Anti War

Before this assignment, I honestly had never really looked at websites like Antiwar.com or The American Conservative.

When I think about news, I usually think about the major networks and websites that everyone knows.

After looking through these two sites, though, I noticed that they talk about American military involvement very differently than what I normally see.

Antiwar.com is especially direct about its position. The website supports a non-interventionist U.S. foreign policy and regularly questions American involvement in wars and conflicts around the world. 

The American Conservative also publishes writers who question American involvement in conflicts overseas and argue for more restraint in U.S. foreign policy.

What stood out to me the most was that I do not hear these kinds of arguments nearly as often in mainstream news.

Usually, coverage seems focused on what is happening in a conflict, what government officials are saying, or what the military is doing next.

There seems to be less attention given to a much bigger question: Should the United States be involved in the conflict at all?

I think part of the reason is that websites like Antiwar.com have a very specific purpose. They can focus most of their coverage on war, foreign policy, and questioning American military involvement.

Mainstream news organizations are covering hundreds of different topics every day, so strong antiwar perspectives may not receive the same amount of attention. 

At the same time, I think it is interesting that people sometimes have to actively search for these perspectives.

If someone only gets their news from major networks or whatever appears on their social media feed, they might never come across a strong antiwar argument.

That does not necessarily mean mainstream news organizations are purposely hiding these opinions.

However, it does show how much the sources we choose can influence the viewpoints we are exposed to.

Before this assignment, I probably would not have thought to search for either of these websites.

That alone says something.

There are people strongly questioning American military involvement, but their voices may not always appear in the places where most people get their news. 

I think that is why looking at different types of media is important, especially when the topic is something as serious as war.

Even if you do not agree with everything you read, hearing opinions that you normally would not come across gives you a chance to look at the issue differently.

It also gives you the opportunity to hear multiple sides and form your own opinion instead of only relying on the perspectives that are easiest to find.

The History of Apple Ipod

Think about how easy listening to music is today. You can open Spotify, Apple Music, or YouTube, search for almost any song, and start listening within seconds. Before smartphones and streaming became normal, though, carrying your music around was not nearly as simple. That is where the Apple iPod comes into the story.

The iPod was introduced in 2001 and became one of the devices that helped move music from CDs and other physical formats into the digital world. Apple was not the first company to make an MP3 player. In fact, portable MP3 players had already existed for several years. The problem was that many of them were either too large, could not hold enough music, or were simply difficult to use. Apple saw an opportunity to create something better. 

There also was not one single person who "invented" the iPod. It was created by a team at Apple while Steve Jobs was leading the company. Jon Rubinstein, who was in charge of hardware engineering, recruited Tony Fadell, who had an idea for developing a better MP3 player and a system that could work alongside it.

One of the biggest breakthroughs came from an incredibly small piece of technology. During a visit to Toshiba, Jon Rubinstein saw a tiny 1.8-inch hard drive. The small hard drive offered the storage Apple needed while still being compact enough to fit inside a portable music player.

Apple unveiled the first iPod on October 23, 2001. The original model had 5GB of storage, cost $399, and could hold around 1,000 songs.

Today, 1,000 songs probably doesn't sound very impressive. In 2001, it was a big deal. 

Instead of choosing which CDs to bring somewhere, people could carry a large collection of music on one small device. That convenience helped solve one of the biggest problems with portable music at the time. People wanted more music without having to carry more stuff.

The iPod also became more than just a portable music player. It was connected to Apple's iTunes software, which allowed people to organize music on their computers and transfer that music to supported iPod models. Later, the iTunes Music Store became another important part of Apple's digital music system. 

This is where the iPod becomes especially interesting from a communication point of view. Music is a form of communication. Artists use music to tell stories, share ideas, express experiences, and connect with audiences. The iPod changed the way that communication reached listeners because people gained more control over what they listened to and when they listened to it.

Instead of waiting for a radio station to play a certain song or carrying physical albums, someone could create a personal digital music collection and take it almost anywhere. Listeners were becoming more involved in choosing and organizing the media they consumed. That expectation of having control over our own media is something that has become even stronger with smartphones and streaming services.

Of course, the rise of the iPod and digital music also had downsides. As digital music became more popular, physical music formats became less important. The iPod was also closely tied to Apple's hardware and software ecosystem. Eventually, advances in technology made a separate music player less necessary.

Ironically, one of the products that helped make the iPod unnecessary came from Apple itself. Smartphones gave consumers one device that could handle music along with calling, messaging, internet access, cameras, apps, and much more. By the early 2010s, consumers were increasingly moving away from dedicated music players toward multifunction smartphones. Apple officially discontinued the iPod product line in 2022. 

Even though the iPod is now outdated technology, its influence is still easy to see. One of the biggest lessons from its history is that Apple did not have to invent digital music or even invent the first MP3 player to make a major impact. The company took an existing technology and helped make it easier, more convenient, and more attractive to regular consumers.

To me, that is what makes the iPod important in the history of communication. It represents a period when media was becoming more personal, portable, and digital. Today, we expect our music, podcasts, videos, and other media to travel with us everywhere. The iPod helped introduce consumers to that idea long before carrying unlimited entertainment in your pocket felt normal.

The actual device may have disappeared, but the idea behind it definitely did not.

A.I. disclosure: I used AI to help organize my research, structure my ideas, and improve the wording of my blog post. I reviewed the information and made sure the final post reflected my own understanding and ideas.

Privacy in the Digital Age

After watching the TED Talks and learning more about privacy in the Digital Age, I realized that privacy is much harder to have than I originally thought. 

Before learning about these technologies, I mostly thought of privacy as something companies like Facebook or Instagram could take away by collecting information about what we post, search, or like. I didn't realize how much information can also be collected by police departments and the government.

There are technologies that can track where people go, who they are around, and what they are doing without them even realizing it. That is what made this topic feel much more real to me.

One example that really stood out to me was automatic license plate readers. These are cameras that scan license plates and record the time and location of a vehicle.

Originally, this technology was used to help find stolen or wanted cars. Now, police can collect information about everyone who passes one of these cameras, even if they have done absolutely nothing wrong.

What is concerning is that this information can be saved for years simply because it might become useful later. Someone could have a record of where they drove without ever committing a crime.

This affects me, my friends, and my family because so much of our everyday lives creates information without us really thinking about it.

Our phones track our locations. Social media records what we post. Websites remember what we search for and buy. Even something as simple as going somewhere can create a digital record.

Location data can reveal a lot more than just where someone is. It could show if someone regularly goes to a church, therapy, an AA meeting, or certain places with certain people.

When all of this information is put together, it can create a surprisingly detailed picture of someone's personal life. Police or other organizations could potentially make assumptions about someone based on information that does not tell the whole story.

Facial recognition makes this even more concerning. A picture of someone could potentially be connected to their name, social media accounts, and other information about them.

This means that being in public does not necessarily mean being anonymous anymore.

The speaker described our digital information as our "electronic tattoos." I thought this was an interesting comparison because a tattoo can tell someone something about who you are without you having to say anything.

Our electronic tattoos can do the same thing. They can show where we have been, what we like, who we spend time with, what we buy, and even what we are interested in.

I also think this affects the way people act online. Sometimes we post things without thinking about who could see them years from now.

Something that seems funny or unimportant today could still exist online years later. Even if we delete it, there is no guarantee that someone else did not save or screenshot it.

I think the government should still be able to use surveillance technology for legitimate reasons, such as investigating serious crimes and keeping people safe.

However, there need to be limits. Just because technology allows the government to collect massive amounts of information does not mean it should automatically be allowed to keep information on everyone.

There should be clear rules about what can be collected, how long it can be stored, who can access it, and when it needs to be deleted.

Information about innocent people should not be kept forever just because it might become useful someday.

There are also things we can do ourselves to protect our privacy. We can be more careful about what we post online, check the location permissions on our phones, use strong passwords, and think before sharing personal information.

The biggest lesson I took from these videos is that once something becomes digital, it can be extremely difficult to completely erase it.

Our online information could potentially outlast us.

The Greek stories from the TED Talk also made this idea easier to understand. Sisyphus represents how things online can keep coming back, even when we want them to disappear.

Narcissus represents our obsession with our own online image, while Atalanta represents how social media constantly distracts us.

These stories are thousands of years old, but their lessons still connect to technology today.

Privacy does not mean that people should be able to hide illegal activity. It means that people should have some control over information about their personal lives.

Technology can make our lives easier and safer, but when it is used without limits, it can also become a tool for constant surveillance.

The biggest thing I learned is that we should not wait until our privacy has already been violated to start caring about it.

We need to think about what information we are creating, who has access to it, and how long it should be allowed to follow us.

Why Freedom of Speech Matters to Me

When I first looked at the eight values of free expressions, the two that stood out to me the most were the Marketplace of Ideas and Individual Self-Fulfillment. At first, they seem like two completely different ideas. One is about finding the truth through different opinions, while the other is about being abble to express yourself and figure out who you are. But the more I thought about them, the more I realized how connected they are to my everyday life, especially through social media, college, and the career I want to have. 

The Marketplace of Ideas is the idea when people are allowed to share different opinions, the truth has a better chance of coming out. Instead of only allowing one opinion to be heard, everyone gets the opportunity to speak, disagree, challenge each other, and decide what they believe.

I see this constantly on social media.

Everyday, I open TikTok, Instagram, or X and see people arguing about politics, sports, celebrities, current events, or basically anything else. Sometimes the information is accurate, and sometimes it definitely is not. That is one of the biggest problems with modern version of the Marketplace of Ideas. There are so many opinions being shared that it can be difficult to figure out what is actually true.

Social media had basically created a giant marketplace where everyone is trying to get your attention.

That is why I think protecting free expression is about more than just letting people talk. It is about creating an environment where people feel like they can actually be themselves. According to the Foundation for individual Rights and Expression's 2026 College Free Rankings, students across hundreds of colleges continue to report self-censoring because of concerns about how other students, professors, or administrators might respond. The study surveyed more than 68,000 college students, which shows that this is not just an issue at one school.

I also think the Marketplace of ideas connects directly to the career I want. As someone Interested in sports media and eventually becoming an on-ice reporter, I do not want to just repeat what everyone else is saying. I want to be able to ask questions, hear different perspectives, and tell a story from more than one point of view. If everyone involved in a story had to agree with each other, journalism would be pretty pointless.

At the same time. I think Individual Self-Fulfillment is just as important.

This value says that free speech allows people to express themselves, develop their identities, and find people who relate to them. That feels especially relevant to me as a college student. College is a time when a lot of people are figuring out who they are, what they believe, what they care about, and what they want their lives to look like. 

For me, social media is a huge part of that. Whether I am posting about hockey, college, my friends, or just something I am interested in, I am choosing what parts of myself I want other people to see. It gives me a way to be creative and connect with people who have similar interests.

But there is also pressure that comes with that.

Sometimes people do not post what they actually think because they are worried about being judged. This is not just something I have noticed personally. A recent national study of college students found that students continue to self-censor because they are afraid of social, professional, or legal consequences for what they say. That honestly does not surprise me. College can sometimes feel like everyone is watching what everyone else says. 

That is why I think protecting free expression is about more than just letting people talk. It is about creating an environment where people feel like they can actually be themselves.

I do not think free speech means I have to agree with everyone. In fact, i think the opposite is true. Being exposed to opinions I disagree with can force me to think harder about what I believe and why I believe it. SOmetimes I might change my mind, and sometimes I might become even more confident in my original opinion. 

That is the point. 

The Marketplace of Ideas gives is the opportunity to challenge each other, while Individual Self-Fulfillment gives us the freedom to figure out we are in the process. I see both of these values every day through social media, college conversations. sports, and even the career I hope to have someday. 

Free expression is not always comfortable, and I do not think it is supposed to be. But without the ability to speak, disagree, question, create, and sometimes even be wrong, we would lose a huge part of what makes us individuals.

And honestly, I think that is what makes free speech worth protecting.  

 

 

Supreme Court Reflection

Before watching this video, I knew the Supreme Court was the highest court in the United States. What I did not realize was how few cases actually make it to the Court.

The video explained that the Court receives about 7,000 petitions each year but hears only around 100 cases. I was surprised to learn that every petition receives individual consideration, whether it comes from a major law firm or a prisoner writing by hand.

One of the most important takeaways was that the Supreme Court's power comes from public trust. The Court does not have its own police force or military. Instead, people follow its decisions because they believe the institution is fair, independent, and legitimate.

I was also interested in learning more about the justices themselves. There have been only about 100 Supreme Court justices in American history, and many serve for decades.

One statement that stood out was the comparison between becoming a justice and "being struck by lightning." That description emphasized how rare and extraordinary the position is.

The most surprising thing I learned involved the Court's internal process. I did not know that the justices shake hands before conferences and court sessions as a way of preventing grudges and encouraging respectful discussion.

I was also surprised to learn how much opinions can change during the writing process. Justice O'Connor's comparison of opinion writing to "wet concrete" showed how ideas become more fixed once a written draft begins to take shape.

Current members of U.S Supreme Court

The historical section of the video was especially memorable. Learning about Marbury v. Madison and the Court's role in judicial review helped me understand how the Court gained its authority. At the same time, the discussion of Dred Scott showed that the Court has also made major mistakes that affected the nation.

Overall, the video changed my view of the Supreme Court. I had always thought of it primarily as a place where judges make decisions, but I now see it as an institution whose influence depends heavily on public trust, careful deliberation, and traditions built over generations.

A.I. disclosure: This post was a collaboration using Microsoft Copilot. I took notes while watching a 20-minute video about the U.S Supreme Court. In addition to the facts I learned I emphasized my own reactions and opinions while watching. I then asked Copilot to grammar check and format my notes into a blog post. 

TOP FIVE SOURCES

New York Times: New York Times feels trustworthy compared to a lot that's out there. The articles go more in depth and explain the full story instead of a quick headline that leaves out context. I like that it is run by actual journalists who fact check their work, so I don't have to worry about whether something's true or not. I'd recommend it to other people my age because it's a good way to understand what's going on in the world, not just skim the surface. It takes more time to read than scrolling on social media, but I think it's worth it. 

TikTok: TikTok makes keeping up with the news so much easier when i'm busy or don't feel like reading a whole article. Creators break things down in a quick simple way that's easy to actually understand and remember. It's also an easy way to see what everyone's talking about or what's trending that day. I'd recommend it to people who want a quick overview, but also don't rely on it as much on it as your only source since anyone can post anything and it's not always accurate. 

Instagram: Instagram is already part of my daily routine, so news pops up naturally through reels, stories, or infographics from accounts I already follow. It doesn't feel like extra effort to stay updated since I am already on the app. I like that a lot of the accounts turn complicated topics into simple graphics that are easy to read quickly. I'd recommend it to people who want a casual low effort way to stay in the loop. But just like TikTok, I always try to double check anything important somewhere more reliable. 

Youtube: Youtube videos can go way more in depth than a quick post or clip can. I can watch full interviews, breakdowns, or explainer videos that actually help me understand a topic instead of just hearing about it in passing. It feels more personal since I can hear someone's tone and see their reactions, which helps me process the information better. I'd recommend it to people who like taking things in visually or who want more context on a story. 

Friends and Family: Getting news from friends and family feels more real and personal than reading it from a screen. It comes with actual conversation, so I get to hear different opinions and think through things instead of accepting whatever I read. It helps me understand how certain news affects people I know, not just strangers or statistics. I'd recommend talking to the people close to you about current events because it makes you think more critically and see different perspectives.