We Must Embrace Change

By Katherine Tibedo

In his essay “The Storyteller,” Walter Benjamin asserts that storytelling is dying. He saw the death of storytelling as a symptom of a greater problem: people no longer appreciated experience, had become isolated and cut off from fellow humans. Benjamin wrote his essay at the end of World War I, but his beliefs and fears are echoed today. As we become more immersed in the digital world, I hear more and more people claim we are becoming isolated, that we don’t talk like we use to, that we don’t tell stories.

These views perplex me. Over the past four years, I have made my way as a storyteller: in marketing, in creative writing and in journalism. Even more, I see storytelling in every aspect of my life and the lives of those around me. I see stories passed across the dining hall tables, texted between classes, and whispered in the ears of friends. But I can understand the concerns about the death of storytelling.

When Benjamin said storytelling, he thought only of oral storytelling. He saw the loss of a world where men gathered around the table after a hard day and shared their experiences. He believed that as this died out, as men shied away from speaking in the wake of WWI, that storytelling as a whole would die. He saw death, where he should have looked for transformation, because storytelling is something integral for society. It connects us, in all its forms, to one another. It holds us together and moves the world forward.

In recent years, the art of storytelling has taken many forms. Its transformation has profoundly affected the media industry. The digital lifestyle has given journalists new challenges. How do we provide the knowledge people want in a way that fits in modern culture? How do we make the information people need stand out amongst the clutter? The future of the media is clouded in uncertainty; not so much its existence, but its form. Will sites like Buzzfeed and Huffington Post capture readers’ attentions to such an extent that the detailed journalism found in outlets like The New York Times fall by the wayside, stop being profitable, and die out?

To keep readers engaged in our stories, change is inevitable. We must be prepared as we move into the future to let go of practices we continue to do simply because we have always done them. We must be ready to take risks, to try new things, and to trust ourselves when others tell us our ideas will never work. We must be ready to change because change is coming and it is coming fast.

This year has been a year of change at The Daily Campus. We changed our look, our production process, our training procedures, our website, the structure of our editorial meetings and our Board structure. And more changes are coming. We’ve created a new executive position called the Digital Manager who oversees the new digital department that includes Daily Campus Video. We have changed the titles and pay of our ad staff, with account managers headed by a sales director. We have put in place new motivations for generating alternative revenue and have begun to look critically about our printing schedule. These are not small changes and bigger ones await us, I am sure of it. But we should not be afraid of change. We should embrace it.

Too often change is seen as threat. Every year we pour our soul into this paper. When we leave, it can be hard to have our vision challenged. I know the paper will continue to change after I leave. I sense that a year from now it will be a different paper from the one today. I know I will not agree with everything the new executives do, but my role is not judge. I am officially disconnected. I know less than those directly involved. It is my role to support the next generation, to be there when they seek advice, and to trust them when they do not.

This is my pledge. I pledge to be a resource to next year’s staff and all that come after. I pledge to never to judge their decisions before getting all the details. I pledge to offer only constructive remarks about the paper on social media. I pledge my continual support of the paper I love. I pledge to be a proud alumnus of The Daily Campus.

Saying Goodbye

By Katie McWilliams

It took 14 weeks, but when I made the choice to walk into The Daily Campus on January 30, 2012, I knew I’d found my place at UConn. Where my dorm room felt claustrophobic, The Daily Campus opened doors to an amazing side of UConn I’d never experienced. I spent the first half of my freshmen year going to SUBOG movies, hanging out in my dorm room, hitting up Chaugies if I felt particularly fancy, but when I got involved at The Daily Campus I became engrained in UConn life. Suddenly I was covering art exhibits, concerts, panel discussions on migratory workers, Rainbow Center lectures and everything in between. I used to joke that I knew everything happening on campus because I worked at The DC.

 

When I became Managing Editor last year I had no idea what I’d gotten myself into. It’s been a challenging year at The Daily Campus. Not only did massive editorial changes occur in our leadership and content, but the very structure of our organization shifted. But I’m not here to talk about regrets or how I wish things had gone. I’m choosing this moment to honor the hard work of everybody at The Daily Campus and the people who’ve made me the person I am today.

 

I first need to thank the first Editors I worked under, Purbita Saha and Jon Tyczkowski. You may not remember me, but you’re the reason I stayed on at the DC. After my first article, you gave me “Article of the Week,” and made me realize that journalism was not only something I enjoyed, but something I was good at. That positive affirmation is something I’ve carried since that night.

 

Kim Wilson and Tyler Morrissey. I don’t know where to start with thanking you. You two were my role models at the DC—I wished to be as forthright and capable as Tyler, and as passionate and resilient as Kim. The Daily Campus thrived under your editorships and I would never have gone for Managing Editor if you two hadn’t inspired me to always be a better journalist, copy editor and designer. I owe you two much more than you can imagine. Your friendship through the struggles you faced at the DC is admirable and I wish that on every class of editors to come.

 

The best part of working at The Daily Campus for four years has been the people. As any DC staffer knows, the friends you make breaking news together, digging into the $5 combo at Husky Pizza (here’s looking at you Tim and Francesca) or commiserating over dropped articles and overdue deadlines are friends for life. Or so I hope. I know we all share an experience of working together, often into the wee hours of the morning, to bring UConn the best damn paper we can. The late nights spent deliriously complaining about why the basketball gamer hasn’t come in yet, the shared glee over Vines of Kentucky fans destroying dressers and the contagious enthusiasm of breaking a story from the newsroom—this is what DC friendships are made of.

 

I have a few more people to thank for being there for me this year. My dear friends Jon Kulakofsky and Tim Fontenault. Thank you for being my comic relief, listening to me vent about everyday annoyances and for the endless support and encouragement. Whether it was Jon sending me GIFs during editors meetings or Tim lightening the mood with a ridiculous Buzzfeed quiz or video at just the right moment, you guys are the best.

 

Jack Mitchell—thanks for being my partner in crime three nights a week and in class. It’s been a fun year whether it was Visual Journalism or the Yale Conference and I’m forever grateful that you’ve been on my team. You don’t need it, but good luck next year and at WBUR this summer—I hope our paths cross frequently in the future.

 

Zach, you’re an endless fountain of support and reinforcement and I’d have been lost without you this year. Even from 3,000 miles away you made me feel important and took care of me. Whether it was sending me Honey BBQ wings from Wings Over or walking me home at night—you never failed to make things easier for me at the DC. I’m so glad that The Daily Campus was a shared experience for us and that I dragged you here four years ago. I love you.

 

It’s hard to name every single person at the DC who has made a positive impact on my life, but to all of my friends here: know that you’re all so important to me and I’m going to miss you or have been missing you if you graduated last year: Katherine Tibedo, Francesca Colturi, Sylvia Cunningham, Margaux Ancel, Marissa Piccolo, Mike Peng, Randy Amorim, Spencer Mayfield IV, Katie Loughrey, Cheyenne Haslett, Jackie Wattles, Jimmy Onofrio, Sabrina Herrera, Brendon Field, Nicole Horseman, Elan-Carlo DePaolo, Mike Corasaniti, Troy Caldeira, Amar Batra, Jason Jiang, Kelley Huber, Emily Lewson, Sten Spinella and Domenica Ghanem. I hope I didn’t miss anyone—but please know you are all integral parts of my DC experience and I am grateful and happy to have worked with all of you during my time here.

 

I leave The Daily Campus a better, more confident and self-assured individual. This is thanks to all of you. I leave The Daily Campus in excellent hands and I hope that all of you find your way and use your talents to bring the DC to greater heights. Julia Werth, Nick Shigo, Ward Pankowski, Anokh Palakurthi , Matt Zampini, Dan Madigan, Chris Sacco, Vinay Maliakal, Ashley Maher and Bailey Wright—I will miss you all, but I can’t wait to see the great work you do. You all have it in you.

 

Kayvon Ghoreshi, Matt Zabierek, Carles Lopez and Jack Mitchell—here’s to you. You each have been important players in my life at the DC and I wish you all the luck in the world. You can handle anything that comes your way and will confront every challenge ahead. Go get ‘em and keep up the DC pride.

Is it time to talk with North Korea?

If Congress ends up approving the terms of the arraignment, the US and Iran will soon close the deal on a new nuclear agreement. Yet as one problem is addressed, another problem arises. Satellite imagery analyzed by the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington shows that centrifuges have been activated at North Korea’s Yongbyon nuclear center. Experts also suspect that North Korea will begin renovating the plant, a sign that the country plans to increase production there. As of last year, the uranium enrichment facility and possibly even the plutonium reactor at Yongbyon nuclear complex appeared to be shut down. Now it appears that North Korea has decided to continue uranium enrichment as the Iran deal comes to a close.

In the past, North Korea has frequently taken provocative actions with the goal of winning a concession from the United States or some other western power. Typically a visit by a high-level official or former official is sufficient enough for North Korea to become satisfied, and consequently resolve whatever situation was at hand. American Journalist Laura Ling was arrested by North Korea in 2009, but was quickly released after former President Bill Clinton made a visit to the country. More recently, a 2014 visit by James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, got two Americans, Kenneth Bae and Matthew Todd Miller, released from a North Korean prison.

An increase in nuclear research activity may mean that occasional visits by high level officials are no longer going to be enough to satisfy North Korea’s demand for attention. North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, has been watching the delicate Iran negotiations for a while. Now that said negotiations are near a close, North Korea may begin to crave their own series of high level talks, which in their view, bestows a certain kind of prestige upon the country. Negotiations make North Korea seems important and give high-ranking North Korean officials the feeling that their nation has real clout when it comes to foreign relations. Thus the recent decision to reactivate the nuclear complex at Yongbyon may be an attempt to initiate a dialogue with the U.S. If there were any talks, it is likely that China would be involved.

Right now the Chinese government is particularly upset at the North Korean leadership. Yesterday, a number of North Korean border guards reportedly crossed into China and killed three Chinese civilians in the town of Longcheng. Cross border criminal acts by North Korean border guards are becoming increasingly common. Last year seven Chinese civilians were murdered by North Korean border guards. Incidents like these give China a strong motivation to engage North Korea in talks. However, North Korea isn’t interested in talking with China, the country desires attention from the West, especially America. If the U.S. decides to hold talks with North Korea in the future, the United States could win favor with China by also inviting them to a multilateral discussion. China’s frustration with North Korea means that the Chinese would be willing to join the US in talks with North Korea.

North Korea is a secretive country, and no one really knows what the North Korean’s government’s intentions are. South Korean intelligence reports that Kim Jong-un has executed around 15 senior officials so far this year. Many were killed for trivial offenses such as expressing distaste for a certain design style. The vice chairman of North Korea’s State Planning Commission was reportedly executed because he did not like the shape of a planned stadium. This is another reminder that any negotiations with North Korea are really negotiations with just one person, Kim Jong-un. It is no longer difficult to get both North Korea and China to the negotiating table. Now the ultimate challenge would be finding out Kim Jong-un’s decision making process, as all North Korean policy is decided by him alone.

Supreme Court Should Not be Solution for Gay Marriage

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on a momentous question: whether the Constitution prohibits state bans on same-sex marriage. The fact that this issue has come so far and changed so many minds illustrates the remarkable progress of our country in recognizing the liberty of men and women to love who they wish, regardless of sex. That being said, should the Court decide in favor of the homosexual couples in these cases they would be inappropriately sacrificing the republican principles of our system of government in order to reach their desired result.

 

In the American system of government, the people of the several states govern. It is the people who ratified the Constitution and through their political capacity as sovereign states. It is the people, through their elected representatives, who create law, both state and federal. It is the people, who have ratified subsequent Amendments to the Constitution. The government and its acts are legitimate insofar as they rely on the people, the font of all political authority. If laws or constitutions are to change, then it is the people that must enact such changes, either directly or through their elected representatives.

 

The Framers reflected these principles in the process they established to change the federal Constitution. Any amendment of the original governing charter would require the ratification of at least three-fourths of the states. They knew it would be unfair to alter the system of government unanimously agreed to by the states, unless an overwhelming majority of states consented to the proposed change in the system. Any change that does not meet these requirements is a usurpation of authority and is unlawful.

 

Whether you support or oppose it, no one doubts that the legalization of same-sex marriage is a groundbreaking, unprecedented, and momentous change in the status of American law. Such a change should occur as all political change should occur, through an enactment of the American people. Some states have already taken the initiative and legalized same-sex marriage through their state legislatures; these are noble examples of people enacting legal change through the appropriate channels. It shows how our adaptive republican system is meant to work. However, the people have never surrendered the right to ban same-sex marriages and subject themselves to federal control. Certainly, the people who ratified the Fourteenth Amendment would be aghast to think that they had altered the relationship between the federal government and the states in this way through either the Due Process or Equal Protection Clauses. Neither did they believe they were entrusting the federal judiciary with the power to adopt a radically different interpretation of the Amendment if social mores changed.

 

Yet the petitioners in this case are asking the Court to find a Constitutional prohibition against state bans on same-sex marriage. We are entering a sorry age where rather than convince their fellow citizens through the political process Americans are rushing to the federal judiciary and asking it to adopt revolutionary and unprecedented interpretations of previous Constitutional enactments. The Court has too often seen itself as the creator of rights, rather than the expounder of rights the people have already agreed to protect. This “black-robed supremacy”, as Justice Scalia has called it, is dangerous for republican government. If we allow nine judges, rather than the American people, to take the lead in changing the Constitution, we might ask ourselves what value or security there is in written constitutions. If the Supreme Court is recognized as free to inject its sense of what the law ought to be in its supposed declaration of what the law is, then perhaps the American people should abandon their role in constitutional government, forget the amendment process, and hand the charter ordained and established by “we the people” over to the safekeeping of that illustrious tribunal.

Editorial: Faster Internet in Storrs

Researchers in Storrs, Connecticut will soon see an upgrade in internet speeds. Currently, researchers working at UConn’s Storrs campus have access to a one-gigabit internet speed, while some at other UConn campuses have access to 100-gigabit internet speeds. The university plans to link the Storrs campus with UConn Health via a 40 gigabit connection. This connection would be solely used by researchers, presumably from any department, and not just departments related to the medical field. The upgrade is expected to come later this year and is financed in part by a grant from the National Science Foundation.

This planned upgrade is in part due to a partnership with the Internet2 network, a network which includes 252 other U.S. universities. The Internet2 high-speed network will give UConn researchers a high-speed connection similar to the ones used by the U.S. military, National Science Foundation and leading research institutions. In the U.S., high speed Internet is not a common sight. Internet infrastructure in Connecticut, and the United States as a whole, is inferior to some of the European and Asian networks, which have widely available access to high speed internet.

Not only is there a demand among researchers for a quicker internet network, but the general public also wishes for a faster internet network as well. The state government recognizes that Connecticut’s internet connection is in need of an upgrade. Back in February, the state legislature heard testimony on a proposed bill that would have opened the door for the quick establishment of high speed gigabit networks in towns all throughout the state. At least 100 cities in towns in Connecticut banded together to call for the creation of a statewide gigabit network.

Even if a statewide network was established, it probably would not reach speed of up to 100 gigabits such as the networks used by some of UConn’s labs do. Those kinds of high speed connections are probably only necessary for those who do research. Similarly, it is unlikely that the average student at UConn will get access to a gigabit network in the near future, for now students will still have to rely on UConn Secure to do every day pedestrian tasks like check email. Still, it is great to see that the university is committed to expanding internet connectivity and broadband capacity, even as attempts to expand internet speeds on a state level have been slowed. Hopefully, the internet infrastructure that UConn has built up can be used in the future to bring faster internet to the whole university community.

Violence in Baltimore is not helping

Baltimore is in the process of recovering from riots that plagued the streets beginning on Monday. The nation’s attention turned to the city over a week ago when peaceful protests began after the death of Freddie Gray, a 25-year-old who died on April 19 due to severe spinal injuries sustained while in police custody. On Monday, riots broke out after Gray’s funeral. Rioters, some armed with crow bars, threw rocks at police, destroyed police cars and smashed store windows. During the riots, businesses were looted, a CVS pharmacy was set on fire and protestors slashed fire hoses to prevent fire fighters from extinguishing the fires they started. According to an article by Time, over 200 people were arrested, and over 20 police officered were injured.

The protests began as a rally against police racism and brutality. An investigation is underway into Gray’s arrest, while six officers related to the case are suspended with pay. The results of this investigation are important, but with either outcome, there is an evident problem of racism and abuse of power in the police force. The majority of police offices are fair; however, due to the minority that constitute the problem, the whole system needs to be addressed. The protests began with the goal of confronting these matters, and the riots continued with it in mind. However, the difference between peaceful protests and chaotic riots is immense. Peaceful protests highlight the matter at hand, while violence distracts from the cause and instigates more problems.

The violent protests have harmed many innocent people. Businesses now have to cope with robbery and vandalism, people’s homes have been damaged and schools had to close for a day because the streets were too dangerous. The original goals of the protest were to support victims, but the outburst of violence has victimized innocent people. The destruction of the city is using a lot of Baltimore’s resources and thus harming each citizen. City property like fire hoses and police cars will need to be replaced. Thousands of officers and National Guard soldiers have been called to protect the city, and they will need to be paid. This protest will cost the city thousands of dollars that could have been allocated to improving the city. In that way, the violence has victimized all Baltimore citizens.

The violence and destruction draws the attention away from the purpose of the protests. Baltimore protests currently are associated with violence and chaos, but that is not the complete story about the protests. Before the violence erupted, over 10,000 protesters were gathered peacefully in downtown Baltimore. Even during the violence, some protesters stood arm and arm against the destruction that was occurring around them. NBC reports that the family of Freddie Gray is appalled that the protests for him have descended into violence. This displays how the violence warps the meaning of the movement. A large aspect of protest is the publicity they gain from the media. Even though the violence has gained the protests a lot of publicity, it is not helping the cause because the media is discussing the amount of destruction instead of the subject being protested.

Riots make the situation seem like there are only two sides: the rioters and the police. Police and government are not inherently prejudice, and a lot of police are against discrimination just as much as the public. The public, the government and the police need to cooperate to address the problem of racism and abuse of power within the system. With flowing communication between these systems, targeting the problems and finding solutions will be more effective.

Protests are important tactics to utilize when there is injustice in society. They have effectively been used before, and society is better off because of them. However, nothing good can result from massive violent outbreaks. Citizens in Baltimore should continue the protests peacefully if they want to carry on shedding light on the problems of racism and power abuse in the police force.

Editorial: Guard Dogs must return as soon as possible

Last week, the Undergraduate Student Government of the University of Connecticut voted to approve the necessary steps for the return of GUARD Dogs to campus. Pending approval by the UConn Student Activities Business Office (SABO) and other organizations, GUARD Dogs could be back on campus as soon as the fall of 2015, according to an article published by The Daily Campus.

GUARD Dogs is a free, student-run sober rides program that was suspended in the spring of 2014 due to poor organization and management. The legislation passed this past week is the culmination of an effort dating back to September 2014 to reinstate GUARD Dogs with new policies to prevent such mistakes. The reintroduction of GUARD Dogs will include a committee, for which students can apply to be part of, to oversee the sound transition back into campus life.

The return of GUARD Dogs should be a top priority. The availability of free and accessible sober rides is essential for student safety. Currently, through groups such as Buy or Sell, sober drivers can post their contact information and fee for the night, however it is not as organized or reliable. Husky Watch, a service coordinated by the UConn Police Department, is the only UConn-associated alternative, however it is not for students who may have been drinking.

Additionally, many students have been affected by the delay in the return of the program. The return of GUARD Dogs is long overdue, especially after students were told the program was originally set to return in the spring of the 2015 semester. In addition to strict student activities policies hindering the swift reintroduction of GUARD Dogs, there has been no free alternative option provided for students in the meantime.

The projected return of GUARD Dogs for the fall of 2015 must come to fruition. In an interview, Eliza Conrad, USG senator and Guard Dogs chairperson, stated that if SABO approves GUARD Dogs, it might still take months of work, likely over the summer, to complete the transition into the fall semester. This is certainly a worthwhile effort that must be met with the necessary expediency – while remaining diligent with new training programs, etc., to ensure past mistakes are not repeated.

 

To Accept or Decline an Internship

It is almost summer and although this should exude feelings of freedom and happiness, the recurring pressure of stockpiling resumes is right around the corner. Undergraduate college students are faced with the constant battle of striving to be the best – and when it comes to how to spend summer break, the talk of internships slowly emerges from winter hibernation. Many internships nowadays are unpaid, and solely for learning hands-on experience in a field of person’s interest. This makes the decision between potentially working a part time job at home or taking a full time internship very difficult, especially when there are multiple years before graduation to seize these opportunities.

An article by Time Magazine, published in the fall of 2013, analyzes job markets and the reasons companies aren’t hiring new college grads. In the article, a study by the Workforce Solutions Group at St. Louis Community College found that more than 60 percent of employers said that candidates lacked “communication and interpersonal skills,” also referred to as soft skills. Applicants may have known how to navigate computer programs or do the technical work required for the job, but no interpersonal proficiencies were visible. Part of this lack of communication skills could be attributed to the current technological age, one where young people are constantly texting and “snap chatting” each other and can barely hold a conversation in person. An internship before graduation could help close this gap, giving young adults the work environment and professional experience needed to grasp jobs in the future.

There is a monumental difference in the job increasing statistics of an unpaid internship versus a paid internship. An article from the Forbes website published in July of 2012 found that if you are a college graduate working at a paid internship, 60 percent of the time the internship will transition into a full time job offer. However, for unpaid internships, the chance of getting a job offer was 37 percent, which is only 1 percent higher than the general population of college graduates with no internship experience. This is a perfect representation of the saying “you get what you pay for.” When companies are more willing to spend money on interns, it could signify that they are more invested in the work they allocate to these interns. The National Association of College and Employers (NACE) executive director Marilyn Mackes substantiates this idea, stating that paid interns tend to get better job offers because they are doing more hands-on professional work rather than secretarial, inconsequential tasks.

If a student has the choice between a paid or unpaid internship, it is evident that a paid internship is the one to take. Employers treat paid interns as regular employees, often giving them specific responsibilities and staying up to date with their work. There should not be as much social pressure on young adults to obtain multiple internships, especially if students have more than one year before graduating with a bachelor’s degree. One internship experience is enough to considerably increase the chances of being offered a full time job. Timing is essential, and if the opportunity for an internship arises at least once before graduation it should be grasped.

Even after graduation, seeking an internship if the job search is not successful can be particularly beneficial. Stuart Lander, the chief marketing officer at Internships.com, has found that “…At a time when 54 percent of recent graduates are unemployed or underemployed, the best chance you have as a student not to be part of that statistic is to do an internship. You have a seven in 10 chance of being hired by the company you interned with.” The statistics from his statement were compiled from a survey conducted in the winter of 2012, which polled more than 7,000 students and over 300 human resources and recruitment professionals.

Internships may not be for everyone, but they certainly are tailored to make it much easier for young people to secure a career early in life. If that intern position you really wanted was unavailable this summer, have no fear, because positions are constantly increasing in many different sectors. Even after graduation there will still be chances for the test drive of a potential career – never put the possibility of an internship out of your mind, because they will always be around.

 

Why I Wrote Opinion

Unlike a lot of the columns you have read or will read this week, this is not a farewell column. I am not graduating and I will be returning to The Daily Campus as the editor-in-chief. However, this is the last column I will write as the Opinion editor. At the end of my freshman year, when I was named section editor for the following year, the outgoing section editor had me on the Daily Campus radio show to introduce me. He asked me what articles people could look forward to and I told him that I was planning to write a column about why I like writing opinion. Two years of writing numerous weekly columns and editorials later, here is that long overdue column.

Among all of the sections in the paper, at both a collegiate and national level, opinion sections tend to garner the least respect, which is not surprising. Opinion sections tend to be smaller. An opinion column will almost never appear on the front page. And opinion columns are considered easier to write than traditional news columns since they are inherently supposed to be subjective and biased and have less rigid structure. This is even further reflected in the fact that in my time writing for the section I have only encountered three journalism majors, who are generally drawn toward sports and news since that is what they will likely do in any future career. However, this should not diminish the importance of opinion writing.

Before coming to The Daily Campus I had written news and I continue to do so for certain websites. However, my draw to the opinion section was due to doing debate team in high school and having a propensity for argument. At the time I did not think much of it. I was simply looking to get involved around campus and the current editor seemed like a nice enough guy that I figured I would try it. Three years later, I have learned the value of opinion writing.

When I did debate, we were given the topic of debate and a packet of information and articles related to the topic. With that information, we had to construct arguments that were both in favor and against a resolution. News and opinion writing have that same type of relationship. News, investigative journalism and interviews present information. Opinion writing analyzes that information and makes sense of it. Coming from a science background, this type of analysis speaks to me. And while people can certainly come to their own conclusions based on objective news reports, opinion columns help introduce people to other ways of thinking and can help people make sense of incredibly complex topics.

My time as editor has also allowed me to pick up on the difference between good and bad opinion writing. When I say “good” and “bad” I’m not referring to whether or not I agree with the opinion, but rather whether the opinion is argued well or not. If an opinion article has no line of logic or empirical evidence to support it, then it becomes no better than a purely emotionally charged rant on a personal blog or social media. Opinion writing is more than just stating your thoughts on a certain matter. It is to, ideally, convince others to agree with you, or at the very least reconsider a contrasting position that they may have held.

This ability to form and articulate an argument, whether it is written in a newspaper or not, is absolutely crucial. Every law that has been passed, every court decision that has ever been made, and every social movement that has ever been started has been due to someone having and successfully arguing an opinion. This to me is the most important skill developed by writing good opinion columns. I do not plan on going into journalism after I graduate next year or anytime soon after that. However, more likely than not, I will have to argue in favor of or against something at some point in my life. It may be a minor matter or it could be of national importance, but the lessons I’ve learned in three years of honing how to write and read opinions will be of use for whatever I want to do in my life.

 

Positive change seen in smoking policy

What do Hawaii and New Orleans have in common besides being part of the same country? In the last week, they have both seen bills regarding smoking moving through the legislature and one even being signed into law.

Hawaii’s new proposed bill to raise the smoking age (not purchasing age!) from 18 to 21 has cleared the legislature and now rests on Governor David Ige to sign into law. This would make Hawaii the first state to pass this measure, which is a truly commendable move on their part.

A first time violation for getting caught smoking underage is 10 dollars; every subsequent fine is raised 50 dollars and includes mandatory community service. I believe that the smoking underage fine should be steeper. Connecticut’s laws on minors possessing liquor in a public space, buying liquor and attempting to buy liquor have fines from 200 to 500 dollars. Anyone with a fake I.D. can face up to 30 days in prison.

Now, should we differentiate between minors caught with tobacco products or alcohol? Both are wildly detrimental to one’s health as well as the health of those around them. Someone drinking and driving can harm a person’s life instantly. We see a consequence of their action in the immediate future as opposed to those who smoke around others. The second hand smoke inhaled won’t reveal its toll on their health until years later.

Meanwhile, in New Orleans, a city with bars that never close, a law went into effect on the stroke of midnight on Wednesday. Throughout the city, bartenders and club owners collected the ashtrays and asked their patrons to put their cigarettes and cigars out.

The ban calls for no smoking in “bars, restaurants, casinos or fairgrounds. It is now prohibited in outdoor sporting arenas and stadiums, except during concerts, festivals and parades. There is no smoking allowed within five feet of Lafayette Square.”

Many bars at the stroke of midnight started handing out nicotine gum and patches while Harrah’s Casino offered Tootsie Pops, according to The New Orleans Advocate.

Even the bartenders can’t argue against a bill passed to protect the patrons’ as well as workers’ health. Sure, there are a few attempting to sue for infringement on their God-given right to shave years off their lives, but for the most part, the law has been met with a shrug as most already saw this coming.

There were still heated debates before the law went into effect. Many were worried about the atmosphere changing and the free spirit of the New Orleans being crushed. However, the bill was still unanimously passed.

I believe this says a lot about the public’s opinion on smoking and this is a wonderful example for other big cities that are holding their image in higher standards than public safety.

Times are changing and more people are becoming aware of the consequences of their actions. I truly don’t understand why the tobacco industry still exists and sells products to people in the first place. It’s true that argument can be made for virtually anything as many other products we use and food we eat can contain carcinogens. In terms of alcohol, abuse can often lead to addiction and eventually liver failure. In some cases, it can even cause cancers of throat, mouth, liver, esophagus and colon. However, the difference is that alcohol consumption in moderation allows individuals to avoid any short- and long-term damage.

There are over 4,000 chemicals found in an average cigarette and most of these chemicals’ purpose is to instigate addiction. Basically, there is no safe level of cigarette use. It causes up to 6 million preventable deaths every year. E-cigs are no better even if they don’t have tobacco. It’s not just the tobacco that’s hurting your body but the hundreds of other chemicals that are also found in e-cigs.

To end this rant, I think we should give a round of applause for both Hawaii and New Orleans. Hopefully, we see more of this progressive action in other legislatures.