Fake News and Online Regulations

Fake News and Online Regulations The dissemination of fake news by online is a threat to democracy. Should online platforms therefore be subject to regulatory control? Professional journalism plays an important role in our democratic societies by acting as a public watchdog over the concentrations of power, ensuring the accountability of these institutions, and informing us of important occurrences.[1] However, fabrication, fakery and falsehood have been a part of journalism since the first journalists put quill to parchment.[2] Therefore, statutory laws and regulatory bodies aim to ensure journalism is impartial and accurate. However, journalism today is experiencing fundamental transformation due to technological advancements; consequently, the public now acquires news through digital platforms as well as traditional sources. A 2016 survey found that 35% of people in the UK now use social media to access the news, for those under 35 years old, 41% used Facebook and 20% used Twitter as a weekly source.[3] Online platforms have created more news sources to larger audiences, but this has also opened floodgates of inaccurate information pouring into our news feeds by deskilled journalists. The phenomena of citizen journalism and ‘we media’ have accelerated the pattern of random and instantaneous digital dissemination of information.[4] These activities have contributed to blurring the lines between truth and falsehood, and created fake news, which puts professional journalism under pressure. On 30th January 2017, The Culture, Media and Sport Committee launched an inquiry into fake news and called for submissions to be made suggesting ways to respond to the phenomenon of fake news. Various regulatory bodies, and institutions including the LSE Media policy project have shed some light on this topic.[5] Fake news can be best understood as ‘the misinformation (the inadvertent sharing of false information) and disinformation (the deliberate creation and sharing of information known to be false)’.[6] These types of content are being created as a result of: poor journalism, parody, provocation, passion, partisanship, profit, political influence and propaganda.[7] They are published on news sites and listed by digital intermediaries (groups consisting of news aggregators, social networks, search engines, and digital application stores) [8] causing fake news to spread across the globe. The concerning issue is the channels through which most people gain their news from are currently subject to no statutory laws, editorial guidelines nor regulation by organizations such as the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO). However, there is a wealth of evidence supporting the scale, dissemination and effects of fake news. The debate has gained significant prominence since the 2016 US presidential elections. Statutory regulation of digital intermediaries A YouGov survey commissioned by Channel 4 found that only 4% of people were able to correctly identify fake news.[9] This inability is concerning as many people, especially the young, acquire knowledge, and form opinions, by what they see and read on the internet. Statutory regulation would therefore be the most direct response to the challenge of fake news;[10] under this approach digital intermediaries would be treated as publishers even if they have not played an active part in the commissioning or presentation of such content.[11] Such an approach may be necessary as a study analysing how social media can improve citizens’ knowledge of political preferences proved that there is a remarkable ability for social media to forecast election results.[12] This proved to be the case during the EU referendum, where 7% of those that voted for Brexit regretted their choice later. [13] News reporters found voters claiming they voted leave because they believed lies or false promises[14]; it is most likely that the sources of these false statements were from unregulated online platforms. Therefore, enforcing legislation on digital intermediaries would hold these platforms directly accountable, ensuring they take their civic duty seriously.[15] Fake news is also a concern on Twitter where ‘Twitter bombs’ (the act of sending unsolicited replies to specific users via Twitter in order to get them to pay attention to ones cause), are being launched within days of the elections.[16] Despite Twitter’s attempts to shut them down it has been ineffective as these users create fake accounts, fake replies and fake grassroots movements.[17] These tweets target deskilled-journalists online, pressurising some to moderate their views. Democracy is threatened if people’s views are influenced by false statements in the guise of news. Aside from political motivations, the spreading of fake news was also noted by users retweeting fake images of the Hurricane Sandy disaster[18], and pictures of the of Osama Bin Laden’s dead body.[19] Such action usually goes unnoticed unless someone has detected and reported the issue. This response is different for newspapers because they are subject to the IPSO, or a similar body. Journalists employed by regulated publishers are required to uphold the values enforced in the Editors’ code of practice. This aims to ensure accuracy of information and a standard of professional journalism is maintained[20] . However, digital intermediaries are not held accountable by any body, like the IPSO, even though they have a large audience that is affected by fabricated stories. Therefore, it is crucial that these organisations take some responsibility in resolving this issue.[21] Without implementing any strict regulatory initiatives such incidences would occur daily and remain unquestioned, leaving users to believe false information. Statutory regulation would therefore fill the gap in the law, bringing clarity and holding digital intermediaries responsible for their part in disseminating fake news. There is no doubt that intermediaries play a dominant role in the global public sphere, but perhaps we need to address the question of whether we should continue to consider them as mere intermediaries.[22] Unlike news providers, intermediaries have no investment in journalism and are therefore more likely to filter out news. This limits users’ understanding of the world, as they are insulated from opposing views. The risk is that these ‘filter bubbles’ (restrictions of a users perspective) will promote misperceptions by hiding the truth,[23]   which supports the economic models of intermediaries because digital programmatic advertising follows users through their ‘clicks’, ‘shares’ and ‘likes’.[24] By learning from the past actions of a user, news feeds will only show similar material in their next use. Requiring digital intermediaries to change their approach by bursting this ‘filter bubble’ would not be in their commercial interests, as the bubble’s content is what keeps users engaged. Statutory regulation would therefore enforce strict rules on how intermediaries should enforce mechanisms to detect and filter fake news instead of opposing views. Moreover, ensuring impartiality and accuracy is important especially during election time. ‘A BuzzFeed News analysis found that top fake election news stories generated more total engagement on Facebook than top election stories from 19 major news outlets combined’.[25] This imbalance illustrates the significant role digital intermediaries play in today’s society, and therefore it is particularly concerning if their news content is fake. If newspapers and broadcasting media organisations are obliged to follow strict guidelines on impartiality[26] and accuracy, then why should it be any different for online platforms?   For example, Section 319 of the Communications Act 2003 requires TV and radio broadcasters to comply with the standard objectives set by Ofcom. This includes, reporting ‘with due accuracy’ and not ‘misleading’;[27] furthermore, Parliament ‘requires Ofcom to develop rules with respect to broadcasters’ wider editorial coverage of elections’.[28] Similar regulations on intermediaries would ensure information is not personalized to a user’s preferences, thus maintaining impartiality and accuracy, whilst avoiding the risk of disseminating fake news to users. Statutory regulation of online news providers The dissemination of fake news by online news providers has proven to be a great concern as anonymous individuals are inventing fake news for the purpose of generating clicks and earning revenue.[29] Such behavior has been identified in Macedonia, where teenagers were found to be making money by creating fake news on US presidential candidates and promoting it via social media.[30] If statutory regulation is placed on digital intermediaries, then the same could be done for online news providers, as the same news from online news providers will be shared via digital intermediaries. This was proven to be the case as various US sites claimed to be exposing ‘Russian propaganda’,[31] was shared via other online platforms which influenced voter behavior in the US elections.[32] Examples such as as this suggest ‘misleading, biased propaganda’ is also part of the fake news phenomenon.[33] It is therefore important to set statutory regulations for both, as this type of de-skilled citizen journalism is a threat to democracy especially because people’s views are being influenced by biased and inaccurate information.[34] Furthermore, news outlets that only have an online presence, such as AOL news, Vice, and Huffington Post, are not subject to any regulatory controls as they are not members of regulatory bodies like IPSO;[35] even though they are subject to some statutory control such as defamation,[36] copyright[37] and data protection laws,[38] control is not the same as the additional regulatory standards most UK press (with a physical and online presence) comply to. Without belonging to any recognised regulator, publishers may have to pay exemplary damages under the Crime and Courts Act for defamation or other relevant claims;[39] therefore, it would be in the interests of online publishers to join a recognized regulatory body. Interestingly, Wikipedia recently banned Daily Mail as an unreliable source and excluded it as a source of reference. Wikipedia claimed the newspaper to have a ‘reputation for poor fact checking and sensationalism’.[40] These claimed characteristics are another concern for UK journalism, as IPSO regulates Daily Mail (Associated Newspapers Limited) [41] yet they are still being labelled as an unreliable source. This indicates the ineffectiveness of IPSO as it failed to ensure the credibility of a publisher they regulate. Such failures generate an inclination towards statutory regulation of online news providers as regulatory bodies are not enough, to ensure that newspapers report accurately and without exaggeration. Not only do such flaws lose the public’s trust in professional journalism’ but they also create a society that is vulnerable to fake news. There is also no evidence to suggest that the levels of   accuracy are rising or that the self-regulatory bodies set up by the major publishers, and IPSO, are having any identifiable positive effect.[42] Hence, it may be necessary to set up statutory regulations of online news providers which will create a more direct and stringent approach to tackling fake news. The Leveson Report[43] suggested that such statutory regulation would be necessary to underpin the process of recognition, and reinforce the importance of statutes guaranteeing press freedom.[44] However, three years on from the publication of the Leveson Report, the landscape of press regulation is still fragmented and confused,[45] and it may therefore be necessary to re-consider these suggestions. The implementation of statutory regulation, combined with independent regulatory bodies, should be extended to intermediaries and online news providers. Such a framework is an essential stepping stone towards a regulatory regime that is entirely fit for purpose in this new era. The negative issues with this initiative would include costs, and whether a consensus by major publishers and online platforms can be formed. Self-regulation by digital intermediaries An alternative to statutory regulations would be to enforce a self-regulatory system for digital intermediaries which would allow them to have significant control in filtering fake news according to methods they believe are most effective. Mark Zuckerberg, although first dismissing the idea that fake news influenced the US election, later acknowledged the role of social media in helping promote fake news, and proposed ways in which Facebook could help resolve this issue.[46] Actions include taking an approach that ‘will focus less on banning misinformation, and more on surfacing additional perspectives and information, including that fact checkers dispute an items accuracy’.[47] Other ways Facebook could reduce fake news without resorting to  censorship include; nudging, crowdsourcing and reducing the algorithmic bias.[48] Nudging involves monitoring what users are writing in a new post; if the content includes words they may regret posting, it notifies them. Crowdsourcing allows users to evaluate news sources by indicating ratings. Lastly, the most important solution is to reduce the algorithmic bias. This involves trying to diminish filter bubbles that create an â€Å"echo chamber†, where similar ideas bounce around endlessly which is a problem when the echo chamber blocks out corrective or fact-checking information.[49] Although, some digital intermediaries have already taken steps to tackle the issue of fake news, it would be ineffective to give them sole responsibility. More useful would be to establish a governance mechanism, such as an independent board, that could check whether the algorithms accord with acceptable principles.[50] This view is supported by the Trust Project, which suggests that algorithms alone will struggle to root out fake news, unless they can quantify indicators of trust elements, which can help set a ‘kitemark’ for trustworthiness.[51] This suggestion includes being able to distinguish the intentions behind the news, and whether it is genuine, or inaccurate reporting. Therefore, remedies based solely on technological fixes or market-driven corrections will not, on their own, address these problems. Additionally, judgments of this kind need to be carefully reviewed hence, an independent body should be established to perform this role. This approach will ensure tech platforms maintain transparency in the work they carry out to tackle this public issue. Firstly, there is no guarantee that only one country’s statutory regulation would work as technologic advancements allow users to create and access online news sites from anywhere in the world. If users can create fake news, they can create fake identities, which raises ‘concerns for verification, accountability and accuracy’[52]; therefore, alternative solutions may be needed to tackle the problem effectively. This view is supported by Dr Tambini from the LSE, who states that the unprecedented number of fake news sites is a huge and far-reaching problem that cannot be dealt within existing legal categories.[53] Therefore, a possible solution to tackling fake news would be to establish a global regulatory body that could operate across borders. Taking such an approach would not hinder the freedom of expression nor create restrictive frameworks, as a global collective regulatory body would find common ground, respecting the rights of all democratic institutions, and ensure that accuracy of information could be maintained across online platforms. Whereas, it would be difficult to establish statutory regulation without hindering the right to freedom of speech, which must be balanced against the risk of giving states excessive powers over the expression rights of individuals and organizations creating such content.[54] ‘The only category where there may be an argument for statutory regulation is the category of deliberate falsehood with intent to compromise national security’.[55] However, such a high standard will be difficult to meet and not tackle the phenomena of fake news. Instead a global regulatory system is more likely to create an effective solution that can monitor all types of fake news. However, the major concern with creating a global regulatory body is forming a consensus to establish one, and deciding some universal criteria of what constitutes as fake news. Regardless of the flaws in a global regulatory body, it is likely to be the most effective solution for a global problem. A further concern that must be addressed is the misuse of the term ‘fake news’. The term ‘fake news’ has been used by public figures and politicians to justify politically motivated attacks on journalists and press freedom.[56] ‘What was once considered a symbiotic relationship between politics, media and the public is turning from a Golden Triangle into a Bermuda Triangle’. [57] Representatives from the White House and President Trump have used this term on numerous occasions to accuse media reports that oppose Trump’s views.[58] Moreover, in the UK, headlines such as, ‘we invested  £10bn extra in the NHS last year’, and claims that, ‘Corbyn would order Labour MPs to vote for the government’s bill triggering Article 50’,[59] were later found to be false. Nonetheless journalists claim to have correctly interpreted quotes from politicians, but due to the lack of clarity, and changing views of the politicians, their journalism was labelled as ‘fake news’.[60] This labelling is no fault of their own, but it definitely damages their reputation as credible sources in the eyes of the public. A global regulatory body could establish mechanism which safeguard online journalists and individuals that may have complaints to online content. These mechanisms would be similar to the way the press is currently protected by regulatory bodies such as IPSO, Ofcom, and Advertising Standard Authority which provide all individuals with a complaints procedure to resolve disputes.[61] For online news sites created by individuals, however such protections and remedies are not available. In these cases, the only way the news sites could safeguard themselves from possible accusations of creating false news would be to become members of such bodies. A global regulatory body could protect and hold online journalists accountable for their reports, and scrutinise claims by politicians in the public eye. This protection could be extended to the existent online press, to further safeguard them from accusations and ensure accuracy. Traditional gatekeeping mechanisms, such as national statutory laws and self-regulatory frameworks, can ensure online platforms are subject to similar frameworks as newspapers and the broadcasting media are, but this approach would ultimately fail because the internet has no borders- allowing online platforms to operate globally, across multiple jurisdictions.[62] Fake news created in a different country, would still be accessible and impact users from other countries, (as proven to be the case with Macedonia). Therefore, the issue of fake news can only be tackled effectively by all democratic institutions through the creation of a global regulatory body. Bibliography Allen Nick and Lawler David, Donald Trump says fake media is enemy of the people they have no sources, none (The Telegraph, 24 February 2017) accessed 13 April 2017 BBC, Donald Trump aide accuses BBC of fake news (BBC News, 17 February 2017) accessed 13 April 2017 BBC, Fake news: How can African media deal with the problem? (BBC News, 16 February 2017) accessed 11 April 2017 Bfi, Regulation and Censorship (Bfi.org.uk, 2014) accessed 11 April 2017 Broersma M.J and Peters Chris, Rethinking Journalism Trust and Participation in a Transformed News Landscape (Routledge, 2013), pp 15 Byrne Andrew, Macedonia’s fake news industry sets sights on Europe (www.ft.com, 16 December 2016) accessed 11 April 2017 Ceron Andrea, Curini Luigi, M Iacus Stefano, Porro Giuseppe, Every tweet counts? How sentiment analysis of social media can improve our knowledge of citizens’ political preferences with an application to Italy and France [4 April 2013] 16(2) New Media & Society, pp 340-358 Dearden Lizzie, Brexit research suggests 12 million Leave voters regret their choice in reversal that could change result (The Independent, 1 July 2016) accessed 13 April 2017 Fenton Natalie, New Media, Old News, (Sage Publications Ltd, 2009) pp.10 Garrett R.Kelly, Facebooks problem is more complicated than fake news (The Conversation, 17 November 2016) accessed 11 April 2017 Gilad Lotan, Fake News Is Not the Only Problem (www.points.datasocietynet, 23 November 2016) accessed 11 April 2017 Goldsbie J, Craig Silverman, the man who exposed the fake-news racket in 2016 (NOW Magazine, 22 December 2016) accessed 11 April 2017 Goodfellow Jonathan, Only 4% of people can distinguish fake news from truth, Channel 4 study finds (The Drum, 6 February 2017) accessed 11 April 2017 Goodman Emma, How has media policy responded to fake news? (LSE Media Policy Project, 7 February 2017) accessed 11 April 2017 Gupta Aditi, Lamba Hemank, Kumaraguru Ponnurangam, Joshi Anupam, Faking Sandy: characterizing and identifying fake images on Twitter during Hurricane Sandy [2013] In Proceedings of the 22nd International conference on World wide web, WWW ’13, pp 729-7637 Heawood Jonathan, Independent and effective? The post-Leveson framework for press regulation [2015] 7(2) Journal of Media Law pp 130-144 Impress, IMPRESS Submission on Fake News (Impress press, 10th March 2017) accessed 11 April 2017 Ipso, Editors’ Code of Practice (The Independent Press Standards Organization, accessed 10 April 2017 Ipso, UK Regulated publications (Ipso.co.uk) accessed 13 April 2017 Jackson Jasper, Wikipedia bans Daily Mail as unreliable source (Guardian.com, 8 Feb 2017) accessed 13 April 2017 Johnson Adam, Fairness and Accuracy in reporting (Why Are Media Outlets Still Citing Discredited ‘Fake News’ Blacklist? (Fair.org, 1 December 2016) accessed 9 April 2017 KCL Centre for the study of media, communication and power, Submission to: Consultation on the Leveson Inquiry and its Implementation Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Home Office (Kcl.ac.uk, 2016) accessed 11 April 2017 KCL Centre for the study of media, communication and power, Submission to: Inquiry into Fake News (Kcl.ac.uk, 16 February 2017) accessed 11 April 2017 Lord Justice Leveson, An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press’ (www.gov.uk, 2012) accessed 16 April 2017 Mcnair Brian, Fake news – a user’s guide (The Conversation, 6 March 2017) accessed 11 April 2017 Mcnair Brian, Journalism and Democracy: a millennial audit [2000] 1(2) Journalism Studies pp 207 Metaxas T. Panagiotis and Eni Mustafaraj, Manipulation of social media affects perceptions of candidates and compromises decision-making [26 Oct 2012] 338 (6106) Social Media and the Elections pp 472-473 National Union of Journalists, NUJ submission to the CMS parliamentary select committee inquiry on fake news (www.nuj.org.uk, February 2017) accessed 11 April 2017 Nelson Steven, ‘Publications Called Russian-Propaganda Distributors Consider Suing Anonymous Experts’, (US News, 29 November 2016) accessed 9 April 2017 Newman Nic, H.Dutton William, Blank Grant, Social Media and the News: Implications for the Press and Society (OUP 2014) pp.139 NMA, CMS Select Committee ‘Fake News’ Inquiry: NMA Response (News.media.uk.org, 30 March 2017) accessed 11 April 2017 NMA, CMS Select Committee ‘Fake News’ Inquiry: NMA Response (Newsmediaukorg, 30 March) accessed 11 April 2017 Ofcom, Review of Ofcom list of major political parties for elections (Ofcom.org.uk, 16 March 2015) accessed 12 April 2017 PA, Can the law do anything to stop fake news? (Aol.co.uk, 12 Dec 2016) accessed 11 April 2017 Public relations and communications association (PRCA), PRCA response to the CMS Committee’s ‘Fake News’ Inquiry (Prca.org.uk, 6 March 2017) accessed 11 April 2017 Robbins Martin, Fake news and fact-checking: Trump is demonstrating how to outsmart an AI (Theguardiancom, 31 January 2017) accessed 13 April 2017 Sievers Bruce and Schneider Patrice, The Civic Media Crisis and What Philanthropy Can Do (SSIR) (Stanford Social Innovation Review 8 March 2017) accessed 8 April 2017 Singer-Vine, Most Americans Who See Fake News Believe It (Buzz Feed News, 7th December 2016) accessed 13 April 2017 Stromer-galley Jeremy, Three ways Facebook could reduce fake news without resorting to censorship (The Conversation, 2 December 2016) accessed 13 April 2017 Tambini Damian, Fake News: Public Policy Responses, LSE Media Policy Project Series, (2017) pp13-15 The Trust Project Org, (thetrustproject.org, 2016) accessed 13 April 2017 Thompson Clive, Why Facebook and Twitter have a civic duty to protect us from fake news (WIRED UK, 24 February 2017) accessed 11 April 2017 UK Parliament, Select Committee on Communications Corrected oral evidence: Children and the Internet (Dataparliamentuk, 22 November 2016) accessed 11 April 2017 UK Parliament, Social Media and Access to Information (UK Parliament, Jan 2017) accessed 11 April 2017 Wahl-Jorgensen Karin, Hintz Arne, Dencik Lina, Bennett Lucy, Journalism, citizenship and surveillance [2017] 5(3) Digital Journalism pp 256-261 Wardle Claire, ‘Fake news It’s complicated’, (First Draft News, 16 February 2017) accessed 9 April 2017 Wise Michael, News Plurality and Digital Intermediaries European Journalism Observatory- EJO (European Journalism Observatory EJO, 28 August 2012) accessed 13 April 2017 Zuckerberg Mark, Building Global Community (Facebook.com, 16 February 2017) accessed 11 April 2017 [1] Wahl-Jorgensen et al, Journalism, citizenship and surveillance [2017] 5(3) Digital Journalism pp.256-261 [2] Brian Mcnair, Fake news – a user’s guide (The-Conversation, 6 March 2017) accessed 11/April/2017 [3] UK Parliament, Social Media and Access to Information (UK-Parliament, Jan 2017) accessed 11/April/2017 [4] Siervers and Schneider, The Civic Media Crisis and What Philanthropy Can Do (Stanford Social Innovation Review, 8 March 2017) accessed 8/April/2017 [5] Emma Goodman, How has media policy responded to fake news? (LSE-Media-Policy-Project, 7 February 2017), accessed 11/April/2017 [6] Claire Wardle, ‘Fake news It’s complicated’, (First Draft News, 16 February 2017), accessed 9/April/2017 [7] Ibid [8] Michael Wise, News Plurality and Digital Intermediaries-EJO (European Journalism Observatory-EJO, 28 August 2012), accessed 13/April/2017 [9] Jessica Goodfellow, ‘Only 4% of people can distinguish fake news from truth, Channel 4 study finds’ (The Drum, 6 February 2017), accessed online 11/April/2017 [10] Impress, IMPRESS Submission on Fake News Page , (Impress press, 10th March 2017) accessed 11/April/2017 [11] Ibid [12] Ceron et al, Every tweet counts? How sentiment analysis of social media can improve our knowledge of citizens’ political preferences with an application to Italy and France [4 April 2013] 16(2) New Media & Society, pp.340 358 [13] Lizzie Dearden, Brexit research suggests 12 million Leave voters regret their choice in reversal that could change result (The Independent, 1 July 2016) accessed 13/April/2017 [14] Ibid [15] Clive Thompson, Why Facebook and Twitter have a civic duty to protect us from fake news, (WIRED UK, 24 February 2017), accessed 11/April/2017 [16] Metaxas et al, Manipulation of social media affects perceptions of candidates and compromises decision-making [26 Oct 2012] 338(6106) Social Media and the Elections pp.472-473 [17] Ibid [18] Gupta et al, Faking Sandy: characterizing and identifying fake images on Twitter during Hurricane Sandy [2013] In Proceedings of the 22nd International conference on WWW ’13, pp.729-7637 [19] Newman et al, Social Media and the News: Implications for the Press and Society, (OUP, 2014), pp.139 [20] Ipso, Editors’ Code of Practice, (The Independent Press Standards Organization), accessed 10/April/2017 [21] UK Parliament, Select Committee on Communications Corrected oral evidence: Children and the Internet (Data.parliament.uk, 22 November 2016), accessed 11/April/2017 [22] NMA, CMS Select Committee ‘Fake News’ Inquiry: NMA Response (News.media.uk.org, 30 March 2017), accessed 11/April/2017 [23] R.Kelly Garrett, Facebooks problem is more complicated than fake news (The Conversation, 17 November 2016), accessed 11/April/2017 [24] Ibid [25] BBC, Fake news: How can African media deal with the problem? (BBC News, 16 February 2017), accessed 11/April/2017 [26] Brian Mcnair, Journalism and Democracy: a millennial audit [2000] 1(2) Journalism Studies pp.207 [27] Communications Act 2003, Section 319(2)(d) and (h)†¨ [28] Ofcom, Review of Ofcom list of major political parties for elections (Ofcom.org.uk, 16 March 2015), accessed 12/April/2017 [29]   Jonathan Goldsbie, Craig Silverman, the man who exposed the fake-news racket in 2016 (NOW-Magazine, 22 December 2016) accessed 11/April/2017 [30]   Andrew Byrne, Macedonia’s fake news industry sets sights on Europe (www.ft.com, 16 December 2016), accessed 11/April/2017 [31] Steven Nelson, ‘Publications Called Russian-Propaganda Distributors Consider Suing Anonymous Experts’, (US-News, 29 November 2016), accessed 9/April/2017 [32]Adam Johnson, ‘Why are media outlets still citing discredited Fake News Blacklist?’, (FAIR, 1 December 2016)

Essay --

STATEMENTOF PURPOSE â€Å"The real secret of success is enthusiasm†-Walter Chrysler This is Sneha Vynathi Garaga, pursuing final year of under-graduation from Keshav Memorial Institute of Technology (www.kmit.in) in Electronics and Communication Engineering. It is with great incitement and warmth that I write this personnel statement to discuss my academics and motivation for pursuing graduate studies. In my schooling, after identifying my diligence in academics, I was selected to attend five-day 58th International Astronautical congress (IAC) held at Hi-tech city, Hyderabad. I was inspired immensely by the speech given by Sunita Williams and it was, indeed, a huge source of inspiration for me to pursue my career in the field of technology. Following this motivation, I opted for Electronics and Communication Engineering as my under-graduate major. Though my major in under-graduation is electronics, I am applying for Master’s study in Computer science. I joined my under-graduate college with interest towards electronics; however, later I realized that I have a great inclination towards c...

Movie “Himala” by Ishmael Bernal Essay

The movie â€Å"Himala† by Filipino National Artist Ishmael Bernal deals with the social issues of poverty, religion and fanaticism. It is a commentary to the living conditions of the Filipino people and their faith and beliefs. The greatness of the film is reflected by the fact that it is now considered a Filipino classic, with Elsa’s (Nora Aunor) speech being quoted until today. The different characters in the movie represent a variety of sectors in society. Elsa, the protagonist of the movie, is an image of a false prophet. Apparently she can heal the sick and perform miracles but no proof of it can be seen throughout the movie. Nimia (Gigi Duenas) portrays the people who do not believe in miracles. She may be considered a sinner because she was a prostitute in Manila, not to mention she also set up a cabaret in the town of Cupang, but she only does this just so she can put food in her stomach. She strives hard to keep herself alive. Chayong (Laura Centeno) is Elsa’s confidante, and she fully believes in Elsa’s healing powers. She personifies an innocent and gullible person. Because of this blind faith, she gets assaulted and causes her to resort to suicide. Mrs. Alba (Veronica Palileo) used Elsa’s supposed healing power to profit from the people, selling merchandise and other paraphernalia. She is the epitome of an exploitative person, taking advantage of the people’s gullibility and innocence and making money out of it. The filmmaker Orly (Spanky Manikan) shows a person who is an outsider. He uses the opportunity to make a name for himself by producing a movie centering on Elsa’s life. He shows a change of heart when he felt guilty for not helping Chayong and Elsa when they were assaulted. Lastly, Sepa (Ama Quiambao) and the fans of Elsa represent a sector of the Filipino people who are willing to sacrifice their livelihoods just to be saved by a false prophet, all for the belief that God will help those who do not help themselves. They are so blinded in their faith that they don’t even see the truth, Elsa’s confession, even when it is presented right in their face. The whole film is focused on faith. It depicts the ease of Filipinos to believe religious claims without evidence and thinking logically. Poverty is also visible in the film, showing kids eating stale meat and enacting a cholera outbreak. Miracles are a controversial issue, and talking about its truthfulness will more likely spark a debate. I personally do not believe in miracles because I believe that what you put out in the world comes back at you. I think miracles are not miracles per se, but they are the good that you did before which is coming back to you. The film shows Filipino spirituality’s different sides. Of course, there are believers and non-believers, and none of which is considered right or wrong since they have the freedom which to believe. As I have said, it shows that people are willing to sacrifice their whole lives work just to secure their spot in heaven without acknowledging the facts. There is also a good side to Filipino spirituality, as showcased by the priest (Joel Lamangan), who believes in God but still is a rational thinker. People should believe the real meaning of religion and not some false prophet’s views on the matter. The message of the film is that to do not believe everything you see, for we may see a slightly skewed image of the truth. In the film, it was said that Elsa had healing powers, but not once did a person actually thank her for healing her or a cured person appeared. This may tell us that Elsa never had healing powers or that the people she was healing were in on the lie. We can also take away from the film that if we are to believe in God, we should believe in God himself, not on any person claiming to be a prophet because it can lead to deadly consequences, like the death of Sepa’s two sons and Elsa’s death. The film is now considered timeless, classic even because it can withstand time. It is a universal struggle. Not only the Filipinos adhere to this problem but the rest of the world does too. Religion scopes a huge population; many of them may face the same problems discussed in Himala. Overall, the film was great and I am glad I had the chance to watch a Filipino film classic known around the world because of its greatness and permanence.

Crusades

Crusades refers to a series of religious-based wars among the Jews, European Christians, and the Muslims, primarily initiated to exercise full control over certain places which were considered sacred by both religious groups. It is mostly held in places regarded as holy such as the Mecca, Churches and the Erected tents in the streets (Hindley 81). Basically, the major concerns of crusades were to promote the culture of peace, love and unity among the people, respect for one's life, transformation and shaping of the people's moral way of life and to preach salvation to both Christians and Non-Christians. It is organized and presided over by Bishops, Prophets, Priests, and Clerics etc. It involved shouting of certain spiritual messages along the corridors and preaching of the coming of the Messiah. Through crusades, Christians were urged to change their ways of life, repent their sins and turn away from their wrong deeds. However, the crusade aspect has been covered broadly by various historical writers. This paper, therefore, seeks to examine the various significant approaches employed by different writers on the subject matter, the difference in their points of views as well as the factors that might have led to their different thoughts. The origin of crusade can be traced far back in the year 1095 during the Urban II's preaching. Frank the Monk, a French writer, attended the council of Clermont and witnessed the first crusade which occurred in 1107 titled â€Å"The Deeds of the Franks† (Riley-Smith 82). The council was presided over by Pope Urban II and other Bishops in an open field due to a large number of people who could hardly fit in any of the buildings. Most approaches used by the writers include converging the people and encouraging them to fasten their spirits and have faith in God. They condemned the inhuman and hostility of landowners who killed innocent Christian lives and held some in captives (Rubenstein 109). Guibert of Nogent, on the other hand, argued that not unless the time of the nation is fulfilled, the city of Jerusalem will be destroyed by the people. He clarified further that, according to the Lord's gospel, only those who will carry their cross and follow Jesus will remain to be worthy. On the other hand, Albert of Aache, Rosenfeld, among others disagrees with their French counterparts over the preaching aspect of the crusade. Instead, they strongly advocated for Peter the Hermit, who was believed to be the inventor of the crusades. Peter the Hermit, was not pleased with the criminal acts and wicked deeds of the Christians in church. He knew it was wrong to still church offerings (Rubin 98). He knew such acts were filthy before the lord and was against all other immoral deeds. He was then sent on a mission by God to preach repentance message to the people before the coming of the lord. However, it is evident that the writers used different approaches in developing their crusade chronicles. Some of the factors that contributed to their difference in approaches include the background, scramble for holy land and other socio-cultural factors such as their religions. In conclusion, the use of crusades has become more common in the recent past. It has provided a platform through which the word of God can be preached to many in an open place with an aim of transforming people spiritually and building their faith in God. In the ancient past, various historical writers have channeled their significant approaches on crusades in which they have also differed in their thoughts on some points. Factors behind their disagreement include the religious issues, their backgrounds, and acquisition of certain portions of land regarded as holy.

A Comparison Of The Catcher In The Rye And The Adv Essays

A Comparison Of The Catcher In The Rye And The Adv Essays A Comparison Of The Catcher In The Rye And The Adventures of Huck Finn English A Comparison Of The Catcher In The Rye And The Adventures of Huck Finn by Keith Eich [emailprotected] neonet.net/keith There are a bunch of gramatical errors, but the paper got an A.. The forthcoming of American literature proposes two distinct Realistic novels portraying characters which are tested with a plethora of adventures. In this essay, two great American novels are compared: The Adventures of Huck Finn by Mark Twain and The Catcher In The Rye by J.D. Salinger. The Adventures of Huck Finn is a novel based on the adventures of a boy named Huck Finn, who along with a slave, Jim, make their way along the Mississippi River during the Nineteenth Century. The Catcher In The Rye is a novel about a young man called Holden Caulfield, who travels from Pencey Prep to New York City struggling with his own neurotic problems. These two novels can be compared using the Cosmogonic Cycle with both literal and symbolic interpretations. The Cosmogonic Cycle is a name for a universal and archetypal situation. There are six parts that make up the cycle: the call to adventure, the threshold crossing, the road of trials, the supreme test, a flight or a flee, and finally a return. There are more parts they do not necessarily fall into the same order, examples of these are symbolic death and motifs. The Cosmogonic Cycle is an interesting way to interpret literature because is Universal or correlates with any time period and any situation. The Call to Adventure is the first of the Cosmogonic Cycle. It is the actual "call to adventure" that one receives to begin the cycle. There are many ways that this is found in literature including going by desire, by chance, by abduction, and by being lured by an outside force. In The Adventures of Huck Finn, Huck is forced with the dilemma of whether to stay with his father and continue to be abused or to leave. Huck goes because he desires to begin his journey. In The Catcher In The Rye, Holden mentally is torn between experience and innocence, it would seem to him that an outside force is luring him to do something but in actuality he is beginning his journey because of his desire. The Call to Adventure is the first step in the Cosmogonic Cycle, it is the step at which the character or hero is brought into cycle. The Threshold Crossing is the second step, it is the place or the person that which the character crosses over or through into the Zone Unknown. The Zone Unknown being the place where the journey takes place. The threshold crossing is often associated with a character change or an appearance change. An example of this is in The Wizard of Oz, when the movie goes from black and white to color, showing a visual symbolic death. A symbolic death is another part to the Cosmogonic Cycle of which the character goes through a change and emerges a more complete person or more experienced. In The Adventures of Huck Finn, a symbolic death is very apparent during the scene in which Huck sets up his fathers cabin to look like Huck was brutally murder. Huck emerges as a runway child and now must be careful of what he does, so that he does not get caught. Huck also tells people false aliases for himself so that no one knows his true identity. Every time that he does this he is symbolically dying and reemerges a more experienced person. In The Catcher In The Rye, Holden also uses fake names, but Holden symbolically dies through fainting, changing the position of his red hunting hat, and is associated with bathrooms. The bathroom motif, or the reoccurring appearance of a bathroom, symbolizes death for Holden because he enters bathrooms with a neurotic and pragmatic frame of mind and exits with a cleared mind. The use of symbolic death and motifs is associated with the Threshold Crossing, the second step of the Cosmogonic Cycle. The Road of Trials is the next step in the Cosmogonic Cycle, which are the obstacles which the character faces throughout the literary work. In The Adventures of Huck Finn, Hucks Road of Trials occurs on the Mississippi River. He faces many obstacles, including moral decisions of right and wrong, dealing with con-artists, and helping a runaway slave. He promulgates more experienced from his journey down the river on his raft. In The Catcher In The Rye,

Health Promotion with Healthy People 2010 Essays

Health Promotion with Healthy People 2010 Essays Health Promotion with Healthy People 2010 Paper Health Promotion with Healthy People 2010 Paper ‘Healthy People’ is a truly healthy forum, but more correctly a governmental think tank in collaboration with important experts in the health care industry, including scientists, businesses and others that relate to the objectives of the forum. Comparable to a hypothetical national drive for ‘sustainable health care,’ Healthy People also takes community members such as consumers of health care into account when planning improvements in the health of the nation. All stakeholders receive timely information about the health care industry, especially in the priority health care areas that are identified by the think thank, e.g. environment and pollution.   Healthy People, additionally, monitors the priority areas with as much concern as possible, seeing as all stakeholders have a direct interest in the improvement of health care across the nation. One of the most important areas in health care that Healthy People 2010 has identified is that of immunization.   Unsurprisingly, immunization brings to mind children, and their families who must look after their health especially with respect to vaccination against various diseases/illnesses. People 2010 does not only deal with the priority area of universal health insurance for children; in addition to mental health, seeking to provide better protection to children against abuse; but the Initiative most importantly calls for immunization for all children of America, be they black or white, infants or toddlers.   As a matter of fact, the Healthy People Immunization Initiative is one of the foundations of Healthy People 2010. The United States government, in collaboration with a large number of experts in the field of children’s health care, have already collaborated to do their utmost to have every child of America vaccinated against MMR (at the very least) by 2010. â€Å"Universal immunization,† as the sole objective of Healthy People 2010 Immunization Initiative, works to eliminate infectious diseases in the young and old. Families of young children (known to be especially vulnerable to disease) are not put in a tight corner because of the Initiative, however.   Rather, the government along with various members of the public, both organizational and individual, have realized that all Americans must be financially supported to access good health care for their children (and next of kin, including the elderly). In other words, Healthy People is not intended to put an undue burden on the family of the child.   Instead, the government and a huge number of collaborators are already arranging for free immunization, or highly subsidized vaccination for all. Healthy People 2010 Immunization Initiative seeks to bridge the gap between the haves and the have-nots by making it stress-free for all people, rich or poor, to get their children immunized against certain diseases that can be life threatening. In particular, the Healthy People Immunization Initiative for 2010 is described as an attempt to â€Å"[p]revent disease, disability, and death from infectious diseases, including vaccine-preventable diseases.†Ã‚   After working out its objectives, the government department responsible for Healthy People attempts to implement various plans that serve to fulfill the goals of a healthier America. The Immunization Initiative of 2010 is designed to work on the following goals apart from many more: (1) â€Å"Reduce or eliminate indigenous cases of vaccine-preventable diseases;† (2) â€Å"Reduce chronic hepatitis B virus infections in infants and young children (perinatal infections);† (3) â€Å"Reduce hepatitis B;† (4) â€Å"Reduce bacterial meningitis in young children;† (5) â€Å"Reduce invasive pneumococcal infections;† (6) Reduce hepatitis A and C;† (7) â€Å"Reduce meningococcal disease;† etc. By helping to fight diseases in infants as well as the toddlers and young children, the Healthy People alliance is helping to energize and strengthen our homeland, especially its future. Although Healthy People Immunization Initiative 2010 would increase the number of children immunized by leaps and bounds; parents of little children are required to be informed about various diseases and their vaccinations anyway.   For this reason, Healthy People 2010 introduces awareness campaigns that publicize such pertinent information to parents. Parents are also required to time the vaccinations of their children, and to be on guard against infections in their children.   As far as changing health habits is concerned, Healthy People further seeks to introduce to children over the age of seven, health literature and multimedia lessons via programs implemented with ‘collaboration.’

Gimi coefficient Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Gimi coefficient - Essay Example According to the ranges of gini coefficient, the developing or poor countries, those countries who have per captia GDP low, comes in the range from 0.25 to 0.71. As far as rich countries are concerned they come in the range of under 0.40 (Mandal 126). The Lorenz curve diagrams ratio of area can be used to elaborate the gini coefficient. In Lorenz curve if we say that A symbolizes the area among the line of perfect equality and B symbolizes as the Lorenz’s curve inner area then A/(A+B) is the equation which represents the gini coefficient. Subsequently A+B = 0.5, the gini coefficient, G = 2A = 1-2B. By incorporation the value of B can be found if the Lorenz curve is characterized by the function Y= L(x) and the equation will be, (Catalano and George D. n.p). The usage of gini coefficient measure of inequality leads to many advantages, one of which is that it can be used to compare income distributions crosswise diverse population. Gini coefficient is easily used because of its simplicity rather than other measuring techniques, through gini coefficient we can come to the results of changed distribution of income over the year in a country. It also satisfies great principles of anonymity, scale independence and population independence. As on one hand it has many advantages, on the other side there are many problems faced while using gini coefficient measure of inequality. Gini coefficient, uses income gained from wealth, it measures net income more than net worth, having a possibility of misinterpretation. For example, a low gini coefficient for income is seen in Sweden, but Sweden’s coefficient for wealth is higher. Numerous whiles in gini coefficient, there is no description of the proportions used for measurement. As granularity impacts the measurements of gini coefficient, we find numerous problems while conducting measurements through it. If there is low granularity, that is four 20% quantiles it will lead to a lower gini coefficient, while at t he same time if we take twenty 4% quantiles that is high granularity the results would be higher gini coefficient if we take both of these figures from the similar distribution (Mandal 129). Because it a measure of income dispersion a lot of care have to be taken through the use of gini coefficient as a measure of egalitarianism. For example We will get a result of difference in gini coefficients when we take two different countries having equal egalitarian, but as they both have different policies, gini coefficient will be different. As it measures at a point in time of the greatest problem of gini coefficient is that is errors a lot of energetic information about lifetime income of the individual. In gini coefficient, not only the income but also the individual’s age distribution within population and mobility in income classes are not taken into consideration (Mandal 129). It can be observed that if gini coefficient is showing higher results at one point, but will not gibe same result at different point because gini coefficient does not notice the changes over a period of time. A number of more problems arise when it comes to measurement through gini coefficient; difficulty arises that is when two counties income are associated as both the countries differ in benefits systems, like some countries give benefit in monetary form, while others not in monetary form. Some countries may include benefits some may not, as the