Helen H. Moore's Blog, page 276

We watch as Melania battles Ivana because Trump has made us all as petty as he is

Ivana Trump (Credit: AP/Michael Zorn)

We already knew that the Trump administration is perhaps the pettiest group of individuals to ever hold sway over the executive branch.

President Trump himself has offered a steady stream of digs at the media and celebrities who speak critically of him, and just yesterday Vice President Mike Pence made a planned and potentially costly exit at a football game because he doesn’t agree with the NFL protests. This comes on top of all the private jet scandals, cases which just show how low, greedy and frankly unimaginative these people are. Even their notion of graft is pretty bargain basement.

But by no means is this pettiness circumscribed by the grounds of the White House. The sphere of Trump’s pettiness is wide. For proof, just look to Trump’s first wife — his ex-wife — Ivana, who is pointlessly and perhaps facetiously vying with Melania for the title of “First Lady.”

Ivana was on ABC’s Good Morning America on Monday morning to market her new book, “Raising Trump.” In the interview, she took shots at Melania and the president’s second wife, Marla Maples.

“I have the direct number to the White House, but I don’t really want to call him there because Melania is there and I don’t want to cause any kind of jealousy or something like that, because I’m basically first Trump wife, okay,” Ivana said, laughing. “I’m first lady, okay?”

Ivana took another shot when ABC’s Amy Robach pressed about Marla Maples, responding: “Well, I don’t want to talk about a showgirl.” She apparently only referred to Maples as “showgirl” throughout her entire book.

Now, these are jokes. Petty jokes to be sure, but just jokes from a woman who legitimately has an axe to grind with her former philandering spouse. It’s Page Six stuff any serious person should have ignored.

But Melania Trump did not ignore Ivana’s comments, despite the clear fact that there’s no purpose in arguing who is First Lady outside of low-grade personal point scoring. But, Melania is Donald Trump’s wife. Melania is part of the Trump White House. So, of course, Melania clapped back.

Through her spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham, the first lady of the United States released a statement that read:

Mrs. Trump has made the White House a home for Barron and the President. She loves living in Washington, DC, and is honored by her role as first lady of the United States. She plans to use her title and role to help children, not sell books. There is clearly no substance to this statement from an ex, this is unfortunately only attention-seeking and self-serving noise.

While she slams her predecessor for “attention-seeking,” the first lady’s response is even more so, having been written by a woman of such high national stature. She’s turned a blip of a breaking story into grist for hot takes (pieces like this included), all because petty battles of this nature are the language Trump and his circle speak.

Now we rubberneck as two rich women who married an odious man snark at each other throughout media, in a pointless war over who truly has a grip on his scerlotic heart and who should be regarded America’s wife. It’s middle-school stuff and all of us — the president, his ex-wife, the first lady, the media and the readers — are stuck in the cafeteria.

Experience the polychromatic world of New York Comic Con in photos

New York Comic Con brings together fans and creators of all things comic, anime and gamer related. Dedication and creativity reach a whole new level when cosplayers bring their favorite heroes and villains to life.

Below I’ve compiled photos of my favorite cosplayers of #NYCC17.

Click the photos to enlarge.

Colorado Captain

Denver native Matt Gnojek dons a fitted leather Captain America outfit and a custom helmet. His superhero vehicle of choice? A shiny Harley Davidson. Known as Colorado Captain, Gnojek aims to raise awareness and money for youth charities and refugees.

“This character is not intended to be political, he’s about being hopeful, spreading joy and love, but if I’m going to be driving around wearing the American flag on my back then I think I should stand for something.” Gnojek told me. “Rather than voting with protest or causing anger or difficulty, my idea is to bring a change in the world by putting my money where my mouth is. So that’s why I believe that America loves refugees and I want the world to know that. So when they see me riding down the road they’re going to know — refugees welcome here.”

Harley Quinn and the Joker

Lilly Wilton, better known as @LillyDubs has been cosplaying for over four years. Wilton is drawn to the popular Suicide Squad character because she “is not inhibited by societal norms and indulges in everything naughty and pleasurable—sex appeal, junk food, whiskey, et cetera.” Even in her most sinister form, she says she does everything “in the pursuit of a great punchline.” And of course, Harley Quinn is never too far from The Joker (brought to life by Danny Roman, @therealdannydarko).

Wilton revealed her attraction to cosplay.”For a brief amount of time we can be as loud, powerful, sexy, colorful, et cetera as we want to be,” she said. “That kind of freedom is intoxicating.”

Hip-Hop Spidey

“I break dance and hip-hop was just a huge influence on my life. Being a teacher I’m teaching the youth now so I feel like another way to get to the youth and make people happy just like I’ve been doing, is by dressing up like a character that people can recognize and maybe grasp onto.”

[Cosplayer: @HipHopSpidey]

Ororo Munroe, better known as X-Men’s Storm

Heather Mann (@Miss318i) has been cosplaying for over three years and is passionate about black female representation in comics. She noted that black female superheroes are becoming more prevalent at Comic Cons and comics themselves.

Swamp Thing

“I decided what I was going to do last week and I went to Walmart to buy the cheap stuff and then it got more expensive as it went.”

[Cosplayer: Alex Holland]

Sylveon, an evolution of the Pokémon Eevee 

“I am a huge exhibitionist and I love attention. I thrive on it and I love the camaraderie and the community that this place has.” – Aedan Roberts, @AedanRoberts

Toothiana, Tooth Fairy from “Rise of the Guardians” 

This handmade rendition of Toothiana from “Rise of the Guardians” took a year to make and features over 5,000 feathers. [Cosplayer: @acaswell23]

Urban Bunny

“I think it’s a great opportunity for people of all walks of life,” Urban Bunny told me about the subject of cosplaying. “Once you put a mask on you can be a woman, you can be black, you can be Asian, you can whatever and you can be Spider-Man, and you can be Superman, you can be Batman. It’s just a fun way to get outside of yourself and be someone else for a day.”

[Cosplayer: @urban_bunny]

Bumblebee and Honeybee from “Transformers”

This extravagant Transformer, commissioned by Hasbro and standing over nine and half feet tall, took the company Extreme Costumes five months to make and required a dedicated team of five. Tom DePetrillo, the owner of Extreme Costumes, told me about his attraction to cosplay. “I do it because it’s the greatest experience in the entire planet and this is the most fun I could have in four days.”

Here’s why there were no Weinstein jokes on “Saturday Night Live” this weekend

Harvey Weinstein (Credit: AP/Charles Sykes)

This past Saturday’s episode of NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” came and went without ever mentioning the embattled Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein, who was by then at the center of 30 years of sexual misconduct allegations.

Many people found this odd for a show that held nothing back in their jokes about Presidents Donald Trump and Bill Clinton as well as Bill Cosby, Bill O’Reilly, Roger Ailes, Anthony Weiner and many others accused of sexual harassment, assault or worse. (The show was forward enough this weekend to make light of O.J. Simpson, a man who most likely murdered two people.)

When the Daily Mail confronted SNL creator Lorne Michaels early Sunday morning about the absence of the Weinstein controversy, he claimed it was because “it’s a New York thing,” perhaps intimating that the rest of the country did not know or would not care about the issue (not that heaping on jokes that only make sense to those in the city has ever been a problem for the show before).

But according to The New York Times, Weinstein jokes were indeed prepared for Saturday’s show, but they were shelved. The Times wrote, “These cuts were made simply because the material seemed to fall flat with the show’s studio audience, the person said.” The anonymous source also told them that show was focused on the Las Vegas shooting. Country musician Jason Aldean, who was playing while bullets ripped through the music festival on October 1, opened the show with remarks and a performance.

Some conservative critics called it a double standard and that Weinstein was spared likely because of his liberal politics. One who zeroed in on Michaels’ dubious statement was Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., who tweeted Sunday: “Out of curiosity where is @realdonaldtrump from???”

Out of curiosity where is @realdonaldtrump from??? Seems like there could be more to that pass than this nonsense. https://t.co/N01MLZA0Wa

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) October 8, 2017

Whether this was reason for Michaels to omit Weinstein jokes or not, allegedly, the Times did kill a story in 2004 about Weinstein’s sexual harassment allegations, Sarah Waxman wrote in The Wrap. She claims that as a reporter for the Times back then, Matt Damon and Russell Crowe called her to quell her reporting about Weinstein and “the story was gutted.”

According to the New York Times’ “SNL” source, in light of Weinstein’s termination, they may address it this upcoming Saturday — that is, if Michaels figures out that one of the most famous producers in film harassing women (movie stars included) isn’t just a “New York thing.”

It’s been one year since Ken Bone came into our lives

Kenneth Bone listens as Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton answers a question during the second presidential debate with Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump at Washington University in St. Louis, Sunday, Oct. 9, 2016. (Rick T. Wilking/Pool Photo via AP) (Credit: AP)

Times were different in 2016. Leonardo DiCaprio finally won an Oscar. The world was distracted by the Olympic Games as opposed to the prospect of nuclear war.  The president of the United States could type a coherent sentence of more than 140 characters. Life was good.

And then on October 9th, 2016, Ken Bone came into our lives.

He entered the second presidential debate at Washington University in St. Louis as a regular undecided voter from an Illinois suburb and left as an internet sensation, leaving America awestruck for all of three weeks. So let’s celebrate the anniversary of a suburban undecided voter turned internet meme’s bizarre rise to fame.

His question to Trump and Clinton — “What steps will your energy policy take to meet our energy needs while at the same time remaining environmentally friendly and minimizing job loss for fossil power plant workers?” — was all but lost in the internet’s barrage of memes.

Some say it was his round face and mustache; others thought it was his red, cable-knit Izod sweater. For whatever reason, Ken Bone set off a social media storm.

“I didn’t have time to think about how weird it was,” Bone told CNN. Upon leaving the debate, Bone found that he had thousands of messages, which eventually led to celebrity appearances on Jimmy Kimmel and Comedy Central’s “@midnight with Chris Hardwick.” His sweater was eventually auctioned off for charity to the tune of $10,000 — yes, you read that right — $10,000.

One year later, Bone has finally “decided” where he stands in the country’s politics but remains as confused as the rest of us about his celebrity status.

Though he refused to say who he voted for in 2016, Bone told CNN that “almost anybody who is currently a Democrat in the Senate, I think I would probably vote for over Trump” in the next election.

As far as his fame goes, Bone just doesn’t understand what happened. He’s experienced the negative side: he receives prank calls, had some regrettable past social media posts dug up and even had to have police sweep his home. But the upsides might make up for it; he’s earned approximately $150,000 from celebrity appearances, filmed a commercial for Izod and has fans swarm him for autographs at events, CNN said.

So if you’ve got some debt to pay off, here’s what to do. Be an undecided voter in 2020. Wear a red sweater. Ask about energy policy. Become a popular meme. And let America’s celebrity-obsessed, social media-loving population do the rest for you.

“I don’t know why I have fans, but I like it,” Bone said. “It’s fun.”

The psychological ripple effects of mass shootings

A woman sits on a curb at the scene of a shooting outside of a music festival along the Las Vegas Strip, Monday, Oct. 2, 2017, in Las Vegas. (Credit: AP/John Locher)

The latest mass shooting in America — the largest in modern history — has us once again questioning the role of guns in our society and our willingness to allow weapons and ammunition to proliferate throughout. Until Sunday, when a gunman opened fire in Las Vegas and killed 59 people and wounded hundreds more, the deadliest mass shooting happened in June 2016 at an Orlando nightclub, leaving 49 dead and many injured. Since then, there have been over 520 mass shootings, which the Gun Violence Archive defines as an event in which four or more individuals are shot at or killed in the same general time and location.

How do these mass shootings impact all those involved as well as those who witness them from afar? We asked Sheila A.M. Rauch, Ph.D., an associate professor at Emory University School who has been providing treatment for PTSD and anxiety disorder for over 20 years, what these events are doing to the individuals involved as well as our collective national psyche.

Karin Kamp: The death of a loved one is always upsetting. But how it different for people to cope with such a loss as a result of a mass shooting like the one in Las Vegas?

Sheila Rauch: Coping with loss is difficult but when that loss is unexpected and due to senseless violence, it can compound the impact on those who are left behind. As people, we want to have a sense of control over our world and the people we love. When death due to violence occurs that sense of safety and comfort is ripped away and leaves the people left behind feeling vulnerable and angry along with the deep sadness that follows loss.

In times like these it is particularly important to make sure we are supporting those around us who are impacted and providing them ways to vent in a safe environment. It is also important to look for ways to prevent such events in the future through examination of why this act was able to occur and why this person was able to harm so many so quickly by using a type of weapon that can fire quickly. We want survivors to recover and we want to prevent future incidents of violence.

KK: There were also over 500 people wounded, and surely many will have very serious lasting physical problems as a result. How does this type of event impact the wounded and their families psychologically?

SR: Whether their loved ones were physically injured or killed, the impact on family and friends can be similar. As previously mentioned, violent trauma steals the sense of safety that most people take for granted in their lives for themselves and those they care about.

For those who may not have been personally injured, we will not know until a few months from now the impact on their psychological health. Trauma, such as a shooting, can lead to depression or PTSD or other mental health issues that can impede family and work function. Physical injuries may require rehabilitation and medical intervention and the psychological injuries may require care as well over time. Providing support for the survivors and their families in the aftermath of trauma can speed recovery and reduce rates of negative mental health consequences over time. Giving people a voice to express their stories as they see fit can also aid in their recovery.

KK: There were also 22,000 people in attendance at the concert. What can you say about how their lives will be impacted?

SR: We would expect that most of the people who survived this incident will be feeling some signs of trauma exposure — images coming into their heads over and over, sadness, anxiety, fear, problems sleeping, anger, avoidance of things that remind them. Over time, most people will see these reactions fade away naturally as they gradually get back into their lives and reengage with activities such as work and family. This time course typically sees symptoms reduce over about a year post trauma. For some, the reactions will remain or even worsen over time, leading to post-traumatic stress disorder or depression. Typically, PTSD is not diagnosed until one month after an event. Effective treatments are available including medications (such as SSRIs) and psychotherapy (such as Prolonged Exposure therapy or Cognitive Processing Therapy). However, if someone if having intense reactions prior to one month and wants assistance, starting earlier can be helpful.

KK: What is your advice to anyone who was at the event in terms of their mental health?

SR: My advice to anyone at the event is to pay attention to what you need to recover. Everyone is different and recovers at a different pace and cadence. Ensure you connect with your trusted supports including family and friends and community. Talk about it in whatever way you feel comfortable and let yourself feel the emotions that this experience may bring up for you. Make sure you are not using substances to try and avoid. Channel your energy into positive coping such as raising awareness of gun violence or telling the stories of yourself and those you love surrounding this incident.

KK: Shootings with the biggest death tolls make headlines, but according to Gun Violence Archive their have been over 270 mass shootings incidents in 2017 alone. These happen in schools, malls and other public places. How is this effecting us?

SR: My observation is that we seem to be becoming less outraged with each incident. This should be unacceptable and instead it seems to be shrugged off as the way things are now. I think this has a numbing effect on our society.

We have both fearful and numbing reactions over time and across people. However, as these events have become more common the intensity of the fear gets reduced each time. I think the impact of fear is that we become less trusting of each other. This especially problematic at a time when we need each other to recover and try to work together to prevent these incidents in the future.

KK: Then there are the thousands upon thousands of first responders that come to the aid of victims in such attacks. Of course they are trained to see traumatic events, but what toll does this take on them?

SR: First responders — because of the number of traumas they are closely engaged with — are at a higher risk than the general population of developing PTSD, depression and other mental health issues over time. That being said, they are also a very resilient and strong population that bears the violence of our society. I would encourage them to take advantage of their supports in their community of responders as well as the resources in the community. As a society, we need to support first responders and their families for their bravery and service.

KK: On the news you can hear the gunshots and see the horrific aftermath of the shooting. How do these kind of repeated images affect our society in general?

SR: I would caution people to monitor how much you view such images. They are not generally helpful and most of us do not need that level of detail to be aware of the event.

KK: As children become increasingly aware of these events given the proliferation of breaking news on-air in public places, cell phone ownership and social media, how is this impacting their mental health?

SR: Parents should make sure they talk with their children about this event. Discussion should focus on what the child is aware of and their thoughts about the incident at the developmental level of the child. Start with their understanding. As much as parents can provide a clear sense of safety for their children this will help to reduce the impact of the event. What are the child’s thoughts about why this happened? How do they feel this impacts their life? What do they think needs to happen now? How can they feel safe in their life?

 

Urban noise pollution is worst in poor and minority neighborhoods and segregated cities

(Credit: AP Photo/Mark Lennihan, File)

Most Americans think of cities as noisy places – but some parts of U.S. cities are much louder than others. Nationwide, neighborhoods with higher poverty rates and proportions of black, Hispanic and Asian residents have higher noise levels than other neighborhoods. In addition, in more racially segregated cities, living conditions are louder for everyone, regardless of their race or ethnicity.

As environmental health researchers, we are interested in learning how everyday environmental exposures affect different population groups. In a new study we detail our findings on noise pollution, which has direct impacts on public health.

Scientists have documented that environmental hazards, such as air pollution and hazardous waste sites, are not evenly distributed across different populations. Often socially disadvantaged groups such as racial minorities, the poor and those with lower levels of educational attainment experience the highest levels of exposure. These dual stresses can represent a double jeopardy for vulnerable populations.

Our research shows that like air pollution, noise exposure may follow a similar social gradient. This unequal burden may, in part, contribute to observed health disparities across diverse groups in the United States and elsewhere.

Mapping city sounds

In 2015 we stumbled across a Smithsonian Magazine post about the National Park Service sound map. The sound estimates are meant to represent average noise levels during a summer day or night. They rely on 1.5 million hours of sound measurements across 492 locations, including urban areas and national forests, and modeling based on topography, climate and human activity. National Park Service colleagues shared their model and collaborated on our study.

By linking the noise model to national U.S. population data, we made some interesting discoveries. First, in both rural and urban areas, affluent communities were quieter. Neighborhoods with median annual incomes below US$25,000 were nearly 2 decibels louder than neighborhoods with incomes above $100,000 per year. And nationwide, communities with 75 percent black residents had median nighttime noise levels of 46.3 decibels – 4 decibels louder than communities with no black residents. A 10-decibel increase represents a doubling in loudness of a sound, so these are big differences.

Why worry about noise?

A growing body of evidence links noise from a variety of sources, including air, rail and road traffic, and industrial activity to adverse health outcomes. Studies have found that kids attending school in louder areas have more behavioral problems and perform worse on exams. Adults exposed to higher noise levels report higher levels of annoyance and sleep disturbances.

Scientists theorize that since evolution programmed the human body to respond to noises as threats, noise exposures activate our natural flight-or-fight response. Noise exposure triggers the release of stress hormones, which can raise our heart rates and blood pressure even during sleep. Long-term consequences of these reactions include high blood pressure, Type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and lower birth weight.

As with other types of pollution, multiple factors help explain why some social groups are more exposed to noise than others. Factors include weak enforcement of regulations in marginalized neighborhoods, lack of capacity to engage in land use decisions and environmental policies that fail to adequately protect vulnerable communities. This may lead to siting of noise generating industrial facilities, highways and airports in poorer communities.

Segregated communities are louder

We also found higher noise levels in more racially segregated metropolitan areas, such as Milwaukee, Chicago, Cleveland, Trenton and Memphis. This relationship affected all members of these communities. For example, noise levels in communities made up entirely of white Americans in the least segregated metropolitan areas were nearly 5 decibels quieter than all-white neighborhoods in the most segregated metropolitan areas.

Segregation in U.S. metropolitan areas is a process that spatially binds communities of color and working-class residents through the concentration of poverty, lack of economic opportunity, exclusionary housing development and discriminatory lending policies. But why would even all-white neighborhoods in highly segregated cities be noisier than those elsewhere? Although we did not find conclusive evidence, we believe this happens because in highly segregated cities, political power is often unequally distributed along racial, ethnic and economic lines.

These power differences may empower some residents to manage undesirable land uses in ways that are beneficial to them – for example, by forcing freeway construction through poorer communities. This scenario can lead to higher levels of environmental hazards overall than would occur if power and the burdens of development were more equally spread across the community.

Segregation can also physically separate neighborhoods, workplaces and basic services, forcing all residents to drive more and commute farther. These conditions can increase air pollution and, potentially, metro-wide noise levels for everyone.

Curbing noise pollution

The U.S. government has done relatively little to regulate noise levels since 1981, when Congress abruptly stopped funding the Noise Control Act of 1972. However, Congress did not repeal the law, so states had to assume responsibility for noise control. Few states have tried, and there has been scant progress. For example, in 2013-2014 New York City received one noise complaint about every four minutes.

Without funding, noise research has proven difficult. Until recently the United States did not even have up-to-date nationwide noise maps. In contrast, multiple European countries have mapped noise, and the European Commission funds noise communication plans, abatement and health studies.

In 2009 the World Health Organization released a report detailing nighttime noise guidelines for Europe. They recommended reducing noise levels when possible and reducing the impact of noise when levels could not be moderated. For example, the guidelines recommended locating bedrooms on the quiet sides of houses, away from street traffic, and keeping nighttime noise levels below 40 decibels to protect human health. The agency encouraged all member states to strive for these levels in the long term, with a short-term goal of 55 decibels at night.

Nonetheless, inequalities in exposure to noise still exist in Europe. For example, in Wales and Germany, poorer individuals have reported more neighborhood noise.

The most successful U.S. noise reduction efforts have centered on the airline industry. Driven by the introduction of new, more efficient and quieter engines and promoted by the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990, the number of Americans affected by aviation noise declined by 95 percent between 1975 and 2000.

Moving forward, our findings suggest that more research is needed for studies on the relationship between noise and population health in the United States – data that could inform noise regulations. Funding and research should focus on poorer communities and communities of color that appear to bear a disproportionate burden of environmental noise.

Liberals and conservatives call on Trump to reject JFK assassination secrecy

John F. Kennedy (Credit: AP/Henry Griffin)

A bipartisan group of congressmen are urging President Trump to insist on “full public release” of the government’s JFK assassination records by October 26 and to “reject any claims for the continued postponement” of the records.

In two “sense of Congress” resolutions introduced Wednesday on Capitol Hill, the legislators call for the CIA, FBI and other federal agencies to release all of their records related to the November 1963 murder of President John F. Kennedy.

JFK’s assassination generated six official investigations and widespread belief that the liberal president was the victim of a conspiracy and not of a lone gunman.

After the box-office success of Oliver Stone’s conspiratorial epic “JFK,” Congress unanimously approved the JFK Records Act on Oct. 26, 1992, mandating release of all government records related to JFK’s death within 25 years. Most of the files have been made public, but some 35,000 documents remained fully or partially redacted and have never been seen by the public, researchers or the media. By law, federal agencies must obtain the written permission of the president to keep these documents secret after this month.

“The president can be a real hero to the American people if he says the truth does matter,” Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC), leader of the effort, told AlterNet in a phone interview.

“Transparency in government is critical not only to ensuring accountability; it’s also essential to understanding our nation’s history,” said Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) in a written statement. “Americans deserve a full picture of what happened that fateful day in November 1963. Shining a light on never-before-seen government records is essential to filling in these blank spaces in our history.”

The CIA and FBI have not yet revealed whether they will appeal to Trump for continuing secrecy.

“CIA continues to engage in the process to determine the appropriate next steps with respect to any previously unreleased CIA information,” spokesperson Nicole de Haay told AlterNet last month.

In a statement to AlterNet, the FBI press office said, “We do not have a comment to provide and suggest you reach out to the White House.”

The White House did not respond to request for comment.

According to the National Archives online database, the unreleased records include CIA files on two senior officers involved in assassinations and four Watergate burglars, as well as the closed-door testimony of numerous JFK witnesses, such CIA spymaster James Angleton.

Diverse Supporters

The resolutions have attracted diverse support. The House measure, introduced by Jones, is co-sponsored by several members who served in Congress in 1992 and voted for the original JFK Records Act. They include liberal representatives John Conyers (D-Mich.), currently the longest serving member of Congress; Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), the longest serving woman in the House; Louise Slaughter (D-NY); and Gerry Connolly (D-Va.).

The House Republican co-sponsors include conservative Reps. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) and first-termer Matt Gaetz (R-Florida).

The Senate resolution (S. Res. 281) was introduced by Grassley, the conservative chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and co-sponsored by liberal Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), the ranking member of the committee.

“Chairman Grassley and I both believe that a government of, by, and for the people simply cannot be one that needlessly hides information from them,” Leahy said in a statement. “I look forward to continuing our efforts to make our democracy ever more transparent to the American people.”

Jones said he will send a letter to all members of Congress seeking their support for the non-binding resolutions.

Jones also said he plans to contact Roger Stone, a confidante of Trump and a JFK conspiracy theorist. On Wednesday, Stone joined anti-conspiracist author Gerald Posner in a public statement calling for release of the JFK files.

“I will ask Mr. Stone to please use his influence with Donald Trump to encourage the president to join in this effort,” Jones added.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump floated a bogus JFK conspiracy theory to smear Republican rival Ted Cruz.

Four Revelations

The first batch of the last JFK records, released by the National Archives in July, generated several revelations that shed new light on the JFK story.

One top CIA counterintelligence official came to doubt the lone gunman theory in the mid-1970s and suspected Cuba might have been involved, according to Politico.

WhoWhatWhy reported on records showing that Earle Cabell, the mayor of Dallas at the time of JFK’s murder, was a CIA asset.

For AlterNet, I wrote about how CIA counterintelligence chief James Angleton repeatedly deceived Warren Commission investigators about the agency’s knowledge of Oswald’s pre-assassination activities.

Collectively, the latest revelations pour cold water on the theory that the Soviet intelligence service, the KGB, was involved in JFK’s murder, while raising questions about the “Castro did it” theory and the role of the CIA in the events leading up to Nov. 22, 1963.

Whether any JFK records will remain secret after this month is up to President Trump. The conspiracy-theorist-in chief has three weeks to decide.

Does the First Amendment let celebs say whatever they want?

Eli Harold, Colin Kaepernick and Eric Reid of the San Francisco 49ers (Credit: Getty/Thearon W. Henderson)

When NFL player Colin Kaepernick refuses to stand for the national anthem, or the cast of the Broadway musical “Hamilton” confronts the vice president-elect, or the Dixie Chicks speak out against war, talk quickly turns to freedom of speech. Most Americans assume they have a constitutional guarantee to express themselves as they wish, on whatever topics they wish. But how protected by the First Amendment are public figures when they engage in political protest?

Coming out publicly, whether for or against some disputed position, can have real consequences for the movement and the celebrity. However helpful a high-profile endorsement may be at shifting the public conversation, taking these public positions – particularly unpopular ones – may not be as protected as we assume. As a professor who studies the intersection of law and culture, I believe Americans may need to revisit their understanding of U.S. history and the First Amendment.

Harnessing the power of celebrity

Far from being just product endorsers, celebrities can and do use their voices to influence policy and politics. For example, some researchers believe Oprah Winfrey’s early endorsement of Barack Obama helped him obtain the votes he needed to become the 2008 Democratic nominee for president.

This phenomenon, however, is not new.

Gilbert du Motier Marquis de Lafayette, early celeb.

Joseph-Désiré Court

Since the birth of the nation, celebrities have used their voices – and had their voices used – to advance important causes. In 1780, George Washington enlisted the help of Marquis de Lafayette, a French aristocrat dubbed by some “America’s first celebrity,” to ask French officials for more support for the Continental Army. Lafayette was so popular that when he traveled to America some years later, the press reported on each day and detail of his yearlong visit.

Social movements also have harnessed the power of celebrity influence throughout American history. In the early 1900s, after the National Woman Suffrage Association was founded to pursue the right of women to vote, the group used celebrities to raise awareness of the cause. Popular actresses like Mary Shaw, Lillian Russell and Fola La Follette, for example, brought attention to the movement, combining their work with political activism to push the women’s suffrage message.

Celeb actions can move the needle

The civil rights movement of the 1960s benefited from celebrities’ actions. For instance, after Sammy Davis Jr., a black comedian, refused to perform in segregated venues, many clubs in Las Vegas and Miami became integrated. Others – including Ossie Davis and Ruby Dee, Dick Gregory, Harry Belafonte, Jackie Robinson and Muhammad Ali – were instrumental in the success of the movement and passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. These actors planned and attended rallies, performed in and organized fundraising efforts and worked to open opportunities for other black people in the entertainment industry.

By the 1980s, you could watch Charlton Heston and Paul Newman debate national defense policy and a potential nuclear weapons freeze on television. Meryl Streep spoke before Congress against the use of pesticides in foods. Ed Asner and Charlton Heston publicly feuded about their differing opinions of the Reagan administration’s support of right-wing Nicaraguan militant groups.

Whatever you think of how well thought out their opinions are (or aren’t), celebrities have the ability to draw attention to social issues in a way others do not. Their large platforms through film, music, sports and other media provide significant amplification for the initiatives they support.

There is, in particular, a measurable connection between celebrity opinions and young people. Most marketing research shows that celebrity endorsements can improve the likelihood that young consumers will choose the endorsed product.

Antagonism toward celebrity activism

Celebrities have been important partners, strategists, fundraisers and spokespeople for social movements and politicians since the earliest days of modern America. Recently, however, celebrities speaking out about policy and politics have received some harsh responses.

Kaepernick, in particular, has received scathing criticism. Fans of his team have burned his jersey in effigy. Mike Evans, another NFL player, drew so much criticism for sitting in protest of Donald Trump’s election to the presidency that he was forced to apologize and say he would never do it again. #BoycottHamilton trended on Twitter after the cast of the Broadway show Hamilton addressed Mike Pence.

President-elect Donald Trump jumped into the fray, tweeting that he does not support the public expression of sentiments like those of the “Hamilton” cast.

Unprotected speech

All of this raises significant questions about speech, protests and the law. Often celebrities, commentators and pundits talk about being able to say whatever they want thanks to their right to freedom of speech. But this idea is based on common misconceptions about what the U.S. Constitution actually says.

What is allowed under the law starts with the text of the First Amendment, which provides that:

“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.”

The language essentially allows for freedom of expression without government interference. The right to free speech includes protests and distasteful speech that one might find offensive or racist.

But, the First Amendment as written applies only to actions by Congress, and by extension the federal government. Over time, it’s also come to apply to state and local governments. It’s basically a restriction on how the government can limit citizens’ speech.

The First Amendment does not, however, apply to nongovernment entities. So private companies – professional sports organizations or theater companies, for instance – can actually restrict speech without violating the First Amendment, because in most cases, it doesn’t apply to them (unless the restriction is illegal for other reasons). This is why the NFL could ban DeAngelo Williams from wearing pink during a game in honor of his mother, who had died from breast cancer, and fine him thousands of dollars when he later defied the rules and did it anyway.

DeAngelo Williams is outspoken in supporting breast cancer research. The NFL can limit when he can display his position.

AP Photo/Nell Redmond

How does all of this affect celebrities? In a nutshell, if a celebrity is an employee of, or has some kind of contract with, a nongovernment entity, his speech actually can be restricted in many ways. Remember, it’s not against the law for a nongovernment employer to limit what employees can say in many cases. While there are other more limited protections based on state and federal law that protect employee speech, they are incomplete and probably wouldn’t apply to most celebrity speech. Any questions about what a public figure can or cannot express, therefore, will start with the language of any contracts she has signed – not the First Amendment.

For better or worse, celebrities can make significant impacts on policy, politics and culture, and have been doing so for centuries. But speaking out can put them at risk. Celebrities can be fined by their employers, like DeAngelo Williams, have their careers derailed, like the Dixie Chicks, or receive death threats, like Colin Kaepernick. Even so, their involvement can provide an influential platform in promoting and creating societal change.

Shontavia Johnson, Professor of Intellectual Property Law, Drake University

The enduring power of print for learning in a digital world

(Credit: AP)

Today’s students see themselves as digital natives, the first generation to grow up surrounded by technology like smartphones, tablets and e-readers.

Teachers, parents and policymakers certainly acknowledge the growing influence of technology and have responded in kind. We’ve seen more investment in classroom technologies, with students now equipped with school-issued iPads and access to e-textbooks. In 2009, California passed a law requiring that all college textbooks be available in electronic form by 2020; in 2011, Florida lawmakers passed legislation requiring public schools to convert their textbooks to digital versions.

Given this trend, teachers, students, parents and policymakers might assume that students’ familiarity and preference for technology translates into better learning outcomes. But we’ve found that’s not necessarily true.

As researchers in learning and text comprehension, our recent work has focused on the differences between reading print and digital media. While new forms of classroom technology like digital textbooks are more accessible and portable, it would be wrong to assume that students will automatically be better served by digital reading simply because they prefer it.

Speed – at a cost

Our work has revealed a significant discrepancy. Students said they preferred and performed better when reading on screens. But their actual performance tended to suffer.

For example, from our review of research done since 1992, we found that students were able to better comprehend information in print for texts that were more than a page in length. This appears to be related to the disruptive effect that scrolling has on comprehension. We were also surprised to learn that few researchers tested different levels of comprehension or documented reading time in their studies of printed and digital texts.

To explore these patterns further, we conducted three studies that explored college students’ ability to comprehend information on paper and from screens.

Students first rated their medium preferences. After reading two passages, one online and one in print, these students then completed three tasks: Describe the main idea of the texts, list key points covered in the readings and provide any other relevant content they could recall. When they were done, we asked them to judge their comprehension performance.

Across the studies, the texts differed in length, and we collected varying data (e.g., reading time). Nonetheless, some key findings emerged that shed new light on the differences between reading printed and digital content:

Students overwhelming preferred to read digitally.
Reading was significantly faster online than in print.
Students judged their comprehension as better online than in print.
Paradoxically, overall comprehension was better for print versus

digital reading.
The medium didn’t matter for general questions (like understanding the main idea of the text).
But when it came to specific questions, comprehension was significantly better when participants read printed texts.

Placing print in perspective

From these findings, there are some lessons that can be conveyed to policymakers, teachers, parents and students about print’s place in an increasingly digital world.

1. Consider the purpose

We all read for many reasons. Sometimes we’re looking for an answer to a very specific question. Other times, we want to browse a newspaper for today’s headlines.

As we’re about to pick up an article or text in a printed or digital format, we should keep in mind why we’re reading. There’s likely to be a difference in which medium works best for which purpose.

In other words, there’s no “one medium fits all” approach.

2. Analyze the task

One of the most consistent findings from our research is that, for some tasks, medium doesn’t seem to matter. If all students are being asked to do is to understand and remember the big idea or gist of what they’re reading, there’s no benefit in selecting one medium over another.

But when the reading assignment demands more engagement or deeper comprehension, students may be better off reading print. Teachers could make students aware that their ability to comprehend the assignment may be influenced by the medium they choose. This awareness could lessen the discrepancy we witnessed in students’ judgments of their performance vis-à-vis how they actually performed.

3. Slow it down

In our third experiment, we were able to create meaningful profiles of college students based on the way they read and comprehended from printed and digital texts.

Among those profiles, we found a select group of undergraduates who actually comprehended better when they moved from print to digital. What distinguished this atypical group was that they actually read slower when the text was on the computer than when it was in a book. In other words, they didn’t take the ease of engaging with the digital text for granted. Using this select group as a model, students could possibly be taught or directed to fight the tendency to glide through online texts.

4. Something that can’t be measured

There may be economic and environmental reasons to go paperless. But there’s clearly something important that would be lost with print’s demise.

In our academic lives, we have books and articles that we regularly return to. The dog-eared pages of these treasured readings contain lines of text etched with questions or reflections. It’s difficult to imagine a similar level of engagement with a digital text. There should probably always be a place for print in students’ academic lives – no matter how technologically savvy they become.

Of course, we realize that the march toward online reading will continue unabated. And we don’t want to downplay the many conveniences of online texts, which include breadth and speed of access.

Rather, our goal is simply to remind today’s digital natives – and those who shape their educational experiences – that there are significant costs and consequences to discounting the printed word’s value for learning and academic development.

Patricia A. Alexander, Professor of Psychology, University of Maryland and Lauren M. Singer, Ph.D. Candidate in Educational Psychology, University of Maryland

 

31 Halloween ideas for kids to play, make, eat, and watch

(Credit: AP)

Halloween is one of our favorite times of year because families can have so much fun together with — and without — media. From spooky movies, music, and games to fun crafts, snacks, and parties, October offers a month packed with family pleasures. We culled the Web for inspiration to get kids and families learning, doing, and having fun.

Pretty Cool Pumpkins

Motion-Controlled Silly-String-Shooting Pumpkin

Looking for a fun Halloween project? This is it.
Pumpkin Carving Ideas

Hundreds of designs and stencils, including geeky, pop culture, and traditional styles.
DIY Pumpkin Decorations

No carving needed!
Pumpkin Recipes

When the holiday’s over, don’t toss it — cook it!

Costume Inspiration

Dirty-Laundry Group Costume

Keep it clean this Halloween.
Classic Literary Costumes

Bring these characters to life.
YA Book Cover Costumes

Dress up as your favorite heroine.
Last-Minute Costumes

What busy family doesn’t need these?
Incredible Pinterest Costume Page

If you can’t find an idea here, maybe you should just give up.

Food Fun

Halloween Lunchbox Ideas

Keep the spirit going throughout the school day.
Healthy Halloween Snacks

Counteract all the sugar with these holiday treats.
Candy-Coated Caramel Apples

This classic fall treat doubles down on the candy.

Spooky Crafts and Activities

Icky Science Experiments

Using anything from slime to potions, kids will delight in these weird educational projects.
Hot-Glue-Gun Necklaces

As part of a costume or just for Halloween fun, these are easy to make.
Bread-Clip Comic Strips

Create your own scary or not-so-scary ghost stories.
Easy Sewing Patterns and Projects

Some are creepy, some are cute, but they’re all fun.
Trick-or-Treat Bags and Buckets

Carry your candy in style.
Scary Witch Rhythm Song and Game

Preschoolers will love this fun Halloween-y song activity.
Candy-Toss Game

Even if they can’t eat it all, they can play with it.
Pumpkin Pie Play Dough

Fun to make and fun to play with, too.
Candy Activities for Fun and Learning

Think candy’s bad for the brain? Wrong!
Find Haunted Houses

Teens and adults might enjoy seeking out a scary spot nearby.
Halloween Hacks

Spirited activities and eats you can do at the last minute.
Start a Boo-Bag Tradition

Surprise your friends and neighbors with Halloween goodies.

Scary (and Not-So-Scary) Media

Halloween Apps

Stock your device with seasonal games for the kiddos.
Classic Horror-Movie Posters

Get decor or costume inspiration from these great images.
Halloween Books for Young Kids

Wee ones will love these adorable and not-too-scary tales.
The Best Spooky Music Videos, Ever

From “Thriller” to “Monster Mash,” kids will adore these creepy songs and videos.

More Halloween Fun

Party Planning

Throw the best kids’ Halloween party on the block.
History of Halloween

Teach curious kids why we do all this silly, spooky stuff each October.
Tips for Taking Good Halloween Photos

Want some great pics for your Instagram?