the
POLITIK PRESS
3/31/14
MARCH 31st, 2014
the
POLITIK PRESS
Volume XV, Issue VII
Volume XV, Issue VII
1
POLITIK PRESS VOLUME XV, ISSUE VII
Volume XV, Issue VII
the
the
MARCH 31st, 2014
MARCH 31st, 2014
POLITIK PRESS A publication of
JHU POLITIK jhupolitik.org
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Rachel Cohen MANAGING EDITOR Colette Andrei ASSISTANT EDITORS Katie Botto Sarallah Salehi Christine Server CREATIVE DIRECTOR Victoria Scordato COPY EDITOR Peter Lee MARKETING & PUBLICITY Rebecca Grenham Audrey Moss WEBMASTER Sihao Lu FACULTY ADVISOR Steven R. David
HEAD WRITER Julia Allen MARYLAND EDITOR Adam Roberts POLICY DESK EDITOR Michael Bodner STAFF WRITERS Eliza Schultz Dylan Etzel Abigail Sia Adrian Carney Geordan Williams Chris Winer Akshai Bhatnagar Rosellen Grant Preston Ge Corey Payne Mira Haqqani Arpan Ghosh 2
Volume XV, Issue VII
the
POLITIK PRESS
MARCH 31st, 2014
INSIDE THIS ISSUE WEEK IN REVIEW: Technology ..........................................................
Page 4
Dylan Etzel ’17
“PREPOSTEROUS”: CNN Coverage of MH360 ..............................
Page 5
Abigail Sia ’15
WHEN ALLIES STAY SILENT: Russia, Crimea, and China ................
Page 6
Mike Bodner ’14
SECESSION, SANCTIONS & THE SECOND COLD WAR .............
Page 7
Mira Haqqani ’17
PIRATES OF THE USA: Stop Illicit File Sharing .............................
Page 8
Arpan Ghosh ’17
IN DEFENSE OF THE COMMON CORE ....................................
Page 9
Harry Black ’11
3
Volume XV, Issue VII
the
POLITIK PRESS
MARCH 31st, 2014
WEEK IN REVIEW: Technology By Dylan Etzel ’17, Staff Writer Facebook Ventures Into the Virtual Realm This week Facebook bought virtual reality gaming company Oculus for $2 billion. Whether Facebook overpaid or not, this represents mass potential for the advancement of virtual reality gaming. This has led to speculation that Facebook will challenge SONY, who recently unveiled their plans for a virtual reality gaming headset. Whether Facebook will integrate Oculus into their organization is uncertain, but what is interesting is the possibility of linking Facebook to virtual reality gaming. Utilizing the information and user base that Facebook has obtained would clearly give it an edge over SONY. Because Facebook legally distributes information to various companies and the government, an expansion of their domain could lead to a better understanding of popular wants, and perhaps government intrusion as well.
Baidu’s Monopoly of Information A lawsuit brought against Chinese search engine Baidu by New York writers was dismissed this week. The search engine was accused of limiting the right to voice political views and freedom of the press by blocking articles relating to advocacy for democracy. However, the Manhattan district court ruled that the accusation itself infringed on the search engine’s right to free speech, under which Baidu is allowed to operate in an editorial capacity. Preference for non-democratic government, such as in China, is their right. This is quite a development in the question arising for many human rights advocates as to whether or not freedom of information is a basic human right. Courts have a long history of ruling against censorship since the beginning of the digital age, but this case presents a reversal of that trend.
Yahoo and Google Reflect NSA Scandal Impact Yahoo experienced a decrease in the renewal of requests from the government for information this week, as Google’s number slightly increased. This is most likely due to a trend pioneered by Yahoo to inform users when the government is requesting their data, such as the content of emails. Google, like Yahoo, has also reported that they are providing the government with less information despite an increase in their number of requests. Both search engines are refusing more requests on the grounds of breadth or questionable legality. This demonstrates that the NSA leaks are effectuating real change in the policies of search engines and the protection of their users’ information. However, the increase in requests also means that the NSA leaks have not tempered the government’s desire for personal information. PP
4
Volume XV, Issue VII
the
POLITIK PRESS
MARCH 31st, 2014
“PREPOSTEROUS”: CNN AND ITS COVERAGE OF MH370 by Abigail Sia ’15, Staff Writer
D
uring the week of March 17, 2014, the White House announced that 5 million people had enrolled for health insurance through HealthCare.gov. The Venezuelan police detained the mayor of San Cristobal, the city where antigovernment protests began a month ago. The United States moved to sanction Russian President Vladimir Putin’s inner circle over Russia’s annexation of Crimea, while Russia responded with sanctions of its own. There was a lot of news that week. But if you were watching CNN – or have done so at any point since March 8 – chances are you didn’t hear any of these stories. Instead, you were treated to an exhausting, round-theclock coverage of the saga surrounding the mysterious disappearance of Malaysian Airlines flight MH370. CNN trotted out expert after expert, explored countless theories, and at one point, an anchor even brought a toy plane onto the set. On March 19, anchor Don Lemon asked if the possibility of a plane flying into a black hole was really as “preposterous” as it sounded. Despite CNN’s best efforts, it accomplished very little aside from highlighting the frustrating lack of information surrounding the flight’s final hours – while aggravating more than a few viewers. (This article is not trying to demean or in any way diminish the significance of flight MH370. The emotional turmoil that the families of the victims have suffered is unimaginable, and a dear friend of mine lost two high school classmates when the plane disappeared.)
information ad nauseum. CNN’s handling of the MH370 story has turned a sad tragedy into a farce. When faced with a dearth of new details, CNN chose to repeat previously-broadcasted information and walk viewers through nearly every relevant conspiracy theory. Was there a fire on board? Was it a terrorist plot? Did the Bermuda Triangle shift to the South China Sea? When there was still no new information, CNN carried on the same strategy supplemented by its beloved technological gimmicks including interactive maps and countdown clocks. MH370 is certainly not going to be the last sensational news story to grip the world’s attention. My message to CNN and other news outlets? When faced with a lack of developments on a very important story, put on a brave face and admit that to your viewers. Avoid the Faustian bargain that sacrifices the quality of coverage for increased ratings. Instead of grasping at straws to fill airtime, turn to one of the other countless news stories of equal importance and share that. Do not insult your viewers’ intelligence by floating ridiculous theories and asking if a black hole could swallow a plane without swallowing the entire planet. Viewers will still want to know what is going on in Ukraine, Venezuela, and the state next door. No matter how sensational a story is, the world does not stop for one event – and neither should the news. PP
What was actually “preposterous” is that CNN decided to virtually ignore the rest of the world in favor of covering the mystery. Between 4:00 PM and 10:00 PM on March 12, CNN devoted 256 out of 271 broadcast minutes to covering the flight’s disappearance and the subsequent search operation. CNN has certainly reaped the ratings rewards: from March 10 to March 17, it attracted roughly 300,000 additional primetime viewers who tuned in to watch the MH370 drama unfold. Viewers turn to the news media to find out what is going on in the world around them, not to be fed the same
5
Volume XV, Issue VII
the
POLITIK PRESS
MARCH 31st, 2014
POLICY DESK by Mike Bodner ’14, Policy Desk Editor
When Allies Stay Silent: Russia, Crimea, and China It is safe to assume that when Russia formally annexed Crimea on March 18th, they expected something of an international outcry. Irredentist politics are, after all, generally looked upon with some disfavor. Fortunately, they could hope for support from China, a global power with which Russia has a distinguished history of ignoring human rights abuses and vetoing UN resolutions. Yet China has been pointedly neutral on the Crimea issue, if not mildly pro-Ukraine. On March 2nd, a representative of the Chinese foreign ministry stated, “We respect the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.” On March 15th, the United Nations Security Council voted on a resolution urging countries not to recognize Crimea’s referendum on independence. Russia unsurprisingly vetoed the resolution, and it hoped for China to do the same, in order to put up a united front against the west. Yet China chose only to abstain, a move which isolated Russia amongst from the international community. A later statement from Foreign Ministry Spokesman Qin Gang called for “all parties to remain calm” in order to prevent tensions from being raised. Why has China been reluctant to protect such an important ally in this time of crisis? China maintains an official policy of non-interference in the domestic affairs of sovereign nations. This policy has been used to defend, for example, Chinese opposition to an intervention in Syria. Yet principles are frequently broken, and it is hard for China to pretend its arms sales to Sudan have not contributed to the latter country’s recent hostilities with South Sudan. A stronger contributor to China’s hesitancy to take Russia’s side is probably Beijing’s fears about backing any regional independence movements. China has long faced strong resistance to its rule in the Xinjiang and Tibet autonomous regions. Backing Crimea’s independence could have the unwanted side effect of strengthening similar movements in China. On an economic level, China had strong relations with Ukraine’s former regime. Bilateral trade between the two countries reached $10 billion, which made China Ukraine’s second-largest trade partner. Strong trade does not need to end with a change of government, and perhaps
China is looking to avoid alienating the new leadership in Ukraine. Supporting independence in Crimea would not be an ideal way to begin a new relationship. Despite public Chinese actions and statements, Moscow insisted early in the intervention that China supported Russia’s actions. Before China abstained on the Security Council resolution on Crimea, and after the Chinese public statement respecting Ukrainian sovereignty, the Russian Foreign Ministry stated that there existed “a broad convergence of views between Russia and China in connection to the situation in Ukraine and around it.” Another statement by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov claimed that Russia and China had “coinciding views” on the situation. Recent Russian rhetoric has not mentioned Chinese support. Perhaps there is a fear that continuing to emphasize Chinese support can push China to more clearly state its reservations to an annexation of Crimea. Does China have an endgame in their neutrality, or are they simply trying to maintain a status quo in international and domestic policy? Perhaps China is angling to trade eventual support for concessions by Russia in energy-producing Central Asia. China is taking over energy assets in Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, countries who had long sent their resources north. China may have caught Russia, a country whose actions lack legitimization from the international community, in a vulnerable position. The Russians may be willing to trade some energy rights for a Chinese vote of support. When United States Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power claimed that “Russia finds itself extremely isolated,” she was not overstating the truth. What will Russia do now that it sees itself lacking the support of its most powerful ally? They cannot back down from Crimea without a serious loss to prestige, and defying the United States and the European Union on a diplomatic or an economic front could prove extremely difficult without a strong ally to rely on. Ultimately, the vast majority of countries choose to act in their own self-interests. Russia may have foreseen China’s opinions on Crimean independence and annexation, yet they may not have prepared to deal with the consequences of such neutrality. PP
6
Volume XV, Issue VII
the
POLITIK PRESS
MARCH 31st, 2014
SECESSION, SANCTIONS & THE SECOND COLD WAR by Mira Haqqani ’17, Staff Writer
T
he Russian annexation of Crimea has created what seems to be a second Cold War, particularly as tensions between Moscow and the West continue to deteriorate in the wake the of the Ukrainian crisis. As a result of what has been referred to as an “illegal” occupation of the Crimean peninsula, the United States and several European countries have punished the Russians through the imposition of heavy economic sanctions. Not only is this a way of condemning Russian actions in the region, but it is largely aimed at pressurizing Vladimir Putin into retracting Russia’s military presence in Crimea. However, these economic sanctions come with heavy costs that suggest that they are an ineffective means of pacifying Russia. In a Moscow backed referendum that took place on the 16th of March, 93% of Crimean voters chose to secede from the Ukraine and become an official part of the Russian Federation. The result sparked springs of celebration across Russia and the Crimean peninsula, where pro-Moscow voters took to the streets to hoist the Russian flag with pride. As the Crimean population prepares itself for its secession to Russia, one can expect several major changes to take place including an official adoption of the ruble, Russian passports, and Moscow Standard Time. However, the Crimean referendum has been subject to international criticism and has recently been declared illegal by the United Nations. As the USA and Europe tighten economic sanctions on Russia, they ignore the adverse consequences they create for not only the Russians, but their own countries too. There are several reasons as to why economic sanctions on Russia are an ineffective way of dealing with the situation. Sanctions, on their own, are not penalizing enough for a country like Russia with a globalized economy, especially as it engages in frequent trade with European countries. In this case, sanctions are likely to adversely affect markets for European countries such as Germany and Hungary that have publicly voiced their opposition to them. In addition, economic constraints on Russia are unlikely to affect those responsible for making decisions in Moscow. Rather, they will affect average Russian citizens as sanctions deprive them of medicine, food and other valued goods.
While sanctions may not always hurt a large number of people in a country like Russia, they do create a very strong anti-West sentiment within the local population. At this point, not only are the Russians angered by the American decision to denounce the Crimean referendum, but they are also accusing the Obama administration of exploiting its economic position in the world to malign that of Russia’s. However, what most Western countries are ignoring are the long-term effects that economic sanctions will have on their own economies, especially since most countries are now connected to each other through strands of globalized economic activity. Bankers and politicians are confident that sanctions will do little to damage Russia. This confidence seems to echo across the country as international businesses continue to invest instead of being deterred by the threat of economic uncertainties. However, it will be interesting to see how events in Crimea play out in the near future and whether the US and EU will continue to increase economic penalties imposed on Russia, especially since in doing so they may risk losing invaluable supplies of energy and gas to European countries. Even though the Russians are convinced that this temporary economic dip will pass, it is worth questioning whether their assumptions are somewhat rooted in complacency. Knowing Putin’s persistent and stubborn nature, it is unlikely that a set of restrictions on Russian economic activity will be able to prevent him from taking bold actions in Crimea. It is for this reason that the West should focus on means other than economic sanctions in order to pacify Russia, since doing so will benefit the former in the long run. It is evident that economic sanctions in this case are a short-term solution and are likely to fail in preventing the situation from worsening. PP
7
Volume XV, Issue VII
the
POLITIK PRESS
MARCH 31st, 2014
PIRATES OF THE USA: STOP ILLICIT FILE SHARING by Arpan Ghosh ’17, Staff Writer
T
he availability of affordable, high speed internet has created a nation addicted to downloading. Computer users across the nation are knowingly partaking in the illegal practice of file sharing of copyrighted material. It’s so rampant amongst the youth that several movie theaters across the nation continue to play public service announcements attempting to inform audiences about the legal consequences of illicit file sharing. But the problem is actually incredibly serious and complex. In 2003, a 12-year-old girl was prosecuted for illicit music downloading by MGM Music and subsequently faced $150,000 per song shared. Only 231 individuals were charged for copyright infringement in the entire year of 2003. So why hasn’t the U.S. government fixed the problem? It seems simple: just block the websites that hold torrent databases of copyrighted material, right? The government has tried that, but a lot of the sites that hold torrent links and databases are held in servers outside the American border, which makes enforcement difficult due to jurisdiction concerns. The U.S. government is also unable to enforce the actions of Internet Service Providers (ISPs), like Comcast or Verizon, due to breaches in corporate-governance contracts. People who support pirating are the same people who are against government interference with regulating the Internet. These people believe that corporations lobby too much for power and have taken control over our government, further digging their claws into the spectrum of the Internet. A prime example of overbearing corporate power is the conglomeration of ISPs across the nation, or even the advent of personalized advertisements based on users previous search history. Pirating on a computer may not be considered immoral or unethical to some people, but illegal downloading is the same thing as stealing an album from your local electronics store, and regardless of how you want to sugarcoat the action, theft through file-sharing hurts the economy. On top of that, file sharing is a severe breach of intellectual property rights that all content creators hold upon licensing their digital material. The U.S.
government claims that the music and movie industry loses $200 to $250 billion per year as a result of pirating, in addition to the loss of 750,000 American jobs over the span of a decade. The Recording Industry Association of America also claims that the global economic loss due to file sharing of music to be $12.5 billion in 2011, as well as $800 million in lost tax revenue. Many reputable sources claim these numbers to be inflated, but no matter how much statistical pundits from both sides want to spin the exact estimate, the implications of illegal file sharing have overbearing consequences in numerous sectors of not only the U.S. economy, but in the global economic sphere as well.. There’s a simple fix to this problem. Our government has to take a stand to protect the copyright liberties of musicians, artists, programmers, and all other digital creators of intellectual property. Let’s increase international pressures to have the source of the problem eliminated. The owners of ThePirateBay, the world’s largest pirating website, should be put on trial for a second time in their respective countries, for sending the source code of the original websites to foreign web developers even after being initially prosecuted. To keep the government somewhat disconnected from the entire notion of increased regulation over the Internet, Internet service providers (ISPs) should be held responsible for blocking content that assists in the illicit downloading of files. Internet service providers who do not block access to downloadable pirated content should be held responsible, and heavy penalties should be issued to ISPs who fail to enforce the law. Legislation, similar to the Stop Online Piracy Act of 2011 (SOPA) introduced in the House by Republican Lamar Smith from Texas, should be implemented to combat widespread digital theft. The bill was struck down mostly because of international concerns regarding a legislative precedent to censor online activity in the United States; however, the bill wasn’t without merit. Precise legislation with coherent and balanced wording should appear in front of Congress, and only then will proper legislation be enacted to solve and enforce America’s file-sharing conundrum. PP
8
Volume XV, Issue VII
the
POLITIK PRESS
MARCH 31st, 2014
IN DEFENSE OF THE COMMON CORE by Harry Black ’11, Founder & Former Editor in Chief
L
ast week marked a milestone in the attempt to reform American primary and secondary education. For the first time, over four million students in 36 states and the District of Columbia took Common-Core aligned tests. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are a set of standards or skills that students in kindergarten through 12th grade must master in English language arts (ELA) and mathematics to be prepared for college by the time they graduate high school. Next year, 44 states and the District of Columbia will finish replacing their own standards in ELA and math with this new collection of benchmarks. Prior to the Common Core, the last major revision to American elementary and secondary education came with the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2001. NCLB required each state to establish its own set of standards along with assessments designed to measure student understanding of those skills. Current data suggests NCLB and other elements of education reform have yielded some success. According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) students aged nine and 13 have significantly increased their scores in reading and math since the 1970s (with much of the growth occurring in the past decade). In 2012, the Pew Research Center reported 88% of Americans 25 and older have completed high school, while in 1971 that percentage was only 57. Moreover, the NAEP has demonstrated the achievement gap, which is the difference in the performance of students from wealthy families (whom are predominantly white) and of students from lowincome families (whom are mostly black or Hispanic), has shrunk in both reading and math for students aged nine, 13, and 17. Perhaps you may be wondering why states are abandoning their own standards for the CCSS if things are getting better. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, right? Well, the truth is while the state of education has improved, it is not improving fast enough for our workforce to remain competitive. The NAEP has also
revealed that, since 2008, reading and math scores have remained stagnant for students aged nine and 17 and have increased just slightly for students aged 13. And, a recent survey conducted by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development—a global policy organization—indicates the United States still lags behind other nations regarding student performance in reading, math, and science. There are several well-known factors that help explain why American primary and secondary students continue to struggle including significantly increasing rates of childhood poverty, inadequate school funding, mediocre teacher training, and, as a result, inconsistent teaching quality. A lesser-known variable, but just as important to consider, is the state standards themselves. To understand why state standards should be included in the list above one should consider a collegecompletion report produced by the Knowledge Is Power Program (KIPP) in 2011. KIPP, one of the most successful national charter-school networks in the US, predominantly enrolls students from low-income backgrounds. In its 2011 college-completion report, KIPP published the undergraduate graduation rate of its first classes of students, which was just 33% despite the fact that 89% of those students matriculated to college. Well-funded and staffed with effective teachers KIPP schools are able to help their students overcome the pernicious effects of poverty. So, what then accounts for the disparity in the percentages of KIPP students who enroll and complete college? Despite being at the cutting edge of today’s education-reform efforts, KIPP schools, like all other charter or public schools, are still obligated to teach according to their state standards. States, under pressure from NCLB to immediately boost the achievement levels of their primary and secondary students, produced standards that children and young adults would have an easier time mastering. These standards prefer the acquisition of facts over synthesis and evaluation of information, which are skills integral to success in college. Thus, many KIPP
9
Volume XV, Issue VII
the
POLITIK PRESS
students have dropped out of college possibly because they were not sufficiently prepared to handle the academic rigors of higher education. The KIPP college-completion report is a sobering reminder that increased funding and improved teacher quality are only partial solutions to the problem of low primary and secondary student achievement in the US. To prepare students to succeed in college, the issue of what they are taught, not just who teaches them, must also be addressed. And this is where Common Core comes in. Unlike most state standards, the CCSS are rigorous and require students to analyze information often through writing.
MARCH 31st, 2014
improve the quality of their offerings. With the impending augmented rigor of the SAT and increasing competition for jobs, there exists an imperative for states to stick with employing and assessing student mastery of the Common Core as planned. Failure to do so could result in the US education system falling even farther behind that of other nations, resulting in disastrous consequences for its citizens. PP
Yet, the adoption of the CCSS has garnered controversy and opposition. To date, nine states have pulled out of the consortiums designing the Common-Core aligned tests having witnessed students already struggling to grasp the new standards. Four more are debating whether to follow suit. If more states decide to implement their own (inevitably less rigorous) Common-Core aligned tests, then the US may not be able to realize the benefits of the CCSS and so may be unable to adequately prepare its workers to compete for the difficult work that an increasingly globalized economy requires. Inadequate instruction lies at the heart of students’ current struggles with Common Core, and such instruction is a result of educators’ lack of preparation in teaching the new standards. Instead of distancing themselves from the Common Core, states should improve the training of their educators so students are able to receive the benefits of the CCSS. According to the National Council on Teacher Quality, only 10% of schools of education and alternative certification organizations are able to adequately train teachers on implementing CCSS. Hence, states should start by revamping their teacher-preparation programs. To do this states should first establish task forces to review and recommend the best practices of highlyrated teacher-preparation programs. States can then base their funding of their own teacher-preparation programs in large part on whether those programs incorporate the recommendations of the task forces. Beefing up oversight of teaching programs and setting limits on the number of teaching licenses issued each year, which increases competition for licensure, will further induce teacher-preparation programs to
10
Volume XV, Issue VII
the
POLITIK PRESS
MARCH 31st, 2014
WRITE FOR thePOLITIK PRESS
Photo Courtesy: United States Library of Congress’s Prints and Photographs Division
The Politik Press, originally founded in 2008 as JHU Politik, is a weekly publication of political opinion pieces. We proudly seek to provide the Johns Hopkins campus with student voices and perspectives about important issues of our time. Rather than hide within a cloistered academic bubble, we know we must critically engage with the world that surrounds us. That, we believe, is at the heart of what it means to be learning. We’re lucky to be situated in the city of Baltimore, a city with a rich history and an ever-changing politics. We aim to look at the politics of the Homewood campus, of the city of Baltimore, of the domestic landscape of the United States, and then of the international community as well. While we publish the Politik Press weekly, we work simultaneously on our special issues which come out once per semester. These magazines confront a single topic from multiple angles. We have run issues covering topics like the political nature of research, the Arab Spring, and our city Baltimore.
If interested e-mail us at
JHUPOLITIK@gmail.com Or find us online at
jhupolitik.org 11