The “Safe Campus” Act has been met with significant criticism since it was introduced into Congress this summer. There are a few troubling aspects to the proposed legislation, but one in particularly really stands out: unless rape victims report their assaults to the police, the school isn’t allowed to investigate them, or levy any sort of action against the accused. This bill was supported by much of national Greek Life–both the North-American Interfraternity Conference and the National Panhellenic Conference were on board. But one sorority–Alpha Phi–just broke from the NPC to say it doesn’t endorse the deeply problematic bill.

Alpha Phi released a statement obtained by the Huffington Post today that outlined the organization’s views on the bill. It explained:

We are writing at the request of many of our members and chapters to clarify Alpha Phi’s position on the 2015 Safe Campus and Fair Campus Acts which have been endorsed by the National Panhellenic Conference. Alpha Phi has not endorsed this legislation and has not committed to any financial support.

Additionally, Alpha Phi explained its position further, saying:

We believe our sisters who are survivors should have choices in how, when and to whom they go to for support or to report the crime. They should have their own voice and the support and encouragement they need to move forward including reporting as they choose to.

The issue critics have with the Safe Campus Act isn’t necessarily that police shouldn’t be the ones looking into a crime. Rather, the act would hamstring universities’ abilities to take any actions. Given that police investigations and convictions can take years, groups that oppose the act are arguing that a school should be able to work in the meantime to provide a safe environment for its students.

Additionally, requiring victims of rape to report their assaults to the police opens up a whole new set of issues–including the fact that rape victims often aren’t treated with respect or dignity. Dana Bolger, co-founder of Know Your IX, an advocacy group, explains:

Many survivors of color, who experience police surveillance and brutality every day, don’t want to go to the very people who have been agents of violence against them. And for male survivors and survivors assaulted by someone of the same sex, reporting to the police won’t do anything: Many states still don’t recognize rape against people of the same gender, or against men, as rape at all.

There are other arguments against the Safe Campus Act as well–for example, many other crimes (drug possession, alcohol violations, etc) are able to be handled with schools without involving the police.

It’s unclear exactly which reasons motivated Alpha Phi to clarify its position on the bill, but the organization’s executive director, Linda Kahangi explained:

Many of our members — both collegians and alumnae — had expressed concern that NPC’s endorsement of these two bills implied that Alpha Phi had endorsed them. We wanted to clarify to them that we had not.

It’s an important clarification, and will hopefully cause some of the other Greek Life fraternities and sororities under these umbrella organizations to question their involvement as well. While making campuses safe for all is a great goal, the Safe Campus Act falls too far short to fit the bill.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Alpha Phi Breaks From National Greek Life Organizations on “Safe Campus” Bill appeared first on Law Street.

Earlier this month the CNN/Multichoice Africa Journalists Awards were held in Nairobi, Kenya, featuring special guest Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta. Although his arrival was not so punctual, he made up for his tardiness by giving a “very frank” opening remark about how news in Africa is being reported by both local and international media.

Reporter for The Nation Nigeria, Lekan Otufodunrin, attended the event and commented on the African leader’s candor. “Expectedly, he lamented the emphasis on negative reports with not much attention being paid to some positive developments on the continent,” Otufodunrin recounted. Otufodunrin also discussed the obligation that African media forums have to share negative stories in addition to positive stories, to ensure that African leaders work hard to make a better standard of living for African citizens.

However, as Kenyatta noted, this multi-faceted obligation is not similarly shared by international media outlets, which consistently depict Africa as a dark hole, composed of corrupt leaders, violence, and general dysfunction. For example, this recent article by the Associated Press discusses the need for more food in southern Africa, reporting significant droughts and subsequent severe poverty. This article supports the idea that Africa is so dysfunctional that not only can it not support its people, but it can’t even address the issue at all. However, in contrast, Kenyatta pointed out that “child mortality rates fell by an average of forty percent in Africa in the period under review,” a fact that didn’t receive the same type of international recognition. By only consistently reporting on negative events, many international media outlets fail to highlight not only the growth that is happening in this part of the world, but the natural beauty and culture that is already established within the many different African nations.

“Why exaggerate African failure? Why ignore African success?” Kenyatta questioned. His questions are beyond valid. Why are stories of African growth and success so far and few between in international media? International media forums create a skewed perception of Africa to members of their audiences, which creates a domino effect perpetuating racism and violence rooted in ignorance.

International media also fails to differentiate the different countries in Africa, sometimes making it seem like Africa is just one country. For example, CNN recently published an article entitled “Mall the Merrier: Africa’s Growing Appetite for Shopping,” in which a cultural shift in capitalism in Africa is assumed to be the same in all African countries.  This dynamic established by international media takes away from what makes Africa such an incredible addition to the global community. Each African country has its own distinct culture and people, making the continent incredibly diverse. A change in the international media’s depiction of Africa is going to have to start on a national level, within African media forums. Once those media forums begin celebrating the success and growth within their country, it will influence a different depiction of Africa on an international level.

Kui Mwai

Kui Mwai is a junior at American University, studying Law and Literature. She is from Nairobi, Kenya. Contact Kui at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Reporting in Africa: President Uhuru Kenyatta Explains How We Can All Do Better appeared first on Law Street.

Periscope, a new live-streaming application, was launched less than a month ago, but it’s already making headlines with celebrities and ordinary people alike broadcasting their daily activities and conversing in real time. Live streaming is not a novel concept, but it might be the next big thing in the social media world. As people are ready to embrace this new way of interacting, “periscoping” may soon become a daily activity for many people across the globe. Read on to learn more about Periscope and what live-streaming applications can bring to the table.

What is Periscope?

Periscope is part of the next generation of social media applications that are based on real-time interactions. Acquired by Twitter for nearly $100 million and launched on March 26, 2015, the tool seems to be on the rise.

How was Periscope created? 

Periscope started two years ago when CEO and co-founder Kayvon Beykpour was traveling to Istanbul, Turkey. The protests in Taksim Square, near the hotel in which Beykpour was supposed to stay, became violent; however he couldn’t find any meaningful information on the web about the extent of that violence. Thus, the idea for Periscope was born. He had an urgent need to see the protests in real time, but there was no social platform to do so. Periscope has already demonstrated its abilities to capture events in real time, including live streaming protests in Ferguson, Missouri, and capturing the fires in San Francisco’s Mission District and New York’s Lower East Side.

How does Periscope work?

Periscope is an IOS application that can live stream what you see at any given moment. It can essentially broadcast your every move if you wish. People are already using it in a variety of ways, including artistically, conducting Q&As, walking around a city, talking, or just showcasing their everyday activities. The app also has a way to interact with those who are watching, all in real time. Viewers can choose to ask questions or leave comments that are shown through a trace of messages on the screen, like a live feed. Engagement can also be demonstrated through hearts that viewers can create by tapping the screen as many times as they like. This feature shows viewers’ level of engagement and interest–the more hearts that are tapped, the stronger the viewers’ levels of satisfaction and excitement are.

Unlike other live-streaming apps, Periscope lets you save your broadcasts for a certain period of time, which enables viewers to play back what they’ve already seen. The app also allows viewers to invite their followers to watch a live steam together.

Some users of Periscope report a need for certain technical updates, such as better search features, better browsing, and a better notification system. The developers have already fixed the issue of the “zoomable map” that could pinpoint a person’s location when live streaming, and are continuing to work on other improvements.

Watch the video below to learn more about Periscope from BeyKpour who speaks about his idea and the app’s capabilities.

Is Periscope the first live-streaming app? 

All in all, progressive technological advances constantly change the world of social media interactions and online communication. Facebook was launched in 2004 and forever changed the way people communicate online. Twitter followed in 2006. Both companies have continued to expand by acquiring photo and video-oriented social media platforms; Facebook acquired Instagram, while Twitter bought Vine. Now, new advances are under way and live-streaming applications may be the next big thing.

History of Live-Streaming Apps

Periscope is not the first application to allow users to live stream their experiences. Live streaming has been around since the 1990s when video recording and instant messaging became the big thing. The reason why Periscope is making  waves right now is because live streaming has moved into the mainstream, and people are more comfortable revealing information about themselves.

Even before the idea of Periscope was born there were an abundance of applications that could be described as under the live-streaming umbrella. UStream was founded in 2007 and provides free video-streaming services as well as paid ProBroadcasting options. YouNow, launched in 2011, allows live broadcasting. Justin.TV has been around for several years and just recently was renamed Twitch Interactive, a new platform to broadcast video games or any gaming-related content. Livestream is another app that lets users broadcast and watch live events.

Meerkat

Meerkat is a live-streaming application that was launched on February 27, 2015–one month prior to Periscope. In this regard, Meerkat can be considered the first “new generation” live-streaming app. The application really made its debut last month at SXSW in Austin, Texas. A number of performers were “meerkating,” aka live-streaming their shows, which greatly promoted the app. Meerkat is a real competitor of Periscope as both apps are brand new, well designed, and easy to use. Unlike Periscope, however, Meerkat doesn’t provide an option to save broadcasts–all of its live streams are instant and cannot be replayed.

Watch the video below to learn more about Meerkat from its founder, Ben Ruben.

What are the concerns with using live-streaming apps?

Live streaming applications such as Periscope and Meerkat raise certain concerns, including the infringement of privacy, intellectual property rights, and harassment and cyber bullying.

Infringement of Privacy

Clearly, live streaming can invade peoples’ privacy. If you are in a public space, anybody can live stream you, revealing your activities and location. The fact that one may not wish to be live streamed is irrelevant as there are no real remedies for it. Generally, when people are in public places they don’t expect privacy, but with live streaming, the invasion of privacy becomes more pervasive and inescapable. People can be streamed without their permission or knowledge.

Celebrities and politicians have even greater privacy concerns, as Periscope can provide users with the instant ability to live stream public figures if spotted on the street or in any other public place. It could completely transform the way famous people maintain their images and market themselves.

Intellectual Property Rights

Intellectual property rights generally protect people’s creations, whether they are in the form of music, design, photography, performance, or any other artistic expression. Intellectual property rights include trademark and copyright laws.

Live streaming is an immediate recording of something that is happening at any given moment, and therefore doesn’t require downloads or saving a copy of one’s broadcast. This leads to confusion as to how to apply existing copyright laws to the new generation of apps that can live stream certain content. In their terms of use, both Meerkat and Periscope state that users are prohibited from exploiting third-party copyrights and trademarks in their live recordings. In addition, under United States copyright laws, it’s illegal to reproduce, distribute, display, or perform a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder.

As of now, live streaming is subject to the same laws that protect any copyrighted video, song, or photographic content. If one live streams, he distributes the content of his broadcast to an unknown amount of users and reproduces it at the same time. This can potentially infringe on artists’, publishers’, and labels’ copyrights if the content is copyrighted on the first place.

Simply put, if you live stream at a concert or sporting event, you could violate copyright laws, public performance laws, and exclusive rights of broadcasting stations to live stream an event. Most of the time concert venues and sport leagues clearly state on admission tickets their policies regarding video recording or streaming of the event. Not only can this violate the right of the artist to solely profit from her performance, but in the case of sporting events, can infringe on intellectual property rights of leagues and pay-per-view (PPV) producers. In addition, major television providers spend millions of dollars to obtain exclusive rights to broadcast games and other major events. Record labels’ performance rights can be easily infringed as well by live streaming sound recordings at shows.

It’s possible that live streaming performances and sporting events can also violate reproduction and distribution rights of copyright holders. As Periscope archives users’ live streams for 24 hours, it can potentially infringe on reproduction rights if the saved content is considered intellectual property.

Harassment and Cyberbullying

Using social media can perpetuate harassment and bullying. Generally, every social media platform has rules and protocols that prohibit pornographic or overly sexual content, as well as content that can incite violent, illegal, or dangerous activities. Periscope is not an exception–its community guidelines are crafted to prevent sexual comments and online harassment of any sort. However, the new app is still struggling with enforcing these rules as its instant messages are bursting with sexually explicit communications. It was reported that many female users have been sexually harassed while live streaming.

As Periscope exposes more intimate moments of people’s lives, the dangers of using this technology may become greater than those of other social media. The difficulty can be seen in its live feed, which vanishes in a matter of seconds–how can this dissipating content be reviewed? Private broadcasting settings are another worry as those can appeal to people who operate sex cameras or conduct other illegal activities.

Periscope is a very new app so there are expectations for future updates and technical improvements. The company has acknowledged the need to find a better solution for moderating users’ content, and is working now on a new feature that will allow for the easy and instant blockage of undesirable users.

What changes can live-streaming apps bring to our lives?

With live-streaming applications on millions of smartphones around the globe, changes in media coverage, politics, and advertising are imminent. But the biggest change may be manifested in a completely new kind of online interaction. With Periscope and other live-streaming applications, it will be easier to reconnect with families, and share happy moments such as weddings, birthdays, and graduations all in real time.

Live streaming can revolutionize news reporting by giving media outlets the opportunity to produce real-time news. At the same time, live streaming will create challenges for reporters as events and stories unfold instantly, journalists will have to adapt to the ever-changing dynamics of live-streaming reporting.

The advertising industry will greatly benefit from live-streaming apps, as well as experience difficulties in using such apps for marketing purposes. Live streaming can bring brands closer to customers, provide unbiased and instant feedback about products, and help to promote transparency in companies’ practices. On the other hand, brands that decide to live stream for the purposes of promoting their products may be overwhelmed by the amount of people they will need to alert about their live-broadcasting. Companies will need to make sure that every person featured in live streaming intended for commercial purposes has signed a release, otherwise the brand can be sued for violating personal rights.

The world of politics is about to change, too. Political campaigns can be live streamed, providing instant access to candidates’ everyday activities and all sorts of political events. Labor Secretary Tom Perez and Senator and presidential candidate Rand Paul are already using Meerkat and Periscope to live stream their political endeavors. Some financial and structural constraints of political campaigns may be diminished as live streaming is a free and easy-to-use platform that provides instant access to millions of voters.

Conclusion

Humanity seemingly has no other choice but to embrace new technology and welcome a new generation of social media apps based on live streaming. But as technology evolves so should our laws. There is an urgent need to rethink and reevaluate current laws pertaining to intellectual property rights and synchronize them with technological advances. There is also a need to create better ways to protect individuals from bullying and women from sexual harassment on the web. Media outlets, record labels, and sports leagues should also embrace new technologies. Consumers should be ready for a closer engagement with brands. Meerkat may have started the revolution, but Periscope made a mind-blowing breakthrough. We’ll have to wait and see what’s next when it comes to live streaming.

Resources

Primary

U.S. Copyright Office: Promoting Investment and Protecting Commerce Online: The ART Act, the NET Act, and Illegal Streaming

Additional

Australian Business Review: Periscope: Will the Live-Streaming App Be the Next Big Thing?

ABC News: Periscope, Meerkat, YouNow: Which Live Streaming App is Right For You

BBC News: Periscope: Anglesey Man Behind Video Streaming App

Billboard: The Meerkat Minefield: Legal Issues With Live-Streaming Apps

CBS: Periscope, Meerkat Threaten Multi-Billion Dollar Sports Broadcast Copyrights

Columbia Journalism Review: How Social Media Livestreams Will Impact Political Journalism

Customer Think: As Twitter Acquires Periscope, Live Video Streaming Apps Will Transform Social Media Marketing in the Second Half of 2015

DailyMail: New Live Streaming App Periscope is Already on Its Way to Becoming a Parent’s Worst Nightmare

Fast Company: Streaming Video on Periscope Just Got Way Less Creepy

Graham Cluley: Periscope Raises Privacy Concerns

Guardian: Periscope Up! Twitter’s Live-streaming App is Exciting Us, But Here’s How it Could Be Better

Huffington Post: Why You Should Care About Periscope, Twitter’s New Live-Streaming App

Huffington Post: What Does Periscope’s Live Mobile Streaming Mean to Media?

IT Business: Up Periscope, Down Privacy? Twitter’s Live Streaming Service Bound to Cause Controversy

Kerry O’Shea Gorgone: Meerkat, Periscope, Privacy and the Law: Is Live-Streaming Video Legal?

Legal Zoom: Copyright Law on Streaming PPV Events

MIT Technology Review: Broadcast Every Little Drama

New York Business Journal: Down Periscope: MLB  Set to Crack Down on Live Streaming From the Bleacher

The New York Times: As Twitter Introduces Periscope, Tech Titans Bet on Live Streaming Video

Providence Journal: So Social: Meerkat, Periscope Make it Easy to Live Stream From iPhone

Verge: Periscope, Twitter’s Answer to Meerkat-Style Live Streaming, is Now Available

Wired: Twitter’s Periscope App Lets You Livestream Your World

Valeriya Metla

Valeriya Metla is a young professional, passionate about international relations, immigration issues, and social and criminal justice. She holds two Bachelor Degrees in regional studies and international criminal justice. Contact Valeriya at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Periscope & Meerkat: Live Streaming is the Latest Social Media Development appeared first on Law Street.

The FBI released its Preliminary Semiannual Uniform Crime Report last week indicating that violent crime in the United States is down 4.6 percent overall. The report, which marks the first FBI statistics for the 2014 calendar year, compares crime levels from January to June to the same period in 2013. The charts below highlight five important takeaways from the FBI’s report. Click here to read Law how the Top 10 Safest and Most Dangerous Cities fared with the latest data.

1. Crime is Down… Again

Despite a slight uptick in 2012, violent crime levels have been decreasing for years, and the preliminary numbers for 2014 are no exception. Overall violent crime was down 4.6 percent in the first six months of last year relative to the first six months of 2013. This downward trend in violent crime is not limited to the first six months of the year; annual statistics have shown a decrease in violent crime in six of the last seven years. The full year statistics for 2013 indicate that violent crime was down 18 percent when compared to the level in 2000.

The chart below details the change in violent crime from January to June for the past seven years. Note: each bar represents a percent change relative to the first six months of the previous year.

2. Better Data on Rape in America

Starting January 1, 2013, the FBI began using a new definition of rape to make the measure more inclusive and as a result more representative of the crimes that occur. Due to the nature of the UCR program, where cities and states voluntarily report their crime statistics to the FBI, it is up to individual law enforcement agencies set a time frame for adopting new procedures. It typically takes several years before a change in the reporting system is universally adapted by reporting agencies.

The preliminary semiannual report only includes agencies with three to six months of comparable data in two consecutive years. This means that the report does not cover the details of every agency in the United States, particularly agencies that recently transitioned to the new rape definition in 2014, as comparable data is not available. A better understanding of how many agencies use the new definition we be available once all full-year data for 2014 is submitted to the FBI.

The chart below indicates the total number of agencies that report using the revised and legacy definitions of rape as well as the the share of the population that they cover. Note: because this graphic is only based on agencies included in the recent report, the total number of agencies and total population is lower than it would be for the entire United States.

3. Violent Crime Fell Across Nearly All Categories

With the exception of the legacy definition of rape as discussed above, crime numbers decreased for every category of violent crime. The number of robberies experienced the steepest decline, falling more than ten percent relative to the first six months of 2013. Agencies using the revised definition of rape also had a significant decrease, though those numbers only cover about 55 percent of the population in this report. The total number of murders also had a notable decrease, going down six percent or more for the second year in a row.

4. Midwestern Crime is Dropping Faster Than the Rest of the Nation

According to the recent FBI report, violent crime decreased in every region during the first six months of 2014. The Midwest saw the largest decline at -7.6 percent, followed by the Northeast at -6.6 percent, then the South at -3 percent, ending with the West at -2.7 percent. The chart below indicates the regions defined by the FBI and the change in their violent crime levels.

Source: FBI Preliminary Semiannual Uniform Crime Report 2014, Table 2

5. Crime Dropped Across Every Population Group

The recent FBI report indicates that violent crime went down in every single population grouping. Led by cities with populations of 10,000 people or fewer, which saw a 6.7 percent decrease in overall violent crime and a 17.8 percent drop in murders. The chart below shows the change in violent crime for each of the eight population groupings used by the FBI as well as the number of law enforcement agencies in each grouping and their population coverage.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What You Need to Know About the FBI’s Latest Crime Statistics appeared first on Law Street.