Too weak to stand, a young Sudanese girl crawls toward the center of a clearing, attempting to reach a nearby United Nations feeding center. As she continues to struggle, a vulture lands, his eyes carefully trained on the child. Kevin Carter, a South African photojournalist, witnesses the scene. He reaches for his camera, takes a picture and walks away without ever helping the girl. Carter’s photograph earned him the 1994 Pulitzer Prize for Feature Photography, as well as an outpouring of criticism for his failure to assist the child; however, Carter clearly understood what his persecutors did not: a journalist is a detached-observer who should not, under any circumstances, intervene in the story he or she is covering.

An African village devastated by a flood receives aid from a humanitarian organization; unfortunately, the agency is severely understaffed and cannot provide immediate assistance to all those in need.  A relief-coordinator asks a bystander to deliver medical supplies to the villagers with the worst injuries, which would potentially save lives. Should the bystander help? Ask an average citizen this question and, without hesitation, the answer will most likely be, “Yes, of course.” Ask a journalist, however, and the answer will not be that quick or simple. When determining whether to intervene in the situation, a journalist must first ask himself or herself a series of questions: Is my ability to intervene essential? Will my actions alter the outcome of the story? If I intervene, can I still report the story objectively? The answer to the last question is always no. The moment journalists insert themselves into a story, they compromise the objectivity.

When Kevin Carter’s photograph was first published in The New York Times, there was public outrage. The one question the world seemed to ask was, “How could he not help? How could anyone not help?” In an interview with NPR, Dan Krauss, director of the Oscar-nominated documentary The Death of Kevin Carter: Causality of the Bang Bang Club, explains that “People were very quick to label Kevin Carter a vulture, but they didn’t take the opportunity try to understand the complexity of the situation in the Sudan and the complexity of being a journalist faced with that degree of suffering”. However, Carter’s photograph did more than just enrage audiences; it brought international attention and, subsequently, aid, to the famine-stricken Sudan. Thus, by remembering his journalistic role as a detached-observer, Carter was able to serve humanity on a different level.

After Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast in 2005, journalists flocked to the scene, documenting heartbreaking stories of anguish and despair. For many journalists, the suffering they witnessed was overwhelming, compelling them to set down their notebooks and help by whatever means possible. These journalists thought they were merely assisting people in need, but in actuality they were setting a dangerous precedent for themselves. What happens the next time a similar situation arises? They will feel required to respond in the same way. At what point does a journalist become an activist?

Paul McMasters, the First Amendment ombudsman at the Freedom Forum’s First Amendment Center states, “In the world of journalistic ethics, there are seldom good answers or pat answers,” but in terms of the debate regarding journalists’ roles in events they are covering, there is, in fact, an answer that is both “good” and “pat”…an answer that stands above the rest: a journalist should not, under any circumstances, intervene in the story he or she is covering.

Too weak to stand, a young Sudanese girl crawls toward the center of a clearing, attempting to reach a nearby United Nations feeding center. As she continues to struggle, a vulture lands, his eyes carefully trained on the child. Kevin Carter, a South African photojournalist, witnesses the scene. He reaches for his camera, takes a picture and walks away, preserving the integrity of his profession and becoming a role model for all those who wish to call themselves a journalist.

Ana Billotti - Round Table editor

On Nov. 21, Emma Sullivan, a senior at Shawnee Mission East High School in Kansas tweeted, “Just made mean comments at gov brownback and told him he sucked, in person #heblowsalot.” Thus, Sullivan unknowingly sparked a firestorm about freedom of speech and social media networks.

Sullivan was attending a Youth in Government Program in Topeka, Kansas where Governor Sam Brownback was speaking at when she sent her tweet.

Brownback’s office monitors social media networks for postings that include the governor’s name and when they saw Sullivan’s tweet contacted the youth program coordinator who then contacted Sullivan’s principal.

Sullivan was called into her principal’s office and told that she needed to write an apology to Brownback. But in a strange turn of events, Brownback is now finding himself the one to issue an apology.

“My staff overreacted to this tweet, and for that I apologize. Freedom of speech is among our most treasured freedoms,” said Brownback in a statement released Nov. 28.

Sullivan, who’s followers on Twitter went from 62 to over 15,000 people, has been using the social media site to continue to bring awareness to the topic; tweeting, “I’ve decided not to write the letter but I hope this opens the door for average citizens to voice their opinion & to be heard! #goingstrong.”

This public example of freedom of speech is a great tool to teach others about the protection of their First Amendment rights. In a day and age where anything and everything can be posted for the public to view and comment on, it is important to teach not only teenagers and children, but adults as well about freedom of speech and the use of technology, when it is combined.

Sullivan’s tweet, regardless of how harsh it may sound, is protected under the First Amendment.

Under the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Freedom of speech does not just protect a person when they say something to a person’s face. It means that, like Sullivan, they can tweet an opinion, or post a status and as long as their actions don’t put others in danger their freedom of speech is protected.

Freedom of speech has always come under fire, from freedom of speech in films (Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson; 1952) to preventing a school district from disciplining a high school student for giving a lewd speech at a school assembly (Bethel School Dist. No. 403 v. Fraser; 1986).

Freedom of speech is granted to every citizen in the United States but as society becomes more involved with online social media, freedom of speech is sure to be targeted more frequently.

Sullivan is well within her First Amendment rights and, although she may receive some dislike for what she said, she is protected and allowed to voice her own opinion.

High school students across America should take note about freedom of speech and the use of the internet because it is easier today then it was twenty years ago to get in serious trouble for comments posted online.

Caitlin Ortiz, a college student, got in trouble with her softball coach, in June, after posting a picture of herself and lyrics from Big Sean and Chris Brown’s song, “My Last.” She reportedly lost her scholarship and was kicked off the softball team at her school.

Sullivan, just like Ortiz, is doing the right thing by taking a stand and making a point. Sullivan didn’t do anything wrong, but tweeted her own opinion and yet she got in trouble for it.

Taking a stand and promoting the protection of First Amendment rights is important and it takes strong individuals to do that.

Twitter on Dec. 15 will be holding an event called “Free to Tweet”. They invite students ages 14 to 22 to tweet their support for the First Amendment with the hash tag #freetotweet. This will enter them in a competition to win a $5000 scholarship.                                                                                                         

However, anyone is welcome to tweet and show their gratitude for the first amendment rights and Twitter is already getting big name celebrities to join in, such as, Ke$ha, Blake Shelton and Brad Paisley.

The First Amendment needs to be protected because it is essential to the freedom of every citizen in the country. If it comes to making an individual’s story public to help bring awareness to a cause than that may just need to happen.

As Sullivan tweeted, “”First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” –Gandhi.”

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me; although that phrase has long endured as a symbol of strength, it’s implication that words don’t, and shouldn’t, have an impact on a person is either incredibly naïve or just hopelessly idealistic.

 The truth is that words carry a significant impact and not just in terms of hurt feelings. Words can have different connotations even if they have similar definitions. Consequently, if words are carelessly switched around or substituted, it can result in a change of content.

 The most recent incident that demonstrates the power of words is the alteration of the classic novel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain. Alan Gribben, an English professor at Auburn University Montgomery, and New South Inc. plan to release a revised edition of Twain’s novel that replaces the “n-word” with “slave”. Similarly, the word “Injun” is exchanged for the seemingly less-offensive “Indian”.

 Although the modifications may initially seem harmless, they essentially destroy the novel’s historical impact. Twain was a noted satirist and his excessive use of the “n-word” portrays the hypocrisy of the Deep South and the extent of racism. Even if Twain had not used the word in a satirical manner, it was still an important part of the vocabulary of the time period in which it was written.

 Nevertheless, Gribben decided to edit the The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, currently one of the most banned books in schools, in hopes that schools would re-introduce the novel into the curriculum.

 However, if students are only exposed to the modified version, then they aren’t learning the true characteristic of the south circa late 1800s. Teaching an altered version of Twain’s novel that is free from “offensive” words is just an attempt to ice skate over America’s past which prevents children from learning the truth; history is not pretty.

 Twain himself once said, “The difference between the almost right word & the right word is really a large matter–it’s the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning.”

Has the recent switch from the “right word” to the “almost right” word in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn become the difference between Mark Twain’s novel and something else entirely? Only time will tell.

Does the SAT really matter when it comes to college applications? Is it really a decision factor that will determine if one gets accepted or not?

 Whether Middletown High School students feel that the test is critical for acceptance into college, they still showed determination to succeed, shown by how the MHS SAT scores improved by 32 points in the 2010 results.

 Students in Frederick County scored an average of 519 for the critical reading, 532 for math, and 508 for the writing portions of the SAT. The combined average was 1559.

 Middletown students beat these scores with an average of 542 for critical reading, 551 for math, and 524 for writing. The average combined score was 1617.

 Seventy-four percent of MHS seniors, about 250, took the SAT. Middletown held the highest number of seniors who took the SAT.

 “The SAT was really hard, but I was confident with my scores because I had such great teachers,” says junior Maddie Nissel.

 These scores may seem great, but how do they determine the possibility of acceptance into an institution?

 College admissions counselors claim that they look at applications holistically and that SAT scores are not the most important part of admissions. Over the past few years, the test’s defenders have started to lose ground. About 280 of the nation’s 2,083 four-year colleges and universities make the SAT optional for some or all applicants, according to cnn.com.

 A handful of prestigious colleges, including Franklin and Marshall and Mount Holyoke have joined their ranks since the early ’90s and say they aren’t admitting the SAT as a fault. Hamilton College is also considering making the SAT optional. Countless other schools have de-emphasized the SAT in more subtle ways — continuing to ask for scores but weighing other factors more heavily.

 In Maryland, universities such as Salisbury include the “test-optional” alternative on applications, where the applicants may choose whether they wish to have their scores considered in admission.

 The SAT may be losing popularity amongst colleges but was once very prominent. By looking back at the history of the SAT and the College Board itself, it’s easy to see how the SAT became so accepted.

 Promoted by the College Board, the SAT first became fully adopted by the University of California, then the biggest university in the nation.

 Within a matter of years, as college attendance skyrocketed, many admissions offices came to rely heavily on the standardized SAT scores to help decide among applications.

 However, the popularity of the SAT did not last long. By the 1970s, two arguments emerged.

 The first that drew the most media attention claimed that the test was inherently biased against African Americans and Latinos, who to this day score worse on average than Caucasians. African Americans score about 120 points lower on average than Caucasians.

Anti-testers often explain the racial gap by saying most of the test writers are Caucasian and import cultural biases into the SAT. However, the College Board says SAT questions are always previewed by a large sample of test takers, and any questions that generate racial disparities are tossed out before they appear on the SAT. 

 Research shows that even high-achieving African-American pupils may be distracted by a fear that they will confirm the stereotype that they won’t don’t do well on intelligence tests.

Testing of this theory was proven by giving an exam to two mixed-race groups of students.

 One group was told that the exam was a simple problem-solving exercise; the other was told that their scores would show how smart they were. The Caucasian kids scored about the same no matter what they were told. The African American kids who thought they were taking an intelligence test performed considerably worse than those told the test was no big deal.

 The racial gap in test scores is one of the most vexing problems in social science, in part because it opens the door to the whole notion of eugenics.

 Eugenicists believe that the human species would advance more quickly if it discouraged reproduction among certain groups deemed unfit — including those that score poorly on aptitude tests.

 Ironically, the SAT was designed by a psychology professor who became a leading member of the eugenics movement before denouncing it later in life.

 The second argument was that SAT scores measure only the ability to take the SAT — a skill that, depending on the ability to pay, one could pick up in a coaching class (a growth industry that in 1999 alone raked in $400 million). Aside from that class inequality, the test’s failure to measure anything meaningful also meant that kids were spending a lot of time fretting over different tricks to remember at the expense of real learning.

 Money is another big issue concerning the SAT. While not only paying the $47 to take the test, many students also prepare for the test by spending money on SAT prep classes.

 The College Board says the average SAT taker spends 11 hours preparing and that coaching on average adds fewer than 40 points to a score. But test prep has become a big part of teen culture in most suburbs. Even the College Board sells its own test-prep material.

 The Princeton Review’s $799-to-$899 SAT classes typically meet weekly for six weeks, and students are expected to practice analogies and memorize vocabulary at home.

 “My family spent hundreds of dollars paying for SAT prep classes. The classes only gave me helpful tips on which questions to answer on the SAT, which I could have found online for free,” said senior Shannon Buckley.

 Students have spent money, worked hard and committed long hours to succeed on the SAT. Is it worth all the time and money for an aptitude test that doesn’t always qualify a student?

 If most admissions officers — both colleges and giant state schools — say they work hard not to put too much emphasis on the SAT, then do we really need it?

In order to graduate from a Frederick County public high school, a student is required to have 25 academic credits; four math, four English, three social studies, three science, one physical education/health, one fine arts and one technology education along with eight other additional credits.

 Initially, the FCPS graduation requirements seem like they give students a good deal of freedom. Sure, students are required to have a certain number of credits for each subject, but at least they get to choose what classes they take within those subjects, right?

 Wrong. FCPS mandates several classes that a student must complete within each subject. For example, a student needs to take Algebra and Geometry as two of their four math credits. As for social studies, students must take Government, Modern World History and American Studies 2, giving them a limited opportunity to take other social studies classes that might interest them.

 According to FCPS, the purpose of establishing these requirements is to allow students to “grow intellectually, personally and socially.” However, if students are forced to take classes that hold no relevance to what they want to do in the future or better yet, classes that don’t even interest them, then how is that helping them to grow?

 It’s understandable that there has to be some guidelines to prevent students from exclusively taking “easy” elective courses throughout their high school career, but it should not be FCPS’ right to determine a student’s individual classes to any degree.

 If students were given the freedom to choose their classes with little interference from FCPS, it would give those who know what they want to do in the future an opportunity to gain skills related to that field. For students who don’t yet know what they want to do, it would allow them to experiment and discover their areas of interest.

 Concerns might be raised for the students who require a more direct approach when it comes to their education, the students who need to be told what classes to take. For those students, some might argue, abolishing the current FCPS requirements system will be detrimental.

 Then again, if those students have never had the opportunity to create their own schedule free from FCPS mandated classes, how do they know that they are unable to do so?  A new system in which FCPS does not require specific classes would give students a chance to see for themselves whether or not they need more assistance when it comes to scheduling.

 If it turns out that, yes, a student does still need help, guidance counselors should be made aware of that and work more closely with those students. On the other hand, if students discover that they have never actually needed as much guidance as they were given, then they have gained the ability to organize their own schedule which is a valuable skill to have in life.  

 Changing a well-established system can not be expected to happen overnight, but making small changes to the FCPS graduation requirements system over the next several years would allow an easier transition for everyone involved and by the end, a system that is truly beneficial to all.