Computational Controversy

Climate change, vaccination, abortion, Trump: Many topics are surrounded by fierce controversies. The nature of such heated debates and their elements have been studied extensively in the social science literature. More recently, various computational approaches to controversy analysis have appeared, using new data sources such as Wikipedia, which help us now better understand these phenomena. However, compared to what social sciences have discovered about such debates, the existing computational approaches mostly focus on just a few of the many important aspects around the concept of controversies. In order to link the two strands, we provide and evaluate here a controversy model that is both, rooted in the findings of the social science literature and at the same time strongly linked to computational methods. We show how this model can lead to computational controversy analytics that have full coverage over all the crucial aspects that make up a controversy.Comment: In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Social Informatics (SocInfo) 201

In-House Counsel’s Role in the Structuring of Mortgage-Backed Securities

The authors introduce the financial crisis and the role played by mortgage-backed securities. Then describe the controversy at issue: whether, in order to own and enforce the mortgage loans backing those securities, a special-purpose vehicle “purchasing” mortgage loans must take physical delivery of the notes and security instruments in the precise manner specified by the sale agreement. Focusing on this controversy, the authors analyze (i) the extent, if any, that the controversy has merit; (ii) whether in-house counsel should have anticipated the controversy; and (iii) what, if anything, in-house counsel could have done to avert or, after it arose, to mitigate the controversy. Finally, the authors examine how the foregoing analysis can help to inform the broader issue of how in-house counsel should address complex legal transactions

Got Controversy - Milk Does

This article analyzes ongoing controversy over how to best label rBST-free milk. Recombinant bovine somatotropin is a genetically engineered drug administered by some farmers to their dairy herds to increase milk production. FDA first approved its use in 1994, despite great controversy. The FDA also issued labeling guidelines that allowed voluntary disclosure of rBST-free milk, so long as it carried the disclaimer that no difference could be detected between milk produced with rBST and rBST-free. The controversy continues today as consumers express a preference for rBST-free milk and many rBST-free producers label their milk this way. Conventional milk (with rBST) is viewed by the FDA as materially the same as rBST-free. So, conventional producers have continually challenged marketing that is meant to convey rBST free milk is superior or more nutritious. This article specifically analyzes the recent activities surrounding rBST - an FTC petition, an FDA petition to withdraw rBST approval, and several states\u27 rulemaking and legislation to tighten rBST-free labeling. One of the state\u27s rules has also spawned federal litigation. The article recommends that stakeholders must generate consumer survey data to understand the effect of rBST labels on consumers, and then use that data to design better milk labels

The Class Size Controversy

[Excerpt] When we ask whether class size matters for achievement, it is essential to ask also, how class size matters. This is important for three reasons. First, if we can observe not only achievement differences, but also the mechanisms through which the differences are produced, this will increase our confidence that the differences are real, and not an artifact of some unmeasured or inadequately controlled condition. Second, the effects of class size may vary in different circumstances, and identifying how class size affects achievement will help us to understand why the effects of class size are variable. Third, the potential benefits of class size reduction may be greater than what we observe. For example, suppose class size reductions aid achievement, but only when teachers modify instructional practices to take advantage of the smaller classes. If a few teachers make such modifications, but most do not, then understanding how class size affects achievement in some cases will help reveal its potential effects, even if the potential is generally unrealized

The Initial Controversy - Introduction

During the middle third of the twentieth century, the ideas of John Maynard Keynes and those who described themselves as “Keynesians” acquired a profound influence over both the economics profession and the macroeconomic policy process. After the publication of Milton Friedman’s (1956) Studies in the Quantity Theory of Money, Keynesians were obliged to compete with “monetarists” for policy and intellectual influence. These two volumes examine aspects of this counter-revolution by focusing on Friedman’s claim that he was merely formalising the macroeconomic ideas of the first generation Chicago School, at whose “feet” he “sat” in 1932-3 and 1934-5 (Friedman chapter 7 [1972/1974], 163). ISBN: 185196767

The Controversy of Vaccinations

Recently vaccination has become a controversial topic. There is a growing number of people who believe that vaccines carry great health risks to patients and therefore refuse to be vaccinated or to vaccinate their children. This ill-informed view of immunizations is beginning to cause serious problems in the United States as growing numbers of disease cases are being seen. A closer look into the science of vaccines and the benefits they have brought, clearly show that not only do vaccines carry very little risk to patients, but they are responsible for the eradication and reduction of multiple debilitating diseases

Foreword: The Perpetual Controversy

[Excerpt] “Two qualities of American capital punishment perhaps explain its ability to command the attention of the Court, year by year, decade after decade. First, an exceptionally talented and dedicated specialist capital defense bar continually mounts new challenges to the institution of the death penalty. This year, for example, we await a decision from the Supreme Court on the claim that the lethal injection method of execution violates the cruel and unusual punishments clause of the Constitution. Never before has the Supreme Court confronted this claim; indeed, not for more than a hundred years has the Supreme Court addressed a claim that a method of execution violates the Constitution.