(1) THE Ohio State University recently settled a sex abuse legal matter for millions of dollars. We think that was ridiculous because all of the individuals involved were consenting adults. We don’t in any way condone what happened; we just don’t agree that the school should have paid outa fortune under these circumstances. In a separate story (coincidence??) OSU announced that they are increasing their tuition next year by 4.6%. So the students who had nothing to do with the sex abuse shenanigans of the past will pay for the poor decision of the school’s administration to compensate consenting sexual behavior. Seems fair to me!!!
(2) A recent anti-depressive medication TV ad touted the value of a new drug. Then, at the end of the ad and very quickly and at a lower volume than the ad itself a comment was made “This drug may enhance the possibility of suicide and should be taken under the direction of a qualified physician”. We ask the question; “how did a drug that is designed to treat depression but may cause suicide get approved by the FDA?” Per FDA guidelines, cautionary statements are REQUIRED whenever a drug is tested and a significant negative result occurred. Bottom line: some test subject took the drug and committed suicide. Is this really a safe product? Does the disclaimer absolve the drug maker if/when a customer commits suicide? Guess somebody at the FDA had a financial interest in the drug maker???
(3) THE PEN IN MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD. We knew that before Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and all the rest. And yet we (Think the Federal Communication Commission) allowed social media companies access to every human being on the planet. Now that the genie is out of the bottle we’re trying to figure out ways to controls the monster we’ve created. It won’t work because lawyers will tie up any attempt to muzzle social media with First Amendment arguments for years. Our society–maybe subconsciously- always evaluates positives and negatives of every new product/service. Generally speaking, if pluses outweigh minuses we try to maintain access. But with all the misuse of social media for terrorist contacts, bomb building, body-shaming, suicide taunting and other unsavory activities, it is extremely difficult to defend social media as the positive communication vehicle it was intended to be. We don’t discount the wonderful opportunity that Facebook provides to stay in touch with family and friends. But the dark side has sprung up like deadly weeds. Our suggestion: expand E mail capabilities and allow each person to create his/her own communication universe so that undesirables cannot hijack major word distribution highways and disrupt everyday life. First Amendment rights do not allow you to yell “Fire” in a crowded theater because by doing so you violate the rights to safety for those around you. The same principle applies to social media posts. The question is: is so much money tied into social media that the Federal Government is unwilling to get involved?
Comments are closed