Soccer fans around the world held their breaths as England and Italy headed into a penalty shootout following a nail biting regular period plus overtime that left the two teams in a 1-1 draw. The shootout would determine who would be crowned victors of the UEFA Euro 2020 Championship on Sunday, July 11. Nineteen-year-old midfielder Bukayo Saka stepped up to take England’s fifth penalty in hopes of leading the team into the next round of penalty kicks.

If Saka scored, the shootout would continue. Despite his best efforts, however, Italian goalkeeper Giauigi Donnarumma came up with a spectacular save to end the shootout at 3-2 and take the Henri Delaunay Cup trophy back to Italy for the first time in over 50 years. 

This tournament was riveting for more reasons than one, including the surmount of expectations by several teams. Italy was certainly anticipated to perform well, but announcers, critics and fans alike did not project them to win the whole tournament after the team failed to qualify for the FIFA World Cup in 2018.  

Denmark also shocked the world by advancing to the semifinals, even after losing star midfielder Christian Eriksen in their first game. Eriksen collapsed suddenly on the pitch, suffering a cardiac arrest and putting his career, and life, in jeopardy.

England, Germany and France had some of the strongest rosters and were favorites heading into the tournament. Ultimately, though, Italy rose to the occasion and was victorious in the most deserving manner. 

Although many predicted a competitive matchup,  England was the favored team because of its talented starting lineup and deep bench. 

England also had home field advantage. The game was played at Wembley Stadium in London where over 60,000 fans were in attendance — the majority of whom were English. With icons like the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and former English soccer legend David Beckham in the stands, it seemed as though the entire country had their eyes on their soccer team. There was even an announcement for a potential holiday if England were to win. Little did England know what Italy had in store for the contest. 

England gained a quick confidence boost within the first three minutes of the game when defender Luke Shaw blasted a volley into the goal, making the game 1-0. Italy was not discouraged, though, and they continued to play together as a team and dominate possession. Italy seemed to outplay England in the midfield which gave them better opportunities to connect in the final third of the field. This eventually forced England to concede a corner kick, allowing Italy’s central defender Leonardo Bonucci to put the ball in the back of the net.

As the game came to its end and neither team was able to score in overtime, the game progressed into penalty kicks in which Italy would ultimately win 3-2. The victors of the tournament undeniably deserved to bask in the glory of being champions and bring home the pride of becoming champions of the 2020 Euro Cup. 

Italy clearly showed up to compete and leave victorious, and they did just that. The underdogs really stepped up not only in the finals match but throughout the entirety of the tournament. Defender Giorgio Chiellini, for example, played a vital role in leading his team to victory. The 37-year-old served as Italy’s captain and starting center back in the tournament. Though he did not start nor get as much playing time as he does with his club team Juventus, Chiellini certainly stood out on the field for his leadership. Italy also had others who rose to the challenge, which goes to show that they played to win despite what others predicted about their potential tournament success. 

Overall, Italy’s team chemistry, creativity and grit were unwavering in the UEFA 2020 Euro Cup, leading them to an unexpected but well-deserved championship.

Over one year after COVID-19 canceled professional sports, 60,000 fans packed into England’s Wembley Stadium for the UEFA Euro 2020 Final. Italy defeated England in penalty kicks. (Wikimedia Commons/Kwh1050)

The post How Italy defied all odds in the UEFA Euro 2020 appeared first on The Emory Wheel.

UC regents, City Council have turned their backs on Berkeley community

In anticipation of this week’s UC Board of Regents meeting, the People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group provided the regents with specific comments on UC Berkeley’s Final Environmental Impact Report, or EIR, which is required for approval of the campus’s Long Range Development Plan, or LRDP. The EIR is a review of potential environmental impacts of proposed projects required by the California Environmental Quality Act. Ironically, UC Berkeley describes the LRDP as “one of our most important tools for responsible long-term campus planning and for being a good community partner.”

Our detailed remarks reflect the outlook of the 120 signers of our open letter to the regents; the more than 100 residents who communicated with Berkeley City Council on this issue; the coalition of neighborhood groups; the tenants of 1921 Walnut St. and their supporters; as well as other concerned Berkeley residents.

To put it bluntly, Berkeley citizens feel besieged by the overreach of UC Berkeley. Our concerns include the campus’s surreptitious adding of students beyond its former LRDP, its lack of housing for those students (least among all UC campuses relative to the student population), its gobbling up of property in the city, its monetization of public property in its new projects and its apparent disregard for tenant rights as well as Berkeley’s historical and cultural legacy, parks and open spaces.

Our outrage is compounded by the arrogance and indifference of UC Berkeley administration. We see the university leaving behind its mission of public service as an institution of higher learning to become increasingly like a rapacious corporation within our midst.

UC Berkeley’s LRDP implies ballooning enrollment and further expansion projects without providing housing for its present or future student population, creating pressures in the city that lead directly to displacement of current residents, many of whom are longtime citizens of Berkeley, low-income tenants and underrepresented minorities. This incremental process goes largely unnoticed (unless you are a victim of it), but it becomes glaringly apparent when its total impact is surveyed.

The campus’s Project #1 (known as Anchor House, which includes the property at 1921 Walnut St.) and Project #2 (the development of the People’s Park site) will demolish historic buildings, eliminate affordable and rent-controlled housing and destroy a park and open space. In their place, luxury and market-rate housing and commercial space will be erected. 

The ethical stance of campus is absolutely under question. For example, in the case of Project #1, Capital Strategies (the aptly named planning and development department at UC Berkeley) has teamed up with the Helen Diller Family Foundation (the project’s financial contributor), which is directly connected to the Prometheus Real Estate Group and is one of the largest funders for defeating statewide rent control initiatives. Their joint project will evict longtime tenants of a rent-controlled apartment building.

The destruction of People’s Park would forever erase an area of refuge in times of wildfires, earthquakes and pandemics, as well as prevent its preservation as a site of historical and cultural legacy. UC Berkeley’s final EIR essentially dismisses serious consideration given to the alternative of “No Project,” a no-build option for People’s Park that would preserve a valuable public open space and an official city landmark.

The city of Berkeley and Save Berkeley Neighborhoods filed a lawsuit in June 2019 against UC Berkeley for increasing student enrollment by 33.7% without a proper environmental review under its LRDP and accompanying EIR. An Alameda County Superior Court judge ruled July 9, 2021 that UC Berkeley’s environmental analysis of the enrollment increase was “legally insufficient.”

However, in a closed session, Berkeley City Council voted to approve a settlement agreement. This decision is in direct violation of the Brown Act because it was enacted in closed session, never announced or debated in open session and never even disclosed to the public for comment or consideration, except by means of comments made by city officials after the fact. Therefore, this unlawful decision should not have been part of any decision by the regents to approve the 2021 LRDP.

Berkeley residents value the presence of UC Berkeley as an institution of knowledge and public service, but they see their city being increasingly preyed upon by a coercive and unyielding corporation-like entity with ambitions designed to trample native gardens, user-developed open spaces, tenant rights, community and neighborhood interests, environmental values and quality of life in the city.

UC Berkeley originally took the land of People’s Park from Berkeley residents. In essence, it plans to take it again. A life was lost in the original struggle over the park. Our fear is that mounting opposition will again result in legal delays and costs, in addition to disruptive demonstrations and extra policing costs.

Berkeley needs more housing. However, such housing should be affordable and should be built in appropriate locations. Monetization of public spaces through the inclusion of rental and commercial space should not be a feature of any UC Berkeley projects. Let private enterprise be the function of local business; let public education be the entire focus of the university.

The People’s Park Historic District Advocacy Group brings together historians, preservationists, students, neighbors and concerned citizens to document and preserve the open space of People’s Park and the historic resources encircling it. Contact the opinion desk at opinion@dailycal.org or follow us on Twitter @dailycalopinion.

The Daily Californian

Since June, Crawford County has seen an increase in new COVID-19 cases.  

At 11 a.m. on Tuesday, July 13, a press conference was held on campus in the lobby of the Bicknell Family Center for the Arts. In attendance was Crawford County Health Officer Dr. Tim Stebbins, Dr. Katelyn Falk, chief medical officer at Ascension Via Christi, Dr. Linda Bean, chief medical officer for the Community Health Centers of Southeast Kansas, and Teddi Van Kam, Crawford County Health Department director and so-health officer. 

As of Monday, July 12, there were a total of 136 people in isolation and 680 persons in quarantine. The region has seen five deaths in the two weeks prior to the press conference.  

“The current spike has largely affected the unvaccinated population and is highly related to the Delta variant,” Stebbins said. “The variant is more transmissible and is causing worse infection even in the younger population that tolerated the previous variants well. Nationwide, 80-90 percent of the new cases are in the unvaccinated, no previous infection group and they account for 99 percent of the current deaths as well.”  

As of the day of the conference, Crawford County has given 19,381 first doses of the vaccine and 13,801 second doses for a total of 33,182. This translates to 49.93 percent of the county population vaccinated with the first dose of the vaccination.  

“The single, greatest protective element from the virus is the vaccine and we are encouraging anyone not vaccinated to seek… (vaccination),” Stebbins said. “Vaccination limits the spread of the virus, protects individuals for serious disease or death, and reduces the potential for new, possibly worse, variants from forming.”  

Stebbins addressed the misinformation about the vaccines circulating on social media and in the news.  

“…The vaccines are effective and safe,” Stebbins said. “The vaccines are monitored closely for adverse events and these are reported and followed both locally and nationally… Very few individuals would not benefit from the vaccine such as those that have severe allergic reactions.”  

Additionally, Stebbins said that the current vaccines are “highly effective” against all current strains of COVID-19 including the Delta variant.  

Falk handles inpatient care at the hospital and took care of the first COVID patient at Ascension Via Christi.  

“…If you have had COVID, go donate blood,” Falk said. “That is one of our treatment options is to give people a blood transfusion from those who have survived so that those who are currently sick get those antibodies… If you can, if you have had it, please go donate. That will help us out once people do get sick enough to come into the hospital.”  

Bean also commented on the situation during the conference.  

“I just really want to reiterate that the threat is still real,” Bean said. “We’ve had a really hard last year and we are still facing the same threat with a little bit of a variant… What puts us differently at this moment in time is that it’s preventable. We have (a) vaccine, we have tools that can treat it, and so we are sitting in a very different place, but we have to utilize those tools that we have. The vaccine is very important, it’s very effective, it’s very safe, and it’s very accessible in our communities. If you are showing symptoms of illness, we encourage getting tested. There are treatment options, and all of this can prevent severe illness and death which is what our primary focus is at this point… “  

Emory College of Arts and Sciences (ECAS) faculty started a petition on July 11 asking the University to require all returning faculty, staff and post-doctoral fellows receive full COVID-19 vaccinations two weeks prior to the first day of classes. Currently, the University is only requiring students to be fully vaccinated by the time they arrive on campus.

Professor of History Clifton Crais, an organizer of the petition, sent an email on July 15 to University President Gregory Fenves notifying him of the faculty’s request and urging him to adopt the suggested policy. Crais said Fenves’ office acknowledged the petition and was told the topic will be discussed this week.

Emory University Administration Building. Photo by Jason Oh.

Crais said that as of July 22, the petition amassed 174 names, including some from faculty in the Schools of Medicine, Law and Business.

Crais called current University policy a “contradiction” and considers Emory to be an outlier compared to other schools which require staff and faculty vaccinations.

“We are demanding, mandating vaccines for one population, the students, but not for other populations, faculty and staff,” Crais said. “We’re telling students to do one thing, and everyone else to do something different.”

The University did not directly address the petition or provide a timeline for updates in a July 16 statement from Assistant Vice President of Communications and Public Affairs Laura Diamond. 

Diamond pointed to the University’s COVID-19 safety guidelines outlined by administrators on June 3 in her response. The University declined to clarify why faculty and staff are not mandated to receive a COVID-19 vaccine while students are required. 

Crais cited recently implemented vaccination policies from peer institutions including Johns Hopkins University (Md.), the University of Chicago (Ill.) and Washington University in St. Louis, whose administrations now require vaccinations for all students, faculty and staff. 

The University of Chicago goes further, requiring proof of vaccination from “anyone who is doing business on behalf of the university.” Washington University indicated sanctions, including termination for employees and loss of campus building access, for students, faculty and staff who don’t provide their vaccination status by Aug. 30. The requested two week period prior to campus return was chosen based on when an individual is considered to be fully vaccinated after receiving their final dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, Crais said.

The post Emory professor creates petition urging vaccination requirements for faculty and staff appeared first on The Emory Wheel.

It has been an eventful week for Colorado State athletics, and it is easy to miss some of the key updates during the summer. July 13 Athletic Director Joe Parker announced Mai-Ly Tran will be leading the women’s tennis program. “I would like to thank President Joyce McConnell, Joe Parker, Steve Cottingham, Shalini Shanker and […]

If you’re anywhere near the University of Minnesota campus and into neon-colored drinks, happy hour specials and the general chaotic atmosphere of a long-standing local college bar, chances are you’ve stepped foot in Sally’s Saloon. For the select few that haven’t been, Sally’s Saloon is making its presence known via subtle advertising and a growing following on TikTok.

Despite its beginning in January 2020, the official Sally’s Saloon TikTok account didn’t gain popularity until the following year with a video welcoming its patrons back in. While that one gained a cool 60,000 views, the account’s most-viewed video remains a take on the Adult Swim trend that circulated on the app in early June with over 120,000 views.

One of the women behind Sally’s latest marketing venture is Emily Leighton, a recent University of Minnesota graduate and current Sally’s employee. Leighton runs the TikTok account on the job and in her free time, sharing the responsibility of creating new content with her fellow coworkers.

According to Leighton, the team at Sally’s seeks inspiration for new videos through an employee-run group chat, viral trends on social media, popular music and from the things they think people might like. Their “on-the-fly” ideas seem to be doing the job, too. One of the videos recommending a Dragon Berry Bacardi Mule even caused a shortage of the drink due to so many people ordering it, according to Leighton.

“It’s hard sometimes because the area we are marketing is drinking, and we have to figure out how to make it appropriate but still fun with these trends,” Leighton said. “But it’s been fun. People always say ‘I saw your TikTok’ or ‘We love you’ at work.”

Why does Sally’s TikTok content work? “They’re authentic and they connect with their customers,” Parker Fox, University of Minnesota basketball player, said.

Fox has spent a lot of time at Sally’s over the years — so much so that the servers worked with him to create his own secret menu item, Parker Fox’s Loaded Tater Tots. He had the chance to star in a TikTok of his own featuring the dish, a video that has prompted many people to come in and order the item, according to Leighton.

Other local establishments have taken inspiration from Sally’s — including Cowboy Jack’s Downtown and Blarney Pub — to create TikToks of their own.

They’ve got the right idea. Transitioning to the platform has proven to be successful for businesses across the country, according to Katie Love, CEO of Love Social Media. Love said TikTok is helping businesses stand out from their competitors by expanding their social media presence.

“TikTok lets you show another side of your business. It’s not just the curated feed with the beautiful product photos,” Love said. “It allows people to get a real inside look and allows you to share some personality. TikTok isn’t just about teenagers dancing in front of their mirrors in crop tops anymore.”

Perhaps Sally’s has found success because their feed isn’t perfectly curated and does provide that aforementioned “real look” into what it means to be at Sally’s Saloon. From the inside looks at a day in the life of a server to guides at what not to do at the bar, viewers curious about the ins and outs of the establishment can find most niche tidbits on Sally’s page.

“They use the trends really well to relate to people on campus,” Mayzie Olsonn, Sally’s employee and University of Minnesota student, said. “It seems less like a restaurant and bar and more like a place to meet people your age and hang out.”

Recent months for the University and Providence at large — entailing vaccine distribution, uncertain public health guidelines and a gradual re-opening of in-person activity — have proven to be a time of change, documented in an outpouring of new COVID-19 policies and plans. As College Hill approaches its return to normalcy, The Herald has compiled a list of key announcements and decisions that shaped the University since the turn of the new year.

Dec. 2020 to Jan. 2021. Adhering to Rhode Island’s phased COVID-19 vaccination plan, the first vaccines to arrive at College Hill were distributed among local health professionals, including many University community members. Doses of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine were distributed to members of Health Services, Emergency Medical Services and the Department of Public Safety, as well as medical students coming into contact with patients.

Jan. to March 2021. With differing timelines of vaccine eligibility across the nation, the University allows students to return to their home states to receive vaccines, provided they return within the same day and receive prior approval from the University.

Feb. 9. Rhode Island residents aged 75 years old or older become eligible to receive a first dose of the Pfizer vaccine at Walgreens and CVS locations across the state.

Feb 15. The University experiences the fewest weekly positive COVID-19 cases on campus since October.

Feb. and March. Students begin to receive surplus COVID-19 vaccines after volunteering at local vaccination clinics.

Mar. 2. The City of Providence announces it will expand vaccine eligibility to all residents 50 or older in the “neighborhoods hardest hit by COVID-19” as part of an effort by city legislators to prioritize at-risk neighborhoods in vaccine distribution.

Mar. 12. The Rhode Island Department of Health updates its vaccination rollout plan to allow “Pre K-12 teachers, school staff and licensed child care workers” to receive their first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine in early to mid-March, reflecting a new prioritization of the state’s educators in vaccine distribution.

Mar. 18. Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee announces that all Rhode Island residents ages 16 or older will become eligible for COVID-19 vaccination April 19. The decision marks a significant shift in the RIDOH’s earlier estimated vaccination rollout timeline, which predicted that all adults would become eligible in June.

Mar. 22. Vaccine eligibility expands to residents ages 18 or older in the “hardest-hit” communities of Providence and Pawtucket.

April 2. Rhode Island residents ages 60 or older become eligible for their first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. With full vaccine eligibility for Rhode Island adults on the horizon, the University encourages students to get the vaccine “as soon as (they) can,” Executive Vice President for Planning and Policy Russell Carey ’91 MA’06 told The Herald. But with the end of the semester roughly coinciding with the opening of eligibility requirements, the process of students receiving vaccines within Rhode Island posed challenges, he added.

April 6. The University announces that “all undergraduate, graduate and medical students on campus or participating in in-person instruction” are required to receive the COVID-19 vaccine for the fall 2021 semester, barring exemptions due to medical or religious reasons, in an email from President Christina Paxson P’19 to the Brown community. It joins other higher education institutions including Cornell and Rutgers University in the decision.

April 9. The University announces its decision to hold on-campus pre-college programs during the summer.

April 19. Rhode Island residents ages 16 or older become eligible for their first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine.

April 27. The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announces that fully-vaccinated individuals are no longer required to wear a mask while outdoors.

May 13. The CDC announces that fully-vaccinated individuals no longer must wear a mask in most indoor or outdoor settings, barring health care settings, public transportation and businesses that require them for entry.

May 15. At the start of the summer term, the University ends its Quiet Period three days early due to low positivity rates in the asymptomatic testing program. The seven day summer Quiet Period was already a shortened version of the original 14-day Quiet Period implemented during the fall 2020 and spring 2021 semesters.

May 20. The University announces that all employees and all students participating in on-campus activities will be required to receive and document their COVID-19 vaccination by July 1. The decision aims to fast-track the University’s goal of reaching “near universal levels of vaccination” within the Brown community, according to a letter from Paxson sent to community members.

May 27. The University announces changes to its COVID-19 guidelines, eliminating its outdoor mask-wearing requirement for vaccinated individuals and lifting restrictions on University-sponsored domestic travel. It announces additional plans to reduce its required COVID-19 testing frequency, as well as some restrictions on indoor communal spaces.

May 28. In a COVID-19 Testing Update, the University announces that a total of 40.6 percent of students and 59.7 percent of employees have documented their COVID-19 vaccinations with the University.

May 30. For the first time in the history of the University’s COVID-19 testing program, there are zero positive cases in one week, according to the Healthy Brown COVID-19 Dashboard.

June 1. The routine COVID-19 testing requirement for on-campus students and faculty is reduced from once every four days to once weekly.

June 13. The University experiences a third consecutive week with zero positive COVID-19 cases in its testing program, according to the Healthy Brown COVID-19 Dashboard.

June 19. High school students participating in pre-college summer programs arrive at the University, participating in asymptomatic COVID-19 testing twice weekly regardless of vaccination status.

July 7. Students and faculty on campus for the summer semester pass a 90 percent overall vaccination level. Fully-vaccinated individuals are no longer required to wear masks indoors or outdoors while on campus, including during in-person classes. Additionally, the University announces fully-vaccinated individuals will be phased out of routine COVID-19 testing.

July 13. Fully-vaccinated community members are removed from the University’s routing testing program.

July 15. The University loosens restrictions on University-sponsored travel, allowing students to visit lower-risk international destinations, as well as some higher-risk international destinations with prior approval.

July 18. The University lifts restrictions on campus indoor density requirements, broadening access to library seating and other indoor facilities. The University experiences two consecutive weeks without any positive COVID-19 tests in its testing program, albeit with a significant reduction in participants due to eased testing requirements on campus.

July 20. The campus vaccination rate reaches 97.2 for students on campus for the summer 2021 term and 97 percent for faculty and staff on campus for the term. The total population of vaccinated students and faculty and staff members reaches 86 and 93.8 percent, respectively, according to the Healthy Brown COVID-19 Dashboard.

Stand up for whistleblowers: Reporters’ records are not up for grabs

Jericho Tang/Staff

Starting in the tail end of Donald Trump’s presidency and continuing into Joe Biden’s term, the Department of Justice “waged a secret legal battle to obtain the email logs of four New York Times reporters.” The DOJ was after one piece of information: the identity of the anonymous sources that had leaked valuable information to the press. Top executives at the Times were placed under a gag order, barred from speaking about the legal effort until this summer. Fortunately, Google — the platform the Times uses for emails — refused to pass over the reporters’ logs.

Anonymous sources and reporters build their relationship upon a foundation of trust. The DOJ’s actions could cause this trust to erode — through no fault of the journalists working tirelessly to bring the truth to light. The consequence could be that anonymous sources choose to stay silent, fearing that their identity could be leaked through the public. Not only does this harm the quality of the news, but it upsets the very foundation of our democracy. 

The actions of the DOJ also set a disturbing precedent for local newsrooms that likely don’t have resources for litigation. If local or national governments demanded email logs or phone records from a small-scale paper, it might have no choice but to oblige. 

Biden condemned the actions of the DOJ under the Trump administration and promised that under his administration, the department would not attempt to seize the records of journalists. This is an important step in protecting democracy. However, Biden’s promises are not completely reassuring — according to the Times, the legal effort to obtain email records continued into Biden’s term.

Attorney General Merrick Garland might have finally given Biden’s words legal backing. On Monday, he issued rules that disallow the department from seeking journalists’ records unless the reporter is the subject of an investigation outside their work or is suspected of working within a foreign terrorist group. The DOJ can no longer legally pursue records simply to determine the identity of a whistleblower.

The DOJ’s actions flagrantly disregard the First Amendment and the ideals upon which this country was founded, and it is troubling to see this as a larger global trend.

Recently, the phones of 40 journalists and activists abroad were tapped and surveilled using Israeli spy software. And while this infringement was discovered, it is troubling to consider heinous breaches of privacy currently flying under the radar.

Although Biden decreed that these attacks on free press will not continue under his administration, news outlets from the local to national level should feel compelled to speak out. We must stay vigilant and fight for a reality in which government officials let journalists deliver the news, unbridled by bias or meddling.

Editorials represent the majority opinion of the editorial board as written by the summer 2021 opinion editor, Sarah Siegel.

The Daily Californian