Letter from the Editor-in-Chief

By Joseph Zuloaga ’23

Dear reader,

Thank you so much for reading Issue 5 of The Crusader.

As a senior and the outgoing Editor-in-Chief, I have been a part of the newspaper for four years. During this time, I contributed to 17 wonderful issues, numerous articles, headlines, deadlines and much more. I have grown to love the field of journalism and decided to pursue it as a career.

I am proud of all our accomplishments: a variety of stories, creative layout, new equipment, and countless awards. Amidst all of those achievements we also shared many laughs and puns, whether that be in Room 207, or out on field trips, like the journalism convention.

Now, for some heartfelt thank yous.

First off, thank you to the previous Editors in Chief: Steven Rissotto ’20, Jordan Maralit ’21, and Grayson Salomon ’22 for teaching me how to effectively lead the newspaper staff.

Next to all of the editors and staff. Thank you for being reliable and hardworking people. You all went above and beyond.

Last but not least, thank you Ms. Sutton for the mentorship and guidance. I will cherish all the advice you shared with me.

I wish incoming Editorin-Chief Naomi Lin ’24–the first female Editor-in-Chief–her editors, and the rest of the staff all the best next year.

Here’s to continued success for The Crusader!

Sincerely, Joseph

Zuloaga ’23 2022-2023 Editor-in-Chief

By Angela Jia ’25

Although AI has been around for a while now, ChatGPT took the world by storm when it was released on Nov. 30, 2022 by OpenAI because it forced us to reckon with how far we’re really letting AI go.

There’s a myriad of issues with AI that can’t be covered in a short article. A little known consequence, however, is how AI worsens misogyny in social media and the workplace.

Social media companies use AI to determine what to suppress and amplify in algorithms. A Guardian investigation found that AI tools objectify female bodies by rating pictures of women as more “sexually suggestive” than men in everyday situations, especially when pregnant bellies and exercise are involved.

These tools are meant to limit inappropriate content, but the problem arises when the mere existence of women is flagged as “racy.”

Leon Derczynski, a professor at the IT University of Copenhagen, says, “Objectification of women seems deeply embedded in the system.” This results in the suppression of female presence in public forums, exacerbating current day sexism.

This may be due to the fact that most AI algorithms are developed by males. Margaret Mitchell, chief ethics scientist at AI firm Hugging Face thinks it is because photos used to train the algorithms were labeled by men who perceive fellow men working out as “fitness” but women working out as “sexual.”

Artificial intelligence is only as good as the data it’s trained on, and the data it’s trained on is pretty sexist.

It’s not just social media, though. The inherent sexism in AI tools will also be detrimental to female applicants who are applying to jobs. A few years ago, Amazon used an AI recruiting and hiring tool meant to filter in top talent.

However, that system rated men more highly than women. That’s because the system was trained to observe patterns in hired resumes over a 10 year period, most of which were male.

The AI essentially learned that male applicants were preferable and even downgraded candidates from all-female colleges and penalized resumes including the word “women’s.” Eventually, Amazon scrapped the system, but it carries concerning implications for women in the workforce as companies around the world become more reliant on AI to do jobs.

Proponents of AI say it’s a mark of progress and innovation for humanity, but clearly women are being left behind. It seems that when people say AI leads to progress, they only mean progress for men.

Tensions heat up over gas stoves

By Julien Untalan ’24

We, the people, are under attack from our very own government with their draconian mandate of the future ban of gas appliances.

They mask their ulterior motives by proclaiming that their withdrawal of our property is for our health. They spread the idea that gas stoves pollute our air and poison our children and therefore must be removed; however, do not be fooled by such deception!

While there may be some evidence that gas stoves release some pollutants and cause asthma in children, the government still has no reason to take away our stoves for our health. If they were so concerned for our health, then they would tackle the bigger producers of pollution and hold them accountable for destroying the environment.

We, the common people, do not dump chemical waste into our water. We do not spill millions of gallons of oil into our oceans, nor do we manufacture tons of plastics that continue to litter our Earth.

We simply live our lives in a constant attempt to be happy, a right recognized in the Declaration of Independence. So why must we be punished for the sins of corporations?

It is my American right to be able to roast bell peppers on a gas stove.

It is our duty as Americans to protect our values from all invaders. When the day comes when our gas stoves are ordered to leave our homes, we must resist and demand our rights as Americans do!

Let freedom ring and let our gas stoves cook!