Final Project and Presentation (Inspired Post 8)

When we originally picked topics for this project, I was pretty much open to any idea that wasn't super technical or very much based in science. I had no idea the depth of understanding that would be required, nor the amount of time that I would eventually put into the project. Our group put in more time on this single project than I have ever put in to a project in my life. For four weeks, every Sunday night, we met for two to three hours to work on the initial part of the project. Yet it wasn't until we were preparing for the presentation that we were actually able to put all of our ideas together and really gain an in-depth understanding of the issue at hand.

Today, we met at 4:00pm and it is 10:25pm and we are still going.

This is about how I feel after concentrating intently for over 6 hours....

I have never experienced such dedication to a project in my entire schooling career. Perhaps it is because it is an honors class, but I have drawn a separate conclusion. I believe that the intensity of having to give the presentation in front of a panel of judges initially led us to become completely invested in actually understanding as many facets of the problem as possible. This is rare--usually students (myself included) work to complete projects as fast as possible while covering their bases in the most efficient manner possible. This project was different in that we actually cared about understanding the ins and outs of the entire problem and wanted to become experts on it.

Coming into the project, the amount of knowledge I had on the Mexican drug cartels was nothing more than they were bad, dangerous and were making it so people thought twice about traveling to Mexico. I had no idea about the root of this issue, the programs we currently had in place, or how to best go about solving the problem. I didn't even consider Latin America, Europe or North Africa having an effect on the problem that I had previously associated as only being between the United States and Mexico. I now feel that I can confidently explain the problem to anyone and be able to hold up my end of a conversation about it. That is what this class is about--understanding the importance of being active in current events. Back in August, I said that I was hoping to get back into current events (I was heavily involved in Speech and Debate in high school) after feeling trapped in the bubble that Penn State has put me in. I can honestly say that this class has helped me pop that bubble and helped me become a more informed, educated citizen.

Aging Discussion (Bonus Blog)

Tonight, I went to a discussion on aging through the Distinguished Honors Faculty discussions through the Schreyer Honors College. I figured this would be particularly interesting after learning about the demographic issues that aging causes during our visit to CSIS. This discussion was from a Health Policy Administration professor who had a very differing perspective than the one we heard at CSIS simply because it was based more in the healthcare policies rather than general public policy.

It was incredible to learn how much we have spent on healthcare in the past year: 2.3 trillion dollars. This breaks down to 7,500 dollars per capita. The next highest per capita country is Switzerland, but they merely spend around 3,000 dollars for each citizen. Perhaps it was ignorant, but I had always assumed that the U.S. spent less on healthcare than other countries, considering all the debate it. One of the most interesting things about this is that the United States is one of the most unhealthy developed countries even though we spend so much. We have less doctors, lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality. If you want to read more about this, you can read this article because it touches on a lot of what we discussed tonight.

We also discussed how women use more healthcare than men. They live longer but eventually are sicker. It was fascinating that the professor made it seem so obvious when he drew a simple parallel when explaining why this occurs. He talked about males inability to ask for directions when they get lost driving; men also do not go to the doctor when they have a health problem. This inevitably leads to their death. Yet the single strongest predictor of male life expectancy is whether or not they are married. That nagging wife that makes her husband ask for directions or go to the doctor inevitably makes him live longer. Who woulda thunk? It was such a simple explanation for this difference, but in reality it made a lot of sense. I would like to have seen some statistical backup to such a claim, but I certainly wouldn't doubt it.

At the end of the talk, we talked about caregiving which is a pretty controversial issue. We watched a clip about elderly persons who could not take care of themselves whom needed 24/7 care. We discussed how this is a problem that we didn't have to face until recently because just 100 years ago, the most common reasons for death were things that killed us quickly--now we die slow deaths like cancer and it is super expensive to cover such caregiving.

The video showed people whos quality of life was so diminished that some of the people in the room thought they would rather be dead. Some said of course they would rather be spoon-fed and on bed rest for months on end because at least they would be alive. In all reality, I find it extremely difficult to have a true opinion on this matter because I haven't yet had to deal with the effects of long-term caregiving for a loved one, although I do expect that at some point in my lifetime, that will unfortunately occur many times.

This was a really interesting discussion and I hope to be able to attend the future talks next Spring that revolve around similar topics. I think that this is something we need to be talking about more because it is such a huge issue and such a difficult thing for people to really feel comfortable discussing.

UC Davis Pepper Spray (Inspired Post 7)

My Facebook was flooded with "shame on you"s and tons of posts about the UC Davis pepper spray incident. I had yet to see the actual video, but I had heard about it from lots of other people and had painted a picture of it in my head. And then this was posted to my Facebook newsfeed...

If you have time to watch it, it is certainly worth your time. This video gives a timeline of events through a video stream that shows the events of the Occupy Davis event from start to finish. It shows how the students not only were blocking the police from getting through but also threatening them as well. The students literally make a circle around the cops and tell them that they will only let them leave once they release the students who were previously arrested. It also captures the police explicitly asking the students ofer and over to move and telling them of the consequences if they don't. The students sort of laugh it off and don't take the police seriously. When the other cops run up and the students still won't move, they resort to pepper spray.

From this point of view, the police did everything in their power to avoid using painful tactics. They were more or less defenseless and had no other option.

This article explains the events by saying nothing about the events that occured beforehand but making it seem as if the police simply randomly started spraying a whole bunch of students with pepper spray. One girl even says, "I think UCD just got radicalized," Carla told the World Socialist Web Site. "We're going to meet back here next week... I feel like we have to understand that this system is not set up to protect us—we have a human response to say, 'that's completely unjust'."

When the media acts the way they do, it is so hard to ever find the truth within a story. Every story has at least two sides, and the media jumps right on the most flashy, interesting, emotional side they can grasp. I simply hope that the students at UC Davis are able to watch the video above, see the events unfold, and realize that the pepper spray usage may not hae been as "completely unjust" as they originally claimed. Lots of my friends go to UC Davis, so it will be interesting over Christmas break to ask them if they watched it. (Finally, something to talk about other than Sandusky and Joe Paterno!)

Cyber Security Simulation (Inspired Post 6)

After listening to Jim Lewis speak about Cyber Security on the first day of our trip to CSIS, I felt as if I had learned a lot about the topic, but still felt overwhelmed by the idea of doing a Cyber Security Simulation the following day. During lunch on Thursday, I reviewed the notes that I had taken during his presentation in preparation for the simulation. When the simulation finally began, it was awkward because we sat there and attempted to come up with three pillars for cyber security but didn't want to go too in depth knowing that any minute something new would be thrown our way.

When we initially found out the Chicago's power had gone down and it was an expected cyber attack, the first thing our group did was rule out pointing fingers.

We didn't want to blame anyone for this attack until we had hard, legitimate evidence to support such an accusation. This was a very interesting situation to be put in. We needed to find out who did it (Madame President was waiting) but we had no real evidence, let alone any real leads. We didn't know who we could trust so collaborating with other allies seemed like a poor choice. We also didn't even know if the attack had come internally, so we didn't even know if we could trust our own people.



Once China was thrown into the mix, the situation became much more complicated. We had to watch our every move to make sure we didn't piss of China, but we also had to look over our shoulder to make sure China wasn't planning another attack.

For me, this simulation was an extremely good look at the problems that government officials face. Although these may not be entirely indicative of every day problems, it must be true that they are often expected to find solutions when they don't really know where to look. It is also true that we never know who are our allies and who is working against us (be it a whole country or simply an individual within that country) so it is quite a difficult predicament. I think the intensity of this simulation, combined with the effort that the students put in to come up with well thought out plans, made for a really successful and meaningful experience. I think that this a course that all students who aim to be policymakers ought to take. Because of the Honors College, I have been afforded the opportunity to take classes that were so unique and such incredible experiences. I am extremely grateful to have had the chance to go to CSIS and I plan to find as many other Honors courses like this one to take before I graduate. And of course, getting a $15 Starbucks gift card for winning the simulation was a pretty big perk, too! :)

CSIS Experience (Required Post #12)

 
After spending a few days inside the Center for Strategic and International Studies, I feel as if I finally have a clear understanding of what a think tank is and what they really do. It is hard to only read about something as complex as a think tank...the experience of listening to speakers, sitting in on an event and doing a simulation we're so much more effective than reading in a book. 

One of the things that impressed me most about CSIS was how up to date all of their material is. In the Seven Revolutions presentation, it seemed as if Scott had updated his information the day before he gave the presentation. I saw the same trend throughout the other presentations. I think staying up-to-date is essential for a think tank because of how quickly the facts and information changes. Having the most recent data is likely part of what gives them legitimacy with policymakers.

I really appreciated all of the speakers' willingness to answer the questions we had to the best of their ability. They each arrived very prepared to speak with us and make sure that we got the most out of the short time we had together. I was even a little surprised that some of them (Arnaud, Jim Lewis) were able to spend a full hour with us, when I am sure they had a million other things they could have been doing. And I'm sure they do that kind of thing a lot as it sounded like many student groups come through CSIS.

I also found it interesting that a good handful of the speakers we listened to made sure to explain that CSIS was a nonpartisan or bipartisan (they all said both) company. This blog talks about why our government should look to nonpartisan committees rather than bipartisan ones. I completely agree with what he has to say. I also think that CSIS ought to aim to be nonpartisan rather than bipartisan. America's political parties are so extreme and so limiting, that if policy was created without taking them into consideration, it would likely be better legislation. But then again, the likelihood of it getting passed would probably be less.

 One of the things that I least liked about CSIS was what I learned in the student panel: there is essentially no room for advancement. Students come in, do the (pardon my french) bitch work for a few years and then move on to bigger and better opportunities. It is as if CSIS is only a spring board for these young professionals. With that in mind, where is the incentive to teach the younger people or on the other hand for the younger people to try their absolute best. It just seems kind of weird to take a job and spend at least two years of your life just looking for the next opportunity. But I guess that is sort of how Washington is...

I found myself being very glad that I had decided not to major in Political Science, that I had decided not to do to Washington program (in which PSU students spend a semester in DC being taught by PSU professors while completing an internship). The environment and the culture seems to rushed and too intense for me. But then again, I am from California. I was inspired, though, to continue to pursue policy making outside of the capital. In my major, Education and Public Policy, there are opportunities for policy making all over the nation (and truly all over the world).

Overall, I had a great experience at CSIS. I learned a great deal, not only about the topics we discussed but also about the organization and Washington, DC as a whole.

Cybersecurity (Required Post #11)

This week in class we discussed a lot about cyber security. While this is a topic I am facing everyday when I log onto my computer, check my Facebook, sign into Gmail, or do a search on Google-- I had rarely considered the issue and knew little about its importance. My generation is so used to using the internet for just about every facet of our lives that we don't think about the implications it could have on our rights to privacy. After reading "The Significance of the Frontier: Why Privacy and Cybersecurity Clash" by James Lewis, I felt as if I got a much better understanding of the issue at hand. Cybersecurity is an extremely important, controversial and prevalent issue in today's world. The topics brought up in this article are essential for us to understand as we move forward. The article in its entirety can be found here.

Lewis states that "we are moving ineluctably into an era of decreased privacy." He believes that as we move into the 21st century and begin utilizing all the technology that surrounds us, it is inevitable that we will experience less and less privacy. Yet Lewis does not believe that less privacy necessarily means less civil liberties. While I was initially skeptical by this claim, his statement, "If free speech and freedom of assembly are protected, less privacy will not lead to decreased political freedom and civil liberties in democratic states" definitely got me thinking. After reading why he feels this way, I tend to agree with Lewis. If we are legally allowed to speak, assemble and protest freely, then our privacy may not seem as essential, as long as these rights are forever protected.

Lewis then discusses the issue of anonymity. I am in the position of which I believe that the ability to remain anonymous on the internet is essential. It is essential for the flow of information, as people will be less apt to share information if they feel as if they are being watched or tracked and if they feel as if the information can be directly linked to them. While this picture is somewhat extreme...

it is more or less our expectation when using the internet. The internet has developed in a way that remaining anonymous has been a part of its core--it is how we began using the internet and how we aim to continue. Some have argued the need for a personalized avatar of sorts in which an individual's actions on the internet could all be traced back to that being. I think this goes against everything that the internet stands for and everything it was intended for.

One quote about anonymity that really spoke to me in light of recent events was: "Anonymity can allow the expression of opinions without fear of retaliation, such as an employee revealing misdeeds by an employer." I find this to be a really good example of why anonymity is essential not only on the internet but also in real life in the real world.


In general, I think cybersecurity is an issue that requires our utmost concern because remaining anonymous on the internet while keeping our privacy AND our civil liberties is absolutely essential.

TEDxPSU (Bonus Blog)

This morning I attended session one of TEDxPSU. My best guess is that about 800 participants gathered in Alumni Hall to hear speakers on a variety of different topics discussing "ideas worth spreading".

The introduction was a video in which the founders of TED explained that they had very little to do with the day we were about to experience, but rather the local community defined our experience. That's what is so interesting about TED. It provides a few simple tools for localities to use to put together a TEDx event, and then lets them run with their ideas.

Ideas are spread at these individual events around the globe and then broadcasted online for all to see. A specific number of minutes at each TED event is required to be dedicated to sharing the ideas of past events. For example, this video was shared at TEDxPSU.

This particular video is from Edinburgh, Scotland but was seen not only at Penn State today, but also has over 450,000 views on YouTube. It is also available with subtitles in 43 different languages. TED is changing the way we share and spread information. It is allowing people from all over the world to have their voices be heard in a constructive, straight-forward manner. TED is inspiring us to think bigger than ourselves and learn from the world around us. TED is globalization and it is awesome!


The topics of this mornings talks ranged from understanding that the deaf are bilingual to giving plants mobility to global warming. Yet what I realized from attending today's event was that TED is so much bigger than the speeches given at each single event or the videos that come from those events. It is about the thousands upon thousands of stories and ideas that are shared with anyone who is willing listen. It doesn't matter where you grew up or where you come from, not only can you hear all the amazing ideas worth spreading, but if you have your own idea, you can spread it too.


If you log onto ted.com, the front page hosts an array of different videos that all have different topics. When you put your cursor over each different video, there is not only a description, but also a few labels that each video has been given. For example, a video could be frequently deemed informative, inspiring, unconvincing, persuasive, fascinating, beautiful or funny. But the only way to really tell, is to watch it yourself.


One of the most impressive parts about today's event was the use of technology. I often find PowerPoints to be fairly distracting and to take away from a presentation like this. Yet the PowerPoints today were crafted so carefully and so strategically, they did nothing more than supplement the material. Most of the slides were extremely simple, with about 5 words tops. There were pictures that said more words than the speaker could in their entire presentation. They were clean, well-prepared, and added to the presentation. That is how PowerPoints ought to always be used.


Overall, I was extremely impressed by the work that the TEDxPSU team did to bring this event together. Not only was the event live in Alumni Hall, there were also viewing rooms around the HUB and a live stream online here. Around 2pm when I logged on, there were 50 people currently watching the stream and there had been over 700 views throughout the day. I can't wait until TED becomes as popular as it deserves to be. Most people have seen a TED talk or two, but I think the possibilities are endless for the utilization of the information they provide. I have already had a professor use a TED talk in class and I hope that as I move forward in my education, I will only see more of these ideas spread through the classroom, through the community, and around the world.

Technology Coordinated Protest (Inspired Post 5)

Last night, around 8:00pm, I rode my bike by Old Main and had to get off and walk because there were so many people on the patio. There were "Joe Paterno" chants, "Fuck Sandusky" chants, and a lot of fight songs being sung. It looked more of less like this:

Then, when I got out of my THON committee, I overheard many people speaking about a riot going on downtown. Some friends and I decided we should check it out. We walked over to Old Main and it looked more like this...

Thousands of students were gathered around Old Main doing more or less the same chants. As I stood at the far side of Old Main, I was surrounded by a whole bunch of students that were just as confused as I was. No one really knew why we were there and what our being there was accomplishing. Within five minutes, a crowd of students started walking in my direction. "To the stadium!" they yelled as the marched off in that direction. Over the next few minutes, students slowly trickled away, some going home, but most heading to the stadium. Being the ever-curious student I am, I figured I might as well go up to the stadium as well.

When we got there, I was pretty surprised walking by Paternoville. While I expected the students there to be protests or rioting in some way, they all simply stood watching the crowds roll by in complete silence. I think it was sort of their way of saying--this isn't the correct response to such a situation.

When I finally arrived to the area that the protest/riot/rally/whatever-you-want-to-call-it was commencing, there were between one to two thousand students all standing in the street, screaming, cheering, and chanting. Soon after, a few members of the band (not sure if it was Blue Band or some other band...I couldn't see them in the middle of the crowd) started playing the Penn State fight songs. It was really powerful to all be there together in the middle of the street outside of the stadium, arms around eachother, singing loud and proud. For me, that's what last night was about. It was about being proud Penn Staters and coming together to share that pride. While for many, it was about protesting Spanier or supporting JoePa, I didn't really engage in that.

What was so incredible was the amount of students all in the same place all at the same time. There were oodles of Facebook events, text messages, picture messages, tweets and blog posts about it that made the word spread faster than one could imagine. The use of technology in these events have been absolutely essential. Facebook events have been created to "Blue Out" the stadium on Saturday in order to support the fight against child abuse. The event can be found here. There is also a candlelight vigil planned for Friday evening as a memorial for the victims of this tragedy. This article written by the Daily Collegian reports on many different events that have been created.

This is globalization at its peak. Students informing each other of their efforts so that they can all go into the streets together. Like I mentioned in a previous blog, that's the point of this new technology and these new social media resources in instances like this. It is to inform and educate, to coordinate and plan. And after last night, I can honestly say, it is working.

Let's be Cautious, but Let's do this (Required Post #10)

One of the biggest takeaways I got from this week's discussion was that diplomats in the 21st century not only have to be really good at working with technology, but also they must be very controlled about their actions. This is because everywhere a diplomat goes, everything a diplomat says and everything a diplomat does can be so easily recorded and then shared all over the world. With new technology like YouTube having such a prevalence in todays' world, it is so easy for the actions of an American diplomat to be seen within minutes in just about any country.

If we think back to when Osama bin Laden was found and murdered, the speed with which this information was shared was extraordinary. Not only was it all over the traditional news sources (TV and newspaper) but it was also shared immediately on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, blogs, and just about any other source you can think of. And it doesn't have to be a big event Osama bin Laden or a big scandal like the Jerry Sandusky case for the news to go global. If we consider the absolutely ridiculous amount of attention that this video got...

This isn't actually the real video, because it only has about 5 million views, as opposed to the original one that had well over 80 million. This whole craze occurred while I was studying abroad in Spain and one of my friends there was trying to do her homework while someone in the apartment below her was blasting this song on repeat for hours on end. Nope--certainly (and perhaps shamefully) not just an American thing.

Today, information flows faster than ever before. If the American government wants to enter into the age of Digital Diplomacy, we will need to be incredibly informed and completely understand the frequency and speed of information sharing. We must be prepared for the implications of this new technological world. One of the articles from this week's readings called Digital Diplomacy by Sam Dupant states: "The hope in all of this is that the U.S. State Department can be a cut above other governments in becoming a technologically adept diplomatic machine." I think this is absolutely essential for America and if achieved, will be a hugely monumental step in the right direction.

As I discussed last week, this is not exactly the easiest problem to solve. When you enter a world where the technology is so new and so controversial, knowing when to step in is hard to do. But I strongly believe that we are going to have to carefully and cautiously step in and attempt to utilize all that the technology has to offer for the diplomacy of today's world.

21st Century Statecraft...Dun dun dun dun....(Required Post #9)

While 21st Century Statecraft sounds like a futuristic, high-tech, overwhelming and scary, Star Trek-type idea, it is not quite as daunting. Rather it is a super fancy way to say: the art of running a country. And the technology isn't even that fancy, considering the US Government is pretty far behind the rest of the world in terms of social media usage. "The Gov" is now officially using Twitter and Facebook and working with all the big players like Google, Twitter, Facebook, etc. to make sure that they are staying up-to-date on the latest and greatest technologies.


But when the US Government is buddy buddy with Google, Facebook and Twitter, the implications are not always positive. This is because Google, Facebook and Twitter are therefore seen by the rest of the world as an extension of the US Government. Nowadays, big brother is not only watching us....

............he's friending us too!


While this is a bit of an exaggeration, it is true that the US Government is being rooted into our social media. And other countries are not going to respond positively to this. Just like last year when Jared Cohen told Twitter that they better not do their scheduled maintenance during the Iranian protests (and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said nothing nor did nothing to stop him), other countries are getting suspicious and worried about the US trying to infiltrate their countries. When we suggest to other countries that they should use Facebook or Twitter, our suggestions are not going to be thought of as simply a matter of bettering their communication.


But honestly, this isn't exactly a new idea. The US government has been tightly integrated within Facebook and Twitter and Google since the beginning. These big three (FB, Twitter and Google) are constantly working with The Gov to help them develop better technology. Youtube and Flickr are definitely being used by the government too. 


In 2009, the US Government got a YouTube channel. This article details the ways that YouTube worked with the government in order to create this. For example: "One of the steps that YouTube took was creating a goverment version of its embeddable video player that does not deposit a cookie on the viewer's computer until the video play button has been clicked." I strongly believe that coordination like this will be the only way that the US government can really understand the technology they are using. This ability to work together has been and will continue to be absolutely essential for the advancement of our nation into the world of...dun dun dun dun...digital diplomacy. 

World Poverty (Inspired Post 4)

Today in my Sociology 001 class, we talked about world poverty. This class is exceptional in its ability to cover a huge range of subjects in only one semester. Granted, the amount of depth we can dive into for each topic is minimal, but it is certainly enough to get my mind going. My teacher is obsessed with data and this class period was definitely a time when the facts said it all.

Nearly half of the 6 billion people in the world live in poverty. Each day, 20,000 people die each day from extreme poverty. Extreme poverty is defined as getting by on less than one dollar a day, not meeting basic household needs for survival, and only exists in developing countries. When doing a Google Image search of the word "extreme poverty" the images that come up are entirely disturbing.

Looking at these pictures makes it even harder to comprehend the facts because you put a face to the figures. I literally cannot believe that in this day and age, this type of poverty still occurs. In the world I live in, food is only a problem because it takes time to make and distracts me from doing the myriad of other things I have on my plate. In America, we are so fortunate to live in a world where we don't usually have to think about food.

We cannot live in a world that is completely globalized if this type of poverty is still occurring. We cannot live in a society that is even close to globalization if 20,000 people are dying each day due to hunger.

There are efforts to combat this problem such as The Hunger Site, which easily allows people to give cups of food to the hungry. All you have to do is click the link on the page and 1.1 cups of food will be donated to the hungry. This can occur because of the advertisements that come up after you click. Such a simple and easy way to help others, yet it is so rare that we (myself included) take the 0.3 seconds to do it.

This Sociology class has taught me that there are so many problems in this world that need to be addressed before we can ever get to a fully globalized place. It is upsetting and honestly disgusting that the American culture is so self-centered that we never think about these issues. Every day I throw away food that I haven't completely eaten. I may not be able to change this habit, but I can, at the very least, click the link on The Hunger Site every day and post it to my Facebook so that hopefully others will do the same. At least we will be using technology and social media for the better, Friedman would be happy.

WikiLeaks (Inspired Post #3)

With my embarrassingly minimal understanding of what happened during the WikiLeaks fiasco, I marched into 112 Katz ready to learn. Then I marched right out after realizing I was in the complete wrong classroom. Yet attempt two was successful and I anxiously awaited the presentation's commencement.

A woman popped up on the projector screen and I looked around the room for a good 30 seconds trying to figure out where she was. It was only until 30 embarrassing seconds later that I realized this was a live broadcast and that the presenter was not actually present.

All that aside, I really enjoyed the introduction of the topic, the forum and Mr. Crowley. The topic introduction did a great job of summarizing the events that occurred and explaining (which was helpful for those semi-ignorant ones like me) and the forum explanation cleared up the confusion about where the heck that woman was and why she wasn't actually in our classroom. Her detailed introduction of Mr. Crowley was essential for understanding where he was coming from and why his opinion mattered.

One of the main things Mr. Crowley explained was that there were three main consequences from the WikiLeaks. First, there was a potential impact on critical relationships between the US and other countries. These leaks undermined the trusts others had in the US. The second, and most fully realized, potential consequence was the risk of the lives and livelihoods of people. Mr. Crowley explained that physical harm has occurred as a result of these leaks. Finally, the third consequence is the impact on future net growth.

While Crowley officially condemned the publication of these documents, he explained that the most important problem was what was actually published. Just referencing a place or date that a conversation occurred, rather than actually naming someone, is enough to put lives in jeopardy. Here is a pretty comical representation of the ability for WikiLeaks to expose people that would much rather not be exposed.

While this cartoon uses a light tone, the undermining issue is that the heroes of our society, be it an Afghan citizen or a member of the CIA, can be exposed so easily through WikiLeaks.

Crowley does not aim to limit the freedom of the press, but rather wants them to be responsible journalists that listen to the government on issues concerning highly classified topics. I think he did a good job of explaining that the press surely does not have to listen to the government--they are under no contractual agreement, they will face no sanction-- but they ought to out of good judgement for the safety of citizens around the globe.

I think Mr. Crowley was the perfect person to speak on such a topic. While he may not be entirely neutral (based on his military experience and work for the government), he was extremely knowledgeable of the topic and able to portray his opinions in a way that was easy to understand.

#OccupyWallStreet (Required Blog #8)

I first heard about Occupy Wall Street via Facebook, then via the news. Oh the irony in that one. But I guess it is not entirely ironic that I first heard about it via social media. When Osama bin Laden was murdered, I was studying in Spain and therefore sleeping during the time that the country heard the news and also sleeping during the entire Penn State riot. When I woke up in the morning, I logged on to my Facebook and saw a bunch of status updates, posts, and pictures about Osama dying.

This was not actually one of my friends' posts but it is pretty entertaining...

I scrolled down my entire newsfeed reading all the updates and then I fact checked on Google news until I found a legitimate enough web source (Washington Post) for me to feel confident telling my host mom the news. When I did, she ran and turned on the TV and low and behold the Spaniards were chattin' up a storm about it.

Every celebrity death, every major news event, and every earthquake-- I find out about via Facebook. Facebook is inevitably a source of information that is fast and easy. While most of my friends' status updates have more to do with what they ate for breakfast than what is happening around the world, it is extremely important to realize the impact Facebook, and all social media, is having on the world.

While Malcolm Gladwell would like for us to believe social media "makes it easier for social activists to express themselves and harder for that expression to have any impact", I think we are seeing a clear impact with the Occupy Movement. The combination of technology and globalization has lead to the movements popping up around the world. People are not just tweeting about it, not just updating their Facebooks about it, but they are camping out in the HUB to #OccupyPennState or planning events outside London to #OccupyEngland. This use of technology to inspire and promote the fight for global democracy. While Morozov believes that social media leads to Slacktivism, in this case, he is and Gladwell are both wrong. In this case, social media has been the outlet used to organize, inspire and create an actual, physical movement. And thanks to technology and the interconnectedness of our world today, that movement is spreading like wildfire.

When one protesting idea gains enough popularity that it is repeated in over a thousand cities around the world, and when it gains enough popularity that President Obama talked about it, you know that that was an impactful idea. After Arab Spring and the "revolution" in Iran, it is apparent that social media is having a bigger and bigger effect on our nation. The #Occupy movement is just one more push toward using social media to implement and promote real-life ideas.

Slackity Slacktivism (Required Blog #7)

Chapter seven of The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom by Evengy Morozov focuses on a term called Slacktivism. This is the idea that people have gotten lazy and are unmotivated to actually make monumental changes in society. Rather, they hide behind their computer screens and like a page on Facebook that promotes the fight against breast cancer or they retweet a post (and don't even bother putting it in their own words) about supporting our troops. As Morozov explains, "Given how easy groups can form online, it is easy to mistake quantity of quality." (p. 187)

While I agree that the new age of technology has definitely caused people to be lazy in terms of their support for causes, I am not so sure it is an entirely bad thing. For the laziest of lazy, you can even support a cause through your cell phone (which obviously is attached to your hand 24/7) by texting a number that will automatically draw $10 from your account in support of that cause.

This is probably one of the easiest possible ways to support a cause. Yet what Morovoz would define as laziness, I would define as pure genius. Because when one text message turns into this...

...ten dollars turns into hundreds and thousands of dollars. Technology has simply made it easier to support causes in just about every way and I don't see anything wrong with that.

In my opinion, the whole point of creating a Facebook page is to promote awareness. Whether it is for your company, the party you are throwing Friday night, or a non-profit, getting the word out to a lot of people without a lot of stress is possible because of Facebook and other technologies. It is okay to have the Slacktivists--it is okay to have people sitting behind their computer and "liking" the fight against pediatric cancer. That handy dandy like button that we know all too well...

should not be viewed as a problem in our society, but rather as an excellent form of creating awareness. All the traditional techniques to get people actually involved in a cause still can be and still ought to be utilized. Technology like Facebook and Twitter do not take away from these traditional techniques, but rather make people more aware of issues when they do see traditional techniques being employed.

For example, last year THON was heavily promoted after it there was a news report that focused on all the great things THON does for the Four Diamonds Families. This clip was disseminated all over YouTube, Facebook and Twitter and brought much more legitimacy to the THON name. Now, when I stand on the street corner dancing around with a big sign around my neck that says "Help Kids Fight Cancer", people are more likely to think "Hey...I saw that on TV last year!" or "Hey, I saw a YouTube clip about this organization." These thoughts will keep the coins and dollars coming into my can.

Morozov fails to see the bright side of social medias use in the promotion and spreading of awareness of causes. He pretty much views technology in general as an evil, and in this case, I think he is wrong.

Is Censorship Always Bad? (Required Post 6)

In his book, The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom, Evengy Morozov discusses the amount of censoring that is occurring worldwide. While he discusses it as a negative thing and uses a lot of cynicism, it got me thinking about whether censorship is always a bad thing. I have come to the conclusion that no, censorship is not always bad.

Censorship has changed within the past few decades. What used to be government censoring citizens by blatantly not allowing them to see things has now turned into a much more stealthy approach. As I mentioned in class, I was recently shocked to realize that Google was actually tracking the links I had previously clicked on on different computers because I was signed into my Gmail account while searching. My initial reaction was to be creeped out, hate the Big Brother looking over my shoulder, and sign out of my Gmail account before ever searching for something again. But then I got to thinking. The fact that Google was able to tell me which links I had previously clicked on was really helpful. What if I had spent a while searching for something, finally found the information I was looking for, and then accidentally lost the link. At least I would be able to know which links I had clicked on, how many times I had clicked them, and when I clicked on them. What could be seen as censorship could also be seen as a really handy tool for research.

For at least a year after I applied to do Birthright in Israel, the ads on the side of my Facebook page all revolved around being Jewish, finding a Jewish boyfriend, or going to Israel. When I spent two weeks in Denmark, the ads on the side of my Facebook were in Danish for at least a month. And while I was also creeped out by this as well, I guess I would rather have the ads relate to things I am interested in than be about random topics. 

It seems to me that old school censoring is more likely to be “bad” than the new forms of censoring. Not allowing kids to read Harry Potter in the classroom has limited benefits for those who are being censored other than limiting the information they are exposed to. The new type of censorship still continues to limit information, but it at least gives people something back in return. In this world where we are given so much information all at once it is often overwhelming and hard to sort through. So maybe if the news that comes up on my homepage is only the things I would be most interested in reading (even if it means that Big Brother knows what things I would be most interested in reading) it would actually be beneficial for me as the user.

We constantly think of censorship in a negative light and as the government denying its citizens the right to information. It is time that we redefine censorship and also think about whether it is always inherently bad.

Rest In Peace, Steve Jobs (Inspired Post 2)

Last night, I pulled up Firefox on my Macbook computer, opened up Facebook and saw through repeated status updates that Steve Jobs passed away. Immediately, I switched to Google News to check the legitimacy of the sources and when I saw Washington Post, I knew it was true.

I spent the next half hour or so reading over inspirational quotes said by Steve Jobs, a man who was truly able to express his feelings and ideals through words.

"Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart. Stay hungry. Stay foolish." - Steve Jobs

His passing made me, and most of the world, stop and reflect on the impact he has had on technology. His innovation and creativity have changed the world as we know it. Two of the celebrities I follow on Facebook made a point to update their status in memoriam. Lance Armstrong explained that he was devastaed and posted this quote on his page, said be Steve Jobs himself-- "A computer is the most remarkable tool that we've ever come up with. It's a bicycle for our minds". The Fray, a popular music group, made their status, "It's crazy how something as simple as Video Chat or FaceTime can make you feel at home when you're not. Thank you Steve Jobs for making this crazy job of ours a little easier for us and our families, among many other things. Rest in Peace."

In a class about globalization, I think it is extremely important to stop and remember a man like Steve Jobs. His inventions are truly global-- you can see Apple products around the world. When I was in Europe and even in Morocco, I saw iPods, iTunes, iPhones, and Mac computers. And not has Steve Jobs, and Apple as a whole, created incredible products, but they have also encouraged the creativity and competition of new products, as can be seen with the new Windows Media Phones, tablets like the iPad, and an array of MP3 players that are trying to compete with the iPod.

Rest In Peace, Steve Jobs. You are a technological legend that has changed the world for the better. (Or so Friedman would say!)

INTAG 499B (Inspired Post 1)

Tonight, I attended a Distinguished Honors Faculty Dinner with Mark Brennan for about Community and Leadership Development in Vietnam. I was lucky to have gotten a spot on this dinner--they fill up so quickly. I think it is the combination of free food, interesting topics, and iPhones that get e-mail immediately. Unfortunately for me, I have a phone that is internet-less.

This is not exactly my phone...but close.

I was initially going to say that I have a regular phone that doesn't have internet. Yet in this day and age, it is actually irregular that I don't have a phone with internet. Oh technology, how you change the way of life so quickly... I am at a huge disadvantage in terms of signing up for these things because of my phone (along with a bunch of other disadvantages as well).

Anyway, this dinner was a really interesting opportunity because we were able to hear about Dr. Brennan's experiences in Vietnam. He had a graduate student in the past that was from Vietnam and they worked a lot together at Penn State. After the student graduated, Dr. Brennan decided he wanted to go to Vietnam and learn about his student's culture. He has spent a great deal of time in Vietnam and has traveled around much of Southeast Asia. His work has been particularly focused on international development efforts. He is most interested in the rebuilding efforts of Vietnam and Cambodia because they are so distinct in how they have occurred, but so similar as well. Dr. Brennan is actually hosting a class next semester that takes a trip to Vietnam and Cambodia after learning about the community development efforts that have evolved from the grassroots up in both of these countries. I am planning to apply to this class because this seems like an exceptional opportunity. I really hope I get in because ever since coming back from Europe, I have wanted to go abroad again--anywhere where I can learn about and explore another culture!

Throughout this entire dinner, I was constantly reflecting on how prevalent globalization is in our world today. The fact that we can learn so much about other cultures and then get the opportunity to actually visit these countries shows that the borders are blurring and the world is flattening as we speak. It may not be as flat as Thomas Friedman claims, but we are definitely entering a world full of globalization.

The ease of travel is one thing, but the ease of the transfer of information is another totally separate thing. The amount of information I was able to find out about Vietnam and Cambodia by doing a simple Google search was incredible. I could sit in my own bedroom and learn so much about the world. It is astounding to see the power of the Internet. But then again, nothing compares to actually going to a country and experiencing the life there first hand. I certainly am crossing my fingers that I get into his class...

Think Tank Credibility (Required Blog #5)

In his book The Competition of Ideas, The World of the Washington Think Tanks, Murray Weidenbaum sheds a positive light on all think tanks in general. He argues that although some environmental groups such as Greenpeace argue against think tanks,they are wrong in doing so because they too are financed in corrupt ways. (p. 56) He believes that all think tanks are benign, could cause no harm and puts them on a pedestal of utmost credibility. So this got me thinking. What makes a think tank credible? What makes a think tank lose its credibility?

Although also humorous, this picture above does a good job of explaining this issue. If approval ratings are low and people are not believing what you say, as was the case of George Bush, it is obvious you will lose credibility. But think tanks don't really have approval ratings so their credibility has to be decided within other means. 

Objectivity of thought and research is the main think that gives think tanks the most credibility. Although leaning a little to the right or a little to the left, the big 5 think tanks of Washington fall mainly into the centrist category. This is certainly saying something. It is saying that they are the most respected and their research is most used because people feel as if they can trust it. As Weidenbaum explains, think tanks must remain unbaised in order for the public to trust them.

While we would traditionally assume that objectivity of research means credibility, then the advocacy think tanks came around. Do these groups lack any such credibility? Thomas Medvets said "These 'advocacy think tanks' were less inclined than their predecessors to claim ideological neutrality as an underpinning of their credibility" in his book called Think Tanks and Production of Policy - Knowledge in America. This, though, makes perfect sense. If a think tank is advocating for a specific idea, of course they are not going to be objective and neutral. While they may lose support or credibility from their opponents, they were certainly gain it from their supporters. If a politician finds facts that support their point, he or she will likely use it without question. Whereas if it is against their point, they will try to rip its credibility to shreds.


Nationalpress.org explains in this article, "The biggest issue with think tanks is understanding and appreciating their biases beforehand, and then making your own decision on what to use, or how to identify them to readers." It then goes on to explain ways you can determine the biases of such think tanks...did they just get a big donation from a specific source? Is there existing material all leaning toward the right or the left? While these may seem obvious, it is definitely important that we look at think tanks credibility before believing what they have to say.

Dani

Think Tanks and Social Media (Required Post #4)

In class we discussed that think tanks do not have the same appeal as medicine in terms of getting people to support their research (with money). I agree that this is true because of the life and death consequences of supporting medicinal research and also because when we give money to medicinal researchers, we are more or less comforted by the fact that we know where our money is going and that it will be used in ways we agree with. With think tanks on the other hand, and basically anything government related, there is much more skepticism in terms of where the money goes. There is also a lack of urgency for solving the American train problem than there is for curing cancer.

But I also think that in our discussion in class, we were giving the think tanks less credit than they deserve. A quick search on Twitter showed me at least 10 legitimate CSIS accounts, ranging from CSIS Poni (Project on Nuclear Issues) to CSISAfrica. Although their pages don't have that many followers (meaning between 400 and 1800) they do post a lot of information weekly. Yet CSIS is sort of on the backburner in terms of social media action for think tanks.

The Heritage Foundation has got their social media game together. Their twitter account boasts over 150,000 followers. Their Facebook page has over 360,000 likes. This is significant and important, but not nearly as important as their membership levels. Heritage has more than 710,000 individuals with membership who are willing to donate at least $25 annually. This link gives more details if you are interested. A quick search on the Heritage Foundation website shows that joining is simple and easy. All you have to do is select which level you want to be, ranging from Basic Member ($25 donation) to Founder ($100,000 donation). The benefits reaped from such membership also range. Any member of the Heritage Foundation receives a quarterly newsletter and opinion surveys, whereas the founders get invitations to lots of fancy meetings and issue briefings.


The website states, "By becoming a member of The Heritage Foundation, you will join hundreds of thousands of conservatives around the nation in supporting our work to build an America where freedom, prosperity, opportunity and civil society flourish." Now doesn't that sound enticing?  

With a logo like this, than invokes feelings of liberty and freedom, who wouldn't want to support the foundation?


So maybe we were off a little in class. Maybe some Think Tanks have got it figured out. But I think this just brings up the most important thing about think tanks. They are all so different and so distinct that it is hard to classify them as one single entity. While The Heritage Foundation has done a pretty good job of getting their name out and finding supporters, many think tanks struggle on this front. Like I said in class, I never would have heard of any of the think tanks in this book if I hadn't done Speech and Debate. (On a side note... we cited think tanks right and left even when we were making up the facts. They gave us lots and lots of credibility...). So I conclude that on a whole, think tanks not only need to utilize social media better. Maybe this will help Americans understand who they are and what they do...because at this point, Americans don't seem to have such knowledge. 


Dani

The Problem is NOT Resources, It's Consumption. (Blog #3)

As I closed The World Is Flat by Thomas Friedman after reading the final page, I sat for a few minutes trying to digest everything. In the final chapters, Friedman scared me as a reader but then didn't do much to comfort me afterward. He brought up some of the negative sides of the flat world, especially the use of technology by terrorists, and said that we can combat it by being the best global citizens we can possibly be or by getting on the airplane. I also pondered his reasons for saying that the world is not flat. Personally, I don't believe the world is flat and I am not sure it will become so within my lifetime. So I wanted to really understand why Friedman thought it hadn't yet happened. I get the sick, disempowered, frustrated, and humiliated thing, but I had a hard time wrapping my head around the "Too Many Toyotas" concept. With this, Friedman argues that the lack of enough resources for India, China, and the rest of the world to become flat are a huge road block for a flat world.


So I did some research to find out the predictions that are out there in terms of the longevity of our resources. I stumbled upon some pretty negative websites, and then I found this:

As someone who is truly concerned about our environment, I am not sure I want to buy into this option but honestly, I think it is true. I think Friedman is wrong when he states that "we are, at best, going to experience a serious energy shortage." As the video states, we have been predicting that we will run out of energy for the past hundred years and it has yet to happen. As the world becomes more flat, the world also becomes more innovative.

This chart shows the number of patents being filed throughout the past century or so by other countries versus the United States. It is apparent that as these countries flatten out, their ability to create, produce and innovate increases. With minds working all around the globe, and not just in certain pockets, it is likely that there will be a new form of energy, or a new way to use renewable energy, that will gain popularity.

What I do agree with Friedman on is the fact that consumption increasing is really going to destroy our planet. Friedman says "The best thing we in the United States can do to nudge China toward greater conservation is to set an example by changing our own consumption patterns." For one of the first times, I can wholeheartedly say amen to that, Friedman. America needs to make monumental changes in its consumption. American businesses need to only work with other businesses that follow these same practices. American consumers need to only buy from companies that care about the planet too. While I think we are definitely moving toward a greener world, I think we are far from it. The monumental change needs to come from the top in order to have an effect worldwide. While I do believe that each person can contribute to the solution of the problem by reducing their carbon footprint and encouraging others to do the same, I simply do not believe this is enough.

America needs to get serious about going green. We need to be greener than green. And it is going to take a lot of sacrifices on our part. We might not be running out of resources, but we are destroying our planet day after day. I might not fall into the category of believers that our oil will run out, but I definitely am one to believe in global warming. When Friedman said "A Green New deal today requires getting two things right: government regulation and prices," he was right on the money.

I don't believe a lack of resources is going to stop our world from flattening. But what happens when we get to that flat world and it is a piece of crap? Look at the effects of global warming today and then add in the consumption levels of an entirely flat world, and try to tell me that something doesn't need to change.

Social Activism--Good for Society (Blog #2)

In his book The World is Flat, Thomas Friedman briskly mentions and then overlooks the idea of social activism in terms of a way to go about "maximizing the benefits and opportunities of the flat world" (p. 378). It is likely that his understanding of such a topic was minimal and he threw it into the book in passing as a way of making himself look well-versed. Yet Friedman then created an award that is recognized nationally for social activism--one of the largest awards for social activism known to date. How does this make sense? 

That's because the Friedman that created this award was not Thomas Friedman, but rather Stephen Friedman, the President of MTV. The 2011 Video Music Awards included this category-- "Best Video with a Message". It seems logical that in 2011 such thing would occur, as social activism is a much more talked about subject than it was when Thomas Friedman published his book. It seems as if his inclusion of that topic was a little ahead of the curve. Today, social activism can be seen everywhere. To Write Love On Her Arms, an almost purely technology-based non-profit that works to reduce suicide and depression has over a million supporters on Facebook. 

Each year the organization picks one day and promotes it like crazy on all the social media websites. Millions of people around the world write the word "love" on their arm on that day in support of their cause. 

Personally, I am a huge supporter of social activism. The ability to reach out to large groups of people is key in getting support for movements to promote change. This year, Penn State's FreshSTART Day of Service had over 900 volunteers, all of which signed up online. The possibilities for service and for bettering the world, to me, are endless with the use of social activism. Whether it is a small group of university students, a non-profit organization, or a celebrity, social activism is truly bettering the world.

If we jump back to the first example with the Social Activism Award at the VMAs, we can see how social activism is being noticed throughout the world. This article by the Huffington Post lists the nominees for this award:

Pink - “F-ing Perfect”

Lady Gaga - “Born This Way” 

Katy Perry - “Firework” 

Eminem featuring Rihanna - “Love the Way You Lie” 

Rise Against - “Make It Stop (September’s Children)”

Taylor Swift - “Mean”

While I wouldn't say these are the best songs of all time, if you check out the lyrics, they do all send positive messages. The winner of the first annual Social Activism Award was Mean by Taylor Swift. 

 
The song's lyrics include phrases such as this one:

"You, with your voice like nails on a chalkboard/Calling me out when I'm wounded/You picking on the weeker man"

Taylor Swift inspires youth by saying that one day they will grow up to be bigger and better people, but the bullies are simply always going to be mean.We have seen bullying, and cyber-bullying in particular, in the news quite frequently, as kids are feeling more comfortable bullying behind the protection of a computer screen. Songs like this, and many other videos that have been created recently, work to combat cyber-bullying. 

So what do you think? Are you as supportive of social activism as I am? Do you feel that the use of social media has caused too many service-related causes to gain importance that you almost don't know which one to support? I am looking forward to your responses!

Dani

In-Forming the World (Blog #1)

In Chapter Two of The World is Flat, Friedman discusses the ten major factors that he believes truly flatten the Earth. While I have experienced the effects of many of these flatteners personally, the flattener that jumps out the most to me in in-forming.

This takes me back to Morocco in April of the past year. We were in Rabat, the capital city, and met with an NGO that has helped to make a poor neighborhood better to reduce crime and gangs. This wasn't your typical NGO though. It was run by college students--people just like you and me. The way they helped was through hands-on efforts; they plan a summer camp for the kids to get them off the streets and participating in positive, confidence-boosting activities. The people we met with were both inspiring and motivational.

Here's a picture of some of the kids from my study abroad and our new Moroccan friends! Please note the super comfy couches that go all the way around the room: typical in Morocco and a wonderful place for guests for sleep!

After talking to one of the guys for quite some time, I realized the true depth of his inspirational qualities. He began telling me about the fact that he watches tons of American poetry slam videos on YouTube and that he does poetry slamming as well. Yet these aren't the only types of videos he can be found watching. He also watches lectures from American universities such as Stanford that are posted on the internet for anyone to see.

After watching these videos, he and one of his buddies decided to get together and do their best to change and educate the world. Their plan is to start a website in which they can make videos of themselves and others teaching lectures in a classroom setting that can be broadcasted across the globe. Learning for the sake of learning. Learning as an equalizer. He's pretty good at math and sciencey type stuff, so he wanted to lecture on that. He planned to create a chatroom in which people could ask questions and in real time he would answer their questions on a livefeed. He was seeking others to help with this work, others to teach English and history and just about any subject you can think of.

While this idea has yet to materialize, it is completely obvious that in-forming has become a flattener in his life. He spends his time learning all there is to learn on the internet and he wants to share the favor. He feels that no matter where you live, you should have access to the same free and customized education. Ten years ago, a dream like this would not even have materialized. Ten years from now, this dream will easily become reality.

Throughout my entire time in Morocco, I realized just how small the world truly is. An eye-opening experience like this which shows globalization at its utmost potential, is exactly the type of experience that would fire Friedman up. Just the fact that I was in Morocco was an accomplishment. It required tons of technology just to plan--especially because almost 100 people from my study abroad program were there during four separate sessions. The fact that we were able to communicate in one language with little to no problems was also impressive. Moroccans learn French in schools but speak Moroccan Arabic outside of the classroom, yet many of them have also managed to learn (or more often teach themselves) English.Thanks to technology, they can listen to songs, movies, and TV shows in English and therefore have a much easier time learning the language.

It's exciting and scary and weird and inspiring to think about the potential flattening that will occur in the future. Imagine a world where you can get a well-rounded education online for free. It might seem a little unrealistic today, but I don't think my Moroccan friend was too far off. I think with Globalization 3.0 and the pace that we are moving, it's more than possible. In my opinion, we need more people just like him. We need more people to take the positive effects of globalization and run with them to make the world a better place.

Welp that's all for now, but check back next week for more!
Beslama! (That means bye in Moroccan Arabic!)

It's a small world...and I'm not talking about Disneyland

Hello! My name is Dani Lichliter and I am a junior here at Penn State. I am California-born and raised, and often wonder (especially in the winter) how I ended up smack dab in the middle of Pennsylvania. But regardless, I am one of those people that has overflowing amounts of pride for the university that I attend. I am involved in many organizations across campus and like to stay busy.

During the Spring 2011 Semester, I studied in Granada, Spain. While I was there, I traveled to 11 countries, including a life-changing trip to Morocco. After Morocco, I decided to change my major, change my summer plans, and essentially change my life plan. So now, I am amidst the process of figuring out what in the world I want to do with my life. I spent my summer traveling for a month and then volunteering with other international volunteers in Poznan, Poland and Copenhagen, Denmark. Here's a picture of me with what is called a Hairy Coo--essentially a very hairy and adorable cow--outside of Edinburgh, Scotland.

Ever since my trip, my outlook on the world has changed completely. Places that used to seem so distant now seem as close to me as my hometown. I made friends with people from all over the world and that made the world seem so much smaller. It opened my eyes to the fact that the world we live in really is a small world, after all.

So I'm taking this course on Globalization and World Trends to gain as much knowledge as possible about the world we live in. I've decided that I want to be a global citizen and I think do that I need to understand as much as possible about the most recent technology, the most up-to-date policies, and the most pressing topics.

In high school, I followed current events very closely as I was involved in the Speech and Debate program. Since coming to Penn State, I feel as if the amount of world news I've been exposed to is generally limited. It is time to pop that little bubble and get excited about understanding the current events that are occurring around the world.

This blog is intended to address the material that we discuss in IST445H, but also things that inspire me and interest me in the news throughout the semester.  Hopefully through this class my opinions will be questioned, changed, and developed. I'm excited to share my ideas with you, and I'm looking forward to reading about yours as well!

Dani