#still not pulling for a few days out of respect for the boycott | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

pjpblinks · 5 years ago

Text

Yesterday marked four years of veganism for me. I used to count the days, months, weeks so intently because I used to consider being vegan a huge personal sacrifice, as though I am giving up something valuable to me. I now realize that’s not the case at all. In fact, my experience has taught me that it’s the opposite that’s happened. I think this will be a long-ass post, so I should probably do a TL;DR at the bottom or something.

I started thinking about veganism five years ago, when I came across Michael Pollan’s essay An Animal’s Place. Back then, I was struck by how ignorant I was about food and food production, and how I was willfully blind to the simplest fact about eating animals: that animals have to be killed to be eaten. Ultimately, at the time, I agreed with Pollan’s point that it is reasonable to eat animals as long as they did not die in pain, and lived pain-free lives where they were free to act according to their nature.

Two things happened after that: first, I realized it was very difficult for me to determine where the meat I was buying came from, much less if the animals lived pain-free lives, etc. Where I come from (a 3rd world nation in Southeast Asia), the issue of animal welfare is almost not talked about (unless it concerns pet animals), and data about animal handling are very hard to come by. It was simpler to avoid meat altogether. Second and more importantly, right after An Animal’s Place, I got my hands on a copy of Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation. That book forced me to reckon with one of the nagging thoughts I had even after reading Pollan’s essay: Is my desire to eat an animal’s flesh or to wear its hide greater than the animal’s life? After reading Singer, I started a year-long process of becoming vegan: first cutting out red meat, then seafood, then eggs and dairy, culminating in September 2015, when I decided to be vegan.

---------------------------

Since I was a heavy meat-eater and a dairy fan back then, I treated veganism as a personal sacrifice, like I said. I would tell myself that I am doing this because my conscience does not allow me to see animals as food, that I must resist the “temptation” to eat animals. To me, the whole thing as a limiting experience.

Four years on, I realize I’ve cooked more, eaten with more variety, experienced new flavors, experimented more with food. It’s true what other vegans say: veganism is eye-opening.

Being vegan also dispelled the deeply and unfortunately popular notion that all we care about are animals; that we don’t care about other people-- minorities, persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples, immigrants, laborers, and other groups of people who either work hard to provide us with food or who cannot be vegan. We’re single-issue advocates, nothing more.

On the contrary, for me, veganism has made me aware of issues that I otherwise would not have been aware of had I stayed non-vegan. Veganism, for me, became a magnet of awareness, pulling in issues such as inequality in access to food, food justice, labor law violations in food production as well as bad labor laws, environmental destruction, land-grabbing, and the like. Being vegan did not narrow my advocacy; it did the opposite. These issues are not inconsistent with veganism. Making the moral stand that animals have the right to live, the right to be free from human consumption, only strengthens and supports the stand that human beings also deserve these rights.

Four years on, I’m glad I made the decision.

---------------------------

If you are thinking of going vegan, I realize it can be daunting at first. But thankfully we are living in a world where a wealth of online resources abound. Here are a few that have helped me:

1. @acti-veg is a tireless blog that is always eye-opening, logical, incisive, and respectful. I only started reading it this year and I don’t plan on stopping.

2. Bite-Sized Vegan was a big help to me when I was a wee vegan. The videos are entertaining, tongue-in-cheek, and informative.

3. Astig Vegan is a vegan Filipino food blog. I desperately needed to veganize my favorite Filipino meals growing up, and this blog saved my life. If you’re interested in Filipino food, this is the place to go.

4. Me and My Veg Mouth- is Filipino-run collective that focuses on vegan food, food justice, activism, and food access. Their Facebook and Instagram pages feature delicious recipes and shine a light on the issues mentioned. Recently, they came out with Makisawsaw, a book containing vegan recipes for food and sauces, inspired by the Nutri-Asia boycott. The boycott came about because of Nutri-Asia’s abusive labor practices.

5. The Vegan Strategist- Tobias Leenaert’s long-running blog is still one of my favorites to read. It focuses on ways to mainstream veganism.

6. Faunalytics’ motto is Animals Need You. You Need Data. Research papers on animal rights abound. I have literally spent whole days just neck-deep in this site.

Plus, many others. Please feel free to comment if you have go-to vegan resources!

TL;DR: I’m four years vegan today (with links to great vegan resources)

Edit: I realize that posting an entry about how long one has been vegan may be taken as a brag, but, well, I just wanted to chronicle how the experience has been for me. (it’s partly vanity that I want for there to be a written record of this moment). New and old vegans alike, I give you a big hug. The animals thank you, the world thanks you, I thank you.

#personal #vegan #go vegan #animal rights #an animal's place #animal liberation #peter singer #vegan resources #filipino vegan

51 notes · View notes

modelronpagame · 6 years ago

Text

Modelkuma’s Final Thoughts || GFS End I

Once all of the students have completed their runway walks, Modelkuma clears their throat and pulls their mic close, tapping it gently to get everyone’s attention.

“Congrats on completing your first Group Fashion Show, everyone! I know it’s hard getting your footing when you’ve never done a big fashion show like this before, but a few of you have definitely impressed me a bit!”

They nod, humming softly to themself.

“Alright then, now for my final thoughts!

de Silva-san! For me, it felt like you were trying a bit too hard this time around. I loved your moves a few days ago when you walked the regular fashion show runway, but this time.. It’s just not cutting it! You’re going to have to try a bit harder, okay? Only a 12 from me this time! Bathory-san! Though I wasn’t floored, I liked this performance better than your last! That first move was delightfully cute! I think when you take on a sort of whimsical aura, you can really shine! Unfortunately, your last two moves didn’t really pique my interest. You get a 25! Fujimoto-san! Your walk wasn’t as show-stopping this time around as it was before, but I can imagine this kind of thing would make one nervous! Still, you performed well enough! A 28 from me! Fujimoto-san number two! You really sucked this time! Your performance put me in a bit of a bad mood. I think you needed a lot more practice for this one, and you just didn’t deliver! I’m disappointed. I’m only gonna give you a 5! Boo! Mazawa-san! I understand that this theme was probably a bit difficult for you, but I appreciate that you did your best! You clearly tried hard, and I can always respect that! A 27 from me! Fukumoto-san! Your performance was fine, and your first move was stunning! The other two didn’t impress me all that much- in fact, I think your first move sort of out-shined them in the end! Guess I’m a sucker for those pretty eyes, huh? A 26 from me! Fukuyama-san! Hahahaha!~ I loved that costume! You really embody the essence of Chiitan, don’t you? It was a bold move, and not one without praise! I definitely loved it!~ You get a nice 37 from me! Bahahahahah!~ So cute!~ Aikawa-san! You don’t seem to have improved at all since your last fashion show! Then again, I guess it’s a lot to ask for you to improve in such a short amount of time. It’s not a bad thing, I guess- your performance was pretty good! I’m just gonna give you the same score as last time! A good ol’ 29! Amashiro-san! Mmmm, I wasn’t impressed. None of your moves really stood out to me, it was all just sort of boring! I think you need a little more practice- sorry! You only get 12 from me. Imamiya-san! You have experience in this field, and you haven’t disappointed me yet! This category isn’t really your forte, but you rocked it anyway! For a cute-themed runway, you did the best you could, and I’m satisfied! A 30 from me! E.ve-san! I know I’ve been hard on you during these past few days, but I was truly inspired by your runway performance today! It’s good to see you shying away from your goofy style and giving us something with a little more spunk! So much enthusiasm and charm, I was blown away by your talent! It just goes to show that when you put yourself out there and show us everything you’ve got, you really steal the spotlight! Upupu! You’re getting my highest score yet! A whopping 40!~ Kyou-san! You started off strong, but really blew it there at the end! You’re undeniably cute, and that’s a fact! Next time just try not to overdo it, alright? I think if you practiced a little bit more, you could’ve saved yourself from the disaster that was your last pose! Keep that from happening again, okay? I give you a 24! Kanta-san! Your entrance really knocked me off of my wheel! I was so amazed at your charm, that coy smile was just to *die* for! Unfortunately, that was the best it got! Next time I think you should try and keep up that charm throughout your whole walk, alright? You get a 28 from me! Kumagae-san! Wahahahaha!!~ Wowee!! I think I’ve fallen head over heels! You sure are a cutie, aren’t you? Your pure charisma on the runway blew me away! I don’t think I’ve seen such a performance in a long time! Perhaps I should have put you in the cute category, huh? Upupupu! Even though it got a little dodgy in the middle there, you picked it right back up in the end! I truly loved it! An astounding 44 whole points for you, Yuuna-chan!~ Woooo!~ Hamaguchi-san! It’s clear we have an experienced young model in our midst! It’s easy to see your years of stardom giving you the one-up here on the runway! You may have fumbled a bit in the middle there, but overall your walk was a delight to watch! Keep up the good work! I’ll have to be a bit stricter with you next time, knowing you come from an experienced background!~ That’s a 39 from me!~ Ng-san! I should have expected the same sort of routine from you. The ‘too-good-for-modelling’ shtick is getting old, and you’ve completely abandoned the theme! It wasn’t cute at all! I can admire your captivating stage presence, but that’s about it! Find a new act, okay? You’ve got 19 points from me! Next!~ Oh-san! I suppose I was a bit too harsh on you during your first fashion show, wasn’t I? Your performance was delightfully cute and I found myself enjoying all of it for the most part! Sure you may not have been outstanding, but you’ve got plenty of experience and it really shows during your walk! You’ve earned a comfortable 38 points!~ Sada-san! I can understand that cuteness isn’t really your forte, right? Still, you did your best and I can appreciate the effort! Even though you’re not what a lot of people would describe as ‘cute,’ I still found myself liking it all a lot! The whole walk made me feel happy, upu!~ That’s a 29 from me! Red-san! Hmmm, while it was a creative technique, I have to say I wasn’t a huge fan of the signs. Where’s the action? Where’s the pizzazz? I’d venture to say you barely moved a muscle! Next time I’d like to see you engage in some actual posing, okay? You get a 21 from me!”

They pause, and for a moment they hold their cutesy smile. Then, slowly, they turn to Raketsu.

“.... But it looks like there’s still someone left, isn’t there? Someone whose decided to boycott this little fashion show of ours, huh? Well, I’m sorry to say, Hachimitsu-san, but you’ve earned 0 points!”

They then glance to their fellow judges in anticipation for their scores.

#modelronpa #gfs #group fashion show #chapter 1 #modelkuma

4 notes · View notes

newstechreviews · 4 years ago

Link

When Anthony Lynn, head coach of the Los Angeles Chargers, was in third grade, his world changed. He grew up in Celina, Texas—the son of a single mother, and one of the few Black kids in what was then a small town north of Dallas. A girl—Lynn thought she was cute—was handing out invitations to her birthday party one day, when Lynn noticed she skipped him and a Black girl in the class. When Lynn asked why, the response left him devastated. It’s because you’re Black and my parents won’t allow you to come to my place.

“After that moment, I never saw things the same,” Lynn, now 51, tells TIME in a video call from his office in Costa Mesa, Calif., where the Chargers are headquartered and holding training camp. “That’s when I knew the world was different. There’s a difference being Black and white. Then I started seeing color.” Lynn says this, and other experiences with racism throughout his life, helped motivated him to reach the top ranks of the NFL, where he is now one of just three Black head coaches. “I didn’t didn’t like the fact that people didn’t think I was equal, or thought they were better than me,” says Lynn. “I can’t say race wasn’t a big part of why I’m where I’m at. Because it pushed me.”

Now, the realities that Lynn confronted head-on in his life are at the forefront of his job as head coach. He sees systemic racism in the NFL, a league in which Black men are 60% of the players, but less than 10% of head coaches. He sees it in the streets, with the killing of George Floyd and the shooting of Jacob Blake. “I was like, wow, again?” Lynn says of watching the video of police shooting Blake in Kenosha, Wis. “It’s always unarmed Black men. And seven times? That just made me sad, man. I got emotional.” On Aug. 26 the Milwaukee Bucks declined to take the court for a playoff game against the Orlando Magic; other teams across sports also staged strikes, effectively shutting down the games. The Chargers were supposed to hold a scrimmage at their new home, the $5 billion SoFi Stadium, the next day. Lynn called a team meeting, and let players express their frustrations. “After that, no way could we take the field and practice,” says Lynn. “Because something was more important than football at that time.” The scrimmage was cancelled.

Read more: Why Jacob Blake’s Shooting Sparked an Unprecedented Sports Boycott

Lynn’s Chargers will kick off an NFL season like no other this weekend. In the midst of a pandemic and national reckoning on race, L.A. travels to Cincinnati to take on the Bengals and the No. 1 pick in the 2020 draft, quarterback Joe Burrow, on Sunday. While Lynn says he would have supported a player walkout in Week 1, he did not encourage it. “If I thought not playing Week 1 would make a major change, I’d give these boys the whole week off,” says Lynn. “I wouldn’t show up. But we’re football players, we’re not politicians.”

Still, don’t expect silence. In the past, Lynn says he’s tried to keep talk of controversial social issues—like Colin Kaepernick’s kneeling during the National Anthem—out of the locker room, lest it become a dreaded “distraction.” “We can talk about that s–t in February, in late February hopefully,” says Lynn, explaining his prior philosophy. Not so this year. “If I was to suppress this, I think it would hurt their passion and I don’t think they would play the game that they love well,” he says.

After Los Angeles made the playoffs in 2018, his second season as Chargers coach, Lynn’s team finished 5-11 last year. He’s under pressure to correct the course as the Chargers move into a new home. Lynn’s team will share SoFi Stadium with the Los Angeles Rams while desperately fighting for fans in an L.A. market that has greeted them mostly with indifference since moving from San Diego in 2017. Still, Lynn says his focus is not just victory on the field. “We have committed to winning the championship,” he says, “and fighting for social justice.”

A bunch of plays are diagrammed on a white board behind his Lynn’s desk; he’s wearing a Chargers cap and jacket during our interview, and some gray stubble is peppered on his chin. Lynn’s no typically programmed football coach. He talks in a real, conversational manner, which is all-too-rare in his ranks.

As a kid he played quarterback on youth teams in football-crazed Celina. In seventh grade, however, a coach informed Lynn he’d be moving to running back. “He goes, ‘Black kids can’t play quarterback,'” Lynn says. Lynn asked why. “Well, they’re not smart enough,” the coach responded.

These accumulated experiences with racism “made me more aggressive,” says Lynn; he got into fights in school, but he also channelled his anger onto the football field, eventually earning a scholarship to Texas Tech University and playing in the NFL for the San Francisco 49ers and Denver Broncos; he won a pair of Super Bowl rings with Denver in 1997 and 1998.

Tensions boiled over during Lynn’s senior year at Texas Tech. Lynn says police were gathered at an apartment building where two teammates were staying; when he went to see what was happening, the cops “just jacked me up against a wall.” They asked if he was a drug dealer. “And I just lost it, man,” Lynn says. “The next thing I know I’m fighting with his cop and I’m on top of him and I get hit in the back of the head with a billy club and they got me tied down on the ground and they’re taking me to jail and the one officer kicked me inside my head.” Thanks to Lynn’s football connections, the cops eventually let him go. “Today, I would have been shot,” says Lynn. “I mean, think about that. I said, ‘I would have been shot.’ I was dead wrong going off on that cop. But it was just years of accumulation of this and that. I can’t go to the birthday party. I can’t play quarterback.”

Lynn stresses that he has great respect for police officers. In 2005, after he was struck by a drunk driver while crossing the street in Ventura, Calif., police officers helped save his life. The near-fatal incident left Lynn with temporary paralysis and injuries that required four surgeries. He has remained friends with one of the officers who rescued him. Still, he tires of the constant stings of racism. Just last year, he was pulled over for what he calls a “bogus reason.” Before a white officer asked him for license and registration, Lynn says, he asked if he had been in jail or on probation. “I’m afraid for some people that might not be as strong minded, if they hear something like that too many times, they start to believe it,” says Lynn. “That they’re not better. That they’re not equal. That’s my biggest fear. But for me, it just pisses me off. It always has.”

READ MORE: America’s Athletes Are Finally in a Position to Demand Real Change. And They Know It.

Lynn’s also irked that only three of the NFL’s 32 head coaches—Lynn, Brian Flores of the Miami Dolphins, and Pittsburgh’s Mike Tomlin—are Black. “I’m not comfortable with that number,” Lynn says. As recently as 2017, there were seven Black head coaches in the league. (Washington Football Team coach Ron Rivera, who’s Latino, is the NFL’s only other minority head coach). The Rooney Rule, which was implemented in 2003 to guarantee that at least one minority candidate is interviewed for open head coaching positions, seems broken. Is this the product of systemic racism? Lynn agrees that’s a fair assessment. “I played in this league for eight years, and a player knows a head coach when he sees one,” says Lynn. “There were African-American coaches that could have been head coaches but just never got the opportunity.”

How do you fix this? Lynn believes reforming the head coach feeder system will help. Between 2009 and 2019, according to a recent study from Arizona State University, offensive coordinator was the most frequent former position for head coaches: 40% of NFL head coaches were hired from offensive coordinator spots (NFL defensive coordinator, and NFL head coach, were the next most frequent positions). During same period, however, 91% of offensive coordinator hires were white.

“I’ve seen so many play callers get head jobs that have no personality, no leadership whatsoever,” says Lynn, who during his 17 years as an assistant coach in the NFL never entered a season holding a coordinator position (a few weeks into the 2016 season he was named offensive coordinator in Buffalo; that year he took over as interim head coach for one game after Rex Ryan was fired). His coaching career previously saw him as mostly a running backs coach and assistant head coach. Broadening the feeder system would result in a more diverse—and talented—candidate pool. “And then you wonder why every year in the National Football League we are firing anywhere from six to eight head coaches?” says Lynn. “If we open this thing up to position coaches, assistant head coaches, then you’re going to have more African-American applicants.”

He also believes Black coaches have to win faster than their white counterparts to keep their jobs secure. “I’m not happy with the leash that African-American coaches get,” says Lynn. “I had my first losing season last year. And I come home one day and my wife is like, ‘Honey, are you okay?’ And I’m like, ‘Why wouldn’t I be? I’m fine’. And she’s like, ‘Well, do you not know half the country wants you fired?’

When he entered coaching, Lynn understood the hurdles. The memories of being told he couldn’t attend a birthday party because he’s Black, or being asked if he was a drug dealer, were never too far from his mind. Lynn’s grandfather once told him he’d always have to be better because of his skin color. He’s never forgotten those words. “It’s a shame, but I know that going into it,” says Lynn. “I know I’ve got to turn this damn thing around, soon. But at the same time, I’m going to stand up for what’s right. I’m going to speak out when I have to. I’m not going to let that scare me from doing that as a human being.”

To wit: he’s unafraid to say that Kaepernick got a raw deal. Lynn is happy with this current quarterbacks, but did express some interest in Kaepernick earlier in the summer. “I do think there’s a possibility that Kaep could come on somebody’s roster this year because you can hold roster spots for veteran players now because of injuries and because maybe of COVID,” says Lynn. “There’s still a possibility there. But Colin’s busy doing things to help make a change and he’s signing big deals, he might not have the time to come back and play NFL football. But I know over the years he should have been given an opportunity. There’s no doubt about that. We’ve had those discussions. I can say that. We’ve had those discussions.”

Jayne Kamin-Oncea–Getty ImagesHead Coach Anthony Lynn of the Los Angeles Chargers on the sidelines in the first half of the game against the Oakland Raiders at Dignity Health Sports Park on Dec. 22, 2019 in Carson, Calif.

Lynn is facing unprecedented challenges in carrying out his team’s turnaround plan. Start with his own bout with COVID-19; he was diagnosed while on a trip to Dallas, to visit his mother, in late June. “You always say, well, it’s really only killing 1%,” says Lynn. “But when you get it, start thinking about that 1%.” He’s not sure how he got infected. “I mean no one was more paranoid about this than me,” Lynn says. “You’re talking about a guy that has hand sanitizer in his front belt loop everywhere he goes. Wears gloves, masks.” Lynn’s lungs collapsed during the car accident 15 years go, which he feared would make him even more vulnerable. “And so it was some anxiety there for a little while,” says Lynn. “For me it was a really, really bad flu for about three or four days.”

Read more: Coronavirus is Placing College Sports on Hold, Putting Students, University Budgets, and Entire Towns At Risk

In training camp, Lynn believes COVID-19 has affected team chemistry. “A big part of football is camaraderie,” he says. “When you have to social distance, it’s hard to build a team.” The first full in-person, locker room team meeting Lynn had was on Aug. 27, at SoFi Stadium, to discuss the Blake shooting. “I could just feel the people craving that community, that fellowship,” he says. “We haven’t had it. It’s going to be difficult to build tight teams and trust with new players when you don’t have that. The longer we do without it, the more of us see it. I mean, this is Zoom all year. Are you kidding me? It’s going to be different. But we knew that it was going to be a challenge and we’ve got to figure out a way to still make it work.”

The Chargers enter this season with veteran Tyrod Taylor starting at quarterback. A potential franchise QB, Justin Herbert—the sixth overall pick in this year’s draft, out of Oregon—will be the backup. (Quarterback Philip Rivers, who started every game for the Chargers the last 14 seasons, signed with Indianapolis in the offseason). Preseason games were cancelled this year; in some ways, this made Lynn’s training camp smoother. Because if Herbert shined in preseason games, screams to start him right away would have been pronounced.

In sticking with Taylor as the starter, Lynn cites John Elway and Peyton Manning, two legends who started their rookie years; each threw more interceptions than TDs (Manning threw a rookie-record 28 interceptions in 1998, tops in the NFL that year). “But those guys are two real strong-minded individuals, Hall of Famers,” he says. “Not everybody’s wired that way, man. It’s not everybody that can overcome that. So I don’t expect [Herbert] to come in and play right away. I think sitting him for a year would do nothing but benefit him.”

Does Herbert seem to have the Elway-Manning mentality, or is it too early to tell? “He is a leader in his own way,” says Lynn. “He’s more of an introvert. He quieter, but he communicates when he has to with his teammates. And people try to say that was a knock with him coming out. Said he has all the tools but wasn’t much of a leader. Introverts get labeled that way. I just know these players react well to him.”

The Chargers spent the last three seasons playing in a Carson, Calif. soccer stadium that held just 27,000 fans, by far the smallest capacity in the NFL. Now, they will move into a shiny $5 billion palace playing in front of zero fans, due to the pandemic, making the team’s effort to win the hearts and minds of Los Angeles even more difficult. “L.A. is a hard city,” says Lynn. “You have to be successful here, bro. You’ve got to win. And if you don’t, people just do other things. And there are other sports franchises here that people are attached to. So it’s no doubt a hard market. But people respect that hard work, young men of high character that are helping their communities and doing things that we’re doing. It’s just a matter of time before we have a strong fan base here. But we knew when we moved here it wasn’t going to happen overnight. Just like social justice. It isn’t going to happen overnight.”

More than ever, social justice will be a major theme of the NFL season. An Alicia Keys rendition of “Lift Every Voice And Sing,” a song known as the Black National Anthem, was played before Thursday night’s season-opening Kansas City Chiefs-Houston Texans game. At least some players are likely to kneel during the National Anthem or utilize some other form of protest when the NFL kicks off this weekend. Lynn recalls the reaction of his players after Blake’s shooting. “I’ve been dealing with this s—t since since I was nine years old,” says Lynn. “I was more sad that day for how they felt. We’ve got to move beyond it. We’re certainly not going to forget about it. But I wish I could do something to make them feel better in moments like that.”

Still, the Chargers coach remains confident that his recent powerful wave of sports activism will bring change, both inside and outside the NFL. “I’ve got to tell you, I’ve never seen so many people from all different backgrounds and colors come together and want change,” says Lynn. “So man, I’m hopeful. I’m very hopeful.”

#Blogger

0 notes

techcrunchappcom · 5 years ago

Photo

New Post has been published on https://techcrunchapp.com/most-nbc-stations-wont-air-the-30-rock-reunion-vulture/

Most NBC Stations Won't Air the '30 Rock' Reunion - Vulture

If you can watch the 30 Rock reunion on TV this Thursday, you’re one of the lucky ones. Photo: NBC

In a plot twist right out of 30 Rock, NBC’s biggest local affiliate groups have decided not to broadcast the network’s upcoming 30 Rock reunion special, meaning at least half the country won’t be able to see it when it debuts Thursday night. Vulture has learned that Gray Television, Hearst, Nexstar, Tegna, and Sinclair Broadcast Group — huge TV-station groups whose NBC affiliates reach about half the country’s TV homes — have told NBC that they are planning to preempt Thursday’s remotely filmed hour.

The apparent reason for the decision, per sources familiar with the matter: The station owners think the 30 Rock reunion, which was produced by the NBCUniversal ad-sales division as a replacement for the usual upfront presentation, is too much of a promotion for the company’s new Peacock streaming platform. Station owners are understandably worried about Peacock siphoning viewers from linear TV, particularly since the new platform will offer next-day reruns of NBC shows on its premium tier (and week-late access to reruns on its free level). Reps for station groups contacted by Vulture, including Gray and Sinclair, did not respond to requests for comment. An NBC rep confirmed the preemptions but declined further comment.

This last-second revolt doesn’t mean audiences won’t be able to see Liz Lemon and the gang back in action. NBC owns its own stations in the nation’s ten biggest TV markets, including New York and L.A., so viewers in about 40 percent of the country can still tune in as scheduled on Thursday at 8 p.m. In addition, NBC will post the full special to its NBC.com website, cable video on demand platforms, and, yes, Peacock on Friday morning. The special will also air on NBCU cable networks USA, SyFy, Bravo, Oxygen, E!, and CNBC that Friday. (Hulu users take note: The special will not stream there.) But Lemonheads living in Las Vegas or South Bend, Indiana (where Gray runs the NBC affiliate), will have to wait a few hours to see what’s up with the Girlie Show gang.

It’s not unprecedented for TV-station affiliates to preempt programming from the network; individual stations do it all the time for sports or news coverage, and every once in a while if a local station thinks the content of a program is too controversial for that city or town. Stations have also at times pulled very low-rated shows from prime time and replaced them with local or syndicated content due to financial considerations, i.e., they think they can make more money with nonnetwork programming. But a boycott of a prime-time special across multiple major station groups is not common at all, and is possibly a symptom of station groups’ unhappiness with NBCU’s Peacock plans.

Earlier this year, station owners pushed back at a decision to have Peacock stream episodes of The Tonight Show and Late Night a few hours before broadcast, though NBCU Television and Streaming chairman Mark Lazarus recently told Vulture that he had been working to address affiliate concerns of Peacock. “The affiliates, they definitely had a reaction to that,” Lazarus said late last month, referring to the late-night early kerfuffle. “We’ve subsequently had many, many meetings and conversations around what Peacock is going to be. They have economic interest in our current season programming and we respect that economic interest. So we’re working with them to make sure their contribution … is recognized. I feel very confident in that.”

As big as this 30 Rock preemption is, NBC won’t feel any direct financial sting from the affiliate decision. For one, the 30 Rock special won’t have any traditional commercials from advertisers: It’s basically an infomercial for all things NBCUniversal — which, again, is why local stations appear to have decided to drop it, even if it means denying die-hard 30 Rock stans immediate gratification over a reunion of characters from the show. The boycott does deny NBC a broad platform on which to promote its non-NBC networks and new streaming platform, which is surely a bit of a loss to the company. On the other hand, by making it tougher for their viewers to watch on TV, the local affiliate groups will, ironically, be encouraging audiences to engage with the very same platforms they’re upset about — including Peacock.

#Uncategorized

0 notes

news-lisaar · 5 years ago

Text

0 notes

the-record-columns · 5 years ago

Text

Feb. 19, 2020: Columns

It ain’t over till...

By KEN WELBORN

Record Publisher

I suppose I would be considered a casual sports fan.

I enjoy watching college basketball on television most of all, but by no means am I a rabid fan of anything or anybody—even our own Carolina Panthers are trying their best to discourage everyone who ever pulled for them.

While I can tell you the names of the mascots of many teams and the towns they hail from, you'll have to ask someone else about the personal statistics for Bronco Nagurski from a game played in 1968. But, believe me, there are those out there who can.

However, many years ago when my children were young, we loved going to sporting events, most of all to basketball games with the old Charlotte Hornets. Now, I am talking all the way back to Kelly Tripucka, Dell Curry , Kurt Rambis, and, of course, Wake Forest's own 5' 3” Tyrone “Muggsy” Bogues.

In those days the old Charlotte Coliseum was sold out every night. The Hornets worked the crowd like no other team. At halftime one game, Neil Diamond did a mini concert—completely unannounced. They would give away cars, even a brand new three bedroom house now and again. But most of all it was fun. Hugo the Hornet worked the crowd all night and the special effects and sound guys were state of the art (at least for then) and we loved it.

Once, they even had a formal wedding at halftime. No kidding, a real wedding was paid for by some radio station for the couple who wrote the best “Why We Want Married at a Hornet's Game” letter. It happened that our seats were close to the wedding party and we had a great time with them. Actually, the wedding itself was taken serious to the extent it could be at a basketball game—the place was quiet and you could hear the preacher. It stayed quiet until the preacher said the part that ends with “...speak now or forever hold his piece,” and a drunk screamed, “Don't do it.!!!” It did go downhill from there.

Well, enough of that, back to basketball.

After a few years, most of the expansion team days of older players had come and gone and the team was stronger and winning became the rule instead of the exception. The games were still always sold out, and it became increasingly hard to buy a good seat out in the parking lot, but we would get there early and always managed to get in.

One evening the Hornets were playing the Golden State Warriors led by their star guard Chris Mullen. The warriors were on their game and the Hornets had an off night to say the least. We were down over 20 points at halftime and did worse in the third quarter. Then, I witnessed a phenomenon I had never seen at a Hornets game—everybody just got up and went hone. Yes. They simply gave up and left.

It was disheartening beyond words to watch the aisles literally clogged with folks leaving. As I looked around the arena I thought of the old Dizzy Dean line when the attendance was announced at a baseball game, “Looks like we've got a bunch of fans dressed as empty seats.”

Well, to make the best of a bad situation, I moved my family down to better seats in the lower arena. I admonished my children that, when you are for a team, you are for them all the time, and it is a mortal sin to leave a game early, most especially if your team is losing. Actually, I told them, that is the absolute worst thing you can do—both for the morale of your team and for the fans who stayed the course. The remaining crowd continued to pull harder than ever for the Hornets, and they began a comeback like no other. By the end of the game the Hornets had not only made the game respectable, but beat Golden State in what I think is still the largest comeback in franchise history.

I was so proud.

On the way home we always listened to the Hornets radio network for the post game wrap-up. In between viciously berating the fans who left early, the announcers did the usual interviews. The one that stuck in my head best was when Chris Mullen, always the gentleman, said in his remarks that he had never been at a game where so few fans made so much noise. He went on to say it was so loud in the arena that the Warriors committed three 24 second violations toward the end of the game because they simply couldn't hear one another above the crowd’s noise.

Never, never leave a game early.

First, it's the wrong thing to do to your team, and, if you stay, you just might get to see a helluva memorable ball game after all.

The Blacklist

By AMBASSADOR EARL COX and KATHLEEN COX

Special to The Record

Some of you may think I’m referring to the American nighttime television crime drama starring James Spader. While there are similarities, I’m referring to the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and their recently released “Blacklist.”

The U.N. is calling it a database, but blacklist is a more accurate description. This list contains the names of more than 100 companies engaged in business activities with Jewish communities and Israeli enterprises who are doing business in Judea and Samaria. Those on the list have been deemed by the UNHRC as being complicit in helping “Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, to include East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan.” This list is nothing more than another arm of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign (BDS) against Israel designed to harm her thriving economy and give her a bruised public image.

When will the Palestinians realize that those who claim to be standing with them in solidarity are only using them as pawns in fulfilling their own anti-Semitic agendas?

The UNHRC, BDS proponents, and other pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel groups have done nothing to elevate the healthcare, education or general standard of living for the Palestinians. They stand with the Palestinians on one issue only - the destruction of Israel. The publication of the blacklist by the UNHRC amounts to nothing more than an attack on Israel’s right to exist.

Ironically, it is only Israel which is helping the Palestinians rise above poverty in their respective territories. Yet, of the 112 companies blacklisted, 95 are Israeli and they are being judged as guilty of fostering economic activity in the disputed territories rather than being charged with damaging or restricting the Palestinian economy.

What the UNHRC wants to keep quiet is a report which shows that, according to Palestinian workers, Palestinian lawyers, and the Palestinian Bureau of Statistics, Palestinians enjoy better working conditions and prefer working for Israeli employers - including in Israeli settlements beyond the Green Line – rather than working for Palestinian employers. Wages are four times higher with Israeli employers and Palestinian workers receive health benefits, sick leave, and vacation time to the same degree as Israeli workers.

By trying to harm Israeli companies that have “activities” in the West Bank, the UN is also harming the many Palestinians who work in these businesses, and who enjoy the better conditions. If the UN’s new BDS-flavored efforts lead to a larger boycott of these businesses, eventually they may have to let go of employees, among them Palestinians. Furthermore, it is likely that there will be pressure from the PA on Palestinians who work for the blacklisted businesses to leave their jobs. Even the Palestinian leaders are not standing with the Palestinian people much less the UNHRC.

The UNHRC’s blacklist, intended to harm Israel, is actually harming the Palestinians.

0 notes

fakexpearls · 8 years ago

Text

I’ve got some issues with the Hockey Fandom, and I’m tired of being a good little Hawks fan and being quiet about it so I don’t get nasty messages or whatever.

Maybe it’s because it’s Playoffs and the Hockey Fandom is alive and well at the moment, but the hate…it’s pretty disgusting.

You have every right to not like the Chicago Blackhawks. You have every right to hate them – hell, I hate the Anaheim Ducks with a passion of 1,000 suns. You can hate players. You can hate the logo. You can hate the organization. You can make the argument for league “favoritism” and hate the team for that. Whatever.

But, you don’t have to be a dick about it to the fans.

What I see a lot of in Tumblr Hockey Fandom is the Hawks fans off in their little corner of pretty decent people who care about a sport and a team just doing their own thing and trying not to offend anyone, and then I see a good chunk of the other 29 team fandom being shitty when the Hawks so much as breathe or win or are seen anywhere. And god forbid if a Hawks fan tries to be a reasonable human and mention when another hockey fan is kinda being a dick. Or if they want to celebrate a victory.

Look, does Hockey Fandom really thing that every Chicago Blackhawks fan supports Patrick Kane after the summer of 2015? Does Hockey Fandom really think Chicago or its fans wants more outdoors games? (Especially with how bad they are at them?) Or that “favoritism” is the reason for the club’s success in the post season? Does Hockey Fandom really think that all the fans just accept the logo and don’t have any issues with it? Does Hockey Fandom really fucking think that Duncan Keith, Jonathan Toews, and Patrick Kane thought they should be a part of the Top 100 players this year?

Let’s break down these arguments.

First of all, Patrick Kane is not the only member on the Chicago Blackhawks, Shocking, I know. He is also not that only one who is 1) very good at hockey and 2) gets media attention. He isn’t even in the leadership group (officially). You think he’s a disgusting human? Cool! You don’t think he should have a job? That’s your right! You want to boycott the team because of that? You can do that.

…But you don’t have to be a dick to those who remained Blackhawks fans after the summer of 2015. There are 19 other people on the roster who Blackhawks fans can like that are not Patrick Kane!

Second of all, if the NHL favors the Blackhawks, it’s because they are successful. I’m gonna be salty for a hot second and say that maybe if your team - whoever they are - was successful, I would be sick of them being shoved down my throat too. Lucky for me, they aren’t.

League favoritism did not build the core that won 3 cups in 6 years. A lot of shitty years of hockey and the ability to draft well helped, but it also takes some luck and driven players.

That said, success breeds fans. If you’re good, you’re going to have more fans. If you have more fans, those fans will buy merchandise. Now, the NHL is horribly bad at doing anything to grow its own visibility anywhere that is not Canada (looking at you, Olympics 2018) and if it was smart, it would stop putting one of its most popular teams in outdoor games THAT THE TEAM CANNOT WIN. But… do you know how much money they get from that merchandise? And if you’re a casual hockey fan, or a sports fan in general, are you not more likely to watch a game with the Chicago Blackhawks on New Year’s Day than with two unknowns?

Not to get too involved in the NHL and how much money this league bleeds regularly, but very few teams are in the green come the end of the season from an operating standpoint – salaries of the players not included - I think Chicago barely clears that mark. And the league as a whole funnels so much money to keep teams alive and hockey development programs afloat that the broadcasting deals for the outdoors games/Wednesday Night Rivalry/Weekend games on NBC are really important. So important. If you’re the Commissioner, what teams do you think are going to pull in more viewers and therefore more money? The good teams. The teams that have had reoccurring success. Is it favoritism? I think its smart business sense.

You don’t have to like it! But guess what?

…You don’t have to be a dick to Chicago Blackhawks fans because their team plays on national broadcasts or outdoor games frequently. You just don’t. Let me tell you, most of them are tired of it too.

Let’s move on to the logo.

A little history for you: the origin of the team name comes from Frederic McLaughlin, the qusi-first owner, “who had been a commander with the 333rd Machine Gun Battalion of the 86th Infantry Division during World War I. His Division was nicknamed the "Blackhawk Division" after a Native American of the Sauk nation, Black Hawk, who was a prominent figure in the history of Illinois.” So okay, the name still comes from a Native American origin. It’s also WWI based, though, and if you think someone in 1926 was going to even think about that sort of thing, or that a logo was socially incorrect... But does time make it alright? No. But, the Chicago Blackhawks do make a point to honor the Native American people of Chicago EVERY GAME during the Anthem, and they also work with the community to educate the fans on Native American Culture. So, does all that make it okay? Well, it makes it not as shitty as it could be and makes sure the more educated fans know that hey – it’s not just a name or an image. There’s respect and a history there.

Is the logo racist? As a person with Native American decent, I do not think so. I do not think it is crude. I think it is a decent image that could be so much worse. What I think is crude is Chicago fans at games with the Indian headdress on, and I think Corey Crawford’s goalie mask with the headdress is distasteful. Personally, I think the tomahawks Chicago has as their secondary logo are a way cool and would prefer to see that on more merchandise, but shocker – no one from the Blackhawks or the NHL has asked for my opinion on that. I doubt they’ve asked any other fans either.

To be clear, just because the logo does not offend fans does not make them racist. Hockey Fandom really stretches with that one. You don’t have to like the logo or the team name! You can feel that they are racist – that’s you’re right!

…but you don’t have to treat people with different opinions than you like shit! Or treat the fans like shit when they have no control over those sorts of things.

I don’t even want to give the Top 100 list a second of attention other than to say none of the chosen players were asked if they wanted to be honored, and if you really think the three current Hawks chosen were not humbled beyond belief, I won’t be able to convince you otherwise. Also, it’s a list that the entire Hockey World has said is stupid and meaningless. Let it fucking go.

---

After all of that, let’s bring it back to the simple core values of fandom: Ship and Let Ship. If you don’t like it, don’t read it!

This applies to sport teams too: be a fan and let others be a fan. If you don’t like a team, don’t watch them.

“But my team is playing the Blackhawks!” You don’t have to watch the game if the team offends you so much. You don’t have to search the tags on Tumblr, Twitter, or Instagram. You don’t have to make nasty posts or graphics. You can blacklist the team and players as you see fit.

…but you don’t have to make people feel like garbage for liking what they like. Hockey Fandom does itself a disservice by allowing that to continue and not calling people out for being bags of dicks because they don’t like another team.

I don’t know, this got away from me pretty quickly and I have a lot of feelings about the Chicago Blackhawks and Hockey Fandom and the people in it. But I really don’t think you should be a dick because you don’t like something. That makes you petty and it makes you look bitter and jealous no matter what your actual valid reasons for disliking a team are. Also, that’s a lot of negative energy. Wow.

#hockey #hockey fandom #chicago blackhawks #mine #i guess this would be #discourse #long post

2 notes · View notes

tkmedia · 4 years ago

Text

Harry Kane is as timeless as his purple patch is endless

At some point Tottenham hero Harry Kane just totally dedicated himself to being the best and pursued that goal with intensity and ruthlessness. Who’s this then? Harry Edward Kane is 28 in a couple of weeks and is currently a striker for Spurs but perhaps won’t be for much longer. And in case you’ve been off your head on mushrooms for the last few days, he has just led England to a European Championship final for the very first time, scoring the rebound from a saved penalty that took them there. A 6ft 2ins Walthamstow boy, growing up 15 minutes from White Hart Lane, he spent a year on Arsenal’s youth books before Liam Brady got rid saying he was a chubster and not athletic enough. He joined Spurs in 2009 when he was 16 but only made a single appearance until the 2013/14 season, being famously sent out on loan to Leyton Orient, Millwall, Norwich and Leicester where he ‘learned to play football with grown men’ as the grizzled old warhorse managers always put it, with just a hint of the homoerotic. He played 65 games for those clubs and scored 16 times. On returning to Spurs there were still a lot of doubts about him. ‘Kane Not Able’ was a headline someone must surely have written after a barren spell in front of goal. But in 2014/15 it all changed. Suddenly he dropped weight, his body seemed to get far bigger and harder. He seemed to get much wider, much more well-developed. Whether this was simply his body growing into adulthood, or whether he’d been on the beef tea and chicken giblets, I don’t know. But the change was remarkable. He netted 31 in 51 that season and from the chubby, dull caterpillar had emerged the bright elusive butterfly of Kane love. Since that season he’s scored 216 times for Spurs in 310 games with 2017/18’s remarkable 41 goals in 48 games being his best campaign total to date. Now with his own personal chef to make sure the chicken and pasta is just the right temperature and to make sure he doesn’t, like the rest of us, eat a bucket of Mackie’s salted caramel ice cream because he’s depressed at the state of the country with a charlatan like Boris Johnson getting a large parliamentary majority despite being a useless, duplicitous, lying bastard. His (Kane’s, not Johnson’s) assists stats now impress massively, too, as he has transformed himself into two players: one a striker, one a playmaker. Spurs, of course, continued not to win anything under the guiding bucket-on-a-stick that is Daniel Levy and yet relied on Kane to make them look like a serious club involved in a serious project to be serious about coming somewhere in the top ten every season. The result is the Kane trophy cabinet is full of personal honours but entirely empty of actual trophies. The Queen even took sympathy on Harry and in 2019 gave him an OBE to play with, which he no doubt looks at wistfully in the silence of a long night. Inevitably Harry has got a bit fed up with having the piss taken out of him, but despite this he still signed an extension which was very, very silly but then contracts are worthless totems and he has already phoned a cab to go to what I insist on still calling Maine Road and being stroked like a pro by Pep Guardiola. His goal tally for clubs now stands at 237 in 401 games. Meanwhile, for England he’s reached 38 goals in 60 games and looks odds-on to break Wayne Rooney’s record of 53 goals without any hair. He’s about to surpass infamous movie-hating-because-they’re-not-real, Michael Owen and his record of 40 goals. It’s not far-fetched to think he could finish with 65-70 goals for England.

Why the love? In the interests of full disclosure, for years I never thought Kane was a top-rank footballer. I remember seeing him huff and puff his way around the pitch in 2013/14 as Spurs gave him 19 games in the first team that season, during which time he scored just four times. He looked a bit useless and it was hard to know what role suited him. He was too slow, sometimes to the point of lumbering, to play on the shoulder, but didn’t seem to know how to play a lone striker and didn’t have the ball game to be a No. 10. I fully expected him to drop down the leagues and be playing for Southend by now. This went so deep that even as he started scoring and playing fantastic football, I still expected this to be a blip, a purple patch and nothing more and that his form would recede to the mean soon enough. Of course this never happened, though when he goes through one of those periods of looking like his legs are made out of night storage heaters and he is running through peanut butter, that thought always returns. Indeed, I can’t think of any supreme striker that is capable of looking so exhausted, washed out and anaemic, only to suddenly turn up the saturation and bloom into a bloody brilliant goal machine. He is, of course, a gift to the awful tabloid and right-wing press in general. Here’s a nice boy who married his childhood sweetheart and does right by everyone. He won’t be found at a Kyle Walker sex party, indeed it is hard to imagine Harry even knows what sex is, despite having two children. Not an ounce of that sort of twinkle in the Kane eyes, oh no. The press seem to have turned him into some sort of cartoon English character who has just returned from the Crusades or something and they vaunt his every move at every opportunity whilst overlooking the similar or greater achievements of others. Even on Wednesday night it took Ian Wright to query why he had got Star Of The Match and not Raheem Sterling who, by any stretch of the imagination, or any perusal of the statistics, deserved it more. Hard not to think the worst about such things. Not that it is Harry’s fault, or indeed, anything to do with him at all. His commitment to his game and to his club and country has always been exemplary. He’s developed into not just a phenomenal striker but also a brilliant provider. This isn’t a role that many, if any, perform well. To state the obvious, it is hard to create goals for others and score them yourself as well but last season’s 14 assists and 23 goals in the Premier League show that is exactly what he does. Some players seem like instinctively great footballers who are born to it. Harry doesn’t. His success seems purely the product of incredible hard work and dedication. At some point he just totally dedicated himself to being the best and pursued that goal with intensity and ruthlessness. For a very modern player, playing a very modern role, there is nonetheless something quite timeless about him. Maybe he is a familiar sort of archetype: the big lad up front who scores loads of goals. However, he has refined the role massively and very much made the dual role of scorer and assist machine all his own. What the people say A bursting mailbag this week, as everyone wants to share their Harry love. We start, as ever, with a lovely 4_4_haiku: Draws you in too deep Swivels, bursts, dissects the lines Now he’s free – and scores — 4_4_haiku (@4_4_haiku) July 9, 2021 ‘He’s really good at manufacturing fouls.’ ‘When he first broke into the first team, I thought that if you were to combine Andros Townsend and Harry Kane you would end up with 2 players: one quick and tricky with an excellent shot and brilliant decision making, and one with the opposite characteristics. Wven as a youngster his decision making was invariably spot on even if the execution wasn’t.’ ‘A player who is easy to like, perhaps because he is more of a hardworking Harry than a Flash Harry.’ ‘On tour before his breakthrough season, he saw a senior pro ask the press officer to bat away media requests. Kane said: “Never tell the media I’m too busy – I want to learn how to be the best I can at every aspect of this.” And he has been true to his word ever since. #Respect.’ Kane is one of our own. Means so much to Spurs fans. All about the team. As a young player, he and Ryan Mason took on established players in a dressing room clash, punches thrown allegedly, because they weren’t pulling their weight. Changed the whole ethos at the club — Alan Fisher (@spursblogger) July 8, 2021 ‘Genuinely nice bloke.’ ‘Won Young Player of the Season at Millwall in 2012. Was very humble during his time at the club and never let the success go to his head; he’s clearly been working hard on his game ever since!’ ‘His mental resilience is wildly underestimated.’ ‘Something about him that is not very aesthetically pleasing about how he plays. But by Christ is he good? If Mbappe is Gower, then Kane is Boycott. Hope that makes sense.” Beautiful technique, should be at an elite club (he would have scored a trillion goals if he played for Bayern Munich). Also his face looks like a sepia photo of somebody from WW1 (“…and this is your great, great uncle Harry, who fought in the Somme…”) — Stuart Dennis (@Stuart_Dennis) July 9, 2021 ‘Someone’s opinion on Kane is very much a barometer for their football knowledge/worth as a person. If they slag him off, one or both of those things is probably defective.’ ‘Ever since we first heard the name Harry Kane he’s not been good enough for some people, he just shuts them up one after another with goals, goals, goals. Seems likeable and intelligent. Manager material for sure if he wants it.’ ‘Kane was written off by 70% of Spurs fans when he first broke through. Too slow and not exciting, it was said. Hard work, determination and natural striker instinct made many of us look like muppets and deservedly so. The best Spurs player for a generation and deserved legendary status.’ ‘He’s a genuinely elite player, who obviously just loves playing football. Definitely won’t see him falling out of a club at 3am. Does boil a lot of peoples p*ss, never sure why to be honest.’ He’s like a combination of Shearer and Sheringham. And that’s wasn’t a bad combination. — Rob Michael-Phillips (@RobMP73) July 9, 2021 ‘His career has an interesting arc. Clearly worked hard early on and showed an underrated ability to adapt, accepting and acknowledging gaps in his own game. Suspect he’s always had to think how he can best impact games and it’s become a real virtue as he’s lost some of his pace and earlier physicality.’ ‘He’s a good example of natural talent only being part of the package. There will have been plenty of players in his age group touted as being more talented yet his mentality has seen him excel.’ ‘Maybe be nice to see him fall over a bit less mind!’ ‘His finishing is the difference, head, left foot, right foot. He hits the inside netting. Not a wonder kid, not a big signing, he impressed in training. A classic case of a player succeeding against the odds.’ 25th August 2011, a young striker starts a 2nd leg Eufa Cup play off game with Spurs 5-0 up from the away leg After half hour he takes and misses a pen, the game finishes 0-0 We experts knew he’d never score for us Fortunately Harry knew better — Brian (@LukaMoric14) July 8, 2021 Three great moments THAT penalty, shot from the crowd. I thought David Baddiel’s idea was good, that this showed the conscious and the subconscious player. Self-conscious, inhibited and pressured into taking the penalty poorly, but then the subconscious kicks in and without evening thinking, he pounces on it and slots home without even looking: His first goal for England back in 2015 v Lithuania, and look who set it on a plate for him: The assists impress as much as the goals: Future days If he does join Manchester City, it is hard not to see him scoring at least 85 goals per season and making 65 assists, so dominant will he be. Traditionally, players are said to reach their peak at 27 and 28, so is it all downhill from next year for Harry? That seems doubtful given his fitness regime. However he has, by common consent, been flogged like an old carthorse by Spurs and England too. As a result, there is always a moment in each season when he conks out, something goes ouch and he has to be out for a few weeks, then tends to come back too early and goes into the plodding through treacle mode while he gets some oil in his engine again. Hopefully, Guardiola will have spotted this Groundhog Day tradition and will rest him appropriately so that he breaks the cycle. Harry’s an easy man to like. There appears no side to him and you won’t find him with rope and an orange in his mouth in a hotel room, unless it’s for a bit of extra vitamin C. And there is nothing at all wrong with being decent and respectable. In that, Gareth Southgate must see some of his own quiet sensibilities in his captain and notably kept faith with him when he was out of form and struggling. On Radio 4’s ‘Deadringers’ programme, the fella doing the impression of Harry portrays him as a sort of simpleton, mouthing meaningless PR with an exaggerated (what we used to call) speech impediment. That always seemed a bit unfair and awkward. No-one could have served his country better than Harry and to take the piss out of him for not being the reincarnation of Peter Eustinov (ask your grandpa) seems a little shallow. He currently sponsors Orient. Which is a unique sort of thing to do to help support the club that gave him his professional start. The sponsorship has been donated to charities which will receive 10% of the proceeds of shirt sales. The home shirt shows a thank you message to the NHS frontline workers tackling the pandemic, the away shirt sporting a logo of Haven House Children’s Hospice, while the third kit features the mental health charity Mind. Aw.

At almost 28, he can reasonably expect to have a good eight to ten years in the game to rack up more records. In his later career, clearly he can drop deeper and dedicate himself to being some version of a 10. It’s not like he’s got bags of pace to lose and that should ensure his career is a long one. He also seems like the sort of player that would happily play on, even slipping down a division or two just to keep playing, as he doesn’t have a grain of the Billy Big Bollocks about him. The last ten years have seen him rise to the peak of the English game. The next ten should see him consolidate his legend and ensure his place in history. Read the full article

0 notes

lodelss · 5 years ago

Link

Aimée Lutkin | Longreads | November 2019 | 15 minutes (3,262 words)

“Hello?” my grandmother’s cigarette-seasoned voice would always answer the phone immediately. I pictured her sitting directly beside it in her motel room, waiting to see which of her three daughters or four grandchildren was checking on her.

“Hi, grandma! Just calling to see if you and Papa are OK in the storm,” I’d say cheerfully, assuming they were basically fine, as they always were. They had evacuated their house, a flimsy four-room hut built atop cement blocks, that was set inconveniently close to the Narrow Bay, right on Mastic Beach in Long Island. All that stood between their home and a body of water that could consume it was a dirt road and a rustling wall of reeds that created a marshy barrier and the illusion of distance. That illusion was regularly washed away by storm flooding, sending them skipping backward like sandpipers.

“Well, we’re all settled in here,” she’d answer, sounding pleased to have evacuated for the night to an artless motel next to a barren parking lot. “Your father is watching the news. Looks like we’ll be back tomorrow!”

“Oh, that’s good,” I’d say, ignoring that she had confused me for my mother as she often did after passing her 80th birthday.

“Yeah, not too bad, not too bad,” she’d say, though there were a few times that did get bad. The year their cars were washed away and they were trapped in their house, years where the power went out. But they always bounced back and during the next storm I’d call to check in again, repeating the same familiar pattern.

For years, visiting my grandparents involved a two- to three-hour train ride on the LIRR from New York City; I went by myself once every summer or spring, and I visited with my mom and aunt and uncle who lived in Montauk every Thanksgiving and Christmas. Montauk is on the eastern tip of Long Island, so Mastic was where we met in the middle until my mother refused to go back. Then I’d go by myself for one winter holiday, alone on the cold, empty train, traveling back and forth on the same day. A six-hour train ride was preferable to spending the night in the drafty house, making conversation around my mother’s absence.

Most of my memories of dinners in Mastic were of the escalating tension between my mother and her father. At some point, Papa had been banned from direct criticism, so he substituted the word “Democrats” for her name. One of his favorite pointed sayings was “An open mind is like a sewer — all the garbage falls in.”

On the trip home, no matter how enraged she had become, my mother would say he hadn’t always been like this. He’d been a teacher. A philosopher. He used to build things and volunteer and not watch Fox News.

Before my mother’s boycott began, managing the volatile atmosphere was my job; the open hostility in the air bothered me, but it was easier to handle with a generation of distance between us. I learned quickly that one of the safest conversational topics was always the view.

“Look how beautiful it is,” I would say, and the group would repeatedly comply, turning to stare out the wide picture window over the dilapidated second-story porch. Any time of day was lovely, in any weather, but a clear sunset would flood the room with a warm apricot glow. The water caught and refracted the end of the day, allowing its goodbye to sweetly linger. My grandmother’s table, too big for the space, trapping us against the walls, would become a map of the world. Every person with their face tilted out toward the sun was trapped in amber light, frozen momentarily by warmth instead of cold.

***

I spent most of Superstorm Sandy drunk. At some point the internet went out. My roommates — who were also drunk — and I sat around our living room checking our phones again and again. I lay on my back watching the bare trees whipping outside my window. To us, hurricane preparedness meant having enough wine in our apartment. We’d been responsible. Born and raised in New York City, I’d weathered many hurricane seasons and had found that the danger warnings were always over the top, at least for the five boroughs.

Lack of internet in our Brooklyn neighborhood gave us some hint of the extremity of the situation, but it still took a little while before we understood that this hurricane was different. Reports of destruction filtered in as we sobered up and got back online. The lights were out in Manhattan, Red Hook was underwater, the Rockaways were a disaster zone, and Breezy Point was on fire.

They returned when the water receded. At first it seemed to me that that was that. Another storm survived.

In the following weeks, I volunteered, making sandwiches in a church basement, sorting clothes and other donations, traveling out to the Rockaways to help people find what they needed at an auditorium that had been transformed into a relief center. I went with a group of volunteers to knock on doors in apartments that still had no heat or power, finding people who hadn’t left or who had nowhere to go. I met a woman who was running out of insulin, which we didn’t have, and another whose antibiotics for a MRSA infection had been ruined in her water-damaged car. A father and daughter were boiling a kettle on their gas stove to keep their apartment warm, which another volunteer warned was dangerous. They nodded politely. Most of the people we met appeared very calm in the dark hallway, as though they were certain that things would soon snap back into normalcy. Walking down below their complex, seeing how the boardwalk had been pulled into twisted spikes by the waves, how sand spilled everywhere, gobbling up the streets, it seemed impossible that anything would be normal again.

Since Sandy, new condos have gone up in many of the hardest hit areas, even those still in flood zones. Writer Sarah Miller has investigated for Popula the cognitive dissonance required to move real estate into Miami Beach, purchases that essentially boil down to buying a house for 50 years, tops. Real estate development has mutated to work in tandem with climate change: Destruction levels an area, driving out residents; developers move in, their projects subsidized by government relief efforts. Gentrification accelerates and the people who left can’t afford to come back — yet, this all happens in an area that remains threatened by further climate destruction. The very wealthy can afford to buy the last 50 years of river views, as the people who once lived there search for a place that is not only affordable, but also doesn’t teeter constantly on the edge of ruin. The land shrinks.

***

After Sandy hit, it took a while to get in touch with my grandparents and my aunt and uncle, who said they’d briefly been cut off entirely by rising waters around the Montauk peninsula, which knocked out phone service. My grandparents’ home had flooded, but they’d made it to their usual motel. They returned when the water receded. At first it seemed to me that that was that. Another storm survived.

The seasonal challenges of my extended family’s geographic location hadn’t been something I thought about much, just as I hadn’t worried too much about a hurricane even though I grew up on an island. New York contains many mythologies and most of them are connected to the city’s relentless ability to continue, no matter what. This is basically the definition of hubris — the confidence that because you survived something the last thousand times, you will survive it the next thousand.

My grandparents were also both born in New York; my grandmother was an only child. Her mother and father worked as a cook and a chauffeur, respectively, and rented an apartment close to St. John the Divine, in Morningside Heights. In her childhood photos, she looks like a little doll, solitary and posed in patent leather shoes. She grew to be almost six feet tall and gorgeous. She once showed me a photo of herself looking dashing in a headscarf, seated high on a fence.

“Look at me,” she cough-laughed. “I knew what I was doing there.”

Any time of day was lovely, in any weather, but a clear sunset would flood the room with a warm apricot glow. The water caught and refracted the end of the day, allowing its goodbye to sweetly linger.

My grandfather was one of many children of an Irish immigrant mother and an Italian mobster, whose name he wasn’t allowed to speak. I’ve never seen a picture of him before his days as a soldier in WWII, stationed in France after surviving D-Day. His family lived on the Lower East Side, then Williamsburg. He would sometimes tell stories about collecting lost bits of coal that fell from the delivery truck and hollering up at his mom to drain the bathtub full of gin when the cops walked down the street. These were colorful tales meant to make growing up poor sound much more fun than it ever actually was, but he enjoyed telling them. Once when he came to visit my mom and me at our East Village apartment, he spent the day pointing at rooftops, saying he used to jump from one to the other as a kid.

My grandparents met at a funeral. They were cousins of each other’s cousins.

New York City starts to feel very small if you’ve lived there all your life, so by the time they were married with children they’d moved further out, then further out again when the kids were gone. They’d wanted a small, manageable place by the beach for their retirement. They drove past the house in Mastic and a man was standing outside. They asked him if he’d like to sell it, and he miraculously said yes.

I’ve been told the house washed away once, during a storm in the 1920s, then got hauled back to the same spot and put up on those cement pylons. The story was suspect, but to me it said something about what used to pass for hurricane preparedness.

***

A few weeks before Christmas 2012, less than two months after Sandy, my grandfather fell down the stairs. The staircase leading up to the livable floor of the house was curved and uneven, twisting in at two points. I’m not sure how far down he went, but he broke his hip on the journey and was taken to the hospital, then a rehab center.

My grandmother eventually went to stay with her eldest daughter in Maryland. She was behaving erratically. She didn’t notice that her swollen legs were leaking clear fluid until my aunt pointed it out. She sounded strange when we talked.

“I think I’m about to die,” she told me on the phone. This was something she’d been implying for years, giving away her most cherished wicker-frame mirrors and seashell-covered jewelry boxes until her shelves emptied, explaining she “didn’t need them anymore.” But that was the first time she’d said it so explicitly. She didn’t sound scared. She delivered the news like she was discussing the weather — a little bored, a little distracted. It was the voice of someone going through a transition so huge they couldn’t possibly be bothered to talk about anything else.

My grandfather was moved to an assisted living home that was difficult to get to from the city. My mother traveled there alone and discovered he’d been sleeping in a wheelchair because it was too hard for him to get in and out of bed. He’d immediately fallen into an intense enmity with his roommate, who had an electric Lazy Boy he wouldn’t let my grandfather nap in. She started to look for homes in Brooklyn, somewhere she could check in on him every day.

And then my grandmother did die.

***

After holiday dinners, the younger folks would usually go on a walk around the block before dessert. My grandmother accepted a very limited amount of help from us. We could clear the table, but she wouldn’t allow anyone into her rapid-fire cutlery shuffling over the small sink. Everything she did was set to a higher speed and we would only slow her down.

We walked to digest her butter-soup mashed potatoes and to release a little of the tension into the fresh, salty air. Before we left, my grandfather often called out to insist we bring his walking stick by the door, warning, “Take it with you to beat off the wild dogs. They run in packs out there!”

Kickstart your weekend reading by getting the week’s best Longreads delivered to your inbox every Friday afternoon.

I never saw a single dog without a fence penning it in, but I did once ask my aunt if we should bring the stick.

“If you see a dog, are you going to hit it?” she asked.

The answer was no, so we went silent and empty-handed down the rutted road, past the reeds to a small slope of empty shore. Water lapped the edge, which was covered in blue mussel shells and seaweed, plastic bottle caps, broken glass, the occasional dead fish, and a thin crust of ice, which became thinner every year, as the weather grew milder in winter.

Past the ripples, Pattersquash Island created a dark line on the horizon. The island was originally part of the tribal land of the Unkechaug Nation, who live on the smallest reservation in New York state, set along the shore a 10-minute drive from my grandparents’ house. It covers less than a mile, which includes water. Shinnecock artist Jeremy Dennis has been compiling stories of indigenous Long Island for his project On This Site, and he writes that Pattersquash is historically considered a sacred site for vision quests. It appeared so still and desolate from a distance.

During Sandy, more than 100 homes on the Poospatuck reservation were damaged. There has been some attention paid to the reservation’s recovery from missionaries and PR companies, but there has not been much media coverage of the incipient creep of rising sea levels, stealing yet more territory from Indigenous people year by year. Mastic and its residents have been living under the threat of both weather and gentrification for decades, resisting a transformation that almost no other beach town on the East End has managed to avoid. Stories about the area over the past 20 years are a whiplash of wonder and warnings.

In 2001, the New York Times touted Mastic as the island’s “Best Kept Secret,” citing its proximity to Fire Island and the relative affordability of real estate compared to the Hamptons. It was suggestively dubbed a “working class stronghold,” but several political and financial mishaps, including a series of racial housing discrimination suits, almost drove the area into bankruptcy, and they were obligated to rejoin the Town of Brookhaven after an attempt at self-governance that began in 2010. In 2018, Newsday heralded another Mastic renewal, pointing out that real estate was still comparatively cheap, and many of the decrepit buildings that had given the area a bad rep were being torn down by new management.

Damage in the Hamptons after Sandy redirected vacationers to Montauk, transforming a quieter part of the island into a party hotspot that is barely navigable from June to September. My aunt and uncle, who work in the lighthouse and laying tile, were evicted from their home of more than 25 years after its owner died and a fashion photographer bought the property. They’ve been looking for somewhere to move they can afford. They’re thinking out of state.

New York contains many mythologies and most of them are connected to the city’s relentless ability to continue, no matter what.

Bad housing and “slumlords” have been a continuing point of contention in the area, as the New York Times also reported in 2008, seven years after recommending it as summer getaway. A number of sexual assaults brought attention to the high rate of registered sex offenders in the area, whether they were responsible for the attacks or not. In 2006, a man was arrested for planning to set fire to a building occupied by four tenants on the registry. While some of these units have been torn down via legal means, issues around infrastructure, especially inadequate sewage systems, seem to be holding greater change back.

Visiting only briefly and driven from the train station to the edge of the world every time, I was largely unaware of these issues before Sandy, except for general observations about the number of beer emporiums we drove by to get to the bay. My grandfather built a homemade security system. It felt absurd to be deafened by sirens out on that otherwise quiet corner, and toward the end of their time there, the system was perpetually offline. The house was empty for a week before it was broken into.

***

My grandfather died about nine months after my grandmother, while living in an assisted living home in Brooklyn. I’d like to say he was happy to be back in his old borough, but he most definitely was not. Every time I visited, he practically begged me to move back to Mastic with him, to live in that house, and take care of him there. It was both an outrageous and completely understandable request.

“We were happy there,” he told me one afternoon, tears in his eyes, though by then my mother was pretty convinced he hadn’t fallen down the stairs. She thought, based on the comments he’d let slip, that my grandmother had maybe pushed him during a fight, but that was just her theory. She guessed that the stress of the storm hastened my grandmother’s mental deterioration, maybe even that the new hurricane molds growing in their dirt-floor basement infiltrated her brain somehow, and my grandmother didn’t recognize the danger as their argument escalated. Not exactly a scientific diagnosis, and there’s no proof, but it was hard not to see some connection between Sandy and their deaths — how many storms had they survived before one rose too high and their whole survival system collapsed? All it took was for something they’d lived through over and over to hit a little harder, in a moment of vulnerability, a moment of unpreparedness.

I went by the house before it was sold to see if there was anything that should be retrieved. The people who broke in hadn’t found much of any value, but they appeared to have had a fun afternoon trashing the place. All the familiar knick-knacks and books and worn blankets had been strewn with abandon across the living room, then pissed on. It felt like the destruction from Sandy had been here since the night it happened and had only now become visible. I looked for the ashes of my grandmother’s favorite cat, but only managed to find my grandpa’s dog tags and a few old pictures in the debris and a piece of paper documenting my mother’s first communion. I took my grandmother’s tarnished silver spoons and a collection of vinyl records that had sat so long their grooves were almost flat. I played them later, trying to imagine her listening to them when she was young and felt much sadder than I did on the day of her death.

Then I walked out onto the old porch, stepping over holes, past a long beam that had once served as a ladder for a cat named Squeaky. I turned the corner around the dining room to look one last time at the view. The bay stretched out below as the blinding white light of the late afternoon sun swallowed the hard borders of the land. It seemed like the waves were rolling all the way to their door.

***

Aimée Lutkin is a freelance writer who has written for Jezebel, Glamour, Marie Claire, Popula, and others. She is currently working on her first book for Dial Press on the current societal trends around loneliness titled The Lonely Hunter; you can follow her on Twitter @alutkin.

Editor: Kelly Stout Fact checker: Sam Schuyler Copy editor: Jacob Gross

#IFTTT #Blogger

0 notes

biofunmy · 6 years ago

Text

To Many Chinese, America Was Like ‘Heaven.’ Now They’re Not So Sure.

BEIJING — Qi Haohan describes with pride the times he has leaped and pirouetted with American dancers across stages in China, and he counts as a major influence Daniil Simkin, a principal dancer with the American Ballet Theater.

Ask him about China’s trade war with the United States, however, and Mr. Qi’s admiration for America evaporates.

“Fight, fight, fight!” the 25-year-old wrote on social media, urging his country to stand strong after trade talks with the United States broke down.

“America’s decision to increase tariffs will only bring about its own destruction,” Mr. Qi, a dancer with the National Ballet of China, said in an interview. “China is totally ready to respond.”

Mr. Qi’s views are an example of the complex, sometimes contradictory attitudes toward the United States held across China — a love-hate relationship that presents an unusual challenge to the ruling Communist Party and its leader, Xi Jinping, as they try to defend their image at home amid the bruising trade war.

Divided popular opinion — and ambivalence about America, even among some of its most ardent fans (and critics) — makes it difficult for Beijing to come down too hard on the United States. But if it does too little, the party risks looking weak.

Chinese people have long looked to America as a source of inspiration, with its gleaming skyscrapers, financial power and unparalleled military might. But they also increasingly see it as a strategic rival — a view partly fueled by pride in China’s rise, and by the party’s propaganda organs, which have long depicted America as a hostile, imperialist country that has tried to keep China down.

“China now has the No. 2 mentality,” said Yun Sun, a China analyst at the Washington-based Stimson Center. “It’s only natural for No. 2 to want to surpass No. 1.”

Even in China’s authoritarian political system, public opinion must be carefully managed. If leaders push an anti-American message too far, they run the risk of nationalist sentiment spiraling out of control. That would limit their options in talks with Washington by forcing them to adopt a tough posture.

Though China has ways to prop up its economy, there are deep-seated concerns that it is not ready for a prolonged standoff, which could exact a heavy toll on people’s livelihoods. That could ultimately backfire on the party, which has staked its legitimacy on generating continuous economic growth.

On the other hand, if Chinese leaders act too cautiously, they could look inept to a domestic populace that has, in recent years, become more self-assured about China’s status as a rising power.

What was once starry-eyed enthusiasm for America among many Chinese has given way to sober admiration, if not outright disillusionment, as people have gotten to know the United States better and its problems have come into clearer view.

According to the latest nationwide survey by the Pew Research Center, published in 2016, 45 percent of Chinese saw American power and influence as a major threat to their country, up from 39 percent in 2013. More than half of Chinese believed the United States was trying to prevent China from becoming as powerful as America, the survey found.

That trend may well have accelerated over the past year, which has seen the world’s two largest economies go head-to-head in a protracted trade war and a dispute over Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant. The United States has also tightened restrictions on visas for Chinese students and visiting scholars, measures it says are aimed at curbing intellectual property theft and spying.

Such developments have reinforced the Chinese perception that the United States is deliberately thwarting their country’s rightful rise — leaving China with no choice but to fight back.

“We are not scared. China has money,” said Amanda Lin, 36, as she sipped an Americano at a Starbucks in Beijing. She said the Chinese manufacturing company she works for had been badly hit by the latest round of tariffs. “Perhaps we have to sacrifice a little in the short term, but if we don’t fight, then we will suffer more in the longer term,” she said.

Skepticism about American intentions taps into China’s collective memory of the 19th century, when Western powers forcibly opened Chinese ports and carved up the country into spheres of influence. Nowadays, China is a fast-modernizing nation, home to a booming middle class and cutting-edge infrastructure.

But many Chinese still remember their outrage when the United States accidentally bombed China’s embassy in Belgrade in 1999, during the war in the former Yugoslavia. The bombing, which killed three Chinese people, prompted days of violent protests. Two years later, tensions flared again when China detained a United States Navy flight crew after a Chinese fighter and an American spy plane collided in midair.

China has ratcheted up anti-American propaganda in recent weeks, but its campaign has been comparatively restrained. Still, the authorities, ever wary of unrest that could be turned against the government, are taking few risks.

Chen Chun, a liberal political columnist in the southern Chinese city of Guangzhou, said he was recently pulled in for a meeting with local security officials who urged him to take a more moderate tone in his writings.

“They said that Chinese people are easily instigated and that emotions can get really complicated,” Mr. Chen said.

“On one hand, the authorities want to use nationalism to legitimize their regime,” he added. “But if the nationalists spin out of control, it can also affect their power and the system’s stability.”

The party may also be reluctant to play up China’s rivalry with America, knowing that affection here for the United States — whose Chinese name means “beautiful country” — still runs deep.

American culture is so deeply embedded in China, experts say, that it would be impossible to boycott the country’s products, as China has done with goods from Japan and South Korea when tensions with those countries ran high. Many Chinese love their iPhones and lobsters imported from Boston, and are fans of American television hits like “House of Cards” and “Modern Family.”

The affinity extends beyond products. Many Chinese still admire America for its education system, strong rule of law and soft-power dominance. Some continue to draw inspiration from the idea of the American dream.

“The American dream means working hard and achieving your goals one step at a time,” said Kobe Liu Zhe, 29, a Kobe Bryant superfan in the northeastern city of Harbin who recently made headlines in America after he unknowingly bought the National Basketball Association star’s stolen high school jersey. (He later returned it.) “Kobe Bryant represents that dream.”

And yet, while the United States remains one of the top destinations for Chinese tourists, business travelers and students, the growth in that traffic is slowing. The increase in the number of Chinese visitors to the United States fell sharply from 16 percent in 2016 to only 4 percent in 2017, according to the United States Commerce Department.

The slowdown has been even more apparent in education. The increase in the number of Chinese students going to America has slowed from a high of nearly 30 percent in 2010 to just 3.6 percent last year, according to the Institute of International Education.

The decline, experts say, partly reflects a growing belief that America’s star is losing its luster.

“Thirty years ago, a lot of people thought that going to the United States was like going to heaven,” said Liu Peng, an education consultant in the eastern city of Qingdao. “But now people think the United States is falling behind while China is growing.”

Even if a trade deal is reached soon, experts say party leaders are bracing for a prolonged period of competition with America. Preparing public opinion for that future, some say, will require adjusting to the younger generation’s increasing cultural confidence.

“The older generation of Chinese both respect and fear the United States, we were brought up to think America was superior and we were the underdog,” said Wang Xiaodong, a nationalist writer. “But the perspective of young Chinese is different. They don’t respect you. Nor are they afraid of you.”

Sahred From Source link Business

from WordPress http://bit.ly/2W8CmGN via IFTTT

#IFTTT #WordPress

0 notes

maxwellyjordan · 6 years ago

Text

A “view” from the courtroom: Counting to five

Today is the oral argument in one of the term’s biggest cases, Department of Commerce v. New York, about the Trump administration’s efforts to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. It is also a rare day for afternoon arguments, and rarer still because there will be two of those.

Solicitor General Noel G. Francisco at lectern (Art Lien)

When the court squeezed the census case into its already announced April calendar, it made the wise decision to push the two cases that were originally set for this morning into the afternoon. Thus, after the 80-minute argument this morning, everyone gets a nice break before the court returns for Mitchell v. Wisconsin, about whether a state law authorizing a blood draw from an unconscious motorist requires a warrant; and Rehaif v. United States, about a “knowingly” provision of a federal firearm statute.

In honor of the census question, I have undertaken to conduct an “actual enumeration” of the population of the courtroom this morning. It’s not a simple task, because I am the only enumerator and I don’t have the benefit of distributing any census forms. In fact, I have to do the best I can from my seat in the press section. Just as with the actual count, there are comings and goings that complicate the task.

Let’s start with the bar section. My rough count is that 70 seats are filled, almost all those available, and that includes the four advocates who will argue the census case and their associates at the counsel tables. A few stragglers will be shown to seats in the bar section after the arguments begin, so I’ll set the total at 76.

Next up is the VIP section, which has three rows of benches and one row of cushy chairs to the right of the bar section (looking at the bench). Joanna Breyer, the wife of Justice Stephen Breyer, and Ashley Kavanaugh, the wife of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, are among the 18 people I count in that section.

There are a number of court personnel, including the marshal, the clerk, marshal’s aides, at least a couple of employees who make sure the sound and recording system are running smoothly, and a few others. These number about 12 people. There are an ample number of Supreme Court police officers, but for reasons of security I won’t specify how many.

Big cases like this one also draw a number of the justices’ law clerks. Because I can’t see how many are filling their alcoves on the south side of the courtroom, I’ll impute that there are at least 12 of them here this morning. The others are all back in chambers working on opinion drafts and planning the end-of-year skit, I’ll presume.

Then there is the public section of the courtroom, which includes numerous long benches, some side chairs and three alcoves filled with smaller chairs. My count is that some 200 people are in the public gallery.

Normally a case like this might draw several members of Congress and officials from the administration. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross, whose actions pushing for the addition of the citizenship question are at the center of the case, is evidently not here. Later today, he will tweet a shoutout to a Census Bureau report of an increase in new residential sales for March.

However, John Gore, the principal deputy assistant attorney general, who figures prominently in the so-called administrative record of the case, is here.

Congress is in recess this week, which may account for the lack of spectators wearing House member pins. But Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., is here, and she will join New York state Attorney General Letitia James at the press microphones on the court’s plaza after the argument.

At 10 a.m., the census count in the courtroom increases by nine, as the justices take the bench.

I have saved my enumeration of the press section for last, because the court has indicated the possibility of opinions today. On such days, even when a big case is being argued, several reporters will remain in the press room to learn which opinion or opinions are being released. If it is something big, they may elect to skip the argument altogether. That won’t be necessary today, though, because Chief Justice John Roberts has just opinion to announce.

“In case 18-459, Emulex Corporation versus Varjabedian, the writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted,” Roberts says. He then turns to Clerk of the Court Scott Harris for routine bar admissions. Some seven or eight reporters who were downstairs quickly make their way up to the courtroom, and most roll their eyes as they take their seats. It’s a blessing that reporters don’t have to write about a big opinion on such a busy day for arguments. But it seems that a DIG like this one could have been announced on a different day.

(Perhaps, though, a more substantive opinion got pulled at the last minute. Later Tuesday, the court announces the possibility of opinions of Wednesday, which had not been announced as a possible opinion day after last Thursday’s conference.)

So with the press section now full, I count 70 reporters present. And the result of the enumeration of the entire courtroom is 397 people, with no inquiry as to whether they are U.S. citizens or not. This does not include the groups of a dozen or so spectators who shuffle in and out throughout the argument as part of the three-minute rotating line. I fully acknowledge the possibility, even the likelihood, of an undercount.

As to the argument itself, Amy Howe has the main account (and on such a tight deadline between the morning and afternoon arguments!).

The court’s liberal bloc will spar repeatedly with U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco over the commerce secretary’s push for the citizenship question.

Justice Elena Kagan, a former solicitor general herself, tells Francisco that “your briefs are extremely well done. … But a lot of your arguments just do not appear in the secretary’s decision memo. And the fact that SG lawyers can come up with 60 pages of explanation for a decision, that’s all post hoc rationalization.”

A short time later, Francisco says, “Your honor, I’m tempted to pocket the compliment and sit down, but I won’t do that.”

Two of the court’s conservatives, Kavanaugh and Justice Neil Gorsuch, ask about the long history of some use of a citizenship question, which was first asked on the 1820 census, as well as practices in other countries.

“What do we do with the history and the fact that this question” was on the main census form for “a long time,” Gorsuch asks.

Kavanaugh says, “The United Nations recommends that countries ask a citizenship question on the census. And a number of other countries do it. Spain, Germany, Canada, Australia, Ireland, Mexico ask a citizenship question.”

Francisco makes the same point about the UN in his brief, which is more respect than the international organization usually gets from U.S. conservatives.

The three advocates who argue on behalf of the challengers—New York state Solicitor General Barbara Underwood (a former acting U.S. solicitor general under President Bill Clinton), Dale Ho of the American Civil Liberties Union, and Douglas Letter, representing the U.S. House of Representatives as an amicus, do so ably, but it is uncertain they make much headway with the court’s conservatives.

The most explosive exchange comes toward the end of argument, as Francisco takes to the lectern for his rebuttal.

He suggests that challengers’ positions on standing are “effectively empowering any group in the country to knock off any question on the census if they simply get together and boycott it.”

When Justice Sonia Sotomayor seeks to question him on this, he keeps speaking, as he did with some of her other questions earlier in the argument.

The chief justice, who has been perceived as annoyed by Sotomayor’s frequent questions during a lawyer’s rebuttal time, feels compelled to cut off Francisco by saying, “Justice Sotomayor.”

“Are you suggesting that Hispanics are boycotting the census,” she asks. “Are you suggesting they don’t have, whether it is rational or not, that they don’t have a legitimate fear?”

Not at all, Francisco says. It’s just that the challengers’ view could lead to groups feeling empowered to “knock off any question of the census that they found particularly objectionable.”

“Mr. Chief Justice, unless the court has further questions,” Francisco says.

“We’re all done,” Roberts says breezily before adding the more traditional, “The case is submitted.”

The post A “view” from the courtroom: Counting to five appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from Law https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/04/a-view-from-the-courtroom-counting-to-five/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

#law #justice

0 notes

mlmcompanies · 6 years ago

Link

If you love beauty products but still hanker for chemical-free varieties, Arbonne is your go-to beauty brand.

Arbonne is a direct selling company that offers natural cosmetic and skincare products…

Like an all-natural, cruelty-free, hippie peace-loving version of Mary Kay.

You can also think of them as Mary Kay’s little sister, always trying to catch up, but always just a touch behind.

Should you get involved with Arbonne? Here’s what you need to know.

FAQ

1. What does Arbonne sell? Botanically based beauty, personal care, and nutrition products that support healthy living inside and out.

2. What are Arbonne’s most popular products? The product that put Arbonne on the map is their RE9 Advanced skincare line, with formulas that support healthy aging. In 2018, they released a collection of four RE9 Advanced Prepwork products: Cleansing Polish, Hydrating Dew Cream, Gel Eye Masks, and Soft Focus Veil Broad Spectrum SPF 30 Sunscreen—all vegan, allergy, and dermatologist-tested, gluten-free, and cruelty-free. These products are made with a superfood cocktail of ingredients that include vitamins C and E, omegas, and pea protein with antioxidant and phytonutrient properties. The goal? To preserve a youthful glow while safeguarding skin from external stressors such as dryness and UV rays. Perfect for people in their 20s and 30s, before skin is showing the effects of these aging factors.

3. How much does it cost to join Arbonne? To join Arbonne, you’ll pay a $49 registration fee, which lasts 12 months. You’ll also need to buy a starter kit. You can choose from the skincare value pack ($311), the nutrition value pack ($296), the skincare and nutrition value packs ($528).

4. Is Arbonne a scam? No, Arbonne is a legitimate business with legitimate products. It’s been around for decades and has earned respect for the quality of its products.

5. What is Arbonne’s BBB rating? A+

6. How long has Arbonne been in business? Since 1975

7. What is Arbonne’s revenue? $553 million

8. How many Arbonne distributors are there? More than 250,000

9. What lawsuits have been filed? In 2017, Arbonne was slapped with a class-action suit alleging they were a pyramid scheme and deceptively representing the income potential for independent consultants. In 2018, the case was settled and dismissed with prejudice. [1] In 2013, Arbonne was sued for causing liver failure after an Indiana woman used their 30-Day Feeling Fit Kit and developed toxic levels of green tea extract. [2] In 2006, a class-action lawsuit for falsely claiming that their Miracle Cold Buster product could prevent colds. In 2007, the FTC began investigating the cold-busting claims that Arbonne had been making since the product’s launch in 1999. Arbonne settled the case in March 2008 for $23,3 million. [3] In 1994, Arbonne terminated a distributor for distributing products for a similar company. They argued that their agreement was “at-will,” allowing them to terminate distributors for any cause or no cause. The court ruled in the plaintiff’s favor because her agreement did not specify any termination provisions. Those clauses had been added after she was with the company three years. [4]

10. Comparable companies: Mary Kay, Seacret Direct, Jeunesse

The company is doing their best to catch up, but as far as income opportunities go, there are better options out there.

Click here for my #1 recommendation

Either way, here is the full review on Arbonne.

Overview

Arbonne was founded in 1975 in Switzerland by Petter Mørck. He had years of experience leading a major Norwegian skincare company, but he had a vision of creating his own skincare products that offered superior quality and natural ingredients that actually benefit the skin.

Although Mørck has since passed, his legacy lives on in the form of a $550 million company with over 250,000 consultants around the world.

Their former CEO, Kay Napier Zanotti, was with Arbonne since 2009 and pulled the company up out of bankruptcy…in her first month. She was named Entrepreneur of the Year for achieving such a feat. [5]

In February 2018, Arbonne was acquired by France-based Groupe Rocher. An independent family-run group, Groupe Rocher added Arbonne to its family of nine other brands dedicated to women’s beauty and well-being—Yves Rocher, Petit Bateau, Stanhome, Dr. Pierre Ricaud, Daniel Jouvance, Kiotis, ID Parfums, Flormar, and Sabon—amounting to more than 2 billion euro in 2017.

Of course, a shake-up had to follow. In June 2018, a new CEO, Jean-David Schwartz, took the reigns. A seasoned direct selling executive with more than 15 years of experience, he planned to focus on “sharing Arbonne’s mission of healthy living inside and out in bigger and broader ways than ever before.” There were some other turnovers as well. Arbonne’s previous CFO and COO were replaced with long-time Groupe Rocher executives. [6]

While they’re not one of the billion-dollar brands, Arbonne is definitely one of the MLM giants up there with Rodan, Nerium, and Jeunesse, and they’re moving up quickly toward the 8-figure club with an annual revenue of over half a million dollars before their acquisition by Groupe Rocher. They’re currently ranked at #40 on the DSN’s Global 100 list. [7]

For reference, competitors Mary Kay and Avon hit $3.25 and $5.70 billion, respectively. Arbonne still has a ways to go.

That being said, Mary Kay has been around since the 60s, and Avon…well they practically started direct selling way back in the 19th century. Arbonne has barely been around for 40 years, so the fact that they’re already catching up with arguably the two biggest names in MLM is pretty insane.

How much does Arbonne cost?

A start-up kit at Arbonne costs $49, which is pretty average.

Products

Arbonne started out as a skincare company, and they’re still most known for their skincare and cosmetics products. However, they now have a HUGE line of products.

Skincare

Makeup

Bath & Body

Hair

Sun

Nutrition

The company is known for the purity of its botanical ingredients and its commitment to providing not just cruelty-free but 100% vegan products. Their products are naturally-based and contain no animal products or animal by-products.

A lot of cosmetics companies claim to be ethical but few are completely vegan.

This is largely because up until recently, China had a law requiring all cosmetic products sold in their country to be tested on animals. Many cosmetics companies wouldn’t do the animal testing themselves, but they would agree to allow China to do it. Any cosmetics company that chose to be 100% vegan basically had to boycott the largest market for beauty products in the world. [8]

Arbonne has done just that, and they’ve been named a top “brand you can trust” and one of the best picks for cruelty-free cosmetics. [9]

Their products come with a high price tag (a basic cleanser or moisturizer will run you around $42-$60, while skincare sets retail for over $300), but many claim it’s worth paying extra for quality products that don’t harm your skin. Arbonne products are not just vegan, they’re also free of parabens, benzene, petrolatum, formaldehyde, and other harmful preservatives.

According to a Bustle study of social media mentions, Arbonne is one of the top 5 most popular skincare and cosmetics brands, sitting alongside companies like Burt’s Bees, Sephora, Urban Decay, and none other than Mary Kay. [10]

Benefits:

Arbonne’s skincare products moisturize and cleanse, ridding it of toxins and rejuvenating and renewing skin. Their line of anti-aging products reduces the appearance of wrinkles and sun spots while helping you look younger.

Side Effects:

There are no known side effects associated with Arbonne products, and all of their cosmetics and skincare lines are free of harmful additives such as parabens.

Compensation Plan

The Arbonne compensation plan is fairly simple and straightforward, with four ways to earn:

Commissions

Overrides

Mercedez-Benz Cash Bonus Program

Cash Bonuses

Commissions offer consultants a 35% profit on personal retail sales. While this is lower than Mary Kay (who offers 50%), it’s still higher than most in the industry.

Overrides are the commission you make on your team’s sales. They depend on rank and are given out as follows…

Independent Consultants make 6% on personally sponsored recruits who sell more than 500 PQV in a month.

District level Consultants make 8% on their Central Group, 8% on their 1st Generation, 2% on their 2nd Generation, and 1% on their 3rd Generation.

Area Consultants make 6% on Central Group, 6% on 1st Generation, 1% on 2nd Generation, and 1% on 3rd Generation.

Region Consultants make 3% on Central Group, 3% on 1st Generation, 2% on 2nd Generation, and 2% on 3rd Generation.

Nation Consultants make 1% on Central Group and 1% on all generations down to their 6th Generation.

Mercedez-Benz bonuses, like the Mary Kay pink Cadillac, offers certain high-performing consultants a bonus that goes toward buying or leasing a Mercedez-Benz.

Cash Bonuses give Consultants who perform very well additional bonuses.

Overall, it’s a solid compensation plan.

According to their compensation summary, the top 1% earners are making an average annual income of $254,069. That’s fantastic.

However, the majority of Consultants are making an average annual income of $674, which isn’t even enough to pay your cable bill.

Still, stats for all MLMs look like this. Arbonne’s are actually less ugly than most.

Recap

Arbonne is a very well-established and trusted brand with decades of customers built up.

While no one is going to call you a scam artist for repping Arbonne, there’s a good chance you’ll burn through most of your friends pretty quickly. This is yet another MLM that still relies on home parties and shameless peddling to friends and family until they block you on social media and stop talking to you altogether.

The fact is, even if you manage to make a decent income (as in, more than a few hundred dollars a YEAR) off of it, NO ONE likes that friend who only calls you up to sell their product to you and only asks you to go to lunch so they can give you yet another pitch.

I’ve been involved with network marketing for over ten years so I know what to look for when you consider a new opportunity.

After reviewing 200+ business opportunities and systems out there, here is the one I would recommend:

Click here for my #1 recommendation

#MLM companies #network marketing companies

0 notes

lindyhunt · 7 years ago

Text

How Should We Feel About Comebacks in the #MeToo Era?

The ranks here at FASHION are not filled with men. Shocking, right? But there are one or two (there are actually, literally, two). Naturally, when a question about male/female dynamics arises it’s only fair that one of them stand in for the members of his gender and provide some insight. Our last topic of conversation was about the concept of ‘the redistribution of sex’ as a response to the incel movement and today we’re talking about the comebacks of men who’ve fallen from grace in the #MeToo era. Two of our staffers—from the men’s corner, Greg Hudson, and from the women’s, Pahull Bains—talk it out.

Greg Hudson: A few weeks ago there was a story that got passed around about how disgraced interviewer and person I first heard about in a Treble Charger song, Charlie Rose, was going to be making a comeback by hosting an interview show where he talks with other men who were taken down by the #MeToo movement (not without reason). The news was not well-received. And while that example seemed particularly tone deaf (but really, tell us more about how hard it was to be called out for abusing your power…), generally it didn’t seem like enough time had passed for these men to be talking about reclaiming their Patriarchal Thrones. I had been meaning to talk to you about it, actually, but then the news cycle moved on and there were other things to be outraged by.

There are always more things to be outraged by.

If you were on the Internet last week, particularly the parts of the Internet frequented by older millennials, you would have seen the new Backstreet Boys video. They released a single! The first time in like five years! And they dance, even though they are very clearly not Boys anymore!

You’ll recall–or maybe you won’t–that Nick Carter was among the first chunk of allegations after the Weinstein story broke. A former member of the girl group DREAM, which I oddly don’t remember (were they the American equivalent of Sugar Jones?), accused Carter of raping her nearly 20 years ago. He denied it, of course, saying that he thought they were in a consensual relationship. She even filed a police report though.

Then! Netflix released the new season of Arrested Development starring Jeffrey Tambor, who was accused of inappropriate behaviour by women on the Transparent set and was fired from the show because of it, despite the fact that he was the Trans Parent at the centre of the family drama. Not only has Tambor returned to our screens, but according to an article on Deadline yesterday, Netflix has submitted his name for Emmy consideration.

And finally, Deadline recently published a story about Pixar’s John Lasseter preparing to take his old job back after stepping down for six months because employees had complained that his hugs and touching made them feel uncomfortable.

So, my question: is this how comebacks will happen? They’ll just sail by, covered by other band members, cast members, and corporate bureaucracy? Is it because these cases were never proven, or never as credible as other ones that these men just pick up where they left off? Does this prove that all the fussing men were doing about potentially ruined careers was all just so much male bluster and threatened privilege? Or is it a question of fame: the higher they were, the farther they fell, and the harder it will be to come back. Nick Carter, for example, always seemed a little close to the ground, so his fall was never going to be too serious.

Thoughts?

Pahull Bains: I actually did NOT know about the accusation of rape against Nick Carter!!! But right off the bat I guess I should point out that… this has all totally happened before? Lets count the men who’ve done some–very publicly known–awful and even illegal things, and yet continued to work another day (or, you know, decade). Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, Mel Gibson, Chris Brown, R Kelly… Of all of them, Gibson’s probably the only one who pulled off a “comeback,” whereas the others were sort of steadily working right through, or soon after, their respective scandals. So I suppose the question is: why should this time be different? Or maybe even: should this time be different?

I know the world at large has been describing this moment in time in rather hyperbolic terms—watershed, sea change, reckoning—and perhaps we need to take a moment to step back for some perspective. Like I said, this has all happened before (the accusations, the outrage, the comebacks), albeit not in the heightened atmosphere of “a movement.” Things do seem different this time around though. Thanks to the current zeitgeist, we’re even re-litigating (in the court of public opinion, at least) some of those old high crimes and misdemeanours, most notably with Woody Allen and R Kelly. But the thing with both of them is: it’s the public, as a whole, that seems to be shunning them, even if the dudes who call the shots (aka the studios, the record labels, the production companies etc) seem happy to maintain the status quo. So what does it mean when a behemoth like Netflix not just welcomes Jeffrey Tambor but puts his name up for a major award? Is the corporate bureaucracy just testing us? Trying to see how far they can push us before the inevitable boycott hashtags sweep Twitter? The only thing that brought down Bill O’Reilly, after all, was advertisers pulling out from his show after being flooded with tweets, calls and emails. I can’t help but feel that these comebacks are going to be quietly, deftly attempted in various ways and with various men, just to see what the public pushback is. And in many cases, the public isn’t going to care. Or rather, is going to be too weary to care, too weary to summon their outrage for yet another cause. Like you said, some of the comebacks are going to sail by, and some aren’t, and I think the powers that be are willing to take a few gambles to see what works and what doesn’t.

GH: Have you seen Star Wars: The Last Jedi? One of the reasons some people didn’t like it–not counting the dudes who complained about the audacity of a woman daring to be the main character in a Star Wars movie, without wearing even one metal bikini–was because of the Canto Bight scene. You’ll recall that the entire subplot–where Finn and Rose try to find a code breaker so he can something something, it’s not important–ends in failure, and so some people felt that the movie was wasting their time. It’s a fair complaint, narratively speaking, but thematically, those characters had to fail in order to Learn an Important Lesson.

I wonder if this is an analogy for this moment. I think it’s possible to look at these accused men slowly coming back to prominence as a failure. Like, we thought we could fight the system, but the system is too powerful. Aside from the men who may be formally charged, inevitably all the others will find work again. But maybe it’s not a failure. Maybe the whole movement has at least taught people an Important Lesson.

But, can we really learn a lesson if there are no lasting repercussions? My one concern during all the allegations–and admittedly it wasn’t a pressing concern–was that there didn’t seem to be any path toward redemption. There was no way to change. It felt like any man who did something wrong was to be banished forever. And, to be fair, I can find articles that basically say just that.

The only problem is, we’re getting the final answers without seeing the work. Maybe these men deserve redemption because they learned their lesson, apologized to the victims, worked on themselves, all that good stuff. Or maybe they deserve their careers because they were innocent all along. Or, maybe they’re just benefitting from inertia and male privilege. We don’t know, and that’s frustrating. We do know that the conversation has changed, and that’s something. It feels like a loss, but maybe it’s not?

My only other observation about this: quality matters in journalism. One of the things that depressed me the most about Trump’s win was that it seemed to prove how impotent the media was. Basically every newspaper and magazine endorsed Clinton and roundly rejected Trump. The Atlantic endorsed a candidate for only the third time in its LONG history. And it made no difference. The Asshole won.

But with this movement, the better researched stories, the ones with the most detail and–not for nothing–the serious ones: the people at the centre of those stories seem to still be keeping quiet. At least for this week.

Should we–and by we I mean not me, because I’m, you know, a straight white man–define what winning looks like? Then we’d at least know how to feel when more men started coming back.

PB: Good question. But before I get into that, I just want to say that redemption is possible. BUT we’re sharp enough to sniff out the truly reformed cases from the ones that are just doing it to weasel their way back into the public’s good graces. Harvey Weinstein, for example, has been assaulting and abusing women for decades; he’s not going to be miraculously transformed overnight and we’d be silly to think he can. Someone like Dan Harmon, on the other hand, was thoughtful and introspective about a subordinate he chased and behaved poorly with for years, and it did genuinely seem like he’d seen the error of his ways. So there are Lessons being Learned, and they’re moving the conversation forward, which we both agree is only a positive thing. As time goes on, I think we’re all also getting better at understanding nuance and context; the defense of Aziz Ansari from various corners of the Internet is a good example of that.

Back to whether the learning of these lessons makes any difference at all: while I think it’s far too optimistic to think that the #MeToo awakening is going to bring about unwavering, unalterable change, it’s also defeatist to think that nothing has changed. Like I said, these comebacks have happened before, and they’re happening now, right before our very eyes. The main difference that I sense between then and now is that people are less willing to take shit. We want better of our celebrities, of our idols, of our colleagues, of our friends. And with the Internet, there’s a sort of strength in numbers; we can collectively demand better, and our combined voices carry real weight.

I think what winning looks like in the context of the long game of the #MeToo movement is an attempt, even if not always successful, at challenging the power of certain kinds of men in civil society and popular culture. Some might return, like you say, to their Patriarchal Thrones, and some might even find themselves in the White House (it’s STILL hard to believe) but at the very least, those thrones have been indelibly smeared, and the reality of their wrongdoings will follow them forever, no matter what. Lets face it: even if Charlie Rose comes back, no one’s going to ever look at him in quite the same way again. So while we might lose some battles, in the long run the war, I think, will still be won.

0 notes

thedeadshotnetwork · 7 years ago

Link

To Save 'LA Weekly,' Journalists Want to Destroy It The funeral was held last Friday on the sidewalk in front of the LA Weekly offices in Culver City. Black-clad mourners gathered around a shiny white casket to read eulogies through a megaphone, the smell of smoke from nearby fires hanging in the air. The crowd of about two-dozen, many of them former freelancers or staffers for the LA Weekly —myself included—had gathered to pay our respects not to a person, but to a newspaper we once loved. “ LA Weekly is a place that gave people a chance,” Jeff Weiss, a former music columnist who contributed to the paper for a decade, told the crowd. “It gave artists a chance that might not have been heard. It gave a voice to the voiceless, not a voice to power.” Like Weiss, I also got my start at the LA Weekly , where I was hired as an editorial assistant in January 2013. Reporting was not in my job description, but I eventually bugged my editors enough that they gave me a chance to write. Maybe it was because I wanted to do the kinds of assignments nobody else would: Waking up at 5 AM to go to a sober rave, Biking 17 miles to the Emmys, getting drunk and then sticking an IV in my arm the next morning to cure a hangover. I was happy to be a guinea pig in the name of journalism if it meant landing a byline. By the end of 2014, I had my first cover story. For me and countless others, writing for the LA Weekly wasn’t just a dream job or a professional launching pad, but a civic duty that gave us unparalleled access to just about anything and anyone we could think to write about. Weiss was one of the organizers of the mock funeral, which was held in response to the sale of the LA Weekly to a mysterious shell company called Semanal Media, which two weeks ago laid off nine of the paper’s 13 editorial employees (I was no longer with the company, but the layoffs did include my former editors). The new company did not fully disclose its investors’ identities or lay out a plan for the future of the newspaper, which led to speculation that it was either highly incompetent, part of a larger plot to use the historically left-leaning paper as a conservative mouthpiece—several of the new owners have donated money to the Republican party—or some combination of both. “The LA Weekly as we know it is dead,” Katie Bain, a former senior music writer who I’d met years ago while working at the paper, told me. “I think it died last Wednesday with the layoffs. Not only because nine people lost their jobs, but because 40 years of direction and ideas and reputation were suddenly shifted, and that to me, means the paper is over as we knew it.” To Bain and Weiss, LA Weekly ’s death isn’t just speculative or metaphorical. Rather, they and the other writers who organized the funeral want to make certain of it. It may seem counterintuitive, but in order to save the publication that helped launch their careers, they believe they’ve first got to kill it. They’re aiming to do that through an aggressive boycott campaign that seeks to tank the paper before it has a chance to survive under its new ownership. The vengeance plot has them targeting individual advertisers and pressuring them to withdraw their business from the newspaper. So far, the tactic seems to be working: Last week, the paper canceled its annual Sips Sweets event, just days after vendors including Amoeba Music and Angel City Brewery and restaurants such as Otium, The Pikey, and The Roger Room pulled out. “The goal is to make it so toxic for them here that they have no choice but to sell it back. We want to basically take their legs out from under them,” said Bain. “Obviously we’re dealing with businessmen. The swiftest way to hit them is with money and that's the language they understand.” Of course, the organizers of the boycott can’t take all of the credit for alienating readers, advertisers, and freelancers—the new owners of LA Weekly have done plenty of that on their own. Statements they made to the LA Times , in which they disparaged LA’s cultural scene and a tweet in which they suggested they planned to use unpaid contributors, drew outrage on social media. It wasn't just that they botched interviews with other media outlets, but apparently also didn’t know how to manage their own website and Facebook page, both of which have been hijacked by former staffers: The funeral was live-streamed on LA Weekly ’s Facebook page and a blog post pointing fingers at the new owners is still featured on the site today. (Semanal Media’s operations manager Brian Calle did not respond to my request for comment.) “It’s really hard to tell how evil they are,” former food editor Katherine Spiers, who was laid off last month and supports the boycott, told me at the funeral. “How evil can you be when you’re fumbling at every turn?” Watch: Adding to the massive clusterfuck, Hillel Aron, the only staff writer who was spared from the layoffs, was promoted to interim editor in chief on Friday—and then abruptly suspended from his post on Tuesday, when Spin dug up and published some of his offensive tweets. When I talked to him on the phone on Sunday morning, before he was suspended, he was the first to admit that his new bosses badly botched the transition, creating a PR nightmare in which he’s become a primary target. “I think they've made numerous mistakes and were very naive in doing what they did and thinking that we could actually function with that few employees,” he said. To him, like many outsiders looking in, the mass layoffs “didn't make any sense. There’s no excuse for it.” (The backlash from the sale of the paper has been so messy—complete with a frantic, typo-laden email that was widely mocked after being leaked to a reporter—that I can’t help but imagine it’s the kind of story Aron would go after, were he not personally living it.) “Honestly, I’m impressed at how effective the boycott has been. I think they’ve done a really great job,” said Aron. He added that he believes the outrage of former writers and laid-off staffers would be better spent on a more outwardly political cause. “I wonder if they could maybe put this energy into getting rid of [Orange County Republican Representative] Darrell Issa or organizing voters.” But to many of the organizers and supporters of the boycott, fighting to save—by way of killing—an alternative weekly is inherently political, particularly at a time when the media is under attack. While President Trump leads a national crusade against so-called “fake news,” conservative billionaires like the Koch brothers—who last month invested in Meredith Corp. , which owns Time magazine—have been quietly taking stake in media properties and consolidating them. Last month, Gothamist owner Joe Ricketts—a conservative Trump donor—abruptly shuttered the entire chain of local blogs in a move that was largely viewed as retaliation for unionizing . (I’d been working for LAist at the time.) “It’s this concerning aspect of what we’re seeing with a few other media companies right now is that we don't actually know where the money’s coming from. There’s not much transparency,” April Wolfe, the former film critic for the LA Weekly who was laid off last month, told me in a phone call. “The boycott campaign for me specifically, and this might be different for Jeff [Weiss], is to get people to pay attention to their local media and what is happening to it and to be their own media watchdogs,” Wolfe said. “Because journalists have been sounding the alarms for a very long time and it’s hard to get people to care about things.” Wolfe hopes the #BoycottLAWeekly hashtag, which has already been retweeted by the likes of Mark Ruffalo and Ava Duvernay, whom Wolfe profiled in an LA Weekly cover story last year, will help mobilize people for an admittedly unsexy cause. But not every former LA Weekly contributor is down with the boycott, and particularly not those who have watched layoffs, cutbacks, and ownership changes at the newspaper for decades. Jonny Whiteside, a former calendar editor who was laid off in 2009 and has been contributing to the paper’s music and calendar sections for longer than I’ve been alive, says the paper is no worse now than it was under previous owners. He sees the boycott as a grossly naive and hypocritical form of overreaction. “In journalism, you know how it works: they clean house, it’s routine,” he told me in a phone call, identifying himself as “a freaking anarchist” without a political bent. “You can’t rail against the ownership. It’s just stupid because, yeah, they’re all bastards. This is America. Your corporate parent is a bastard,” he said. “You can either exist and, you know, try to further your career or spin your wheels and make a jerk of yourself.” Whiteside, like several other veteran LA Weekly Writers including Lina Lecaro , has no plans to stop writing for the paper under its new ownership—which is a key demand of the boycott. I get why Whiteside is jaded. I survived a round of LA Weekly layoffs during what couldn't have been more than my second week on the job. There’s something about watching people who are twice your age, have double the experience, and kids at home to feed, get canned that feels like a punch to the gut. The blow came even harder when, not even a year after that, the writer whose work I most admired was let go. The position, one I had wondered if I might someday get to fill, was eliminated. But what happened at LA Weekly two weeks ago—wiping out nearly every editorial staffer with no transition team in place—feels entirely different and wholly unprecedented. Based on what we know (and still don’t) about the new owners, including that head honcho Calle formerly led a right wing think tank and once appeared in what may have been a Russian propaganda film , I think we have every right to question their motives—not just as former contributors or laid-off staffers, but as people who care about what happens to our city, who reports on it, and why. While the boycott appears to be picking up steam on social media, it remains to be seen what its organizers will do if they actually succeed at convincing the new owners to sell the paper back to them. At that point, will their boycott efforts have sabotaged their own master plan to revive the paper under new ownership? “I actually had this thought,” Rebecca Haithcoat, a former LA Weekly music writer and one of the boycott’s organizers, told me. “I was like, what’s going to happen if we do get it back and people are like, ‘Wait, we took [out] our advertising, so wait, now we should do it again?’” Weiss is ready to cross that bridge when he gets to it. For now, he’s got LA Weekly advertisers to call. “We have to keep going, and we will. And we we will win. I promise you we will win because I’m crazier than they are and you guys care more than everyone else does and we will win this shit,” he said, standing in front of the open casket at the funeral. “I will never stop.” December 13, 2017 at 11:35AM

#Blogger

0 notes