a lot of work but thankfully services exist to make it easier. ViDA (virtual dating assistance) will create and optimize your dating profile as well as message and arrange your inperson dates. They basically do all of the emotional labor for you prior to the first meeting, and they’ll help you present your best self in your profile. Sociological research by Monica Whitty tells us most daters tactfully over and under report their characteristics (height, weight, income, age, etc.) but this service takes it to another level. Here we see style consultants, photo shopping, and the outsourcing of flirting. I think Erving Goffman would have a field day with this idea. “Sign equipment” here includes fancy clothes and puppies as these props help present a desirable self to others. Another interesting observation here is that the company essentially makes you look and act like everyone else. Instead of conveying the characteristics that make you special or unique, your profile conforms to whatever had worked well in the past or whatever has been a success for others.

Why do we view dating as “work”? And what do you think of this service? Is it deceptive or unethical? Or is it a smart new way to facilitate personal contact in the busy, modern age? If you found out you’re dating someone who uses this service, what would you do? Do you think this service results in happy relationships?

From the video’s description: ViDA Select is the biggest virtual dating company of its kind. Over a dozen consultants work together to curate your profile for you, and they even flirt with your matches on your behalf. VICE News’ Evan McMorris-Santoro put the service to the test.

Fitness advice on the Internet ranges from credible to bizarre with much of the later coming from fitness influencers. Since having a great body is the primary way we evaluate authorities on fitness, non-experts can easily make their personal routines appear as exercise science. Part of the reason for this, according to sociologist Joe Krupnick, is that there is no readily identifiable or accessible authority on fitness, health, or exercise advice. Instead of getting fitness advice from a vetted authority, “bros” tend to exchange tips/tricks with one another at the gym. Another reason could be that exercise and diet companies conduct their own research (with profits in mind) and these findings end up being accepted by non-scientists as fact. The video also talks about the reproducibility crisis where prior research cannot be replicated while yielding the same conclusions. This could be due to bad statistical analysis, small sample sizes, errors in procedure, or many other faults, but regardless of the reason, prior results cannot be replicated by modern, reliable methods.

Where do you get your fitness or health advice from, and is it from a (non-profit) scientific source? How would you evaluate credibility or authority when receiving exercise advice? What other areas or topics have similar problems with non-expert advice or crises in reproducibility?

From the video’s description: Online fitness advice is notoriously bad. So why is it so popular? Exercise gurus and fitness influencers are all over social media with supplements and research claims. Broscience is in your feed telling you about fad diets and free weights — but how much is actually supported by science? Quartz News speaks with scientists, researchers, and fitness experts about the sources and research behind the proliferating stream of advice online. (Along the way, we offer some commentary on the most absurd tips we've come across during our research).

Sociologist Lewis Wickes Hine (1874-1940) helped expose the cruelty of child labor with visual research methods. Interestingly, photography and sociology were formalized at the same time (roughly 1839) when Louis Daguerre publicly debuted his Daguerreotype image and Auguste Comte began publishing a series of texts on positivism. In addition to a shared birthday, Douglas Harper argues both were children of the industrial revolution, with photography being “a new way of seeing” and sociology being “a new lens of interpretation” (1988:55). Sociologists like Lewis Hine were pioneers in what we now consider visual research methods. Hine even wrote a book on social photography and hoped the camera could help elicit empathy when written words could not.

As a pieces of data, what do you think are the advantages and limitations of photographs? How might visual methods be used to document social problems today? What distinguishes research photography from other styles of photography (e.g., journalism)?

From the video’s description: Child labor was widely practiced until a photographer showed the public what it looked like. The 1900 US Federal Census revealed that 1.75 million children under the age of 16, more than one in five, were gainfully employed. They worked all over the country in cotton mills, glass blowing factories, sardine canneries, farms, and even coal mines. In an effort to expose this exploitation of children, the National Child Labor Committee hired a photographer to travel around the country and investigate and report on the labor conditions of children. Lewis Wickes Hine photographed and interviewed kids, some as young as 4 years old, and published his findings in various Progressive magazines and newspapers. Once the public saw the plight of these children, state legislatures were pressured to pass bills regulating labor for workers under the age of 18, effectively bringing an end to child labor in the United States.

You can see more of Lewis Hine’s photographs here: https://www.loc.gov/collections/national-child-labor-committee/about-this-collection/

Camp Dash at Purdue University can be used as a case study in poorly-designed and badly-managed research. Short for “Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension”, Camp Dash was supposed to be a 7 week experiment investigating a low-sodium diet’s effect on blood pressure in children ages 11-15. However, Purdue’s IRB pulled the plug on the experiment after several police visits resulting in arrests and numerous reports of violence among the study participants. So what went wrong and who is to plan? This video explains how much of the blame can be placed on misguided decisions in the research planning stage.

Researchers have an ethical obligation to protect their participants from harm yet pressures to publish and competitive grant funds can easily blind us to potential risks. For example, the participants in Camp Dash were recruited from lower-class families in inner cities. These children were arguably pressured by the generous incentive to participate, and the experiment was pitched to families more as a summer camp than data collection project. They were told there would be sports, activities, and field trips, but the majority of the schedule made by the research team was dominated by unstructured down time. There was also a lack of mental health services though the population recruited for the study is known to have a high degree of trauma. The experiment also suffered from a shortage of well-trained staff and poor communication between the research team. Likewise, there were pressures to withhold reporting incidents as the impressive grant fundinging

We learn a lot in this video about IRBs (Institutional Review Boards) and how research ethics become secondary when large grants enter the picture. Perhaps the biggest problem of all here, though, is that the research team did not match the participants in the study. They eventually recruited a counselor with experience working with underprivileged youth, but this would have been better to do in the planning stage. If the day was structured in an engaging way, if staff had appropriate training for working with children exposed to violence, and if incidents were reported and corrected, the experiment might have been a success. Unfortunately, collecting data was deemed more important than participant wellbeing.

Who is to blame for this disaster? How could the researchers improve their design and implementation? If you were conducting this study, what would you have done differently? What should we do to prevent situations like this from happening in the future?

From the video’s description: Camp Dash was no ordinary summer camp in Indiana. Children were there to take part in a multi-million dollar nutrition experiment. But events quickly spiralled out of control, and some of the children turned on each other. The consequences haven’t been easy to forget.

This video profiles Paul and Hava, a couple with intellectual disabilities who fought to have their union recognized. Too often our society (mis)constructs those with disabilities as asexual and/or aromantic. Perhaps this is indicative of ability privilege in the areas of love, family, and sexuality. We learn about the legal and institutional parameters which marginalize these relationships, as well as strategies to empower these individual’s sexuality. New York State law mandates they receive sexual education including topics on consent, safe sex, and pregnancy prevention. Unfortunately, the same state also decided group homes have no obligation to house married couples.

From the video’s description: Paul and Hava met at a performing-arts social event for people with intellectual disabilities. With the assistance of their parents, they went on a few successful dates. The connection was immediate. After some time, they decided to make their strong, loving bond official. The couple made each other so happy that their parents saw no good reason to deny the proposal. The group homes where Paul and Hava lived, however, stood in the way of the couple’s union. “They want us not to get married—not to live together,” says Paul in a new short documentary.

These students are being paid to do a type of visual content analysis on old yearbooks throughout Virginia. They are tasked with compiling examples of overt and covert racism, or anything that comes across as racially insensitive. While this is important research financed via crowdfunding, there is controversy surrounding how the data will be used. How should it be published or made accessible? Should it contain identifying labels? What about the safety of the research team? With these issues in mind, this video is a great example of research methods, especially in terms of validity and ethics.

From the video’s description: After a few months of searching through Virginia yearbooks for people in blackface, a group of students had cataloged over 380 examples of offensive images and words — ranging from the less-surprising in the 1920s to the '70s.

Would you pay money for a guided tour of an impoverished neighborhood? A new tourism sector in South Africa takes (wealthy, white) tourists through the slums to observe how folks live in poverty. While the tour guide claims he is providing something akin to cultural education, many of the tourists are explicitly there to gawk at poor people. Such tours may be seen as an immersive type of poverty porn, an experience which exploits the stereotype of poor people for the amusement of well-off others. There are many problems with objectifying the poor in this manner such as it conceals structural/economic oppression, depicts the poor as helpless, and is often done for individual or organizational profit (not for the betterment of the impoverished community). On the other hand, an argument could be made that such tourism infuses cash into the community and exposes tourists to the reality of life in the area. Too often tourists are provided with glamorized and corporatized experiences where they never journey outside of their oceanfront resorts. Modern tourism is becoming more like a total institution where a single facility can provide for all of your needs and desires while shielding you from the actual lifestyles and culture of an area. Furthermore, such corporatized resorts are a drain on the local businesses since tourists patronize franchised establishments (e.g., Starbucks) rather than establishments owned/operated by locals.

What are we to make of the slum tours in this video? Who benefits from the tour (and at what cost)? How might social media be fueling this type of tourism?

From the video’s description: Cape Town is the premier tourist destination in South Africa. Wine tours, beaches, and scenic hiking are all within easy driving distance. But if none of that sounds appealing, you can take a guided tour of a slum. Mzu Lembeni runs one of the many tour companies that takes tourists into Cape Town’s townships, impoverished areas that were first created when the Apartheid government forced nonwhites to live in segregated areas. On his tour, tourists can walk right into people’s homes, drink homemade liquor, play with children at a local school, and take as many pictures as they like. For some people, this sounds like exploitation. But Lembeni, who grew up in a township himself, disagrees. “If there was no poverty ... I'll do the township tour, because [of] the culture,” Lembeni says. “I don't sell the poverty, I sell the culture.” Most of Lembeni’s clients are white Europeans, who have come to see the “real” South Africa. Mzu says his tours are the best way to do that. In a country where more than half of the population lives below the poverty line, and where the shadow of apartheid still looms over daily life, a township is a pretty good primer on what “real” looks like for a lot of people. But not everyone who lives in the townships likes the tourists who are constantly wandering their streets. VICE News joined a group of Europeans on vacation to see how local residents feel about being part of the holiday scenery.

While “sugaring” is controversial, this video is great because it is so bluntly honest. The men interviewed are very up front regarding their views on transactional romance. They see relationships primarily through the lens of economic exchange. Wealthy men provide finances and opportunities for social mobility in exchange for the sexual capital of younger women. One man interviewed even calculated his “price per fuck factor” and discovered his sugar baby was a better value than his wife. Another man proudly says “love is for poor people”… and he has a point. Why do people enter into relationships? Our culture currently emphasizes love-based marriages and pushes the idea of a soul mate. But this has not always been the case. Dating is a twentieth century phenomenon and prior to this, many married out of obligation to their communities and families. For women especially, marriage was a necessity as they were often excluded from well-paying jobs making independent living difficult. Furthermore, arranged marriages are still very common throughout the world and rest on the principle that love will develop over time (see passionate love and companionate love for more information). In sum, people do relationships for a variety of reasons: love, tradition, necessity, convenience, and social status… so why is it the last of these that is so highly stigmatized? In this era of late capitalism, we are increasingly becoming “personal brands” (in the words of one interviewee) and relationships can now be an effective means of social mobility. Nonetheless, this is a video to watch with all one’s critical senses. It is well known websites such as Seeking Arrangements tactfully place their best success stories in front of the media, so this is by no means an accurate representation of the sugar community. It is, however, a great example of how economic ideology has subsumed sex and romance.

How has hegemonic capitalism changed the way we see relationships? In what ways does sugaring reproduce gender inequality and patriarchal dominance? Is sugaring empowering, exploitative, or something else?

From the video’s description: Incredibly, right now in Australia there are more than 200,000 young women who have either become, or are trying to be, “sugar babies”. Their ambition is for a sweet life of pampered luxury, paid for by older, sometimes much older, men. For the so-called “sugar daddies”, the equation is simple: the wealthier they are, the more attractive they are. But as Sarah Abo finds out, it’s not hard to read between the lines here. The term sugar baby is often code for sex worker, and the male moneybags are often crinkled-up creeps. And that leads to a very important question: is this sugar baby phenomenon about empowering women or exploiting them?

Are you retired and looking to chill with a young person? Now there’s an app for that. Papa is a gig economy service that pairs college students with older clients. The goal is to counter increasing loneliness among the elderly as a lack of socializing can be detrimental to one’s health. In more sociological terms, this app pays college students for their emotional labor and time spent with senior citizens. We pay to ride in stranger’s cars (Uber/Lyft), we pay strangers to deliver groceries to our homes (Shipt), and now we can pay strangers for social interaction. It seems this service brightens up the lives of those profiled in this video, and it will be interesting to observe if this becomes more popular in the future.

Would you use or work for this service? Does payment for friendship change the dynamic of social interaction or the received benefits on one’s well being? What might this service say about how a society cares for its elderly?

I’ll admit that I have some reservations about the pal-for-pay model here, but I still think it’s wonderful and can see myself working for and one day using this service. I am from a small family and I am also proudly single with no desire for commitment or children. As such, I wonder how this service might be differentially viewed by those with large families and those like myself. One could view this service as outsourcing family or community support, but I think something can be said for making such supports available on demand for individuals who feel alienated.

From the video’s description: Nilsa Torres, 70, and her frail 91-year-old mother Ignacia Rodriguez rarely left the modest two-bedroom apartment they share in this Gulf Coast retirement community. Torres is Rodriquez’s daughter, but also her primary caregiver — a relationship complicated by the conflation of love and need. They often didn't do much of anything, and it was making Torres feel trapped and lonely. “I would love to do more for my mother, like even take her out,” Torres told VICE News. “A lot of times I know she wants to do it, but she declines because she thinks that it's too much work for me.” Then came the app — and the young woman — who changed their life. A Miami-based startup called Papa provides what they call a “grandkid on demand” service, where they send a vetted college-age person or young adult for companionship and transportation to seniors in need. Clients can use the app, but Papa’s average customer is 75 years old, so most people just call in for the service. As soon as Torres heard about the program, she signed up, and she and her mother have been getting weekly visits from Christine Perez. “I got off my Celexa [anti-depressant],” Torres said. “My mother started eating again, and she's gained weight. She's happy and, I mean, what can I tell you — she's a different person.” The cost of loneliness is real, nearly $7 billion a year to Medicare alone, according to a 2018 AARP study. Which is why Papa has caught the attention of numerous states’ Medicare Advantage programs. As of press time, Papa was offered in major cities in Florida, Pennsylvania, and Michigan, with plans to expand soon to Arizona, California, Texas, New York, and New Jersey. We visited Torres and Rodriguez when Christine made one of her visits.

A timely video about gender equality in the workforce and at home. Time use studies show us Japanese men spend just 41 minutes (on average) of child care each day compared with 244 minutes on the part of women, and this imbalance is a key hurdle to women’s participation in the (paid) economy. Furthermore, while the Japanese government has established generous parental leave policies (fathers can take up to a year off) only 5% of fathers end up taking any leave at all. Legislation does not necessarily change culture so the government is turning to the public relations campaign instead. The Ikumen project encourages dads to spend time with children while eliminating some of the stigma associated with taking time off work. It is designed to increase the involvement a father has in a child’s development while giving mothers some reprieve, especially since women are underrepresented in the country’s workforce.

There’s some important criticism of this effort at the end of this video. The Ikumen campaign makes it seem like any domestic labor on the part of men is deserving of praise while women continue to do far more (and are often unpraised). It also seems that the government is only interested in more female workers rather than achieving more gender equality.

So, what are we to make of the Ikumen campaign? Is it a step in the right direction or a distraction from the real issue? How else can gender equality be promoted by the government, economy, and other institutions?

From the video’s description: Japan is tackling gender inequality with a "hunky dads" campaign. Japan’s workforce is shrinking and aging. To keep its economy growing, it needs more of its citizens to work, which means getting more women into the workplace. Nearly half of Japanese women quit their jobs after the birth of their first child. To get mothers back to work, Japan’s government has focused on encouraging men to more fully share household responsibilities. The government started a campaign called the “ikumen” project.

It is often said that alcohol is only drug that requires explanation for NOT using. Afterall, we live in a culture where booze is promoted as a social lubricant, a gateway to good times, and even a relaxant. This video examines an increasingly popular trend: abstaining from alcohol (for the most part). These “sober curious” individuals do not avoid alcohol out of addiction, but rather out of health concerns and general disinterest. Interestingly, many sober curious folks appear to engage in the scenes of night (or day) clubs and bar-like establishments. But why is this happening now? Alcohol-free beverages and events are not new inventions, so what might explain their resurging popularity? This video doesn’t examine any structural or cultural factors, but it hints at over-work culture and healthism (loosely defined here as the cultural pressure to always be in pursuit of optimal health). What other sociological explanations can you think of? How might changes in our society, cultures, or institutions illuminate this trend? And do you think it will continue to grow in popularity or decline?

From the video’s description: Followers of this growing movement say it's not abstaining from alcohol altogether but rather taking note of how drinking alcohol has impacted you and making changes.

A powerful example of discrimination within sports and sponsorships. While male athletes may be praised for becoming fathers, pregnant female athletes are often disowned by their sporting organizations and sponsors (even when their performance remains high). Perhaps the most troubling piece of information in this video is how athletes can lose their health insurance when their performance drops, effectively shutting mothers out of the health care they need. How is this legally and culturally allowed to continue in our society? What can be done to change these sexist and oppressive practices? Could we re-frame athletic pregnancy to be an asset rather than a set back (like an injury)?

From the video’s description: Being a mother and a champion was a crazy dream. But it didn’t have to be. Olympic runner Alysia Montano had accomplished all her dreams but one: being a mom. When she finally went for it, she faced her biggest challenge yet — her sponsors. When Montano approached her sponsor to announce her pregnancy, they told her that they would just pause her contract. She famously ran a national championship and eight months pregnant to prove that pregnant women could compete. Now, she’s speaking out so that no one has to suffer like she did.

Imagine how quiet the world must have been only a century ago. Nowadays, we face a constant barrage of internal combustion engines, transit in motion, sirens, horns, and other noises. These are the sounds which constitute noise pollution, and just like other forms of pollution, it can have detrimental impacts on quality of life. It can reduce productivity, detract from learning, and be averse to our physical and mental wellbeing. Yet much of noise pollution is inescapable since it comes from a constellation of environmental factors. Therefore, how might we collectively address this as social problem? An individual solution might be to wear noise-cancelling headphones or to move to a quieter area, but a societal solution would be more effective while helping large numbers of individuals.  

Have you noticed noise pollution in your daily life? If so, where is it most pervasive? What do you think should be done to combat noise pollution? Think about changes to culture, policy, enforcement, the built environment, and more.

From the video’s description: David Owen reports on noise pollution, an intangible phenomenon with serious costs to human health and wildlife.

Ironing clothes is coded as a feminine, but what might masculinizing this practice look like? This recently-uploaded news segment from 2003 looks at the “sport” of extreme ironing. The idea seems to be making ironing as difficult and ridiculous as possible. Unsurprisingly, it appears that extreme ironing is largely an activity taken up by men. This reminds me of research on the gendered division of household labor by Kristen Myers and Ilana Demantas (2015). They found (unemployed) men push household chores to an extreme lengths, arguably making the chores more arduous in the process. This allowed the men to perform masculinity while engaging in a traditionally feminine activity. For example, one man interviewed refused to use a mop to clean the floor, prefering to do it on his hands and knees instead (p.641). Other men interviewed would (re)clean areas of the home which were not dirty, kinda like ironing clothes for no practical reason. As such, I see this clip as an example of the masculinization of ironing… they push it to the max, turn it into a competition, and perform the activity in the public sphere (as opposed to the private confines of the home). Wouldn’t it be nicer if these men would simply do the second shift (the unpaid housework often expected of women) along with their partners? I bet if these men simply ironed at home in a normal manner, they would have more time to help out with cooking, cleaning, childcare, and other unpaid jobs which too frequently become the responsibility of women.

What other examples of “extreme chores” can you think of? How might these be explained through a gendered lens?

[Reference: Kristen Myers and Ilana Demantas. 2015. “Being ‘The Man’ without Having a Job and/or Providing Care Instead of ‘Bread’”. Pp.632-647 in Families as they Really Are (second edition). W.W. Norton & Company].

From the video’s description: It's not an Olympic sport (yet), but as correspondent Bill Geist discovered, adherents of extreme ironing go to herculean extremes as they wield their irons in ever-more challenging situations, pressing on in their quest to remove wrinkles. Originally broadcast on "Sunday Morning" November 7, 2003.

Gastrodiplomacy is essentially diplomacy through cultural cuisine. Every nation and culture has unique dishes, ingredients, and styles of cooking/eating, so why not use these as a means to promote one’s identity abroad? This video elaborates on this practice with a focus on Thai restaurateurs and Somali refugees. We learn how the Thai government sponsors authentic restaurants in foreign countries and how this has helped raise the profile of Thailand. We also learn how food can be a gateway to acceptance by reducing social distance experienced by immigrants and refugees. A program in Pennsylvania encourages citizens to dine at the homes of Somali refugees so the two groups can develop social bonds over dinner. Each of these examples are connected to the growth of foodie culture.

How else might food or foodways be used as tools for politics or social justice? If the United States were to formally engage in gastrodiplomacy, which foods do you think should be promoted overseas?

From the video’s description: Thai restaurants are abundant and popular in many parts of the world. This has a lot to do with the Thai government actively promoting Thai food overseas for more than a decade. The strategy has been so successful that it inspired a new trend in foreign policy: gastrodiplomacy. And food isn’t just a diplomatic tool for governments. There’s a new kind of gastrodiplomacy on the rise, one that’s led by people who have left their governments behind. Quartz News went to Lancaster, Pennsylvania, the refugee capital of America, to visit a 25-year-old gastrodiplomat who fled war in Somalia, rebuilt his life, and connects neighbors through his mouthwatering Somali samosas.

A fantastic history of redlining and how it still affects residential segregation today. Redlining was/is the practice of barring families from mortgages based on their area of residence. More often than not, the areas that were redlined were communities of color. This gave whites access to financing to relocate or to improve their neighborhoods. While the practice of redlining is now illegal, its legacy lives on in our communities, schools, and criminal justice system.

How has redlining produced inequalities in education, economics, and policing? Why do these inequalities persist today despite fair housing and loan policies? What could we do to desegregate or improve these areas?

From the video’s description: In 1968, Congress passed the Fair Housing Act that made it illegal to discriminate in housing. Gene Demby of NPR’s Code Switch explains why neighborhoods are still so segregated today.