The First Amendment: Politics and the Press, April 2020

the

FIRST AMENDMENT Politics and the Press

April 2020

CONTENTS

APRIL

COVID-19 CRISIS: PRESIDENTIAL INFLUENCE Mac Dilatush ’21 turns to history for his take on the coverage of the coronavirus in The United States and across the world.

03-04

A PANDEMIC OF THE MEDIA: CHINESE COVID-19 COVERAGE

THIS MONTH’S ISSUE A FEW WORDS FROM THE 10TH BOARD

The First Amendment of The Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” A founding tenet of our republic and of Western democracy, the amendment was intended to grant citizens the right to express themselves and their views. As a publication, our mission is to promote this ideal to its fullest extent. However, we should all be alarmed at how divisive the political climate has grown.

As Plato once warned in Republic, some of our leaders have lost sight of the true purpose of politics: to promote healthy discourse and produce meaningful, lasting change to improve the lives of our country’s citizens. The press has only exacerbated the chasm between parties. It should be our mission to return to constructive politics, one where we elicit the best ideas from each one of us to produce the most effective governance.

Constructive politics also requires a balance between conciliation and antagonism, not just between parties, but between the press and the government. Though too much agreement has its own drawbacks, the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction, as evidenced by the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). Though the nation needs a united front more than ever, the press continue to attack President Donald Trump. With such high levels of distrust, negotiation and compromise become impossible. The news networks’ constant second-guessing of all decisions, the myriad of “experts” that opine endlessly online, or the reporters who ask “gotcha” questions in the daily White House press conferences do not help a nation in crisis.

Thoughtful analyses surrounding the relationship between politics and the press can be found within the 24 pages of the 10th’s Board’s last issue. Take a moment to consider our writers’ views, to create your own, and to engage in conversation–even in quarantine.

- The 10th Board

CONTENTS

China’s state media apparatus faces an unprecedented challenge in covering the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak. The highly controlled flow of information, combined with seemingly incongruous policymaking by Beijing, leave the Chinese people paranoid and panicked in the face of what many see to be downplaying at best and a coverup at worst.

05-06

CORONAVIRUS COVERAGE Different countries have taken different approaches on covering the developments of the virus. The author explores many of them.

07-08

SOCIAL MEDIA AND CLIMATE CHANGE

Lucia Wetherill ’21 discusses the impact and effectiveness of social media in the context of international climate reform. With the difficulty of evoking action halting the amount of change, climate influencers like Greta Thunberg can make, Wetherill addresses many lawmakers’ choice to ignore a long-term issue in favor of the immediate appraisal of big oil conglomerates.

09

MEDIA VOCABULARY

A list of eight key terms that are used frequently when discussing politics in the media. These terms range from “Lame Duck” to “Filibuster.”

10

PARTISANSHIP AND THE PRESIDENCY

Trump is a frequently covered figure on several of the mainstream cable news networks, but does it really matter? In the face of a media circus surrounding the impeachment trial, will the inevitable bad press bounce off or cut deep?

11

2020

NEWS SOURCE CRITIQUE

Through a comparison of language used by both sources to describe Mitt Romney’s vote during Trump’s Senate hearing, the author deciphers the respectively liberal and conservative biases of CNN and Fox News.

12

DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES USE OF MEDIA A look at each of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates’ usage of social media, as compared across Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook.

Editor-in-Chief Shreya Kumar ’20 Executive Editors Jasper Zhu ’21 Avigna Ramachandran ’21 Cherie Fernandes ’21 Domestic Editors Natalia Ibarra ’20 Chelsea Wang ’21 Features Editors Elaine Wang ’20

13-14

US FREE PRESS TIMELINE Freedom of expression and the press has been a pillar at the foundation of American society, but over the United States’ history, many private and governmental agencies have circumvented this ideal in the name of national security.

International Editor Santi Parra-Vargas ’20 Senior Columnists Praneel Chakraborty ’20 Sid Sharma ’20 Tri Giao Vu Dinh ’20 Laura Zvinys ’20 Graphics Editor Jeffrey Tao ’20

15-16

INTERNATIONAL CENSORSHIP MAP An outline of media censorship in five countries across the world, from Asia to the Middle East to the Americas.

Ashley Wang ‘23 explores how governments use media monopolies and the harassment of journalists, amongst other methods, to censor the press.

17-18

GENERAL ELECTION UPDATE+ LETTER TO BERNIE

Associate Editors Simon Cull ’20 Mel Josephson ’22 Ben Polaski ’21 Nico Torres ’22 Faculty Advisor Anne Louise Smit P’10 ’13 Cover Art by Jeffery Tao ’20

A glance at news and information regarding the upcoming 2020 Presidential Election. Plus, Cate Levy ’20’s letter to Bernie on why he could not win.

19-20

POP PERSPECTIVE

Statistics on a sample of those in the Lawrenceville community and their media tendencies. This includes how they read the news, what they read in the news and their thoughts concerning the media.

21

Contact Us Like us on Facebook at: facebook.com/firstamendmentlville Follow us on Instagram at: lville_thefirstamendment

APRIL 2020 ISSUE N. VI

COVID-19 Crisis: Presidential Influence

in 1918. Days later, an Army general prosecuted the paper under a wartime sedition act, arguing the article “depressed morale.” The Spanish flu would have affected U.S. citizens no matter what measures officials took, but their failure to seriously consider the flu likely enhanced its spread. A famous example features 300 infected soldiers returning to Philadelphia ahead of the city’s largest parade in its history. Doctors and reporters wrote that the parade shouldn’t happen.

Despite the warnings, editors refused Mac Dilatush ’21 to run the story, the city’s government ignored the concerns, and the parade Governments and public leadAmerican. In contrast, World War continued as planned. 48 hours later, ers are expected to reassure their I took 53,000 American casualties. the city was stricken with the Spanconstituents during crises. Elected Interestingly, current historians’ ish flu, and 12,500 residents died. On officials are often evaluated on the scholarship argues that some of the that occasion and others, governtone they adopt during disaster, deaths are attributed to the flu. Wil- ment neglect and choice to withhold sometimes despite their actions. son, then President of The United information fueled an emerging, Subsequently, leaders in the past, States, however, chose to down- often fatal health crisis. Attempts to like Woodrow Wilson, and recently, play the virus. He issued no public reassure the public contributed to a Xi Jinping, have employed widestatements, and his administration massive death toll, suggesting that spread censorship during pandemunderstated the severity of illness. facts and general awareness should ics. However, the severity of the curDespite overwhelming evidence to take precedence over concerns about rent COVID-19 pandemic demands the contrary, Surgeon General Ru- morale or civil unrest.

The COVID-19 outbreak is not toawareness regardless of morale and pert Blue claimed “there is no cause public opinion. The viruses are diffor alarm if proper precautions are tally comparable to the Spanish flu’s ferent, but the new outbreak could observed,” while another impor- spread, but governments still need to disclose information immeprove as or more deadly than the diately. The flu and the novel Spanish flu. Wilson’s decision to “Attempts to reassure the coronavirus produce similar censor information in favor of public contributed to a massymptoms, but are from difprotecting public spirit contribsive death toll, suggesting ferent families of viruses, and uted to the spread of the Spanthat facts and general awaremedicine has developed signifish flu, and China’s government ness should take precedence icantly since the 1920s. There made similar mistakes when over concerns about morale are now four prescription medfaced with COVID-19. Other icines for the flu and widely governments can still adopt reor civil unrest.” available vaccines that are 40 assuring tones, but they must avoid Wilson’s and China’s censortant health official labeled it an “or- to 60 percent effective, for example. ship mistakes in order to save lives. dinary influenza by another name.” Modern methods to contain the new People want to be comforted, but The Spanish flu sported a mortality pandemic may prove more effective, during situations like the novel rate of 2.5 percent, far higher than and the coronavirus might be less coronavirus outbreak, facts should the seasonal flu, but the govern- deadly; four in five observed cases come before morale and fear of civil ment obscured facts in an attempt result in mild symptoms, and only unrest. to keep morale up in the wake of six percent of cases induce critical The 1918 Spanish flu pandemWorld War I. Wilson’s administra- conditions. The death rate, around ic killed an estimated 50 million tion even threatened newspapers 1.5 percent, is likely an overestimate people and infected a third of daring to report the truth. The Jef- since only people showing sympthe world’s population over two ferson County Union in Wiscon- toms of infection are tested. There years. 675,000 of those deaths were sin issued a warning about the flu could be just as many people, or even

INTERNATIONAL 3

more, who contracted the virus but display either no signs of infection or very mild symptoms. UCLAbased infectious disease expert Dr. Otto Yang says it’s completely plausible that the virus has infected ten times the reported amount. But regardless of the differences between influenza and the coronavirus, our past dealings with pandemic remind us that, even in unprecedented times, governments’ responses can significantly impact the spread of viruses. Given COVID-19’s high death rate and virulence, the consequences of ignoring the virus or censoring information should outweigh concerns about public spirit.

When the Coronavirus emerged in Wuhan, China, the government’s response was reminiscent of Wilson’s. On January 1, the Wuhan police announced that it took legal measures against Li Wenliang, the doctor credited with raising the alarm, and seven other individuals who spread rumors online about a new illness. The police claimed the aforementioned individuals “caused adverse impacts on soci-

ety.” A Weibo announcement and CCTV country-wide broadcast followed and clarified that the government would continue to prosecute people who spread information about the coronavirus online or in a public domain. The government discouraged people from sharing important information, which might have helped curtail the outbreak if distributed earlier, and maintained that the virus could not be transmitted from human to human, despite significant evidence otherwise. On January 31, when he was already afflicted, Wenliang wrote that he wondered why the government claimed no healthcare workers had been affected, and human transmission could not occur.

COVID-19 killed him seven days later. The Chinese government’s poor response to the coronavirus made it more difficult to contain; by the time Wuhan was quarantined, five million people had already left on holiday for the Lunar New Year, many taking the virus with them.

Had the government acted more efficiently instead of censoring sub-

stantiated rumors, the illness might have been better contained and treated. In a rare admission of guilt from a Chinese official, Wuhan mayor Zhou Xianwang acknowledged that his government failed to disclose information “in a timely fashion,” maybe costing hundreds of lives.

China has since quarantined the entirety of Wuhan, ordered extreme social distancing measures, and built temporary hospitals.

In the wake of extreme government response, they are reporting a decline in the number of cases.

China’s numbers are hard to verify, especially since they changed the method of recording cases the day they began reporting a decline, but they provide reason for optimism.

Coupled with China’s initial censorship-driven missteps, they also suggest governments must clearly articulate the nature of the illness and respond to it immediately amid pandemic and economic turmoil.

Other current governments cannot repeat Wilson’s mistakes without enduring a shocking death toll.

APRIL 2020 ISSUE N. VI

4

A Pandemic of the Media: Chinese COVID-19 Coverage Carina Li ’22 Today, we are living through a global crisis. COVID-19, a respiratory disease that originated in Wuhan, China, and currently widely known as “the coronavirus,” has spread rapidly. As of April 14, 2020, the official death toll is 125,859, and the official number of cases is nearing 2 million. The disease evolved into a global health emergency

by March, partially due to China’s ineffective coverage and containment in its early stages.

As the disease began to spread in late January, China saw panic, shortages of medical personnel, overcrowded hospitals, fights for essentials like masks, and full lockdowns on at least 16 major cities. Every day, thousands of new cases were reported, and the death toll continued to rise. Meanwhile, the Chinese media, infamous for its censorship to bolster the gov-

ernment’s image, only made the situation worse as there are discrepancies in the government’s reporting concerning the virus.

Official Chinese government information was not transpar-

“The disease evolved into a global health emergency

by March, partially due to China’s ineffective coverage and containment in its early stages.” ent or accurate in its reporting of the coronavirus. For example, the first coronavirus case was identified on December 8, yet the Chinese government did not officially announce it until the end of the month. Local authorities initially tried to hide news of the outbreak, but when more people

started to contract the virus, and rumors about a new illness spread, the government was forced to come clean. From the very beginning, the government tried to hide the severity of the virus. Numerous sources testified to bodies being cremated in Wuhan without the death being recorded as a coronavirus fatality, which made it highly difficult to tell just how lethal the virus is, and proves that the government’s death toll is less than the true value.

Similarly, the government’s actions didn’t match up with what the media reported. In February 2020, the strict lockdowns in more than 16 major cities despite a limited number of cases in some of those cities calls into question either the necessity of what the government was doing or the accuracy of the information reported. In Xinjiang, a ten-day lockdown was implemented with little to no warning for its citizens. At the time the lockdown was announced, there was only one official reported case of coronavirus. Because the government knows there are serious negative effects of lockdowns, like children not attending school, economic downturns, and people stranded in their homes without resources, people begin to believe the situation is much worse than reported.

A strict lockdown with such consequences should only be put in place if the situation is dire, and the government is aware of this. Thus, the numbers of cases and deaths

INTERNATIONAL 5

are likely much higher than the government reports. Panic stemming from erroneous information wouldn’t be as much of an issue if there were multiple media sources in the mix that would be reporting on coronavirus, which would usually lead to a more accurate report.

However, the government cracked down on what is acceptable to publish in the media concerning the virus. An interview run by the news outlet Caixin recorded a doctor in Hubei, the virus’s origin, talking about infection among health care officials, patients being forced to pay despite promises of free care, and unreported deaths in hospitals. Shortly after, the government released a statement that declared: “Sources of articles must be strictly regulated, independent reporting is strictly prohibited, and the use of nonregulated article sources, particularly self-media [content produced by citizen journalists], is strictly prohibited.” Considering the crackdown in the media after numerous sources claimed an outof-control situation, the government clearly attempted to hide the reality of the coronavirus’ severity in China. The government punished those trying to speak their truth. There were numerous reports of journalists or people who claimed there was more death than being reported suddenly going “missing” or being arrested.

In mid-December, before the first case of the virus was reported by the Chinese government, a group of eight doctors discussed numerous cases of people with fast breakdowns of their respiratory systems and noted the possibility of the return of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), which is one strand of coronavirus, on the messaging platform WeChat. On January 1, 2020, Wuhan police said they had “taken legal measures”

against the eight individuals who had “spread rumors,” despite being correct about the coronavirus emerging in China. The message sent is clear: Citizens who report their concerns about the coronavirus can and will be punished.

The effects of the government crackdown on media are jarring: People are afraid to speak out, there is confusion about how serious the risk of contracting coronavirus is, and rumors are spreading rampantly with citizens having no way of knowing if they’re true. This made an already scary situation for those in China even worse, and it will leave a lasting impression on Chinese citizens once the outbreak is over. In doing such a poor job in attempting to cover up what’s happening, the Chinese government made it clear that it’s capable of spreading erroneous information to make itself look better, which will only lead to more questioning of the accuracy of government information in the future.

UPDATE AS OF APRIL 17, 2020: The daily increases in China have since fallen to a manageable level, with most new cases stemming from students returning from abroad.

Most of the lockdowns in the country have since been removed and the Chinese Government is attempting to revert citizen lives back to normal. Many safety measures still persist, with restaurants restricted to 50 percent carrying capacity and the strong encouragement of social distancing and personal hygiene (masks, hand washing, etc.) as the government is afraid of a second outbreak. Despite these changes, many sceptics still challenge the veracity of these numbers. Yet, the reality remains, with a virus as contagious as COVID-19, if the numbers were truly made up, the world will stand testament to the rapid resurgence of cases that Mainland China has yet to experience.

APRIL 2020 ISSUE N. VI

6

In response to the spread of the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19, which was officially declared a global pandemic, national governments and media outlets have had varying responses in their coverage of the virus. Most countries have created preventive measures in an effort to contain the spread of the virus, such as encouraging social distancing and establishing curfews. On the other hand, governments in China and Iran have been criticized for censoring coronavirus coverage and covering up the severity of the outbreaks, and in some countries, tabloids have even published racist stories. As panic spreads globally, misinformation plagues global coverage of the coronavirus. (updated 4/5/2020)

The United States

Tensions between the United States and China have increased in response to coverage of the coronavirus. President Trump initially condemned China’s handling of the virus, but has recently taken a softer tone in order to encourage China to share crucial medical supplies and information about the virus.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo criticized Jinping’s failure to alert the public about the virus, stating that “it took us too long to get the medical experts into the country. We wish that could have happened more quickly.” So far in the U.S., federal health officials have confirmed 239,279 cases of the coronavirus and 5,443 deaths. Additionally, 6.6 million Americans filed for unemployment benefits this week as businesses lay off employees, highlighting the severe economic damage wrought by the virus.

Congress passed a $2 trillion stimulus bill

that will help unemployed people and businesses such as airlines, who have suffered greatly as more countries place travel bans and people become scared to travel. The U.S. responded slowly to the outbreak but has since advised its citizens to practice social distancing. States took matters into their own hands by ordering citizens to stay at home. While these measures should help slow the virus’ spread, the U.S. still lacks enough ventilators and other medical supplies to aid the crowded hospitals, which are quickly reaching full capacity. President Trump imposed a travel ban on 26 countries and advised citizens not to leave the country. The media reports freely and quickly on updates concerning the virus, with some media outlets like the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times publishing live updates.

Corona

The United Kingdom

The United Kingdom’s Department of Health and Social Care declared that the coronavirus is an “imminent threat to public health,” and announced protections to fight the spread of the virus. The department recommends citizens stay at home and away from the general public. Also, the United Kingdom is offering grants up to £2,500 a month for self-employed people to create stability for those suffering the consequences of a less active economy.

To date, there have been 17,089 cases of the virus in the U.K. with 1,019 fatalities.

Additionally, British Airways has suspended all flights to and from China.

While most mainstream media outlets report on the issue in a timely and

truthful man accounts an about the vi about bat so Chinese cul virus—went was publish British gove spreading m virus, and B the Prime M reports Chin surrounding downplayed Some Britis considered a failure to co foreign nati

China

Egypt

On February 14, Egypt reported one confirmed case of the coronavirus, the first in Africa. As of April 4, Egypt has reported 985 cases and 66 deaths from COVID-19. In a statement, the Egyptian Health Ministry claimed that it had already informed the World Health Organization and had taken necessary preventative measures. Since the initial spread of the virus, the Egyptian government has evacuated its citizens from China, screening all incoming flights and passengers for signs of the illness.

According to a former Egyptian health ministry official, the government has also been monitoring Chinese restaurants for the coronavirus, imposing certain controls on these establishments. A notable event regarding press coverage of the pandemic in Egypt has centered around British

newspaper The Guardian. On March 17, a reporter from The Guardian and Egypt correspondent Ruth Michaelson had her Egyptian press credentials revoked by the State Information Service in retaliation for an article written by Michaelson two days prior on March 15. In it, Michaelson noted research by Canadian epidemiologists that suggested the situation in Egypt is much worse than reported, with the “conservative estimate” for true cases standing at 19,310.

Over the past decade, China has invested heavily in Africa, boosting the frequency of flights to the continent by over 6oo percent.

This has also increased the potential of the virus spreading to Egypt, making it one of the highest-risk countries in Africa for a coronavirus outbreak.

As of April 4, th death toll of 3,3 new local trans people returnin surrounds the n country. Still, th an effort to ma its communica untouched, the in the case of th coronavirus in February, he an despite the vali started a propa achievements f journalists to W Recently, news Disease Contro the absence of taken to social stories and mem social media pl

VID-19, which was officially declared a global g responses in their coverage of the virus. Most the spread of the virus, such as encouraging rnments in China and Iran have been criticized the outbreaks, and in some countries, tabloids sinformation plagues global coverage of the 2020)

employed people and as airlines, who have as more countries place people become scared to esponded slowly to the s since advised its citizens distancing. States took r own hands by ordering t home. While these d help slow the virus’ still lacks enough ther medical supplies to hospitals, which are full capacity. President a travel ban on 26 vised citizens not to leave media reports freely and tes concerning the virus, a outlets like the Wall d the New York Times pdates.

e the first eported D-19. In inistry d the d taken ince the tian ns from ts and

alth as also nts for ontrols event demic in

Coronavirus Coverage

The United Kingdom

// Roma Kale ’23 & Ashley Wang ’23

The United Kingdom’s Department of Health and Social Care declared that the coronavirus is an “imminent threat to public health,” and announced protections to fight the spread of the virus. The department recommends citizens stay at home and away from the general public. Also, the United Kingdom is offering grants up to £2,500 a month for self-employed people to create stability for those suffering the consequences of a less active economy.

To date, there have been 17,089 cases of the virus in the U.K. with 1,019 fatalities.

Additionally, British Airways has suspended all flights to and from China.

While most mainstream media outlets report on the issue in a timely and

truthful manner, some social media accounts and tabloids share racist stories about the virus. One video in particular about bat soup—essentially blaming Chinese culture and cuisine for the virus—went viral on social media and was published by the Daily Mail. The British government criticized China for spreading misinformation about the virus, and British scientific advisors to the Prime Minister say that the official reports China released about statistics surrounding the virus “could be downplayed by a factor of 15 to 40 times.”

Some British papers call for China to be considered a hostile state due to their failure to communicate objectively with foreign nations.

China

newspaper The Guardian. On March 17, a reporter from The Guardian and Egypt correspondent Ruth Michaelson had her Egyptian press credentials revoked by the State Information Service in retaliation for an article written by Michaelson two days prior on March 15. In it, Michaelson noted research by Canadian epidemiologists that suggested the situation in Egypt is much worse than reported, with the “conservative estimate” for true cases standing at 19,310.

Over the past decade, China has invested heavily in Africa, boosting the frequency of flights to the continent by over 6oo percent.

This has also increased the potential of the virus spreading to Egypt, making it one of the highest-risk countries in Africa for a coronavirus outbreak.

As of April 4, there have been 81,639 confirmed cases of the coronavirus in China, with a death toll of 3,326. Notably, on March 18, the government reported the first day with no new local transmissions of the virus. Since then, most new cases have originated from people returning to China from abroad. However, a considerable amount of skepticism surrounds the numbers reported by the government, from both within and outside the country. Still, the government has clamped down on the coverage of the coronavirus in an effort to maintain a narrative of control and stability. Even though it has improved in its communication towards the public and left some critical social media content untouched, the country has cracked down on so-called “online rumors,” as exemplified in the case of the late Dr. Li Wenliang, a whistleblower who first posted about coronavirus in a private WeChat group in December. Before coronavirus took his life in February, he and others were targeted by Wuhan police for spreading false rumors, despite the validity of the information he was posting. Instead, the government has started a propaganda campaign focused on “vividly conveying the stirring achievements from the front lines of epidemic prevention,” sending more than 300 journalists to Wuhan to publicize the government’s prevention-and-control campaign.

Recently, newspapers have been publishing articles about the Chinese Center for Disease Control’s detailed quarantine procedures whenever someone tests positive. In the absence of news critical of the government’s handling of the virus, citizens have taken to social media to spread information. According to Hiyn Jia of Lehigh University, stories and memes relating to the coronavirus have become trending topics on Chinese social media platforms.

Social Media’s Role in Climate Change Lucia Wetherill ’21 Despite not receiving the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize, climate activist Greta Thunberg has already been nominated for the award in 2020. Thunberg’s meteoric rise to fame began in 2018, when she began to skip school to protest outside the Swedish Parliament in hopes of more action against climate change. Since then, she has mobilized worldwide student protests, spoken to lawmakers and government officials, and been named Time magazine’s 2019 Person of the Year. She reached out to supporters and opponents alike through social media, posting about opportunities to get involved in the fight against climate change. Thunberg is one of several examples of climate activists mobilizing people through social media.

Organizations like Extinction Rebellion and movements to aid climate crises have also primarily used social media to further their agenda. The real question is: Is it working?

2020 began with news of the devastating Australian bushfires, which have burned down two thousand homes and 12 million acres of land and killed 24 people and nearly half a billion animals. Yet the response the horrific fires generated was incredible. The largest Facebook fundraiser in the history of the platform raised $26 million for The Trustee For NSW Rural Fire Service & Brigades Donations Fund. Another fundraiser collected more than $3 million for WIRES Wildlife Rescue, while a third raised more than $1 million for The Trustee For Country Fire Authority & Brigades Donations Fund. Celebrities used social media to reach out to fans, urging them to donate towards relief efforts—one woman even took to Instagram to solicit donations in exchange for nude pictures. Social media has allowed for a generation of massive donation campaigns, involving millions of people. In the case of the bushfire relief movement, online climate activism was incredibly effective. Yet other climate

issues are unable to be resolved by fundraising alone. Activists like Thunberg seek systemic change to combat global warming. Individually, online activists lack the power to enact any real changes, thus, they focus their efforts on mobilizing people to pressure governments to respond to climate change by reforming existing and enacting new legislation.

The majority of online climate campaigns and messages are meant to reach ordinary people—Instagram or Facebook posts, videos, and tweets all target the masses scrolling through these platforms every day. More often than not, these movements do attract the attention they seek. The search engine Ecosia, for instance, became a sensation, with millions simply adding the extension to their browser and using the search engine. In return, the organization promised to use its profits to plant trees. As of February 2020, Ecosia can claim 15 million users and has planted over 83 million trees.

Yet other movements—metal straws, for example— have not been as effective, despite their prominence on social media. While social media campaigns have motivated some to use the metal straws, others, despite being moved by the posts online, continue to use plastic straws anyway. This is the struggle that online climate activists constantly face: not only do they have to get people’s attention, but they have to simultaneously convince users to create change. For Ecosia, convincing people to take a few seconds out of their day to add an extension to a browser was easy. For those pushing for widespread use of metal straws, however, it’s more difficult to convince people to give up the cheap convenience of plastic. Climate activists are in a constant war with convenience. After all, it’s far more convenient for people to just ignore climate change altogether. Mobilizing people over social media can be incredibly difficult—it is one thing to like a post, but

another to get people to skip school and protest. This is why Greta Thunberg’s campaign has been so impressive. She has gotten millions of students to forgo convenience to protest climate change.

One of the major problems is that when dealing with climate change, most lawmakers suffer from apathy, not ignorance. Protests seeking to alert people in power to climate change are lost on lawmakers because most know that climate change is real—it’s just not in their immediate interest to make the radical changes climate activists are pushing for.

In the United States specifically, switching to sustainable energy sources would hurt oil companies. Oil companies have spent heavily to undermine the credibility of science backing climate change and have pressured politicians to keep from moving toward widespread sustainable energy. In 2019, the Trump administration worked to roll back regulations requiring oil and gas companies to halt methane emissions, the second-most common greenhouse gas. Many suspected that Trump’s efforts to undo President Obama’s environmental regulations was supported and perhaps even prompted by oil and gas companies. For some lawmakers, the interests of oil companies and their next term in office are more important than global warming. Many lawmakers know about climate change, but don’t care enough to do anything. No matter what climate activists do online or in person, no matter how many people they rally to their cause, it’s difficult to enact any real systemic change without the participation of lawmakers.

It’s clear that climate change is a multilayered problem. It’s not enough to post on social media or get people to protest.

It’s not enough to convince lawmakers of the urgency of the situation. Convincing people of the facts and pushing them to action are two different things. Although online climate activism can produce incredible results and make a difference, it often falls short of what it hopes to achieve. While excellent at mobilizing people to donate to a fundraiser or foregoing convenience to protest, social media fails to reach those in positions of power in the government. Thus, it’s clear that social media alone will not be able to solve climate change, but it’s still a start.

INTERNATIONAL 9

Understanding Today’s Media: Some Vocabulary Ethan Leung ’23 As the next presidential election nears and media coverage of the government’s response to the global health crisis remains a valuable source of information, familiarity with the following terms helps us remain thoughtful in our consumption of news media.

Polarization

Polarization occurs when two political parties have opposing opinions about some principle or rule. It also refers to an increase in opposition over time to an extreme level. In America, polarization refers to the gap between two groups, such as liberals and conservatives or Democrats and Republicans, which has continued to grow and divide Americans. An example of the use of “polarization” is that many have argued that polarization in America has grown to the extent that both parties fail to reach a consensus on any issue.

Biparitisanship

Bipartisanship, or sometimes referred to as nonpartisanship, is when two parties find common ground through compromise and collaborate on an issue. Though this is something we see less of in modern politics, it is still a term widely known and used.

An example of how “bipartisan” would be used in a sentence is “it would take a bipartisan effort to turn the bill into a law,” meaning that it would take a cooperative effort between both parties to pass the law.

Filibuster

Filibuster refers to when a senator attempts to block or delay an action that the Senate has on a bill. They usually do this by debating the bill at length, offering multiple procedure motions, delaying or obstructing actions, or by making extremely long speeches. Politicians do this when they don’t want a bill to be passed, and it is widely used in politics and can be successfully waged unless the time for adjournment is definitely and irrevocably fixed.

Fishing Expedition

Fishing expedition refers to when a politician conducts a legal interrogation or an examination to discover information for a later proceeding. Fishing expeditions are usually conducted when one hopes to uncover incriminating or newsworthy evidence against a certain politician or famous individual. The information that is being uncovered is usually embarrassing or damaging towards a political opponent; for example, President Donald Trump and Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller both conducted fishing expeditions on each other in 2019.

Propaganda

Propaganda is information used by a government that is either completely false or only highlights one side of a situation; governments and political groups use propaganda to sway public opinion. Propaganda can be an extremely powerful political tool, often used during wartime to win the public’s support. Since public support can play a large role in winning the war itself, wartime propaganda is used as a large influence in many, if not all, major wars.

Fake News

The term “fake news,” popularized after Donald Trump’s election in 2016 but coined a year before the election, describes content that was purposefully created en masse by troll farms to look like it was from legitimate news outlets but was intended strictly to mislead and polarize through its spread. The source of a story might be attributed in a Facebook news feed to “ABCNews.co” rather than ABCNews.com. A glancing eye wouldn’t catch it, but it conferred legitimacy to the source by the glancing reader. In today’s definition, fake news is usually in the forms of inaccurate facts and has become Donald Trump’s catchphrase in addressing news that has any negative coverage on him. The term is becoming mo43 popular as authoritarian leaders from other countries; for example, President Assad of Syria has used the term to discredit reports of chemical attacks.

Censorship

Censorship is defined as the suppression of words, images, or ideas that are considered “offensive.” Censorship can be carried out by the government or private pressure groups and refers to attempts to conceal or distort the information that citizens are receiving through the suppression of political news that the public might receive. Through censorship, governments are able to control the content of the public and use news sources as a form of propaganda to influence public opinion.

10

APRIL 2020 ISSUE N. VI

How Partisanship Influenced the Trials of Clinton & Trump Chris Delaney ’20

Over the past four years, the media’s coverage of President Trump’s actions has been overwhelmingly negative. Trump’s upset victory in the 2016 election—in which he won the Electoral College but lost the popular vote—ultimately strengthened the criticism directed towards him.

Unlike past presidents and other 2016 presidential candidates, Trump garnered attention for his “antiestablishment” attitude, primarily aimed at Washington’s political elite.

His unconventional background in business along with his tendency to “tell it like it is” defied the norms and ultimately contributed to the criticism he has received. After reviewing over 30 hours of footage from networks such as ABC, CBS, and NBC, a study conducted by the Media Research Center found that 92 percent of coverage was critical towards the President. Media has also focused on anti-Trump issues, such as the Russian investigation, immigration, sexual assault allegations, and most recently, his impeachment following the Ukrainian scandal. News sources from the left have consistently tried to tarnish Trump’s reputation by criticizing his morality rather than his policy. Accusations of racism, bigotry, womanizing, and corruption are too often the center of the media’s criticism. While the truthfulness of these allegations of collusion with Ukraine remains ambiguous, it may not matter in the end. Bill Clinton, the last president to be impeached, did not suffer a decrease in his approval rating, and Trump’s supporters will similarly continue to stand

behind him regardless of his impeachment trial. Therefore, the media’s berating of Trump’s character through its negative coverage of his impeachment will have little effect on popular support for his presidency or 2020 election’s outcome.

Bill Clinton’s presidency took place before social media and instant news updates. Although Clinton sported an above-average total approval rating and many political victories, like Trump, he was scrutinized for his morality by the media, specifically targeted after a sexual assault scandal in 1998. Reports from various reputable newspapers headlined: “Monica’s Love Dress,” and “Dress May Hold Truth” to “Alleged Affair with Clinton.” CNN even aired a video clip of Clinton and Lewinsky from two years prior in White House receiving line, the two sharing a warm embrace, suggesting to viewers an intimate relationship between the two. Rumors of resignation swirled throughout the media at the time–it seemed like that was Clinton’s only option moving forward. However, polls showed continued support for Clinton and his presidency. Although the number of Americans who viewed Clinton as “moral” declined to below 30 percent after the impeachment trial, support for Clinton actually increased, as he achieved a term-high approval rating of 69 percent, the second-highest throughout his entire presidency. Bipartisan support for Clinton established throughout the early stages of his Presidency allowed for the public to ignore this stain on his reputation.

While bipartisan support for

Trump may not appear after the impeachment trial ends, his support from the Republican Party will continue, regardless of the media’s biased coverage of his impeachment. Trump has established a strong group of supporters over the past three years, and recent allegations of collusion followed by the impeachment trial have had little effect on his popularity, which has increased six percentage points since the inquiry opened in the fall.

The effects of these media attacks can be seen in the polarity of the political climate today. Despite his political successes, most notably in domestic economic growth, Democratic support for Trump lies below 10 percent. Negative media coverage that has fed Democratic disapproval of Trump’s morality also resulted in the increased strength of Trump’s existing base of supporters. Because of the media’s portrayal of Trump as immoral, political debate is now nearly impossible. CNN’s coverage of current events is considered disreputable, and Trump’s supporters are labeled as bigots. There lies no middle ground.

Therefore, the media will play a small role in deciding the outcome of the 2020 election. Trump supporters will not be swayed by the accusations or the negative implications of Trump’s character implied by the impeachment trials. As seen in the 1998 trial of Bill Clinton, the President’s support system will likely not falter because of the trial itself. The mainstream media must take its attention away from bashing Trump and instead, focus on their own legitimacy. If the Democrats want to have a chance this coming fall, they must focus on bolstering support behind one of their own candidates. Instead of attempting to prove the supposed racism and corruption in Trump’s administration, they must focus on their own agenda in order to make this

DOMESTIC 11

News Source Critique: CNN vs Fox News Nico Torres ’22 Fox News and CNN: The two standardbearers for conservative and liberal news conglomerates. These two news channels are commonly recognized as polar opposites, but why?

An analysis of two articles about Mitt Romney (R-Utah) and President Donald Trump’s impeachment provides an introductory answer. On February 5, 2020, the Senate voted regarding President Trump’s removal from office after the House of Representatives approved articles of impeachment against him on December 18, 2019. During the Senate vote, Mitt Romney was the only member of the Republican Party voting to remove President Trump from office. Fox News and CNN both published an article concerning this incident. CNN’s article was written by political commentator Chris Cillizza, who graduated from Georgetown University with a B.A. in English after attending The Loomis Chaffee School in Windsor, Connecticut. He began his journalism career at a liberal-leaning newspaper, Roll Call, in 2001. Afterwards, he worked at two other liberal media institutions, The Washington Post and MSNBC, prior to joining CNN. Surprisingly, Howard Kurtz, the author of Fox News’ article, spent 37 years at liberal newspapers after earning a B.A. in psychology and English from the University of Buffalo and a master’s degree in journalism from Columbia University. Kurtz’s work brought him to The Record, The Washington Post, CNN, The Daily Beast, and eventually Fox News. Due to the numer-

ous switches in political leaning, Kurtz has been accused of changing his bias to accommodate his employer. The title of CNN’s article, “Mitt Romney Finally Drew a Line in the Sand Against Donald Trump,” implies that someone must side against Trump through the word “finally.” In contrast, the Fox News article is titled “Trump easily beats impeachment, Romney vote stirs backlash,” implying that Trump holds innocence and the Senate overwhelmingly agrees, hence he “easily beats the impeachment” in the majority vote. Further, the word “backlash” imprints a negative connotation on Mitt Romney in contrast to CNN’s implications of heroism.

The contents of each article conform to the biases observed in their respective titles. CNN’s report praises Romney with adjectives such as “stirring, emotional, stunning, morally right, remarkable,” and phrases like “choosing the harder path.” Cillizza portrays Romney as a conflicted hero choosing between blind allegiance and moral decision making, with the latter ultimately winning out. The Fox article, however, insinuates that Mitt Romney backstabbed Republicans by suggesting that his actions secured him a “new respect from many liberals,” many of whom are affiliated with the so-called “incompetent state party” (in reference to the Iowa Caucuses). The article favors conservatives; its language denounces the Democratic Party and instills fear in conservatives that Romney is a traitor who has betrayed the Republicans.

A look at the vocabulary employed by Fox and CNN further highlights their differing biases. The Pudding, a website, published visual essays, uses statistics and graphs to display how Fox News and CNN cover news from August 25, 2017, to January 21, 2018. According to those figures, the word “Trump,” as opposed to “president,” was used 32,217 times by Fox News and 50,958 times by CNN. As shown, CNN uses the president’s name, as simply “Trump,” 58 percent more than Fox News, whereas Fox News refers to him more frequently with the title “president.” CNN uses Trump’s name informally, conveying less respect for him. A similar pattern corresponds to the word “obstruct.” Fox News used the word 161 times while CNN used it 473 times, which amounts to 193 percent more than Fox News. The last word we will look at is “tweet.” For a third time, CNN trumps Fox News, using the word 60 percent more frequently with 1,003 mentions compared to the 627 mentions from Fox. This statistic illustrates how CNN spends more time critiquing Trump’s tweets. If we look at the context of the word “tweet” in CNN’s news segments, words frequently associated with “tweet” are “obstruct,” “sexist,” “Trump,” and “claims.” His tweets are considered mere “claims,” rather than factual statements, emphasizing CNN’s critique on President Trump’s tweets. On the other hand, Fox News uses the words “president” and “news.” Fox News provides President Trump with his formal title, which shows respect. In addition, Fox News refrains from terming President Trump’s tweets as “claims.”

The two articles concerning Mitt Romney and Trump’s impeachment, as well as the vocabulary of each news channel, highlight the different messages conveyed by Fox News and CNN. The differences in what the news channels provide their readers and viewers are part of a larger picture concerning the hyperpolarization in America’s media. Hyperpolarization instigates more political divide between the readers, as a reader of each news source is more likely to side with one party due to being fed biased media.

APRIL 2020 ISSUE N. VI

12

2020 Democratic Candidates’ Use of Media Carina Li ‘22 From least to most active on social media:

Relative to other candidates’ usage of the platforms mentioned above, Joe Biden uses Facebook the most, with an average of around seven posts a day that has been steadily rising since July 2019. While he is relatively inactive on Twitter with less than 200 total tweets as of December 2019, he has the most liked tweet of any other candidate, attacking current United States President Donald Trump. Other tweets of his have branded Biden as adamantly anti-Trump on multiple occasions. Through social media, he makes it clear that he is anti-Trump, and appeals to his realtively older demographic of supoorters through his use of Facebook. His Tweets communicate a strong sense of nationalism, with some of his most common words on Twitter being “country,” “America,” and “nation.”

Joe Biden

Elizabeth Warren was fairly active on both ter, ranking second most active on both pla other candidates listed. Notably, her numb and followers on both accounts had been s since she announced her campaign, indica As of 2019, she had the most amount of Tw word “abortion” than any other candidate. around May, during the time when new law Alabama and Georgia regarding abortion. W more popular Tweets about violence again tion, she used Twitter to appeal to female v the importance of gender equality.

Pete Buttigieg

Elizabeth

Pete Buttigieg was fairly inactive on both Facebook and Twitter relative to other candidates. He tweeted less often than most of the other candidates, but when he did, the topic was typically either political outrage or a light-hearted story. This allowed Buttigieg to express a mix of political statements while branding himself as a likeable person, as one of the most frequently used words in his tweets is “thanks.”

An example of a political Tweet:

I’m outraged by these photos — all Americans should be. Children without access to showers, sleeping on concrete floors. 51 women in a juvenile cell built for 40. 88 men in a cell built for 41. What’s being done to them is being done in our name and with our money. #CloseTheCamps

FEATURES 13

In the 2020 presidential race, candidates have taken to social media in order to boost their campaigns, and their online presence has grown increasingly important as social media use continues to grow and as candidates try to appeal to younger voters. This article examines the social media usage of 2020 democratic candidates Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, and Andrew Yang. These candidates most commonly use Twitter, followed by Facebook and Instagram, and account activity typically spikes in the days around presidential debates.

h Facebook and Twitatforms among the ber of likes on Twitter steadily increasing ating steady growth. weets containing the These Tweets spiked ws were enacted in With some of her nst women and aborvoters and emphasizes

h Warren

Andrew Yang was by far the most active Twitter user, with the number of average twitter posts per day over double that of the next user, Elizabeth Warren. However, he has a total of only about 1.2 million Twitter followers, a relatively small amount in comparison to Bernie Sanders, who has over 10 million. Among the five candidates, he was fourth in facebook usage, although the activity he lacked in Facebook was made up for by his sheer number of Tweets, which totalled almost 3000 in 2019. His “average Twitter sentiment” based on balance between generally positive and negative Tweets was ranked more positive than any other candidate. Because of his relatively smaller supporter base, social media was a critical part of his platform, which he capitalized on in his Tweets.

An example in which he promoted his idea of a universal basic income:

“We asked fans on FB how Universal Basic Income ($1,000/month) would change their lives. This was one of the most moving. UBI helps so many who are trapped and dependent on others. Domestic abuse would go down. This gives millions the mobility they need to protect themselves.”

Bernie Sanders

Andrew Yang

Bernie Sanders is more active than any other candidate on both Facebook and Instagram. Through these two platforms, he reaches both generally older voters with Facebook and generally younger voters with Instagram. However, it appears that the youth vote has not come in clutch for him this election as he is currently lagging far behind Biden in the primary, suggesting that the focus on social media popular with younger demographics has not been effective. Sanders is the least active compared to other candidates on Twitter, with virtually no activity on that platform at all. This is especially notable considering the average posts on twitter per day for these five candidates is over double the average posts per day of any other social media account, making it one of the key social media platforms in the 2020 election.

Despite his inactivity, he has the most Twitter followers of any other candidate, showing that he has a strong supporter base without the need for much social media activity.

APRIL 2020 ISSUE N. VI

14

Free Press in the United States Timeline of Events Daniel Zhu ’23

The Ratification of the First Amendment 1791 In 1791, the First Amendment, along with nine nine others to the U.S. Constitution, were ratified. These ten amendments made up the Bill of Rights, a document enacted to protect the basic rights of United States citizens. The First Amendment protects the freedom of speech, religion, and press. Freedom of the press, a liberty that not all people around the world are able to enjoy, has allowed the U.S. to develop into the democracy of free expression for which many recognize it today.

John Peter Zenger’s Trial 1735 John Peter Zenger, an immigrant from Germany, published a weekly magazine called the New York Weekly Journal in New York City. One particular article publicly criticized and condemned the actions of the corrupt royal governor William S. Cosby by accusing him of committing many grave crimes, including rigging elections and allowing the enemy at the time, France, to explore the New York harbor. Though Zenger was only responsible for the printing of the magazine and not the writing itself, he was arrested since he refused to reveal the identities of the anonymous authors. In 1773, Zenger was charged with libel, the spreading of information, accurate or misleading, that opposes the government. After a long process in court, Zenger was found not guilty.

Though the right to freedom of press had not yet been ratified under the First Amendment, the decision made newspapers and publications across the country more free to print controversial opinions.

FDR Creates the Office of Censorship 1941 The Office of Censorship was an emergency agency set up by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt during World War II. The purpose of the agency was mainly to control public information that United States enemies could exploit and use for their advantage, relying on censorship to pursue their goals.

The agency primarily used a voluntary regulatory code, which was implemented in January 1942, that many press outlets willingly adopted. Despite freedom of press being a valued right by citizens across America, there was minimal backlash to the office’s creation, as Americans felt an urgency to protect sensitive information regarding to the war. The Office of Censorship closed several years later in November 1945, roughly two months following the end of the war.

FEATURES 15

The freedom of the press is often considered to be one of the cornerstones of the American liberal-democratic tradition, but the long road to its hallowed role stretches all the way back to colonial times. These are just a few of the landmark moments of the American free press.

T2 1971 In 1967, then secretary of defense Robert McNamara, conducted a secret government study on the United States involvement in Vietnam. When he completed the project just a year later, the 7,000-page project was labeled classified, and only 15 copies were made. Roughly three years later, Daniel Ellsberg, an employee who worked on the project, secretly made copies of the project and passed them on to the The New York Times, where they began to publish the nicknamed “Pentagon Papers.” In an attempt to prevent the The New York Times and several other news outlets from publishing their findings, the Nixon administration argued that the publications were endangering national security and brought the matter to the Supreme Court. However, the court did not find real urgency and stated that there was no real evidence showing that the safety of Americans was being put at risk; as a result, this prior restraint was unreasonable.

Edward Snowden was a former systems administrator under the Central Intelligence Agency who also worked under the private intelligence contractor, Dell. While working under the contractors, Snowden was able to download and disclose thousands of NSA documents revealing the extent of espionage the National Security Agency had on Americans’ phone and website usage as well as data disclosing their ability to spy on communications of foreign leaders. His sole motive for his actions was to “to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them.” Since being charged with unauthorized communication of national defense information and willful communication of classified communications intelligence information to an unauthorized person by the U.S. Justice Department, Snowden has fled to Russia, where he is currently living under temporary asylum.

The Edward Snowden Whistleblowing Incident 2013 APRIL 2020 ISSUE N. VI

16

An Update on the 2020 Election Annabelle Rustum ’21 The year 2020 welcomes a new decade, as well as the election of our next president; November approaches steadily on the political horizon.

Out of the 29 total Democratic candidates, only former Vice President Joe Biden remains. The three Republican challengers have dropped out, leaving Biden and Trump pushing forward in their respective campaigns in hopes of garnering the support of the American people.

The Iowa caucus on February 3 proved to have its fair share of technical issues. The release of its results were delayed until the following evening, inciting frustration among many. The top three winners of the caucus were Mayor Pete Buttigieg in first place, reeling in 26.2 percent of the vote, closely trailed by Sanders with 26.1 percent, followed by Senator Elizabeth Warren with 18 percent. The Iowa caucus is the first political contest of the election, and it often indicates the results of contests to come. Heading into the caucus, Biden, an early-election favorite praised by media for being the ‘most electable’ candidate, seemed to be losing ground to Warren, and the caucus confirmed these concerns.

Warren’s campaign heavily focused on Iowa, which certainly did not hurt considering she came in third, but did not provide the edge the Warren campaign was hoping for.

Though many found Buttigieg’s

success to be a surprise following his mediocre polling numbers prior to the caucus, the young candidate’s strong voter response can be broken down into two categories: geography and organization. As the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, it is not surprising that voters of a similar geographical region would support Buttigieg. This Midwest proximity helps because many voters believe their interests will be better prioritized by a president with ties to their region. Considering the latter of those two categories, Buttigieg’s campaign focused significantly on

this caucus, thoroughly training volunteers in Iowa and encouraging voters to sign commit-to-caucus cards, according to Politico. These categories are not mutually exclusive, however, as there were certainly cases of overwhelmed voters signing a commit-to-caucus card for the familiar, Midwest mayor with the enthusiastic and (in true Buttigieg fashion) articulate campaigners.

In the next contest in New Hampshire, the Democratic National Convention counted another close result with Sanders in first place, pulling in 25.7 percent of the vote, and Buttigieg tailing in a close second place with 24.4 percent. Klobuchar arrived in third place with 19.8 percent. The Sanders campaign anticipated a strong showing in the primary due to the geographical proximity of New Hampshire to his home state, Vermont, which he represents in the U.S. Senate. The Nevada caucus continued Sanders’ winning streak, fueling the campaign with hope after receiving almost 50 percent of the vote. As the Sanders campaign pulled ahead, it became widely anticipated that he would become the Democratic nominee. However, Biden’s remarkable comeback in South Carolina, as well

FEATURES 19

as the coalition of the Democratic establishment, occurred on the eve of Super Tuesday, shattering hope for Sanders and his support base.

Candidates Buttigieg and Klobuchar dropped out suddenly before Super Tuesday on March 3, joining forces behind and endorsing Biden in an effort to consolidate the support of the Democratic base. This move was incredibly successful, as Biden won ten out of fourteen states, including Oklahoma, Maine, and Minnesota, all of which Sanders won in his 2016 run. In what some dubbed a “Second Super Tuesday” on March 10, six more states held primaries as Biden’s campaign pulled away from his opponents. Biden won all but North Dakota. On April 8, frontrunner Bernie Sanders exited the presidential race, likely securing Biden the Democratic presidential ticket. In a live-streamed address, Sanders explained that victory was unlikely and while the campaign was over, his ideological movement will continue to spark change.

However, many election contests have been postponed due to an apolitical yet fierce opponent that commanded the immediate attention of the country and the world at large, COVID-19. It is at the discretion of each state to make decisions regarding their respective contests, but President Trump has advised Americans to adopt the practice of social distancing to combat the spread of the virus, preventing individuals from gathering at the polls to vote at this time. Although the coronavirus has hijacked nearly all media attention, observing the responses of political leaders in a time of crisis richly informs voters in their decision-making process on who to cast their vote for this election season.

As many Lawrentians will be eligible to vote this year, it is crucial to stay informed and form independent opinions. After all, voting is a civic duty and a right not everyone across the world has access to. Go on, exercise your freedom.

DELEGATES WON

1,305

936

To win the Democratic nomination, candidates must earn 1,991 delegates.

1,432

To win the Republican one, candidates must earn 1,276 delegates.

DOMESTIC

An Open-Letter to Bernie Sanders Cate Levy ’20

Dear Bernie, Congratulations on how far you made it in the race. I want to preface this letter by saying that I really was rooting for you!

Your ideas have inspired a movement that has given many Americans hope. Unfortunately, 2020 was not your year, and, to be honest, I don’t know when your time to implement democratic socialism in the United States will come. Through this letter, I hope to make the case that your political beliefs are not your problems; it is your failure to take into account American political culture.

To begin, socialism is deeply rooted in collectivism. The United States was a country founded on rugged individualism.

While the government–Homestead Acts, FDR’s New Deal, GI Bill, etc.– contributes to the socioeconomic success of Americans, many still believe that they work independently from the government to realize “the American dream.” Bernie, trust me; I want to believe that most Americans care about the greater good, but the truth is, our political culture is infused with deep-seated admiration for people who “pull themselves up by the bootstraps.”

We are not yet at a place where the majority can enthusiastically support a democratic socialist system. Americans still believe that there are deserving and undeserving poor. The rhetoric associated with “welfare queens” from the age of Reagan still pervades.

In addition, Bernie, you are a populist and simultaneously a socialist. I do not believe those two ideologies can successfully coexist. Populism is a movement rooted in pitting the working class against elites. Populism feeds off of pessimism.

Most importantly, though, populism promotes that the disillusioned and disadvantaged find the same success as their oppressors. Socialism cannot successfully be implemented if working-class Americans want to accumulate the wild wealth of the very billionaires they despise; that would be another form of capitalism, a system that embraces the zero-sum game.

I am not suggesting that you are advocating for working-class people to try and accumulate that amount of wealth; I am just saying that I find your union of populism and socialism contradictory and harmful to your greater cause.

I want to close by saying that I really am sad that this election did not work out for you or for those of us who believed in your message. The two-party system failed you. As the title of Alexis de Tocqueville’s most famous work notes, we are living in a democracy in America, not anywhere else. And with that comes a set of challenges and subtleties unique to the United States that we must address headon if we ever hope to shift problematic paradigms.

Thank you for all that you’ve done, Cate Levy ’20

APRIL 2020 ISSUE N. VI

20

POP PERSPECTIVE INTERPRETING LAWRENTIANS’ INTERACTIONS WITH POLITICS THROUGH THE MEDIA

// STAFF REPORT BASED ON 104 RESPONSES.

Cable TV

How do you receive your news?

9.62%

Podcasts

25.96%

Word-of-Mouth

48.08%

In-hand Newspaper

10.58%

Social Media

71.15%

Online Ne ws Outlets

88.46% 0

20

40

60

80

100

40 35

How important is it to a political campaign that a candidate has an online presence?

30 25 20 15 10 5 0

1

Very

2

3

4

Does social media intro- 24.04% duce you to more diverse standpoints, or does it just reinforce the views you already have? 14.42% FEATURES

5

Not at all

Both More diverse standpoints

61.54%

Rein forcement of current views

Endnotes

Social Media and Climate Change (3) Ecosia. “Ecosia.” Ecosia. Accessed February 10, 2020. https://info.ecosia.org/ Rosenblatt, Kalhan. “Australian wildfires spur biggest Facebook fundraiser ever.” NBC News. Last modified January 6, 2020. Accessed February 9, 2020. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/donations-pour-australian-wildfires-continueburn-n1111156.

Worland, Justin. “Even Oil Companies Are Now Saying Climate Change Will Hurt Their Business.” Time. Last modified March 1, 2018. Accessed February 10, 2020.

Chinese Coverage of the Coronavirus (4) Chen, Nanshan, Min Zhou, Xuan Dong, and Jieming Qu. “Epidemiological and Clinical Characteristics of 99 Cases of 2019 Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia in Wuhan, China: A Descriptive Study.” The Lancet, January 30, 2020. Accessed February 5, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30211-7.

Hong, Brendon. “China Arrested Doctors Who Warned about Coronavirus Outbreak. Now Death Toll’s Rising, Stocks Are Plunging.” The Daily Beast. Last modified February 3, 2020. Accessed February 5, 2020. https://www.thedailybeast. com/china-arrested-doctors-who-warned-about-coronavirus-outbreak-now-death-tolls-rising-stocks-are-plunging.

Palmer, James. “China Is under Lockdown.” Foreign Policy. Last modified February 5, 2020. Accessed February 5, 2020. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/05/china-lockdown-wuhan-coronavirus-government-propaganda-xi-jinping/.

Palmer, James. “Chinese Officials Can’t Help Lying about the Wuhan Virus.” Foreign Policy. Last modified February 3, 2020. Accessed February 5, 2020. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/03/wuhan-coronavirus-coverup-lies-chineseofficials-xi-jinping/.

Yeung, Jessie. “February 4 Coronavirus News.” CNN. Last modified January 4, 2020. Accessed February 4, 2020. https://www.cnn.com/asia/live-news/coronavirus-outbreak-02-04-20/index.html.

County Coverage of Coronavirus (5) Adam, Shamim. “Coronavirus: These Countries, Airlines Restrict Travel to China.” Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg, February 2, 2020. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-02/coronavirus-these-countries-airlines-restrict-travelto-china.

“Arab Health Officials Scramble to Prevent Spread of Coronavirus | Voice of America - English.” Accessed February 25, 2020. https://www.voanews.com/middle-east/arab-health-officials-scrambling-avoid-severe-coronavirus-outbreak. “‘I’m Not a Virus’: French Asians Angered by Racism.” BBC News, January 29, 2020, sec. Europe. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51294305.

Iqbal, Nosheen. “Coronavirus Fears Fuel Racism and Hostility, Say British-Chinese.” The Observer, February 1, 2020, sec. World news. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/01/coronavirus-weaponised-way-to-be-openly-racist.

Murphy (now), Simon, Matthew Weaver, Ben Quinn, Naaman Zhou (earlier), Ben Quinn, and Matthew Weaver. “First Confirmed Virus Case in Africa – as It Happened.” The Guardian, February 14, 2020, sec. World news. https://www. theguardian.com/world/live/2020/feb/14/coronavirus-latest-updates-wuhan-hubei-china-deaths-cruise-ship-sydney-cases-covid19-live-news.

Myers, Steven Lee, and Edward Wong. “Coronavirus Worsens U.S.-China Ties and Bolsters Hawks in Washington.” The New York Times, February 19, 2020, sec. World. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/19/world/asia/us-china-coronavirus. html.

Specia, Megan, and Constant Méheut. “U.K. Declares Coronavirus ‘Imminent Threat’ as Europe Scrambles.” The New York Times, February 10, 2020, sec. World. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/10/world/europe/coronavirus-europe. html.

Radu, Sintia. “Global Media Accused of Bias in Coverage of Coronavirus.” U.S. News & World Report, U.S. News & World Report, 7 Feb. 2020, 7:00 am, www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2020-02-07/how-the-global-mediacovered-stories-about-the-coronavirus-outbreak.

UPI. “Egypt, Algeria, South Africa at ‘high Risk’ for Coronavirus, Analysis Finds.” Accessed February 25, 2020. https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2020/02/19/Egypt-Algeria-South-Africa-at-high-risk-for-coronavirus-analysisfinds/9751582125046/.

Wang, Vivian, Donald G. McNeil Jr, Farnaz Fassihi, and Steven Lee Myers. “With 4 Deaths in Iran and More Cases on 3 Continents, Fears of Coronavirus Pandemic Rise.” The New York Times, February 21, 2020, sec. World. https://www. nytimes.com/2020/02/21/world/asia/china-coronavirus-iran.html.

Zhong, Raymond. “China Clamps Down on Coronavirus Coverage as Cases Surge.” The New York Times, February 5, 2020, sec. World. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/05/world/asia/china-coronavirus-censorship.html.

Politics of the Coronavirus (6) Begley, Sharon “Once widely criticized, the Wuhan quarantine bought the world time to prepare for Covid-19,” STAT, February 21, 2020, accessed March 14, 2020, https://www.statnews.com/2020/02/21/coronavirus-wuhanquarantine-bought-world-time-to-prepare/.

Brockwell, Gillian, “Trump is ignoring the lessons of 1918 flu pandemic that killed millions, historian says,” The Washington Post, February 29, 2020, accessed March 11, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/02/29/1918flu-coronavirus-trump/.

Fottrel, Quentin,”Mayor of Wuhan, epicenter of coronavirus outbreak, says 5 million people left the city before travel restrictions were imposed,” MarketWatch, January 27, 2020, accessed March 12, 2020, https://www.marketwatch. com/story/mayor-of-wuhan-epicenter-of-coronavirus-outbreak-says-5-million-people-left-the-city-before-travel-restrictions-were-imposed-2020-01-26.

McKay, Betsy, “Coronavirus Vs. Flu: Which Virus Is Deadlier?,” The Wall Street Journal, March 10, 2020, U.S., accessed March 11, 2020, https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-vs-flu-which-virus-is-deadlier-11583856879.

McKay, “Coronavirus Vs. Flu,” U.S. Netburn, Deborah,”The flu has killed far more people than coronavirus. So why all the frenzy about COVID-19?,” Los Angeles Times, March 6, 2020, accessed March 11, 2020, https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/the-fluhas-killed-far-more-people-than-coronavirus-so-why-all-the-frenzy-about-covid-19/ar-BB10OgJF. Netburn, “The flu has killed,”.

Qin, Amy, “China May Be Beating the Coronavirus, at a Painful Cost,” The New York Times, March 7, 2020, accessed March 14, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/07/world/asia/china-coronavirus-cost.html.

Qin, “China May Be Beating,”.

Xiong, Yong, and Nectar Gan. “This Chinese doctor tried to save lives, but was silenced. Now he has Coronavirus.” Cable News Network, February 4, 2020, World. Accessed February 17, 2020. https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/03/asia/ coronavirus-doctor-whistle-blower-intl-hnk/index.html.

Xiong and Gan, “This Chinese,” World.

Yong Xiong and Nectar Gan, “This Chinese doctor tried to save lives, but was silenced. Now he has Coronavirus.,” Cable News Network, February 4, 2020, World, accessed February 17, 2020, https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/03/asia/ coronavirus-doctor-whistle-blower-intl-hnk/index.html.

Media Vocabulary (7) DiMaggio, Paul, John Evans, and Bryson Bethany. “Have American’s Social Attitude Become More Polarized?” American Journal of Sociology 102, no. 3 (November 1996). http://educ.jmu.edu/~brysonbp/pubs/PBJ.pdf NW, 1615 L. St, Suite 800Washington, and DC 20036USA202-419-4300 | Main202-857-8562 | Fax202-419-4372 | Media Inquiries. “Political Polarization.” Pew Research Center (blog). Accessed January 28, 2020. https://www.pewresearch.org/ topics/political-polarization/.

“Bipartisan: In a Sentence – WORDS IN A SENTENCE.” Accessed February 4, 2020. https://wordsinasentence.com/bipartisan-in-a-sentence/.

Amadeo, Kimberly. “The Hidden Power of Being a Lame Duck.” The Balance. Accessed February 4, 2020. https://www.thebalance.com/lame-duck-definition-session-how-it-got-its-name-3306307.

Washington, Kathy Gill Kathy Gill is a former instructor at the University of, A. Former Lobbyist, and Spent 20 Years Working Public Affairs Executive in the Natural Resources Industry. “Do You Know How the Coattail Effect Works in American Politics?” ThoughtCo. Accessed February 5, 2020. https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-the-coattail-effect-3368088.

“Coattail in a Sentence - How to Use ‘Coattail’ in a Sentence - Ichacha Sentence Maker.” Accessed February 5, 2020. https://eng.ichacha.net/zaoju/coattail.html.

“Pork Barrel Definition and Meaning | Collins English Dictionary.” Accessed February 5, 2020. https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/pork-barrel.

Kenton, Will. “What Is Pork Barrel Politics?” Investopedia. Accessed February 5, 2020. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/pork_barrel_politics.asp.

“Pork Barrel Definition and Meaning | Collins English Dictionary.” Accessed February 5, 2020. https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/pork-barrel.

“Definition of FISHING EXPEDITION.” Accessed February 5, 2020. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fishing+expedition.

“Propaganda | Definition from the Politics Topic | Politics.” Accessed February 10, 2020. https://www.ldoceonline.com/Politics-topic/propaganda.

“Propaganda Is Everywhere.” Accessed February 10, 2020. https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297a/War%20Reporting%20on%20the%20U.S.%20War%20in%20Iraq.htm.

Everything After Z by Dictionary.com. “What Does Fake News Mean? | Politics by Dictionary.Com.” Accessed February 10, 2020. https://www.dictionary.com/e/politics/fake-news/.

American Civil Liberties Union. “What Is Censorship?” Accessed February 10, 2020. https://www.aclu.org/other/what-censorship.

“Political Censorship.” In Wikipedia, January 30, 2020. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Political_censorship&oldid=938358483.

Trump in the Media (8) “Presidential Approval Ratings -- Bill Clinton.” Gallup.com, Gallup, 26 Nov. 2019, news.gallup.com/poll/116584/presidential-approval-ratings-bill-clinton.aspx.

Kalb, Marvin. One Scandalous Story: Clinton, Lewinsky, and Thirteen Days That Tarnished American Journalism. Free Press, 2001.

Media Trump Hatred Shows In 92% Negative Coverage Of His Presidency: Study. 10 Oct. 2018, www.investors.com/politics/editorials/media-trump-hatred-coverage/.

News Sources Critique (9-10) “Chris Cillizza.” Wikipedia, February 3, 2020. Accessed February 10, 2020. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chris_Cillizza&oldid=939031003 Editor-at-large, Analysis by Chris Cillizza, CNN. “Mitt Romney Finally Drew a Line in the Sand against Donald Trump.” CNN. Accessed February 10, 2020.

“Howard Kurtz.” Text. Fox News. Last modified February 10, 2020. Accessed February 10, 2020. https://www.foxnews.com/person/k/howard-kurtz.

“Howard Kurtz.” Wikipedia, February 8, 2020. Accessed February 10, 2020. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Howard_Kurtz&oldid=939803898.

Kurtz, Howard. “Trump Easily Beats Impeachment, Romney Vote Stirs Backlash.” Text.Article. Fox News. Last modified February 5, 2020. Accessed February 10, 2020. https://www.foxnews.com/media/trump-easily-beats-impeachmentromney-vote-stirs-backlash.

“The Differences in How CNN, MSNBC, and FOX Cover the News.” The Pudding. Accessed February 11, 2020. https://pudding.cool/2018/01/chyrons.

Democratic Candidates’ Media Usage (11-12) “Andrew Yang Twitter Statistics.” Social Bakers. Last modified February 3, 2020. Accessed February 2, 2020. https://www.socialbakers.com/statistics/twitter/profiles/detail/2228878592-andrewyang.

“Bernie Sanders Twitter Statistics.” Social Bakers. Last modified February 3, 2020. Accessed February 2, 2020. https://www.socialbakers.com/statistics/twitter/profiles/detail/216776631-berniesanders.

Glazer, Emily. “Presidential Candidates Take to Social Media.” Wall Street Journal, December 19, 2019. Accessed February 2, 2020. https://www.wsj.com/articles/presidential-candidates-take-to-social-media-11574942401.

Heath, Ryan, and Beatrice Jin. “Where 2020 Democrats Shine and Stumble.” Politico. Last modified November 20, 2019. Accessed February 2, 2020. https://www.politico.com/interactives/2020-democratic-candidates-rethinking-thepresidential-field/.

Tauberg, Michael. “Which 2020 Candidate Is the Best at Twitter?” Towardsdatascience. Last modified May 30, 2019. Accessed February 2, 2020. https://towardsdatascience.com/which-2020-candidate-is-the-best-at-twitter-fd083d13fb4e.

US Free Press Timeline (13-14) “The Trial of John Peter Zenger.” ushistory.org. Independence Hall Association. Accessed February 5, 2020. https://www.ushistory.org/us/7c.asp.

“Office of Censorship.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, January 19, 2020. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Censorship.

“Secrets of Victory: The Office of Censorship and The American Press and Radio in World War II.” Central Intelligence Agency. Central Intelligence Agency, June 27, 2008. https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/ csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol46no3/article10.html.

Robertson, Steve. “New York Times Co. v. United States.” New York Times Co. v. United States. Accessed February 5, 2020. “{{Meta.pageTitle}}.” {{meta.siteName}}. Accessed February 5, 2020. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1970/1873.

“Who Is Edward Snowden, the Man Who Spilled the NSA’s Secrets?” NBCNews.com. NBCUniversal News Group, May 26, 2014. https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/edward-snowden-interview/who-edward-snowden-man-who-spillednsas-secrets-n114861.

Greenwald, Glenn, Ewen MacAskill, and Laura Poitras. “Edward Snowden: the Whistleblower behind the NSA Surveillance Revelations.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, June 11, 2013. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/ jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance.

American Portrayal of Foreign Events (15-16) “15 Killed in Violent Protests, Clashes in Chile.” Voice of America. https://www.voanews.com/americas/15-killed-violent-protests-clashes-chile.

Collyns, Dan. “Indigenous Ecuadorians Too Strong to Be Ignored after Deal to End Protests.” The Guardian. October 16, 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/16/ecuador-indigenous-protesters-bittersweet-triumph.

MacLeod, Alan. “With People in the Streets Worldwide, Media Focus Uniquely on Hong Kong.” FAIR. December 06, 2019. https://fair.org/home/with-people-in-the-streets-worldwide-media-focus-uniquely-on-hong-kong.

“Press Briefing Note on Haiti Unrest, 1 November 2019 - Haiti.” ReliefWeb. https://reliefweb.int/report/haiti/press-briefing-note-haiti-unrest-1-november-2019.

International Censorship Map (17-18) 10 Most Censored Countries. September 10, 2019. Accessed January 25, 2020. https://cpj.org/reports/2019/09/10-most-censored-eritrea-north-korea-turkmenistan-journalist.php Bennett, Isabella. “Media Censorship in China.” In Civil Liberties, edited by Noël Merino, 60-69. Global Viewpoints. Detroit, MI: Greenhaven Press, 2013. Gale eBooks (accessed January 25, 2020). https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/ CX2074000018/GVRL?u=lawr21149&sid=GVRL&xid=fdc016ac Council on Foreign Relations. “Media Censorship in China.” Accessed January 25, 2020. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/media-censorship-china.

“Cuba,” November 1, 2018. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2018/cuba “Eritrea,” March 10, 2016. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2016/eritrea.

“How Iran’s Government Shut Off the Internet.” Wired. Accessed February 3, 2020. https://www.wired.com/story/iran-internet-shutoff/.

“Iran,” November 1, 2018. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2018/iran.

Margolin, Madison. “Inside Eritrea: The World’s Most Censored Country.” Vice (blog), July 20, 2016. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/gv5dqx/inside-eritrea-the-worlds-most-censored-country.

May, Tiffany, and Olivia Mitchell Ryan. “After John Oliver’s Jokes About Xi Jinping, China Blocks HBO Website.” The New York Times, June 25, 2018, sec. World. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/world/asia/china-hbo-john-oliver-xijinping.html.

Shih, Gerry. “Chinese Doctor Who Tried to Raise Alarm on Coronavirus in Wuhan Dies on ‘Front Line’ of Medical Fight.” News. The Washington Post, February 6, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/chinese-doctorwho-tried-to-raise-alarm-on-coronavirus-in-wuhan-dies-from-disease/2020/02/06/8bf305a2-48f9-11ea-8a1f-de1597be6cbc_story.html.

“Six Facts about Censorship in Cuba.” Accessed February 3, 2020. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2016/03/six-facts-about-censorship-in-cuba/.

Vietnam Country Report. 2018. Accessed January 25, 2020. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2018/vietnam.

General Election Update (19-20) Akela Lacy and Ryan Grim, “Amid Social Security Fight, Joe Biden Is Losing Ground among Middle-Aged and Older Voters,” The Intercept, last modified January 28, 2020, https://theintercept.com/2020/01/28/joe-biden-older-voters-berniesanders/.

Elena Schneider, “Inside Buttigieg’s Iowa Comeback,” Politico, last modified February 7, 2020, https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/07/inside-buttigiegs-iowa-comeback-111837.

Henry Olsen, “Elizabeth Warren Might Regret Her Feud with Bernie Sanders,” The Washington Post, last modified January 14, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/01/14/elizabeth-warren-might-regret-her-feud-withbernie-sanders/.

22

The First Amendment A Student Publication of The Lawrenceville School • Founded in the Bicentennial Year, 2010