performed by the steel band at SF Jazz on Nov

TRAVEL TOURNAMENT Members of the debate team attend the annual Cal State University tournament in Long Beach. The team won 2nd, 7th, 12th, 13th, 14th, and 15th speaker awards.

No ‘I’ in all-around success for the parliamentary debate team

Cumulative back-to-back victories are a testament to the team’s growth

STORY Josie B. PHOTOS Riyana S.

In Long Beach, California, cheers ring out as a crowd of students lines up to form a human tunnel. Moments later, seniors Riyana S. and Abi W. parade under the crowd’s hands, accompanied by the opening notes of “Silk Chiffon” by MUNA and Phoebe Bridgers.

The parliamentary debate team had left for the annual California State University tournament days earlier, and after a weekend of rounds, it was time to celebrate an exciting victory. Riyana and Abi took first place overall, winning the tournament for Nueva.

Head coach Sam Timinsky said the moment stuck with him as the team was not only celebrating a success, but also giving much-deserved recognition to their fellow teammates.

“It wasn't a question that [the tunnel] was what we were going to do; everybody did it without thinking,” said Timinsky. “It was super sweet.”

The October tournament has been far from the team's only victory this fall. If not winning overall, as they have done back-to-back, they regularly make it to the quarterfinal and semifinal rounds of competitions.

What was the key to success this season? One important factor, according to research lead Lauren S. '24, was the team's research and drill program.

“We tend to spend only about a third of our time in practice rounds, which are actually full start-to-finish rounds,” said Lauren. The other two-thirds, she says, is spent listening to and giving feedback. “There's lots and lots and lots of repetition, just like a tennis player hitting thousands of times.”

According to Timinsky, the group's collective effort to gather files has evolved into a strategy for encouraging teamwork as students are unified around common experiences and frustrations.

“Research is not for yourself. It's the gift you give to the team. Everybody donates from the beginning; it's the way you buy in,” Timinsky said. “Just like if you're becoming a partner at a law firm, you have to buy equity, and your equity on this squad is your donation of files.”

Ben J. ‘23, widely acknowledged as the leader of the team's culture, said another key part of the team’s practices involves adapting what they are studying depending on what kind of tournament they are going to next. Depending on the tournament, judges will have different levels of experience and therefore require different arguments.

“Right now, we're switching from traditionally lay arguments that we would read in front of parents or inexperienced judges, to very technical and critical arguments,” Ben said. “We are talking about capitalism and we're talking about gender issues, and that's a switch we have to make.”

Ben said that this year's changes have gone beyond their topics in tournaments. With winning a constant certainty, the team has had more time to spend on strengthening group bonds.

“We've gotten to a point where we pretty consistently win things; we get close to winning most tournaments,” Ben said. “I think that's allowing us to focus more on the social aspect, like team bonding, and trying to create a positive space.”

The team's efforts to establish this space have centered on mentorship opportunities and forging connections between new debaters and experienced upperclassmen. In recent years, the group has expanded rapidly, and it now includes 30 to 40 students from all four grade levels.

“The team is made up of kids from all different grades. It’s a good way for younger kids to get to know older kids and use them as mentors,” Ben said. “I found the mentorship program super helpful when I started; older debaters became role models.”

According to Timinsky, a new aspect of success that has come with this growth has been the cumulative wins across grade and experience levels, rather than one dominant partnership.

“When we win, it's not the same team over and over again. That’s the biggest win; not only are we winning things we have won before, but the team is winning broadly. It's not one powerhouse team,” Timinsky said.

Building the team up as a community rather than a series of individuals, Timinsky says, is one of the most important aspects of the team's future.

“The fact that we oriented ourselves first, mainly around the community, and made sure that we're collectively growing, not just one partnership, is really important.”

Sophomore’s tutoring program helps underprivileged students

Natalie S. ’25 offers academic support to local low-income, first-generation students through a student-led tutoring program

STORY Char P. & Owen Y-L. PHOTO Natalie S.

From costly standardized test prep courses to poorly-funded public schools, successfully navigating the US education system is a pay-to-play. According to the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation, the largest private scholarship provider in the country, only 28 percent of first graders in the top quartile of achievement were from lower-income families.

Natalie S. ’25 aims to close this gap through her tutoring program, which she co-leads with a friend at Crystal Springs Uplands School in the grade above her. Natalie started as a tutor when she was in fourth grade, and currently meets weekly with students in kindergarten through fifth grade.

The program partners with the Young Scholars program, an extension of Family Connections, a nonprofit that has provided academic and mental health support to low-income, first-generation families in the Bay Area since 1993.

“Many of the students are incredibly smart but don't necessarily have the resources to go into gifted programs or schools like Nueva,” Natalie said. “We make sure they're engaging in material that's more than what they get at school.”

Younger students focus on math and reading comprehension, while third through fifth graders receive support as they prepare for standardized testing and essay writing.

Furthermore, many of Family Connections’ students come from Spanish-speaking families and don’t receive English language support at home. Tutors with fluency or proficiency in Spanish help to bridge that divide and ensure each student feels comfortable.

Regardless of each student’s learning background and abilities, Natalie’s program focuses on providing individualized instruction and support.

“We strive for a one-on-one ratio between the tutors and the kids," Natalie said. If there are more students than tutors, students are grouped into twos or threes; the tutors aim to pair students who are at similar academic levels and work well together.”

Fourth and fifth graders also get a unique opportunity to tutor younger students, which Natalie says is beneficial and enriching for both parties. "If a younger student is struggling, how do you help them sound out a word without telling them what it is? How do you interact with them and make sure they're engaged?" Natalie said. "The older students learn a lot about how to help younger ones."

Natalie’s favorite part is seeing the students blossom and simply “smile and laugh more.”

“It's great to see the kids become more confident,” Natalie said. “When they come to us, we try to make sure that they are understanding the content, however long it takes.”

However, maintaining a stable cohort of both students and tutors has been a challenge, especially after the pandemic put the program on hold.

“Pre-Covid, we had a solid group of seven to 15 students,” Natalie said. “We're hoping to get back to that kind of number.”

In the long term, Natalie hopes to expand the program and “make sure that it will outlive [the current tutors].” Several Nueva students have already joined as tutors; Natalie encourages anyone interested to email her to get involved.

“This is something that we hope students for years to come will be able to interact with—both the tutors and the students with Family Connections,” Natalie said.

A HELPING HAND Volunteer tutor Margot S. ’25 assists a young student with math homework. "One of my favorite things is when you can tell that something has finally clicked for them," Natalie said.

Vox populi: Opening the birdcage

Elon Musk assumed complete control of Twitter in October. What could that mean for free speech?

STORY Owen Y-L. ART Anwen C.

I. “A DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD”

CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1

“Just setting up my twttr.”

With this tweet by co-founder Jack Dorsey on Mar. 21, 2006, “twttr,” as it was originally named, unfolded its wings for the first time.

Initially prototyped as an internal SMSbased messaging service for employees of podcasting company Odeo, Twitter quickly exploded globally, growing from five thousand tweets per day to over 60 million daily in its first three years.

Much of Twitter’s allure was found in its 140-character tweet limit. What was once a capacity restriction for SMS messages sprouted a novel form of social media: ”microblogging.” Twitter became a space for “sharing funny stories, grievances, the little things that pop into your brain at 2 a.m., and everything in between,” according to Riyana S. ’23.

Riyana described Twitter as a “personal diary” and highlighted the ability to foster and join communities of like-minded users. Everyone from journalists to K-pop superfans could find a home on Twitter.

“The best thing I’ve gained from Twitter has been knowledge, book recommendations, and interesting little facts and tidbits,” Riyana said. “I follow a lot of really interesting political organizers and activists, and learning from them has definitely broadened my horizons.”

Politics, in particular, has thrived on the platform, in part due to Twitter’s emphasis on cultivating a “free and global conversation,” according to the company’s mission statement.

Many prominent political figures flocked to Twitter to join this conversation, transforming it into a virtual town square for everything from election announcements—Barack Obama first declared his historic 2012 presidential victory on the platform—to controversial opinions. Pew Research Center estimated that one-third of all tweets in 2021 were political in nature.

Jack L. ’23, an active Twitter microblogger since 2019, likened the site to a room everyone can “scream into.” But unlike other social networking sites like Instagram and Facebook, Jack said, Twitter fosters uniquely bidirectional relationships, even with celebrities or strangers.

“The thing about Twitter is not only can you scream into the room,” Jack said, “but you can also see what other very famous people are screaming into the room.”

However, the platforms of some prominent figures can have dangerous consequences.

Former President Donald Trump was one of Twitter’s most vocal users, leveraging his account to broadcast and propagate racist, Covid-denial, and other harmful rhetoric.

During the 2020 presidential election, Trump repeatedly made false, inflammatory claims about election results that ultimately resulted in the deadly insurrection at the United States Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Trump’s personal Twitter account was permanently suspended two days later “due to the risk of further incitement of violence,” according to the company’s official blog. content can achieve a global audience with a click and a bit of algorithmic luck, he said, Twitter can also be used as a megaphone for false and dangerous ideologies.

“Small conspiracy theories could travel really far because of these technologies,” Jack said. He compared the social media platform to the historical development of the mail system and the telegraph: “How is Twitter’s enabling of fringe topics any different?”

In an effort to combat disinformation, in 2021, Twitter launched Community Notes, which allows users to contribute context to potentially misleading tweets. Once enough users rate a disclaimer as “helpful,” it is displayed publicly below the corresponding tweet.

However, Twitter’s attempts to create a safer, more curated online environment would soon be challenged and even rebuilt from the ground up. not).” He also suggested in one interview that Blue subscribers’ tweets would be “prioritized” by the algorithm, while non-subscribers would be suppressed, purportedly to reduce spam.

Along those lines, one of Musk’s main reforms has been a shift towards “freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach,” as Musk described in one tweet. The content moderation policy remained the same, he assured, but instead of banning offenders, hateful or harmful content would be suppressed and made difficult to find on the site.

In a step towards this goal, Musk reinstated the accounts of previously banned figures, including Donald Trump, whose reinstatement was based on the results of a poll Musk conducted with his Twitter followers.

“Vox Populi, Vox Dei,” Musk tweeted after 51.8% voted to unban the former president, quoting a Latin phrase meaning “the voice of the people is the voice of God.”

In another move towards unrestricted speech, Twitter stopped enforcing the Covid misinformation policy, which had been in place since 2020 to flag and remove misleading content.

Additionally, Musk has repeatedly aired his distrust of mainstream media, even calling an article from The New York Times biggest failures in US journalistic integrity of the 21st century” in a tweet. His goal is to transform Twitter into an avenue for citizen journalism by encouraging competition and disrupting the media’s “oligopoly on information,” he said.

“Twitter is like open-sourcing the news,” he summed up in a tweet.

In response to skeptics, Musk tweeted, “Truth over time builds trust. Nothing else.”

Only time would tell whether Twitter’s 450 million monthly users would be willing to take that risk.

“I’ve seen really adorable and heartwarming interactions on Twitter. But I’ve also seen some pretty disturbing examples: misogynists are provided a platform to connect with each other."

While Twitter has served as a channel for prominent figures, it also plays a unique role in amplifying the voices of ordinary people.

“It creates opportunities for new voices to come out and push against dominant narratives in our society,” said upper school history teacher Tom Dorrance.

For example, Donnya J. ’23, who joined Twitter “for the memes,” highlighted how the site gives a platform to marginalized content creators.

“Viral fame due to the spread of memes gives a chance for non-white or non-rich influencers to become ‘Twitter famous’ and essentially make a living for themselves,” Donnya said.

For Riyana, however, the communitybuilding aspect is a “double-edged sword.”

“I’ve seen really adorable and heartwarming interactions, where people find their people through Tweets about shared interests or a mutual celebrity idol,” Riyana said, “but I’ve also seen some pretty disturbing examples: misogynists are provided a platform to connect with each other and I’ve witnessed people bond over a shared violent dislike of a person.” Jack expressed a similar view: while lighthearted

II. “THE BIRD IS FREED”

At first glance, it appears almost oxymoronic: the wealthiest person on Earth purchasing a social media platform to amplify the voices of the masses. Yet that’s exactly what Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, set out to do this year.

The tumultuous saga began in April after Musk acquired a 9% stake in Twitter, making him the company’s largest shareholder. A week later, he presented an unsolicited offer to purchase Twitter for roughly $44 billion and expressed his intention to take the company private. The company’s board unanimously accepted the offer shortly thereafter.

In May, Musk abruptly threatened to withdraw from the deal after reports surfaced that 5% of the platform’s users were bots. In response, Twitter filed a lawsuit against Musk, claiming he had breached contract, triggering a bitter legal battle that dragged through the summer.

Finally, on Oct. 26, Musk tweeted a video of himself carrying a porcelain sink into Twitter’s headquarters with the caption, “Entering Twitter HQ – let that sink in!” The next day, he announced the completion of the $44-billiondollar purchase with a tweet: “the bird is freed.”

Almost immediately, the newly selfproclaimed “Chief Twit” began enacting a series of sweeping changes. He fired top executives and nearly half of the company’s 7,500 employees. In addition, hundreds of employees resigned, leaving a skeletal workforce as Musk began laying the foundation for his ambitious Twitter 2.0.

On Nov. 9, Musk launched the updated Twitter Blue service with the fated verification badge feature, which was later paused after impersonation accounts wreaked havoc. Musk stated that a modified version would return in the future, with a “gold check for companies, grey check for government, blue for individuals (celebrity or

Free speech activists have rejoiced over Musk’s reforms, which have, in particular, allowed many far-right extremists to return to the platform and participate without consequence.

Brands, on the other hand, have been more hesitant to be associated with a platform that harbors unchecked, potentially dangerous speech. Despite Musk’s claims that hate speech had declined after his takeover, York Times reported that the number of daily tweets using a slur against Black people had tripled. Transphobic slurs increased by 62%, homophobic slurs by 58%, and misogynistic language by 33%.

Out of caution, many companies, including General Motors, Coca-Cola, and Verizon, paused their advertising campaigns on the site. Advertising constituted about 90% of Twitter’s revenue in 2021, so a mass exodus of willing advertisers could cost the company billions of dollars annually.

Musk responded with a tweet blaming activists for pressuring brands and inducing the subsequent “massive drop in revenue.”

“Extremely messed up! They’re trying to

III. “A RECIPE FOR DISASTER”

How would you describe the Twitter situation in a tweet (140 characters or less)?

Opening the birdcage

not).” He also suggested in one interview that Blue subscribers’ tweets would be “prioritized” by the algorithm, while non-subscribers would be suppressed, purportedly to reduce spam.

Along those lines, one of Musk’s main reforms has been a shift towards “freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach,” as Musk described in one tweet. The content moderation policy remained the same, he assured, but instead of banning offenders, hateful or harmful content would be suppressed and made difficult to find on the site.

In a step towards this goal, Musk reinstated the accounts of previously banned figures, including Donald Trump, whose reinstatement was based on the results of a poll Musk conducted with his Twitter followers.

“Vox Populi, Vox Dei,” Musk tweeted after 51.8% voted to unban the former president, quoting a Latin phrase meaning “the voice of the people is the voice of God.”

In another move towards unrestricted speech, Twitter stopped enforcing the Covid misinformation policy, which had been in place since 2020 to flag and remove misleading

Additionally, Musk has repeatedly aired his distrust of mainstream media, even calling The New York Times “one the biggest failures in US journalistic integrity of the 21st century” in a tweet. His goal is to transform Twitter into an avenue for citizen journalism by encouraging competition and disrupting the media’s “oligopoly on

“Twitter is like open-sourcing the news,” he

In response to skeptics, Musk tweeted, “Truth over time builds trust. Nothing else.”

Only time would tell whether Twitter’s 450 million monthly users would be willing to take

III. “A RECIPE FOR DISASTER”

Free speech activists have rejoiced over Musk’s reforms, which have, in particular, allowed many far-right extremists to return to the platform and participate without

Brands, on the other hand, have been more hesitant to be associated with a platform that harbors unchecked, potentially dangerous speech. Despite Musk’s claims that hate speech had declined after his takeover, The New reported that the number of daily tweets using a slur against Black people had tripled. Transphobic slurs increased by 62%, homophobic slurs by 58%, and misogynistic

Out of caution, many companies, including General Motors, Coca-Cola, and Verizon, paused their advertising campaigns on the site. Advertising constituted about 90% of Twitter’s revenue in 2021, so a mass exodus of willing advertisers could cost the company billions of

Musk responded with a tweet blaming activists for pressuring brands and inducing the subsequent “massive drop in revenue.”

“Extremely messed up! They’re trying to destroy free speech in America,” he proclaimed.

Dorrance pointed to this as a difficult decision Musk may have to make: fulfill his ambitions and appease his followers or retain advertisers and accept the consequent corporate influence.

“Hate speech is intrinsically an enemy of free speech. It’s just as easy to use Twitter to advance hate speech as it is to advance free speech. The difference in those two outcomes is profitability,” Dorrance said. “It’s encouraging that businesses see Twitter becoming more useful for hate speech and something they don’t want to be affiliated with.”

For Riyana, it’s not just a money battle; she fears absolute free speech could, in practice, silence certain voices instead.

“We’ve often seen media organs serving the interests of capital. Twitter is not a public service; it’s a for-profit entity. And I certainly don’t think it’s a victory for free speech.”

“‘Free speech’ that allows hateful or violent figures to spread their hate simply pushes minorities who fear for their own safety off of the app,” Riyana said. “If Elon wants ‘total free speech,’ it will only be free speech for the most powerful, hateful, or controversial people.”

Similarly, Donnya worries that it’s “going to start a lot more fights” instead of encouraging healthy discourse.

“On Twitter, everything is much more intense,” she said. “One tweet can lead to a huge Twitter storm over even the most trivial topic. It’s a very volatile place.”

Riyana also expressed concern over the prospect of a single man controlling a vital public forum, calling it a “recipe for disaster.”

“I find it laughable that Elon Musk claims to care so much about free speech, when his actions have shown that he only cares about ‘freedom’ when it benefits him,” Riyana said, citing Musk’s history of suppressing Tesla whistleblowers and others who threatened him or his companies. “I think his drive to have a monopoly over free speech at the expense of safety is indicative of a broader technological crisis: big companies do not and likely will never have our best interests at heart.”

Dorrance echoed Riyana and described Musk’s ownership as “scary.”

“It goes back to the erosion of a non-market social sphere. It’s not a new development. We’ve often seen media organs serving the interests of capital,” Dorrance said. “Twitter is not a public service; it’s a for-profit entity. And I certainly don’t think it’s a victory for free speech.”

For these reasons, many ex-Twitter users, coined “Twitter quitters,” have flocked to other social networks. App downloads for Mastodon, an open-source, decentralized platform, surged by over 100 times in the 12 days following Musk’s takeover. Another service, Hive Social, crashed after hundreds of thousands of users attempted to join in a single day.

Jack, who has already switched to a personal website to host his blog, says he has been “trying to leave Twitter.”

“Twitter is good for hearing other people’s opinions, but I’m trying to change my consumption to more about facts and be more conscious of who I’m listening to,” Jack said. “I think there should be a better solution but I haven’t found one yet.”

In the meantime, Jack doesn’t believe content moderation should extend beyond what is prohibited by law.

“Hate speech actively hurts people, but it’s up to regulatory bodies and not companies to figure out what can be said,” he said. “If you set up a talking booth in the middle of New York City, what is allowed to be said in that booth should be exactly what’s allowed on Twitter.”

On the other hand, Dorrance believes there need to be “referees for civic debate” to prevent the “manipulation of truth.”

“I don’t think that’s an infringement on free speech. I think it’s a precondition to free and open exchange to have mutually agreed-on terrain of exchange,” Dorrance said. “Otherwise you’re just shouting things at each other.”

Dorrance also pointed out the irony in the current Twitter debates, which he described as “a departure from earlier movements for free speech.”

“A lot of the early controversies around free speech were around the right to organize and mobilize mass protest in the early 20th century, whether it was advocating for labor rights or resisting the war,” Dorrance said. Organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) emerged to provide protection from government prosecution and brutality, he added.

“That’s the biggest transformation: we’re not looking at free speech in terms of defense from real government repression nowadays,” Dorrance said. “Ideally, free speech should be about having a debate. We see it more often that people want to say whatever they want without facing any consequences.”

The First Amendment, he explained, was intended as a way to speak truth to government power, and Dorrance believes the authors of the U.S. Constitution would, in reality, be “more afraid of the anarchical character of Twitter than anything else.”

For now, Dorrance doesn’t believe there is a simple technological fix. Instead, he highlighted the opportunities for conversation offered by educational settings.

“Non-market solutions are where we’re going to get the best debate, where the incentives are developing a more nuanced understanding of the world rather than getting the most clicks or views,” Dorrance concluded. “Schools and classrooms are great places for that. We can have an accumulation of small debates; it doesn’t have to be a single grand debate that brings about cultural or social change.”

How would you describe the Twitter situation in a tweet (140 characters or less)?