More stories

  • in

    Will Biden’s Recent Victories Lift the Democrats?

    More from our inbox:What’s Better, an After-School Program or a Job?President Biden is still one of the most unpopular presidents in modern history, despite his political victories.Yuri Gripas for The New York TimesTo the Editor:Re “Biden Basks in String of Wins. Will This Be a Turning Point?” (news analysis, front page, Aug. 9):The president’s legislative agenda, a close approximation to the one promised, has passed. These are accomplishments, not rhetorical speculations. That the president has low ratings at this juncture speaks volumes not about him — he has delivered, and in under two years — but about the fuzzy-thinking electorate surveyed by pollsters.Yes, voters are perennially concerned about their purchasing power and the brutal effects of inflation. Americans need to be reminded that presidents do not bring inflation with them to the White House. A complex set of global problems — including a war, a pandemic and supply chain problems — contribute to a disrupted economy.Americans would do well in this historic moment to stop and smell the proverbial roses: We, as a country, have finally acted on climate change. And drug pricing. And infrastructure. And, incredibly, guns. Much remains to be done on all these fronts. Nothing is perfect, though voters polled seem disappointed that all their wishes don’t come true on Election Day.President Biden’s poll numbers are low, but let us take a poll of climate activists, people struggling with the cost of drugs, those who understand the truly herculean effort it took to pass the Inflation Reduction Act bill. Would his numbers be higher? I’ll go out on a limb and say they would triple.Will SouthColumbia, S.C.To the Editor:As a Democrat who had previously been disillusioned with President Biden’s commitment to working with Congress in a bipartisan manner, I found the legislative and economic accomplishments noted in this article reassuring and worth celebrating.However, they may not mark a turnaround for the Biden presidency, especially with respect to the coming midterm elections. We can simply revisit the first two years of the Obama administration to see why.Barack Obama’s legislative, economic and judicial achievements through the second year of his presidency are comparable, if not more remarkable, than those of Mr. Biden. By August 2010, Mr. Obama had already nominated two Supreme Court justices, passed Dodd-Frank and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and signed into law what was arguably his crowning piece of legislation, the Affordable Care Act.But, as we all know, he and the Democrats suffered substantial losses in the midterm elections of 2010.So, is Joe Biden on a legislative hot streak? Yes. But will it play to his advantage during the midterms? History suggests otherwise.Ravin BhatiaBrookline, Mass.What’s Better, an After-School Program or a Job? BjelicaS/Getty ImagesTo the Editor:Re “The Best Extracurricular Is a Job” by Pamela Paul (column, July 31):Ms. Paul is right to lament the decline in the number of teenagers who work after school. Teens who work can learn valuable things about themselves and work life that are not readily available otherwise.Where Ms. Paul goes wrong is in playing down extracurricular and after-school activities. After-school experiences help teens develop soft skills and self-confidence. They also provide credentials for getting good jobs down the road.In my research, I spoke with dozens of human resources professionals who had conducted mock job interviews with teens who had participated in after-school programs.The professionals were impressed with the experiences and skills that the teens had acquired and considered many of them to be hirable, even without a history of paid employment. In particular, after-school programs provide opportunities for teens to develop complex leadership skills, something they can rarely do at work.Teens need sequences of after-school programs and work experiences that build on each other, providing the best of both worlds.Bart HirschEvanston, Ill.The writer is professor emeritus of human development and social policy at Northwestern University, and the author of “Job Skills and Minority Youth: New Program Directions.” More

  • in

    Principal of Uvalde elementary school suspended in wake of deadly shooting

    Principal of Uvalde elementary school suspended in wake of deadly shootingMandy Gutierrez put on administrative leave, as 77-page report details multiple failures from police and other Texas officials The principal of the elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, where an intruder shot dead 19 students and two teachers in May, has been suspended from her job.Mandy Gutierrez of Robb elementary school was put on paid administrative leave on Monday, her attorney Ricardo Cedillo said in a statement to the Associated Press.The Uvalde school district superintendent made the decision to place Gutierrez on leave, Cedillo said.‘Nancy, I’ll go with you’: Trump allies back Pelosi’s proposed Taiwan visitRead moreGutierrez had worked in the Uvalde school district for more than two decades and was finishing her first year as principal when the killings there occurred, according to a preliminary investigative report released on 17 July by the Texas state legislature.Cedillo did not provide any details on why Gutierrez was suspended.The decision against Gutierrez is only the latest against an official in the wake of the report’s release.After initially being put on paid leave as the report was being prepared, the Uvalde school district police chief, Pete Arredondo, saw his pay halted on Friday, five days after the report’s release.The school board had called a meeting on Saturday to consider Arredondo’s firing but ultimately postponed it, citing “due process requirements” and a request from Arredondo’s attorney.The 77-page report from the state legislature’s special investigative committee laid responsibility at Gutierrez and a school assistant for knowing that the lock on a classroom in which the massacre took place was not working but not getting it fixed.In addition to the 21 people killed during the shooting, 17 were wounded.Other parts of the report detailed several failures at various levels in the years leading up to the mass shooting at Robb as well as on the day of the massacre.According to the special committee report, nearly 400 officers went to the elementary school as the shooting began, but a lack of coordination between law enforcement agencies meant police failed to confront the shooter quickly.“In this crisis, no responder seized the initiative to establish an incident command post,” the committee wrote in its report.“Despite an obvious atmosphere of chaos, the ranking officers of other responding agencies did not approach the Uvalde [school district] chief of police or anyone else perceived to be in command to point out the lack of and need for a command post, or to offer that specific assistance.”On Monday, the district school board also announced that the district school year would be pushed back to 6 September. The district intends to use the extra time to install additional security measures while also providing emotional and social support services, ABC News reported.TopicsTexas school shootingUS politicsUS educationnewsReuse this content More

  • in

    Thought Crimes: the Shameful Undemocratic Wilding of Contrary Opinion

    The Fair Observer website uses digital cookies so it can collect statistics on how many visitors come to the site, what content is viewed and for how long, and the general location of the computer network of the visitor. These statistics are collected and processed using the Google Analytics service. Fair Observer uses these aggregate statistics from website visits to help improve the content of the website and to provide regular reports to our current and future donors and funding organizations. The type of digital cookie information collected during your visit and any derived data cannot be used or combined with other information to personally identify you. Fair Observer does not use personal data collected from its website for advertising purposes or to market to you.As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media. More

  • in

    India Looks to Finland for an Effective Educational Model

    The Fair Observer website uses digital cookies so it can collect statistics on how many visitors come to the site, what content is viewed and for how long, and the general location of the computer network of the visitor. These statistics are collected and processed using the Google Analytics service. Fair Observer uses these aggregate statistics from website visits to help improve the content of the website and to provide regular reports to our current and future donors and funding organizations. The type of digital cookie information collected during your visit and any derived data cannot be used or combined with other information to personally identify you. Fair Observer does not use personal data collected from its website for advertising purposes or to market to you.As a convenience to you, Fair Observer provides buttons that link to popular social media sites, called social sharing buttons, to help you share Fair Observer content and your comments and opinions about it on these social media sites. These social sharing buttons are provided by and are part of these social media sites. They may collect and use personal data as described in their respective policies. Fair Observer does not receive personal data from your use of these social sharing buttons. It is not necessary that you use these buttons to read Fair Observer content or to share on social media. More

  • in

    Universities failing to tackle sexual misconduct ‘should risk losing status’, MPs say

    Universities failing to take tough action on sexual misconduct should risk losing their official status, ministers have said. Education secretary Nadhim Zahawi and Universities minister Michelle Donelan have told the higher education regulator it should become a sanctionable offence to not follow its recommendations on tackling sexual violence, The Independent can reveal.This could involve a range of penalties, with the worst or repeated breaches potentially resulting in a loss of university status. Last April the regulator, the Office for Students (OfS), set out a list of recommendations aimed at helping universities to prevent and respond to sexual harassment and misconduct on campus. These include introducing sound processes for reporting incidents, support for those involved in investigations and governing bodies making sure approaches to tackling sexual misconduct are “adequate and effective”. At the time, the regulator said it would consider giving these more weight by making them a “condition of registration”.This would give it powers to issue sanctions for breaches but a year later that has yet to be introduced.The OfS recommendations were made in the wake of the Everyone’s Invited campaign, which saw current and former students share thousands of testimonies of abuse. The website, as well as the murder of Sarah Everard, had also sparked campus protests calling for tougher action on sexual violence. Students have told The Independent they felt let down by universities after experiencing sexual assault, saying there had been a lack of support or they were put off reporting in the first place.Jo Grady, the head of the University and College Union, told The Independent there needed to be a “strong stance” from the university regulator to tackle “endemic” sexual violence on campuses.“Although the sector is waking up to the issue, the pace of change remains slow and far too variable in places,” she said.Education ministers say they made clear in a letter published online late March they wanted regulatory powers to cover sexual misconduct policies as soon as possible. “The Office for Students – which regulates universities – has published a statement of expectations on how universities should handle cases sexual harassment and misconduct,” a Department for Education spokesperson told The Independent. “In March the education secretary and Minister Donelan wrote to the OfS making clear his view that this should be made a condition of registration, meaning the regulator would have very real powers to penalise universities which are failing victims of sexual harassment and assault. “In our view, the OfS should include this in a condition of registration as soon as possible.”John Blake, the OfS director for fair access and participation, told The Independent last week: “We are now examining how universities and colleges have responded to the statement of expectations, and this work includes listening to the views of students and students’ unions.“Once this work is complete, we will consider what steps to take next including whether to connect the statement directly to our conditions of registration.”The regulator says universities would likely be given an opportunity to “improve performance” before anything else in the case of breaches.If they fail to do so, they could face further escalating intervention. Among the lighter sanctions are fines, while tougher ones include revoking the use of “university” in its name.“The consequence of this approach is that the OfS would be willing to use its power to deregister a provider that continues to breach conditions, or where an initial breach was judged to be sufficiently serious,” the OfS says online.“Such providers would therefore no longer be able to operate within the regulated higher education sector.”The Independent has approached OfS for comment about the education ministers’ letter. More

  • in

    Poor pupils ‘left behind’ by new schools plan, ministers warned

    Poorer pupils will be left behind by the government’s new plan for schools because of the failure to offer adequate funding and ambitious ideas, experts and teachers have warned.Education secretary Nadhim Zahawi announced on Monday that all pupils will be offered targeted support as part of the long-awaited white paper on schools. But the plan was criticised by educational leaders for being too “vague”.The vision for England’s schools over the next decade includes a “parent pledge” that guarantees extra support for pupils falling behind in English and maths, such as small-group tutoring sessions. But the Education Policy Institute (EPI) think tank described the white paper as “disappointing”. It said the plan was “not well-funded enough” to help disadvantaged pupils catch up after the pandemic and close the inequality gap.Adding to the criticism was the National Association of Head Teachers union (NAHT), which said the proposals “fall short” of the ambition required. “Commitment to adequate funding, access to support services or detail on how these bold ambitions will be achieved is sadly missing,” said general secretary Paul Whiteman.The white paper said the government would aim for the national average GCSE grade achieved in English and maths to rise from 4.5 in 2019 to 5 by 2030. Schools will also have to offer a 32.5-hour school week by 2023 as part of a push to increase teaching hours, and Ofsted will be asked to inspect every school by 2025.But the EPI criticised the failure to set out a clear plan to reduce the disadvantage gap leaving the poorest pupils behind. The institute said disadvantaged pupils in England – the 1.74 million children eligible for free school meals – will still be 18 months of learning behind their peers by the time they finish their GCSEs. “This gap had stopped closing before the pandemic and is now significantly wider,” said EPI executive chair David Laws.“If the government wishes to meet the white paper aims, it may well need a further education recovery package, targeted on the pupils, schools and local areas which have missed out most,” the former Liberal Democrat minister added.Meanwhile, Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said the plan lacked “big ideas”, describing the proposal for boosting pupils’ literacy and numeracy targets as “vague”.“There is little recognition of the wider societal factors which affect those outcomes, such as the fact that nearly a third of children in the UK live in poverty,” he said. “It is hard to learn when you are hungry, cold, poorly clothed and live in inadequate housing.”Labour accused the government of making a “smoke and mirrors” announcement, saying that developing good reading, writing and maths skills should be fundamental and not just an “add-on”.Shadow education secretary Bridget Phillipson said the strategy is “distracting from the business of teaching with yet more tinkering with school structures whilst offering nothing to change children’s day-to-day experience in the classroom”.And Conservative MP Robert Halfon, chair of the Education Committee, said he hoped that “increasing parental engagement through the ‘parent pledge’ will help break down long-standing and often complicated barriers that exist to help increase attendance”.Mr Zahawi said the white paper was “levelling up” in action. It also includes a pledge for all schools to join a “strong” multi-academy trust by 2030, and a commitment for Ofsted to inspect every school by 2025.Councils will be able to establish and run their own academy trusts, which it is hoped will encourage more primary schools to become academies. Councils will also legally be able to request for their non-academy schools to join a trust.And where schools have received two consecutive Ofsted judgements below “good”, the government plans to help them to join strong trusts – with an initial focus on schools in the 55 education “cold spots” identified in the levelling up paper.The NAHT said the decision to change school structures was likely to be “controversial”, warning it could prove distracting unless the government presented a “compelling case” for the changes.Among the white paper’s other announcements is that 500,000 teacher training and development opportunities would be introduced, and a commitment to raise starting salaries to £30,00 was affirmed.However, Mr Zahawi indicated that senior school teachers would not be receiving a pay rise, saying that the public sector had to “exercise restraint” as inflation levels soar. The education secretary told Times Radio: “For more senior staff, we’re looking at a 5 per cent increase over two years … inflation is running ahead of that, of course.”He was also grilled over findings from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) showing that the gap between private and state school spending has doubled in just over a decade. The education secretary blamed a period of “tightening our belts” after the financial crash. “The important thing is to continue that investment now and deliver,” he told Sky News.Mr Zahawi also defended the “deserved” awarding of a knighthood to Sir Gavin Williamson – who oversaw the exams fiasco in 2020 – but said the closure of schools during the pandemic was “a mistake”. More

  • in

    Taliban reversal on girls’ education derails US plan for diplomatic recognition

    Taliban reversal on girls’ education derails US plan for diplomatic recognitionJoint event had been planned ahead of Doha Forum that would have set process in motion to grant group diplomatic recognition The US was poised to set the Taliban on the path to diplomatic recognition before the plan was derailed by the Afghan rulers’ sudden U-turn on a promise to allow girls’ education, the Guardian understands.The group prompted international outrage and confusion on Wednesday when it reneged on a deal to allow teenage girls to go to secondary school, just a week after the education ministry announced that schools would open for all students.Taliban decide against opening schools to girls in Afghanistan beyond age of 11Read moreUS diplomats had been so optimistic that the Taliban would make good on the promise that a joint event had been planned ahead of this weekend’s Doha Forum in Qatar that would have set the process in motion to grant diplomatic recognition to the group.A seat had been reserved for the Taliban at a panel at the forum dedicated to girls’ education in which a Taliban representative would have addressed the role of women with Afghan female activists.The sudden reversal undermined the argument that a more “moderate” leadership now dominates the Taliban, and such optimism was further clouded this weekend when the group ordered Afghanistan television stations to remove BBC news bulletins in Pashto, Persian and Uzbek.In a statement on Sunday the BBC said “This is a worrying development at a time of uncertainty and turbulence for the people of Afghanistan. More than 6 million Afghans consume the BBC’s independent and impartial journalism on TV every weekWestern officials made it clear that diplomatic recognition will be impossible unless the decision on girls’ education is reversed. The move will also make it harder the international community to raise money for an international pledging conference next week, and require tighter handling of any cash raised so that it does notThomas West, the US special envoy for Afghanistan, said: “I was surprised by the turnaround this last Wednesday and the world has reacted to it by condemning this move. It is a breach first and foremost of the Afghan people’s trust.“I believe hope is not all lost. I am hopeful we will see a reversal of that decision in the coming days.”But West defended the US engagement with the Taliban saying that a complete diplomatic rupture would mean abandoning 40 million Afghans amid growing concerns over a possible famine in the country.“We are talking about the modalities of an urgent humanitarian response, the need for more than a humanitarian response, a policy not just an admire the problem of a broken banking sector but find ways to fix it, a professionalisation of the Central Bank so that the international financial community can begin to have confidence in it, we are talking about terrorism and we are talking about women’s rights.“One of the first times we sat down in October in a formal setting they had a request of us ‘please put our civil servants – 500,000 – back to work’. We thought a logical place to start given the sector resonated so much in the international community was education. We had requests of them, as well. Number one, women and girls could attend at all levels across large swathes of Afghanistan. Number two we wanted to see a monitoring mechanism and third there be a serious and rigorous curriculum. Over the following the months the international community receive the necessary assurances, and more importantly the Afghan people were told on March 23 we would see girls attend secondary education and that did not occur.”Hosna Jalil, a former interior minister was one of many Afghan women at Doha to claim the Taliban will not be able to keep a lid on the demand for education. She said the last 20 years had not been a waste but left a positive legacy. “We facilitated a generation, two thirds of the population, that knows what a better life looks like. That is why we will not give up. They are loud, they believe in freedom and democracy.”Malala Yousafzai, who won the 2014 Nobel Peace Prize for her fight for all children’s right to education, told the Forum that times had changed since the Taliban first banned girls’ education in 1996. Taliban U-turn over Afghan girls’ education reveals deep leadership divisionsRead more“It is much harder this time – that is because women have seen what it means to be educated, what it means to be empowered. This time is going to be much harder for the Taliban to maintain the ban on girls’ education. They are learning in the hide-outs. They are protesting on the streets. This ban will not last forever. They were waiting outside the school gates in their uniforms and they were crying. Seeking education is a duty of every Muslim,” she said.Dalia Fahmhy, an Afghan professor of political science said in 1999 no girls were in secondary schools. “Within 15 years later there were 3.7 million girls. Over that period a thousand women became business owners. This cannot be curtailed. We live in a digital age and 68 % have cellphones and 22 % are connected to each other and to the world. This cannot be curtailed. 27 % of the parliament were women.”TopicsTalibanAfghanistanUS foreign policyUS politicsSouth and Central AsianewsReuse this content More

  • in

    If You Think Republicans Are Overplaying Schools, You Aren’t Paying Attention

    The warning signs are everywhere. For 30 years, polls showed that Americans trusted Democrats over Republicans to invest in public education and strengthen schools. Within the past year, however, Republicans have closed the gap; a recent poll shows the two parties separated on the issue by less than the margin of error.Since the Republican Glenn Youngkin scored an upset win in Virginia’s race for governor by making education a central campaign issue, Republicans in state after state have capitalized on anger over mask mandates, parental rights and teaching about race, and their strategy seems to be working. The culture wars now threatening to consume American schools have produced an unlikely coalition — one that includes populists on the right and a growing number of affluent, educated white parents on the left. Both groups are increasingly at odds with the Democratic Party.For the party leaders tasked with crafting a midterm strategy, this development should set off alarms. Voters who feel looked down on by elites are now finding common cause with those elites, forming an alliance that could not only cost the Democrats the midterm elections but also fundamentally realign American politics.The Democrats know they have a problem. One recent analysis conducted by the Democratic Governors Association put it bluntly: “We need to retake education as a winning issue.” But reclaiming their trustworthiness on education will require more than just savvier messaging. Democrats are going to need to rethink a core assumption: that education is the key to addressing economic inequality.The party’s current education problem reflects a misguided policy shift made decades ago. Eager to reclaim the political center, Democratic politicians increasingly framed education, rather than labor unions or a progressive tax code, as the answer to many of our economic problems, embracing what Barack Obama would later call “ladders of opportunity,” such as “good” public schools and college degrees, which would offer a “hand up” rather than a handout. Bill Clinton famously pronounced, “What you earn depends on what you learn.”But this message has proved to be deeply alienating to the people who once made up the core of the party. As the philosopher Michael Sandel wrote in his recent book “The Tyranny of Merit,” Democrats often seemed to imply that people whose living standards were declining had only themselves to blame. Meanwhile, more affluent voters were congratulated for their smarts and hard work. Tired of being told to pick themselves up and go to college, working people increasingly turned against the Democrats.Today, as the middle class falls further behind the wealthy, the belief in education as the sole remedy for economic inequality appears more and more misguided. And yet, because Democrats have spent the past 30 years framing schooling as the surest route to the good life, any attempt to make our education system fairer is met with fierce resistance from affluent liberals worried that Democratic reforms might threaten their carefully laid plans to help their children get ahead.In California, plans to place less emphasis on calculus in an effort to address persistent racial and socioeconomic disparities in math achievement have spawned furious backlash. So, too, did the announcement last fall that New York City schools would be winding down their gifted and talented program, which has been widely criticized for exacerbating segregation — an announcement that Mayor Eric Adams has begun to walk back.Mr. Youngkin was one of the first to recognize that these anxieties could be used for political gain, and he carefully tailored his messaging to parents from both affluent families and the conservative movement. In his appeals to the Republican base, he railed against critical race theory and claimed that allies of George Soros had inserted “operatives” on local school boards. To centrist parents, he pledged to undo admissions policy changes aimed at bolstering diversity at Virginia’s prestigious Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, where graduates regularly go on to attend Ivy League universities.These promises seem to have worked. A recent focus group conducted by a Democratic polling firm showed that education was the top issue cited by Joe Biden supporters who had voted or considered voting for Mr. Youngkin. Participants referred to an array of complaints about education, including a sense that the focus on race and social justice in Virginia’s schools had gone too far, eclipsing core academic subjects. Similar charges echoed through the San Francisco school board election last month as Asian American voters, furious over changes to the admissions process at a highly selective high school, galvanized a movement to oust three school board members.How can Democrats claw out of this bind? In the near term, they can remind voters that Republican efforts to limit what kids are taught in school will hurt students, no matter their background. The College Board’s Advanced Placement program, for example, recently warned that it will remove the AP designation from courses when required topics are banned. Whatever the limitations of the AP program, students from all class backgrounds still use it to earn college credit and demonstrate engagement in rigorous coursework. Democrats could also take a page from Mr. Youngkin’s playbook and pledge, as he did, to invest more “than has ever been invested in education,” an issue that resonates across party lines.But if Democrats want to stop bleeding working-class votes, they need to begin telling a different story about education and what schools can and can’t do. For a generation, Democrats have framed a college degree as the main path to economic mobility, a foolproof way to expand the middle class. But now kids regularly emerge from college burdened with crushing student debt and struggling to find stable jobs. To these graduates and to their parents it is painfully obvious that degrees do not necessarily guarantee success. A generation ago, Mr. Clinton may have been able to make a convincing case that education could solve all people’s problems, but today Democrats risk irrelevance — or worse — by sticking with that tired mantra.So, yes, strong schools are essential for the health and well-being of young people: Schools are where they gain confidence in themselves and build relationships with adults and with one another, where they learn about the world and begin to imagine life beyond their neighborhoods. But schools can’t level a playing field marred by racial inequality and increasingly sharp class distinctions; to pretend otherwise is both bad policy and bad politics. Moreover, the idea that schools alone can foster equal opportunity is a dangerous form of magical thinking that not only justifies existing inequality but also exacerbates our political differences by pitting the winners in our economy against the losers.Democrats can reclaim education as a winning issue. They might even be able to carve out some badly needed common ground, bridging the gap between those who have college degrees and those who don’t by telling a more compelling story about why we have public education in this country. But that story must go beyond the scramble for social mobility if the party is to win back some of the working people it has lost over the past few decades.Schools may not be able to solve inequality. But they can give young people a common set of social and civic values, as well as the kind of education that is valuable in its own right and not merely as a means to an end. We don’t fund education with our tax dollars to wash our hands of whatever we might owe to the next generation. Instead, we do it to strengthen our communities — by preparing students for the wide range of roles they will inevitably play as equal members of a democratic society.Jennifer Berkshire (@BisforBerkshire) is a freelance journalist, and Jack Schneider (@Edu_Historian) is an associate professor of education at the University of Massachusetts Lowell. They are the authors of “A Wolf at the Schoolhouse Door: The Dismantling of Public Education and the Future of School” and the hosts of the education policy podcast “Have You Heard.”The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More