Last week’s election and the entire year’s campaign cycle absorbed people’s interest people across the nation.

A tidal wave of posts took over social media outlets. Voters and non-voters alike took to message boards, walls and Twitter feeds to air their unfiltered opinions.

Some veered into disrespectful, uncivil speech.

While freedom of speech is a vital part of our society, it is not reason to fill news feeds with hate and disrespect.

Whether it was Democrats gloating about their victory or Republicans angrily lamenting their loss, the divisive statements were unbecoming.

Ironically, these polarizing, intense rants failed to recognize a basic democratic ideal—the uniting of diverse viewpoints.

By creating a dichotomy between “a good side” and “a bad side,” people discount the possibility of compromise.

They refuse to understand another person’s perspective.

Setting up this false binary means people are overlooking the full range of opinions.

These enraged posts underscore a larger issue—uncivil discourse.

Many Facebook status updates and tweets came across as demeaning.

Instead of promoting ideas, it dampens the political ideation process and discourages all parties.

We rarely see this type maliciousness play out in real life, but in cyberspace, it’s an all-out fight.

Behind the protection and distance of a screen, people can easily make a sweeping insult about a person’s beliefs.

This destroys any chance for someone to feel welcomed into  political discussion.

Hearing these divisive arguments coming from fellow students was especially disheartening.

Just follow the old adage: Think before you speak.

This way, students will represent their school well.

And, more importantly, they will represent themselves and their ideologies better.

Of course people should express their opinions. But they should do so in a decent manner.

Otherwise, the true goal of social media—to connect people from disparate backgrounds— will never be achieved.

Students should still be active in community, even without national spotlight on Indianapolis.

The recent Super Bowl madness is giving the rest of the nation a chance to learn what the Butler University community has known since 1855: Indianapolis is a super city, and that fact has nothing to do with a visit from Jimmy Fallon or a celebrity basketball game at
Hinkle Fieldhouse.

After all, one sporting event can’t create a city’s entire legacy, and the 2012 Super Bowl isn’t the first time that Butler students got involved when the city hosted a large sporting event.

Does anyone else remember a NCAA men’s basketball Final Four and national championship that we hosted and participated in less than two years ago?

We have much more to be proud of—namely, Butler students, faculty and staff who make a difference each and every day in the Indianapolis community by volunteering, student teaching, starting businesses and creating programs that continue to make a lasting impact on our city.

Even after the larger-than-life XLVI letters are taken down and we all go back to drinking literally anything besides Bud Light, the Butler community should still continue to display its Indianapolis pride by forging and maintaining lasting partnerships with meaningful groups and organizations.

The Collegian reported today in “Despite administrative changes, partnership stands” that Butler’s relationship with Shortridge Magnet High School, an Indianapolis Public School, is growing despite the school’s recent administrative layoffs and dismissals.

This is an admirable connection for Butler and one the university should keep for years to come.

This connection does every day what the media makes a big deal of highlighting during the hype over a football game—how great it is that Butler students get involved in the city.

To be sure, there is a lesson in the Super Bowl hype. Indianapolis thrives when people get excited about its possibilities.

It is not that we shouldn’t be excited for all of the Butler students who volunteered at the NFL Player’s Party or who posted Facebook pictures of  their downtown celebrity sightings. However, I’m betting these people got more pats on the back and press in the last week than the staff or students at the Butler Volunteer Center have gotten in the last year.

Once the Super Bowl fuss is over, the fact that Butler students danced or participated in a Twitter campaign for Fallon to come back to Butler will not matter.

However to kids involved in the Shortridge partnership, Butler students’ involvement will matter.

There’s no glam or mass media appeal to regular old volunteering, but that doesn’t mean that we should care about it less.

Over the past few weeks, Butler University  students’ Twitter and Facebook feeds have been covered with Jimmy Fallon tweets and messages.

Now, the “Late Night with Jimmy Fallon” host is making a special visit to campus during his stint here at Hilbert Circle Theatre, but the social media campaign may not have been  the sole
reason.

“I hope it helped,” Vice President for Student Affairs Levester Johnson said. “But in the end, we reached out to [Fallon’s people] and made an offer, and we were very lucky to be selected.”

The Office of Student Affairs, the Student Government Association and Clowes Memorial Hall worked together to bring Fallon and friends to campus.

Along with Fallon’s personal show for the Butler community, Kodi Colip, a senior marketing major, was selected to work as a production assistant for the “Late Night” show while it is at the Hilbert.

All the schools that received discounted tickets were notified about the opportunity. Colip, who helped coordinate the #bringjimmyback campaign, including the flash mob, was what Johnson called an “obvious choice” for the role.

Colip said her resume was sent in by Butler, and she found out the good news three weeks later.

It looks like Fallon might have a soft spot for bulldogs.

Fallon performs at 7 p.m. on Sunday at Clowes.

For tickets, contact the box office at 940-6444.

Photo by Maria Porter

This year, Butler University is looking to planet Earth to stimulate academic conversations throughout its colleges.

The Earth Project, run by a committee of faculty and staff through the provost’s office, is designed to support cross-campus collaborative activities and promote collegiality among the faculty, staff, and students.

“I think it’s interesting that although the themes have all been planet-related, there has been a wide diversity of interpretations of these themes, some of which are explicitly environmental and some of which are not,” said Timothy Carter, director of the Earth Project and director of the Center for Urban Ecology.

Events this semester have included an author’s presentation, a local food convention, an alternative cooking demonstration and lectures on biodiversity conservation and environmental justice.

Titled “Yin Yang Ruminations: Mahler’s Song of the Earth,” the next event in line celebrates the centenary of the death of composer Gustav Mahler by investigating his song cycle “Das Lied von der Erde” (“The Song of the Earth”).

Xiaoqing Liu, an assistant professor in the department of modern languages, is presenting this event with professors from the Jordan College of Fine Arts.

“Yin Yang Ruminations,” according to the proposal submitted by Liu and others will delve into the song cycle to illuminate the relationships between Mahler’s German lyrics and the classical Chinese poems that inspired them.

The proposal says that the translations of these poems from Chinese to French, and then to German, and their adaptation by Mahler have transformed the poems into a complicated picture of Chinese aesthetic.

This cultural mixture will be expounded upon in the event, which will include both lecture and performance elements.  The implications of such a mixture are also an important element of the event, according to Liu.

“Artists communicate with one another across time and space,” she said. “That’s one thing that I especially want the Butler students to be aware of. They should open their minds to a much larger world, rather than their immediate lives and environment.”

Another Earth Project event, open through Friday, is a student photo gallery exhibition throughout Jordan Hall, featuring photographs by Butler students of the land in and around Rome.

Over the summer and throughout this semester, the committee members have been accepting proposals from faculty, staff and students for events related to an investigation of the Earth.  The committee chooses events to sponsor and offers grants to help offset the costs.

Carter said next semester’s events so far include a lecture by Wes Jackson on the relationship between land and one’s sense of place, an exploration on the history and practice of brewing cider and a presentation on literary and film genres relating to eco-horror and eco-fantasy.  The committee is still accepting proposals.

Specific information regarding these events is forthcoming on the Earth Project’s Facebook page, “The Butler University Earth Project,” and on Butler’s website through the provost’s office.

The next Earth Project event takes place today at 7:30 p.m. in Eidson-Duckwall Recital Hall.

Advertising attacks women with constant images that demean, objectify and subordinate them.

That’s the premise of “Miss Representation,” a documentary showing this week on campus.

I hope to see a packed house and not just with women.

According to the organization’s website, “the film…exposes how American youth are being sold the concept that women and girls’ value lies in their youth, beauty and sexuality.”

Some people, including some of my classmates, believe that the feminist revolution is over, that women are now equal in society.

Counter arguments may suggest that women do not have to listen to these ads, that advertising does not affect people or that men are portrayed unrealistically, too.

But according to Jean Kilbourne, a feminist activist who appears in the documentary, only 5 percent of women have the body type used in almost all advertising.

The first point is only true in a fantasy world where advertisements aren’t everywhere.

And on the sidebar of every Facebook or YouTube page, targeted ads clamor for attention.

According to the documentary, the average American woman spends 10.4 hours a week consuming media.

Billboards, television commercials, magazines, radio ads and a dozen other forms of advertising intrude on all of our lives
constantly.

Most of the time, they do not even register with our conscious minds.

But almost all of us buy and eat almost exclusively brand-name food.

Another simple test: observe what Butler University students, faculty and staff wear.

I recognize the vast majority of the labels and logos without even thinking about it.

Studies done by sociologists and marketing companies alike show that the second point is perfectly ludicrous.

Of course advertising works.

Finally, some people argue that men are portrayed unfairly as well.

I offer no argument.

Men in media are portrayed as ridiculous stereotypes of body builders, who shrug off explosions and wrestle sharks on their vacations.

But the stereotypes have completely different implications.

Men in advertising are often shown to be physically and socially dominant.

Women, more often than not, are put on display, beckoning the viewer and taking up as little space as possible.

So yes, the stereotypes cut both ways.

But a stereotypically influenced man feels angst over how unfulfilling it is to be a lonely alpha male—or just exalts in his superiority.

The woman who has been victimized by stereotypes instead looks at herself in the mirror and finds herself lacking.

“Miss Representation” attempts to reveal a very simple truth of advertising in relation to women:

In order to sell anything, one must address a need in the consumer. Where there is not a need, one must be made apparent.

Watch the next cosmetic commercial that comes on. And I mean actually watch and listen to it. Chances are the incredibly bubbly narrator will announce how their formula will banish all fears of age, pores, eye color, etc.

In other words, the ads pre-suppose that women are worried about these things. And while one ad is simply noise, 10.4 hours a week of bombardment takes a toll on everyone.

Perhaps after reading this, you will feel, like many Americans do, that I am exaggerating or ignoring free will.

I have good news: The documentary will be playing Thursday night, and I’ll be there, along with several members of the community who are certainly more knowledgeable than I am.

The film will show at Butler on Nov. 17, at 7 p.m. in the Pharmacy Building Room 150.

Bring concerns and arguments, and enjoy the show.

Persuasion, yelling and calling into question the moral character of an opponent are all interesting and predictable components of a modern argument, especially one between young adults.

In the hustle and bustle of college, it seems that students are losing the perspective that comes with civil discourse.

Instead of arguing from a logical standpoint and accepting the inevitable counterargument, students nowadays are convinced that their arguments are superior at all times.

After attending Student Government Association’s assembly on Oct. 26, it occurred to me that this is a massive problem to have among college students.

There are several factors that have contributed to this transition away from logical arguments into deranged yelling matches.

The first is social media.

The Internet as a whole, whether it be comment boards, forums, Facebook or Twitter, has contributed to the systematic breakdown of argumentation.

The Internet provides a level of anonymity that breeds a courageous attitude and inspires Internet users to say whatever they want, essentially, wherever they want.

This attitude has transcended our online world and is now commonplace in our society.

People seem to have forgotten the concept that they must pause to hear the rebuttal from their opponent.

They have also forgotten that when arguing, an actual stance must be reached by each party in lieu of gross generalizations.

My generation is suffering from a loss of argumentation etiquette, compliments of constant Internet use and availability.

The second factor involving the transition away from arguments is a misinterpretation of the First Amendment.

The First Amendment allows anyone have protected speech, among other rights.

However, most forget that it also allows someone with a differing argument to say what he or she wants as well.

A firm grasp of this concept will help current youth argue in a more productive fashion.

Plus, proving someone’s argument wrong with his or her own logic is the best part.

But the opponent’s opinion can never be known if a party simply refuses to hear it.

The third factor is the media.

Turn on any political news channel around 7 p.m. on a given weeknight. Scroll through the programming, and the viewer is bound to see a roundtable of eloquent political professionals arguing with one another to the point of shouting.

This also is negatively impacting the way that we see arguments, especially in the professional sphere.

Instead of the “winner” of an argument being the person with the most well-reasoned argument, it appears to be that the person who yells the loudest is the one who is ultimately considered “right.”

Not only is this inaccurate, but it’s lazy.

Anyone can shout and yell about a certain topic ad nauseam; it takes more effort to develop a concrete stance and support it with evidence.

Let’s throw this childish argument format that we have grown so accustomed to out the window.

Engaging in civil discourse not only prepares students for the real world where inarticulate opinions aren’t tolerated, but it makes students more accepting of the fact that differing opinions, and the subsequent arguments, are unavoidable and equally as important.

Free Speech Week was two weeks ago, and I’ve been spending a lot of time thinking about how great a privilege free speech really is.

But the more I contemplate it, the more a certain phrase keeps popping into my head—just because I can doesn’t mean I should.

And with so many outlets for free expression today (YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, tumblr), it’s easier than ever for one to express their opinion on a whim without careful consideration of the broader scope of their actions.

A friend of mine recently showed me a music video on YouTube called “Throw that Bitch a Bagel (Bitches Love Bagels)” by Deuce Deuce, a band that has performed several times on Butler University’s campus.

Some of my female friends expressed a sense of personal offense taken from the video and its lyrics like “Bitches love floor sex / Bitch you gettin’ blown out / And we ain’t even keepin’ score yet.”

Josh Whitaker, a member of Deuce Deuce and a Butler student, explained that the song wasn’t meant as offensive and involved inside jokes.

“It’s about me, just a kid doing something I love doing, with a sense of humor that not everyone agrees with,” Whitaker said. “But I don’t expect everyone to laugh at my jokes.”

Having only come across the video by accident, I had no idea there was subtext to the song, so I initially had to take it at face value.

I’m not easily offended by things, so the song didn’t upset me. It was more funny than anything and employed remarkably high quality video production.

However, free expression involves both the expresser and the audience, and any expression, especially artistically, is subject to personal interpretation and potential controversy.

A blogger or YouTube user might not consider the fact that they are a representation of their community. They might overlook that just because they’re trying to appeal to a certain group of people doesn’t mean that someone else might see what they post.

Just because I have the means to express myself doesn’t mean that every thought I have needs to be expressed—I realize the irony of saying this in an opinion article.

Responsible free expression considers the consequences before blogging. It takes into account the audience, both intended and unintended, before posting a video. It accurately expresses the author’s thoughts and intentions while acknowledging potential alternative interpretations, positive and negative.

Whether it’s entertainment or discourse, responsible free speech requires that an author  convey their thoughts clearly, or be willing to handle the consequences of misinterpretation. Conversely, a responsible audience should seek to understand the author’s true intention.

Being able to express oneself is great. We shouldn’t ignore the right to express ourselves. But taking it for granted is just as ignorant as not using it at all.

People need to find a responsible balance. Think before you speak.

Just because you can express something doesn’t mean you should.

Photo by Reid Bruner

Word gets out faster than ever on Facebook and Twitter. Soon Butler University emergency alerts will, too.

Next semester expects students, faculty and staff to have the option of receiving official Butler notifications on the popular social media websites.

“It’s the age we live in,” said Andrew Ryan, assistant chief of police at Butler University Police Department.

The integration is the result of a change in the software vendor used to distribute the school’s messaging service.

A three-to-five-year contract with the provider Send Word Now will replace the more expensive current agreement with Honeywell Instant Alert Plus. The new deal is scheduled to be signed later this year and take effect in January.

Wilkey said the updates will still be available by voicemail, text and email, but the additions of Facebook and Twitter notifications could prove especially popular.

“We think you need to hit every possible communication medium you can,” said Kathleen Wilkey, senior director of application services for information technology.

Freshman Christiaan Ruff, an arts administration and dance major said, “Using the web is the best way to reach everyone reliably and quickly.”

Two different types of alerts exist: emergency notifications are sent to all available mediums warning of a verified campus emergency and a timely warning is an email designed to make the campus aware of criminal activity.

“It’s a known immediate or potential threat to your campus where you need to get information out as quickly as possible telling them to do something or not do something,” Ryan said.

As an institution that receives federal funding, Butler is subject to the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act.

According to the 1998 law, the university is required to issue “timely reports to the campus community on crimes considered to be a threat to other students and employees.”

The Department of Education handbook states that the decision to produce a timely warning depends on “a case-by-case [examination] of all factors surrounding a crime such as the nature of the crime and the continuing danger to the campus community.”

Students said they are pleased to be alerted to ongoing investigations and find the warnings useful.

“Informing will not hurt anyone,” Ruff said. “It will only be beneficial toward resolving the issue.”

Senior biology major Shannon Knall said, “I would make a note in my head to be aware.”

“I’d be looking over my shoulder a little more suspicious.”

Wilkey said those on campus are highly encouraged to sign up for every form of safety notification, including Twitter and Facebook alerts when they become available in the future.

Technology is advancing constantly. It seems as though every time I buy a new computer or phone, a more advanced one has already appeared to take its place.

Although it is always exciting to grab the latest edition of the hottest technological device, I am starting to realize that I have become annoyingly dependent on the abilities of my electronic devices.

For Christmas, I got my first smartphone and I love it. It is, however,  in some ways assisting in ruining my life. Let’s start with the Facebook app I installed on it. It is convenient and I can easily upload any picture or status in an instant.

It is also unequivocally distracting. Some days I find myself scrolling through my news feed while walking back from class, going to my room and immediately checking Facebook on my computer.

The most disturbing part is that I have turned into one of those “I would die without my phone” people.

My phone dies sometimes, mainly because I do not charge it enough. When it does, I suddenly feel ill-equipped to handle the world. I feel lost without my plethora of apps to direct me to gas stations and my favorite restaurants, while giving me directions when I get lost driving.

Regrettably, I have fallen into the technology trap. My phone has become an extension of my right hand and when I cannot use it, I turn into someone with no outside knowledge of the world and no clue how to handle the obstacles that come my way.

This new wave of technology is dumbing the world down. I have fallen victim, just as the other “73.3 million U.S. smartphone users in 2011 [have],” according to rbr.com.

We use our phones to do everything lately, from paying bills to shopping. Although we are a nation centered on convenience, technology has become more of a crutch for us all. We have even worked to simplify the task of reading a book, with devices like the Kindle.

It is as though Americans have become too lazy to do much of anything without the help of a technological device.

I am not advocating the eradication of smartphones. I enjoy mine far too much to get rid of it. However, what separates me from many of the other 73.3 million drones is that I am aware that I am becoming too dependent on my phone’s abilities.

It is not as if we do not understand how to navigate city streets or how to calculate 20 percent of a restaurant bill, so why are we so reliant on our phones to accomplish these tasks for us?

We should make a slow transition into being independent human beings again, who talk to each other instead of quick firing text messages. We should walk around without our heads bent over our phones.

Let’s work to reestablish a connection with one another, before technology alienates us permanently.

In less than a decade, there will be an entire generation of people who have never lived without Facebook.

If that does not terrify you, it should.

Facebook users in our generation, which is nearly all of us, are increasingly using the Web site not as a networking tool, but as a means to recreate ourselves.

Consider what your friends publish on their profile, their statuses, through their picture and  even in their listed  ‘likes’ and interests. If you know them in the real world, are those things indicative of who they actually are or how they want to be perceived?

If we are pictured drunk at a party, we appear more popular and social. If we list Neil Gaiman’s work under our favorite books, we appear cultured and well-read. If we announce we’re in a relationship people will talk about us and, for that little bit of time, we are the center of attention.

Are any of these actually indicative of who we are?

To some extent they are, but in an age when people can control their own image with an upload or a deletion, who we actually are is becoming less and less important.

In the real world, we assume we know other people based on a few observations. We fancy ourselves to be very keen about picking up characteristics.

If someone gives a weak handshake, we think them timid. If they trip, we suppose that they are clumsy. Whether or not these are valid, we take these perceptions, extrapolate them out for the entirety of their personality, and assume we have a good understanding of the person.

With the ability to control how we are perceived virtually, to present exactly the clues we want, we take on a role, hoping that people perceive us the way we want.

On Facebook, we are simply playing our favorite character, and are proud of ourselves for being as confident, popular and interesting as we wish we were in real life.

The problem arises from the dissonance between our two selves. Another way of saying “playing a role” is “living a lie.” While it might only be a white lie, it reveals how insecure total candidness makes us.

By putting our lives on Facebook, we leave ourselves completely vulnerable to the judgments of others. And so the cycle is self-perpetuating: we look at others’ profiles, we judge them, and we hope that people don’t judge us as harshly.

So we pick our profile picture carefully, our wording on posts carefully and our friends carefully, then watch as the rest of the world’s view of us is slightly altered.

Whereas the Internet initially offered total anonymity, now the opposite is true.

We use our Facebook identities to control the rest of the world’s perception. Facebook has become another place where we must constantly be in character because of the innate fear of revealing too much about who we really are.

So at the end of the day, who are we?

Are we actually Shakespeare fans, or did we just put up lines from A Midsummer Night’s Dream that we thought sounded cool? Are we the compilation of all the pictures in which we are tagged? Is there more to our lives than what we report in our statuses?

While that might seem hyperbolic, the problem is that we aren’t exactly sure where our digital selves end and our real selves begin.