>> A MAN GLUES HIS BALD HEAD TO A FAMOUS PAINTING.. WHAT'S THAT ALL ABOUT?

WE'LL TELL YOU NEXT, ON IVORY TOWER.

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ WELCOME TO IVORY TOWER.

I'M BARBARA FOUGHT FROM SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY.

HERE TO DISCUSS THE WEEK'S NEWS ARE --- BEN BAUGHMAN FROM GANNON UNIVERSITY SARAH PRALLE FROM SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY ANIRBAN ACHARYA FROM LE MOYNE COLLEGE AND TARA ROSS FROM ONONDAGA COMMUNITY COLLEGE WELL, PANEL, IN MY COMMUNICATIONS LAW CLASS WE TALK ABOUT DEMOCRACY ----AND THE IMPORTANCE OF THE PUBLIC BEING ABLE TO CRITICIZE ITS LEADERS.

BUT THAT POLITICAL CRITICISM SEEMS TO BE CROSSING INTO VIOLENCE MORE OFTEN, ESPECIALLY AGAINST WOMEN.

THIS WEEK A MAN SAID HE WANTED TIE UP AND BREAK THE KNEES OF NANCY PELOSI, THE SECOND-IN-LINE TO THE PRESIDENCY.

SO SARAH, IS THIS NORMAL?

>> WELL, THE PROBLEM IS GETTING WORSE.

"THE NEW YORK TIMES" RECENTLY DID AN INVESTIGATION OF THREATS TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND THEY FOUND THAT THE NUMBER OF THREATS HAD GONE UP BY 10 FOLD BETWEEN 2016 AND 2021.

IN 2021 ALONE, THERE WERE OVER 10,000 THREATS TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, WHICH IS A REALLY EYE POPPING NUMBER AND STAGGERING WHEN YOU THINK THERE ARE ONLY 535 MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.

THEY FOUND PATTERNS THAT SOME PEOPLE GOT MORE THREATS THAN OTHERS.

IN PARTICULAR DEMOCRATIC WOMEN OF COLOR GOT A LOT OF THE THREATS BUT NANCY PLEASE OWE WAS IN A LEAGUE OF HER OWN AND SHE HAS BEEN A TARGET EVER SINCE SHE ASSUMED THE HOUSE SPEAKERSHIP.

I WAS-- ANOTHER STUN STUNNING STATISTIC IS THAT SINCE 2018, REPUBLICANS HAVE SPENT OVER $227 MILLION IN ADS THAT TARGET HER AND TREAT HER AS A VILLAIN.

SO THAT JUST SEEMS VERY SHOCKING TO ME.

>> ANIRBAN, WHY IS THIS?

WHY TARGET THE WOMEN, BLACK WOMEN IN PARTICULAR?

>> YES, I DO THINK THERE IS AN INCREASE IN THIS SORT OF VIOLENCE.

BUT TO CONTEXTUALIZE THIS, VIOLENCE TOWARDS WOMEN HAS BEEN A BIG ASPECT OF AMERICAN SOCIETY.

I WANT TO REMIND PEOPLE THAT A PRESIDENT OPENLY TALKED ABOUT SEXUALLY ASSAULTING WOMEN AND BECAME AND GOT ELECTED AS PRESIDENT, RIGHT?

SO IN DECEMBER 3, I REMEMBER TALKING ABOUT PAUL GOSAR OPENLY FANTASIZING ABOUT KILLING OCTAVE YO' CORTEZ.

AND WHEN WE LOOK AT THE BIGGER PICTURE, WE SEE THE 2019 DATABASE THAT TALKS ABOUT WOMEN IN PARLIAMENT, THE U.S.

RANKS IN THE WORLD IN THE 70s.

SO I DO THINK IT'S A FACET OF NOT HAVING ENOUGH WOMEN REPRESENTATION AS IN OTHER COUNTRIES, BUT AT THE SAME TIME I AGREE THAT THERE IS A PART OF THE REPUBLICAN BASE THAT IS, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, MISOGYNIST.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER ENGLISH WORD I CAN USE.

THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE AND THAT'S THEIR AGENDA AND THAT'S WHY THEY WANT TO ATTACK WOMEN SPECIFICALLY.

>> YOU ARE QUITE CORRECT AND PART OF THIS IS A REFLECTION OF THE FACT THAT PROBABLY THE EPITOME OF WOMEN QUOTE UNQUOTE OUT OF PLACE IS FEMALE POLITICIAN BECAUSE SHE LITERALLY IS IN THERE FIGHTING IN WHAT HAS TRADITIONALLY BEEN CONSIDERED A MAN'S WORLD.

YOU KNOW, THE MAN'S WORLD, BUSINESS, POLITICS, IT WAS MEN'S WORLD DATING BACK TO THE VICTORIAN ERA, SO WOMEN POLITICIANS WHO DO THAT WELL ARE TRULY OUT OF PLACE AND THEY ARE TRULY IN SOME CIRCLES, SEEN AS THE ULTIMATE THREAT TO THE POWER AND STABILITY OF MEN AND THEIR INFLUENCE IN THE COUNTRY.

AND I ALSO THINK SOMETHING ELSE OCCURS IN PARTICULAR WITH WOMEN OF COLOR.

ANIRBAN, YOU MENTIONED THE AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL STUD NECESSITY WOMEN IN ENGLAND.

WOMEN OF COLOR SORT OF AMPLIFY WOMEN OUT OF PLACE.

FIRST THEIR WOMEN AND THEN THEY'RE WOMEN OF COLOR.

THEN YOU HAVE WOMEN WHO YOU STEREOTYPE FOR GENERATIONS OF OF BEING INFERIOR AND THEY'RE PROVING BY THEIR EXISTENCE AND THEIR SUCCESS AND ABILITIES AT THEY ARE NOT OUT OF PLACE, THAT THOSE STEREOTYPES VERY CLEARLY ARE NOT TRUE.

AND SO I SEE PART OF THE REASON THERE IS MORE EMPHASIS ON WOMEN IN GENERAL ON WOMEN OF COLOR IN GENERAL BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ULTIMATE THREAT TO MALE POWER.

>> WE DO KNOW JUST IN CRIME GENERAL THAT WOMEN TEND TO BE THE TARGETS OF ASSAULTS SO WE SEE THAT RATE AND PRIOR TO TRUMP, I WOULD SAY THAT WE WERE STILL HAVING VIOLENCE BUT WE HAVE SEEN THIS UPTICK IN RADICALIZED THINKING IDEOLOGY, DEHUMANIZATION OF OUR POLITICIANS ACROSS THE BOARD.

ONE OF THE STUDIES THAT WAS BROUGHT UP THAT 75 INDICTMENTS THEY LOOKED AT AND A THIRD OF THOSE WERE REPUBLICAN THREATENING DEMOCRATS ABOUT A QUARTER OF THOSE WERE DEMOCRATS THREATENING REPUBLICANS.

SO I THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING THAT WE ARE NOT JUST SEEING ONE PARTY REALLY TARGETING ANOTHER PARTY THAT WE ARE SEEING SOME TRENDS FROM CRIME IN GENERAL SO THERE SHOULD BE DISCUSSIONS AROUND THE MULTI-FACTORS THAT GO INTO THIS PROBLEM.

>> SO I'M WONDERING, HOW DID WE GO FROM CRITICIZING PEOPLE TO THESE MORAL JUDGMENTS AND THEN DEMONIZING THIS VITRIOL AND HATRED STUFF?

SARAH, HOW DID THAT HAPPEN OVER TIME?

>> POLITICAL SCIENTISTS HAVE DOCUMENTED THIS INCREASE IN WHAT THEY CALL AFFECTIVE POLARIZATION AND THIS IS THE SORT OF INCREASE IN DISTRUST AND DISLIKE OF PEOPLE IN THE OTHER PARTY.

AND IN FACT THAT LEVEL OF ANIMOSITY IS MUCH HIGHER THAN THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PARTIES.

AND PART OF THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT PEOPLE'S PARTISAN IDENTITY IS STACKED UP ON TOP OF OTHER IDENTITIES LIKE THEIR RELIGIOUS AFFILIATIONS, THEIR RACIAL IDENTITIES, THEIR GENDER STATUS.

AND SO POLITICS BECOMES VERY PERSONAL UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES.

AND THAT LEVEL-- WHEN YOU START TO SEE THE OPPOSITION AS VERY DIFFERENT FROM YOU, THEY DON'T JUST NOT SHARE YOUR POLICY VIEWS BUT THAT YOU CAN'T EVEN RELATE TO THEM AT ALL, I THINK WHAT IT CAN TURN INTO IS THIS DEHUMANIZATION.

WHEN YOU DEHUMAN SIZE PEOPLE, IT'S MORE LIKELY THAT KIND OF STUFF LEADS TO THREATS OF VIOLENCE.

>> AND IT DOES REALLY DRIVE INTO ONE OF OUR CORE THINGS AS HUMANS US VERSUS THEM.

AND WHEN YOU HAVE THESE SILOS ON SOCIAL MEDIA THAT FEEDS AN ALGORITHM AND GIVES PEOPLE WHAT THEY EXPECT TO SEE AND REALLY PUTS THEM IN THEIR OWN AREA, TO CONTINUE TO FEED OFF OF THAT AND DEHUMANIZE OTHER HUMANS, IT REALLY IS A BAD-- AS WE ARE SEEING, IT SETS US UP IN A BAD WAY.

>> OKAY.

WELL, I WORRY ABOUT YOUNG WOMEN BEING INTERESTED IN GOING INTO POLITICS OR EVEN BUSINESS WITH THIS DEMONIZATION THAT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.

LET ME TURN TO OUR NEXT TOPIC.

I READ ABOUT A MAN AT THE HAGUE GLUING HIS HEAD TO A PAINTING AND THINKING IT WAS RIDICULOUS.

THE GIRL WITH THE PEARL EARRING.

BUT THEN I READ WHAT HE SAID: HOW DO YOU FEEL WHEN YOU SEE SOMETHING BEAUTIFUL AND PRICELESS BEING APPARENTLY DESTROYED BEFORE YOUR EYES?

DO YOU FEEL OUTRAGED?

GOOD.

WHERE IS THAT FEELING WHEN YOU SEE THE PLANET BEING DESTROYED BEFORE YOUR VERY EYES?"

THEN I GOT WHAT THE PROTEST WAS ABOUT.

IS THIS AN APPROPRIATE WAY TO PROTEST?

>> I DON'T THINK IT IS BECAUSE IN THE SHORT-TERM IT GETS A LOT OF ATTENTION WHICH WAS ONE OF THE GOALS OF THESE PROTESTORS FROM THESE GROUPS.

BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, DOES IT ACHIEVE WHAT IS DESIRED IN THE LONG-TERM?

AND I DON'T THINK IT DOES.

FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU LOOK BACK AT THE SUFFRAGIST MOVEMENT WHEN THEY WOULD CHAIN THEMSELVES TO BUILDING, WHEN THEY WENT ON STARVATION STRIKES, ET CETERA.

CERTAINLY IT IDENTIFIED AND AMPLIFIED THE FACT THAT WOMEN DID NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE.

BUT WOMEN DIDN'T GET THE RIGHT TO VOTE, AT LEAST IN AMERICA UNTIL AFTER WORLD WAR I PARTIALLY THANKS TO THEIR SERVICE IN WORLD WAR I.

YES, THE ACTIVITIES AMPLIFIED THE ISSUE BUT THEY DIDN'T ACHIEVE THE GOAL AND THAT'S MY PROBLEM HERE.

I DON'T THINK THIS ACHIEVES THE GOAL.

IT GETS ATTENTION AND POSSIBLY GETS THE ATTENTION OF WORLD LEADERS BUT WHAT ATTENTION DOES IT GO IT FROM THE AVERAGE PERSON?

AND THAT'S REALLY WHERE YOU ARE GOING TO NEED THE THRUST IF YOU ARE REALLY GOING TO PUSH POLITICAL LEADERS TO ACTUALLY MAKE SOME REAL CHANGE ON CLIMATE CONTROL.

>> WHAT BOTHERS ME IS THAT THEY'RE TARGETING AN INSTITUTION THAT IS ALL ABOUT PRESERVING, YOU KNOW VERSE VERSUS TARGETING SOMETHING WITH A MORE DIRECT CORRELATION WITH AN INSTITUTION THAT IS FEEDING INTO CLIMATE CHANGE.

>> I'D LIKE TO PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE THOUGH BECAUSE A TENDED THE CLIMATE MARCH IN NEW YORK CITY MANY YEARS AGO, 400,000 OF US ON THE STREETS.

IT BARELY GOT ANY MEDIA ATTENTION: AND THESE YOUNG PEOPLE GOING DO A LITTLE PICKET LINE OR PROTEST IN FRONT OF B.P.

OIL OR SHELL OIL AND THERE IS NO DOUBT IT WOULD HAVE GOTTEN, YOU KNOW, ALMOST NO COVERAGE.

SO I THINK THE SORT OF VALUE OF THIS KIND OF THING IS LIKE IT DOES PUNCH THROUGH ALL THE NOISE OUT THERE.

>> SOMETHING DRAMATIC.

>> POLITICS IS ALL ABOUT GETTING ATTENTION AND IT'S VERY HARD TO DO THESE DAYS.

I USED TO WORK FOR GREEN PEACE AND GREEN PEACE WAS KNOWN FOR THESE ATTENTION GRABBING ACTS OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE AND ONE OF THEIR MOST SUCCESSFUL AND EARLY ONES WAS ACTUALLY GETTING BETWEEN RUSSIAN WHALING SHIPS AND THE WHALES THEMSELVES AND BEFORE WE HAD THE WORD VIRAL, THE IMAGES OF THOSE IMAGES AND VIDEO CLIPS WENT OUT AROUND THE WORLD AND THEY DID MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE ACTUALLY.

I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT THAT THOSE ACTIONS HELP TO PUT A MORATORIUM ON WHALING WORLDWIDE.

>> I WOULD JUMP ON THAT.

WITH GREEN PEACE AND THE RAIN RAINBOW AREA IS ONE OF THOSE IMPORTANT DRAWING ATTENTION TO NUCLEAR TESTS AND SO ON.

MY POSITION IS IT'S A NON-VIOLENT PROTEST AND I CANNOT DECRY A NON-VIOLENT PROTEST, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE GOAL IS TO ATTRACT ATTENTION TO THE HYPERCONSUMPTIVE KIND OF INFINITE GROWTH MODEL THAT WE HAVE AROUND THE WORLD, RIGHT?

AND I THINK IN THAT CASE THEY WERE SUCCESSFUL THE PAINTINGS WERE COVERED WITH GLASS.

ALL THEY HAD TO DO WAS BUY SOME CLEANING PRODUCTS AND THAT'S OKAY GIVEN HOW WELL THE CLEANING PRODUCTS ARE DESTROYING THE ENVIRONMENT.

>> IT'S IMPORTANT FOR PEOPLE TO KNOW, THEY DID NOT DESTROY THE PAINTING.

>> THEY DID NOT DESTROY THE PAINTING.

THEY JUST DESTROYED THE GLASS.

EVEN IF THEY DESTROYED THE PAINTING, THESE THINGS ARE INSURED AT ONE LEVEL OR ANOTHER.

SO WE ARE DESTROYING THE PLANET AND THESE PEOPLE ARE SAYING LOOK, YOU ARE DESTROYING THE PLANET AND ANY OTHER SOLUTION YOU BRING UP SEEMS LIKE MORE ABOUT PROTECTING THIS KIND OF FANTASY OF HYPER GROWTH THAN ABOUT PROTECTING THE PLANET.

AND HERE WE ARE, DISRUPTING IN THESE NON-VIOLENT WAYS SO I THINK IT'S A GENIUS WAY TO DO IT.

>> SARAH, I KNOW YOU TEACH ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND YOU TALKED ABOUT THIS WITH YOUR CLASS.

I'M INTERESTED IN THEIR PERCEPTIONS?

>> IT'S FUNNY.

I STARTED THE DISCUSSION OUT ASKING HOW MANY OF THEM HAVE HEARD OF IT AND IN A CLASS OF 55 STUDENTS, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM HAD RAISED THEIR HAND.

SO I THINK THAT ALSO JUST SPEAKS TO HOW EFFECTIVE IT WAS, AT LEAST COMMUNICATIVE STRATEGY, RIGHT?

AND THERE IS A WIDE VARIETY OF REACTIONS.

SOME THOUGHT IT WAS SILLY AND LIKELY INEFFECTIVE AND THEN OTHERS HAD PRETTY ELOQUENT DEFENSES OF IT IT ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT I WAS SAYING ABOUT HAVING TO BE ABLE TO PUNCH THROUGH THE NOISE.

AND ALSO HAVING TO CHANGE TACTICS AND STRATEGIES.

LIKE EVERYONE PROTESTS NOW.

AND SO WE ARE VERY USED TO SEEING IT AND THEREFORE IT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE MUCH OF AN IMPACT AND IT'S HARD.

SOCIAL MOVEMENTS HAVE TO THINK OF NEW WAYS OF DOING IT SO I THINK THEY APPRECIATED THAT A LITTLE BIT.

>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.

THERE WAS A SELF EMULATION BY AN ENVIRONMENTALIST ACTIVIST IN APRIL?

>> IN FRONT OF THE SUPREME COURT.

>> WHY DO YOU THINK THIS SEEMS TO BE GETTING MORE ATTENTION THAN THAT DID?

WHICH TO ME, THE SELF MUTE LAYINGS WAS MUCH MORE VIOLENT AND MORE RISK IN TERMS OF THE DEATH OF THE PERSON.

>> YEAH, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

I THINK PERHAPS THE LARGER POINT IS THAT THESE TACTICS NEED TO BE EMBEDDED IN A SOCIAL MOVEMENT FOR THEM TO BE REALLY EFFECTIVE.

A TACTIC ON ITS OWN OR ONE ACTION OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE, I THINK MIGHT NOT HAVE THAT MUCH IMPACT AND STAYING POWER.

AND I THINK PART OF THE WHY THIS HAS BEEN EFFECTIVE IS BECAUSE IT WASN'T A ONE OFF THING AND THEY'RE FINDING NEW WAYS OF DOING SOMETHING SIMILAR AND THEY'RE BACKING IT UP WITH INTERVIEWS.

AND I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE EXPLANATION FOR THAT.

>> ANOTHER REASON MIGHT HAVE BEEN MEDIA ETHICS BECAUSE WE TEACH JOURNALISTS NOT TO OVER SENSATIONALIZE DEATH OR SUICIDE.

LET'S TURN TO THE THIRD TOPIC.

ARGUMENTS BEFORE THE U-S SUPREME COURT THIS WEEK THE COURT SEEMS READY TO SAY TO OUR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES --- YOU CAN'T USE RACE AS A FACTOR ANYMORE IN YOUR DECISIONS ABOUT WHICH STUDENTS YOU ADMIT.

BACK IN 2003 JUSTICE O'CONNOR WROTE THAT IN 25 YEARS RACIAL PREFERENCES WON'T BE NECESSARY IN COLLEGE ADMISSIONS.

IT'S BEEN ABOUT 20 YEARS, SO BEN, IS IT TIME TO DROP RACE AS A CRITERIA?

>> I THINK WE ARE LOOKING AT THE WHOLE PERSON.

WE DO KNOW THAT DIVERSITY IS ESSENTIAL FOR RICH AND ROBUST EDUCATIONAL EXPERIENCE.

WE FOE THAT.

LOOKING AT THE WHOLE PERSON IS ESSENTIAL.

WHAT I THOUGHT WAS INTERESTING IS THE JUSTICES BROUGHT UP SOME REALLY GOOD POINTS ACROSS THE BOARD.

IT DID SEEM VERY PERSONAL TO EACH JUSTICE WHEN YOU LISTEN TO THE ARGUMENTS.

BUT THE ARGUMENTS WERE REALLY PELL PUT.

AND WOULD I SAY THAT THE ISSUE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP WAS WHAT IS DIVERSITY?

IF YOU ARE LOOKING AT MAKING HARVARD DIVERSE?

IS 80% BEING, YOU KNOW, THE EXTREMELY WEALTHY?

IS THAT A DIVERSE CAMPUS?

ARE THEY REALLY MAKING IT DIVERSE?

SO I THINK IT'S A BIGGER PROBLEM THAN JUST RACE WHEN YOU ARE STARTING TO LOOK AT DIVERSITY AND MAKING THAT.

AND THE OTHER COMPONENT WAS THAT IT WAS BROUGHT UP THAT THEY SELF REPORTED.

IT'S AN INDIVIDUAL'S VIEW OF WHAT THEY SEE THEMSELVES RATHER THAN HOW THEY'RE SEEN BY EVERYBODY ELSE AND THAT WAS ANOTHER ARGUMENT MADE BY THE COURT THAT IT NEEDS TO BE A REPRESENTATIVE CROSS SECTION OF SOCIETY.

I'M ON BOARD WITH THAT.

I AGREE WITH THAT BUT HOW DO YOU DO THAT?

WHAT IS AT THE CORE OF THAT?

>> THE PREVIOUS CASE, THE COURT SAID THAT RACE WOULD JUST ONE OF THE FACTORS.

IT INCLUDES CLASS, GEOGRAPHY, GENDER AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.

I AGREE WITH YOU.

HARVARD HAS AN UPPER CLASS IN THAT WAY AND IF YOU LOOK AT DIVERSITY IN TERMS OF CLASS, HARVARD IS NOT DIVERSE.

THERE ARE DIFFERENT ARGUMENTS TO BE MADE ABOUT THAT.

BUT I DO THINK JUSTICES WOULD WEIGH ON THE IDEA OF LIBERTY, THE ABILITY TO ACHIEVE YOUR OWN LIFE GOALS WITHIN A GIVEN GOVERNMENT RESTRICTIONS, WITHIN A GIVEN SYSTEM.

SO EVEN IF-- MY QUESTION IS THIS.

EVEN IF THE JUSTICES SAY RACE CANNOT BE USED AS A FACTOR, HOW DO YOU MODEL THAT IN A REAL LIFE WORLD?

THERE ARE SO MANY APPLICANTS, SO MANY DIFFERENT DIVERSE TALENTS, GEOGRAPHICAL DIFFERENCES IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE WORLD, HOW DO YOU ARE YOU ABLE TO IMPLEMENT THAT.

THE COURT MIGHT MAKE A CONSTRICTED DECISION OR MIGHT NOT OVERRIDE OR OVERRULE RACE BUT I'M NOT A SUPREME COURT SCHOLAR SO I CAN'T PREDICT LIKE THAT.

>> I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH YOU AND CONNECTED WITH THAT FACTOR IS HOW DO YOU TRULY ACHIEVE DIVERSITY AND DIVERSITY WILL LOOK DIFFERENT AT DIFFERENT SCHOOLS WHICH IS ANOTHER FACTOR BUT ONE OF THE POINTS THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE COMMENTARY ABOUT THE COURTS HEARINGS THIS WEEK WAS THE FACT THAT IN FOCUSING ON AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND THE WAYS SCHOOLS HAVE TRADITIONALLY DONE AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, IT HAS ALLOWED THE SCHOOLS NOT REALLY TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE STRUCTURAL ISSUES WITHIN THE SCHOOLS.

AND AGAIN THAT WILL VARY DEPENDING ON THE SCHOOL AS WELL.

AND IT CONNECTS WITH ANIRBAN'S POINT ABOUT HOW DO YOU ACHIEVE DIVERSITY BECAUSE WHAT DIVERSITY IS WILL VARY AT DIFFERENT SCHOOLS.

AND WHO DETERMINES WHEN YOU HAVE ACHIEVED THAT DIVERSITY?

IS IT THE SCHOOL?

IS IT THE COMMUNITY?

WHO DETERMINES AND HOW DO YOU DETERMINE IT?

>> BEN, JOHN ROBERTS SAID THAT RACIAL DIVERSITY IS IMPORTANT FOR MILITARY STRENGTH, COHESIVENESS AND READINESS.

I'M WONDERING WHY IS IT IMPORTANT FOR THE CORPORATE WORLD AND EVERYBODY ELSE?

>> IT IS.

IT ABSOLUTELY IS.

ACROSS THE BOARD.

WHEN YOU HAVE DIVERSITY, DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES, YOU ARE GETTING TO SEE THE WHOLE PICTURE A LOT BETTER THAN WHEN YOU SEE ONE SIDE OF IT SO I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THERE IS A FINE LINE BETWEEN DIVERSITY AND DIVISION AND I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER POINT THAT THE JUSTICES WERE TRYING TO GET TO WITH THIS.

>> JUSTICE THOMAS SAID HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE EDUCATIONAL BENEFITS WERE THAT CAME FROM DIVERSITY.

DO YOU SEE SOME?

>> I THINK IT'S WELL DOCUMENTED AND NOT JUST BENEFITS TO COLLEGE STUDENTS.

BUT IT'S ALSO A BENEFIT TO OTHER INSTITUTIONS BECAUSE THESE SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES PROVIDE A PIPELINE OF STUDENTS OF YOUNG PEOPLE WHO ARE THEN GOING TO GO POPULATE OUR INSTITUTIONS LIKE OUR LEGAL INSTITUTIONS, MILITARY, CORPORATE BOARDS, K-12 EDUCATION.

THERE IS A LOT OF RESEARCH RIGHT NOW THAT SHOWS THAT HAVING A TEACHER OF THE SAME RACE AS YOU IMPROVES OUTCOMES A GREAT DEAL SO GRADUATION RATES ARE HIGHER.

ACHIEVEMENT IS MUCH HIGHER BUT THERE IS A HUGE GAP BETWEEN THE NUMBER OF MINORITY TEACHERS AND MINORITY STUDENTS.

AND ONE WAY TO TRY TO CLOSE THE GAP IS TO GRADUATE MORE BLACK STUDENTS FROM COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES.

SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO THE ENTIRE SOCIETY.

>> JUSTED QUICKLY ANIRBAN, LET'S SAY THE EXORT SAYS YOU CAN'T TAKE IN RACE.

WHAT DO THE INSTITUTIONS DO?

MORE FINANCIAL AID?

HOW DO THEY ENTICE PERSONS OF COLOR.

>> HONESTLY WE HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT AND WE REALLY DON'T KNOW, RIGHT?

IF CLASS AND RACE MAPS BECAUSE OF STRUCTURAL INEQUALITIES OVER HISTORY, THEN CLASS COULD BE A FACTOR AND THAT WOULD INCREASE RACIAL DIVERSITY AS WELL SO IT-- THERE SHOULD BE SOME GUIDELINES IN TERMS OF GUIDELINES THAT SHOULD BE MADE BUT I'M NOT REALLY SURE HOW THIS COULD BE IMPLEMENTED OR SOMEONE CAN BE REALLY SUED SAYING THAT NO, YOU DID TAKE RACE AS A FACTOR.

I DON'T KNOW HOW QU LOOK AT THOUSANDS OF APPLICANTS AND TRY TO BRING IN A VERY DIVERSE BODY BASED ON DIFFERENT CRITERIA, NOT JUST RACE.

>> THE COURT WILL BE DECIDING SOMETIME BEFORE NEXT JUNE AND WE WILL KNOW.

IT'S TIME TO OPEN UP THE GRADEBOOK.

BEN, WHO GETS YOUR F TODAY?

>> MY F IS GOING TO JOURNALIST FOR NOT GETTING THE MESSAGE OUT THERE THAT OUR POLICE OFFICERS ARE UNDER ATTACK.

WE LOST 55 OFFICERS THIS YEAR TO GUNFIRE, 281 OFFICERS HAVE BEEN SHOT THIS YEAR.

104 OF THOSE OFFICERS WERE SHOT AND 71 SEPARATE AMBUSH STYLE SHOOTINGS.

SO WE ARE UP 11% JUST FROM 2020 WHICH WAS ALREADY A NIGHTMARE.

>> SARAH, YOUR F?

>> MY F GOES TO DAN BOLDOCK, A REPUBLICAN RUNNING FOR THE NEW HAMPSHIRE SENATE SEAT AGAINST DEMOCRAT MAGGIE HASSEN.

HE HAS SPREAD THE HOAX THAT SCHOOLS ARE PUTTING OUT LITTER BOXES FOR CHILDREN WHO ALLEGEDLY IDENTIFY AS CATS.

AND THIS WACKY RUMOR HAS ITS ORIGINS IN THE BACKLASH AGAINST TRANS GENDER RIGHTS AND HAS BEEN RAPIDLY SPREADING IN CONSERVATIVE CIRCLES FOR THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS AND HE HAS EMBRACED ELECTION FRAUD CONSPIRACIES.

I'M ORIGINALLY FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE AND IT'S PRETTY EMBARRASSING THAT ONE OF THE CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR SENATE STRUGGLES TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN FACT AND FICTION.

>> ANIRBAN?

>> I WILL DRAW MY ATTENTION TO THE F TO THE U.S. GOVERNMENT'S FILING OF MORE THAN $9 BILLION INTO OIL AND GAS PROJECTS IN AFRICA SINCE IT SIGNED UP TO RESTRAIN GLOBAL HEATING WITH THE PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT WHIL ONLY CHUMP CHANGE OF 682 MILLION WAS SPENT ON CLEAN ENERGY AND SOLAR AND WIND DEVELOPMENT.

FROM 2016 TO 2021, PROJECTS IN AFRICA MADE UP ABOUT 68% OF WHILE U.S. INTERNATIONAL FOSSIL FUEL ENERGY AND FUNDING SO I GUESS THIS ADMINISTRATION IS BLURRING THE LINE BETWEEN ARCEIST IN AND FIREFIGHTER.

WE DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE IS GOING ON HERE.

>> TARA.

>> MY F GOES TO ELON MUSK FOR INFERRING TO TWITTER THAT INITIAL REPORTS ON NANCY PELOSI'S HUSBAND LACKED ACCURACY AND THERE MIGHT BE "MORE TO THE STORY THAN MEETS THE ."

HIS USE OF INACCURATE INFERENCES AND FAILURE TO CORRECT IT DOES NOT BODE WELL FOR THE FUFT TWITTER.

>> WE NEED TO MOVE TO THE As AND QUICKLY, ABOUT EN.

>> MY A GOES TO EDWARDS LIMITED WHO IS BRINGING OVER $300 MILLION TO UPSTATE NEW YORK TO MANUFACTURE SEMICONDUCTORS.

>> A GREAT ADDITION TO THE MICRON ANNOUNCEMENT FOR SURE.

>> SARAH, WHAT IS YOUR A?

>> MY A GOES TO NEW YORK STATE FOR ASKING VOTERS TO MAKE A HISTORIC INVESTMENT IN ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION BY PASSING WHAT'S CALLED THE CLEAN WATER CLEAN AIR AND GREEN JOBS ACT.

THIS HAS A LOT OF FEATURES TO IT BUT ONE OF THE EXCITING PROJECTS THAT WILL BE FUNDED IF IT PASSES IS TO ELECTRIFY SCHOOL BUSES ACROSS THE STATE.

AND THIS IS REALLY GOING TO HELP CLEAN UP THE AIR.

IT'S GOING TO HAVE POSITIVE HEALTH IMPACTS FOR STUDENTS.

AND FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE BUSES IDLE FOR LONG PERIODS.

AND JUST A REMINDER.

THE BOND ACT IS ON THE BACK OF THE BALLOTS.

>> ANIRBAN, YOUR A.

>> MY A GOES TO THE CHEROKEE NATION'S STRUGGLE AGAINST THE U.S. GOVERNMENT TO HONOR THE TREATY THAT ENTITLED THE NATION TO NON-VOTING SEAT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

ALL THE YEARS LATER IT HAS NOT BEEN HONOR SOD I'M GIVING AN A TO THEIR STRUGGLE TO GET THE SEAT.

>> AND YOUR A TARA.

>> TO THE 3.7 INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN AMERICA.

NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE MONTH STARTED THIS WEEK AND MONTAGE OF PHOTOS THAT YOU ARE SEEING ON YOUR SCREEN REFLECT THE DIFFERENT INDIGENOUS PEOPLE, THE DIFFERENCE THAT INDIGENOUS PEOPLE ARE MAKING IN AMERICA.

YES, NATIVE PEOPLE ARE REAL AND NOT SOME SELL LLOYD IMAGE AND YES THEY'RE STILL HERE.

>> TELL BUS WHO SOME OF THE FOLKS ARE.

>> ONE IS REPRESENTATIVE HALEN.

ONE IS OUR FIRST INDIGENOUS ASTRONAUT.

ANOTHER IS AN INDIGENOUS RODEO CHAMPION.

>> THAT'S QUITE A BIT OF DIVERSITY.

WELL, THANK YOU FOR MAKING TIME FOR US TONIGHT PLEASE LET US KNOW WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THE TOPICS WE'VE DISCUSSED.

YOU CAN WRITE US AT THE ADDRESSES ON YOUR SCREEN.

IF YOU MISS THE SHOW ANY FRIDAY NIGHT, TUNE US IN SATURDAY AFTERNOONS AT 5:30 • OR WE'RE STREAMING ANY TIME AT WCNY,ORG.

WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO VOTE THIS WEEKEND OF TUESDAY.

OR ON TUESDAY.

GOOD NIGHT.