America and the Big Bang

In a recent poll conducted by the Associated Press and GfK it was found that “51% of Americans are not too/not at all confident that the universe began 13.8 billion years ago with a big bang.” This poll was unique in that the Americans were asked to rate their confidence level regarding the validity of widely accepted facts within the scientific community rather than quizzing their knowledge. The margin of error for this poll is 3.4%. I will be comparing this story’s news coverage from two different outlets and mediums. The first will be an article by Al Jazeera published on the web. The second will be a video interview of a Nobel Prize-winning scientist conducted by CBS. Using the media literacy critical process I will show that the progress of space science has not been effectively communicated by the American education system for the last five decades.

Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation

Al Jazeera effectively summarizes the AP/GfK poll results. The majority of the article is devoted to America’s lack of confidence that the Big Bang occurred. They add perspective by comparing that to the statements that did receive a high confidence rating. For example, “94% are very/somewhat confident that smoking causes cancer.” They report that “these results upset some of America’s top scientists” which is to be expected considering nine out of the ten statements in the poll are considered to be “settled scientific facts.” The article implies that we are more likely to believe what we can directly sense with our bodies. They note that the statements with the highest confidence ratings are all sensory in nature. The poll also asked what the religious and political values of the participants were. The article then links those results to the belief in the Big Bang. Al Jazeera interviews both average Americans and scientists.The article is written with the view that the Big Bang most assuredly occurred. They use the results of the political and religious values portions to make an argument for why Americans may not have faith in scientific facts. The article attempts to justify the results of the poll. They quote Robert Lefkowitz, Professor of Biochemistry at Duke University, as saying, “It makes sense now that science would have made no headway because faith is untestable.” Overall, the article does a good job covering the story. It is not biased in its coverage but may come across as such if you do not accept the Big Bang as scientific fact.

Poll results

As a supplement to their article covering this story CBS News posted a video in which they interview a scientist regarding his reactions to the poll’s results. They chose to interview Brian Greene, Professor of Physics and Mathematics at Columbia University. The interview is all opinion based. Greene begins by saying that democracy can not be representative of the issues facing our world without a basic understanding of science. He then explains that some of these statements may be challenged because they entail changing your world view. Greene uses the example of smoking and cancer saying that one can accept cancer as a consequence of smoking without having to contemplate the origins of the universe. He says that an understanding of the Big Bang is more difficult for many to accept because it may change your current outlook on life. Professor Greene then goes on to say that our education system has not provided us with the mathematical skills needed to understand these concepts. Greene argues that it’s challenging to accept ideas without a “chain of reasoning.” The interview closes with Greene explaining how important it is for scientists to “come out of the laboratory and explain science in plain language” to get the public up to date and excited about the discoveries made in space science in the last 50 years. The interview emphasizes the state of scientific understanding in the United States. Greene continuously raises the point of how difficult it can be to challenge one’s world views. The interview seems to convey a sense of urgency as Greene is visibly distressed. His call to action directed to the scientific community is a positive sign of change among those who can create it. However, the interview is one-sided and gives the viewer little perspective on the story.

The Al Jazeera article and CBS interview are similar in that they approach all of the statements in the poll as scientific fact. Al Jazeera is attempting to explain the situation while the CBS interview implies what should be done about it. Al Jazeera does a better job of explaining the poll and its results. The article is a detailed and varied in its coverage as it includes the opinions of average Americans. In the CBS interview Greene does not raise attention to the link between sensory perceptions and the likelihood of confidence in a statement. Al Jazeera’s emphasis of this point adds validity and perspective to their article.  The medium of video is not as effective in communicating this story as the medium of print is.

Expansion of the Universe

I find this issue to be especially distressing. In 1963 Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias discovered something amazing. While studying microwave signals they heard a mysterious noise emanating from every direction of space. A year later they found that what they were hearing was radiation leftover from the big bang, as predicted by its theory. The cosmic microwave background radiation can be heard on any static television or radio channel. The WMAP is a probe that was launched in 2001 to measure the expansion rate of the universe. According to NASA the WMAP “can measure the basic parameters of the Big Bang theory including the geometry of the universe.” This device found that the universe is expanding thus proving the Big Bang theory. It also proved that the universe is flat and that its age is 13.82 billion years. The margin of error for this experiment is 0.4%. The scientific community has known for over five decades that the universe started with a big bang and with near certainty for over a decade. The AP/GfK poll is an example of the education system’s inability to keep up with modern science, especially space science. The concepts, while abstractions, are easily grasped when researched. The American education system has failed us in explaining one of life’s greatest mysteries – how did the universe form? As a culture we need to embrace science. It is in our spirit to attempt the impossible and raise the bar of innovation. We need to ask big questions, especially if they are scary. We need to utilize the Internet, our best means of communicating information. I encourage you to explore NASAs webpage on the Big Bang and start a discussion here online.

Code of Ethics

The people of South Sudan have been facing civil war since rebel forces brought up arms against those faithful to their President, Salva Kiir. In the last five months the country has gone from being poverty stricken and peaceful to on the brink of total disaster, with close to one million displaced and thousands left dead. On April 20th Toby Lanzer, the UN’s top humanitarian official in South Sudan, reported that after the rebels took hold of the oil-producing capital, hundreds in the town of Bentiu were killed.

Al Jazeera complied with the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics in their article reporting the recent happenings in South Sudan. On the front page of their international (English) website they highlight the tragedy and bring factual insights to a story that is still developing. They take care to adhere to each category of rules provided by the Code of Ethics: minimize harm, seek truth and report it, act independently and be accountable. Al Jazeera did not simply quote Lanzer’s Twitter account but instead actually interviewed him, “Lanzer told Al Jazeera on Monday that some individuals ‘associated with the opposition’ had used an FM radio station to broadcast hate speech in the town.” The majority of the article is comprised of quotes from Lanzer, a reliable source. Any additional text provides context but does not give an opinion, “The UN’s mission in South Sudan said on Monday hundreds of civilians were reportedly killed or wounded after rebel forces took control of the capital of the oil-producing Unity state last week.” They did not add anything that could be misconstrued as sensationalist but still highlighted the tragedy currently happening in the region. 

Fox News did not comply with the Code of Ethics in their reporting of this issue. The article can not be found on the main page of their website. They provided no opinion because they provided little context. More importantly they committed plagiarism by copying the Al Jazeera article and reporting it as their own:

Al Jazeera: “Toby Lanzer, the UN’s top humanitarian official in South Sudan, said in Twitter posts late on Sunday that there were shocking scenes of atrocities, with “bodies of people executed” lying in Bentiu’s streets.”

Fox News: “Toby Lanzer, the U.N.’s top humanitarian official in South Sudan, said in Twitter posts late Sunday that there were shocking scenes of atrocities, with “bodies of people executed” lying in the streets of Bentiu.”

Fox News assumed changing “lying in Bentiu’s streets” to “lying in the streets of Bentiu” would prevent them from committing plagiarism. However, that shows incompetence since all journalists should have a strong understanding of how to cite and not blatantly steal.

Space travel

Virgin Galactic was founded in 2004 by billionaire and entrepreneur Sir Richard Branson. His goal is to build aircrafts that send civilians into space. Since the company was started, two spaceports have been built in the US and several preliminary flight tests have taken place. In December of 2013 Sir Branson was aboard the first public space flight. The company believes that by the end of 2014 they will be providing public flights to those who can afford it.

Their latest advertisement is primarily footage of the technology these crafts use. Dramatic music and a NASA countdown leave the impression that we are watching science fiction. Once the craft is in orbit both the music and jet flames stop, highlighting the silence and stillness of space. The craft then moves towards the sky and the Virgin Galactic symbol showcasing the evolution of flight becomes visible. We are then left staring at the Earth from orbit before the company’s logo appears.

The major source of repetition in this advertisement is footage of the spacecraft. The company seems to be putting an emphasis on it as if to show that it is actually real. Not too long ago nothing of its kind existed. No footage of the interior is shown. Few would be concerned with the comforts provided inside. Most want to know that the craft is not only a reality but also safe. That is the purpose of the advertisement and it is achieved. This is a successful advertisement that is appealing to the explorer in all of us. I have now seen that the crafts Virgin Galactic are producing are safe and can fly into and orbit space. I am also inclined to believe that this reality will become more commonplace.

This advertisement makes me want to go into space, even if only for a single flight. If one of your childhood dreams was to become an astronaut you probably did not anticipate the effort and years of training required for space flight. The outcome of going into space once required extraordinary experience and intelligence. Space was kept private for elite researchers. Virgin Galactic has opened the door to space for those that can afford it. The first pioneers on these crafts will be elite in that they have oodles of money and are primarily famous. This should not bother anyone. Their tickets are outlandishly expensive so that the company can do more research, build more crafts and  eventually open their doors to more people. In ten short years we have come so far. Where will the next ten bring us?

Print media and space

Print media remains the most popular method of announcing scientific discoveries. The first scientific journals were published in 1665. The process by which these journals are produced has created a culture of keeping your discoveries to yourself until they have been peer reviewed and published. This created a sense of structure and reputability within the scientific community. In order to achieve prestige among other scientists you must first be published. The telescope was invented in the same century as the scientific journal. This gives me the sense that the publishing aspect of science is deeply engrained in astronomy and astrophysics, if not the process of science itself.

The most enduring scientific journal, Nature, was first published in 1869. Today for $199 a year you can get 51 print issues and access to all previously published journals available through their online archive. Over the last decade the Internet has made these types of journals more accessible to the masses. However, few can pay such a large cost each year. This has sparked a debate on whether open-access, or free scientific journals, are a better method of communicating information to the public. Additionally, most journals are written in such a way that they are not appealing to the average reader. They are written so rigorously to protect the integrity of science. For these reasons most people receive their space and science news through other media outlets such as news websites. This may be beneficial for the public’s understanding because news articles give you background and context in regard to the discovery that journals can’t.

The Cost of Publishing, Nature

Scientific journals have been adapting to the Internet by publishing e-prints. Similar to e-books, e-prints are the digital equivalent of scientific journals. There are a couple major advantages to this method. One is that they can be published immediately after being peer reviewed. This speeds up the rate at which science can progress. Another is that it cuts the cost of publishing by nearly half, according to Nature. Lastly, e-prints are more accessible to scientists in developing nations than costly print copies. Over the next decade I suspect that journals will continue to shift to e-prints but there will always be an option for print available.

The future of print media is hard to predict. For now, space continues to survive not only through journals but also magazines and books. So long as these formats exist there will be a place for science and space among them.

Television and space

Television does a fantastic job of promoting popular science and technology. However, it is rare to see anything about space or space exploration in the news or in our favorite shows. We know so little about space that it seems distant to us. The role of space in television has changed drastically over the years. Depicted first as reality and now primarily as fiction. The moon landing footage brought hope that we would go far. ‘Cosmos’, which aired in 1980, made the possibility of space exploration within our galaxy seem like a not so distant reality. Six years later the Challenger disaster turned people away from space. Nearly two decades after the tragedy and we’ve made little progress since.

News about space is especially difficult to promote through the medium of television. Most discoveries made are best expressed through photographs. The context that gives importance to the photographs is daunting to express in a short segment. Additionally, most of the images we are getting from the Hubble telescope are starting to look familiar. This does not make for exciting news. The James Webb Space Telescope, successor to the Hubble, will bring us images of our early universe. I don’t believe this news will be properly expressed through television because we won’t get any footage – only photographs. An exception to this is the recent footage that has been sent back from Mars. Television is effective in promoting space through storytelling. Since nearly all of us don’t know what it’s like to travel in space anything seems possible. This promotes a positive and hopeful outlook on space.

A revival of ‘Cosmos’, produced by Seth MacFarlane and starring Neil DeGrasse Tyson, may help in altering the current tone. Neil DeGrasse Tyson is already a well known popularizer of science and logical thinking. This type of optimistic, but still realistic and informative show can only bring more interest to the subject of space. The show will air March 9th on Fox.

Radio and space

Radio and space have a unique relationship. In 1932 the first astronomical radio source was discovered and assumed to be extraterrestrial life. We now know that there are many objects in the universe that naturally emit radio waves: the sun, pulsars, supernova remnants and the cosmic microwave background radiation are just a few. Radio telescopes study these types of objects but also serve the purpose of attempted communication with other forms of life. By beaming messages directly at stars with known Goldilocks conditions we are more likely to contact our interstellar cousins using radio waves.

In 1974 a group of astronomers composed a binary message that crudely sums up what extraterrestrial life should know about us. Included in the message was a graphic of what the average human looks like, the atomic numbers of the elements that form DNA, and a graphic of our solar system. The massive Arecibo radio telescope in Puerto Rico set it sights on globular cluster M13. At the time we knew this to be the closest cluster in our galaxy. The message will not arrive to M13 for 25,000 years. If they immediately respond it will take 25,000 yeas for their message to reach us. The Arecibo message was sent as a symbolic gesture demonstrating the capacity of new equipment.

LoneSignal, a crowdfunded company, sent its first message into space in 2013. For $0.25 you can send your tweets into space. This company converts your message into binary and aims it at a star system with conditions that are conducive to life as we know it. For just $0.75 you can send an image. The goal here is not to convey information that proves to aliens that we are an intelligent species. Instead, the goal is making our presence known. This has re-sparked a minor controversy in the astronomical community. Should we be broadcasting our location to other lifeforms before we’ve communicated? More importantly, should we be sending them pictures that may inadvertently display our resources? Its unlikely that the potential harm outweighs the current benefits of attempted communication.

While we are still Earthlocked there are a number of stellar podcasts available here at home. NASA offers 3 podcasts and 6 vodcasts. Topics range from astronomical news, updates on current projects and new discoveries. Neil DeGrasse Tyson, astrophysicist and Director of the Hayden Planetarium, hosts his own podcast: StarTalkRadio. This is most assuredly the funniest podcast about space if not the most interesting. Not only is he able to secure entertaining guests, he is also able to keep topics relevant.

Information and news about space is readily available to us through both the medium of radio and the Internet. The future of radio wave utilization for communicating with other humans seems uncertain. Its future as a medium for the most massive of communication with our universe remains clear.

The evolution of hip hop

What’s the only hip hop song my nana knows the name of? “Rapper’s Delight” by the Sugar Hill Gang is an iconic song that helped create hip hop. It has been sampled and quoted many times over since it a laid a creative foundation in 1979. The genre was so new that the song begins, “Now what you hear is not a test/I’m rapping to the beat/And me, the groove and my friends are going to try and move your feet.” Rhymes and beats are hallmarks of hip hop but its most essential aspect is the flow, or fluidity and coherence, of what is being sung. “Rapper’s Delight” created the rap formula of introducing yourself, bragging and passing to the next MC. This song, while catchy and fun, has very little substance in its lyrics. This is a trend that has continued decades after its release with too few exceptions.

Yasiin Bey (Mos Def) is changing this formula as an artist on the forefront of hip hop’s continued evolution. In “Quiet Dog Bite Hard”, Bey uses the scat singing from the intro of “Rapper’s Delight” to remind us of the genre’s foundation and history. With heavy drums and a sped up sample from the same song, he modernizes the tone. To this he adds poetic lyrics, “We’re all going back to the same one/This constant motivation I stay with/Remarkable flavors, that all bear the mark of that greatness.” These lyrics coupled with the politically driven introduction by Fela Kuti show a desire to share an idea bigger than oneself through art. Most people are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the materialism and insincerity throughout hip hop. Few artists in this genre play instruments and sing well further adding to Bey’s authenticity. In this live performance (0:00-2:11) from 2012 Bey’s flow is more impressive than the studio version. YouTube has encouraged us to become more critical of artists whose live performances do not stack up to what we’re sold. Hip hop is malleable to societies attitudes and like all music is a reflection of our time. The genre is continuously evolving and we only need to support talented artists to receive quality music.

Yasiin Bey and Talib Kweli are currently working on releasing another album under the name of their collaborative effort, Black Star.

Net neutrality under threat

Net neutrality is a topic that hasn’t come up often enough with my friends and family. My experiences leave me with the impression that it is a relatively new subject to many and like that “mysterious cloud” should be left to the experts. The idea of net neutrality simply implies that you should be able to access the Internet without a corporation or the government controlling the content you can view and at a speed that they choose. Today I’ll be analyzing a recent article by Marguerite Reardon of CNET that discusses the current issues facing net neutrality.

The author summarizes the recent court drama well. Since 2010 the Open Internet regulation, created by the FCC, has keep net neutrality safe. Verizon recently challenged these regulations in an appeals court. On 1/14/14 a loophole related to how Internet services are classified brought down net neutrality. The court determined that basing the Open Internet regulations on the concept of common carriage was a misstep by the FCC as those rules only apply to telecommunication services. The Internet is currently classified as an information service. While the court did disagree with Verizon’s claim that the FCC does not have the right to regulate the Internet, net neutrality is under threat until the FCC can revise their regulations. Two bills have been introduced to the House and Senate that would temporarily restore net neutrality, and our rights as consumers, until the rules are revised. The author doesn’t mention what proponents of net neutrality are now looking for – signs of throttling, or decreased download speeds of certain Internet traffic to some or all users. Additionally, the article does not raise questions as to how the Internet should be regulated. With the NSA in mind, users of the Internet should be concerned by the amount of control we are relinquishing to governments and businesses alike.

The article has a negative tone. It is clear that Reardon is a proponent of net neutrality. She states that the bill may get farther in the Senate than the House because Democrats are “slightly friendlier” towards net neutrality. This implies that the bill should be welcomed like a friend. She also uses negative imagery to demonize companies who are against net neutrality by saying that a reclassification would “ignite a firestorm” from them. She could have been more effective by giving a call to action. Subtly implying an opinion throws objectivity to the wind just the same as providing links to your cause.

This issue matters to everyone that uses the Internet. We must question the motives of the companies who want what was once your right to a neutral Internet to remain suspended. I suggest that you test your Internet speeds to see if your service is being throttled. What speed are you paying for and what are you getting? Calling your Internet provider’s customer service line most certainly won’t help but calling your State Representative will.