By: Rojan Habon of Heritage High School
College is competitve
There is rising pressure among high school students to stand out during their high school year to appeal to colleges. For academics alone, the majority of the students at these prestigious colleges are top of their class as Crimson Education found that Harvard admitted students with a GPA “ranging from 3.8 to 4.0” and for the SAT, “admitted students range from 1480 – 1580, with an average score of 1530” and for the ACT, “33 to 35, with an average score of 34.”
The average student at top-level colleges such as Harvard is expected to maintain a strict 4.0 GPA with high scores on the SAT and ACT. However, this is only academics alone, students at these top universities are involved in dozens of clubs, non-profits, working, community service and the list goes on.
With this rising pressure among students also comes a toll on mental health. Jade Bluestone from Mckinley High School wrote an article about students burning out and found that at their school students felt burnt out and “18% were led to a depressive state.” This is apparent in a variety of high schools ranging across not only the United States but the world.
Rebecca Michaud, long-term sub for English 10 at Heritage High School touched on high stress levels because “Students’ attachment to their phones and pressure to maintain an online presence has caused them to have immense amounts of stress,” adding “School is not about learning and engagement anymore.”
School, a place for engagement and learning has now turned to become a competitive field to stand out for colleges.
Rebecca Michaud shared her thoughts on prevalent burnout experienced by many students saying how it is “not worth the danger to your health, burnout is real. There is a balance between hard, honest work and overworking yourself.”
For those who are taking many Advanced Placement (AP) classes, it is not worth losing your sanity as Rebecca Michaud stated “I have witnessed the pressure and stress that a large amount of AP’s can give a teenager. I believe there is a limit in order to maintain adequate health!”
Though college is continuously getting more competitive as seen with these high standardized test scores, extensive extracurriculars and above-average GPA growth through the years, the expense to these is a student’s mental health. It is visible from a student-teacher perspective and will only grow as the years pass.
By: Nancye Wedajo of Heritage High School
Language death, human ghosts
Immigration is a process most United States citizens have become accustomed to. It is a global sensation where individuals migrate to foreign countries normally seeking betterment and an abundance of opportunities, normally tailed by an onslaught of cultural practices, traditions, and expressions.
Language for one thing is an aspect of culture that traverses thousands of miles with its patron immigrant. It is a concept that values heredity and longevity as languages are passed down from generation to generation.
Under unfortunate circumstances, language can be severed from its primary vessel: the human being leading to its extinction. This phenomenon, as described by Angela Farrer from Language Humanities, is called Language Death or Linguicide, and “it occurs when a language loses its native speakers, fading into silence.”
Language death is a concept that has only been perpetuated over the years. Time has sharpened its edge with social strife and issues guaranteeing that its blade will never dull. It is ever present in current society as seen by the graveyard of phonemes, but it isn’t a brand new notion.
According to the Center for Applied Linguistics, language death can be dated back to 19th century America which worsened “the experiences of Spanish-speaking immigrants in schools, where some teachers would punish them for speaking even a word of their home language.”
The erasure of culture and tradition is deeply rooted in our society first stemming from social concepts like racism and nativism. Here we can see the suppression of a minority group’s culture to coerce them into adopting the dominant culture. The English-speaking culture.
The children of immigrant parents are usually the first to face the harrowing effects of linguicide.
With the influx of immigrant families, it is easy to observe just how little effort is being put into preserving their mother tongue. From the Calgary Journal, Katarina Daignult claims that she’s finally come to understand the significance of the pieces she’s lost alongside her mother tongue: “a connection to her culture, a sense of belonging and even the confidence to identify as an ethnic woman.”
Language death starts early on. Immigrant parents begin meticulously cutting off the cultured roots of their children at a very young age to cultivate the “perfect” environment for learning English. By milking out the tradition and banning the mother tongue, parents effectively foster a child who speaks sharp, crystal-clear English.
But in the long run, these drastic measures done for “the better good” only isolate kids as they prevent them from fertilizing a connection with their heritage. Their self-identity is left blank as they grow up absorbing the culture of strangers.
Richard Armstrong from the University of Houston reiterates that linguists have discovered nearly 31,000 languages that have existed in human history, but currently only 6,000 are active. 81% of human languages have died. And these numbers are only increasing as ghosts of people are left in their wake.
But now we can see a new era of linguistic revitalization taking over social media. The digital age and the platforms associated with it are becoming a new tool when reinvigorating and renewing nearly extinct languages.
On Facebook, Twitter, and TikTok it is apparent that current generations are attempting to revitalize indigenous languages through the development of diverse online communities and open talks about feeling alienated behind your skin. Individuals are finding their cultural communities on social media and reconnecting with their past.
Although people are combatting linguicide on the internet, it is possible to combat it in the classroom as well. Rachel Cortese, a speech-language therapist at the Child Mind Institute claims that “Research overwhelmingly supports teaching second languages early because as we know it’s harder to learn a second language as we get older. But when kids are very young—from birth to about three-years-old—they are very ripe for receiving new information.”
Now is not the time to end the discussion, to discontinue languages like they are not the human way of communication. Keeping the world’s languages afloat not only preserves the rich century-long traditions of cultural groups but also allows people to maintain their unique form of self-identity and continue to learn more about what makes them connected. This connection is the basis of what makes a human, “human.” As creatures who are meant to network and bond, without communication and a full understanding of our past, we are only ghosts.
It is important to gradually implement foreign languages into the education system earlier on and it is equally important to encourage parents to withhold from letting their next generation be inept. Unable to pass down wisdom in their mother tongue.
Linguicide is a nightmare that is constantly overlooked. Shedding light on this large-scale phenomenon is only the beginning. The time and effort put towards excavating and revitalizing languages can only come from the public. Language death can not persist if the human race is meant to persist.
By: Muskaan Adeel of Los Medanos College
Dark humors effect on mental health
The mix of dark humor and mental health unveils a complex tapestry of coping mechanisms and potential harm within societal discourse. For some, dark humor serves as a coping strategy to alleviate the weight of mental health struggles. In certain communities, it acts as a shared language, fostering camaraderie among those navigating similar challenges.
However, the impact is not uniform, and the flip side reveals potential harm can perpetuate stigmas and contribute to a negative environment.
Dark humor, when insensitively used, can stigmatize mental health by reinforcing negative stereotypes and downplaying the gravity of certain conditions. This may create an atmosphere where seeking help is perceived negatively.
An article by Emily Bashforth, “Why do we use Dark Humor as a coping mechanism,” explains that dark humor’s popularity has increased in media and how this makes this a normalized effect. “Dark humor now seems to have taken on a new life with the growth of the internet and social media, and the way it is used by young people. It’s even used by brands as a form of marketing and a way of connecting with an audience,” wrote Bashforth.
The use of such humor can also lead to isolation, alienating individuals who find it triggering or offensive. In addressing this issue, education plays a pivotal role. Promoting awareness about mental health, including the impact of language and humor, can facilitate constructive conversations that emphasize empathy and understanding.
Creating inclusive spaces is equally crucial, recognizing that individuals have diverse perspectives on humor and sensitivities. Many people use dark humor to make their grief or mental health “better.”
The article “The Use of Bright and Dark Types of Humour is Rooted in the Brain,” written by Ilona Papousek and other contributors, discussed how humor is known to be used as a positive tool or a negative one.
“To brighten others up and point up funny sides of adversities or shortcomings in order to make others laugh about them are goals of the benevolent humor style.”
Context matters, and staying mindful when dark humor is used can mitigate unintended harm. Encouraging positive discussions, fostering environments that respect different sensitivities, and promoting the importance of seeking professional help collectively contribute to a more supportive and understanding approach.
Addressing the relationship between dark humor and mental health requires a nuanced understanding, empathy and a commitment to fostering environments that prioritize well-being.
By: Nancye Wedajo of Heritage High School
Savings don’t always equal sustainability
Most of us are familiar with the consumerist jamboree that is Black Friday. Deals galore stampedes aplenty and wastefulness at the max. Black Friday is a hub for the diligent shopper who will do anything to score a good deal, but do they understand the repercussions of their materialism-driven habits? That’s what we’re going to uncover today, the “dark” side of Black Friday (ironic I know).
But what even is it to begin with? Where did this notorious post-Thanksgiving craze originate from? Well, it turns out that there are many different interpretations and versions of the origins of Black Friday.
The most consistent one though, coming from freelance writer Don Vaughan, states that the term originated back in the early 1960s when “police officers in Philadelphia began using the phrase ‘Black Friday’ to describe the chaos that resulted when large numbers of suburban tourists came into the city to begin their holiday shopping.”
Black Friday has always been a term associated with commercial America, it is a concept that has blossomed over time, marinating in the materialism that manifested in most early Americans through the “American Dream.” But while simmering with the toxins that are capitalism and consumerism, Black Friday has become burnt.
According to Waste Managed UK, “This year’s Black Friday is expected to produce 429,000 metric tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions from product deliveries alone,” and “80% of products bought at Black Friday end up in landfill, are incinerated, or are recycled poorly.”
Black Friday is the center of most holiday merrymaking endeavors as most people stock up on goods and supplies for Christmas. But simply having these items delivered to one’s house is equivalent to turning the notch on an oven just one degree higher. People are cooking the Earth alive.
Incineration releases harmful pollutants into the air, landfills ravage environments and poor recycling pollutes bodies of water. There is no exception when it comes to the unsustainability of Black Friday. This amount of waste and emissions, just expedits global warming and climate change. These natural phenomena are not the ones individuals desire to hasten.
On top of environmental sustainability, Black Friday promotes social unsustainability through the practice of fast fashion. Gillian Innes from the University of Minnesota reports that “The problem with this [Fast Fashion] is that a lot of companies are outsourcing their production to the global south. They are using that to drive down their production costs by paying people less, using child labor, using cheaper materials, and having unsafe working conditions.”
Black Friday is a holiday built on the very American concepts of “cheap” and “quick.” It reflects those ideals in their garment production too. Major retailers like H&M, Zara, Forever 21, UNIQLO, Gap, etc. are all in the fast fashion game and pay their workers as little as $2 a day. Sofya Zakharova from Spruce – a refillable, environmentally friendly, cleaning product brand– elucidates that “Factory workers, working behind the scenes, are already majorly underpaid below the minimum wage by most fast fashion brands and fast homeware brands.”
Fast fashion is an unethical money-making strategy. Large corporations refuse to pay their workers anything but minimum wage which capsizes and prevents revolts or protests because the workers themselves can barely even afford to exist let alone demand fair treatment. Black Friday only exacerbates these negative, unethical, immoral, and dehumanizing effects of fast fashion and erases the progress that ethicists, activists, and people in general have made to erase it.
To be progressive as a society, a way to morph Black Friday into a socially and environmentally sustainable event must be found.
In an article by Craig Lord and Anne Gaviola from Global News, they mention that “Major brands are also taking notice of the push for sustainability. Swedish furniture giant Ikea, for instance, is incentivizing shoppers with deals on used products through its Green Friday initiative.” 98% of Ikea’s wood materials are used from FSC-certified or recycled sources.
If brought to attention and prioritized, major brands can still contribute to the reversal of unsustainable consumerism practices like Black Friday. There are still ways to counteract the burnt quality of Black Friday and return it to an unsullied state.
Keep Nature Wild, a corporation dedicated to well, keeping nature wild through trash pickups and cleanups, provides many different ways for consumers to combat unsustainable Black Friday habits.
Consumers can support small businesses, combine shipments to minimize delivery impacts and only buy essentials, recycle old electronics, etc. There are numerous ways to remedy the ramifications of Black Friday shopping, but it starts with being mindful.
Bringing awareness to the unfavorable consequences of Black Friday shopping is only the beginning. Unsustainable practices must be combatted. Although removing Black Friday as a whole isn’t feasible, there are still ways that it can be made sustainable.
Just a simple Google search will provide people with ways to practice consumerism in an environmentally friendly fashion. Black Friday should not remain the ash heap collector that it is currently, it could instead become a global statement towards progression and a greener future if only people were more aware.
By: Rachel Lei of Heritage High School
Literacy in media’s literature
For the most part, “literacy” refers to someone’s ability to read and interpret the language around us, which is a critical skill needed to navigate life. But with the rise of mass media and various social platforms, most people will have to interact with spoon-fed information through a third party.
As such, it’s not a surprise that what the media says isn’t always true, correct, or reliable. Because of this, this article aims to provide information and resources on how to better navigate the internet and whatever media is thrown at the public through promoting media literacy, a critical skill needed to navigate modern life.
Let’s begin with the basic question: “what is media literacy?” According to the Center for Media Literacy, an organization focused on media-based education, media literacy is “a framework to access, analyze, evaluate, create and participate with messages in a variety of forms — from print to video to the Internet.” The mentioned framework is appropriately vague, since there is no one way to safely navigate and understand information provided by the media.
But, doesn’t saying that imply that the media isn’t safe to begin with? Isn’t published media supposed to be trustworthy, since it’s passed under the eyes of multiple professionals?
Studies such as the one performed in Duke Reporter’s Lab in 2017 find that large news organizations often manipulate the news they publish. For example, they found that “only 40 percent of large news organizations provide labels about article types,” with several categories of labels often inappropriately named.
This results in misinformation, as the lab found, and makes assessments of bias harder to perform. As UC Santa Barbara’s Center for Information Technology and Society concludes, readers may be easily convinced to believe and act on polarizing narratives and false facts, creating distrust of the masses and undermining democracy.
Unsurprisingly, these skills are needed now more than ever, considering current affairs and how children today are growing up. In June of 2018, CNN Health reported: “Our understanding is that about half of kids have some form of social media by age 12,” continuing with, “parents reported that the average age when initially signing up for the account was 12.6 years.”
More recently, a 2021 study from Cleveland Clinic, an organization that provides digital medical resources, showed a decrease in the average age of kids getting on social media: “50% of children 10 to 12 years old use social media apps.” This means that younger children are increasingly accessing the Internet, creating a more dire need for media literacy education.
To make matters worse, the Canadian Pediatric Society found that “a number of studies have documented that children under the age of eight years are developmentally unable to understand the difference between advertising and regular programming,” which is extremely concerning considering the rampant misinformation on the Internet in times of crisis like now.
Sofia Williams, a co-founder of Teens for Press Freedom, a media advocacy and education group, emphasizes the political polarization the media has caused. She shares a personal experience documenting a recent example of misinformation she had seen, “My friend showed me a post that alleged that a recent explosion in Gaza was the result of an Israeli air strike…while other sources alleged that the rocket was misfired from a Gazan militant group.”
With this only being one instance of misinformation, Sofia acknowledges that others that spend large amounts of time on the Internet could be easily susceptible to such misinformation on a regular basis.
Undoubtedly, an inability to navigate forms of media safely is bad, so how can we actually gain media literacy? Media literacy stems off of critical thinking, which can be practiced and mastered. In October 2022, The New York Times compiled several ways to practice this kind of thoughtfulness using the following questions:
- Is this fact, opinion, or something else?
- Can I trust this source to tell me the truth about this topic?
- Who might benefit from this message? Who might be harmed by it?
- How does this make me feel and how do my emotions influence my interpretation of this?
- How might different people understand this message differently?
- Is this message good for me or people like me?
As for local resources, the Contra Costa County Library often hosts events where speakers come in and talk about important issues. In May 2023, the Ygnacio Valley Library started to host Media Literacy Mondays, encouraging both adults and teens to carefully discuss the news. The CCCLIB website also lists dozens of free digital resources and databases where users can go in and fact-check the media they encounter, including Archive Unbound and LearningExpress Library.
By: Nancye Wedajo of Heritage High School
Dress up should not be culturally messed up
Costumes erase history through cultural appropriation. Halloween is a holiday that invalidates the struggles of many people simply because others see their cultural attire and features as “cute,” “funny,” or “aesthetic.” Cultural appropriation during the Halloween season is a huge problem across America.
The term “cultural appropriation” is defined as “the adoption, usually without acknowledgment, of cultural identity markers from subcultures or minority communities into mainstream culture by people with a relatively privileged status.” This concept is only exacerbated more on Oct. 31 and the days leading up to it.
In an article by Ohio University, dressing up as a “gypsy, geisha, Día De Los Muertos skeleton costumes or costumes that depict Middle Eastern, Hispanic, Southeast Asian, Indigenous or Native American cultures” are examples of Halloween attire that worsen racial stereotypes and exhibit cultural appropriation. This is a problem because it discredits the heritage, hardships, bloodshed and adversity that these minority groups have been through.
Most of the time, individuals who dress up as such live a life of privilege and are unaware of the rich history behind their costumes. In the words of the Indigenous Corporate Training Inc., “Don’t refer to a culture or a People as exotic. That emphasizes their ‘otherness.’”
This blatant ignorance also objectifies and dehumanizes these individuals because their intricate and complex cultures have now turned into a cheap and quirky “aesthetic.” This tragic and expedited erasure of a group’s history just to “stand out” at a Halloween party or post on Instagram is sad and disappointing.
Nowadays, there are tons of shows that have characters from differing minority groups and cultural appropriation is now being displayed through the alterations of a person’s features to embody said characters.
A show that has gained lots of attention these past couple of years is Squid Game. There have been many Squid Game costumes lately, but Susan Scafidi, director of the Fashion Law Institute at Fordham University, who was interviewed by USA Today, said “…there may be people that may take their green tracksuit costumes too far by ‘changing their features to emulate an Asian person.’”
Mimicking the features of a specific ethnicity will never not be offensive, but glamorizing it through makeup and dress-up is downright pernicious. Individuals who alter their appearance to resemble another ethnicity are the same people who engage in blackface, yellowface and redface.
Being an enabler of disrespectful stereotypes towards a culture not only looks horrible on a person’s track record but is harmful to whole communities and discourages diversity. Meanwhile, an article by Florida International University adds that “Cultural appropriation is also about power,” because most costumes are of minoritized groups. This isn’t a mere coincidence, but instead a perpetuation of the power imbalances that “fall on racial lines.”
The concept of cultural appropriation and its negative connotations and effects need to be introduced to our youth now instead of later.
Jess Lifshitz, a 5th-grade teacher interviewed by KQED, says that “having those conversations ahead of time allowed [her] kids to see why somebody else’s struggle shouldn’t make up someone’s Halloween costume.” The truth will not harm these kids, but will instead manifest into a new generation of upstanding individuals that protect and covet diversity.
Bringing awareness of this issue to youth as young as elementary school is detrimental to fostering a better understanding of the culturally and ethnically diverse community in Brentwood and beyond.
This spooky season and the upcoming one, be mindful of what you wear. Dress up should not be racially, ethnically, or culturally messed up.
By: Alison Chiu of Heritage High School
Florida restricts Collegeboard’s AP Psychology curriculum
Collegboard’s Advanced Placement courses are a series of classes that can qualify students for college credit in the case that students pass an end-of-the-year exam. For many, Advanced Placement classes help students save money by completing credits in high school rather than in college and excel academically in a “college class” taught at high school.
In the AP Psychology curriculum, Collegeboard sets one of the learning targets to ask students to “describe how sex and gender influence socialization and other aspects of development.” However, the standard directly conflicts with a new Florida law that states teaching “instruction on gender identity and sexual orientation is now restricted through 12th grade,” according to a New York Times article published on Aug. 4, 2023.
Thus, when Florida passed the law, it essentially banned AP Psychology from being taught in its classrooms, despite Collegeboard’s refusal to change its learning standards. However, Collegeboard stated in response, “Any course that censors required course content cannot be labeled “AP” or “Advanced Placement,” and the “AP Psychology” designation cannot be utilized on student transcripts.”
Florida’s sudden new law shortly before the beginning of school has “sent some schools scrambling to find replacements last week while others were left weighing their options with mere days before classes start” out of fear of running into potential legal issues.
As a high school student who has taken AP Psychology, I can verify that although there is content about gender identity and sexual orientation in the course, it is very sparse–just barely a few pages in the textbook–and not on the exam last year.
On the other hand, the curriculum emphasizes many different perspectives that are essential in understanding different scientific approaches to human psychology. Including multiple discussions on gender identity and sexual orientation in the AP Psychology curriculum aims to emphasize ongoing developments within the psychological field.
Tamara Afonso, a high school senior who has also taken AP Psychology, underscores the censorship of the curriculum as “an attack on not only for the LGBTQ community but for anyone that believes in science and perspective.”
Additionally, the regulation of LGBTQ content in AP Psychology is very similar to other initiatives in Florida, such as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, which aims to remove information on LGBTQ communities and perspectives in schools altogether.
Likewise, Afonso highlights, “censoring data and information about how trans and gay people feel is just stunting the development of children because if they can’t show empathy or understanding for another’s situation, how can they function as an adult?”
Not only has the new Florida law caused significant fear and frantic change among districts statewide due to the potential legal issues with the course, but have significantly restricted the reach of AP Psychology in Florida. Eliminating the LGBTQ community from the curriculum ultimately defeats the core idea that psychology is a multi-perspective field and diminishes the lasting scientific and educational purposes of AP Psychology.
By: Rojan Habon of Heritage High School
What should the voting age be?
Determining the optimal voting age remains a longstanding debate, with proposals to lower it to 15 or elevate it to 21, but this intricate issue encompasses diverse viewpoints and considerations.
Advocates of lowering the voting age argue that engaged student activists aged 15-17 warrant a say in shaping their future. These young individuals are already involved in economic activities such as tax payments and implying a sense of responsibility for participating in the political process. Their input and assertion are crucial for influencing policies that will inevitably impact their lives.
Conversely, supporters of raising the voting age range, specifically Gen X, emphasize the opinions of young minds. Scientific research suggests that brain maturation extends until around 25 years of age, raising queries about the capacity of individuals younger than 25 to make informed and sensible political decisions.
The study “Maturation of the adolescent brain” from Saint James School of Medicine explains “brain development is not complete until near the age of 25 years refers specifically to the development of the prefrontal cortex.” This contention posits that the voting age could be raised due to the need for the development of the brain for opinions.
The benefits of modifying the voting age are apparent on both sides. By enabling younger individuals to vote, societies create a stronger link between the younger generation and the political process. This allows for political awareness and engagement from a younger age. It would empower impassioned young individuals to voice their opinions on matters that will influence their lives down the road, allowing them to actively contribute to shaping their society.
However, changing the voting age also poses potential downsides. Lowering the voting age could introduce a susceptibility to influence that may not align to form an informed electorate.
Younger minds tend to be more adaptable and impressionable, rendering them susceptible to external opinions and trends. This raises concerns about the genuineness of the votes cast by younger individuals, and whether they genuinely reflect independent thought or are swayed by external factors.
Although, altering the voting age could hold significant drawbacks. Extending the age range of voters by a few years may introduce more diverse perspectives. Still, it could also impact the election dynamics, changing voter statistics due to various opinions and ages. Moreover, there is potential for negatives, as the younger generations have strong opinions at an early age.
The issue of the minimum voting age is not an easy one to answer. While young activists aspire to have their voices heard and their opinions counted, concerns about the maturity of young minds cannot be dismissed. Any law change to the voting age is a heavy topic, as it wields the power to reshape the political landscape, although the voting age has not been altered in years.
Essentially, the conversation is almost useless because, in our current society, the system works. People argue about raising or lowering but do not consider that since there are so many pros, cons, why’s, and don’t they realize that it should be kept the same.
The topic surrounding the minimum voting age conversation reflects on different issues taken at different points, although it has not changed does not mean it will not be spoken upon.
By: Muskaan Adeel of Los Medanos College
TikTok and mental health: exploring the Surgeon General’s Warning
In this digital age, social media platforms have become a significant part of our lives, shaping the way we communicate, share information and entertain ourselves. TikTok, a popular video-sharing application, and other social media platforms have garnered attention not only for their viral dance challenges and comedic sketches but also for concerns about their impact on mental health.
Recently, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy issued a warning about the potential dangers of excessive TikTok use and the reasons behind this warning.
This social media platform allows users to create, share and discover short videos, typically ranging from 15 to 60 seconds, and has gained immense popularity, especially among younger people. Unlike Instagram, which primarily focuses on sharing photos and curated content, TikTok is centered on user-generated videos that cover a wide range of topics, including dance, comedy, education and activism.
Holding great significance among young people, TikTok provides an outlet for self-expression, creativity and connection. Through its intuitive and user-friendly interface, this platform enables individuals to showcase their talents, build communities and engage with content that resonates with them. Its algorithmic recommendation system tailors the content to the user’s interests, making it an engaging and personalized experience.
However, from an outside perspective, the impacts are not as positive as they may seem. The allure of TikTok lies in its ability to captivate users with bite-sized, entertaining content that can be consumed in quick bursts.
This format, coupled with the addictive nature of the platform, leads to prolonged usage. Addictive qualities arise from its endless scroll feature, where users can easily get lost in endless videos. This uncontrollable behavior can harm mental health, leading to decreased productivity, disrupted sleep patterns and increased anxiety and self-comparison.
As an avid user, I spend a considerable amount of time on the platform each day. Its seamless integration of humor, creativity and informative content keeps me engaged for hours on end, even though I recognize this excessive usage as detrimental because it leads to a loss of focus and neglect of other aspects of life. With similar platforms common among generations, it is essential to maintain a healthy balance between online and offline activities.
TikTok is free, allowing anyone to download the app and create an account without financial barriers. This accessibility has contributed to its widespread popularity, making it available to individuals from various backgrounds and age groups.
The U.S. Surgeon General’s warning about TikTok’s impact on mental health is not an overreaction. It serves as a reminder to users, particularly young people, to be mindful of their screen time and prioritize their well-being. While TikTok itself may not be inherently harmful, excessive use and reliance on the platform can harm mental health. The Surgeon General’s warning aims to raise awareness and encourage responsible digital habits.
Considering the Surgeon General’s warning, participants must evaluate their usage patterns and make necessary adjustments. By setting boundaries, diversifying activities and finding alternative outlets for self-expression, users can strike a balance between enjoying TikTok and maintaining mental well-being.
TikTok has undoubtedly revolutionized how we consume and engage with content, especially among younger people. However, it is essential to approach its usage with caution, as excessive screen time can harm mental health. The Surgeon General’s warning serves as a wake-up call, urging users to be mindful of their digital habits and cultivate a balanced approach to technology.
Click here to visit the Surgeon General’s advisory.
By: Rojan Habon of Heritage High School
What’s at stake following the Supreme Court’s decision on Affirmative Action
Recently the Supreme Court has announced that higher levels of education may no longer consider race and ethnicity into accepting and granting students admission into colleges and universities. Well, what does this mean for the lower-income and minority groups who do not have access to resources that of upper-class individuals? What does it mean for the White and especially Asian/Asian American individuals who have been targeted due to their race throughout the years?
This means colleges’ diversity pool will decrease as colleges will begin to accept either the rich or the smartest people who have the opportunities to succeed. Minority groups will be singled out since one of the important aspects of the minority group is their race.
Referring to those of the Latin American and African American minorities, percentages increased ever since the decision of race was admitted into college admission. However, removing affirmative action in college admission will target the Latin American and African American minority groups and reduce acceptance into higher prestigious institutions.
Now, what does this mean for Asian/Asian American and White applicants? Throughout the years, prestigious higher education colleges have commonly accepted the wealthy and or those who do better academically.
Colleges have been singling out Asian/Asian Americans due to the high student population of Asians in colleges such as Harvard. At times, Harvard has faced lawsuits and protests because they decided on race admissions, especially with the Asian/Asian American community to try and reduce the population of the minority. Alternatively, those of the upper white class will continue to be accepted because of their opportunities and economic state which fuels these institutes.
This effect poses numerous threats to minority groups which cause disadvantages during college applications.
Why are minority groups becoming victims when they are not given opportunities such as those of the upper-class white group? Is the Supreme Court allowing colleges, specifically prestigious colleges, to single out people because of social class? Are they allowing the sacrifice of diversity and the chance of minority acceptance for those who are more fortunate?
It is unfair to rank everybody the same when others are more fortunate with opportunities to help them succeed. Instead, people should be considered based on their circumstances and the characteristics an individual can bring to campus. Removing an essential part of one’s identity essentially takes away who they are as a person.
By: Aliyah & Alexis Ramirez of Los Medanos College
Cultural appropriation brings the worst out in everyone
Our world is made up of countless cultures–represented in the languages we speak, the clothes we wear, the food we eat, as well as the traditions and customs we follow. Every culture is different, but we see threads similar to one another as they continue to be embraced and evolve.
More specifically, in nations like America, where communities have been built on immigration and interaction, cultures have entered a melting pot of diversity. However, in more modern debates, ethical expressions of culture have been challenged with ‘cultural appropriation.’
In a decade of cancel culture and polarization, has the term ‘cultural appropriation’ become desensitized? That begs the question, which is the root of this heated issue: giving more credit, representation, education, and or sensitivity?
Cultural appropriation is defined as “the unacknowledged or inappropriate adoption” of customs practices, or ideas of a person or society. The term has been popularized on social media platforms, but its validity has been misconstrued as people have continued to use it without understanding others’ intent.
It has been paired with arguments of individuals ‘owning’ cultures, instead of not understanding or misrepresenting them. And while these arguments raise logical questions as to who can declare some practice or object as their own, it also opens debate on misrepresentation and the unrecognized victimhood of minorities.
For instance, fashion is a common scapegoat for cultural appropriation. While an individual can claim a piece of clothing has traditional ties to their culture, claiming to exclusively own it is an offensive stretch. The issue is, by ‘owning’ a culture, you take it upon yourself to police anyone outside of your culture for wearing or taking influence from that specific piece of clothing.
Even more, it dismisses other cultures that may have historically similar foundations in fashion. This mindset stands hypocritical of diversity, building itself on the theory where x is yours, y is mine, and there could never be a crossover. Not only does this encourage the segregation of cultures, but it also eliminates the defense for finding a tradition in fashion simply appealing.
As humans, we are all naturally drawn to things we find attractive, but when this argument arises, it is immediately shut down for the offensive, surface-level use of aesthetics. What makes these situations even more difficult to resolve is that the counters against cultural appropriation are rarely considered, as those who claim to ‘own’ a culture dig into the assumption of ill intent. The cancel-and-attack mentality society so heavily turns toward today keeps a polarizing divide from recognizing the real issue–accurate representation.
In most cases, it is impossible to track down the origin of a cultural practice or object. In theory, the argument of giving credit to a culture’s owner seems fair, but it is both impractical and unnecessary when you consider how basic representations of cultures have now gone global–consistently borrowed and shared in today’s age of the internet and travel.
More dire attention needs to be placed on educated intent and representation. When we adopt a custom or item from a culture outside of our own, understanding where it comes from and why we choose to wear it should be the bare minimum. If it is out of mockery or insensitivity, marginalized groups have a right to speak about their frustration.
The marginalized groups that culture is being taken from often feel more passionate about appropriating culture because they come from a background of structural racism, degrading stereotypes, and fetishization. Yet, they should have adequate avenues to represent their culture in the same ways celebrities outside of their culture do–in celebration, not degradation.
Accurate representation outweighs assumptions of appropriation.
Today’s world would not have such diverse cultures if it weren’t for the borrowing, adoption, and interaction of different ethnic groups. As the media continues to desensitize and polarize identity politics, it will become more difficult to understand the depth and meaning of our debates. The debate on cultural appropriation has evolved drastically over the past decade, and while foul intent is the root of the issue, misrepresentation is just as vital in discussions moving forward.
By: Jenna Cajayon of Los Medanos College
The value of chess in mainstream media
Netflix’s hit mini-series The Queen’s Gambit was released on Oct. 23, 2020, and sparked nationwide interest in chess. According to the NDP group, a marketing research company, unit sales of chess sets jumped 87% in the US, and chess book sales rose 603%. Inspired by unique, modern chess openings presented throughout the series, I also caved and purchased my own chessboard.
The female protagonist, Beth Harmon, played by Anya-Taylor Joy, delivered a memorable performance showcasing her wits and determination as she paved her way to success in the male-dominated field of chess.
Beth Harmon was an iconic fictionalized character because she nearly crossed the borderlines of genius and pure madness. The Queen’s Gambit depicted adversity and mental roadblocks in an intimate, relatable way – one that did not solely center around chess but life itself. Gaining millions of viewers and influencing the masses, The Queen’s Gambit allows more than a glimpse into what it takes to play to our strengths and the value of collaboration.
In the era of social media and larger-than-life reality TV and gameshow, is there still any value in chess being portrayed in mainstream media?
Simply put, there is incredible importance in the circulation of chess in media. There is the possibility of younger audiences becoming influenced by chess’s elaborate framework, storytelling, artistic elements and the fundamental basis of creativity expressed in games. Chess can help future generations develop their focus, ambitions and mastery of anything they pursue.
When people think about chess, they associate the game with intelligence, immense concentration and the ability to plan. The game requires that each player “wage a war” against each other and strategize until the other’s King has fallen.
In all its simplicity, chess offers a multitudinous amount of opportunities to conquer, think critically and even abandon the idea of routine and expand beyond the scope of our knowledge.
Chess requires intensive memorization of grand openings, endgame theory and the ability to react to our opponents. When I first started playing, I constantly ran through different chess openings, such as the king’s gambit and the London system. Soon, placing the pieces into squares that displayed my intentions and plan became second nature.
My mind became incredibly observant of the moves and played my opponent made within a game. Chess requires patience and purpose, and in playing, I developed my pieces and how I think about winning. Going beyond my plays and seeing into the mind of the person across from me was a learned skill in my journey to becoming an engaged chess player.
Chess promotes our ability to creatively express our intentions in 64 squares with 16 faithful men (pieces). There is immense value in chess in mainstream media, for it nurtures the process of learning and thinking outside of the box.
By: Sara Shafi of Zaytuna College
How Islam is portrayed in the World Cup
Before the attacks of 9/11, the West was relatively unaware of Islam and Muslims. Post 9/11, coverage regarding Islam and Islamic Law increased significantly across all media platforms. Many times, these reports helped establish certain negative stereotypes. Fortunately, this year in the 2022 World FIFA Cup, the country of Qatar was given a tremendous opportunity to rectify misinformation about Islam.
Muslims heavily combated these accusations and depictions, but this year’s FIFA World Cup helped defend Islam with no mitigations.
Some Muslims and non-Muslims alike seemed apprehensive of Qatar hosting the World Cup for various reasons; Qatar is known for human rights violations and a drinking ban in the stadiums. However, throughout the World Cup spectators were able to observe aspects of Qatari life, which were inspired and in accordance with Islamic morals, which enabled them to contextualize and arrive at a personal understanding of Muslim values rather than ethics alienated and separate.
Dress in Qatar dispelled the notion of a ‘misogynistic Islam.’ Many political commentators attack Islam on its requirement to dress modestly.
Yet, Islam requires modesty from both men and women. Qatari men wear long white thobes and cover their heads with white cloth, making it difficult to find a Qatari man in a t-shirt or tank top and shorts.
The Middle Eastern dress for men is just as modest as for women because modesty is a core value in Islam.
Spectators presume the Islamic faith to be intertwined in everything Muslims do, especially for the Moroccon team. Players from the team fell into sujood or prostration expressing submission to God multiple times throughout their games. Some players ran to their mothers and celebrated with their families. These physical displays manifested the true principles of Islam.
The FIFA World Cup exhibited Islam in a completely new light in a way that did not conform to the terms of the West. It showed Islam for what it is unapologetically.
By: Tsola Bemigho of Liberty High School
The effects of true crime entertainment
True crime entertainment has been around for decades but entails mixed feelings. Netflix’s most recent installment, Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story, retells the crimes of Jeffrey Dahmer, a serial killer who murdered 17 victims over the course of 13 years.
The show sparked controversy after family members of Dahmer’s victims spoke out against Netflix using their trauma for entertainment. People called out Netflixs’ unethical actions, but these problems aren’t exclusive to the Dahmer series as such practices are prevalent throughout the true crime genre.
Some true crime producers neglect ethics for entertainment. This could be as simple as embellishing details withholding suspect confessions and manipulating the timeline of events, seen in HBO’s documentary, The Jinx.
Oftentimes, producers have theories about a crime and manipulate the narrative to move their story along. This leads them to omitting evidence, under-analyzing details, or changing important facts, leading to the spread of misinformation.
Additionally, consuming crime news makes people more fearful of crime. It makes them feel like serial killers are everywhere, despite serial murders accounting for less than one percent of all murders, according to the FBI. This causes anxiety and paranoia for true crime viewers.
This is common among fans as many claim watching true crime strays further from entertainment, into fear.
So how should society respond? Should true crime media be banned?
True crime is everywhere, on the news and in history, which can make it hard to avoid. Due to excessive violence, studies show watching both forms of media has harmful effects, but society still continues. Why is that?
Perhaps, because hearing true crime stories gives people a jolt of adrenaline and they become addicted to it. They can experience complex emotions and explore the psychology of murderers in the comfort of their own homes.
But engaging in true crime entertainment is still harmful. It causes people to idolize killers, especially when they’re conventionally attractive. Serial killers played by famous and conventionally attractive actors such as Evan Peters, Zac Efron, and Ross Lynch make them appear worthy of stardom and praise.
Yet, change can only occur if producers abandon sensationalism and dramatization of stories to focus on factual reporting, including viewers.
The issue of true crime isn’t black and white. True crime is an effective tool to convey information and entertainment, but changes should be made to combat the inherent flaws. Until then, the genre cannot reach its full potential.
By: Jenna Cajayon of Los Medanos College
We need to be wary of our social media use
It’s 3 a.m. and you find yourself mindlessly scrolling through the many different apps on your phone: TikTok. Instagram. YouTube and Reddit. The common question pops up, “How is it even this late?” I’ve been through this on too many occasions. We need to be more aware of how social media affects us, mentally, emotionally, and physically.
Social media platforms are designed to be addictive. Reeling in consumers to crave more gratifying content. Our endless scrolls on these platforms result in a repetitive cycle: our desire to see a clip, meme, or relatable post that makes us laugh and feel good.
The usage of social media is linked to and activates our brain’s reward system which releases the “feel-good” chemical, dopamine. Dopamine is the chemical that allows us to feel pleasure, motivation, and satisfaction.
According to the Pew Research Center, 69% of adults and 81% of teens in the US use social media. Our brains develop fully in our mid 20’s, so can we begin to see how younger audiences’ exposure to uncensored content, addictive systems, and extremely fast-paced modes of communication and transfer of ideas might actually do more harm than good to the development of our brains?
Losing and risking the quality of our sleep is one thing, but can our patterns of using social media actually be a source of a generation’s low-self esteem, depression, and anxiety?
The Internet and social media are gold mines for accessing information, as well as providing us with the resources to satisfy our needs and questions. But is there ever a moment where having that kind of power actually backfires on us? In our pursuit to find another funny video or creative cooking short, might we find something that disgusts us and entirely distorts our views of ourselves, or even other people?
I was scrolling through Instagram on a bad day, hoping to see more uplifting content, only to find another celebrity I found to be a good soul, get called out for questionable, infuriating behavior and misconduct. From reading the comments filled with malicious intent to having to absorb all the weight of current events, it was a humbling experience. The way the situation was blown up and attacked from all sorts of perspectives genuinely fascinated me, but also instilled fear within me. We just can’t truly believe all that we see on the screen.
As Aristotle described in his virtue analysis, there can be too much of a good thing. Overuse of social media can negatively affect mental health in numerous ways. I can think of two ways social media has affected me and altered my personality in a way that is more pessimistic and cynical.
Oversaturation of the media involving graphic news of abuse, sexual content, and worldwide news has gradually desensitized me to the crimes and intrusive content I’ve been exposed to early on. As I work to repair my relationship with social media, I must also acknowledge the harmful impact that using social media has on my mental health. It is never a good thing to indulge in sensationalized headlines and the tragedies of another individual, yet, our curiosity drives us to learn more.
Furthermore, constant exposure to others who are seemingly more successful, well-off, and happier than us leads to more harm than good. As the population of social media users increases, so have the many ways we alter our appearances by creating and transforming the way our lives are presented through media. I’ve found myself constantly comparing myself to other people I see on the Internet, and it has consumed me enough to the point where I question if I am doing enough. But the comparison is off base because I truly don’t know these people!
Social media platforms are a source of creative expressions, and new ideas and are an effective way to explore connections with people. However, social media also affects and rewires our brains, and at times, for worse. We must know when to draw the line, and take necessary breaks from overloading our brains with information available at our fingertips.
By: Sara Shafi of Zaytuna College
Don’t ditch the sweatpants
Casualwear and loungewear hang as staples in every American closet. Especially as the leaves turn to beautiful shades of fall, pumpkin spice scents fill the air and the autumn chill has us reaching for our cozy, warm sweatpants.
Some may buy sweatpants and continue wearing them till the flowers bloom again, however; people tend to view these styles as longtime wear as opposed to seasonal. The overall acceptance of sweatpants as outerwear has destroyed the creativity and morale of fashion, but the impact extends by contributing to the fast-fashion industry.
The intricate designs on garments in different cultures represent one of the highest forms of human intellect and creativity. Crafting ornate designs and transferring them onto delicate cloth, displays the uniqueness of each culture.
The nature of fashion is constantly changing and fast fashion promotes vices such as over-consumption and the slaughtering of proper dress by creating the monster of “trends.” Clothing corporations produce pieces of cloth for profit, not garments for people: destroying the planet, local economies, and creativity.
Now, how do casual wear and loungewear play into this?
Well, much of casualwear and loungewear originated from the lower classes as a form of counterculture and revolution. Many of the fashion trends originate from minorities due to their own creativity.
These styles made their way into pop culture, increasing in popularity and slowly becoming more acceptable. However, over time clothing corporations appropriated these styles from ethnic minorities and downgraded the quality by selling them for unjustifiable prices.
Tragically today we dress down for everything, yet dressing up gives importance to all activities by what one wears. When we put effort into what we wear, it creates excitement even for seemingly mundane tasks like grocery shopping or cooking.
Now, my advice for you is to refrain from believing you need boatloads of cash to hire a stylist and buy tons of new clothes to dress better. When you go out to buy clothes, think about what purpose would I assign this to?
This prevents clutter and awareness of what you currently have. Also remember to invest in good quality fabrics, such as cotton, cashmere, linen, and silk.
So by no means am I saying to get rid of your sweatpants, instead save them for a cozy night at home. Always remember, fashion allows us to express our individuality and let us dress well, let us dress with purpose and intentionality. Allow the garments we choose to beautify us and dignify us.