You can download the full 9:15 minute version here.

The episode doesn’t proselytize the beliefs of privacy advocates, in fact it often makes privacy concerns seem silly, but it raises the issue and lets the viewer come to their own conclusion. What do you think?

Links

•  Mashable — Why ‘Parks and Recreation’ tackled digital privacy in its final season
• Engadget — NBC’s ‘Parks and Recreation’ Puts Data Privacy Under the Comic Lens
• Giga Om — Parks and Recreation Takes On Silicon Valley in Final Season
• Washington Post — Parks and Recreation Take on Online Privacy and it Hits Close to Home
•  Computer World — Parks And Recreation, Facebook and The New Privacy
• Check out another Parks and Recreation clip from 2011 below (youtube version)…

The post Parks and Recreation and Online Privacy appeared first on Leftward Thinking.

The case, Maya Arce v. John Huppenthal, revolves around four subsections of the law. The law bans any classes or courses that either…

1. Promote the overthrow of the United States government.
2. Promote resentment toward a race or class of people.
3. Are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group.
4. Advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.

Full video of the proceedings below (most lively part is 21:30–32:30)

The oral arguments opened with Erwin Chemerinsky, arguing on behalf of Maya Arce, laying out the facts of the case and arguing that the statue was unconstitutionally vague and over broad. Chemerinsky highlighted Huppenthal’s recent letter to TUSD to illustrate how the state of Arizona can cherry pick any small thing from a class to find that course to be in violation of the law. Chemerinsky then went on to highlight how legal protocols were not followed when the state of Arizona shut down Tucson’s Mexican American Studies program. Chemerinsky also noted a precedent that argued that such a breach of protocol is evidence of discriminatory intent. Furthering his argument that Huppenthal’s actions were motivated by racial animus, Chemerinsky pointed to the Cambria Study and Cabrero Report, which show how Tucson’s MAS program bolsters student achievement, and how the program was shut down despite those findings.

Next, Ms. Cooper, arguing for Huppenthal, took the stand. Her first point was to argue that Huppenthals 2015 letter to TUSD should not be taken into account as evidence. Her second point was to argue that the Cambria Study and Cabrero Report should also not be counted as evidence for technical reasons, but if it was counted as the evidence that it would be irrelevant anyway. One of the judges immediately cut off Cooper to say that it seemed to him that the fact that the program was outlawed, despite it’s positive effect on student achievement, is highly relevant and supports an inference of discriminatory intent (21:35). Shortly thereafter the judges focused on sub-section three, because it was the section that was struck down by the lower court, and pressed Cooper on how a course could violate sub-section three without violating any of the other clauses. Cooper responded unvoncingly that the state’s main concerned was that all of its student receive an equal education and not be divided along racial lines. One of the biggest highlights of the oral arguments came soon after when one judge offered up a hypothetical asking Cooper to explain why the law would not forbid such a scenario. Cooper was then then forced to admit that the law could in fact outlaw the judges scenario (30:09). The exchange culminated with one judge saying “how does that not suggest discriminatory animus, we don’t want minorities to develop any kind of ethnic pride?”. To which Cooper feebly responded that students have no constitutional right to ethnic pride. The conversation then turned to more technical questions of whether or not the law as a whole could stand if certain sub-sections were struck down.

On the whole the judges seemed open to the idea that discriminatory animus played a role in the law’s creation. They also seemed to come down firmly against sub-section three. To me, the most likely outcome is that the judges will strike sub section 3 from the statue and let the rest of the law stand, a result that would be considered a loss of MAS advocates. However it is always exceeding difficult to predict a cases outcome from the oral arguments alone.

*Note: Several people were turned away from the courthouse because they did not have government ID.

Related Articles

• Arizona’s Mexican-American Studies Ban Questioned By Appeals Judges [VIDEO]
• Chicana plaintiffs for Ethnic Studies explain why they fight for MAS at Ninth Circuit[VIDEO]
• MAS goes to Ninth Circuit, Arizona looks ignorant defending Ethnic Studies ban
• Meet the director of “culturally relevant” classes in TUSD, former MAS teacher Lorenzo Lopez [VIDEO]
• Arce v. Huppenthal Legal Materials

The post Tucson’s Ethnic Studies Goes to Court appeared first on Leftward Thinking.

Regardless of the specifics, we allow this type of speech under the law and depend on society to not propagate and encourage hateful messages. We use our public discourse, and developed cultural institutions, to police speech. However there is another kind of speech that is banned outright under the law, illegal speech that the government is very bullish about enforcing. This is speech that infringes on copyrights.

Instead of investing in an practical ethics surrounding the everyday copying, sharing, and remixing of information and art, we give the state the power to ban huge amounts of speech in the form copyright law enforcement. The public is not engaged in an ongoing discussion about what is, or is not, socially acceptable when it comes to remixing and sharing content. Instead the public is subjugated by the threat of corporate lawsuits that dictate which speech will be allowed and which will be banned.

Why do we trust the public to appropriately handled violent and hateful speech but not copyrighted speech? Just some food for thought.

*I’m aware that there are also restraints on violent speech, and hate speech, but my point is only to draw contrast in the degree to which this speech is left to the “court of public opinion” compared to tightly legislated copyrighted speech.

*This post was originally posted at The Copyright and Hip Hop Project

The post Charlie Hebdo, Copyright, and Sanctioning Speech appeared first on Leftward Thinking.

Now, years laters, the Arizona head of public education, Superintendent Huppenthal, has declared more classes in Tucson to be illegal. In his last day in office (Huppenthal lost his re-election campaign after he was revealed to be the one behind a slew of anonymous racist and bigoted online comments) Huppenthal sent a letter to Tucson Unified School District citing reasons why certain classes are in violation of the law. Below is a sampling of that evidence.

Promoting Resentment Toward a Race of People

One piece of HB 2281 (A.R.S. § 15–112(A)(2)) outlaws material that “promotes resentment toward a race or class of people”. I agree that we don’t want to be teaching hate in our classrooms. Lets see some of the examples that Huppenthal claims violate this section of the law…

-An essay prompt “Why was American slavery the most brutal in history” was found to be illegal because it “promotes resentment toward a race or class of people”.

-The concepts “Hegemony, Social Reproduction Theory, Theory of Surplus Equality, Schooled by Social Class, Cultural Capital, Subordinate Group, Dominate Group, Colonization, Theory of Inequality of Language, Racial Justice Theory, Resistance Theory, Race, Racism, Strategic Conjuncture, Oppression Fatalism, Privilege, Subtractive Schooling, Agency, Transformation, Resistance Dystopian Parody” were all found to be illegal because they “promote resentment toward a race or class of people.”

-The prompt “Write about 3 ideas in the Declaration of Independence that are lies, hypocrisy, and break the social contract between new democracy colonial leaders, and the society they are representing” was found to be illegal because it “promotes the resentment toward a race or class of people”

-An example thesis for the prompt “offer your stance on the impact that European colonization had on the Natives of ‘The New World’ ” reads… “European colonization of ‘The New World’ has a horrifying and negative effect on the Natives that had been there for thousands of years”. This example thesis was found to be illegal because it “promotes resentment toward a race or class of people.”

Advocating Ethnic Solidarity

Another section of the law passed in 2012One piece of HB 2281 (A.R.S. § 15–112(A)(4)) outlaws classroom material that “advocates for ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals”. Let take a look at some of the activities that Huppenthal thinks violate this section…

-Legendary Hip Hop artist KRS-One wrote a 4,000 word “Introduction to Hip Hop” which includes this 50 word excerpt that Huppenthal didn’t like, “Hiphop Kulture = or, Hip Hop’s culture, is the name of our unique community; it is the name of our tribe. Hiphop Kulture is the manifested character, patterns, beliefs, sciences and arts of OUR collective consciousness; it is our reality and mental landscape. Hiphop Kulture is an international community of specialized urban people.”  This excerpt was found to illegally advocate ethnic solidarity. *UPDATE: KRS-One is scheduled to perform in Tucson AZ on Jan 27th @ The Rialto (buy tickets)

-In one teacher’s syllabus it says, “In this class we will study the history and culture of Chicano, Mexicano and indigenous people throughout the United States and Mexico. This class is intended to get students to become critically conscious about the society that we in and the history that has made it what it is today”. Again Huppenthal declares these sentences illegal because they advocate for ethnic solidarity.

Overthrowing the United States Government

One piece of HB 2281 (A.R.S. § 15–112(A)(1)) outlaws anything in the classroom that “promotes the overthrow of the United States government”.   Not surprisingly Huppenthal even found a case where a Tucson class promoted an overthrow of the US government…

-Analyzing the lyrics of  “Take the Power Back” from Rage Against the Machine’s 1993 self titled 3x platinum album was found to promote the overthrow of the US government and thus is illegal.

Conclusion

While HB 2281 seems absurd, or at least unnecessary, the way it has been applied to specific cases has been absolutely despicable. Prompts about slavery and about the colonization of America are found to be illegal because they “promote resentment toward a race or class of people”? The concept of colonization itself is somehow deemed illegal?  Telling students they will be taught US history through a “critically conscious” advocates ethnic solidarity? And incorporating lyrics from a multiplatinum selling album is said to promote the overthrow of the US government? All I can say is that the biggest thing that promotes resentment and requires ethnic solidarity is the attack on knowledge that the state of Arizona is perpetrating.

Notes and Related Articles

• The Daily Show discusses Arizona original ethnic studies ban [MUST WATCH]
• Rage Against the Machine Tweets
• Rolling Stone — Rage Against the Machine Defy Ethnic Studies Ban, Says Arizona Schools Chief
• Think Progress — Arizona Threatens To Take Away School District’s Funding Over A Course On Hip-Hop
• The Arizona Republic — On last day, Huppenthal targets ethnic-studies classes
• The Arizona Daily Star — Huppenthal says TUSD’s cultural courses are illegal
• Huffington PostTeaching Hip Hop Illegally Promotes Ethnic Solidarity, Arizona Official Says
• The Arizona Daily Star — Steller: Huppenthal’s parting shot at TUSD is cheap
• Huffington Post — Arizona Education Officials Say It’s Illegal To Recite This Poem In School
• Rolling Stone — KRS-One Weighs in on Arizona Ethnic Studies

The post Arizona Bans Ethnic Studies, Again appeared first on Leftward Thinking.

I’m a white person and a huge fan of hip hop. Recently a discussion about white appropriation has been re-ignited within the hip hop community. While pieces of this discussion involve personal feuds (aka rap beef) the larger series of events serve as an interesting look into how race and white privilege play out in the real world.

XXL Freshman Class 2012

In 2012 hip hop magazine XXL released their annual freshman class edition, an issue that showcases up and comping hip hop artists. Among the 10 artists featured that year were Macklemore and Iggy Azalea. Iggy Azalea, a then 21 year old Australian, wasn’t chosen to be on XXL‘s coveted cover by the staff outright, but instead won a people’s choice vote held on the magazine’s website. Iggy who had released her first mixtape/EP only six months earlier also happened to be the first female MC to be featured in an XXL freshman class.

Meanwhile another young hip hop artist, Azealia Banks, took to twitter to criticize Iggy Azelea for calling herself a “runaway slave master” in one of her lyrics.

How can you endorse a white woman who called herself a “runaway slave master ” ?

— AZEALIA BANKS (@AZEALIABANKS) February 28, 2012

Iggy quickly responded…

You can’t block my blessings! Today I’m celebrating! Get with it or kick rocks! — IGGY AZALEA (@IGGYAZALEA) February 28, 2012

Over the next months both Iggy and her record label boss, and famous rapper, T.I. minimized Azealia Banks’ critique by saying that Banks was only upset because she wasn’t as successful as Iggy. In the end Iggy released a public letter that was half defense of her actions, half apology. Her letter begins…

Im writing you today to address a lyric I said a few months ago in one of my songs that I feel has been used to unfairly slander my character and paint me as a racist person.

She then goes on to defend her lyric and explain how it was a “metaphoric take on an originally literal lyric”. In the middle of her letter is her apology…

Sometimes we get so caught up in our art and creating or trying to push boundaries, we don’t stop to think how others may be hurt by it. In this situation, I am guilty of doing that and I regret not thinking things through more.

The last piece of her letter argues that she is being targeted because she is white and that “It is unfair to say other races who also grew up listening to rap don’t get a place too”.

Macklemore at the Grammys

Fast forward to January 2014. Macklemore, who shared the same XXL 2012 Freshman Class cover with Iggy Azalea, had been an underground rap artist for fourteen years, releasing his first mixtape/EP in 2000. At the 56th Annual Grammy Awards Macklemore was nominated for seven Grammys after his album, The Heist, had swept the nation with songs like “Same Love”, “Can’t Hold Us”, and most popular “Thrift Shop”.

That same year a black Los Angeles artist named Kendrick Lamar had released his debut major label album “Good Kid, M.A.A.D City”. Kendrick had been crowned the new king of west coast rap by Dr. Dre and Snoop Dogg (I witnessed that moment in history first hand) and was being compared to rap legend Tupac Shakur. “Good Kid. M.A.A.D City” was received as an instant classic, a cohesive album of universal acclaim. Unlike many popular artists who rapped about gold chains and fancy cars, “Good Kiss, M.A.A.D City” told a sober story of the challenges, tribulations, and beauty of growing up in Compton Los Angeles. It’s gritty story telling, musical innovation, and unmatched lyricism made it a source of pride for the hip hop community.

Then Macklemore won Best Rap Album, Best Rap Song and Best Rap Performance. He also beat Kendrick Lamar in the Best New Artist Category. Kendrick didn’t win a single Grammy.

The hip hop community was outraged. There was no way Macklemore’s The Heist was a better album than “Good Kid, M.A.A.D City”, period. Just hours after the award show ended Macklemore posted the following image on Instagram.

Reactions to Macklemore’s ‘apology’ ranged from a mild appreciation of his recognition, to anger and rejection of what many saw as pitty from a privileged white man.

*Now this year, Iggy Azalea’s “The New Classic” has been nominated for Best Rap Album at the Grammys.

Mike Brown and Eric Garner

Fast forward to August 2014 when Mike Brown was killed by a police officer in Ferguson. Many black artists spoke out on social media, wrote protest songs (2, 3, 4), and visited Ferguson in person. Many people online note the absence of white artists’ voices on the subject…

I have yet to hear anything about #Ferguson from Miley or Bieber. Katy? Iggy? Everyone wants to be black until it’s time to be black.
— #BlackLivesMatter (@locoernesto) August 14, 2014

Fast forward to Dec. 3rd when the police officer who killed Eric Garner is acquitted. Azealia Banks took to twitter to vent her frustration and call out Iggy Azalea for appropriating black culture (See the full set a tweets here).

OURSTORY is deeper than the boat ride over and slavery and civil rights.…… We have soooooooooo much that has been forgotten. — AZEALIA BANKS (@AZEALIABANKS) December 3, 2014

“EVERYBODY WANNA BE BLACK, BUT DON’T NOBODY WANNA BE BLACK” — PAUL MOONEY

— AZEALIA BANKS (@AZEALIABANKS) December 4, 2014

its funny to see people Like Igloo Australia silent when these things happen… Black Culture is cool, but black issues sure aren’t huh? — AZEALIA BANKS (@AZEALIABANKS) December 4, 2014

@Iggyazalea Why do you imitate us in such a way that i feel like you are actually making fun of us? Why?

— AZEALIA BANKS (@AZEALIABANKS) December 4, 2014

Iggy responded several hours later (See the full set a tweets here)…

Theres more to sparking a change than trolling on social media. World issues shouldnt be used as a poor excuse to promote fan battles. — IGGY AZALEA (@IGGYAZALEA) December 4, 2014

Make sure you do something to let YOUR government know how you feel when something is unjust., not JUST your followers on twitter…

— IGGY AZALEA (@IGGYAZALEA) December 4, 2014

HERE ARE SOME ACTUAL PRODUCTIVE WAYS YOU CAN HELP http://t.co/zi5SqDQsTc — IGGY AZALEA (@IGGYAZALEA) December 4, 2014

Azealia Banks on Hot 97

Several weeks later on December 18th Azealia Banks was interviewed on Hot 97’s Ebro in the Morning radio show in New York City. During the interview she was asked about Iggy Azalea and her thoughts on cultural appropriation.

The most relevant sections of the interview above come at 8:30–13:33 and 35:00–38:50, though the entire interview is worth watching. During these sections Azealia Banks discusses the depth of white appropriation of black culture and tears up when she describes how black people are robbed of their own identity and their histories are erased

The day after the interview Iggy Azalea responded harshly and directly on Twitter saying…

Special msg for banks: There are many black artists succeeding in all genres. The reason you haven’t is because of your piss poor attitude. — Your inability to be responsible for your own mistakes, bullying others, the inability to be humble or have self control. It’s YOU! — you created your own unfortunate situation by being a bigot and don’t have the mental capacity to realize yet. Probably never will. — Now! rant, Make it racial! make it political! Make it whatever but I guarantee it won’t make you likable & THATS why ur crying on the radio. — Enjoy continuing to bang your head against that metaphoric brick wall & Savor this attention. I’m the only way you get ANY. — You’re poisonous and I feel genuinely sorry for you because it’s obvious at this point you are a MISERABLE, angry human being. Regards!

Not long after came Banks’ response…

Itchy Areola, you are so stupid and selfish to make any of this about yourself in particular, — My tears had absolutely nothing to with you and everything to do with society and the media in general. — You have absolutely no place to comment. — Stay out of this one.… — But, iffy azuzu will not play victim and make this about her, I made some very valid points about things that are important to me. — Things in society and culture. Things that really resonated with a lot of people.

The hot 97 interview, and the exchange that followeed, took the Azleais Ezlea feud to a whole new a level. Many people felt that Iggy’s response was calous and ignored the very real social issue that Banks brought up in her iterview.

Even if you don’t like Azealia, Iggy is corny and watching her make fun of black girl crying about her racial struggle is proof of that.

— Nik (@Judnikki) December 19, 2014

Even hip hop legend Q‑Tip (member of Tribe Called Quest) was compelled to write 40 tweet rebuttle(readable version) directly to Iggy, explaining the roots of hip hop and why her comments were insensitive.

HipHop is a artistic and socio-political movement/culture that sprang from the disparate ghettos of NY in the early 70’s Coming off the heels of the CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT and approaching the end of the Vietnam war it was a crossroads 4 America specially for blacks in the US Being a spirited, rhythmic & expressive people music art dance outlined our existence… it proved a way for us to exhault to scream to dance to laugh and find OUR VOICE Black and Latino Kids were carving out their space and it became infectious… eventually Keith Cowboy coined the phrase hiphop . Yrs later the first rap record was recorded and now we r moving. But during these strides this country still had the monster of racism and racial insensitivity breathing and ruling… believe it or not young black n Latino lives specifically weren’t acknowledged in mainstream American culture unless Of course.. the convo was abt gangs , being criminals or uneducated. And hey! Like I stated early our families were rushed our schools sucked and we were left to put devices to survive… but HIPHOP showed that we had DEPTH, fire, and BRILLANCE… the music was undeniable! It moved from NY N became national and even GLOBAL.” Hiphop now was FOR EVERYBODY!! All of those who cld relate to the roots, the spirit, the history, the energy.. It reached YOU… it touched your spirit n took u up. We magnetized you! That’s what BRILLANCE does… now u are fulfilling your dreams … BUT! you have to take into account the HISTORY as you move underneath the banner of hiphop. As I said before… hiphop is fun it’s vile it’s dance it’s traditional it’s light hearted but 1 thing it can never detach itself from is being a SOCIO-Political movement.

Macklemore on Hot 97

Less than two weeks later Macklemore was interviewed on the same Ebro in the Morning show.

Unlike Iggy Azalea’s dismissive response Macklemore appears very thoughtful and reflective in his opinions about cultural appropriation, racism, and the role of white rappers in hip hop. To me, this interview is a must watch for white people.

An index of the most interesting sections of his interview is listed below

• 2:11 (to 6:00) — Mike Brown, Eric Garner and white privilege.
• 11:40 (to 14:22) — White privilege in hip hop
• 15:05 (to 16:40) — White America and rap
• 27:47 (to 35:35)- Reflecting on Azealia Banks’ interview
• 35:35 (to 39:04)- White rappers’ place in hip hop
• 40:38 (to 43:07 ) — Making mistakes and race
• 43:15 (to 44:10) — Kendrick Lamar’s “i” song
• 45:54 (to 51:14) — Last year’s Grammys
• 54:41 (to 55:04) — Will Iggy win rap album of the year?
• 57:43 (to 58:12) — J. Cole calls out Macklemore on his record

In Macklemore’s interview you see a white artist at least attempting to grapple with many of the complicated issues around race and hip hop in a way that Iggy Azealia completely ignores.

Analysis

Looking at the story above it seems evident that being white has given both Iggy Azalea and Macklemore some advantage in their careers. Ebro mentions multiples times in his Banks and Macklemore interview that it is the American consumer, and broader American culture, that bestows privilege on white rappers but it is the responsibility of those white rappers to recognize and acknowledge this dynamic. While both Iggy and Macklemore continue to profit, at least in part, from their whiteness, the way each artists has dealt with addressing their privilege has been drastically different.

Whether Macklemore’s handling of his position justifies his role as a white artist performing black music is still up for debate. I know many people who would argue that Macklemore’s career is nothing more than black cultural exploitation regardless of how “enlightened” he is. After all Macklemore is still taking something that black people invented and profiting from it using his white privilege. On the flip-side, hip hop is all about taking, remixing, remaking,  and white people in all careers profit from their white privilege.

To be sure the issue is a complicated one, I’m still struggling to come to my own conclusion, but events like this can at least act as a starting point for future conversations on race that must be had.

Please feel free to comment below, share with others, and use this blog post to continue conversations with your own friends!

Notes

• *This story was originally posted at The Copyright and Hip Hop Project.
• Jeff Change wrote a good article on this story, “Azealia Banks, Iggy Azalea and hip-hop’s appropriation problem”
• Uproxx — Hip-Hop Activist Harry Allen Responds To Macklemore And Hot 97’s ‘Great Race Debate’ In Rap

The post A Tale of Two White Rappers and Racial Injustice in America appeared first on Leftward Thinking.

Generally in copyright cases there is something called a De Minimis defense, which allows the defendent to argue that that piece of the original work that they ‘borrowed’ is so small and insignificant that copyright law does not apply. However the rulings in the two cases mentioned above demonstrated that in practice there is no De Minis defense for hip hop music made via sampling.

*Listen to the two songs at issue in the famous Bridgeport case. Can you even hear the sample? If this isn’t De Minimis then nothing is.

However! This week we saw the first sign the courts may moving away from that interpreation. On December 8th 2014 Judge Lewis A. Kapland dismissed a case by Tuf America against Jay-Z’s  2009 single “Run this Town featuring Rihanna and Kanye West”. The case focused on an ‘oh’ sound in the backgorund of “Run this Town” that Tuf America alleged was a sample from Eddie Bo’s 1969 song “Kook and Sling — part 1”. Stangley enough, Tuf Ameria previously sued Kanye West in 2009 for using the same sample in two of his songs (“Lost in the World” and “Who Will Survive in America”). Kanye West paid to settle that case out of court, but now Jay‑Z has gone to court andd received a ruling in favor of lososening restrictions around hip hop sampling.

Whether this case is a narrow exception given to Jay‑Z because he’s Jay‑Z, or a precedent setting case that marks the beginningof a sea change in the decriminalization of hip hop sampling remains to be seen. My guess it that it’s somewhere in between, but any shift in the legal system toward acknowledging the validity of remix culture (especially hip hop) is good news.

Related Articles

• New York Times — Judge Dismisses a Suit Over Jay Z’s ‘Run This Town’
• Death and Taxes — Jay Z fighting legal battle that redefines copyright laws
• TechDirt — Jay Z Steps Up To The Plate To Argue That Tiny Music Samples Are Unprotected By Copyright 
• Harvard — So-Called Sample Troll Sues Jay Z, Alleging “Run This Town” Infringes Copyright
• The Hollywood Reporter — Oh, Yes, Jay Z Has Lawsuit Over One-Syllable Sample Run Out of Town
• Rolling Stone — Jay Z’s ‘Run This Town’ Sampling Lawsuit Dismissed
• Five Useful Articles — Run This Takedown
• Rap Genius — “Run This Town” Lawsuit

Notes

*This post was originally posted at The Copyright and Hip Hop Project

The post A De Minimis Victory in Hip Hop appeared first on Leftward Thinking.

The story made known what I had already known, that using technology to spy on another person is not just something the NSA can do but something that any moderately technologically savvy person can do. While I appreciated the fact that this reality was being discussed, I found that the way the story was presented was extremely problematic.

An Advertisement for Stalking Software

The way the story was presented made it sound almost like a commercial for the spying software itself. The story focused mainly on one particular product. The story played a short promotional clip from the product’s company, it mentioned both the monthly and annual price (with the reporting noting how cheap it was), and mentioned the product’s name seven times in under four minutes. The reporter says, “[product name] is easy to install… [product name] has a step by step guide with screenshots on how to download the app onto an iPhone or Android, how to activate it, and then how to delete any visible trace of it” before going on to detail each of the software’s powerful features in its “really nice dashboard to organize all the information you’re grabbing”.

I don’t mind the fact that the story explicitly enumerates the different ways a smartphone can be turned into a spy tool (gps tracking, microphone eavesdropping, call recording, password stealing etc) or that the story emphasizes how easy it is for a stalker to achieve this. These details make the story more real and hopefully give the story a greater impact, alerting women to this potential danger. However, constantly mentioning the product by name, and noting how cheap and easy and capable the software is, may just act to promote the use of such software by abusers.

Ironically I recently had a debate with a family member who works on a police procedural how ridiculous it was that TV shows shy away from revealing certain criminal techniques for fear that doing so was proliferate the use of such techniques, and make criminals more difficult to catch. My stance then was, “all of this information is available online, why does it matter if the TV show broadcasts it”. However, in this smartphone stalking example I find myself on the other side of the argument.

One reason I think this story is so harmful and problematic is it’s lack of balance between detailing the ways someone can spy on a smartphone, and the ways someone can protect themselves from being spied on. While detailing spyware installation procedures and calling products by their brand names over eleven times, the story mentions only once, in passing, The National Network to End Domestic. The reporter even fails to note that NNEDV has easily accessible online resources to help victims manage their digital privacy. The only remedy the story alludes to is to “shut off GPS and Wi-Fi, and stay away from Facebook”, which are certainly not successful techniques to evade the spyware the rest of the story talks about. Tools like malware scans, factory resets, security settings, and other preventive measures were never mentioned once.

I guess I just wish the story had highlighted resources for women to educate and protect themselves, rather than detailing to stalkers how to do their stalking.

Notes

Two statistics from the story that really jumped out at me…

• 85% of the shelters say they’re working directly with victims whose abusers tracked them using GPS.
• 75% say they’re working with victims whose abusers eavesdropped on their conversation remotely — using hidden mobile apps.

Here are Technology Safety Tips from The National Network to End Domestic Violence

Here is audio of the original broadcast in case NPR ever takes it down

The post Smartphones and Domestic Violence Stalking appeared first on Leftward Thinking.

Introduction

“Yesterday, the U.S. State Department released a video about global internet governance. In addition to explaining what is going on with global internet governance, it is full of great animations that you might expect in an internet advocacy-type video. Since the video is a work of the U.S. State Department and therefore in the public domain, those animations are freely available for anyone to use however they see fit.”

The above is pulled from a blog post by Public Knowledge who has taken the video and remixed it to discuss the importance of net neutrality. You can check out their remix project here.

My Remix

Inspired by Public Knowledge’s idea, I took the same U.S. State Department video and made my own remix using Mozilla’s Popcorn Maker tool. Check out my remix here (or view it below). But I didn’t just make my own remix, I made a template for future remixes!

Now it’s Your Turn

Because I used Mozilla’s Popcorn Maker tool, you can easily use my remix as a template for you own. By either clicking the “recycle” icon on the embedded video above, or by visiting the view my video page here and clicking the green remix button at the top, you can edit/remix my video using the same tool I did and make it your own!

*A modified version of this blog post was originally creating using Mozilla’s Webmaker Thimble tool and can be viewed here.

The post The Internet Belongs to Everyone appeared first on Leftward Thinking.

A Wave of Feedback

The day of action was a great success with companies from Netflix, to Etsy, Kickstarter, to Foursquare, Vimeo, to Tumblr all participating. The action generated over 700,000 comments from internet users to the FCC, as well as over 2,000,000 emails, and over 300,000 phone calls made to the White House and members of Congress. At one point the Internet Slowdown tool was facilitating over 1,000 calls per minute. This type of mass feedback from internet users to Washington D.C. was exactly what the organizers hoped to achieve. Check out this cool infographic that the organizers made showing the impact of the day’s actions.

So what does all of this have to do with Janet Jackson?

Well, with this influx of comments to the FCC, net neutrality finally dethroned the incident Janet Jackson’s 2004 Superbowl “wardrobe malfunction” as the number one most commented issue at the FCC. That’s right, for the past 10 years the FCC had received more comments about Janet Jackson’s breast than any other issue. However we can now close that dark chapter in history as the FCC has now received more than 1.4 million comments about net neutrality.

Take Action

In case you missed your chance to make your voice hear, not not fear!
The FCC is taking comments until September 15th, just visit battleforthenet.com to get started!

The post Take That, Janet Jackson’s Nipple #InternetSlowdown appeared first on Leftward Thinking.

A part of me was simply affronted that the current events issue I cared most about wasn’t the primary topic of discussion. But it was more than that. Something about the stark contrast of the protests in Ferguson and the tone of the #IceBucketChallenge rubbed me the wrong way, and stuck with me.

Over the following days this dissonance nagged my brain, and I began to try to dissect what exactly was most bothering me. A few things became clear.

Different People, Different Conversations

The first thing that became apparent was that different groups of people were having different conversations. Certain people predictably spoke out against Mike Browns death, while other people, equally predictably, seemed to be either decidedly ignoring #Ferguson or simply unaware of what was going on.

While there were of course exceptions, the racial divide between these groups was undeniable. The topic of #Ferguson tore through my social circles that included people of people of color. Meanwhile my groups of white friends went about as though nothing had happened.

This reality was extremely heartbreaking. The lack of productiveness among my white friends was unbelievable. I think for many of them there was a calculation that they had nothing to gain from talking about race. Afraid of being called out on their views, or of making other white people feel uncomfortable, I think it was just too easy for my white friends to ignore the issue altogether. They didn’t see the damage their silence and inaction was causing.

I would like to think that at the root of this inaction was an ignorance or unawareness. My white friends were not forced to confront these issues because they were not engaging each other and had little to no meaningful contact with people of color. But isn’t that what the internet and social media is supposed to enable? The ability for ideas to spread across society?

Filtered v. Unfiltered Posts

One strange thing I noticed was that on Twitter, #Ferguson exploded and immediately began trending, while the topic on Facebook didn’t start peculating until much later. It’s true that Twitter has a higher proportion of African American users than Facebook does, so the issues discussed above were definitely at play, but there was something more.

Unlike Twitter, the Facebook newsfeed is curated by behind the scene algorithms (known as ‘edgerank’) that show Facebook users a very limited number of their friends’ posts. It was very clear that, for whatever reason, Facebook was heavily favoring posts of the #IceBucketChallenge over #Ferguson posts, essentially hiding the #Ferguson posts from view. There seem to be several possibilities as to what went on…

First, it’s possible that Facebook recognized #Ferguson posts as ‘downer posts’ and buried them for that reason, as they did an a secret recent experiment.

Second, it’s undeniable that way that #IceBucketChallenge posts often tag numerous other people in them helped those posts proliferate much more efficiently than #Ferguson posts (so no real fault to Facebook there).

Finally, it’s likely that Facebook favored posts on topics from certain influential users, who also happened to be white and not discussing Ferguson. In this case, Facebook was simply mimicking our offline world where a powerful, predominately white group of people, set the agenda for the national discussion.

Whatever the reason, Facebook was re-enforcing a racial divide that makes a discussion about race nearly impossible. It was silencing already disempowered voices trying to draw attention to an important national issue, while magnifying the usual viral, feel-good content, that populates much of the web.

Once I started posting about #Ferguson on Facebook other #Ferguson posts quickly populated my newsfeed. This “filter bubble”, where Facebook users see a customized version of only items that Facebook targets at them, has worried me for a long time but this clear cut example took my concerns to a whole new level. While I won’t place all the blame on the “filter bubble”, the extent to which white Americans are out of touch with the realities of being black in America is truly scary.

The Juxtaposition

The #IceBucketChallenge and #Ferguson have more in common than simply being two competing news items in our current 24 hour news cycle. Both issues involve tragic death. One by a terrible disease, one by unwarranted violence. Both hashtags are a form of activism and awareness raising. One to promote ALS research, and one to shed light on  systemic police brutality. However how the two issues were handled couldn’t have been more different.

The #IceBucketChallenge became a fun and social way to feel as though you’re making the world a better place. Meanwhile, #Ferguson became a polarizing third rail that many politicians, celebrities, and leaders remained silent about.

To see white people laughing and patting themselves on the back for doing the #IceBucketChallenge while other’s were mourning another casualty of police violence, was painful. How dare people, in a moment of turmoil and pain, take the opportunity to claim to be selfless and charitable by completely ignoring #Ferguson altogether.

In many ways the #IceBucketChallenge was used as a distraction by the media and others to avoid addressing #Ferguson. I was infuriated that important people in the media would participate in something as light-hearted as the #IceBucketChallenge without ever addressing the immediate and pressing issues around race and justice in #Ferguson.

I’m Not the Only One

Early on I wondered why I was the only one who was so struck by this dichotomy but soon after I saw that many other people were observing the same phenomenon, and were equally frustrated by it. Below are just a few examples.

Below is a tweet from a Washington Post reporter…

Above: #Ferguson, on Twitter Below: Rest of America, on Facebook pic.twitter.com/C8u2lqK40d

— Anup Kaphle (@AnupKaphle) August 18, 2014

  Jon Stewart used this observation as the intro to his first Daily Show episode after being on haitus…

    Rappers Fabolous and Wale alluded to this in their song “Don’t Shoot”… “Yeah, I seen a lot of ice water tossed, and I know it’s for a cause My only question is, what we doing for the loss of Mike Brown? Cuase right now, I challenge you to use your talents to Speak up…” (2:45) “I’m sure the general population trying to be more active But when the light finally catches you, you ice challenge  Okay, and I support the ALS just like the rest of them But you have yet to pay your debt…” (3:38)   This tweet is from a contributor to The Economist.… 

Maybe we need a Tear Gas Challenge to get Facebook interested in Ferguson. — Glenn Fleishman (@GlennF) August 18, 2014

And this tweet comes from the public policy director of Yelp…

My Facebook feed is videos of white folks dumping ice water on themselves while my Twitter feed is videos of black folks getting tear gassed

— Luther Lowe (@lutherlowe) August 18, 2014

Conclusion

Every time I hear people talking about the #IceBucketChallenge I am reminded about what people are not talking, #Ferguson. To me, these two hash tags demonstrate how wide the racial divide in America really is. Whether it is because a “filter bubble” hides important racial issues from the white community, or because white people actively avoid the topic, their silence in this struggle extremely damaging.

The self-congratulatory tone of the of #IceBucketChallenge stands in such stark contrast to the violence in #Ferguson, the side-by-side imagery is jarring. The whole incident seems to be be the perfect microcosm of how the longstanding marginalization of black Americans is neglected while white America congratulates itself on how much they care for one another.

On a positive note, hopefully this example can be used to illustrate to others how their charity and good will can (and should) be channeled to more substantive issues.

Update

I just discovered the #IceBucketHack (Facebook Page).

This is an awesome project (I’m glad the ALS Association withdrew their trademark applications, or else projects like this could not be done). Finding this really made me happy : )

The post #IceBucketChallenge v. #Ferguson appeared first on Leftward Thinking.