Each
and every day, the great world of science advances as new discoveries
are made. Americans are
often
confused by these new scientific developments, which frequently leads
people to
abandon any hope of understanding such discoveries as they leave it up
to
scientists, doctors, and others in the scientific community to grapple
with. As
the realm of innovations broadens, as does the term “science” and its
many sub-categories.
It has become increasingly difficult in recent years to determine what
is
considered “science” and what falls into other, variant categories of
existence.
In
Daniel Patrick Thurs’s Science Talk, recently released in
paperback by Rutgers University Press, the author examines how
scientific
controversies have changed, and will likely continue to alter, the way
in which
Americans view issues connected to the world of science.
Continue reading "New in paper: Science Talk by Daniel Thurs" »
On March 17, 2008, the Supreme Court agreed to hear
a case that has had a significant impact on free speech over the airwaves. The
Court granted the Federal Communication Commission’s request that it review last
year’s decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Fox Television v. FCC, which rejected
the FCC’s strict new “fleeting expletives” regulation that prohibited the use
of inappropriate language on broadcast stations during the day-time hours. This
directive was instituted after Janet Jackson’s infamous "wardrobe malfunction" during the
2004 Super Bowl half-time show. The rule issued by the FCC
later recognized exceptions to the decree, as it stated that it was acceptable
for inappropriate language so long as it was in context and not patently
offensive, but the FCC refused to apply this stipulation to The Blues, a 2006 documentary
which aired on PBS, because they
maintained that director Martin Scorsese could have replaced the musicians actual language with
more appropriate words. The Second Circuit ruled that the “fleeting expletives”
order is “arbitrary and capricious” as it is applied only when the FCC feels
like applying the rule. What extent is speaking openly in America an expression of individuality and
freedom, and where does such speech turn into an unlawful offense to others?
In Marjorie Heins's Not
in Front of the Children, recently published in paperback by Rutgers University Press, the author examines the historical
evolution of “indecency” laws that began as an attempt to protect our nation’s
impressionable youth.
Continue reading "Not in Front of the Children by Marjorie Heins" »