Pledging Allegiance to One Flag Only

NPR and the local radios have been taking callers expressing their opinions about the Charleston tragedy, which has sparked larger controversy over the Confederate flag. Working for my high school newspaper in northern Virginia, I contemplated the topic during a piece dealing with race, in which I interviewed a diversity of students. Not one of the students whom I spoke with believed that the Confederate flag was an acceptable motif or symbol. One of my peers even explained his misconception about the flag’s history, seeing it only as a way of displaying Southern pride (until he came to understand its associations and context). 

Erected as a symbol of the South, its declared President and the values it fought for, the Confederate flag brings to mind the Civil War era: the most divisive time period in American history. The Civil War, inspired by and fought for for more reasons than one, is undeniably marked by the brutality of slavery. While listening to the radio, many claimed that the Confederate flag stands for southern pride or for their ancestors who were veterans of the Confederation. Obviously the Confederate lost to the Union and thankfully, all fifty states are under one United States of America, one president and one flag. Pride in one’s ancestors or home is understandable and should go without need for justification, regardless of disagreement to fundamental principles they may have believed in. However, the flag is a widespread symbol tainted by the very principles the Confederacy stood for. 

The Confederate flag may not stand to instigate, but the context from which it was born should not be forgotten or replaced. The Confederate flag should not fly in fronts of government buildings (or at all, in my opinion). This is not an encroachment of privacy or upon individual rights — this is a decision founded upon a consensus that the larger connotations of the flag — slavery, divisiveness, secession — overshadow personal meaning and should not stand at the forefront of American foundations or values, but inside of a museum where its meaning will be preserved with other memories of the past.  

As is the choice to fly the flag and believe in its continuity, the choice for companies, such as Amazon and Walmart, to discontinue its sale is completely within their rights. Reddit, an online news/social media forum, has taken steps to shut down communities deemed to encourage hatred or condemning of certain groups of people. In response to an idea heard on the radio: their choice to discontinue Confederate flag merchandise is completely unlike discontinuing the sale of LGBTQ merchandise. The LGBTQ flag symbolizes peoples’ pride and encourages their own self and societal acceptance. Fundamentally, it promotes love, not hatred. If there were a flag symbolizing hatred toward the LGBTQ community, that one would be unacceptable in accordance with Amazon’s policies. The Confederate flag is like its opposition; while it may promote unity amongst people of the American South, it also draws a division between America and within a community that once stood as a force against the other half. 

To address fears over encroachment on rights and freedoms of speech, worries over whether other motifs, such as the cross, should not be had. The Confederate flag is more than a symbol of unity: it is a symbol of hatred and a statement of one side against the other. To compare a flag of racial supremacy can be compared only to the Nazi flag (not churches, or anything else). 

The swastika, originally a Sanskrit motif meaning “well-being" (which has since been tarnished), was taken and used by the Nazis, who conducted one of the largest genocides in history, targeting multiple groups of peoples they superficially perceived as beneath them: most famously, people of Jewish faith. Nazi Germany and the Confederate States of America existed as vastly different bodies in their actions, intentions and contexts. Yet the Nazi flag is now banned in Germany, France (with the exception of historical purpose) and Hungary. This opinion is not unpopular; actress Whoopi Goldberg stated, “It would be like having the swastika flag flying on your next-door neighbor. If it continues to fly, the statement that’s being made is that ‘We miss this really crappy part of history.'” 

The fact that church shooter Dylan Roof used the Confederate flag to declare his twisted belief in white supremacy and in some eyes, to reignite a race war, is not illogical. The flag stands for exactly this, despite additional meanings it may take on by individuals. The weight of history is not one that can be replaced.

On the topic of the race war, I would like to highlight another point on the radio concerning race and whether it matters: one caller stated that if racism existed, then Rachel Dolezal could never have gained power. Thankfully, the radio host proceeded to almost immediately thank and dismiss her. This does not prove that racism does not exist because an African American person can gain political influence; it has proved a widespread agreement that one’s race and ethnic background is not a choice, but an unchangeable part of oneself that is fundamental to being and pertinent to perspective and consequently, societal perception and experience. 

Racism will not simply cease to exist with the banning of the flag and the events of the Civil War will not fade to fiction. For those who fight that the flag is not racist, is it as easy to deny the fact that the Confederacy existed to divide and separate? Honor of individuals should not be stuck to a flag, but should exist in memories of people who should be able to place meaning in people as they are instead of causes they stand for. Was Roof’s usage of the Confederate flag so far manipulated that its meaning was indecipherable? Was it so far off from its roots that his donning was illogical? 

Southern society may be decorated with Confederate-themed paraphernalia and a single flag’s removal may seem insignificant in terms of its extensiveness, but the larger statement that its removal will make will echo hope for the future of America. Just because change may be hard to make or peoples’ ways of thinking may be ingrained or unchangeable, it should not discourage a belief in change. South Carolina state Sen. Lee Bright stated, “These are honorable men who fought for their homes, their home state; to disgrace them in the name of political correctness is just wrong. They’re not here to defend themselves.” 

The removal of the flag is not a disgrace to their honor and the sacrifices they made will be forever remembered; but the flag has been a longtime symbol of Confederate values, which are outdated and no longer have a place in American society. The honor of the soldiers will remain, but alone, and without need for support by the flag. At the cornerstone of the flag are beliefs in separation, resistance and supremacy. By removing the flag, we are not removing the existence of these soldiers or their individual lives; we are removing the side for which they fought: one that exists no longer, losing to a unification that is the strength at the core of the United States of America. 

While memories and honor of Confederate soldiers are not up to us to judge to remain, the flag as a symbolic cause should not. By removing the flag, we are taking a step to remove a way of thinking. We are not working backwards; we are working for a stronger future based upon unity and acceptance and without any semblances of separation or hints of supremacy. 

The unforgiving history that flies with the Confederate flag is one that cannot be buried or denied — it is one that will ring with reminders of slavery, divisiveness and a history of hatred and discrimination, and should be lowered from its staff and laid to rest. 

Take down the #ConfederateFlag at the SC Capitol. To many, it is a symbol of racial hatred. Remove it now to honor #Charleston victims.

— Mitt Romney (@MittRomney) June 20, 2015

Good point, Mitt. https://t.co/Ryusfp8Xbh

— President Obama (@POTUS) June 21, 2015

Movie: "Everything Before Us"

I am a long-time, loyal fan of Wong Fu Productions, an independent film production company started by Wesley Chan, Ted Fu, and Philip Wang, three University of California (San Diego) grads. Their YouTube has garnered more than two million followers through short films (my favorites), music videos and vlogs. What I appreciate most about their videos are the very typical yet thought-provoking moments that shine through in planning, dialogue, videography and plots of each short. Their stories are playful and serious, and each portrayal of emotion is deep and meaningful. (One of my favorites is "The Last," starring Kinna Grannis and Harry Shum, Jr. -- confession: I cried.)

This past semester, I enrolled in Asian American Experience (a sociology/religion and culture class). This class was unique: for the first time, I was talking openly about culture in both an academic and personal way. It opened a forum for discussion of race and culture in various contexts, one of them being media. As a Multimedia Journalism major and Asian American student, WongFu was of great interest to me and I decided to include it in my studies concerning media and Asian Americans (some broad points of study included "yellowface," "whitewashing," underrepresentation and misrepresentation). 

"We’re committed to portraying Asian Americans in a positive light," Chan said. "It’s important to represent the community as best as we can."

Wang adds, "It's important to show that we're going to build up our star power on our own so that Hollywood can't ignore that we have millions of followers."

In an industry with space for diversity (The Last Airbender, Pitch Perfect's Kimmy Jin and Lily, How I Met Your Mother and most recently, Aloha), WongFu's commitment to portraying Asian Americans fairly and accurately (and portraying them at all) is refreshing and encouraging for the future of Hollywood.

So when the WongFu team announced their plans to produce their very first full-length movie, Everything Before Us (2015), I was pretty excited. The movie's leads include Brittany Ishibashi, Ki Hong Lee, Chris Riedell, Joanna Sotomura, Randall Park, Victoria Park, Brandon Soo Hoo and Aaron Yoo. The casting, which is almost entirely comprised of Asian American actors and actresses, was a conscious decision.

(Please take five minutes to watch this! It is honest, direct and refreshing.)

A product of their two and a half year journey, Wang explains that the team originally tried to produce a movie in 2008, but was denied by the movie industry because casting Asian actors was "not a good business choice" and "there was no market for it." When WongFu first started, Wang says they weren't trying to be "pioneers" for Asian Americans; they just wanted to tell good stories and happened to be Asian.

They addressed the question of casting perfectly on social media:

..Why not?? It's ironically perfect that our film @everythingbeforeus came out right around the time of this Emma Stone casting controversy. Isn't this be the besT time to support a movie that actually cast AsnAmericans.. and as leads? Hope Hollywood can someday not see us as a liability, just a martial artist, or quirky side kick. We have feelings and stories just like everyone that deserve to be shown and seen. Hollywood is slow, we're not waiting. #timetowatchWFsmovie! #thebiggerpicture

A photo posted by Wong Fu Productions Official (@wongfupro) on Jun 9, 2015 at 9:47pm PDT

So as both a fan and supporter of the team and their beliefs, I watched the film on Vimeo for $4.99. Like always, their videography was stellar. Their plot dealt with emotions and how our lives revolve around them -- nothing is truly black and white. It was realistic, relatable and entertaining while existing as a purely fictional story. Throughout the film, there were thought-provoking moments and scenarios I reminded myself to reflect upon later and quotes that inspired me to think more deeply about my perspective.

As always, WongFu delivered a wonderfully entertaining, inspiring and moving film that was rich with quality and depth. Their art is a product that speaks for itself -- both in creative expression and in everything that they stand for.

Their film portrays an undeniable reality: that the human experience is one that transcends race.

(Watch the trailer below.)

Journalism Ethics: Photo/Video Rights

This past semester, I learned a little about journalism ethics in my Media Institutions (COMM 2084) class, including First Amendment rights. As our generation learns and grows with social media and technology, it becomes increasingly vital that we understand its impacts, potential and sphere of influence. Social media has given rise to many citizen journalists and continues to globalize our increasingly interconnected global society. We are not only citizens of a country, but citizens of the world. 

Here is a short video by the Washington Post on ethics and rights when it comes to civilian rights photography and videography involving law enforcement. Information is from a collaboration between the International Union of Police Associations and the National Press Photographers Association.

(I summarized the points below) 

1. You have the right to record and photograph police unless you’re physically interfering with them performing their duties.
2. You must be on public property, your own property or if you’re on private property, you must have permission from the owner.
3. Police can tell you to step back, but they cannot tell you to stop recording. They cannot order you to leave the area if other members of the public (without cameras) are allowed to stay.
4. If you’re going to record police, do it in an open and obvious manner. 
5. Police say you should avoid interfering and warn not all bystanders know and understand proper use of force. 
6. (acc. to the U.S. Department of Justice) Under the First Amendment, there are no circumstances under which the contents of a camera or recording device should be deleted or destroyed. 

The McKinney, Texas Pool Party

The debate over police brutality has been constantly making headlines with a new incident over the past months. Without context, stories are easily manipulated or twisted to favor the speaker's opinion (but what goes without bias?). In the most recent episode, the McKinney, Texas pool party, on June 16, 2015, Brandon Brooks, a 15-year-old teenager, posted a seven-minute video showing a police officer using force on a teenage girl to establish order and control when a pool party got out of hand.

Being aware of context when absorbing information from the news is imperative to understanding. That being said, here is a list of facts concerning this particular incident: 

•  According to a 2015 estimate, the population of McKinney, Texas is at 155,142 people. It was number one on TIME Money's list, Best Places to Live in 2014. According to 2010 census data, 75 percent of the town residents are white and 10 percent are black. 
• The pool party was hosted by Tatyana Rhodes at Craig Ranch North Community Pool. According to the McKinney police department, they were answering residents' concerns about "multiple juveniles at the location, who do not live in the area or have permission to be there, refusing to leave." The Homeowner's Association rules prohibit more than two guests at the pool. Officers arrived at 7:15 p.m. local time on Friday.
• According to Rhodes, a racially-charged fight started after two white women told a group of African-American teenagers they should "leave and go back to their Section 8 homes." Brooks said he was one of the "only white people in the area when it was happening." He explained that the fight was between a mom and a girl, and that Becton was "running her mouth," but freedom of speech did not warrant Casebolt's actions. 
• Cpl. Eric Casebolt, the officer who is seen briefly pulling a gun and putting his knees on the back of Dajerria Becton, 15, (in addition to shouting profanities) was put on leave and later resigned after meeting with the department's internal affairs uint to review possible charges. He was a 10-year veteran of the McKinney police department. His lawyer, Jane Bishkin, explained he was under the stress of the day and "allowed his emotions to get the better of him." 
• "I'm happy that he's resigning," Rhodes said. "I feel that everyone in McKinney will feel better that he's resigning... it's the first step." 
• According to Michael Quattrin, a community resident whose Facebook post has been shared more than 100,000 shares, explained the situation: 
• "The teenagers (both black and white) were being brought into our neighborhood by the carload because the DJ was tweeting out invites to a “pool party” for $15 (obviously unauthorized by our neighborhood). The teens began fighting with each other and pushing their way into our private pool. Some were jumping our fence. The security guard was accosted when he tried to stop the beginnings of this mob scene."
• "The actions of Eric Casebolt are indefensible." Greg Conley, police chief, said. "I had 12 officers on the scene, and 11 of them performed according to their training."

Headlines demanding racial equality are frequent, but Benet Embry, a 43-year-old African American and eight-year resident of McKinney, said,

"Let me reiterate, the neighbors or the neighborhood did not call the police because this was an African-American party or whatever the situation is," he said. "This was not a racially motivated event -- at all. This whole thing is being blown completely out of proportion." I may or may not agree with everything that the police officer did, but I do believe he was trying to establish order."

#AllLivesMatter