https://www.democracyworkspodcast.com/

This week I listened to a recent podcast on the democracy works site entitled “Give me liberty or give me Covid-19?” It was really interesting and concerned the recent outbreak of American protests at state capitols to persuade state governments to reopen. 

So the podcast began by examining the concept of federalism. Essentially, federalism defines distinct roles of state and national governments. Currently with governors enforcing their own stay-at-home orders and President Trump wanting to push for an earlier reopening, part of the discussion now is about whether or not the governor’s are overstepping their bounds. Apparently many citizens seem to think so as protests for reopening have been popping up in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and California to name a few. Chris Fitzsimon analyzes what reporters have observed at these protests and whether or not these protests are justified. 

What concerns me most about the reports of these protests, is that the participants are not taking any safety precautions. Reporters stated that very few protestors were actually wearing masks and hardly any were maintaining social distancing guidelines. To me, if a state wants to show that it is ready to reopen, the citizens would stay at home to flatten their curve and show that the number of new cases in their state has been decreasing. These protests are not conducive for anyone and seem more like a dangerous event that poses serious health and security risks. 

In addition, an interesting topic covered in the podcast was about how these protests were in direct violation of federal orders, and consequently President Trump’s orders. The President has already outlined the course of action for states to reopen based on the stipulation that a state can reopen if it does not have more than 50 new cases per 100,000 people over 14 days. But the majority of protestors seem to be Trump supporters and reporters have even described the protests as pseudo Trump rallies. Thus the podcast seemed to suggest that these protests are not actually motivated by anger at violations of federalism or the constitution, but rather politically motivated and partisan in nature. Fitzsimon spoke with another analyst about how this current situation is reminiscent of the rise of the Tea Party in opposition to Obama’s policies more than anything else, corroborated by the group’s funding by conservatives dissatisfied with the Obama administration like David Koch.

Finally, I just wanted to provide some of my lasting thoughts about this topic as well as some recent musings as the number of protests has only been increasing. Primarily, these protests make me really angry. Everyone is frustrated but we are maintaining social distancing guidelines because it seems to be the only thing proven to work against the spread of this virus. You would think that it’s common sense that if we reopen too fast, the spread of the disease will only spike again and our problems will be greater than if we never implemented social distancing in the first place. Yes, the economy must open but only when there are signs that the situation is getting better. These protests are not helping the situation at all and I seriously hope they do not influence the decisions of experts and governors. 

First of all, I just want to share some of my initial thoughts upon finishing Tiger King. I think what’s particularly interesting is the dichotomy of people who watch it and those who don’t. Personally, I could not stop watching simply because I could not believe what I was seeing. The character of Joe Exotic continued to amaze viewers like me every episode by doing and saying crazier things than before. However, when I suggested Tiger King to some friends, they completely dismissed it. One intellectual friend even said “I just don’t see the point of wasting my time to watch some guy in Oklahoma.” Which brings me to the crux of what has made Tiger King popular as well as why it was created: to glorify and highlight the exploits of a strange zookeeper and use tactics of sensationalism to spark and retain interest. Thus, I do not believe Tiger King is a piece of advocacy. 

As we learned “in class”, advocacy typically follows a sequence in which the viewer’s attention is first brought to some issue, and ultimately the work of advocacy invites or incites the viewer to complete some action in addressing said issue. As revealed now through interviews, Carole Baskins reports that she was told the documentary would be like “Blackfish” but for big cats. But Blackfish was a piece of advocacy while Tiger King was not. Blackfish exploited the malpractices of SeaWorld and its mistreatment of orcas in an effort to inform viewers and persuade/incite them to at the very least spread awareness of the issue. The ending minutes of the documentary show protesters and experts who say that SeaWorld should free Tilikum and other orcas into the wild. Thus the documentary has a central thesis focused around advocating for why killer whales should not be in captivity

Tiger King on the other hand, does not have such a thesis. Instead of focusing on advocating against captivity of tigers and tiger cub euthanization, the filmmakers saw the opportunity to document a crazy personality and the people around him. Focused on Joe Exotic, Tiger King primarily seeks to entertain viewers rather than inform them. I know personally I enjoyed the docuseries, but after finishing it I did not feel any obligation to act on the real issue of tiger captivity. Instead, I told friends about the show so they could maybe be entertained as well.

Finally, I want to discuss the ethics of Tiger King. I believe the most flagrant issue of ethics comes from the presumption that key interviewees were under. As Carol Baskins and Doc Antle have discussed since the release of the series, they were not expecting to be portrayed the way they were nor was the focus of the series what they were told it was. In addition, many deviations from the documentary’s focus made to further entertain viewers such as the strong insinuation that Carole Baskins killed her husband as well as the insinuation that Doc Antle had a harem of women. Without the individual’s knowledge of these concurrent investigations or their ability to comment on the claims, the series commits unethical actions.

Ultimately, Tiger King fails to be an ethical piece of advocacy, diminishing the focus on 50% of the title, Tiger, and instead entertaining viewers with a focus on the King, Joe Exotic.

With all that’s going on in the world right now, the only certainty seems to be that the future is uncertain. However, I am trying not to despair because I know that human ingenuity and human innovation will ultimately succeed as it inevitably does in history. Specifically in this instance, I believe this necessity will birth technological advancements and that’s what I will be examining in this post. I’ll be looking at some of the advancements or even technological adaptations made during these times as well as similar situations in the past.  

First, an interesting story that grabbed my attention concerns the shortage of face masks in the US. To combat this issue, many groups are stepping up to independently supply medical services – one of these groups is Penn State. Among a group of about 5 universities, Penn State is collaborating with engineering departments to 3D print and laser cut plastic face shield masks. At Michigan State University for example, within a few hours a team produced about 130 faces masks. 

While this example comes from a protective and safety approach, let’s take a look at what researchers are working on to “solve” the disease. One approach involves examining the blood of people who recovered from COVID-19. That blood contains a stockpile of antibodies made by immune cells that have succeeded against the invading virus. While multiple efforts are focusing on repurposing existing drugs, like remdesivir or chloroquine, to fight this new virus, many scientists think that the fastest route to treat the infection could come by harvesting those antibodies. This method would not produce a cure, but would give patients time to produce their own antibodies, important for older people whose immune systems have difficulty fighting the disease. 

Even more astounding, a company called GigaGen calls the aforementioned method “old school” and instead are trying to do something new called polyclonal antibody therapy. To do this, they will collect blood from about 50 to 100 people that have recovered from COVID-19, find B cells that make antibodies for the virus, and then copy the genes from those B cells into genetically modified cell lines that crank out these virus-targeting antibodies in bioreactors. CEO David Johnson says “it’s like recreating the entire immune system in a drug.” The timeline for this is expected manufacturing in July and clinical trials beginning in 2021. While the method is unproven, the results could be promising.

In short, what I’m trying to get at with these examples is that these desperate times will spark innovation, and not just in the medical sector to combat this virus. While many people express fears about the impending recession, some of the largest tech companies were formed during recessions. General Motors, IBM, Microsoft, and Venmo are just some of the many examples of companies that fit this profile.

To conclude this passion thread post, I hope you have realized how rapidly we as a people are advancing technologically. Ideas not fathomable even a couple years ago are now becoming a reality. Consequently, technology will continue to advance to beat this pressing obstacle of coronavirus. Don’t lose faith and never lose your curiosity! Thanks for reading.

While the reported numbers are certainly drawing some question, nonetheless China clearly has done something right as the number of coronavirus cases has gone down significantly. In fact, they are now uplifting the nearly 3 month nationwide imposed lockdown. But you might be wondering, how exactly was a country of 1billion+ people able to achieve this and could the US implement a similar policy? After reading about it, I’m sure you’ll agree that the feasibility of using similar methods in our country is slim to none. 

During these crucial last few weeks, the lives of Chinese citizens have been entirely dictated by technology, specifically apps on their phones. The “health code” service – run on the ubiquitous platforms Alipay and WeChat and developed for the Chinese government – give users color-coded designations based on their health status and travel history, and a QR code that can be scanned by authorities.

The apps are specific to each city or province, but generally people given a green code are allowed to travel relatively freely. A yellow code indicates that the holder should be in home isolation, and a red code says the user is a confirmed Covid-19 patient and should be in quarantine.The apps have become an integral part of Chinese authorities’ management of people and their movements in and out of affected areas. When lockdown restrictions in Hubei province were lifted last week, the government allowed residents with a green code to travel within and out of the province. Some restaurants, shops, hotels and other establishments ask for patrons to show their codes before entering. In Wuhan, only those with a green health code are allowed to take public transport.However, the technology has raised concerns about their reach into people’s  private lives and rightly so. Their government has been gathering an incredible amount of data to track every aspect of citizens’ lives. While the severity and threat of the situation there has been high, I don’t think officials realize or frankly care about the implications this dangerous technology poses for people after the pandemic. These QR codes and tracking apps are only the tip of the iceberg. Police have helmets with temperature scanning cameras on them to detect who in a crowd could have a fever.

Now, many Chinese people are taking to social media to express their discontent concerning this intrusive technology. Not only is it dangerous for the government to have it, there is a high probability of sensitive information being leaked or misused. Some comments made by citizens include “please release us, we are regular people”, “I feel like I am always being watched”, and “monitoring is everywhere, now it is just more obvious.” 

But on some level, should we applaud China for using such innovative methods that clearly seem to be working? The ultimate test of “desperate times call for desperate measures.” So what do you think? Is the government justified by intruding/violating privacy for the safety of its people? Or are these actions unethical? Finally, could you see anything like this being implemented in America and if so, would it be beneficial/effective?