Category Archives: Editorials/Student Voice

Editor’s Note: The Plaid Line publishes editorials that contain opinions that are those of the student authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the the Plaid Line, HPSH, or its staff.

Editorials/Student Voice, School Life

Why are teens smoking more now?

Leave a comment

By: Heidy Ramirez

“Why are teens smoking more now?” is the question of the day.

A lot of them are smoking because of peer pressure or stress and it has not been good with the pandemic going on. They don’t really have anyone to turn to, so people turn to drugs.

2020 was no one‘s year. There was a riot, pandemic lockdown, and COVID.

The teens that start to smoke, mostly start before the age of 18 because of their friends, older siblings or they think they look cool. Another big reason they start is stress, because of everything in the world.

Right now, with the entire pandemic, and with the students not going to regular school, and parents not going to work, there is a lot of pressure at home because of school and work. So, there are a lot of arguments going on, and that creates people wanting to let out steam which is smoke, so they start smoking. 

There is a lot of pressure, and it mostly falls on the teens because we have to show leadership to these younger kids, but the parents don’t understand that it could be a little bit too much for us, so we turn our heads to smoking.

Some teens think that doing grown up stuff can make you grow, but that’s not what happens with smoking; they are smoking their life’s up. The teens are using vapes, juul’s and e-cigs now these days, and there are different flavors so you can choose the one you like and get hooked on it.

For more information, please visit:

Editorials/Student Voice, Movies/TV/Theaters

​The danger of high school movies

Leave a comment

​By: Annika Getz

There are countless movies revolving around high-schoolers, and middle-schoolers, and their many adventures and misadventures. These movies appear to be harmless on the surface, but when one thinks about the material in said movies, and the results they have on real teenagers, it’s evident that they are more harmful than they seem.

For starters, there’s a significant lack of diversity in most of these movies. The majority of the time, the main characters are white, cisgender, able bodied, and straight. It is this exclusion of races, sexual orientations, and gender identities, which results in straight, cis, and white, being seen as a sort of default.

However, it’s not just the lack of diversity which makes these movies detrimental to teenagers. Another big issue is that they’re often very dramatized. The situation which the characters are placed in are more often than not, extremely unrealistic. This sets an impractical expectation for kids going into high school and middle school. School, in real life, often seems boring in comparison to the films that teens have watched leading up to it.

Many movies also include a “quirky girl” trope. This trope creates a girl who is supposed to break stereotypes, but usually it is not carried out well, and ends up only perpetuating said stereotypes. The “quirky girl” is often portrayed to be unlike other girls, however this implies that most girls are stereotypical “girly girls.” It also degrades those who are like that.

These movies also dramatize cliques, many times even giving names to each specific one. When this is done, it only enforces the idea that everyone has to fit into a specific group in order to enjoy their experiences in middle school and high school.

And while there are groups of friends, it normally isn’t as dramatic as it is in many of these movies (this is of course only my experience, and I’m sure there are some people who have undergone different experiences).

I believe another large issue with these movies is that they are not typically made with teenager’s best interest in mind. Oftentimes, they’re just capitalistic money grabs, fueled by corporate greed. This means that they aren’t made with the viewers wellbeing in mind. And sometimes, regardless of the creators intentions, these movies still have some sort of negative influence on the teens watching.

I’m not saying that high school movies are inherently bad. There certainly are some good ones, but sometimes, it feels like for every good one, there are ten bad ones.

Given everything I’ve just listed, I think it’s incredibly important that directors and writers make sure to keep the wellbeing, of their teenagers watching, in mind when making these movies, because when they don’t, they more often than not, end up harming their target demographic.

Editorials/Student Voice, Music/Concerts

Xenophobia in the Western music industry

Leave a comment

By Ellie Mulvaney and Irene Cohen

Music is often called a universal language; something that ties people together without bounds. Throughout history, genres have been passed through people and geographical groups to spread different traditions, dances, and instruments through the music they originate from.

With this history, it’s hard to imagine that modern society is sometimes extremely intolerant with music, and the culture that’s associated with it, sometimes resorting to racism or xenophobia to hate on unfamiliar forms of media.

K-Pop is a genre of music thats name is a direct conjunction of its meaning: Korean pop. It’s typically associated with bright colors, vigorous dances, energetic songs, and is usually performed by groups.

The genre has spread west in past years, led by worldwide sensation group BTS. The group kicked off their first US tour in 2015, and since then, has only grown, getting their first Grammy nomination in the “Best Pop Duo/Group Performance” category in November of 2020. However, the road to this accomplishment was anything but easy, and to this day, they still are on the receiving end of countless amounts of unjustified hate.

The stage makeup and outfits they wear are beaten down for being too feminine, while their songs are often branded as shallow, despite the language barrier that many Americans don’t care to overcome when looking into their music.

On a professional level, they have been void of some opportunities that many theorize could be due to where they’re from. At the 2019 MTV Video Music Awards, the group received a nomination for “Best Collab”, which was won with regards to their song with an ​American​ artist, rather than a nomination for their solo music video that broke the record on YouTube for the most views in 24 hours.

This lack of Western recognition for the current, biggest, boy band in the world seems to run deeper than just simple coincidence, and bleeds into the xenophobia in America.

Some argue that BTS even being included in award ceremonies is the representation of East-Asian music groups that is needed in the award ceremonies. While BTS is able to get some representation from mainstream Western media, this is the first step in a very long journey to be more inclusive in award ceremonies.

Even when foreign groups are included in these ceremonies, they have special award names like “Best in K-Pop” instead of simply “Best in Pop.” They have these categories to make it seem like these groups are good but cannot be compared to our Western music artists. It is almost demeaning to have these categories.

This doesn’t just happen to K-Pop idols, either. In many music award ceremonies they have “Latin Pop” for Latinx artists instead of giving them just the “Pop” award.

We have seen countless times that when a song isn’t in English, it does not get the same representation in the award ceremonies that English songs receive. Many a time, songs not performed in English have performed extremely well worldwide to get beaten out by some English pop songs only known in the Western world. And that’s the best case scenario. Most of the time these songs aren’t even nominated for an award.

The Western music industry needs to be more inclusive in their coverage of music. Too long the Western music industry has not recognized the success or impact of a song, album, or artist just because it is foreign. The mindset of this music industry needs to change so that products of Western artists will not always be considered better than that of different regions.

Music should surpass language and culture, not be judged on it.

Editorials/Student Voice, Entertainment

Obsessions with serial killers have gone too far

Leave a comment

By: Olivia Knafla

Whether you spend your time on Instagram, Tiktok, or YouTube, you’ve probably seen a thing or two about serial killers at some point. Whether it was a short video summarizing a case or a post to remember victims, there is lots of information on the internet about these killers that people naturally find terrifying, heartbreaking, fascinating, or all three.

True crime is captivating for a number of reasons. With the tap of a screen, or click of a button, we can delve into spine-chilling words from the comfort of our own couch and return back to real life afterwards. We can learn about the situation without being thrown into the danger. On top of that, true crime can appeal to many interests from psychology, to criminal justice, to law. It’s easy to see the appeal for the genre because there is so much to be learned from it.

That being said, it makes sense that people find serial killers and the cases surrounding them so intriguing – but where should the line be drawn?

I believe the line lies between two words: interest and romanticization.

The illustrate my point, consider the two following situations:

  1. A person spends some time learning about what a serial killer did, how they were caught, ect., because they find it interesting to research and learn about.
  2. A person spends some time learning about a serial killer to then post online about how much they love said serial killer, whether as a joke or in seriousness.

Which situation feels strange or disturbing?

Most likely situation B. Why? Because the person from situation B is no longer interested in what happened or why, but only in the killer themselves, and for all the wrong reasons.

It may seem unrealistic for somebody to post about their fondness for a killer online, but it has happened more times than can be counted.

Even off-screen, killers in prison can receive up to hundreds of letters of fan mail weekly or even daily. And while online, such interactions may be less direct, they are certainly not invisible.

From people posting about how attractive Ted Bundy is to making fan accounts for Jeffrey Dahmer, it’s an understatement to say things have gotten out of hand. This was not the work of a couple internet trolls or people posting solely for attention (although I’m sure those people have some sort of involvement in these types of posts), but a large number of people.

For example, in January, of 2019, Netflix had to take to Twitter in response to people posting about how hot Ted Bundy was in the documentary: ‘Conversations With a Killer: The Ted Bundy Tapes’ and near the release of: ‘Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil, and Vile’ with the following statement:

All of this being said, it is no secret that Hollywood enjoys glamorizing killers and their relationships. Take the TV series ‘You’ for example. The show is centered around killer Joe Goldberg and his relationships with women who just seem to love him so much.

Rather than talk about, quite literally, anything else, social media flooded with posts about how attractive Goldberg was, creating a uniquely uncomfortable environment for actors and those affected by similar situations.

Possibly worse than all of this though, was in early 2020, when teenagers located the Instagram account of an alleged active killer in the east coast, named Peter Manfredonia, a 23-year-old student at the University of Connecticut. Authorities were attempting to locate him after he was suspected of murdering two people, assaulting one, and finally kidnapping another. However, this did not prevent his comments from being flooded with everything from compliments to people writing down their home addresses and phone numbers.

Below are some of the comments that were left under his photos.

It should be obvious that these responses are not normal nor acceptable, and there are several answers that go further in depth explaining why.

Firstly, to show appreciation to somebody who is a serial killer is wildly insensitive to the victims and their families. Walk a mile in the shoes of somebody who was tortured and killed and then consider leaving these comments or making such remarks.

If that is not enough, think of the further damage such remarks could cause. Of course, no person is the same, and killers all have different ways of thinking and unique minds. However, by directly inflating the ego of one of these people, especially those who are not yet incarcerated or dealt with legally, is irresponsible and foolish.

No person who willingly hurts or preys upon others deserves any sort of fanbase, and by giving it to them you are telling them that you approve of them and what they are doing. And make no mistake – there is no excuse for it.

So, one may ask: how are we to get people out of this mindset? How are we, as a society, going to stop showering the monsters who walk among us with love and appreciation?

While there may always be some who enjoy the attention or shocked laughs they receive for glorifying these folks, the best thing you can do is to not do it yourself. If you choose to interact with an individual who participates in such behaviors (either online or in person), explain to them that it is wrong and why. Only when we all value our lives and the experiences of others will we move forward from this. And that I hope we do.

Editorials/Student Voice, Travel/Food

GMOs vs. organic

Leave a comment

By Nora Doyle

The debate on whether or not GMOs are good or bad has been going on for a while now and has become more of a commonly talked about issue as the organic foods movement has become more popular.

What are GMOs? GMO stands for Genetically Modified Organism. ​Forbes.com​ scribes GMOs as an organism whose genetic material or DNA has been changed in an unnatural way. ​’Forbes​’ also says GMOs are mostly designed to increase the nutritional value, and protect crops against pests.

As for organic food, ​’Forbes​’ describes it as food that doesn’t contain any pesticides or fertilizers, and is completely natural. Some people swear by organic foods and refuse to eat anything that has been genetically modified, and others don’t want to spend the extra money just for products that are fully natural.

The first topic of this argument has to do with this money opinion.

When you look at a package of organic blueberries at the grocery store, compared to blueberries that do not say organic, you will notice that the organic blueberries are significantly more expensive. Some people believe it’s worth the extra money, but some don’t.

There are a few reasons why organic food is more expensive according to ​OrganicAlberta, ​and one reason is that the demand is often greater than supply. Also, they say organic farming methods are more expensive than non organic farming methods, meaning they have to sell at higher prices.

Is organic food actually better for you?

According to ​Harvard Medical University, ​organic foods don’t appear to have nutritional advantages. USDA data shows that organic foods do have fewer pesticide residues, but both organic and non organic are the same level of safe for consumption.

However, Harvard studies do say that organic farming doesn’t feed their animals growth hormones. They are mostly naturally raised, so it may be arguable that organic is better for the animals.

Overall, it seems as though GMOs don’t really do much for us, but neither does organic food. Eat what you like how you like it!

Editorials/Student Voice, Music/Concerts

Why K-Pop is good

Leave a comment

By: Kayla Madison

So, I’m not really sure how to explain why K-Pop is good. It just is.

So, I’ll just kinda explain why I like it, because I didn’t before this year, 2020.

Fortunately, I don’t like BTS. Their fans are literally crazy and they’ll like, eat me. I listen to NCT and all their subunits: Ateez, TXT, Got7, Monsta X, SuperM, Red Velvet, Twice and, Stray Kids.

Here’s what I’ll say, no matter what – there’s always someone hot in a K-Pop group. It’s unethical to stan for that reason, but it’s a reason nonetheless. I won’t lie. I can’t lie.

I may not know Korean, but I know whatever they’re singing or rapping about…is facts. It’s so catchy. All the songs I’ve listened to are so catchy. Doesn’t matter what I’m doing, it’s always in the back of my mind.

With stanning comes the secret shipping, making it known that you have a ship in a group of guys isn’t good for them, it hurts the group and it also hurts the company. If the company is SM, do everything in your power to hurt them, and not the group. SM sucks so much. Ask anyone into K-Pop. They’re terrible. So are the MAMA awards, but going into that would take me hours.

How I got into K-Pop is pretty simple actually. I’m not sure what I was watching, but “God’s Menu,” by Stray Kids, popped up and I was like “that’s funny.” I gave it a listen and my jaw dropped all the way into the asthenosphere. It was so good. The boys looked heavenly. The vocals *chefs kiss*, FELIX’S PART, holy who knew a voice could go so deep *tear starts rolling down*.

My bias for that group…yes, I have a bias for every group I’ve ever listened to, well it’s more than 1 haha. Lee Know, Seungmin, Han, Hyunjin…I’m naming everyone. Apparently I don’t have a bias; I love them all.

Anyways, ever since I’ve listened to “God’s Menu” I’ve sunk deeper into the fascinating world that is K-Pop. Don’t knock it before you try it. Give it a listen.

Editorials/Student Voice, Sports

How the sports world reacted to the capitol protests

Leave a comment

By: Caden Ligman

With Congress in session to count the electoral votes that would confirm Joe Biden as the 46th president of the United States, hundreds of Pro-Trump organizers stormed the capital building in Washington DC. Protesters broke through barriers and were soon marching around the offices of our elected officials. Something so disrespectful and violent has not happened at the Capital since the British stormed the capital in 1814.

Many people blame President Donald Trump for inciting these protesters after making baseless claims about voter fraud. This isn’t the beginning however, of Trump’s “conspiracy” theories about the presidential election. Months before the election took place last November, Trump repeatedly preached to his supporters that the only way he could lose the presidential race was if it was rigged.

The NBA recently has been seen as a very left-wing organization, with many of its members speaking out against our President, and many of his policies and actions. This time was no different. While this historic event was playing out, current and former NBA players spoke in interviews and took to Twitter to address the subject.

One of the sport’s biggest stars, Stephen Curry, responded to one of Trump’s tweets saying, “​There is literally a tweet for everything. Cat got your tongue today huh?” referring to Trump’s inaction to stop his supporters from storming the capital.

Similarly, former NBA star Dwane Wade tweeted out, “Black people get pulled over and don’t make it out alive. We can’t sleep in our own beds without being killed. We can’t jog without being killed. We can’t walk down the street with our hoodies up without being killed but they can do this???”

Coaches of NBA teams also spoke out in recent interviews. Philadelphia 76ers head coach Doc Rivers said this, in an interview Wednesday night, “I will say it, because I don’t think a lot of people want to. Can you imagine today, if those were all black people storming the Capitol, and what would have happened? That, to me, is a picture that’s worth a thousand words for all of us to see.”

Seeing this historic event play out has opened many people’s eyes to the reality of what it is like to live in America today. What is happening at the capital not only exposes the discrimination of black people in America but also exposed the true values of our president and what his real motives are. No one knows how all of this will play out, but in the words of 76ers coach Doc Rivers, “Democracy will prevail, it always does.”

Editorials/Student Voice

Why Trump’s ban of transgender people from the military is transphobic

Leave a comment

By: Quentin Miller

On July 26th, 2017, Trump tweeted out this: “After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military, our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail.”

On January 22nd, 2019, this ban was put into temporary action by the Supreme Court, despite there being multiple lower court cases going on. 

In the wake of controversy related to the 2020 election, many Trump supporters have been trying to defend these actions to win over support of the LGBTQ+ community for Trump. Claiming that, just as Trump said, it was for economic reasons only.

Here’s why that’s factually incorrect.

First of all, he didn’t just claim it was for economic reasons. While he did say it was for the military budget, he also claimed it was to prevent “disruption that transgender(s) in the military would entail,” a blatantly transphobic statement claiming that transgender people are somehow disruptive, dramatic, or a burden. 

Second of all, if you do any research on the topic, you will learn that almost no medical  insurance in the U.S. covers facial reconstruction, hormone treatments, or genitalia reconstruction. Those are the only medical procedures that trans people “need” to go through, to transition. The health insurance issued to all U.S. army members, regardless of rank or division, is called Tricare. And while it is an extremely nice health care program, according to its own website, Tricare.mil, it only covers cosmetic surgery under these conditions: 

  • Correction of a birth defect (includes cleft lip).
  • Restoration of a body form following an accidental injury.
  • Revision of disfiguring and extensive scars resulting from neoplastic surgery (i.e., surgery that removes a tumor or cyst).
  • Reconstructive breast surgery following a medically necessaryTo be medically necessary means it is appropriate, reasonable, and adequate for your condition. mastectomy.
  • Reconstructive breast surgery due to a congenital anomaly (birth defect)
  • Penile implants and testicular prostheses for conditions resulting from organic origins or for organic impotency.
  • Surgery to correct pectus excavatum.
  • Liposuction when medically necessary.
  • Panniculectomy (tummy tuck) performed in conjunction with an abdominal or pelvic surgery when medical review determines that the procedure significantly contributes to the safe and effective correction or improvement of bodily function.

None of these apply to transgender people. This means, the U.S. military wouldn’t even be paying for these treatments.

Third of all, let’s just say there was a contract change, and Tricare would be responsible for paying for transitioning treatments. If we do the math, the argument that this is too big of an economic burden on the U.S. is still ridiculous.

There are anywhere between 2,000 and 15,000 people in the military (counting active duty and reserve troops). Now, I’m going to be doing an extremely high ball estimate, so we’re going to use 15,000.

Now, the most expensive set of treatments a trans person can get is, genitalia reconstruction (aka gender reassignment surgery), facial reconstruction, and hormone therapy. A reasonable estimate for the cost of these surgeries is about $61,500 upfront plus $1,500 a year for continued hormone therapy.

But, many transgender people aren’t interested (these people could be non binary, or could be using other non surgical methods of dealing with body dysmorphia) or have already had these transitions, so let’s cut the amount of trans people in half.

Let’s also take into account that those prices are for the average consumer, not insurance companies. Insurance companies negotiate prices that they pay hospitals for treatments, meaning they get massively discounted prices for everything. And the insurance company with the most bargaining power is, you guessed it, Tricare. So let’s just cut the cost in half, which is still way higher than what the military would be paying. So we’re left with 7,500 x $30,750 and we get an initial cost of  $230 million plus $750 a year for every transgender person taking hormone therapy, which can be stopped and continued at any time.

Just a reminder, the annual budget of the military is approximately $721,531,000,000, with around $200 billion of wiggle room. So, the military would be able to pay for the initial treatment of every transgender person in the military 3,137 times over, not even including the $200 billion they normally spend over their allowed budget. And again, that is an extremely high estimate for how much they would actually be paying.

So, not only would the government not have to pay anything at all, as cosmetic surgeries for non medical reasons aren’t covered, it would barely even be a dent in their budget.

So, the only possible reason that Trump could have for not wanting transgender people in the military is because he wants to discriminate against them, which isn’t surprising coming from the man who was sued by the Justice Department for discrimination in the past.

Editorials/Student Voice, Getting To Know/History

Heteronormativity in the portrayal of historical figures

Leave a comment

By: Irene Cohen and Ellie Mulvaney

Stigmas have been prevalent in modern society since its creation; limiting those who act or think differently than the status quo. Even now, there are conscious and subconscious prejudices against these people or ideas that taint the way they are perceived.

Homosexuality is one of such stigmas that has been frowned upon or discouraged in many communities, from the past through to present day. There are many figures in American history alone that have been rumored or confirmed as LGBT+, though this is often omitted when their stories are recounted. Let’s look at who some of these people are and why their sexualities were kept under wraps.

To begin, we have a revered poet and author responsible for works such as ​”I Hear America Singing​” and “​Song of Myself”;​ the latter of the two being a mildly controversial poem that sparked intrigue over the topic of sexuality. The University of Illinois reports that this poem contains a certain “Section V”, which contains explicit themes in a setting with another man. He titled the group of works centered around this man ​”Leaves of Grass”,​ and upon its discovery by his employer, this homoerotic poetry cost him his job. He was quickly rehired, but the work remained controversial and even prohibited in places. Since he self-published it in 1855, it underwent multiple transformations to muffle it’s suggested nature by scandalised editors, and was banned in Boston in 1882. At the time, Robert K. Martin was credited with saying “Whitman intended his work to communicate his homosexuality to his readers.”

Back then, being anything but straight was heavily condemned, and hidden almost completely by those who that pertained to. Despite progress made in terms of acceptance in the present day, there still is heavy criticism around the LGBT+ community. Could this in part be accredited to the lack of normalization?

In the case of Walt Whitman, even after his unconventional poems, that called mass amounts of attention to his identity, his sexuality is not commonly known. In my own years of studying and analyzing his work, this detail has always somehow been excluded from what I’ve learned about him. Teaching about honored individuals while being fully transparent in who they are can not only provide role models for LGBT+ youth, but also give more insight into the lives and experiences of said individuals.

A personal idol of Walt Whitman, who had similar gender preferences in relationships, was the renowned president Abraham Lincoln. Famous for documents such as the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln is one of the US’s most prominent political figures.

As familiar as many are with his achievements in office, his personal endeavors are much less known. One piece of information that many point to, to support the claim that Lincoln was actually gay, is the fact that Lincoln admitted to sleeping with another man, Joshua Speed, for four years, though Speed was far from the only man to have shared a bed with Abraham Lincoln over the years. Lincoln’s law partner, William Herndon, mentioned that Billy Greene had once said to him “They were as perfect as a human being could be,” in reference to Lincoln’s thighs.

Another, Captain Derrickson, was known to sleep in Lincoln’s bed and use his nightshirts when Mrs. Lincoln was out of town. Despite this overwhelming amount of corroboration for the idea that Lincoln was gay, historians to this day are maintaining that this esteemed president was heterosexual. One could argue that had any of these citations been with women rather than men, the claim that these people had an intimate relationship with Lincoln would be almost completely certain.

Looking back in the history books, it is evident that there is a lack of LGBTQ+ figures. The idea that people have only now begun to identify as anything but straight is nothing but illogical, though historians have seemingly edited out the parts of history they deemed unnatural or distasteful to further this notion. The public not seeing this aspect of the identities of figures they respect, or idolize, can be toxic to the queer community. Treating being gay as some sort of taboo stunts the movement and normalization of the existence of queer people.

Hopefully, the discussion opens up more and more in the future about just how many capable, and successful, people lived a non-heterosexual lifestyle.

Editorials/Student Voice

Are Christmas cards becoming less popular?

Leave a comment

By: Jimmy Somerville

I’m asking the question today, are Christmas cards becoming less popular? More specifically, the type of Christmas card I put an image of above, where you and your family select photos of your family together, and maybe some other pictures of the family children.

Some Christmas photos also give a quick explanation of said family, and most Christmas cards share the age of each of their children if they have any. Also, most family Christmas cards have a small phrase that usually goes with the Christmas theme such as the one above; “Simple Moments Bring Great Joy.” Christmas cards are also sent through the mail and arrive at your front door in envelopes usually.

As I’ve noticed through the last couple of years though, I feel like I haven’t seen as many Christmas cards around the house which, weirdly, greatly satisfied me; I enjoyed them. I liked reading and looking at them, and it’s funny because half the families I see, have no idea who they are. So, I’m basically just learning about new families that my parents know.

Now, to answer my question, are Christmas cards becoming less popular? I’d say yes, as you can already update your friends, on your life, on social media, and they can also update your families and other families on their lives on social media.

Christmas cards were used to update your old friends and family, as social media wasn’t always around. This was a good way to see your friends and family at least once every year. You get to see how big, how tall, how old, and how different your friends and family look by looking at the Christmas cards.

When you are following your friends on social media, you are already updated on their lives pretty much every day, so this sort of defeats the purpose of a Christmas card, but I think we should still use them for the tradition.

I couldn’t find any statistics of if Christmas cards were becoming less popular, but I did find an article, in the Chicago Tribune, asking the question “Are Christmas Cards a thing of the past?” It seems as if they were answering with “yes” to this question.

I say Christmas cards should still be just as popular as they always have, as I believe it is a great and fun tradition.

-Jimmy Somerville
For more information, please visit: