The Antisocial Effects of Social Media and How Colleges and Universities Can Manage Related Litigation Risks

Rapid advancements in information technology have transformed day-to-day university operations and, in doing so, have altered the landscape of risk management. Authors Gregory L. Demers, J. William Piereson, Mark A. Cianci, and Peter L. Welsh provide an overview of some of the most significant social-media-related risks faced by colleges and universities, before considering ways to mitigate these risks through a broad insurance coverage plan. The article explains how, given the relative novelty of this field, the coverage afforded by insurance policies inevitably will vary, often significantly, from insurer to insurer

The impacts of discriminatory experiences on lesbian, gay and bisexual people in sport

This study examines the nature and impact of sexist and homophobic discrimination experienced by lesbians, gays and bisexuals (LGB) in Australian sporting settings. A mixed methods online survey was utilized to collate participant experiences. The findings suggest that, in sport, participants experienced sexism directly and systemically, and homophobia explicitly and implicitly. Women experienced sexism and homophobia, whilst men reported more homophobic events. The most mentioned impacts of discrimination were negative emotions such as sadness, anger, distress and shame, followed by negative engagement with sport such as disliking sport, or avoiding or leaving sport. The well-recognized benefits of sport such as physical and mental well-being, social connections, enjoyment, positive identity and achievement may be more difficult to realize within this context of significant social stress

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field