Recently, I was helping a fellow student on a paper regarding the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s, and I started to mentally compare the activism that was present then to the activism that is present now. Back then, people used to be horribly beaten and even murdered for their beliefs. Individuals participated in well-organized movements that managed to attract attention worldwide. Looking around at my peers, many of which attempt to voice and formulate opinions on subjects they know nothing about, I can't help but wonder what the hell happened?

For example, consider the current protests regarding the Long-Range Development Plan (LRDP). Apparently, UCSC is planning on constructing a bio-medical facility near what students refer to as "Science Hill" as well as a new college to accommodate the insane amount of students that keep being admitted. To oppose this, a number of individuals, some from this campus and some not, have decided to literally camp out in a clump of trees next to the road. Furthermore, on the day that these people first climbed the trees, protesters entered a number of the nearby buildings and pulled the fire alarms, causing some chaos and creating a nuisance for innocent bystanders. As a result, the parking lot in which these trees stand is being cornered off and a number of classes have been moved (including 2 of mine...). Although this protest has affected virtually all of the students at UCSC, no one, with the exception of these protesters, has really said or done anything.

February 1996: The Telecommunications Act of 1996 becomes law. Section 202 of the Act instructs the Federal Communications Commission to review its media ownership rules every two years, and to consider "whether any such rules are necessary in the public interest as a result of competition." ("FCC initiates third biennial review of broadcast ownership rules," news release, September 12th, 2002)

September 20, 2001: The FCC initiates a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) seeking comment on whether the Commission should revise its rules limiting common ownership of a broadcast station and a newspaper in the same market. The Commission adopted the rule in 1975. It "prohibits common ownership of a full-service broadcast station and a daily newspaper when the broadcast station's service contour encompasses the newspaper's city of publication." The Commission's NPRM notes that when Congress passed the Telecommunications Act, it "expressly considered but rejected making changes to the news/broadcast co-ownership policies." But the Notice asks whether the "proliferation of new media" means that "the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule is no longer necessary to ensure that consumers of news and information have access to diverse ideas and viewpoints" (Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, September 20, 2001, Sections 2, 6, 15).

October 7, 1994: The bill later known as the "Communications Assistance for Legal Assistance" [CALEA] passes the Senate. Congress, responding to complaints from law enforcement, requires telecom companies to modify their infrastructure for wiretapping and "call identification"—and provides $500 million in subsidies. The legislation represents a compromise between innovation, privacy, and security.

March 10, 2004: "Joint Petition for Expedited Rulemaking" filed by the FBI, DEA, and Department of Justice. Concerned about Internet-enabled Voice over Internet Protocol services (VoIP), the agencies ask the FCC to extend CALEA-required wiretapping support to VoIP. The initiative urges the FCC to include Internet Service Providers (ISPs) as well, in short, to broaden CALEA to cover ISPs as "substantial replacements" to existing telephone services.

May 10, 2006: USA Today reports that "NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls." The story cites "people with direct knowledge of the arrangement" as sources, one of whom is quoted as calling it "the largest database ever assembled in the world." The article says that the database uses records provided by AT&T, Verizon, and BellSouth. QWest declined to cooperate with the project.

May 12, 2006: Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte files a declaration on behalf of AT&T, which is being sued by the Electronic Frontier Foundation in Federal District Court for its alleged cooperation with the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program. Negroponte invokes the "states secrets privilege," stating that he has "determined that the disclosure of certain information implicated by Plaintiffs' claims . . . could reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security of the United States and, thus, must be protected from disclosure and excluded from this case."