Thứ Sáu, 22 tháng 2, 2019

News on Youtube Feb 22 2019

Over the last 40 years public REITs have outperformed the broader S&P 500.

They've also outperformed over 30 years, 20 years, 10 years, and you would think

that they've done this by taking on more risk, but the reality is that REITs

actually display lower risk characteristics. And fundamentally a REIT

behaves somewhere between a bond and an equity. The underlying leases in the

properties that they own act more like bonds. The physical real estate

appreciates and acts more like an equity. And so you would expect that the returns

would fall somewhere between bonds and equities - certainly the risk does. That's

not the case though. They've actually done far better than the equity

positions in the S&P 500 and the question is: Why do REITs outperform the S&P 500?

And will they continue to do that? I believe they will, and they have major

structural advantages. The first advantage that they have is that they

are not subject to corporate taxation which means that every dollar that flows

up to the REIT flows out to the investor. In fact, a REIT is required by law to pay

out 90% of its income to its shareholders. A c-corp on the other hand

like an Amazon or other companies, when capital comes up to the parent company

they can decide whether to reinvest that money, but certainly any income is taxed

at the government level. So when a REIT is competing against the company in the

S&P 500 that S&P 500 company has to earn 20%

more in income to pay the exact same distribution to shareholders... and it's

not even required to pay distributions to shareholders. The second point which I

think gives REITs a distinct advantage is the fact that real estate always has

intrinsic value. When a company goes out of business

there's nothing left. The shareholders have nothing

to go after, sometimes the creditors do. Real estate really never becomes

worthless. There's always an intrinsic value. When a company leaves a piece of

real estate, or goes bankrupt and they occupy a piece of real estate, the real

estate itself continues to have value, which inherently creates downside

protection for these assets. The third advantage that REITs enjoy are that

they own properties that have stable and predictable cash flow streams, and those

cash flow streams allow REITs to pay a very healthy and high dividend yield. The

dividend yield of the REIT index is in fact about double that of the S&P 500. The

structural advantages that REITs enjoy are the reasons why they've

outperformed over the last 40 years, and they're not going away. And that's why we

believe that they will continue to outperform over the next 30 years and

they're a better risk adjusted investment than going into the S&P 500.

For more infomation >> 3 Reasons Public REITs Outperform the S&P 500 - Duration: 3:25.

-------------------------------------------

Kanne Kalaimaane Public Review | Udhayanidhi | Tamannaah | Yuvan | Kalakkal Cinema - Duration: 2:28.

For more infomation >> Kanne Kalaimaane Public Review | Udhayanidhi | Tamannaah | Yuvan | Kalakkal Cinema - Duration: 2:28.

-------------------------------------------

Senator Roth Questions Governor Appointee to State Department of Public Health (Q1) - Duration: 3:39.

THANK YOU SENATOR SENATOR ROTH

HUMAN PRO TEM.

SLOWLY FIRST CONGRATULATIONS

THANK YOU.

YOU KNOW I NOTED IN THE IN OUR

RULES COMMITTEE NOTES THAT YOU

HAVE IDENTIFIED OBESITY DIABETES

AND MENTAL HEALTH IS KEY

PRIORITIES FOR THE DEPARTMENT

MOVING FORWARD IN THE FUTURE.

AS FAR AS SOME OF US ARE

CONCERNED PARTICULAR WITH

RESPECT --

TO TYPE ONE DIABETES.

THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT NEED FOR

A FURTHER EDUCATION EFFORTS IN

THE STATE TWO TWO INCIDENCES OF

MISDIAGNOSIS AND THE LIKE

PARTICULARLY WITH YOUNG.

CHILDREN AND IN THE AREA OF

MENTAL HEALTH.

DUE.

TO A FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT

DISPARITY AND MENTAL HEALTH

FUNDING PARTICULARLY UNDER THE

NINETEEN NINETY ONE REALIGNMENT.

FOR MENTAL HEALTH FUNDING IN

VARIOUS AREAS OF THE STATE.

THERE'S A NEED --

FOR IN MY OPINION MENTAL HEALTH

[inaudible]

FUNDING PARITY [inaudible]

SO.

GIVEN THE PRIORITIES THAT YOU'VE

IDENTIFIED FOR THE DEPRIVE

DEPARTMENT PARTICULARLY THOSE

WITH RESPECT TO DIABETES AND

MENTAL HEALTH --

WHAT ARE YOUR PLANS?

SO RIGHT NOW FOR MENTAL HEALTH

WE HAVE A A SERIES OF ACTIVITIES

THAT WE ARE DOING ONE IS THE

CALIFORNIA REDUCING DISPARITIES

PROJECT --

AND THAT PROGRAM IS AROUND FIVE

DIFFERENT POPULATION AREAS AND

REALLY WORKING WITH COMMUNITY

LEVEL FOLKS ON THE GROUND TO

LOOK AT POPULATIONS FROM --

ASIAN AND ASIAN POPULATIONS

AFRICAN AMERICAN --

LGBT Q. --

THE AND REALLY LOOKING AT THOSE

POPULATIONS AND COMMUNITIES THAT

HAVE PROMISING PRACTICES THAT

MAY NOT BE A HAVE BEEN ABLE TO

QUALIFY FOR BIG GRANT PROGRAMS

AND THINGS BUT WORKING WITH THE.

BECAUSE WE THINK THEY HAVE GOOD

IDEAS AND LEARNING I'M ON THE

RESOURCES THEY NEED TO CONDUCT A

REAL EVALUATION AND COLLECT DATA

SO THAT WE CAN OVER TIME SEE

WHAT ACTUALLY IS WORKING ON THE

GROUND AND SO.

WE'VE BEEN WERE THE SET IN OUR

SECOND YEAR OF A FIVE YEAR SORT

OF PILOT PROJECTS AND I THINK

THAT WE WILL WE HAVE AN OVERALL

EVALUATION STRATEGY SO THAT

EVERYBODY.

REGARDLESS OF THE TYPE OF

PROGRAM THAT THEY'RE RUNNING THE

EVERYBODY WILL COLLECT SOME

STANDARD DATA SO THAT WE CAN SEE

WHAT WORKS AND WHY IT WORKS.

AND I THINK THAT'S A BIG EFFORT

THAT WERE UNDER WAY ON THE

MENTAL HEALTH SIDE MANY OF OUR

PROGRAMS AND IN OUR MATERNAL AND

CHILD.

AND ADOLESCENT HEALTH TO ALSO

ADDRESS MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

SO OUR HOME VISITING PROGRAM

PART OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO

TO IMPROVE OUTCOMES OF MOTHERS

AND BABIES IS REALLY TO LOOK AT

NOT JUST HEALTH CARE AND ACCESS

TO HEALTH CARE ABOUT THOSE.

COMMUNITY LINKAGES THAT CAN

BUILD RESILIENCY IN OUR

POPULATION AND THINGS LIKE

STRESS MANAGEMENT AND LINKAGE TO

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES CAN

REALLY BUILD THE AND OUR

POPULATION AND SO I THINK THOSE

ARE.

SOME OF THE THINGS WE'RE DOING

ON MENTAL HEALTH AND WE'RE ALSO

WORKING WITH ALL OUR

STAKEHOLDERS UNDER THE LET'S GET

HEALTHY CALIFORNIA PROJECT.

ARE ARE OF STATE HEALTH

IMPROVEMENT PLAN TO AND MENTAL

HEALTH COMES UP ACROSS THE BOARD

WITH MANY OF OUR STAKEHOLDERS AS

AN AREA WHERE WE WANT TO WORK

MORE CLOSELY TOGETHER TO ADDRESS

AND HOPEFULLY HAVE SOME

COLLECTIVE IMPACT AROUND THOSE

ISSUES.

ON DIABETES UNFORTUNATELY DON'T

RECEIVE A LOT OF MONEY TO DEAL

WITH DIABETES BUT WE HAVE A

PROGRAM CALLED PREVENTION

FORWARD.

ON A WHERE WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE

SURE THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR

CLINICAL PARTNERS AND MEDI CAL

AND DH CS AND TO IDENTIFY AND

DIAGNOSE DIABETES MUCH MORE MUCH

EARLIER TO EDUCATE PEOPLE

BECAUSE NOT ONLY DIABETES BUT

THOSE WITH PRE DIABETES AND

TRYING TO KEEP THEM FROM GETTIN.

DIABETES SO WE HAVE --

AN AWARENESS CAMPAIGN MEMBER

WEBSITE OF INFORMATION AND WE'RE

WORKING.

PARTNERING WITH HEALTH CARE TO

For more infomation >> Senator Roth Questions Governor Appointee to State Department of Public Health (Q1) - Duration: 3:39.

-------------------------------------------

How To Become a Great Public Speaker (Animated Video) - Duration: 8:30.

How to become a great public speaker

Let's face it. We all will have to make a public speech at some point in our lives.

And whether we were given a heads up or we are suddenly called to do it, it'll be up

to us to wow our audience or make a mess of ourselves.

If you are going to be able to pass across your message effectively, sell an idea, or

paint a vision to a particular set of people/audience without boring them, then public speaking

is something you have to learn.

You're probably asking yourself one question. Why should anyone even bother to learn how

to speak effectively before an audience?

You see, everyone has a message and everyone has an audience but not everyone's message

is special or unique. However, if you think you have a special message for your audience,

what better way to pass it across than to communicate properly?

Yes! We get it. You get nervous on stage. It's understandable. As a matter of fact,

it's normal because we all get that way.

Marjorie L. North, a speech pathologist and lecturer at Harvard University, who has been

teaching public speaking courses for more than 35 years says, "When your heart starts

pounding, you're sweating, your hands are shaking, your knees are shaking, and you feel

like you're going to pass out — that's the way everybody feels,"

So, how can you overcome your nervousness and become a great public speaker?

In this video, we'll be sharing with you some tips on how to become a great public

speaker. If you're new here, consider subscribing so that you won't miss other interesting

videos like this.

1. Know them before you meet them

Even before you appear on stage to your audience, do you background checks. Know who these people

are, their age group, their profession, the locations where they are coming from, their

culture, even their marital status if possible. This is very important because people receive

information in different ways. For example, you cannot speak to teenagers the way you'll

speak with octogenarians. You cannot use the same examples or illustrations for an audience

filled with Doctors and an audience filled with Lawyers. You cannot use the same analogy

for an Asian audience and African audience. Make sure you know as much as you can about

the people you want to speak to so that you'll communicate the exact way they can understand.

2. Start strong

You only have the first few minutes to get your audience attention. If you succeed, you

can bet they'll be attentive the whole time. But if you don't, you will have to work harder

to get them to listen to you, which is why it is important to standardize your introduction.

As a matter of fact, prepare your introduction and rehearse it word for word until you can

deliver it in your sleep.

According to "a top TED talks" research done by Vanessa Van Edwards and her team at Science

of People, the team reported that "the ratings overall — who people liked overall and

who they didn't like — matched, whether they'd watched the first seven seconds or

the full talk. We think that the brain actually decides as soon as that person takes the stage

and begins speaking, "You know what? I'm gonna like this talk."

Ever heard the phrase, "Knowledge conquers fear?"

When you take out to know exactly what you are going to say within the first 3-5 minutes

of your talk, you push nervousness away. Your audience sees your confidence and they'll

become attentive to the things you have to say.

3. Memorize concepts not your content

Everyone knows that no one is perfect, so do not try to be.

Often times, we think that the best way to give a flawless speech is to memorize our

speech word for word. When you do that, you sound artificial, which is the opposite of

what we want to achieve. Besides, when you memorize your script word for word, your mind

can go blank at any point, resulting in awkward silence and nervousness once again. This can

destabilize you and ruin your presentation.

A good idea will be to outline your points rather than writing it all down and reading

word for word. It allows the language you use to be more natural, it allows your voice

to be much more natural and eye contact is better. You're speaking to them about it.

I could get up there and read a script from a paper without knowing anything about it.

4. Tell your audience what they stand to gain

When people attend conferences, seminars and other talk events, they do so with the intention

of learning something new and getting inspired by the speaker. Hence, the need to announce

to your audience what they stand to gain. Doing this will get their attention and get

them interested in your speech because they know you've got a message for them indeed.

Remember that the essence of giving a talk is because you want to pass a message across

to your audience. So do not get carried away with your speech that you forget to pay attention

to your audience and offer them valuable solutions to their need.

5. Engage with your audience

To engage with your audience, it's best you take the time to study them. For instance,

you can ask them questions or have them ask you questions at intervals. This makes you

feel less isolated as a speaker and keeps everyone involved with your message.

6. Use experimental and participative training

Public speaker, Michael Port, from time to time, make his audience repeat key messages

back to him especially takeaway points of his speech. This keeps the audience involved,

but even more brilliantly, it gives them devises to remember the material.

You see, the more your audience do, the more they understand and the more they engage.

When you plan your speech, think about how you can involve your audience so that at the

end of the day, you are talking with them and making sense, not just talking to them.

7. Speak to a single person.

Most people speak well while talking with their friends. One big reason why most people

are afraid of public speaking is because they are worried about speaking in front of a hundred

or a thousand different people.

Don't be deceived. The reason why the people you want to speak to are call "an audience"

is because they are one. Speak to them as though you're conversing with a single person

and you'll do a great job.

8. End Strong

Do this. Give people a list of 7 or 10 things and ask them few minutes later to remember

3 of those things in the list. Chances are that most people will remember the first two

and the last thing on the list. The reason is because we pay attention to the beginning

and the end of things. As a speaker, if there are two important things you have to plan

so well about your speech, they are the beginning and the end of your speech. The first and

last impressions determine how people feel about your speech.

End strong. Summarize the whole points and give them some great ideas as a take home.

Now this is it. The take home in this video is; plan your intro and outro and everything

in-between will be well.

Thank you very much for watching our videos.

We'll like to give you another interesting video for you to enjoy next but before then,

our team will be very happy if you can like this video and share it with your friends

on social media.

If you're new here, don't forget to subscribe so you won't miss other interesting videos

like this.

Look at your screen now to see two other videos we handpicked for you to enjoy next.

We love you.

For more infomation >> How To Become a Great Public Speaker (Animated Video) - Duration: 8:30.

-------------------------------------------

[KPOP IN PUBLIC CHALLENGE] ITZY (있지) - DALLA DALLA (달라달라) - Dance Cover Behind The Scenes - Duration: 4:10.

We are shooting a dance cover video

You guys are doing great

But our knees really hurt

Is it (the choreography) really hard?

Are you guys done filming?

We're still doing it

Oh, really?

Are you guys Korean?

No, we're Vietnamese

But your Korean is so good

We've been studying for over a year

Keep up the work!

Thank you ~

#Messy

#Notready

Look like we care?

Filming: START

The "slide" choreography hurts our Toto's knees real bad

The most TIRING man on the set

This is from our manager-nim. He gave me his headband because my knees was scratched

He also tied it for me. I'm touched

Okay...

Our manager and supporters

And special cameo of our Ngành-managernim

When will you guys leave me alone...

Continue filming (a lot of) another shot...

Why are you filming me looking messy like this?

What are we filming?

Let's take a photo

For more infomation >> [KPOP IN PUBLIC CHALLENGE] ITZY (있지) - DALLA DALLA (달라달라) - Dance Cover Behind The Scenes - Duration: 4:10.

-------------------------------------------

Official "Kesari Trailer" | Akshay Kumar Kesari Trailer | Parineeti Kesari Trailer | Public Reviews - Duration: 1:33.

Official "Kesari Trailer" | Akshay Kumar Kesari Trailer | Parineeti Kesari Trailer | Public Reviews

For more infomation >> Official "Kesari Trailer" | Akshay Kumar Kesari Trailer | Parineeti Kesari Trailer | Public Reviews - Duration: 1:33.

-------------------------------------------

Public Review Of The Film "Total Dhamaal" | Ajay Devgn | Anil Kapoor | Madhuri Dixit - Duration: 13:01.

Public Review Of The Film "Total Dhamaal" | Ajay Devgn | Anil Kapoor | Madhuri Dixit

For more infomation >> Public Review Of The Film "Total Dhamaal" | Ajay Devgn | Anil Kapoor | Madhuri Dixit - Duration: 13:01.

-------------------------------------------

Khloé Kardashian Steps Out with Malika Haqq at First Public Event Since Cheating Allegations Surface - Duration: 5:36.

 Khloé Kardashian's best friend Malika Haqq is sticking by her during this difficult time

 Just two days after it was revealed that Kardashian's boyfriend Tristan Thompson allegedly cheated on her with little sister Kylie Jenner's best gal pal Jordyn Woods, the Revenge Body star, 34, and Haqq, 35, stepped out in Los Angeles to attend the opening of Pretty Little Thing's new store

Get push notifications with news, features and more. Follow Following You'll get the latest updates on this topic in your browser notifications

 For their outing Wednesday, which marks Kardashian's first public event since news of the scandal broke, the pair celebrated being true friends by wearing matching outfits — black Pretty Little Thing sweaters paired with leather pants and pointed toe heels

 Kardashian opted for a wet hair look while Haqq styled her ombre tresses in loose waves

 Kardashian appeared to be in good spirits despite the drama of the past few days

She beamed as she walked into the clothing label's new West Hollywood headquarters hand-in-hand with her friend

 All the while the Keeping Up with the Kardashians cameras were there to capture her return to the spotlight

 Kardashian also posed for photos with Ashley Graham, who was co-hosting the event, and did the honor of cutting the ribbon

 The duo left shortly after, but not without stopping to take more photos.  Kardashian and Haqq's outing comes just one day after the new mom stepped out solo to pay a visit to Kanye West's office in Calabasas

 The Keeping Up with the Kardashians star cracked a smile as she arrived in an all-white ensemble which she accessorized with giant silver hoop earrings and a pair of aviator sunglasses

 Although without Haqq on that occasion, the ATL star has proven she's Kardashian's ride or die by publicly slamming Woods, 21, on numerous occasions on social media

 On Tuesday, Haqq left a fiery comment on a post that made fun of the alleged scandal

Ashley Graham and Khloé Kardashian  The post, which showed Jenner's daughter Stormi excitedly saying bye while seated in a high chair, was captioned "Stormi in Calabasas waiting for Jordyn to pack her s— and get out of Kylie's house like…"  "These h— ain't loyal," Haqq wrote in a since-deleted comment captured by Instagram account Comments by Celebs

 Kardashian's best friend quoted Chris Brown in his track "Loyal" to seemingly taking a jab at Woods

 Haqq also responded to Hollywood Unlocked's Instagram post — about her best friend's reported split from Thompson, 27, and cheating with Woods by writing, "STRONG FACTS

" Khloé Kardashian  Kardashian later wrote eight mouth talking emojis in the post's comment section

 On Tuesday, TMZ and Hollywood Unlocked reported that Kardashian and the Cleveland Cavaliers player split after he was unfaithful to her with Woods, who is also a member of the Good American squad, representing Kardashian's clothing brand

 Reps for Kardashian and Thompson have not returned PEOPLE's requests for comment

Woods' rep had no comment.  And while the alleged affair feels like a deep betrayal for Kardashian, the rest of the family is hurting as well

"It's all a mess now. Everyone considered Jordyn family. She was like a family member and always invited everywhere," a source told PEOPLE

"The family helped her and wanted her to be able to have a business venture too."  Previously living at Kylie's home, Woods is now "moving back to her mom's house," says one insider

"It's been a difficult time and she's broken up about it. She's heading home to be with her mom

"  The alleged scandal comes nearly one year after videos leaked of Thompson getting close to other women, just days before Kardashian gave birth to her first child, baby girl True, in April 2018

For more infomation >> Khloé Kardashian Steps Out with Malika Haqq at First Public Event Since Cheating Allegations Surface - Duration: 5:36.

-------------------------------------------

Dr. Nick Delgado PhD, is an American doctor, public speaker, author, and endocrinology researcher. - Duration: 2:46.

Nick: Hi, I'm Dr. Nick Delgado.

Over the past 40 years I've dedicated my life to researching health, anti-aging, lifestyle

medicine and immortality.

I'd like to continue to help improve the quality of life for my loved ones and everyone who

wants to follow me on this incredible journey to a more fulfilling life.

Male: Dr. Nick Delgado was one of the world's foremost authorities the science of anti-aging

and lifestyle medicine and a diplomat to the American Board of Anti-aging Health Practitioners,

a community of over 20,000 doctors and medical experts invested in reversing the symptoms

of aging and improving the quality of life.

Female: I get inundated with newsletters and all of that but yours is the one I read.

Male: In a career that has spanned over 40 years and taken him across the globe as both

a health and wellness coach and accomplished public speaker, Dr. Nick Delgado has changed

the lives of literally hundreds of thousands of people through dispelling common and oftentimes

costly myths revolving around diet, hormones and longevity.

Nick: My name is Dr. Nick Delgado and I'd like to share with you a way to change your

life dramatically.

Male: Having collaborated and studied with some of the biggest names in nutrition and

self-improvement like Tony Robbins, Nathan Pritikin and Dr. Thierry Hertoghe, Dr. Nick

Delgado has outlined a well-rounded and easy to understand protocol which has been featured

on Fox News and other major broadcasting networks and the Journal Anti-aging Medical News as

well as in his best-selling books Stay Young, Annihilate Acne Now and the Simply Healthy

Cookbook.

Nick: You can perfect the body beyond what steroids do.

Male: His protocol includes supplements to induce maximum performance.

Nick: We've discovered a way through plant nitrogen to absorb tremendous amounts of energy.

Male: From the Navy Seal and NFL down to the UFC, Dr. Nick Delgado's plant-based approach

to optimum health and peak performance has proven to work not only for the general public

but also for elite athletes on the world's biggest stages.

In 2007, Dr. Nick Delgado proved that he too can walk the talk and broke the world record

for strength and endurance lifting a total 50,640 pounds in one hour, a feat that had

never before been accomplished.

In 2014, he led Team USA at the Arnold Classic who in a landslide fashion finished undefeated

in all categories.

Nick: We live in a time of great prosperity yet too many people are challenged with illnesses

and dying a younger age than they should from conditions like heart disease, diabetes and

cancer.

It's time to take your health into your own hands.

Join me at NickDelgado.com for exclusive educational content, books and live web classes designed

to revolutionize your well-being.

I can't wait to see you there.

For more infomation >> Dr. Nick Delgado PhD, is an American doctor, public speaker, author, and endocrinology researcher. - Duration: 2:46.

-------------------------------------------

2,500 families living in public housing could soon have air conditioning in their units - Duration: 2:03.

For more infomation >> 2,500 families living in public housing could soon have air conditioning in their units - Duration: 2:03.

-------------------------------------------

WV Teachers Defeat Anti-Public Education Bill - Duration: 2:37.

For more infomation >> WV Teachers Defeat Anti-Public Education Bill - Duration: 2:37.

-------------------------------------------

KPOP IN PUBLIC RUSSIA] iKON (아이콘) - I'M OK DANCE COVER by Dartelion - Duration: 2:53.

thank you for going right in front of the camera, you certainly don't bother me

poor human :)

Katya is an operator who is very tired.

we have a company here

For more infomation >> KPOP IN PUBLIC RUSSIA] iKON (아이콘) - I'M OK DANCE COVER by Dartelion - Duration: 2:53.

-------------------------------------------

அரசியல்வாதிகளை கிழிச்சிட்டாங்க, மெர்சல் 2 - LKG Public Review | RJ.Balaji | UNCUT Review - Duration: 8:57.

For more infomation >> அரசியல்வாதிகளை கிழிச்சிட்டாங்க, மெர்சல் 2 - LKG Public Review | RJ.Balaji | UNCUT Review - Duration: 8:57.

-------------------------------------------

"Total Dhamaal" Movie Public Review | Box Office Collection | Ajay Devgan | Madhuri Dixit - Duration: 2:03.

"Total Dhamaal" Movie Public Review | Box Office Collection | Ajay Devgan | Madhuri Dixit

For more infomation >> "Total Dhamaal" Movie Public Review | Box Office Collection | Ajay Devgan | Madhuri Dixit - Duration: 2:03.

-------------------------------------------

Andrade Comments on Relationship With Charlotte Flair Going Public - Duration: 1:21.

Hi Friends welcome to C4E Wrestling News Andrade Comments on Relationship With Charlotte Flair

Going Public News broke yesterday of Charlotte Flair and Andrade's relationship The couple

was not keeping it a secret so it was bound to come out eventually Charlotte Flair commented

on the news coming out about her relationship by asking if it was a slow news day No Charlotte

it wasn't Slow news days don't exist in pro wrestling Andrade commented later on by

simply posting an animated gif of himself along with the caption Lol…

#Quiet He seems very happy about this relationship but why wouldn't he be?

We continue to wish them the best of luck as they continue as another couple in WWE

Perhaps in time WWE could write this into a storyline However Flair is very busy with

her WrestleMania program so that isn't likely to happen for a while Friends what are your

thought about this Have your say in the comments section below

For more infomation >> Andrade Comments on Relationship With Charlotte Flair Going Public - Duration: 1:21.

-------------------------------------------

The Spread of Hate and Racism: Confronting a Growing Public Crisis - Duration: 1:06:05.

MICHELLE WILLIAMS: Welcome to The Forum,

live streamed worldwide from the Leadership Studio

at the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health.

I'm Dean Michelle Williams.

The Forum is a collaboration between the Harvard Chan School

and independent news media.

Each program features a panel of experts

addressing some of today's most pressing public health issues.

The Forum is one way the school advances

the frontiers of public health and makes

scientific insights accessible to policymakers and the public.

I hope you find this program engaging and informative.

Thank you for joining us.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

PHILLIP MARTIN: Well, welcome, everyone.

This is going to be an extraordinary discussion

and one that is timely, to say the least.

My name is Phillip Martin.

I'm a senior investigative reporter with WGBH in Boston

and also contribute to The World, PRI's The World.

And I'm today's moderator.

Our panelists starting from my immediate right

here are Oren Segal.

He's the director of the Anti-Defamation League

Center on Extremism.

We also have David Williams, my friend David Williams,

who's been on the panel with me, or I've been on panel with him

several times.

He's the chair of the Department of Social and Behavioral

Sciences at the Harvard Chan School here.

We have Dipayan Ghosh, who is a fellow at the Harvard Kennedy

School and an expert on social media.

We'll be talking about that.

Maureen Costello, all the way in from Montgomery and Birmingham,

Alabama, director of Teaching Tolerance

and member of the Southern Poverty Law Center's

senior leadership team.

And my friend joining us remotely again,

Jim Doyle, former senior Menschel fellow

and former governor and Attorney General

of Wisconsin, a state that's really in the news these days,

isn't it?

This event is being presented jointly with PRI's The World

and WGBH.

And we're streaming live.

Just want everyone to get to your Facebook

and your social media because we're streaming live

on Facebook and YouTube.

This program will include brief questions and answers.

And you folks, you can email questions

to theforum@hsph.harvard.edu.

I'm going to repeat that again--

theforum@hsph.harvard.edu.

And you can also participate in a live chat

that's happening on The Forum site at this very moment.

We've seen it.

All you have to do is turn on your television,

turn on your radio.

You've heard people and seen people

marching in Virginia shouting, "The Jews will not replace us."

We've seen a synagogue where a massacre took place.

We saw supermarket-- people going out shopping and shot

to death because of the color of their skin.

Acts of hate and racism, whether online or in person,

are painfully visible these days.

Statistics from the FBI, as well as

from organizations such as the Southern Poverty Law

Center and the Anti-Defamation League,

confirm that hate crimes are on the rise.

Such acts are, of course, not only in the United States.

We see this in Europe and other places globally.

Just take a look at the streets of Poland.

Or look at Hungary or the Philippines or Brazil.

And you see what they have in common besides the populism--

that is the term of choice--

is a lot of hate.

And today, during Black History Month, we pause.

We take a moment to ask, what forces are fueling

the rise of hate and racism?

What's contributing to what we're seeing out here?

And what can we do about it?

That's the operative question.

To give us a snapshot of one disconcerting

facet of extremism, let's just take a look

at a clip from the Anti-Defamation League.

This clip illustrates the explosive growth

of white supremacist propaganda on college campuses.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

I'm going to turn to Oren right now.

Oren, your organization's been tracking--

looking at the data for years.

What exactly is going on?

I've seen posters, for example, at local colleges

in Boston of basically where folks have essentially

been recruiting.

Can you talk about what the data shows

and how you've been tracking these organizations?

OREN SEGAL: Sure.

So at ADL, we're tracking both extremist-related data,

but also hate incidents and hate crimes of all types.

And I think the discussion today about what

is driving hate and racism and what we can do about it really

needs to start with the data.

So what I'd like to do is just provide some of that.

FBI hate crime statistics recently

came out for 2017, which demonstrated

a 17% increase in hate crimes around the country.

That was over 7,000 incidents that were reported.

Now one of the key pieces of data that, I think,

was not necessarily underscored but is as critical

is that in over 90 cities with people that have over 100,000

in population either reported zero hate crimes

or didn't report hate crimes at all.

So even that number, we know, is much lower.

At ADL, we also track anti-Semitic incidents, not

just crimes but other forms of harassment and intimidation.

And in 2017, we saw a 57% increase

in those anti-Semitic incidents from the previous year.

And that included an over 90% increase

in just k-through-12 through 12 schools.

Right, our kids are watching the public discussion.

They are viewing how the headlines on the news

and in your newspapers and on your social media feed

are constantly filled with hate and extremism.

And the last point about this to the video that we just saw,

we've actually seen a 500% increase in white supremacist

propaganda on the ground.

Not just college campuses where we saw a spike

and we continue to see that increase.

But what that means is this post-Charlottesville

environment that we're in, white supremacists

may not be as comfortable showing their faces at a rally.

But what they're doing are finding other clandestine ways

to amplify and spread their messages through propaganda

spread out not only in small towns,

but literally in every major city that we see.

And last point, we also track extremist-related murders

at ADL, and we've been doing so since about 1970.

2018 was the fourth deadliest year related

to extremist-related murders.

We saw over 50 people killed by extremists,

and 98% of those were by right-wing extremists--

white supremacists, antigovernment types.

And when you look at the past 10 years,

of all the extremist-related murders-- about 427--

73% have been carried out by white supremacists

and other homegrown antigovernment type extremists.

That may not necessarily connect with some of the narratives

we hear in the news every day.

But these are the statistics we need to account for

as we have this discussion about whether hate is rising or not.

PHILLIP MARTIN: I'd like to see how those statistics also

connect with David Harris's research.

David, your work is evidence-based,

as you've described it.

You've studied how discrimination,

including racist language and attitudes

on prejudice, the effects of health of those

who are in the crosshairs.

You've talked about that impact.

Tell us more about what you and what

your colleagues have found.

DAVID WILLIAMS: Well, there's a large body of research--

and it's a global body of research--

that indicates that exposure to discrimination,

both kind of virulent forms but even little

indignities on a day to day basis,

has pervasive adverse negative effects on health.

There's studies showing an increase

in the risk of premature death linked

to exposure to discrimination.

What the research is also showing us

that is very relevant for our conversation,

that it's not just the incidents that are

targeted at you individually.

But if you live in a community with higher levels

of prejudice, studies show African Americans who

live in such communities across the United States,

such counties across the United States

have higher rates of death.

It's not just African Americans.

There's a study looking at anti-gay prejudice

in the United States.

And for LGBT populations who live in communities

of higher anti-gay prejudice, their death rates

are three times higher than those

who live in communities of low levels of anti-gay prejudice.

And this is pervasive throughout society.

One of the studies I was involved with

documented that among high school and middle school

students who are exposed to racial discrimination

in online contexts, their levels of anxiety,

their levels of depression are higher,

even after you take into account other adolescent stresses

and discrimination offline.

So documenting the discrimination online

is a unique contributor to their poor health.

There's research documenting the negative effects

of anti-immigrant rhetoric, but also anti-immigrant policies.

So for example, a study I was involved

with in the state of Arizona after SB1070

was passed, a law that authorized

local officials to stop anyone who looked

as if they might be illegal.

And we documented among Mexican American mothers,

there was a decrease in the use of preventive health

services for their children and the access of social services.

And most strikingly in that study,

that effect was strongest among US-born Mexican American women.

So those women who were citizens of the United States,

we suspect, were so--

it was such an assault to their dignity

that they could be stopped simply because of how

they looked that there was these negative effects.

And there's research documenting that--

a study out of Los Angeles that shows 11th graders who,

in the year before the election, were

concerned about the hate and the discrimination in the society.

A year later, they have higher levels of depression,

higher levels of anxiety, higher levels of substance abuse.

So the bottom line is we are finding

pervasive negative effects on the health

of multiple stigmatized populations linked

to the exposure, not only the personal targeting

but this broader context of hostility in our environment.

PHILLIP MARTIN: One thing is this conversation

is such that, no, we don't have to struggle

to connect the dots between your different expertise.

Dipayan, something David just talked about--

the role of online media, the role

of social media in promulgating hate is fairly clear right now.

But you've done research on this topic.

What have been your findings?

DIPAYAN GHOSH: Well, I think both Oren's

and David's comments and yours really resonate for me.

When we think about some of the memes that

have risen over the past few years

or even particular instances of hate-- so,

for example, the frog meme or instances

of hate against particular classes of the US population

really pushed by others groups.

The thing that we really have to think about

is, why is this happening?

What is the infrastructure that is enabling

the spread and the pervasiveness, as David

has suggested, of all of this content being consumed?

Why is it having such an impact on the internet?

And what I'd suggest is that it is about the infrastructure.

It is about the commercial regime

that sits behind these internet platforms,

from YouTube to Facebook to Twitter to even

some of the newer platforms.

And when we think about that infrastructure,

it's sometimes difficult to get our heads around how it works

and what connects them all and how they're all similar.

But deep down, I think that infrastructure,

that commercial regime that defines

these platforms is actually fairly simple at a high level.

First of all, these platforms, they

develop very compelling services--

like Messenger or like the News Feed or like the Twitter feed

or like the YouTube system--

to such an extent that they're, as some psychologists

have suggested, addictive.

And this has prevented other services

from actually challenging these services to the extent

that they're limiting competition on the internet.

Second, through these services that

are dominating the internet, these companies

are drawing up--

hoovering up large amounts of data

of our personal information through our engagement

on the News Feed, as well as through purchases

of data from third parties, as well as from third party

websites to develop behavioral profiles on us.

And those first two pillars move us

to the third, which is that these companies develop

very precise and sophisticated algorithms that do two things--

curate content in our social feeds and target ads at us

based on our behavioral profile and based on our extensive use

of these platforms.

And so what I'd suggest is that this infrastructure has grown

up in this way for 20 years, as we've

seen Facebook and Google come to the fore in the global economy,

and really taken over the internet commercially,

to the extent that these impacts against hate are not really--

these companies are not really challenged

from a business perspective to do anything about it

until and unless the public sentiment rises up

so much that they have to actually start to address it.

What I'd suggest is that we draw on the tremendous public

sentiment against hate, against the spread of disinformation,

against the spread of algorithmic discrimination

and take this opportunity in the next couple of years

to push a regime, a regulatory regime that addresses

the harms of that business model so that we have better

competition on the internet, so that we have better privacy, so

that we can have better transparency

and to the ways that these algorithms work.

And what I'd suggest is that that

can start to address in the long run

this spread of hate issue, which is really, really challenging

us in really difficult ways.

PHILLIP MARTIN: OK.

The online content that you, Oren--

David Williams have talked about--

this stuff, of course, is being consumed by everyone.

It's across the board.

But it's mainly being consumed by young people

when you talk about online platforms.

And we talk about Teaching Tolerance,

both the name of the organization

and an objective of the organization.

What are you finding in terms, Maureen,

in terms of young people, the reception?

And what are you finding in the schools?

How are the schools being shaped by all of this?

MAUREEN COSTELLO: What we're finding

is that schools are not immune to the climate that

is pervasive in the United States Teaching Tolerance

has always operated to reduce prejudice in schools

and to improve intergroup relations among students.

And we've always heard about hate incidents.

Starting in 2016, we became aware

that there were more incidents happening

as a result of the rhetoric of the presidential campaign,

and we surveyed teachers.

And as a result, we came out with two reports in 2016

that showed three alarming phenomena.

The first, of course, was that teachers

were reporting that marginalized students, whether they

be immigrants, LGBT students, students of color generally,

religious minorities, were feeling high levels of anxiety.

And that has been supported by subsequent studies,

one out of UCLA last year, that have just

said this has continued.

The second finding was that bullying,

which has been a long standing concern of educators,

had taken on a kind of political tint,

and that we might consider that politics had weaponized

bullying in a way, and that the kind of rhetoric that

was being mentioned in political campaigns

was now being used against vulnerable students.

And the third thing we found was that teachers

were really, really uncertain about how to handle this--

not only about how to support marginalized children,

how to contain the hate that they were seeing emerging,

and, finally, even how to talk about politics and the election

in a way that would itself not seem partisan.

We've been tracking hate incidents at schools.

And by hate incidents at schools,

we're not talking about hate crimes necessarily.

We're talking about harassment, disparaging remarks,

negative behaviors that target a group of people

based on their identity.

It's very hard to say whether they have increased

because no one really was tracking this very closely

prior to the last couple of years.

But what we've seen is a regular number of incidents.

And as the FBI hate crime data showed, 25% of the hate crimes

happened in schools from K through college.

We're about to release a report next month in which we've

looked at both news reports of hate incidents

and also data gathered from educators.

And what we can tell you is that anti-Semitism is on the rise.

Racial harassment is on the rise.

Anti-immigrant, anti-LGBT, anti-Muslim harassment are all

happening at schools with a terribly detrimental effect

on students, most of whom--

over 51%-- are children of color,

and they come from these marginalized groups.

So obviously, this is not only a public health crisis of sorts,

but also a problem about making schools

effective in doing what they're supposed to do,

which is educate.

You cannot educate when children don't feel safe.

I would just leave by saying that what we've also

discovered-- and this will be in our report--

is that the vast majority of incidents at schools never get

reported in the news media, that probably fewer than 5%

are reported.

And that for many, many children,

they're being exposed to hateful language

and to disparaging remarks in a hostile environment

in the very place where they should feel safest.

PHILLIP MARTIN: In the last two years, as probably especially,

you've seen a lot of kids being emboldened, of chants,

of all types of things that perhaps you hadn't seen before.

I don't think we could divorce a lot of this

from the political atmosphere.

And to that end, I'd like to turn to Jim,

who we're talking to remotely.

He's out in Wisconsin.

Jim, as former attorney general, as a former governor,

what role are you seeing in terms

of the law, but, more importantly, politics,

in promulgating and then propagating hate?

JIM DOYLE: Well, first on the law,

let me say I argued before the United States Supreme Court

in the 1990s the first case that went

to them on hate crimes in which they

upheld the right of a state--

the ability of a state to impose harsher sanctions on people

that commit crimes motivated by racial,

gender, other kinds of biases.

And it was a big win at the time.

But I think we all have to recognize that the law--

and it's critical, I should say, that those laws be enforced

and people understand that the law

is on one side of this issue.

It's not on the other side-- that the law is on the side

that people ought to be able to live freely in this country,

and they ought to live freely in a way

that they are not harassed, harmed because of their race,

their religion, their sexual orientation, whatever.

But we ought to recognize that the law is--

for the issues that have been talked about,

the demeaning statements in schools, the low-level,

street-level interaction between a police officer and somebody

on the street that can be so demeaning,

that have the kind of harms that Professor Williams has

documented--

that the law is a pretty ham-fisted way

to deal with those.

It doesn't really get to those kinds

of very significant issues.

That's where politics becomes so important

and where leadership becomes so important.

Much of this-- and I'd be interested to see while

it's accelerated--

if I recall the statistics from the Anti-Defamation

and Southern Poverty Law Institute and others--

it really started with the election

of Barack Obama and this virulent reaction

by segments of our society, the idea

that an African-American person could

be president of the United States,

birthers, and all of that racist stuff that came out of it.

And now it's obviously been accelerated,

why political leadership that talks in stereotypes,

and that's what's so harmful.

These horrible stereotypes that that brown people coming across

the borders are criminals, that African-American people--

the stereotypes they've dealt with in my world

of law enforcement.

It's been so harmful as there's somehow

some kind of inherent criminality

that we all have to be very scared about

that is existing there.

Those kinds of large stereotypes that

come from political leadership from our president.

Let's just say it.

I'm mean, when you have a president that

talks in terms of people and these kinds of groups instead

of Americans as American, citizens

as immigrants as individual people with hopes and dreams,

most good, some bad.

When we have some who lump-- who sees the world in these--

and talks about it in that way.

And then you have the obvious, when politicians

start drawing equivalencies that what happened in Virginia

was equal on both sides.

That has a horrible effect on our political atmosphere,

but what concerns me is what Professor Williams was talking

about is the effect on people that

hear that coming at them, an African-American student

working hard in school, trying to get ahead,

who hears leadership talking about the people

of African-American backgrounds with that kind

of dismissive attitude.

It has terrible, harmful effects,

and it does in the law, as well, because these attitudes do then

pervade the policing on our streets and lead

to some of the terrible incidents we've seen.

But even more the lower level--

I shouldn't say more but equally important

that lower level, that kind of routine stop on the street

in which a young black person is treated in a particularly

aggressive way that a young white person might not

has very serious effects on how people see the government,

how they relate to the government,

how they see the political process,

whether they see it as something that's

out there to try to help them.

So, obviously, my one question I often ask is when I hear--

I've heard the president and others say,

I'm tired of all this political correctness.

why can't we just say what we want to say?

And my question is, what is it you really want to say?

why don't you just tell us what you really want to say?

Let's get this out there.

But that's really what we're dealing with, with a lot of--

and, politically, I think, with the issues

that we're talking here today.

PHILLIP MARTIN: Well, one of the things I'd like to do

is even explore this--

we might not have the time to do it here-- but even explore

the term political correctness.

What does that mean usually and often?

And the other point that you just made--

and I want to address this to our panel in a few minutes--

is that about the role of the president.

It's the elephant in the room, but it's one

that I think we have to explore.

Before we do that, I want to turn to another clip, this one

by Teaching Tolerance.

This is a clip of a part of a film they put together

called Mix It Up at Lunch.

GIRL: Mix it up day was a very fun day.

I got to see more people mingling and getting along

with people that they usually don't necessarily talk to

or even look at.

And it was a very fun thing to see

that people were being proactive and getting

in there with other kids.

WOMAN: I loved the whole day even though it seemed chaotic.

I loved everything they did because it's

our kids speaking to our kids, which is what we need.

We need interaction between our students

so that they understand.

And, hopefully, even though they took it

as acting or just singing, they'll

go home tonight, or this afternoon,

or even think about it tomorrow, you know, what they said

really will make a difference if I just stand up

or if I learn that I'm different from somebody else,

and it's OK.

And that's my message that I hope

they perceive from today, whether it

be today or tomorrow.

But I think the whole thing was a shining moment for me,

just to have them involved and work with each other.

GIRL: My advice to give to other students

is to keep their eyes open, don't shut off

and jump to conclusions, to just participate because I promise

it's very rewarding in the end.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

PHILLIP MARTIN: Well, that's a good idea.

[LAUGHTER]

PHILLIP MARTIN: Now we're going to mix it

up and right before my second favorite meal lunch.

And, Maureen, let's start off with you.

And this, obviously, is part of an effort

to counter the hate and the type of intolerance we're seeing out

there.

Can you talk about other aspects of Teaching Tolerance's

programs and how you're reaching or attempting

to reach young people much like the local program Facing

History and Ourselves?

MAUREEN COSTELLO: We work through teachers

across the United States and millions of them

turn to Teaching Tolerance for advice,

and guidance, and curriculum.

And while we do sponsor Mix It Up at Lunch Day,

we're very cognizant of the fact that this can't just

be a moment in the school year, that, in fact, schools are

incredibly important places.

They're crucibles for building the society

that we're all going to live in in 10 years or 20 years,

and they are also one of the last common institutions

standing.

And so I think that it's a time that

calls for more investment in making sure that schools are

doing their jobs to counter hate and to build that good society.

What does that mean?

All of our work is guided by something

we call the social justice standards,

and they're based on four pillars, identity, diversity,

justice, and action.

The idea of identity in our vision

is that schools should have this at the center of their vision

so that, as they look at students who come in,

they want every student to find in school a place where their

own identities-- whatever those identities are,

be they religious, racial, sexual orientation,

whatever-- can be affirmed and basically that they can have

positive identity development.

Secondly, that they develop a curiosity--

and obviously have exposure-- to people

with different identities, but that it's

a healthy open-minded curiosity of, I know who I am.

Tell me who you are.

The third is we want children to have a commitment to justice,

and that shouldn't be very controversial.

I mean, it is part of the Pledge of Allegiance,

that we want justice for all.

And we want children to be able to think

critically and recognize injustice when they see it.

And, finally, we feel that the end of all education

has to be a capacity to take action,

to work with others to address injustices

and to do the work that we're all called upon to do,

which is to make this world a better place than we found it.

And so for us, it's about encouraging peer relationships.

It's about encouraging schools to have

daily interactions between--

among students and adults that bring them together.

It's curriculum based, explicit curriculum

about prejudice and about stereotypes

but also that builds community, implicit curriculum that

exposes students to the lived experiences of others.

This is incredibly important, and there's

lots of good research that has shown that when

students learn about the history of discrimination, they,

in fact--

their attitudes, their discriminatory attitudes

decline and decrease.

So we should be honest in our curriculum about the warp

and the flaws in our history.

And, finally, I think the most important thing-- and school

leadership is incredibly important here-- not

every school in this country is a cauldron of hatred.

We hear from a lot of teachers who talk about,

how this doesn't happen in my school,

and they always point to school leadership

who really walk the walk as well as talking the talk.

Kids learn from adults, and they learn from each other.

And so what matters is not only what

we say but also what we do.

And that means that we have to greet every person who

comes into that school and treat them

as a deserving human being who deserves our respect.

PHILLIP MARTIN: It's funny but when

I'm thinking about the whole notion of trying

to engender empathy--

which is what your program does, which

is what the world of difference program does--

you're also dealing, however, with a larger message that's

coming across, for example, and oftentimes,

on Twitter of a huge megaphone that certain individuals have

in order to promulgate a particular message.

And one question I would have for Oren,

in the context of that, is how do you basically get to a point

where you think you're reaching where you actually are making

a world of difference, when you have that bigger

megaphone out there that might be drowning out your message.

OREN SEGAL: Yeah, I mean this is a battle for hearts and minds

at the end of the day.

So in the Center on Extremism, we

believe sunlight is the best disinfectant.

You need to expose the extremists.

You need to expose the hate so that people can frankly

understand what they're up against.

But our work would not be enough without

our educational resources.

So a World of Difference, for example,

it trains not only students but teachers and their parents,

not only how to identify bias--

we're good at-- we're pretty good at identifying

what is racism, anti-Semitism, what

is Islamophobia, et cetera.

But you know what's more important?

And this is a lesson from the Holocaust

is to have people to say, I'm not just

going to sit around and do nothing about it.

You're training kids, and, often,

this is peer-to-peer model, as well, that we have at ADL.

And that gives it a little bit more legitimacy

for younger people.

But to say, you have a stake here.

You have a role.

We will teach you how to identify bias

within institutions, within others, and within yourself.

And then we are going to arm you and help

you to speak out and challenge that bias and that racism.

That makes my job as somebody who's

tracking extremism easier because I

know there's an army behind me who

are going to be able to call it out and do something about it.

Deborah Lipstadt said anti-Semitism

starts with the Jews, but it doesn't end with the Jews.

The same is true for all forms of hate,

and look no further than Pittsburgh,

where here's an individual who attacked 11 people largest

massacre against Jews in this country's history.

And it was motivated by an anti-immigrant sentiment,

talking about the caravan, talking about the social media

hate of that day, and he targeted Jews

because in his conspiratorial white supremacist worldview,

the Jews are controlling our immigration policy.

So by teaching kids of all different backgrounds,

religious, races, et cetera, that

helps to the fight against anti-Semitism.

And the fight against anti-Semitism

helps fight all forms of racism and bigotry.

That's what we're trying to teach our kids in our schools.

PHILLIP MARTIN: Oren, and just as a good segue way to David.

You know how to talk about this stuff.

You know how to talk about this stuff.

All of you, you're conversationalists.

David, a lot of your research is based on the conversations that

take place between individuals and the amelioration

of discrimination as a result of those discussions.

Talk about that work and what conclusions

are you coming to in this age of heightened anxiety

and hate, if you will?

DAVID WILLIAMS: I think we need, as a society,

to find safe places where people can talk.

When if someone, because of their background

and understanding, said something

that was inappropriate, they're not castigated and excluded.

So I think creating those safe places generically

is one thing that all of us need to be because there's

a sense in which--

Kellogg Foundation had a program called the Truth, Racial

Healing & Transformation.

People need-- don't assume that everyone has the same level

of knowledge that you have.

And there's a term in their socialization

that was used that didn't think it was a problem,

and they're now learning it's a problem.

So I think we need to be patient with each other

but be committed to firmly but lovingly raise its use

and provide truth.

There is a study I want to talk about it.

It was published recently, very elegant study

published in Science, where a group of researchers

took political canvases and sent them out

to Democratic and Republican voters

and had these canvassers allow the voter they were talking

to to do most of the talking.

And their job was to find ways to link an experience

in the life of the canvasser to think of some experience they

had had when they had been treated negatively

and then to link that to how transgender individuals would

feel when they are treated negatively.

And this showed that this kind of conversation

was effective in reducing prejudice against transgender

individuals, it was effective in increasing levels of support

for policies to ensure anti-discrimination legislation

towards transgender individuals.

And what they would say is the key

is the specific language and conversation that

was used to engender this.

And this organization out in Southern California

who does this work, they tested 13,000 conversations first

to find the right kind of conversation

that nonetheless can open the door to help to build empathy.

And I think the building of empathy of putting ourselves

in the shoes of another is one of the keys

to build in the kind of tolerance

that we need in our society.

PHILLIP MARTIN: One of the cauldrons that we're

seeing where empathy is basically being challenged

would contravene and it seems to be taking place online.

I think about Reddit, for example,

which has become a platform for abuse and for a lot of haters.

And, Dipayan, how are you basically finding

Reddit and other social media platforms?

Are the conversations that David talked about

and the efforts toward empathy--

or can they possibly take place on online platforms

that seem to have been basically subsumed by the haters?

DIPAYAN GHOSH: Wow, it's very difficult, I think.

I think it's very difficult. To cite

another study, a different study,

MIT researchers showed about just a few months ago

in a paper--

I believe in Science or Nature-- that falsehoods travel

20 times faster than the truth.

And they travel faster, they travel farther,

and they reach deeper into social networks,

meaning to individual people using Twitter,

which was the social network that these researchers

analyzed.

And I think what that suggests is that, well, falsehood,

and hate, and disinformation are all linked together.

And in the practice of spreading hate online,

on social networks, or the practice

of spreading disinformation, we've

seen over, and over, and over, again,

that propagators of this kind of content

are really linking the two and trying

to hit those thin cracks in American society

and pound them over, and over, and over, again, and fracture

society by targeting ads, or targeting content, or pulling

people into filter bubbles and showering them

with content about a particular political issue that

triggers hatred or triggers discriminatory action going

forward.

And I think to really resolve that kind of issue,

we have to revisit the business model.

We have to think, again, about how

do Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, how do they work?

It's about these services.

It's about the collection of data

to drive behavioral profiling, and it's

about these algorithms that target ads and curate content.

And to really address hate speech in the long run,

we're seeing two issues.

We're seeing this problem of filter bubbles which is--

I believe-- is caused by this business model of people trying

to force people--

hate speech propagators and disinformation operators

trying to force people into these filter bubbles

and increase engagement over these platforms,

as the internet platforms themselves

want to increase their ad revenues.

And we're seeing this problem of pushing content

against those thin cracks to try to break people or break

their will to be tolerant.

I think the only place to start, then, is

to address that infrastructure.

And that's going to require a lot of political will,

and right now if we-- we talked earlier about politics,

these issues even as they pertain to social media

are divided along partisan lines.

When I worked in the White House during the Obama

administration, we saw this, and it

was very difficult to do anything about it.

When I worked at Facebook in Washington, we saw this again.

And I think it's going to be extraordinarily

difficult to address it, but we need political will.

We need to build sentiment and build up

the public education on these kinds of issues

and start to address them looking deep down at the way

that the internet is structured today.

PHILLIP MARTIN: Let's take it from online

to the streets of the role, for example, of law enforcement,

in much of what many people see as antithetical relationship

with communities of color, with many communities

in the country.

And then many seem to be emboldened

by the current administration, the Justice Department,

and by the White House.

Jim, can you talk about--

and then I'm going to ask the panel pretty

much the same-- the panel here, pretty much the same question--

can you talk about the role that police officers are playing

in terms of, if you will, the receptivity to a lot

of these negative messages that are being, if you will,

being seen as messages of hate.

JIM DOYLE: Many more people are going

to have contact with a police officer

than they are with the President of the United States.

And many-- or a governor, or an attorney general--

and many are going to draw their conclusions about how

the government reacts to them over their lifetimes based

on that contact.

We have been at this for a long time of the training,

and that's why I really encourage

all of people who have spoken here

about the training they do to modernize

police training on this issue.

After Rodney King, we set out on a large scale training

in Wisconsin, as many states did,

on police understanding racial divisions.

Much of the training when I look back at it--

and I've seen the results-- was just plain wrong.

I mean, a lot of it was police officers going up

to people to African-American people and calling them,

man, because they thought that was

how they were going to relate more closely

and be part of the community.

Much of the training and community policing

was to teach white police officers how

to talk kind of jive, street jive,

thinking that somehow that was making them culturally aware

and with the people that they were talking about.

You saw it at Harvard with the Professor Gates incident

where a distinguished professor is treated in that way.

We probably all know, and I know dear relatives and friends

who have been treated--

I've often asked-- I think the training for police officers

ought to start by having rich African-American people come in

so they know this isn't about poverty

and tell them about their worst experience with the police.

And white people are shocked to hear these stories.

I've done this a few times.

To hear to hear their friends talk about what

happened to them when they went in the hardware store and got

followed around and then stopped because maybe they

were shoplifters.

So it gets back to this empathy issue.

And much of the training was good and, obviously,

the major part of law enforcement

after training has to be, this is the law,

and you have to enforce the law, and it

doesn't matter who the person is in front of you or their color.

But when you get into these deeper assumptions that people

have-- and many police officers are not immune to them--

that for some genetic reason black people

have more criminal disposition than white people,

that's at the heart of much of what we're talking about here.

And that gets reinforced politically.

So I really encourage the kind of training we've talked about

and we've heard about in the schools and others,

particularly about empathy, to really

have that be the training that moves into the law enforcement

realm as well.

I want to make one other point if I

can about politics quickly.

We've come, unfortunately, in this country now,

to two parties that are-- one is almost an all-white party

and one is a party that is made up

of most racial minority, some white males, and about half

of the white females in the country.

If you just look at this demographically,

that's not a good place for us to be politically

because the white party has to maximize its white vote

in every election.

And the way you do that is to get white people,

the majority people voting as a block,

and we saw this in the South after the Civil Rights Act.

Nobody thought in the South that Republicans someday could

get 75% of the white vote.

They said, that'll never happen.

Well, it's happened.

And now you are seeing that same thing happening politically.

And the result is on this-- on the messaging issue that

we've talked about--

there are political incentives now

that are exploited, as was just described, on the internet.

What do we know about what the Russians did?

Some of that's come out is they exploited racial divisions

by putting all kinds of stuff out on the internet that both--

after police shootings-- that inflamed both sides.

That's how they know they can get to us.

And our politics is now driving us

into that same position where one side benefits

from inflaming it, and the other side

benefits by trying to make sure that all

of the people of minority background in the country

are voting for their party.

And we now are in a very, very difficult political place.

We've been here for a long time, but it has now

gotten that you just look at the numbers, and the vote,

and how it breaks down by race, it is just stark.

We have parties that are divided on this issue.

PHILLIP MARTIN: I can tell you, we

could talk about this, folks, for days

because it's so much to talk about.

We have time at this point for just a few questions

from our listeners and our viewers.

This question is from Michael and he says, "Clearly, there

are a host of levels that impact racism,

institutional, cultural, et cetera,

what is our best chance of changing

racism on an individual level?"

I'm going to direct this one right now to David and then

to the rest of our panel.

DAVID WILLIAMS: It's a big challenge.

I think I would say we need to raise awareness levels.

So what's happening with teaching tolerance

so that people are knowledgeable.

And I would say that the media has a powerful role to play.

We have seen-- now, I'm not suggesting in any way, shape,

or form that we've solved the problem--

but we have seen striking declines

in the levels of prejudice against LGBT populations

in the United States.

That has not happened by chance.

Much of that has been linked in scientific research

to explicit strategies that were implemented

in the media that has led to reductions of prejudice.

And I think we need to change the culture.

We need to change what people think.

And the media and other larger cultural institutions,

like religious institutions, can also play an important role

in changing the very culture around these issues.

PHILLIP MARTIN: Oren.

OREN SEGAL: Yeah, I mean-- this was the $64,000 or the million

dollar question.

I do think this, in tracking extremism of all types

and narratives, especially, online,

I am always disappointed by the lack of content that tells

the other side of the story.

So if you go onto YouTube, and you put 9/11.

You want to learn about what happened,

and younger people are not quite sure what happened

because they weren't alive.

It's only a couple of suggestions

away from conspiracy theories, and these our more mainstream

platforms that are being exploited by those who are

giving these false narratives.

These hate hateful narratives.

So I do think creating an opportunity for people

to create content--

not just that counters it, that's difficult--

but to have a place to develop your own narratives

is part of that effort of creating critical thinking.

Not only think about what you're seeing

and what you're bringing in, and think

about who's trying to fool you, and try to trick you,

and brainwash you into having these hateful beliefs,

but you need to have an opportunity to then leverage

other types of content.

I learn about new technologies from two places,

from extremists and from my seven-year-old son.

And so we need to be able to arm our youth with the ability

to tell their stories in compelling ways that

are as sexy, and cool, and interesting as those

who have those hateful ideas.

PHILLIP MARTIN: One of the questions I do want to ask--

in the little time that we have-- is, Maureen and Dipayan,

are you saying--

what is the impact of what we're seeing

outside of the United States?

What impact is that having on, if you will,

thoughts about tolerance intolerance

here in the United States?

Out of Hungary, for example, where you see Roma

under assault, where you see immigrants

immigration has become an issue that

has been defined as us versus them like here

in the United States.

What's your view about that, the impact?

MAUREEN COSTELLO: I don't think that we're seeing it explicitly

on school children, for instance, or even on educators,

but I think that a lot of the language and the ideas that

are coming out of Europe are being amplified in social media

here in the United States.

And nobody is paying attention to where

they're coming from, basically.

So I think that the notion that just because they're

across the ocean, they don't affect those is just untrue.

DIPAYAN GHOSH: Just to add to that,

I completely agree with Maureen, and we're definitely

seeing some really nasty themes come particularly

from all over Europe, Eastern Europe, Western

Europe, and Northern Europe, that are,

as Oren and I have researched a little bit and spoken about,

driven from this idea of identitarianism.

And that is definitely shaping a lot

of cultural creation of this--

or this ethos that we are better and they're worse.

And I think that people like Richard Spencer and people

like that in the United States have certainly

subsumed that message and projected it here.

And that's obviously dangerous.

PHILLIP MARTIN: I'm looking at our clock

and so-- but I also need all of you

to just take a moment to, if you will,

summarize this discussion and your thoughts

on hatred and intolerance that's sweeping across our nation,

unfortunately.

Oren.

OREN SEGAL: Sure, to the degree this is a final word for me,

I would say, we have a heat map at ADL where we track incidents

of anti-Semitism, hate crimes, extremist activity

of all types.

And I'm always reminded, as we're trying to explain

to the public, the trends that we're seeing,

that each one of those points on a map over 5,000-- now,

over the last two years--

is a story of community resilience.

Is a story of people coming together

and rejecting that hate.

And to your point about the media,

I think we need to start telling more inspiring stories.

And because when we hear that, that also has an impact

and that also maybe creates courage amongst people

to hold all those who are purveyors of hate accountable,

whether they're in your local community

or whether they're in the highest office.

We all have a voice.

And we need to constantly support all those

in our communities to show that hate really

does have no place here.

So you don't do this work for 20 years

without having some sort of hope that things will get better.

But I think the data, and I think

the training, whether it's for law enforcement, students, et

cetera, will help make those dots a little bit

more actionable.

And you're turning basically lemons into lemonade.

DAVID WILLIAMS: Two quick things.

Governor Doyle talked about interactions

of African-Americans with the police.

I and other colleagues published a paper last year

in Lancet that shows that when police killed

an unarmed African-American male,

the mental health of the entire African-American population

in that state is adversely affected for the next three

months.

So, again, it's another example of this

is affecting the quality of life of individuals here.

And, finally, my other quick point

is that this environment of hate.

It's not only about individual interaction.

It is driving social policy, and we

are leaning towards policies, the policy proposals

right now in Washington DC, that will destroy the social safety

net as we know it today.

And we don't have to guess about what would happen.

In 1981, the omnibus reconciliation bill,

early in the Reagan administration,

let a million people lost food stamps and 600,000 people

would dropped from Medicare--

Medicaid.

And 250 community health centers closed in the United States

as a result to cuts to social services,

and there were pervasive negative effects on children,

on pregnant women, on the elderly in the United States.

So we have to look not only at all interactions,

we have to look at the policies that we decide

driven by false narratives.

PHILLIP MARTIN: Dipayan.

DIPAYAN GHOSH: I'll also share just two quick thoughts.

First, addressing the online space.

Again, I think these internet platforms are designed

the way they are because they're designed to increase engagement

and there's no regulatory regime that

sits above them right now that that tells them, no, you

can't do that. you can't spread hate. you

can't spread discrimination.

One example, Latanya Sweeney, a professor

of computer science here at Harvard, searched for her name

on Google, and I believe the story

that she reported is that she saw an ad for jails

because Google inferred that her name is associated

with African-American heritage and thought that, hey, we

should show her this ad.

In another example, Google--

when kids were searching for gorillas on Google Images--

people saw images of minorities in the United States.

These systems are designed to drive engagement

because they want professor Sweeney to click on that ad

because they think that that's going to drive engagement.

They want people to--

they design these algorithms in ways

that encourages clicks and encourages bigger ad spend.

So my first point is that we need to address that system.

We need our leadership to understand

how these systems work and start to address them at their core.

Second point is just a broader one

which is that I think our leaders, in society,

from politicians to actors and actresses,

thought leaders need to be more honest and need to speak up.

I think, just one example--

this didn't come up yet-- but with Liam Neeson,

we've seen over the past few days.

I want to highlight not just what

he said, which was honest to the public, which I appreciate

at some level, but also what a soccer player,

John Barnes of African origin but who played in England,

his reaction to Liam Neeson.

And his reaction was one of great appreciation

for the honesty, instead of just the traditional media

reaction which was that, wow, Liam Neeson is

a horrible person, and we need to vilify him.

So I would appreciate more honesty.

We've seen that in the US Congress,

as well, over the past week.

So just two quick points, thank you.

PHILLIP MARTIN: Maureen.

MAUREEN COSTELLO: I think we're going

to win or lose this battle in the schools, basically.

If we do not orient our schools towards the vision

that they are, in fact, building the society that we're

going to live in in the future, we have lost.

We've been focusing a lot in schools on college and career

readiness, and we really have to focus on social and emotional

readiness, as well.

My ideal-- the ideal policy change

is to really make integration a focus of our school policy.

But if we can't go there, then we

really need to make sure that young people have

digital intelligence so that they know not only

how to interpret material that comes to them as consumers,

but that they also learn how to be productive consumers--

producers for social media.

I think at the end of the day, I'm reminded of the phrase

that Dr. King used in his last book, which

is that we have a choice between chaos and community.

And what we've been talking about so much is isolation.

Hate grows in isolation.

And schools are places of community.

And so everything that we need to do is deliberate talking--

teaching about the kind of discrimination that exists,

not pretending it doesn't exist, admitting that we've all

been socialized to be racists.

And I think it's particularly an issue in schools

because 80% of teachers are white women.

And I'm very fond of white women.

[LAUGHTER]

But they carry with them-- we all

carry with us implicit biases.

It's one of the issues that a lot of good police training

has tried to address, and it's something

we have to address with teachers as well.

But we really, really need to decide

that this next generation has to be

better than we are generally.

PHILLIP MARTIN: And, Jim, in Wisconsin, please,

your last words.

Well, not your last words.

[LAUGHTER]

Your words today.

[LAUGHTER]

JIM DOYLE: Well, I agree with everything

that's just been said.

I had a friend, a European, say to me recently,

whatever happened to your country?

And he went off about how bad everything was.

I said, well, remember, this is a country

that, just a few years ago, you were

cheering because of the election of Barack Obama as president.

And it's not like everybody just suddenly

moved out of this country and a whole new group,

new people moved in.

But what happened is we are a complicated country.

And while we've talked about the problems here,

we are a country of great tolerance

and of acceptance, and in our schools, and churches, and much

of the work that's being done here.

The police officers all across the country

are doing really, really important things on this.

So I'm going to end this if I could just politically,

which is in Wisconsin-- and we weren't unique--

in this last election, in November,

we had more people vote in an off-year election

than at any time since the Second World War

and a massive turnout at presidential levels.

And it was a very, very close vote,

and, I will say the person I wanted to win won

but that's beside the point.

The point is we do have a very, very engaged political world

right now.

And all of the education we've talked

about, the issues of implicit bias,

of tolerance, the more we talk about that in all the ways

we've talked about here today really affect

how current voters and younger people who are going

to be coming voters will vote.

And that's how in a democracy--

back to Professor Williams' comments

about the policies that make the difference-- that's

how we try to make sure the policies

we want are effectuated.

And so it is really critical that we have a very, very

engaged political body and I'll give President Trump

credit for this-- he has truly engaged the American people.

And we are seeing voting turnout like we have never seen before,

and that's a good thing.

And that, politically, is the way you address these issues.

PHILLIP MARTIN: Jim, thank you, and on that note.

And on that note, I want to thank

our panel, Jim, Maureen, Dipayan, you know David,

and Oren.

And I'd like to thank you, our audience,

for taking part in this forum.

Let me mention also something that's coming up

on March 4, another event.

And I'm going to read this.

This is the Dr. Lawrence and Roberta Cohn

forum, it's deaths from pregnancy and childbirth,

why are more US mothers dying and what can be done?

This was also presented jointly by PRI's The World and WGBH.

I'd like to thank you, and I'd like to thank our panel.

Engaging discussion.

There's a lot of work to be done, obviously,

but you've begun that work and you are carrying out

that work every day.

Thank you very much.

And I thank you.

[APPLAUSE]

[MUSIC PLAYING]

For more infomation >> The Spread of Hate and Racism: Confronting a Growing Public Crisis - Duration: 1:06:05.

-------------------------------------------

New 9-1-1 system seeks to improve public safety in Cherokee County - Duration: 2:26.

For more infomation >> New 9-1-1 system seeks to improve public safety in Cherokee County - Duration: 2:26.

-------------------------------------------

Public Advocate Candidates Pan Idea Of De Blasio Running For President - Duration: 1:42.

For more infomation >> Public Advocate Candidates Pan Idea Of De Blasio Running For President - Duration: 1:42.

-------------------------------------------

Best Bike stunts || Bike Stunt In Public Reaction Latest || #bikestunt - Duration: 2:26.

watch more videos

plz subscribe my channel

Không có nhận xét nào:

Đăng nhận xét