JuicyCampus

Stolen from mainecampus.com (by me, of course):

For those of you who don't know what JuicyCampus.com is, it's a Web site that allows students to be completely anonymous and gossip freely. These posts usually discuss who is the hottest in each fraternity, who slept with whom, or which Student Government employee was a douche bag this week. I couldn't believe it either.

Let's put this in a historical perspective. Every communication device, for the most part, was intended to help citizens become informed and engaged in their world. Each of these failed. The TV allows us to watch "True Life" and "Sex and the City;" films are now a vehicle for "Dumb and Dumber." The Internet has - well, we have JuicyCampus.

The University of Maine has its own JuicyCampus page. I'd say ours leads the pack, as it has a "who is the best teacher?" thread ... followed by three different threads, all with the same subject: "Sluts."

It's a revolting site, that's for sure. It is like roadkill - really bloody, still crawling while its tail and hind legs are smushed to the ground by tire treads - you can't not look. It's disgusting and terrible. What's worse is you're probably on it, and your angry ex probably detailed the exact inflammations of your last three herpes outbreaks. But, JuicyCampus has its place.

Is this an issue of free speech? JuicyCampus thinks so. The "About us" section states that its mission is to enable "online anonymous free speech on college campuses." It adds, "today it is a forum where college students discuss the topics that interest them most, and in the manner that they deem most appropriate."

Is it libelous? Of course. People are listed by full name and campus with the juicy gossip attached. Unless every bit of information is true, which is tough to prove in the case of "douche bags," it's absolutely defamatory. I could not find one lawsuit against the site or any of its anonymous posters - though the site could be subpoenaed and forced to give the IP addresses of specific posters. The free speech argument is difficult or impossible to make when the speech is pure libel.

JuicyCampus is not the most useful outlet for desirable information. The information is undesirable. But if people think it is so terrible, and if they do not want the outlet to exist, why do they keep looking?

The real issue is common decency. As the mission states, "in the manner [students] deem most appropriate." It's easy to say that the site is unfair to its victims and encourages pure malice among peers. And of course, it is. The main tab says "gossip" - the purpose isn't hidden. What it comes down to is, people should be acting like humans, and not bashing others to a bloody pulp ... like roadkill.

Heather Steeves is news editor for The Maine Campus.

Government's intimidating nature detracts from democracy

The environment of government is intimidating to citizens. Although America, arguably, has a strong, cemented structure, it's this rigidness that can be disconcerting to curious laypeople whom otherwise might like to be more politically active. Two years of being the editor of a college newspaper and a myriad of public affairs reporting experiences from a slew of newspapers and television stations has made this abundantly clear to me.

When I am assigned a new town government to cover, it is not easy to get started. The first thing I do is try to buddy up with the last reporter to get my bearings. Towering court houses and stuffy town halls full of men in suits are not exactly a fresh-baked-pie atmosphere for us non-elected folk.

If there is no other reporter to help me, I am alone. I drift through the empty halls of the public buildings where I can hear my heels click with every step until I stumble across a clerk. Clerks are angels sent from heaven with public records and the knowings of everyone and everything. She — as the clerk is, in my experience, always a she — is friendly, but skeptical of new observers.

I feel that my experiences of being forced to attend many public meetings and digging through many public documents have taught me a lot about the structure of government and its environment. Most people do not have this experience. They do not know where to get an agenda, what a resolution is, when they are allowed to speak and ask questions, etc. This is intimidating for outsiders. This is supposed to be the "people's" government, yet, through both apathy and a lack of understanding and education, most people can't find their way through a court house — or know that they are allowed to be there. This is sad.

I feel that American government has a strong structure. This strong structure does lead to delays in policy passing, but at the local level we can be directly involved in how policy, laws, regulations are made. I think people do not take advantage of this because of the unwelcoming environment that comes with the intimidating hierarchy and lack of outreach on the part of our government to solicit views from constituents — whom they are supposed to represent.
Government, of course, is not solely to blame. Apathy about government is overwhelming in the United States. This is not the 1970s when students would protest on malls across the nation. Rarely do we see any uprising at Maine's statehouse or at the local level. CSPAN's ratings don't compare to those of MTV's. But what happens behind the doors in Washington, D.C., and even in Town Hall chambers affects each citizen every day of his or her life. Taxes, medical care, public transit, where you can build a house — all the things that impact citizens seem foreign to them.

When a new reporter comes in and wants to become my Student Government beat reporter I give them a schpeel. "It isn't fun. It's a lot of hard work and many boring meetings — but, as you work on it, it will become the most interesting, inflammatory subject ..." etcetera. But each one of them is always terrified to sit through a meeting. The structure of most governmental meetings is that all the elected officials sit at one table and are observed by the media and citizens who have opinions they wish to be shared. These people too are usually shaking. They are unsure when to speak, what they can and can not say and where to sit. This may seem arbitrary, but when citizens do not know how to partake in a democracy, except to get their information second-hand and to vote every four years, this is not effective. I blame the hostile environment of government.

Update

The Columbia test was great. Reading the almanac and studying world maps was completely unnecessary. Mostly, I got to show off my writing and word choice. 

Getting busy, sorry, will write more later.

Irony ... creatively

Tomorrow Columbia will administer a test to me that will help them decide if I'm worthy of giving them thousands of dollars. For this, I have set myself an academic diet of regular almanac and world map digestion. This has been difficult to do. Not because of my attention span; I love reading the almanac. No, my lack of focus comes from inspiration. 

When I start to try to study, I get suddenly inspired. I want to write down all my news ideas and e-mail my writer to do a story on the thing I'm reading about, I want to blog about it, I want to write a poem, etc.

Such happened today in my public management course. My teacher was giving me the quick and dirty on American politics. This information would probably have helped me tomorrow ... had I been at all able to pay attention to the poor woman. I wasn't. Again, inspiration hit. Her appearance alone caused my pen to erupt on the left, usually blank, side of my notebook.

*

Her cheeks sag around her cleft lip which seems to deepen the fissures that define her chin, carved from the rest of her face; like a canyon -- not water: age.

Her gold-framed glasses reflect the fluorescent light, protecting the boil under her right eye from scrutiny. A bubble of skin bumping into her bright, blue pupil.

She was exactly whom I would want to teach Public Management. She looked like every lady in Orono's town office. Her short, orange-blonde ruffled mane looked like it was trying to escape her forehead. This was most likely a side effect of wearing a green cap of a winter hat that clashed against the pair of bright red gloves laying underneath the olive rumple beside her podium.

Her rings, nail polish, necklace and large, solid, circular earrings carefully chosen -- probably the night before. Her cardigan sweater the exact color of her sea-wash eyes. A yellow turtleneck beneath.

Her name is Marie. Marie probably did not have a doctorate. She used not-words including "irregardless." This one in particular made my itch all over. She wrote her name on the board with chalk -- in cursive -- something that is no longer taught in grade schools. Next to her perfectly curved name, she listed her home phone number. This said something. First, she was old. She did not have a cell phone. 

*

It is not finished, it was just a blurb my pen spouted in class as she lectured about the Articles of Confederation. I couldn't help it.

Which makes me wonder: Columbia, what would you want? Someone who pays attention to American politics, world affairs and geography; or someone so inspired by the mundane that she can not keep the words in her hand anymore, they must pour onto the page or risk being pent up with the unborn ideas, projects, dreams? 

I'm a writer. It's what I need, and the only thin I can do to be fulfilled, and if this is not enough for a school, thats OK because it always will be for me.

Deadlines must be met (if they exist, that is.)

I'm a skeptic of most everything, and this includes the University of Maine. College professors can make or break an experience. Some professors reign students in tight, work them to the bone and get a lot from them. Others let their students go with little instruction and let them find their own paths. Some don't do much for students at all and lecture the yawns out of them.

Today I found a professor who wanted to reign us in, but was more of the "find your own path" sort of guy.

I read through the syllabus before allowing him to explain its stipulations. 

"Late work is not accepted," it states under "Assignments." "You can not pass the course without completing every assignment," it states under "Grading."

OK, I thought, this guy is serious.

Then I flip to the back, where the schedule for the semester is. Each reading is given its own Tuesday or Thursday. "We don't have to do it in this order," the professor explained. "It's pretty flexible."

At a closer examination, he has no deadline for any of the seven, what look to be difficult, assignments and research projects. "I'm not sure what I want you to do yet," he explained. "And projects never finished, they are unending."

So, from what I learned today, late work is not accepted, but don't worry because there are no deadlines and there never will be because research never ends.

This is life at a liberal arts college.

Cut the cuts

I keep reading about Obama's tax cuts. In the past, I've, for the most part, been a fan. But once several banks started to fail, the American auto industry sputtered and the rest of the world's economy fell, I started thinking differently. 

I've been listening to some financial news, researching past efforts, and thinking a lot on this subject. My conclusion is that, although tax cuts are nice, they are not the answer to this problem. Here is my idea of what tax cuts do. 

Give people some extra money to give to banks/auto industry/whatever>People, in turn, go to Walmart> The money the U.S. government gave to help resurge American companies, is now (at least partly) invested in Honduran sweatshops>Now, the U.S. government has less money (because of the tax break, and in turn, now in other countries) to give to invest in other means to strengthen our economy.

What has worked: job creation. During the Great Depression, America went into what is called the "New Deal Era." During this time, Roosevelt made new jobs (a lot which had to do with the environment) to lower the unemployment rate. Today, America is in a similar situation where most unemployed citizens want to, but can not find work. Here is where the government could help.

Building a wind farm, for instance, takes a lot of people. We need the people to dig holes, people to build the different parts of machinery, people to erect them, people to maintain them, etc. If we kept this work in the U.S., not only would this boost our workforce, but it would have the added benefit of reducing our dependance on other countries. 

Currently, the United States is not a country that can stand on its own. If every other country cut us off from trade, we would not be able to survive. Maybe this could be a goal to work toward to keep employment, and therefore our spending (both governmental and personal) in house.

Semester off

On surveys "some college" is usually an option for "level of education." This leads me to believe that many people start, and do not complete college. I know, I'm very smart, hold your applause. 

Recently, my friend told me she would be taking next semester off. Not because she could not afford it, but because it was too much stress. This friend has been dreaming to be a lawyer for a long time, in her second year of college, she is far from law school.

Taking time off. Can it be helpful? Or is it a sign that maybe you are not cut out for a job as intense as a lawyer's? I'm honestly curious. College, compared to the "real world," to me, seems like a break in itself. An investment of youth in exchange for an economically easier future.

On the other hand, maybe people sometimes need to slow down and breathe before finishing their academic marathons. I mean, people who finish college are in it for 17 years plus pre school. Maybe these people come back refreshed, rejuvenated and ready to work.

Perhaps it's my skeptical nature, but working 50 hours per week at Taco Bell to pay rent/gas/insurance/electric is not a "break" or any less stressful, it's a new, different stress that has no investment in a degree-required career.

I'd love to get comments on this. Has it worked? Does it? Do people come back, and if they do, is it the same? My curiosity has stemmed me to assign this topic for a news story in the paper next semester. 

But for now, I'm on break.

Are you sure this isn't a penalty?

I like news. I've acted in many positions in the business: editor, assistant editor, reporter, features writer, photographer, copy editor, producer, director, technical director, floor director, audio, anchor, teleprompter, cameraman, weather person, etc. Point is, I love it -- all of it.

Until today. Today I learned the one news job I hope to never repeat. Hockey still photographer.

Knowing the sports editor of the school paper was working and unable to attend the game, I volunteered myself to photog, and found a writer. Great. I've taken plenty of photos before, including working as a photographer for a Maine paper last summer. No problem.

Wrong.

I got a ticket and hit the main stretch of concrete where fans can watch the game on their ways to get fries and pizza slices. From there I could see everything and get clear shots without anyone in front of me. Suddenly, a jolt. A man had grabbed my jacket and pulled me back. He had a much fancier camera than I. I apologized, assuming I blocked his shot. 

"Who are you with?" I asked.

"The AP," he said haughtily. 

"Oh, I write for them."

No response. 

I wandered up the nearby stairs to get a different angle. 

"Look," he says to me, "if you keep blocking people's views you're going to get us both in trouble. You will be gone and I will still be pulled, pushed and yelled at. K?"

"OK, sorry."

I had not known I was blocking anyone's way. I stayed in the zones he deemed safe. Until I got yelled at again. "Keep moving," said a woman in a yellow jacket, indicating that she was event staff. "I don't care if you stand here, but keep moving."

If you've never worked with a still camera in hopes to produce publishable content, it is relatively difficult to do at even the slowest of walks.

Finally, I found a quiet spot behind the crowd, but in front of a wall. I would be blocking only the wall's view. It had seen enough games, and it was taller than me, I figured. I was correct ... until UMaine scored one of its four goals. Then, for a third time, I got tugged. This time out of the way of the naked students who make a lap on the concrete after every goal.

By this time, I was sick of being pulled about. I could not find my reporter, and to top it off, my camera was a shitty loan from the library, as the newspaper office was inaccessible. I decide to take a breather. I dig my ticket out from the depths of my pocket. Section D, Aisle 8, Seat 4. I find it.

Best seat ever. From there I took great pictures. It was the top row so no one was in my way. It was in the center (but a bit closer to the Maine side) so I could get shots of both team's goals.

It's something I don't plan to repeat. Newspapers: save the crowd, staff, police, naked men and photographers time and hassle and buy your photog a great seat.

Almanac observances

With Columbia Journalism School's test quickly approaching, I have begun to read the 2009 almanac. I'm not sure how much this has prepared me for my international affairs section of the test, however I'm amused by the knowledge I've gained. For instance, since 1970 the U.S.'s consumption of broccoli has increased by 1,040 percent. These facts have begun to annoy my roommate. 

This is good to know and makes me feel a little brighter, but I learned one fact that I found disagreeable. According to the Department of Commerce 0.6 percent of an American's income is disposable. This compares to 10 percent in 1980. The average Joe makes approximately $500 per week, if paid hourly (also according to my almanac). This means Joe can spend $3.00 on himself each week, $12 per month. 

People why so many people have credit card debt.