No means no!

     On Saturday, September 12, an article was published to the Chicago Sun-Times where editor Mary Mitchell questioned if the sexual assault of a sex worker, at gunpoint, could really be classified as rape. She believes that taking the sexual assault of a sex worker "minimizes the act of rape" and is "an insult" to 'real victims'. The article then goes on to explain how sex workers are mistreated by police and many of them don't receive the justice they deserve if they're a victim of sexual assault.

    This article caught my eye because I found it shocking that someone would use their platform to send out such an awful, incorrect message to so many people. There is no such thing as a fake victim of sexual assault. If you are not given full consent, you have no right to do as you please, no matter the persons age, gender, sexuality, clothing, line of work etc. I found this article important because the media tends to blame the victims in situations like this, such as what they were wearing, how they were acting, or if there had been drinking involved when none of that should matter! Young girls and boys then start to believe if they were ever in a situation like that or have been in a situation like that, it would be their fault, and that adds so much more emotional damage to the victim. People who do the wrong thing should face serious consequences for their actions.

   Finally, I wonder, does Mary Mitchell have a comment on all of the negative feedback she's getting? Why does media put blame on the person who doesn't deserve it?

LINK TO ARTICLE

#FeelTheBern

     It's no secret that news sources will report about things that will get them the most views, or they twist a story around to make it seem more interesting than it really is. This is exactly why the New York Times article claims that in the August alone, they have published 63 articles on Donald Trump, 54 articles on Hillary Clinton, but only 14 articles on Bernie Sanders. Although this article focused on the lack of coverage Sanders is getting in the media, it made me realize how much stuff gets misrepresented in the media, especially with presidential candidates.

           

     I chose this article because the media only shows you the stuff they think will get the most views. If they have the option to write an article about Bernie Sanders' budget proposals or Donald Trump kicking someone out of his press conference, they'd go with the Trump story, and they have gone with the Trump story. A majority of the articles published on presidential candidates won't teach anything worth knowing. Many people who are working or going to school don't have time to research every candidate and find out which one they agree with the most, they use what they see on TV or news sources on their phone. Some people don't even know who the candidates are other than Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Its hard finding accurate, factual article's that will teach you about a candidates proposals and what they want to accomplish while in office. This article affects me as a student because I see so many people getting wrong information from the media and either don't know or don't care to make sure its accurate. As a consumer it worries me because I have believed many things I've seen online without further researching it. As a filmmaker it has inspired me to one day create content that teaches people about stuff that matters, stuff that will help people, stuff that is truthful and accurate. 

       Lastly, I wonder, will the media ever produce content thats backed up with facts in order to teach people about current events, or will it always be about views and money to them?

LINK TO ARTICLE

Sony Pictures reaches settlement in hacking lawsuit

   In November of last year, Sony Pictures was hacked, releasing the personal information of many Sony employees. U.S. officials blamed North Korea for this attack because it happened around the time The Interview was going to be released, a comedy with a plot to assassinate North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. A lawsuit was filed in mid-December saying Sony failed to secure computer systems, servers and databases leaving employees confidential information such as, social security number, and health insurance records unprotected. Sony tried to dismiss the case but the court rejected their request. Sony has finally reached on an agreement to solve the case but a settlement was not disclosed.

     This intrigued me because the threat of hackers are becoming such a big problem. There's so many news stories of hackers getting into websites and emails of people and releasing private information. As a student it worries me because kids do many things online that require personal information such as applying for colleges and jobs and those sites could be hacked anytime. It's also important to realize that even big companies like Sony can be hacked so you shouldn't give personal information unless you have to. 

     I do wonder though, how serious are other companies this? Will they really secure their websites to protect people information or will they just wait to see if it happens to them? 

                                             

LINK TO ARTICLE