Other issues that interest me...

Alternative Energy

Cloning

Organ Donation

Racism

Rape

Immigration

War Crimes

Animal Experimentation

The debate between the scientific community and those who oppose animal experimentation involves some very difficult questions. Animal rights activists believe those who use animals experimentally for science and other research, even though responsibly, should realize their work treats animals as objects without rights. Others would counter this by saying their work is essential to our way of life and to human health and well-being, and that there is no real substitute for animal experimentation.

Alternative Energy

Alternative energy refers to non-fossil fuel sources of energy, such as wind, solar, and hydro (water) power as well as nuclear reactors, hydrogen, bioenergy, such as ethanol, and geothermal energy. Today, fossil fuels provide over 85% of the total primary energy used around the world; they also contribute to the world’s pollution problem and, some believe, global warming. Alternative sources of energy are under research in an effort to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

Ethnic Relations

Ethnic communities in the United States today still struggle with the tension between preserving an ethnic identity and assimilating into the larger community. Immigrants generally try to preserve a sense of their native homeland and ethnic heritage, but in order to advance economically and socially, they often need to assimilate into the American community. The process of assimilation is not always smooth, as evidenced by tension between different ethnic groups and those who consider themselves Americans.

Having a Salvadorean father and a "white," American mother, I can definitely relate to both sides. But, I'm still drawn back to this..

Environmentalism

The ethical and political perspective that places the health, harmony, and integrity of the natural environment at the center of human attention and concern. From this perspective human beings are viewed as part of nature rather than as overseers. Therefore to care for the environment is to care about human beings since we cannot live without the survival of the natural habitat.

Hmmm...

Ideas for Social Design Problem 2:

I found a pretty cool site, http://socialissues.wiseto.com/Topics/CreationismVsEvolution/ that has an A-Z list of social issues -- pretty much everything you could imagine. Possibilities are endless. Perfect!

Ones that caught my attention:

Creationism vs. Evolution

Evolution is the process by which gradual genetic change occurs over time to a group of living things. Creationism holds that Earth was miraculously created as it exists today. Creationism is not based on any presently held scientific principles and members of the scientific community do not accept it as a possible theory for the origin of the universe; they reject the idea that it should be taught as a part of science education.

I think this is definitely interesting -- not sure how important it is in society today (apart from the science community) or how I could use it in a project, BUT it grabbed my interest. I think I interpreted it differently that what it really means. Scratch that one.

Environmental Policy

Environmental policy can be strictly defined as a government's chosen course of action or plan to address issues such as pollution, wildlife protection, land use, energy production and use, and waste generation and disposal. In reality, a government's environmental policy may be characterized by examining its overall responses to environmental challenges as they occur, or by defining its policy as the sum of plans for, and reactions to, environmental issues.

U.S. Measures to Protect the Environment Are Effective and Necessary:

The United States does a good job of preventing damage to the environment and responding to environmental disasters when they do occur. Despite the difficulties of operating within a large bureaucracy, key proponents of environmental policy have made programs like the Environmental Protection Agency's Superfund a reality.

Sorry, but this is a little funny to me. Although, yes, the U.S. might be doing a decent job on their response to environmental disasters, and preventing damage to the environment, they are in absolutely NO WAY doing enough!!! There is SO much more that we should be doing to better our environment and to lessen the DESTRUCTION of the environment EVERY MINUTE! I mean come on, look at Canada for example -- now THEY are taking effective and necessary measures to protect the environment. Here we are, greedy, lazy Americans who consume so much and destroy the environment so much in our own region that we don't have enough room to dispose of all of our crap anymore! So what do we do? We dump it in other countries! Did you know we don't even dispose of our used tires in our own country? Nope, we drop it off in other countries. Real cool.

Shoo I just got all worked up with that topic -- maybe I should use it as a lead for my project? I think so... but where to go with it...

This class is definitely to blame for my new, heightened awareness and passion for the topic of environmental efforts, sustainability, etc. I'm glad for it, though. The other day I saw someone throw a napkin out their parked car window, and I said something to them about. They picked it up. This morning, as my sister was getting ready and she was using her Aussie aerosol hairspray, I told her all about how bad it is for the environment. Well, she used it anyway, but I didn't.

200 families on brink of homelessness being treated like 'rats in a lab experiment'

So while searching for information, topics, etc for my next project, I came across a link to an article at NYDailyNews.com about an attempt to test how well a one-stop assistance program, called Homebase, is working. In order to do this, the Department of Homeless Services split 400 struggling families into two groups -- one half get rental assistance, job training, and other services through Homebase. The other half or the "control group" are shut out of Homebase for two years. Rather than helping them, the families were given a list of other agencies and were told to go hunt for help elsewhere. For two years, researchers of this project will track the two seperate groups using their Social Security numbers to see how each group "uses city services... such as shelter, public assistance, foster care," etc. Starting in August, letters were distributed to 400 families at random who were applying to join Homebase, informing them that they would be part of the study. They want to see if the "control group" will find aid through other agencies or if they will end up in shelters. The article also touched on the unhappy reaction of a pregnant single mother who lives in a one bedroom apartment with her 8 and 1 year old daughters who was dubbed a "have-not."

I think this is outrageous. A lot of people commented on the article, saying they think it is good, and that women who get pregnant who already have children they can't support shouldn't receive aid because it is their fault for getting pregnant again -- that people like this are draining resources that come from our tax dollars. Although, yes, I do somewhat agree with that statement, that our actions come with consequences and responsibilities that we must handle, I think to randomly select and divide families into "haves" and "have-nots" seems a little harsh, unfair, not right? But then again nothing is free, nothing is really, truly fair, and I suppose something like this has to be done in order to see how struggling and homeless families use their resources and what is available to them to better their own individual situations, rather than acting helpless just because they are struggling. I think too often in this society people who are needy are handed so much, so easily, for simply not having anything. Why not TRY to make something with what they have? Instead of acting helpless, DO something about it. For example, a single women with a low paying job who receives ridiculous amounts of aid and help simply because she made the decision to have a child that she can not support. But, say, a young adult just getting out of college with no job is prooobably not going to receive that kind of aid. Why? My opinion on this article goes back and forth. Definitely an interesting thing to think about.

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/09/30/2010-09-30_city_cruel_test_for_poor_families.html

Business of Green: A Future Built on Different Standards

Styria, a province in southeastern Austria, what was once an economic backwater, is now enjoying an economic boom generated in part by a regional project that has brought together 79 municipalities to promote local, green, self-sustaining businesses. Financed by the European Union, fourteen mayors came together to develop a sustainable business strategy -- they borrowed €1.5 million to help finance a local energy management agency. The agency provided advice on the design of sustainable energy projects and helped to develop local energy resources. Other small businesses have been encouraged to develop local resources, skills, and markets. Farmers, small businesses, restaurants, etc are also now using electricity supplied partly by solar panels, and even recycling the heat from their refrigerators.

Restaurants are also using produce of small, environmentally conscious neighborhood farms. The people have become a lot more eco-conscious and are showing a "newfound awareness of nature as a gift to be respected.” I think this whole effort of an entire province going green and becoming more conscious of the environment is amazing. It reminds me of the extreme efforts that Canada has taken in making changes and laws to help better the planet we live on -- not too many other countries seem brave enough or care enough to take such lengths to making a difference. I hope projects like these help influence other countries to follow their example, showing them it can be done, that it's really not hard, and that it is rewarding. Something small and silly, but like I read on my Sun Chips bag at lunch today, "Big changes can come from small steps," but I think I've stressed that through my entire blog!

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/03/business/energy-environment/03iht-rbogvol.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=energy-environment

A "green" blog on energy and the environment!

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/

Beyond Fossil Fuels: Can We Build a Brighter Shade of Green?

Articles in the "Beyond Fossil Fuels" series in the NY Times examines innovative attempts to reduce the world's dependence on coal, oil and other carbon-intensive fuels, and the challenges faced. This particular article discusses the building of passive homes, which often use up to 90 percent less heating and cooling energy than similar homes built to local code. Although they are more expensive to build than regular homes, they later save homeowners an a lot of money with much lower energy and electric bills. They have no furnace but simply have great insulation, sometimes with people being the only source needed to heat the entire house and heated floors in the bathroom; they can be up to 80 percent more energy efficient than regular homes. Although there are only 13 in the United States to date, it is estimated that there will be about 300 by the end of this year. I think most people wouldn't want to build a passive home because of the extra cost, but in the end it would probably end up balancing out as energy bills would be dramatically lower, and it would be greatly benefiting our environment -- so if someone in the market for a new home has the means to do this, why wouldn't they? People seem so scared of change or too lazy to make the effort to simply try something new that they miss great opportunities like this one -- things that could be better in the long run for both the homeowners and the environment! This is the most I've really heard about homes being built like this and I think there should definitely be a bigger market for them. Little steps like this is will help to save and preserve the world we live in today.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/26/business/energy-environment/26smart.html?pagewanted=1&ref=business&src=me

(Published September 25, 2010)

NY Times: For the Unemployed Over 50, Fears of Never Working Again

Because of the economic collapse, people in their 50s who lost their jobs when the economy went downhill are having an extremely hard time trying to find jobs now -- people who have college education and have been in the work force for decades and in need of a job to pay for their retirement. After 14.9 million people were left unemployed due to the recession, 2.2 million being over 55, it is hard for anyone to get a job. However, companies are most likely going to choose a younger applicant with up to date technological skills rather than an older individual who is "rusty" after working with the same company for years, which, who could blame them? But still, it's not fair that after so many years in the workforce, it's nearly impossible to get back into it -- just because they are older than the young, new, fresh workers, they still need jobs and money, too!

(Published September 20, 2010)

NY Times: Still Few Women in Management

The article, "Still Few Women in Management" in the NY Times discusses the difference in wages between female workers and male workers, particularly manger positions, where women on average earn about 80 cents on every dollar a male manager makes. A report commissioned by the Joint Economic Council of Congress made a comparison between men and women "in a specific industry and in similar jobs, and also controlling for differences like education levels and age. On average, female managers had less education, were younger and were more likely to be working part time than their male counterparts." Although the gender gap has narrowed slightly over the last decade, female managers still earn less, especially when they are married and/ or have children. However, men lost the most jobs during the recession because of the types of industries they worked in. Although this has been an ongoing, obvious issue for as long as women have been in the work force, it still appalls me that with how advanced our society has become and how educated women are now, that they still are paid less than a man when doing the same exact job. They could be doing it a hundred times better than the man with the same position, but because of the simple fact that they are a woman, they are paid less. It's gross and for a country that is supposed to be equal and fair and full of rights, this situation does not seem fair or equal or right. This is 2010, not the early 1900s -- time to get with the program and make a change already! Women bare the children that grow up to make our nation what it is -- they should have more equal rights than anyone.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/business/28gender.html?_r=1&hp

(Published September 27, 2010)

The Need/Want Campaign

So for my project on addressing a social issue using DIY (Do It Yourself) and guerilla tactics, I wanted to raise awareness of materialism in the United States in contrast to other countries. After much brainstorming, research, and inspiration, I chose to design labels to be tagged on winter coats... winter coats to target a "right now" issue -- as the winter months are creeping up on us, more fortunate people are going to begin winter clothes and coat shopping (for things they may or may not need) while the less fortunate people will suffer the colder elements (because they don't have the means to keep warm). These tags will hopefully convince people (who really, actually don't need them) to not to buy the coats and to donate one regardless if they bought it or not. I hope this will make people adjust, even if only some, of their materialistic ways, and want to help in other ways as well. The tags read: "Do you really need this? The money you might spend on this coat could give 20 coats to needy children in Afghanistan. Think about it. Already have one? Donate one! NeedWantCampaign.blogspot.com. The blog that people are directed to has statistics, quotes, insight, and ways that they can make a difference, hopefully getting into their heads and hearts. Change happens one step at a time and every individual person really can make a difference. I want my project to make people want to be that change and make that difference.

My friend Alex and I went to the mall (Nordstrom, Macys, and Eddie Bauer) and Target. We took coats into the dressing room where we tagged coats (ranging from $99- about $250) and put them back onto the racks, usually putting them in the front of the rack. We pinned the tags either on the actual tag on the inside of the coat or next to the actual tag which usually hung from the sleeve of the coat. The tags, made with brown cardstock, green ink, hemp string, and small black safety pins, blended in well enough for the store employees not to notice anything out of the ordinary, but to catch the buyers' eyes. It was definitely a rush but so much fun and so worth it! (Hopefully I don't somehow get caught and get in trouble for it! But, "if you ask, they'll most likely say no!) :) Either way, it was worth it and I really hope it helps get my message out there and gets people to want to help, too!

My computer's acting funny so no pictures uploaded yet, but I'll definitely be putting pictures of the evidence up asap!

Cordaid People in Need Campaign

"Cordaid, which is involved in helping the most vulnerable groups in society, particularly adults and children struggling in the face of discrimination or exclusion, has launched this print advertisement campaign draw people’s attention. The campaign aims at making people aware about the misery of poor people in Africa while comparing it with the luxurious spending elsewhere in the world. At the same time campaign is urging people to make donation to help those poor people. The campaign clearly shows the worth of money for them. The advertisements are showing underprivileged people with their problems while holding luxurious articles in order to emphasize their fundamental needs of which they are deprived."

"The campaign has adopted a sharp approach to present the idea in order to penetrate into the minds of people. Moreover, giving luxurious articles in the hands of underprivileged person was definitely a good idea to show a clear cut demarcation of privileged ones and under privileged ones. The campaign was created by Saatchi & Saatchi, Netherlands. The campaign was also chosen as winner in Cannes 2007 Outdoor category." (http://www.adpunch.org/entry/people-in-need/)

For some reason my computer won't let me upload the advertisement, but go to http://trendsupdates.com/cordaid-ad-campaign-trying-to-make-big-spenders-guilty-to-gain-aid

I found this after creating my campaign and clothing labels which got me even more hyped up for my project and gave me hope that it really can make a change! The Cordaid People in Need Campaign is definitely based around the same idea as my Need/Want Campaign and my coat labels... making consumers feel guilty for their unnecessary spending, comparing it to what could be bought with the money they would be using on unimportant materialistic items, and giving them a way to help! I think this is way too cool! Guerilla tactic? I'd say so.

Human Rights?

"Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent and indivisible." (http://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/Pages/WhatareHumanRights.aspx)

NY Times: Iran Lifts Sentence of Stoning For Woman 9/9/10

An Iranian woman was accused of adultery and the murder of her husband. She was originally sentenced to death by stoning and although this sentence was halted by the government, she was still facing accusations of murder followed by a possible death sentence or prison term. There was a tape found of the woman confessing to having a part in her husband's death, however, human rights groups "condemned the broadcast, and [her] lawyers said she agreed to appear in [the video] only after being tortured in prison." Human rights is a pretty obvious social issue. Although I find this article appalling, it really doesn't surprise me at all the wa other governments and countries treat criminal cases, especially pertaining to accusations made against a woman in a foreign country. Not only does it make me even MORE grateful to be an American, but it makes opens my eyes to how unfairly people are treated under other governments in other countries and that human rights aren't really human rights at all in some countries. I don't think many people are aware of this issue, too consumed in their (our) undeniable priveleges that come with being Americans. 

Google Instant: "The Third Half of Your Brain!"

NY Times: Google Unveils Tool to Speed Up Searches 9/9/10

Google has introduced "Google Instant," which "predicts internet search queries and shows results as soon as someone begins to type." They say they want to make Google "the third half of your brain." Although there are some glitches in the new addition to the search engine, the tool is supposed to cumulatively save us more than 3.5 billion seconds each day and it is supposed to be more convenient as results can be adjusted as new search words are listed. This invention reminded me of the never ending process of design -- we always need to be brainstorming, inventing, and creating new concepts, processes, designs, and products as the times change and as people's (and the environment's) needs change. These days, time is money, and the invention and innovation of new, better, more practical products is an ongoing project. 

Materialism

Materialism. We all know what it is and as Americans, I think it's pretty safe to say we are all undeniably guilty of it. Obsession and greed definitely play a huge role in this. As children in other countries don't have clean water to drink, enough food to eat, books to learn from, and shoes for their feet, we are, individually, splurging thousands and thousands of dollars each year on updating our cell phones and iPods, shopping for the latest, most trendy clothes and shoes, or the fastest, "cutest" car, most of which are eventually just thrown away (most of it just piling up in landfills, only destroying the Earth more than it already did during the creation of the darn thing) so we can move on to the next "coolest" thing. And that's just what they all are - things, stuff, completely unimportant and insignificant to the whole of our lives. And for what? Because we have the means to buy this stuff, because we are greedy and selfish and blinded to the reality of it all. While some people are sitting in their luxuriously furnished living rooms with their feet propped up watching their 72" plasma screen TV, texting their friends on their iTouch cell phone, surfing the web on their laptops, wearing their name brand clothes, all while eating a fat sandwich, families are starving, catching diseases, and dying because they literally don't have the means to SURVIVE. But what do we care? We have everything we need, want, and more, so who cares what's happening to anyone else around us or thousands of miles away? I think you're probably getting the picture. Now I'm not saying all of this as if I'm some saint who does no wrong and helps everybody, because I'm just as guilty of all of this as the next person. Materialism is like a disease -- it's contagious, it spreads fast, and it's hard to stop. But to make our world a better place, materialism seriously has got to be controlled in some way, or at least more awareness of the situation needs to be made in some way. Something that really gets put in someone's face to make them feel guilty about it and their careless, selfish ways. Something that might really engrave this problem into people's heads, even if only SOME people, that really might make them change their "materialistic ways" in some manner... every effort, and every person really can lead to a change. I think I have some ideas of how to bring about this social problem...
Think about this: At least 80% of the human population lives on less than $10 a day.

NY Times: For President and Predecessor, A Chill Returns

Embarrassingly, I'm definitely not as aware of everything going on in our government and with the President as I should be, but I did find a little article involving this topic that caught my interest. The article touched on how when Presidents leave office, it is then that they become friends with their predecessors, but not much until this time. President Obama, and former President George W. Bush have hardly had contact since Obama has taken over the presidency. They clearly have different views and standings on different issues given the politics at the moment-- particularly the war in Iraq. Obama insinuated that he "inherited two unfinished wars and an economy in grave recession" -- not exactly a "subtle dig" at Mr. Bush. The article ended with a statement that there is a "mechanism for using someone who has been there, and can help them," which is definitely true, so perhaps President Obama and Mr. Bush will one day become friends, however, with the current political standings, this probably will not be the case for some time coming. I think this is the case for so many other issues and situations in the world today, that we could use people who have "been there, done that" as a tool for making the situation better, whether by learning from their mistakes, correcting them, and making the situation better, or by going to them for support and advice as they have been through it all before. I think many times we are just too stubborn or too proud to do this. But why? If someone really is wiser and more experienced with a topic or situation, why not use that person as a resource?

NY Times: Child's Ordeal Shows Risks of Antipsychotic Drugs for Very Young

On Thursday, September 2nd, the New York Times published an article about a young boy who had been prescribed anti psychotic drugs since he was 18 months old for his "severe temper tantrums," attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, bipolar disorder, and sleeping medicines. The mother herself even said that she felt like she didn't have her son anymore -- that she would look into his eyes and just see blankness. Not only was he practically sedated all the time, but he gained weight as a side effect of the medicines. His mother also admitted that she simply couldn't handle her son and that she was at her "wit's end" -- unprepared for motherhood at the age of 22. This to me is absolutely appalling and disgusting. As a topic discussed in class on social issues, I personally think this is complete negligence to personal responsibility. His mother chose a poor, selfish decision as a parent to resort to giving her infant drugs rather than simply just giving him the attention that psychologists and counselors later say was all he needed and craved. It makes you wonder what the heck the doctors, pediatricians, and his mother were even thinking to find it in any way acceptable to give a BABY medications that in most cases only strictly adults should be taking. It makes me question health regulations, the personal responsibility of all "professionals" involved in the prescribing of these hardcore medications to an innocent infant who really only needed more attention and care from his mother -- something he should have been getting in the first place. Thankfully, through a therapy program called Early Childhood Supports and Services, he was able to be weened off of the drugs by the age of six. Makes me question a lot about our medical and health care.

Link to a video on this article:
http://video.nytimes.com/video/2010/09/01/business/1248068952581/medicating-children.html?src=tp

Geurilla or Gorilla?

So I know Wikipedia isn't a credible source, but I feel like it's definition of geurilla marketing made the most sense to me:

"The concept of guerrilla marketing was invented as an unconventional system of promotions that relies on time, energy and imagination rather than a big marketing budget. Typically, guerrilla marketing campaigns are unexpected and unconventional; potentially interactive, and consumers are targeted in unexpected places. The objective of guerrilla marketing is to create a unique, engaging and thought-provoking concept to generate buzz, and consequently turn viral." This idea is derived from geurilla warfare.

From an article titled "Geurilla Tactics: Not Just for War," the concept of geurilla tactics is described as "working with less to achieve the same results as if you had more resources" and that it "has become something more than violence between opposing groups. It is now often being used as a tactic in public relations, marketing and even art."
http://abrushwithpr.wordpress.com/2008/10/07/guerrilla-tactics-not-just-for-war/

Some of my classmates described geurilla tactics as invasive and "in your face" -- that it is a powerful/forceful method to get people to change their mind about an issue.

Different things that I find to be really disturbing social issues that I might want to interpret using geurilla tactics include: racial discrimination, poverty/homelessness, gender inequality -- particularly the unfair treatment of women STILL to this day. Still stirring around ideas but I'll post them as they come!
The Geurilla Girls, who feel women and minorities are discriminated against in art museums, art galleries, and film, demonstrate their issue in a very invasive, effective, creative way.

Thoughts about What I've Read...

So, when we were first assigned the five readings as a part of the introduction to the class, I thought, "oh boyyy." But, the readings really did end up catching my interest and made me want to dive into the class even more. I feel like a nerd, but it really is making me get more excited about the topic of Social Design as a whole. Do Good Design, which talked about how designs should be functional and practical for the issues of today, rather just look pretty -- these designs should serve a purpose (like the new, much more functional emergency signs in the German airport which might actually save lives if it were to go up in flames again). The author made it a clear, apparent point that as designers, WE have to take responsibility for what we make. Max Bill said 90% of a designers efforts should go toward making the design work, while only 10% should go toward making it look good. Might sound silly to some, but shouldn't the main purpose of a design be it's functionality? Min Wang described "good design" as "conducive to the planet and humanity and that is aesthetic and benevolent." I couldn't agree more. The reading also stressed that "creativity can defeat habit" aka creating design to better the world and referring back to the statement that designers have more power than they think -- that their designs CAN make a difference and a change in the world. *"Designers have an essential social responsibility because design is at the core of the world's largest challenges and solutions." Before reading these articles and looking deeper into what social design is, I hadn't viewed designers in this way. One of our biggest challenges today is creating a sustainable future. Designers, Visionaries, and Other Short Stories discusses how design is a "needed, necessary, and valuable process of invention and innovation with the potential to take us to a sustainable society." Potential as in we need to WORK toward making this a reality or it's only going to get worse, and absolutely not better. As human behavior is the reason for all production and consumption, sustainability is (clearly) a challenge -- a design issue for design activists. Which, leads to Design Activism. If only all designers were activists -- using their power of design to better humankind and nature, leading us to a better, healthier, sustainable future. Two quotes that really stuck with me, one from Massive Change and one from Cradle to Cradle are that change is "not about the world of design, it's about the design of the world," and that "design is a signal of intention." It's what we intend to get out of our designs, whether we want it to just sit and look pretty, or if we want it to be stronger than that and have a purpose, to create a possible change in the world, or change the minds of people who could contribute to a positive change in the world. And that ultimately, responsibility for these designs is taken by the designers, because just as we are responsible for our actions, we should be responsible for the affect that our designs have on the world. Personally, I'd rather design and create something that means more than just it's aesthetic value -- even something as small but potentially worldly effective as Michael's idea of recyclable shoes! I think in this case, the possibilities really are endless!