It's Time to Let Go

     It has been twenty three years since "one of the greatest art thefts of all time" took place at the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum and just now the FBI finally thinks they have cracked the case. The FBI, the museum, and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts are all simply asking for the pieces to return, instead of going after their new suspect (NBC article). They have to result to such a desperate measure as asking for the items back because they can no longer prosecute the thieves. So, instead of prosecuting the people responsible for this lengthy investigation, they are pleaing for the art work to be returned for a five million dollar reward.
     However, the people with the painting should not be too quick to turn themselves and the art in. Even though the FBI and Justice Department claim "recovery over prosecution" there is also another plea from them stating, "bring back the artworks and the federal prosecutors will consider not filing charges" (NBC article). "Consider" as in to think carefully about. The FBI should realize that any threat over possible prosecution is not going to welcome people to bring back the stolen items.
     So, if prosecutors are till "considering" prosecuting people then I guess we can say that recovering the lost art is not the FBI's, the Attorney's office, or the museum have in mind. I think this highlights a problem in America. I feel we always need some kind of justice. Even after twenty three years and the stautes of limitation having passed on the case, people are still looking for someone to "pay". The U.S. has the largest amount of prisoners in the world and now we know why, someone has to be held responsible.

Mickey Mouse is In Charge

Dreams may becoming true but who's dreams are they?

     Since I was very young my family and I have always loved Disney. I mean everything about Disney! I think I have been to Disney World seven times, I know we own most of the movies Disney has made, and I have watched the shows on Disney channel since I was born. Disney has had a huge impact on my life and I guess I didn't realize how big Disney's impact really is, until I read a blog post from a classmate called, "Media Dominance".
      My classmate does not enjoy Disney World like I do but, I can not deny that I also feel as if I am "stuck in a bubble" when I go there. Disney has made it so that they control everything you do while in Disney World. And not only does Disney control customers while they are in there territory they also control us from our own homes. Like my classmate says in her blog, "the channels ABC, The Disney Channel, SoapNet, ESPN, A&E, The History Channel, Lifetime, and E!, are all owned, or partially owned, by Disney, along with 27 radio stations and numerous publications". With that much reach Disney is controlling what music we hear, what we watch on television, and what we read.
     This makes me wonder who really has control over us? Is it the government? Ourselves? Our elders? Or the thousands of companies that surround us in our daily lives? Looking at how much power Disney has that can impact our lives, I know see that companies can eventually start to control the way we think. Our minds think things based on what we see, read, and hear and if companies have control of all of though they therefore can start to control us. Who do you think has the greatest influential power in our society?

I'm Done With TV Tokenism! Psych!

     This blog was inspired by my teacher Mr.Bolos's post on "TV Tokenism" and a project on tokenism that I am in the midst of for school. I am finding the subject of TV tokenism so interesting that I wanted to share another analysis of a current day television show. For those who need to play a little catch up, TV tokenism is prevalent in shows where there are those "token"/necessary minority roles. Television networks try to make all of their viewers happy to avoid problems such as people claiming a show is racist. So, in order to keep happy viewers TV shows attempt to show diversity and equality but, without pushing the boundaries of what is accepted by most of society.

Psych season one cast photo

     The show, where I have found some typical TV tokenism is Psych. Psych's main character (Sean) is the white man on the left of the photo, who is a fake psychic but, uses his real power, to notice small details, to solve crimes. And of course we can't forget about Sean's minority sidekick/ best friend (Gus) who assists Sean in his adventures.
     In the cast photo to my right we are quickly drawn to Sean, who is looking very thoughtful at the camera while seeming suspicious and a little crazy. Right away we can Sean is a very complex character who thinks a lot and the crazy look gives us a sense that Sean might be a little quirky. The white male lead is usually a very complex character that the audience wants to try and figure out. Behind Sean we see Gus. He is standing behind Sean, perhaps he is always living in Sean's shadow? Gus is a much less complex character. His facial expression says little to nothing and in the actual show we know very little about Gus. However, USA couldn't let Gus come in second to Sean on everything so, they gave him a little bit of authority with his morals and knowledge. This is seen in the cast picture because Gus is dressed much nicer than Sean, making him somewhat of an "Authority Minority".  In the show, Gus often has to be the moral compass of the partnership and pull back Sean when he gets a little too wild. By giving this small amount of power to Gus, USA stills gets to keep the white male in the center whilst giving the black community the equality they want.
How purposeful do you think TV tokenism is? Where do you see TV tokenism in the future?

I'll Give You a Dollar to Shut Up!

Today it was announced that the Los Angeles public school system is going to pay $30 million dollars to settle some of the 191 claims of sexual lewd acts by a former elementary school teacher. The article claims that about 58 of the students' lawsuits will be settled by the price of $400,000 to $500,000 dollars. The alleged offender's victims were students ranging from 7-10 years. Besides the students who are settling their claims, their are also 23 others who have filed criminal cases for which the former teacher is still being held for.
All of the settlements will be paid by tax dollars and the elementary school's insurance fund. David Holmquist, general counsel for the Los Angeles Unified School District, claims, "we are not admitting liability" but, "we thought we would put this behind us by resolving it through remediation and early dispute resolution." Although Holmquist is not "admitting" anything, by definition "remediation" means the correction of something bad and it sounds as if the settlements are an attempt at an apology to the affected families. Why would the school system going so far to "put this behind us" if they weren't guilty?
Where I find the issue here is the "money makes everything better" attitude. With these many children claiming sexual lewd acts it seems very likely the teacher is guilty and in that case I think these children need more than money to help them. Not only could they suffer physical damage from their offender but also at such a young age they are vulnerable and could end up with serious mental/emotional issues. This teacher should be brought to justice for all the crimes he committed and not have some of his wrongs made right by the victims getting paid of with their own tax dollars!
Do you think that money can settle these wrongs? Why do you think the school system is trying to settle all these claims with money rather than in court?

Good News! You're a Minority

     In kindergarten my teacher always said my classmates and I were all the same no matter what we looked like because it was what was on the inside that counted. Only later in life did I find out that how we look not only matters but in some cases it is more important then what's on the inside. For this blog to make more sense I would also like to note that I have tan skin from my mom's Chinese nationality.

     Last month, my field hockey team was chosen to be the face of a national campaign for USA field hockey. I did not think my coach would ever choose me for the photo shoot so, I was flattered when I received the e-mail. Until, I saw who else was on the mailing list: the one other Asian girl, the only four black girls in the club, and two white girls. My coach even quoted, "this photo shoot might not work if we can't show the diversity of our club so, I hope all you girls can make it". She uses the word "show" as if we have to prove something. 

I made the picture small because
it's not very flattering but, at least
it shows USA field hockey
welcomes all races!

     It's not only my coach who tries to prove diversity. My American Studies class has been reviewing television shows and how they try to prove their own diversity and fight racism complaints. Even out of television, places in our reality such as colleges and businesses use people just for their ethnicity. I think this becomes a problem when people start to receive things only for being a different skin color. Not only is it unfair to the less wanted majority races, but it also does not feel good knowing you were only chosen for something based on what's on the outside.
Do you think our world could handle buisnesses and colleges that don't have to reach diversity quotas?