CNN: Can Second Life help teach doctors to treat patients?

Second Life is an online learning program where medical students at Imperial College London are seeing patients, ordering X-rays, making diagnoses and consulting with colleagues all online. Even though it is not real there is still an interactive and hands-on experience. Students use alter egos called avatars to interact with each other online. The third-year med students are part in this pilot program for game-based learning. It’s a way for students to breakup the lecture and textbook learning. "The aim is to develop a more engaging learning environment, rather than just replicate what you have in real life, said Maria Toro-Troconis, a senior learning technologist at Imperial College London. Game-based learning plays a very important role." Also, “Toro-Troconis is looking into possible partnerships with other universities around the world. She envisions a day when nursing students from Australia use Second Life to collaborate with physical therapists from Japan and medical students from the U.S. -- all of them playing, and learning, together in a virtual environment.”

I think this is one of the coolest ideas in teaching medical students. It is a more interesting method to learn, rather than using textbooks and lectures. I know I would enjoy an “on-line gaming” experience much more than the traditional teaching techniques. I think this Second Life program will help students become more engaged in the classroom with lecture discussions. Also, I think it will help students have a more “visual effect” on the reading material, allowing them to actually see what they read. I believe this type of learning is going to spread like wild fire when people are more acceptable of digital print over paper print. Before people are acceptable of total digital print I don’t know what will come first, a total newspaper cross over or all academics incorporating this type of teaching in the curriculum.

Octuplet mom gains public sympathy

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/showbiz/2009/03/28/sbt.octumom.babies.home.cnn


Is she really as bad as the media has made her out to be?

RCFP: Bills to bar Internet regulation, limit data collection introduced

            “A House bill designed to prevent attempts to regulate the Internet was part of a package of privacy measures introduced in late July. Included in the bill are prohibitions against regulating the rates charged to the customers of Internet information services, as well as against imposing federally-mandated standards on the industry.” The act will require industries to show users who are seeing the information. Also, users have to give consent to release their information. Secondly, before information is solicited to children parental permission must be given. Lastly, the bill gives users the option to “opt out” of giving personal information. Finally, the third bill will ban the ability to modify scanners to intercept cell phone calls.

            I think after reading this article the bills are a great idea and will help protect Internet users. The Internet is growing at a fast-rate and there are more and more hackers stealing people’s identity on the Internet. These bills are another “patch” in the wireless system. Unfortunately, the government or whomever else are working to protect users will hit a dead end and will have to come up with other means to protect Internet users.  

RCFP: Chicago freelancer arrested, again, on the job

Mike Anzaldi, 12-year veteran journalist has been arrested twice in the last month on obstruction charges. The latest arrest was for “allegedly being told he couldn’t take photos of a police-involved shooting.” Police have decided to not move forward with the charges from the second arrest but on Dec. 4 he goes on trial for his first arrest.

 On Oct. 22 when he arrived to the crime scene neighbors invited him onto their property to take photos and videotape. He was asked to stop once but when he later started recording police spokeswomen asked for his credentials. Anzaldi had left his police-issued press pass in his car and claims Chicago does require journalists to carry them. The police told reporters he crossed the line at least once but on his police report it says two or three times. Anzaldi claims he never crossed the line.

            Anzaldi says he wasn’t targeted on the first arrest. It was just a sensitive crime scene and, “ ‘I personally happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time’ -- caught between a high-stakes police event and the First Amendment.” Anzaldi says the second arrest he did feel like a “marked man.” The article also said, “That second case was thrown out, Anzaldi said, after the officer didn't show up in court, freeing him up to prepare for trial in early December on the prior charges.” Anzaldi is still out covering the news but taking more precautions. He said,  “’I’m not going to go up to the point that I know legally I could go, because I could end up in jail.’ He's hoping in court, ‘cooler heads’ will win the day.”

            The second arrest I think was deserved because after Anzaldi was told to not film or take photos he did. Anzaldi deliberately disobeyed which made the police upset. The one thing you never do is upset the police because they can and will take you to jail for not “obeying the law.” I also think the police make it hard for reporters to do their jobs. In one of the incidents Anzaldi camera was taken from him and 500 photos were deleted from his camera. I think his photos should not have been messed with because the reason he was arrested was for walking over crime scene lines not for taking illegal photos. 

RCFP: Lobbyist settles libel lawsuit against New York Times

Lobbyist Vicki Iseman settled a libel lawsuit against The New York Times. Iseman was suing The New York Times over an article published over one year ago accusing her of having an affair with Sen. John McCain. Iseman said the article left readers believing her and McCain had a romantic relationship. McCain denied the affair immediately after the story was published. There was a joint statement announced by the newspaper and Iseman’s lawyer posted on the Times’ website. The newspaper did not apologize for what was printed by stating, “we stand by our coverage,” “and we are proud of it.” To resolve the lawsuit the Times’ wrote a note to readers saying exactly this, “the article did not state, and The Times did not intend to conclude, that Ms. Iseman had engaged in a romantic affair with Senator McCain or an unethical relationship on behalf of her clients in breach of the public trust.”

            I don’t really know what to believe in this situation. I think it was pretty bold of the newspaper to say they stand by what they printed. I do not believe the newspaper would have printed this story without having hardcore reliable sources confirming the affair. If a public figure is going to engage in this type of activity I think it is the newspaper’s job to print the facts and expose the truth of political figures.

RCFP: Victory for online speech in Maryland

            The highest court in Maryland ruled a newspaper-owned forum Website does not have to reveal the names of three bloggers who anonymously posted comments about a Dunkin’ Donuts shop owned by Zebulon Brodie.  Brodie alleged the statements about the shop he owned as, “one ‘of the most dirty and unsanitary-looking food-service places I have seen,’ were defamatory, and he subpoenaed Independent Newspapers for the identities of the anonymous commenters.” When the trial court ordered the newspaper company to identify the names of the bloggers they appealed and the highest court decided to take the case, which is unusual. The article stated, “In the opinion, the court recognized the need to balance the First Amendment issues with the right to seek protection against a defamation claim.” Then the court adopted a five-part test that, “recognizes that anonymous bloggers be notified when a subpoena is seeking their identity, requires the plaintiff to set forth a basis for his or her lawsuit, and weighs the First Amendment concerns against the need to protect the plaintiff from defamatory statements.” The Reporters Committee filed a friend-of-the-court brief so the court would protect the bloggers and adopt the five-part test.

            I think this case is important because bloggers have the right to post whatever they want on the Internet especially in situations like this one. The whole point of blogging is to share ones opinion. The fact is three bloggers went on the Internet and posted their thoughts about a Dunkin’ Donuts shop and the owner got upset. In my opinion, the purpose of the lawsuit was to make Brodie feel better because he was embarrassed about that statements posted on the forum. If one person had posted on the forum Brodie wouldn’t have cared but because there were three he decided to take it to court. Instead of paying all the court and lawyer fees, Brodie should have paid a cleaning service to come sanitize his donut shop.