Students and professors speak out against potential TikTok ban

FROM TIKTOK PAGE 1 technology frm ByteDance Ltd. — will grant China access to sensitive information, The New York Times reported.

“They’re not serious about passing legislation,” Muirhead said. “This is a general problem in American politics right now. We have a legislative class that isn’t serious about governing. They’re just taking symbolic positions for the sake of advancing their own celebrity and power.”

Muirhead added that he does not “quite see the mechanism by which TikTok is posing a security problem.” He explained that companies like Chinese-owned technology corporation Huawei — which Muirhead said might be connected to the Chinese government — could be more likely to violate American privacy than TikTok.

Bedi added that the U.S. government has not released enough information on the security issues posed by TikTok to warrant a ban.

“[The government] can’t just say it’s a national security threat,” he said. “That’s not sufcient if the government is seeking to restrict the First Amendment.”

According to Muirhead, other issues with TikTok — such as the spread of misinformation online — will persist in spite of a ban, as younger users could easily turn to a similar app. Muirhead added that the country should instead focus on learning to regulate the rapidly changing digital landscape and understand our reliance on online information.

“The half-life of these platforms is very short,” Muirhead said. “Something that’s really compelling to you is not going to be very compelling to the kids who are in third grade today. They’re going to go to something else. Believe it or not, Facebook was once upon a time used by young people, not just grandparents.”

Already-existing alternatives, like Instagram Reels, would be the greatest beneficiaries of a ban, government professor Brendan Nyhan wrote in an email statement. Nyhan called for federal privacy legislation and platform transparency, “not an ad hoc ban on a single product.”

Zoe McGuirk ’25, who said she uses TikTok for about an hour every day, agreed that other apps could simply replace the platform.

“There’s so many other social media platforms, and you already see TikToks [reposted] on Instagram Reels, and other apps adopting similar features,” McGuirk said. “I feel like you could just seek out the

Multiple other abortion-related bills were tabled or rejected, according to the records. A constitutional amendment to protect abortion failed to reach the threeffths margin required to pass. The House also rejected a proposed “heartbeat bill” that would outlaw abortions after the frst detectable heartbeat in a fetus — which can occur six weeks into pregnancy — as well as a bill that would require medical treatment for infants still alive after an attempted abortion. Representatives also voted against a bill that would mandate individuals to wait 24 hours for treatment after requesting an abortion.

According to the Planned Parenthood of Northern New England website, New Hampshire law allows abortions for any reason until six months into pregnancy. After six months, abortion is banned with exceptions for protecting the life of the mother and fatal fetal diagnoses. A 2022 St. Anselm poll found that current state law aligns with the views of most New Hampshire residents — while 71% of Granite Staters describe themselves as pro-choice, 71% also oppose unrestricted abortion access.

During the 2022 gubernatorial race, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, a Republican, said that he would codify abortion rights and sign a bill removing civil and criminal penalties for doctors who perform abortions. Although both of Sununu’s legislative priorities recently passed the House, their fates — HB 88 for codifcation and HB 224 for civil and criminal penalties — will be determined in the Republican-controlled State Senate, which rejected a similar bill to codify abortion before 24 weeks on March 9, the Associated Press reported.

The new bills — and abortion laws in general — are hotly contested among both parties in the state legislature.

State representative Ross Berry, R-Manchester, said he voted against HB 224 because he did not want to act against current state laws — including a bill passed in February 2022, which made it illegal to terminate a pregnancy after 24 weeks and required every person seeking an abortion to have an ultrasound. Berry added that he thinks the current state law is “extraordinarily reasonable.”

“The promise I made to my voters was that I would not make any changes to the existing laws pertaining to abortion,” Berry said. “That means no new restrictions and no attempting to undermine those restrictions.”

Jason Hennessey, president of New

Hampshire Right to Life, a pro-life organization, also criticized the new bill, explaining that such laws need penalties to be efective.

“HB 224, by removing the penalties [for doctors], would render the law moot because a law with no penalties means that nobody has to follow it,” he said. “[Members of New Hampshire Right to Life] consider this to be one of the worst human rights travesties that we could do.”

He added that the bill “does literally nothing,” as abortion is already legal before the third trimester in New Hampshire and the bill could later be repealed by a pro-life legislature.

Hennessey dismissed the idea that the New Hampshire ban is extreme, adding that many states restrict abortion earlier than New Hampshire does.

Berry added that he took issue with the principle of codifcation, explaining that the government should not have to grant rights, since rights are assumed by citizens of a free society.

“The government does not tell you that you can do something,” Berry said. “It tells you that you cannot do something.”

Government professor and state representative Russell Muirhead, D-Hanover, disagreed, adding that codifcation brings both awareness and permanence to reproductive rights.

“Any time you make the nature of the protection more explicit it becomes more secure,” Muirhead said.“It’s true that every policy can be overturned in the future, but a policy that is popular, widely understood and has the force of precedent is going to be harder to overturn.”

Josie Pinto, executive director of the Reproductive Freedom Fund of New Hampshire, a pro-choice group, added that 24-week codifcation is necessary to protect reproductive rights.

“New Hampshire is the only state in New England that doesn’t have proactive protections for abortion rights,” Pinto said. “We want a law saying that we are proactively afrming the right to abortion so we are not at the whims of the legislature who can just chip away at that 24-week ban.”

Pinto added that restrictions on third trimester abortions unnecessarily insert the government between the patient and a doctor.

“To date, I cannot remember a single patient ever coming to us just because they wanted an abortion in the third trimester,” Pinto said. “We don’t want the government to have an unnecessary week number ban because we think it’s important that we let this be between a provider and a patient.”

Muirhead also emphasized that restrictions may harm both the pregnant individual and their children.

“I don’t see that an infexible policy is going to serve mothers or their children,” he said.

Dartmouth Democrats member Fiona Hood ’26 added that HB 224 encourages doctors to provide strong care.

“I think that doctors should not be criminalized for doing their job,” she said. “If there are criminal restrictions on doing their job, the best doctors will be disincentivized from coming to the state.”

Dartmouth Conservatives declined to comment for this article.

S a i n t T h o m a s

E p i s c o p a l C h u r c h

C e l e b r a t e t h e j o y o f

E A S

same platform elsewhere.”

While David Rogers ’25 — who reached 66,000 followers on TikTok after posting a video where he cosplayed as Augustus Gloop and smeared chocolate on his face — agreed that video content can be found elsewhere, he said that he appreciates the “fun” aspects of TikTok that distinguish it from written media.

“I’m not a big newspaper reader, but I’ll watch a video,” Rogers said. “Give me some fun music behind it, like some Dua Lipa, [and] I will sit there and watch your one-minute video on whatever you’re talking about.”

Rogers said he has since deleted the app because of how much time he was spending on his phone, adding that he used to watch TikTok for about five hours everyday. Still, Rogers agreed with Nyhan that alternative platforms, such as Youtube Shorts and Instagram Reels, have replaced his TikTok habits. “I’ve also switched into the Snapchat and Instagram versions of [TikTok], which is kind of the same thing,” Rogers said. “It’s easier for me to click out of [Instagram and Snapchat], because I just feel like TikTok is its special little thing.” m a s E p i s c o p a l C h u r c h & E p i s c o p a l C a m p u s M i n i s t r y

Students should educate themselves on the cultural signifcance of mishandled Natve remains without relying on Natve students for explanatons.

Governor DeSants’ messaging focused on climate change adaptaton strategies gives the governor an edge over other Republican presidental candidates.

This column was originally published on April 4, 2023

Last week, the Dartmouth community learned that the College possesses the remains of 15 Native American individuals –– a discovery resulting from the re-inventories of the Hood Museum and anthropology department archives. Since then, the College has created a task force to ensure these remains are returned to their respective tribes. This announcement directly impacted students who had interacted with these bones in ANTH 43: “Human Osteology” and ANTH 50: “Forensic Anthropology” last fall. In addition, many Native students on campus grieved in reaction to the news — and rightfully so.

The discovery revealed the College’s inexcusable failure to comply with NAGPRA, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990. For Native students, this is more than a federal violation by the College — it is the mishandling of ancestors. To give our Native classmates a space to mourn, students and faculty should educate themselves on the historical and cultural signifcance of this discovery using other resources.

Following the announcement, several Native students created Instagram stories asking non-Native students to educate themselves rather than asking Native students for explanations. The burden of educating campus should not fall on the shoulders of the Native American community. We urge the community to take the initiative to educate themselves on the repatriation and the importance of Native bones held by institutions like Dartmouth. We urge students to do their own investigations, not only to encourage understanding of our fellow community members, but because this is our historically inherited responsibility due to the College’s troubled and often paradoxical history with Native students.

We have all heard, at one time or another, the following words from the College’s charter: “for the education and instruction of youth of the Indian tribes in this land.” However, for approximately 200 years after the College’s founding, fewer than 100 Native students attended Dartmouth, a fgure that demonstrates the College’s failure to fulfll its stated purpose. When the College recommited itself to its original mission in 1970 under former President John G. Kemeny, he proclaimed that a “signifcantly greater” number of Native students would be enrolled. To that extent, Dartmouth has earned a reputation as the “Native Ivy.” Native students now comprise 4% of the current student population, the highest percentage of Native students at any Ivy League school.

Despite the College’s more recent recommitment to its original mission, it has continued to let down Native students. For example, when Native students arrived at Dartmouth under the Kemeny administration, many were disturbed by the prolifc and ofensive usage of Native imagery, especially the unofcial Dartmouth Indian mascot. Although the College urged the “voluntary discontinuance” of the mascot in the 1970s, people continued to use the image decades later, and the College only removed other ofensive symbols within the last few years. For years, Native students also demanded the removal of the weather vane which formerly sat on top of Baker Tower — which depicted a stereotypical and patronizing image of a Native American smoking a pipe in front of Dartmouth’s founder, Eleazar Wheelock. Still, it wasn’t until 2020 that the College fnally removed the weathervane. The mere existence of the weather vane, along with other Native imagery, indicates a pattern — although one not exclusive to Dartmouth itself — that relegates Native people to characters in myths and traditions.

While the discovery of Native remains in the College’s inventories may be news to some, Native students are all too familiar with the topic. According to federal documents, the College returned some remains in a series of repatriations after 1996, with the last returns occurring a mind-boggling 20 years later in 2016. The fact that there were still more remains following the prior repatriations reveals the College’s lack of oversight. Had the College been more diligent, students would not have unknowingly used Native American bones in anthropology classes, and Native students would not have experienced grief yet again.

In light of these events, what should non-Native students do? The answer is not to contact Native students seeking information about the subject — unless, of course, these communities reach out on their own to ofer their wisdom and personal experiences. Many Native students are grieving, and among some communities — such as the Navajo or Diné — it is taboo to even speak on the topic. The discovery of the remains is deeply personal for the Native American community. As our recent news coverage shows, these remains are peoples’ ancestors, and each individual’s response to the news may be diferent. It is important to give Native students the respect and space they need to process and grieve. Yet, if Native students do choose to speak up, non-Native students should listen to what they have to say.

Non-Native students must work to educate themselves on the cultural signifcance of remains, rather than relying on their Native peers. Many of us grew up with a woefully inadequate understanding of Native peoples, through a lack of Native American representation in our school systems and through popular stereotypes and misconceptions of Native peoples. A good place to start is by reading this informational comic book series on NAGPRA, published in collaboration with the Ziibiwing Center of Anishinabe Culture & Lifeways. In addition, articles on NAGPRA from Indian Country Today, a newspaper on Indigenous afairs globally are highly informative. These resources are not comprehensive nor complete, but we hope students will use them as a way to begin learning more about this topic.

Needless to say, the non-Native members of this editorial board are not experts on the matter — one of our members, who is Mixtec, does not consider themselves an expert either. However, we encourage students to educate themselves on repatriation and other issues impacting Native peoples in the United States. We have the privilege of attending Dartmouth, yet many of us do not fully understand the College’s history with Native peoples. In an interview, Provost David Kotz claimed that Native Americans are an “important part of [the College’s] essence.” However, we hope that the College recognizes that the large community of Native students on campus today does not excuse the College from its troubled past. Likewise, the recently discovered Native remains are more than just remains, and it is time non-Native students take their share of the responsibility for building a better future.

As the presidential nominee process for 2024 barrels towards us, future candidates are deep into planning their campaigns, refining their messages and scheduling rallies. As Governor Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., and his staff do the same, they ought to consider the governor’s somewhat brilliantly dexterous environmental policies. Governor DeSantis’ environmental strategies appeal to environmentally-conscious conservatives, giving him an edge over other Republican presidential candidates come 2024. DeSantis has successfully avoided being painted as economically damaging or leftist, which causes Republican and Republican-leaning voters to balk at voting for moderates or Democrats with strong climate change policies. In stark contrast to Democrats, Governor DeSantis’ environmental policies instead capitalize on fears of economic damage and “leftist” labeled policies. By assuring Republicans that his environmental policies will exclude leftist beliefs, DeSantis quiets these concerns.

Although DeSantis has not yet launched a presidential bid, Republicans should be prepared for DeSantis to be a competitor for the Republican nomination. Political pundits and much of the public alike expect his candidacy due to his rapidly growing popularity, campaignstyle rallies in major cities and an uptick in big donations. A Quinnipiac University poll indicates that Republican and Republicanleaning voters favor former President Trump over DeSantis, with Trump earning 43% of the hypothetical Republican and Republicanleaning vote and DeSantis earning 41% of that vote. However, with the nomination process more than a year away, DeSantis has plenty of time to tilt the scales in his favor. With the right strategy, DeSantis can win over environmentallyconscious conservatives who have climate change on the top of their minds. Those voters would be unlikely to vote for Trump if Trump’s opponents call enough attention to his disastrous climate record, leaving those voters to decide between Biden or a Republican candidate.

Many Republican voters are concerned about the climate and support environmentallyfriendly policy goals. More than a third of all Republicans and Republican-leaning voters and almost two-thirds of moderate Republicans think the federal government is doing too little to reduce the effect of climate change. Almost two-thirds of Republicans overall think the US government and businesses should do at least a moderate amount to address the effects of climate change, and nearly two-thirds of Republicans think the average person should do at least a moderate amount to deal with climate change.

Regardless, even Republicans who care about reducing climate change’s effects are concerned about the economic impacts of such policies. Only a quarter of moderate Republicans say climate policies help the US economy. Some Republican and Republicanleaning voters worry that Democrats and environmentalists are willing to cause energy poverty if it means reducing or cutting the use of fossil fuels. Reducing fossil fuel production and implementing additional taxes on fossil fuel companies, Republican politicians argue, would increase the costs of electricity and gas, making energy bills unplayable for many Americans. While pushing this narrative, Republican politicians of course neglect scientists’ findings that a clean energy transition will lead to trillions of dollars in savings for the US economy.

DeSantis’’ climate change policies have focused almost entirely on adaptation strategies, allowing DeSantis to steer clear of fearmongering surrounding mitigation policies. There are two approaches to addressing climate change: mitigation and adaptation. Mitigation tactics seek to lessen the severity of climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, while adaptation strategies strive to adjust to climate change’s current and future effects. By focusing exclusively on adaptation, DeSantis can address the effects of climate change without acknowledging humans’ role in creating and accelerating those changes. For example, in DeSantis’ first few weeks as governor, he signed an executive order that appointed a chief science officer and created the Office of Resilience and Coastal Protection. Throughout his tenure, DeSantis signed several bills that dedicated hundreds of millions of dollars to fund projects to protect infrastructure from sea rise, storms and inland flooding. His allies have applauded his adaptation plans as bold and a sign of leadership that prioritized protecting Florida communities. At the same time, DeSantis has done nothing to prevent further climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and opposes government interference in industry and emissions. It is a global scientific consensus that human action and anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are the dominant cause of global warming, which causes the increasing severity and frequency of storms, hurricanes and inland flooding that plague Floridians. By not mitigating greenhouse gas emissions, DeSantis turns a blind eye to the root cause of the climate-induced suffering of Floridians. For example, DeSantis supported and signed a bill that banned local governments from pushing for state utilities to use clean energy, and he blocked the state pension fund from considering environmental, social and governance metrics when making investments.

Yet, his approach of completely excluding mitigation tactics successfully escapes rightwing critiques of stifling economic activity, as DeSantis’ policies avoid restraining industry and reject the idea of collective action to protect the environment. DeSantis’ policies thus appeal to the 20% of Americans who think human activity does not play a role in climate change and the 42% of moderate Republicans that think human activity contributes only some to the changing climate.

September 30, 2022

DeSantis’s anti-leftist narrative fits some Republican and Republican-leaning voters’ biggest worries about Democraticled environmentalism. DeSantis works to create a hard boundary between his policies and Democrat’s climate policies, dodging Republican-leaning and Republican voters’ uneasiness about climate change concerns being exploited to achieve certain political agendas. In 2021, he answered a reporter’s question about climate change policies with, “What I’ve found is people, when they start talking about things like global warming, they typically use that as a pretext to do a bunch of left-wing things that they would want to do anyways. We’re not doing any left-wing stuff.” He also warned, “Be very careful of people trying to smuggle in their ideology [into environmental policies].” More recently, DeSantis declared he is “not in the pews of the church of the global warming leftists.” DeSantis’s competitors in the 2024 presidential election will be put at a disadvantage if they neglect developing a clear environmental policy platform. His environmental plans are carefully sculpted to avoid conservative criticism and have strong follow through, making them appealing to Republicans and moderates.

The Department of Physics and Astronomy Presents:

A Public Lecture

The Science and Art of Taming Light”

Professor Lene Hau

Harvard University

Wednesday, October 5, 2022

Wilder 104, 7:00 pm