#opinionarticle

In today’s digital age, social media feels like both a lifeline and a trap. I’m not really into Instagram, Twitter, or TikTok like most people my age, but I do enjoy watching YouTube and Netflix or reading stories and novels online. Even if I’m not constantly posting or scrolling through feeds, I still feel the pull of the digital world — the comfort, the distraction, and sometimes, the pressure to stay connected.

For many college students, social media has become more than just a pastime — it’s part of daily life. It helps us stay updated, entertained, and informed. Apps and websites give us access to information, study tips, and even communities that share our interests. In my case, YouTube tutorials and online reading platforms have been a big help, making learning more flexible and fun. It’s amazing how much knowledge and creativity can be found online if you know where to look.

But there’s another side to it. Hours can disappear before you realize it, and sometimes, you end up feeling more drained than relaxed. For others who actively use social media, there’s also the mental weight of comparison — seeing people’s “perfect” lives, grades, or looks and feeling like you don’t measure up. According to research from the American Psychological Association, excessive screen time can lead to higher stress levels, anxiety, and poor sleep, especially among students who rely on digital spaces for both school and leisure.

So, is the online world helping or hurting us? I think it depends on how we use it. Technology itself isn’t bad — in fact, it can open doors to learning and creativity. But when we let it control our time or emotions, it becomes a problem.

It is clear that convervative opinions have gained prominence in the political scene of several countries and influenced the political direction of the world population. In Brazil,  the election of Jair Bolsonaro demonstrated a turning point in brazilian political conduct. After 16 years led by a left-wing political party, the majority of the brazilian population decided to elect a leader with convervative opinions, who is not afraid to appear racist, misogynist and sexist. 

 In the United States, it is also posible to observe a leader with similar thoughts. It is true that each country has different reasons for the rise of conservative opinions, but it is posible to visualize some themes that are recurrent debated and understood as true flags to be defended by theses people. Protection against immigration, national identity, respect for traditional family values and religious beliefs are usually the themes defended. 

In my opinion, there was no increase in the number of people who think conservatively, but the evolution of social networks has enabled people to join their voices to fight for what they believe. In addition, access to information has enabled people to follow the political process more closely.

Eine ausgezeichnete Hintergrundanalyse zu China, den USA und unternehmerischer Habgier.

Countries that are lagging behind upgrade their technologies in many ways, through study, imitation ... and, yes, copying. And with any fast-changing technologies, there are always running battles over intellectual property. That's true even among US companies today ... this kind of competition is simply a part of the global economic system ...

The United States relentlessly adopted British technologies in the early 19th century. And when any country wants to close a technology gap, it recruits know-how from abroad ... If China were a less populous Asian country, say like South Korea, with a little more than 50 million people, it would simply be hailed by the United States as a great development success story - which it is. But because it is so big, China refutes America's pretensions to run the world.

- Jeffrey Sachs -

Someone said to me the other day that people do not change. That we are doomed or blessed to remain as we are throughout the duration of our lives, and that we as humans are only capable of changing externally. As the conversation went on, he also stated that a person is capable of knowing one’sself, and since we lack the ability to change, all we can do is learn to accept ourselves.

It was something that I could not stop thinking about, as my mind battled over the actuality of such statements. Just as it can be painful and uncomfortable to squeeze a size 8 foot into a size 7 shoe, maybe we cannot choose who and what we are, but to say that someone is incapable of change, goes against many ideas about humanity and personal development that I have always held; particularly in regards to emotional intelligence and psyche. To say that we know ourselves at any giving time seems unrealistic, as the way we view everything in life is ever changing.

I think about the way I have viewed myself over the span of my short 27 years, and at many different stages, what I thought I knew of myself has been quite opposing. For instance, at age 17 I thought I was unintelligent, and that my life would purely entail getting married to my tradie boyfriend and having little beach babies, which was fine because I had no personal goals. At age 19 I viewed myself as invincible, that I was confident, strong, courageous and ambitious beyond my years… I even got a tattoo to represent that image! At 23, I fell into deep depression to the point where I tried on numerous occasions to take my own life. I viewed myself as a disappointment, a misfit, like I was nothing but a waste of space, that I would never amount to anything other than to live in the shadow of all those smart enough, brave enough, talented enough, and normal enough to become great. Now here I am, and I have no idea who I am. All I know is what I don’t want to be.

I say all of this because I believe that what we think we know is always based on perception. Unless something is factual - like observing that a lemon is yellow, how can we ever be certain when we are always influenced by our state of mind? I do agree that we can identify personality traits within ourselves, but to say I know myself, or that I know anyone for that matter, is an impossibility. There are so many things that we may not have had the opportunity to learn about ourselves, such as how we would react to certain situations, good or bad, which we haven’t yet encountered. We would also not be human if we did not evolve and learn and adapt to our social, cultural and physical environments. So if we are an entity that is ever adapting, ever evolving, ever absorbing information, ever learning; how can we really know who we are?

In my opinion, pigeon holing and typecasting “what we are” based on our biased negative or positive opinions, is only serving to limit us. It makes us feel as though we are not capable of developing or changing, which presents a rather hopeless existence. I personally feel as though I change with every experience, and with every new thing that enters my mind. I have come leaps and bounds from where I was a few years ago, or a few years before that, and I know that will continue to happen throughout the duration of my life. The difference is making the choice to change and having the desire for more or other. If you feel as though there is something about yourself that you don’t like, find a solution to either change wholly or change it enough to make it better, rather than remaining stagnant. We should all try our best to learn from our mistakes and our losses, cause if we don’t we would make the same mistakes over and over. Similarly, it’s important for us to recognise the value in the things that we accomplish and that bring us happiness. As we go through life making these realisations about the world and aspects of our personality, how can we prevent ourselves from changing?

Today at Flinders Street Station, i saw the new line of Coca Cola designs. In a cheap little fridge, i saw this displayed in a random shop...

I saw blue and pink. And drew conclusions. My friends and I began to discuss gender stereotypes, and how Coca Cola were endorsing traditional roles of 'men' and 'women' through the symbolic nature the colours of pink and blue represent. We began to talk about our future children, and how we would dress them in whatever colours we wanted, and not conform to these ridiculous gender-defining categories. I decided to research Coca Cola's new campaign in a feminist rage and prepared myself to bag the crap out of it, only to realise that our critiques were presupposed.

On research, i discovered that Coca Cola, in an effort to reconnect to teens, has launched a new campaign, 'Colour you Summer', embracing the new season with a new colour range to represent vibrancy and entertainment, rather than focussing on flavour and taste.

This realisation made me rethink my ideas and my feminist state of mind; was i becoming too intense? Overly analytical?

It was simply by coincidence that both pink and blue cans were the only ones displayed at that random store today. But its sheer existence made me get my titties in a twad, causing me to raise issues of gender norms and traditions.

I am proud to be surrounded by a culture where gender prejudices are being challenged in my everyday life, but the innocence of this marketing campaign was completely overlooked by its selective and spontaneous publicity.

I sometimes feel like an amateur feminist when i resort to conclusions without fully understanding what's going on. And although the ideas my friends and I discuss are relevant and stimulating, i often question my views on the world because of my rash-behaviour and it's ability to assume everything is anti-this or anti-that.

With that said, i would rather be a feminist and a look like an idiot every now and then, than without.

The issue of feminism as an exclusive plight for women has come into light since a recent screening of Family Feud. Two questions were asked on the show; firstly, “Name something people think is a womans job” and secondly “name something people think is a man’s job”.

The results for the female question ranged from domestic duties, receptionists, hairdresser and nursing. This caused viewers to react angrily on social media, causing the show to be branded as ‘misogynistic’ and reaffirming that sexism was alive and well in Australian society.

In defence, Network Ten explained that the results are determined by a database of 100 samples, acknowledging that the limited responses are not reflective of ‘all Australians’. However, even if this limited sample base was not reflective of ‘all Australians’, the contestants managed to get all the answers correct.

I decided to explore more on the controversy. I immediately became fired-up for women’s rights after watching the footage, now loaded on the Sydney Morning Heralds official website.

(see link here: http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/family-feud-under-fire-for-misogynistic-question-20141015-116oqg.html )

It was only until the last few seconds of the report that addressed a similar situation occurred for the men. On further research, the majority of online feature articles were female-sympathetic, and restricted highlighting male stereotyping.

‘Family Feud under fire for ‘misogynistic’ question’

‘Family Feud fury over ‘name a woman’s job’ answer’

‘Family Feud Australia Thinks Women’s Jobs are ‘Cleaning’, ‘Dishes’

I WILL EAT YOU

Here is a radio wrap I edited about student opinions on the new dorm construction at Howard University. 

Reporter: Sade Richardson; [email protected]