In theory, the logic behind this is to allow the advertisers to advertise to people who are more likely to buy their stuff. For example, Ebay would take data on a college student, and give it to these advertising agencies. It does this through tracking customer’s browsing data in order to gauge their interests. In the case of the college student, if they were browsing for school supplies or something, it would be reported to these advertising companies so they could try and sell their stuff to the student. Ebay’s move is relevant to the overall structure of the technology industry, something that I call “Big Tech,” because it’s a move following Google, Amazon, and Facebook in order to boost ad revenue (Graziano 1). Some users of these organizations may wonder why this is a big deal. They would say probably reckon that this seems harmless. Some may actually welcome this, as they’d see these companies as trying to enhance their experience and make it better by selling them useful ads instead of useless ads. However, some people – like myself – may view this as an egregious act of overreach and a breach in privacy to people that are using these products. The thing is that by taking data on users, it may be used for bad intentions will be explained more in the paper. While these companies may try and justify this because we, as a consumer, are using their product and choose to have our data taken. However, these tech companies have built up a huge monopoly, or oligopoly, and consumers don’t have anything else to use.

Many bad things can go wrong. What if these companies get hacked or breached? What if the government demands information on the consumer? Will these tech companies cave or protect the consumer? In 2014, Ebay was hacked and 145 million of their users were exposed; their personal data was hacked and it was considered one of the biggest hackings ever. Initially, Ebay believed that user data was safe, but upon later inspection it was revealed that individuals were unmasked (Finkle 1).

I want to focus my paper on the rise of tech companies and why this doesn’t bode well for our privacy or rights guaranteed by our constitution. By taking in mass amounts of user info and tracking our search history, it leaves ordinary U.S. citizens open to blackmail by either hackers or bad forces inside of the government.

Here is my thesis statement as of right now: Ebay’s decision in tracking user data along with several other tech companies endangers the privacy of many citizens and leaves them exposed if a cyberattack hacks into these companies.

As for the structure of my paper, I’d like to start off with a history of the tech industry, centered around Ebay, and how it rose to prominence and eventually began overreaching through this ad tracking system. I will then transition into Ebay’s case and the risk of taking in private information. Finally, I will conclude and tie in Ebay’s case with the rest of the tech industry and look to try and make a resounding argument that is applicable to society to as whole and not just Ebay.

Works Cited

Finkle, Jim, and Deepa Seetharaman. “Exclusive: EBay initially believed user data safe after cyberattack.” Reuters, Thomson Reuters, 23 May 2014, www.reuters.com/article/us-ebay-cybercrime/exclusive-ebay-initially-believed-user-data-safe-after-cyberattack-idUSBREA4M0PH20140523. Accessed 23 Sept. 2017.

Graziano, Dan. “EBay will now use your data to sell targeted ads.” BGR, 11 Apr. 2013, bgr.com/2013/04/11/ebay-user-data-sharing-advertising-425896/. Accessed 23 Sept. 2017.

None of this is explicable unless a certain perspective is applied, and one recognizing how the enormous impacts of modern media have redefined cultural participation in, and creation of, that which the public esteems. Essentially, the society elevates the Kardashians because it can, and the simplicity of that statement does not lessen the extraordinary meaning of it. As will be examined, the Kardashians viewed through.

Symbolic Interactionist Theory are identified as meaningful in popular culture largely because that society, heavily mediated and equipped with unprecedented opportunities and values, establishes the family as a necessary frame of reference to be simultaneously shamed, ridiculed, and admired.

The Kardashians as a Media Culture

Cultural elements invariably reflect the society in which they exist, and particularly in entertainment genres. Historically, films and TV shows both influence American ideologies and provide catharsis in offering experiences in which audiences may share to an extent, or emotionally invest in the entertainments. Within this context are the popular musicals of the mod-20^th century, the science fiction trends of later decades, and a range of TV programs emphasizing cultural ideals while challenging norms. More recently, however, the phenomenon of Reality TV fascinates untold millions of viewers and draws intense criticism. On one level, these are presented as harmless, “light” viewing in which the audience vicariously enjoys how other people live, and people alternately extremely privileged or focused on obsessions, such as hoarding. Perhaps the most remarkable such program was, Keeping Up with the Kardashians, which became a kind of template for the genre. Essentially, this show, centered on the eponymous sisters, created a massive interest in the superficial behaviors of women as celebrities by virtue of only the show itself. What has evolved, in fact, is a Kardashian commercial empire, so the primary question becomes: what may explain why the society fixates on those with nothing to offer the viewer beyond exposure of their relationships, conflicts, and elitist behaviors? As the following supports through the Symbolic Interactionist lens, the Kardashians exist in popular culture largely because the mediated society, equipped with unprecedented consumerist opportunities and values, elevates them as a necessary frame of reference to be simultaneously shamed, ridiculed, and admired.

Analysis

To understand the relevance of Symbolic Interactionism to the impact of the Kardashians, it is first necessary to briefly trace the origins of the Reality genre. Most significantly, the genre has a history unknown to younger viewers as, in the early 1970s, the PBS An American Family premiered and pioneered the form. Suddenly and surprisingly, the simple production of cameras recording the lives of the California Loud family became both a cultural sensation and the subject of immense critical evaluation. These were ordinary people being presented in a medium created to offer celebrities, talent, and traditional attractions. Not unexpectedly, much criticism focused on the inexplicability of reality as remaining reality in front of cameras. Beyond this, however, others perceived symbolic interactions in play; what was occurring was an identification between the viewers and the Louds, even as that family underwent struggles of divorce and the elder son’s coming out as gay. The Louds “stood for more than themselves” and, for millions, represented the failings of the American dream so many were experiencing or perceiving in their own lives (Ruoff, 2002, pp. 111-112). If by no means as sensational or glamourous as the programs that would follow, An American Family triggered a genre, and achieved impact through how media acts as a process enabling vast symbolic interaction.

In accessing the significance of the Kardashians, the same processes of interaction, augmented by mediating, fundamentally remain in place decades later. To begin with, there is the important component of shame as enabling audiences to both condemn and enjoy the sisters.

Much is made over the inescapable fact that no Kardashian, with the interesting exception of Caitlyn Jenner, has any claim to celebrity apart from the series. Kim, Khloe, and Kourtney, however, had consistently sought to elevate themselves prior to the show, and in ways reflecting American values of wealth and social stature. They were involved in various entrepreneurial efforts, but Kim in particular appears to have pursued a “stardom” quality, as in her association with Paris Hilton (McClain, 2014, p. 4). More to the point, everything changed when Kim’s sex video tape was made public. In a remarkable, and perhaps pioneering, process, what had in the past ruined potential celebrity was instead an instrument for gaining popularity. This presents the interesting aspect of how shame itself has been mediated in popular culture. If Symbolic Interactionism relies on the public’s usage of a frame of reference, media itself allows for that public to redefine shame through control. In the theory, interpretation is central to effect; the culture is empowered to create its own ideas of even fixed norms and assign new meanings to them (Carter, Fuller, 2016, p. 932). In a very real sense, media provides the public to “own” shame and, if an act is deemed inappropriate or wrong by the society, that society is then motivated to forgive simply because it has the power to condemn. Within this aspect of the Kardashians is the further element of ancillary celebrity as accepting of moral flaws. For example, Kim claims that the idea for the show was suggested by Kathie Lee Gifford, but what is notable is the timing. The show premiered in the same year, 2007, that Kim’s pornographic video became a media sensation (McClain, 2014, p. 5). This then indicates that “forgiveness” was amplified by Gifford’s endorsement, as well as by the plain fact of a TV show built around the family. Socially, a new tide was developing, and because media allowed the culture to simultaneously judge and absolve transgressors, and transgressors more than eager to accommodate the interactive process elevating them to great success.

The above then relates to how media creates a participatory culture to an unprecedented degree, which in turn pertains to how the Kardashians, if ridiculed, are as well admired. Research on the effects of social media are inevitably ongoing, given its inestimable impact globally on thought and behavior. Nonetheless, certain qualities of it are definable, and chief among these is how it literally encourages culture of interaction, which is synonymous with participation. Degree is a consideration here; if the public believes it participates equally within the spheres of Facebook, Twitter, blogs, etc., the reality is that those with power and/or celebrity always command more attention (Fuchs, 2014, p. 62). In this, Symbolic Interactionism takes on another dimension. There is a reflex in the culture esteeming celebrity and, if this is largely understood, the critical factor is that the esteem applies in positive and negative, or traditionally negative, instances equally. Arguably, the mediated culture has moved to a state wherein content is less meaningful than presence. Needs within the public to be vicariously engaged with celebrities not only creates the celebrities themselves, as with the Kardashians, but also accepts virtually all behaviors of them. Admiration is generated, not by personal character, action, or achievement, but by the engagement itself. This in turn indicates that, with media so ingrained within the culture, Symbolic Interactionism exists as a process so exponential, it defies structural definition. Certainly, Kim Kardashian has enjoyed immense brand recognition and benefits from multiple revenue-producing markets and activities (McClain, 2014, p. 109). This single reality relies on how, for reasons connected to the public’s awareness of the celebrity it has provided her, she is admired enough for her name and image to sell a range of products.

Adding to the exponential processes of media and Symbolic Interactionism here, and elsewhere, is how rapidly and pervasively the Kardashians have exploited the advantages of social media. They have in fact tailored the media to serve their interests in specific ways; the sisters and Caitlyn use Facebook, but primarily as a means of directing users to their own blogs and social media outlets which invariably promote their brands (McClain, 2014, p. 69). This in itself reveals the remarkable evolution of media as media, and also clarifies the family’s achievements through interactionist engagement. More exactly, it is reasonable to assume that, when media was limited to film, radio, and TV, the culture’s ability to invest in celebrities was defined by the barrier of no real interaction. Rather, only the components of sending and reception were in place, and in distinctly separate forms. With social media, there is at least the illusion of participation and, in order to symbolically gain a sense of control over that which it permits as influential, the public perceives its social media interactions with the Kardashians as authentically interactive. It very much seems, in fact, that social media so expands on the theory, it recreates Symbolic Interactionism because the interactive occurs on so many levels, and the vicarious quality evolves more into ownership. In such a scenario, then, admiration is intrinsic. The culture must attach value to anything it embraces and the Kardashians are then, by “default” objects of esteem.

Additionally, and interestingly, cultural disdain for the Kardashians appears to be as beneficial for them as the admiration and brand popularity. Critics, professional and otherwise, have continually ridiculed the family as “famous for nothing” and ultimately nothing more than a vapid subject (McClain, 2014, p. 105). This has been widely voiced since their emergence as a modern phenomenon, and shows no signs of lessening. That the criticism has in no way damaged Kardashian success, however, strongly indicates the noted characteristic of modern media as having taken an unprecedented form, and how a public believing itself to be the arbiter of what is valuable is unconcerned with negative judgement. As Symbolic Interactionism involves interpretation, the newer quality of public ownership alters the perceptions creating the interpretations. The same culture free to mock the Kardashians is all the more free to enjoy them because it has acknowledged and accepted the meaninglessness of investment in them. To be ridiculed then takes on new definition, provided the ridicule is directed at the object set apart from the mainstream. Essentially, what was in the past a vicarious or cathartic experience is translated into a more cooperative relationship, in which power is alternately wielded and bestowed by the public no longer passive. Ultimately, then, any criticism of the Kardashians is questionable at best, and because they very much exist as what the culture made them. Symbolic Interactionism has, through the pervasive and inestimable forces of social and other media, become an arena in which no single element dominates, and passive and active alternately decide on what demands recognition. Beyond anything else, examining the Kardashians through the theory’s lens affirms that the culture is wholly responsible for their impact, and because that impact has become necessary to the culture enabling and reinforcing it through admiration and ridicule.

Conclusion

It is extraordinary that the Kardashians are a modern phenomenon, just as it is virtually unfathomable to explain how and why this fascination exists. In plain terms, it is culturally irrationally that a family possessing no traditional talents or valuable qualities should be empowered to rule over a commercial empire, and command the attention of millions. None of this makes sense unless there is a deeper understanding of Symbolic Interactionism, and how that theory has evolved into a new entity due to media, and social media. The rules of social empowerment have, in a word, changed, and this family exemplifies the modern cultural need to create the subject influencing it. As has been seen, and when Symbolic Interactionist theory is applied, the Kardashians are important in popular culture largely because the mediated society, equipped with unprecedented interactive opportunity and empowered values, upholds them as a necessary frame of reference to be simultaneously shamed, ridiculed, and admired.

References

Carter, M. J., & Fuller, C. (2016). Symbols, meaning, and action: The past, present, and future of symbolic interactionism. Current Sociology, 64(6), 931-961.

Fuchs, C. (2014). Social Media: A Critical Introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

McClain, A. S. (2014). Keeping Up the Kardashian Brand: Celebrity, Materialism, and Sexuality. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Ruoff, J. (2002). An American Family:A Televised Life. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

The question with which this paper is concerned is how hyper-partisanship relates to the often fine line between reporting actual news and propaganda. Is it the case that societies with a strong respect for media freedom and free speech have an easier time getting real news in comparison to propaganda? The paper will argue that the answer to this question is ‘yes and no’. On one hand, having a strong respect for media freedom and free speech is a necessary condition for getting real news. On the other hand, there is plenty of room for propaganda systems to infect even countries that appear to have great respect for media freedom and free speech.

Propaganda can take many forms. Some of these are subtler than others. This wide range is well-illustrated in certain works of fiction. Harper Lee’s classic To Kill a Mockingbird shows how propaganda and simply discrimination can intertwine with each other. “Learning” from one’s parents, for example, that members of a certain minority group are inferior is itself a form of propaganda. Indeed, it is something necessary for racism to thrive. As the popular saying goes, no one is born a racist. In Lee’s book, those with power ensure that the wrong man, who happens to be black, is convicted (and unfortunately dies trying to escape) for a crime that someone else committed. A slightly more straightforward example of propaganda is to be found in George Orwell’s Animal Farm. Here again, the line between propaganda and the sort of simple brainwashing that leads some children to lead racist lives is blurred. However, the theme is much more prominent in Orwell’s book than in Lee’s. Orwell’s character of Napoleon lies to others and uses their fears and hopes effectively to enslave them.

There seems little doubt that hyper-partisanship makes it more difficult to sort out actual news from propaganda. This is perhaps seen most clearly today in the United States, where the current Presidential administration has declared war on respected traditional media outlets such as The New York Times. Also relevant is the same administration’s obsession with what it calls “fake news”. These factors, together with the hyper-partisanship that infects the United States’ government in general, in one sense make it quite difficult to distinguish real news from propaganda. This is so with many online media outlets, including social media, as well as openly discriminatory more traditional outlets such as Fox News. However, it is an illusion that traditional media outlets such as The New York Times can no longer be trusted to the extent that they once were. The standards have not changed.

Social media, on the other hand, together with other aspects of the Internet have indeed undermined the extent to which what one reads online can be trusted to be real news rather than propaganda. It is well-known that Russia has attempted to disrupt many American elections, and many believe they are doing the same thing in Europe and Great Britain. It is relatively easy to create fake Internet websites that purport to produce actual news. It is also easy to buy influence on social media like Facebook and Twitter by contracting the services of so-called “bots”. Of course, only wealthy elites can typically afford to do these things, which gives them even more power than they already had. This is a very good reason not to rely for one’s news on social media. However, this reason is not enough for millions of people.

Thus far the “yes” portion of the thesis of the paper has been argued. It is now time for the “no” part. It is an illusion to think that propaganda requires social media, Russian interference, open censorship, or hyper-partisanship. As Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky show in their classic book Manufacturing Consent, traditional Western media outlets (the authors focus on the United States, but many of the points made are relevant for other parts of the world) automatically produce a considerable level of propaganda. This is so because news must pass through several “filters” before it is consumed by the public; and the filters are anything but neutral on social, political, and economic issues. Examples of the filters are the fact that most large traditional print media are owned by extremely wealthy individuals or corporations. Such owners have a definite stake in certain stories being run rather than others, and in those stories permitted to run being told in a certain manner. Another filter is advertising. If those who pay to advertise in a newspaper do not like the stories being run in the newspaper they may withdraw their funding. A third and final example is the fact that so much news consists of press releases and official governmental “briefings”. It is not to be hoped that this sort of news can remain independent of the social, economic, or political views of those making the releases, or holding the briefings. All of these are examples of how powerful elites control the narrative in many countries, including even those that have been celebrated for their respect for freedom of the media and free speech.

In summary, it seems certain that hyper-partisanship blurs the already blurry lines between actual news and propaganda. Media freedom and free speech, which are still lacking in many parts of the world, are a necessary condition for the production of actual news rather than propaganda. However, as Herman and Chomsky show, it is not a sufficient condition. Unfortunately, the amount of propaganda that is spread, much of it in the guise of actual news, is unlikely to decrease anytime soon.

Bibliography

Herman, Edward and Noam Chomsky. Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. New York: Pantheon, 2002.

“Freedom on the Net.” Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/FOTN_2017_Final.pdf

Lee, Harper. To Kill a Mockingbird. https://cleveracademy.vn/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/To-Kill-a-Mockingbird.pdf

Orwell, George. Animal Farm. http://www.huzheng.org/geniusreligion/AnimalFarm.pdf

With hubs in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Denver, Chicago, and D.C., United Continental Holdings is responsible for transporting people and property (Samadi). The corporation’s total annual revenue is about $38.3 billion (Samadi). Despite keeping the two brand names of United Airlines and Continental Airlines, United Continental Holdings, Inc. is currently operating through a single website and reservation system (Samadi).

Southwest Airlines, Co., in ownership of the brand names Southwest and AirTran, holds 12.6% of the market (Samadi). In terms of the total number of passengers in a given period of time, Southwest Airlines, Co. is the largest domestic airline in the United States (Samadi). Southwest Airlines, Co. produced $17.7 billion in revenue in 2013 (Samadi).

Southwest Airlines, Co. focuses on providing low-cost tickets by limiting excess costs in customer service (Samadi). It operates more than five hundred 737 airplanes, and focuses on one-stop flights in order to minimize ground time (Samadi). Although it has retained low labor costs, Southwest Airlines, Co. has the largest percentage of unionized employees in the United States (Samadi). The corporation is currently expanding to different states, and began operations in Mexico, Jamaica, The Bahamas, Aruba, Dominican Republic, and Bermuda in 2011 (Samadi).

Competition

The airline industry is highly competitive, wrestling keeping costs low for consumers, offering frequent flights with high capacity in order to provide options to the consumer, providing unique and excellent service, and attracting customers through promotions, rewards, and loyalty programs (Samadi). Of these concerns, price is the most precedent, as the majority of customers is more concerned with the price of their seats than the amenities on the plane (Samadi). Customers are often willing to pay slightly more if perks such as Wi-Fi or the ability to bring pets on board are included, so corporations that are not attempting to offer the cheapest ticket in the market will often include offers that are inexpensive to the corporation but slightly expensive for the customer (Samadi).

When possible, the greatest advantage an airline corporation can have over another is offering a particular route exclusively, in which case the corporation can set the price without worrying about the competitive price market (Samadi).

Corporations in the airlines industry need to be able to deliver services as quickly as possible in order to keep customers (Samadi). Through its unified website for United Airlines and Continental Airlines, United Continental Holdings, Inc. is able to gather customers for all of its services without dividing the market. The website of Southwest Airlines, Co. is currently a large draw for customers, being responsible for a significant portion of the corporation’s sales (Samadi).

As price comparison has become increasingly accessible for the American customer base, the cheapest ticket is frequently the one that gets sold, no matter the brand (Samadi). The relatively inexpensive tickets offered by Southwest Airlines, Co. place the company in a position over United Continental Holdings, Inc. and other, more pricy sources.

The demand for airline services in a given location is not regular, and corporations must have the flexibility to meet all changes in customer demand (Samadi). This includes the ability to expand to new airports when there is demand in new areas (Samadi). Southwest Airlines, Co. is currently demonstrating its ability to expand rapidly, but United Continental Holdings, Inc. has already expanded to almost four times as many cities as Southwest Airlines, Co. (Samadi).

For short-distance travel, competition also comes to a small degree from ground and sea transportation (Samadi). Airline travel is faster and usually more convenient than other forms of travel, so the impact is minimal (Samadi).

Industry Changes

While it was officially deregulated in 1978, the airline industry is currently undergoing more and more government regulation (Chandler). For instance, the federal government charges $27,500 per passenger if an airplane is unable to take flight within three hours, putting pressure on airlines and their antiquated use of radar technology in air traffic control (Chandler). Both United Continental Holdings, Inc. and Southwest Airlines, Co. are hiring lawyers, accountants, public relations and HR workers, and engineers in order to fight against the legal issues set up by the United States government (Chandler).

As both United Continental Holdings, Inc. and Southwest Airlines, Co. have recently undergone mergers, both corporations are struggling to blend their company cultures (Chandler). The president and CEO of United Continental Holdings, Jeff Smisek, is meeting with individual workers, answering personal emails from staff, and creating a simple, clear vision for the company as a whole in order to solve this problem (Chandler).

Works Cited

Chandler, Michele. “Ever-Changing Airline Industry Provides Diverse Challenges, United CEO Says. Stanford Graduate School of Business. 1 April 2011. 13 June 2014.

Samadi, Nima. “IBISWorld Industry Report 48111b; Domestic Airlines in the US.” IBISworld. December 2010. 13 June 2014.

This is often a tough job on a limited budget and when incidents of vandalism occur, they are often left for people to see for a while before these negative acts get cleaned up. Throughout this paper, I will discuss the issue of vandalism and deterioration for local governments and what strategy they should implement to keep this from occurring.

Vandalism and a Strategy to Address It

Vandalism may seem like a small issue, however, it is not only an eye sore, it can lead to the deterioration of an area. Therefore it is important for local governments to address this issue to prevent areas from being overrun by nuisance crimes with the potential for larger more serious crimes moving in. One example of a city that has a plan in place to control vandalism is the city of Los Angeles. According to the Los Angeles Police Department, vandalism may be more costly than many people first think. Acts of vandalism include incidents such as: walls spray painted with graffiti; trashcans and mailboxes knocked over, signs spray painted; missing street signs, broken windows, and more. These incidents cost schools, businesses, local governments, and taxpayers significant amounts of money each year. In addition, these acts lead to feelings of fear and sadness in those who must view the damage. 

According to the broken windows theory, acts such as vandalism if left uncontrolled, can alter the community landscape in a way that invites new and more serious crime into the neighborhood. A window that has been busted out makes the neighborhood look less safe and amenable to crime. To prevent the criminal element from slowly moving into the neighborhood, it is important to have a strategy in place to eliminate things such as broken windows and other acts of vandalism.

According to the presentation, when acts of graffiti vandalism occur, it is important to contact the police department, the public works department and community development. Each of these organizations should be involved in the prevention and cleanup of these acts to ensure that the community stays safe.

The Los Angeles Police Department proposes educating the public, especially young people about the costs associated with vandalism (See Preventing Vandalism). In addition, they recommend cleaning up all acts of vandalism as soon as they occur. This is the duty of the public works department which the local government should have trained to respond to such acts to a timely manner in order to keep these acts to a minimum. In addition, it is important to get the community involved with keeping their own community beautiful; encourage people to report all acts of vandalism to their local police department. This would be the duty of the community development department, to reach out to the community and encourage residents to report vandalism to the proper authorities. Finally, the Los Angeles Police Department advises that everyone ‘take a stand’ against acts such as vandalism which they do not want in their communities; if local governments, the police department, and the people work together, these acts can be kept to controlled levels which keeps the community from eroding.

References

“Broken windows theory.” (2015). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1929803/broken-windows-theory

“Preventing Vandalism.” Los Angeles Police Department. Retrieved from http://www.lapdonline.org/crime_prevention/content_basic_view/1382

However, this led to a movement of sorts after the war for law enforcement agencies to institute early forms of community policing which appears to have been quite successful until the 1960s. As a result of social unrest that occurred as a result of the war in Viet Nam and the Civil Rights Movement, police across the country found themselves, once again, alienated from the public-at-large. Yet, efforts to improve relations with communities did not begin to take shape until the end of the 1970s with the introduction of problem oriented policing, or POP for short (Ross, 2012).

POP was a way in which to address crime from a structural standpoint and with assistance by community members was a proactive approach to address deficiencies within communities identified as causing crime. While POP would eventually lead to what is now recognized as community-oriented policing, the problem with instituting either approach is that police agencies are slow to embrace change and, thus, resort to practices which are more authoritarian (Ross, 2012).

It would seem that local criminal justice agencies throughout the nation have “ramped up” such authoritarian approaches since the tragic events that had occurred on September 11, 2001, as they were provided by the federal government with the financial means to purchase military-style equipment in exchange for cooperation in intelligence gathering. This accelerated militarization of police agencies has again formed a wedge throughout communities in the country and aggressive policing has now caused a great deal of conflict with no apparent resolution forthcoming.

References

Ross, J. I. (2012). Policing issues: Challenges and controversies. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

The aim of the research is to examine the manner in which college students perceive and utilize their school’s psychological support. The research involved 312 students from local universities, where 96 were male and 210 were female, their age ranging between 18 and 65 years, with diverse ethnic identities. Data collection was done through Survey Monkey software, where participants were identified by specific features such as gender, country, age, income, and employment status. They were then asked to match the selection criteria for participation after which they got instructions on completing the survey. 

The results showed that the likelihood of using counseling services is greater in schools where students are aware of their existence, and higher familiarity would increase the use of such services in the future. There is also a significant difference in the use of counseling services between male and female students.

In conclusion, the obtained results focus our interest on the need to bridge the gaps in outreach activities for mental health support so as to overcome the barriers that prevent college students from accessing psychological help.