#industrial safety video production

[studio52group]

Ultimate Tips To Improve Safety in the Oil and Gas Industry

Working in the oil and gas industry comes with its share of risks. It’s no wonder that it is one of the more dangerous occupations worldwide. However, the industry has been striving to improve, and statistics show a positive trend in workplace safety with reduced fatality risks.

In 2019, the International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (IOGP) reported 25 fatalities spread across 22 separate incidents. While any loss of life is a tragedy, the numbers show a slight improvement from 2018, when there were 31 fatal incidents.

So, how can companies ensure they meet the industry’s safety standards? Let’s explore some effective strategies to enhance safety practices and protect the well-being of your workforce.

The Most Prominent Fatality Causes

One significant area of concern is the so-called “caught in, under, or between” incidents, which resulted in 12 fatalities in 2019. While it’s positive to see fatalities decline, too many lives remain on the line.

The industry still has a long way to go and must take serious steps to reduce these numbers even more. The incidents cause immense pain and suffering for the victims and their families, but they also tarnish the industry’s reputation.

This comes secondary, but the accidents also take a toll on productivity and finances. According to the IOGP report, the companies surveyed reported 21,899 days of work lost due to injuries.

The focus should remain on creating a safer working environment and minimising risks to protect the people involved and to keep the industry thriving.

Ways To Improve

Let’s dive into some practical steps to enhance safety and minimise hazards in this dynamic industry. How can we take daily strategies and steps to make the oil and gas sector a safer place for everyone involved?

Develop a Safety Program That Brings Workers on Board

Let’s create a workplace where open communication and mutual respect thrive! Who better understands the ins and outs of an oil rig’s risks than the individuals who have faced these challenges firsthand? Let’s take a personal approach to safety training, giving workers the time and space to get to know everything and each other. One such idea is personalised safety training videos. Just like the one we made for Foresight! 

When we build stronger personal connections among team members, we’re not just fostering trust but forging a sense of camaraderie that makes all the difference. Together, we’ll remake your rig into a place where everyone looks out for one another, with a supportive and secure environment for all.

Work With Local Emergency Services

Let’s strengthen the bond between the oil and gas industry and local emergency response services to create a safer working environment! When emergency responders, rig hands, and company health and safety professionals work hand in hand, they become a formidable force ready to tackle any challenge that comes their way. 

By fostering better communication and cooperation, they can pool their resources and expertise, ensuring swift and effective responses to emergencies. 

Explore More: The power of workplace safety training videos

Employ Housekeeping Rules

How about decluttering floors, pathways, and work areas to prevent trips and falls? Even the most minor hazard triggers shouldn’t be ignored when striving to make a safer workplace — these small things can quickly become more significant problems. Keep an eye on health and safety data to gain valuable insights into potential risks and devise a plan to address them effectively.

Implement Workplace Familiarity

Safety training is a must for all workers. Employees should have a firm grasp of their role, be aware of potential hazards, and know how to take necessary safety precautions. Effective communication of procedures and hazards to new workers is key to keeping everyone informed and safe. Personalised safety training videos can make a difference in keeping our workforce well-prepared and protected!

Monitor Mental Health

A positive workplace culture is vital for safety. It fosters a sense of community and trust among workers, where everyone feels free to voice their opinions and concerns. This way, the employees are more inclined to ask for help, follow safety rules, admit mistakes, and seek advice. It’s all about building a solid, caring team that looks out for one another!

Develop an internal HR team that is always there to talk to, track and record any problems the workers can report, and allow for a healthy flow of information.

Implement Proper Signs

Labels and colour coding are superheroes in workplace communication! They help direct, warn, and share important info with our hard working crew. By colour-coding materials, tools, and equipment, we can make everything a breeze to find!

Keep an eye out for worn-out, hard-to-read, or outdated signs. It’s crucial to replace them with fresh, clear ones. And don’t forget about our floor markings! Give them a little touch-up when needed to keep our workplace running smoothly and safely!

Implement Safety Checks and Maintenance Routines

Now, let’s talk about those mighty machines! Out on the offshore rigs, they’re lifelines for our hard working crew, miles away from the shore. To keep them running like clockwork and ensure the safety of our workers, regular maintenance checks are the name of the game! Preventing premature machine failure is key to a smooth and secure operation. Let’s give the machines some care and love they deserve!

An In-Vehicle Monitoring System (IVMS) Is a Must.

Let’s hit the road to safety! In this industry, accidents while driving or riding in vehicles are a serious concern. We’ve got our eyes on the road, monitoring driver behaviour like pros! By identifying any issues and bad habits, we can pinpoint where improvements are needed in our vehicle safety programs. Forklift safety cameras are one tool that can help us with the effort. Safety first, always!

Conclusion

Safety videos are real game-changers in the oil and gas industry! In the bustling Middle East, where this sector plays a significant role, it’s vital to tackle safety risks head-on. And one prominent tool these days comes in the shape of safety training videos. 

At Studio 52, our team is seasoned in producing top-notch animated safety videos! Our talented animators and developers are all geared up to create savvy industry-relevant content in various formats. 

So, let’s join hands and make worlplace safety a breeze! Reach out to us, and let’s take your safety game to the next level!

Contact us today at +971-04-454-1054 or mail us at Sales@studio52.tv

[amaranooreen]

Safety video in Oil & Gas Industry

[studio52sblog]

Explore expert tips and strategies to enhance safety in the oil and gas industry. Discover best practices for improving workplace safety and reducing risks.

[eph-em-era]

well all i can say about HBO's anti-union message in that bts video is that AS A KIWI ACTOR/STAGE/SCREEN INDUSTRY WORKER who isn't being strongarmed by a corporation into saying shit that they agree with

the hobbit laws suck. peter jackson is universally despised. what that man did with warner brothers and the national government to make our laws worse for workers so he could film his bad films here in the late 00s is akin to several crimes.

we WANT union protection! we WANT to be able to strike! i'm a member on the Equity NZ (union akin to SAG-AFTRA) committee for Wellington and the amount of work that's going on behind the scenes at the moment to claw back worker protections from our fucked up local laws is immense.

most of us aren't allowed to strike. most people working at wētā (the big screen production house), as well as on most screen/stage jobs are employed as contractors, so they're taxed exorbitantly, have no sick leave, have no holidays, have minimal protection from harassment or being taken advantage of.

long hours? being burned out? that's the kiwi way of living in the screen/stage industry and it SHOULD NOT be celebrated.

The Screen Industry Workers Act of 2022 has fixed some of that but there's still so much to go. yknow how SAG-AFTRA is fighting over residuals? here, we don't even know her.

i know all this personally and intimately.

i was taxed 39% on my contractor income last year.

only now that i'm a salaried worker can i afford to get my teeth fixed.

i had to get a legal action from a lawyer from ANOTHER UNION to get paid for one of my contracts in 2021 because the production team didn't like how i spoke up about their lax health and safety rules (this was a contract I was nominated for one of the most prestigious awards in the country for my work on, fyi)

sexual harassment is rife. what support is there? basically none. we hope it comes out in the media, or it doesn't change and there's nothing we can do cause we'll get sued into oblivion.

ive worked multiple 12+ hour days with only a tiny break in the middle or none at all. friends of mine have done 10-16 hour night shoots.

i've burned myself out multiple times in five years of professional practise cause that's the expected thing. that's what you do. if you're not working at 150% the entire time then you're a bad arts industry employee.

in conclusion, fuck off with your anti-union message, fuck you for utilising our weak-ass laws and HBO i'm in your walls

if you're in the US, support the Entertainment Community Fund! if you're a screen/stage worker in NZ, join Equity!

[kdinjenzen]

Games industry question: Why do QA testers get viewed so lowly when they represent a proxy for end users, when studios get into such a panic when the actual end users are unhappy? It seems like taking what should be a safety net and stowing it away, then being upset it is not there when the game is in free fall.

So the simple answer is "Influencers And Media Outlets Are To Blame" and what I mean by that is that in most areas that have a very low understanding about how games are made see the term "QUALITY ASSURANCE" or "QA TESTER" and think that means that it is entirely up to those people to ensure the product is of a certain quality.

Which is not the truth and a pretty baseless thought.

Lots of "WHAT WERE THEY THINKING!? WHO TESTED THIS!? THEY SHOULD BE FIRED!!!!" types of comments in magazines, websites, and YouTube videos caused this issue to explode.

[insomniaccat0107]

league of villains but they all work in entertainment industry

toga:

- well-known in industry because of her quirk

- if actor is sick or can't attend work for personal reasons it's time for toga to shine

- she refuses to work without personal permission of actor

- she still get to act as herself mostly in school setting romance

- once was asked to work for some indie horror movie and was absolutely thrilled through whole experience

- planning to attend more auditions for horrors but afraid that her school romance image would ruin her chances

-writes manga and light novels

dabi:

- specifically asks post production team to credit him in end as 'dabi' not 'todoroki toya'

- because of scars mostly works for mafia related movies

- once was invited to film an advertising with hawks. agreed only to tease hawks by flirting with him, was not expecting hawks to start flirting back.

- someone put those bloopers on herotube and half of the internet convinced that they are a couple

- really likes it when toga drops by the set just to say hi

- hates that he has to spend the most time out of all actors on set for make-up

shigaraki:

- started to stream just for fun, was not expecting it to become full time job

- if spinner has no fans shigaraki's dead

- has a herotube channel with short animation videos

- finds dabihawks shipping situation hilarious

- had been shipped with dabi after a few streams, but cut this off by coming out as aroace

- makes blind reaction videos with spinner

- invites toga and/or dabi for streams which includes them trying to cook something once in a while

- usually these streams end up in chaos

spinner:

- was streaming for longer time then shigaraki but was less popular

- more known as a bass player for a few rock bands

- almost passed out when shigaraki showed up in chat for the first time

- 'close your eyes bro' 'okay' 'what do you see?' 'nothing' 'that's my world without you, bro' 'bro' – kind of relationship with shigaraki

- tries to bring all of his gaming gear to tours with bands and fails miserably every time

- comes to toga-dabi-shigaraki cooking streams but stays behind the camera ready to call firefighters

- wears mask and sunglasses for streams and mask and hood for concerts

mr. compress:

- one of the most popular cosplayers in the community

- somehow manages to visit all of the cons with multiple cosplays

- uses his quirk to carry costumes around

- makes custom cosplay gear and has herotube channel with cosplay tips for newcomers

- freelance photographer for a few geek magazines

- met shigaraki and dabi at a photo shoot for magazine

- a few times was hired as a concert photographer and met spinner at the first one

- magne's podcast buddy

- carries toga's bags at cons and helps her with shopping

magne:

- has been working for huge animation studio but started her own project and quit

- does podcast about queer and quirk discrimination with compress

- once invited shigaraki to discuss 'villainous' quirk discrimination and shigaraki ended up coming out

- actually the one who encouraged toga to apply for auditions for horrors

- met compress through cosplay community

- has been planing to work with shigaraki on some animation project

- runs support center for teens with twice

twice:

- works A LOT with dabi

- started as a cameraman but then dabi suggested to try acting

- toga's number one fan

- voiced a lot of characteres from magne's shows

- was the one who brought up the idea of support center

- always declines magne's invitations for podcast because he convinced that he doesn't experience any oppression

- helps compress and toga to get ready for cons

kurogiri:

- shigaraki's editor and assists compress for photo shoots

- making tiktoks of chaotic cooking streams is his favorite part of his job

- the one who shigaraki calls when accidentally decays controller or other gaming stuff

- thankful to spinner for attending chaotic cooking streams for safety reasons

- his quirk is the reason why compress able to attend so many cons

- goes to every premier of toga, twice or dabi movies

- the one who organizes the league meetings once a month

[evidence-based-activism]

you know that porn doesn't have to involve women, right? you know that porn can be animated, right? you know that sex workers often run their own websites and publish their own work, right? good lord

"all porn is bad because the porn industry is often abusive" ok. stop eating chocolate. all chocolate. the chocolate industry is hugely abusive. stop eating it. all of it. even chocolate that you're pretty sure was ethically sourced. even homemade chocolate from your neighbor or that you bought online from the person who harvested the beans

"you know that porn doesn't have to involve women, right?"

(1) The vast majority of it does. (2) I actually do care about the men being abused in pornography as well. It may not be as frequent of an issue, but it does exist. (3) So ... you admit that pornography hurts women?

(Also, here is a post with a quote on this topic.)

"you know that porn can be animated, right?"

There are three forms of harm resulting from pornography: (1) the harm incurred by the people who are involved in its production (primarily the women - and sometimes the men - being filmed), (2) the harm incurred by the "consumers" of pornography, (3) the harms incurred by society (e.g., the connection to misogynistic beliefs, violence rates, etc.).

Animated pornography doesn't involve the first harm, but it may (and likely does) involve the second two harms. There is very little research on animated and/or written pornography. (I've asked for people to send any me known sources on this topic in the past.) That being said, here's a few sources I did find:

This article [1] describes how hentai, a common form of animated pornography, is disproportionately viewed by children aged 6-12 years and includes violence directed at female characters.

This article describes the similarities between animated and "regular" pornography [2]. This post [3] describes how animated pornography may be a "supernormal stimulus", affecting us in way that mimic other supernormal stimuli (e.g., junk food).

You can consult this website [4] that lists literally hundreds of sources on the negative effects of pornography. Most of these concern the harm incurred by the "consumer", which are likely shared (at least in part) by animated pornography.

We absolutely need more research on the topic of animated pornography specifically (and also written/drawn pornography). But given that we've established the harms of pornography, it's reasonable for the "burden of proof" to be transferred (i.e., we no longer need to prove the harm of pornography, you need to prove that this harm doesn't apply to animated pornography).

"you know that sex workers often run their own websites and publish their own work, right?"

(1) You'll need to provide a source for that "often". (2) What "sex workers" do you mean, anon? Pimps and pornography producers have taken to calling themselves "sex workers", but they are clearly in a different situation than the women who are "having sex" and being filmed are in. (3) How do you know which websites and work are "their own"? How do you know if the content is being posted by the women in the video and not someone else? If everyone was of age? If all the sex acts were consensual? If the women consented to it being posted/distributed? If she's being coerced by a pimp or a boyfriend or economic destitution? (4) Most importantly: are you willing to risk watching and masturbating to a rape video?

[Your chocolate metaphor.]

This is a false analogy for a few of reasons. Most importantly, however, it is possible to produce chocolate without exploitation. It is not possible to produce pornography without exploitation. It isn't even possible to conform to existing health and safety laws; the only reason why the pornography industry exists (in the USA) is because the government hasn't been enforcing these protections.

Here's an article [5] discussing how prostitution (and pornography is just prostitution on film) upends traditional consumer models (and is therefore not comparable with other "products"). Here is a post comparing the pornography and film industries, so as to highlight the inherent and inescapable differences between them. And another post, with the same purpose.

Conclusion

Pornography results in violence against women and the majority of it is violence against women. No amount of false analogies or loaded questions will change that.

References under the cut:

Wheelock College, USA, et al. “Hentai and the Pornification of Childhood: How the Porn Industry Just Made the Case of Regulation.” Dignity: A Journal of Analysis of Exploitation and Violence, vol. 8, no. 1, Feb. 2023. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.23860/dignity.2023.08.01.03.

Fight the New Drug. “What Is Hentai Porn, and Why Is It So Popular?” Fight the New Drug, https://fightthenewdrug.org/exposing-the-new-wave-of-extreme-hentai-animated-porn/.

“Why Are People Sexually Attracted to Cartoons? Nikolaas Tinbergen’s Concept of ‘Supernormal Stimulus’ Explains Why Humans Are Attracted to a Heightened Version of Reality.” Your Brain On Porn, https://www.yourbrainonporn.com/rebooting-porn-use-faqs/how-is-internet-porn-different-from-porn-of-the-past/why-are-people-sexually-attracted-to-cartoons-nikolaas-tinbergens-concept-of-supernormal-stimulus-explains-why-humans-are-attracted-to-a-heightened-version-of-reality/.

“Relevant Research and Articles About the Studies.” Your Brain On Porn, https://www.yourbrainonporn.com/relevant-research-and-articles-about-the-studies/.

Farley, M. (2018). Risks of Prostitution: When the Person Is the Product. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 3(1), 97–108. https://doi.org/10.1086/695670

[gayferrari]

idk if you watch the F1 Academy weekend wrapped but they did a very interesting piece on female anatomy in cars vs male. And how they the engineers and F1 academy developers have ti physically change the car and develop different parts and qualities to fit for a woman

All this to say, a lot of people (redditors) don’t seem to REALIZE that this is a multi-year endeavor that will require, engineering development, safety research and of course development of more female drivers. They’re not gonna advance a woman all the way through the Formula Ladder within three years in the second season of the championship

i feel that’s just common sense and i just don’t understand how people missed that

I haven't watched it! I'm actually very curious to see how they address this bc I feel like it's a topic that could get very easily misconstrued.

Disclaimer that again, I haven't watched those videos YET but my current stance would be: I see this as a double-edged argument because motorsport is one of the sport disciplines where broad biological differences in anatomy between AFAB and AMAB bodies that may to some extent influence performance in different sports (broadly and generalising and I am so not qualified to get into that) are pretty much non-existant. The technology at play minimises variations in physicality. There's no difference between drivers of any gender when they're in a car, beyond the basic body variations that you already get between somebody like, idk, Alex and Yuki. SO I don't love discussions that feels like it ultimately would boil down to "female racers need their own category because they can't compete with men in the same machinery."

HOWEVER. From what I understand (again not an expert just a Sport Follower) there ARE some differences that are mostly felt by junior drivers and broadly fall along gendered lines. iirc, F3 level cars take relatively more upper body strength to operate efficiently than F4 level cars, and that's a "jump" that's going to be felt more acutely by girls / young women vs people of the same age who are going through / underwent male puberty. It's less of an "issue" for adults but, at those ages — when a lot of talented pro-track youth athletes of all genders often "fall off" bc it takes them longer to adapt to their changing bodies, or they never quite manage it — it seems to be something that affects AFAB drivers the most. Again I'm 1) generalising and 2) this seems to be the current consensus based on the very small sample of junior female drivers who are competing. But basically I'm, uh. If I were the one in charge of F1A communication (which!!! I haven't watched these videos yet! I could be talking out of my ass) I would phrase it as "the way current cars are set up doesn't really allow all drivers to showcase their potential" vs. "girl drivers need special cars."

I'm absolutely gonna run to watch this video and I may eat my words, but I feel very strongly that we can call out the societal bias that means that most product designs / medical protocols / various industry standards / etc. in society are developed with a cis male (white) individual in mind as "the standard" AND we can also do so in ways that don't imply segregation across biological sex is something to strive for

(anyway ngl you hit the nail on the head because the thing I hate about redditors who talk about F1A is that they always go "Cute but what's the point, they'll never be competitive if they ever get into F3" and it makes me want to punch the walls. shut UP)

[glassprism]

hey there! i just read your post about musical bootlegs, and you mentioned that some filmers just disappeared. do you have any examples? i'd love to learn more about the history of bootlegging

Oh, that would probably be a really long list. I'll just note some of the most well-known ones that occurred during my time trading (so post-2011), whether within the trading community or in Phantom. Keep in mind too that some filmers disappear for a long while only to make a return; I won't be listing them since they're still around in some form. I'm also not going to name many of them because, well, safety, but you might be able to tell who they are based on the bootlegs I list as theirs.

One of the first is a filmer who filmed, among other things, the last show of Phantom's 3rd national tour, the video of Chris Mann and Katie Travis in Phantom, and the complete video of Dallas's modernized version of Les Miserables. They're well known to me because they actually posted their releases on Tumblr for a time, only to get harassed out because people kept yelling at them for bootlegging or selling bootlegs. They disappeared shortly thereafter; not sure if it's related to what happened to them on Tumblr, but it was a loss because I believe they were situated on the West Coast, whereas most other US filmers are in the East Coast, around Broadway, so we lost someone who could film productions in LA, San Francisco, and the tours.

Another who disappeared shortly thereafter was someone who was, well, a prolific filmer of many shows on Broadway and occasionally tours all over the US and was active since at least the mid-2000s. If you've watched, I don't know, the Cooper Grodin restaged tour videos, the original Broadway cast of Hamilton, the original Broadway cast of the 2nd revival of Les Miserables, any of those, you've seen their videos. From what I've gathered, they experienced some personal issues that caused them to take a break from filming and they have not returned since.

Also happening around the same period of time was another, mainly Broadway-based filmer who also did a few videos on the West End. (They filmed a video of Ben Crawford with Ali Ewoldt as well as the video of David Thaxton and Kelly Mathieson.) My recollection is that this person experienced a lot of leaks of their videos, causing them to take stricter and stricter measures in an effort to stop that, which culminated in them leaving altogether. Them leaving along with the two above contributed in some part to the dearth of bootlegs you see in the... late 2010s or so, at least with Phantom, because they were some of the most prolific filmers around. It wouldn't be until after COVID-19 that I saw a resurgence of filmers on Broadway.

Going back in time a bit! If you ever look at trading lists, you might see that there are a lot, and I mean a lot, of videos from the Broadway production of Phantom from 2012-2015 or so. That's almost entirely due to two filmers who were also very active on Tumblr and were based in NYC and went quite often to catch various understudies, swings, and unusual cast combinations. Both have since left filming, though in their case, it's at least partially because they're working in the theater industry in some capacity now.

And onto more depressing cases... there were a couple of filmers based in Europe, I think Germany or Austria, though they definitely made trips to other countries. They filmed several of the Phantom Hamburg revival videos, a lot of Elisabeth videos, and a number of the West End Les Miserables videos (if you see one that's heavily focused on Anton Zetterholm - yeah, that's one of theirs, that filmer was a fan). Unfortunately both were... I think either arrested or had their homes raided (or both) and collections confiscated, and while I think they were released, you can bet that put them off filming.

Finally and most recently, that I know of, the filmer who got the one complete video of Jonathan Roxmouth in the World Tour was caught and has not done any filming since, obviously. That was a shame as well because they had been planning to get more videos of the World Tour with the various alternates and understudies, but of course that never happened.

So that's a few, there's way more around, but I was just trying to think of some of the most prolific recorders around.

[fruityyamenrunner]

There are a lot of websites purporting to sell "Caluanie muelear oxidize". and even apparently a local "research chemicals" company.

what is it for?

The Caluanie product is a light brown liquid made from transmogrification of palm solution. The Crude Caluanie 99% is produced from Muelear oxidize Pasteurize manufacturer, which is a first-rate chemical with prospective uses around the world to primarily chemical centralized processing industries.

Caluanie is popular in the chemistry, and paint industry as a hygroscopic agent and also it is broadly used in the industries of paints, coatings, printing inks and plastics. I highly recommend buying 100% pure Caluanie chemical from a trustworthy supplier.

Caluaine is also called heavy water as it includes heavier hydrogen atoms when compared with standard hydrogen atoms. This chemical product is made to break up and also burn metal oxides while staying away from interactions with other chemical substances.

This colorless liquid has been tested on the lab to validate that manual handling does not have unfavorable implications. Caluaine can be found in online store with full confidence in its safety and purity. Wholesale shopping are eligible for considerable savings!

Caluanie Muelear Oxidize can be purchased for a variety of uses

Chemicals are usually used for various applications in any industry. Caluaine Muelear Oxidize USA is actually an extremely desired product in the metal and also chemical industries. Among its most significant uses are:

– Emulsification

– Chemical crushing of metals

– Metal hardware processing

– Removing substances that other chemicals cant

– Stain removal

– Refinement of precious and semi-precious stones

thermostat!

everything about it looks automatically generated, so what the fuck is it? some drug precursor? literally just alcohol in a bottle? part of some law enforcement entrapment scheme?

here is a website selling some of it, with addresses in salubrious Batley, West Yorkshire and exotic Louisville, Kentucky. They have a video, dated in September of this year, of someone soaking a rod that appears to be ferromagnetic in the mystery chemical, giving 👍👍👍 while it takes effect and then extracting it, breaking it and finding it to be no longer magnetic

[beeinyourbreadbox]

Okay I'm shamelessly wading back into my Hunger Games era to tell you all one of my FAVORITE details from the book. I'm a writer so like, the things that catch my attention in books tend to be a bit 'strange' .

Anyway my point here is that one of my personal FAVORITE small moments with HUGE implications in the book is Finnick knowing CPR while Katniss is so unfamiliar with it she actually thinks he's kissing Peeta's dead corpse at first. This is a funny little scene but dude. Okay. Katniss mentions in this scene that she's seen her mother do CPR once or twice, but that the types of patients she deals with in 12 are usually victims of starvation, mining accidents, etc. The types of ailments and death that are most common in 12 aren't the kind that chest compressions will help with, so it's pretty much an irrelevant technique in that particular district.

But what's even MORE interesting than that and the thing my brain latched on to like a squeaky toy is that district four's industry is fishing. Of course, the most obvious conclusion here is that CPR is more common due to higher drowning rates. They're the ocean district. But to go a little deeper, I would be willing to bet that not only Finnick knows CPR, but that it's probably a required part of schooling in district 4. This is basically head cannon territory but I'm basing it completely on details from the books. So here we go

We know that in each Hunger Games district, pretty much the entire culture and function is based off of whatever industry that particular district is primarily responsible for. In 12, many of the school classes focus on coal and coal production, the children are taken on yearly field trips down into the mines, etc.

So in district 4, which is also a career district, I would bet dollars to fucking donuts that swimming and water safety classes+CPR are a standard part of the curriculum. You probably aren't allowed to graduate and enter the workforce in district 4 unless you can demonstrate at least basic swimming abilities and understanding of how to save someone from drowning. I imagine it's probably a very similar program to lifeguard type training in real-life.

Just. Look up a video of newborn swim training for me, okay? The thing where they basically throw a baby in the water and let them resurface? And then imagine that every single parent in district 4 does that or at least it's a cultural norm. Baby Finnick being borderline waterboarded at birth to prepare him to survive. Just. That image makes me giggle a lot for some reason. Also water births are probably the norm in 4. That just feels correct.

There's not really a point to this post I'm just OBSESSED with Suzanne Collin's subtle world-building and how easy she makes it to fill in the blanks. Like. I don't know if any of what I've said here is cannon but it would make COMPLETE sense

[vidreview]

VIDREV: "NO CGI is really just INVISIBLE CGI" by The Movie Rabbit Hole

[originally posted march 19th 2024]

like a lot of folks, i've grown weary of the preponderance of CGI in Hollywood flicks these days. it's all but a cultural tradition at this point to watch John Carpenter's The Thing, sigh wistfully at the goopy silicone animatronics, and say "man, you couldn't make anything like this today." the Marvel/Disney machine has done a lot of heavy lifting to engender this perspective, particularly in the cape department where every aspect of the film is under intense and non-negotiable executive revision until quite literally days before theatrical release (as was the case with Marvel's The Marvels). it doesn't help that this shift has a lot less to do with what's best for any given movie, and a hell of a lot more to do with the lack of unionization in the visual effects industries making them a readily exploitable source of labor. in such an environment, films that nevertheless lean on practical effects are enticing (and, quite often, demonstrably better) enough that we'll sing their praises to the point of hyperbole.

enter Jonas of The Movie Rabbit Hole, here with a genuinely essential series of video essays to slap some sense into that hyperbole and bring us all back down to earth.

one of the more important directors for the development of unobtrusive CGI is David Fincher. i have my fair share of issues with his films, but credit where it's due: they're constantly pushing technology in ways that you absolutely would not expect. there's a crane shot at the start of The Social Network that couldn't be shot with a crane for safety reasons, so instead it was stitched together in post from footage taken on multiple 4K cameras at once. a shocking majority of the blood you'll see in his movies is CGI. the praise i've portioned for his recent films, even as i find him sort of a fundamentally anti-human director, is that he understands that visual effects work best as a supplement to existing footage, rather than a pure replacement.

i share all this to underline my use of the word "essential" in describing this series. i worked in film for a few years, i went to film school, i try to understand the production process as pragmatically as possible. i am under no illusions that Christopher Nolan flicks or the John Wick movies are totally practical. i'm not an anti-CGI evangelist! and yet, even then, i had NO idea just how wrongheaded i still was on the subject until i watched these videos.

Jonas brings 18 years of visual effects experience to bear on a series that feels very much like him trying to settle an argument he's been having for about as long. he has countless examples of films praised for their lack of CGI that relied heavily on their CGI, using the demo reels of effects houses as the smoking gun. Jonas speaks with a plain matter-of-fact-ness that's bolstered just so by an edge of smug frustration, the kind you only get after bearing a cross for years. but it's not just an "i'm right, you're wrong" affair by any stretch. Jonas does a fantastic job communicating a lot of complicated subjects in ways that are friendly to even the most casual of viewers, rarely blaming the audience for their ignorance when studios and market trends are the real culprit. and because he's a veteran of the industry, he's able to interview prominent figures that would otherwise be inaccessible for the average essayist, like Academy Award winning VFX supervisor Paul Franklin.

(and here we come up against a question countenanced more than once on this blog-- where is the line between video essay and documentary? i think this readily qualifies as the former given the first-person direct address shot-in-his-living-room style, yet somehow i feel a bit uneasy with the classification. oh well, a topic for another day)

the most eye-opening section for me is also one of the first, where Jonas confronts the public image of Top Gun: Maverick. i haven't seen this film yet, but i have seen the endless and unqualified buzz about its practical effects. and to be sure, these deserve quite a lot of praise-- they put real actors in real fighter jets for crying out loud! yet in all that crowing, a very important fact totally fell by the wayside: nary a single shot in the film is without digital manipulation. and not just in the basic touch-up sense, removing safety anachronisms and the like. the jets, the cockpits, and the actors themselves were all extensively replaced with digital doubles! i felt like an utter fool when he pointed out that quite often films praised for their lack of CGI will have more VFX artists credited than any other department in production. like, holy shit, it's all right there on the screen? what job were those hundreds of people doing if it was "all practical effects"?

which is the crux of the series' title: "NO CGI is really just INVISIBLE CGI." we have --or perhaps it'd be more honest to say i have-- a tendency to address CGI in binaristic terms. either it's there, or it's not there, right? Fincher's team can put digital blood running down Daniel Craig's face in the shower after he gets shot in The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, but it's Craig's physical presence that sells it. a film like Top Gun: Maverick makes its bones marketing the spectacle, and because there's such fatigue with CGI-heavy blockbusters any mention of intermediary visual effects carries with it a stain on the authenticity. but really, it does nothing to diminish the practical nature of the photography to also acknowledge how much of what makes it to cinemas is, essentially, an extremely realistic cartoon.

and this is what Jonas's series really exposes for me. a lot of what we're looking at here is rotoscoping, the longstanding tradition of animating over top of live footage a la Disney's Snow White in 1937, though the technique was truly mastered by Max Fleischer in the 1910s. is there some gradeschool nag whispering in the back of our head that a rotoscope is just elaborate tracing? that it's a cheat, because "real" animation is done without reference? (for anyone who has actually worked in animation, this is your cue to laugh derisively)

but the truth is that you do not get one without the other. it takes a lot of planning to film a scene with an eye towards being reanimated, just as it takes tremendous skill to make that animation look good. if Top Gun: Maverick feels viscerally real, it is because the visual effects artists had a real reference to work from. one is not inherently better than the other, more pure or authentic. this isn't the 80s anymore, man. i mean, to get real fucking technical, the instant we stopped shooting on film was the death of "true practicality" in cinema, because a digital sensor must by its nature interpret visual information as raw data and then translate it to something we'd recognize as an image. celluloid film is purely optical, but a digital sensor requires someone (or a team of someones) to write an algorithm to do that interpreting-- which is, inherently, subjective. different cameras have different image processing algorithms, different bitrates and dynamic ranges, to say nothing of custom LUTs and the extensive post-processing required to make RAW footage not look like complete ass. and even now, celluloid cannot be said to be truly pure, because any film shot on celluloid is then digitally scanned, subjected to the exact same post production processing as any other digital film, the final product re-scanned to celluloid to give it a true filmic look, and then yet again digitized for wide distribution (because most cinemas today only have digital projectors).

this is not A Bad Thing! it is simply the material reality of film production in the 21st century. it has many upstream and downstream effects, of course, many of which have negatively impacted the quality of films and television in various ways-- but these are not qualities inherent to digital technology! rather, they are the result of a profit-seeking industry eager to cut corners wherever possible. the existence of CGI is not to blame for the bad CGI in Marvel movies, it's the greedy executives exploiting non unionized labor, forcing crunch at every level with no regard for the human cost, endlessly meddling in the production with their indecisive market-analysis driven brand alterations. ah, the age of the executive auteur, when at last the soulless corporate mindset once commonly decried by artists and audiences alike has been fully naturalized and even embraced by people who call themselves fans, who would sooner throw a director under the bus than say a bad word about Kevin fucking Feige.

it's a pathetic state of affairs, and it can only be called a brilliant act of marketing that CGI burnout in the public has been leveraged to only further erase the essential labor of visual effects artists. Jonas here even points out, much to my slack-jawed amazement, that promotional behind the scenes footage today frequently removes green screens and other indicators of a digital-forward production as a way of unduly acquiring practical effects credibility. as someone who watches a lot of these BTS features, i feel lied to and manipulated, and ashamed of myself for not realizing that making-ofs are just as much marketing as they are educational, often moreso by a lot. it's all just an illusion! and it cannot be repeated often enough that this is an erasure of a historically under-unionized industry, one whose exploitation has been thoroughly documented for years. that this erasure is occurring at a moment when finally, finally, finally corners of the visual effects world have begun to shed the libertarian values inherited from the tech industry and actually unionize is pretty fucking conspicuous to say the least.

i call these videos essential because they reveal a tremendous blind spot in our media literacy, even among those like myself who've studied media extensively. we are, generally, pretty good at identifying the weaknesses in a finished film, but our lack of experience and our credulity towards marketing that doesn't feel like marketing leads us to utterly fail when we attempt to diagnose their cause. when our analysis lacks an understanding of the material conditions of production, as informed by firsthand accounts of those who actually do the work, we cannot help but embarrass ourselves and in so doing blatantly misinform our audiences.

it didn't used to be like this. i remember the late 90s and early aughts, when joints like ILM were praised for their innovations. how often do you hear about VFX houses today? probably only when they go bankrupt. it's such a shame, because what Jonas does in these videos most of all is reveal just how astonishing the work of visual effects artists actually is. these are the perils of an industry whose job is to be invisible, which is why it's so important that their labor be made visible after the fact, celebrated rather than papered over, analyzed extensively rather than mentioned offhand. the truth is that quite a lot of us have been boldly, profoundly wrong about CGI in movies for a long time, and we're well past due for a correction of the record.

all of which is to say that these are some really great videos and you should absolutely go watch them right now

NOTE FROM THE FUTURE: episode 4 came out and it's also great.

[amaranooreen]

Safety videos for uae workplace safety Discover how safety videos reinforce crucial safety messages, enhancing workplace safety and reducing risks effectively.

[studio52sblog]

Discover effective ways to communicate safety ideas in Kuwait with Studio52. Explore our blog for insights on promoting workplace safety and fostering a culture of security.

[mariacallous]

As the civilian cost of Israel’s war in Gaza continues to mount, advocates have waged massive information campaigns to give Palestinian suffering and victimhood due attention. The view that Israel is actively perpetuating a genocide is increasingly prevalent, held by groups ranging from governments to growing numbers of American Jews to experts on genocide and atrocity crimes. Allegations of Israeli wrongdoing range from well-evidenced accounts of indiscriminate force, failure to respect the flag of surrender, and prisoner abuse, to alarming but less well-evidenced claims of mass executions or even of organ harvesting. In response to a case brought by South Africa, the International Court of Justice has made an interim ruling that Israel must take measures to prevent acts of possible genocide while the case continues.

Globally, Israel’s image has collapsed.

But maintaining an appropriate sense of skepticism, without dismissing real atrocities, is important whoever the perpetrators are. Allegations should be investigated, but care should be taken to distinguish between substantiated and unsubstantiated claims. Defenders of Palestinians’ rights to the protections accorded civilians in war may not think this skepticism is important when it comes to Israeli military actions. Substantial evidence already suggests the operations of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) could violate the laws of war, and one way to hold Israel accountable is to believe Palestinians when they testify that crimes have occurred.

Yet while eschewing all skepticism in favor of horror at the carnage is understandable, it does not link up to the diplomatic and domestic levers that could cause Israel to change the intensity of its military action, improve humanitarian aid flows, and restrain its soldiers. Israelis have become dangerously convinced that the world is deeply biased against their country. Spreading unsubstantiated allegations contributes to that belief—and allows Israelis to dismiss foreign criticism too easily. This is a serious problem, as Israeli public support will be crucial for pressuring the Israeli government to further reduce the intensity of its military action and develop solutions to the humanitarian crisis the war has now produced.

Disinformation has been a consistent and serious problem in this war. From the outset, footage of atrocities and violence from other conflicts has been shared as though it was depicting Israeli and Palestinian victims. Some pro-Israel commentators have claimed that genuine images and videos of dead Palestinian children are in fact hoaxes, products of an imagined “Pallywood” industry producing fake victims, while even major media outlets repeat unsubstantiated claims made by the Israeli government, ranging from a now-disputed guard rosters in underground facilities to the discovery of alleged Hamas suicide vests for children.

Others, including journalists and academics, have denied or dismissed the sexual torture and rape committed by Hamas attackers on Oct. 7 or claimed that large portions of Israel’s civilian dead were killed by Israel’s own security forces. Many expert commentators have discussed how difficult it is for members of the public to know what is happening when falsehoods circulate and every claim of victimhood is contested.

Much of the Israeli public has been conditioned by its politicians and media, for decades, to view foreign critics as implacably hostile, prejudiced, and uninterested in their right to safety. Audiences refusing to accept claims of Hamas atrocities, perhaps jaded by Israel’s own unconfirmed allegations, and willing to accept thinly evidenced claims of monstrous behavior by the IDF affirm this perception and make Israel less likely to deescalate. Put simply, if foreign critics deny Israeli suffering and believe Israel guilty of every alleged wrongdoing, they alienate everyone in Israel, including those otherwise sympathetic to calls for restraint.

One political scientist has referred to this as a “Masada complex,” in which the Israeli public imagines itself to be a besieged people facing death, with no option but resistance even to the point of suicide. Indeed, Israeli youth for generations went on pilgrimages to Masada, as part of the country’s collective memory of Jewish historical resistance. Generational Holocaust trauma and victimhood are socialized and collectivized in Israel. Perpetual sensitivity to the possibility of Jewish genocide has led to a militaristic society in which the IDF and the political elite are intertwined. For Israelis, statecraft is a redemptive project as much as it is an institutional one, aimed at restoring agency and political self-awareness to the Jewish people, while geopolitics carry a perpetual awareness of the apocalypse. The upshot of all this is a “security concept” fixated on overwhelming military power and anxious about the very survival of the Jewish people.

Israelis believe foreign audiences have dismissed the genocidal threat posed by Hamas while unreasonably inflating the destruction the IDF has inflicted. Lampooned in sketches by Israel’s famous comedy show Eretz Nehederet, Israelis believe foreign media is quick to believe the worst about Israel in any dispute over a mass death event during war while treating Hamas as legitimate and reasonable representatives rather than monstrous terrorists.

When observers deny the rape of Israeli women on Oct. 7, Israeli audiences view this as a denial of Hamas’s genocidal desire or intent, because Hamas’s massacre as similar to the Holocaust or earlier pogroms—a perception shared by Jews elsewhere as well. Indeed, for Israeli audiences, refusal to admit the true violence of Hamas’s attack may itself be an attempt to provide cover for genocide or indicate the desire to see one carried out without interference. When observers accept without hesitation that Israel is carrying out unlimited violence in Gaza, some Israelis even see this as a resurrection of the blood libel, analogous to Christian propaganda about Jewish ritual sacrifices and clandestine killings of gentile children. These reactions are the product of long-standing cultural trauma and memory—an underappreciated commonality Israelis share with Palestinians. The result is that Israelis, a majority of whom strongly support their war on Hamas as a security necessity in the face of a genocidal adversary, are insensitive to foreign horror and outrage over the conduct and effects of their military operation.

Scholars of international relations would identify this as a matter of “ontological security.” Nearly 20 years ago, pathbreaking research used psychoanalytic methods to identify the ways that anxiety, identity, and cultural commitments can lead countries and communities to pursue policies that make them less safe from violence or more isolated internationally. The insight of scholars such as Jennifer Mitzen and Brent Steele was that “security of the self” requires remaining true to one’s worldview, even when this involves painful material sacrifices. Israel’s fortress mentality, tendency for apocalyptic anxiety, and hyperawareness of past genocide have all contributed to a tendency to see any concession as total rather than limited. To concede anything is to concede everything.

At the moment, the Israeli public is united in support of its military activities, even as it continues to be fractured by domestic opposition to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right governing coalition. More extreme figures such as politicians Itamar Ben-Gvir, as well as celebrities such as Eyal Golan and government ministers in non-security portfolios, have called for unambiguous retaliatory genocide. The broader public does not necessarily support these calls but is convinced that if it cannot win the war, the future of the country and its people is at risk.

Confronted with public opinion polls showing very high levels of Palestinian support for Hamas and for the Oct. 7 attack, and by some apparent foreign enthusiasm for the massacre from segments of the global anticolonial movement, Israelis believe that their fight is an existential one. They are convinced that hostile foreign audiences simply do not understand or care about the future of their country—making them ignorant at best and threats at worst.

For much of the Israeli public, a cease-fire—or even an imposed reduction in military intensity—is an unthinkable concession if the current war is an existential one. To be clear, this is an extreme reaction to reasonable demands for greater protection for civilians facing horrendous conditions of bombardment, displacement, and deprivation. Israel’s militarism, tendency to identify all threats as existential, and unwillingness to treat foreign criticism as good faith are causing a brutal callousness to Palestinian suffering.

But a complete cease-fire is, for better or worse, unlikely, and the next year is likely to see a continuation of military operations throughout a devastated Gaza Strip and amid a population already in grave crisis. Many lives will be saved by better humanitarian aid access and, crucially, IDF military conduct that takes greater precautions before opening fire and uses smaller explosive weapons, even though this raises the risk to Israeli soldiers—an obligation under international law. This will require domestic pressure from the Israeli public alongside Israeli government sensitivity to diplomatic pressure. So long as Israelis are caught in their Masada complex, they may refuse even at the cost of becoming international pariahs.

There is a way out of the Masada complex, however, without limiting urgent and legitimate criticism of Israel’s military excesses. While Palestinian commentators need not be expected to express empathy for Israel while their families are under bombardment, foreign critics can make a difference by recognizing Israeli suffering and Jewish fear in the wake of the Oct. 7 attack. This is consistent with research suggesting that persuasion and diplomacy are stronger when they begin from a position of empathy rather than hostility.

But this requires a tone shift—and a dose of political realism. As noted, some observers in other countries celebrated or at least excused Hamas’s actions, some prominently blaming Israel for the murder of their own citizens and others engaging in genocidal chants. They do so in the context of a media machine poised to grant outsized significance to these spoilers or treat them as representative of the pro-Palestine movement more generally. Such positions are disconnected from the realities that real stakeholders face; foreign commentators celebrating atrocity crimes have prioritized their abstract moralism over seriously engaging with the fact that Israelis and Palestinians have no choice but to coexist. And if they must coexist, they must do so without the need to continuously fight to prove their own humanity and right to life.

Yet this does not merely mean avoiding genocidal language. It also means avoiding narratives that paint one party as essentially villainous, guilty of every accusation and capable of every evil act. Every allegation should be investigated, and every victim deserves justice, but members of the public should ask if they are in a position to properly gather and assess evidence before sharing claims. Foreign critics of Israel should focus their rhetoric on well-documented violations and abuses, granting space and agency to journalists and investigators to gather evidence and report truth. With so many confirmed cases of law-of-war violations by Israel, it is also not necessary to endorse unconfirmed allegations as a condition for exerting pressure for a cease-fire or de-escalation.

Perhaps the most difficult sticking point, though, is the claim that Israel is carrying out a genocide in Gaza. It is more or less unfathomable for Israelis, whose cultural and national identities are thoroughly bound up in being victims of genocide, to accept that they are perpetrating one. Moreover, to accept the label of genocidaire is to take on a moral status that obliterates all right to sympathy or support. But it is unfair to demand that international audiences stop calling Israel’s conduct a genocide, as that claim is subject to expert and legal contestation and is also the discursive center of gravity to Palestinian demands for a cease-fire and for relief.

There is still a version of the claim that grants space to step back but does not accept the premise that Israel has forfeited all legitimacy or committed deeds from which no moral return is possible. Nothing can undo the destruction and death of Israel’s military campaign, but allegations of genocide can be accompanied with a question: If this isn’t a genocide, why isn’t there more humanitarian aid, more caution in the use of military force, and a clear plan for postwar reconstruction that restores the conditions of life to Gaza and seeks to heal the wounds of the fighting?

While those who have already broken through the walls of Israel’s cultural fortress, such as U.S. President Joe Biden, may receive a better reception from asking such a question, all commentators can make a small difference by linking allegations more closely to avenues of action. In other words, the allegation of genocide can be accompanied by an invitation, such as the ICJ has implicitly offered, to refute it through deeds rather than words.

When the fighting stops, Israel and Palestine will still exist. Palestinians will not be eradicated, and Israelis will not return to the myriad home countries of their diaspora ancestors. More than ever before, they will need to find a path toward a just peace. The occupation of Palestine must end if Israel is ever to enjoy full international legitimacy, and Israelis must find a way to elect a government capable of pursuing a diplomatic solution to the roots of the conflict. But if that is to happen, Israelis must learn (and see) that they are not in Masada and the world can treat them like any other state, capable of legitimate existence.

The way international audiences respond to events, assign credibility, and share claims of victimhood and criminal activities can have a large effect on this. The more scrupulously observers, especially those invested with official status or expertise, stay close to the available evidence, the less likely they are to feed Israeli fears.

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

May 24th, 2022 was awards day at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. Fourth grader Mayah Zamora won three of them – in math, robotics, and for making the honor roll. Not long after the ceremony, an 18 year-old walked into the school with an AR-15 style Daniel Defense rifle and started shooting.

Nineteen children and two teachers were killed. Zamora was airlifted to the hospital and has had more than sixty surgeries in the year since. Zamora's mom, Christina, says her daughter had been a fearless child before the shooting.

"Mayah shows a fear of this world that she had never shown before," she says. "Someone unexpectedly knocking on the door is a scary trigger for her."

Last year, the Zamoras became the second family to file a lawsuit against law enforcement, the school district, the gun store, and the maker of the weapon, Georgia-based Daniel Defense.

Federal law protects the firearms industry from lawsuits if their products are misused. But the law has exceptions, and the lawsuits allege that Daniel Defense can be held liable for what happened because of how they market their products.

"We need to speak up, for our daughter, for our family, for children in the future, maybe this will make a change," Christina Zamora says. "Nineteen children died. They were massacred. By an 18-year old boy. There's something wrong there."

In 2005, Congress granted broad immunity to gun manufacturers. But some legal experts believe exceptions allow gunmakers to be held partially responsible for these mass shootings if they deceptively marketed their products in violation of the law.

Georgia State University Law Professor Timothy Lytton, an expert on health and safety regulation, says Daniel Defense is notorious for its provocative marketing.

The lawsuits argue that the company violated federal trade law by unfairly marketing its products to civilians as tools for offensive, military-style operations.

"And they also allege that the placement of this AR-15 style weapon in video games allowed young men in particular to fantasize about use of this weapon in a way that would simulate the kind of violence that we saw in Uvalde," Lytton says.

After the Sandy Hook school shooting, some families of the victims made a similar argument in the Connecticut courts against the gunmaker Remington, which was in bankruptcy. And while the families won a seventy-three million dollar payment, it didn't create a sea change.

"It's not like a manufacturer came to the table and said, 'We admit liability here for the carelessness of our marketing practices.' This was a bankruptcy in which bankruptcy creditors paid out in order to get the company back into business," Lytton says.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up the case on appeal. So while gun control supporters cheered the settlement, the litigation left many legal questions unresolved. One big question is whether violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act even apply to the exceptions allowed under that sweeping immunity law. As a result, the Uvalde lawsuits against Daniel Defense could be the biggest test yet of the extent of the firearms industry's liability protections.

The cases have been filed in federal court in Texas, with the help of Everytown Law, an arm of the group Everytown for Gun Safety.

Daniel Defense didn't respond to an interview request, but has called the lawsuit politically-motivated and legally unfounded.

Mark Oliva is managing director of public affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade association for the firearms industry.

"Trying to sue a firearm manufacturer for the crimes committed by a remote third party would be the same thing as trying to sue Ford and Annhauser Bush for the deaths caused by drunk driving," Oliva says.

Even if the Uvalde cases clears the stringent immunity law and are allowed a trial, the courts would still have to consider another set of thorny questions, like whether the company's marketing is protected by the first amendment.

But Lytton says whatever happens, these liability cases put more focus on gunmakers.

"You only need one or two lawsuits to win to transform the whole industry," Lytton says. "If it got planted in Connecticut, and it flowers in Uvalde, that might be enough. And if it never takes root there, it's likely to pop up in Chicago. Or California."

Some states are passing laws that would make it easier to file these suits against gunmakers, but Oliva says the industry is pushing back.

"Are we going to bend to the idea that we're going to suffer death by a thousand cuts? I think your answer to that is we're challenging the law in New York. We're challenging the law in New Jersey. We're challenging the law in Delaware," Oliva says.

Back in Texas, the Zamoras want to make Wednesday's anniversary as normal a day as they can. Right now, they're focused on their daughter's recovery.

But they hope accountability will come, too.