A.I: Radical Technology and Racial Divide

A.I, short for artificial intelligence, has been in constant improvement and development, going as far to be called "revolutionary." Except, it has only one flaw. It lacks in facial and vocal recognition for people who happen to be non-white. Misidentification of people because of A.I claiming there was a warrant or 87% similarity to a wanted person, no identification of non-white users, and A.I misinterpretation of words due to an accent. 

There are two notably superpowers leading the A.I development on a global scale. China and the United States. The top 10 A.I superpowers can be viewed here. Taiwanese computer scientist, businessman, and writer Kai-Fu Lee is a leading expert and speaker on how these two superpowers have been competing for A.I dominance on a hemispherical scale, and possibly even a global scale. Two global superpowers have advanced past other developed countries in the race of A.I development. But what's wrong with this picture?

These are countries with both subconscious and conscious bias. 

Take China in 2022. It's a "surveillance capitalistic" nation. A surveillance nation, as defined by Shoshona Zuboff, is the "unilateral claiming of private human experience as free raw material for translation into behavioral data." There is a constant surveillance presence, like street cameras routed to a police-viewing center, throughout the country. There is a much heavier concentration of surveillance in the Xinjiang region which is home a minority of China called the Uyghurs. Surveillance, predominantly supplied by Huawei, here is something more... authoritarian and invasive. See Chinese surveillance below:

Now, let's take a view into the United States and her companies' versions of A.I: Google Home, Amazon's Alexa, Apple's face and finger recognition on their iPhones and MacBooks respectively. How well developed is A.I in a country as diverse as the United States? It's obviously well-developed enough for mass production, but it's not made very accurate to the American consumer. 

The 2020 U.S Census states that Whites have dipped from 63.7% (2010) to 57.8% in racial or ethnic prevalence. Recorded Latino/Hispanic numbers are 18.7%. The Black American population is at 12.1%. This means that facial and vocal A.I systems must be updated to better recognize this growing number of diversity. For instance, a number of Latino/Hispanic adults retain their parents accents, which cause issues with a system like Amazon's Alexa recognizing what is being told. Sometimes, people have to change their accent in order for A.I to recognize a voice. 

Other times, facial recognition systems used for a larger company, organization, or school does not individualize recognize a face with no white features, like skin tone or facial structure. Features are generalized and the technology can be fooled. 

So how much trust are you willing to put in your A.I system? Is your Alexa something you're going to rely to understand you the majority of the time or will you need to change your accent? Is your organization's facial recognition system able to recognize you? Is your surveillance system accurately able to identify people?

The world is a big place with a lot of people. A lot of people in a big place have a lot of time, resources, and intelligence. More information may lead to an overwhelming amount. More information may lead to a bias in coding or development. 

Ask yourself: is your technology bias?

KEY: Each One Teach One on the Printing Press

Communication methods have been constantly evolving from oral communication, to paper communication, to communication through technology. Today, communication happens orally, on paper (through written or printed word), on social media, and even through the use of hands by gestures and sign languages.

At certain moments of history have provided explosions in communication methods. One of the more notable technologies in Western European history is the revolutionary printing press (seen above), initially a simple creation requiring attendants.

The History

Invented by Johannes Gutenberg (circa 1400-1468, seen right), full name Johann Gensfleisch zur Laden zum Gutenberg, the printing press was born in a period of uncertainty to its inventor. Gutenberg was entangled with legal issues shortly after his business partner, and friend, passed. These issues threatened to erase his name from creating the first Western printing technique. What the legal proceedings did succeed in doing at the time was sullying Gutenberg's name, as he died penniless in 1468.

While the printing press was an invention built in the wrong time, its Asian counterpart and inspiration was not. The Chinese and Koreans had their own variations of printing. For instance, China printed via "relief blocks," which titled the printing technique as "relief printing." The Western printing press moved from private production to public production in 1454. 

By the end of the 15th Century, roughly 8 million books had been printed by means of the press. In 1517, Martin Luther used the press to produce the infamous 95 Theses that caused a schism in the Catholic Church. Once this religious revolution happened, the press became a means of spreading ideas: religious, political, and otherwise.

An Invention that Failed its Inventor Proves Itself to the World

While Johannes Gutenberg died penniless and ashamed, the printing press created a means of intellectual revolution. The Reformation of the Catholic Church was bolstered and recognized by the masses due to the ability to print religious intellect that did not align with the Church, which had massive influence over Middle Age Europe. 

The Enlightenment, a time of revolution in philosophy, scientific investigation, government and human thought, would've failed to take off or grown mutated in predominately French ideas between countries. The United States may have never gained its independence or written her Constitution. Revolutions that created sovereign nations might've collapsed early in their battles. Philosophical and political, respectively, Enlightenment thinkers Voltaire, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Montesquieu were only a few thinkers that were able to spread their ideas so quickly, thanks to the quick production and distribution of their written works.

While less-than-wanted or agreeable ideas were also spread out as a consequence of the mass production of an evolved printing press, it created a need for people to debate and learn to understand various ideas, theories and manners of how to approach ideas they may not be in agreement with. An invention is never 100% good just as the world is not 100% pure and good. An invention is as its users intend it. 

However, the question remains: was the printing press a critical piece of history? Did it create history as we know it?

Unheard Anti-War Voices

2001: the year the United States self-inserts its military power into the Middle East.
2021: the year the United States pulls out of the Middle East due to agreement with the Taliban.

The U.S thrives on war both that it is involved in and not, be it economically or socially. It's all a matter of power. Due to recent political shams, issues, and shifts, the United States has lost much of its international power and is struggling to maintain its power over the youth of the United States.

Th United States has been conceived as a global superpower. Its international standing used to be the ever-powerful "world police" or "international cops." Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S passport was one of the most "powerful" passport possible until plummeting significantly through the ranks of passport power. Below, you can see how much of the world was occupied by U.S forces. The white regions show no American military presence whereas the darkest areas are significantly occupied, whether due to war troops or American bases.

 

Sites like antiwar.com keep people informed of the current wars (like the Ukraine-Russia war that erupted earlier in 2022) more than encouraging less. However, staying informed through a less bias website may diminish the power of American propaganda, especially that of which surrounds the politically-intriguing theme of "war" that the American people would prefer to not have.  

American propaganda can be seen in how students are taught history and current affairs. For instance, the United States paints itself as a Land of Dreams and the "greatest country" in the world, however does not allow for students to learn about American failures in human rights concerns, war, and racial views. Due to wars in the Middle East and dislike of heavy immigration of people of color (Latinos) coming through the Mexico-United States border, American politics encouraged discrimination of Islam and Latinos by calling the minorities that fall under this topics any horrible name between "terrorist" and "rapist" and "drug dealers." When you search for United States propaganda, there are only suggestions for the World Wars, not today.

The United States is becoming blind this way.

In the website called The American Conservative, alternate and unbiased views of American work in international affairs are explored. Exclusively international affairs (no American interference) are also explored. Sites like those mentioned in this writing are being underused and covered up by "bigger" news and media because that's not what brings in money or appeals to the "American way."

When talking about war and its propaganda in your country, be mindful of what it meant historically. In the United States, the "American Dream" was and remains to be exclusively for the straight, white, Christian working male, who also happens to be rich. Immigrants, racial minorities, religious minorities, et cetera, are excluded... and the number of straight, white, Christian working males is declining. That kind of dream is dying. Voices of the minorities are rising up. 

Who's to say speech minorities like antiwar.com and The American Conservative won't also rise up? In order to facilitate speech diversity and combat propaganda, it's the responsibility of the people to educate themselves and fight back. 

So fight back and educate yourselves.

KEY: Eight Values of Free Expression

As stated by the First Amendment of the United States, the People are promised the right to 

• Respect of their establishment of religion
• Free practicing of their faith
• Freedom of speech
• Freedom the press
• Peaceably assemble
• And to petition the government 

In the Speech Theories section of medlawlit, there are also eight values of free expression written out for observation and understanding. They are as follows:

1. Marketplace of Ideas (AKA Discovery of Truth): first suggested by John Milton, saying that when truth and falsehood are allowed to freely fight, truth wins out and is stronger when fought over. Milton argued against a licensing/publishing license.
2. Participation in Self-Government: suggested by Alexander Meiklejohn that citizens will not make wise and informed choices in elections if candidates and proponents of certain policies are restricted in their ability to communicate positions. 
3. Stable Change (AKA Safety Valve): suggested by Benedict Spinoza. A society in which angry and alienated citizens are allowed to speak their mind, or "vent," will be more stable, as people will be less likely to resort to violence. Ultimately, it is in the governments own self-interest to allow such venting.
4. Individual Self-Fulfillment (AKA Self-Actualization): suggested by C. Edwin Baker. Free speech enable individuals to express themselves and thereby create their own identity, and possibly relationships with kindred spirts in the process. Freedom of speech becomes an aspect of human dignity, agency and autonomy. 
5. Check on Governmental Power (AKA Watchdog Role: elaborated by Vince Blasi. Freedom of the press enables citizens to learn about abuses of power, and then do something about the abuse at the ballot box if they feel so moved. Enables the People to be part of the check-and-balance system to restrains government power and abuse of power.
6. Promote Tolerance: elaborated by Lee Bollinger. Argued that freedom of speech, especially through our  practice of extending protection to speech that we find hateful or personally upsetting, teaches us to become more tolerant in other aspects of life.
7. Promote Innovation: elaborated by Jack Balkin. Community in which free speech is valued and protected is likely to be a more energized, creative, interesting society as its citizens actively fulfill themselves in many diverse and interesting ways.
8. Protect Dissent: elaborated by Steve Shiffrin. Our system is not supposed to be one of mob rule. The First Amendment protects minority views, no matter how unpopular. You have a strongly protected right to disagree with the government — and everyone else. In fact, it is your patriotic duty to criticize the government.

Note that the First Amendment also protects hate speech under its right to freedom of speech due to possible learning moments society may learn from, as well as create societal tolerance. The extent of the First Amendment has been reviewed in cases that reach even the Supreme Court.

Which of the Eight do I Value Most?

When I say I value two of the previously mentioned Values of Free Expression the most, it may sound like it's from naivety. I value the Check on Governmental Power (Watchdog Role) value and the Marketplace of Ideas (Discovery of Truth) value interchangeably. Sometimes, the former is valued more, whereas other times, it's the latter that is valued more. They feel the most important to me because they are the most personal to me. 

I'm first-generation Mexican- and Serbian-American (flags seen above). I identify more as Latina/Hispanic (specifically Mexican, of course) due to more cultural exposure to various Latin cultures. My entire life, but especially during my high school years one (Trump administration and currently, Biden administration), I have been lucky to be white-passing. Mexicans are incorrectly generalized as the whole of the Latino/Hispanic population, especially those who are coming through the U.S.-Mexico border. All of these migrants must live at risk of the stereotypes projected by white American Hollywood: Mexicans are all drug dealers, dangerous, low-level workers or exotic. A significant of what and where American citizens benefit from are because of underpaid Latinos/Hispanics, predominately the men in the family.

Through the Watchdog Role, there can be protections for immigrants (not just Latino/Hispanic, but they are a dominant demographic in the immigration numbers). The Immigration and Customs Enforcement department, or ICE, has been known for and exposed in a Netflix documentary for its common inhumane treatment of detained immigrants, which are also majority Latino/Hispanic. In construction, an occupation these immigrants can more easily acquire, the government and law enforcement could step in to force the companies that are underpaying and/or not paying their immigrant workers at all to pay livable wages and protections as construction work is a risky job.

Through the Discovery of Truth, stereotypes of Latino/Hispanics can be disregarded, removed, and even not capitalized on as it has been. As seen in the table below (titled "How Latinos are perceived in Television and Film"), Latinos have more often been given the position or role of criminal, gardener, or maid by at least 2.5 times more than other roles. Latinos/Hispanics are limited in their capacity in the real world because employers are likely to view their possible Latino/Hispanic employees to be a negative addition to their business. Using the Discovery of Truth washes away a negative stereotype on Latino and encourages equal opportunity for Latino/Hispanics, and even immigrants, who often immigrate to the United States thinking that it's a Land of Dreams for all, not just whites and white-passing individuals. 

All values are important, but when you're in a minority by stance in issues or by racial difference, searching for the truth or checking your government becomes rather predominant. What's your values? Why do you think your values aligned that way? Is it influenced by racial stance? Politics? Your upbringing, therefore the culture of the times? 

Everything has influence. However, not everything has equal influence or importance. 

The Supreme Court of the US or, simply, "SCOTUS"

 

Housed in a building shaped in the grandeur of Greco-Roman elegance and strength, the Supreme Court of the United States of America both is the highest level of judicial power and shapes the definition of federal-level justice... divided between a dated white view and modern view carried by younger and/or colored Justices. A Justice on the Supreme court is simply a judge that was elected by the currently-serving President of the United States (POTUS) and serving on the bench of 9 Justices. 

116 Justices have served since the starting of SCOTUS. The nine currently serving are as follows:

• Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.: selected by George W. Bush, serving since 2005
• Justice Clarence Thomas: selected by George H.W. Bush, serving since 1991
• Justice Stephen J. Breyer: selected by Bill Clinton, serving since 1994
• Justice Samuel A. Alito: selected by George W. Bush, serving since 2006
• Justice Sonia Sotomayor: selected by Barack Obama, serving since 2009
• Justice Elena Kagan: selected by Barack Obama, serving since 2010
• Justice Neil M. Gorsuch: selected by Trump, serving since 2017
• Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh: selected by Trump, serving since 2018
• Justice Amy Coney Barret: selected by Trump, serving since 2020 

(See the Supreme Court website for changes.)

AN HONORABLE MENTION

Currently serving in the U.S. Court of Appeals in the D.C. Circuit, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson (seen below) is set to succeed current Justice Stephen Breyer, who is expected to retire at the end of his term in the summer. President Biden selected Brown Jackson to look like America and "reflect the full talents and greatness of our nation." 

What Didn't I Know? 

I grew up relatively aware of legal proceedings and legal-centric issues. When I wasn't watching kid shows, I was watching cop shows, like Law and Order or the relatively-light NCIS. However, what these shows didn't tell me were the dates and history of cases that create what's so ingrained in the legal system and the law enforcement procedure.

For instance, in Law and Order and Law and Order: SVU, theres always the assistant district attorney (ADA), the district attorney (DA), or one even the defense attorney in a variety of episodes bringing up the fact that evidence which was obtained illegally, or without a search warrant, cannot be used in a criminal case. This precedent was declared in 1961 in the case of Mapp vs Ohio. 

Precedents like those aren't always so explicit. In the Bill of Rights, it wasn't clear whether flag burning or potentially offensive speech was protected under the First Amendment's statement of "free speech." Texas vs Johnson, settled in 1989, found that speech or action presented in the case was in fact protected by the First Amendment. 

A rather currently-popular case, Roe v Wade, was settled in 1973 by a majority ruling. As stated by History.com, the Justices at the time ruled "that women have a right to an abortion during the first two trimesters." The case, which challenged the constitutionality of Texan laws criminalizing abortion, was presented by a single pregnant woman (Jane Roe) and other appellants (et al). This case in its entirety is what is considered a landmark case.

Landmark case: a court case studied for its historical and legal significance

Roe v Wade protects a woman's liberties of her own body and has been standing as the most pivotal example of protections of women. It prevents excessive governmental interference with a woman's right and ability to get an abortion. However, recently, the case has been threatened with removal, therefore jeopardizing the most basic of human rights for women in the U.S.: anatomical freedom and personal liberty.

SCOTUS is not Ultimate 

There wasn't much for me to learn about SCOTUS. Landmark cases and their rulings, like Roe v Wade, are subject to the culture of the times and the progression of the current Justices. Originally, Roe v Wade passed with 7-2 favor. Today, with the older white Justices and Trump's elected Justices, there is an extreme risk that Roe v Wade could be repealed. 

However, in a certain way, states have already repealed the rulings. Texas, lately notorious for anti-"progressive" laws (anti-LGBTQ+ laws like the Don't Say Gay law, anti-abortion laws, and limiting of women's other rights), has already put the Heartbeat Bill into effect, banning and therefore criminalizing abortion after 6 weeks of pregnancy. (Most women don't realize they're pregnant at this stage.) 

What should you take away from this? SCOTUS is not ultimate law. It's simply the federal precedent and standard, not binding every state to its standards. Texas, as controversial as its constant jabs at women's rights are, is allowed to pass laws in contradiction of even a 1973 Supreme Court case, landmark or not. Each state may pass its own laws, and every law or ruling has its victims.

Five Sources I use

 

It should come as no surprise when a journalism student or an established journalist says they're never willing to trust a single source of news. Currently, I'm a first-year journalism student with heavy involvement in news casting. On Mondays, I work my role in a broadcasting club as part of cast, the talent, for international news. One of my responsibilities as anchor is to find stories, verify them, and write a script. My minimum number of sources to verify is three different writers and from different news stations. I don't trust any source as individual sources, but I trust the same story across different writers and stations.

For now, out of the sources I've used, some are listed below:

1. CNN
2. BBC
   
3. Euronews
4. NPR
5. NBC

CNN: Cable News Network

Headquartered in Atlanta, CNN was founded in 1980 as a 24-hour news network. CNN has been subject to biased writing and reporting like so many sources, so it's a source I prefer to use more like journalistic Wikipedia. It's a start to searching what story I may be more interested in investigating and/or reporting on international news for Monday broadcast. The network provides a quick story one can skip through and provides images related to the story. Much of CNN's headlines are also the same headlines to other networks, which is why I call CNN a Wikipedia of journalism. It provides a start in networks based in the U.S.A.

BBC: British Broadcasting Corporation

Founded in 1922 Central London, London, BBC provides anything between World News to Business and Technology. CNN provides a little less than one of its European, specifically UK, counterparts. I use the BBC because researching and reviewing international news isn't really international research if its all done exploring the story exclusively from an American point of view. While the BBC provides more information and an alternate understanding, its website is a little busier and harder to skim through than CNN's website. However, it's a good beginning to cross reference information. Additionally, since the BBC isn't an American publication, the BBC provides an external view into the United States and other Americas.

Euronews

Euronews is set up a little differently than the previously mentioned sources and a fairly new publication, as it was founded in 1993 in Lyon, France in order to provide a European view. It accounts for general European news, world news, sports and travel-based stories, like culture. It's a blend of BBC and CNN in its set up as well. The headlines are organized with large images like CNN organizes their stories, but the writing is similarly broken up like how the BBC writes and places images. Euronews is also like the European journalists' Wikipedia: general, short, sweet, and a starting point for European news. I find some stories on the front page of Euronews that I have to dig through to find in American or more national-based publications.

NPR: National Public Radio

NPR is a non-profit broadcasting station with private and public funding going into their East Coast HQ (in Washington DC) and their West Coast HQ (in California). The East Coast HQ is the main headquarters and was founded in 1970. Unlike a majority of sources, NPR sorts its stories through News, Culture, Podcasts and Music. Live updates are on the primary home page. NPR shares most of its top headlines with CNN and is another research starting point to cross reference. I usually opt not to use NPR as a main source, but rather a base to find stories off of and grow from there with other sources.

NBC: National Broadcasting Company

Lastly, NBC, based primarily in NYC since 1926, is a rather popular news station, reporting from international news to entertainment both in broadcast and print. It's another American publication sharing much with other American news stations but with a slightly bigger amount of stories and writers on similar stories. While I do like using NBC as a more credible source than CNN, it doesn't provide as easy access to stories without having to specify "X news" in a search engine. Providing live updates and a multitude of stories, NBC is one of the main sources I reference to verify a publication I don't trust as much (like CNN). 

Trust but verify every source.