13 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(11/30/14 11:28pm)
As if making a living as an artist was not hard enough, one website has made it even more difficult for graduates in the creative field. Fiverr is a peer-to-peer online services platform where users can exchange creative and professional services to one another for $5. The site provides services ranging from help with translating different languages to coding assistance, but the biggest controversy regarding Fiverr’s business model is its logo design service.
The site works by allowing designers to upload their portfolios to the site in order to attract entrepreneurs looking for a logo for their new company. After specifying what they want, entrepreneurs will pay designers as little as $5 for the rights to use it.
A variety of issues have risen as a result of Fiverr’s business model. First off, $5 is an extreme low-ball payment for a designer’s talents. As a precedent, the logo you see below for BP sold for $211 million.
Now, of course not every logo is going to sell for that much; but you should now have a better idea of just how cheap $5 is to charge for a logo. My first thought was that if designers aren’t happy with the compensation for their time and effort, they should simply stop using it. But, the truth is that the consequences of Fiverr extend beyond just the designers choosing to use it.
Fiverr is making it even harder for college grads in the creative field to find a job. Business owners can now opt out of hiring designers and instead outsource their work to “designers” on Fiverr.
I say designers in quotations because in addition to eliminating jobs, Fiverr is becoming a hub for fraudulent activity. This article from Folyo.com recounts one designer who went undercover as an entrepreneur looking for a logo and found that a majority of the portfolios he came across were made up of appropriated work. The image below speaks for itself.
With that being said, I can’t help but wonder: Why would anyone use Fiverr.com? Even from the entrepreneurial perspective, you would be building the brand image of your new company around a logo for which you paid a stranger $5. In the rare case that the image you bought was not stolen from another designer, your logo is not going to be quality design work. The good designers are too smart to make the same mistake as Simon Oxley, designer of the Twitter logo, who received $6 from Twitter for his design.
The long-term consequences of Fiverr are real. Designers struggling to make a living are resorting to letting entrepreneurs low-ball the cost of their talents, in addition to putting their own work at risk for appropriation by fraudulent designers using the site. Both the designers who spent four years earning a degree and the entrepreneurs looking to start their own business are starting off on the wrong foot by using Fiverr.
Some things are worth paying extra for — the face of your business being one of them. Stay away from Fiverr and instead start hiring designers for the positions they have rightfully earned.
Reach the columnist at ralynch3@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @ryguy916
Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.
Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.
Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter
(11/14/14 1:30am)
Curiosity has been known to drive innovation, but recent news shows us that it can also sometimes strip us of our rights. As we continue experimenting with advanced technologies and finding new applications to use them in, we find ourselves losing some of the freedoms our constitutional rights once promised. A recent Virginia court ruling permits police to force you to unlock your phone if you are using a fingerprint sensor.
This loophole in our Fifth Amendment rights says that while passcodes are protected as a form of knowledge, we are required by law to hand over physical evidence or DNA information. Because fingerprints are considered a physical object, police are therefore allowed to force you to give it to them.
Apple’s Touch ID feature is supposed to be a convenient means for unlocking phones without the hassle of entering a passcode every time you want to use your device. After making its debut only a year ago, it didn’t take long for lawmakers to exploit its self-authenticating reliance.
This ruling was linked to a case dating back to February where one man was charged with strangling his girlfriend and allegedly saving a video of it on his phone.
While lawmakers may have good intentions for passing the law as a means for bringing justice to the victim, the truth is that in the long-run, this loophole is going to cause more problems than it solves.
For those of you using a fingerprint sensor, realize that you are now indirectly giving up consent. While you can argue that you shouldn’t have anything to hide in the first place, the truth is that this goes beyond just your cellphone.
Look at this ruling in a different context where this ruling doesn’t seem as justified: home security. With the popularity in biometric readers increasing, this could mean the elimination of warrants being required to enter someone’s home. Additionally, this law is also contradictory to vehicle searches. Asking people to hand over their fingerprint is no different than asking them to hand over their keys, yet one requires a warrant and one does not.
Requiring people to hand over physical objects and DNA has and always should be meant strictly for identification purposes, not gaining access to private information.It is an abuse of power and has the potential to knock down walls that were once put up to protect us against such an invasion of privacy.
While biometric technology is making our lives easier, consumers need to realize that they are putting their once promised rights at risk. What was intended to help sustain our personal privacy is now giving it away. And technology is only expected to continue advancing in this direction toward more medium for biometric reliance.
Recent events involving the virtual leakage of celebrity nudes made it clear that the information stored on our phones is not safe. Now, we see physical means of depriving this security; only it's the people who granted us that privacy in the first place that are the ones taking it away.
Reach the columnist at ralynch3@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @ryguy916Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter
(11/07/14 1:16am)
With the rise in the popularity of online courses over the past few years, particularly here at ASU, I cannot help but think: What’s next? Virtual courses have made it possible for students from all around the country to obtain a degree from our university, in addition to helping those who need to work full-time or take care of family. While I fully support the idea of creating more convenient means for obtaining a degree, I think there is untapped potential in the extent of our educational opportunities, one of these being a more nomadic approach to education.
Brian Chesky, co-founder of Airbnb, recently discussed his own predictions for the future of education. Chesky believes that 20 years from now, students will be moving to study in different cities on a monthly basis. The idea is that if you were, for instance, studying art, you could spend a month in Paris, a month in NYC, etc. The idea behind this is that fieldwork, meeting new people and constantly experiencing new environments is going to pay off far more than sitting in a classroom or behind a computer screen ever could.
If you’re like me, your first thought was probably something like, “Wow! Now if only money grew on trees.” But, the truth is that with the right agreements and policies in place, this type of education could cost no more than what most students are already paying for a private school education.
The idea behind this vision is a reliance on peer-to-peer collaboration. Partnerships between university students could mean an exchange system where you live in another traveling student’s apartment. It could also mean still paying your home university tuition but borrowing textbooks and other materials that saved you enough money to be used toward your flight.
Here's the truth: putting this system in place isn’t the hard part. The hard part is making it affordable. Semester at Sea is a study abroad program that most closely resembles this vision for the future of education. In this program, students spend a semester on a cruise that travels to different cities throughout the world where they take part in fieldwork and cultural expeditions. The problem is that most in-state students would be paying more for one semester of this program than they would for all four years at ASU.
Mitigating the costs of such a system is a hurdle that needs to be tackled for this vision to become a reality. However, the ability of most international universities to charge little to nothing in tuition gives hope that a system can someday be put in place that shares those benefits with ambitious students from around the world looking for a new, more collaborative and constantly changing educational atmosphere.
Reach the columnist at ralynch3@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @ryguy916Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
(10/29/14 12:40am)
Time and time again we are reminded to think twice before posting something on the Internet. Even from our personal accounts, we have the responsibility of upholding a positive representation of our on-campus organizations, our jobs, our school, yada, yada, yada—the list goes on and on. Well, one mobile application decided to eliminate that responsibility.
(10/24/14 2:09am)
With the approval of the “Central Station” project, downtown Phoenix is one step closer to getting the skyline it deserves.
A recent vote by city councilors approved a Chicago-based developer to lead the project and build what is going to be the tallest residential building in town. The building, which will be located at Central Avenue and Van Buren Street, will be incorporated into the already existing Central Station.
Affordable housing in downtown Phoenix is scarce. The goal of this building is to provide relatively low-cost housing, with rent ranging from $800-$1,600 to accommodate the needs of both students and professionals.
This $82 million dollar project is expected to begin development late next year and should be completed by 2017.
Before locals start naming off the list of things that they think this money could be better used toward, hear me out. Building a skyscraper in downtown Phoenix is a baby step — an admittedly expensive baby step, but one with definite long-term potential.
Coming to Arizona as an out-of-state student, I will admit that I was a bit shocked by the lack of evening activities in downtown Phoenix. During the day, it is a bustling business city, but once the clock hits 5 p.m., it’s like someone flicked the city off with a switch. Phoenix is a beautiful city — the architecture, the coffee shops, the restaurants. It’s just missing a crowd that consistently visits these places. Part of this reason is that not many people can afford to live there. With rent lower in Tempe, students tend to find housing there and just commute each day. This is where nightlife in downtown Phoenix takes a toll.
The addition of more affordable apartments downtown will help make Phoenix more than just a daytime destination. New apartments will be the first step, and then other things will begin to accommodate accordingly. This could mean more grocery stores, more parks, or anything else that will continue contributing to the development of Phoenix as a residential location, not just a commuter destination.
Still not convinced? Think back to Roosevelt Row prior to undergoing the development process that transformed it from boarded-up buildings and crack houses to art studios and gallery space. This area gradually transformed into a nationally known art and cultural events hub in the urban core of downtown.
Passion for the arts catalyzed the transformation of Roosevelt Row and other things began falling into place after that. Crime rates dropped and more people from around the Phoenix-Metro area began moving into the area to experience the cultural vibrancy that it offered.
The Central Station project has the potential to attract even more people downtown. Downtown Phoenix has the potential to become a beautiful, vibrant, residential city. We just need to provide more options for people to experience it.
This project is meant to do more than just make the skyline look pretty. It’s going to assist downtown Phoenix in transforming into the urbanized paradise in the sun that it is capable of becoming — a bustling city by day and night.Any “Field of Dreams” fans out there? “If you build it, they will come.” Once we have the right systems in place, the rest will come.Reach the columnist at ralynch3@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @ryguy916Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
(10/09/14 9:49pm)
Have you ever noticed how most of us can watch movie characters get killed off without even batting an eye, but as soon as a dog gets killed, our stomachs tend to drop? Unfortunately, the events that took place this week are no movie. Dog-lovers everywhere bow their heads in mourning over the loss of Excalibur, the dog of Teresa Romero Ramos, a Spanish nurse-aid and Ebola victim who is being held in quarantine.
The photos below from the Daily Mail Online depict a scene that does look like something out of a movie. Thousands of people had gathered outside of Ramos’s home to protest the euthanization of her dog.
Despite the family’s request, including her husband who is also being held in quarantine, the dog was put to sleep earlier this week on court order.
The husband made a post on Facebook last week stating:If they are so worried with this issue I think we can find another type of alternative solution, such as quarantining the dog and put him under observation like they did with me. Or should they sacrifice me as well just in case?
Animal rights activists everywhere are infuriated — and they have a right to be. Why is it that Ramos’s husband was placed in quarantine, but the initial response for how to handle the dog was to kill it? Neither the dog nor the husband had been confirmed as having the virus, yet the precautionary measures being taken for each of them fell on opposite ends of the spectrum. The dog was not confirmed to have Ebola, and even if it did, scientists are still trying to figure out if he would even be able to spread the virus to humans.
I understand the risk of the dog spreading the virus, but why was there such an urgency to kill the dog? The husband was quarantined to prevent spreading it to anyone else. Why couldn’t the dog be treated the same? Neither of them were going anywhere.
For those of you thinking that humans and animals do not need to be treated equally, at least think about this: The Spanish government is setting an awful example moving forward for how to go about treating this virus. Excalibur was killed out of fear by the Spanish government, and who is to say that humans aren’t going to be treated the same? We cannot find a cure for Ebola by simply killing anything that catches it. Research and testing are going to be required if we are ever going to find a cure. But now, one more step toward the solution has just been wasted.
Ebola is not an airborne virus. Furthermore, there is no set-in-stone proof for authorities to confirm the dog was capable of spreading the virus. All of the articles you see online regarding Ebola use words in their titles such as “scientists worry…” or “experts believe….” Until I start seeing articles that use words like “confirm” or “prove,” I am not convinced that dog needed to be put down immediately.
Excalibur was in isolation. Excalibur did not pose an immediate threat. Excalibur was not suffering. Excalibur did not need to be killed.
Reach the columnist at ralynch3@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @ryguy916
Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.
Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.
Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
(10/02/14 10:15pm)
Remember when elementary school teachers would tell us, “You need to learn this, because it will be important later down the road.” Well, nearly a decade has passed, and I still find myself waiting for cursive writing or the quadratic formula to come in handy.
(09/25/14 10:39pm)
Good news for all the broke college students out there. Instead of putting your money towards plane tickets, hostels, and tourist attractions, try investing in Adobe Photoshop instead. At least, that is what one Dutch student did: Zilla van der Born convinced her friends and family that she had been backpacking through Southeast Asia for five weeks, when in reality she had never left her home city.
From posing in a local Buddhist temple, to snorkeling in her apartment complex’s pool, van der Born used Photoshop to convince all of her Facebook friends that she had been traveling the world for five weeks. Van der Born was inspired to conduct this scheme as part of her university thesis, but her intentions for doing it go far beyond just getting a good grade.
She wanted to prove how easy it is to distort reality using social media. Van der Born states, “Everybody knows that pictures of models are manipulated. But we often overlook the fact that we manipulate reality also in our own lives.” Despite van der Born’s particular “fakecation” getting international attention, the truth is that a majority of society has taken part in similar fabrications.
While some of us are certainly better at doing it than others (reference the photo below for proof), it appears that this generation can no longer resist exploiting the advanced features of today’s technology to enhance the way others view them online. Regardless of the kill involved in creating these illusions, the truth is we don’t need another article arguing how society manipulates social media to give off false appearances to others. Instead, let’s look at it this way: By augmenting reality, your manipulated photos of over-saturated sunsets and filtered selfies are taking away from the true identity of this era.
Many of our grandparents grew up at a time where only black and white photos existed. Many of our parents used Polaroid cameras that produced low-saturated, low contrast photos. Even many of our older siblings grew up with that vintage, unsharpened look that displayed the time and date the photo was taken in the bottom right-hand corner. These photos were accurate depictions of those generations’ lifestyles. The difference between then and now is that photography for most people then was a 2-step process: Take the photo and print it. Today, we have adopted an additional step in between those two: editing. Too many people use this middle step to manipulate a photo to the point that it isn’t an accurate depiction of reality.
Technology has given us the tools to essentially time travel with our photos. Going for that throwback, early '90s look? Throw a vintage filter on it. Going for that futuristic, new age look? Saturate that photo ‘til it looks like a coloring book. But, what about a modern look? What does a typical 21st century photo really even look like? This process of distorting reality online has hurt the identity of our generation and caused us to lose touch with our present reality.
I understand there is a dilemma between making a photo look as good as possible and preserving the actual reality of it, but it’s time we balance out where our photos fall on that spectrum. When you look back on your photos 10 or 20 years down the road, you are going to want to remember that moment for what it was, not what you wanted others to think it was.I'll leave you with this: Did van der Born fool us any more than we already fool each other?Reach the columnist at ralynch3@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @ryguy916Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
(09/17/14 10:50pm)
Since 2000, researchers believe that the human attention span has decreased by 4 seconds, making it even shorter than that of a goldfish. Despite the common belief that technology, such as smartphones and social media, is the cause for this decline in attention span, some tend to overlook all the new doors that technology and the Internet have also opened up for us in terms of educational opportunities. One of those ideas is TED Talks. For those of you unfamiliar, TED is a non-profit devoted to spreading ideas, usually in the form of powerful talks that last fewer than 18 minutes.
Despite research indicating students not typically being able to focus for more than 15 – 20 minutes in college lectures, universities still implement classes ranging from 45 minutes to 3 hours long. By the time class is halfway over, students’ notes have gotten less detailed, their eyes have gotten droopier and their overall engagement with the material has vanished.
TED talks, on the other hand, keep it short and sweet. Topics range from personal development, such as Dan Gilbert’s “The surprising science of happiness” to professional development, such as Simon Sinek’s, “How great leaders inspire action.” Graduates, do you ever think to yourself, “Why didn’t they teach me this kind of stuff in college?” That’s what TED Talks do. Watch one TED Talk per day, and it will teach you more about yourself and the world around you than four years of college combined.
Of course, watching TED Talks is not something that’s going to be put on a résumé. But, the topics discussed are something that can be brought up in intellectually stimulating, everyday conversations, as well as future job interviews. Today, students are constantly trying to diversify themselves in order to impress future employers. Graduate schools, law schools, and med schools are all looking for applicants with a broad spectrum of interests and experiences. They want to see applicants who demonstrate knowledge learned outside the classroom.
TED Talks are a short and simple medium for obtaining such knowledge. Think of it like an elective: There’s hundreds to choose from that cater to an individual’s interests, and, to make them even better, they are free. Your college degree is what will get your foot in the door for an interview, but the skills TED Talks teach is what will get you the job. For instance, Amy Cuddy’s TED Talk, “Your body language shapes who you are” provides fascinating insight into ways that body language can influence other people’s perceptions, as well as our own body chemistry. More often than not, this type of material is not discussed in a college classroom. Even when it is, students have typically already maxed out their attention span for the day and aren’t fully engaged with the material.
TED is a worldwide community of passionate people with an interest in extending their knowledge outside of the classroom. Some people start their day by watching the news; some read books for enjoyment; and some simply hit the snooze button until minutes before class. I challenge you to take some time each day, even if it means using the time that might have been wasted scrolling through your Facebook newsfeed, to watch a short, 18-minute TED Talk. Doing this will improve your everyday conversations, as well as your attention span.
Let’s show those goldfish who is really in charge around here. Reach the columnist at ralynch3@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @ryguy916Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
(09/10/14 11:21pm)
As time progresses, cultural constructs change, values transform and we struggle to hold on to the traditions we once valued so highly. One of those endangered traditions is fraternity life at ASU.
Like many incoming freshmen, I came to college expecting my weekends to be full of house parties with supermodels, kegs and the occasional pig running through the house. Instead, I found that fraternity row had been knocked down. Former Interfraternity Vice President Davey Breitman stated, "Nobody wants to see a large part of the Greek community's history end up a pile of rubble. Brothers of our houses from up to 50 years ago lived there; it's a pretty historical landmark." Unfortunately, a pile of rubble is, indeed, all that remains today.
Fraternities were left with the option to either move into sketchy complexes in higher risk areas, residential neighborhoods where they disturb families or back into University housing at Vista Del Sol’s Greek Village. When I think of fraternity life at ASU, I think of the phrase, “You don’t have to go home, you just have to get the heck out of here.”
This isn’t going to be an argument blaming Michael Crow and the University. This isn’t going to be an argument blaming previous incidents that led to the punishment of our fraternities. I am not going to blame anyone for the changes taking place. But I will say that what is responsible for these changes is time and social evolution. One might still argue that fraternities have been the victims of the administration, but they fail to overlook the fact that the administration was also a victim — of something even greater. Wild parties, hazing and underage drinking are no longer tolerated the way they were 30 years ago. Pressure from Tempe families, police and political figures have led the administration at ASU with no choice but to drop the iron fist on fraternities as soon as they slip up.
The same morals, rules and status quo that existed when some of our fathers or grandfathers rushed fraternities are no longer accepted today. For example, in previous generations, universities typically turned a blind eye to fraternity parties. Today, new laws have been imposed in Tempe that require special housing permits for affiliates of Greek organizations, as well as a heftier fine for noise complaints.
I am not trying to discredit the brotherhood or camaraderie exhibited by fraternity brothers at ASU. I’m simply saying that as we continue being faced with hurdles to jump over and compromise for, our definition of fraternity is getting further and further away from what it meant to the previous generation. And I’m sure that the previous generation’s definition varied greatly from that before it, too. Change is inevitable and can be good, but here we are at ASU, 85 years after the establishment of Greek life on campus, with limited housing, limited freedom and limited patience. What’s next?
Fraternity life is dying out at ASU. It’s not something I want to see happen; it’s just something I think will happen. So, for those of you still thinking about a joining a fraternity — I say do it. It was one of the best decisions I made here at college. Just remember to enjoy it while it lasts. The type of fraternity your father joined no longer exists at ASU. And the type of fraternity you've joined, if any at all, might not be there for your kids.Reach the columnist at ralynch3@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @ryguy916Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
(09/08/14 10:15pm)
It seems like every day there is a new article published on how corrupt and technologically dependent the millennial generation is. There is a noticeable absence of articles about what society is going to do about it. It is true that today some teenagers and young adults are so caught up in social media, romantic comedies, and video games that they don’t even know "what an ISIS is" or “what Russia’s deal is.” But how about rather than beating a dead horse, someone does something about it?
(08/26/14 11:00pm)
As a university that prides itself on diversity and inclusion, ASU does a great job at attracting students from around the world. With nearly 4,000 international students enrolled, the opportunity to learn about students from all different walks of life is there. The problem is that this is, more often than not, an overlooked opportunity.
I will openly admit that when previously paired up with international students, I thought this meant that I was going to be stuck doing a majority of the work. As a result of this mindset, I typically did end up doing a majority of the work. I now see this was my fault.
Let me explain this better by sharing some insights I gained after spending a semester studying abroad in Singapore, a city-state and island country in Southeast Asia. Although the population is predominantly Chinese-speaking, English is the primary spoken language, which was going to make it easy for me to succeed in my classes — or so I thought.
On the first day of classes, I quickly learned that I was going to typically be the only white student among about fifty other locals. Right off the bat, I wanted to demonstrate to my classmates that despite primarily being on study abroad to enjoy exploring Southeast Asia, I was also going to be serious about my classes. I showed up to all of my classes, participated everyday and did well on all my assignments. Just as I was beginning to think I had proven that I wasn’t just another privileged exchange student there to slack off, a group project was assigned. The classmates to my left and right quickly scattered away to search for group mates, and as I continued to approach other students, they either greeted me with, “We already found our team,” or avoided making eye contact with me entirely. This left all of the exchange students together to be on a team. Aside from making projects more difficult, since we were all unfamiliar with grading criteria there, this prevented us from meeting locals and gaining a better understanding for Singaporean culture.
I talked with other exchange students and quickly learned that these types of behaviors were becoming a trend. Singaporeans are extremely hardworking, goal-oriented, and not going to let any distractions get in the way of graduating with top honors. As exchange students, we were seen as one of those distractions.
After this experience, I began to think back to all the times that I had done the same thing in my classes at ASU. I assumed that international students were not going to put in the time, so I took on a larger part of the workload without even giving them a chance — and I complained about it the entire time, too.
Rather than viewing international students as a distraction in our classes, it is time we start viewing them as valuable additions to our learning experience. These students are here to experience our culture, but we continue to put up walls that induce them to only hang out with other international students. The biggest detriment to any study abroad experience is latching on to people from your own country and never leaving your comfort zone. However, we often put international students in a position to do just this.
Many of us can agree that one of the best feelings in life is feeling welcomed. A simple, “How was your weekend?" or a suggestion for somewhere they should visit will go a long way for an international student. It is important that we acknowledge their differences, but continue to treat them the way you would treat any other student at ASU.
What good is a diverse campus if we are not taking advantage of it? Enough of the grunting when paired with an international student, and enough of the "foreign cliques" around campus. It’s time we start living up to the diversity and inclusion standards that ASU has made possible for us.Reach the columnist at ralynch3@asu.edu or follow him on Twitter @ryguy916Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.
(08/20/14 9:39pm)
Like many of you, I am someone who has loved and lost. Someone who understands that twisting feeling you get in your chest after hearing someone you know has passed away. Someone who understands that innate desire we have to do something — anything really — to try to bring light to the situation. Someone who understands that mourning is inevitable in these difficult situations. What I don’t understand, however, is why this mourning is being done on social media.