May 5, 2014
Passionate fans devote to local sports, entertainment It’s no secret that fans of the Portland Trail Blazers are devoted to their home team. No matter what sport or activity people enjoy watching, they will support who they like until the end. Passion for professional sport teams is not anything new. However, seeing the Trail Blazers make it to the second round of the playoffs, is not all that common. The last time they made it to the second round of the NBA playoffs was 14 years ago on May 2, 2000. Portland is known for having passionate fans for all professional sport teams
Jonathan Williams Opinion editor represented in the Rose City. It doesn’t matter if people are passionate for sports, music, theater, or movies they will always stick with who they support. Rooting for the underdog is something that many
people enjoy doing. It is hard to disagree that the Trail Blazers are the underdogs in the NBA playoffs. Fans of the team were ecstatic May 2, as Damian Lillard was able to achieve a three point shot beating the Houston Rockets by one point, 99-98. Having athletic teams that everyday people can connect with on a social and emotional level promotes what sports and performance is all about, passion. Giving people something to root and hope for presents them with the opportunity to become engaged in following some-
thing they might not have before. There will always be die heart fans that will only root for one team in any given sport. The economic benefits gained from fan support is tremendous as sport teams gain the following of larger numbers than usual of people that are interested in their sport. It isn’t all that different in the entertainment business. When a new actor or actress is first cast in a role, some viewers might be skeptical of their overall ability. As viewers begin to
warm-up to the newcomer, they may even start to build a fan base. Once people start to devote some of their time and energy focusing on one performer or sports team, it is unlikely that they will stop supporting that particular person or team. The level of a supporters pride may often vary. Some might attend one or two games or performances a year whereas others might purchase season tickets so they can support them as often as they can. Not everyone can afford to buy tickets to the events of those that they support because it isn’t inexpen-
sive to attend professional sporting or theater events often. Fans will do what works best for them to support their team. If that means watching them on TV, and wearing cloths that advertise their favorite team or performer, that is what they will do. Fans also like to use social media to spread the word of their support to all of their friends. Once people find a group or person that they like, it is unlikely they will stop supporting them once they become interested.
Jonathan Williams can be reached at email@example.com
Linfield continues to move toward climate neutrality Joey Gale Office of Sustainability In January of 2014, Linfield College submitted its third greenhouse gas emissions report to the American College and University President’s Climate Committee. Back on April 22, 2008, president Thomas L. Hellie signed the ACUPCC commitment, setting a goal for Linfield College to reach climate neutrality by the year 2060. To increase the accuracy of Linfield’s last greenhouse gas emissions report, the Office of Sustainability is partnering with Nancy Broshot’s Environmental Problem Solving class. In order for Linfield College to reach zero net carbon emissions by the year 2060, all facets of the report will most likely need to be improved upon. Most recently, Broshot’s class constructed a transportation commuter survey, which was sent out to the students, staff, faculty, and administrators at the college. With no commuter transportation data included in the 2013-2014 fiscal year report, Broshot’s class aims to establish a definitive method for gathering said information to simplify the data collection process for future reports. The main focus of the commuter transportation survey was to assess an individual’s method of transportation to and from Linfield College. Additionally, survey takers were asked to provide information on the type of vehicle they drive, level of interest they had in a rideshare program on campus, method of transportation around the Linfield campus, etc. Getting an idea of what
students at Linfield would like to see for transportation presents useful information for administrators. Students in Broshot’s class are working with Linfield’s International Programs Office to potentially add in-country transportation data from abroad January Term trips into next year’s report., as well as communicating with the Facilities Office. By analyzing various areas of the college, which are responsible for a significantly large portion of Linfield’s overall carbon emissions, the Environmental Problem Solving class hopes to create a more precise report that can be improved upon by future Linfield students. The Office of Sustainability is actively working with Broshot’s class to create a more sustainably-minded campus, and with additional research put forth towards Linfield’s greenhouse gas emissions reports, we are heading in the right direction. If you are interested in the results of Broshot’s survey and additional studies, the findings will be uploaded to Linfield’s Digital Commons. Please feel free to contact Duncan Reid from the Office of Sustainability to get involved with current oncampus projects. The Office of Sustainability is always looking for students interested in participating in various projects. Having students who want to promote sustainability is a vital part of what makes Linfield a successful school. If you have any ideas or projects that you or your friends would like to see happen on campus please contact us. The Office of Sustainability can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org
Political campaigns face scrutiny
Times editorial board Los Angeles Times Does the First Amendment allow states to make it a criminal offense to disseminate false statements about a political candidate? Should citizens who fear that their free speech will be chilled by such a law be permitted to challenge it? Only the second question was argued before the Supreme Court. If the court rules that the Susan B. Anthony List, an antiabortion group, may not challenge Ohio’s criminalization of false political speech, that law and similar ones in other states will remain on the books. Ohio’s law prohibits false statements about a candidate if they are made knowingly or with reckless
disregard of whether they might be false. If the Ohio Elections Commission decides the law was violated, it “shall refer” the matter to prosecutors. During the 2010 election campaign, the Susan B. Anthony List planned to post an ad on billboards accusing then-Rep. Steven Driehaus, D-Ohio, of voting “for taxpayer-funded abortion” when he supported the Affordable Care Act. Driehaus learned about the forthcoming ad and complained to the commission. Fearing legal consequences, the ad agency that owned the billboard space refused to post the ad. A three-member panel of the commission found “probable cause” that the statement was false.
The Susan B. Anthony List tried to challenge the constitutionality of the law, saying that it had the effect of “chilling” political speech, but the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals wouldn’t consider the group’s objection. The court reasoned that no “case or controversy” existed because the full elections commission never made a final decision on Driehaus’ complaint and because the group couldn’t establish that it faced an “imminent threat” of prosecution. The 6th Circuit’s decision should be overturned by the Supreme Court. Citizens who believe that a law chills speech shouldn’t have to surmount high legal hurdles to challenge it in court. If the court were to con-
sider the constitutionality of Ohio’s law, there are good reasons to believe it would be struck down. In 2012, the justices invalidated a federal law making it a crime for a person to falsely claim to have received military honors. In that decision, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote: “The remedy for speech that is false is speech that is true.” In extreme cases, a politician who feels his reputation has been besmirched by a false statement may file a civil libel suit. But using criminal law to police truth in political debate is unnecessary and invites abuse. A ruling for the Susan B. Anthony List in this case would be a first step toward recognition of that principle.