The Observer XIV.II - Tech in a Changing Society

XIV.II

Tech in a Changing Society

Welcome to the second issue of Volume XIV. This issue’s theme is “Tech in a Changing Society”, and it allows writers to grapple with the various ways that the rapid technological advancements of recent years has dramatically changed society. This issue exposes the great irony of technology in that it holds the power to both transform and re-entrench inequalities in our world. In addition, we explore the dialectical relationship between how technology shapes our thoughts about the world, and how likewise our modes of thinking shape technology.

In this issue you will find a variety of articles that speak to technologies interaction with economic, social and political aspects of our world. Including, Monique Sereneo who writes on the tech sector in China’s economy, Rebecca Frost discusses how agricultural technology is shaping rural communities, and Alex Bernst looks at the effect of Artificial Intelligence (AI technology on employment. Gavrilo Randjelovic touches on the recent invention of cyber-currency, Emily Robertson discusses issues around gender inequality in STEM fields, and Vruksha Vakeeswaran treats us to a look at new technology is healthcare.

Other contributors include Harrison Giovannetti who looks at the interactionbetween our digital age and a declining in religiosity within society, Jacob Aheam who discusses the relationship between the proliferation of internet pornography and global sex trafficking, Kristen Johnson who considers the impact of tech on illiteracy in Africa, and Joshua Lim who explores the opportunity that cyberspace represents for our world.

Other salient topics that are covered include refugee aid apps by Sinead O’Hara, twitter and its impact on politics by Sean Stead-Fecser, the nuclear age and North Korea by Stephanie Repic, how technology is shaping journalism by Gillian Moir, information communication technology (ICT) and East African elections by Pam Simpson, the occurrence of Syrian war battle footage being posted on YouTube by Kayla Rolland, online voting and social media in modern democracies by Shaniah Hogman, and technology in the arctic by Joshua Finkelstein.

Overall, I hope you find this issue to be engaging and we hope that it stimulates critical reflection on the rapid change happening all around us.

Sincerely,

Kelley Humber Editor-in-Chief Political Studies ‘18

Nicole Toole Editor-in-Chief Global Development & Political Studies ‘18

er from t t t e L he

Dear Readers,

r o t Edi

s t n te

gy”

on c C f Te o ct ” f ide o kS gA r n a s” i ” nc nU eD e a a lture l h h u t a c T l i : B r r y h :“ te Ag n in o i t Tab ue Sereneo “Pornograp lligence – Bet a v Inno lo hno

m: Tech nte niq I f a l o o e a s r M ci ” Ah rtifi Lose rency ob r A d u “ c c n : o a a J st ypt rs ern of Cr nne i B y g x W o l “ t: Ale deo Fros nge I a a r t c S c e he Reb vic: “T o l e j ap” Rand ender G o G l i e r h t v and Ga “Google : n o s t r obe Emily R re” n Meets Healthca io at ov nn “I : an ar Vruksha Vakeesw

Josh Finkelstein: “Technology at

Stephanie R e

Joshua

Kriste

pic: “Nuclea

Lim: “Cy

n Joh

the Top of the World”

berspac

r North Kore a”

e – The

Next Fro

ntier” Sine ts in A ad O frica” ’Har Sea a: “R n St efug ead ee A Gil -Fe id, O lian c ser: ne C Mo “Ho lick Pam ir: “ wT Awa Jou Sim w y” itte rna Ka p r lism son Is C yla han ’s F : “I Ro CT utu gin Ma lla g th r Ro nd e” e-L l e Po e : “E in Sh in E litic De vid an ast al L L i e a a nc Afr and hH Ha ng e i sca can e: rri o M pe” g “ so ish Fa Ele ma nG k a ctio eN nd n: iov led ns” “D ew ea ?S an s o th yri ne nS to an tti: oc t Wa he ial “T rF Me he De oo dia mo Ne tag ” xt cra e& Gr tic Yo ea Pro uT tA ub c es wa e” s: ke On nin lin g” eV oti ng ”

nson:

“Table

Balancing Acts: Technology and Economic Growth in Modern China By: Monique Sereneo

Rows of newly stocked toys line the shelves; upon closer inspection it’s clear that they share more than their cheap, plastic exterior. Carefully stamped along the bottom of each product the print is clear – “Made in China”.

It’s not exactly what any country would want as its defining narrative. Despite a global supply of Chinese imports that has expanded and diversified over the years, a persisting stereotype of low-priced and low-quality goods remains.

While it is true that this model catalysed an era of rapid economic growth, a shift towards the technological sector is what China hopes will sustain it. Through strategic investments and increased research and development in science and technology, China is reclaiming ownership of its growth story.

“The impending failure of this export model is unsurprising.”

The 1970s commenced China’s era of economic growth. An export-oriented model and focus on mass production led to a 10% average annual growth in gross domestic product (GDP). Disposable incomes increased considerably while extreme poverty declined from over 90% in the 1980s to less than 10% currently. Unlike its competitors, China thrived on exporting lower quality variations

of products that allowed companies to sacrifice quality for manufacturing costs. Arguably, it was a model that worked - until recently. Given that return on investments have been steadily declining since 2007, China has reason to worry about sustainability.

The impending failure of this export model is unsurprising. After all, China is not the first Asian country to test its feasibility. A similar narrative followed Japan after World War II, when low quality factory exports to the United States caused people to view Japanese products as cheap junk. Similarly, South Korean automotive manufacturer, Hyundai, established its reputation in the 1990s as the maker of inexpensive but flimsy models. Both countries reached the same realization: low quality products are not internationally competitive. Japan, under the Prime Minister Hayato Ikeda’s leadership in 1960, gain success in the international market as an exporter of high-quality goods while Hyundai adopted a corporate directive focused on quality in 1998. For China, improving its model is an inevitable next step.

Unlike Japan and South Korea however, success in the international market isn’t China’s primary goal. Negative externalities – consequences of China’s precipitous growth model – have taken their toll in the form of environmental degradation and a worsening income inequality gap. Such problems call for a new industrial structure - one that considers environmental impact and shifts away from

quantitative goals for production. In a period of transition, the answer lies in research and development (R&D).

While the USA has typically led the world in scientific knowledge, China currently publishes more than any other country in scientific papers for computer science and engineering. The country has become the 2nd largest spender of R&D globally while a strategic focus on education had made China the world’s top producer of science and engineering undergraduates. These investments illustrate a steep shift from the country’s original manufacturing model but its one that the government hopes will pay off through new technology and innovations.

The concept is not exactly revolutionary. Following World War II, the Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency (JIOA) instigated Operation Paperclip, a secret program that recruited more than 1,600 German scientists, engineers, and technicians to the United States. This was done with the intention of the United States gaining advantage in the Cold War and the Space Race. The Soviet Union shares a similar goal with Operation Osoaviakhim. While China has taken to investing in its own citizens instead, the intent remains the same. With new technology comes the possibility of China moving up the value supply chain. Ideally, the sustained market success would bring a more balanced growth to the Chinese economy, decreasing income equality and resulting in less environmental damage.

The question, however, is whether increased investment in the science and technology sector contribute to long-run economic growth. In current economic theory, technological change generated by domestic activities such as R&D, represent an endogenous factor – a direct factor of influence for macroeconomic models. However, in a study on the effect of technological progress in Romania, researches found a marginal connection between increased investments in R&D and innovation, and macroeconomic growth. Essentially, increased investment alone is not enough to warrant sustainable economic growth.

Instead, investments must also be carefully allocated by

field and sector depending on the specialization capacity in the country in terms of efficiency and economic, social, and technological competitiveness. China appears to be on the right track thus far, developing in areas such as 3D printing, advanced robotics, industrial Internet, and bio and nano-technology materials. Ultimately, as China prepares for the next step, it must proceed with caution. By 2020, China hopes to transform into a major centre of innovation and by 2050, it hopes to become a global leader in science and innovation. The implications of these goals, however, must be considered.

Take for example, the United States who adopted a seemingly strategic model in 1980s. Manufacturers began to outsource production to cheap-labour countries such as Mexico and Taiwan rather than incur the costs of production with the US. It aligned with the concept of international comparative advantage, which states that it is more advantageous for a country to specialize in the good it sacrifices the least to produce, and trade for anything else. While this makes sense in theory, it fails to account for the jobs lost when companies outsource their operations. In particular, technology and innovation represent a difficult case given that their intent is generally increased efficiency. Again, it is a good intention but not at the expense of thousands of lost jobs.

However, China has been strategic thus far. Their investments in science and technology have all been planned; China adopted the 13th Five-Year Plan in March 2016 with the aim of building a “moderately prosperous society” by 2020. Their focus isn’t necessarily inward looking either. Internationally, China has developed foreign direct investment (FDI) policies for international joint ventures (IJVs) with the aim of attracting technology from foreign firms to boost domestic productivity. If preparation alone was an indicator, China appears to be on track in finding a balance between economic growth and a technological age. As to whether this prediction will hold true - the world can only wait.

Pornography:

Error:

The Dark Side of Technology By: Jacob Aheam 01

010

11 110

01

01

Internet technology has been a ground-breaking phenomenon. From affording humans, the ability to communicate in a multitude of ways never considered possible, to allowing for the transmission of vast amounts of information worldwide; the internet has undoubtedly changed the lives of billions of people. However, the Internet has also paved the way for the emergence of various destructive industries, none more so than online pornography. In the modern world, cultures worldwide are becoming increasingly sexualized. Thus, public opinion regarding pornography has become more favourable; it is often perceived as an expression of sexuality and a natural indulgence. Therefore, from a hedonistic standpoint, porn is, at its essence, an intrinsic good; or in this way is justified as being such.

On the flip side, various types of porn aggravate sexual violence, and are used as an instrument by sex traffickers to facilitate the increased exploitation of individuals who fall victim to the vicious cycle of sex trafficking. Therefore, from an instrumental perspective, porn has devastating consequences.

It is a misconception that the sharing of explicit im-

1

ages is a new occurrence brought on by the internet; nude bodies and sexual acts have been depicted in art pieces for thousands of years. Slavery has also been widespread for thousands of years. Therefore, sexual violence and sex trafficking do not stem directly from porn; explicit images, sexual violence and sex slavery have been prevalent for quite some time before modern technology. In many instances however, porn normalizes violent sexual behaviour and exacerbates pro-abuse and pro-coercion attitudes in sexuality and relationships. A Canadian study found a correlation between young males who consume pornography and the belief that holding a woman down during sex is acceptable. Similarly, in a study of Italian youth aged 14-19, there was a correlation between the usage of pornography and forcing someone into sex. Various other experimental studies in mainstream media found that both males and females who had been exposed to sexualized portrayals of women were more supportive of rape myths and sexual violence. Furthermore, in studies that feature the usage of pornography in everyday life, men who watched violent porn were more likely to admit that they would rape wom-

en if they could ensure they would get away with it. It is apparent that porn, even if not the direct cause, has acted as an incitement for violent sexual tendencies.

These studies indicate that violent sexual behaviours are often legitimized by pornography. With easy accessibility to types of pornography that feature activities such as rape, coercion, and bestiality, these acts can easily become validated. Various factors such as cognitive state or cultural and familial background can either mitigate or aggravate tendencies toward sexual violence, however most studies indicate that the information seen is consistent and reliable worldwide.

That being the case, it should be argued that porn has been cast away into the realm of libertarianism for too long. The reality is, porn has transcended the private sphere. It is a destructive force in international society; not only exacerbating sexual violence and distorting conceptions of a healthy sexual relationship, but also acting as a tool in global sex trafficking.

There are strong ties between the porn industry, especially websites that feature violent porn, and the sex trafficking industry, which has a strong international presence. Pornographic photos and videos, much of which includes child pornography, are used as advertising material to attract potential clients. Research shows that sex traffickers often hold explicit content of victims against them as an instrument by which to blackmail them, with the fear of the content going viral acting as a control mechanism.

Customers and sex traffickers alike use pornography as a mode by which to instruct victims how to perform specific sexual acts. Victims are often forced into pornography, and videos are subsequently sold. Furthermore, many organizations, such as the Salvation Army, hold that pornography is a form of trafficking in itself, as victims from pornography have stories from shoots that run parallel to stories from victims of sex trafficking. Many victims recount being treated in a degrading manner, including being slapped and spit on. The demand for and usage of pornography in its connection to and aggravation of sex trafficking is evident.

In 2016, a massive child pornography ring was discovered in Ontario. 80 individuals were arrested on charges including possession of child pornography and sexual assault. Police also said to have rescued nine minors involved in the sex trade during the investigation. Lianne Macdonalds from the Canadian Centre for Child Protection says that 50 per cent of child pornography cases involve sexual assault. The correlation between pornography and forms of sex trafficking and sexual violence is commonly perceived as a third world issue, although it has a pernicious effect in developed nations as well.

In conclusion, there is a strong link between pornography and sexual violence and sex trafficking that transcends state borders. The easy access to these violent, coercive types of porn contributes to the exacerbation of sexual violence and sex trafficking. We must be prepared to infringe on values of autonomy and freedom in order to regulate the making and distribution of porn. It begins with a large scale, international discussion on the topic. One which has scarcely been had.

Artificial Intelligence: Better Than Us By: Alex Bernst

Humans have come a long way in the last few already helped overturn 200,000 tickets. thousand years. Graduating from deserts, forests, and The same principle applies to the medical field. open fields to thriving cities. In the Middle Ages, over half A doctor’s job is to gather information from patients and the population worked in agriculture in order to feed ev- choose the best course of action to treat their ailments. eryone. Today, that number has decreased to a miniscule IBM developed a computer system called Watson, which percentage. These advances are the result of a myriad of listens to patient’s questions and helps determine lung factors, but an important one is technology. cancer treatment options. Watson is one of many systems

Technology, this result of human creativity and la- working in this field. These programs are capable of knowziness, has taken our species to places that people could ing more than human doctors. Additionally, programs are only dream of centuries ago. It has enabled a much smaller able to learn from both their own experiences and those of amount of the population to produce needed food, allow- other programs around the world. ing the remaining members of society to specialise in oth- Computers easily complete even creative tasks. er activities. This has benefited everyone.

Programs can already create music. The Google Brain

Humans have never stopped creating and improv- group began a project in 2016 called Magenta, with the ing these tools. These tools have come to replace human express purpose of developing computer programs to labour across the world. Working faster, better, and cheap- create music and art. An AI developed by Facebook’s Reer than humans ever could. In the coming decades, it will search Lab, Rutgers University, and College of Charleston be very difficult to find a task that a robot or an artificial in- created works of art so authentic that critics could not detelligence (AI) program cannot do. As a society, we need to termine whether it was made by a human or not. become comfortable with the Humans have always idea that these technological looked for ways to make our miracles will be everywhere. lives easier and better. That drive

This innovation has to improve life was never a threat grown past manual labour into to our way of life. Replacing the “This innovation has grown past the realm of cognitive labour. tasks of some for the benefit of Computer programs have the whole was acceptable. But manual labour into the realm of been created to perform both now we are in the process of recognitive labour. Computer simple and complex tasks. placing ourselves. Not just manprograms have been created to Gone are the days of “automaufacturing jobs and low-skilled tion,” simply referring to large jobs, but in everything we do. perform both simpleand robots performing singular ex This reality is closer than complex tasks. “ ercises. Robots today can obwe think. Much closer. One IT serve the world around them firm predicts that over 30% of and react accordingly. Some jobs will be replaced by macan watch and mimic the bechines, software, and other haviour of humans. They can smart robots by 2025. And Ray learn.

Kurzweil, director of engineering at Google, believes that

Technological progress does not simply create computers will reach human levels of intelligence by 2029. new jobs for people. Just like machines in manufacturing What will we do? No one knows for certain. Kurplants have pushed out human labourers, computer pro- zweil is confident these advances will bring nothing but grams will take over the jobs of white-collar workers. Al- good. Robots may take the jobs we know today, but future most any job done at a desk on a computer will soon have generations will have thriving careers in fields that have not a computer program that can do it for a much smaller cost. been invented yet. Regardless, it is crucial that we adjust to Even the jobs of those who write the programs will soon be the idea that robots will become omnipresent in our socilimited, as new programs are able to learn and evolve on ety. Those who are not prepared could be the ones who their own. are left behind.

Complex mental tasks, like those performed in the legal field, are within the scope of machine learning. The majority of a lawyer’s time is spent reading. Lawyers comb through documents, contracts, and the details of the law, analyzing how it does, or does not, apply to the situation at hand. These are incredibly time-consuming tasks for a human, yet a computer program could read through the same number of documents lawyers do in weeks in a matter of days, if not hours.

A Stanford University student created a robot lawyer called “DoNotPay” programmed to fight parking tickets in large cities in the UK and United States. It asks you several questions and, within minutes, a 500-word letter is written and sent to city officials. As of January 2017, it had

Reapers and Sowers:

Winners and Losers of Technological Innovation in Agriculture By: Rebecca Frost

The Green Revolution, the period of rapid advancement in fertilization, irrigation, and pest control technology that revolutionized the global agricultural system in the mid 20th century, was heralded as a force that would lift masses out of poverty and allow newly decolonized countries to build a strong economic backbone. While the Green Revolution has supported the recent human population boom to an extent that conventional methods could likely not have done, its benefits have not been equally felt by all. Namely, many small-scale farmers have not been able to reap some of the gains of the Revolution. The adverse effects felt by some farmers are not inherent to the development of agricultural innovations, but rather the result of the economic systems that support their implementation. As new agricultural technologies are looked to as a means to support the world’s population in an era of population growth and climate change, consideration of how the economic structures that support these developments impact small-scale producers will become increasingly important.

India has been the source of significant controversy over the effects of agricultural innovation. Assertions were made in the late 2000s by prominent figures such as Prince Charles and environmental activist Vandana Shiva that the introduction of genetically modified (GM) cotton seeds created by U.S. biotech giant Monsanto to Indian agricultural system was the direct cause of the alarmingly high rates of suicide seen among rural farmers. While the hyperbole of this claim has since largely been discredited, significant discrepancies between the benefits experienced by large and small-scale cotton producers using the seeds remain. Yields from GM cotton seeds tend to gener-

ate gains for large-scale farms that operate with irrigation pumps. Meanwhile, the costs of the seeds and the cost of the fertilizers they require often increase the debt burden of farmers who rely on rain to water their crops and cannot afford to install the irrigation pumps that would make the seeds more productive; this is a significant barrier to the 65% of cotton producers dependent on rain for irrigation.

Many larger farms also have access to public credit that smaller producers do not because they are seen as less risky by lenders. Since many small-scale farmers do not have access to public credit, they often take out loans to pay for seeds and fertilizer with private organizations that charge high rates of interest and use aggressive collection tactics. This is one of the many factors thought to be at work in the farmer suicide crisis in India. The results of a study released earlier this year by researchers at the University of California at Berkley found these rain-fed, smaller farms using the GM cotton seeds tend to have higher rates of farmer suicide than the larger pump-irrigated ones. The government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has promised to help remedy the problems facing small-scale farmers by completing rural irrigation projects that have been delayed for years, although the status on this initiative isn’t clear. Supporting these farmers is an important part of ensuring that innovations like these cotton seeds, which do genuinely increase yields and decrease the need for chemical pesticides, are able to benefit all farmers and not just large operations.

Guatemalan farmers have also experienced mixed results from the agricultural innovations of the past few decades. While the Green Revolution enabled per-capita maize consumption to remain constant despite population

growth, large and medium-scale farmers were mostly responsible for the growth, while small farms experienced their share of output decline. Furthermore, the Green Revolution fueled inequality. In the 1960s and 70s, drastic increases in fertilizer consumption favoured the country’s plantation elite and made the vestiges of the country’s colonial land distribution system even more apparent. This allowed export-oriented industries to grow rapidly and cut off expansion opportunities for small-scale maize farmers.

Access to credit has also played a role in exacerbating existing inequalities between farmers. During the 1970s, 85% of agricultural credit was given to sugar, coffee, and cotton; all mass-produced export crops. This lack of financial support made small-scale maize producers significantly more vulnerable to price shocks in the fertilizer market in the 1970s, leading to mass scale migration of farmers into cities. Land ownership in Guatemala remains dominated by a small percentage of the population and production has become more skewed towards large-scale export growers. Some local Catholic organizations and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) have given some small-scale farmers access to chemical fertilizers and new hybrid seeds, and these projects have generated significant increases in yields. Despite the success of these programs, most of these small-scale farmers do not yet have access to these technologies, and land ownership remains highly concentrated in the hands of a very small proportion of the population.

The adverse effects of advances in agricultural technology on small-scale farmers also appears in industrialized nations. The industrialization of the animal agriculture industry in the United States has had negative impacts on the health of some rural American communities. Many of the industrial technologies that have become available to livestock farmers since the mid 20th century must be utilized on a large scale in order to generate returns. Due to the high fixed costs of these technologies, farmers are no longer able to decrease production to compensate for falling prices. As a result, large-scale producers have emerged as dominant forces in the livestock supply chain.

These firms contract smaller farmers to “grow” animals for them. Farmers usually have little choice other than to enter

into these contracts, as these large firms own the processing facilities farmers need access to in order to sell their products. There is often only one processing facility within the geographic reach of many farmers, so competition is limited. The contracts these farmers enter into often require them to provide most of the capital needed for the venture. In some industries, such as hog production, contracts offer little stability in return for up-front investment.

Due to the diminishing number of small, independent producers, lowering prices and increasing production to run small farms out of the market when prices fall is becoming a less viable option for large producers. Instead, contracts can be cut off or the prices farmers receive per animal can be reduced to offset losses. If there is no other processer to sell their animals to in the area (which is frequently the case), farmers must either accept the lower price or exit the market. The economic situation around technological innovations in livestock production has created an unjust balance of economic power and has put farmers in precarious economic situations. This contract system also leaves the local economies out of the picture. This can be problematic for many communities as livestock farming used to be a critical piece of their economies that supported many other local industries. Impacts like these on individual farmers and their communities must be accounted for in policy decisions surrounding agricultural industrialization.

Innovations in food production can bring undoubtable benefits to society.

The world’s population is expected to continue growing for several decades to come and new technologies that increase crop yields and protect against food shortages caused by the effects of climate change will be essential. As agricultural technology advances, the potential for harm to farmers and their communities caused by the economic systems that support the dissemination of agricultural technologies must be taken into account by policy makers. Economic systems that deliberately seek to ensure that technological advancement benefits all producers, not just those with existing power and capital, must be implemented if the world is to properly support its farmers.

The Strange Ideology of Cryptocurrency By: Gavrilo Randjelovic

The prevailing wisdom in modern finance states that securities – such as stocks, bonds and options – tend to be priced efficiently. This means that their current price usually reflects all available information regarding the security, what it tangibly represents, and what its future value is projected to be. It is in the context of this theory, known as the ‘efficient market hypothesis’, that examining the recent explosion of investor interest in cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin becomes both incredibly interesting and extremely difficult. After all, there have been no sudden, ground-breaking revelations about the currencies’ capabilities that would precipitate such rapid growth.

Cryptocurrencies are a type of digital asset based on a blockchain, a form of global decentralized ledger.

The nature of the blockchain, which cannot be manipulated by a single entity, ensures that cryptocurrencies can be used to transfer value safely as well as anonymously.

Supporters highlight these properties, as well as cryptocurrencies’ convenience of use and scalability as key advantages to traditional currencies.

When breaking down cryptocurrency valuations in terms of such properties however, the high prices become even more perplexing. Current investment in cryptocurrencies is driven based on a belief in future ubiquity; the currencies’ use today would be far too limited to justify the valuations they receive. It goes then, that the value is derived from an expectation that the aforementioned advantages would propel cryptocurrencies to a much larger role as monetary units.

Such expectations are, however, naïve. The use of blockchain and blockchain-related systems is not limited to cryptocurrencies. Indeed, many major financial institutions are experimenting with blockchain for internal

transfer of information. There are also numerous financial technology firms examining ways to apply blockchains systems to transfer of traditional currency. Innovations in this space could provide consumers with the same benefits of convenience and safety pioneered by cryptocurrencies, while letting them sidestep the associated volatility.

Furthermore, absolute anonymity in financial transactions is not a desirable quality – without a traceability, currencies may be ripe for money laundering and illegal transactions. Bitcoin, the most prominent example, has for many become synonymous with online black markets. This has especially been the case following the success of ‘Silk Road’, a dark web drug marketplace taken down by the FBI in 2014.

Yet despite the potential real currency applications of blockchain being widely understood, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies continue to be popular as an investment option. Given that their long-term ease of use and security are likely to converge with that of traditional currencies, just one explanation can be offered: some investors believe cryptocurrencies are intrinsically superior to standard currency and will ostensibly become the ‘money’ of the future.

Modern currencies exist as fiat money, obtaining their value through the backing of the government issuing them. It is typically a nation’s central bank that oversees these issuance activities. Over the latter half of the 20th century, global central banks’ role in doing such grew immensely as economists’ understanding of how changes in the money supply affect macroeconomic trends expanded. The result has been a wide period of macroeconomic stabilization known as the “Great Moderation”, which began in the 1980s and continued until the 2008 financial

crisis. The crisis itself, though dire, was effectively mitigated by the actions of the United States’ central bank, the Federal Reserve.

Although central banks have had tangible benefits, such as preserving economic growth and price stability, they have fierce ideological opponents. Many of these come from the so-called Austrian school of economics, a widely discredited heterodox school of economic analysis.

The school is typically linked to extreme anti-government libertarian movements and its adherents are vociferous in their opposition to fiat currency. In the past, they have often latched onto gold as a necessary backing for currency, advocating for the gold standard years after the world’s nations abandoned it.

The advent of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies has propelled Austrian ideology into the modern age. The anonymity and decentralization they offer blend perfectly with the Austrian skepticism of government and central banking. They view the mathematically fixed stock of Bitcoin and its steady, predictable growth as far more desirable than the “inflation-ridden” fiat currency in use today.

The academic consensus, however, is that small inflationary pressures are ideal to encourage consumption and economic growth. Cryptocurrencies are usually stringently deflationary due to their fixed stock, which forces the value of one cryptocurrency unit to increase as productivity rises. Deflation is often viewed as one of the most difficult and dangerous issues for a modern economy to face, with many economic historians blaming the deflationary pressure of the gold standard for prolonging the great depression in the United States. Moreover, the inability of a governing authority to issue and withdraw cryptocurrency from circulation prevents them from expanding and contracting the monetary supply as needed, sharpening recessions and creating instability in the economy. Taking into consideration all available metrics and information, cryptocurrencies would be an incredibly poor choice for the currency of the future.

This is not to say that they should hold no value today. Until some of the features they have pioneered enter the mainstream, they may serve as a good vehicle for payments and storage of value. Certain cryptocurrencies such as Ethereum are designed to interact with protocols such as “smart contracts”, enabling the quicker and safer verification of contract-based payments. This is a potentially revolutionary innovation that may very well have a strong future of use with traditional currencies.

Yet these features can hardly justify the almost $150 billion market cap cryptocurrencies possess. Bitcoin in particular, containing over $70 billion of that sum, lacks many important innovations that have since become standard among newly issued cryptocurrencies. Indeed, it is apparent that a great deal of value held in these assets exists on account of a faulty economic ideology, predicated upon an irrational hatred of government authority. Based on widely agreed economic principles of the present, their long-term future is both unsustainable and undesirable for any use but transferring payments for illicit goods and services. Investors would do well to realize this sooner rather than later.

Where Will the Women Be in the Jobs of the Future?

Google and the Gender Gap in STEM By: Emily Robertson

Only 17 Women have been awarded a Nobel Prize in the categories of physics, chemistry or medicine since 1903 compared to over 500 men. Are men really smarter than women?

As our society becomes more technologically advanced, it is clear that many of the high paying jobs of the future will lie in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). While the job market is shifting, women are falling behind in both education and careers within these STEM fields. Global studies show that females represent only 35% of all students enrolled in STEM related fields, with even fewer women pursuing careers in STEM-related fields.

Recent claims of sexism and a gender pay gap at Google, a company with a supposedly progressive tech culture, demonstrate how in the 21st century women are still being systematically discouraged from entering technological careers and penalized if they get there. Addressing this issue now is important in order to provide sustainable policies that will promote the gender equality and universal education commitments that were adopted in the 2030 UN Development Goals.

At an international symposium and policy forum held in Thailand this summer, the United Nations Education, Scientific and Culture Organization (UNESCO) met with academics, policy-makers and teachers to discuss why there is a discrepancy within the STEM academic and employment fields. Not surprisingly, the conclusion from this forum was that the gender gap in the STEM fields is a direct result of socialization, particularly within the education system. It is within the education system that girls and woman learn much about their role in society and what society expects of them. For example, gender-related stereotypes held by teachers, parents and even their own classmates, can significantly undermine girls in their performance in math as well as shape girls’ attitudes about their own abilities and interests in fields related to science, technology and engineering.

The UNESCO policy forum argues that this gender gap in both STEM education and careers is a major concern from a variety of perspectives, including from human rights, science and development perspectives. From a human rights perspective, every person regardless of gender, should be given equal opportunities including the right to study and work in the field of their choice. From a scientific standpoint, the inclusion of women is beneficial for the future of science because it opens up the possibility for greater knowledge and solutions by allowing more diverse perspectives into the STEM fields. From a development perspective, the gender gap in STEM education and employment broadens the gender inequalities in status and income within greater society.

In August of this summer, Google Inc., the American multinational technology company, made headlines in the news cycle when one of their software engineers, James Damore, wrote in an internal memo to the company that he believed the reason for the low number of women in science and technology was explained by biological differences, not discrimination. Damore’s memo was meant to criticize the company’s attempts at encouraging

diversity and inclusion initiatives. He argued, “gender gaps [do not always] imply sexism” and therefore to “discriminate just to increase the representation of women in tech [would be] unfair, divisive and bad for business.”

The following day, Damore’s memo was leaked to the press. As a result, the chief executive of Google, Sundar Pichai, fired the engineer for perpetuating gender stereotypes. This begs the question, would Google have taken the same action had the memo not gone public? Nevertheless, Pichai firing Damore proved that the company is willing to take action against employees who are hostile towards women in the workplace. However, the memo has also reminded the public how Google, like many other technology firms, failed to effectively hire and promote women and minorities. The company’s most recent workforce representation data revealed that 69% of the company’s total workforce is male and 56% is white. In addition, it has also been scrutinized by the US Department of Labour for underpaying its female employees. Despite these statistics, it seems most alarming that Google’s diversity efforts, meagre as they are, still go above and beyond what most other technology firms have done.

“Global studies show that females represent only 35% of all students enrolled in STEM related fields, with even fewer women pursuing careers in STEM related fields.“

The Google anti-diversity memo reflects a divided tech culture and the continued existence of systemic beliefs that hinder women’s inclusion in STEM fields. The perpetuation of gender stereotypes in technology firms such as Google confirms to girls and women that they are not wanted nor deserve to be in these STEM fields. This story represents an underlying sexism within the tech industry that needs to be addressed. Although Google’s firing of Damore may represent how the hostility towards women in this field will be met with serious action, this occurred only after Damore’s memo went public. Furthermore, if gender bias and pay inequality is found at a supposedly progressive company like Google, who knows how widespread this misogynist culture may be?

Rather than rationalizing the gender gap in the tech industry like Damore attempted to do by pointing to supposed “biological differences,” it will be necessary for technology firms like Google to take the lead in overcoming obstacles to gender diversity in order to change not just the working environment, but how women see themselves and their abilities. This tidal shift needs to start in schools, amongst parents and most importantly, amongst the women of the next generation. If we do not take action now, where will the women be in the jobs of the future?

Innovation Meets Healthcare: The Cultivation of Digital Health Under President Obama By: Vruksha Vakeeswaran

There have been numerous technologies that have emerged in the field of healthcare, and the recent surge can be largely attributed to the global political climate. The US government’s movement towards repealing Obamacare calls for further innovation in this field now more than ever.

Obamacare, more formally known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, was a legislative piece passed in March 2010 by the Obama administration. Its sole purpose was to make healthcare universal, and offer health insurance to those who were previously unable to afford it. In order to ensure that everyone was insured, an end of year fine was instated for those who did not purchase the inexpensive health insurance.

In addition, under the Obama administration, digital health moved forward tremendously. President Obama was able to increase the number of hospitals that adopted an electronic health record (EHR) system from approximately 10% to 95%. His healthcare policies fostered an era of healthcare IT entrepreneurs. Since the establishment of Obamacare, 90 new healthcare companies have been created and venture capital funding for these firms went from 1 billion dollars in 2010 to 6 billion dollars in 2015. In doing

so, President Obama was able to cultivate an ecosystem in which the use of machine learning and augmented reality have been used to help the healthcare system flourish.

One of the technologies that has emerged in enabling healthcare is machine learning. Machine learning uses a set of data to predict algorithms and trends which are heavily important to healthcare. This is because biological data is collected in order to help doctors in the diagnosis and treatment of a variety of new and old diseases.

Machine learning has greatly impacted the insurance industry as the use of it has allowed companies to underwrite their insurance premiums. For example, Oscar Health, a New-York based insurance company, offers individual health plans while prioritizing the user experience.

In June 2017, Oscar Health announced that they were expanding their business to five new states due to the Affordable Care Act, through which they were able to sell insurance on and off exchanges. By doing so, the use of machine learning combined with relaxed market regulations created an environment amongst insurance companies to provide competitive rates and coverage to all Americans.

Another technology that has gained significant

traction in healthcare innovation is augmented reality.

Augmented reality is the integration of computer generated images with the user’s view of the real world. Pear Therapeutics is an American company that received the Food and Drug Administration’s approval to use this technology to deliver digital therapies for schizophrenia, post-traumatic stress disorder, and opiate disorders to its users in the form of a mobile app. Further applications of augmented reality include surgeons being capable of peering inside the human body prior to making incisions. This has proven extremely beneficial in cases of neurosurgical and spinal procedures which are of extreme difficulty and require maximal accuracy. In other cases, it has also aided in medical education as it allows for students to more accurately see the human body to gain a better understanding of internal organs.

It is clear that President Obama was an integral part of fostering significant advancements in the digital health space.

By doing so, the world has reaped countless benefits in the form of new healthcare IT start-ups, new technology for medical procedures, and many more. In contrast, the Trump presidency repeals the American Care Act which

poses a threat to healthcare IT. The direct impact is one that forces handover of personal data to various institutions instead of voluntarily to organizations created under Obama’s legislation. It is acts like these which intimidate Americans’ belief in the administration and promotion of healthcare but also blocks the advancements made by the Obama administration. Organizations that President Obama funded include initiatives like the Precision Medicine Initiative and the Cancer Moonshot, which were initiated by President Obama to use artificial intelligence, particularly, machine learning to collect the largest biological dataset that can be used for research. Although the new onset of artificial intelligence and augmented reality carries its risks, the future of health care is heavily dependent on the continued growth of it in order to make healthcare more efficient and more accessible to the world as a whole.

Technology at the Top of the World By: Josh Finkelstein

Canada’s current defence policy, released this past June, outlines three major trends in global security. Strong, Secure, Engaged, as the document is titled, lists “the evolving balance of power, the changing nature of conflict, and the rapid evolution of technology” as the core issues concerning the country’s military planners. As a key issue affected by these themes, the plan highlights the conflicting and cooperative interests between different countries over the partly frozen land lying above 60° latitude, known in most of these countries as the Arctic.

The policy states: “Climate change, combined with advancements in technology, is leading to an increasingly accessible Arctic.” It further mentions that the growth expected in commerce, research and tourism that will result from easier access to Canada’s North will be matched with an increased need for organized security in the region.

This, without directly stating as such, is declaring a reinvigoration of arctic sovereignty efforts as a direct need of current technological advancements.

The relevance of a defensive presence in the Arctic began in earnest during the Cold War. With the threat of armed conflict not localized in Europe, due to advancements in weapons and radar technology, the territory of NATO members either side of the Atlantic were believed to be at risk. The sheer size of the region, and potential for covert operations aided by the sparsity of population throughout, fuelled a fear of Soviet infiltration, and con-

certed efforts to increase the presence of Canadian military institutions. Airbases had been established in the Eastern Arctic as transport facilities during the Second World War, but their construction in larger settlements, along with the addition of measures like the DEW line, were a project of the second half of the century.

The new policy acknowledges the technological deficit of the defence systems currently in operation from decades ago, and reconciles it with proposals of widespread modernization. This includes aerial radar-based improvements, and various forms of new, powerful vehicles fit for Arctic ice and sea.

Sovereignty interests- a chief concern of Strong, Secure, Engaged- are not entirely for the sake of defense.

The geographic location and natural resources beneath the ground, sea and ice pose a massive economic opportunity for Canada.

One major aspect of the government’s plan to increase physical presence in unpopulated areas, and ensure sovereignty, is to make the Arctic a hub of scientific research. In the works are is a plan to build the Canadian High Arctic Research Centre, even issuing an act for its completion in 2015. The stated goal is “advancing Canada’s knowledge of the Arctic and strengthening Canadian leadership in polar science and technology.”

Additionally, with access to three oceans, the country’s northern territory was touted as what could be consid-

ered a natural Panama Canal, connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Long an unattainable fantasy of European explorers, crossing the “Northwest Passage” captured the imagination and unchecked ambition of those hoping for a quick route between Europe and Asia. Since the first successful voyage, by the American icebreaker SS Manhattan in 1969, transit has been known to be possible, but not in every case economically viable, due to the slow, high-cost nature of icebreaking.

This is no longer the case, however. First noted in 2007, climate change has led to sufficient ice melt for a boat to cross, without an icebreaker on the bow. This presents tremendous opportunity for Canada, but also increases the need to assert and defend control over the area.

Just this summer, a Chinese ship was caught trying to cross West-to-East through between Canadian islands, without proper allowance.

Chinese interests, and those of countries with lesser or no claims to the Arctic are likely also driven by a new, hightech opportunity- oil. Reserves had long been suspected in the Beaufort Sea and Arctic Ocean, with the melting ice pack making it appear ever more feasible to create a new energy extraction hub.

Despite this, a moratorium on new drilling was issued in 2016, with justifications from both the Canadian and American governments focusing on the potential environmental impacts. Negative feedback loops of ecological damage certainly pose an issue, with increased activity in the region, because of a warming climate, further contributing to the warming. Moreover, research in the area has expressed concern that oil extraction in the area may not actually be an economically productive activity, based mostly on the high initial costs. This may have also played into the government’s decision, whereby an economic decision could be well-received through an environmental lens.

What is very often overlooked in discussions of sovereignty and Arctic policy, as this article has done up to now, is consideration for the more than 100 000 residents of the three Territories in the Arctic (in addition to around 15 000 in Labrador and Northern Quebec). Particularly for

the large Inuit and First Nations populations (most concentrated in Nunavut and Northwest Territories, respectively), the lack of autonomy in decision-making is a tremendous issue.

This includes on ending drilling in the Arctic. Both Peter Taptuna and Bob McLeod, the leaders of Nunavut and Northwest Territories, have expressed their personal disappointment with the decision. More than just the severing a possible economic pipeline, the two premiers were disappointed with the lack of consultation with Ottawa. It appeared, they mentioned, that all progress towards devolution- “providing Northerners with more control over their own economic and political destiny”, as described by Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada- had been halted.

Devolution should be at the core of all policies concerning Arctic sovereignty and development. The environmental, economic and security concerns that the country has in the North are amplified for those who call it home, much as many of their ancestors have done for thousands of years. Climate research and market analyses are certainly beneficial for developing relevant policies, but an aspect that must not be overlooked is the opinions of those most affected by the decision. Otherwise, Canada’s activity in the Arctic will continue to be no better than that of the explorers who sought to colonize the area, with no consideration for those who lived there.

Stories tell of how on John Franklin’s doomed voyage to reach the Pacific through the Arctic, his icebound Erebus, and its surviving crew, could have been saved by using Inuit technology and mapping, as opposed to trekking southbound to find solid land. Today, Canada seems to be presented with a similar issue. The value of innovative technology to the North can not be overstated, both in environmental and commercial fields.

Instead of suffering a fate similar to English explorers of previous centuries, these advances should be leveraged to positive effect- not determined by those without proper understanding of the area, but instead by the people living in, and surviving on all that the Arctic provides.

Nuclear North Korea By: Stephanie Repic

The role of technology in our world has increased unbelievably in the last 50 years – not only in individual social networks with the creation of smart phones and social media but with world politics and how warfare is carried out. The shift from typical modern warfare technologies – such as tanks, troops, and aircrafts – have set the standard for national security around the globe and the 21st century has amplified warfare with nuclear and cyber components. These technological developments have become super powers for world leaders used to motivate citizens and military officials to develop bigger, better, and smarter technologies for defence with incentives, praise, and prestige. In 2017, North Korea carried out dozens of successful missile tests - well on their way to surpassing their fourteen successful launches from last year.

North Korea has been effectively displaying their nuclear capabilities throughout the past couple of months, including that their missiles can reach Guam and potentially the United States. Tension between North Korea and the United States have been prevalent as early as 2002 when George Bush deemed North Korea (as well as Iran and Iraq) an “axis of evil,” and that “by seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger”.

Building nuclear technology in North Korea comes with great esteem from the North Korean government and general population. Scientists working on these high-profile government tasks have the most prestigious jobs in the country. There has been a significant shift in national security agendas; previously it was most important for politics to be interconnected with military, now there is the shift to interconnecting politics and technological progression. The advancement of technology, and most importantly nuclear technology, is projected and advertised to better the economy and political standing of North Korea. This type of propaganda has been systemically fed to the civilians which builds a union across the country. People gather in the streets to witness launches, and parades and celebrations are thrown in the streets to honour success and the scientists behind it all.

North Korea continues to display their nuclear capabilities and capacity to hit as far as the United States, threatening heavily populated metropolitan areas like Boston and New York City. Accomplishing such through their use of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and hydrogen bombs.

North Korea has been systemically underrated for many years due to the perceptions that are portrayed to people in popular media. On countless websites, popular television shows, and news media, North Korea’s leader has been described and spoken about as “cartoonish.” This viewpoint skews and makes light of a powerful and dangerous leader who continues to send shockwaves across the world with his nuclear tests and missiles. The window has passed where world powers and leaders take Kim Jong Un seriously and efficiently deter the development of nuclear weapons.

North Korea has repeatedly ignored the UN’s preventions and so-called efforts to halt nuclear tests. Each time North Korea is slapped on the hand by the UN they

have returned with bigger tests and bigger missiles. This forces other world powers to accept the fate that there is no longer time or any sanction that can stop or match North Korea’s attempts. Attempts have dated back to early 2000s and North Korea is closer than ever to perfecting their nuclear missiles. The world typically looks to countries like the United States, South Korea, and Japan in relation to North Korea and deterrence. However, it does not look like any of them will be the country to mitigate these decisions going forward - U.S. President Donald Trump continues to taunt and mock North Korea via Twitter and outrageous statements.

This leads one to question which country will be the one to “talk down” North Korea, so to speak. North Korea will never denuclearize – that is off the table completely as they are far too obsessed with finding the perfect missile formula. Sanctions do not resonate with North Korea either, but that is not to say that sanctions are obsolete.

They are still very important and embody a unity between countries to condemn others when they have gone too far.

With this all outlined, Russia is a prime candidate to get involved. It is a global and nuclear power, permanent member of the UN security council, and has a vested interest in North Korea’s nuclear capabilities. Close in proximity to North Korea, Russia fears contamination if something were to malfunction in a missile test, giving them motivation to attempt nuclear de-escalation of North Korea.

Suggesting new economic venues and neutralizing global tensions with North Korea are the only possible next steps if North Korea can even be approached by Russia in the next while.

The global implications of North Korea’s nuclear technology, and threats to the United States pose great problems for the US and their economy – which then poses problems for the rest of the world as the United States is so integrated into the global economy. Tensions are intensifying between North Korea and the US - if a real attack were to be carried out, it would have a huge effect on things like global supply chains, and US debt levels could rise as result of conflict.

“The global implications of North Korea’s nuclear technology, and threats to the United States pose great problems for the US and their economy – which then poses problems for the rest of the world as the United States is so integrated into the global economy.”

Cyberspace: The Next Frontier By: Joshua Lim

The Information Age has arrived; technology is becoming more and more entwined with our daily lives and society – hundreds of millions of tweets, Facebook posts, and Instagram uploads are posted per day. A veritable Niagara Falls of data and information, every minute, every hour of every day, all across the world, without pause.

When taken over the span of a year, these simple statistics make for a very interesting reading indeed.

These developments have certainly brought great benefit. The digitisation of people’s lives and data has brought the world closer together than ever before in history. Whole careers have been propelled to dizzying heights, some almost solely by the power of the internet and social media. The whole character of the global economy has changed – companies and enterprises across the world have prospered and wilted as they venture into this new frontier with varying degrees of success.

Vast reserves of information lie at the fingertips of anyone with an internet connection, of which there are very many – over 3.2 billion as of 2015, according to the United Nations, a figure that has almost certainly increased in the years since.

The world of cyberspace is indeed a new frontier; rich in data, information, and promises of opportunity. But,

just like the frontiers of old, it is by no means safe.

Judge for yourself. Think about some of the biggest headlines over the past year – Equifax, Wannacry, Anonymous, hacktivism, and national elections. Notice anything?

Consider this year’s Equifax data breach, one of the major credit reporting agencies, and target of possibly the largest and most severe incident of its kind in history.

A hacker’s exploitation of some outdated software, along with ineffective security practices, turned the personal information of over 145 million US consumers - in addition to several thousand Canadian residents - into a buffet; with names, birth dates, addresses, social security numbers, and more up for grabs on the menu.

The main breach took place in mid-May. It was not detected by Equifax until late July – several weeks on – and only made public in September, almost four months after the attack occurred. Even now, in October, the full extent of the breach and its consequences are still being investigated.

More troubling are the implications, for both now and the future. Because the security apparatus of a major organisation – not just some small business down the street – was penetrated, it’s very future now hangs in the balance despite all efforts to mitigate the damage, to say

nothing of its customers. We have not even considered yet the fact that Equifax needed at least two months to detect the threat, much less respond to it, effectively meaning that the perpetrators had at least two months to make origami out of the sensitive information they had broken into.

Without getting into how the identities of nearly 146 million victims have effectively been stolen and what this means for them, the effect on Equifax itself has been staggering. Their stocks tumbled with the announcement of the breach in September, and many of their key figures – including their own CEO – have been replaced and ordered to publicly explain themselves. Already the company faces a growing line of lawsuits, some of which are demanding very large sums indeed.

More recently, Juniper Research predicted that the total cost of data breaches alone will rise to 2.1 trillion dollars by 2019. By comparison, the current GDP of Canada is approximately $1.6 trillion, according to the IMF. The Equifax breach is clear evidence that these figures are by no means far-fetched, and is a grim reminder of the very real dangers in the world of cyberspace.

This is far from an isolated incident – the Wannacry ransomware attacks struck computers in every corner of the world, from governments and corporations to ordinary individuals, remotely locking them down and demanding

money. The 2012 LinkedIn breach exposed the passwords of millions of its users to cybercriminals. These are only a few of numerous accounts.

A more frightening aspect is these are only the incidents we are aware of. According to some experts, a very considerable proportion of cyberattacks are simply not detected, quietly bypassing all security measures.

So, what does this all mean? This question is simple. Cyberspace has tremendous potential as a weapon, one whose power has not been fully understood but is nonetheless pursued, perhaps reasonably, by many people and organisations all over the world for their own ends.

For example, it is very possible weaponised cyberattacks will add a new dimension to any future war, whose terrifying power may never be truly known until it is used as such, perhaps in a similar way to how the atomic bomb changed the face of warfare forever during the 1940s.

The scale of these developments should be a wake-up call. They have already demonstrated their power to change the very ebb and flow of history, with no sign of ever slowing down.

Someone I know likened cyberspace to fire; it’s warm and nice to have, but one must also respect its inherent dangers. The cyberspace frontier may be a big place – but, no matter what happens, you will not be missed.

Tablets in Africa: a Solution to Illiteracy or a Virtual Band-Aid? By: Kristen Johnson

On September 8th, the International Literacy Day Conference was held in Paris. Over two hundred world leaders, not-for-profit organizations, and members of the United Nations Educational, Science and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) congregated to discuss issues in global literacy. Their main focus, as made clear by the title of the conference, was “Literacy in a Digital World”. Discussed were methods for not only bridging the global literacy gap, but ensuring developing countries were well-equipped to access and maneuver through the digital world.

By UNESCO statistics, seven hundred and fifty million people are illiterate worldwide, with sixty three percent of those people being women. Central African Republic has the highest rate (67%) of youth illiteracy followed by Guinea and Niger at ~76%. The countries with the highest rate of adult illiteracy (fifteen years and older) are South Sudan (27% literate), Guinea (25%) and Niger (15%). Young women (15-24 years of age) account for 59% of the world’s total illiterate youth, with female youth literacy being as low as only 15% in Niger.

Global illiteracy in general has been reduced from 170 million to 115 million in the past two decades, but regional disparities are still present, with “least developed countries” averaging rates of only 73%. Naturally, both adult and youth literacy rates are highly correlated with the strength of a country’s educational system. As such, efforts

being concentrated to mend these gaps focus on national education systems and factors that hinder participation and access to quality education.

In many developing countries, education tends to be unequally distributed between rural and urban areas. In Kenya, schools in rural or low-income areas typically have only the most basic amenities such as chalkboards, desks, and a limited supply of worn-out textbooks. While more and more students are coming to these schools to receive an education, the quality of education they receive is lower than that of both students in developed countries, and their peers in urban areas. As well, these schools tend to focus only on traditional subjects, which although important and necessary, do not fully prepare students for the ever-increasing technological world.

Digital literacy is, according to UNESCO, the “ability to understand, engage and critically use e-services that are today replacing basic off-line services”. When an individual, or a country, lacks expertise with technology, they may become more dependent on other actors to provide the daily services that they could themselves accomplish with education in the area. When a country’s population is educated in technology, there are more opportunities for internal growth and development, and less dependency on outside sources to provide necessary services that are technologically based.

Digital literacy is not solely taught through computer the issues. Without proper quantities of teachers and propscience classes. Many children gain familiarity with vari- er infrastructure, even virtual classrooms will not be able ous gadgets and tools through simple exposure and in- to deal with the increasing influx of students attending teractions. As such, many social science researchers and schools. Over-capacity classrooms and decreasing teacher non-government organizations (NGO’s) believe that sim- support creates an environment where it can be difficult for ply increasing the amount of technology available to stu- students to receive the necessary guidance. Virtual classdents could help bridge the digital literacy gap rooms may be able to solve this through online teacher/

Beyond being a fundamental aspect of the modern peer support, but such solutions are not as flexible as on economy, modern technological innovations are playing a the ground support staff of teachers and learning staff. crucial role in advancing classical aspects of education. A Greater increases to technology across the world must 2011 joint study by MIT and Harvard University concluded be accompanied by greater efforts to eliminate the techthat technologically conducted instruction, such as com- nology and education gap between developed and develputer or mobile phone-instructed learning, enhanced stu- oping countries. Closing this gap has become a universal dent learning in rural or low-income areas. This conclusion priority, and rightly so, but non-technological considerhas been backed up by the success that charities like “One ations must be taken into account. Basic education must Laptop Per Child” have experienced in lessening the nega- remain a priority in developing countries, and in develtive impacts of poverty and isooped countries as well. Human conlation on educational capacity. tact and proper infrastructure are still Virtual classrooms, lessons needed in education and cannot be taught almost entirely through virtually deleted in a real world. online learning modules, not “Beyond being a fundamental only familiarize children with technology like tablets and lap- aspect of the modern economy, tops; they can correct for a lack of paper textbook or available modern technological innovations teaching staff with pdfs or vidare playing a crucial role in eos that simply require downadvancing classical aspects loading once to be accessed of education. “ forever. The apparent success of these studies has prompted NGO’s to focus on providing technology to developing countries. In Kenya, the government has even revamped its curriculum and reallocated its funding to focus on creating an electronic based curriculum, and providing digital access to all its students.

The inevitable skills these children will learn from digital classrooms are likely to assist in their countries’ development, improving the average education and skills of their workforce. Through having a workforce that is digitally literate, more local programs and businesses can be internally established, leading to an increase in jobs and improvement in standards of living.

In Kenya, especially rural and low-income areas, basic school infrastructure such as multi-room buildings and teachers are still underfunded, however. The government, instead of allocating funding to solve these fundamental holes, has established a new program focused on supplying technological aids. While this initiative does assist in decreasing the countries dependency on NGO’s, the prioritization of digital aids over fundamental necessities may not be a long run solution.

It cannot be denied that technical and digital literacy are crucial to every child’s education, but should it be prioritized before basic education? Supplying digital aids to schools in developing countries is a solution to the problem of lack of available digital technology, but there are additional obstacles to education in developing countries.

While digital literacy is, and will continue to be vital to development, entirely virtual classrooms may not solve all

Refugee Aid, One Click Away By: Sinead O’Hara

In the smartphone-centric world we live in, smartphones are an exemplary tool to help in a crisis. A smartphone is an incredible resource that is readily available.

By using apps, aid organizations can maximize the way they deliver aid and what provisions they offer. One study showed that 85% of Syrian refugees have smartphones, and many rely on communication apps to find their route to safety. In today’s world, people are more likely to have a smartphone than access to proper sanitation or clean water. Our world is dominated by technology, however in terms of aid relief, we are not using technology to its full potential. Organizations must keep up with technology and its prevalence in order to offer the most effective aid.

The Refugee AID App (RefAid), is the revolutionary app used by both organizations and refugees. It helps connect refugees to resources like food, health services, legal aid, and many other services by using location technology and user information. RefAid was created in the past year and is now a major aspect of assisting refugees. It helps them to find their route, offers assistance along the way, and provides help with their integration once they have reached safety. Created by Shelley Taylor and launched in February of 2016, the app has partnered with 400 aid organizations across the world, notably organizations such as the Red Cross, Save the Children, and Doctors of the World. It is now available in 14 countries, including Greece, Italy, France, Germany, and the United States.

RefAid is not the only refugee aid app that exists.

There are many others such as Refugermany, Where2help, and InfoAid. A simple search in Apple’s app store of “refugee aid” produces multiple search results. Most of these apps are on a smaller scale and are much more localized than RefAid. They are based mostly in Europe, usually a first stop for refugees. These local apps provide refugees with information such as border crossings, transport departures, residency regulations, job openings in host coun-

tries, and learning host languages. The popularity of these apps are gaining traction and the demand for apps on a local scale will only increase. Assisting in the migration, then integration of refugees is crucial. It can provide refugees with a sense of community, support, and the ease of convenience after their often traumatic journey.

Refugee aid apps will also provide refugees with a platform. Refugees are often denied the right to speak of their experiences, and they may feel silenced. After all the hardship refugees experience, they deserve for their voice to be heard. Providing them with a way to share their stories and a support network will be key to their healing.

The logic behind refugee aid apps has the potential to revolutionize aid. It could change the way we view aid, as well as how we provide it. In the midst of crisis, it is very hard for organizations to gain accurate information to provide help. Much of aid is given without proper consultation to the recipients, this can result in giving food insufficiently and not taking into account cultural differences. The aid being provided, although well intended, may not translate. Integrating technology, specifically smartphones, into crisis response would result in a direct communication line from refugees to organizations. Aid agencies should better understand the refugee experience and the diversity that comes with it.

While these apps may seem to be a game-changer for the aid industry, specifically in the current refugee crisis, there are pitfalls. They may expose people as being refugees, which may be a serious danger throughout their travel and while in their host country due to local hostilities surrounding refugees. The apps need to assure users a level of anonymity. RefAid attempts to protect refugees’ identities by only requiring an email address and no other personal information. This may suffice, so long as the app doesn’t fall victim to hacking. Hacking is one of society’s major issues, so creating firewalls to protect refugee aid

apps must be a priority. Another problem is aid organizations, more specifically, the lack of regulations and lenient criteria needed to set up one. Posing as an aid organization, predators may use the app to target the vulnerable.

Shelley Taylor, RefAid creator, stated that they want to be sure that no one can use the platform for malicious purposes such as trafficking women or children, so they are very strict about who can use it. For the smaller apps, however, this could be a real issue. If they don’t have the means to control who offers assistance, it could quite easily become a network for targeting already vulnerable refugees.

Another problem with refugee aid apps are the expenses.

“Although the downsides are heavy, they do not dispute or negate the value apps bring to refugees. “

Aside from the price of a smartphone, the price to maintain the apps is high. Although the apps reduce costs and increase efficiency of aid organizations, it is the app that picks up the bill. Development cost is low, often with “Hackathons” creating apps free of charge. A German startup, Memorando, had a hackathon with the goal to “Make 4 apps in 4 teams in 4 days that help refugees in their daily life.” The problem is keeping the apps running

smoothly, as the current solution to this is finding donors.

Maintaining the apps shouldn’t only fall on the developers, aid organizations could contribute financially or raise awareness for potential sponsors. Unfortunately, financing aid will always be problematic. Apps experience this problem frequently since they are more of a middleman between organizations and recipients.

Although the downsides are heavy, they do not dispute or negate the value apps bring to refugees. These apps can assist refugees in a variety of ways that were previously impossible. The term refugee has become politically charged, and these apps may help mend the “us” and “them” mentality that plagues so many. The apps offer the opportunity to connect refugees with people in host countries to speed the immigration process, and make for a successful integration. The use of apps in aid, specifically refugee aid, is an innovative new strategy for crisis response.

It provides refugees with support throughout their journey, support that is crucial to creating successful migration stories.

“The use of apps in aid, specifically refugee aid, is an innovative new strategy for crisis response. “

How Twitter Is Changing the Political Landscape By: Sean Stead-Fescer

Twitter has become one of the primary forms of new media. It is a quick and easy way to give out essential information in 140 characters. Many politicians, most notably President Donald Trump, use Twitter to push their political agendas and to express their ideas. While this can be a useful tool to directly engage with your audience, it comes with many complications as well.

While Twitter provides a medium for everyone to express their thoughts on a political situation, effectively democratizing the political conversation, there have been critiques of it as a platform. Kerric Harvey, author of the Encyclopedia of Social Media and Politics argues of Twitter “Both the technology itself, and the way we choose to use the technology, makes it so that what ought to be a conversation is just a set of Post-it notes that are scattered”. She goes on to say that what we do on Twitter around politics isn’t a conversation at all; it’s a loud mess. Obviously, this makes it difficult to follow or engage in a political discourse when a user on Twitter has trouble reading and connecting several scattered Tweets about different subjects.

Twitter is also known for their 140, now turned 280-character limit per post. While they have made new features such as quoting a Tweet, creating a poll and being able to post 4 pictures at a time, 280 characters is still short.

This makes it difficult to talk about complex political situations that require extensive detail to be discussed.

Twitter is being used more and more by political figures and as a way to for the public talk about political situations. Twitter as a medium played a significant role in the 2016 American presidential election. Many presidential candidates took to Twitter to advertise and give updates about their campaign. There was also some Twitter “beef”, or conflict, among candidates. Donald Trump Tweeted “Obama just endorsed Crooked Hillary. He wants four more years of Obama – but nobody else does!” to which Hilary Clinton famously replied, “Delete your account.”.

While this is entertaining content, this type of Tweeting was one of the problems of Twitter surrounding the election campaign. It creates a political conversation that is made up of gossip instead of actual political content.

Much of the news on social media surrounding the election were scandals about the candidates. Data tracking trending topics and themes on social media networks over the course of the campaign show that for the most part, America was least concerned with policy than with any other topic. A social media analytics company called Talkwalker found that the top three political themes found across social media platforms in 2016 were Trump’s comments about women, Clinton’s ongoing email scandal, and Trump’s refusal to release his tax returns.

What is said on Twitter has also often become topics on mainstream news. A journalist’s story could cover Tweets made by a politician. To give an example, President Trump released the news via Twitter that his government is going to reinstate a ban on transgender individuals from serving “in any capacity” in the US armed forces. Not releasing this news to the press allows Trump to develop his own narrative. He has called out many media sources as “Fake News”. Therefore Trump has taken to release news himself effectively cutting out the middle-man so that information comes directly from him. The problem being, Tweets are not fact-checked so users could be getting false and biased information.

One of the reasons Trump’s Tweets become news is because they are often so outlandish. Trump has dominated the press for being extremely controversial in what he says and how he acts. For example, he recently retweeted an edited video of himself hitting a golf ball into Hillary Clinton’s back. Many have called him childish and disrespectful, but he still continues to receive considerable media attention. Trump thrives off of his press and gaining attention, and Twitter gives him the platform to say anything he wants which is how he has dominated the media.

Another problem with Twitter and engaging in political discourse is that generally, people will follow others who share similar views to them. They will only see and engage with people with whom they already agree. To have a healthy political discussion, one must be exposed to ranging views on a political topic. But, Twitter has implemented their “Moments” feature where they show tweets of varying opinions on popular news items of the day. This does help to counteract only seeing certain media that agrees with your own opinion.

Although Twitter has its numerous faults when it comes to creating political discussion, one of the advantages of Twitter is that it does give everyone a voice. Everyone is given a platform to express their views and they can engage directly with politicians to discuss their comments and concerns, unlike ever before.

Overall however, Twitter does make it difficult to maintain a political conversation. The short and scattered tweets make it hard to follow a narrative. With the evidence of the 2016 election, Twitter spread more information about political scandals that it did policy. Certain political figures like Donald Trump abuse the app to center the media attention around him, saying whatever he pleases.

While Twitter does democratize having a political conversation, it still has far to go to perfect it.

Journalism’s Future: Doomed to the Digital Graveyard?

By: Gillian Moir

It’s been repeated countless times before: journalism is dying.

Of late, the claim has been repeated most often by officials within the Trump administration, and incessantly by the president himself. While the legitimacy of other claims from the president’s office are frequently challenged, this statement may be, unfortunately, not entirely wrong.

Unlike Mr. Trump’s accusations, however, print news outlets are not hampered by a fundamental aversion to honesty. Instead, their struggles are based on a current inability to adapt to the internet era. And similarly, in contrast to the president’s eulogy for the craft, journalism may have a very optimistic future.

For many, the moment that most signalled the start of the decline was the global financial crisis of 2009. In January of that year, Time Inc., publisher of the iconic political weekly, was bailed out from bankruptcy by the Mexican Billionaire, Carlos Slim.

Certainly, the financial crisis did devastate the company’s revenue. However, the economic turmoil near the end of the decade was simply the final blow. Between 2005 and 2010, the Times had already lost $600 million in print revenue, their digital revenue in that same period was just $100 million. Time was falling behind in the new digital era.

This internet-caused decline was not unique amongst traditional media outlets, though. In fact, the Pew Research Center estimates that the total industry revenue

is only two thirds of what it was a decade ago.

The proliferation of the web challenges these outlets for three main reasons. Firstly, internet sources have become direct competitors in providing news. Today, people have access to virtually all information known to mankind. While local papers used to be the only source for any type of news, anything, apart for in some cases local stories, can be found online. As a result, subscribers who were once motivated to pay for sections covering everything from international affairs to advice columns or cars, are now unwilling to pay for this content when they can find specialized publications online, to cover everything that was found in traditional print.

“Compared to print, digital advertising carries far less value, due in part to how people interact with advertisements online.”

In the transition to the internet, this creates a key problem for advertising revenue. Compared to print, digital advertising carries far less value, due in part to how people interact with advertisements online. Attention spans on a phone or a computer are far shorter than with a newspaper. This, naturally, makes advertisers less willing to invest heavily in marketing a product on a modern news site, as

they would have done in a paper.

Moreover, current data shows that consumers are more likely to “stumble upon” news articles on social media feeds, than to seek them out from their original source.

Knowing this, companies prefer to advertise on pages like Twitter, Facebook and Google, where traffic is heavier than on The New York Time’s or The Atlantic’s sites.

Even media companies that have erected paywalls (providing content only for paid subscribers, like newspapers) still struggle to survive. Modern news companies are finding it difficult to create enough value to convince subscribers to pay for their stories.

This may be more rooted in a modern perception that journalism should be free. In the early days of the internet, most news companies didn’t charge for access to their website. This set a precedent for the public, who now believe that given its importance for democratic accountability, journalism should be a right. The free-to-access structure of internet certainly also contributes to this sentiment.

People are used to browsing the internet with few barriers and have little interest in remaining one source’s page, given the ease of switching to another one.

In general, consumers still only have the finances to pay for one or two digital subscriptions, as they would have with traditional newspapers. Most journalism companies do not offer enough services or enough of a specialized area of interest to be valuable to consumers. When the information is general or easily sourced elsewhere, it is difficult to convince consumers that any company deserves their time and money.

“Despite these challenges, some experts are optimistic that there is beginning positive change in the industry. “

Despite these challenges, some experts are optimistic that there is beginning positive change in the industry. Reuters’ Nic Newman states in his company’s data report on the industry’s finances that 2017 could be the beginning of a large turnaround. “Some of the content and the innovation we are seeing coming from some of our partners are extremely impressive”, he said.

One example of this innovation is the formation of newnews sources entirely. Outlets like Buzzfeed are emerging with business models and advertising strategies that are sustainable in the modern world. As an established giant of youth culture, they attract loyal viewers to their political content, and sustain readership of their journalism with their broad accessibility. More importantly, Buzzfeed is now a site internet-scrollers directly seek out (as opposed to “stumbling upon”), and spend copious amounts of time visiting. This has made their monetize-through-advertising strategy profitable enough to be sustainable.

Traditional media companies are also now imple-

menting new business models. The New York Times are currently creating a Netflix-like platform that offers a variety of services, beyond news reporting, that consumers appreciate greatly. Currently, they’re investing in podcasts, virtual reality documentaries on popular news stories, and platforms like Google Home or Amazon’s Alexa.

Another model proving successful is used by outlets attempting to appeal to small, niche audiences, that are willing to pay for highly specialized content. An example is the Canadian source, BlackLock’s Reporter, which focuses on the incremental progress of Canadian bills in the Houses. Their audience is small, but readers typically have vested interests in the content, and are therefore willing to pay.

The Washington Post is attempting a very different approach, looking to appeal to as many niches as possible, but in an innovative new way. They’re investing in an AI-powered bot called Heliograf, that can cover a range of data-heavy topics. Heliograf allows The Post to report on a vast range of smaller topics and attract many niche audiences, at little additional cost. For example, Heliograf is currently writing stories on congressional elections in Iowa. This topic is not likely to draw great readership, but because of the inexpensive reporting process, immense amounts of content can be generated, to cover any topic one may care to read. USA Today is doing something similar, but with Wibitz- its own AI video software, used to draw viewers interested in many different topics to its page.

After a tumultuous decade, the story of journalism is more optimistic and renewed. This process was not quick, and involved much loss and evolution throughout, but the industry looks to finally be catching up with the digital revolution that once threatened its defeat. The world will be better off for it.

ICT Role in East African Elections: The Good, the Bad, and the Violent By: Pam Simpson

Recent studies have been conducted analyzing the impact of information communication technology (ICT) on elections, and have a new focus in Africa.

In February 2016 Uganda conducted national elections resulting in the re-appointment of Yoweri Museveni as the President of Uganda, who has held presidential power since 1986. The elections were said to be corrupt, featuring a media blackout during the election and on the day Museveni was sworn into power. The electoral campaign, however, was much more hopeful. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) such as Great Lakes Institute for Strategic Studies (GLiSS), African Centre for Media Excellence (ACME), and the Foundation for Human Rights Initiative (FHRI) worked tirelessly at disseminating policy information to urban and rural parts of Uganda for months prior.

During this election cycle, GLiSS organized a forum for a televised presidential debate between the incumbent, Museveni, and opposition leader, Besigye. Never before had Ugandan elections utilized broadband access to televise and disseminate political leaders campaign platforms. Unfortunately, Museveni, who has now been in power for over 30 years, declined the invite to the first debate, leaving Besigye and other opponents to take the stage. An unfortunate trend in East Africa; Kenya also experienced a one man debate this past August.

While the efforts of grassroots NGOs to use ICT in disseminating political information is commendable, the trend of politicians and political institutions squandering the ICT efforts for positive political participation is growing.

The Kenyan 2007-2008 national election saw explosive violence all across the region, killing over 800 people, and displacing over 200,000. Kenya experienced a brief pause in post electoral violence following the 2013 election, but this year, Kenya again endured some post-violence election upon the announcement of election results in August.

However, it was not comparable to the severe violence upon the 2007-2008 election. The 2017 election featured Uhuru Kenyatta, the current President, and opposition leader Raila Odinga. The election was heavily questioned for its legitimacy, resulting in the losing ballot, Odinga, to file a report for corruption over faulty results. After the 2013 elections, the Kenyan ICT department at the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBT) sought to create an electoral system based on the technological administering and counting of votes.

Interestingly, the head of the ICT department was killed a week prior to the August election occurred. With Kenyatta achieving a whooping 85% majority win, Odinga was quick to call the results fraudulent and demanded the

case be investigated for corruption. ICT plays a large role in disseminating information pre-election, but in the case of Kenya, the more profound impact came post-election.

The Supreme Court of Kenya recently nullified the election, stating corruption in the tallying of votes. The court order for a re-election to be held on October 17th.

The circumstances of the Kenyan Presidential election demonstrates the divisive aspect of ICT’s role in elections. Though Kenyan politics are commonly said to be sometimes split among faithful ties to a certain political leader instead of the policy’s, social media entrenched these divisions with the outpour of support for the Supreme Court decision on Twitter. Many even mobilized to the streets after hearing of the Supreme Court’s decision to celebrate.

This exhibits the diverse range of uses for ICT, and how ICT is commonly thought about and used in East African elections. While NGOs may be employing useful initiatives to drive the dissemination of political information using ICT, weak electoral institutions will consistently nullify those efforts. Kenya’s response to the corruption of the former election was justified in that it sought to take power away from a multitude of independent, potentially corrupt or coerced vote counters, and employ the platonic, non-biased use of a technological voting system. Unfortunately, ICT initiatives will only work as strong as the institutions they are working for.

Looking ahead, it will be interesting to see how NGOs use ICT to respond to the issue of post-electoral violence. Groups like the Women’s Situation Room (WSR), which has made incredible progress in multiple African states in reducing post electoral violence, uses ICT to alert relevant authority to where violence is breaking out so it can be reduced in a timely manner. In fact, the WSR was so adept at communication in the Ugandan elections, their phone number got called more than the electoral commissions’ phone number on the day of election, with voters mistaking the number as the direct line of communication for voting questions (which is not part of the WSR’s mandate).

The WSR effectively employs ICT, which is exclusively controlled by their organization, proving to be more effective than countries’ own electoral commissions. Essentially, a robust institution for which the ICT operates within will yield positive results in combatting corruption.

Grassroots successes like the WSR have proven this. Kenya should be taking the killing of the head of the ICT department in the IEBT incredibly serious, as ICT will continue to penetrate all aspects of East African politics in decades to come.

Evidence Mishandled? Syrian War Footage & YouTube’s Dilemma By: Kayla Rolland

Often called the first YouTube War, the Syrian conflict has been documented through video from it’s early beginnings With free accounts, editing tools, and translation tools, YouTube has served as a vital platform for a variety of individuals on the ground to document the conflict. The result has been the emergence of graphic and extremist content being uploaded to the website. Following a series of attacks over recent years, social media platforms including YouTube have been under increasing pressure from governments to identify and remove extremist content from their platforms. While their efforts have been welcomed by many, others including human rights activists have raised the alarm over the loss of important documentation of the conflict. YouTube now faces a difficult task of balancing the censorship of violent and extremist content with the importance of preserving the history of the conflict.

The use of social media platforms including YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter by terrorist groups pose concerns regarding radicalization and recruitment, particularly amongst young people. Following an attack on London Bridge this past June, reports cited YouTube as a radicalization and instructional tool in the plot. Given the widespread use of the platform, with 400 hours of video uploaded per minute, the platform and its parent company Google have looked for new ways to monitor content. YouTube has his-

torically relied on a user based reporting structure, where users “flag” content they believe is inappropriate. In an effort to increase efficiency, YouTube recently introduced software that flags potentially “objectionable material” to human reviewers. This software targets content that is graphic or related to terrorist activities. The result was the removal of hundreds of thousands of videos from the website this past summer.

While much of the content removed is undoubtedly disturbing, many of these violent videos serve as critical documentation of the conflict. Activists have spoken out regarding the need to preserve these videos as evidence for future war crimes prosecutions, pointing to instances such as the recent issuance of an arrest warrant by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for Mahmoud al-Werfalli, a Libyan army commander. The warrant issued for al-Werfalli for his actions in the execution of a dozen prisoners was prompted by the surfacing of video evidence. In the more immediate term, these videos can provide an integral glimpse into the conflict for intelligence agencies. In 2015, intelligence agencies on both sides of the Atlantic reportedly used video evidence to identify “Jihadi John,” or Mohammed Emwazi, a British national and ISIL executioner involved in the killing of American journalist James Foley. Activists have also pointed out the need to preserve

footage for future generations and historians. Others have decried the removal of videos of human rights abuses taken by activists who have risked their lives to document these events.

It is important to issue a caution in regarding the credence of these videos. Videos are shot in accordance with an individual’s personal ideologies and agenda, and can be cut, organized, manipulated, and disseminated to further a particular narrative. These videos must be addressed critically, but still offer an irreplaceable record of the conflict at the ground level.

One potential answer to this dilemma is the establishment of external archives. Groups such as The Syrian Archive download and upload these videos to their own private servers. The group seeks to organize material and preserve it for future use. Yet this process can be costly

and labour intensive, sparking fears these organizations may not be able to keep up with newer automated removal systems. YouTube itself has also proposed several new solutions. In cases when content may not be illegal but in violation of the website’s policies regarding terrorism and hate speech, the platform has proposed allowing videos to remain on the website, but they will not appear as recommended, allow comments, or for the videos to be monetized with advertisements. The company has also increased resources directed at screening content.

YouTube is faced with a difficult balancing act between the censorship of violent and extremist content and its role as a video archive. With increasing traffic on the platform coupled with increasing pressure on platforms to monitor content, it is a balancing act that will only grow tougher.

Fake News on Social Media: Irresponsible Journalism or Irrelevant By: Mae-Lin DeLange

While the quantity of fake news on social media may not matter, the amount of times it gets shared certainly does…

Social Media noun [soh-shuhl·mee-dee-uh] “Forms of electronic communication (as Web sites for social networking and microblogging) through which users create online communities to share information, ideas, personal messages, and other content (as videos).”

Historically, the first known use of the term “social media” was in 2004. At first there was the mentality that these platforms were merely for kids and teens; however, nowadays it is evident that the use of social media is an integral part of just about every public relations program.

With media platforms allowing you an array of possibilities ranging from improving the customer experience to keeping an eye on what your competitors are doing, having a social media presence is almost a requirement in this day and age. This form of media has become known as social media marketing, a practice employed not only by companies but also by governments and non-profits. From Facebook news articles to trending Twitter hashtags, even Instagram has begun displaying sponsored ads. Not to be forgotten, there is of course social media giant Snapchat, whose ‘Discover’ feature allows media companies access to the over 75 million North American daily users of the popular mobile app. Individuals today have access to higher volumes of data via more channels than ever before, with the past two years creating more data than ever before within the entire sum of human history. However, high accessibility to data does not mean that all the information being processed is of high quality. Articles presenting entirely false information have been appearing with no obvious way to identify them as being inaccurate. One only has to consider recent events south of the border to realize both the incredible potential and risks which may result from social media marketing influencing today’s society.

With the recent US presidential election not far from everyone’s minds, everyone has surely seen some of the debate highlights or the countless memes of the presidential candidates. As it turns out, there were 20 top-performing false election stories from hoax sites during the critical months of the campaign which generated 8,711,000 shares, reactions and comments on Facebook.

In comparison, the 20 best-performing election stories from the 19 major news websites merely generated a total of 7,367,000 shares, reactions and comments on the same platform. The fact that fake election news stories somehow managed to outperform real news is a scary thought. Even if these stories do not end up deciding the election, it is evident that these fictitious tales manage to amass quite a number of views.

One reason could be simply that these fictitious headlines are merely “clickbait” or rather, content published with the intent of generating online advertising revenue at the expense of quality or accuracy for Facebook’s 2.01 billion users - 47 percent of whom claim they get their news through this. These sensationalist headlines can often be too much to resist;, as one user claims they “get

suckered into reading tons of articles just because [they] can’t believe how outrageous things have become with political rhetoric.” For similar reasons, one may seem to support a political figure or celebrity by following them on social media, while the true reason for this affiliation may be quite different. Taking a closer look at Trump’s 39.9 million followers on Twitter, one individual mused “I wonder how many people follow Trump just because it’s like looking at a train wreck and not because they actually support him.”

Nevertheless, if you count yourself amongst the 60 percent of millennials who receive the majority of their political news through Facebook, please take caution. Facebook recently claimed it has begun to rely more heavily on algorithms, rather than people, in order to specify which articles to show as trending. According to an experiment conducted by the Washington Post, as many as 72 percent of the new material a person’s friends and subscribed pages will post never actually show up in their newsfeed. The reason for this is quite logical: if you were to see every post, it would be quite overwhelming. As a result, Facebook notes your level of engagement through certain algorithms in an attempt to predict what posts you’d be most interested in seeing, and only shows those on your newsfeed. Although it should be widely known by now that newsfeeds do not reveal everything someone’s friends post on Facebook, there still appears to be a significant misunderstanding about how newsfeeds actually work. A recent study concerning social media awareness at the University of Illinois showed that 62.5 percent of study participants did not realize that Facebook had filtered out posts so that only a select few were shown on the newsfeed. Since this process means that a person may not be shown everything, it may result in one’s views being slightly skewed or altered when it comes to political news. This fact may not be so concerning when considering your previous neighbor’s most-recent-vacation-to-Florida family trip photos; however, it is significantly more alarming when talking about more controversial topics, such as political scandals and other world news.

Social media includes all websites and applications that enables one to create and share content, as well as participate in social networking. However, in today’s world, another use of these social networks appears to be for individuals to educate themselves about the world around them. With approximately 63 percent of Facebook and Twitter users claiming to use these platforms as ways to find out about news, most users fortunately claim they consider these sites to be secondary sources. Nevertheless, it is often the younger users who see these social media sites as their primary source of news. It is crucial to ensure open discussion about the content found on these platforms, as this is the only way to establish positive, global digital citizenship, as well as overall healthy behaviour.

While these statistics are enough to raise concerns, as well as a few eyebrows, remembering to keep an open mind and to be curious can go a long way. For millennial users of social media, it is an important reminder to be aware and not become disconnected with reality due to what is seen on your newsfeed.

Death to the Democratic Process: Online Voting By: Shaniah Hogman University of Calgary

Online voting, enabling more citizens to dictate how their society is run and by who? Or is it allowing the vote to be cast aside as just another tab open on your smartphone alongside Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and the Weather Network?

In the year 2000, the United States became the first country to utilize high-profile internet voting. The modern voting technique was used in Arizona, and declared a success. Resulting from this supposed success other countries began to follow suit, and implemented online voting in one form or another; Canada, Australia, Estonia, Finland, France, Norway, and Spain have all attempted to incorporate online voting into their democratic process. However, to determine whether this method should be established as a ‘democratic norm,’ we must take an in-depth look at the possible, detrimental, consequences that this type of voting could impose on society.

Effects of using online voting are vast, and should be creating concern among not only officials in countries implementing this strategy, but also among the civilians.

In 2011, Australia used online voting in New South Wales, and the outcome was of great concern; miss-recorded votes caused many voter’s ballots to become ambiguous, discarded and their vote could not be re-cast. The result of this failure in the system was the loss of these voter’s voices; the freedom that the democratic process intended to protect. Along with these irrelevant votes, other voters lost their anonymity due to the issue of their voting ID numbers being incorrect and therefore traceable by government officials. These outcomes, though they can be stated simply and succinctly, have large implications and should be a cause for immense consideration regarding the phenomenon of online voting.

The concerns of online voting extent beyond technical errors and contemporary technology. For example, the threat of external influence of online voting is one threat that the government is utterly unfit to monitor or control.

There is no means in telling if an individual was swayed or pressured to vote for a particular outcome during the online voting process.

The San Francisco Department of Elections published an extensive article to ensure the proper conduct was followed by polling stations on election day. The Election law “strives to balance the public’s right to open, transparent elections with each voter’s right to cast a secret ballot,” and for the voter to be “free from any form of intimidation or coercion.” Staff numbers are selected individually to ensure that the polling stations are run fairly, to ensure the citizen’s right to vote, and to eliminate any outside influence within the polling stations. The goal of the law is to make sure that as the voter goes to cast their ballot on a specific day, at their designated polling station, they are not overcome by electioneers, signs, or any other activity that will unduly influence the vote that they cast. It also goes to ensure the safety of the voter, on the chance that another citizen wishes to influence how they vote directly. The law attempts to provide complete freedom from biased influence, intimidation, or coercion. Cameras or video equipment are also prohibited from interfering with the voting process, and must keep a precise distance from

the polling booths to ensure privacy is secured. With these rules and regulations determining how a polling station is to be run, to ensure freedom and the right to cast a ballot anonymously, how does any political institution or citizen believe that online voting could ever be an equal alternative?

Voting from ‘the comfort of your home,’ holds within it many dangers to the freedom and right to a private vote. Influences such as other members of the household, either through recommendation by blunt intimidation, can change the outcome of many votes, eliminating a long tradition and value of the freedom to vote in democratic societies. Issues such as hackers being able to acquire information about who voted for who, or even changing the vote that was cast is a matter which may be able to be detected, but not prevented. Government officials have a broad range of issues to deal with before the online vote could ever come close to equalling the security and privacy ensured by ‘in-person’ polling stations.

Does having the ability to vote early, on multiple days, from anywhere, warrant the implantation of online voting into the democratic process? Weighing the benefits and trepidations that arise when considering this form of balloting, the unanimous conclusion will be that it is an absurd idea. Online warfare and hacking are becoming too common for a government to consider establishing this ‘luxury.’ Instead, governments in democratic societies must continue to embrace the traditional culture of politics; going out on election day to your designated precinct, casting your vote with no direct intimidation influencing you, with confidence that your vote will be kept anonymous.

The importance of the vote must be highly valued and protected; this cannot be maintained if online voting is allowed to prevail as a common practice.

The Next Great Awakening By: Harrison Giovannetti

People who identify as having no religion – a diverse group usually referred to as “nones” – have been steadily growing as a percent of the population in most Western nations. At present, in many of these countries, they constitute a sizable minority, or even a majority, of the overall population. In the United States, for example, about 23% of adults consider themselves religiously unaffiliated, up from 16% only a decade ago. This shift is even greater in places such as the United Kingdom, where “nones” now represent 53% of the population – including a staggering 71% of young adults.

Dramatic demographic shifts such as this cannot, of course, be boiled down to only one cause. Many explanations have been offered for the rise of irreligion in the West. Some attribute the shift to the long-term amelioration of living standards; as people experience greater stability and financial security, it is argued, there is less need for them to turn to the spiritual realm for comfort and guidance. Others suggest that, especially in the United States, the reluctance of many individuals to identify with a specific organized religion is partly due to a broader trend of

growing public mistrust in the country’s institutions.

One of the more intriguing theories links increasing secularization to the technological developments of the Digital Age. Much as the invention of the printing press facilitated the large-scale dissemination of information that in turn fostered the Reformation, the immense volume of current knowledge proliferated through new, online communication channels is having a considerable impact on the way people today think about religion.

This is particularly true with respect to organized religions and the long-established power structures within them. Rather than consulting a local preacher or a holy book for faith-related questions, today’s believers have at their disposal millions of online videos, articles, and message boards offering insight on virtually any religious issue imaginable. This exposes them to new ideas and interpretations that may run contrary to what they learned from faith leaders growing up. Consequently, the authority of many of these leaders is undermined as more people embrace an individualistic, subjective approach towards religion, in lieu of adhering to a given institution’s dogma.

Although they may continue to believe in some teachings, these people no longer find it necessary to participate in the formal elements of worship or to affiliate themselves with one denomination. This had led to the peculiar situation of many self-described “nones” still professing a belief in the existence of a god and the power of prayer.

Yet beyond simply revising their religious beliefs, many people have been led to renounce their faith altogether. The wealth of information available online can be particularly enlightening for individuals who grew up in environments where legitimate scientific theories were dismissed, in favour of contrived, nonsensical explanations to accommodate for beliefs on topics like the origin of the universe and human life. (Even today, several US states permit evolution to be taught as a “controversial” theory in public schools, while earlier this year Turkey outright removed it from school curricula).

For these people, websites such as YouTube and Wikipedia that provide this information in detailed, yet easyto-digest formats are especially useful in this regard. The opportunity they pose to explore the scientific findings on these matters can be enough to turn them away from religion completely.

The internet also serves as a vehicle for non-believers to network, allowing them to organize and proselytize more effectively. This is accomplished through discussion boards, podcasts, and conferences such as those hosted by the Center for Inquiry, a US-based secularist think-tank.

For those living in areas where irreligion is heavily stigmatized, this can be a valuable arena in which to become more comfortable with themselves and to share their convictions more openly.

The ramifications of the continuing shift away from religion will be enormous, altering everything from the makeup of political landscapes to the role of women in society to the future of philosophy and ethics. It is no

coincidence that the countries with the greatest irreligious populations – among them France, the Netherlands, and Sweden – are also among the most socially liberal. As opposition to some of the most contentious contemporary social issues – such as abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem-cell research, and LGBT rights – is often founded on religious grounds, supporters of these causes can be expected to gain greater public favour going forward.

Still, earning support from the majority of a given population is not the same as reaching public consensus; as such, the culture wars waged by proponents of traditional values systems and the right-wing political movements fuelled in part by their discontent should not be expected to dissipate any time soon. They may even become more reactionary as they decline in influence, sparking incidents such as the 2015 case of a Kentucky county clerk who was jailed – and subsequently held up by supporters nationwide as a martyr – for refusing to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Much has been said about how modern technology has revolutionized the ways in which humans interact with each other and with the surrounding world. However, comparatively less attention has been given to the impact it has had on the way people regard the supernatural. While religion will continue to have a place in Western culture for some time to come, it is set for an increasingly diminished role in the public sphere, due in no small part to changes brought upon by the Digital Age. For centuries, the West has encountered a series of revolutionary religious movements, ranging from the Reformation to the Great Awakenings, that have brought about long-lasting divisions and fundamental social change. Far from being one, single intellectual movement, driven by ideas that will eventually wane in popularity, this drift towards a new era of irreligion represents a fundamental shift in the very tenets of Western thought.

O c

rv e

r

tri e M

Th e

Ob

s

e

6.7 percent change in China’s GDP in 2017

43 percent of Americans report accessing news online

1.3 million refugees have applied for asylum in Europe

$10 billion is the value Bitcoin currency has risen since 2009

22 percent of the world’s countries have an official state religion

16 percent of American news stories contained a direct tweet from President Donald Trump in 2017

6,000 videos documenting Syrian conflict were removed from YouTube because they depicted atrocities

81 percent of U.S. adults expect artificial organs to be routinely available for transplant

21 percent of those who have experienced severe forms of online

harassment have had explicit images of themselves shared without their

consent 24 percent of STEM workers are women, whereas they comprise 48 percent of the workforce in the U.S.

25 percent of wired voters went online for voting information prior to casting their ballot in the 2008 U.S. election

50 percent of the paid jobs can now be replaced by artificial intelligence

66 percent of Americans have experienced data theft

64% of U.S. adults say fake new causes confusion