Incorporating technology into friendship in a balanced way

One of the things I think we've lost in friendships is the value of not being preoccupied when spending time with someone: not checking text messages to communicate with someone else while having a conversation, not absent-mindedly attempting to do homework on your laptop while half-watching a movie with friends, not listening to headphones every time you walk to class in the morning. Even now I am typing this post as I am with friends as they have a power hour to classic 90s songs of our childhood because I have much more to do for finals week but want to at least be in the presence of friends before leaving for Paris next semester.

However, earlier tonight, I put down my phone, as did most of my work friends, and we sat on the couch and watched a video of us from our once-a-semester giant night together of dancing, drinks, food, and fun. I thought about how maybe it was lame that we were watching a video of ourselves from just a couple of weeks ago, and did we really need a video in the first place? Is part of the thrill of the once-a-semester just that - that besides pictures, we don't have any way to look back on it other than memories, so we look forward to the next one that much more?

Then I realized that it didn't matter if it was "lame" or not to watch a video of ourselves being goofy because the video itself brought us together. At least 20 people showed up in the middle of finals week to watch the 20-minute video all together as a group and laugh together about it. Some people had three exams the next day, I had a paper due at midnight that wasn't finished, but we all deemed it important to come be together for a short while and watch that video our friend had filmed, edited, and burned onto a disc.

So even though I hate it when my friends are texting other friends while trying to have a legitimate conversation with me at the same time - and I hate it when I do the same thing to my friends - I have to admit that technology and our generation's obsession with it is not all bad, and as much as it can separate people from each other, it can bring people together, develop friendship, and spark joy just as much.

Thanksgiving Resolution

Blog post published on The Marquette Tribune's website 12/1/11

“I have three exams on the same day. I hate my life.”

“Why does my professor do this to me?”

“I need coffee if I’m going to survive this day.”

Sound familiar? These are all sentiments most of us share on a regular basis with our friends, especially around this time of year. I know I do, at least. School is hard, and there never seems to be enough time in the day to get everything done.

But let’s be honest. People our age tend to exaggerate. “This class is going to be the death of me.” Is it? Really? Will that class actually make your heart stop beating?

Ellen Degeneres plays on this idea of exaggeration in one of her comedy routines. “People always say things they don’t mean. You know, like people who say ‘the worst thing.’ ‘Oh, the paper cut, that’s the worst thing.’ Is it? Really? Okay… What about pickle juice in your eye? That’s pretty bad, too, isn’t it?”

On the one hand, exaggeration is fun. It makes us feel a little more important and a little more validated that we are conveying the enormity of what we are feeling to another person, and it’s more or less harmless, anyway.

But is it? Words have meaning. Words carry implications. Words are essentially the only way we have to deliberately express exactly what we think. Of course we do not always use our words in this manner, but words are nevertheless how we assert ourselves in society.

Do we ever think about what we are really saying when we complain in this way about our education? We are blatantly dismissing, if not mocking, those who do not get to go to a school like Marquette and would give anything to do so.

We are ignoring the sufferings and sacrifices of girls like 14-year-old Dao Van Hiep in Vietnam, whose story in this New York Times article made my heart ache. Dao wakes up at 3 a.m. to cook for her brother and sister while going over her books. She bikes to school for 90 minutes and arrives 20 minutes early to ensure she is on time. She begs her father to pay for extra tutoring, but at $40, he just cannot afford it.

This is how strongly other people feel about learning. Others understand education to be the key to achieving a better life. It is often the only thing on which they can place hope. Learning is literally at our fingertips, 24 hours a day, and I have to ask, do we feel that same passion?

With a week and half of classes left before exams, stress is practically palpable on campus. The reason for our stress is completely valid, and we do not have to diminish it. But let’s make an effort to be mindful of the way we talk about our stress. Let’s remember that we are lucky we get to be stressed about finals. We don’t have to be stressed about feeding our siblings at the age of 14. We don’t have to be stressed about not having shoes to protect our feet while walking for miles to get to school. Let’s count our blessings that for most of us, the bulk of our stress right now is simply the consequence of getting a $40,000-a-year, first-rate education. And let’s ease up on complaining about the misery of our lives.

What’s the point of waiting until New Year’s to resolve to change our behavior? This can be the Thanksgiving Resolution of the Marquette community: remembering that we chose to go to college and to make that college Marquette. We are (usually) having the time of our lives here in Thrillwaukee. Finals are a tiny price to pay for our privilege.

Do you think you're ugly?

Blog post published by The Marquette Tribune's website, 11/15/11

My freshman year, one of my professors told our class that we are all ugly, and we all believe we are ugly. Think about it, he said. Why do you put on makeup in the morning? Why do you use deodorant every day? You believe you have to change something about yourself to make yourself better.

This idea has come back to me time and again, especially when I notice ways I have been conditioned to view myself as ugly.

I am generally a proponent of not worrying what others think about you. I could never understand why people in my dorm freshman year took an hour to get dressed to go to class in the morning, straightening their hair, applying a gallon of hairspray and changing jeans – jeans! – multiple times. Why on earth would you sacrifice sleep time like that? No one cares what you wear to class; it’s class. At times, however, I wonder if I actually have the same mentality and am just less blatant about it.

Yesterday, I went to the Rec Center. I knew I wanted to use a treadmill instead of my usual elliptical, and I knew when I’ve used treadmills in the past, my tennis shoe has scraped away the back of my heel, leaving a painful, bloody sore (TMI?). So I put on longer socks to prevent this from happening, the type of sock a mom or dad would wear, but not usually someone of our ankle-sock generation. As soon as I walked outside, I was conscious of the socks. When I got to the gym, I looked around and wondered what people were thinking about them, if people were thinking I was a goody two-shoes or that I was simply clueless fashion-wise. While I didn’t focus on the socks the entire time I was there, I would estimate I probably thought about them at least once every five minutes.

Whaaat? I spent a significant amount of my own me-time worrying that people were judging my socks?? And at the gym, of all places? What does that say about me? What does that say about our society? In thinking about this, I’ve asked myself if the reason I worried so much was because I would judge someone else, however subconsciously, for wearing the same ones. I do not think this is true, but then again, I do not understand the inner workings of my psyche. Maybe it is.

And let’s go back to why I was at the gym in the first place. Yes, I was there primarily because when I do not exercise over the course of several days, I start feeling yucky. But let’s be honest, I was also there because I want to lose weight and make myself more attractive.

I do it, too – the same thing I judged others for doing freshman year. I worry. I feel exposed or think that I look tired when I don’t put on a little makeup in the morning, especially when I go to work. I look in the mirror to envision what other people will see.

To some degree, it is not a bad thing to want to enhance one’s appearance. People have been doing it for thousands of years. On the other hand, if we have reached the point where we do not see our natural selves as beautiful, well, that’s a problem. Our natural selves are all we have, so how could they not be perfect?

I could use lots of song lyrics to cheesily tie into this idea. A couple that spring to mind: the classic “you are beautiful, no matter what they say,” (thanks, Christina) and the more recent “baby, you were born this way,” (so true, Lady Gaga, I mean, Stefani).

On the way back from the gym, though, I heard the following lyrics pounding in my earbuds: “Tell me what do you see when you looking at me – On a mission to be what I’m destined to be” (that’s Maino, featuring T-Pain, for ya). And I’d go with that.

When others look at us, they should not see a face full of makeup or inhale a boatload of Axe. They should see that we’re on a mission to fulfill our destinies, to be our authentic selves. And that, my friends, is beautiful.

Bless you! as a human experience

Blog post published by The Marquette Tribune's website, 11/9/11

A few weeks ago, I sneezed in my philosophy class. Immediately, three or four voices rose up in that anticipated chorus, “Bless you!” I blushed at the fact that my sneeze had caused a disruption of class and replied “thanks” while trying to spin my head around to simultaneously acknowledge all of the voices. The class continued.

Since then, I have been paying attention to the reaction of every class whenever someone sneezes. Generally, at least one person will respond; it almost leaves an awkward absence in the air if it’s not said.

My sixth grade teacher used to stop class when someone sneezed and it went unacknowledged, or when people invoked a blessing on the sneezer and the sneezer did not respond with a thank you. This was just rude, she told us.

Has anyone ever stopped and thought about this? How weird this phenomenon is, that we are almost obligated to respond with “Bless you!” or “God bless you!” when someone gets a fuzzy in her nose and her body involuntarily twitches and makes a noise?

Children somehow grow up knowing this. What is even crazier is that children across a multitude of cultures spanning the globe for hundreds upon hundreds of years have grown up knowing this. Responses vary from culture to culture. Some responses send wishes for the sneezer’s health or fortune, others for safety and still others praise for Allah or God. There are plenty of legends and explanations as to how the phrase came about, but I don’t think it really matters at this point. What I think is fascinating is that we still do it, and we likely will still be doing it for centuries to come.

Pondering all of this made me start to think about and notice other societal idiosyncrasies.

Take people in “the elevator,” for instance. It does not matter which elevator; elevator behavior is the same in all of them. You’re the only person on board…cruising on up…the door opens…someone else steps into the box…instinctively, you step to the other side of the box…someone else steps on…everyone shifts. People just do it.

My personal favorite is the dance that ensues on the street when two people headed in opposite directions toward each other each try to go the same way along the path, and then each try to go the other way. Almost powerlessly, this continues until each party chuckles uncomfortably and finally manages to sidestep the other.

We have these responses as human beings. Whether by natural instinct or instinct formed through social conditioning, every one of us seems to share these reactions. And that is simply fascinating.

Last year, I took a seminar about labyrinths. What was most intriguing to me about labyrinths is that almost every human culture invented some form of the labyrinth at around the same time, despite the fact that there was no means of communication or even a knowledge that there were other cultures at that time. When I walk the path of a labyrinth, I participate in an intrinsically human experience.

In my ethics class, we are trying to determine what it is that connects us as humans. Some philosophers say human nature, some say the experience of pleasure, some say rationality. We can probably all agree with the existentialists that we are all at least connected by our common human condition of existence.

I have gotten rather philosophical here, and who knows if anyone is still reading? There really is not much more of a point I am trying to make other than the fact that this question of human connectivity is ever before us, evident through our collective and instinctual responses, and thinking about it fills me with wonder. Therefore, I think you should try it, too, if you have not already.

One myth regarding how the phrase “Bless you” came into being is that it was believed that the heart stopped beating when a person sneezed, and this response was meant to encourage the sneezer’s heart to continue beating.

I like to look at “Bless you” like this – as an affirmation of the human person who sneezed, and as a recognition that those around this person are truly happy he or she is alive.

November - Time for a freshly brewed cup of rejuvenation

Blog post published on the Marquette Tribune website, 11/1/11

Hello, Marquette. Welcome to November. Congratulations on making it past the mid-point of the semester. I imagine I speak for most of the student body when I say that by now, we all are probably entrenched in our activities, overwhelmed by our studies and at least a little sick of eating dorm food or attempting to cook for ourselves.

It is possible we have experienced frustrations with our roommates and are dreading the cold of winter setting in any day now. After returning from a break which seemed to end before it started, we may be starting to feel a little less enthusiastic about Marquette than we did in August.

Or maybe not.

But in my experience as a wise, old junior, I can imagine that in general, we all could use a little affirmation and rejuvenation right about now.

This weekend, I attended the 25th Marquette Experience retreat. This retreat in particular is about embracing the Marquette community around us and realizing all that it has to offer. It encouraged us participants to relax a little bit and allow the people around us to build us up.

One of the speakers on this retreat talked about the Jesuit ideal of “cura personalis,” or care for the whole person. She spoke of a time last week when she was faced with the hardest exam of her life, and she knew she needed to calm her nerves before she could take it. She texted two different people, asking one for a prayer and one for a goofy piece of encouragement. They responded to the call, and she walked into the exam elevated and ready to go.

How simply brilliant.

This person had recognized what she needed at that moment to tackle something difficult, and she used the unique gifts of her friends to help her through it. She let them exercise their roles of “friend,” and in doing so, she exhibited care for not only her whole person, but for each of them as well.

It is so easy in the hustle and bustle of our day-to-day activities to forget that our friends, our professors, our co-workers, our family, our neighbors and our classmates possess special gifts that they are willing to share if only they are called to share them. Think about it: when someone tells you they need a hug, aren’t you delighted to provide one?

As refreshing as retreat was this weekend, it helped me figure out that I do not even need to leave this 90-acre stretch of downtown Milwaukee to get rejuvenated. I need only seek a new experience like taking a different route to class or identifying a beautiful trait of a friend.

And even if you feel as though you lack these people, this sense of community at Marquette (freshmen, I’ve been there, I understand), you are never actually alone.

One of the hilariously beautiful things about Americans in general and Midwesterners in particular is their love of all things optimistic. Why else would silly YouTube videos such as “Jessica’s Daily Affirmation” and “Thumbs Up for Rock and Roll” have a combined viewer count of over 12 million? (If you haven’t seen these, get to the nearest computer and watch them now.)

My point is, most people on this campus cherish human connection and enjoy supporting the people around them, even strangers.

Challenge yourself to smile at a random person on the way to class, or start a conversation with the kid waiting in line in front of you at Marquette Place. Maybe it’ll be awkward, but maybe it won’t be. If you see someone wearing a Cardinals hat, talk about how happy you are that they won the World Series (shameless St. Louis plug, I can’t help myself).

One of my favorite lines of poetry is by David Whyte in a poem called “Everything is Waiting for You.” It reads, “The kettle is singing even as it pours you a drink.” The world is alive around us, and it is ours to embrace.

Notice it. Smile at it. Love it.

And let yourself be rejuvenated.

Virginia Tech - the student journalists' response

One thing I read about in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shooting was the response of the university newspaper's editor-in-chief and the sports editor. Upon receiving the initial alert, they took off toward the scene to learn more.

As the Collegiate Times website received so much traffic it crashed, they turned to Twitter after relocating to a secure location. They tweeted updates with information every few minutes, gathering news from the police scanner, from what they could see from their dorm windows, and from other students and reporters on campus, according to the New York Times blog post about the coverage.

Within a few hours, the newspaper's Twitter account went from having 2,000 followers to 20,000, and major news outlets such as NPR, ABC, the NYTimes, The Huffington Post, and other major outlets directed readers to the Twitter account for up-to-date info. The reporters' coverage has been lauded as fantastic journalism and they have received praise for their resourceful use of Twitter.

This incident reminded me of the power of platforms such as Twitter and well as the power that we possess, that we can take into our own hands in our recognition that our job is to be a writer and write no matter the circumstance.

The incident also made me ask a few questions -

Would the Marquette turn to The Marquette Tribune as fast as the VA Tech community turned to The Collegiate Times?

Would our reporters be as quick and as resourceful? as courageous? Would I?

It is important as student journalists to hypothetically put ourselves in these situations when they come up. If the answer to the above question is not "yes," we should be asking "why not?" and "how could I change and develop my talents and my courage so that the answer is 'yes?'"

New York Times blogger - lessons to learn

I discovered this Mashable link on Twitter a couple of weeks ago and thought it was extremely relevant to this class and this blog. New York Times blogger Brian Stelter talked about social media and multi media in today's journalism.

Stelter talked about how in today's journalism, even though he would define the New York Times as the "embodiment of old media," you don't really find the "old print stodgy representative of the group" like you might have even three years ago. The aversion to technology is gone, and everyone has embraced the idea that digital media is indeed the future of news.

He did draw the conclusion, however, that after years of preaching about the importance of Twitter, he has realized that Twitter might not be for everyone. Some journalists' talents may be better served through Tubmlr, or Facebook, or simply through email, and there is not a "one size fits all" approach; rather, we as journalists have to figure out what we're best at and expand on it. He did say that everyone will need to be a video reporter, while not necessarily a television reporter.

He advises never hesitating to pitch a story or start a random project if you have a good feeling about it and a unique perspective to bring. He said a Tumbr project you start for a new topic sets you apart and creates a unique online identity for you. On that note, he said we should embrace sharing our personal lives with our readers, not just hard news, because we will be more likely to connect with readers by doing so.

The most important lesson Stelter had to share - and we can learn from - is the lesson that journalists benefit when they listen to their readers, and they benefit even more when they respond to their readers.

He said he wants to believe, although he's never seen it proven in a study, that when he replies to readers on Twitter, they will be a little more likely to subscribe to the New York Times and maintain a loyal readership. Not only does responding make your work better, it makes business better.

I think this is so interesting when thinking about what it means. While in the past, people may not have wanted to know journalists personally or hear about their personal lives for fear of losing a sense of objectivity, now they do, because it creates a feeling of transparency and connectivity. Perhaps this is bad because it heightens readers senses that they get to decide what news is important, but I think it is largely good, because journalists will be able to show them why news that seemingly doesn't affect them is actually relevant.

Advertising with online journalism

One thing I've been meaning to write about for some time now is about the ethics of certain types of advertising used on news websites.

A few weeks ago, I came across the following article, published by the Seattle Times's website. The article is about a famine in Somalia that is taking the lives of tens of thousands, while there is a "blockade of aid" by an Islamist militant group, preventing even more people from receiving food and attention.

The article continues with devastating statistics and a comparison to another, similar disaster in Somalia in the early 1990s. Meanwhile, after scrolling less than halfway down the page, I noticed a Keds ad: brightly colored, cute tennis shoes popping up at me as I read about Somalia's famine. Out of pure distraction and instinct, I moved my mouse to click on the advertisement and be taken to the Keds' website before realizing the implications of what I had just done.

I had decided that I would rather devote thirty seconds of my attention to a tennis shoe company than finish reading about famine claiming the lives of hundreds of thousands of human beings.

Something seemed disturbingly wrong about that. Moreover, something seemed disturbingly wrong about the fact that this advertisement ran in the same space as the famine article in the first place. It is scary to think that the media think we readers are that desensitized to issues that we will not care. It is even scarier to think that for a second there, the media was right.

I'd like to investigate further into the standards of certain web new sites regarding advertisements so embarrassingly juxtaposed like this one. With more and more news organizations relying on web advertising, though, I don't know if it always will be financially feasible to turn down such advertisements. It may be one of those things that we just have to accept within the dawn of the digital journalism age.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2016221871_somalia16.html

Evolving journalism

In my journalism classes and throughout training week for the Marquette Tribune, I have heard again and again that this is such an exciting time to be in journalism because we are able to contribute to how journalism will evolve out of the print stage and into the digital age (rhyme intended).

Today I noticed an interesting example off such an evolvement on CNN.

Viewers were presented with teasers for three entertainment stories CNN reporters had covered, and they could text a number to vote for which one of these three they wanted to see aired later that day.

This seems like an innovative way to keep viewers watching CNN and to spark interest, but it also causes me some disappointment in CNN's journalistic integrity, not so much for entertainment stories, but for the future of its news stories.

Are the major news networks going to let viewers determine what news is important and what news is not? One of the amazing things about these networks - and their distinction from citizen journalists - is that they have the resources to report on stories the public cannot access. As such, the public may not know that they should find a news event important and may vote for a more familiar, engaging, "light" topic if presented with such a choice.

This speaks to the concern that with the new social media as the major platform by which people learn news, people will tailor the news they read and hear to their own pre-formed beliefs - what they want to hear, not necessarily what they need to hear.

Food for thought.

Cell phones: why are we so obsessed?

This week, the production of Little Shop of Horrors opened at the Helfaer Theatre.

Today, while listening to the usual pre-show announcements from backstage, I thought about the extensive pleas for the audience members to not only turn off their cell phones for the duration of the performance, but to refrain from texting so as not to disrupt fellow viewers. Unfortunately, I have seen what happens if such an announcement is not made: people in the audience think they are being discreet, but the bluish glow can be seen by people all around them, including the actors onstage.

I started thinking about how these incredibly challenging and imposing limitations on people would undoubtedly result in a widespread emergence of the cell phone as soon as the house lights go up for intermission. As I am backstage during intermission, there is no way for me to prove it, but having partaken in such a collective act myself many a time at other events, and seeing the scattered glowing blue when the show begins to resume, I find this to be a logical and accurate assumption.

This led me to think about why we are all so obsessed with cell phones. Just a few years ago, we would not have had to make such a lengthy request to audiences asking them for basic etiquette. I'm definitely not trying to be preachy on this one; I'm as guilty of it as everyone else. As much as I judge us for walking around with our hands and eyes glued to our keyboards, I do it, too. When I'm waiting in line for food, I will pull out my smart phone to scan texts, check Facebook, and - my redeeming usage - read the New York Times. I've been annoyed with people walking slowly on the sidewalk and blocking my path due to their attempts to textandwalk, but I'm sure others have been annoyed with me for the same thing.

So what's the deal?

And let's be honest; we cannot continue to issue the refrain of "what is this generation coming to?" because it's not just young people anymore; it's everyone.

When a cell phone goes off in an event like a theatre performance, it more often than not belongs to someone older than 40 who forgot to turn off her or his phone. This semester, I have heard professors' phones sound at least three times and have not heard students' once. Adults are becoming just as quick to whip out their gadgets at intermission.

My question is - why???

The only philosophical answer I could conjure is that we all want to feel important. We all want to feel loved. When someone sends us a text message, that means he or she was thinking of us. We have to respond in a timely matter so as to 1. not inconvenience the other person and have he or she think less of us, and 2. reassure ourselves that our response does indeed matter. People take us seriously.

But most texts do not merit an immediate response, even if we think they do. And we don't ever ask ourselves, if we don't text back right now, what's the worst that can happen? We don't recognize a fundamental value in not communicating for a time, or in actually communicating with the people sitting right next to us instead.

So my challenge to us all is to refrain from reaching for that cell phone this intermission - at least for 30 seconds.

Shoes stuck in tree

Journalism - doomed to fail philosophically?

A few weeks ago, I had a conversation with a former journalist about the philosophy of journalism. This man, Eric, thinks that journalism is doomed to fail.

People don’t care about the news unless it directly affects them, he said. As the people who can afford to purchase newspapers or online subscriptions to news websites are more or less unaffected by the daily events of the world, journalism as a means to make a living by informing the people has become less important.

This is ironic because with globalization, it has become more and more evident how our world is co-dependent. Even if a war in another country does not directly harm American citizens, it can affect our gas prices or our likelihood of experiencing another terrorist attack. Even if we do not suffer from a disease spreading across Africa, global health will be decreasing, our immune systems will be more at risk, our food may become more expensive or may become less healthy.

One of the goals of journalism, if it is to succeed philosophically in serving the public with news, is to convey how everything is actually affected by everything else. We must be collaborative and creative in figuring out how to do that, but with video and audio news so much more easily accessible than in previous decades, we have the means at our fingertips.

Realtime Japan

The increasing accessibility and immediacy of the Internet makes it easier to remember that Japan is struggling right now.

It is important to recall throughout the day that the events unfolding in Japan and throughout the world are not happening at night while we are asleep for us to read in the news in the morning. The events are happening while we are walking through our own days, going to classes, work, meetings and scrolling through pictures on Facebook.

Therefore, in this post I will discuss some of the latest developments coming out of Japan.

According to Reuters.com, Japanese engineers are currently struggling to get control over the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant 150 miles north of capital Tokyo. The plant was damaged by the earthquake and tsunami. It poses a serious threat to those in the area.

Only two of the six reactors at the plant are considered stable.

“Their dilemma is that they must keep pumping water to prevent overheating and meltdowns, but that creates more contaminated water that must be pumped out and kept somewhere when they are running out of storage space,” Mayumi Negishi writes in the article.

One of the reactors has emitted radiation at over 1,000 millisieverts an hour, which means that “a worker who entered the room would top his annual radiation exposure quota in just 15 minutes.”

No one knows how long it will take to get control of the plant. The main risk posed is that leaking water could seep into the soil and the ocean, contaminating the crops and the water.

The Washington Post reported this morning that Tokyo Electric Power Co. has begun dumping water tainted with “low levels of radioactivity” into the Pacific Ocean. The company said it could release up to 11,500 tons of this water into the sea.

The Reuters article estimates that the site will likely become “no man’s land.” It could become possible to live and work a few kilometers away, but recycling and transporting the materials are both more or less unfeasible. Experts say that the clean-up of this mess will take decades.

Meanwhile, in a joint, three-day search between Friday morning and Sunday afternoon, 69 more bodies were found, according to CNN. The search was conducted by Japanese and U.S. militaries at a strategic time when the tides would be low and allow for better access to tidal flats.

The current overall confirmed death toll now stands at 12,087 people, with 15,552 missing or unaccounted for and 2,876 injured.

Buses have begun evacuating 1,120 people from shelters in the town of Minamisanriku. The community’s major encouraged residents to go to other cities while temporary housing is being built.

“Over 300 more people have applied for evacuation to other cities and towns, but the Miyagi prefecture government did not have any other evacuations planned Sunday,” Negishi writes.

It is clear that Japan cannot rely on the current trendiness of giving to pick itself back up as people and as a country. It has decades upon decades of work ahead.

Japan and the creativity of the human spirit

In the last post, I voiced my concern over the United States’s double standard in determining which people need our attention and aid and which do not.

However, the disaster in Japan has also manifested the creative spirit of humanity. It has been incredibly heartening to see how technology such as cell phones, Facebook and Twitter have been able to adapt effectively to reach millions and raise millions in a very short period of time.

While I find the worship of celebrities as annoying as the next person, I cannot deny that their influence in a crisis like this is very welcome. It is sad that Americans have to be told by their favorite pop singers to contribute to relief efforts after a natural disaster, but when it becomes trendy to donate, the good that results is indisputably worth it.

According to Teen Vogue as of April 1, Lady Gaga’s bracelets created to raise money and awareness for Japan have contributed over $1.5 million to the earthquake and tsunami relief. Within just 48 hours of selling the bracelets, she had raised a quarter of a million.

Other musicians and celebrities are also using their influence to encourage action. Bands Blink-182 and Linkin Park have designed t-shirts in which 100% of the proceeds will go to Japan. EMI Music, Sony Music, Universal, and Warner Music lent some of their artists’ hit songs to a “Songs for Japan” relief album. According to Reuters.com, the album has “rocketed to the top iTunes charts in 18 nations” and is slated to arrive in stores on April 4.

For a more comprehensive list of all products being sold to benefit Japan, click here.

Charlie Seen pledged to donate $1 from every ticket sold for his upcoming stand-up tour to the Red Cross. Other celebrities such as Conan O’Brien, Katy Perry, Diddy and Chris Brown have used their Twitter influence to promote their fans to donate.

Phone companies such as Verizon and Sprint have allowed their users to send free texts and make free calls to Japan until April 10. Google’s Person Finder allows users to view aerial and satellite images to locate loved ones displaced by the disaster.

Sites such as LivingSocial, which sells discounts to local areas of interest, offered their customers the chance to have their $5 donations to the Red Crossed matched.

Smaller efforts are being undertaken by those in Japan, such as this man Jason Kelly, who is encouraging people to send new socks along with a note of support in plastic bags. “People need lots of them in disastrous times away from home,” his blog says.

These are just a few examples of the beautiful and transcendent ways humans can come together for the betterment of others. While we cannot reply on any one of these methods alone to restore Japan, we can be assured that they are helping. Trendiness can be substantial and meaningful, too.

If you have not yet, choose one of these opportunities and donate. I hear everyone’s doing it.

U.S. response to Japan, Pakistan

The United States dispatched immediate aid to Japan in response to the massive earthquake and subsequent tsunami that hit the northeastern coast on Friday, March 11 at 2:46 p.m. local time. The earthquake was initially declared to have an 8.9 magnitude. Three days later, the U.S. Geological Survey updated the magnitude to 9.0, and Japanese seismologists did the same thing independently.

This ranked the earthquake as the fourth largest in the world since 1900 and the largest in Japan in the past 130 years when modern instrumental recordings have been in use.

Hundreds of people were estimated dead immediately, and rescue efforts commenced while Japan continued to experienced aftershocks of the quake.

By March 12, several U.S. Marines aircraft groups boarded cargo to be taken to the mainland, and pilots flew helicopters to Naval Air FAcility Atsugi to provide help in the surrounding areas.

On March 13, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney released a statement regarding the United Sates’s response to the crisis in Japan. In this address, he said that “we have offered our Japanese friends whatever assistance is needed as America will stand with Japan as they recover and rebuild.”

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) began “coordinating U.S. government efforts in support of the Japanese government’s response.” The U.S. Ambassador declared the aftermath of the quake an emergency, which opened up the funding of $100K from USAID’s Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance.

Response teams partly comprising of experts on energy and health were established immediately, as were rescue missions.

The end of the statement read, “From the moment this earthquake struck our State Department and Embassy and Consulates in Japan have been working around the clock to assist and inform U.S. citizens.”

By March 25, the Marine Expeditionary Force and the Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 265 had flown thousands of supplies into Japan, including 129,000 pounds of water, 4,200 pounds of food, 94,230 pounds of cargo.

Various Marine groups have been coordinating other missions as well, including the facilitation of distributing supplies. “Tomodachi, which means ‘friends’ in Japanese, was the name selected by Japan for this operation.”

According to Reuters.com , as of April 2, a total of 11,938 people have been confirmed as dead by Japan’s National Police Agency. An additional 15,478 people are reported missing.

Residents who live in areas around nuclear power plants have largely either left or been evacuated. The government estimates damages to be around $190 billion to $298 billion, making it one of the world’s most expensive disasters. 134 countries and 39 international organizations have offered assistance.

While this level of assistance from the United States and so many other countries is incredible and necessary, I cannot help but wonder where the U.S. was when Pakistan was blighted by massive flooding in July of 2010.

In no way am I trying to diminish the amount of death and destruction in Japan; on the contrary, I believe the U.S. has a responsibility to respond in the way it has. However, people are people are people, regardless of where they are when they are struck with a natural disaster.

OXFAM declared the Pakistani floods as the “worst humanitarian crisis that the UN has recognized.” The damage was greater than both the Haiti and Kashmir crises combined.

The flooding left over a fifth of the entire country underwater. Over 1,600 people were killed immediately. 20 million people were displaced.

The UN estimated that around 3.5 million children were at risk of contracting water-borne diseases, and as many as six million people faced the risk of contracting diarrhea, dysentery, etc. 70 percent of the roads and bridges in the affected areas were washing out.

The U.S. has undergone massive fundraising campaigns on a nation-wide level to raise money for the Japanese victims. Yet few people in the U.S. even remember that there was flooding in Pakistan last summer.

The question facing us as Americans is not whether these two disasters are comparable. The question is why our response was not comparable.

Do we help Japan because they like us more than Pakistan? because Japan is wealthier than Pakistan and therefore more worthy of saving? Where were our "friendship" operations there?

It is perhaps tempting to be hesitant in aiding a country like Pakistan with the excuse of not knowing where that money is going, and “it could just end up in the hands of future terrorists.”

To this argument, I would reply that it is common knowledge that organizations like the Red Cross and the UN are not going to be funding terrorism but serving people. Furthermore, all moral obligations to help aside, does the world really think that a flood-ravished country which receives a fraction of the help it needs will produce people who will love the West?

Political tension should never blind us from seeing the suffering of human beings. We as Americans claim all people are created equal. We need to start acting like we believe it.