Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
The Facebook Oversight Board’s ruling temporarily upholding the social media giant’s ban on former President Donald J. Trump, which they instructed the company to reassess within six months, noted that the parameters for an indefinite suspension are not defined in Facebook's policies. The non-decision in this high-profile case illustrates the difficulties stemming from the lack of clear frameworks for regulating social media. For starters, says web science pioneer James Hendler, social media companies need a better definition of the misinformation they seek curb. Absent a set of societally agreed upon rules, like those that define slander and libel, companies currently create and enforce their own policies — and the results have been mixed at best. “If Trump wants to sue to get his Facebook or Twitter account back, there’s no obvious legal framework. There’s nothing to say of the platform, ‘If it does X, Y, or Z, then it is violating the law,’” said Hendler, director of the Institute for Data Exploration and Applications at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. “If there were, Trump would have to prove in court that it doesn’t do X, Y, or Z, or Twitter would have to prove that it does, and we would have a way to adjudicate it.” As exemplified in disputes over the 2020 presidential election results, political polarization is inflamed by a proliferation of online misinformation. A co-author of the seminal 2006 Science article that established the concept of web science, Hendler said that “as society wrestles with the social, ethical, and legal questions surrounding misinformation and social media regulation, it needs technologist to help inform this debate.” “People are claiming artificial intelligence will handle this, but computers and AI are very bad at ‘I’ll know it when I see it,’” said Hendler, who’s most recent book is titled Social Machines: The Coming Collision of Artificial Intelligence, Social Networking, and Humanity. “What we need is a framework that makes it much clearer: What are we looking for? What happens when we find it? And who’s responsible?” The legal restrictions on social media companies are largely dictated by a single sentence in the Communications Decency Act of 1996, known as Section 230, which establishes that internet providers and services will not be treated as traditional publishers, and thus are not legally responsible for much of the content they link to. According to Hendler, this clause no longer adequately addresses the scale and scope of power these companies currently wield. “Social media companies provide a podium with an international reach of hundreds of millions of people. Just because social media companies are legally considered content providers rather than publishers, it doesn’t mean they’re not responsible for anything on their site,” Hendler said. “What counts as damaging misinformation? With individuals and publishers, we answer that question all the time with libel and slander laws. But what we don’t have is a corresponding set of principles to adjudicate harm through social media.” Hendler has extensive experience in policy and advisory positions that consider aspects of artificial intelligence, cybersecurity and internet and web technologies as they impact issues such as regulation of social media, and powerful technologies including facial recognition and artificial intelligence. Hendler is available to speak to diverse aspects of policies related to social media, information technologies, and AI.
A Message from Dean Sarah Gehlert on the Derek Chauvin Verdict
When I heard the verdict read at the trial of Derek Chauvin, I was relieved that a change had been made in how excessive violence by police officers has been viewed and treated in courts. This gave me some hope that a door had finally been opened to create change. A single verdict does not even begin to erase all the lives lost over decades of police violence based on prejudice and discrimination. It does however signal that change is happening, or is at least possible, if we are vigilant. It can be a step taken toward ending systemic discrimination by race in how our judicial system considers the actions of police. The wisdom of George Floyd’s seven-year-old daughter, who stated that her dad “changed the world,” has been validated. We also recognize the wisdom and courage of Darnella Frazier, the Minnesota teenager who filmed the event, knowing that what she was witnessing was wrong. When the verdict came in, I was with a group of community activists from three California counties around Los Angeles. While group members expressed some elation for an episode of justice realized, some cautioned that this victory does not mean that all is well. Racism, and the discrimination that it engenders, continues to run rampant through our judicial system. Within the last week we have added the names of Daunte Wright and Adam Toledo to our protests and vigils. We hope this verdict is a turning point, but we will need to work to assure it. It is worth reading a publication from 2018 to understand the role that social work needs to play in ensuring effective and lasting change to our judicial system. In their paper entitled “The Futile Fourth Amendment,” Professor Osagie Obasogie and Postdoctoral Researcher Zachary Newman examine the Supreme Court case that established the standard for court adjudication of excessive force by police, and how this has perpetuated excessive use of force in many communities of color. Protesting alone will not create the change we want to see. It will require change in policy and practices to establish equal protection for all under the law. This is a moment for us as social workers to seize. We must not wait to act until there is another incident of police brutality or an unfair trial. We should use this moment to move forward with renewed conviction in our beliefs, using our training in policy, community organizing, management and planning, and clinical practice. We should always be the voices demanding equality under the law, saying that an end to systemic racism is possible. The world is ready for change and social work should be leading it, with those whom we serve. We should be the champions of social justice for the well-being of individuals, families and communities through innovative teaching of evidence-informed and practice-based skills, and pioneering transformative research. If not us, then who? Sarah Gehlert Dean
Social Work is Advancing Addiction Science Research
Tens of thousands of Americans die from drug use and addiction every year, with overdoses killing over 63,000 people in America in 2016, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Add in deaths linked to alcohol overuse and tobacco, and the number climbs above half a million Americans. The collective work of several researchers at the USC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, in collaboration with other USC faculty and outside organizations, is advancing knowledge of substance use disorders. Social work has become a hub where researchers and practitioners drive understanding and improve treatment for this disease that impacts millions of families each year. “Either as a cause or consequence, addiction relates to every problem we deal with in social work,” said John Clapp, professor and associate dean for research and faculty development at the USC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work. Addiction’s complexity The social work field is uniquely poised to help effect change because of its holistic approach to individual well-being and the public good. According to Clapp, substance use disorder problems are inherently ecological, impacting and being impacted by individuals, families, peers, neighborhoods, communities and public policy in complex and dynamic ways. Untangling those causes and effects and interdependencies is one part of the solution. The other part is understanding that simple solutions may stay out of reach. “We will not find a one-size-fits-all answer,” said Clapp. Looking at addiction as a genetic, psychological or sociological issue only shows one piece of the overall cause. A comprehensive approach is essential, he said, especially when statistics from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) show alcohol use disorders alone as the third leading cause of preventable death in the world. A hub for addiction science The need for a transdisciplinary response to this worldwide crisis was behind the 2018 creation of the USC Institute on Addiction Science (IAS), a joint venture between social work and the Keck School of Medicine of USC, with membership from 10 different schools, colleges and hospitals. Its vision is to strengthen the discipline of addiction science and improve the lives of those touched by the disease. Clapp is co-director of the institute and one of its founding architects. IAS is quickly becoming the foremost place for a broad effort focused on addiction that brings together researchers from the fields of public health, social work, law, public policy, mathematicians, computer engineers and others in recognition of the promise of new approaches to longstanding problems. The USC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work has eight faculty making substantial contributions to the prevention of addiction-related disorders as members of the IAS: Professor Avalardo Valdez, associate professors Julie Cederbaum and Alice Cepeda, and assistant professors Jordan Davis, Shannon Dunn, Jungeun Olivia Lee, Danielle Madden, and Hans Oh. “Social work brings one of the broadest perspectives on the underpinnings and solutions to the addiction crisis,” said Adam Leventhal, director of IAS and professor of preventive medicine and psychology at Keck. “By approaching addiction as a health condition and a social justice issue, social work brings to the table the opportunity for high-impact, multi-modal intervention and social policy approaches, which are needed to address the addiction epidemic.” A holistic approach Social work faculty are raising the bar in addiction science research, developing new and novel approaches to improving outcomes for those affected by addiction. In a study recently published in Addiction, a multidisciplinary team lead by Davis and Clapp found gender differences in the risk factors for relapse following treatment for opioid use disorder. The study was the first in this field to use machine learning techniques to process large data sets and identify risk factors for relapse, said Davis, who also serves as associate director of the USC Center for Artificial Intelligence in Society (CAIS). The findings may result in more personalized treatment for opioid use disorder with lasting results. This dovetails with additional research Davis is conducting with computer science engineers at CAIS to collect and input neighborhood and census data into their models in an effort to better understand how these macro variables affect relapse. “We are finding that data points such as crime statistics, population density and concentrated poverty tend to be some of the most important predictors of relapse, over and above individual-level predictors such as impulsivity, motivation or gender,” Davis said. These findings echo Clapp’s description of addiction as ecological and point to the need for holistic solutions. “These machine learning techniques are helping us gain an apparent picture of what the most important factors are surrounding someone’s recovery,” Davis said. “Environment matters greatly.” Davis is also collaborating closely with Eric Pedersen, associate professor at Keck School of Medicine at USC, on several research efforts examining substance use among veterans. Most recently, they have assembled a survey group of approximately 1,200 veterans whom they survey quarterly about their well-being. A recently conducted survey of the group found that veterans with PTSD prior to the COVID-19 pandemic were now managing their symptoms with more frequent alcohol and cannabis use. Another joint research endeavor between the two is examining the use of mindfulness smart phone apps to help reduce substance use in Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom veterans with PTSD and alcohol use disorder. Where well-being and inequalities intersect Jungeun Olivia Lee also seeks to decode the network of relationships between socioeconomic status, adverse childhood experiences and drug use. Her experience as a social work practitioner working directly with clients drives her motivation to demonstrate to policymakers what she sees as a linkage between unemployment, economic stress and substance use disorders. She is lead author on a paper published in Nicotine & Tobacco Research that found unemployment may advance nicotine addiction among young adults, rather than the idea that nicotine addiction may lead to unemployment. Lee’s research interests lie at the intersection of substance use and co-occurring mental health, social inequalities (such as poverty and low socioeconomic status), and adverse childhood experiences. She is interested in combining these three areas of inquiry to explore their influence on addictive behavior that can persist over generations of at-risk families, such as adolescent mothers and their children. Her memories of working directly with clients struggling with the impact of addiction remain clear in her mind. When Lee hears policymakers and others suggest that individual willpower will solve substance use disorder problems, she has a straightforward response: “People are not born with addiction.” In her view, many factors contribute to the triggered distress, including socioeconomic status and adverse childhood experiences. Lee is exploring an idea with other IAS researchers to investigate the relationship between financial strain and employment uncertainty and addiction. “Individual circumstances, such as losing a job, certainly influence substance use, but policy-level decisions, such as the generosity of unemployment insurance, can mitigate the impact,” she said. Transdisciplinary collaboration with social scientists, psychologists and medical researchers at IAS and across the USC campus enriches and amplifies her work. “We are breaking down discipline-specific silos and bringing new and valuable perspectives to this work,” she said. “The synergy is both useful and inspiring.” Looking ahead Researchers also hope to spark interest in the field among the next generation. A new minor for undergraduate students in addiction science was introduced at USC in Fall 2020. The minor is an interdisciplinary collaboration of the Keck School of Medicine, the USC Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, the USC School of Pharmacy and the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts, and Sciences. It is designed to provide students with a transdisciplinary approach to understanding and treatment of the broad spectrum of addiction-related problems. The goal of addiction science research and education is to improve the long-term effect of addiction treatment and save lives. As society’s understanding of the cause of addiction grows, researchers like those in the school of social work and the IAS strive to bridge the gap between science, practice and policy to positively impact outcomes for those affected by addiction.
What will real police reform mean for America? Our expert can explain if you are covering.
It seemed as if all of America was waiting and watching on April 20 as the jury delivered its verdict in the trial of Derek Chauvin. After the killing of George Floyd last May, Americans took to the streets in protest across the country. Demand change come and an end to police racism and systemic discrimination. The trial has garnered attention and calls for change from the country’s highest office. "We can't stop here," President Joe Biden said at the White House, calling Tuesday's verdict "a much too rare" step forward for Black men. Vice President Kamala Harris said: "We are all a part of George Floyd's legacy and our job now is to honor it and to honor him." The method for making the most fundamental set of changes to policing in a generation, the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, is already sitting in the Senate. Democrats say it would end racial and religious profiling, ban chokeholds on suspects, eliminate no-knock warrants on drugs cases, make it easier to prosecute offending police officers and would overhaul police training to build trust with the communities in which officers serve. Yet its path is challenging given the opposition of many Republicans to the concept of Washington establishing federal standards for police. April 21 - CNN But what will it take for change to come? What will that change look like? And is America really ready for fundamental change when it comes to policing and law enforcement? Media are looking for answers. Politico included MSU's Jennifer E. Cobbina as one of the country's top experts and sought here opinion on Tuesday's verdict. "Today we have seen accountability for one police officer’s actions. We have witnessed some form of accountability take place, which was necessary. However, we should not be mistaken that justice has taken place. Justice would have been George Floyd not being murdered. Every day that Black people worry whether they will be the next George Floyd is another day without justice. The one guilty verdict does not mean that the criminal legal system values Black lives. It took overwhelming evidence with unimaginable footage and witnesses to bring this case to trial and gain convictions. Collectively, so many people were holding their breath waiting for the verdict. The fact that so many of us knew what the verdict should be but remained uncertain of what it actually would be speaks volumes about the state of our nation. Police are rarely held accountable. Hopefully this case will send a signal to every official within the criminal legal system that the tide is shifting. There is still so much work to be done, which begins with acknowledging that structural racism is entrenched in policing, and we must continue to fight for systemic change to policing in America. We need to stop pretext traffic stops, stop reliance on fines and fees, end qualified immunity, restructure civilian payouts for police misconduct, limit the power of police unions and defund the police." April 21 - Politico If you are a journalist covering the outcome of the Derek Chauvin trial and what reforms or changes lie ahead in America -– let our experts help with your story. Jennifer E. Cobbina is an associate professor in the School of Criminal Justice at Michigan State University. She is an expert in the areas of race, crime, policing, as well as protest movements. Professor Cobbina is available to speak with media – simply click on her icon to arrange an interview today.
Could Smarter Guns Be the Key To Stopping Mass Shootings and Other Violence?
“Gun violence in this country is an epidemic, and it’s an international embarrassment,” President Biden recently said. At least 45 mass shootings have occurred in America in the last month, according to reports. In the same time period, news of police officers killing unarmed Black men and boys, including 20-year-old Daunte Wright in Minneapolis and 13-year-old Adam Toledo in Chicago, sparked waves of protest around the country. These all-too-common tragedies could be significantly reduced — and even eliminated — without any of the partisan rancor and gridlock typically associated with gun-related debates, says Selmer Bringsjord, an expert in artificial intelligence and reasoning and a professor of cognitive science at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. “There is a solution,” Bringsjord, the director of the Rensselaer AI and Reasoning Laboratory, wrote in the Times Union. “A technological alternative to the fruitless shouting match between politicians: namely, AI — of the ethical sort. Guns that are at once intelligent and ethically correct can put an end to the mass-shooting carnage.” Rather than an endless debate over whether the public should have more guns or less, Bringsjord’s novel – and, he says, plausible – proposal is to shift to “smart and virtuous guns, and intelligent restraining devices that operate in accord with ethics, and the law.” Along with his coauthors, Bringsjord detailed his ideas in a recent paper, “AI Can Stop Mass Shootings, and More.” Anticipating some counterarguments, the authors urge readers “to at least contemplate whether we are right, and whether, if we are, such AI is worth seeking.” Bringsjord and his collaborators have created simulations showing how, in only 2.3 seconds, ethical AI technology can perceive a human’s intent and environment and then, if necessary, prevent their gun from firing. Importantly, he notes, the same technology that could prevent a criminal from opening fire in a public area could also prevent a police officer from shooting a person who posed no threat. “Ultimately research along this line should enable humans, in particular some human police, to simply be replaced by machines that, as a matter of ironclad logic, cannot do wrong,” Bringsjord said in a recent public radio segment. The AI capabilities discussed by Bringsjord are the product of prior work over seven years of funding from the Office of Naval Research devoted to developing moral competence in robots. Bringsjord has spoken about robots and logic at TEDxLimassol. He is the author of What Robots Can and Can’t Be and Superminds: People Harness Hypercomputation. He is also the co-author of Artificial Intelligence and Literary Creativity: Inside the Mind of Brutus, a Storytelling Machine. Bringsjord is available to speak about his recent proposals around AI-enabled guns, as well as other aspects of AI, human and machine reasoning, and formal logic.
Is It Time to End Qualified Immunity?
Following the death of George Floyd and subsequent protests of police brutality, many began to wonder if this should be the end of qualified immunity, the legal protection that police officers and other government officials have from civil rights lawsuits unless the victim is able to show their constitutional rights had been violated by that official. At the time, there seemed to be a lot of momentum. "Based on the events of last summer, we were all poised for the United States Supreme Court to take action on qualified immunity," says Teri Ravenell, a law professor at Villanova who specializes in police accountability and municipal liability. "There were almost a dozen cases pending before them. With the egregious facts in these cases, it was ripe for them to act, but they refused to take cert." It was around the same time that the House passed the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act. And while there had been no action at the federal level, we began to see more states and local municipalities decide to move forward on their own. New Mexico and Colorado put laws in place to end qualified immunity, including for police officers, and New York City recently ended it as well. "Qualified immunity still exists at the federal level, but you now have local options that don't have the same obstacles because it has been eliminated in these state and local statutes," Prof. Ravenell says. While there has been progress, Prof. Ravenell cautions to look beyond the present moment. "We say we want to end qualified immunity, but we're not thinking five steps ahead about what this actually does. We can say we want to make police more accountable, but how are we doing that? If it's that we want them to pay damages, if they take on more liability, municipalities will stop indemnifying and plaintiffs will go uncompensated. We have to think about how different rights and issues intersect with each other."
Public health education soars in wake of pandemic
Maybe a silver lining can be found from the COVID-19 pandemic, as interest in public health education is soaring at U.S. colleges and universities, says a nationally prominent public health professor. Public health education has become a logical choice for students when looking at changing public health practice trends and their implications for public health education, explained Gulzar Shah, Ph.D., who authored an invited editorial in the March issue of the American Journal of Public Health (AJPH). Shah is department chair and professor of health policy and community health in Georgia Southern University’s Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health. His editorial is titled “Public Health Education and Changing Public Health Realities in the Public Health 3.0 Era.” “For many of the 19 million college students enrolling annually in public and private colleges in the United States, public health is becoming a logical choice,” he said. “Because of COVID-19, interest in public health careers is soaring, evident from the 20% increase nationwide in Master of Public Health applicants.” The editorial also drew insights from the Association of Schools and Programs of Public Health’s national-level data from schools and programs of public health about the first employment destinations of public health graduates. “The emphasis on aligning public health practice and policy with the Public Health 3.0 framework, in which leaders partner across various sectors to address social, environmental and economic factors that affect population health and health inequity, has attracted the spotlight on generalist, behavioral education and health policy degrees,” Shah noted. “The Public Health 3.0 framework has also underscored the desirability of adopting the Health in All Policies approach and encouraging public health leaders to act as chief health strategists in influencing policies in other sectors affecting population health. Increasing focus on Health in All Policies and higher salary positions in health care may further explain the popularity of health policy and management and health law programs.” If you are a journalist looking to know more about Dr. Shah’s work, and the importance public health education in America of the programs Georgia Southern is offering – then let us help. Dr. Gulzar H. Shah is a Professor and Department Chair, Health Policy and Community Health at the Jiann-Ping Hsu College of Public Health (JPHCOPH), Georgia Southern University. He is available to speak with media regarding this important topic - simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
Criminal law expert on Derek Chauvin trial
Chris Slobogin, Milton R. Underwood Chair in Law and Director of Vanderbilt's Criminal Justice Program, is available for commentary and analysis on the murder trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin. Chris is an expert in criminal law and procedure, mental health law and evidence. He is the author of more than 100 articles, books and chapters and 200 judicial opinions, including three U.S. Supreme Court decisions. He has also served on the American Law Institute's Principles of Police Investigation Project, which focuses on the legal issues related to police procedures.
Election integrity and the Peach State - What does the new voting law in Georgia mean for voters?
It’s a law that passed in record time. Georgia politics is once again capturing the national spotlight and headlines with The Election Integrity Act of 2021. Here’s what it means in a nutshell: “The new law imposes new voter identification requirements for absentee ballots, empowers state officials to take over local elections boards, limits the use of ballot drop boxes and makes it a crime to approach voters in line to give them food and water. "It's like the Christmas tree of goodies for voter suppression," Democratic state Sen. Jen Jordan said on the Senate floor as lawmakers prepared to vote on the nearly 100-page bill Thursday. Republicans cast the measure, dubbed The Election Integrity Act of 2021, as necessary to boost confidence in elections after the 2020 election saw Trump make repeated, unsubstantiated claims of fraud. By Thursday evening, a lawsuit challenging the new law had already been filed by a trio of voting rights groups: the New Georgia Project, the Black Voters Matter Fund and Rise Inc. "In large part because of the racial disparities in areas outside of voting -- such as socioeconomic status, housing, and employment opportunities -- the Voter Suppression Bill disproportionately impacts Black voters, and interacts with these vestiges of discrimination in Georgia to deny Black voters (an) equal opportunity to participate in the political process and/or elect a candidate of their choice," the lawsuit states. March 26 – CNN The new law is under a lot of scrutiny and is getting a lot of coverage. If you are a journalist looking for expert perspective on the legality and legitimacy of new law, what it may mean for future elections in Georgia voters and potentially voters across America, then let us help. Dr. Stephen Farnsworth is a sought-after political commentator on presidential politics. He has been widely featured in national media, including The Washington Post, Reuters, The Chicago Tribune and MSNBC. Dr. Farnsworth is available to speak with media any time regarding the election and its aftermath – simply click on his icon to arrange an interview today.
Marijuana law scholar on legalization in New York
Robert Mikos, professor of law, is available for commentary on the legalization of recreational marijuana in New York. Professor Mikos is one of the nation’s leading experts on federalism and drug law. His most recent scholarship analyzes the struggle among federal, state and local governments for control of marijuana law and policy, which includes a first-of-its-kind casebook, Marijuana Law, Policy, and Authority. He has written, testified and lectured on: States’ constitutional authority to legalize marijuana Federal preemption of state marijuana regulations Political and budgetary considerations that limit enforcement of the federal marijuana ban Federal law’s influence on state regulation and taxation of the marijuana industry Desirability of marijuana localism
