Weinstein's Woes 

In relation to my class' Supreme Court talk and the varying branches of government, an event that immediately pooped into my mind, was that of Harvey Weinstein's current Supreme Court trials. This case involving his alleged and accused sexual harassment and rape charges has been in circulation since as early as 2017. This especially interests me being that I plan to be involved in the film production business myself. The women accusing Weinstein of multiple acts of sexual harassment and assault stated that Weinstein, before suggesting sexual acts, then proceeding to follow through on said acts (without consent) stated that he said "…this is how the industry works." 

The proceedings in the Supreme Court have been going on for some time now, and issues of statute of limitations, credibility in accusations, recollection of events, and what actually defines "sexual assault", has all been debated or is currently being discussed in these trials. Weinstein has plead not guilty to many of the rape charges. Despite what actually happened or not, if he is guilty or not, if these women obtain justice or not, this raises a bigger question within the industry itself. This male dominated profession, operating primarily on the perpetuation of the male gaze through not only technical production, but also seeping into actual content, continues to maintain hegemonic ideology all throughout media and film. Women are finding it difficult to find proper and accurate representation within film, and equal opportunity of jobs within film as well. People like Weinstein, who hold these oppressive ideologies about 'women's place' in regard to that of a man's, is what continues to ruin this industry in varying ways that I cannot sadly get into due to time and space on this blog. This ideology pressures women to submit their bodies for professional and career advancement, completely negating any form of talent, character, or merit. 

Weinstein listed three other prominent Hollywood names who had allegedly "got to where they are" because of this dynamic as Ms. Dunning, the latest to testify against Weinstein, recalls. This is an atrocious and unfortunate crime that has gone on too long within this industry specifically. Just imagine the many more industries that unfortunately follow in these footsteps but go unaddressed. Men like Weinstein have conditioned women to think that all they have to them is their bodies in which are directly for men to use for the sole purpose of creating a career; justifying this monstrosity of a concept as simply just “how the industry works." Equal representation and proper justice for these victims have a long way to go before we as a society can claim any progress in rectifying this industry’s virtue. Hopefully our judicial system will prove its worthiness in delivering retribution in one of the first of many steps in reinventing cultural ideologies in our society.       

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/29/nyregion/harvey-weinstein-trial-tarale-wulff.html   

Did You Know Just How Much We Don't Know...

In this relatively recent article, Australia's former Prime Minister (2015-2018), Malcolm Turnbull, speaks out about the 'misleading' information on the Australian bushfire crisis. He particularly made criticism on US President, Donald Trump's, and current Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison's, lack of action and denying of climate change. Turnbull's main issue, other than the actual destruction of the million hectares of Australia, seemed to be the downplaying of the crisis itself through media and policy. Turnbull has realized the mass impact media coverage has had on the overall effect of activism on a global scale and is therefore outraged by the lack of advocacy and denial of scientific backed facts and statistics. Turnbull accuses Morrison of downplaying the influences of global warming and thus bringing about a debate of environmental and communicative ethics. Morrison also received harsh criticism as he chose to take a vacation to Hawaii amidst the bushfire crisis. This angered many as the dismissal of urgency and leadership made itself apparent in this instance. Turnbull doesn't stop there; he claims that many political leaders "… knew we were in a very dry time" even before the fire season was projected to begin and that the resultant consequences could be extremely damaging. Yet nothing was done, and no precautions taken, to either inform or stop the potential destruction until it was too late. 

Turnbull's accusations of Morrison's misleading information came from when Morrison, along with Trump, discounted the influence of climate change, assuring the masses over media that everything would be under control and efforts in place to stop it.  Turnbull asserts that Trump was of no help in the case of advocacy for the climate as he "makes no bones about it…" and is attempting to "put a brake on global action to reduce emissions." Turnbull stated that the lack of American leadership proves just as damaging in this time of crisis. 

This article is more than just a rant on changing our discourse on climate change and environmental activism. It raises the question of morals in deception and if withholding information is just as bad as lying about information. It is the right of the people to know and be informed of the issues that impact their lives and habitat. The media coverage on this crisis was severely lacking the urgency of the issue. This, along with the downplaying of the situation itself from world leaders has left Australia, and therefore the rest of the world's climate, in peril. These leaders, although not entirely lying about the issue, have concealed a lot of information and denied legitimate scientific facts. I personally believe that the mass public deserves to be debriefed of all information involving and going into a situation of this caliber. In general, any situation that heavily impacts the way we live and interact in this world, deserves to have more accurate media coverage and more honest discussion on a praxis of action. 

Especially in America, the First Amendment of freedom of speech and press should go both ways. Meaning that if the people have the right to exercise our opinions in a variety of ways, whether that be print, media, or more, the leaders of our country should be compelled to unveil the sheet of ignorance and further work to enlighten the public so that we may act more accordingly and more efficiently to a situation, policy, or issue at hand. This hazy middle-ground of telling half-truths or the concealment of information works against freedom of speech and press as it oppresses our intellectual agency. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-51202534