Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Unprecedented levels of partisanship vitriol threatens the health of democracy in U.S., globally
Voter-based political parties have played an integral role in American politics since their formation in the 1790s, yet it is difficult to remember any other time in history — other than perhaps the 1850s — when the level of divisiveness was this high and the polarity this profound between Republicans and Democrats. To add more fuel to the fire, the anti-democratic actions against the rule of law by President Donald Trump have become a primary threat to democracy in the U.S., said David Lynch, Ph.D., a professor of History and Social Sciences and Political Science program coordinator at Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota. The same action are also threatening how the government works and delegitimizing and undermining institutions that make and enforce laws,Lynch added. Those institutions include formal ones such as Congress and the political parties themselves, as well as less formal entities, such as the traditional news media. “You have to have free, fair, open media in order to have a democracy. If you do not have a free press, you do not have a democracy,” Dr. Lynch said. “And similarly, you need to have the rule of law where laws are carried out not for political ends, but based on the laws.” The recent impeachment proceedings were an attempt to curtail these actions, but the partisan response to the Senate’s impeachment trial allowed the violation of democratic norms to be rewarded, said Dr. Lynch. Furthermore, politicians who react strongly to anti-democratic actions threaten to further delegitimize the government, such as Trump’s refusal to shake the hand of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, at his most recent State of the Union address and her subsequent action of tearing up his speech. “That helps both sides reinforce their own position that the other side is less legitimate and that we shouldn't cooperate with somebody like that,” Dr. Lynch said. Dr. Lynch pointed to how the indices that measure the health of democracy both in the U.S. and abroad have all gone down since Trump won the 2016 election. In addition, the most recent Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index reflected the worst registered global democracy score since its inception in 2006. In that report, the U.S. received a score of “flawed democracy.” Traditionally, the U.S. democratic system has been able to regulate such extreme partisanship before election day by not nominating candidates that violate democratic norms or are far from the ideological center. On election day, overly partisan candidates are vulnerable in swing districts and swing states. That ability for the public to express its collective voice, though, has eroded over the years as the number of swing districts has dwindled. "When people view through a partisan lens, it changes the incentives that elected officials have because they may be rewarded for partisan but anti-democratic actions,” Dr. Lynch said. “It also changes how average people view this whole debate.” To demonstrate the current political scene in the U.S., Dr. Lynch alluded to a 2017 study conducted by a group of political scientists at Yale University in which experimental surveys were sent to Venezuelans to see to what degree they would be willing to accept a less democratic candidate if he or she was a member of the political party they affiliated themselves with. The answer was quite a large degree. “The big message here is you can't necessarily rely on the public just to vote out an anti-democratic candidate because they might get a partisan advantage from that anti-democrat,” Dr. Lynch said. Are you a journalist covering this topic and interested in an interview? That’s where we can help. David Lynch, Ph.D., professor of History and Social Sciences and Political Science program coordinator, has taught political science at Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota since 1996. Dr. Lynch has also written over a dozen chapters on international relations, international political economy, and American foreign policy, including the chapter on trade in the United Nations Association of the USA’s “A Global Agenda” from 1996 to 2005. Dr. Lynch is an expert in political science, political economies, and international relations. He is available to speak with the media. To arrange an interview with him, simply click on his photo below to access his contact information.
Harvey Weinstein Found Guilty. What's Next?
Harvey Weinstein was found guilty on two charges but acquitted on three of the more serious charges in a New York courtroom on February 23. He will be sentenced on March 11, facing five to 29 years in prison. He also awaits criminal charges of sexual assault in Los Angeles. Michelle Madden Dempsey, professor of law at Villanova University's Charles Widger School of Law, says there are three main takeaways from this verdict: Prosecutors were right to take this case to a jury, and even if the jury had acquitted, it still would've been an important "win" simply because it went to trial. The jury seems to have taken the case seriously and delivered a fair verdict. We can't read too much into this verdict (as far as #MeToo is concerned). When women and girls of color, socio-economically marginalized women and girls, prostituted people and others who lack relative structural power receive justice from the criminal legal system, then we can start to celebrate. That is to say, there's still a lot of work to be done before all sexual assaults are taken seriously in our criminal justice system. Prof. Dempsey also says we shouldn't be too quick to assume that a social movement is driving this verdict. "The social movement, I think, is driving prosecutors to take these cases to a jury—which is a good thing. But I think juries typically try to reach verdicts based on the fact and particular law of the jurisdiction in which the alleged offense occurred."
New Data Protection Agency: Good or Bad? It Depends.
New York senator Kirsten Gillibrand has proposed legislation to create a new data protection agency. She cites the need as personal information is freely sold across the internet without users' knowledge. She specifically calls out Facebook and Google for their misuse of consumer information. Similar legislation has been proposed in California. But is this a good idea or a bad idea? Law professor and privacy expert Doris DelTosto Brogan says it ultimately depends. "It will depend on how well resourced the new agency is both in terms of human and financial resources, and whether it is truly independent," Prof. Brogan said. "The area is huge and complex and ever-changing. The problems are often under the radar until they explode, and the nature of the threats are often nuanced and subtle. So, a good idea to create a dedicated agency? Yes, to the extent the agency comes to the table with real independence, adequate resources and genuine expertise." But the answer isn't all that simple, she says. "In terms of expertise, the agency will need people who understand the threats, and the reality of how the organizations that are managing data work. It will also need the financial resources to pursue a broad range of matters across a wide landscape not only of subject areas (hotels, airlines, credit reporting agencies, social media, financial institutions, etc.) but also the technology of how data is obtained, and accumulated, stored, used, manipulated and 'shared' by the players. "One concern with a subject-specific agency is the tendency to become overly reliant on and enmeshed with the industry being regulated. This is always an issue (like the critiques of the FAA in the Boeing matter), but with the oversized influence of big tech, and the issues of understanding a dense, rapidly evolving, tech-heavy industry the risk is significant. "Finally, if we are going to take seriously an agency dedicated to protecting privacy, in addition to mastering the market and developing technical expertise the new agency, if it is truly privacy-focused, it will have to develop a robust understanding of privacy conceptually—that is, privacy as more than just a consequentialist understanding. "A dedicated agency, if properly created, will come to the task with a deep understanding of privacy beyond just the implications of my social security number being hacked—but rather an understanding of privacy as essential to humanness, to intimacy, to thought and to informed self-governance."
As Mayor Pete pops and Democrats feel the ‘Bern’ – is Biden a bust for the third time?
As the results from Iowa seem to be still trickling in, it looks like it could be either a slim lead or even a pretty much statistical tie between Indiana’s (former) Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. Both spent a lot of time, money and energy campaigning across Iowa and that seems to have paid off. For Democratic candidate Joe Biden – it must feel like Groundhog Day. For the third time, his presidential bid that started with high hopes and promise seems to be crashing down in front of him. And as the critical primary in New Hampshire approaches – there are a lot of questions to be asked as this once crowded field of close to two dozen might be down to four or even fewer. Can Biden recover? With two losses in a row, can he sustain, and should he? What about Elizabeth Warren? If her ‘plan’ can’t attract the support of even 15 percent of any primary, perhaps it’s back to the drawing board? And what are the key differences between Buttigieg and Sanders? Which one has the upper hand with voters, organizers and finances? Oh … and the legend of Michael Bloomberg and his gold-plated campaign team are reaching an almost legendary status. When is the time right for the former mayor of New York City and does he risk being too late to the game? It is going to be a wild-ride for those who follow politics over the next few months and if you are a journalist covering this road to November – let our experts help. Mark Caleb Smith is the Director of the Center for Political Studies at Cedarville University. Mark and Marc are both available to speak with media regarding the DNC Primary and the upcoming election. Simply click on either icon to arrange an interview. Dr. Marc Clauson is a professor of history and law at Cedarville and is an expert in the fields of political and economic philosophy.
Soundgarden, Chris Cornell's Widow Spar Over Royalties and Recordings
It's been a "Black Hole Sun" set of months for the members of Soundgarden, who are in a legal fight with the widow of the band's former lead singer, Chris Cornell, who died in 2017. Cornell's wife, Vicky, filed suit against the band in December 2019, claiming that her husband's estate was owed "hundreds of thousands of dollars" in royalties for unreleased recordings prior to his death. Now, the band has filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Intellectual property expert and law professor Michael Risch says it's an interesting decision on the band's part. "The allegations in the lawsuit are heavily fact-bound, as are the defenses," Prof. Risch says. "A motion to dismiss assumes that all the facts in the complaint are true, but the band's motion asserts that the facts are false." He says that band members usually always work things out. When you see lawsuits for copyright or other reasons, it's usually always heirs that are involved.
It’ll be early mornings and long nights for just about anyone involved in covering, watching or taking part in the impeachment hearings of President Donald Trump. With an impeachment trial, there is process, debate, strategy and rhetoric. The goal for Democrats will be a guilty verdict that will remove a sitting President from office. Some experts aren’t sure if this monumental event will have any troubling repercussions on Trump’s campaign for re-election this fall. “We did see some minor impacts of impeachment in the past,” says Matt Grossmann, professor of political science and director of MSU’s Institute for Public Policy and Social Research. “We’re talking pretty minor effects. It’s hard to see it making a big difference in what happens come November. I certainly don’t think you can either count him out or say that he’s going to cruise to victory. I think we’re going to see a competitive presidential election.” And when it comes to the details of removal from office and the difference between a criminal act and what an actual impeachable offence is according to the constitution - seems to be getting lost on most inside and outside of the Senate. “I wrote months ago that one side would argue that President Trump had to commit a crime to be removed from office while the other side would say the opposite,” says Brian Kalt, professor of law at Michigan State University. “This back-and-forth happens in every impeachment, and the parties switch sides depending on who’s on trial with little regard for what the Constitution really states. The Constitution and 200 years of precedent make it extremely clear that impeachment and removal do not require a crime to have been committed.” Are you a journalist covering the impeachment trials? Our experts can help explain every angle of this process, the potential outcomes and the consequences for both sides arguing for the removal of a sitting president and how it will impact the upcoming election in November. Brian Kalt is a professor of law and the Harold Norris Faculty Scholar at Michigan State University. He is an expert in constitutional law of the presidency, presidential pardons, impeachment, succession and the 25th Amendment. Matt Grossmann is an associate professor of political science and the director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social Research. His expertise includes American politics, political parties and campaigns and he has been featured in the New York Times, Washington Post and other media outlets commenting on these issues. Both Brian and Matt are available to speak with media regarding this topic – simply click on either expert’s icon to arrange an interview.
In the latest round of legal decisions on the enforcement of international privacy laws between the EU and the U.S., Peter Swire, professor of Law and Ethics at the Georgia Tech Scheller College of Business, and associate director for Policy of the Georgia Tech Institute for Information Security and Privacy looks at how the EU may examine foreign intelligence surveillance in his article “Foreign Intelligence and Other Issues in the Initial Opinion in Schrems II” in Lawfare. The Schrems II case is the subject of the recent opinion from Advocate General (AG) Henrik Saugmandsgaard Øe before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). In the case, Austrian lawyer Max Schrems challenged Facebook’s ability to transfer personal data from the EU to the United States using the standard contractual clauses, which exist where a company such as Facebook follows EU-level privacy standards when private data is transferred outside of Europe. Schrems’s specific claim is that he cannot access any files that the National Security Agency (NSA) may have collected about him and lacks legal redress for any violation of his rights under EU law. Swire writes that the case examines the transfer of an individual’s personal data from the European Union to the United States using the standard contractual clauses and the Privacy Shield, which was negotiated in 2016 by the U.S. and the EU for privacy data transfers to the United States specifically. Facebook’s headquarters are in Ireland, and the Irish High Court ruled in favor of Schrems and certified 11 broad questions to the CJEU. The AG opinion published this week concerns this appeal in Schrems II from the Irish High Court. If Schrems wins this appeal, then many flows of personal data from the EU to the U.S. may become illegal. Swire’s expertise in U.S. privacy laws is extensive. He is a sought after privacy expert and he has been highlighted in Bloomberg Law, Le Monde, LawFare and numerous scholarly publications. He has appointments by courtesy with the College of Computing and School of Public Policy and is Senior Counsel with Alston & Bird, LLP. If you are a reporter covering this topic and would like to speak with Professor Swire – simply click on his icon to arrange an interview or email media@scheller.gatech.edu.
Social Media Spaces Can Be Instruments of God’s Unconditional Love, Theologian Says
Being 'always on' can be a source of anxiety or sorrow, but it also can be a way to strengthen faith, Baylor author says Many of us are “always on” — scrolling through social media, checking email or searching the web, says author Angela Gorrell, Ph.D., assistant professor of practical theology at Baylor University’s George W. Truett Theological Seminary. In her book “Always On,” she writes about how social media spaces can be instruments of God’s unconditional love — but also sources of anxiety, jealousy and depression. With the arrival of 2020 — and its potential for change for the better — she discusses in this Q&A some tools for understanding social media and enabling Christian communities to address its use in constructive ways. Q: From your perspective as a practical theologian, are the social media strategies you recommend aimed solely at people of faith? Dr. Gorrell: Practical theology takes different forms. Ultimately, I aim to write about issues — like social media — that matter to people and shine the light of the Gospel on them. I also research and write about theology and faith in practice, how people express and perform their values, hopes and beliefs through practices, rituals, disciplines, activities, relationships, work—through their way of life. While I write about social media from a Christian perspective, much of what I have written about using social media mindfully and having “interested conversation” about media is applicable to people from a variety of religious and philosophical perspectives. Q: There is much talk about how people spend too much time on social media, to the point of ignoring family and friends when in their presence. How much is too much? And what problems can this create for people? Dr. Gorrell: The most important thing for people to realize is that how you spend time online is more important than how much time you spend online. There are a variety of issues that “passive,” unintentional, unregulated, time online can extend and nurture. I say extend because all of these issues can also be in-person issues. For example, empathy burnout, depression, anxiety and jealousy. We often encounter an enormous amount of suffering online. The amount of suffering and the velocity of these encounters — and rapidly seeing multiple examples back to back in articles or our newsfeeds — can nurture empathy burnout. We can become numb to the suffering we see online and take in but do nothing about it or think very little of it. Likewise, being on social media and passively scrolling through people’s status updates, tweets and stories for unbounded sets of time and looking at copious amounts of content but never replying, messaging, posting or sharing has been linked to depression and anxiety. Similarly, passive following, which is following people closely that we do not know (e.g., celebrities) or people we do not see regularly in person (e.g., high school friends) has been linked to jealousy, which can negatively impact how we perceive ourselves and our lives . . . When we see someone a lot in person or talk to them regularly by phone, we know that their lives have a lot more going on than what they are sharing online. Q: What strategies do you suggest help people use social media wisely? Dr. Gorrell: The goal is meaningful participation. I encourage people to limit passive scrolling and following as much as possible. Create something and share it online. Join conversations. Reply to people’s statuses rather than just clicking emojis. When you see that someone is celebrating, share their joy in a significant way. Share it as your status with a note of congratulations or text them or call them. When you notice someone is mourning, message them. When you encounter suffering online, stop scrolling and do something in response. Get offline, take a walk and pray about this suffering. Give money to an organization that is relieving this suffering. Find other articles and educate yourself on the issue. Learn more about how to help or how to invite other people to care. Q: Any suggestions as to how and where people might create a space to ask and answer questions about social media use? Dr. Gorrell: Asking powerful questions about people’s online experiences that encourage storytelling and helping each other think about new media can happen around the dinner table, in a church small group or on a road trip in the car. When family and friends ask each other about one another’s lives, we can include asking questions about and discussing social media experiences. We can ask curious, open-ended questions without simple yes or no answers like: 1. How do you make decisions about what to respond to online? 2. Have you ever been frustrated or sad about new forms of technology? What causes frustration or sadness for you? 3. When have you had a joyful experience online? Could you describe a time when you felt heard, affirmed or understood online? 4. How does social media help you love God and others and/or prevent you from loving God and others? 5. When have you had a painful experience online? Could you describe a time when you felt unheard, bullied, left out or misunderstood online? 6. What are the top two feelings you experience when using social media, and why do you think this is so? Q: How can we do a better job of using social media? Dr. Gorrell: Develop a rhythm for life with your friends or family that specifically addresses technology — when you will use it and for what purposes, when you will not use it, what boundaries you will have. Using social media constructively requires intentionality. I encourage people to find times in their week or month or year to not use devices and social media and to write down their plan on a calendar. A college student told me that he and his friends put all their phones in the center of the table at restaurants and say that the first person to pick up their phone during dinner pays the entire bill. Since they started this ritual, no one has picked up a phone during dinner. Practices like these help people to be present to people they are with in person. It is a great idea to put all devices away at night one to two hours before bed so minds and bodies can get prepared for sleep. I know families that have a basket for this purpose in their homes. I especially encourage parents to make sure children under 18 do not have a device in their room during sleeping hours so they can get adequate rest. I invite people to consider turning off notifications from all social media platforms and email and only check apps and email at a certain time each day. It is also important to have a plan for difficult moments and conversations online. What will you do when you get angry, disagree with someone else or feel depressed about your life or feel left out? What will you do next? It is equally important to think about what you will use social media for. How can you use social media to love people well, truly stay connected to people, expand your thinking on certain subjects, remain humble and open to being corrected, and nurture your creativity and increase your compassion? How might meaningful participation online support goals like these? ABOUT ANGELA GORRELL Angela Gorrell, Ph.D., assistant professor of practical theology at Baylor’s Truett Seminary, is the author of “Always On: Practicing Faith in a New Media Landscape,” which addresses the perils and possibilities of Christian faith in an era of massive technological change. She also is writing a book that addresses America’s crisis of despair, illuminated by its suicide rates and opioid addiction, and describes joy as the counteragent to despair. Gorrell earned a bachelor’s degree in youth ministry from Azusa Pacific University and an M.Div. and Ph.D. from Fuller Theological Seminary. She came to Baylor from the Yale Center for Faith and Culture at Yale Divinity School, where she developed relationships with more than 250 scholars from roughly 150 institutions on four continents while managing metrics and evaluation for the project. She has more than 14 years of experience in congregational and parachurch ministry, including serving as a chaplain at a women’s maximum-security prison. ABOUT BAYLOR UNIVERSITY Baylor University is a private Christian University and a nationally ranked research institution. The University provides a vibrant campus community for more than 17,000 students by blending interdisciplinary research with an international reputation for educational excellence and a faculty commitment to teaching and scholarship. Chartered in 1845 by the Republic of Texas through the efforts of Baptist pioneers, Baylor is the oldest continually operating University in Texas. Located in Waco, Baylor welcomes students from all 50 states and more than 90 countries to study a broad range of degrees among its 12 nationally recognized academic divisions. ABOUT GEORGE W. TRUETT THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY AT BAYLOR UNIVERSITY Baylor University’s George W. Truett Theological Seminary is an orthodox, evangelical school in the historic Baptist tradition that equips God-called people for gospel ministry in and alongside Christ’s Church by the power of the Holy Spirit. Accredited by the Association of Theological Schools, Truett Seminary provides theological education leading to the Master of Divinity, Master of Arts in Christian Ministry, Master of Theological Studies, Doctor of Ministry and Ph.D. in Preaching. The MACM and MTS degrees also can be completed at the seminary’s Houston campus. In addition, Truett Seminary offers joint degrees: M.Div./M.S.W. and M.T.S./M.S.W. with the Diana R. Garland School of Social Work, M.Div./M.B.A. with the Hankamer School of Business, M.Div./J.D. with Baylor Law School, M.Div./M.M. with the School of Music and M.Div./M.S.Ed. or M.Div./M.A. with the School of Education. Visit www.baylor.edu/truett to learn more.
Is there a link between economic stress and opioid abuse? Let our experts help if you are covering
Recent media coverage is pulling back the curtain to reveal another angle on opioid abuse. The facts are startling, and it seems there is a direct relation between those facing economic stress and hardship and abusing opioids. “In 2015, Jennifer Silva, a professor of sociology and anthropology at Bucknell University, began interviewing people in the coal region of northeastern Pennsylvania. She was working on a project, which would become the book We’re Still Here, about how poor and working-class Americans were affected by the collapse of the coal industry—the major job provider in the region. She was curious how the regional decline might have shaped her subjects’ politics. But she quickly noticed a startling trend alongside the growing unemployment: Her subjects and their families were struggling with opioid abuse. At community meetings, doctors and coroners would debate solutions to the problem. Should they be arresting people? Should they be creating support groups? She describes one desperate parent who asked whether Donald Trump’s proposed border wall would keep black tar heroin from getting to Pennsylvania. Silva’s interviewees might have been representative of an awful connection between job loss and opioid abuse, a connection that continues to be bolstered by research. A study published on Monday in the journal JAMA found that counties with automotive assembly plants that closed had, five years after the closure, 85 percent higher rates of opioid-overdose mortality, relative to counties where automotive assembly plants remained open.” January 02 – The Atlantic The opioid epidemic has seen approximately 700,000 Americans dies since 1999. And there are many people who have become victims – rich and poor. However, this recent finding may show a link that public health officials, law makers and addiction experts can further focus on, especially in areas of America facing current or impending economic strife. There are a still lot of questions and that’s where we can help. Dr. Marc Sweeney is the Founding Dean of the School of Pharmacy at Cedarville University and is an expert in the fields of drug abuse, prescription drug abuse and Opioid addiction. Marc is available to speak with media regarding this growing issue. Simply click on his icon to arrange an interview.
Is your social media ready for when the next crisis strikes? Let our experts help!
At the National Institute for Social Media, response plans are the priority. A response plan is the high-level look, or the umbrella overview, that crisis management falls under. Your response plan details how you respond to positive, negative feedback, and any neutral feedback that comes your way. Take a compliment and make the most out of it: Positive feedback feels like you’re off the hook. If feedback is all positive, you feel like you don’t have to do anything. But that’s your opportunity to nurture and strengthen those who are already your supporters. They then become your brand champions. Avoid the neutral zone traps – react and respond accordingly: Questions or posts that aren’t really positive or negative land in neutral space, and that’s really not crisis communication, responding to those is just good customer service. When crisis strikes: If you have a crisis, most people associate it with an isolated event, and sometimes you can plan for it, sometimes you can’t. A few years ago, when Nordstrom’s discontinued Ivanka Trump’s clothing line, they anticipated a negative backlash by those who would accuse them of being politically motivated. They stated sales was the reason, and 100 percent came out neutral, but they could anticipate that particular feedback. Whereas, in the viral video of a passenger being physically dragged off an airplane, the airline couldn’t have anticipated that event. However, with an online response plan, they would have been prepared to respond to the unexpected event. A quick response is important but an informed response is more important than anything else. If it fits the situation, you may buy yourself time to do a little research by commenting that you’ve passed their question on and will respond soon. If you don’t have a strategic plan to fall back on, and you respond quickly but poorly, you run the risk of doing more harm than good. With an online response plan, people understand how to assess a given situation. Respond: To show transparency, we want everyone to see we are responding to customer; we have a planned response where we acknowledge the customer. Take offline: Give them an offline option for sharing additional information. Resolve: This allows the customer to have their issue resolved and be heard but discourages them from sharing ugly details on that highly visible platform. The plan is for a social media manager to have a path when they don’t know what to do. The viral airplane video is one example because by the time their social media people saw it, it was already going viral. They had every indication they should be panicking. Did they have a person to talk to help them make the decision about how it needs to be addressed? For those crises we can’t anticipate, there needs to be a clear path to a leader who can help with this difficult situation. One of my favorite things to tell people is that you don’t have to be victimized online just because you’re a professional organization. You can set up community guidelines. Some businesses think, what if someone starts using racial slurs or inappropriate comments? You can post community guidelines that state these are our expectations of how our customers can participate respectfully, and we reserve the right to delete your content. You can set the expectation that you want people to engage respectfully. You have to get to the heart of what people are really asking or wanting. In the case of Ivanka Trump’s clothing line, nobody was upset because Nordstrom’s wasn’t carrying the clothing line; what they were really upset about was that a large organization could be taking a political stance against the at-that-time republican candidate. Are you looking to know more about how corporations and institutions need to be prepared and how they need to react when bad news goes viral? That’s where we can help. Amy Jauman is social media expert, consultant, writer, and professor at Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota. Dr. Jauman authored a (National Institute for Social Media) NISM textbook for social media strategists and is available to speak to speak with media – simply click on her icon to arrange an interview.