I think that if this story is entirely accurate, then it is something we must turn our attention to. Nate is right, if it really is a threat then we should be over-prepared than under-prepared. However, if its like the case of the "zombie virus" that turned out to be a hoax last year, then we can dismiss it.

I think this article might be a little bit over sensitive on the homophobia issue, although the argument does make sense to me. However, this article tied more into the rape culture. Schools are more likely trying to prevent the idea that women are just "pretty objects" for boys to look at. When girls dresses inappropriately, it may somewhat distract the boy from his work (a tiny bit), but it ultimately gives him the idea that she's just an object for looking at and having sex with, and the girl isn't seen like an individual with feelings and smarts like she really is. Girls these days seem to be somewhat "expected" to expose a little bit of skin to attract male attention, but too much fuels the concept of "rape culture" at schools, as the boys take the clothing as a gesture that the girl wants to engage in sexual activities.

Daniel: Maybe she thought the notebooks belonged to her children or their friends. As for the yogurt, I can't see any reason why any good parent would bring random food from the street into their home. Not the best example of parenting I've ever heard of. However, this article says something about violence in the world. Kids are exposed to violence at such a young age, that these rivalries form and can grow so much that lives are lost. This could potentially happen not just in the United States, but really anywhere. In order to solve this potential problem, exposing children to less violence would definitely be a solution.

There was one point that did seem reasonable to me, which was "physical violence against men is often minimized or seen as normal." However, it seems that these "men's rights activists" are probably just making a miserable attempt to distract people from the feminist movement. Whoever these men are, they are most likely upset that women are now taking an important role in our society, and are gaining the same rights as men are (although in many cases we can still see sexism against women taking place around the world).

http://www.gallup.com/poll/162803/americans-say-religion-losing-influence.aspx

This article discusses how us Americans are slowly getting rid of the influence of religion in our society. Is this entirely true? Can this article really accurately represent the opinions of Americans around the nation? If true, is this necessarily a good thing? What do you think of the article?

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-05-25/news/sns-rt-us-usa-arizona-sheriffbre94n0y3-20130524_1_toughest-sheriff-cecillia-wang-saturation-patrols

This article basically tells the story of a very tough sheriff and how he uses racial profiling to target potential illegal immigrants, and discusses how a judge ruled against him in court. Where else do we still see racial profiling like this today? Is racial profiling likely to cease soon, although we all do have biases in us?

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/20/world/asia/chinese-hackers-resume-attacks-on-us-targets.html

Do you think that cyber-terrorism will eventually become the most prominent way of terrorism? Is this why our dependency on technology needs to be dumbed down?

Although on some occasions students will just forget to read the instructions for the face matching thing and will associate a black male with the word "terrible" on accident, it does a good job at emphasizing the fact that although most of us might think that we are saints as we don't have any racial or gender bias whatsoever, most of us do have at least some sort of a bias toward people of other races or other genders, and we may not even notice. These biases are buried so deep in the subconscious that we never notice, and this test did a good job exposing that.

The stricter regulations did have good intentions, and were bound to be brought to the table after what happened in Boston, although it may have been more annoying for students. However, I've heard from numerous people that these rules that were supposed to be enforced weren't actually enforced at all. Students have said that they were easily able to jump into the race at any point without paying, even when they were carrying backpacks. This is somewhat worrying, luckily nobody who participated had evil intentions, but if someone did, it sounds like anything could have easily taken a turn for the worst.

http://www.wisn.com/news/social-media-helping-lead-investigators-to-deadbeat-parents/-/9373668/19901576/-/item/1/-/8o5iuy/-/index.html

Child support cases are being solved by using Facebook, as investigators can find pictures of dads or family members holding money they "don't have." Should police continue using Facebook as a tool to solve crimes? How well was this article written?

Fighting fire with fire never works. Especially not in this case. Promoting the use of firearms at school in order to stop people bringing them in the first place? That just doesn't make sense. If I had a teacher that kept a firearm in the classroom, it wouldn't make me feel any safer. I would feel a lot safer if there was no gun in the classroom and very tight gun control policies outside the classroom. The money spent on buying the firearms for the teachers or the money spent on having to train them to use the weapon correctly could easily be spent on something with educational value to the students.

It seems like most of us are in agreement that in this scenario, the Tam News made the right decision. It may have just been luck that none of the information in our article was incorrect, but we had enough information from credible enough sources to go for it. However, I also thought that because they took it slow, the Bark's article was more in-depth and generally had a lot more sources and information than we did. So now, the question is, was it better to get it out first or should we have focused more on having a more in-depth article to read?

I agree that most of the added pictures and videos really helps the reader understand the story better, as it allows the reader to picture the story. However, I think that some of it was unnecessary. For example, they would give background information on whatever source they were using, but would sometimes have slideshows depicting parts of the sources' life, and it ended up distracting me from the story a little bit. I think that if the Tam news incorporated this into the website, we would to balance it out, and just have enough pictures and videos to capture the reader's attention.Finally, on the 911 calls, I thought that it was another one of those completely unnecessary things they incorporated in the article. However, whether it's beneficial or not depends on the type of person who's reading the article. I can imagine some people viewing that as a total invasion of privacy while others feel that it helped them understand the story and captivated them even more.