Leettaschmidt

Almost two-thirds of Americans 18-39 didn't know that 6 million Jews were murdered in the Holocaust, according to a survey. From The Guardian:

According to the study of millennial and Gen Z adults aged between 18 and 39, almost half (48%) could not name a single concentration camp or ghetto established during the second world war.

Almost a quarter of respondents (23%) said they believed the Holocaust was a myth, or had been exaggerated, or they weren't sure. One in eight (12%) said they had definitely not heard, or didn't think they had heard, about the Holocaust.

More than half (56%) said they had seen Nazi symbols on their social media platforms and/or in their communities, and almost half (49%) had seen Holocaust denial or distortion posts on social media or elsewhere online.

"The results are both shocking and saddening, and they underscore why we must act now while Holocaust survivors are still with us to voice their stories," said Gideon Taylor, president of the Conference on Jewish Material Claims Against Germany (Claims Conference) which commissioned the survey.

Tarot is an amazing tool for spiritual exploration and esoteric study. What is also wonderful about the tarot is how it can guide us through everyday life, no matter how mundane the situation in question. I firmly believe there is no situation in life for which tarot cannot provide guidance. In this blog post I’d like to share with you one of my favorite tarot exercises or spreads I created to help with any situation that has you in a bind.

Certain situations in life are beyond our control, or they certainly feel that way. Our reaction, of course is what we can control. And even that feels impossible at times! We panic, our emotions get the best of us, or we freeze with indecision. Feeling empowered to make decisions is so important, but it’s also intimidating and overwhelming at times.

I came up with a simple tarot spread for guidance one day and found it worked so well, I’ve used it ever since. Many tarot spreads answer questions like, “What do I need to know about situation (fill in the blank).” Answering a question like this can be helpful when you have no clue what is going on. However, when you do have some information, a question like this can render an answer that feels too vague. Common spreads will also cover the past, present, and future of the situation. You think, “I don’t need to know about the situation, I need to know what to do about the situation!”

This is where a spread I call “Stop, Start, Continue” comes in. Knowing that some kind of action must be taken but needing guidance and clarity, I pull three cards, asking, “What do I need to stop doing. What should I start doing? And what am I already doing that I should continue doing?”

As an example, I asked the cards, “When it comes to growing my client base, what should I stop doing, what should I start doing, and what should I continue doing?” Using the Spirit Keeper’s Tarot, Vitruvian Edition, by Benebell Wen, the cards I pulled were the 8 of Swords, the Herald of Awakening (the Page of Wands), and the 6 of Orbs (Coins).

The adjustments I need to make are immediately apparent to me! I need to get out of my own head and stop trapping myself by over thinking. I need to start expressing my creativity and communicating spiritual messages with more confidence. Lastly, I need to continue providing content and offering my spiritual services to any would-be clients. I need to take action and continue to be of service. This is much clearer than if I’d just asked, “What do I need to know about growing my client base.”

Let’s look at another example. It’s a controversial one! I asked, “How best can America handle the upcoming election?” Using the Mystic Mondays Tarot by Grace Duong, I pulled the 5 of Cups, the Queen of Swords, and the Ace of Swords! Alrighty then! What Americans need to stop doing is focusing on the disappointment we feel at how things are going in the political landscape and in 2020 in general. We’re seeing the glass as half empty, not half full. Then, we need to start communicating our thoughts and ideas with respect and clarity. We need to say what we think with measure and grace. The Queen of Swords doesn’t shout – she doesn’t need to. Then, we need to continue speaking our minds and communicating with each other. Keep having those difficult conversations, don’t shut down.

Hopefully you can see this tarot exercise is great for when you need clear direction and actionable guidance. Try it out for yourself and let me know what you think!

Following Trump's posthumous pardon for suffragist Susan B. Anthony, the museum founded in her memory is rejecting the gesture.

"Objection! Mr. President, Susan B. Anthony must decline your offer of a pardon," Deborah L. Hughes wrote in a statement. She continued:

"Anthony wrote in her diary in 1873 that her trial for voting was 'The greatest outrage History ever witnessed.' She was not allowed to speak as a witness in her own defense, because she was a woman. At the conclusion of arguments, Judge Hunt dismissed the jury and pronounced her guilty. She was outraged to be denied a trial by jury. She proclaimed, 'I shall never pay a dollar of your unjust penalty.' To pay would have been to validate the proceedings. To pardon Susan B. Anthony does the same."

Hughes pointed to Anthony's support of sex education, fair labor practices, excellent public education, equal pay for equal work and elimination of all forms of discrimination.

A key issue for voting rights activists, obviously, is that Trump's effort to steal an election he fears he will otherwise lose hinges on voter suppression.

Harrods is a fancy department store in London and the largest in Europe, with an illustrious history to go with its sprawling floor plan—and similarly enormous catalogues. The 1912 Harrods for Everything book is 1,525 pages long, illustrates more than 15,000 products, and was backed by a then cutting-edge logistics operation that included telephone ordering and home delivery by automobile van. An epic scanning operation, led by Eric Hutton, is finally complete. [via Metafilter]

Hardly exciting news in 2020! Someone has been diagnosed with the plague in South Lake Tahoe, CA. Last seen in nearby Yosemite National Park, bubonic plague is spread by fleas that ride on rats and mice.

LA Times:

Health officials have confirmed a case of plague at South Lake Tahoe — the first in California in five years.
El Dorado County officials said Monday that the California Department of Public Health had notified them of the positive test of a resident who is under medical care while recovering at home.

Plague bacteria are most often transmitted by fleas that have acquired it from infected squirrels, chipmunks and other wild rodents. Dogs and cats may also carry plague-infected fleas.

Health officials believe the South Lake Tahoe resident may have been bitten by an infected flea while walking a dog along the Truckee River corridor or in the Tahoe Keys area on Tahoe's south shore.

Yale University's doors are opening to incoming students despite the pandemic, and one administrator, Head of College and psychology professor Laurie Santos, plainly told them the disease may kill them there this semester and that life will look more like hospital than college.

In a July 1 email to Silliman College residents when Yale first announced its plan to reopen on-campus housing, Head of College and psychology professor Laurie Santos warned Yale's "community compact" was not to be taken lightly [and] explained that some staff members are from sectors of society that are particularly vulnerable to COVID-19, and that they do not have the choice of whether to come to campus. …

"We all should be emotionally prepared for widespread infections — and possibly deaths — in our community," Santos's email reads. "You should emotionally prepare for the fact that your residential college life will look more like a hospital unit than a residential college."

We're past the point where the people in charge have decided widespread death is necessary for the financial wellbeing of American institutions, and at the point where they're calmly explaining to us the terms and conditions of our demise.

The Washington Post's Hannah Natanson writes: "Maybe at this point nothing should shock anymore. But this email, from a Yale administrator to returning students, is *stunning*"

Notre Dame started in-person classes a week ago; yesterday it reported that 146 students tested positive, more new cases than the whole of Ontario.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and 174 other House Democrats are demanding that Donald Trump's new Postmaster General reverse all of the operational changes they say could harm mail-in voting for the November election.

Read the entire document here.

The smooth functioning of the @USPS during the COVID-19 pandemic is a matter of life-or-death, and is critical for protecting lives, livelihoods and the life of our democracy. Postmaster General DeJoy must reverse new policies which accelerate the crisis at the Postal Service.

— Nancy Pelosi (@SpeakerPelosi) August 12, 2020

Read my letter with @RepMaloney and 173 other Representatives: https://t.co/uiXnSMdPUj

— Nancy Pelosi (@SpeakerPelosi) August 12, 2020

Julian Boilen, a full stack software engineer in NYC, created this cool map that lets you see photos of New York City in the late 1930s and 1940s. "Zoom in!" he says. "Every dot is a photo."

Between 1939 and 1941, the Works Progress Administration collaborated with the New York City Tax Department to collect photographs of every building in the five boroughs of New York City. In 2018, the NYC Municipal Archives completed the digitization and tagging of these photos. This website places them on a map.

FiveThirtyEight made this useful guide on how to vote in each of the U.S. states.

Click on your state in the map to see a lot of the information you need in order to cast a ballot this fall — by whatever method you choose. This page will be updated on a regular basis with the latest developments. While we've made every effort to ensure the accuracy of this information, always double-check with your local election official before acting upon it. Thanks to the pandemic, election laws are constantly changing, and certain voters — like those living overseas or in the armed forces — may be subject to special rules.

Image: David Huang for FiveThirtyEight

The Golden Girls was a TV sitcom that, in many ways, was far ahead of its time. Though a comedy, the show made it a habit of tackling difficult and controversial subjects such as LGBTQ issues, racial issues, elder abuse and much, much more.

Told through the prism of four senior women who share a home, the show worked to balance the humor with the gravity of its subject matter. To that end, The Golden Girls was an unconventional show. This is especially true for its time, which includes 7 seasons and 177 episodes released between 1985 and 1992.

However, for a show dealing with as serious of topics as The Golden Girls, plagiarism is a bit out of place. As important as plagiarism is, it’s a bit odd that a show that earned a reputation for tackling some of society’s biggest issues would cover it.

But cover it the show did. Toward the end of the show’s run, in episode 14 of season 7, plagiarism took center stage. The episode, entitled Goodbye, Mr. Gordon, takes a short but deep dive into the subject of plagiarism and highlights just how stark the personal impacts of plagiarism can be.

Content Warning: Spoilers for The Golden Girls Season 7, Episode 14

The Plot

The episode begins with the phone ringing. Blanche answers and says that there is no Dorothy there and that he must have the wrong number despite the fact Dorothy is in the room. Blanche then says it was a man’s voice and that there was no way a man could want to talk with her.

When the phone rings a second time Dorothy answers it and, after a brief call, agrees to meet the other person for lunch. Dorothy reveals the person on the other end of the line is Mr. Gordon, her 11-grade English teacher from Brooklyn. She says he’s moved to Miami and is wanting to reconnect.

Sophia, Dorothy’s mother, reveals that Dorothy used to have a crush on Mr. Gordon (who was only 6 years older) and this crush drove her to do everything she could for him including grading his papers, doing his laundry and rotating his tires.

The next day, while waiting for Mr. Gordon to show up, Sophia expresses concern about Dorothy seeing him again. To calm her, Dorothy agrees to let her come along for lunch. However, once Mr. Gordon shows (and insists on her calling him Malcolm) she is instantly smitten and tries to push her mother out of the lunch date.

Over lunch, Mr. Gordon, now just Malcolm, reveals that, despite his retirement, he’s doing work writing for a book review in a local publication and was struggling with getting started. Dorothy agrees to help and they schedule a time to meet up the next day.

When Malcolm shows up the next day, he brings Dorothy flowers and even kisses her, sending Dorothy into a state of delighted shock.

That night, Dorothy is working on the article at the kitchen table and both Rose and Sophia express concern about how hard she is working on what is not her paper. However, Dorothy deflects saying that he is under a lot of pressure and, in a slip up, says she doesn’t want him to “kiss his deadline.”

After recalling how he kissed her, she goes back to work on the article.

Sometime later, Malcolm comes back by the house with an advance copy of the book review and, much to Dorothy’s horror, she quickly realizes it was just her version of the article without any changes. He says, “I didn’t need to add much” to which Dorothy responds, “I see you didn’t add my name to it.”

Malcolm promises to do it next time, but Dorothy says that there won’t be a next time. Malcolm attempts to explain that he rewrote Dorothy’s piece but the paper wanted a slew of changes with almost no turnaround time so he just submitted her version. He promises it won’t happen again to which Dorothy says, “No it won’t” before showing him the door.

The episode ends with Dorothy telling Sophia she was right and the two of them end the show with a long discussion keeping fantasies and dreams alive.

Understanding the Plagiarism

The plagiarism itself in this episode is easy to understand. Malcolm took a version of the review written by Dorothy and submitted it under his name. That is about as clear cut as a plagiarism can get.

Regardless of the time pressures he was under, he was in the wrong. His wrongness is made worse by three factors. First, this was an optional job for him and a retirement career. He didn’t need this job to live. He had the option to walk away if the pressure was too great or he wasn’t up to the task.

Second, he manipulated Dorothy into doing the work for him. Even if he did have feelings for Dorothy and was genuine with his overtures, he still exploited the fact that Dorothy had feelings for him to get her to do the work.

Finally, he was Dorothy’s English teacher and retired after forty years of work. If anyone should have known how wrong plagiarism is and worked to avoid it, it should have been him.

For Dorothy, the story is easy to understand. Her character on the show is someone that is extremely intelligent and a great writer but also someone that struggles with romance. This made her an easy target for Malcolm to exploit.

From the personal side, this story is a great one. It looks at how plagiarism sometimes happens and examines the emotional toll both from the plagiarist’s perspective and the victim’s. However, from a professional standpoint, it’s much less so.

Malcolm’s only punishment is that Dorothy boots him out of her life. She would be well within her rights to tell the editor of the paper about the plagiarism and to seek a correction for the article’s byline. There may be difficulties in proving that she wrote it (especially given the was set in 1992), but she certainly has the right to try.

In many ways, Malcolm is the winner in this story. If we assume his feelings for Dorothy were not genuine, he got the column printed and it was a success. He is free to either start writing his own work or conning someone else into “helping” him next time. He has no significant repercussions for his actions.

Dorothy did the right thing by throwing him out of her life, but Malcolm deserves professional consequences on top of the personal ones. After all, the newspaper and its readership were the ones ultimately lied to.

Still, the goal of the episode wasn’t to focus on the professional consequences of plagiarism and, instead, it focused on the personal ones. To that end, it did a solid job.

Bottom Line

The Golden Girls had a simple but effective way of approaching serious topics: Humanize them.

Rather than waxing poetic about moral platitudes or turning the show into an after school special, it focused on the human impacts of abstract concepts that often seems too distant or large to understand. It’s no different with plagiarism.

The show avoids making a big stand on plagiarism and the word “plagiarism” isn’t even used in the episode itself. Instead, it focuses on the personal toll that plagiarism takes and sought to humanize both the plagiarist and the victim.

While it may not be the most realistic approach when dealing with plagiarism, it is an effective one, especially if you’re trying to make people care about something that often seems too distant to be worried about.

Further Reading

Want more plagiarism in pop culture? Check out the other installments in this series below:

• The Facts of Life
• Leave it to Beaver
• The Waltons
• Jane the Virgin
• Law & Order: Criminal Intent (Part One)
• Law & Order: Criminal Intent (Part Two)
• Boy Meets World
• WKRP in Cincinnati
• Cheers
• Mystery Science Theater 3000
• Criminal Minds
• Arthur
• Star Trek: The Original Series
• Lou Grant
• The Goldbergs (Part 1)
• Fresh Off the Boat
• Instinct
• Elementary
• Re-Animator
• Coco
• Big Fat Liar
• The Kids are Alright
• King of the Hill (Part 1)
• Yesterday
• King of the Hill (Part 2)
• The Goldbergs (Part 2)
• Young Sheldon

President Donald Trump's hand-picked Postmaster General Louis DeJoy launched a major overhaul of the U.S. postal mail service. Among the changes, the two top executives overseeing day-to-day operations have been let go and replaced with DeJoy's new picks, according to a reorganization memo released Friday.

“The shake-up came as congressional Democrats called for an investigation of DeJoy and the cost-cutting measures that have slowed mail delivery and ensnared ballots in recent primary elections,” reports the Washington Post:

Twenty-three postal executives were reassigned or displaced, the new organizational chart shows. Analysts say the structure centralizes power around DeJoy, a former logistics executive and major ally of President Trump, and de-emphasizes decades of institutional postal knowledge. All told, 33 staffers included in the old postal hierarchy either kept their jobs or were reassigned in the restructuring, with five more staffers joining the leadership from other roles.

The reshuffling threatens to heighten tensions between postal officials and lawmakers, who are troubled by delivery delays — the Postal Service banned employees from working overtime and making extra trips to deliver mail — and wary of the Trump administration’s influence on the Postal Service as the coronavirus pandemic rages and November’s election draws near.

It also adds another layer to DeJoy’s disputes with Democratic leaders, who have pushed him to rescind the cost-cutting directives that have caused days-long backlogs and steady the Postal Service in the run-up to the election. DeJoy clashed with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), in a meeting on the issue earlier this week.

More at the Washington Post:
Postal Service overhauls leadership as Democrats press for investigation of mail delays

Pee-wee Herman for president? SURE, WHY NOT?! Stranger things have happened. At least Pee-wee's slogan is honest: "In your guts, you know he's nuts."

Go to Pee-wee's new store for the "Pee-wee for president" buttons (and tees and pins and stickers and hoodies) but stay for that terrific animated banner!

Francis, his running opponent, is taking a different route with his campaign slogan, the familiar "I know you are, but what am I?" one

images via Pee-wee Store

Mysterious packages of seeds have been turning up in American mailboxes, mailed from China. The consensus is that vendors are using the seeds to create "completed shipment" data as cheaply as possible to run up their ratings on Amazon and other online marketplaces.

Though officials worried the seeds might include invasive species, tests so far show they are "innocuous", reports CBS News. Mustard, cabbage, morning glory, mint, sage, rosemary and lavender are among the gifts falling from the cracks in the Amazon Marketplace.

Nonetheless, don't plant them, experts say. Read the FAQ posted by the USDA as a nice convenient PDF.

Robin Pruisner, a state seed control official at the Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship in Iowa, told Reuters that she has heard reports of a coating of possible insecticide or fungicide on the seeds, which could prove especially harmful to crops.

And if you receive them, it means someone knows enough about you to mail stuff to you and use the delivery confirmation to pose you as a verified customer on some online platform or other.

Los Angeles taxpayers are on the hook for about $55 million stemming from "dozens of lawsuits and claims involving Los Angeles County deputies associated with tattooed groups accused of glorifying an aggressive style of policing," reports The Los Angeles Times. These secret cop societies have names like the Vikings, Regulators, 3000 Boys, and the Banditos, and their street gang-like criminal behavior extends back to 1990. Elected sheriffs and an FBI probe have been unable to stop the violent groups from operating.

From The Los Angeles Times:

"This has been a cancer of the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department for decades," said Ron Kaye, an attorney who represented Carrillo. "The only reason that this type of illegal activity and lawlessness under the color of law can survive is if the department and its administration looks the other way."

Another lawsuit involving a bicyclist shot and killed by deputies in South L.A. was settled for $1.5 million in 2018 in part because one deputy had probably committed perjury when he denied that he was a member of the Regulators operating out of the Century station, officials said.

Several of the payouts involve the 3000 Boys and the 2000 Boys at Men's Central Jail. A top jail official had described exclusive gangs of deputies who would “earn their ink” by breaking inmates’ bones.

One third of US households failed to make a housing payment in the month of July, according to a survey by online rental platform Apartment List.

From CNBC:

About 19% of Americans made no housing payment at all during the first week of the month, and 13% paid only a portion of their rent or mortgage.

That’s the fourth month in a row that a “historically high” number of households were unable to pay their housing bill on time and in full, up from 30% in June and 31% in May. Renters, low-income and younger households were most likely to miss their payments, Apartment List found.

Image: Jumpstory / CC0

"Americans have gone from having access to most of the world to being banned from most of it," writes Indi Samarajiva for Medium Politics. "An American passport is now worthless."

The world now looks at Americans as unhygienic, arrogant, willfully ignorant, science hating, magical thinking, untrustworthy, selfish rule-breakers.

The most reliable projections are saying 200,000 dead and 50 million infected by election day in November. Even these projections struggle to account for completely irrational federal actions like denigrating masks, pushing to reopen early, and pushing students back into schools. This is not the absence of public health, this is its opposite.

It is, in effect, governance by COVID-19. Not a failed state. A plague state.
Even after election day, Donald Trump will still be in power for nearly 3 months, until January 20th. Besides impeaching a dead-duck President, there’s nothing America can do but wait, while COVID-19 grows ever stronger. Grows completely out of control. In a pandemic, days matter, hours matter. A year is entirely too late.

America will be lucky to exit this pandemic with less than a million dead and 100 million infected. The living will be lucky to exit their country within the next five years.

A 1% mortality rate might not seem like much, but the death rate for COVID-19 is just the tip of a massive iceberg that the US economy is heading towards full-steam ahead.

From Franklin Veaux's Quora post:

For every one person who dies:

• 19 more require hospitalization.
• 18 of those will have permanent heart damage for the rest of their lives.
• 10 will have permanent lung damage.
• 3 will have strokes.
• 2 will have neurological damage that leads to chronic weakness and loss of coordination.
• 2 will have neurological damage that leads to loss of cognitive function.

So now all of a sudden, that “but it’s only 1% fatal!” becomes:

• 3,282,000 people dead.
• 62,358,000 hospitalized.
• 59,076,000 people with permanent heart damage.
• 32,820,000 people with permanent lung damage.
• 9,846,000 people with strokes.
• 6,564,000 people with muscle weakness.
• 6,564,000 people with loss of cognitive function.

His conclusion: "The choice is not 'ruin the economy to save 1%.' If we reopen the economy, it will be destroyed anyway. The US economy cannot survive everyone getting COVID-19."

Image: Jumpstory / CC0

Numerous videos shot in the last two days show unidentified armed agents driving around Portland, Oregon, in unmarked vans and forcing protesters into them. The Department of Homeland Securuity admits they sent them in, but local authorities say they have had no contact with the armed men and are not coordinating with them.

Senator Jeff Merkley posted his outrage at the presence of the mystery forces: "Authoritarian governments, not democratic republics, send unmarked authorities after protesters," he wrote on Twitter.

The Portland Tribune:

"I am very concerned that I have seen these pictures (of federal officers) with no ID who are on the streets with camouflage and military-style equipment," he said. "Who are they? Were those U.S. marshals? What organization were they from? How many of them were on the street? Do their protocols allow them to shoot peaceful protesters with rubber bullets? I could get no answers.

"If they cannot be transparent with the public about their role and what they are doing, they should not be here at all. They are probably making the situation worse, rather than better."

Merkley said Driscoll would not discuss how the marshals are coordinating with Portland police — if at all — but promised someone would be designated as a liaison with police. Merkley said he got the impression that they are under a directive to do "whatever is needed" to defend federal buildings.

Some of those taken report being driven around aimlessly, and one reported that they were made to disembark in a building they were later told was the federal courthouse. Whether any have actually been arrested and charged is not clear; the agents' refusal to identify themselves or explain exactly why they are detaining people is one of the signatures of the reported incidents.

The lack of mainstream media coverage of this, especially given that Trump plainly stated he was planning to do it in other major cities, is alarming.

Let us do a little deductive reasoning, shall we? Copyright law has a term length. While that term length has been extended to the point of near-bastardization, that copyright exists on a term at all leads any investigator to conclude that the makers of that law intended for copyright protections on a given work to come to an end. If distinct characters and settings are offered copyright protections, as they are, then it reasons that those, too, were intended to have those protections end after a prescribed period of time. And if Sherlock Holmes is a literary character, an assertion that cannot be doubted, then it stands to reason that the law as written intended for the copyright protections covering his character were also to end after a period of time.

Therefore, all you Watson-esque readers witnessing my astounding logic, when the Estate of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle suggested back in 2013 in a lawsuit that the clock didn't start running as to when a character would enter the public domain until that character had ceased to be developed, the Estate's assertion clearly and undoubtedly runs afoul of the intention of those that crafted copyright law, since an author could simply forever-develop a character, and have him or her never enter the public domain! It's elementary!

But not to the Conan Doyle Estate, apparently, which has sued Netflix over its forthcoming movie about Sherlock's sister, entitled Enola Holmes. In the suit itself, the estate points out in the previous court ruling that, while most of the Sherlock stories and characters are in the public domain, the remaining ten are not. Which is true! But the estate also argues that the Sherlock character is different in those last ten stories because he... wait for it... is more emotional. And, therefore, since the Sherlock character in Enola Holmes is also emotional... copyright infringement!

"After the stories that are now in the public domain, and before the Copyrighted Stories, the Great War happened," states the complaint. "In World War I Conan Doyle lost his eldest son, Arthur Alleyne Kingsley. Four months later he lost his brother, Brigadier-general Innes Doyle. When Conan Doyle came back to Holmes in the Copyrighted Stories between 1923 and 1927, it was no longer enough that the Holmes character was the most brilliant rational and analytical mind. Holmes needed to be human. The character needed to develop human connection and empathy."

And so Sherlock "became warmer," continues the complaint, setting up the question of whether the development of feelings is something that can be protected by copyright and whether the alleged depiction of Sherlock in Enola Holmes is somehow derivative.

Imagine for a moment if this argument were allowed to win the day in court. Suddenly any author who managed to develop the characters in any series of novels would get never ending copyright on those characters. Luke Skywalker is suddenly a dick in Episode 8? New copyright term on his character. Harry Potter goes through puberty and gets romantic with his best friends little sister? Well, first, come on man, but also... new copyright term on his character!

That isn't how any of this is supposed to work, of course. Again, it's quite obvious that the framers limited copyright to a term for a reason, and that reason was that works and characters that are protected by copyright are supposed to eventually end up in the public domain. Playing these games as to when a character that is otherwise in that public domain got some characteristic to end run around the term and still get copyright protection doesn't change that.

If the court has any sense, this suit should find the garbage pail with the quickness.

In 2016, we looked at the idea of writing in a cleanroom and how citation and attribution is part of the writing process, not the editing process. 

Two years later, in 2018, we looked at the idea of citation and code-switching and how, as we change the way we communicate based on the audience, we also change the way we cite.

However, these ideas converge into a singular point: Citation isn’t just an ethical obligation; it’s also a core function of grammar and language. Being able to indicate which words and thoughts are our own versus what came from others is a key aspect of communication.

Teaching that skill as a writing skill can help students understand not only how citation works and why it’s essential, but make the process of including citations natural and automatic.

If we want to teach citation and discourage plagiarism, we can’t simply tell students it’s a responsibility and will face punishment if they don’t. We have to show why it’s a fundamental part of writing and communication. 

Why Citation is Important

The citation discussion is still too often framed as being a matter of ethics or duty. If you don’t cite, you’re a plagiarist and may face dire consequences.

The problem with that argument is that it doesn’t mesh with experiences students face outside the classroom. Post a meme on Facebook or Instagram? No one calls you a plagiarist if it’s not attributed. Post a video on TikTok? You likely don’t attribute the song or the dance.

It can be jarring for students to spend much of their day sharing content without citation and never face any consequences only to be warned of dire ones when doing so in the classroom.

Until teachers can explain this dichotomy, encouraging proper citation is going to be an uphill battle. However, fixing that problem will mean shifting the focus of plagiarism away from the ethics, and onto the implications citation has for communication.

Citation as Function of Communication

The purpose of citation isn’t merely to give credit where credit is due or bolster arguments, even though it does both things.

Instead, citation is intended to indicate the words and ideas that are not yours and make them stand apart from the ones that are. This form of highlighting is something we do all of the time, even in the most casual environments.

For example, if I’m going to tell a joke to a friend, I will likely preface it with, “Do you want to hear a joke I read/heard?” 

That simple statement has a complex meaning. In addition to asking if the other person wants to hear a joke (which from me they likely don’t), it makes it clear I didn’t create the joke, even if I don’t recall where I heard it.

Outside of stand-up comedians and other professional joke-writers, we are not expected to come up with our jokes and mostly repeat things we’ve heard. This is how jokes are shared and passed down. Despite that norm, we commonly preface jokes and indicate they are not our creation.

In other environments, there is even less expectation of originality. Memes are an often-cited example as there is very little expectation the person sharing a meme created it. One of the things that make memes so viral is just how freely they can be shared. 

Academic writing, however, is the opposite. The expectation is that every word and every idea is original to the author unless indicated otherwise. This is why academic writing has the citation standard it does, not just to give credit, not only to leave a trail for others to follow but to indicate what is novel in the paper.

Citation isn’t just an ethical obligation; it is a core function of communication. Looking at it in that way makes it easier to see why citation rules change when communication methods change. That, in turn, may help students better adapt to academic writing and even apply the lessons they learn there to other kinds of writing they encounter.

Bottom Line

The truth is this: Everyone cites content all the time.

Whether it’s as simple as “Dave told me” or as complicated as an MLA footnote, we constantly attribute the words and ideas of others when we are communicating. It’s a natural part of all communication.

The trick is expanding that idea to cover academic writing. Academic citation standards can seem foreign and weird to students used to hyperlinks and @mentions, but they are part of the academic style of writing. 

Teaching citation not as an ethical obligation but a natural part of language and communication can help students understand why there are different standards and why they should follow the ones given to them.

It may seem like a small victory, but students that understand are more likely to follow the guidelines and even make them a habit. Students with the habit are much less likely to plagiarize, even when confronted with temptation.

This approach makes students better communicators AND better researchers. That, in the end, should be the goal for anyone teaching students how to write. 

Starting Oct. 1, the St. Petersburg Police Department will send community and social service professionals instead of armed police officers to handle nonviolent situations as part of the Community Assistance Liaison (CAL) program. The program started in response to daily protests and public outcries that began May 31 after an incident of police brutality in Minnesota led to the death of George Floyd on May 25.

The program shows protesters that the police department is listening and it has aligned itself with the protesters’ goals to reduce crime and make the city safer without the need for police. It’s a step toward a reimagined police department that all cities should be taking. 

During a press conference July 9, Chief Anthony Holloway explained that these professionals would respond to calls relating to disorderly intoxication, drug overdoses, mental health or suicide crisis, disorderly juveniles, truancy, panhandling, homeless complaints and neighborhood disputes.

Holloway continued by saying that the police department is sometimes unequipped to help someone raise their kid or assist someone with a mental health issue. 

“Yes, we go to a lot of training, but not enough, we’re not experts in that,” Holloway said at the press conference.

The St. Petersburg Police Department was awarded $3.1 million in June and planned to use the funds to hire 25 new officers, but will now be using the money along with the funds they set aside to match the grant to retain a social service agency to respond to the listed nonviolent calls.

Many small changes are being made to try and satisfy larger demands from Black Lives Matter activists like Quaker Oats, which owns the Aunt Jemima syrup and pancake mix brand, pledging to change the brand’s name due to the name and logo being related to a stereotype of an older Black woman. While this is a good step and should be done, these changes are demonstrative and lack meaningful impact.

The CAL program reflects a primary demand of the Black Lives Matter movement — defunding the police.

Overall, this decision is a win for everyone. Hopefully, this will not be the last time a city official enacts change to make their community safer for everyone.

Americanism has a weird obsession with vague notions of "law and order." At its core, there's nothing unique about a society whose existence depends on a collective respect for its own internal rule system — indeed, that's basically just a society. But those who buy the narrative of Good Ol' American Jingoism love to toss around their platitudes about being a "nation of laws," without giving much thought to what that actually means, or who is served by that law and order. Whatever the status quo they got used to, that's the way things have always been, and thus, it is right.

Consider the US Department of Justice. I've never even given much thought to its founding; I hadn't thought much about the origins of police departments growing out of slave patrols until it was explicitly brought to my attention either.

But Smithsonian Magazine has a great new piece about the origins of the DoJ, which began on July 1, 1870 — exactly 150 years ago this month. And it turns out, it's a direct extension of Reconstruction-era struggles, and was created specifically to enforce racial equality by fighting voter suppression and the KKK:

In 1870, the United States was still working to bind up the nation’s wounds torn open by the Civil War. During this period of Reconstruction, the federal government committed itself to guaranteeing full citizenship rights to all Americans, regardless of race. At the forefront of that effort was [Amos T.] Akerman, a former Democrat and enslaver from Georgia, and a former officer in the Confederate Army.

[…]

Akerman’s work caught the attention of President Ulysses S. Grant, who promoted the Georgian to Attorney General in June 1870. On July 1 of that year, the Department of Justice, created to handle the onslaught of post-war litigation, became an official government department with Akerman at its helm. The focus of his 18-month tenure as the nation’s top law enforcement official was the protection of black voting rights from the systematic violence of the Ku Klux Klan. Akerman’s Justice Department prosecuted and chased from Southern states hundreds of Klan members. Historian William McFeely, in his biography of Akerman, wrote, “Perhaps no attorney general since his tenure…has been more vigorous in the prosecution of cases designed to protect the lives and rights of black Americans.”

This is a fascinatingly complex piece of history, and the article does a great job of tracing the origins of the DoJ all the way through to the founding of its offspring in the FBI (which … has certainly not been historically concerned with Black equality). And notice how there's nothing in the core founding of the DoJ that involves acting as a personal fixer for multiple Presidents.

If you ask me, these are the kinds of historical details that more of us should learn about, instead of staring at statues of subjugators.

Created 150 Years Ago, the Justice Department’s First Mission Was to Protect Black Rights [Bryan Greene/ Smithsonian Magazine]

Image of Amos Akerman: Public Domain via National Archives / Wikimedia Commons

Douglass' famous anti-slavery oration, one of the most important speeches in the history of the United States.

The Tampa Bay LGBT Chamber has partnered with the Tampa Downtown Partnership for Pride Month to reveal the permanent intersection mural located in the historic Tampa Heights neighborhood of Tampa’s Downtown. The vision of the painting is to signify unity and to showcase Tampa’s diverse community.

“At a time when we need to come together, we celebrate our community with the Pride Mural, signifying the unity of the LGBTQ+ community, with the Black Lives Matter Movement, people of color, and our Trans brothers and sisters. We honor each other and look to build a better future for generations to come,” said Justice Gennari, President & CEO of the Tampa Bay LGBT Chamber.

Prolific artist Cam Parker created the design

Local artist Cam Parker was commissioned for the project. Cam has painted several murals in the Tampa’s Downtown, including in the Tampa Heights neighborhood.

The City of Tampa has proclaimed Saturday, June 27, as “Unity Mural Day.” Volunteers will be painting murals at five locations within the City of Tampa. In conjunction with the City of Tampa’s Lift Up Local and Vision Zero initiatives, street murals are a way to celebrate the unique aspects of neighborhoods, strengthen community bonds, and improve the safety and livability for our communities.

Second in a series of intersection murals

Several weeks ago, the City unveiled a street mural at the intersection of Franklin Street and Twiggs.

Lift Up Luck—designed by local artist, Meaghan Farrell Scalise of Traditional and Digital Arts, LLC—celebrates Tampa’s resilient spirit, mirrors the city’s Lift Up Local program, and adds a touch of beauty to the intersection of Franklin St & Twiggs St in Tampa’s Downtown.

The post New Pride intersection mural to be painted in Tampa appeared first on That's So Tampa.

HOW CAN YOU NOT BE?

What I see most often in response to the protests, is people, often white people, saying Black folks have to be peaceful right now. We have to be calm because anger detracts from our message. We can’t be angry because then the racists win. We can’t be angry because it snuffs out our joy—as if joy is a limited thing that can only be bought with a special coupon. 

What I see most, are platitudes that erase the validity of Black emotions.

People say: 

“You’re better than this.”

“Being angry solves nothing.”

“They don’t deserve your anger.”

On the contrary. Racists deserve every sharp word my Black brothers, sisters, and I have to give. And then some. There is so much to be angry about, that to instead paste a neat smile across my face, and pretend that racism, murders, and systemic oppression haven’t happened, would be delusion.

I’m grieved by the Black mothers, fathers, cousins, aunties, brothers, and friends that have died at the hands of police. Sorrow shakes my every bone. So, I swallow it down and when I do, the sunburst of anger aching in my chest rises to replace it.

I’m angry that I had to tell my four-year-old last week about the protests, and the people “hating Mommy’s skin.” I’m angry that I then had to tell her that their hatred is also tied to her biracial heritage. Her face slackened, her eyes furrowed, and I could see the worry building inside her. I’m angry that I had to snatch away a little more of her innocence.

I’m angry that people who supposedly love me have turned their backs on me. Their ignorance and silence is only kindling.

I’m angry that it has taken so long for our distress to be heard. I’m angry that it has taken so long for our history to be considered. I’m angry that this is happening now. That it didn’t happen in 2016 or 2014, or end with all the stomping and marching my grandparents participated in.

I’m angry that it has taken near economic collapse, a pandemic, and quarantine to force people to sit with this nation’s raggedy truth.

To say that I should not be angry, means you don’t understand. To say that I should not be angry, means that you cannot empathize with me.

To say that I should not be angry, that I should be. . .

. . . anything else, something you can agree with, something more palatable to you, is you asking me to be submissive to your needs. 

Saying that Black folks shouldn’t be angry is admitting that we have disturbed you. It’s as if we spoke too loud. We interrupted your favorite television show, upended a coffee table in the safe confines of your home. Where once there was serenity, we’ve marred it. 

Good. This means our anger has upset you. It has nipped at the thing inside of you. Would you rather us go away? Prefer our silence so that you no longer have to experience discomfort? 

To tell me to not be angry, that it doesn’t have a place in protest, that it should be filed away, muted, is to invalidate it — is to invalidate me. 

Perhaps you only equate anger with violence, and not what else it could be: grief, pain, or righteousness.

Let me ask you this: Why should I not be angry?

Should I not be angry that I’m policed in grocery stores, and have been since I was a child? Should I not be angry that window shopping means something different for me than it does for you, that it means enduring surveillance and restraining my actions in the store so that no one thinks I’m a criminal?

Should I not be angry that job opportunities have been denied to me because of how I looked? Or given to me, not because I was qualified, but because in the words of employers, I was Black and made them look “good”? Should I not be angry that I’ve had to smooth down and rein in my Blackness so that I could be acceptable enough to earn a meager paycheck?

Should I not be angry at the folks who have called me n*gger, Black bitch, monkey, and whatever foulness shaped their lips?

Should I take the unjust deaths of Black men and women, Black queer folks, Black activists, and Black innocents with a smile on my face? Should I turn the other cheek and say, “Oh well. Time to keep on living! Gotta keep being respectable!”

How can you not be angry?

How can you see people dying on your television, on your phones, on your computers, and not be disgusted? How can you not see that the folks whose lives are being stolen are friends, loved ones, people who deserve to live?

How can you not care? 

Or, maybe, you don’t.  

—

The White House

By Claude McKay (1889-1948)

Your door is shut against my tightened face,

And I am sharp as steel with discontent;

But I possess the courage and the grace

To bear my anger proudly and unbent.

The pavement slabs burn loose beneath my feet,

And passion rends my vitals as I pass,

A chafing savage, down the decent street;

Where boldly shines your shuttered door of glass.

Oh, I must search for wisdom every hour,

Deep in my wrathful bosom sore and raw,

And find in it the superhuman power

To hold me to the letter of your law!

Oh, I must keep my heart inviolate

Against the potent poison of your hate.

The post Black People Are Allowed To Be Angry appeared first on On Our Moon.

The ethics of ghostwriting are often the subject of much debate. Though often seen as plagiarism, such as with the battle over Christiane Serruya story, it remains a common practice for many books and creations in general.

Simply put, there are times where, despite someone’s name appearing on the cover of a book, there’s no sincere audience expectation that they actually wrote it. This is also true for many speeches, celebrity social media accounts and so forth.

But all of this raises an interesting question: Who owns the copyright of a work when the name attached to it is different from the person who created it? If copyright normally rests with the creator of a work, how is ghostwriting handled from a legal perspective?

The answer is both simple and complicated at the same time. However, a good place to look for the answer to that question is in Bangladesh, where a recent case highlighted just how muddy these waters can be.

The Spy and The Copyright Office

In Bangladesh, the Masaud Rana book series of espionage thrillers is as popular as it is prolific. First launched in 1966 and continuing today, the series has more than 460 novels under it.

While the books are attributed to author Qazi Anwar Hussain, it’s an open secret that the books themselves are actually produced by a group of ghostwriters with many fans saying that they can tell which author wrote which of the books.

One of the main ghostwriters, Sheikh Abdul Hakim, recently filed a petition with the country’s Copyright Office to attempt to gain control of the copyright over the 260 books he had penned. According to Hakim, there was no contract or agreement in place between him and the publisher and, as such, the copyright in those books should transfer to him.

The Bangladesh Copyright Office ultimately agreed with him and granted him the copyright in the books he wrote, which included 50 books in a separate series. According to the Copyright Office, Hakim was neither an employee nor a staffer of Hussain or the publisher and there was no freelance contract.

As such, there was nothing to stop him from claiming copyright in the books and nothing to prevent him from collecting royalties for his work.

But while it’s an interesting case it’s also an unusual one. Such squabbles over the copyright of a ghostwritten work are surprisingly rare. The reason is quite simple: Most of the time, there IS some sort of contract.

It’s All About the Contract

Hakim’s case is very much the exception, not the rule. Most of the time, ghostwriters do not reserve any claim in the copyright of the work they produce. The reason is that most ghostwriters have clearly laid out terms that prevent them from later trying to claim ownership of the work they produce.

This happens one of two ways:

1. Direct Employment: Often times ghostwriters are direct employees for whomever they are writing for and it is very much their full-time job. For those writers, the copyright in the work they make as part of that employment goes directly to their employer.
2. Freelancer Contract: If the ghostwriter is a freelancer, then the contract that they sign will either designate the work as a work for hire (if appropriate) or will otherwise state that the copyright is to be transferred to the person paying for the work.

It’s only in situations like Hakim’s where he is not an employee and there was no contract that a ghostwriter can come back and claim ownership of the work they did. However, even then, it’s not a guarantee.

In the United States, the courts have to look at what both parties intended based upon their actions and try to draw some kind determination of who should own the rights. It’s a messy, complicated process that often leaves neither side happy.

However, those situations are very rare overall.

That said, all of this highlights the importance of being careful when approaching ghostwriting contracts and agreements. It is especially crucial that such agreements spell out who owns the end product. While this is true of all freelancing agreements, with ghostwriting arrangements the danger is especially potent as the person whose name on the work may end up not owning or controlling it.

Bottom Line

Ultimately, a ghostwriter isn’t significantly different from any other freelancer or hired writer. The ownership of the piece hinges upon the simple questions of whether they are an employee and, if not, what the terms of the contract were.

Things only get messy when either there is no contract or the contract is poorly written. Contracts are ultimately about setting expectations between the parties and, when those expectations are not clearly understood, problems arise. That’s true across all areas of law.

Still, ghostwriting feels very different because there’s the very real danger the person who is listed as the author of a work may not end up owning it. As such, if you’re recruiting a ghostwriter, it’s crucial to be extra careful to nail these contracts and make sure everything is thoroughly understood.

Otherwise, the situation could turn very messy, very fast.