Donald Trump Is Making America Meaner; New York Times, 8/13/16

Nicholas Kristof, New York Times; Donald Trump Is Making America Meaner:

"In Georgia, an India-born Muslim named Malik Waliyani bought a gas station and convenience store a few months ago and was horrified when it was recently burglarized and damaged. He struggled to keep it going. But then the nearby Smoke Rise Baptist Church heard what had happened.

“Let’s shower our neighbor with love,” Chris George, the pastor, told his congregation at the end of his sermon, and more than 200 members drove over to assist, mostly by making purchases. One man drove his car around until the gas tank was empty, so he could buy more gas.

“Our faith inspires us to build bridges, not to label people as us and them, but to recognize that we’re all part of the same family,” the pastor told me. “Our world is a stronger place when we choose to look past labels and embrace others with love.”

This is a wrenching, divisive, polarizing time in America, and we have a major party nominee who is sowing hatred and perhaps violence. Let’s not succumb. Good people, like the members of Smoke Rise Baptist, are reweaving our nation’s social fabric even as it is being torn."

Ethical questions raised in search for Sardinian centenarians' secrets; Guardian, 8/12/16

Stephanie Kirchgaessner, Guardian; Ethical questions raised in search for Sardinian centenarians' secrets:

"Some say thousands of Sardinian research subjects never agreed that their samples could be sold or used by a for-profit company when they signed a medical consent agreement at the time the database was accumulating samples...

The conflict has raised the kind of thorny ethical questions that are likely to become more pervasive as scientists tap into the promise of massive DNA databases to learn more about disease. Should a private company be able to profit from the study of a population’s DNA, when the DNA was voluntarily donated? The deal also raises uncomfortable questions for local critics: why did Shardna go bust to begin with?...

The question now is whether participants like Maria Tegas or her children will ever gain from the research that has put her corner of Sardinia on the map. When Cerrone was asked whether he believed Sardinians ought to benefit in the future from any potentially lucrative medical advancements that might emerge, the executive demurs. Tiziana has already “given back” to the community when it bought the database for €258,000, including all the outstanding debts."

Is the ‘lesser of two evils’ an ethical choice for voters?; Washington Post, 8/13/16

Travis N. Rieder, Washington Post; Is the ‘lesser of two evils’ an ethical choice for voters? :

'On the first point: If a Trump presidency would be as bad as predicted by claim 1, then failing to vote for the candidate who can stop him is contributing to what will likely be a massive, moral harm. While it’s true that each of us has but one vote to cast, in so casting it, we are participating in a collective action with serious moral consequences, and that makes our actions morally serious.

On the second point: Although voting for a candidate we dislike can feel dirty, my guess is that most of us don’t actually hold the ideal of voting for the very best candidate as a central, guiding commitment. Rather, we see voting as a thing we do, but not something that’s deeply tied to who we are. So voting in a way that feels dirty does not seem to rise to the level of undermining our integrity.

Those who are wrestling with whether to vote for Clinton out of fear of Trump are tapping into something real, then. They are distressed that a threat of bad consequences can undermine their freedom to choose as they please. But it is self indulgent, I would argue, to claim their integrity is on the line. If you believe Trump is a moral disaster, then you may well be obligated to vote for Clinton — even if that means getting your hands a little dirty."

Hillary Clinton’s Tax Return Is a Message to Donald Trump: I Pay, Do You?; Daily Beast, 8/12/16

Jackie Kucinich, Betsy Woodruff, Daily Beast; Hillary Clinton’s Tax Return Is a Message to Donald Trump: I Pay, Do You? :

"In May, Trump bragged to George Stephanopoulous that he fights “very hard to pay as little tax as possible.”

When asked what his tax rate was exactly, Trump responded, “It’s none of your business. You’ll see it when I release. But I fight very hard to pay as little tax as possible.”

But that’s the problem.

Because when your whole message is about this rigged system that is ripping off the average American and your tax forms might show you’ve been doing the same in a completely legal way that—well, to use Trump’s verbiage—could be a disaster."

The Rise of the Internet Fan Bully; New York Times, 8/12/16

Amanda Hess, New York Times; The Rise of the Internet Fan Bully:

"Normani Kordei, a member of the girl group on the rise Fifth Harmony, sat for a lighthearted Facebook Live interview earlier this month. Within a week, she had been chased off Twitter by a mob spewing racist insults.

“I’ve not just been cyber bullied, I’ve been racially cyber bullied with tweets and pictures so horrific and racially charged that I can’t subject myself any longer to the hate,” she wrote. Her account has been silent since.

Online harassment has become a depressingly common workplace hazard for people of color in the public eye. Last month, the “Ghostbusters” star Leslie Jones temporarily quit Twitter after weathering a deluge of racist abuse...

The incident illuminates some strange similarities between the bands of internet trolls stalking the web and the legions of online fans seeking to stir up some drama. They both know that the most hurtful online weaponry to wield against black women include images of apes, threats of lynching and a tossed-off N-word."

Think Tanks and the Influence of Corporate Dollars; New York Times, 8/10/16

Room for Debate, New York Times; Think Tanks and the Influence of Corporate Dollars:

"Think tanks inform both government policy and media analysis with their research, because as nonprofit institutions, they are seen as independent. But some institutions vigorously push their donors’ agendas, acting like lobbyists. Some scholars even use their positions at think tanks to promote work they are separately paid to do for corporations.

What can be done to protect against corporate influence over research institutions?"

How Think Tanks Amplify Corporate America’s Influence; New York Times, 8/7/16

Eric Lipton and Brooke Williams, New York Times; How Think Tanks Amplify Corporate America’s Influence:

"The likely conclusions of some think tank reports, documents show, are discussed with donors — or even potential ones — before the research is complete. Drafts of the studies have been shared with donors whose opinions have then helped shape final reports. Donors have outlined how the resulting scholarship will be used as part of broader lobbying efforts. The think tanks also help donors promote their corporate brands, as Brookings does with JPMorgan Chase, whose $15.5 million contribution is the largest by a private corporation in the institution’s history.

Despite these benefits, corporations can write off the donations as charitable contributions. Some tax experts say these arrangements may amount to improper subsidies by taxpayers if think tanks are providing specific services.

“People think of think tanks as do-gooders, uncompromised and not bought like others in the political class,” said Bill Goodfellow, the executive director of the Center for International Policy, a Washington-based think tank. “But it’s absurd to suggest that donors don’t have influence. The danger is we in the think tank world are being corrupted in the same way as the political world. And all of us should be worried about it.”

A group of Democratic state attorneys general is investigating whether Exxon Mobil worked with certain think tanks in past decades to cover up its understanding of fossil fuels’ impact on climate change, in part by financing reports questioning the science, a suggestion the company rejects.

Executives at Brookings, the Center for Strategic and International Studies and other think tanks say they have systems in place to ensure that their reports are based on scholars’ independent conclusions."

Think Tank Scholar or Corporate Consultant? It Depends on the Day; New York Times, 8/8/16

Eric Lipton, Nicholas Confessore, and Brooke Williams, New York Times; Think Tank Scholar or Corporate Consultant? It Depends on the Day:

"Intense advocacy by a think tank scholar is not notable in itself, but Mr. Eisenach, 58, a former aide at the Federal Trade Commission, has held another job: as a paid consultant for Verizon and its trade association.

And he has plenty of company.

An examination of 75 think tanks found an array of researchers who had simultaneously worked as registered lobbyists, members of corporate boards or outside consultants in litigation and regulatory disputes, with only intermittent disclosure of their dual roles.

With their expertise and authority, think tank scholars offer themselves as independent arbiters, playing a vital role in Washington’s political economy. Their imprimatur helps shape government decisions that can be lucrative to corporations.

But the examination identified dozens of examples of scholars conducting research at think tanks while corporations were paying them to help shape government policy. Many think tanks also readily confer “nonresident scholar” status on lobbyists, former government officials and others who earn their primary living working for private clients, with few restrictions on such outside work."

“Moral Sewage”: Trump Is The Opposite Of Christianity; Huffington Post, 8/12/16

Mike Lux, Huffington Post; “Moral Sewage”: Trump Is The Opposite Of Christianity:

"It wasn’t me who called Donald Trump’s campaign “reality television moral sewage.” The person who said that was none other than Russell Moore, the very conservative president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. And it isn’t just things like calling women fat pigs, commenting on women based on how they look, or talking about the size of his penis in a nationally televised debate. Donald Trump’s entire philosophy of life is predicated on the Ayn Randian notion of the ‘virtue of selfishness,’ the belief that power and wealth are the zenith of what is important and good in the world — not more old-fashioned values like basic human decency. Is there a clearer antithesis to what Jesus preached in the gospels?"...

Hillary firmly believes in the Methodist social gospel, exemplified in that quote from the Methodist Church’s founder, John Wesley, that she mentioned in her convention speech: “Do all the good you can. By all the means you can. In all the ways you can. In all the places you can. At all the times you can. To all the people you can. As long as ever you can.”"

She’s With Us: The fundamental choice in this election is between Trump’s “I” and Hillary’s “We.”; Slate, 7/29/16

William Saletan, Slate; She’s With Us: The fundamental choice in this election is between Trump’s “I” and Hillary’s “We.” :

"Trump sees the “we” approach as timid and liberal. But Clinton, like Obama, hears echoes of the anti-government message of Ronald Reagan. “Our founders fought a revolution and wrote a Constitution so America would never be a nation where one person had all the power,” Clinton warned. Obama, in his speech to the convention, issued a similar rebuke: “Our power doesn’t come from some self-declared savior promising that he alone can restore order as long as we do things his way. We don’t look to be ruled.”

Framed this way, the election isn’t a choice between Trump and Clinton. It’s a choice between authoritarianism and self-government, between a man and a team. Clinton can’t match Trump’s ego, and she doesn’t have to. She just has to offer a better alternative. The alternative is a different conception of the presidency, one that’s less imperial but gets more done. It’s less about the president and more about us. The choice isn’t left versus right, or him versus her. It’s Trump versus America."

Clinton’s Fibs vs. Trump’s Huge Lies; New York Times, 8/6/16

Nicholas Kristof, New York Times; Clinton’s Fibs vs. Trump’s Huge Lies:

"ONE persistent narrative in American politics is that Hillary Clinton is a slippery, compulsive liar while Donald Trump is a gutsy truth-teller.

Over all, the latest CBS News poll finds the public similarly repulsed by each candidate: 34 percent of registered voters say Clinton is honest and trustworthy compared with 36 percent for Trump.

Yet the idea that they are even in the same league is preposterous. If deception were a sport, Trump would be the Olympic gold medalist; Clinton would be an honorable mention at her local Y.

Let’s investigate."

Should Teachers Ask Students To Check Their Devices At The Classroom Door?; NPR, 8/5/16

Alva Noe, NPR; Should Teachers Ask Students To Check Their Devices At The Classroom Door? :

"In a post a few weeks back, Tania Lombrozo drew attention to research showing that students using laptops and other digital devices in the college classroom are less likely to perform as well as students not using them...

I can't bring myself to try to ban these new technologies in the classroom because to do so, it seems to me, would be to infringe on the personal liberty of my students.

So what are we to do?

Going forward, I will try to impress on my students that, quite above and beyond the cognitive costs, that is, the decrement in learning, there are social costs. It is rude, basically, to sit there and ignore what is going on around you. It is selfish to disrupt the joint work of the group.

Beyond that, our task, as teachers, must be to engage and capture the attention of these citizens as they are. The new technologies are part of what makes the new person."

Gay and Lesbian High School Students Report ‘Heartbreaking’ Levels of Violence; New York Times, 8/11/16

Jan Hoffman, New York Times; Gay and Lesbian High School Students Report ‘Heartbreaking’ Levels of Violence:

"The first nationwide study to ask high school students about their sexuality found that gay, lesbian and bisexual teenagers were at far greater risk for depression, bullying and many types of violence than their straight peers...

The survey documents what smaller studies have suggested for years, but it is significant because it is the first time the federal government’s biennial Youth Risk Behavior Survey, the gold standard of adolescent health data collection, looked at sexual identity. The survey found that about 8 percent of the high school population described themselves as gay, lesbian or bisexual, which would be about 1.3 million students...

Dr. Elizabeth Miller, the chief of adolescent and young adult medicine at Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, said, “The intensity of homophobic attitudes and acceptance of gay-related victimization, as well as the ongoing silence around adolescent sexuality, marginalizes a whole group of young people.”...

Dr. Miller, who is also a professor of pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, said that self-acceptance can begin at home. “We have to start conversations early with young people about healthy sexuality, attraction, relationships, intimacy and how to explore those feelings in as safe and respectful a way as possible,” she said."

Too Poor to Afford the Internet; New York Times, 8/12/16

Anthony W. Marx, New York Times; Too Poor to Afford the Internet:

"I know there are technological hurdles to providing universal broadband. But the commitment I’m asking for isn’t particularly novel. Early in the last century, the nation’s leaders decided, at no small cost, to bring clean water, then electricity, then phone service to all parts of our country. And from this foundation we built the wealthiest, most productive economy in the world.

When New York City was founded by the Dutch, it had two great strengths: a population of varied backgrounds and ideas, and access to information, through its vibrant shipping industry. This is what made us a global city. Today’s technology revolution promises to provide more information, more widely than ever. Yet we have left almost two million New Yorkers in the digital dark.

We can fix this. We can realize our city’s full potential in the digital age. And the kids in the Bronx can get their math homework done."

Should a Self-Driving Car Kill Two Jaywalkers or One Law-Abiding Citizen?; Slate, 8/11/16

Jacob Brogan, Slate; Should a Self-Driving Car Kill Two Jaywalkers or One Law-Abiding Citizen? :

"Anyone who’s followed the debates surrounding autonomous vehicles knows that moral quandaries inevitably arise. As Jesse Kirkpatrick has written in Slate, those questions most often come down to how the vehicles should perform when they’re about to crash. What do they do if they have to choose between killing a passenger and harming a pedestrian? How should they behave if they have to decide between slamming into a child or running over an elderly man?

It’s hard to figure out how a car should make such decisions in part because it’s difficult to get humans to agree on how we should make them. By way of evidence, look to Moral Machine, a website created by a group of researchers at the MIT Media Lab. As the Verge’s Russell Brandon notes, the site effectively gameifies the classic trolley problem, folding in a variety of complicated variations along the way."

Here’s how I’ll teach Trump to my college students this fall; Washington Post, 8/11/16

Zach Messitte, Washington Post; Here’s how I’ll teach Trump to my college students this fall:

"...[W]e also need to listen and respect those students and professors who support Trump. That 19-year-old supporter just starting his sophomore year shouldn’t be dismissed automatically as a racist for supporting Trump. He’s a stand-in for our next-door neighbor, your child’s softball coach and my cousin’s spouse. Keeping the classroom open for discussion slows a student retreat to the anonymous online world of Yik Yak, where college-aged Trump supporters troll hate without ever directly engaging their classmates. That means that the possibility of ever broadening their perspectives organically will be lost.

There will be tense points and tempers may well flare. Why are Trump’s most ardent supporters rural whites without a college degree? Why does he belittle those he disagrees with? Where does his worldview and his preoccupation with Vladimir Putin come from? But there is a way to have these discussions in the classroom with respect. It will be up to our professors to defend the right to hold an unpopular position, even one that we strongly disagree with. Because if colleges and universities want to remain a training ground for future leaders, an incubator for new ideas or a place where a future political consensus is forged, civil discourse is a fundamental part of that higher calling.

This will not be an easy task, but it is a crucial one. While professors and administrators need to do everything they can to make sure that their campuses promote free speech, they also need to maintain civility and basic decency. And that’s tricky. Beyond higher education, how the nation wrestles with this same conundrum is important — and not just in the run-up to the election. In the weeks and months after Nov. 8, the country is going to have to understand what Donald Trump and Trumpism means going forward. Win or lose, it is critical that we study and interpret what his candidacy signifies beyond American politics. How the nation’s teachers integrate understanding Trumpism into their classrooms this fall, regardless of discipline, will go a long way toward finding some common ground with the 40-something percent of the voting population that supports him."

US Daily Beast website takes down article discussing Grindr dates with Olympic athletes; Guardian, 8/11/16

Elle Hunt, Guardian; US Daily Beast website takes down article discussing Grindr dates with Olympic athletes:

"Tyler Oakley, a gay social media personality, said something similar, accusing Hines and the Daily Beast of treating same-sex-attracted people as “zoo animals”."

Daily Beast Removes Article on Gay Olympians in Rio; New York Times, 8/12/16

Christopher Mele and Niraj Chokshi, New York Times; Daily Beast Removes Article on Gay Olympians in Rio:

"The article drew significant backlash from gay leaders and athletes.

Sarah Kate Ellis, the president and chief executive of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, said on Twitter: “Thoughtless @thedailybeast piece puts LGBT athletes in danger. It should be removed & replaced w a real story about violence LGBT ppl face.”...

Robert Drechsel, who retired last week as the James E. Burgess Chair in Journalism Ethics and director of the Center for Journalism Ethics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, described the article as “thoughtless, insensitive and unethical.”

He said it was good that the article had been removed but that it came too late.

“It’s hard to find the words to describe,” he said. “Why in the world — why in the world of journalism — would anyone do this?”"

A Note From the Editors; Daily Beast, 8/11/16

Daily Beast; A Note From the Editors:

"Today, The Daily Beast took an unprecedented but necessary step: We are removing an article from our site, “The Other Olympic Sport In Rio: Swiping.”

The Daily Beast does not do this lightly. As shared in our editor’s note earlier today, we initially thought swift removal of any identifying characteristics and better clarification of our intent was the adequate way to address this. Our initial reaction was that the entire removal of the piece was not necessary. We were wrong. We're sorry.

Today we did not uphold a deep set of The Daily Beast’s values. These values—which include standing up to bullies and bigots, and specifically being a proudly, steadfastly supportive voice for LGBT people all over the world—are core to our commitment to journalism and to our commitment to serving our readers.

As a newsroom, we succeed together and we fail together, and this was a failure on The Daily Beast as a whole, not a single individual. The article was not intended to do harm or degrade members of the LGBT community, but intent doesn’t matter, impact does. Our hope is that removing an article that is in conflict with both our values and what we aspire to as journalists will demonstrate how seriously we take our error.

We were wrong. We will do better."

Gay Olympian Amini Fonua Has Words for the Grindr-in-Rio Journalist; Slate, 8/11/16

J. Bryan Lowder, Slate; Gay Olympian Amini Fonua Has Words for the Grindr-in-Rio Journalist:

"The queer internet was dominated on Thursday by backlash to Nico Hines' exploitative Daily Beast story on athletes' use of sex apps in Rio, with condemnation from LGBTQ press-watchers (including us here at Outward) being universal. But, likely for reasons relating to safety and focus, we've heard relatively little from athletes themselves. That changed Thursday afternoon when Amini Fonua, an Olympic swimmer and gay man representing Tonga at the Rio games, let fly a tweet storm that powerfully captures the damage this story will cause...

As of 5:30 p.m., the article was still posted on the Daily Beast site

Update, 9:18 p.m.: Later on Thursday evening, the Daily Beast took down the piece entirely."

Augmented Reality Games Like Pokémon Go Need a Code of Ethics—Now; Wired, 8/11/16

Katherine Cross, Wired; Augmented Reality Games Like Pokémon Go Need a Code of Ethics—Now:

"THE WORLD IS full of Pokémon now. This should not be cause for moral panic, but celebration. Contrary to a few handwringing editorials and Twitter hot takes, Pokémon Go is not a triumph of the normalization of violence, the apotheosis of cell-phone zombification, or even gamification gone awry. Amid the neo-Luddite contrarianism, a shining truth rises above all the (Magi-)carping: Pokémon Go comes in peace. But it raises profound questions about ethics in this new overlaid world of augmented reality...

Meanwhile, there are news reports that cannot be dismissed as ironically viral Luddism: Koffing appearing at the National Holocaust Museum, for instance, or women being sexually harassed as they play, or the risk posed to young black players in the US by trigger-happy police officers.

The suddenness of Pokémon Go’s mass popularity signals that a technological revolution is upon us, and it is past time for an industry-wide set of ethical standards for augmented reality."

The Other Olympic Sport in Rio: Swiping; Daily Beast, 8/11/16

Nico Hines, Daily Beast; The Other Olympic Sport in Rio: Swiping:

"Editor's Note: A number of readers complained to The Daily Beast after the publication of the original iteration of this story. We take such complaints seriously because a central part of The Daily Beast's mission is to fight for full equality and equal treatment for LGBT people around the world. Publishing an article that in any way could be seen as homophobic is contrary to our mission.

There was legitimate concern that the original version of this story might out gay male athletes, even by implication, or compromise their safety. This was never our reporter’s intention, of course. No names were ever used and some of the profiles described were of straight women. But there was a concern that even mentioning the home nation of some gay athletes could compromise their safety. We apologize for potentially jeopardizing that safety in any way. As a result, we have removed all descriptions of the men and women’s profiles that we previously described.

The concept for the piece was to see how dating and hook-up apps were being used in Rio by athletes. It just so happened that Nico had many more responses on Grindr than apps that cater mostly to straight people, and so he wrote about that. Had he received straight invitations, he would have written about those. He never claimed to be anyone he was not, did not offer anything to anyone, and immediately admitted that he was a journalist whenever he was asked who he was.

Some readers have read Nico as mocking or sex-shaming those on Grindr. We do not feel he did this in any way. But it’s up to us to deliver stories that are so clear, they can’t be misinterpreted—and we clearly fell short of that standard in this article.

Accordingly, we have made some editorial changes to the article, responding to readers' concerns, and are again sorry for any upset the original version of this piece inspired."

—John Avlon, Editor in Chief

This Daily Beast Grindr Stunt Is Sleazy, Dangerous, and Wildly Unethical; Slate, 8/11/16

Mark Joseph Stern, Slate; This Daily Beast Grindr Stunt Is Sleazy, Dangerous, and Wildly Unethical:

"Anyone who has heard of Grindr has also heard of the Wayback Machine. Nothing on the internet can be reliably deleted.

Shortly after Hines’ article published, openly gay Olympian Gus Kenworthy tweeted that the author “basically just outed a bunch of athletes in his quest to write a shitty [Daily Beast] article where he admitted to entrapment.” That is correct, but it’s worth exploring why Hines embarked upon this weird, sleazy quest in the first place. I count two reasons. The first is that Hines simply enjoys tittering with condescension at all the gay athletes who take the bait and engage with him—a straight dude, as Hines emphatically reminds us. Why else zero in on Grindr? The second reason is more repulsive: Hines appears to take pleasure in luring in these Olympians then outing them to all the world.

But the offensive purpose of Hines’ article is really the least of its problems. Far worse is the actual damage it will likely cause to real, live human beings—inevitable consequences that Hines blithely ignored. Several athletes who are closeted at home (and possibly to their own teammates) will wake up on Thursday morning to the news that the Daily Beast has outed them. Their teammates could ostracize and alienate them; their families could disown them; their countries could imprison them. And for what? A homophobic article about how a straight guy conned gay Olympians from anti-gay countries into hitting on him through Grindr? Hines’ article is a dangerous disaster, a wildly unethical train wreck that should be taken down immediately for the sake of its duped subjects. Hines may view his Grindr-baiting as all fun and games. For the victims of his unprincipled journalism, however, his nasty little piece has the power to ruin lives."

Straight Writer Blasted For ‘Outing’ Olympians In Daily Beast Piece; Huffington Post, 8/11/16

Curtis M. Wong, Huffington Post; Straight Writer Blasted For ‘Outing’ Olympians In Daily Beast Piece:

"The backlash from other media outlets, predictably, was swift. Blasting Hines’s article as a “dangerous disaster” and “a wildly unethical train wreck,” Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern wrote, “Hines may view his Grindr-baiting as all fun and games. For the victims of his unprincipled journalism, however, his nasty little piece has the power to ruin lives.”

Many were specifically concerned that Hines’s piece was outing athletes, especially those from countries like Russia and Jamaica where it’s dangerous for people to be openly LGBT. Added Mic’s Mathew Rodriguez: “Sure, queer sexuality can be a fascinating topic for journalism — when it’s done respectfully and, hopefully, by someone with ties to the community. But just booting up an app and seeing that people like sex isn’t journalism, and the tone stigmatizes gay sexuality even further.”...

After the story was published, a note by Daily Beast Editor-in-Chief John Avlon appeared at the bottom of the piece, noting that “all descriptions of the men and women’s profiles that we previously described” had been removed."

Gay and Transgender Egyptians, Harassed and Entrapped, Are Driven Underground; New York Times, 8/10/16

Liam Stack, New York Times; Gay and Transgender Egyptians, Harassed and Entrapped, Are Driven Underground:

"Mr. Long said that online entrapment had become especially effective in the last two years, because the shutdown of gay-friendly spaces had left many with no place to go.

“There aren’t many queer places left in downtown or in the rest of the city, so people become more reliant on apps and social networks,” he said. “People are lonely and they meet someone who seems like they’re interested, and bang, they’re arrested.”

Ali agreed that despite the dangers, the internet was one of the few public spaces left for gay and transgender people.

“There is no other way,” Ali said. “It is Egypt.”"

Why Are The Media Obsessed With Trump's Controversies And Not Clinton's?; NPR, 8/11/16

Ron Elving, NPR; Why Are The Media Obsessed With Trump's Controversies And Not Clinton's? :

"The question is repeated in one form or another millions of times a day in social media and random conversation. It comes primarily from the backers of Donald Trump, but also from others — including the simply curious:

Why are the media obsessed with Trump's controversies and not Clinton's?"

"On “political correctness""; jensorensen.com, August 2016

Jen Sorensen:

"On “political correctness""

‘Politically incorrect’ ideas are mostly rude, not brave; Washington Post, 8/11/16

Alyssa Rosenberg, Washington Post; ‘Politically incorrect’ ideas are mostly rude, not brave:

"But what if the things people have held themselves back from saying for fear of social censure aren’t inherently meaningful? The sad thing about so much supposed truth-telling is that their supposed transgressions aren’t remotely risky. They’re just rude...

Presenting commonplace unpleasantness as an act of moral courage is a nifty bit of reframing. This formulation allows its practitioners to treat their own laziness, meanness and self-indulgence as ethically and politically meaningful, when in fact they’re anything but. We may not be able to afford the suppression of important ideas in the public sphere. But people who rail against political correctness need better examples if they’re going to insist that kindness and decency are threats to the republic."

John Oliver has given us the best defense of newspapers ever; Washington Post, 8/9/16

Kathleen Parker, Washington Post; John Oliver has given us the best defense of newspapers ever:

"My point — shared by Oliver — is that only newspapers are the brick and mortar of the Fourth Estate’s edifice. Only they have the wherewithal to do the kind of reporting that leads to stories such as “Spotlight.” What happens to the “news” when there are no newspapers left?

We seem doomed to find out as people increasingly give up their newspaper subscriptions and seek information from free-content sources. And though newspapers have an online presence, it’s hard to get readers to pay for content...

And then there’s Sam Zell, erstwhile owner of the Tribune Co., who summed up the sad trajectory of the nation’s interests and, perhaps, our future while speaking to Orlando Sentinel staffers in 2008. When he said he wanted to increase revenues by giving readers what they want, a female voice objected, “What readers want are puppy dogs.”

Zell exploded, calling her comment the sort of “journalistic arrogance of deciding that puppies don’t count. . . . Hopefully we get to the point where our revenue is so significant that we can do puppies and Iraq, okay? [Expletive] you.”

Yes, he said that."

John Oliver’s newspaper rant hits a nerve: “We’ve watched it being not-so-slowly destroyed by forces beyond our control”; Salon, 8/10/16

Scott Timberg, Salon; John Oliver’s newspaper rant hits a nerve: “We’ve watched it being not-so-slowly destroyed by forces beyond our control” :

"So part of what’s interesting about Oliver’s bit — which looked at both the causes of the decline as well as the effects, with his usual combination of hyperventilating moralism and comic exaggeration — is that some seem frustrated with it. And not just people who hate the press, but people who value what it does.

The most visible of these criticisms so far has come from the president of the Newspaper Association of America, who praised the segment’s opening. “But making fun of experiments,” David Chavern wrote, “and pining away for days when classified ads and near-monopolistic positions in local ad markets funded journalism is pointless and ultimately harmful.”

Sullivan, who was once the executive editor of the Buffalo News and the public editor of the New York Times, hit back sharply in a Post piece:

Actually, no. What Oliver did was precisely nail everything that’s been happening in the industry that Chavern represents: The shrinking staffs, the abandonment of important beats, the love of click bait over substance, the deadly loss of ad revenue, the truly bad ideas that have come to the surface out of desperation, the persistent failures to serve the reading public."

Journalism: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO); HBO via YouTube, 8/7/16

HBO via YouTube; Journalism: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO) :

"The newspaper industry is suffering. That’s bad news for journalists — both real and fictional."

Why Your Diversity Program May Be Helping Women but Not Minorities (or Vice Versa); Harvard Business Review, 8/8/16

Even Apfelbaum, Harvard Business Review; Why Your Diversity Program May Be Helping Women but Not Minorities (or Vice Versa) :

"When it comes to issues of race, gender, and diversity in organizations, researchers have revealed the problems in ever more detail. We have found a lot less to say about what does work — what organizations can do to create the conditions in which stigmatized groups can reach their potential and succeed. That’s why my collaborators — Nicole Stephens at the Kellogg School of Management and Ray Reagans at MIT Sloan — and I decided to study what organizations can do to increase traditionally stigmatized groups’ performance and persistence, and curb the disproportionately high rates at which they leave jobs.

One tool at any organization’s disposal is the way its leaders choose to talk (or not to talk) about diversity and differences — what we refer to as their diversity approach. Diversity approaches are important because they provide employees with a framework for thinking about group differences in the workplace and how they should respond to them. We first studied the public diversity statements of 151 big law firms in the U.S. to understand the relationship between how organizations talk about diversity and the rates of attrition of associate-level women and racial minority attorneys at these firms. We assumed that how firms talked about diversity in their statements was a rough proxy for their firm’s approach to diversity more generally.

Two findings were particularly intriguing."

Harassment Crisis Builds at Fox News, Despite Its Swift Response; New York Times, 8/10/16

Michael M. Grynbaum, Emily Steel, Sydney Ember, New York Times; Harassment Crisis Builds at Fox News, Despite Its Swift Response:

"Of particular issue is a $3.15 million settlement that Laurie Luhn, a former booker at the network, said she received in 2011. In an interview with New York magazine, Ms. Luhn said that Mr. Ailes forced her into a yearslong sexual relationship.

Executives at 21st Century Fox have said they were only made aware of the settlement recently. On Wednesday, when asked to clarify exactly when it learned of it, the company declined to respond.

“One would hope that a $3 million settlement for sexual harassment would flow up the line to somebody in corporate management,” said Kirk O. Hanson, executive director of the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University. “At least today, that kind of settlement should come to the attention of the audit committee of the board.”"

Toxic white male nerd avengers: What’s really behind the “Suicide Squad” super-fan freak-out; Salon, 8/9/16

Matthew Rozsa, Salon; Toxic white male nerd avengers: What’s really behind the “Suicide Squad” super-fan freak-out:

"Beyond simply calling for diversity, though, we also must infuse our debate with an awareness that being a fanboy doesn’t entitle you to anything. The common thread linking the “Suicide Squad” petition to other nerd-based racist and misogynist incidents this decade is that, at their core, all of them betray an assumption that producers of popular entertainment are beholden to the nerd community. This misunderstands a basic principle of a free market society — while consumers have the right to invest or not invest their time and money as they see fit, they don’t have the right to demand that producers act as obedient servants to their will. It’s certainly nice when an author or actor or critic or film studio shows deference to the wishes of fans, but they are in no way ethically obligated to do so. Indeed, because many fans (like many people from all walks of life) harbor terrible social views, it is very often necessary for producers to disregard the will of the more vocal segments of their fanbases. Just because some gamers don’t want increased diversity doesn’t mean it shouldn’t happen; just because a lot of moviegoers liked “Suicide Squad” (myself included) doesn’t mean the film critics aggregated by Rotten Tomatoes should agree."

In vilifying Russian swimmer Yulia Efimova, Americans are splashing murky waters; Washington Post, 8/10/16

Sally Jenkins, Washington Post; In vilifying Russian swimmer Yulia Efimova, Americans are splashing murky waters:

"Regardless of what anyone thinks of Efimova, it’s hard to see how the American censoriousness against her — or any individual athlete — is a solution to state-sponsored doping. And it’s just begging for anti-American backlash. King is just 19, and you would never want to curb her outspokenness or competitiveness. But it’s worth suggesting to her that a lot of beloved American athletes take supplements and use medical assistance not on the banned list. It’s also worth suggesting that she’s never walked a mile in the shoes of someone born in Grozny in 1992.

“Usually in the Olympic Games, all wars stopping,” Efimova said."

Ethicists: Clinton team violated ‘spirit’ of pledge; Politico, 8/11/16

Katy O'Donnell, Politico; Ethicists: Clinton team violated ‘spirit’ of pledge:

"Ethicists tended to agree that while there may be no evidence of a deliberate violation of Clinton’s pledge, the emails underscored the blurry lines between the globe-spanning charity and Clinton’s work as the nation’s top diplomat.

“The Clinton Foundation was taking money from anybody who would give it, and the biggest contributions were from people who had business before the State Department,” said Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen.

“They didn’t follow the pledge. … I don’t think anyone in the foundation sought to deliberately violate the pledge, I just don’t think they cared about it,” he added."

Political violence is no joke; Washington Post, 8/10/16

William Kennedy Smith and Jean Kennedy Smith, Washington Post; Political violence is no joke:

"By now, we have heard enough dark and offensive rhetoric from Trump to know that it reflects something fundamentally troubled, and troubling, about his candidacy. Trump’s remarks frequently, if not inevitably, spark outrage, which is followed by a clarification that, in lieu of an apology, seeks to attribute the dark undertones of his words to the listener’s twisted psyche. This fools no one. Whether you like what he is saying or, like a growing segment of the electorate, you reject it, it is easy to grasp Trump’s meaning from his words. But what to make of a candidate who directly appeals to violence, smears his opponents and publicly bullies a Gold Star family, a decorated prisoner of war and a reporter with a disability, among others? To borrow the words of Army Counsel Joseph Welch, directed at another dangerous demagogue: “Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?”

The truth remains that words do matter, especially when it comes to presidential candidates. On that basis alone, Donald Trump is not qualified to be president of the United States."

Do menacing comments about Hillary Clinton cross the First Amendment line?; Washington Post, 8/10/16

James Hoefler, Washington Post; Do menacing comments about Hillary Clinton cross the First Amendment line? :

"Did Trump cross the First Amendment line with his comments? We look for guidance to the Supreme Court’s most recent case to test the limits of this sort of speech: Brandenburg v. Ohio. In that 1969 decision, the court set forth a three-part test to determine the contours of First Amendment sanctuary: Was criminal action (1) intended, (2) imminent and (3) likely?...

We all celebrate the First Amendment and its broad protections of speech, as egregious and unpresidential as that language might sometimes seem. But all political liberties come with limits, and a case could be made that Trump’s brutal entreaties have exceeded that limit. Should he continue to exhort violence at his rallies, it may be his own legal defense needs, rather than those of his followers, that he will need to worry about."

CBS All Access' 'Star Trek: Discovery' to Be Captained By a Woman, Feature Gay Character; Hollywood Reporter, 8/10/16

Lesley Goldberg, Hollywood Reporter; CBS All Access' 'Star Trek: Discovery' to Be Captained By a Woman, Feature Gay Character:

"Fuller confirmed that his Star Trek also will feature a gay character after he received hate-mail during his time on Voyager following a rumor that speculated that one of the show's characters could be out. He noted that fellow executive producer Alex Kurtzman was the first to pitch the idea, which was already something Fuller had planned on including in the 10-episode series.

While details about the cast are still yet to be determined, the news that it would be led by a woman comes as little surprise. Showrunner Fuller — who is openly gay — recently moderated a 50th anniversary Star Trek panel at San Diego Comic-Con where he used the platform to stress that the franchise could serve as an antidote to the current political upheaval.

"Think about what’s happening in America, and think about the promise of Star Trek, and what we can all do to get there," he told the crowd before ending the panel by asking all the fans in attendance to take each other’s hands and “make a promise to leave this room with love, to leave this room with hope, to leave this room and take responsibility to craft a path to Gene Roddenberry’s vision.""

'No room' in Indonesia for gay rights, says president's spokesman; Agence France-Press via Guardian, 8/11/16

Agence France-Press via Guardian; 'No room' in Indonesia for gay rights, says president's spokesman:

"There is “no room” for the gay community in Indonesia, the president’s spokesman has said, as a new report criticised officials for an unprecedented series of LGBT attacks.

“Rights of citizens like going to school and getting an ID card are protected, but there is no room in Indonesia for the proliferation of the LGBT movement,” presidential spokesman Johan Budi said.

Indonesia’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) citizens have long been targeted by vigilante Islamist groups.

But the community experienced an “immediate deterioration” in their rights following a sustained assault by ministers, religious hardliners and influential Islamic organisations in the space of two months this year, Human Rights Watch said in a report released on Thursday."

TRUMP: A TRUE STORY; Washington Post, 8/10/16

David A. Fahrenthold and Robert O’Harrow Jr., Washington Post; TRUMP: A TRUE STORY:

"It was a mid-December morning in 2007 — the start of an interrogation unlike anything else in the public record of Trump’s life.

Trump had brought it on himself. He had sued a reporter, accusing him of being reckless and dishonest in a book that raised questions about Trump’s net worth. The reporter’s attorneys turned the tables and brought Trump in for a deposition.

For two straight days, they asked Trump question after question that touched on the same theme: Trump’s honesty.

The lawyers confronted the mogul with his past statements — and with his company’s internal documents, which often showed those statements had been incorrect or invented. The lawyers were relentless. Trump, the bigger-than-life mogul, was vulnerable — cornered, out-prepared and under oath.

Thirty times, they caught him."

EVERY TIME "BLACK MIRROR" MADE US HATE TECHNOLOGY; Comic Book Resources, 8/9/16

[Spoilers] Jesse Gormley, Comic Book Resources; EVERY TIME "BLACK MIRROR" MADE US HATE TECHNOLOGY:

"Since its debut in 2011, British anthology series "Black Mirror" has merged speculative sci-fi fiction with elements of "The Twilight Zone" and a dash of "Tales from the Crypt." The series focuses on the unrelenting intrusion of technology and how people interact with devices and innovations on both an individual and societal level, with often horrifying results. Creator Charlie Brooker named "Black Mirror" after the powered down devices in all our lives, staring back with a cold, shiny blank gaze.

What makes "Black Mirror" so terrifying is the way it shines a light on the darker side of technologies we're already living with right now. There's no looking into a crystal ball or pontificating on "wouldn't it be great if..."; no dreams of warp drives, laser swords or teleportation. "Black Mirror" brings us the horror of technology that's either currently in the hands of the public, or in the R&D departments of companies like Google, Sony or Facebook.

With Netflix recently announcing the third season's debut this October, CBR looks at the myriad ways "Black Mirror" made us question the computer we use at work, the phone we can't be without, and every time we wished technology could somehow make our lives better -- and how it's made us hate them."

Two Views On The Jim Crow South And Its Legacy Today; The Diane Rehm Show, 8/10/16

[Podcast] The Diane Rehm Show; Two Views On The Jim Crow South And Its Legacy Today:

"Historian Charles Dew was born in 1937 and grew up in St. Petersburg, Florida. His parents, along with every white person he knew, believed without question in the inherent inferiority of black Americans and in the need for segregation. In a new memoir, “The Making of a Racist,” he describes what he learned as a child and how he gradually overthrew those beliefs. Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Isabel Wilkerson details the crushing realities of the Jim Crow South from the other side of the color line. In her 2010 book, “The Warmth of Other Suns,” she documents the migration of black families in the 1930s, 40s and 50s in search of better lives in the North and in the West. Charles Dew and Isabel Wilkerson join us to talk about racism in American, then and now.

Guests

Charles B Dew professor of history, Williams College; author of "The Making of a Racist: A Southerner Reflects on Family, History and the Slave Trade"

Isabel Wilkerson Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist; author, "The Warmth of Other Suns: The Epic Story of America's Great Migration"

"Vetting"; robrogers.com, 8/10/16

Rob Rogers, robrogers.com, Brewed on Grant:

"Vetting"

Anyone who thinks Trump was "just joking" about shooting Clinton is missing the point; Vox, 8/9/16

Zack Beauchamp, Vox; Anyone who thinks Trump was "just joking" about shooting Clinton is missing the point:

"...[I]n a certain sense, it doesn’t really matter what Trump intended. This tweetstorm, from Dallas lawyer Jason P. Steed, explains why.

Before becoming a lawyer, Steed was an English professor. He wrote his PhD dissertation on "the social function of humor" and found something important: Jokes about socially unacceptable things aren’t just "jokes." They serve a function of normalizing that unacceptable thing, of telling the people who agree with you that, yes, this is an okay thing to talk about.

This, Steed explains, is why "it’s a joke" isn’t a good defense of racist jokes. By telling the joke, the person is signaling that they think racism is an appropriate thing to express. "Just joking" is just what someone says to the people who don’t appreciate hearing racist stuff — it shouldn’t matter any more than saying "no offense" after saying something offensive.

Likewise, Trump is signaling that assassinating Hillary Clinton and/or her Supreme Court nominees is an okay thing to talk about. He’s normalizing the unacceptable."

Trump’s reckless call to ‘Second Amendment people’; Washington Post, 8/9/16

Editorial Board, Washington Post; Trump’s reckless call to ‘Second Amendment people’ :

"“You aren’t just responsible for what you say,” Gen. Michael Hayden, a former CIA director, said in response to Mr. Trump’s remark. “You’re responsible for what people hear.”...

As is often the case, Mr. Trump was incoherent enough to permit more than one plausible interpretation of his words. If he had not so often celebrated violence and wielded dark innuendo against political opponents, minority groups, journalists and others, it would be easier to give him the benefit of the doubt in this case.

Unfortunately, a spokesman’s after-the-fact explanation did not clear the bar of plausibility. “Donald Trump was obviously talking about American voters who are passionate about their Second Amendment rights and advocating they use that power at the ballot box,” the spokesman said. No; Mr. Trump was talking about what would happen if Ms. Clinton were elected."

Dan Rather Warns Donald Trump Supporters: ‘History Is Watching’; Huffington Post, 8/10/16

Ed Mazza, Huffington Post; Dan Rather Warns Donald Trump Supporters: ‘History Is Watching’ :

"“By any objective analysis, this is a new low and unprecedented in the history of American presidential politics,” Rather wrote. “This is no longer about policy, civility, decency or even temperament. This is a direct threat of violence against a political rival.”

Trump not only went against the norms of politics, he may have even broken the law.

“If any other citizen had said this about a presidential candidate, would the Secret Service be investigating?” wrote Rather.

“To anyone who still pretends this is a normal election of Republican against Democrat, history is watching,” he wrote. “And I suspect its verdict will be harsh. Many have tried to do a side-shuffle and issue statements saying they strongly disagree with his rhetoric but still support the candidate. That is becoming woefully insufficient. The rhetoric is the candidate.”"

Further Into the Muck With Mr. Trump; New York Times, 8/9/16

Editorial Board, New York Times; Further Into the Muck With Mr. Trump:

"Just eight years ago, Senator John McCain of Arizona, then the Republican presidential nominee, told a man at a town hall session who said he was “scared” of an Obama presidency that Mr. Obama “is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared as president of the United States.”

Twenty minutes later, a woman told Mr. McCain that she couldn’t trust Mr. Obama because “he’s an Arab.” “No ma’am,” Mr. McCain replied. “He’s a decent family man, a citizen, that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues. And that’s what this campaign is all about.”

Republicans would do well to summon the integrity that Mr. McCain showed in 2008, and not just to give some sense of decency to this ugly campaign. The time has come for Republicans — including Mr. McCain — to repudiate Mr. Trump once and for all."

From Trump’s controversial words, a pattern: Outrage, headlines and then denial; Washington Post, 8/9/16

Isaac Stanley-Becker and Sean Sullivan, Washington Post; From Trump’s controversial words, a pattern: Outrage, headlines and then denial:

"One common thread linking many of Trump’s more controversial comments and actions is that he denies having said or done them. Trump claimed never to have mocked a disabled New York Times reporter, despite a widely disseminated video clip showing him making jerking movements with his arms. He claimed that he never said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is not a war hero, despite a Q&A in which he said just that...

Trump also relies regularly on the turn of phrase “many people are saying” to make pronouncements without offering evidence backing them up.

On Monday, for instance, he tweeted: “Many people are saying that the Iranians killed the scientist who helped the U.S. because of Hillary Clinton’s hacked emails.”

“Mr. Trump’s tweets speak for themselves,” said Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks.

Trump and his allies often blame the media for misconstruing his words. The statement issued by his campaign after his Tuesday comments appeared under the heading: “Trump Campaign Statement On Dishonest Media.”"

This is Donald Trump at his lowest yet: a man hinting at murder; Guardian, 8/9/16

Lucia Graves, Guardian; This is Donald Trump at his lowest yet: a man hinting at murder:

"Rebecca Traister has written brilliantly on the long history of powerful men like Trump who would delegitimize the ascent of women and minorities. But this – to have the nominee of a major party appear to encourage his supporters to assassinate his opponent – is unlike anything we’ve seen before, quite likely for the simple reason that we’ve never had a woman this close to the White House steps.

Just as the birther movement that Trump helped lead was thinly-veiled racism rooted in the belief that a black man couldn’t possibly legitimately be the president, Trump’s insistence that “crooked Hillary” has “stolen” the election thrives among those who are angry that power could be taken from them by a woman, and specifically this one.

It’s vulgar, un-American and undemocratic. And it was only a matter of time."