Netflix released the second part of “Pokémon The Series: Master Journeys,” based on the final part of 2019’s Pokémon Sword and Shield, on Feb. 24. Picking up from the...
Eight UCI students convene in a small alcove off the Mesa Parking Structure with an amalgamation of instruments to make music and hang out together. These students, who meet...
JYP’s J-Pop girl group NIZIU released their fifth single, “Paradise,” on March 2. It is produced in conjunction with the “Doraemon: Nobita’s Sky Utopia” anime movie as its ending...
The UC Irvine Women’s Basketball team (25-6,16-2) earned their first postseason victory in history, defeating the San Diego State Aztecs (23-11,12-6) 55-45 in the first round of the women’s...
Gonzalez v. Google, a court case currently pending a decision from the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), has the potential to change the entire landscape of the internet. The case centers around Section 230, a section of U.S. code passed through the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA). Section 230 has protected social media companies from legal action against third-party content posted on their platform, essentially shielding these corporations from having to regulate user content. This has caused an explosion in false information and dangerous extremist views.
Following the 2022 Philippine elections and the rise of the Marcos family to power, a bigger issue has been spotlighted within the Filipino community: historical revisionism or the reinterpretation of historical events.