4A - Monday, October 22, 2012 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com 4A - Monday, October 22, 2012 The Michigan Daily - michigandailycom 1 idhi an:4att Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com TIMOTHY RABB JOSEPH LICHTERMAN and ADRIENNE ROBERTS ANDREW WEINER EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS MANAGING EDITOR Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors. University should immediately release Jensen report Jn May 2011, a flash drive allegedly containing child pornography belonging to then-University of Michigan Health System resident Stephen Jenson was discovered by a medical resident. The resi- dent reported the alleged pornography to her supervisor, but UMHS officials, however, did not report this information to police for six months. After calling this inaction a "failure," the University launched an internal investigation of the missteps and also hired an outside consulting firm to conduct an inquiry. The summary of the external investigation's was released. If the University learned anything from the Penn State scandal, they should have released these findings in full to the public as quickly as possible. While this may be damaging to the University's reputation in the short-term, it's imperative that students and the University community have this information. Say what you meme The third and final presi- dential debate will take place Monday at 7 p.m. in Boca Raton, Fla. There is, of course, one big question on everyone's mind: Which Romney- inspired meme will the Inter- DANIEL net churn out CHARDELL next? First there was Big Bird. During the first presidential debate, former PBS news anchor Jim Lehrer, asked the candidates how they would address the federal budget deficit. Republican presi- dential nominee Mitt Romney said he would lower government spend- ing and, even though he loves Big Bird, end government subsidies for networks like PBS. TheupshotofRomney's remarks? Instant online fame for his yellow, feathery friend. On Facebook, Red- dit, Twitter, Tumblr and elsewhere, memes popped up by the thou- sands. Superimposed over pictures of Big Bird were phrases like "Fired by Romney," "This bird is too big to fail," "Mitt Romney is trying to kill me and "Save Big Bird." Another read, "Obama got bin Laden - I'll get Big Bird!" under a picture of a cackling Romney. The Internet had spoken, but it wasn't finished with Romney quite yet. Round two: Binders Full of Women. In the second presidential debate, the candidates were asked what they would do to address the gender income gap. President Barack Obama drew attention to the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, the first bill passed during his presidency, and his efforts to ensure equal access to higher edu- cation by expanding Pell Grants. Romney tried to anecdotally demonstrate his credentials. While putting together his cabinet as gov- ernor of Massachusetts, he noticed that the pool of applicants was overwhelmingly male. In search of equally qualified women - because he's apparently an affirma- tive action kind of guy - Romney approached "a number of women's groups and said, 'Can you help us find folks?' and they brought us whole binders full of women." Look, I'm savvy to the ubiquitous powers of the Internet, but even I was surprised at how rapidly "bind- ers full of women" took off. Before the debate was over, a "Binders Full of Women" Tumblr blog had already gone viral. Submissions riffed on the image of binders liter- ally full of women and the implicit sexism of Romney's statement. Trapper Keeper? More like, "Trap Her, Keep Her." On Facebook, a "Binders Full of Women" page garnered more than 30,000 "likes" by the end of the broadcast. (At present, that num- ber has grown to 354,000.) Over on Twitter, a "Romney's Binder" account gave us the binder's perspec- tive on its newfound fame: "No com- ment on the rumors that Bill Clinton has already asked to borrow me." The Obama and Romney cam- paigns themselves have been drawn into the meme-driven dia- logue. Campaigning in Iowa Oct. 17, Obama told his audience, "I've got to tell you, we don't have to collect a bunch of binders to find qualified, talented, driven young women to learn and teach" in science,. tech- nology, engineering and math. That same day, the Obama camp came out with an ad titled "Mitt Romney's Condescending views Toward Women," which, against the backdrop of a three-ring bind- er graphic, affirms that Romney's cookie-cutter perception of gender norms is outdated. Also on Oct. 17, in a pathetic attempt to spin the binder contro- versy in Romney's favor, the Repub- lican National Committee released a picture of a binder filled with blank white pages under the words "Obama's Second-Term Agenda." Explaining the image, Reince Prie- bus, the National Committee chair- man, said Obama "didn't lay out a plan for a second term agenda. He's offered plenty of excuses but he hasn't offered a plan. And that's what we're calling the empty bind- er." (Clever, Reince.) In any case, out of all that was said during the second presidential debate, it remains true that the bind- ers full of women meme has gener- ated the most buzz. Is that a bad thing? Should we be concerned that voters - particularly young people, the primary generators of memes - pay more attention to binders and Big Bird than the "real" issues? Memes reflect the artificiality of debates. 4 i While most would like to think that the child abuse scandal at Penn State is an isolated inci- dent, tragic discoveries like these are made somewhat frequently. Universities across the country, however, can learn from this situation by ensuring offenses are reported to the proper authorities as quickly as possible. At the regents' meeting on Friday, the board announced the completion of an external review of the UMHS's delay in reporting Jen- son's alleged possession of child pornography. Theboardwon'trelease the full external report - prepared by the law firm Latham & Watkins, LLP - citing attorney-client privilege. Univer- sity spokesman Rick Fitzgerald said that the law firm suggested it was best not to immedi- ately release the audit in full. While the University's refusal to release the external report is within their legal pro- tections due to attorney-client privilege, the University has a responsibility to inform the people involved and those who live in the community of issues that directly affect them. Furthermore;,the University can release por- tions of the report without breaching attor- ney-client privilege, drawing question to the legitimacy of their decision. At Penn State, attorney and former FBI director Louis Freeh released the full results of an independent review immediately after its completion. If the details of the University's delay in reporting Jenson's offense are ostensi- bly less sordid than those of the Penn State case, there is no reason for the University to with- hold the third-party review. Jenson was in the pediatrics specialty program, which likely brought him into direct contact with children on a regular basis. The delay between the alleged discovery of child pornography on his flash drive and his prosecution is disturbing enough without the University's subsequent delay in releasing pertinent details as to how the case was mishandled. Before inviting further suspicions, the University should ignore its attorney's recommendation, follow the precedent set by Louis Freeh and release the external report immediately. These questions are legitimate, but wrongheaded. Those who attack these memes make two false presumptions. First, they assume the candi- dates and media are discussing the real issues to begin with - which, more often than not, they aren't. In part, that's a reflection of the arti- ficial structure of these so-called debates. But it's also attributable to Romney's pandering and Obama's reluctance to call attention to his opponent's blatant insincerity. Second, they falsely assume young people are incapable of grap- pling with the most pressing issues of the day. That's far from the truth. Those who are the best informed create the funniest memes, and only those who are equally informed can understand them. My Face- book friends who shared links to the "Binders Full of Women" Tum- blr are far from lazy or ignorant. In fact, they turn to memes precisely because, in their scathing irony, memes are more informative than any campaign ad or stump speech. Memes are an outlet for our frustra- tion with the circus that is politics. Can memes be misleading? Yes. Can they oversimplify issues? Yes. (On both counts, see the "You Didn't Build That" series.) But until Romney gets honest, or until these debates getreal, or both, these things called memes are here to stay. Let's see which one goes viral tonight. -Daniel Chardell can be reached 4 at chardell@umich.edu. Follow him on Twitter @DanielChardell. EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS Kaan Avdan, Sharik Bashir, Eli Cahan, Nirbhay Jain, Jesse Klein, Melanie Kruvelis, Patrick Maillet, HarshaaNahata, Timothy Rabb, Adrienne Roberts, Vanessa Rychlinski, Sarah Skaluba, Michael Spaeth, Gus Turner SALAH EL-PRINCE V Take the lead on Israel-Palestine RYAN HERBERHOLZ VIEWPOINT Practicing 'Nobel' politics 4 As an Egyptian, it's nearly impossible to critically engage in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In fact, where I'm from, just calling the conflict "complex" triggers a reaction from Egyptians who think it's as simple as Israel being the aggressor and Palestine, the victim. Earlier this month, Egyptians were com- memorating the start of the 1973 Arab-Israeli War. In the United States, the accepted narra- tive of the war is a clear Israeli victory. But in Egypt, it's remembered as our triumph. About the time of the anniversary, my newsfeed was full of patriotic posts praising the Egyptian military. Far too often, the posts ended up condemning the very existence of the Israeli state. This is all despite the fact that the two states haven't been at war since before my friends were born. This is because the old Mubarak regime used imaginary Israeli plots to divert atten- tionfrom domestic policyfailures andsilenced political opposition by labeling them Israeli clients. Still today, domestic parties vying for power commonly use anti-Israel rhetoric. To me, this is an overly simplistic view of the conflict. I see the destruction of innocent lives by both Israelis and Palestinians. Despite the agreed upon cease-fire, rockets still come from Gaza and target civilians in the southern parts of Israel. Every day, private land is taken from Palestinian families to expand Jewish settlement in the West Bank, despite the gov- ernment's supposed support of a two-state solution. There can be no moral high ground when each side sinks to this level. I've been studying in the United States for more than a year, and I've come to learn that the malicious and selfish politicization of the conflict isn't confined to Egypt. While some politicians in Egypt score political points by aggressively attacking Israel, many American politicians place all the blame on Palestinians or focus on Iran's nuclear program. As a proud member of J Street UMich, I reject a conversation that places all blame on Israelis or Palestinians. I reject the unneces- sary pandering that happens every four years, leading each party in a race to the bottom of who can be more hawkish on Israel. I believe that many Americans understand how crucial a resolution to this conflict is to American interests, thus many support active leadership to resolve it. Yet the issue has hardly been dis- cussed this election cycle. Neither presidential candidate has prov- en themselves on the issue. We've watched President Barack Obama seem to give up on pursuing negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. We watched Republican nominee Mitt Romney argue that Palestin- ians don't want peace, claiming that the best approach to the conflict is to maintain the sta- tus quo and "kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve [itself]" in his now- infamous "47 percent" speech. That is a senti- ment unbecoming of a potential world leader. The final presidential debate is Monday night, with a focus on foreign policy. There is no doubt that the Israeli-Palestinian issue will be brought up. I don't expect either candidate to be honest about the need for vigorous Amer- ican leadership to pursue a two-state solution. I fear that grandstanding around the Iranian nuclear programwill distract both candidates. I fear that the finger pointing we'll likely see in Monday night's debate will not lead us anywhere except toward more bloodshed. Individuals and communities that, like me, support a two-state solution need to become proactive rather than reactive. That's why J Street UMich and more than 40 other J Street U chapters from coast to coast are running our Two-State Semester Campaign. We are demonstratingto our political lead- ers that there's a large and serious constitu- ency of students who believe in a two-state solution. We have been collecting signatures - and will continue to - from individuals and statements from campus leaders that simply state: "We support vigorous U.S. diplomatic leadership to achieve a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict." I may not be American, but as a pro-Peace Arab advocate, I have a stake in the campaign as well. Two weeks ago, J Street UMich host- ed U.S. Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), who spoke eloquently about the need for a nego- tiated two-state solution. I left the conversa- tion hopeful that some of America's leaders would be willing to take a lead on this issue after nearly 100 years of war. As the two-state campaign grows, I am sure there will be more leaders like Dingell in Washington, D.C. Salah El-Prince is an LSA senior. Out of all the individuals and organizations that are genuinely dedicated to creating a peaceful and just global society, the European Union was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Evenifthe prize wasintended to be a political award, I would not rank the EU high on a list of worthy recipients - one only needs to cast an eye at Greece to begin question- ing the validity of this selection. The unrest in Greece and in Spain can largely be blamed on the EU's mishandling of several debt crises. These financial upsets reek of the unregulated and simply vampiric financial practices that Wall Street churns out to create fortunes from thin air. Unfortunately, these convo- luted financial models were export- ed before the fallacy of Greenspan's "self-regulating free markets" lit- erally came tumbling down like a house of cards. Another factor that seems to have been considered when award- ing the Nobel Peace Prize is armed conflict. One may think this is the opposite of peace, but perhaps the Norwegian Nobel Committee was thinking of the kind of peace brought on by war - a philoso- phy that falls into the oxymoron category as firmly as the phrase "humanitarian bombing." This backward thinking has been exem- plified by awarding of the prize to President Barack Obama in 2009 and the subsequent escalation of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars with cooperation from the EU, not to mention the devastation caused by unmanned drone strikes. I don't think Alfred Nobel would agree with this logic. According to his will, the prize is to be given to the person who "shall have done the most or the best work for fra- ternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and pro- motion of peace congresses." I think the Nobel Prize decision is a symptom of the same disease that seems to plague our own country. We allow institutions to be entrusted with individuals whose agendas are influenced by special interests, polit- ical power and wealth, rather than their original purposes. The FDIC was meant - through regulation and insurance - to pro- tect from the collapse of financial institutions, not to be used in com- bination with massive bailouts as publicly funded gambling insur- ance for already filthy rich finan- ciers. In fact, the entire regulatory structure created to avert crisis like the Great Depression is lousy with individuals from the "too big to fail" institutions they supposedly regulate. This blatant conflict of interest and constant legislative castration of regulatory checks on financial institutions - like the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act - illustrate a legacy of decisions made by a small group of very powerful and very wealthy people. Right before the controversial Nobel decision, Americans were treated to a similar spectacle. What the Commission on Presidential Debates calls the "presidential debates," the League of Women Voters (who ran the debates before the commission) calls "the hood- winking of the American public" in a press release delivered in Oct. 1988 when they withdrew their sponsorship and support for the debates. The CDP calls itself a non- partisan organization, but if you look at the circumstances contrib- uting to the commission's creation, it's obvious that this corporation is bipartisan and absolutely unwilling to allow for the possibility of a third party candidate. This unfortunate event is not the only reason for the red-blue monopo- ly on politics, one of the cornerstones of non-representative democracy. The U.S. Supreme Court's Citizens United decision makes the already dim prospect of a political candidate (who does not have millionaire back- ers) participating in any election vir- tually impossible. Teasing out all the ways in which corporate excess and influence have damaged democracy in America is as expansive and complicated a task as solving the problems facing the world today. So I ask why - given the difficulty of the tasks at hand - would the American public accept only two plans for the future pros- perity of our country? This should be an unacceptable situation to every American regardless of party affili- ation. It is undemocratic that the American public should not hear nor can even recognize, the voices of Rocky Anderson, Luis Rodriquez, Dr. Jill Stein, Cheri Honkala, Gary Johnson or Jim Gray (the respective presidential and vice presidential candidates for the Justice, Green and Libertarian Parties). More Americans should remem- ber the fact that political offices exist to serve the people and free- dom in a representative democracy should include freedom to choose the best candidate to serve the 4 American public. Duringthiselectionseason,Ienvi- sion a possible future where candi- dates are chosen based on individual meritrather than the social standing, wealth or inherited political power they wield. I hope to have a future where we are not presented with two predetermined and extremely simi- lar approaches to solving our nation's problems. I hope we can create politi- cal discourse where candidates will not be able to simply ignore ,impor- tant issues facing the public because they did not fit into the palatable scripted format of debates. I hope others will see what's happening in our country and stop focusing on what is said in our red-blue political discourse but rather what is not said. Creating a political landscape where government seeks out the best candidates to fill important offices is a simple idea that can be embraced by voters from both sides of the aisle. Gathering the political will necessary to ensure that future generations can vote in the meritoc- racy Americans should have, rather than the plutocracy our country is becoming, is anything but simple. Ryan Heberholz is a senior in the School of Art and Design.