Mediaboss Marketing

On the day my state introduced a bill that would limit conversation around gender and sexual orientation in the classroom, I reposted the news to Twitter and cried myself to sleep.

Later that night, my phone buzzed. I squinted my eyes, trying to make sense of the words on the screen.

Im sorry that I couldnt be there for you back then.

The message was from my middle school counselor. I felt my heart sink as memories of growing up queer in the South came back to me hearing classmates use gay as a pejorative, feeling them reject the identity I hadnt yet had the space to embody.

I wondered how different it would have been if Id had a teacher or counselor in my corner someone I could trust and talk to about who I was and wanted to be.

Someone who truly made me feel like it was okay to be myself.

Ten years ago, there were no conversations around identity in my middle or high school. Without resources and support, even well-meaning educators like my counselor avoided discussing topics long considered off limits.

Now I fear a return to that, or worse, as anti-LGBTQ+ and Dont Say Gay bills like Floridas sweep the country. At least 15 states have passed or considered legislation that would affect how educators discuss gender identity and interact with LGBTQ+ students.

Related: OPINION: Why educations culture wars are only about some parents rights

I worry that this legislation, and the moral panic surrounding it, will have a chilling effect on conversations between students and teachers, making it harder for students to form the kind of supportive relationships with adults that can make a huge difference in their lives.

Much of the problem lies in the ambiguity of the laws and the charged rhetoric surrounding them. In addition to prohibiting instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in younger grades, Floridas Dont Say Gay law and similar bills include vague language about age-appropriate instruction at any grade level.

Within this climate of intense scrutiny and undefined boundaries, many educators will simply avoid any subject they fear could land them in hot water or elicit false accusations of grooming, a denigrating and inaccurate term used against those who oppose Florida-style legislation.

I wondered how different it would have been if Id had a teacher or counselor in my corner someone I could trust and talk to about who I was and wanted to be.

Even staff who personally agree with these laws may fear getting caught up in an overzealous lawsuit by litigious parents.

This is a recipe for disaster, given what we know about the importance of positive, healthy relationships in addressing the growing youth mental health crisis. As a queer student in the South, having a trusting relationship with an adult at school would have made me feel safer and more welcome.

Students who feel connected at school are significantly less likely to experience a host of negative mental health outcomes, including feelings of hopelessness and thoughts of suicide. The presence of a caring, supportive adult is particularly important for LGBTQ+ youth. Those with an accepting adult in their lives are 40 percent less likely to attempt suicide.

Related: Column: A lesson in hypocrisy whats really behind the parental rights movement

When conversations between educators and students feel like navigating a minefield, these supportive and trusting relationships cant develop. Even if many of these legislative proposals dont pass, they have already created fear and anxiety in schools for students and teachers.

We cant leave kids to face this alone. There is a pressing need for those of us outside of schools to find ways to provide support to LGBTQ+ youth.

One step that adults can take is to become a mentor to LGBTQ+ youth. Mentors can provide emotional support, help their mentees navigate challenges to their identities and help them envision a more hopeful and positive future.

Mentors can also be a source of affirmation at a time when many young people are internalizing the anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric some politicians are using.

Mentoring advocates are joining educators across the country in speaking out against these discriminatory bills and finding ways to help LGBTQ+ students thrive. In Minneapolis, a new nonprofit called QUEERSPACE matches LGBTQ+ youth with LGBTQ+ mentors and works with community partners and families to reduce LGBTQ+ youth isolation, suicide and homelessness.

When my former school counselor reached out to me, I realized how daunting it can be for educators, too, to navigate these issues alone. Organizations like QUEERSPACE serve as a lifeline to students, families and educators alike.

Mentoring wont solve the youth mental health crisis alone, nor is it a sufficient singular response to the wave of anti-LGBTQ+ legislation. But its imperative that each of us find ways to combat or circumvent this legislation so that it doesnt further isolate and marginalize young people and limit educators ability to help them.

We must try to be there for students and educators with the kind of affirming support and connection that can make all the difference.

Amaris Ramey is a graduate student pursuing a masters in social innovation. They work as a grassroots organizing manager at MENTOR, a national nonprofit working to expand the quality and quantity of mentoring relationships for Americas young people.

This piece about Dont Say Gay legislation was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for Hechingers newsletter.

The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn't mean it's free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

Join us today.

Go here to read the rest:
STUDENT VOICE: 'Don't Say Gay' bills will make it harder for teachers to support students like me - The Hechinger Report

Around the world, and against all scientific evidence, a segment of the population believes that Earths round shape is either an unproven theory or an elaborate hoax. Polls by YouGov America in 2018 and FDU in 2022 found that as many as 11% of Americans believe the Earth might be flat.

While it is tempting to dismiss flat Earthers as mildly amusing, we ignore their arguments at our peril. Polling shows that there is an overlap between conspiracy theories, some of which can act as gateways for radicalisation. QAnon and the great replacement theory, for example, have proved deadly more than once.

By studying how flat Earthers talk about their beliefs, we can learn how they make their arguments engaging to their audience, and in turn, learn what makes disinformation spread online.

In a recent study, my colleague Tomas Nilsson at Linnaeus University and I analysed hundreds of YouTube videos in which people argue that the Earth is flat. We paid attention to their debating techniques to understand the structure of their arguments and how they make them appear rational.

One strategy they use is to take sides in existing debates. People who are deeply attached to one side of a culture war are likely to wield any and all arguments (including truths, half-truths and opinions), if it helps them win. People invest their identity into the group and are more willing to believe fellow allies rather than perceived opponents a phenomenon that sociologists call neo-tribalism.

The problem arises when people internalise disinformation as part of their identity. While news articles can be fact-checked, personal beliefs cannot. When conspiracy theories are part of someones value system or worldview, it is difficult to challenge them.

In analysing these videos, we observed that flat Earthers take advantage of ongoing culture wars by inserting their own arguments into the logic of, primarily, three main debates. These debates are longstanding and can be very personal for participants on either side.

First is the debate about the existence of God, which goes back to antiquity, and is built on reason, rather than observation. People already debate atheism v faith, evolution v creationism, and Big Bang v intelligent design. What flat Earthers do is set up their argument within the longstanding struggle of the Christian right, by arguing that atheists use pseudoscience evolution, the Big Bang and round Earth to sway people away from God.

A common flat Earther refrain that taps into religious beliefs is that God can inhabit the heavens above us physically only in a flat plane, not a sphere. As one flat Earther put it:

They invented the Big Bang to deny that God created everything, and they invented evolution to convince you that He cares more about monkeys than about you they invented the round Earth because God cannot be above you if He is also below you, and they invented an infinite universe, to make you believe that God is far away from you.

The second theme is a conspiracy theory that sees ordinary people stand against a ruling elite of corrupt politicians and celebrities. Knowledge is power, and this theory argues that those in power conspire to keep knowledge for themselves by distorting the basic nature of reality. The message is that people are easily controlled if they believe what they are told rather than their own eyes. Indeed, the Earth does appear flat to the naked eye. Flat Earthers see themselves as part of a community of unsung heroes, fighting against the tyranny of an elite who make the public disbelieve what they see.

The third theme is based on the freethinking argument, which dates back to the spirited debate about the presence or absence of God in the text of the US constitution. This secularist view argues that rational people should not believe authority or dogma instead, they should trust only their own reason and experience. Freethinkers distrust experts who use book knowledge or nonsense math that laypeople cannot replicate. Flat Earthers often use personal observations to test whether the Earth is round, especially through homemade experiments. They see themselves as the visionaries and scientists of yesteryear, like a modern-day Galileo.

Countering disinformation on social media is difficult when people internalise it as a personal belief. Fact-checking can be ineffective and backfire, because disinformation becomes a personal opinion or value.

Responding to flat Earthers (or other conspiracy theorists) requires understanding the logic that makes their arguments persuasive. For example, if you know that they find arguments from authority unconvincing, then selecting a government scientist as a spokesperson for a counterargument may be ineffective. Instead, it may be more appealing to propose a homemade experiment that anyone can replicate.

If you can identify the rationality behind their specific beliefs, then a counterargument can engage that logic. Insiders of the group are often key to this only a spokesperson with impeccable credentials as a devout Christian can say that you do not need the flat-Earth beliefs to remain true to your faith.

Overall, beliefs like flat-Earth theory, QAnon and the great replacement theory grow because they appeal to a sense of group identity under attack. Even far-fetched misinformation and conspiracies can seem rational if they fit into existing grievances. Since debates on social media require only posting content, participants create a feedback loop that solidifies disinformation as points of view that cannot be fact-checked.

More here:
I watched hundreds of flat-Earth videos to learn how conspiracy theories spread and what it could mean for fighting disinformation - The Conversation

Executive Producer Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks on stage during "Below The Belt" New York Premiere at Museum of Modern Art on May 24, 2022 in New York City.Cindy Ord/Getty Images

Hillary Clinton slammed the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

The opinion "will live in infamy as a step backward for women's rights and human rights," she said.

The Court overturned the landmark ruling that established the constitutional right to an abortion.

Hillary Clinton said the Supreme Court's decision on Friday to overturn the 1973 landmark Roe v. Wade ruling is a "step backward" for women's rights.

"Most Americans believe the decision to have a child is one of the most sacred decisions there is, and that such decisions should remain between patients and their doctors," she tweeted after the decision.

She continued: "Today's Supreme Court opinion will live in infamy as a step backward for women's rights and human rights."

The Supreme Court's decision to overrule Roe on Friday was part of an opinion in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.

"The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives,"the Friday ruling said.

The ruling now leaves the legality of abortion up to state legislatures.

Read the original article on Business Insider

See the rest here:
Hillary Clinton says Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v Wade will ...

1. Pundits Talking Up a Hillary Clinton Comeback  National Review
2. Hillary Clinton post asserting an abortion shouldn't be harder to obtain than a gun declared dumbest tweet  Fox News
3. Juan Williams: Hillary Clinton can rescue Democrats in the midterms  The Hill
4. Notable & Quotable: Theres a New Kid in Town  The Wall Street Journal
5. 'Hahaha!' Juan Williams truly believes Hillary can save Dems from midterms drubbing  BizPac Review
6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read more:
Pundits Talking Up a Hillary Clinton Comeback - National Review

Public Justice, a non profit that litigates against purveyors of corporate corruption, sexual abusers and harassers, and polluters who ravage the environment,has decided to give its Champion of Justice Award to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

This did not sit well with reporters, academics and activists who have studied Secretary Clintons record.

Clinton has always been a war hawk, said Aisha Jumaan, President of the Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Project. During her tenure at the State Department, arms sales to Saudi Arabia increased by about 100%. These arms have been used against the Yemeni people since the Saudi started their aggression on Yemen in March 2015. In 2011, her aide congratulated her for pushing through arms sales to Saudi Arabia calling it a Christmas gift.

FormerNew York Timesreporter Chris Hedges, author of the best selling bookWar is a Force that Gives Us Meaning(Public Affairs, 2002) and the upcomingThe Greatest Evil is War(Seven Stories Press, 2022) toldCorporate Crime Reporter let the corporate interests Hillary Clinton serves give her encomiums and financial rewards, not those she betrayed.

We know who Hillary Clinton is from the 70,000 hacked emails belonging to the Democratic National Committee and senior Democratic officials released by WikiLeaks, Hedges said. The emails, copied from the accounts of John Podesta, Hillary Clintons campaign chairman, exposed the donation of millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, two of the major funders of Islamic State. They exposed that Hillary Clinton in 2009 ordered US diplomats to spy on U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon and other U.N. representatives from China, France, Russia, and the UK, spying that included obtaining DNA, iris scans, fingerprints, and personal passwords, part of the long pattern of illegal surveillance that included the eavesdropping on UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in the weeks before the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

They exposed that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the CIA orchestrated the June 2009 military coup in Honduras that overthrew the democratically elected president Manuel Zelaya, replacing it with a murderous and corrupt military regime. They exposed the $657,000 that Goldman Sachs paid to Hillary Clinton to give talks.

They exposed Clintons repeated mendacity. She was caught in the emails, for example, telling the financial elites that she wanted open trade and open borders and believed Wall Street executives were best positioned to manage the economy, a statement that contradicted her campaign statements. They exposed the Clinton campaigns efforts to influence the Republican primaries to ensure that Donald Trump was the Republican nominee. They exposed Clintons advanced knowledge of questions in a primary debate. They exposed Clinton as the principal architect of the war in Libya, a war she believed would burnish her credentials as a presidential candidate.

Hedges said that Hillary Clinton is, and has always been, an abject servant of the billionaire class, a politician who cares little about justice for the victims of the wars she supported in the Middle East, the mothers and children who lost welfare benefits under the administration of Bill Clinton, or the workers who lost jobs and saw their communities destroyed under NAFTA and other trade deals.

She is an enemy of economic, social and political justice. She has already been amply rewarded for that. She and Bill Clinton left the White House with over $1 million in debt from legal bills. They are now worth over $120 million.

Public Justice executive director Paul Bland defended the decision to give Clinton the award. Clinton will accept the award via video link at the groups 40th anniversary gala on July 18 in Seattle, Washington.

Our current leadership was entirely supportive of honoring Secretary Clinton, Bland said. She was a very positive force for access to justice, opposing the Class Action Fairness Act, supporting the early versions of the Arbitration Fairness Act, supporting legal services.

As the organization is increasingly focused on advancing diversity, equity and inclusion, she was an important voice for womens rights, and focused a lot of her effort as Secretary of State on aspects of human rights that our country had largely ignored before her on the international stage, Bland said.

But Bruce Fein, a public interest lawyer and author ofAmerican Empire Before the Fall, called on Public Justice to reconsider its decision to give Clinton the award.

Public celebrities or public figures, for good or for ill or a blend, teach people by example, Fein said. Their lives cannot be fragmented on that score. The whole must be examined, and grievous faults outweigh less momentous benevolence or accomplishments.

Bill Cosbys serial predation of women disqualifies him from a race relations or indeed any other public interest award.

The case of President Lyndon Baines Johnson, more to the point, underscores Hillary Clintons unfitness for the Public Justice award. LBJ brought into being the Office of Economic Opportunity, the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, the 1968 Fair Housing Act, Executive Order 11246 for federal government contractors, affirmative action, the appointment of Thurgood Marshall to the United States Supreme Court, and other measures to end and remediate a century of Jim Crow punctuated by thousands of black lynchings.

Yet his unforgivable Vietnam War crimes and dissembling and ethical obtuseness disqualified President Johnson for race-relations, human rights accolades or trophies, Fein said.

Martin Luther King turned against LBJ over the war, and likened his tactics in Vietnam to Nazi war crimes. The NAACP refrained from laureling LBJ with race relations trophies or medals.

Hillary Clinton is an a fortiori case. Her war crimes horrors continue to haunt the world to this very day, including the resistance of Iran and North Korea to nuclear deescalation upon witnessing Clintons gloating over Gaddafis overthrow and assassination after he had abandoned weapons of mass destruction.

Fein said that Public Justices effort to surgically remove Hillary Clintons good works from a torso of malignant injustice and disdain for the law doesnt cut muster.

How can it be denied that bestowing on Hillary Clinton a Public Justice award will be popularly perceived as valorizing and saluting her entire life? Awards do not lend themselves to footnotes or reservations.

Fein said that crowning Hillary Rodman Clinton with the Public Justice Award in 2022 ranks with laureling Henry Kissinger with a Nobel Peace Prize in 1973.

Secretary Clinton engineered the war crime of aggression against Libya in 2011 culminating with her Caesar-like triumphalist, We came, we saw, he [Muammar Gaddafi] died.

Ms. Clintons crime turned Libya into a Hobbesian wilderness earmarked by human trafficking, slavery, and thousands of drowning deaths in the Mediterranean Sea. She urged a reprise of her calamitous crime against Syria. She took Orwellian to a new level in effusing over her Libyan criminal debacle as smart power at its best.

Ms. Clinton exhibited her signature professional and moral obtuseness in declining to suspend the foreign-money-dominated Clinton Foundation during her service as Secretary of State and candidacy for the presidency. Among other things, the Foundation received tens of millions in donations from an all star roster of despotic states seeking to curry favor: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Brunei.

That Ms. Clinton lost the 2016 presidential race to an open, notorious, misogynist, vulgar, unschooled, scofflaw speaks volumes about the publics distrust of her character.

If there are worse choices for the Public Justice award than Hillary Clinton, they do not readily come to mind.

In a March 2016 article titledHillary Clintons Support for the Iraq War Was No Fluke, Code Pinks Medea Benjamin wrote that when Clinton announced her second campaign for the presidency, she declared she was entering the race to be the champion for everyday Americans.

As a lawmaker and diplomat, however, Clinton has long championed military campaigns that have killed scores of everyday people abroad, Benjamin wrote. As commander-in-chief, theres no reason to believe shed be any less a war hawk than she was as the senator who backed George W. Bushs war in Iraq, or the secretary of state who encouraged Barack Obama to escalate the war in Afghanistan.

Clinton may well have been the administrations most vociferous advocate for military action. On at least three crucial issues Afghanistan, Libya, and the bin Laden raid she took a more aggressive line than Defense Secretary Gates, a Bush-appointed Republican.

Read more here:
Champion of Justice Award to Hillary Clinton - CounterPunch