Filtering by
- All Subjects: Health
- All Subjects: Social Media
- Member of: Barrett, The Honors College Thesis/Creative Project Collection
- Resource Type: Text
- Status: Published
In an effort to address these trends, we founded a student organization, The Political Literates, to fight political apathy by delivering political news in an easy to understand and unbiased manner. Inspired by our experience with this organization, we combine our insights with research to paint a new perspective on the state of the American political system.
This thesis analyzes various issues identified through our observations and research, with a heavy emphasis on using examples from the 2016 election. Our focus is how new technologies like data analytics, the Internet, smartphones, and social media are changing politics by driving political and social transformation. We identify and analyze five core issues that have been amplified by new technology, hindering the effectiveness of elections and further increasing political polarization:
● Gerrymandering which skews partisan debate by forcing politicians to pander to ideologically skewed districts.
● Consolidation of media companies which affects the diversity of how news is shared.
● Repeal of the Fairness Doctrine which allowed media to become more partisan.
● The Citizens United Ruling which skews power away from average voters in elections.
● A Failing Education System which does not prepare Americans to be civically engaged and to avoid being swayed by biased or untrue media.
Based on our experiment with the Political Literates and our research, we call for improving how critical thinking and civics is taught in the American education system. Critical thought and civics must be developed pervasively. With this, more people would be able to form more sophisticated views by listening to others to learn rather than win, listening less to irrelevant information, and forming a culture with more engagement in politics. Through this re-enlightenment, many of America’s other problems may evaporate or become more actionable.
There is a lot of variation in health outcomes when it comes to individual states in America. Some states, such as Hawaii, have the life expectancy equivalent to that of developed countries, whereas states like Mississippi have the life expectancy equivalent to that of third world countries. This raised the questions of which states are doing well in health and why, and if their health has to do with their performance in the primary, secondary, tertiary, and/or quaternary prevention levels. The purpose of this research was to investigate if there is a correlation between performance in any of the prevention levels and the overall health status of a state, and if there is, which prevention level would be most beneficial for states to prioritize. The hypothesis of this research was: states that prioritized primary and secondary levels of prevention would have better health than states that prioritized tertiary and quaternary levels of prevention, since basic health measures contribute more to health outcomes than advanced medicine. To investigate this question, indicators were chosen to derive the ranking of each state in health and each of the four prevention levels. Six states were then chosen to represent the high, average, and low health statuses respectively. The six states were ranked for all indicators, and the data was analyzed and compared to determine a potential relationship between the prevention level rankings and the overarching health ranking. It was found that there is a correlation between performance in the primary and secondary prevention levels and a state’s overall health status, whereas there was no such correlation for the tertiary and quaternary levels. A model for health was proposed for states looking to improve their health status, which was to invest in primary prevention, followed by secondary, tertiary, then quaternary prevention and only moving to the next prevention level once the previous level reached a satisfactory threshold.
Americans today face an age of information overload. With the evolution of Media 3.0, the internet, and the rise of Media 3.5—i.e., social media—relatively new communication technologies present pressing challenges for the First Amendment in American society. Twentieth century law defined freedom of expression, but in an information-limited world. By contrast, the twenty-first century is seeing the emergence of a world that is overloaded with information, largely shaped by an “unintentional press”—social media. Americans today rely on just a small concentration of private technology powerhouses exercising both economic and social influence over American society. This raises questions about censorship, access, and misinformation. While the First Amendment protects speech from government censorship only, First Amendment ideology is largely ingrained across American culture, including on social media. Technological advances arguably have made entry into the marketplace of ideas—a fundamental First Amendment doctrine—more accessible, but also more problematic for the average American, increasing his/her potential exposure to misinformation. <br/><br/>This thesis uses political and judicial frameworks to evaluate modern misinformation trends, social media platforms and current misinformation efforts, against the background of two misinformation accelerants in 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic and U.S. presidential election. Throughout history, times of hardship and intense fear have contributed to the shaping of First Amendment jurisprudence. Thus, this thesis looks at how fear can intensify the spread of misinformation and influence free speech values. Extensive research was conducted to provide the historical context behind relevant modern literature. This thesis then concludes with three solutions to misinformation that are supported by critical American free speech theory.
