Datasets:

sc2qa

/

sc2qa_commoncrawl

like 0

Will Williams Companies Continue to Surge Higher?

As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in Williams Companies, Inc. As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in Williams Companies, Inc. WMB. The stock has moved higher by 2.5% in the past month, while it is also above its 20 Day SMA too. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path. We certainly think that this might be the case, particularly if you consider WMBs recent earnings estimate revision activity. From this look, the companys future is quite favorable; as WMB has earned itself a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy), meaning that its recent run may continue for a bit longer, and that this isnt the top for the in-focus company. You can see the complete list of todays Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. From more than 4,000 companies covered by the Zacks Rank, these 10 were picked by a process that consistently beats the market. Even during 2018 while the market dropped -5.2%, our Top 10s were up well into double-digits. And during bullish 2012 2017, they soared far above the market's +126.3%, reaching +181.9%. This year, the portfolio features a player that thrives on volatility, an AI comer, and a dynamic tech company that helps doctors deliver better patient outcomes at lower costs. Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Williams Companies, Inc. (The) (WMB) : Free Stock Analysis Report To read this article on Zacks.com click here. Zacks Investment Research

Williams Companies, Inc. (WMB) has moved higher by 2.5% in the past month. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path.

pegasus

https://news.yahoo.com/williams-companies-continue-surge-higher-111511000.html

Will Williams Companies Continue to Surge Higher?

As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in Williams Companies, Inc. As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in Williams Companies, Inc. WMB. The stock has moved higher by 2.5% in the past month, while it is also above its 20 Day SMA too. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path. We certainly think that this might be the case, particularly if you consider WMBs recent earnings estimate revision activity. From this look, the companys future is quite favorable; as WMB has earned itself a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy), meaning that its recent run may continue for a bit longer, and that this isnt the top for the in-focus company. You can see the complete list of todays Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. From more than 4,000 companies covered by the Zacks Rank, these 10 were picked by a process that consistently beats the market. Even during 2018 while the market dropped -5.2%, our Top 10s were up well into double-digits. And during bullish 2012 2017, they soared far above the market's +126.3%, reaching +181.9%. This year, the portfolio features a player that thrives on volatility, an AI comer, and a dynamic tech company that helps doctors deliver better patient outcomes at lower costs. Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Williams Companies, Inc. (The) (WMB) : Free Stock Analysis Report To read this article on Zacks.com click here. Zacks Investment Research

Williams Companies, Inc. (The) (WMB) has moved higher by 2.5% in the past month. WMB has earned itself a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy), meaning that its recent run may continue for a bit longer, and that this isn't the top for the in-focus company.

ctrlsum

https://news.yahoo.com/williams-companies-continue-surge-higher-111511000.html

Will WNS (Holdings) Continue to Surge Higher?

On this episode of the Full-Court Finance podcast, Associate Stock Strategist Ben Rains breaks down Nike's new Bluetooth connected, self-lacing Adapt BB shoes before he dives into how they tie into the sportswear giant's overall digital growth plans. As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in WNS (Holdings) Limited WNS. The stock has moved higher by 1.6% in the past month, while it is also above its 20 Day SMA too. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path. We certainly think that this might be the case, particularly if you consider WNSs recent earnings estimate revision activity. From this look, the companys future is quite favorable; as WNS has earned itself a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), meaning that its recent run may continue for a bit longer, and that this isnt the top for the in-focus company. You can see the complete list of todays Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. From more than 4,000 companies covered by the Zacks Rank, these 10 were picked by a process that consistently beats the market. Even during 2018 while the market dropped -5.2%, our Top 10s were up well into double-digits. And during bullish 2012 2017, they soared far above the market's +126.3%, reaching +181.9%. This year, the portfolio features a player that thrives on volatility, an AI comer, and a dynamic tech company that helps doctors deliver better patient outcomes at lower costs. Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report WNS (Holdings) Limited (WNS) : Free Stock Analysis Report To read this article on Zacks.com click here. Zacks Investment Research

WNS (Holdings) Limited (WNS) has moved higher by 1.6% in the past month.

ctrlsum

https://news.yahoo.com/wns-holdings-continue-surge-higher-111211724.html

Will WNS (Holdings) Continue to Surge Higher?

On this episode of the Full-Court Finance podcast, Associate Stock Strategist Ben Rains breaks down Nike's new Bluetooth connected, self-lacing Adapt BB shoes before he dives into how they tie into the sportswear giant's overall digital growth plans. As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in WNS (Holdings) Limited WNS. The stock has moved higher by 1.6% in the past month, while it is also above its 20 Day SMA too. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path. We certainly think that this might be the case, particularly if you consider WNSs recent earnings estimate revision activity. From this look, the companys future is quite favorable; as WNS has earned itself a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), meaning that its recent run may continue for a bit longer, and that this isnt the top for the in-focus company. You can see the complete list of todays Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. From more than 4,000 companies covered by the Zacks Rank, these 10 were picked by a process that consistently beats the market. Even during 2018 while the market dropped -5.2%, our Top 10s were up well into double-digits. And during bullish 2012 2017, they soared far above the market's +126.3%, reaching +181.9%. This year, the portfolio features a player that thrives on volatility, an AI comer, and a dynamic tech company that helps doctors deliver better patient outcomes at lower costs. Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report WNS (Holdings) Limited (WNS) : Free Stock Analysis Report To read this article on Zacks.com click here. Zacks Investment Research

WNS (Holdings) Limited WNS has moved higher by 1.6% in the past month. The stock has moved higher by 1.6% in the past month.

pegasus

https://news.yahoo.com/wns-holdings-continue-surge-higher-111211724.html

Will WNS (Holdings) Continue to Surge Higher?

On this episode of the Full-Court Finance podcast, Associate Stock Strategist Ben Rains breaks down Nike's new Bluetooth connected, self-lacing Adapt BB shoes before he dives into how they tie into the sportswear giant's overall digital growth plans. As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in WNS (Holdings) Limited WNS. The stock has moved higher by 1.6% in the past month, while it is also above its 20 Day SMA too. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path. We certainly think that this might be the case, particularly if you consider WNSs recent earnings estimate revision activity. From this look, the companys future is quite favorable; as WNS has earned itself a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), meaning that its recent run may continue for a bit longer, and that this isnt the top for the in-focus company. You can see the complete list of todays Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. From more than 4,000 companies covered by the Zacks Rank, these 10 were picked by a process that consistently beats the market. Even during 2018 while the market dropped -5.2%, our Top 10s were up well into double-digits. And during bullish 2012 2017, they soared far above the market's +126.3%, reaching +181.9%. This year, the portfolio features a player that thrives on volatility, an AI comer, and a dynamic tech company that helps doctors deliver better patient outcomes at lower costs. Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report WNS (Holdings) Limited (WNS) : Free Stock Analysis Report To read this article on Zacks.com click here. Zacks Investment Research

WNS (Holdings) Limited WNS has moved higher by 1.6% in the past month. The stock has moved higher by 1.6% in the past month. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path.

pegasus

https://news.yahoo.com/wns-holdings-continue-surge-higher-111211724.html

Will Zai Lab Continue to Surge Higher?

As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in Zai Lab Limited (ZLAB). As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in Zai Lab Limited ZLAB. The stock has moved higher by 24.3% in the past month, while it is also above its 20 Day SMA too. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path. We certainly think that this might be the case, particularly if you consider ZLABs recent earnings estimate revision activity. From this look, the companys future is quite favorable; as ZLAB has earned itself a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy), meaning that its recent run may continue for a bit longer, and that this isnt the top for the in-focus company. You can see the complete list of todays Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. From more than 4,000 companies covered by the Zacks Rank, these 10 were picked by a process that consistently beats the market. Even during 2018 while the market dropped -5.2%, our Top 10s were up well into double-digits. And during bullish 2012 2017, they soared far above the market's +126.3%, reaching +181.9%. This year, the portfolio features a player that thrives on volatility, an AI comer, and a dynamic tech company that helps doctors deliver better patient outcomes at lower costs. Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Zai Lab Limited Unsponsored ADR (ZLAB) : Free Stock Analysis Report To read this article on Zacks.com click here. Zacks Investment Research

Zai Lab Limited (ZLAB) has moved higher by 24.3% in the past month. The stock has moved higher by 24.3% in the past month.

pegasus

https://news.yahoo.com/zai-lab-continue-surge-higher-110811873.html

Will Zai Lab Continue to Surge Higher?

As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in Zai Lab Limited (ZLAB). As of late, it has definitely been a great time to be an investor in Zai Lab Limited ZLAB. The stock has moved higher by 24.3% in the past month, while it is also above its 20 Day SMA too. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path. We certainly think that this might be the case, particularly if you consider ZLABs recent earnings estimate revision activity. From this look, the companys future is quite favorable; as ZLAB has earned itself a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy), meaning that its recent run may continue for a bit longer, and that this isnt the top for the in-focus company. You can see the complete list of todays Zacks #1 Rank stocks here. From more than 4,000 companies covered by the Zacks Rank, these 10 were picked by a process that consistently beats the market. Even during 2018 while the market dropped -5.2%, our Top 10s were up well into double-digits. And during bullish 2012 2017, they soared far above the market's +126.3%, reaching +181.9%. This year, the portfolio features a player that thrives on volatility, an AI comer, and a dynamic tech company that helps doctors deliver better patient outcomes at lower costs. Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report Zai Lab Limited Unsponsored ADR (ZLAB) : Free Stock Analysis Report To read this article on Zacks.com click here. Zacks Investment Research

Zai Lab Limited (ZLAB) has moved higher by 24.3% in the past month. The stock has moved higher by 24.3% in the past month. This combination of strong price performance and favorable technical, could suggest that the stock may be on the right path.

pegasus

https://news.yahoo.com/zai-lab-continue-surge-higher-110811873.html

How does Brexit affect the pound?

Image copyright Getty Images During the past two years, the pound has had a rough time of things when it comes to its price against the dollar and other currencies. The immediate aftermath of the Brexit referendum saw sterling decline sharply in value. And as the vote on the UK's withdrawal deal from the European Union looms, further volatility is expected. Since June 2016, holidays and imported goods have become more expensive, but UK exports have been cheaper. It's a complex picture, though. Exporters, such as carmakers, are importers themselves, buying in raw materials such as oil or copper. While Britons living abroad but drawing a UK pension have suffered as the pound has declined. Since 1992, the pound has floated freely on currency markets, meaning that traders - buyers and sellers - determine what it's worth. When the pound rises in value, more of the currency is being bought. When it goes down, more is sold. "A free-floating currency is a very good thing, because it works as a safety valve," says Jane Foley, senior currency strategist at Rabobank. After the global financial crisis, countries whose economies suffered had weaker currencies. "Countries in the eurozone such as Greece and Spain had a strong euro they couldn't devalue," or reduce in value, she added, and for them, the safety valve was wage cuts. "The downside is when it comes on the back of political uncertainty," she said. "Goods become more expensive." In recent years, traders have been looking at politics, rather than economic data, which means faster trading, and a faster pace of change in the price. That's the volatility traders talk about. "If you think abut political uncertainty being bad, the worst outcome is a hard Brexit," says Ms Foley, because details of what will happen under those circumstances are so scarce. "If that's the worst case scenario, it [the pound] will rally if hard Brexit seems unlikely." Similarly, talk of putting Brexit on hold has boosted the pound, as it gives businesses more room to plan, she says. A softer Brexit could be good news for savers, according to CIBC's head of foreign exchange strategy, Jeremy Stretch. Currency experts think that a softer Brexit could provide a boost to the economy by providing confidence and certainty to companies and consumers who in turn may decide to spend more or take on more staff. That increased economic activity could prompt the Bank of England to raise interest rates, boosting returns for savers. "We could see an interest rate hike come the May meeting of the Bank of England, although it may be the case that they wait until August," according to Mr Stretch. "Moving towards a softer Brexit would help to alleviate the uncertainty that was impacting the economy in the latter stages of 2018." "Certainly since 2016, sterling is weaker," says Ms Foley. "Our wealth overseas has lessened." At the bureau de change, rates will be even worse than those on the financial market. That reflects their business costs including rent, staff, security and having lots of money ready. And if you buy your notes at the airport, convenience. BBC research shows that travellers have seen bureau de change rates fall in recent months as the pound as suffered against other currencies. But the value of the pound is always reflected in the price of another currency. Which means that since the referendum there are some currencies against which sterling has performed better, notably the Turkish lira and the Argentine peso. Interest rates and money-printing can also have an effect. Higher interest rates, and therefore returns, may attract more foreign buyers, which pushes up the value of the currency. Printing money, either literally or through the bond-buying programmes known as quantitative easing, has historically reduced the value of a currency by increasing its supply. But sometimes the effects can be minor. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Not all currencies have gained against the pound Another factor is the UK's current account deficit, says Jane Foley. That's where imports exceed the value of a nation's exports. A simple way of thinking about it is a deficit of savers, she says. "We need foreign savers to make up the shortfall. If they don't like what they see, they are more likely to pull their money out." That means selling pounds and a cheaper currency. "If we had a surplus, we would not be as vulnerable," she says. It explains why the pound is more volatile - why trading happens at a faster rate - than the yen. Japan has much domestic wealth to draw upon. Companies may buy currencies for a variety of reasons. A company wanting to buy a UK-based rival will need lots of sterling to do so. It may have to sell dollars or euros and buy sterling. Likewise, a company wanting to pay shareholders a slice of profits may need to bring UK sales home. They will sell their pounds. Then you have traders who think they know something others don't. They will make bets on the market, or speculation. "Customers I see are corporate customers who may have to buy energy, grain or some other component," says Ms Foley. "They have a natural need. It's an easy mistake thinking it's just speculators, making a quick buck." Events will determine how the pound performs in the short term, until some sort of resolution for Britain's departure from the EU comes about, said Ms Foley. The vote on Prime Minster Theresa May's Brexit deal will probably be the next event. Market-watchers have typically mixed views. "The pound will react to the extent and manner of the government's likely defeat in the vote, with a heavier defeat more likely to push down on an exchange rate that has already depreciated a great deal," said Gregory Thwaites, research director at WorldRemit and previously Head of International Research at the Bank of England. "In the unlikely event that the deal is passed, sterling will be likely to rally." "Should the withdrawal act be ratified on Tuesday, sterling will probably surge about 5% in value against the US dollar, but if December's failed attempt is anything to go by then the chances look slim," said Simon Harvey, market analyst at Monex Europe. Hussein Sayed, chief market strategist at FXTM, said: "It is expected that the bill will be voted down, but this won't be the most significant factor influencing the pound's direction, it's what will happen next." He says options as diverse as a no-confidence vote in the government, an extension of Article 50, a new general election and a second referendum could mean very different things for the pound. "As of now, investors seem to be on wait-and-see mode."

Since June 2016, the pound has fallen sharply against the dollar and other currencies. But the value of the pound is always reflected in the price of another currency. A softer Brexit could provide a boost to the economy by providing confidence and certainty to companies and consumers who may decide to spend more.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46862790

Where will Sacramento put its new homeless shelters?

More than six weeks after Mayor Darrell Steinberg asked all council members to find sites for 100 homeless shelter beds in each of their districts, three members are disclosing potential locations. Councilman Jeff Harris is exploring the possibility of a Sprung structure with up to 100 beds on a small portion of the state-owned Cal Expo property near the riverfront. Sprung structures are semi-permanent tent-like facilities that can be erected in a matter of weeks. City officials have been in talks with Cal Expos board of directors for months about the idea, and Harris trying is to win the support of the business community, he said. He would like to devote some city resources toward prohibiting panhandling in the area, and other measures to mitigate the effects of homelessness, before opening the shelter, he said. Digital Access for only $0.99 For the most comprehensive local coverage, subscribe today. If we cant manage these and not harm a community, nobody will let it happen, Harris said. So we have to be realistic and allocate enough resources not only to get the shelter up and running, but to manage it and keep it clean, make sure its not an attractive nuisance, make sure theres no ancillary crime that people can attribute to the shelter. Harris wants to get at least 200 beds in his district, which includes East Sacramento, the riverfront and parts of north Sacramento. Hes looking at several other potential sites. The Cal Expo is a good option because its near the riverfront, where many homeless sleep at night, and not near residential areas, he said. The state fair and all other Cal Expo events would not be affected. Councilman Jay Schenirer is looking at a portion of a parking lot near the Florin light rail station owned by Sacramento Regional Transit District as a potential spot for a 100-bed Sprung tent. Schenirer said he will inform the Sacramento Regional Transit board which he sits on Monday about the potential to lease the site to the city. The lease would require approval from the board as well as the City Council. Schenirer plans to hold a public meeting early next week to gather public input on the idea, he said. Hes also looking at another site, but isnt ready to talk about it yet, he said. Im looking at two sites, each of which can handle 100 individuals, and if I can work out both sites, Im happy to do that, said Schenirer, whose district includes Oak Park and Curtis Park. Schenirers best case scenario is to have 200 beds in the district available by early fall, he said. Councilman Larry Carr said he suggested city staff look at a paved lot near the Meadowview light rail station in his district to see if it could work for a 100-bed Sprung structure. Carr also suggested the site near the Florin light rail station in Schenirers district, but said that a shelter should not go on both sites, which are about a mile and a half apart. I dont want (the shelters) concentrated in the undeserved areas, he said. Councilman Allen Warren agreed. Warren said he has several potential sites that could work for Sprung tents or tiny homes, but he will not announce them until all the other council members announce sites in their districts. While the 100-bed Railroad Drive shelter the city opened in December 2017 is located in Harriss district, the closest residents are in Warrens, including the Woodlake neighborhood, he said. Warren urged his colleagues to announce sites within the next two months. The longer this continues to drag, the less likely it is to happen, he said. Councilwoman Angelique Ashby said she plans to house women who are victims of domestic abuse in single-family homes spread throughout Natomas in undisclosed locations. There is a really big need for women and children in the city, Ashby said. They cant go to the (Railroad Drive) triage shelter. Im seeking to provide an avenue for that population. Unlike Railroad Drive, which is low-barrier shelter, residents of the Natomas shelters would be screened for drugs and alcohol a typical requirement for organizations that serve women and children, Ashby said. Steinberg originally requested all shelters be low-barrier, but said this week he is supportive of Ashbys idea. This is not a cookie cutter operation here, Steinberg said. I want to meld all my colleagues passions, talents and perspectives and we want to get thousands of people off the streets. The homes would offer the triage services the Railroad Drive shelter does, though, such as providing residents with medical and mental health treatment, and help removing the barriers they face in finding permanent housing, such as getting state identification cards, Ashby said. Councilman Steve Hansen is exploring several potential sites, some for a Sprung tent and some for smaller facilities where 10 to 15 people could stay at a time, he said. We are looking at every potential option to meet the mayors goal, Hansen said. Hansen has a goal to announce potential sites in March or April in his district, which includes midtown, downtown and most of Land Park. Councilman Rick Jennings said he has two to three sites in in his district in retail centers and open areas, and will disclose them when it is narrowed down to one or two, he said. Im hopeful what we have will bear fruit, but if it doesnt, well go back out and start looking again, said Jennings, who represents a section of south Sacramento, including Pocket/Greenhaven. Vice Mayor Eric Guerra said its been difficult to find shelter sites in his southeast Sacramento district, where there is no available city-owned property, but hopes to announce one by the summer and open it before winter. It hurts me to see people on a day like this when the wind is so harsh and its been rainy and theyre sleeping in the mud, Guerra said. Whats next Steinberg plans to announce a proposal to fund several new shelters for several years on or before the councils Budget and Audit Committee meeting Jan. 29, he said. The council will likely approve a funding plan Feb. 12 when it adopts the mid-year budget, he said. The mayor does not expect any of the members will have announced finalized locations by then, though, he said. Funding several shelters for several years will take tens of millions of dollars, using a mixture of private and public funds from state, local and other sources, Steinberg said. The city last week received $5.6 million in state funds, mostly to be used for new shelters. The city wont start receiving the additional revenue from the Measure U sales tax increase until June, but currently has roughly $15 million in current Measure U revenue in reserves that could be spent on one-time projects, Assistant City Manager Leyne Milstein told the Bee previously. City officials set that money aside in case Measure U failed at the polls in November. The Railroad Drive shelter was originally supposed to just be open last winter, but city officials extended the lease multiple times, using city money and money donated from Sutter Health, U.C. Davis Medical Center and others. Ive raised money to keep Railroad open several times beyond expected closure date, but its piecemeal, Steinberg said. Its finding the money and saying now we have another three months. I dont wanna do that anymore. Ashby said she hopes the new shelters can be less expensive than Railroad, which costs about $400,000 a month, and that they are not fully funded by the citys general fund. We create a reliance we cant maintain, Ashby said.

Three Sacramento council members are disclosing potential locations for homeless shelters. One councilman is looking at a Sprung structure with up to 100 beds on a small portion of the state-owned Cal Expo property near the riverfront. Another councilman wants to get at least 200 beds in his district.

ctrlsum

https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/homeless/article224642900.html

Should Family Guy 'phase out' gay jokes?

Image copyright FOX Image caption Stewie has often been the butt of gay jokes on Family Guy Family Guy is known for its politically incorrect humour, but now the team behind the show are making some changes. Fans of the animated comedy series are used to its often distasteful humour. One character, Joe, is in a wheelchair, and the subject of many of the show's disabled jokes. Another, Quagmire, is used as a platform for the many references to rape or sexual harassment. And during the show's 17-season run, Stewie, the Griffin family baby, has been hit with quips about being gay. But it appears that the jokes targeted at the LGBT community are on the way out. In Sunday's episode, Peter Griffin, who is voiced by the show's creator Seth MacFarlane, was seen telling a cartoon President Trump that the show was trying to "phase out" gay jokes. "Many children have learned their favourite Jewish, black, and gay jokes by watching your show over the years," the animated president tells Peter. "In fairness, we've been trying to phase out the gay stuff," Peter replies. We're a cartoon. You're the president." The change in direction has been confirmed by the show's executive producers Alec Sulkin and Rich Appel, who told TV Line that they want to better reflect the current climate in the show. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Seth MacFarlane with Rich Appel and Alec Sulkin at a Fox press event in 2018 Sulkin said: "If you look at a show from 2005 or 2006 and put it side by side with a show from 2018 or 2019, they're going to have a few differences. "Some of the things we felt comfortable saying and joking about back then, we now understand is not acceptable." Appel added: "The climate is different, the culture is different and our views are different. They've been shaped by the reality around us, so I think the show has to shift and evolve in a lot of different ways." One of the defences of the show's controversial storylines is that they make fun of all minority groups equally and some have argued that there's no reason one particular minority group should be exempt. "If Family Guy is gonna be mainstream and not edgy, what's the point?" asked one fan of the show on Twitter. "Early 2000s Family Guy was funny because it pushed boundaries." And some in the LGBT community argued the show does not offend them. "I'm gay, my boyfriend and I watch Family Guy, and we laugh at the gay jokes as much as we laugh at any of the jokes," wrote viewer Zell on Twitter. "I never felt like the gay jokes were at Stewie's expense, but rather an evolution of the character," added Rhagana. "It seemed like the more queer he became, the less evil he was." However, some people think Family Guy is in need of change, including Nick Duffy, the current affairs editor of Pink News, who says it is important to reflect a more modern view of homosexuality in the show. "Family Guy has been very much reliant on stereotypes of predatory gay men," he tells BBC News. "And it's not just gay people specifically, but before Caitlyn Jenner came out as transgender, they made heavy quips about her gender identity, which they've been criticised for before. "At the time she was in the closet and since then she's come out. They've not apologised although they do seem to have moved past it." Image copyright FOX Duffy says the reason comedy shows often miss the mark is because they portray "a straight white man's experience of comedy - just look at Saturday Night Live!" But, he adds: "We are seeing more diverse narratives of LGBT experience in comedy and new storylines coming through, like Hannah Gadsby's show Nanette on Netflix. "It says something about the world those shows inhabit and it's now changing, so it looks like shows like Family Guy are becoming more inclusive, but I hope that's also happening behind the scenes too." Daily Mail Australia writer Jacques Peterson, who writes about pop culture and entertainment, says that Family Guy misses the mark when it comes to comedic value altogether. "I'm gay and I don't have any problem with Family Guy or anyone else telling gay jokes as long as they're funny. But Family Guy just isn't funny," he tells BBC News. "It's just a bunch of pop culture references and random 'stuff' thrown together... the show doesn't even push the envelope far enough to warrant a few laughs from shock value." He disagrees with the idea that adding diverse writers to the mix would improve Family Guy's gay jokes and says a good joke is a good joke regardless of who wrote it. "Personally I think it's rubbish to say that gay jokes have to be written by gay people. Does that mean gay people can't write jokes about straight people?" he asks. "If we could only write about people who are exactly like us the world would be a very boring place. I'm a writer and I'm going to write about anything and anybody I want, and I hope other writers do the same." Follow us on Facebook, on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts, or on Instagram at bbcnewsents. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.

Family Guy is known for its politically incorrect humour. The show has often been the butt of gay jokes during its 17-season run.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46878017

Should Family Guy 'phase out' gay jokes?

Image copyright FOX Image caption Stewie has often been the butt of gay jokes on Family Guy Family Guy is known for its politically incorrect humour, but now the team behind the show are making some changes. Fans of the animated comedy series are used to its often distasteful humour. One character, Joe, is in a wheelchair, and the subject of many of the show's disabled jokes. Another, Quagmire, is used as a platform for the many references to rape or sexual harassment. And during the show's 17-season run, Stewie, the Griffin family baby, has been hit with quips about being gay. But it appears that the jokes targeted at the LGBT community are on the way out. In Sunday's episode, Peter Griffin, who is voiced by the show's creator Seth MacFarlane, was seen telling a cartoon President Trump that the show was trying to "phase out" gay jokes. "Many children have learned their favourite Jewish, black, and gay jokes by watching your show over the years," the animated president tells Peter. "In fairness, we've been trying to phase out the gay stuff," Peter replies. We're a cartoon. You're the president." The change in direction has been confirmed by the show's executive producers Alec Sulkin and Rich Appel, who told TV Line that they want to better reflect the current climate in the show. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Seth MacFarlane with Rich Appel and Alec Sulkin at a Fox press event in 2018 Sulkin said: "If you look at a show from 2005 or 2006 and put it side by side with a show from 2018 or 2019, they're going to have a few differences. "Some of the things we felt comfortable saying and joking about back then, we now understand is not acceptable." Appel added: "The climate is different, the culture is different and our views are different. They've been shaped by the reality around us, so I think the show has to shift and evolve in a lot of different ways." One of the defences of the show's controversial storylines is that they make fun of all minority groups equally and some have argued that there's no reason one particular minority group should be exempt. "If Family Guy is gonna be mainstream and not edgy, what's the point?" asked one fan of the show on Twitter. "Early 2000s Family Guy was funny because it pushed boundaries." And some in the LGBT community argued the show does not offend them. "I'm gay, my boyfriend and I watch Family Guy, and we laugh at the gay jokes as much as we laugh at any of the jokes," wrote viewer Zell on Twitter. "I never felt like the gay jokes were at Stewie's expense, but rather an evolution of the character," added Rhagana. "It seemed like the more queer he became, the less evil he was." However, some people think Family Guy is in need of change, including Nick Duffy, the current affairs editor of Pink News, who says it is important to reflect a more modern view of homosexuality in the show. "Family Guy has been very much reliant on stereotypes of predatory gay men," he tells BBC News. "And it's not just gay people specifically, but before Caitlyn Jenner came out as transgender, they made heavy quips about her gender identity, which they've been criticised for before. "At the time she was in the closet and since then she's come out. They've not apologised although they do seem to have moved past it." Image copyright FOX Duffy says the reason comedy shows often miss the mark is because they portray "a straight white man's experience of comedy - just look at Saturday Night Live!" But, he adds: "We are seeing more diverse narratives of LGBT experience in comedy and new storylines coming through, like Hannah Gadsby's show Nanette on Netflix. "It says something about the world those shows inhabit and it's now changing, so it looks like shows like Family Guy are becoming more inclusive, but I hope that's also happening behind the scenes too." Daily Mail Australia writer Jacques Peterson, who writes about pop culture and entertainment, says that Family Guy misses the mark when it comes to comedic value altogether. "I'm gay and I don't have any problem with Family Guy or anyone else telling gay jokes as long as they're funny. But Family Guy just isn't funny," he tells BBC News. "It's just a bunch of pop culture references and random 'stuff' thrown together... the show doesn't even push the envelope far enough to warrant a few laughs from shock value." He disagrees with the idea that adding diverse writers to the mix would improve Family Guy's gay jokes and says a good joke is a good joke regardless of who wrote it. "Personally I think it's rubbish to say that gay jokes have to be written by gay people. Does that mean gay people can't write jokes about straight people?" he asks. "If we could only write about people who are exactly like us the world would be a very boring place. I'm a writer and I'm going to write about anything and anybody I want, and I hope other writers do the same." Follow us on Facebook, on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts, or on Instagram at bbcnewsents. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.

Family Guy is known for its politically incorrect humour. In Sunday's episode, Peter Griffin told a cartoon President Trump that the show was trying to "phase out" gay jokes.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46878017

Should Family Guy 'phase out' gay jokes?

Image copyright FOX Image caption Stewie has often been the butt of gay jokes on Family Guy Family Guy is known for its politically incorrect humour, but now the team behind the show are making some changes. Fans of the animated comedy series are used to its often distasteful humour. One character, Joe, is in a wheelchair, and the subject of many of the show's disabled jokes. Another, Quagmire, is used as a platform for the many references to rape or sexual harassment. And during the show's 17-season run, Stewie, the Griffin family baby, has been hit with quips about being gay. But it appears that the jokes targeted at the LGBT community are on the way out. In Sunday's episode, Peter Griffin, who is voiced by the show's creator Seth MacFarlane, was seen telling a cartoon President Trump that the show was trying to "phase out" gay jokes. "Many children have learned their favourite Jewish, black, and gay jokes by watching your show over the years," the animated president tells Peter. "In fairness, we've been trying to phase out the gay stuff," Peter replies. We're a cartoon. You're the president." The change in direction has been confirmed by the show's executive producers Alec Sulkin and Rich Appel, who told TV Line that they want to better reflect the current climate in the show. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Seth MacFarlane with Rich Appel and Alec Sulkin at a Fox press event in 2018 Sulkin said: "If you look at a show from 2005 or 2006 and put it side by side with a show from 2018 or 2019, they're going to have a few differences. "Some of the things we felt comfortable saying and joking about back then, we now understand is not acceptable." Appel added: "The climate is different, the culture is different and our views are different. They've been shaped by the reality around us, so I think the show has to shift and evolve in a lot of different ways." One of the defences of the show's controversial storylines is that they make fun of all minority groups equally and some have argued that there's no reason one particular minority group should be exempt. "If Family Guy is gonna be mainstream and not edgy, what's the point?" asked one fan of the show on Twitter. "Early 2000s Family Guy was funny because it pushed boundaries." And some in the LGBT community argued the show does not offend them. "I'm gay, my boyfriend and I watch Family Guy, and we laugh at the gay jokes as much as we laugh at any of the jokes," wrote viewer Zell on Twitter. "I never felt like the gay jokes were at Stewie's expense, but rather an evolution of the character," added Rhagana. "It seemed like the more queer he became, the less evil he was." However, some people think Family Guy is in need of change, including Nick Duffy, the current affairs editor of Pink News, who says it is important to reflect a more modern view of homosexuality in the show. "Family Guy has been very much reliant on stereotypes of predatory gay men," he tells BBC News. "And it's not just gay people specifically, but before Caitlyn Jenner came out as transgender, they made heavy quips about her gender identity, which they've been criticised for before. "At the time she was in the closet and since then she's come out. They've not apologised although they do seem to have moved past it." Image copyright FOX Duffy says the reason comedy shows often miss the mark is because they portray "a straight white man's experience of comedy - just look at Saturday Night Live!" But, he adds: "We are seeing more diverse narratives of LGBT experience in comedy and new storylines coming through, like Hannah Gadsby's show Nanette on Netflix. "It says something about the world those shows inhabit and it's now changing, so it looks like shows like Family Guy are becoming more inclusive, but I hope that's also happening behind the scenes too." Daily Mail Australia writer Jacques Peterson, who writes about pop culture and entertainment, says that Family Guy misses the mark when it comes to comedic value altogether. "I'm gay and I don't have any problem with Family Guy or anyone else telling gay jokes as long as they're funny. But Family Guy just isn't funny," he tells BBC News. "It's just a bunch of pop culture references and random 'stuff' thrown together... the show doesn't even push the envelope far enough to warrant a few laughs from shock value." He disagrees with the idea that adding diverse writers to the mix would improve Family Guy's gay jokes and says a good joke is a good joke regardless of who wrote it. "Personally I think it's rubbish to say that gay jokes have to be written by gay people. Does that mean gay people can't write jokes about straight people?" he asks. "If we could only write about people who are exactly like us the world would be a very boring place. I'm a writer and I'm going to write about anything and anybody I want, and I hope other writers do the same." Follow us on Facebook, on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts, or on Instagram at bbcnewsents. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.

Family Guy is known for its politically incorrect humour. In Sunday's episode, Peter Griffin told a cartoon President Trump that the show was trying to "phase out" gay jokes. Some fans say the show does not offend them, while others say it needs to change to reflect the current climate.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46878017

What is a vote of no confidence? What time is it?

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn tabled a motion of no confidence after the crushing defeat of Theresa May's Brexit deal by MPs. Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn tables no confidence motion A vote of no confidence lets MPs decide on whether they want the government to continue - and has the power to trigger a general election. The motion's wording is: "That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government." Jeremy Corbyn tabled the motion after Theresa May's Brexit deal was rejected by MPs on Tuesday evening. It is backed by MPs from the SNP, Lib Dems, Plaid Cymru and Green Party. Prime Minister's Questions go ahead as usual at 12:00 GMT on Wednesday. Following a brief debate on banning low level letterboxes, MPs should start debating the motion at about 13:00 GMT. The confidence vote is expected at about 19:00 GMT. Image copyright AFP A 14-day countdown is started if a majority of MPs vote for the motion - and a general election will be called if, during that period, the government or any other alternative government cannot win a new vote of confidence. These 14 days are calendar days and not the days in which Parliament is sitting - so the deadline would be Wednesday 30 January. If there is to then be an election, the earliest it could happen would be 25 working days. Under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011, UK general elections are only supposed to happen every five years. At the moment, the next one is due in 2022. Mrs May has already said that she will not be leading the Conservatives into the 2022 general election. This is the outcome that is widely expected. Labour's shadow chancellor John McDonnell has told the BBC that they are expected to lose the vote and the DUP - the party that props up Mrs May's government - has said it will vote in favour of the government. Following the vote, Mrs May will have to go back to focusing on getting some form of Brexit deal through Parliament. She offered cross-party talks to determine a way forward in the aftermath of her plan's rejection in the Commons. Mrs May is expected to begin a series of meetings with "senior Parliamentarians" on Thursday. She also told MPs she will return to the Commons with an alternative plan next week, provided she survives the confidence vote.

MPs will vote on a motion of no confidence in the government at 19:00 GMT. If a majority of MPs vote for the motion, a 14-day countdown starts.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46890481

What is a vote of no confidence? What time is it?

Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn tabled a motion of no confidence after the crushing defeat of Theresa May's Brexit deal by MPs. Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn tables no confidence motion A vote of no confidence lets MPs decide on whether they want the government to continue - and has the power to trigger a general election. The motion's wording is: "That this House has no confidence in Her Majesty's Government." Jeremy Corbyn tabled the motion after Theresa May's Brexit deal was rejected by MPs on Tuesday evening. It is backed by MPs from the SNP, Lib Dems, Plaid Cymru and Green Party. Prime Minister's Questions go ahead as usual at 12:00 GMT on Wednesday. Following a brief debate on banning low level letterboxes, MPs should start debating the motion at about 13:00 GMT. The confidence vote is expected at about 19:00 GMT. Image copyright AFP A 14-day countdown is started if a majority of MPs vote for the motion - and a general election will be called if, during that period, the government or any other alternative government cannot win a new vote of confidence. These 14 days are calendar days and not the days in which Parliament is sitting - so the deadline would be Wednesday 30 January. If there is to then be an election, the earliest it could happen would be 25 working days. Under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011, UK general elections are only supposed to happen every five years. At the moment, the next one is due in 2022. Mrs May has already said that she will not be leading the Conservatives into the 2022 general election. This is the outcome that is widely expected. Labour's shadow chancellor John McDonnell has told the BBC that they are expected to lose the vote and the DUP - the party that props up Mrs May's government - has said it will vote in favour of the government. Following the vote, Mrs May will have to go back to focusing on getting some form of Brexit deal through Parliament. She offered cross-party talks to determine a way forward in the aftermath of her plan's rejection in the Commons. Mrs May is expected to begin a series of meetings with "senior Parliamentarians" on Thursday. She also told MPs she will return to the Commons with an alternative plan next week, provided she survives the confidence vote.

MPs will vote on a motion of no confidence in the government at 19:00 GMT. If a majority of MPs vote for the motion, a 14-day countdown starts. A general election will be called if the government or any other alternative government cannot win a new vote of confidence.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46890481

Why are the Chinese buying fewer cars?

Image copyright Getty Images Image caption The fact that President Trump's limousine is a Cadillac is said to have helped the US carmaker's sales in China If you're selling Cadillacs in China, it helps that the US president is driven around in one. Cao Chenyi, the boss of a Cadillac dealership near Shanghai, told me that customers know that Donald Trump's presidential limousine is made by the US carmaker. He says they like the prestige. But Mr Cao's had a bad year. Demand dropped 30% in 2018. He's had to shut five of the 11 dealerships his family business owned. Almost half, gone. "The sales on every new vehicle is causing us to lose money. Basically the more we sell the more we lose," he says. Loss leaders are painful. Mr Cao has been forced to shift excess stock, and quickly. The red Cadillac he drove me around in is currently on sale at half price. Image caption Cao Chenyi's family have had to close five of their dealerships - these customers did not make a purchase Nationally, 2018 was a very hard year for the car industry in China, the world's biggest car market. Just over 22 million new cars were sold last year. But that's a near 6% drop on 2017. The first fall in two decades. Inside Mr Cao's Cadillac showroom various models are side by side. An SUV at the back has a canoe on its roof rack. I watched a group of three youngish men come in and sit down for the sales treatment. They didn't buy. They didn't even have a good look inside the cars. Mr Cao thinks the main reason is a tax cut that has gone away. "In 2018 the government cancelled the tax subsidy on car purchases, which was a shock to us," he says. This benefit has been gradually wound down. Others think a credit squeeze has caused the demand for cars to drop. Image caption Cao Chenyi thinks that the end of a tax credit is the main reason behind falling car sales After a decade of near doubling its debt - to almost 300% of China's GDP - 2018 was the year that the government tried to deal with the aftermath of a credit crisis. That crisis was centred on peer-to-peer lending, known as P2P. P2P lenders offer loans to individuals from a pool of funds supplied by other individuals and other businesses, thereby cutting out banks. Cars and houses Economist Andy Xie says the previously increasing national debt kept demand high, particularly in the property and car sectors. "Now the property market has tipped over, and it's affecting a lot of things," he says. "Auto sales are highly correlated to property sales," Mr Xie says. "When people buy property it seems they buy a car at the same time. So when the property market is not doing well the auto demand is down." Image copyright Getty Images Image caption The Chinese government is moving to reduce the country's debt level The collapse of many of the P2P lending platforms is thought to have had a significant impact on both house and car sales, because borrowed money was being used as down payments for both. Mr Xie says the credit system "used to be lubricated by these guys" and suddenly that has stopped. "They lent to people who could not pay back. [Borrowers] shifted their debt from one platform to another." He tells me he's heard statistics suggesting one in four such borrowers "have no ability to pay back". Slowing economy China's car industry is also a key driver of industrial output and a barometer of consumer demand. But growth in China's economy is slowing, and the trade war with the US is starting to bite. Retail sales have slowed to a pace not seen for more than a decade. A couple of hours away from the car dealership is a tiny hair salon, in the heart of Shanghai's old west side. Sun Qiang is the owner and haircutter-in-chief. For a few hours I sat and watched him deal with a handful of customers. First up were three women, two of whom had curlers in, and didn't look happy to be there. Image caption Hairdresser Sun Qiang is saving money to pay for education and healthcare He told me he'd cut my hair for 40 yuan ($6; 4.50). His place is at the bottom end of what you might call the barometer of China's consumption. But business isn't dropping off. He is, though, a barber who also cuts women's hair. When it comes to cars he'd like a Chinese brand SUV. But it's not likely any time soon. He doesn't live that far from work and the buses are good. Plus he doesn't want to borrow. "I think some car dealers, they want to boost their sales, so they need such consumers who love to pay by loans," he explains. "But as a traditional Chinese person, I think we should only buy stuff that we can afford." Global Trade More from the BBC's series taking an international perspective on trade: Traditional attitudes People like Mr Sun are the other problem for China as it contemplates a slowing economy. He is in his mid-40s and has what you might call the traditional Chinese attitude towards borrowing. He says he's worried about mounting healthcare costs and other possible "emergencies". "Medical care and education costs us a lot," he says. "That's why we have to save money." Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Car sales in China may have fallen, but 22 million new cars were still bought in 2018 Just outside the hair salon is a scene of China's changing economy. Demand may have tanked, but there are still plenty of cars on the streets. Next door is a boutique shop selling high-end women's clothes. There's a pair of Louboutin high heels in the window. Just down the street I watched as two female construction workers, with their yellow hard hats on, took down some bamboo scaffolding. China is trying to move from an economy dependent on public investment and exports to domestic consumption. But that transition has taken a knock. The slowdown is here. China's car dealers and hairdressers know it. So do this country's leaders.

Sales of Cadillacs in China have fallen by 30% in the last year. China's economy is slowing and the trade war with the U.S. is hurting sales.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46887984

Why are the Chinese buying fewer cars?

Image copyright Getty Images Image caption The fact that President Trump's limousine is a Cadillac is said to have helped the US carmaker's sales in China If you're selling Cadillacs in China, it helps that the US president is driven around in one. Cao Chenyi, the boss of a Cadillac dealership near Shanghai, told me that customers know that Donald Trump's presidential limousine is made by the US carmaker. He says they like the prestige. But Mr Cao's had a bad year. Demand dropped 30% in 2018. He's had to shut five of the 11 dealerships his family business owned. Almost half, gone. "The sales on every new vehicle is causing us to lose money. Basically the more we sell the more we lose," he says. Loss leaders are painful. Mr Cao has been forced to shift excess stock, and quickly. The red Cadillac he drove me around in is currently on sale at half price. Image caption Cao Chenyi's family have had to close five of their dealerships - these customers did not make a purchase Nationally, 2018 was a very hard year for the car industry in China, the world's biggest car market. Just over 22 million new cars were sold last year. But that's a near 6% drop on 2017. The first fall in two decades. Inside Mr Cao's Cadillac showroom various models are side by side. An SUV at the back has a canoe on its roof rack. I watched a group of three youngish men come in and sit down for the sales treatment. They didn't buy. They didn't even have a good look inside the cars. Mr Cao thinks the main reason is a tax cut that has gone away. "In 2018 the government cancelled the tax subsidy on car purchases, which was a shock to us," he says. This benefit has been gradually wound down. Others think a credit squeeze has caused the demand for cars to drop. Image caption Cao Chenyi thinks that the end of a tax credit is the main reason behind falling car sales After a decade of near doubling its debt - to almost 300% of China's GDP - 2018 was the year that the government tried to deal with the aftermath of a credit crisis. That crisis was centred on peer-to-peer lending, known as P2P. P2P lenders offer loans to individuals from a pool of funds supplied by other individuals and other businesses, thereby cutting out banks. Cars and houses Economist Andy Xie says the previously increasing national debt kept demand high, particularly in the property and car sectors. "Now the property market has tipped over, and it's affecting a lot of things," he says. "Auto sales are highly correlated to property sales," Mr Xie says. "When people buy property it seems they buy a car at the same time. So when the property market is not doing well the auto demand is down." Image copyright Getty Images Image caption The Chinese government is moving to reduce the country's debt level The collapse of many of the P2P lending platforms is thought to have had a significant impact on both house and car sales, because borrowed money was being used as down payments for both. Mr Xie says the credit system "used to be lubricated by these guys" and suddenly that has stopped. "They lent to people who could not pay back. [Borrowers] shifted their debt from one platform to another." He tells me he's heard statistics suggesting one in four such borrowers "have no ability to pay back". Slowing economy China's car industry is also a key driver of industrial output and a barometer of consumer demand. But growth in China's economy is slowing, and the trade war with the US is starting to bite. Retail sales have slowed to a pace not seen for more than a decade. A couple of hours away from the car dealership is a tiny hair salon, in the heart of Shanghai's old west side. Sun Qiang is the owner and haircutter-in-chief. For a few hours I sat and watched him deal with a handful of customers. First up were three women, two of whom had curlers in, and didn't look happy to be there. Image caption Hairdresser Sun Qiang is saving money to pay for education and healthcare He told me he'd cut my hair for 40 yuan ($6; 4.50). His place is at the bottom end of what you might call the barometer of China's consumption. But business isn't dropping off. He is, though, a barber who also cuts women's hair. When it comes to cars he'd like a Chinese brand SUV. But it's not likely any time soon. He doesn't live that far from work and the buses are good. Plus he doesn't want to borrow. "I think some car dealers, they want to boost their sales, so they need such consumers who love to pay by loans," he explains. "But as a traditional Chinese person, I think we should only buy stuff that we can afford." Global Trade More from the BBC's series taking an international perspective on trade: Traditional attitudes People like Mr Sun are the other problem for China as it contemplates a slowing economy. He is in his mid-40s and has what you might call the traditional Chinese attitude towards borrowing. He says he's worried about mounting healthcare costs and other possible "emergencies". "Medical care and education costs us a lot," he says. "That's why we have to save money." Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Car sales in China may have fallen, but 22 million new cars were still bought in 2018 Just outside the hair salon is a scene of China's changing economy. Demand may have tanked, but there are still plenty of cars on the streets. Next door is a boutique shop selling high-end women's clothes. There's a pair of Louboutin high heels in the window. Just down the street I watched as two female construction workers, with their yellow hard hats on, took down some bamboo scaffolding. China is trying to move from an economy dependent on public investment and exports to domestic consumption. But that transition has taken a knock. The slowdown is here. China's car dealers and hairdressers know it. So do this country's leaders.

Sales of Cadillacs in China have fallen by 30% in the last year. China's economy is slowing and the trade war with the U.S. is hurting sales. A credit squeeze and a slowing property market are also blamed for falling car sales in China.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46887984

Is Influencer-Generated Content The New User-Generated Content?

Today, influencer marketing and content marketing are in the middle of a massive transformation. There are teams around the world trying to figure out the best uses of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning to uncover insights across their marketing stacks, there are companies creating new definitions for influencer marketing and there is still a lot of brand dollars pouring into the space. Were all pretty familiar with user-generated content, where users post about a brand on social media, but marketing teams that I have been chatting with are often talking about influencer-generated content now. Its a big shift because were moving into a new evolution of influencer marketing, one in which doesnt necessarily mean people have been paid for promotions. Arguably, direct-to-consumer (DTC) companies are at the forefront of this because they want to capitalize on the earned media and minimize their acquisition budgets. Between 2012 and 2015, there was a surge of companies that began to measure user-generated content like Curalate and Pixlee. However, this new subset of UGC is much harder to identify. You could argue that you can build a simple algorithm to pull out the people who posted with the most followers; however, as we know, there are a lot of con artists with fake followers or those who post with ingenuine intent. So, IGC instantly becomes a lot more complicated, not to mention there wont be that much activity on social media for new brands. With that in mind, a lot of brands are trying to kickstart their IGC communities by systematically targeting micro-influencers so their message can bubble to the top. If you look at the social media accounts of brands like Dollar Shave Club, Harry's and Warby Parker, you can see how they have set the bar. Its an interesting strategy that seems to be working and leading to more community-driven sales. One of the first articles I wrote for Forbes highlighted that the more influencers who mention you, the more likely your organic growth will increase due to the natural mechanics of the Instagram algorithm. Were starting to see this strategy across many brands. They are monitoring their brand health by simply tracking the number of notable mentions because, more often than not, it leads to sales and an increase in community engagement. IGC extends past just social media as well -- we see it in Amazon reviews, Kickstarter and even on retailer websites. Were seeing marketing, PR and data teams collaborating on activities like this, and its one of the main reasons growth in influencer marketing is happening internally vs. externally with agencies. Many teams have 2019 plans of bringing influencer marketing in-house due to its complexity and non-rigidity. If youre thinking about planning more methodical influencer marketing, here are some tips and certain technologies you should consider: Find a great CRM like Hubspot or Salesforce. Rigid CRMs that only solve for a couple use cases wont scale and will be a bigger problem in the future. Find a measurement tool to analyze your IGC across multiple channels (Amazon reviews, social media, etc.). Create a simple dashboard using Google Data Studio or, if your team has a budget, Tableau/Domo are also incredible. Restructure your team to focus on influencer marketing and have data, PR and marketing teams meet once per week to discuss ongoing strategies. Dont be afraid to change your strategies and plans if they arent working out. If you're excited about focusing on IGC or even evolving your mixed media model, the key to success here is to use data to drive decisions.

Influencer-Generated Content (IGC) is the new user-generated content (UGC) Brands are targeting micro-influencers so their message can bubble to the top.

ctrlsum

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2019/01/23/is-influencer-generated-content-the-new-user-generated-content/

Is Influencer-Generated Content The New User-Generated Content?

Today, influencer marketing and content marketing are in the middle of a massive transformation. There are teams around the world trying to figure out the best uses of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning to uncover insights across their marketing stacks, there are companies creating new definitions for influencer marketing and there is still a lot of brand dollars pouring into the space. Were all pretty familiar with user-generated content, where users post about a brand on social media, but marketing teams that I have been chatting with are often talking about influencer-generated content now. Its a big shift because were moving into a new evolution of influencer marketing, one in which doesnt necessarily mean people have been paid for promotions. Arguably, direct-to-consumer (DTC) companies are at the forefront of this because they want to capitalize on the earned media and minimize their acquisition budgets. Between 2012 and 2015, there was a surge of companies that began to measure user-generated content like Curalate and Pixlee. However, this new subset of UGC is much harder to identify. You could argue that you can build a simple algorithm to pull out the people who posted with the most followers; however, as we know, there are a lot of con artists with fake followers or those who post with ingenuine intent. So, IGC instantly becomes a lot more complicated, not to mention there wont be that much activity on social media for new brands. With that in mind, a lot of brands are trying to kickstart their IGC communities by systematically targeting micro-influencers so their message can bubble to the top. If you look at the social media accounts of brands like Dollar Shave Club, Harry's and Warby Parker, you can see how they have set the bar. Its an interesting strategy that seems to be working and leading to more community-driven sales. One of the first articles I wrote for Forbes highlighted that the more influencers who mention you, the more likely your organic growth will increase due to the natural mechanics of the Instagram algorithm. Were starting to see this strategy across many brands. They are monitoring their brand health by simply tracking the number of notable mentions because, more often than not, it leads to sales and an increase in community engagement. IGC extends past just social media as well -- we see it in Amazon reviews, Kickstarter and even on retailer websites. Were seeing marketing, PR and data teams collaborating on activities like this, and its one of the main reasons growth in influencer marketing is happening internally vs. externally with agencies. Many teams have 2019 plans of bringing influencer marketing in-house due to its complexity and non-rigidity. If youre thinking about planning more methodical influencer marketing, here are some tips and certain technologies you should consider: Find a great CRM like Hubspot or Salesforce. Rigid CRMs that only solve for a couple use cases wont scale and will be a bigger problem in the future. Find a measurement tool to analyze your IGC across multiple channels (Amazon reviews, social media, etc.). Create a simple dashboard using Google Data Studio or, if your team has a budget, Tableau/Domo are also incredible. Restructure your team to focus on influencer marketing and have data, PR and marketing teams meet once per week to discuss ongoing strategies. Dont be afraid to change your strategies and plans if they arent working out. If you're excited about focusing on IGC or even evolving your mixed media model, the key to success here is to use data to drive decisions.

Influencer-Generated Content (IGC) is the new user-generated content (UGC) Many brands are targeting micro-influencers so their message can bubble to the top. IGC is a new evolution of influencer marketing, one in which people have been paid for promotions.

ctrlsum

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2019/01/23/is-influencer-generated-content-the-new-user-generated-content/

How will history judge President Trump?

Hostile historians may come to regard Donald Trump's presidency as an aggregation of the lesser traits of his predecessors. The bullying of Lyndon Baines Johnson, who demeaned White House aides and even humiliated his Vice-President Hubert Humphrey - forcing his deputy once to recite a speech on Vietnam while he listened, legs akimbo, trousers round his ankles, on the toilet. The intellectual incuriosity of Ronald Reagan, who once apologised to his then White House Chief of Staff James Baker for not reading his briefing books with the immortal excuse: "Well, Jim, The Sound of Music was on last night." The shameless lies of Bill Clinton about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. The paranoia of Richard Nixon, who in his final days railed, King Lear-like, at portraits hanging on the White House walls. The incompetence of George W Bush, whose failure to master basic governance partly explained his administration's botched response to the aftermath of the war in Iraq and also to Hurricane Katrina. The historical amnesia of Gerald Ford, whose assertion during a 1976 presidential debate that Eastern Europe was not dominated by Moscow was a forerunner of Trump's recent endorsement of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The strategic impatience of Barack Obama, whose instinct always was to withdraw US forces from troublesome battlefields, such as Iraq, even if the mission had not yet been completed. Even the distractedness of John F Kennedy, who whiled away afternoons in the White House swimming pool with a bevy of young women to sate his libido, a sexualised version, perhaps, of Donald Trump sitting for his hours in front of his flat-screen TV watching friendly right-wing anchors massage his ego. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford at a 1976 debate At the midpoint of Donald Trump's first term, historians have struggled to detect the kind of virtues that offset his predecessors' vices: the infectious optimism of Reagan; the inspirational rhetoric of JFK; the legislative smarts of LBJ; or the governing pragmatism of Nixon. So rather than being viewed as the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan or Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Trump gets cast as a modern-day James Buchanan, Franklin Pierce or William Harrison. Last year, a poll of nearly 200 political science scholars, which has routinely placed Republicans higher than Democrats, ranked him 44th out of the 44 men who have occupied the post (for those wondering why Trump is the 45th president, Grover Cleveland served twice). Though the president has likened himself to Abraham Lincoln, who posterity has deemed to be greatest of all presidents, this survey judged him to be the worst of the worst. Even the conservative scholars, who identified themselves as Republicans, placed him 40th. Were it not for his braggadocio, Donald Trump might receive a more positive historical press. A recurring problem, after all, is that he gets judged against his boasts. He can point to a significant record of right-wing accomplishment. Tax reform. Two Supreme Court nominees safely installed on the bench. The travel ban. The bonfire of federal regulations. Criminal justice reform. Legislative action aimed at ameliorating the opioid crisis. Nato members ponying up more cash. Annual wage growth is at a nine-year high. 2018 was the best year for job creation since 2015. Many of his campaign pledges, such as the renegotiation of the Nafta free-trade agreement and the relocation of the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, have been kept. Promise made, promise kept is one of his boasts that regularly rings true. Image copyright Alamy Image caption The bruising but successful addition of Brett Kavanaugh (left) to the bench was a huge Trump victory Often, though, he blunts the impact of authentic good news with inflated claims. US Steel is not opening up six new plants. He is not the author of the biggest tax cut in American history. Besides, the trade war has penalised US manufacturers and farmers, and in 2018 the stock market suffered its worst year since the 2008 financial meltdown. This market volatility highlights other Trump tendencies contributing to his poor reviews: pointing to a buoyant stock market as a metric of personal success, the downside of which is the downswing; and blaming others when things go south, in this case the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell. Trump sits in the Oval Office behind what's called the Resolute desk, hewn from the timber of an abandoned British warship and first used by John F Kennedy, a former navy man himself. But on it you will not find the desk sign favoured by Harry S Truman: "The Buck Stops Here." This America First president is himself an American first. Indeed, a further reason for the disdain of historians is because, historically speaking, his administration has been like no other. The chaos of staff turnover - two secretaries of state, two secretaries of defence, two attorneys general, three White House chiefs of staff, and a revolving door of senior West Wing aides. The foreign policy by tweet. The chumminess with adversarial authoritarian leaders, such as Kim Jong-un and Vladimir Putin. The blurring of ethical lines supposedly separating the Trump White House from the Trump business empire. The Russia collusion investigation, which has raised questions, so far unsettled, about his true allegiance. Read more from Nick Nor have we ever witnessed a US leader who has so flagrantly flouted the normal rules of presidential behaviour. The playground nicknames. The Twitter tirades. The ugly slurs - "horseface" for Stormy Daniels, a former porn star with whom he was once apparently intimate. In response to indictments in the Mueller probe, he has sometimes sounded more like the boss of a crime family. "A rat" is how he described his former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, deploying the lingua franca of the Mafioso. Though he claims to offer exemplary moral leadership, even conservatives have criticised his presidency for being a profile of amorality, whether in response to the murder of the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi or the neo-Nazi torchlight protest in Charlottesville. One of my abiding memories from the past two years came in the lobby of Trump Tower during that extraordinary press availability held a few days afterwards, when he suggested a "very fine people" equivalence between far-right protesters and their opponents. Standing next to me was an African-American cameraman, who abandoned his tripod so that he could join reporters in hurling questions, something that rarely, if ever, happens at press conferences. "What should I tell my children?" he shouted. "What should I tell my children?" Image copyright Alamy Image caption A memorial to Heather Heyer, killed while protesting against white supremacists in Charlottesville With each bizarre press encounter and each ALL CAPS tweet, it can sometimes feel as if America is living through some historical counterfactual. It is as if the right-wing populist Pat Buchanan managed to beat George Herbert Walker Bush to the Republican presidential nomination in 1992 and, on the strength of his fiery culture war speech to the GOP convention, went on to beat Bill Clinton. Buchanan launched his insurgent campaign with a plea to put "America First" and used the mantra "Make America Great Again." Or maybe the Trump presidency is what a Perot administration might have looked like. Ross Perot, who also sought the presidency in 1992, was another populist billionaire and deep state conspiracy theorist. Yet even Buchanan and Perot, one suspects, would have been more orthodox. This alternative history feel to the Trump presidency partly explains why some of the dystopian "Could it happen here?" novels, such as Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale and George Orwell's 1984 have received a "Trump bump" in sales. Phillip Roth's The Plot Against America has also become a touchstone work. It imagines as president the aviator Charles Lindbergh, the telegenic spokesman for the isolationist "America First Committee," who turns the USA into a more authoritarian state. These dystopian analogies, however, are often not analogous. Donald Trump's America is not Margaret Atwood's Gilead, or George Orwell's Oceania. And just as the billionaire unwisely compares himself to the heroes of history, a trait which inevitably invites ridicule, his more strident critics over-reach when they liken him to history's worst villains. He is not a modern-day Adolf Hitler, nor an American Mussolini. When Donald Trump took the oath of office, nobody should have been surprised that an anti-politician would morph into an anti-president. In 2016 Americans rejected politics as usual. And diehard supporters still throng his rallies, wearing Make America Great Again caps and chanting for him to build the wall and lock up Hillary Clinton. His approval ratings among Republicans remain strong - 88% according to Gallup. His overall approval rating - 37% according to Gallup - is on a par with Ronald Reagan's at the two-year mark. Yet the rally chants of "four more years" remain a wish rather than a prophecy, and the setbacks suffered by the Republicans in November's congressional elections point to an underlying weakness: the disaffection of moderate Republicans, who were never enthusiastic about Donald Trump but who refused to countenance Hillary Clinton as president. Trump remains the only president in the history of the Gallup poll not to crack the 50% threshold. Because Donald Trump is unwilling to accept he is anything other than an A+ president, the grade he has bestowed upon himself, he is not prepared to adopt the kind of correctives that have saved troubled presidencies. JFK learnt from the disaster of the Bay of Pigs and the bullying he received from Nikita Khrushchev at the Vienna summit in 1961, which was followed in short order by the Soviet construction of the Berlin Wall. Confronted a year later with the Cuban Missile Crisis, he was less trusting of his generals, who urged airstrikes, and less willing to be pushed around by Khrushchev. More on the Trump presidency Bill Clinton, who was accused of liberal over-reach during his first months in office and was punished as a result in the 1994 mid-term elections, tacked back to the political centre in time to win re-election in 1996. This is not a learning presidency. Incumbents can also benefit from self-doubt, a trait Donald Trump seems to regard as a character flaw. Presidents also usually grow in office. But while there are physical signs the 72-year-old is ageing - unable to holiday in Florida over Christmas, he has looked especially tired these past few days - there is little sign he is maturing. It does not help that so many senior figures within his administration and his party treat him like a child monarch. The cabinet meeting where holders of the highest offices of state went around the table lavishing praise upon the president felt like Pyongyang on the Potomac. Vice-President Mike Pence has perfected the devoted gaze of the prototypical political wife. Senior Republicans, who privately roll their eyes, have been admiring, even sycophantic, in his presence. Image copyright Getty Images For the most part, international leaders have also opted for obsequiousness. Not only did Theresa May rush to Washington to invite Trump for a state visit - a state visit that has still not been diarised - she telephoned him on Air Force One to congratulate him after the mid-term election, even though the Democrats regained the House of Representatives. All this after Trump has frequently undermined her leadership over Brexit and trampled over the special relationship. One of the reasons Mr Trump is said to look so contemptuously upon Angela Merkel is because she makes so little effort to conceal her contempt for him. At the two-year mark, it is usually clear how incumbents will leave their mark on the presidency. After the torpidity of the Eisenhower years, Kennedy made the office more youthful and glamorous. Johnson, that shrewd "Master of the Senate", brought the executive and legislative branches into closer alignment. Nixon consolidated more power in the White House, accelerating the trend the liberal historian Arthur M Schlesinger Jr dubbed "the imperial presidency." Ford reversed much of that process, even going as far to drop the playing of "Hail to the Chief" when he made an entrance. The cardigan-wearing Jimmy Carter, who used to go from room to room turning off lights to save energy, suburbanised the White House. Reagan, who restored many of the ceremonial trappings, erased the lines between politics and entertainment. Clinton, in the age of Oprah, made the office more empathetic, narrowing the emotional distance between the presidency and the people. Obama set a new standard for ethical behaviour - motivated in part by the African-American mantra of working twice as hard to get half as far - and also made the presidency more hip. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Jimmy Carter in the Oval Office By abrogating behavioural customs, Donald Trump has made the presidency more uncouth and less trustworthy. By departing from executive and managerial norms, he has made domestic and foreign policy-making more impulsive and disorderly. By fraying traditional alliances, he has made the US presidency more isolated. By threatening to declare a national emergency in the funding row over his wall along the Mexican border, he has also indicated a willingness to discard constitutional norms that could mean exceeding constitutional limits. The cumulative effect of this has been to make the Oval Office a focal point of perpetual turmoil and uncertainty, with the White House hostage to the changing whims and temper of its occupant. Governing sometimes feels secondary to winning political and cultural battles, and slaying opponents. His presidency has become a roiling permanent campaign. That will depend, to a large extent, on whether or not he wins a second term. Defeat in 2020 would represent a repudiation of his leadership style. Victory would be validating. Yet even as a one-term president, Trump would have changed the character of the presidency and US politics more broadly. While it is hard to imagine America's 46th or 47th presidents unleashing the same barrage of insults, there are already signs of a "Trump effect" on political discourse. Many mid-term races featured unusually ugly rhetoric. Hours after being sworn in as a new Democratic congresswoman, Rashida Tlaib used a profane epithet as she called for the president's impeachment. What is known as the Overton window, the broadly agreed parameters of acceptable public discourse, has shifted to the right. I well remember the moment during the 2016 campaign when an email from the Trump campaign dropped into our inboxes announcing he would ban all Muslims from entering the United States. Initially we thought it might have been a hoax, for it seemed so far outside the mainstream of American political thought. Now, though, calls for a Muslim ban would raise eyebrows and provoke protests but hardly drop jaws. The phrase "Trump has normalised the abnormal" has itself become a clich. Still, though, I am constantly struck by how many Trump stories and scandals that ordinarily would have launched months, even years, of critical coverage for previous presidents sometimes barely last a single news cycle. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Mattis or Tillerson may have more to say about their time in government More long-lasting could be the debasement of facts as the basis for debate and policy formulation. By its own admission, this administration has sometimes deployed what the White House aide Kellyanne Conway memorably labelled "alternative facts", starting on day one with false claims about the size of the inauguration crowd. Since then, the Washington Post has listed more than 7,000 presidential falsehoods. But an unsettling lesson of the Trump presidency is that post-truth politics can be highly effective, especially when it comes to shoring up a political base. As for chaotic governance, future administrations will surely be more stable in terms of staff turnover, and more orderly when it comes to forming and executing policy. But it is easy to imagine Trump's successors pushing the bounds of executive authority in ways that breach constitutional norms, especially now that gridlock on Capitol Hill has become such a permanent feature of Washington politics. Obama, to a howl of protests from congressional Republicans, relied heavily on executive orders, the flourish of his presidential pen. Trump has gone a big step further by threatening to invoke emergency powers to bypass a hostile Congress. Stress tests for the US constitution, even full-blown constitutional crises, could easily become more commonplace. The Trump presidency's first drafts of history - most notably Bob Woodward's bestseller Fear - have painted a portrait of unprecedented dysfunction. If former senior administration officials pen honest participant histories - say former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, ex-Secretary of Defence James Mattis or former chief of staff John Kelly - they are likely, if their parting comments offer any guide, to add more detail and texture to that same picture. If some of the renowned presidential biographers turn their attention to Trump - maybe Jon Meacham, David McCullough or Michael Beschloss, who in the past have rescued the reputations of under-rated presidents such as George Herbert Walker Bush and Harry S Truman - they are unlikely to deliver laudatory manuscripts. The histories already written, along with those taking shape, will someday be housed in the Donald J Trump Presidential Library, an addition to the 13 existing presidential libraries that form part of the National Archive. Even with two years left to run of this history-defying presidency, most Americans, one suspects, have already made up their minds. Follow Nick Bryant on Twitter .

Historians may come to regard Donald Trump's presidency as an aggregation of the lesser traits of his predecessors.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46895634

How will history judge President Trump?

Hostile historians may come to regard Donald Trump's presidency as an aggregation of the lesser traits of his predecessors. The bullying of Lyndon Baines Johnson, who demeaned White House aides and even humiliated his Vice-President Hubert Humphrey - forcing his deputy once to recite a speech on Vietnam while he listened, legs akimbo, trousers round his ankles, on the toilet. The intellectual incuriosity of Ronald Reagan, who once apologised to his then White House Chief of Staff James Baker for not reading his briefing books with the immortal excuse: "Well, Jim, The Sound of Music was on last night." The shameless lies of Bill Clinton about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. The paranoia of Richard Nixon, who in his final days railed, King Lear-like, at portraits hanging on the White House walls. The incompetence of George W Bush, whose failure to master basic governance partly explained his administration's botched response to the aftermath of the war in Iraq and also to Hurricane Katrina. The historical amnesia of Gerald Ford, whose assertion during a 1976 presidential debate that Eastern Europe was not dominated by Moscow was a forerunner of Trump's recent endorsement of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The strategic impatience of Barack Obama, whose instinct always was to withdraw US forces from troublesome battlefields, such as Iraq, even if the mission had not yet been completed. Even the distractedness of John F Kennedy, who whiled away afternoons in the White House swimming pool with a bevy of young women to sate his libido, a sexualised version, perhaps, of Donald Trump sitting for his hours in front of his flat-screen TV watching friendly right-wing anchors massage his ego. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford at a 1976 debate At the midpoint of Donald Trump's first term, historians have struggled to detect the kind of virtues that offset his predecessors' vices: the infectious optimism of Reagan; the inspirational rhetoric of JFK; the legislative smarts of LBJ; or the governing pragmatism of Nixon. So rather than being viewed as the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan or Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Trump gets cast as a modern-day James Buchanan, Franklin Pierce or William Harrison. Last year, a poll of nearly 200 political science scholars, which has routinely placed Republicans higher than Democrats, ranked him 44th out of the 44 men who have occupied the post (for those wondering why Trump is the 45th president, Grover Cleveland served twice). Though the president has likened himself to Abraham Lincoln, who posterity has deemed to be greatest of all presidents, this survey judged him to be the worst of the worst. Even the conservative scholars, who identified themselves as Republicans, placed him 40th. Were it not for his braggadocio, Donald Trump might receive a more positive historical press. A recurring problem, after all, is that he gets judged against his boasts. He can point to a significant record of right-wing accomplishment. Tax reform. Two Supreme Court nominees safely installed on the bench. The travel ban. The bonfire of federal regulations. Criminal justice reform. Legislative action aimed at ameliorating the opioid crisis. Nato members ponying up more cash. Annual wage growth is at a nine-year high. 2018 was the best year for job creation since 2015. Many of his campaign pledges, such as the renegotiation of the Nafta free-trade agreement and the relocation of the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, have been kept. Promise made, promise kept is one of his boasts that regularly rings true. Image copyright Alamy Image caption The bruising but successful addition of Brett Kavanaugh (left) to the bench was a huge Trump victory Often, though, he blunts the impact of authentic good news with inflated claims. US Steel is not opening up six new plants. He is not the author of the biggest tax cut in American history. Besides, the trade war has penalised US manufacturers and farmers, and in 2018 the stock market suffered its worst year since the 2008 financial meltdown. This market volatility highlights other Trump tendencies contributing to his poor reviews: pointing to a buoyant stock market as a metric of personal success, the downside of which is the downswing; and blaming others when things go south, in this case the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell. Trump sits in the Oval Office behind what's called the Resolute desk, hewn from the timber of an abandoned British warship and first used by John F Kennedy, a former navy man himself. But on it you will not find the desk sign favoured by Harry S Truman: "The Buck Stops Here." This America First president is himself an American first. Indeed, a further reason for the disdain of historians is because, historically speaking, his administration has been like no other. The chaos of staff turnover - two secretaries of state, two secretaries of defence, two attorneys general, three White House chiefs of staff, and a revolving door of senior West Wing aides. The foreign policy by tweet. The chumminess with adversarial authoritarian leaders, such as Kim Jong-un and Vladimir Putin. The blurring of ethical lines supposedly separating the Trump White House from the Trump business empire. The Russia collusion investigation, which has raised questions, so far unsettled, about his true allegiance. Read more from Nick Nor have we ever witnessed a US leader who has so flagrantly flouted the normal rules of presidential behaviour. The playground nicknames. The Twitter tirades. The ugly slurs - "horseface" for Stormy Daniels, a former porn star with whom he was once apparently intimate. In response to indictments in the Mueller probe, he has sometimes sounded more like the boss of a crime family. "A rat" is how he described his former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, deploying the lingua franca of the Mafioso. Though he claims to offer exemplary moral leadership, even conservatives have criticised his presidency for being a profile of amorality, whether in response to the murder of the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi or the neo-Nazi torchlight protest in Charlottesville. One of my abiding memories from the past two years came in the lobby of Trump Tower during that extraordinary press availability held a few days afterwards, when he suggested a "very fine people" equivalence between far-right protesters and their opponents. Standing next to me was an African-American cameraman, who abandoned his tripod so that he could join reporters in hurling questions, something that rarely, if ever, happens at press conferences. "What should I tell my children?" he shouted. "What should I tell my children?" Image copyright Alamy Image caption A memorial to Heather Heyer, killed while protesting against white supremacists in Charlottesville With each bizarre press encounter and each ALL CAPS tweet, it can sometimes feel as if America is living through some historical counterfactual. It is as if the right-wing populist Pat Buchanan managed to beat George Herbert Walker Bush to the Republican presidential nomination in 1992 and, on the strength of his fiery culture war speech to the GOP convention, went on to beat Bill Clinton. Buchanan launched his insurgent campaign with a plea to put "America First" and used the mantra "Make America Great Again." Or maybe the Trump presidency is what a Perot administration might have looked like. Ross Perot, who also sought the presidency in 1992, was another populist billionaire and deep state conspiracy theorist. Yet even Buchanan and Perot, one suspects, would have been more orthodox. This alternative history feel to the Trump presidency partly explains why some of the dystopian "Could it happen here?" novels, such as Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale and George Orwell's 1984 have received a "Trump bump" in sales. Phillip Roth's The Plot Against America has also become a touchstone work. It imagines as president the aviator Charles Lindbergh, the telegenic spokesman for the isolationist "America First Committee," who turns the USA into a more authoritarian state. These dystopian analogies, however, are often not analogous. Donald Trump's America is not Margaret Atwood's Gilead, or George Orwell's Oceania. And just as the billionaire unwisely compares himself to the heroes of history, a trait which inevitably invites ridicule, his more strident critics over-reach when they liken him to history's worst villains. He is not a modern-day Adolf Hitler, nor an American Mussolini. When Donald Trump took the oath of office, nobody should have been surprised that an anti-politician would morph into an anti-president. In 2016 Americans rejected politics as usual. And diehard supporters still throng his rallies, wearing Make America Great Again caps and chanting for him to build the wall and lock up Hillary Clinton. His approval ratings among Republicans remain strong - 88% according to Gallup. His overall approval rating - 37% according to Gallup - is on a par with Ronald Reagan's at the two-year mark. Yet the rally chants of "four more years" remain a wish rather than a prophecy, and the setbacks suffered by the Republicans in November's congressional elections point to an underlying weakness: the disaffection of moderate Republicans, who were never enthusiastic about Donald Trump but who refused to countenance Hillary Clinton as president. Trump remains the only president in the history of the Gallup poll not to crack the 50% threshold. Because Donald Trump is unwilling to accept he is anything other than an A+ president, the grade he has bestowed upon himself, he is not prepared to adopt the kind of correctives that have saved troubled presidencies. JFK learnt from the disaster of the Bay of Pigs and the bullying he received from Nikita Khrushchev at the Vienna summit in 1961, which was followed in short order by the Soviet construction of the Berlin Wall. Confronted a year later with the Cuban Missile Crisis, he was less trusting of his generals, who urged airstrikes, and less willing to be pushed around by Khrushchev. More on the Trump presidency Bill Clinton, who was accused of liberal over-reach during his first months in office and was punished as a result in the 1994 mid-term elections, tacked back to the political centre in time to win re-election in 1996. This is not a learning presidency. Incumbents can also benefit from self-doubt, a trait Donald Trump seems to regard as a character flaw. Presidents also usually grow in office. But while there are physical signs the 72-year-old is ageing - unable to holiday in Florida over Christmas, he has looked especially tired these past few days - there is little sign he is maturing. It does not help that so many senior figures within his administration and his party treat him like a child monarch. The cabinet meeting where holders of the highest offices of state went around the table lavishing praise upon the president felt like Pyongyang on the Potomac. Vice-President Mike Pence has perfected the devoted gaze of the prototypical political wife. Senior Republicans, who privately roll their eyes, have been admiring, even sycophantic, in his presence. Image copyright Getty Images For the most part, international leaders have also opted for obsequiousness. Not only did Theresa May rush to Washington to invite Trump for a state visit - a state visit that has still not been diarised - she telephoned him on Air Force One to congratulate him after the mid-term election, even though the Democrats regained the House of Representatives. All this after Trump has frequently undermined her leadership over Brexit and trampled over the special relationship. One of the reasons Mr Trump is said to look so contemptuously upon Angela Merkel is because she makes so little effort to conceal her contempt for him. At the two-year mark, it is usually clear how incumbents will leave their mark on the presidency. After the torpidity of the Eisenhower years, Kennedy made the office more youthful and glamorous. Johnson, that shrewd "Master of the Senate", brought the executive and legislative branches into closer alignment. Nixon consolidated more power in the White House, accelerating the trend the liberal historian Arthur M Schlesinger Jr dubbed "the imperial presidency." Ford reversed much of that process, even going as far to drop the playing of "Hail to the Chief" when he made an entrance. The cardigan-wearing Jimmy Carter, who used to go from room to room turning off lights to save energy, suburbanised the White House. Reagan, who restored many of the ceremonial trappings, erased the lines between politics and entertainment. Clinton, in the age of Oprah, made the office more empathetic, narrowing the emotional distance between the presidency and the people. Obama set a new standard for ethical behaviour - motivated in part by the African-American mantra of working twice as hard to get half as far - and also made the presidency more hip. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Jimmy Carter in the Oval Office By abrogating behavioural customs, Donald Trump has made the presidency more uncouth and less trustworthy. By departing from executive and managerial norms, he has made domestic and foreign policy-making more impulsive and disorderly. By fraying traditional alliances, he has made the US presidency more isolated. By threatening to declare a national emergency in the funding row over his wall along the Mexican border, he has also indicated a willingness to discard constitutional norms that could mean exceeding constitutional limits. The cumulative effect of this has been to make the Oval Office a focal point of perpetual turmoil and uncertainty, with the White House hostage to the changing whims and temper of its occupant. Governing sometimes feels secondary to winning political and cultural battles, and slaying opponents. His presidency has become a roiling permanent campaign. That will depend, to a large extent, on whether or not he wins a second term. Defeat in 2020 would represent a repudiation of his leadership style. Victory would be validating. Yet even as a one-term president, Trump would have changed the character of the presidency and US politics more broadly. While it is hard to imagine America's 46th or 47th presidents unleashing the same barrage of insults, there are already signs of a "Trump effect" on political discourse. Many mid-term races featured unusually ugly rhetoric. Hours after being sworn in as a new Democratic congresswoman, Rashida Tlaib used a profane epithet as she called for the president's impeachment. What is known as the Overton window, the broadly agreed parameters of acceptable public discourse, has shifted to the right. I well remember the moment during the 2016 campaign when an email from the Trump campaign dropped into our inboxes announcing he would ban all Muslims from entering the United States. Initially we thought it might have been a hoax, for it seemed so far outside the mainstream of American political thought. Now, though, calls for a Muslim ban would raise eyebrows and provoke protests but hardly drop jaws. The phrase "Trump has normalised the abnormal" has itself become a clich. Still, though, I am constantly struck by how many Trump stories and scandals that ordinarily would have launched months, even years, of critical coverage for previous presidents sometimes barely last a single news cycle. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Mattis or Tillerson may have more to say about their time in government More long-lasting could be the debasement of facts as the basis for debate and policy formulation. By its own admission, this administration has sometimes deployed what the White House aide Kellyanne Conway memorably labelled "alternative facts", starting on day one with false claims about the size of the inauguration crowd. Since then, the Washington Post has listed more than 7,000 presidential falsehoods. But an unsettling lesson of the Trump presidency is that post-truth politics can be highly effective, especially when it comes to shoring up a political base. As for chaotic governance, future administrations will surely be more stable in terms of staff turnover, and more orderly when it comes to forming and executing policy. But it is easy to imagine Trump's successors pushing the bounds of executive authority in ways that breach constitutional norms, especially now that gridlock on Capitol Hill has become such a permanent feature of Washington politics. Obama, to a howl of protests from congressional Republicans, relied heavily on executive orders, the flourish of his presidential pen. Trump has gone a big step further by threatening to invoke emergency powers to bypass a hostile Congress. Stress tests for the US constitution, even full-blown constitutional crises, could easily become more commonplace. The Trump presidency's first drafts of history - most notably Bob Woodward's bestseller Fear - have painted a portrait of unprecedented dysfunction. If former senior administration officials pen honest participant histories - say former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, ex-Secretary of Defence James Mattis or former chief of staff John Kelly - they are likely, if their parting comments offer any guide, to add more detail and texture to that same picture. If some of the renowned presidential biographers turn their attention to Trump - maybe Jon Meacham, David McCullough or Michael Beschloss, who in the past have rescued the reputations of under-rated presidents such as George Herbert Walker Bush and Harry S Truman - they are unlikely to deliver laudatory manuscripts. The histories already written, along with those taking shape, will someday be housed in the Donald J Trump Presidential Library, an addition to the 13 existing presidential libraries that form part of the National Archive. Even with two years left to run of this history-defying presidency, most Americans, one suspects, have already made up their minds. Follow Nick Bryant on Twitter .

Historians may see Donald Trump's presidency as an aggregation of the lesser traits of his predecessors. A poll of nearly 200 political science scholars ranked him 44th out of the 44 men who have occupied the post.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46895634

How will history judge President Trump?

Hostile historians may come to regard Donald Trump's presidency as an aggregation of the lesser traits of his predecessors. The bullying of Lyndon Baines Johnson, who demeaned White House aides and even humiliated his Vice-President Hubert Humphrey - forcing his deputy once to recite a speech on Vietnam while he listened, legs akimbo, trousers round his ankles, on the toilet. The intellectual incuriosity of Ronald Reagan, who once apologised to his then White House Chief of Staff James Baker for not reading his briefing books with the immortal excuse: "Well, Jim, The Sound of Music was on last night." The shameless lies of Bill Clinton about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. The paranoia of Richard Nixon, who in his final days railed, King Lear-like, at portraits hanging on the White House walls. The incompetence of George W Bush, whose failure to master basic governance partly explained his administration's botched response to the aftermath of the war in Iraq and also to Hurricane Katrina. The historical amnesia of Gerald Ford, whose assertion during a 1976 presidential debate that Eastern Europe was not dominated by Moscow was a forerunner of Trump's recent endorsement of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The strategic impatience of Barack Obama, whose instinct always was to withdraw US forces from troublesome battlefields, such as Iraq, even if the mission had not yet been completed. Even the distractedness of John F Kennedy, who whiled away afternoons in the White House swimming pool with a bevy of young women to sate his libido, a sexualised version, perhaps, of Donald Trump sitting for his hours in front of his flat-screen TV watching friendly right-wing anchors massage his ego. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford at a 1976 debate At the midpoint of Donald Trump's first term, historians have struggled to detect the kind of virtues that offset his predecessors' vices: the infectious optimism of Reagan; the inspirational rhetoric of JFK; the legislative smarts of LBJ; or the governing pragmatism of Nixon. So rather than being viewed as the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan or Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Trump gets cast as a modern-day James Buchanan, Franklin Pierce or William Harrison. Last year, a poll of nearly 200 political science scholars, which has routinely placed Republicans higher than Democrats, ranked him 44th out of the 44 men who have occupied the post (for those wondering why Trump is the 45th president, Grover Cleveland served twice). Though the president has likened himself to Abraham Lincoln, who posterity has deemed to be greatest of all presidents, this survey judged him to be the worst of the worst. Even the conservative scholars, who identified themselves as Republicans, placed him 40th. Were it not for his braggadocio, Donald Trump might receive a more positive historical press. A recurring problem, after all, is that he gets judged against his boasts. He can point to a significant record of right-wing accomplishment. Tax reform. Two Supreme Court nominees safely installed on the bench. The travel ban. The bonfire of federal regulations. Criminal justice reform. Legislative action aimed at ameliorating the opioid crisis. Nato members ponying up more cash. Annual wage growth is at a nine-year high. 2018 was the best year for job creation since 2015. Many of his campaign pledges, such as the renegotiation of the Nafta free-trade agreement and the relocation of the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, have been kept. Promise made, promise kept is one of his boasts that regularly rings true. Image copyright Alamy Image caption The bruising but successful addition of Brett Kavanaugh (left) to the bench was a huge Trump victory Often, though, he blunts the impact of authentic good news with inflated claims. US Steel is not opening up six new plants. He is not the author of the biggest tax cut in American history. Besides, the trade war has penalised US manufacturers and farmers, and in 2018 the stock market suffered its worst year since the 2008 financial meltdown. This market volatility highlights other Trump tendencies contributing to his poor reviews: pointing to a buoyant stock market as a metric of personal success, the downside of which is the downswing; and blaming others when things go south, in this case the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell. Trump sits in the Oval Office behind what's called the Resolute desk, hewn from the timber of an abandoned British warship and first used by John F Kennedy, a former navy man himself. But on it you will not find the desk sign favoured by Harry S Truman: "The Buck Stops Here." This America First president is himself an American first. Indeed, a further reason for the disdain of historians is because, historically speaking, his administration has been like no other. The chaos of staff turnover - two secretaries of state, two secretaries of defence, two attorneys general, three White House chiefs of staff, and a revolving door of senior West Wing aides. The foreign policy by tweet. The chumminess with adversarial authoritarian leaders, such as Kim Jong-un and Vladimir Putin. The blurring of ethical lines supposedly separating the Trump White House from the Trump business empire. The Russia collusion investigation, which has raised questions, so far unsettled, about his true allegiance. Read more from Nick Nor have we ever witnessed a US leader who has so flagrantly flouted the normal rules of presidential behaviour. The playground nicknames. The Twitter tirades. The ugly slurs - "horseface" for Stormy Daniels, a former porn star with whom he was once apparently intimate. In response to indictments in the Mueller probe, he has sometimes sounded more like the boss of a crime family. "A rat" is how he described his former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, deploying the lingua franca of the Mafioso. Though he claims to offer exemplary moral leadership, even conservatives have criticised his presidency for being a profile of amorality, whether in response to the murder of the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi or the neo-Nazi torchlight protest in Charlottesville. One of my abiding memories from the past two years came in the lobby of Trump Tower during that extraordinary press availability held a few days afterwards, when he suggested a "very fine people" equivalence between far-right protesters and their opponents. Standing next to me was an African-American cameraman, who abandoned his tripod so that he could join reporters in hurling questions, something that rarely, if ever, happens at press conferences. "What should I tell my children?" he shouted. "What should I tell my children?" Image copyright Alamy Image caption A memorial to Heather Heyer, killed while protesting against white supremacists in Charlottesville With each bizarre press encounter and each ALL CAPS tweet, it can sometimes feel as if America is living through some historical counterfactual. It is as if the right-wing populist Pat Buchanan managed to beat George Herbert Walker Bush to the Republican presidential nomination in 1992 and, on the strength of his fiery culture war speech to the GOP convention, went on to beat Bill Clinton. Buchanan launched his insurgent campaign with a plea to put "America First" and used the mantra "Make America Great Again." Or maybe the Trump presidency is what a Perot administration might have looked like. Ross Perot, who also sought the presidency in 1992, was another populist billionaire and deep state conspiracy theorist. Yet even Buchanan and Perot, one suspects, would have been more orthodox. This alternative history feel to the Trump presidency partly explains why some of the dystopian "Could it happen here?" novels, such as Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale and George Orwell's 1984 have received a "Trump bump" in sales. Phillip Roth's The Plot Against America has also become a touchstone work. It imagines as president the aviator Charles Lindbergh, the telegenic spokesman for the isolationist "America First Committee," who turns the USA into a more authoritarian state. These dystopian analogies, however, are often not analogous. Donald Trump's America is not Margaret Atwood's Gilead, or George Orwell's Oceania. And just as the billionaire unwisely compares himself to the heroes of history, a trait which inevitably invites ridicule, his more strident critics over-reach when they liken him to history's worst villains. He is not a modern-day Adolf Hitler, nor an American Mussolini. When Donald Trump took the oath of office, nobody should have been surprised that an anti-politician would morph into an anti-president. In 2016 Americans rejected politics as usual. And diehard supporters still throng his rallies, wearing Make America Great Again caps and chanting for him to build the wall and lock up Hillary Clinton. His approval ratings among Republicans remain strong - 88% according to Gallup. His overall approval rating - 37% according to Gallup - is on a par with Ronald Reagan's at the two-year mark. Yet the rally chants of "four more years" remain a wish rather than a prophecy, and the setbacks suffered by the Republicans in November's congressional elections point to an underlying weakness: the disaffection of moderate Republicans, who were never enthusiastic about Donald Trump but who refused to countenance Hillary Clinton as president. Trump remains the only president in the history of the Gallup poll not to crack the 50% threshold. Because Donald Trump is unwilling to accept he is anything other than an A+ president, the grade he has bestowed upon himself, he is not prepared to adopt the kind of correctives that have saved troubled presidencies. JFK learnt from the disaster of the Bay of Pigs and the bullying he received from Nikita Khrushchev at the Vienna summit in 1961, which was followed in short order by the Soviet construction of the Berlin Wall. Confronted a year later with the Cuban Missile Crisis, he was less trusting of his generals, who urged airstrikes, and less willing to be pushed around by Khrushchev. More on the Trump presidency Bill Clinton, who was accused of liberal over-reach during his first months in office and was punished as a result in the 1994 mid-term elections, tacked back to the political centre in time to win re-election in 1996. This is not a learning presidency. Incumbents can also benefit from self-doubt, a trait Donald Trump seems to regard as a character flaw. Presidents also usually grow in office. But while there are physical signs the 72-year-old is ageing - unable to holiday in Florida over Christmas, he has looked especially tired these past few days - there is little sign he is maturing. It does not help that so many senior figures within his administration and his party treat him like a child monarch. The cabinet meeting where holders of the highest offices of state went around the table lavishing praise upon the president felt like Pyongyang on the Potomac. Vice-President Mike Pence has perfected the devoted gaze of the prototypical political wife. Senior Republicans, who privately roll their eyes, have been admiring, even sycophantic, in his presence. Image copyright Getty Images For the most part, international leaders have also opted for obsequiousness. Not only did Theresa May rush to Washington to invite Trump for a state visit - a state visit that has still not been diarised - she telephoned him on Air Force One to congratulate him after the mid-term election, even though the Democrats regained the House of Representatives. All this after Trump has frequently undermined her leadership over Brexit and trampled over the special relationship. One of the reasons Mr Trump is said to look so contemptuously upon Angela Merkel is because she makes so little effort to conceal her contempt for him. At the two-year mark, it is usually clear how incumbents will leave their mark on the presidency. After the torpidity of the Eisenhower years, Kennedy made the office more youthful and glamorous. Johnson, that shrewd "Master of the Senate", brought the executive and legislative branches into closer alignment. Nixon consolidated more power in the White House, accelerating the trend the liberal historian Arthur M Schlesinger Jr dubbed "the imperial presidency." Ford reversed much of that process, even going as far to drop the playing of "Hail to the Chief" when he made an entrance. The cardigan-wearing Jimmy Carter, who used to go from room to room turning off lights to save energy, suburbanised the White House. Reagan, who restored many of the ceremonial trappings, erased the lines between politics and entertainment. Clinton, in the age of Oprah, made the office more empathetic, narrowing the emotional distance between the presidency and the people. Obama set a new standard for ethical behaviour - motivated in part by the African-American mantra of working twice as hard to get half as far - and also made the presidency more hip. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Jimmy Carter in the Oval Office By abrogating behavioural customs, Donald Trump has made the presidency more uncouth and less trustworthy. By departing from executive and managerial norms, he has made domestic and foreign policy-making more impulsive and disorderly. By fraying traditional alliances, he has made the US presidency more isolated. By threatening to declare a national emergency in the funding row over his wall along the Mexican border, he has also indicated a willingness to discard constitutional norms that could mean exceeding constitutional limits. The cumulative effect of this has been to make the Oval Office a focal point of perpetual turmoil and uncertainty, with the White House hostage to the changing whims and temper of its occupant. Governing sometimes feels secondary to winning political and cultural battles, and slaying opponents. His presidency has become a roiling permanent campaign. That will depend, to a large extent, on whether or not he wins a second term. Defeat in 2020 would represent a repudiation of his leadership style. Victory would be validating. Yet even as a one-term president, Trump would have changed the character of the presidency and US politics more broadly. While it is hard to imagine America's 46th or 47th presidents unleashing the same barrage of insults, there are already signs of a "Trump effect" on political discourse. Many mid-term races featured unusually ugly rhetoric. Hours after being sworn in as a new Democratic congresswoman, Rashida Tlaib used a profane epithet as she called for the president's impeachment. What is known as the Overton window, the broadly agreed parameters of acceptable public discourse, has shifted to the right. I well remember the moment during the 2016 campaign when an email from the Trump campaign dropped into our inboxes announcing he would ban all Muslims from entering the United States. Initially we thought it might have been a hoax, for it seemed so far outside the mainstream of American political thought. Now, though, calls for a Muslim ban would raise eyebrows and provoke protests but hardly drop jaws. The phrase "Trump has normalised the abnormal" has itself become a clich. Still, though, I am constantly struck by how many Trump stories and scandals that ordinarily would have launched months, even years, of critical coverage for previous presidents sometimes barely last a single news cycle. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Mattis or Tillerson may have more to say about their time in government More long-lasting could be the debasement of facts as the basis for debate and policy formulation. By its own admission, this administration has sometimes deployed what the White House aide Kellyanne Conway memorably labelled "alternative facts", starting on day one with false claims about the size of the inauguration crowd. Since then, the Washington Post has listed more than 7,000 presidential falsehoods. But an unsettling lesson of the Trump presidency is that post-truth politics can be highly effective, especially when it comes to shoring up a political base. As for chaotic governance, future administrations will surely be more stable in terms of staff turnover, and more orderly when it comes to forming and executing policy. But it is easy to imagine Trump's successors pushing the bounds of executive authority in ways that breach constitutional norms, especially now that gridlock on Capitol Hill has become such a permanent feature of Washington politics. Obama, to a howl of protests from congressional Republicans, relied heavily on executive orders, the flourish of his presidential pen. Trump has gone a big step further by threatening to invoke emergency powers to bypass a hostile Congress. Stress tests for the US constitution, even full-blown constitutional crises, could easily become more commonplace. The Trump presidency's first drafts of history - most notably Bob Woodward's bestseller Fear - have painted a portrait of unprecedented dysfunction. If former senior administration officials pen honest participant histories - say former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, ex-Secretary of Defence James Mattis or former chief of staff John Kelly - they are likely, if their parting comments offer any guide, to add more detail and texture to that same picture. If some of the renowned presidential biographers turn their attention to Trump - maybe Jon Meacham, David McCullough or Michael Beschloss, who in the past have rescued the reputations of under-rated presidents such as George Herbert Walker Bush and Harry S Truman - they are unlikely to deliver laudatory manuscripts. The histories already written, along with those taking shape, will someday be housed in the Donald J Trump Presidential Library, an addition to the 13 existing presidential libraries that form part of the National Archive. Even with two years left to run of this history-defying presidency, most Americans, one suspects, have already made up their minds. Follow Nick Bryant on Twitter .

Historians may see Donald Trump's presidency as an aggregation of the lesser traits of his predecessors. A poll of nearly 200 political science scholars, which has routinely placed Republicans higher than Democrats, ranked him 44th out of the 44 men who have occupied the post. A recurring problem, after all, is that he gets judged against his boasts.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46895634

Why is Chinese media blurring these actors' ears?

Image copyright iQiyi Image caption Actor Wang Linkai's ears are blurred in an episode of the TV show Sister's Flower Shop The decision by a popular Chinese video streaming platform to censor the ears of actors wearing earrings has sparked a heated debate online. Images taken from programmes produced by the Netflix-like streaming service iQiyi, show actors with large blobs covering their earlobes and have been widely shared online. The hashtag #MaleTVStarsCantWearEarrings has been used more than 88,000 times on Weibo where many users are expressing their outrage at the censorship. The controversy is the latest example of the heavy-handed blurring of TV programmes in China. Hip-hop culture, tattoos and LGBT symbols have all been censored. Image copyright iQiyi Image caption Some on Weibo pointed out the difference between actor Jing Boran's ears in episode one (L) and episode three (R) of the TV show 'I Actor' Many took to social media to argue that the censorship was driven by a desire to protect "traditional" gender roles. The effect of male celebrities displaying more "effeminate" characteristics has become a controversial issue in China in recent years. One Weibo user jokingly wrote: "Men who wear earrings are sissies, Genghis Khan's a sissy, we should block him, and kick him out of our history books." Others were quick to suggest a double standard, given that actresses did not have their earrings hidden. We've simply gone back 100 years," one user wrote. While another called the move "unspoken sexual discrimination". Image copyright iQiyi Image caption Weibo users commented on the difference between Lin Yanjun's ears and those of his female co-star Dee Hsu While the majority of comments were critical of the blurring, some wrote that they agreed with the decision. "I support the government moving to rule on this," one user wrote, "men should look like men." Some others commented to say they thought men wearing earrings was "strange" and "effeminate". Analysis: Kerry Allen, BBC Monitoring All TV broadcasters in China are state-owned, heavily regulated and subject to censorship. Domestic programmes must often submit papers to their local Communist party bureau at least two months in advance for official approval. For foreign TV broadcasts, this process can take even longer. Regulation has also extended beyond television to digital platforms, owing to people increasingly watching TV over the internet, and even broadcasting their own content. The popularity of live streaming apps unsettles the Chinese government, who want absolute control over anything that is broadcast. However, social media users have noted their dissatisfaction over a growing list of what they can and cannot watch. One Weibo user commented to question why actors wearing earrings was such a big issue. "Some people actually say this would negatively influence children. If wearing a stud is to blame for negatively influencing a child, how vulnerable is the country's education system?" Image copyright Weibo Various Chinese news publications report that the country's top media regulator has not issued a statement on the issue, despite repeated attempts to contact them.

iQiyi has blurred the ears of male actors wearing earrings. The move has sparked a heated debate on Chinese social media. Some have argued that the blurring is to protect "traditional" gender roles.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-46902973

Why is Chinese media blurring these actors' ears?

Image copyright iQiyi Image caption Actor Wang Linkai's ears are blurred in an episode of the TV show Sister's Flower Shop The decision by a popular Chinese video streaming platform to censor the ears of actors wearing earrings has sparked a heated debate online. Images taken from programmes produced by the Netflix-like streaming service iQiyi, show actors with large blobs covering their earlobes and have been widely shared online. The hashtag #MaleTVStarsCantWearEarrings has been used more than 88,000 times on Weibo where many users are expressing their outrage at the censorship. The controversy is the latest example of the heavy-handed blurring of TV programmes in China. Hip-hop culture, tattoos and LGBT symbols have all been censored. Image copyright iQiyi Image caption Some on Weibo pointed out the difference between actor Jing Boran's ears in episode one (L) and episode three (R) of the TV show 'I Actor' Many took to social media to argue that the censorship was driven by a desire to protect "traditional" gender roles. The effect of male celebrities displaying more "effeminate" characteristics has become a controversial issue in China in recent years. One Weibo user jokingly wrote: "Men who wear earrings are sissies, Genghis Khan's a sissy, we should block him, and kick him out of our history books." Others were quick to suggest a double standard, given that actresses did not have their earrings hidden. We've simply gone back 100 years," one user wrote. While another called the move "unspoken sexual discrimination". Image copyright iQiyi Image caption Weibo users commented on the difference between Lin Yanjun's ears and those of his female co-star Dee Hsu While the majority of comments were critical of the blurring, some wrote that they agreed with the decision. "I support the government moving to rule on this," one user wrote, "men should look like men." Some others commented to say they thought men wearing earrings was "strange" and "effeminate". Analysis: Kerry Allen, BBC Monitoring All TV broadcasters in China are state-owned, heavily regulated and subject to censorship. Domestic programmes must often submit papers to their local Communist party bureau at least two months in advance for official approval. For foreign TV broadcasts, this process can take even longer. Regulation has also extended beyond television to digital platforms, owing to people increasingly watching TV over the internet, and even broadcasting their own content. The popularity of live streaming apps unsettles the Chinese government, who want absolute control over anything that is broadcast. However, social media users have noted their dissatisfaction over a growing list of what they can and cannot watch. One Weibo user commented to question why actors wearing earrings was such a big issue. "Some people actually say this would negatively influence children. If wearing a stud is to blame for negatively influencing a child, how vulnerable is the country's education system?" Image copyright Weibo Various Chinese news publications report that the country's top media regulator has not issued a statement on the issue, despite repeated attempts to contact them.

iQiyi has blurred the ears of male actors wearing earrings. The move has sparked a heated debate on Chinese social media. Some have argued that the blurring is an attempt to protect "traditional" gender roles. But others have supported the move, saying men should look like men.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-46902973

What's behind the success of Netflix's latest releases?

Image copyright Netflix Image caption Sex Education, Bird Box and You have been a big success for Netflix If you've spent the last few weeks binge-watching endless hours of TV (and finishing off leftover Christmas Twiglets) then you're in very good company. On Thursday, Netflix published the figures for some of their biggest recent releases - Sex Education, You and Bird Box. And those numbers were pretty impressive, with the two series on course to be watched by 40 million accounts by the end of the month. Bird Box, which features Oscar-winning actress Sandra Bullock as the lead, has already passed more than 80 million views. Going viral on social media Image copyright Netflix Image caption You has been a huge success on Netflix You, which is based on Caroline Kepnes' best-selling novel of the same name, was initially made for the Lifetime Network in the US, but only averaged about 611,000 viewers. Its addictive format, which sees psychopath bookshop owner Joe Goldberg stalk love interest and college student Guinevere Beck, had Netflix viewers hooked - and more importantly, talking about it all over Twitter. The series sparked a huge debate online over whether it was acceptable to empathise with Joe, so much so that the actor who plays him, Penn Badgley, had to remind people he was a murderer. Buzzfeed's TV editor Scott Bryan tells the BBC the combination of "Netflix's international appeal and social media influence" helped spread You a lot further than the Lifetime Network could. "If you'd have told me about You six months ago, then I wouldn't have known where to find it, but with Netflix's good marketing and social media, I could," he says. Image copyright Netflix Image caption This picture of Sandra Bullock turned into a viral meme on Twitter Bird Box also enjoyed similar social media success, with its star-studded cast of Sandra Bullock and Sarah Paulson and thrilling plot drawing in viewers. TV critic Emma Bullimore references the "Bird Box memes and viral social media campaign" that flooded Twitter over Christmas. "Bird Box isn't Citizen Kane, but it has incredible talent and is based on an intriguing concept," she says. "I saw the blindfold pictures all over Twitter so thought 'let me check this out'." Sex Education was late to the party with its January release date, but it too is set to reach 40 million viewers by the end of the month. The show follows a British sixth-form student, who opens up a sex therapy clinic to help his clueless classmates. It's resonated with many of Netflix's younger subscribers, whilst some of its wittiest lines have become popular memes on Twitter. "With Sex Education, British comedy has always had international appeal and that has been a driver for this series, and the fact there aren't many shows like it at the moment," Bryan explains. "Also it's got Gillian Anderson in it and a universal youthful appeal - I've seen it shared so many times on social media. "Plus it's well-written, thought through and really inclusive on LGBT representation and serious subjects," he adds. The Christmas effect Image copyright Netflix Image caption Asa Butterfield and Gillian Anderson in Sex Education Another important factor is the time of year - these releases all came out in late December and early January. Bryan tells the BBC: "Christmas is when people start a lot of shows and catch up", and adds that these releases really capitalised on that. "For example, Netflix released Black Mirror's Bandersnatch just after Christmas and people were watching it with their families." Bullimore also thinks downtime has played a part in impressive viewing figures. "People have a lot of time over Christmas and want to find something new to binge watch, so bored Netflix subscribers want to find something to get obsessed with," she tells the BBC. "You is a thriller and it grabs you and forces to watch the next episode." Image copyright Netflix Image caption Sandra Bullock's character learns the significance of birds in Bird Box At the end of December, Netflix tweeted that more than 45 million Netflix accounts had watched Bird Box - the best first week ever for a film on the service. This was the first time that we were given any indication of how shows and films are received on the network, and Netflix were clearly proud of these figures. "I think it's a bit of publicity to further their own advantage," says Bullimore. "They're really interested in their industry status, on getting Emmys and being involved with the big players so they get Hollywood stars on the network." "[Releasing these figures] shows the global power Netflix has," says Bryan. "They make shows that can be watched in 195 countries at the same time and this is something rivals can't do." Image copyright Sam Taylor/Netflix Image caption Emma Mackey and Asa Butterfield are two of the stars of Sex Education Bryan thinks that while these figures appear impressive, it's difficult to really measure their relevancy. "What I'm trying to get clarity on is what counts as a viewer. In a shareholder letter yesterday they counted a viewer as watching 70% of one episode; you don't see who drops off [and doesn't watch the rest of series]. "But if you looked at BBC figures for Killing Eve and Bodyguard you could see how many people were watching each episode." Bullimore adds: "Netflix's viewing figures have always been shrouded in mystery, they won't tell us how many people are watching but the rest of the TV industry relies so heavily on these figures. "Now suddenly after saying no, they're very willing to, but they are calculated in a different way, therefore a straight comparison is very difficult." But Hollywood Reporter said Netflix's content chief Ted Sarandos said the decision beind revealing some of its viewing figures was to share "cultural metrics". He added that in his opinion, what was important was being "in the zeitgeist", adding Netflix will "ramp up" future information on viewing figures. Follow us on Facebook, on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts, or on Instagram at bbcnewsents. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.

Netflix released figures for their recent releases on Thursday. Sex Education, You and Bird Box are on course to be watched by 40 million. All three series have enjoyed huge success on social media.

pegasus

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46920719

What's behind the success of Netflix's latest releases?

Image copyright Netflix Image caption Sex Education, Bird Box and You have been a big success for Netflix If you've spent the last few weeks binge-watching endless hours of TV (and finishing off leftover Christmas Twiglets) then you're in very good company. On Thursday, Netflix published the figures for some of their biggest recent releases - Sex Education, You and Bird Box. And those numbers were pretty impressive, with the two series on course to be watched by 40 million accounts by the end of the month. Bird Box, which features Oscar-winning actress Sandra Bullock as the lead, has already passed more than 80 million views. Going viral on social media Image copyright Netflix Image caption You has been a huge success on Netflix You, which is based on Caroline Kepnes' best-selling novel of the same name, was initially made for the Lifetime Network in the US, but only averaged about 611,000 viewers. Its addictive format, which sees psychopath bookshop owner Joe Goldberg stalk love interest and college student Guinevere Beck, had Netflix viewers hooked - and more importantly, talking about it all over Twitter. The series sparked a huge debate online over whether it was acceptable to empathise with Joe, so much so that the actor who plays him, Penn Badgley, had to remind people he was a murderer. Buzzfeed's TV editor Scott Bryan tells the BBC the combination of "Netflix's international appeal and social media influence" helped spread You a lot further than the Lifetime Network could. "If you'd have told me about You six months ago, then I wouldn't have known where to find it, but with Netflix's good marketing and social media, I could," he says. Image copyright Netflix Image caption This picture of Sandra Bullock turned into a viral meme on Twitter Bird Box also enjoyed similar social media success, with its star-studded cast of Sandra Bullock and Sarah Paulson and thrilling plot drawing in viewers. TV critic Emma Bullimore references the "Bird Box memes and viral social media campaign" that flooded Twitter over Christmas. "Bird Box isn't Citizen Kane, but it has incredible talent and is based on an intriguing concept," she says. "I saw the blindfold pictures all over Twitter so thought 'let me check this out'." Sex Education was late to the party with its January release date, but it too is set to reach 40 million viewers by the end of the month. The show follows a British sixth-form student, who opens up a sex therapy clinic to help his clueless classmates. It's resonated with many of Netflix's younger subscribers, whilst some of its wittiest lines have become popular memes on Twitter. "With Sex Education, British comedy has always had international appeal and that has been a driver for this series, and the fact there aren't many shows like it at the moment," Bryan explains. "Also it's got Gillian Anderson in it and a universal youthful appeal - I've seen it shared so many times on social media. "Plus it's well-written, thought through and really inclusive on LGBT representation and serious subjects," he adds. The Christmas effect Image copyright Netflix Image caption Asa Butterfield and Gillian Anderson in Sex Education Another important factor is the time of year - these releases all came out in late December and early January. Bryan tells the BBC: "Christmas is when people start a lot of shows and catch up", and adds that these releases really capitalised on that. "For example, Netflix released Black Mirror's Bandersnatch just after Christmas and people were watching it with their families." Bullimore also thinks downtime has played a part in impressive viewing figures. "People have a lot of time over Christmas and want to find something new to binge watch, so bored Netflix subscribers want to find something to get obsessed with," she tells the BBC. "You is a thriller and it grabs you and forces to watch the next episode." Image copyright Netflix Image caption Sandra Bullock's character learns the significance of birds in Bird Box At the end of December, Netflix tweeted that more than 45 million Netflix accounts had watched Bird Box - the best first week ever for a film on the service. This was the first time that we were given any indication of how shows and films are received on the network, and Netflix were clearly proud of these figures. "I think it's a bit of publicity to further their own advantage," says Bullimore. "They're really interested in their industry status, on getting Emmys and being involved with the big players so they get Hollywood stars on the network." "[Releasing these figures] shows the global power Netflix has," says Bryan. "They make shows that can be watched in 195 countries at the same time and this is something rivals can't do." Image copyright Sam Taylor/Netflix Image caption Emma Mackey and Asa Butterfield are two of the stars of Sex Education Bryan thinks that while these figures appear impressive, it's difficult to really measure their relevancy. "What I'm trying to get clarity on is what counts as a viewer. In a shareholder letter yesterday they counted a viewer as watching 70% of one episode; you don't see who drops off [and doesn't watch the rest of series]. "But if you looked at BBC figures for Killing Eve and Bodyguard you could see how many people were watching each episode." Bullimore adds: "Netflix's viewing figures have always been shrouded in mystery, they won't tell us how many people are watching but the rest of the TV industry relies so heavily on these figures. "Now suddenly after saying no, they're very willing to, but they are calculated in a different way, therefore a straight comparison is very difficult." But Hollywood Reporter said Netflix's content chief Ted Sarandos said the decision beind revealing some of its viewing figures was to share "cultural metrics". He added that in his opinion, what was important was being "in the zeitgeist", adding Netflix will "ramp up" future information on viewing figures. Follow us on Facebook, on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts, or on Instagram at bbcnewsents. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.

Sex Education, Bird Box and You have been a big success for Netflix. Sex Education is set to reach 40 million viewers by the end of the month. Bird Box, starring Sandra Bullock, has already passed 80 million views. You is based on Caroline Kepnes' best-selling novel of the same name.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-46920719

Could Kenya have prevented the hotel siege?

Image copyright Getty Images The deadly militant raid on a hotel complex in Kenya has raised questions about whether the security forces have learned any lessons from past terror attacks, including the four-day siege on the Westgate shopping centre in 2013. These days individuals and vehicles entering any major public premises in Kenya usually have to go through checks by private security companies involving a range of tools - metal detectors, X-ray machines, bomb detectors and sniffer dogs. Though Kenyans have varying opinions about how seriously the security personnel take this process. One place where they would be expected to be conscientious is the scene of the latest attack, the complex that includes the DusitD2 hotel, known by its address: 14 Riverside. Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption Nairobi Dusit hotel attack: explosions, gunfire and rescue operation It is home to a variety of businesses and a major hotel which was frequented by professionals, government officials and foreigners. In other words, the kind of location that the Somalia-based militant group al-Shabab would target knowing that the world would notice. Yet however strict the security measures and however conscientious those enforcing them are, there is only so much the building owners can do to secure their property and clientele, as Tuesday's events highlighted. The main responsibility lies with the Kenyan authorities. Most of the recent al-Shabab attacks on Kenyan soil have been around the border with Somalia, which appeared to feed a semblance of control and stability in the rest of the country amid a lingering threat. This however assumes that al-Shabab always plans its major actions in Somalia. Risk analyst Mathias Muindi thinks that this latest attack has signs that there was some level of preparation by Kenyan militant cells. "The evidence collected about the attack suspects has revealed links to parts of Kenya that are traditionally non-Muslim and non-Somali, where security agencies may not have previously paid much attention," he says. "The problem now is that they do not have the adequate manpower to run an expanded and robust nationwide intelligence operation." Emerged in Somalia after the collapse of Islamic Courts Union in 2006 Linked to al-Qaeda Battle the UN-backed government in Somalia Impose a strict version of Sharia in areas of Somalia under their control Have launched attacks in Kenya and Uganda - both countries have troops in Somalia Read more about the militants The quality and effectiveness of the government's anti-terror efforts will be scrutinised yet again - in particular whether crucial intelligence from local and foreign sources is acted upon. Kenyan intelligence officials argue that over the years they have had successes intercepting some suspected militants, potentially preventing more attacks and proving that they are making progress. They add that it has been nearly four years since the attack the university campus in the town of Garissa and more than five years since similar attack in the capital, referring to the Westgate siege in 2013. The suggestion is that such incidents are not the norm. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption At least 67 people died in the 2013 attack on the Westgate shopping mall Clearly, some lessons were learned from Westgate. The scale and depth of the emergency response - police and military counter-terror units, foreign security personnel, ambulance and fire brigade - that arrived at 14 Riverside showed organisation, in contrast to the shambles five years ago. Security agents arrived relatively quickly and showed composure as they evacuated civilians and screened them before letting them go, to be sure that the attackers did not slip out unnoticed. However, there were still some worrying lapses. 'Training is not enough' Security officials delayed enforcing a strict security cordon, meaning that there could have been more civilian casualties if there had been further explosions, a tactic al-Shabab has used in Somalia. A suspicious vehicle in the car park that security agents thought could have been used by the attackers remained unattended. Footage also showed an unexploded grenade lying in a corridor of one of the buildings as security agents shuffled in and out a few feet away. More on the hotel siege: There are wider issues to consider too for Kenya's security chiefs. "There is a lot of spending on training the security forces yet we only see limited effects because their welfare is poor," says George Musamali, the director of a private security firm. "Training is not enough. Equipping is not enough. Something needs to be done about human resource to make sure that these people are fully motivated to do their work properly." Image copyright AFP Image caption The security response was better co-ordinated compared to the reaction to the Westgate attack He also calls for a better channel of communication between the government and the public, not just in the aftermath of attacks but as a norm so that intelligence from the civilians can be properly gathered and used. The government responded to this week's attack by using a familiar tactic: downplaying the impact of al-Shabab's actions. This is part of an active effort to control the narrative and win the propaganda war that has accompanied this insurgency. Kenyans were warned against sharing gruesome images from the attack and on Tuesday evening Interior Minister Fred Matiang'i announced that the affected buildings had been secured and security forces were mopping up the area. Losing trust But this came as members of the public were reporting that their friends and relatives were still in the complex hiding from the attackers. Mr Musamali feels the government's tone only pushes away the public and loses their trust. The government is up against a group that has arguably the most advanced media operation of any militant Islamist movement in Africa, including established radio and digital outfits. It often films its attacks in Somalia, including the devastating assault on a Kenyan army base in the town of el-Ade exactly three years to the day of this week's attack. Some of its media material is produced in Swahili, clearly targeting audiences in Kenya, revealing its cross-border ambitions. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Kenyans will be hoping that the security lessons from this attack can be learned The threat will not go away in the short term and changes still need to be made. Andrew Franklin, a Nairobi-based security consultant and ex-US marine, says it is clear that the government's security agencies and the many private security companies are not working together enough "and that is evident in the obvious security glitches around Nairobi". Yet again, Kenya has suffered a big loss and as its people come to terms with this week's events they will wonder why it has to take catastrophe for more lessons to be learned.

Militant raid on a hotel complex in Kenya has raised questions about security. Security forces have learned lessons from past terror attacks, including the Westgate siege.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-46921249

Could Kenya have prevented the hotel siege?

Image copyright Getty Images The deadly militant raid on a hotel complex in Kenya has raised questions about whether the security forces have learned any lessons from past terror attacks, including the four-day siege on the Westgate shopping centre in 2013. These days individuals and vehicles entering any major public premises in Kenya usually have to go through checks by private security companies involving a range of tools - metal detectors, X-ray machines, bomb detectors and sniffer dogs. Though Kenyans have varying opinions about how seriously the security personnel take this process. One place where they would be expected to be conscientious is the scene of the latest attack, the complex that includes the DusitD2 hotel, known by its address: 14 Riverside. Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption Nairobi Dusit hotel attack: explosions, gunfire and rescue operation It is home to a variety of businesses and a major hotel which was frequented by professionals, government officials and foreigners. In other words, the kind of location that the Somalia-based militant group al-Shabab would target knowing that the world would notice. Yet however strict the security measures and however conscientious those enforcing them are, there is only so much the building owners can do to secure their property and clientele, as Tuesday's events highlighted. The main responsibility lies with the Kenyan authorities. Most of the recent al-Shabab attacks on Kenyan soil have been around the border with Somalia, which appeared to feed a semblance of control and stability in the rest of the country amid a lingering threat. This however assumes that al-Shabab always plans its major actions in Somalia. Risk analyst Mathias Muindi thinks that this latest attack has signs that there was some level of preparation by Kenyan militant cells. "The evidence collected about the attack suspects has revealed links to parts of Kenya that are traditionally non-Muslim and non-Somali, where security agencies may not have previously paid much attention," he says. "The problem now is that they do not have the adequate manpower to run an expanded and robust nationwide intelligence operation." Emerged in Somalia after the collapse of Islamic Courts Union in 2006 Linked to al-Qaeda Battle the UN-backed government in Somalia Impose a strict version of Sharia in areas of Somalia under their control Have launched attacks in Kenya and Uganda - both countries have troops in Somalia Read more about the militants The quality and effectiveness of the government's anti-terror efforts will be scrutinised yet again - in particular whether crucial intelligence from local and foreign sources is acted upon. Kenyan intelligence officials argue that over the years they have had successes intercepting some suspected militants, potentially preventing more attacks and proving that they are making progress. They add that it has been nearly four years since the attack the university campus in the town of Garissa and more than five years since similar attack in the capital, referring to the Westgate siege in 2013. The suggestion is that such incidents are not the norm. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption At least 67 people died in the 2013 attack on the Westgate shopping mall Clearly, some lessons were learned from Westgate. The scale and depth of the emergency response - police and military counter-terror units, foreign security personnel, ambulance and fire brigade - that arrived at 14 Riverside showed organisation, in contrast to the shambles five years ago. Security agents arrived relatively quickly and showed composure as they evacuated civilians and screened them before letting them go, to be sure that the attackers did not slip out unnoticed. However, there were still some worrying lapses. 'Training is not enough' Security officials delayed enforcing a strict security cordon, meaning that there could have been more civilian casualties if there had been further explosions, a tactic al-Shabab has used in Somalia. A suspicious vehicle in the car park that security agents thought could have been used by the attackers remained unattended. Footage also showed an unexploded grenade lying in a corridor of one of the buildings as security agents shuffled in and out a few feet away. More on the hotel siege: There are wider issues to consider too for Kenya's security chiefs. "There is a lot of spending on training the security forces yet we only see limited effects because their welfare is poor," says George Musamali, the director of a private security firm. "Training is not enough. Equipping is not enough. Something needs to be done about human resource to make sure that these people are fully motivated to do their work properly." Image copyright AFP Image caption The security response was better co-ordinated compared to the reaction to the Westgate attack He also calls for a better channel of communication between the government and the public, not just in the aftermath of attacks but as a norm so that intelligence from the civilians can be properly gathered and used. The government responded to this week's attack by using a familiar tactic: downplaying the impact of al-Shabab's actions. This is part of an active effort to control the narrative and win the propaganda war that has accompanied this insurgency. Kenyans were warned against sharing gruesome images from the attack and on Tuesday evening Interior Minister Fred Matiang'i announced that the affected buildings had been secured and security forces were mopping up the area. Losing trust But this came as members of the public were reporting that their friends and relatives were still in the complex hiding from the attackers. Mr Musamali feels the government's tone only pushes away the public and loses their trust. The government is up against a group that has arguably the most advanced media operation of any militant Islamist movement in Africa, including established radio and digital outfits. It often films its attacks in Somalia, including the devastating assault on a Kenyan army base in the town of el-Ade exactly three years to the day of this week's attack. Some of its media material is produced in Swahili, clearly targeting audiences in Kenya, revealing its cross-border ambitions. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Kenyans will be hoping that the security lessons from this attack can be learned The threat will not go away in the short term and changes still need to be made. Andrew Franklin, a Nairobi-based security consultant and ex-US marine, says it is clear that the government's security agencies and the many private security companies are not working together enough "and that is evident in the obvious security glitches around Nairobi". Yet again, Kenya has suffered a big loss and as its people come to terms with this week's events they will wonder why it has to take catastrophe for more lessons to be learned.

Militant raid on a hotel complex in Kenya has raised questions about security. Security forces have learned lessons from past terror attacks, including the Westgate siege. Kenya's anti-terror efforts will be scrutinised yet again - in particular whether crucial intelligence from local and foreign sources is acted upon.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-46921249

Can anyone 'own' the Moon?

Image copyright NASA Image caption Buzz Aldrin was taken by the Moon's emptiness Companies are looking at mining the surface of the Moon for precious materials. It's almost 50 years since Neil Armstrong became the first man to walk on the Moon. "That's one small step for man," the US astronaut famously said, "one giant leap for mankind." Shortly afterwards, his colleague Buzz Aldrin joined him in bounding across the Sea of Tranquility. After descending from the steps of the Eagle lunar module, he gazed at the empty landscape and said: "Magnificent desolation." Since the Apollo 11 mission of July 1969, the Moon has remained largely untouched - no human has been there since 1972. But this could change soon, with several companies expressing an interest in exploring and, possibly, mining its surface for resources including gold, platinum and the rare earth minerals widely used in electronics. Earlier this month, China landed a probe, the Chang'e-4, on the far side of the Moon, and it managed to germinate a cotton seed in a biosphere on its surface. It's looking at setting up a research base. The Japanese firm iSpace is planning to build an "Earth-Moon transportation platform" and carry out "polar water exploration" on the Moon. Potential ownership of celestial bodies has been an issue since space exploration began during the Cold War. While Nasa was planning its first manned lunar missions, the UN put together an Outer Space Treaty, signed in 1967 by countries including the US, the Soviet Union and the UK. It stated: "Outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means." Joanne Wheeler, director of space specialist company Alden Advisers, describes the treaty as "the Magna Carta of space". It makes planting a flag on the Moon - as Armstrong and his successors did - "meaningless", as it doesn't confer any "binding rights" to individuals, companies or countries, she adds. In practical terms, land ownership and mining rights for the Moon didn't matter too much in 1969. But as technology has developed, exploiting its resources for profit has become a more likely - if still rather distant - prospect. In 1979 the UN produced an Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, better known as the Moon Agreement. This stipulated that they must be used for peaceful purposes, and that the UN must itself be told where and why anyone planned to build a station. The agreement also said that "the Moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind" and that an international regime should be set up "to govern the exploitation of such resources when such exploitation is about to become feasible". The problem with the Moon Agreement, though, is that only 11 countries have ratified it. France is one, and India is another. The biggest players in space - including China, the US and Russia - have not. Nor has the UK. Anyway, Ms Wheeler says, it's "not so easy" to enforce the rules outlined in treaties. Different countries incorporate the documents they sign into law and have the job of ensuring companies and individuals abide by them. Image copyright Getty Images Prof Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz, former editor-in-chief of the Journal of Space Law, agrees that international agreements offer "no guarantees". Enforcement "is a complex mixture of politics, economics and public opinion", she adds. And the existing treaties, denying national ownership of celestial bodies, have faced an extra challenge in recent years. In 2015, the US passed the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, recognising the right of it citizens to own any resources they manage to mine from asteroids. It doesn't apply to the Moon, but the principle might feasibly be extended. Eric Anderson, co-founder of the exploration company Planetary Resources, described the legislation as the "single greatest recognition of property rights in history". In 2017, Luxembourg passed its own act, providing the same right of ownership to resources found in space. Deputy Prime Minister Etienne Schneider said this would make his country "a European pioneer and leader in this sector". The will to explore and make money is there, with countries seemingly becoming more eager to help companies. "Clearly mining, whether with the intention of returning the materials to Earth or to store or manufacture with them on the Moon, is the very opposite of not doing any harm," says Helen Ntabeni, a lawyer at Naledi Space Law and Policy. She adds that it could be argued the US and Luxembourg have "bullied" their way out of the Outer Space Treaty's stipulations. "I'm quite sceptical that the high moral notions of the world exploring space together as equal nations will be preserved," she says.

Several companies are looking at mining the surface of the Moon for precious materials. But can anyone 'own' the Moon? Only 11 countries have ratified the 1979 Moon Agreement.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46877417

Can anyone 'own' the Moon?

Image copyright NASA Image caption Buzz Aldrin was taken by the Moon's emptiness Companies are looking at mining the surface of the Moon for precious materials. It's almost 50 years since Neil Armstrong became the first man to walk on the Moon. "That's one small step for man," the US astronaut famously said, "one giant leap for mankind." Shortly afterwards, his colleague Buzz Aldrin joined him in bounding across the Sea of Tranquility. After descending from the steps of the Eagle lunar module, he gazed at the empty landscape and said: "Magnificent desolation." Since the Apollo 11 mission of July 1969, the Moon has remained largely untouched - no human has been there since 1972. But this could change soon, with several companies expressing an interest in exploring and, possibly, mining its surface for resources including gold, platinum and the rare earth minerals widely used in electronics. Earlier this month, China landed a probe, the Chang'e-4, on the far side of the Moon, and it managed to germinate a cotton seed in a biosphere on its surface. It's looking at setting up a research base. The Japanese firm iSpace is planning to build an "Earth-Moon transportation platform" and carry out "polar water exploration" on the Moon. Potential ownership of celestial bodies has been an issue since space exploration began during the Cold War. While Nasa was planning its first manned lunar missions, the UN put together an Outer Space Treaty, signed in 1967 by countries including the US, the Soviet Union and the UK. It stated: "Outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means." Joanne Wheeler, director of space specialist company Alden Advisers, describes the treaty as "the Magna Carta of space". It makes planting a flag on the Moon - as Armstrong and his successors did - "meaningless", as it doesn't confer any "binding rights" to individuals, companies or countries, she adds. In practical terms, land ownership and mining rights for the Moon didn't matter too much in 1969. But as technology has developed, exploiting its resources for profit has become a more likely - if still rather distant - prospect. In 1979 the UN produced an Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, better known as the Moon Agreement. This stipulated that they must be used for peaceful purposes, and that the UN must itself be told where and why anyone planned to build a station. The agreement also said that "the Moon and its natural resources are the common heritage of mankind" and that an international regime should be set up "to govern the exploitation of such resources when such exploitation is about to become feasible". The problem with the Moon Agreement, though, is that only 11 countries have ratified it. France is one, and India is another. The biggest players in space - including China, the US and Russia - have not. Nor has the UK. Anyway, Ms Wheeler says, it's "not so easy" to enforce the rules outlined in treaties. Different countries incorporate the documents they sign into law and have the job of ensuring companies and individuals abide by them. Image copyright Getty Images Prof Joanne Irene Gabrynowicz, former editor-in-chief of the Journal of Space Law, agrees that international agreements offer "no guarantees". Enforcement "is a complex mixture of politics, economics and public opinion", she adds. And the existing treaties, denying national ownership of celestial bodies, have faced an extra challenge in recent years. In 2015, the US passed the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, recognising the right of it citizens to own any resources they manage to mine from asteroids. It doesn't apply to the Moon, but the principle might feasibly be extended. Eric Anderson, co-founder of the exploration company Planetary Resources, described the legislation as the "single greatest recognition of property rights in history". In 2017, Luxembourg passed its own act, providing the same right of ownership to resources found in space. Deputy Prime Minister Etienne Schneider said this would make his country "a European pioneer and leader in this sector". The will to explore and make money is there, with countries seemingly becoming more eager to help companies. "Clearly mining, whether with the intention of returning the materials to Earth or to store or manufacture with them on the Moon, is the very opposite of not doing any harm," says Helen Ntabeni, a lawyer at Naledi Space Law and Policy. She adds that it could be argued the US and Luxembourg have "bullied" their way out of the Outer Space Treaty's stipulations. "I'm quite sceptical that the high moral notions of the world exploring space together as equal nations will be preserved," she says.

Several companies are looking at mining the surface of the Moon for precious materials. But can anyone 'own' the Moon? Only 11 countries have ratified the 1979 Moon Agreement, known as the "Magna Carta of space" It's "not so easy" to enforce the rules outlined in treaties, experts say.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46877417

Why are so many people still dying from snake bites?

Image copyright Getty Images Tens of thousands of people die from snake bites worldwide every year. Lack of treatment and even the wrong medicine mean many of these deaths are preventable. Snake bites may not strike you as being a major public health problem. But in some parts of the world they are a daily risk, and can be lethal or life-changing. Victims often do not get the treatment they need in time, if at all. In other cases, they are given medicine to treat an injury caused by a different snake. About 11,000 people a month are thought to die from venomous snakebites - similar to the number that died during the whole of the 2014-16 West Africa Ebola crises. A further 450,000 people a year are thought to suffer life-changing injuries such as amputation and permanent disability. The scale of the problem means snake bites are now classed as a priority neglected tropical disease. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Children walking to school can be at risk of snake bite In developed regions - such as Europe, Australia and North America - snake bites kill only a handful of people each year, despite there being many venomous species. That is compared with 32,000 deaths in sub-Saharan Africa, and twice as many in South Asia. Many rural communities in the tropics are at almost constant risk of snake bites, whether working in the field, travelling at dusk or even sleeping in their homes at night. Young male farmers are the most at-risk group, followed by children. While a large rural population is a factor, health systems in some parts of Africa and Asia are often ill-prepared for coping with snake bites. Clinical training, emergency transport and affordable medicine are often in short supply, with tragic consequences. Expensive medicine Venomous snake bites typically cause three main types of life-threatening symptoms: uncontrollable bleeding, paralysis and irreversible tissue destruction. It is essential for snakebite victims to get the correct medicine as soon as possible following a snake bite. Antivenom is the medicine of choice for treating snake bites. It is made using the venom of the snake it is designed to treat. This means that many different versions are needed, because there are so many venomous snakes found throughout the world - cobras, mambas, kraits, vipers and pit vipers, to name just a few. The toxins found in their venom differ from one group of snakes to the next, or even between the same group of snakes in a different region. This means the correct antivenom is often hard to identify and can be very expensive. How antivenoms are made A tiny non-harmful amount of snake venom is injected into an animal - usually a horse, or sheep This stimulates the animal's immune system to create antibodies that neutralise the venom These antibodies are extracted from the animal's blood, purified and made into antivenom Antivenoms must be used in hospital because of patients suffering a high rate of adverse reactions to the medicine In Latin America, antivenom is often produced in the country and subsidised by the government. Death rates are significantly higher in sub-Saharan Africa, where the best antivenom costs $140 to $300 (108 to 233) per vial, with three to 10 vials usually required to save a victim's life. As the typical Swazi farmer earns $600 a year, this medicine out of reach for most. The wrong antivenom Image copyright Getty Images Image caption A juvenile pit viper This situation has allowed weak or inappropriate medicine to flood the market over the past decade, particularly in Africa. These antivenoms often cost about $30 per vial - a fraction of the cost of proven products. Some African health ministries understandably saw this as a win-win situation, with more drugs available and at a lower cost. These products started being used in hospitals throughout much of the continent. However, there are now several reports that some of these medicines may be dangerously ineffective. Small-scale case studies from hospitals in both Ghana and Central African Republic have suggested that when these cheaper medicines were used, fatality rates increased from 2% or fewer, to more than 10%. Often, these antivenoms are made using snake venoms from a different region to where the product is being sold - for example an antivenom made with Indian snake venom being used in Africa. Others are made with the right venoms, but with a low concentration of antibodies per dose - resulting in very weak medicines. This means the number of vials needed to successfully treat the patient shoots up from three to 10, to as many as 20 or 30. Ironically, this situation has prompted some established manufacturers to cut supply of their much-needed products as they became priced out of the market. Lack of testing Image copyright Getty Images Image caption An eyelash viper These problems have been made worse by the lack of antivenom testing. Most drugs have to be thoroughly independently tested, with clinical trials to prove their effectiveness. But this often is not the case with antivenom. National drug agencies sometimes approve products without strong evidence of their effectiveness, or comparison with existing treatments. To tackle this, the World Health Organization has launched a pre-market testing scheme, with the results due to be published later this year. This should allow health ministries, pharmacists and clinicians to better understand which antivenoms are suitable for their region, while identifying responsible manufacturers of affordable antivenoms. However, manufacturers do not have to take part in the scheme, and countries are not obliged to remove products from the market based on the results. Nevertheless, it is hoped that this World Health Organization seal of approval will strongly influence antivenom purchasing decisions throughout Africa. More stories like this Looking to the future Effective antivenom is one part of solving the snake bite puzzle, but many other challenges remain. More work needs to be done to identify the communities most at risk and to ensure a sustainable flow of affordable medicine is sent there. Meanwhile, training more clinicians and healthcare workers in how to effectively treat snake bite victims would reduce the number of deaths. Finally, educating local communities about snake bites would help lower the risk of being bitten, and mean appropriate action was more likely to be taken after a bite. About this piece This analysis piece was commissioned by the BBC from experts working for an outside organisation. Dr Nicholas Casewell is a senior lecturer & Wellcome Trust research fellow at the Centre of Snakebite Research and Interventions (CSRI). You can follow him on Twitter here. Dr Stuart Ainsworth is a post doctoral research associate and lecturer on snakebite at CSRI. You can follow him on Twitter here. Edited by Eleanor Lawrie

Tens of thousands of people die from snake bites worldwide every year. Lack of treatment and even the wrong medicine mean many of these deaths are preventable. In developed regions snake bites kill only a handful of people each year.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-45332002

Why are so many people still dying from snake bites?

Image copyright Getty Images Tens of thousands of people die from snake bites worldwide every year. Lack of treatment and even the wrong medicine mean many of these deaths are preventable. Snake bites may not strike you as being a major public health problem. But in some parts of the world they are a daily risk, and can be lethal or life-changing. Victims often do not get the treatment they need in time, if at all. In other cases, they are given medicine to treat an injury caused by a different snake. About 11,000 people a month are thought to die from venomous snakebites - similar to the number that died during the whole of the 2014-16 West Africa Ebola crises. A further 450,000 people a year are thought to suffer life-changing injuries such as amputation and permanent disability. The scale of the problem means snake bites are now classed as a priority neglected tropical disease. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Children walking to school can be at risk of snake bite In developed regions - such as Europe, Australia and North America - snake bites kill only a handful of people each year, despite there being many venomous species. That is compared with 32,000 deaths in sub-Saharan Africa, and twice as many in South Asia. Many rural communities in the tropics are at almost constant risk of snake bites, whether working in the field, travelling at dusk or even sleeping in their homes at night. Young male farmers are the most at-risk group, followed by children. While a large rural population is a factor, health systems in some parts of Africa and Asia are often ill-prepared for coping with snake bites. Clinical training, emergency transport and affordable medicine are often in short supply, with tragic consequences. Expensive medicine Venomous snake bites typically cause three main types of life-threatening symptoms: uncontrollable bleeding, paralysis and irreversible tissue destruction. It is essential for snakebite victims to get the correct medicine as soon as possible following a snake bite. Antivenom is the medicine of choice for treating snake bites. It is made using the venom of the snake it is designed to treat. This means that many different versions are needed, because there are so many venomous snakes found throughout the world - cobras, mambas, kraits, vipers and pit vipers, to name just a few. The toxins found in their venom differ from one group of snakes to the next, or even between the same group of snakes in a different region. This means the correct antivenom is often hard to identify and can be very expensive. How antivenoms are made A tiny non-harmful amount of snake venom is injected into an animal - usually a horse, or sheep This stimulates the animal's immune system to create antibodies that neutralise the venom These antibodies are extracted from the animal's blood, purified and made into antivenom Antivenoms must be used in hospital because of patients suffering a high rate of adverse reactions to the medicine In Latin America, antivenom is often produced in the country and subsidised by the government. Death rates are significantly higher in sub-Saharan Africa, where the best antivenom costs $140 to $300 (108 to 233) per vial, with three to 10 vials usually required to save a victim's life. As the typical Swazi farmer earns $600 a year, this medicine out of reach for most. The wrong antivenom Image copyright Getty Images Image caption A juvenile pit viper This situation has allowed weak or inappropriate medicine to flood the market over the past decade, particularly in Africa. These antivenoms often cost about $30 per vial - a fraction of the cost of proven products. Some African health ministries understandably saw this as a win-win situation, with more drugs available and at a lower cost. These products started being used in hospitals throughout much of the continent. However, there are now several reports that some of these medicines may be dangerously ineffective. Small-scale case studies from hospitals in both Ghana and Central African Republic have suggested that when these cheaper medicines were used, fatality rates increased from 2% or fewer, to more than 10%. Often, these antivenoms are made using snake venoms from a different region to where the product is being sold - for example an antivenom made with Indian snake venom being used in Africa. Others are made with the right venoms, but with a low concentration of antibodies per dose - resulting in very weak medicines. This means the number of vials needed to successfully treat the patient shoots up from three to 10, to as many as 20 or 30. Ironically, this situation has prompted some established manufacturers to cut supply of their much-needed products as they became priced out of the market. Lack of testing Image copyright Getty Images Image caption An eyelash viper These problems have been made worse by the lack of antivenom testing. Most drugs have to be thoroughly independently tested, with clinical trials to prove their effectiveness. But this often is not the case with antivenom. National drug agencies sometimes approve products without strong evidence of their effectiveness, or comparison with existing treatments. To tackle this, the World Health Organization has launched a pre-market testing scheme, with the results due to be published later this year. This should allow health ministries, pharmacists and clinicians to better understand which antivenoms are suitable for their region, while identifying responsible manufacturers of affordable antivenoms. However, manufacturers do not have to take part in the scheme, and countries are not obliged to remove products from the market based on the results. Nevertheless, it is hoped that this World Health Organization seal of approval will strongly influence antivenom purchasing decisions throughout Africa. More stories like this Looking to the future Effective antivenom is one part of solving the snake bite puzzle, but many other challenges remain. More work needs to be done to identify the communities most at risk and to ensure a sustainable flow of affordable medicine is sent there. Meanwhile, training more clinicians and healthcare workers in how to effectively treat snake bite victims would reduce the number of deaths. Finally, educating local communities about snake bites would help lower the risk of being bitten, and mean appropriate action was more likely to be taken after a bite. About this piece This analysis piece was commissioned by the BBC from experts working for an outside organisation. Dr Nicholas Casewell is a senior lecturer & Wellcome Trust research fellow at the Centre of Snakebite Research and Interventions (CSRI). You can follow him on Twitter here. Dr Stuart Ainsworth is a post doctoral research associate and lecturer on snakebite at CSRI. You can follow him on Twitter here. Edited by Eleanor Lawrie

Tens of thousands of people die from snake bites worldwide every year. Lack of treatment and even the wrong medicine mean many of these deaths are preventable. In developed regions snake bites kill only a handful of people each year. That is compared with 32,000 deaths in sub-Saharan Africa and twice as many in South Asia.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-45332002

Should trains have separate compartments for 'bear children'?

As millions of people travel on trains across China in order to celebrate the new year, they are asking: "Should trains have children's compartments?" The hashtag #ChineseNewYearTravel2019 has been viewed more than 879 million times on Weibo where thousands of people are debating the issue. China's flagship radio station (CNR) discussed the question on air. A senior official at the China Railway Corporation, Huang Xin, thinks the idea is very creative. Billions travel for Chinese new year Nearly three billion trips - including train, road, air and boat - are expected to be completed between Jan 21 and March 1 this year, with 413 million of those by rail, according to China media. With so many people moving across the country at the same time it is perhaps inevitable that social media users are discussing ways to make travelling as stress-free as possible. Image copyright VCG Image caption People are divided over whether there should be a separate compartment for children on trains According to the Chinese newspaper People's Daily, separate compartments for children has attracted a lot of discussion online recently. More than 2,000 Weibo users have been discussing whether it would be a solution to "noisybear children" on the journey. 'Bear children' Some support the idea, saying "what most people are afraid of on a train is noisy bear children". A "bear child" is a common Chinese slang phrase meaning a child who is spoilt. The use of the word "bear" in this instance suggests some people in China think some children on trains can act in a feral way. Image copyright Reuters Image caption There's an emerging generation of "bear children" (children who lack discipline) in China The comment "a carriage full of 'bear children', I can't even imagine" gained more than 4,000 likes on Weibo. One Weibo user says: "Imagine them crying, one after another" Another says that maybe there wouldn't be a problem with excessive noise, if a child had people to play with. One says that there's room to discuss partitioning trains for family areas, adult-only areas, and private mother and baby areas. Children's compartments already exist in Germany. Deutsche Bahn (German Rail) offers a Mutter/Klein Kind (mother and small child) compartment in their newest trains. You may also like: But many think the idea is ludicrous. One says it is a "lazy" solution, and that "parents should be teaching their children public etiquette". Another agrees, saying "it doesn't make sense, nor improve the quality of people." One Weibo user says: "I don't support this! If I have children in the future, I don't want to have to sit in that carriage!" Some joke that it's a hark back to Cultural Revolution times, with one asking whether landlords should be segregated in their own carriage too. Analysis: Kerry Allen, BBC Monitoring Perhaps bizarrely, there have been a lot of stories in China's media in recent months, stressing that there's a demand for better controls on Chinese trains. This started with a spate of incidents involving "seat robbers" going viral. Travellers began flagging up badly behaved people refusing to move out of seats belonging to other people, and social media users jumped on the bandwagon sharing videos that they had seen of bad behaviour leading to nationwide shaming. At the same time, there has been a lot of dialogue in recent years about an emerging generation of "bear children" - children who are raised with no discipline, and misbehave at will. The one-child policy has been partly to blame for parents spoiling their only children and leading them to believe they can get whatever they want. Newspapers recognise that it is a modern phenomenon, and similarly, videos have circulated online shaming the parents of "bear children", and commentaries often appear debating how such children can be properly dealt with. China Railway Corporation's Huang Xin, said she always welcomed new ideas being put forward to the rail services. "(Translated from Mandarin) Whether or not it's necessary to concentrate noisy children in one compartment, all public transport faces a similar situation. "There are people suggesting that those who like to watch films or listen to music should be concentrated in one department. These suggestions provide inspiration for the improvement of the public transport sector, but also bring new challenges about how we can further improve and refine the services of public transportation."

People in China are debating whether there should be a separate compartment for children on trains. Some say it would be a solution to "noisybear children" Others say it is a "lazy" solution, and that "parents should be teaching their children public etiquette" Nearly three billion trips are expected to be completed between Jan 21 and March 1.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-46946642

Is it OK to take the pill every day without a break?

Image copyright Getty Images Newspaper headlines this week have advised women that they can take contraceptive pills "every day of the month, without any break" to avoid monthly bleeds and period pain. But the professional body behind the guidelines that prompted the news reports says their recommendations have been misinterpreted. The Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare (FSRH) says while some women may safely try it, it won't suit everyone. Women should still talk to their doctors about what method of contraceptive is best for them. The combined oral contraceptive pill - usually just called "the pill" - contains hormones that can prevent pregnancy by stopping the user from releasing any eggs from her ovaries. When taken correctly, it is more than 99% effective - fewer than one in every 100 women who use it will get pregnant in one year - but it's around 91% effective based on "typical use". There are lots of different brands but the most commonly-taken packs contain 21 tablets - one to be taken each day for three weeks, with a seven day pill-free period at the end of the month when a woman will usually bleed. Some women can't take contraception that contains oestrogen and instead take the progesterone-only pill - also known as "the mini pill". The mini pill is taken daily without any breaks. The pill only works well as a contraceptive if you remember to take it as recommended. You've "missed a pill" if you take it more than 24 hours later than your chosen time. (This is different for the progesterone-only pill. Follow the instructions for your own medication.) Some brands contain 28 tablets - 21 real ones and seven inactive ones - to make it easier for women, meaning there is no break between packets of pills, although they will still probably have some bleeding each month. The FSRH says some women could take packets of 21 pills continuously, dropping the seven-day break entirely. Their recommendations, which are intended to guide healthcare professionals prescribing to women, say there is no health benefit from the seven-day pill break and some women can safely take fewer or no breaks to avoid monthly bleeds and cramps. It might make it easier for women to take them without forgetting a pill and reduce the risk of unwanted pregnancy, they say. FSRH spokeswoman Dr Diana Mansour said: "Pill-taking often isn't perfect; the riskiest time to miss pills is at the beginning and the end of a pill-free interval." Dr Jane Dixon, from the FSRH, told the BBC a lot of people stuck to the pattern of three weeks on, one week off, because they felt some reassurance that having a bleed meant they weren't pregnant. However, that bleed, she explained, actually doesn't give any such guarantee - it's just a reaction to no longer having the contraceptive chemicals in your system. She goes on: "There's no build-up of menstrual blood if you miss your break. And actually, for many women, it's not convenient to have a monthly bleed when they don't need one. "Also we know that quite a lot of women develop side effects in that week, like headaches and mood change." The pill can cause some side effects and it does not offer any protection against sexually transmitted infections. It has been linked to some serious health conditions, such as blood clots and breast cancer, although the risk is small. Dr Sarah Hardman from the FSRH said: "We are all different: there isn't any one method of contraception that is the 'best' method for every woman, so it's really important that women have choice. "Women need to know that there is a small increase in some health risks with combined hormonal contraception, so it isn't suitable for everyone." The combined pill is not suitable for women over 35 who smoke, or women with certain medical conditions. You should not take it if you are pregnant.

The Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare (FSRH) says there is no health benefit from the seven-day pill break.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46952694

Is it OK to take the pill every day without a break?

Image copyright Getty Images Newspaper headlines this week have advised women that they can take contraceptive pills "every day of the month, without any break" to avoid monthly bleeds and period pain. But the professional body behind the guidelines that prompted the news reports says their recommendations have been misinterpreted. The Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare (FSRH) says while some women may safely try it, it won't suit everyone. Women should still talk to their doctors about what method of contraceptive is best for them. The combined oral contraceptive pill - usually just called "the pill" - contains hormones that can prevent pregnancy by stopping the user from releasing any eggs from her ovaries. When taken correctly, it is more than 99% effective - fewer than one in every 100 women who use it will get pregnant in one year - but it's around 91% effective based on "typical use". There are lots of different brands but the most commonly-taken packs contain 21 tablets - one to be taken each day for three weeks, with a seven day pill-free period at the end of the month when a woman will usually bleed. Some women can't take contraception that contains oestrogen and instead take the progesterone-only pill - also known as "the mini pill". The mini pill is taken daily without any breaks. The pill only works well as a contraceptive if you remember to take it as recommended. You've "missed a pill" if you take it more than 24 hours later than your chosen time. (This is different for the progesterone-only pill. Follow the instructions for your own medication.) Some brands contain 28 tablets - 21 real ones and seven inactive ones - to make it easier for women, meaning there is no break between packets of pills, although they will still probably have some bleeding each month. The FSRH says some women could take packets of 21 pills continuously, dropping the seven-day break entirely. Their recommendations, which are intended to guide healthcare professionals prescribing to women, say there is no health benefit from the seven-day pill break and some women can safely take fewer or no breaks to avoid monthly bleeds and cramps. It might make it easier for women to take them without forgetting a pill and reduce the risk of unwanted pregnancy, they say. FSRH spokeswoman Dr Diana Mansour said: "Pill-taking often isn't perfect; the riskiest time to miss pills is at the beginning and the end of a pill-free interval." Dr Jane Dixon, from the FSRH, told the BBC a lot of people stuck to the pattern of three weeks on, one week off, because they felt some reassurance that having a bleed meant they weren't pregnant. However, that bleed, she explained, actually doesn't give any such guarantee - it's just a reaction to no longer having the contraceptive chemicals in your system. She goes on: "There's no build-up of menstrual blood if you miss your break. And actually, for many women, it's not convenient to have a monthly bleed when they don't need one. "Also we know that quite a lot of women develop side effects in that week, like headaches and mood change." The pill can cause some side effects and it does not offer any protection against sexually transmitted infections. It has been linked to some serious health conditions, such as blood clots and breast cancer, although the risk is small. Dr Sarah Hardman from the FSRH said: "We are all different: there isn't any one method of contraception that is the 'best' method for every woman, so it's really important that women have choice. "Women need to know that there is a small increase in some health risks with combined hormonal contraception, so it isn't suitable for everyone." The combined pill is not suitable for women over 35 who smoke, or women with certain medical conditions. You should not take it if you are pregnant.

The Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare (FSRH) says there is no health benefit from the seven-day pill break. Some women can safely take fewer or no breaks to avoid monthly bleeds.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46952694

Is it OK to take the pill every day without a break?

Image copyright Getty Images Newspaper headlines this week have advised women that they can take contraceptive pills "every day of the month, without any break" to avoid monthly bleeds and period pain. But the professional body behind the guidelines that prompted the news reports says their recommendations have been misinterpreted. The Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare (FSRH) says while some women may safely try it, it won't suit everyone. Women should still talk to their doctors about what method of contraceptive is best for them. The combined oral contraceptive pill - usually just called "the pill" - contains hormones that can prevent pregnancy by stopping the user from releasing any eggs from her ovaries. When taken correctly, it is more than 99% effective - fewer than one in every 100 women who use it will get pregnant in one year - but it's around 91% effective based on "typical use". There are lots of different brands but the most commonly-taken packs contain 21 tablets - one to be taken each day for three weeks, with a seven day pill-free period at the end of the month when a woman will usually bleed. Some women can't take contraception that contains oestrogen and instead take the progesterone-only pill - also known as "the mini pill". The mini pill is taken daily without any breaks. The pill only works well as a contraceptive if you remember to take it as recommended. You've "missed a pill" if you take it more than 24 hours later than your chosen time. (This is different for the progesterone-only pill. Follow the instructions for your own medication.) Some brands contain 28 tablets - 21 real ones and seven inactive ones - to make it easier for women, meaning there is no break between packets of pills, although they will still probably have some bleeding each month. The FSRH says some women could take packets of 21 pills continuously, dropping the seven-day break entirely. Their recommendations, which are intended to guide healthcare professionals prescribing to women, say there is no health benefit from the seven-day pill break and some women can safely take fewer or no breaks to avoid monthly bleeds and cramps. It might make it easier for women to take them without forgetting a pill and reduce the risk of unwanted pregnancy, they say. FSRH spokeswoman Dr Diana Mansour said: "Pill-taking often isn't perfect; the riskiest time to miss pills is at the beginning and the end of a pill-free interval." Dr Jane Dixon, from the FSRH, told the BBC a lot of people stuck to the pattern of three weeks on, one week off, because they felt some reassurance that having a bleed meant they weren't pregnant. However, that bleed, she explained, actually doesn't give any such guarantee - it's just a reaction to no longer having the contraceptive chemicals in your system. She goes on: "There's no build-up of menstrual blood if you miss your break. And actually, for many women, it's not convenient to have a monthly bleed when they don't need one. "Also we know that quite a lot of women develop side effects in that week, like headaches and mood change." The pill can cause some side effects and it does not offer any protection against sexually transmitted infections. It has been linked to some serious health conditions, such as blood clots and breast cancer, although the risk is small. Dr Sarah Hardman from the FSRH said: "We are all different: there isn't any one method of contraception that is the 'best' method for every woman, so it's really important that women have choice. "Women need to know that there is a small increase in some health risks with combined hormonal contraception, so it isn't suitable for everyone." The combined pill is not suitable for women over 35 who smoke, or women with certain medical conditions. You should not take it if you are pregnant.

The combined oral contraceptive pill contains hormones that can prevent pregnancy. When taken correctly, it is more than 99% effective. The most commonly-taken packs contain 21 tablets - one to be taken each day for three weeks. Some women can safely take fewer or no breaks to avoid monthly bleeds and cramps.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-46952694

What is President Weah's Liberia scorecard one year on?

As George Weah, at one time named the world's best footballer, marks a year in power in Liberia the BBC's Jonathan Paye-Layleh assesses his scorecard. There is no doubt that at 52, George Weah can still work a crowd. On New Year's Eve he invited his cabinet and supporters to the dedication of a private family church that he has had built. During the late-night service, the president turned preacher, sermonising for several hours. Dressed in white robes, he told the congregation at Forky Jlaleh Family Fellowship Church: "God has given each and every person talent that they can use for their own benefit." And he likened the opportunity to serve in his government to being on a football team. "When you are on the pitch playing you should know there are others on the substitutes' bench ready to replace you at any time," he said. This elicited cheers from the church-goers, but acknowledges the pressure the government is under. Arsene Wenger honoured In its end-of-year message, the Liberia Council of Churches summed up the inevitable frustration felt after the euphoria of Mr Weah landslide victory. "About a year ago, we elected a government with the hope that economically, our lives would be transformed," Kortu Brown, president of the umbrella Christian group, said on local radio station Prime FM. "But most often what we hear is the negative side of the governance process, the economic challenges by way of corruption, abuse, frauds, wastes." The opposition People Unification Party had more of a stark warning for a country still scarred by years of civil war: "At the end of your first year, our people, your people are hungry; the bread and butter issue keeps getting worse "[A] poorly performed economy is not a good sign for peace and security; when people are hungry they are most definitely angry; Liberia is angry because its people are hungry." Image copyright EPA Image caption Former Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger was given a hero's welcome when he visited Liberia His critics point to one of his first priorities - the retirement of his number 14 shirt, worn during his playing peak - to illustrate what they feel is his lack of vision. Week-long ceremonies were organised in the capital, Monrovia, with Arsene Wenger, the football coach who had signed him up for Monaco in 1998, being flown over in September and given Liberia's highest honour. The president, who retired from football in 2003 to go into politics, played an international friendly as part of the events so the crowds could see him finally hang up the jersey he wore for the national side. It is easy to see that President Weah is a role model for many young Liberians - growing up in a slum in the capital, Monrovia, becoming one of the world's most famous footballs stars and then going back to school and university afterwards to finish his education before winning the presidency. Seven things about George Weah: Image copyright AFP Born 1 October, 1966, grew up in a slum in Liberia's capital Signed by Arsene Wenger to Monaco from Cameroonian club Tonnerre Yaound Made Monaco debut in 1987, went on to play for AC Milan, Paris Saint-Germain and Chelsea Only African to win Fifa World Player of the Year First ran for president in 2005, losing to Ellen Johnson Sirleaf Graduated with a business degree from a US university after being accused of lacking education Inaugurated as president in January 2018 But he faced some immediate criticism for not leading by example in declaring his assets to the anti-corruption commission - something all government officials must do before taking office, according to Liberia's National Code of Conduct. After enormous public pressure, he eventually filed a declaration in July. The whole saga left questions about his government's commitment to fighting corruption. He has also faced accusations about putting his personal business interests first, including pushing ahead with two big real estate projects. But the chairman of the ruling Congress for Democratic Change party said this proved Liberia was now a good place for good for all investors, and was a good thing for the floundering economy. "For you to make a determination to invest in a country, you must be guaranteed a security," Mulbah Morlue was quoted in Liberia's FrontPage newspaper this month. "Now, that the man is our president and has created security for all, the guarantee for one to begin to invest in our country is there." Image copyright AFP Image caption The president is fond of referring to his football career when trying to motivate people And the president has been attacked for the personal nature of other public infrastructure projects, from road improvement in his home areas to slum improvements where he grew up. When he ordered the re-roofing of more than 200 houses in Monrovia's Gibraltar slum, where he was born and raised, the initial official explanation was that the president was undertaking the project privately and paying for it himself. Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption George Weah: The football legend who became president But months after the work had been done, a memo to the finance ministry ordering the transfer of nearly $1m (775,000) in official funds to cover the costs was leaked to the media. The ministry of finance has so far remained silent since the publication of the memo. Free tuition for university students Such stories undermine confidence in his authority and make his leadership a constant debate on lively phone-in radio shows. But he was wildly cheered in October when he announced that tuition fees at state universities and colleges were being scrapped. However, there are some who fear the decision was not properly considered. Before the announcement, the University of Liberia was struggling to make ends meet and it currently operates at half of what it needs to function. Some, including university student leader Martin Kollie, saw it a tactic to distract from the scandal surrounding the allegation that $100m-worth of Liberian currency has gone missing. In March, stories emerged that the newly printed bank notes intended for the central bank did not reach their destination. The notes, ordered in November 2017 before Mr Weah took office, allegedly vanished from containers in Monrovia's port and airport in March, two months after Mr Weah became president. There have been regular protests outside the US embassy under the slogan "Bring Back Our Money", though central bank governor Nathaniel Patray has denied the money is missing. The government ordered an investigation in September, and Mr Weah also asked the US for help with the inquiry. Meanwhile, the journalist who first broke the story has faced death threats. On a personal level, there is no denying that Liberians are having to cope with a severe cash shortage, and people have to queue for hours and sometimes days to withdraw money from banks. Someone wanting to withdraw, for example, 25,000 Liberian dollars ($160) is given just 5,000 Liberian dollars ($36). 'I was a performer' As he inaugurated a community road just before Christmas, Mr Weah roundly rejected those trying to put him down - and said he was used to such pressure. "Remember I was a performer, I played in front [of] 100,000 people, 200,000 people; if I played bad, they laughed at me; they booed me; but with all the boo and what have you, I still became [the winner of] the Ballon d'Or," he said in December. "So anything you say, anything you do to tarnish my reputation - even though I am doing well, you are wasting your time." And after nearly a year in power, the president told his congregation as the New Year struck, that it was not a time for despondency: "Let's forget about all the setbacks in 2018 and focus on the prosperous New Year, what God gave you is enough."

President George Weah marks a year in power in Liberia. One year on, his scorecard is mixed.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-46947032

What is President Weah's Liberia scorecard one year on?

As George Weah, at one time named the world's best footballer, marks a year in power in Liberia the BBC's Jonathan Paye-Layleh assesses his scorecard. There is no doubt that at 52, George Weah can still work a crowd. On New Year's Eve he invited his cabinet and supporters to the dedication of a private family church that he has had built. During the late-night service, the president turned preacher, sermonising for several hours. Dressed in white robes, he told the congregation at Forky Jlaleh Family Fellowship Church: "God has given each and every person talent that they can use for their own benefit." And he likened the opportunity to serve in his government to being on a football team. "When you are on the pitch playing you should know there are others on the substitutes' bench ready to replace you at any time," he said. This elicited cheers from the church-goers, but acknowledges the pressure the government is under. Arsene Wenger honoured In its end-of-year message, the Liberia Council of Churches summed up the inevitable frustration felt after the euphoria of Mr Weah landslide victory. "About a year ago, we elected a government with the hope that economically, our lives would be transformed," Kortu Brown, president of the umbrella Christian group, said on local radio station Prime FM. "But most often what we hear is the negative side of the governance process, the economic challenges by way of corruption, abuse, frauds, wastes." The opposition People Unification Party had more of a stark warning for a country still scarred by years of civil war: "At the end of your first year, our people, your people are hungry; the bread and butter issue keeps getting worse "[A] poorly performed economy is not a good sign for peace and security; when people are hungry they are most definitely angry; Liberia is angry because its people are hungry." Image copyright EPA Image caption Former Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger was given a hero's welcome when he visited Liberia His critics point to one of his first priorities - the retirement of his number 14 shirt, worn during his playing peak - to illustrate what they feel is his lack of vision. Week-long ceremonies were organised in the capital, Monrovia, with Arsene Wenger, the football coach who had signed him up for Monaco in 1998, being flown over in September and given Liberia's highest honour. The president, who retired from football in 2003 to go into politics, played an international friendly as part of the events so the crowds could see him finally hang up the jersey he wore for the national side. It is easy to see that President Weah is a role model for many young Liberians - growing up in a slum in the capital, Monrovia, becoming one of the world's most famous footballs stars and then going back to school and university afterwards to finish his education before winning the presidency. Seven things about George Weah: Image copyright AFP Born 1 October, 1966, grew up in a slum in Liberia's capital Signed by Arsene Wenger to Monaco from Cameroonian club Tonnerre Yaound Made Monaco debut in 1987, went on to play for AC Milan, Paris Saint-Germain and Chelsea Only African to win Fifa World Player of the Year First ran for president in 2005, losing to Ellen Johnson Sirleaf Graduated with a business degree from a US university after being accused of lacking education Inaugurated as president in January 2018 But he faced some immediate criticism for not leading by example in declaring his assets to the anti-corruption commission - something all government officials must do before taking office, according to Liberia's National Code of Conduct. After enormous public pressure, he eventually filed a declaration in July. The whole saga left questions about his government's commitment to fighting corruption. He has also faced accusations about putting his personal business interests first, including pushing ahead with two big real estate projects. But the chairman of the ruling Congress for Democratic Change party said this proved Liberia was now a good place for good for all investors, and was a good thing for the floundering economy. "For you to make a determination to invest in a country, you must be guaranteed a security," Mulbah Morlue was quoted in Liberia's FrontPage newspaper this month. "Now, that the man is our president and has created security for all, the guarantee for one to begin to invest in our country is there." Image copyright AFP Image caption The president is fond of referring to his football career when trying to motivate people And the president has been attacked for the personal nature of other public infrastructure projects, from road improvement in his home areas to slum improvements where he grew up. When he ordered the re-roofing of more than 200 houses in Monrovia's Gibraltar slum, where he was born and raised, the initial official explanation was that the president was undertaking the project privately and paying for it himself. Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption George Weah: The football legend who became president But months after the work had been done, a memo to the finance ministry ordering the transfer of nearly $1m (775,000) in official funds to cover the costs was leaked to the media. The ministry of finance has so far remained silent since the publication of the memo. Free tuition for university students Such stories undermine confidence in his authority and make his leadership a constant debate on lively phone-in radio shows. But he was wildly cheered in October when he announced that tuition fees at state universities and colleges were being scrapped. However, there are some who fear the decision was not properly considered. Before the announcement, the University of Liberia was struggling to make ends meet and it currently operates at half of what it needs to function. Some, including university student leader Martin Kollie, saw it a tactic to distract from the scandal surrounding the allegation that $100m-worth of Liberian currency has gone missing. In March, stories emerged that the newly printed bank notes intended for the central bank did not reach their destination. The notes, ordered in November 2017 before Mr Weah took office, allegedly vanished from containers in Monrovia's port and airport in March, two months after Mr Weah became president. There have been regular protests outside the US embassy under the slogan "Bring Back Our Money", though central bank governor Nathaniel Patray has denied the money is missing. The government ordered an investigation in September, and Mr Weah also asked the US for help with the inquiry. Meanwhile, the journalist who first broke the story has faced death threats. On a personal level, there is no denying that Liberians are having to cope with a severe cash shortage, and people have to queue for hours and sometimes days to withdraw money from banks. Someone wanting to withdraw, for example, 25,000 Liberian dollars ($160) is given just 5,000 Liberian dollars ($36). 'I was a performer' As he inaugurated a community road just before Christmas, Mr Weah roundly rejected those trying to put him down - and said he was used to such pressure. "Remember I was a performer, I played in front [of] 100,000 people, 200,000 people; if I played bad, they laughed at me; they booed me; but with all the boo and what have you, I still became [the winner of] the Ballon d'Or," he said in December. "So anything you say, anything you do to tarnish my reputation - even though I am doing well, you are wasting your time." And after nearly a year in power, the president told his congregation as the New Year struck, that it was not a time for despondency: "Let's forget about all the setbacks in 2018 and focus on the prosperous New Year, what God gave you is enough."

President George Weah marks a year in power in Liberia. He has faced criticism for his record on the economy. But he has also been praised for his work on the football pitch. Here, the BBC's Jonathan Paye-Layleh assesses his scorecard one year on.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-46947032

Why is Wales used as a unit of measurement?

Image copyright Getty Images Image caption You're going to need a calculator for this one... Chances are you've heard someone say - or read in an article - that something is "the size of Wales". It's about 8,194 sq miles (21,224 sq km) - or 2,122,400 hectares. Put simply, your typical rugby pitch is about one hectare, give or take. It's been used to describe the area an asteroid could wipe out if it hit the Earth and - perhaps literally and descriptively - how much damage a nuclear bomb could cause. Swansea University's Prof Adrian Luckman leads Project Midas, which has monitored iceberg A-68 since it broke away from the Larsen C ice shelf in Antarctica in 2017. He needed a way to put the size of the trillion-tonne iceberg into context so the average person could comprehend it, so turned his eyes to home. "The giant block is estimated to cover an area of roughly 6,000 sq km; that's about a quarter the size of Wales," a BBC report at the time read. "People in general find it easier to appreciate the size of geographical features when they are related to other known features, than when they are presented in units of, say square km," Prof Luckman said. "This is especially true for very large objects such as iceberg A-68. Giving a geographical comparison allows the reader to imagine how long it would take to walk or drive across them, for instance. "More prosaically, Wales has been used many times before as an area comparison, we live in Wales, and iceberg A-68 is a relatable fraction of the area of Wales, so it seemed like a very natural comparison to make." The use was so widespread, founders of conservation charity Size of Wales picked it for its name. Established in 2010, its original goal was to help protect an area the size of Wales from deforestation - which it achieved in 2016. Image copyright Getty Images Image caption Wales has long been used as a way of getting across the devastation caused by deforestation Director Elspeth Jones said: "'An area the size of Wales' is frequently used to measure the rate of forest destruction. Our founders wanted to turn that negative use of the country's size on its head and make it a measure of something positive. "It's almost impossible to imagine how big two million hectares is without a reference point. Using 'the size of Wales' helps to illustrate the scale. "For example, when you tell people that roughly 12 million hectares of tropical forest is destroyed each year, the sheer scale of that doesn't register. "When you realise that is an area of tropical forest roughly six times the size of Wales, you can start to picture the scale of the forests and of the problem." Google's Ngram Viewer - which allows you to search words or phrases and how often they have been mentioned in millions of words in books dating back hundreds of years - suggests it has been around for a while. While not definitive, and there are other reasons why the phrase could appear, "about the size of Wales" first shows up in texts in 1844 and peaked in popularity in 1949. One wonders - if you laid out all the pages of those books next to each other - what size the area would be... This story was inspired by a question sent to us by Nicky Churchill from Goodwick, Pembrokeshire. She said: "It was one of those silly, surreal things - we'd heard two or three times in a row on some TV programme that something was the size of Wales. "We wondered why it was held as a standard for things so diverse - it just came from a late night conversation after a glass of wine." Use this form to send us your questions: If you are reading this page on the BBC News app, you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question on this topic. We may get in touch if we decide to follow up on your suggestion.

Wales has been used as a unit of measurement since the 1800s. It's been used to get across the devastation caused by deforestation.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-46737277

Has Fyre Festival burned influencers?

Image copyright Fyre Image caption Expectations.... "Fyre was basically like Instagram coming to life." Or at least, that was the idea, says DJ/producer Jillionaire in the new Netflix documentary Fyre: The Greatest Party that Never Happened. The organisers spent eye-watering sums on an extravagant launch campaign with 10 of the world's top supermodels sharing gorgeous promotional pictures and videos of themselves partying in luxurious style on a sun-drenched island in the Bahamas. Kendall Jenner was reportedly paid $250,000 (193,000) for one single Instagram post announcing the launch of ticket sales and offering her followers a discount code. Despite the "luxury" tickets costing thousands of dollars, the event sold out - many snapped up by social media influencers keen to document their exclusive experience, many in exchange for free accommodation. The festival was supposed to run annually for five years. However, just like Instagram, away from the filters and the supermodels, the reality turned out to be somewhat different. Image copyright Netflix Image caption ... versus reality The "private jet" in which the guests were supposed to arrive, turned out to be an old rebranded aeroplane. The luxury accommodation consisted of rain-drenched tents, and the gourmet cuisine was a cheese sandwich. The event never took place. The organiser, Billy McFarland, is now in prison for fraud. Bella Hadid, one of the models who took part in the promotions, later apologised to her followers and said she had "trusted" the event would be "amazing and memorable". Kendall Jenner deleted her post. Two new documentaries about the luxury event that never was - one by Netflix, the other by US streamer Hulu - have thrown a spotlight on the influencers and celebrities who promoted it. You'd be forgiven for thinking this all sounds like extremely bad news for the influencer industry. But you'd be underestimating their Teflon-like resilience in the face of adversity. Image copyright Netflix Image caption Rapper Ja Rule took part in promotional activity with Billy McFarland Rohan Midha, managing director of the PMYB influencer agency, says that while Fyre itself was a disaster, the marketing choices behind it were not. "It just shows how powerful influencers can be," he told the BBC. On the subject of Fyre, he agrees that while the sheer size of the influencer campaign was "unusual", the results were not. "Influencers can reproduce the largest return on investment," he says. "That's across the board." Werner Geyser, founder of the Influencer Marketing Hub, agrees. He says since the release of the documentaries his web traffic has spiked as curiosity in the industry has increased. "If anything [the Fyre Festival documentary] was showing utilising influencer marketing was part of its success in terms of marketing the event," he says. "It's all publicity at the end of the day. I think brand managers and influencers will be more cautious and that can only be a good thing." Image copyright Netflix Image caption The Fyre team was keen to promote the exclusivity of the event Mr Geyser thinks the documentaries will emphasise the importance of regulation - the responsibility of flagging promoted content using hashtags like #ad, #spon and #sponsored. In 2017, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in the US warned celebrities and influencers that they must be clear about when a post has been paid for - but not all of them do. "Trust is lost when you are selling something that you were paid for but didn't declare," says Mr Geyser. "If you can say something is sponsored [the consumer] can take it with a pinch of salt." Image copyright @world_record_egg / Instagram Image caption The egg that cracked Instagram If you doubt the power of a stranger on social media to tell large numbers of people what to do - have a think about this. "This month we've seen people being influenced by an egg," says Instagram consultant Danny Coy, referring to a picture of an egg which convinced more than 40m people to "like" it on Instagram. Mr Coy, whose photography account on Instagram has 157,000 followers, is a former influencer himself. "What's been happening for a while is the rise of the micro-influencer - people who have a much more organic following, less than 10,000, but they are really niche and targeted," he says. "If you want to geo-locate or target certain areas, brands would rather team up with 10 micro-influencers than one big one." The firm Neoreach offers data on influencer industry growth. According to its research and forecasts: The number of Instagram posts using popular hashtags to denote advertising or promotion has risen from 1.1 million in 2016 to 3.1 million in 2018 They predict there will be 4.4 million officially promoted posts in 2019 The average return on investment in 2018 was $5.20 for every dollar spent on influencer marketing, according to a study of 2,000 campaigns Instagram is the most popular platform for influencer campaigns, followed by Facebook and YouTube The influencer market size has grown from $1.7bn in 2016 to $4.6bn in 2018 and is forecast to hit $6.5bn in 2019 Image copyright The Fashion Law Image caption Bella Hadid was among those who posted an image of an orange square onto Instagram to promote the festival One expert who is not "liking" the influencer phenomenon is Dr Mariann Hardey, associate professor in marketing at Durham University. "I would counter that the influencer industry is not successful," she says. "It appears successful as an extension of aggressive marketing communications and PR methods, but as a standalone, self-sustaining and ethical industry it is far from successful." Dr Hardey points out a growing backlash over some influencer-endorsed products such as weight-loss tea amid reports that it can, in some cases, be addictive and even dangerous. "The backlash against these kinds of products is highly visible - in some cases known more than the influencers involved with the promotion," she says. Image copyright Jameela Jamil / Twitter This was raised by the actress Jameela Jamil, who started the high profile "I Weigh" campaign, to counter promotional weight loss messages spread by influencers, and to encourage more positive body image. Dr Hardey believes that influencers are not as powerful as they may consider themselves to be. "Consumers are smart," she says. "Overall, relying solely on influencers and the commercial viability of platforms such as Instagram [in a campaign] is precarious at best." That lesson was learned the hard way by those involved in the Fyre Festival. "A couple of powerful models posting an orange tile is what essentially built this entire festival," reflects Mick Purzycki, who worked on the festival, in the Netflix documentary. "And then one kid with probably 400 followers posted a picture of cheese on toast and that trended and essentially ripped down the festival."

Fyre Festival was supposed to be a five-year event on a luxury island in the Bahamas. Instead, it was a disaster, and the stars and influencers who promoted it have come under scrutiny.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/46945662

Has Fyre Festival burned influencers?

Image copyright Fyre Image caption Expectations.... "Fyre was basically like Instagram coming to life." Or at least, that was the idea, says DJ/producer Jillionaire in the new Netflix documentary Fyre: The Greatest Party that Never Happened. The organisers spent eye-watering sums on an extravagant launch campaign with 10 of the world's top supermodels sharing gorgeous promotional pictures and videos of themselves partying in luxurious style on a sun-drenched island in the Bahamas. Kendall Jenner was reportedly paid $250,000 (193,000) for one single Instagram post announcing the launch of ticket sales and offering her followers a discount code. Despite the "luxury" tickets costing thousands of dollars, the event sold out - many snapped up by social media influencers keen to document their exclusive experience, many in exchange for free accommodation. The festival was supposed to run annually for five years. However, just like Instagram, away from the filters and the supermodels, the reality turned out to be somewhat different. Image copyright Netflix Image caption ... versus reality The "private jet" in which the guests were supposed to arrive, turned out to be an old rebranded aeroplane. The luxury accommodation consisted of rain-drenched tents, and the gourmet cuisine was a cheese sandwich. The event never took place. The organiser, Billy McFarland, is now in prison for fraud. Bella Hadid, one of the models who took part in the promotions, later apologised to her followers and said she had "trusted" the event would be "amazing and memorable". Kendall Jenner deleted her post. Two new documentaries about the luxury event that never was - one by Netflix, the other by US streamer Hulu - have thrown a spotlight on the influencers and celebrities who promoted it. You'd be forgiven for thinking this all sounds like extremely bad news for the influencer industry. But you'd be underestimating their Teflon-like resilience in the face of adversity. Image copyright Netflix Image caption Rapper Ja Rule took part in promotional activity with Billy McFarland Rohan Midha, managing director of the PMYB influencer agency, says that while Fyre itself was a disaster, the marketing choices behind it were not. "It just shows how powerful influencers can be," he told the BBC. On the subject of Fyre, he agrees that while the sheer size of the influencer campaign was "unusual", the results were not. "Influencers can reproduce the largest return on investment," he says. "That's across the board." Werner Geyser, founder of the Influencer Marketing Hub, agrees. He says since the release of the documentaries his web traffic has spiked as curiosity in the industry has increased. "If anything [the Fyre Festival documentary] was showing utilising influencer marketing was part of its success in terms of marketing the event," he says. "It's all publicity at the end of the day. I think brand managers and influencers will be more cautious and that can only be a good thing." Image copyright Netflix Image caption The Fyre team was keen to promote the exclusivity of the event Mr Geyser thinks the documentaries will emphasise the importance of regulation - the responsibility of flagging promoted content using hashtags like #ad, #spon and #sponsored. In 2017, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in the US warned celebrities and influencers that they must be clear about when a post has been paid for - but not all of them do. "Trust is lost when you are selling something that you were paid for but didn't declare," says Mr Geyser. "If you can say something is sponsored [the consumer] can take it with a pinch of salt." Image copyright @world_record_egg / Instagram Image caption The egg that cracked Instagram If you doubt the power of a stranger on social media to tell large numbers of people what to do - have a think about this. "This month we've seen people being influenced by an egg," says Instagram consultant Danny Coy, referring to a picture of an egg which convinced more than 40m people to "like" it on Instagram. Mr Coy, whose photography account on Instagram has 157,000 followers, is a former influencer himself. "What's been happening for a while is the rise of the micro-influencer - people who have a much more organic following, less than 10,000, but they are really niche and targeted," he says. "If you want to geo-locate or target certain areas, brands would rather team up with 10 micro-influencers than one big one." The firm Neoreach offers data on influencer industry growth. According to its research and forecasts: The number of Instagram posts using popular hashtags to denote advertising or promotion has risen from 1.1 million in 2016 to 3.1 million in 2018 They predict there will be 4.4 million officially promoted posts in 2019 The average return on investment in 2018 was $5.20 for every dollar spent on influencer marketing, according to a study of 2,000 campaigns Instagram is the most popular platform for influencer campaigns, followed by Facebook and YouTube The influencer market size has grown from $1.7bn in 2016 to $4.6bn in 2018 and is forecast to hit $6.5bn in 2019 Image copyright The Fashion Law Image caption Bella Hadid was among those who posted an image of an orange square onto Instagram to promote the festival One expert who is not "liking" the influencer phenomenon is Dr Mariann Hardey, associate professor in marketing at Durham University. "I would counter that the influencer industry is not successful," she says. "It appears successful as an extension of aggressive marketing communications and PR methods, but as a standalone, self-sustaining and ethical industry it is far from successful." Dr Hardey points out a growing backlash over some influencer-endorsed products such as weight-loss tea amid reports that it can, in some cases, be addictive and even dangerous. "The backlash against these kinds of products is highly visible - in some cases known more than the influencers involved with the promotion," she says. Image copyright Jameela Jamil / Twitter This was raised by the actress Jameela Jamil, who started the high profile "I Weigh" campaign, to counter promotional weight loss messages spread by influencers, and to encourage more positive body image. Dr Hardey believes that influencers are not as powerful as they may consider themselves to be. "Consumers are smart," she says. "Overall, relying solely on influencers and the commercial viability of platforms such as Instagram [in a campaign] is precarious at best." That lesson was learned the hard way by those involved in the Fyre Festival. "A couple of powerful models posting an orange tile is what essentially built this entire festival," reflects Mick Purzycki, who worked on the festival, in the Netflix documentary. "And then one kid with probably 400 followers posted a picture of cheese on toast and that trended and essentially ripped down the festival."

Fyre Festival was supposed to be a five-year event on a luxury island in the Bahamas. Instead, it was a disaster, and the stars and influencers who promoted it have come under scrutiny. But experts say the event was a success in terms of marketing the event.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/46945662

What was that small flash of light during the super blood wolf moon?

The super blood wolf moon eclipse is seen Jan. 20 in Burbank, California. (Photo: Kevin Winter, Getty Images) As if a super blood wolf moon wasn't enough, some observers noticed another spectacular sighting in Sunday night's sky: A small flash of light. During the lunar eclipse, a meteorite actually struck the moon. Researcher Jose Maria Madiedo shared a video of the crash he captured through Spain's Moons Impacts Detection and Analysis System. "A rock hits the moon," he tweeted on Tuesday. He wasn't the only one who noticed the object. Some users on Reddit also started a discussion about the "bright flash." The crash was easy to miss. Even with advanced equipment, the meteorite appeared as a quick, speck of light near the top of the moon, as seen in a video. It occurred at 11:41 p.m. Eastern, according to Madiedo's sighting. This could be the first time a meteorite hitting the moon was ever recorded during a lunar eclipse, Gizmodo reports. More: Remarkable photos of the super blood wolf moon eclipse from around the world Follow Ashley May on Twitter: @AshleyMayTweets Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/01/23/flash-during-super-blood-wolf-moon-meteorite-crash/2655585002/

A meteorite hit the moon during Sunday night's super blood wolf moon.

ctrlsum

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/01/23/flash-during-super-blood-wolf-moon-meteorite-crash/2655585002/

What was that small flash of light during the super blood wolf moon?

The super blood wolf moon eclipse is seen Jan. 20 in Burbank, California. (Photo: Kevin Winter, Getty Images) As if a super blood wolf moon wasn't enough, some observers noticed another spectacular sighting in Sunday night's sky: A small flash of light. During the lunar eclipse, a meteorite actually struck the moon. Researcher Jose Maria Madiedo shared a video of the crash he captured through Spain's Moons Impacts Detection and Analysis System. "A rock hits the moon," he tweeted on Tuesday. He wasn't the only one who noticed the object. Some users on Reddit also started a discussion about the "bright flash." The crash was easy to miss. Even with advanced equipment, the meteorite appeared as a quick, speck of light near the top of the moon, as seen in a video. It occurred at 11:41 p.m. Eastern, according to Madiedo's sighting. This could be the first time a meteorite hitting the moon was ever recorded during a lunar eclipse, Gizmodo reports. More: Remarkable photos of the super blood wolf moon eclipse from around the world Follow Ashley May on Twitter: @AshleyMayTweets Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/01/23/flash-during-super-blood-wolf-moon-meteorite-crash/2655585002/

A meteorite hit the moon during Sunday's super blood wolf moon. The crash was easy to miss. It could be the first time a meteorite hitting the moon was ever recorded during a lunar eclipse, Gizmodo reports. The meteorite appeared as a quick, speck of light near the top of the moon.

bart

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/01/23/flash-during-super-blood-wolf-moon-meteorite-crash/2655585002/

Has there been no major terror attack in India since 2014?

Claim: India has not experienced a single major terror attack since Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government came to power in 2014. Verdict: Both official and independent data provide details of a series of fatal attacks by militant groups within India since 2014. The government's own documents refer to at least two of these as being "major" attacks. In a speech to a recent convention of India's ruling BJP, Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman made a bold claim. "We have not had one major terrorist attack in this country after 2014," she said. "There are of course disturbances on the border," she went on, "but the Indian Army has made sure that every attempt to come into this country is eliminated even at the border." The remarks have proved controversial, provoking discussion over what constitutes a "major" attack, given the large number of incidents that have taken place. Opposition response "Will the defence minister take the map of India and locate Pathankot and Uri?" tweeted P Chidambaram, former finance minister from the main opposition Congress party. He was referring to two attacks on military establishments in 2016. Seven Indian soldiers and six militants were killed in an attack on a base in Pathankot in Punjab state in January that year, blamed on a Pakistan-based group Four gunmen attacked the army base at Uri in Indian-administered Kashmir in September, killing 17 soldiers Government figures The Indian Ministry of Defence breaks down internal security issues into four categories: incidents in the Indian-administered Kashmir region insurgency in the north-eastern states left-wing extremism in various areas terror attacks in the hinterland (ie the rest of the country) According to the government's own data, presented to parliament by the home affairs ministry, there was a "major terrorist attack in the hinterland" in both 2015 and 2016. The data presented mentions incidents in the other three categories, but the term "major" is only used with reference to the hinterland. "There's no policy statement or government release where the difference between a major or minor attack has been defined clearly," according to defence expert Ajai Shukla. "It's a matter of perception," he says. "It depends on intangible factors such as the importance of the target, the origin and outcome of the attack and its symbolic value." Image copyright Getty Images The BBC has sought clarification from the Indian government, pointing out that its own documents refer to "major" terror incidents, but has not received a response at the time of writing this article. One non-governmental group, the South Asian Terrorism Portal (SATP), provides its own definition of a major attack. It calls any incident with three or more fatalities - civilian or military - a major attack. According to SATP, there were 388 "major" incidents in India from 2014 to 2018 using their definition. Their reporting uses available ministry data and other media reports. It's helpful to look at how insurgent and militant attacks have changed over time, comparing the situation under the current government with that under the previous administration. From 2009 to 2013, when a Congress-led government was in power, government records show 15 "major cases of terrorist incidents in the hinterland" - significantly more than under the current government. But incidents in Indian-administered Kashmir, which were showing a steady decline from 2009 to 2014, have been on the rise under the current government. And in 2018, Indian-controlled Kashmir saw the highest fatalities in terror-related violence in a decade with 451 deaths, according to the SATP. The last time this toll was exceeded was in 2008 when Congress held power. In the north-eastern part of the country, except for a spike in 2012, there have been fewer and fewer reports of violent incidents - and a sharp fall in civilian deaths since 2015, according to official data. The region has seen ethnic and separatist conflicts for decades, involving a variety of groups fighting for local autonomy or complete independence. When it comes to left-wing insurgent groups in the country, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has compared his government's track record favourably to the previous Congress-led administration. Mr Modi told the Swarajya magazine in July 2018: "Maoist violence has declined by 20% in the affected states with a concomitant reduction of 34% in deaths in 2017 compared to 2013." Maoist rebels, who are active in several eastern and central states, say they are fighting for communist rule and greater rights for tribal people and the rural poor. Mr Modi's figures about the decrease in fatalities match the official tally. But according to the Home Affairs Ministry's own reports, the declining trend in this type of insurgency actually began in 2011 under the previous government. Read more from Reality Check Send us your questions Follow us on Twitter

Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman says India has not had a major terror attack since 2014.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-46902935

Has there been no major terror attack in India since 2014?

Claim: India has not experienced a single major terror attack since Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government came to power in 2014. Verdict: Both official and independent data provide details of a series of fatal attacks by militant groups within India since 2014. The government's own documents refer to at least two of these as being "major" attacks. In a speech to a recent convention of India's ruling BJP, Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman made a bold claim. "We have not had one major terrorist attack in this country after 2014," she said. "There are of course disturbances on the border," she went on, "but the Indian Army has made sure that every attempt to come into this country is eliminated even at the border." The remarks have proved controversial, provoking discussion over what constitutes a "major" attack, given the large number of incidents that have taken place. Opposition response "Will the defence minister take the map of India and locate Pathankot and Uri?" tweeted P Chidambaram, former finance minister from the main opposition Congress party. He was referring to two attacks on military establishments in 2016. Seven Indian soldiers and six militants were killed in an attack on a base in Pathankot in Punjab state in January that year, blamed on a Pakistan-based group Four gunmen attacked the army base at Uri in Indian-administered Kashmir in September, killing 17 soldiers Government figures The Indian Ministry of Defence breaks down internal security issues into four categories: incidents in the Indian-administered Kashmir region insurgency in the north-eastern states left-wing extremism in various areas terror attacks in the hinterland (ie the rest of the country) According to the government's own data, presented to parliament by the home affairs ministry, there was a "major terrorist attack in the hinterland" in both 2015 and 2016. The data presented mentions incidents in the other three categories, but the term "major" is only used with reference to the hinterland. "There's no policy statement or government release where the difference between a major or minor attack has been defined clearly," according to defence expert Ajai Shukla. "It's a matter of perception," he says. "It depends on intangible factors such as the importance of the target, the origin and outcome of the attack and its symbolic value." Image copyright Getty Images The BBC has sought clarification from the Indian government, pointing out that its own documents refer to "major" terror incidents, but has not received a response at the time of writing this article. One non-governmental group, the South Asian Terrorism Portal (SATP), provides its own definition of a major attack. It calls any incident with three or more fatalities - civilian or military - a major attack. According to SATP, there were 388 "major" incidents in India from 2014 to 2018 using their definition. Their reporting uses available ministry data and other media reports. It's helpful to look at how insurgent and militant attacks have changed over time, comparing the situation under the current government with that under the previous administration. From 2009 to 2013, when a Congress-led government was in power, government records show 15 "major cases of terrorist incidents in the hinterland" - significantly more than under the current government. But incidents in Indian-administered Kashmir, which were showing a steady decline from 2009 to 2014, have been on the rise under the current government. And in 2018, Indian-controlled Kashmir saw the highest fatalities in terror-related violence in a decade with 451 deaths, according to the SATP. The last time this toll was exceeded was in 2008 when Congress held power. In the north-eastern part of the country, except for a spike in 2012, there have been fewer and fewer reports of violent incidents - and a sharp fall in civilian deaths since 2015, according to official data. The region has seen ethnic and separatist conflicts for decades, involving a variety of groups fighting for local autonomy or complete independence. When it comes to left-wing insurgent groups in the country, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has compared his government's track record favourably to the previous Congress-led administration. Mr Modi told the Swarajya magazine in July 2018: "Maoist violence has declined by 20% in the affected states with a concomitant reduction of 34% in deaths in 2017 compared to 2013." Maoist rebels, who are active in several eastern and central states, say they are fighting for communist rule and greater rights for tribal people and the rural poor. Mr Modi's figures about the decrease in fatalities match the official tally. But according to the Home Affairs Ministry's own reports, the declining trend in this type of insurgency actually began in 2011 under the previous government. Read more from Reality Check Send us your questions Follow us on Twitter

Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman says India has not had a major terror attack since 2014. Both official and independent data provide details of a series of fatal attacks.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-46902935

Has there been no major terror attack in India since 2014?

Claim: India has not experienced a single major terror attack since Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government came to power in 2014. Verdict: Both official and independent data provide details of a series of fatal attacks by militant groups within India since 2014. The government's own documents refer to at least two of these as being "major" attacks. In a speech to a recent convention of India's ruling BJP, Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman made a bold claim. "We have not had one major terrorist attack in this country after 2014," she said. "There are of course disturbances on the border," she went on, "but the Indian Army has made sure that every attempt to come into this country is eliminated even at the border." The remarks have proved controversial, provoking discussion over what constitutes a "major" attack, given the large number of incidents that have taken place. Opposition response "Will the defence minister take the map of India and locate Pathankot and Uri?" tweeted P Chidambaram, former finance minister from the main opposition Congress party. He was referring to two attacks on military establishments in 2016. Seven Indian soldiers and six militants were killed in an attack on a base in Pathankot in Punjab state in January that year, blamed on a Pakistan-based group Four gunmen attacked the army base at Uri in Indian-administered Kashmir in September, killing 17 soldiers Government figures The Indian Ministry of Defence breaks down internal security issues into four categories: incidents in the Indian-administered Kashmir region insurgency in the north-eastern states left-wing extremism in various areas terror attacks in the hinterland (ie the rest of the country) According to the government's own data, presented to parliament by the home affairs ministry, there was a "major terrorist attack in the hinterland" in both 2015 and 2016. The data presented mentions incidents in the other three categories, but the term "major" is only used with reference to the hinterland. "There's no policy statement or government release where the difference between a major or minor attack has been defined clearly," according to defence expert Ajai Shukla. "It's a matter of perception," he says. "It depends on intangible factors such as the importance of the target, the origin and outcome of the attack and its symbolic value." Image copyright Getty Images The BBC has sought clarification from the Indian government, pointing out that its own documents refer to "major" terror incidents, but has not received a response at the time of writing this article. One non-governmental group, the South Asian Terrorism Portal (SATP), provides its own definition of a major attack. It calls any incident with three or more fatalities - civilian or military - a major attack. According to SATP, there were 388 "major" incidents in India from 2014 to 2018 using their definition. Their reporting uses available ministry data and other media reports. It's helpful to look at how insurgent and militant attacks have changed over time, comparing the situation under the current government with that under the previous administration. From 2009 to 2013, when a Congress-led government was in power, government records show 15 "major cases of terrorist incidents in the hinterland" - significantly more than under the current government. But incidents in Indian-administered Kashmir, which were showing a steady decline from 2009 to 2014, have been on the rise under the current government. And in 2018, Indian-controlled Kashmir saw the highest fatalities in terror-related violence in a decade with 451 deaths, according to the SATP. The last time this toll was exceeded was in 2008 when Congress held power. In the north-eastern part of the country, except for a spike in 2012, there have been fewer and fewer reports of violent incidents - and a sharp fall in civilian deaths since 2015, according to official data. The region has seen ethnic and separatist conflicts for decades, involving a variety of groups fighting for local autonomy or complete independence. When it comes to left-wing insurgent groups in the country, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has compared his government's track record favourably to the previous Congress-led administration. Mr Modi told the Swarajya magazine in July 2018: "Maoist violence has declined by 20% in the affected states with a concomitant reduction of 34% in deaths in 2017 compared to 2013." Maoist rebels, who are active in several eastern and central states, say they are fighting for communist rule and greater rights for tribal people and the rural poor. Mr Modi's figures about the decrease in fatalities match the official tally. But according to the Home Affairs Ministry's own reports, the declining trend in this type of insurgency actually began in 2011 under the previous government. Read more from Reality Check Send us your questions Follow us on Twitter

Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman says India has not had a major terror attack since 2014. Both official and independent data provide details of a series of fatal attacks by militant groups. Government's own documents refer to at least two of these as being "major" attacks. The BBC has sought clarification from the Indian government.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-46902935

Who is Pete Buttigieg, the newest 2020 presidential candidate?

SOUTH BEND, Ind. Democrat Pete Buttigieg, the 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana, says hes forming an exploratory committee for a 2020 presidential bid. The reality is theres no going back, and theres no such thing as again in the real world. We cant look for greatness in the past, Buttigieg says in a video (watch it below) that includes before-and-after footage of South Bend, a Rust Belt city once described as dying. "Right now our country needs a fresh start," he says. Buttigieg has touted his work to improve his city of 100,000 residents as hes prepared for a jump from local politics to a presidential campaign. Hes also said Democrats could benefit from a new generation of leaders as they try to unseat President Donald Trump in 2020. He's expected to travel to Iowa next week to meet with voters in the nation's first caucus state, followed by stops in New Hampshire. Buttigieg is a Rhodes scholar who was first elected mayor of his hometown in 2011 at age 29, making him the youngest mayor of a U.S. city with at least 100,000 residents. A lieutenant in the Navy Reserve, he served a tour in Afghanistan in 2014. Buttigieg raised his national profile with an unsuccessful 2017 run for Democratic National Committee chairman, saying the party needed a new start. He withdrew from the race before a vote when it became clear he didnt have the support to win. Buttigieg has spent time in Iowa and other battleground states in recent years as he tried to build financial support and name recognition. He cracks that those who do know his name still arent sure how to pronounce it. (Its BOO'-tah-juhj.) Most of the time he goes by Mayor Pete. Amid his campaign for a second term, Buttigieg came out as gay in a column in the local newspaper. He went on to win re-election with 80 percent of the vote. In 2018, three years to the day after the column ran, he married his husband, middle school teacher Chasten Glezman. If he were to win the Democratic nomination, Buttigieg would be the first openly gay presidential nominee from a major political party. Buttigieg announced in December that he wouldnt seek a third term as mayor, stoking speculation he would join a field of roughly two dozen candidates who may seek the Democratic nomination for president most of them better known and with experience in higher office, and all of them older. I belong to a generation that is stepping forward right now, he says in the video released Wednesday (Jan. 23). Were the generation that lived through school shootings, that served in the wars after 9/11, and were the generation that stands to be the first to make less than our parents unless we do something different. We cant just polish off a system so broken. It is a season for boldness and a focus on the future. Buttigieg is releasing in February a book about his life and his tenure leading South Bend. - Sara Burnett, Associated Press

Pete Buttigieg, 37, is the mayor of South Bend, Indiana.

ctrlsum

https://www.nola.com/news/2019/01/who-is-pete-buttigieg-the-newest-2020-presidential-candidate.html

Who is Pete Buttigieg, the newest 2020 presidential candidate?

SOUTH BEND, Ind. Democrat Pete Buttigieg, the 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana, says hes forming an exploratory committee for a 2020 presidential bid. The reality is theres no going back, and theres no such thing as again in the real world. We cant look for greatness in the past, Buttigieg says in a video (watch it below) that includes before-and-after footage of South Bend, a Rust Belt city once described as dying. "Right now our country needs a fresh start," he says. Buttigieg has touted his work to improve his city of 100,000 residents as hes prepared for a jump from local politics to a presidential campaign. Hes also said Democrats could benefit from a new generation of leaders as they try to unseat President Donald Trump in 2020. He's expected to travel to Iowa next week to meet with voters in the nation's first caucus state, followed by stops in New Hampshire. Buttigieg is a Rhodes scholar who was first elected mayor of his hometown in 2011 at age 29, making him the youngest mayor of a U.S. city with at least 100,000 residents. A lieutenant in the Navy Reserve, he served a tour in Afghanistan in 2014. Buttigieg raised his national profile with an unsuccessful 2017 run for Democratic National Committee chairman, saying the party needed a new start. He withdrew from the race before a vote when it became clear he didnt have the support to win. Buttigieg has spent time in Iowa and other battleground states in recent years as he tried to build financial support and name recognition. He cracks that those who do know his name still arent sure how to pronounce it. (Its BOO'-tah-juhj.) Most of the time he goes by Mayor Pete. Amid his campaign for a second term, Buttigieg came out as gay in a column in the local newspaper. He went on to win re-election with 80 percent of the vote. In 2018, three years to the day after the column ran, he married his husband, middle school teacher Chasten Glezman. If he were to win the Democratic nomination, Buttigieg would be the first openly gay presidential nominee from a major political party. Buttigieg announced in December that he wouldnt seek a third term as mayor, stoking speculation he would join a field of roughly two dozen candidates who may seek the Democratic nomination for president most of them better known and with experience in higher office, and all of them older. I belong to a generation that is stepping forward right now, he says in the video released Wednesday (Jan. 23). Were the generation that lived through school shootings, that served in the wars after 9/11, and were the generation that stands to be the first to make less than our parents unless we do something different. We cant just polish off a system so broken. It is a season for boldness and a focus on the future. Buttigieg is releasing in February a book about his life and his tenure leading South Bend. - Sara Burnett, Associated Press

Pete Buttigieg, the 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana, says hes forming an exploratory committee for a 2020 presidential bid.

bart

https://www.nola.com/news/2019/01/who-is-pete-buttigieg-the-newest-2020-presidential-candidate.html

Who is Pete Buttigieg, the newest 2020 presidential candidate?

SOUTH BEND, Ind. Democrat Pete Buttigieg, the 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana, says hes forming an exploratory committee for a 2020 presidential bid. The reality is theres no going back, and theres no such thing as again in the real world. We cant look for greatness in the past, Buttigieg says in a video (watch it below) that includes before-and-after footage of South Bend, a Rust Belt city once described as dying. "Right now our country needs a fresh start," he says. Buttigieg has touted his work to improve his city of 100,000 residents as hes prepared for a jump from local politics to a presidential campaign. Hes also said Democrats could benefit from a new generation of leaders as they try to unseat President Donald Trump in 2020. He's expected to travel to Iowa next week to meet with voters in the nation's first caucus state, followed by stops in New Hampshire. Buttigieg is a Rhodes scholar who was first elected mayor of his hometown in 2011 at age 29, making him the youngest mayor of a U.S. city with at least 100,000 residents. A lieutenant in the Navy Reserve, he served a tour in Afghanistan in 2014. Buttigieg raised his national profile with an unsuccessful 2017 run for Democratic National Committee chairman, saying the party needed a new start. He withdrew from the race before a vote when it became clear he didnt have the support to win. Buttigieg has spent time in Iowa and other battleground states in recent years as he tried to build financial support and name recognition. He cracks that those who do know his name still arent sure how to pronounce it. (Its BOO'-tah-juhj.) Most of the time he goes by Mayor Pete. Amid his campaign for a second term, Buttigieg came out as gay in a column in the local newspaper. He went on to win re-election with 80 percent of the vote. In 2018, three years to the day after the column ran, he married his husband, middle school teacher Chasten Glezman. If he were to win the Democratic nomination, Buttigieg would be the first openly gay presidential nominee from a major political party. Buttigieg announced in December that he wouldnt seek a third term as mayor, stoking speculation he would join a field of roughly two dozen candidates who may seek the Democratic nomination for president most of them better known and with experience in higher office, and all of them older. I belong to a generation that is stepping forward right now, he says in the video released Wednesday (Jan. 23). Were the generation that lived through school shootings, that served in the wars after 9/11, and were the generation that stands to be the first to make less than our parents unless we do something different. We cant just polish off a system so broken. It is a season for boldness and a focus on the future. Buttigieg is releasing in February a book about his life and his tenure leading South Bend. - Sara Burnett, Associated Press

Pete Buttigieg, the 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana, says hes forming an exploratory committee for a 2020 presidential bid. Buttigieg is a Rhodes scholar who was first elected mayor of his hometown in 2011 at age 29.

pegasus

https://www.nola.com/news/2019/01/who-is-pete-buttigieg-the-newest-2020-presidential-candidate.html

How dangerous is Australia for women?

Image copyright Aya Maasarwe / Instagram Image caption Aya Maasarwe was killed after getting off a tram in Melbourne last week In the past week, Australians have been shocked by the killing of a young woman who had been walking home at night in Melbourne. The death of Israeli Arab student Aya Maasarwe, 21, has sparked an outcry and fresh debate about violence against women in Australia. According to her family, Ms Maasarwe's belief that Australia was "safer" than other places was one reason she had opted for a university exchange there. Her killing follows several high-profile murders in Australia in recent times which have caused similar anger. What the statistics say Almost one in three Australian women have experienced physical violence, and nearly one in five have endured sexual violence, according to the most recent Australian Bureau of Statistics figures. The rates are even higher for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women. Image copyright EPA Image caption A sign left among public tributes to Aya Maasarwe Almost one in 10 women have experienced violence from a stranger, the statistics show. Domestic violence is more common. On average, one woman per week is murdered in Australia by a current or former male partner. "Violence against women is at its most extreme in murder, but it is more common that women are injured either physically or emotionally in their own home," said Associate Prof Ruth Phillips, a social work expert from the University of Sydney. "It is a serious problem. Not a crisis, but more of an ongoing gender power problem in Australian culture." High-profile murders involving women and children have elevated the issue on the national agenda. Public debate intensified last year following the murder of a comedian, Eurydice Dixon, in another part of Melbourne. Just months later, a particularly alarming October saw 11 women die in violent circumstances around Australia. Image copyright FACEBOOK Image caption Comedian Eurydice Dixon was murdered in Melbourne last June "Sometimes, violence against women comes in a cluster together which alerts us to the problem, but really the hidden epidemic of abuse and violence is always with us," said Associate Prof Kelsey Hegarty, a family violence researcher from the University of Melbourne. One leading public voice has been Rosie Batty, who emerged as a powerful campaigner against domestic violence after her son, Luke, was killed by his father in 2014. The rape and murder of an Irish woman, Jill Meagher, in Melbourne in 2012 also generated immense attention. It led to public marches, and tighter restrictions around parole for sexual offenders. The death of Aya Maasarwe last week has again triggered deep concern. The UN has said violence against women in Australia is "disturbingly common", but experts say it is not an outlier among developed nations. Domestic violence - described by the World Health Organization as the leading cause of violence against women globally - is more prevalent in poorer nations. According to the UN, women in Africa and the Americas are more likely to be killed by their partner than women in Oceania. Among G20 nations, Australia ranks eighth for rates of domestic violence against women, according to the OECD, although data for five countries was not available. In 2012, the Australian government launched a dedicated anti-violence policy, the National Plan to Reduce Violence Against Women and their Children. However, Associate Prof Phillips said many frontline services, such as women's shelters, had not improved since then. "There has been little evidence of a reduction in violence or a strengthening in women's safety," she told the BBC. Experts have urged more focus on reducing broader disrespect towards women. "We will only be able to eradicate violence against women and their children, when women are not only safe, but respected, valued and treated as equals in private and public life," Australia's Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins told the BBC.

One in three Australian women have experienced physical violence. Nearly one in five have endured sexual violence.

pegasus

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-46913913

How dangerous is Australia for women?

Image copyright Aya Maasarwe / Instagram Image caption Aya Maasarwe was killed after getting off a tram in Melbourne last week In the past week, Australians have been shocked by the killing of a young woman who had been walking home at night in Melbourne. The death of Israeli Arab student Aya Maasarwe, 21, has sparked an outcry and fresh debate about violence against women in Australia. According to her family, Ms Maasarwe's belief that Australia was "safer" than other places was one reason she had opted for a university exchange there. Her killing follows several high-profile murders in Australia in recent times which have caused similar anger. What the statistics say Almost one in three Australian women have experienced physical violence, and nearly one in five have endured sexual violence, according to the most recent Australian Bureau of Statistics figures. The rates are even higher for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women. Image copyright EPA Image caption A sign left among public tributes to Aya Maasarwe Almost one in 10 women have experienced violence from a stranger, the statistics show. Domestic violence is more common. On average, one woman per week is murdered in Australia by a current or former male partner. "Violence against women is at its most extreme in murder, but it is more common that women are injured either physically or emotionally in their own home," said Associate Prof Ruth Phillips, a social work expert from the University of Sydney. "It is a serious problem. Not a crisis, but more of an ongoing gender power problem in Australian culture." High-profile murders involving women and children have elevated the issue on the national agenda. Public debate intensified last year following the murder of a comedian, Eurydice Dixon, in another part of Melbourne. Just months later, a particularly alarming October saw 11 women die in violent circumstances around Australia. Image copyright FACEBOOK Image caption Comedian Eurydice Dixon was murdered in Melbourne last June "Sometimes, violence against women comes in a cluster together which alerts us to the problem, but really the hidden epidemic of abuse and violence is always with us," said Associate Prof Kelsey Hegarty, a family violence researcher from the University of Melbourne. One leading public voice has been Rosie Batty, who emerged as a powerful campaigner against domestic violence after her son, Luke, was killed by his father in 2014. The rape and murder of an Irish woman, Jill Meagher, in Melbourne in 2012 also generated immense attention. It led to public marches, and tighter restrictions around parole for sexual offenders. The death of Aya Maasarwe last week has again triggered deep concern. The UN has said violence against women in Australia is "disturbingly common", but experts say it is not an outlier among developed nations. Domestic violence - described by the World Health Organization as the leading cause of violence against women globally - is more prevalent in poorer nations. According to the UN, women in Africa and the Americas are more likely to be killed by their partner than women in Oceania. Among G20 nations, Australia ranks eighth for rates of domestic violence against women, according to the OECD, although data for five countries was not available. In 2012, the Australian government launched a dedicated anti-violence policy, the National Plan to Reduce Violence Against Women and their Children. However, Associate Prof Phillips said many frontline services, such as women's shelters, had not improved since then. "There has been little evidence of a reduction in violence or a strengthening in women's safety," she told the BBC. Experts have urged more focus on reducing broader disrespect towards women. "We will only be able to eradicate violence against women and their children, when women are not only safe, but respected, valued and treated as equals in private and public life," Australia's Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins told the BBC.

One in three Australian women have experienced physical violence. Nearly one in five have endured sexual violence. On average, one woman per week is murdered in Australia by a current or former male partner.

pegasus

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-46913913

How dangerous is Australia for women?

Image copyright Aya Maasarwe / Instagram Image caption Aya Maasarwe was killed after getting off a tram in Melbourne last week In the past week, Australians have been shocked by the killing of a young woman who had been walking home at night in Melbourne. The death of Israeli Arab student Aya Maasarwe, 21, has sparked an outcry and fresh debate about violence against women in Australia. According to her family, Ms Maasarwe's belief that Australia was "safer" than other places was one reason she had opted for a university exchange there. Her killing follows several high-profile murders in Australia in recent times which have caused similar anger. What the statistics say Almost one in three Australian women have experienced physical violence, and nearly one in five have endured sexual violence, according to the most recent Australian Bureau of Statistics figures. The rates are even higher for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women. Image copyright EPA Image caption A sign left among public tributes to Aya Maasarwe Almost one in 10 women have experienced violence from a stranger, the statistics show. Domestic violence is more common. On average, one woman per week is murdered in Australia by a current or former male partner. "Violence against women is at its most extreme in murder, but it is more common that women are injured either physically or emotionally in their own home," said Associate Prof Ruth Phillips, a social work expert from the University of Sydney. "It is a serious problem. Not a crisis, but more of an ongoing gender power problem in Australian culture." High-profile murders involving women and children have elevated the issue on the national agenda. Public debate intensified last year following the murder of a comedian, Eurydice Dixon, in another part of Melbourne. Just months later, a particularly alarming October saw 11 women die in violent circumstances around Australia. Image copyright FACEBOOK Image caption Comedian Eurydice Dixon was murdered in Melbourne last June "Sometimes, violence against women comes in a cluster together which alerts us to the problem, but really the hidden epidemic of abuse and violence is always with us," said Associate Prof Kelsey Hegarty, a family violence researcher from the University of Melbourne. One leading public voice has been Rosie Batty, who emerged as a powerful campaigner against domestic violence after her son, Luke, was killed by his father in 2014. The rape and murder of an Irish woman, Jill Meagher, in Melbourne in 2012 also generated immense attention. It led to public marches, and tighter restrictions around parole for sexual offenders. The death of Aya Maasarwe last week has again triggered deep concern. The UN has said violence against women in Australia is "disturbingly common", but experts say it is not an outlier among developed nations. Domestic violence - described by the World Health Organization as the leading cause of violence against women globally - is more prevalent in poorer nations. According to the UN, women in Africa and the Americas are more likely to be killed by their partner than women in Oceania. Among G20 nations, Australia ranks eighth for rates of domestic violence against women, according to the OECD, although data for five countries was not available. In 2012, the Australian government launched a dedicated anti-violence policy, the National Plan to Reduce Violence Against Women and their Children. However, Associate Prof Phillips said many frontline services, such as women's shelters, had not improved since then. "There has been little evidence of a reduction in violence or a strengthening in women's safety," she told the BBC. Experts have urged more focus on reducing broader disrespect towards women. "We will only be able to eradicate violence against women and their children, when women are not only safe, but respected, valued and treated as equals in private and public life," Australia's Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins told the BBC.

One in three Australian women have experienced physical violence. Nearly one in five have endured sexual violence. On average, one woman per week is murdered in Australia by a current or former male partner. High-profile murders involving women and children have elevated the issue on the national agenda.

pegasus

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-46913913

Are speed cameras coming to Cincinnati?

Buy Photo City of Cincinnati police car (Photo: The Enquirer/Liz Dufour) It might work something like this: Youre driving down the street, going a little faster than the limit. You do not get stopped by a police officer. But, a few days later, a speeding ticket shows up in the mail. Cincinnati police and city hall officials are looking into whether the city could give police officers handheld traffic cameras that would let them issue tickets without ever getting out of their cars. These are not like the red-light cameras that have caused so much controversy in the past. Police officers would likely still hold these cameras, but instead of pulling over drivers on the spot which itself can cause congestion and safety concerns speeding tickets would get sent through the mail. Cincinnati City Councilman Greg Landsman has been pushing the idea, saying it would make everyone safer. And City Manager Patrick Duhaney broached the topic on Tuesday in a memo to city council and the mayor. Cincinnati has put $500,000 a year toward a pedestrian safety program, Duhaney wrote, but more needs to be done. it is very difficult to allocate all the resources needed to address this issue in totality given the operating and capital budget constraints faced by the city, Duhaney wrote. Cars keep hitting people: And it's only getting worse. Neil Kelly: This man would like you to stop hitting him with cars. There were 428 pedestrian crashes in Cincinnati in 2018, according to an Enquirer analysis, a 46 percent increase compared to 2013. Thirteen Cincinnati Public Schools students were hit by cars in 2018. One, a 15-year-old named Gabby Rodriguez, died. It wouldn't be as easy as just buying some cameras and mailing tickets, though. Such speed cameras are against the city charter, which puts strict limits on photo-monitoring devices used to detect traffic violations. The charter would have to be changed in order for the cameras to be legal. Specifically, in order for a ticket to be issued in Cincinnati right now, a law enforcement officer has to be present and personally issue the ticket at the time and location of the incident. CLOSE 13 Cincinnati Public Schools students were hit by vehicles in 2018. Michael Nyerges, Cincinnati Enquirer Read or Share this story: https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2019/01/23/speeding-cameras-cincinnati-officials-looking-into-idea/2656118002/

Cincinnati officials are looking into giving police officers handheld traffic cameras. Instead of pulling over drivers on the spot, speeding tickets would get sent through the mail.

pegasus

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2019/01/23/speeding-cameras-cincinnati-officials-looking-into-idea/2656118002/

Are speed cameras coming to Cincinnati?

Buy Photo City of Cincinnati police car (Photo: The Enquirer/Liz Dufour) It might work something like this: Youre driving down the street, going a little faster than the limit. You do not get stopped by a police officer. But, a few days later, a speeding ticket shows up in the mail. Cincinnati police and city hall officials are looking into whether the city could give police officers handheld traffic cameras that would let them issue tickets without ever getting out of their cars. These are not like the red-light cameras that have caused so much controversy in the past. Police officers would likely still hold these cameras, but instead of pulling over drivers on the spot which itself can cause congestion and safety concerns speeding tickets would get sent through the mail. Cincinnati City Councilman Greg Landsman has been pushing the idea, saying it would make everyone safer. And City Manager Patrick Duhaney broached the topic on Tuesday in a memo to city council and the mayor. Cincinnati has put $500,000 a year toward a pedestrian safety program, Duhaney wrote, but more needs to be done. it is very difficult to allocate all the resources needed to address this issue in totality given the operating and capital budget constraints faced by the city, Duhaney wrote. Cars keep hitting people: And it's only getting worse. Neil Kelly: This man would like you to stop hitting him with cars. There were 428 pedestrian crashes in Cincinnati in 2018, according to an Enquirer analysis, a 46 percent increase compared to 2013. Thirteen Cincinnati Public Schools students were hit by cars in 2018. One, a 15-year-old named Gabby Rodriguez, died. It wouldn't be as easy as just buying some cameras and mailing tickets, though. Such speed cameras are against the city charter, which puts strict limits on photo-monitoring devices used to detect traffic violations. The charter would have to be changed in order for the cameras to be legal. Specifically, in order for a ticket to be issued in Cincinnati right now, a law enforcement officer has to be present and personally issue the ticket at the time and location of the incident. CLOSE 13 Cincinnati Public Schools students were hit by vehicles in 2018. Michael Nyerges, Cincinnati Enquirer Read or Share this story: https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2019/01/23/speeding-cameras-cincinnati-officials-looking-into-idea/2656118002/

Cincinnati officials are looking into giving police officers handheld traffic cameras. Instead of pulling over drivers on the spot, speeding tickets would get sent through the mail. City Councilman Greg Landsman has been pushing the idea, saying it would make everyone safer. Such speed cameras are against the city charter.

pegasus

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2019/01/23/speeding-cameras-cincinnati-officials-looking-into-idea/2656118002/

How Much Can The Indians Cut From Their Payroll And Still Win Their Division?

The popular perception among many Cleveland Indians fans is When are they going to do something? In reality, the Indians have done a lot. More than you might realize, but less than is advisable. For a team that supposedly hasnt done much, the Indians sure have been busy. For example, the following players, each of whom spent all or part of the 2018 season on the Indians major league roster, are no longer members of the organization: Cody Allen, Michael Brantley, Melky Cabrera, Lonnie Chisenhall, Rajai Davis, Josh Donaldson, Andrew Miller, Oliver Perez, Adam Rosales, Josh Tomlin, Brandon Guyer, Erik Gonzalez, Yan Gomes, Yandy Diaz, Yonder Alonso and Edwin Encarnacion. Here is a list of players acquired by the Indians during the offseason: Carlos Santana, Jake Bauers, Kevin Plawecki, A.J. Cole, Jordan Luplow, Daniel Johnson, Jefry Rodriguez, Chih-Wei Hu, and Max Moroff. Six of the nine hitters in the Indians starting lineup for their last postseason game last year against Houston in the Division Series are no longer with the organization: Brantley, Encarnacion, Donaldson, Diaz, Guyer, and Gomes. Of the nine newcomers listed above, only one, barring injury, is guaranteed to be in the Indians opening day lineup this year: Santana, and the Indians arent even sure where that will be. You dont have to be Branch Rickey to realize the Indians list of players gone and players acquired is wildly lopsided towards the players gone side of the ledger. That doesnt mean the Indians cant win their fourth consecutive AL Central title. But it does at least raise the question of whether they may be underestimating the competition in their division. It is, to be sure, a daring strategic cliff dive: a defending division champion lopping off six everyday players in its pursuit of a more manageable payroll. That seems like a fine line to walk, but the Indians, with less than a month to go before the start of spring training, are straddling that precarious ravine. The operative number is $136 million, which was Clevelands opening day payroll last year, the largest in franchise history. As a result of their radical roster reduction, they have rid themselves of Encarnacions $20 million 2019 salary, plus those of Alonso ($8 million), and Gomes ($7 million). With their four of their free agents signing with other teams the Indians are additionally out from under some hefty financial obligations reflected by the 2019 base salaries in the contracts Donaldson ($23 million), Brantley ($15 million), Miller ($11 million) and Allen ($8.5 million) received from the various teams with which they signed as free agents. Thats a lot of money, but also a lot of talent, out the door. The only expensive addition is Santana, who is owed $17 million this year and $17.5 million next year. Cleveland wants to shave some commas and decimal points from its payroll in 2019, and club officials are confident they can do so while still remaining the biggest dog on the AL Central porch. Clevelands $136 opening day payroll last year was $50 million more than the Chicago White Sox $86 million. Payrolls for the other three division teams were Minnesota $129 million, Kansas City $115 million, and Detroit $111 million. In this offseason, the rest of the division has been more aggressive in adding talent and money to their payrolls, but they also have a lot of ground to make up. Cleveland won the division by 13 games last year, by 17 games in 2017, and by eight games in 2016. The Twins have added slugger Nelson Cruz and will pay him $14 million this year. Kansas City added Billy Hamilton ($4.2 million). Detroit signed free agents Tyson Ross ($5.7 million) and Jordy Mercer ($5.2 million). Chicago has been the most aggressive of the AL Central teams. In addition to Alonso ($8 million), the White Sox added Ivan Nova ($8.5 million), Kelvin Herrera ($8.5 million), Alex Colome ($7.3 million), and Jon Jay ($4 million). Chicago is also reportedly trying to bag the biggest free agent catch of the season, Bryce Harper. The challenge facing the Indians in 2019 is whether they can spend less and win more, or at least as much as they did last year _ or, at the absolute very least, however much it takes to insure a fourth straight trip to the postseason. Failure to do so will call into serious question the ownership-mandated payroll and talent downsizing that prevented the Indians from _ never mind adding a key piece here or there _ simply maintaining the elite team the organization had built.

The Cleveland Indians have done a lot during the offseason. The team has cut six everyday players from their roster. The Indians are trying to cut their opening day payroll from $136 million to $135 million. The club is confident they can do so while still remaining the biggest dog in the AL Central.

ctrlsum

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimingraham/2019/01/23/how-much-can-the-indians-cut-from-their-payroll-and-still-win-their-division/

Who made Rob Maclean's team of the Scottish Cup fourth round?

The weekend Scottish Cup ties threw up some surprises and outstanding performances. Here, BBC commentator Rob Maclean reveals his picks for team of the fourth round. Formation 4-3-3: Scott Bain (Celtic); Tony Ralston (Celtic), Craig McCracken (Auchinleck Talbot), Stuart Findlay (Kilmarnock), Gordon Pope (Auchinleck Talbot); Jamie Glasgow (Auchinleck Talbot), Ryan Gauld (Hibernian), Daryl Horgan (Hibernian); Lewis Vaughan (Raith Rovers), Brian Graham (Ross County), Scott Sinclair (Celtic). Goalkeeper - Scott Bain Celtic stand-in keeper Scott Bain's save on Saturday which stopped an Airdrieonians equaliser was so good it came in five instalments. That's how many stops he made in the space of a 10-second goalmouth scramble at the end of the first half as the League One team tried to spring a surprise. Media playback is not supported on this device Celtic goalkeeper Scott Bain's denies Airdrie with five of the best Defenders - Tony Ralston, Craig McCracken, Stuart Findlay, Gordon Pope As Celtic continue their search for a right-back, 20-year-old Tony Ralston has to be worthy of consideration. He's had loan spells with Queen's Park and Dundee United to give him game time and the Scotland Under-21 international was an eye catcher in the 3-0 Scottish Cup defeat of Airdrie. Defender Craig McCracken has a happy habit of scoring big goals. His stoppage-time winner in last May's Junior Cup final took the trophy to Auchinleck Talbot for a 12th time. On Saturday, his 78th-minute header against Ayr United delivered the biggest shock of the Scottish Cup fourth round. Media playback is not supported on this device What a goal! Kilmarnock's Stuart Findlay scores cup cracker Another central defender in great goal-scoring form at the weekend was Kilmarnock's Stuart Findlay. His stunning left-foot strike was the opener in Killie's 2-0 home win against Forfar, which set up a likely last-16 Scottish Cup meeting with Rangers. Gordon Pope is the Auchinleck postie and a long-serving player in the Talbot team. An offside flag wrongly denied him a Scottish Cup goal against Hearts seven years ago but he's heading back to Tynecastle in a few weeks after playing a big part in that sensational Ayrshire derby win on Saturday. Media playback is not supported on this device Scottish Cup: Watch the moment Auchinleck Talbot became giant killers Midfielders - Jamie Glasgow, Ryan Gauld, Daryl Horgan Jamie Glasgow epitomised the impressive work ethic of the Auchinleck Talbot team as the minnows of the competition showed local rivals Ayr the exit door. Midfielder Glasgow was a bundle of energy as the underdogs got the result they richly deserved. Ryan Gauld and Hibs could be just the right fit. The on-loan Sporting Lisbon midfielder made a classy contribution to the 4-0 Scottish Cup defeat of Elgin City and, while there are obviously bigger challenges to come, the former Dundee United youngster promises to be a great signing. Gauld might have grabbed the attention but it was midfield partner Daryl Horgan who scored two of the goals that eased Hibs into the cup's last 16. The Irishman is a big talent who just needs to come up with the goods on a more regular basis. Forwards - Lewis Vaughan, Brian Graham, Scott Sinclair Lewis Vaughan's hat-trick was the highlight of Raith Rovers' derby defeat of Dunfermline at Stark's Park on Saturday. He's been injured and missed a lot of football this season but that's nine goals in 12 games now on the back of a total of 23 last season. Brian Graham has scored goals wherever he's been. Ross County are his ninth club and his double for the Championship promotion chasers secured a cup shock at Fir Park. Top-flight Motherwell were knocked out by two typical close-range finishes from Graham. Scott Sinclair made it six goals in his past five Celtic games as he nabbed a couple in the comfortable cup defeat of Airdrie. He also missed a sitter, had a penalty saved and had a perfectly good goal ruled out. Sinclair's not yet back to his best but he's getting there.

Rob Maclean picks his team of the fourth round from the Scottish Cup. Celtic goalkeeper Scott Bain is the star man with Craig McCracken, Stuart Findlay, Gordon Pope and Jamie Glasgow also feature.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46948768

Who made Rob Maclean's team of the Scottish Cup fourth round?

The weekend Scottish Cup ties threw up some surprises and outstanding performances. Here, BBC commentator Rob Maclean reveals his picks for team of the fourth round. Formation 4-3-3: Scott Bain (Celtic); Tony Ralston (Celtic), Craig McCracken (Auchinleck Talbot), Stuart Findlay (Kilmarnock), Gordon Pope (Auchinleck Talbot); Jamie Glasgow (Auchinleck Talbot), Ryan Gauld (Hibernian), Daryl Horgan (Hibernian); Lewis Vaughan (Raith Rovers), Brian Graham (Ross County), Scott Sinclair (Celtic). Goalkeeper - Scott Bain Celtic stand-in keeper Scott Bain's save on Saturday which stopped an Airdrieonians equaliser was so good it came in five instalments. That's how many stops he made in the space of a 10-second goalmouth scramble at the end of the first half as the League One team tried to spring a surprise. Media playback is not supported on this device Celtic goalkeeper Scott Bain's denies Airdrie with five of the best Defenders - Tony Ralston, Craig McCracken, Stuart Findlay, Gordon Pope As Celtic continue their search for a right-back, 20-year-old Tony Ralston has to be worthy of consideration. He's had loan spells with Queen's Park and Dundee United to give him game time and the Scotland Under-21 international was an eye catcher in the 3-0 Scottish Cup defeat of Airdrie. Defender Craig McCracken has a happy habit of scoring big goals. His stoppage-time winner in last May's Junior Cup final took the trophy to Auchinleck Talbot for a 12th time. On Saturday, his 78th-minute header against Ayr United delivered the biggest shock of the Scottish Cup fourth round. Media playback is not supported on this device What a goal! Kilmarnock's Stuart Findlay scores cup cracker Another central defender in great goal-scoring form at the weekend was Kilmarnock's Stuart Findlay. His stunning left-foot strike was the opener in Killie's 2-0 home win against Forfar, which set up a likely last-16 Scottish Cup meeting with Rangers. Gordon Pope is the Auchinleck postie and a long-serving player in the Talbot team. An offside flag wrongly denied him a Scottish Cup goal against Hearts seven years ago but he's heading back to Tynecastle in a few weeks after playing a big part in that sensational Ayrshire derby win on Saturday. Media playback is not supported on this device Scottish Cup: Watch the moment Auchinleck Talbot became giant killers Midfielders - Jamie Glasgow, Ryan Gauld, Daryl Horgan Jamie Glasgow epitomised the impressive work ethic of the Auchinleck Talbot team as the minnows of the competition showed local rivals Ayr the exit door. Midfielder Glasgow was a bundle of energy as the underdogs got the result they richly deserved. Ryan Gauld and Hibs could be just the right fit. The on-loan Sporting Lisbon midfielder made a classy contribution to the 4-0 Scottish Cup defeat of Elgin City and, while there are obviously bigger challenges to come, the former Dundee United youngster promises to be a great signing. Gauld might have grabbed the attention but it was midfield partner Daryl Horgan who scored two of the goals that eased Hibs into the cup's last 16. The Irishman is a big talent who just needs to come up with the goods on a more regular basis. Forwards - Lewis Vaughan, Brian Graham, Scott Sinclair Lewis Vaughan's hat-trick was the highlight of Raith Rovers' derby defeat of Dunfermline at Stark's Park on Saturday. He's been injured and missed a lot of football this season but that's nine goals in 12 games now on the back of a total of 23 last season. Brian Graham has scored goals wherever he's been. Ross County are his ninth club and his double for the Championship promotion chasers secured a cup shock at Fir Park. Top-flight Motherwell were knocked out by two typical close-range finishes from Graham. Scott Sinclair made it six goals in his past five Celtic games as he nabbed a couple in the comfortable cup defeat of Airdrie. He also missed a sitter, had a penalty saved and had a perfectly good goal ruled out. Sinclair's not yet back to his best but he's getting there.

Rob Maclean picks his team of the fourth round from the Scottish Cup. Celtic goalkeeper Scott Bain is the star man with Craig McCracken, Stuart Findlay, Gordon Pope and Jamie Glasgow also make the cut. Hibernian's Ryan Gauld and Auchinleck Talbot's Daryl Horgan are also included.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46948768

Can Democratic presidential nominees outrun their baggage?

As the Democratic field for president becomes more crowded every day, every life decision and each vote is coming under intense scrutiny. Most candidates have a long history in government and public service, which can sometimes be fraught with missteps and misjudgments. From Joe Biden's treatment of Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas hearings to Kirsten Gillibrand's about-face on gun control, many worry the candidates will be tripped up by past actions. PERSPECTIVES Joe Biden was the chairman of the Judiciary Committee during Clarence Thomas' infamous Supreme Court confirmation hearings and refused to allow for a delay in his confirmation vote. He failed to protect Anita Hill from vitriolic questioning and refused to give credence to FBI investigations into Thomas' behavior. Patti Solis Doyle, Biden's campaign chief of staff in 2008, told Politico in September 2018 that while she considers him one of the strongest contenders in the field, his conduct during the Anita Hill hearings could damage his chances. "If Anita Hill believes she's owed an apology, then she's owed an apology, without question. And he should give one," Solis Doyle said. "Certainly, Joe Biden did not do the harassing. Joe Biden ended up voting against Clarence Thomas. But what was done to Anita Hill in those hearings ... it was unseemly. And as chair of the Judiciary back then, he probably should have taken a bigger role in making Anita Hill feel safe and comfortable, and clearly, she did not feel that way." Biden confronts the ghost of Anita Hill Biden has said he stands by the way he conducted the hearings, claiming there was no way he could have prevented members of the committee from asking inappropriate questions. However, he has expressed regret for the way Hill was treated. Per Vox: "Anita Hill was vilified when she came forward by a lot of my colleagues, character assassination. I wish I could've done more to prevent those questions, the way they asked them," he told NBC. "It takes enormous courage for a woman to come forward." He still tops many lists for the most promising presidential candidate. Joe Biden apologizes again about Anita Hill during the Kavanaugh firestorm New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand announced her intention to run for president on "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert." Gillibrand has branded herself a liberal crusader during her time in the Senate, taking on issues like sexual assault in the military and on college campuses. However, some have expressed concerns about Gillibrand's rapidly changing political views. Before inheriting Hillary Clinton's Senate seat, Gillibrand represented a rural district in upstate New York. While in this position, she was much more politically moderate, particularly on gun control. Per the Washington Post: Gillibrand overhauled her political identity during this period, abandoning the conservative positions that made her popular upstate and embracing or even moving further left than the liberal consensus on guns, immigration, Wall Street and same-sex marriage. As the Democratic Party itself moved left, she staked out positions popular with the party's swelling base of liberals, a posture most evident when she called for abolishing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. She has voted against President Trump's agenda more than any other senator. 'I will stand up for what I believe in' Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand says -- but what she believes quickly changed as she moved from House to Senate Gillibrand has said her changing opinions were based not on political calculation but on exposure to new people and issues. Per Newsday: "I recognized that my focus on the concerns of my upstate district were not enough, I needed to focus on the concerns of the whole state," she said on CBS. "I met with families who were being torn apart because of policies that I did not have enough compassion and empathy for. So I recognized I was wrong." Gillibrand: Regrets past views but ready for Trump California Sen. Kamala Harris has also thrown her hat into the presidential ring, running as a progressive liberal candidate. But many are worried she is much more conservative than she has been portrayed. Before serving in the Senate, Harris was the attorney general for California, where she had a reputation for running a somewhat hardline law-and-order office. In an op-ed for the New York Times, Lara Bazelon, the former director of the Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent in Los Angeles, noted Harris had frequently fought to maintain conservative criminal justice policies and uphold potentially wrongful convictions. Consider her record as San Francisco's district attorney from 2004 to 2011. Ms. Harris was criticized in 2010 for withholding information about a police laboratory technician who had been accused of "intentionally sabotaging" her work and stealing drugs from the lab. After a memo surfaced showing that Ms. Harris's deputies knew about the technician's wrongdoing and recent conviction, but failed to alert defense lawyers, a judge condemned Ms. Harris's indifference to the systemic violation of the defendants' constitutional rights. Kamala Harris was not a 'progressive prosecutor' Harris' campaign disputes these claims, saying they are taken out of context and imply that Harris had control over the actions of every single prosecutor in the state's office. Lily Adams, Harris' spokesperson, told CNN: "In 2004, when most prosecutors were using a tough on crime approach, Senator Harris was starting Back on Track in 2004 which diverted young people charged with first time drug offenses into apprenticeship and training programs instead of decades long prison sentences. When she was Attorney General, she brought accountability to the system with the first statewide training on implicit bias and procedural justice in the country, body cameras to the agents at DOJ, launched multiple pattern and practice investigations and demanded data on in-custody deaths and police shooting be made available to the public." Kamala Harris takes hits on her criminal justice record The Tylt is focused on debates and conversations around news, current events and pop culture. We provide our community with the opportunity to share their opinions and vote on topics that matter most to them. We actively engage the community and present meaningful data on the debates and conversations as they progress. The Tylt is a place where your opinion counts, literally. The Tylt is an Advance Local Media, LLC property. Join us on Twitter @TheTylt, on Instagram @TheTylt or on Facebook, we'd love to hear what you have to say.

Most Democratic presidential candidates have a long history in government and public service.

pegasus

https://www.nola.com/interact/2019/01/can_democratic_presidential_no.html

Can Democratic presidential nominees outrun their baggage?

As the Democratic field for president becomes more crowded every day, every life decision and each vote is coming under intense scrutiny. Most candidates have a long history in government and public service, which can sometimes be fraught with missteps and misjudgments. From Joe Biden's treatment of Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas hearings to Kirsten Gillibrand's about-face on gun control, many worry the candidates will be tripped up by past actions. PERSPECTIVES Joe Biden was the chairman of the Judiciary Committee during Clarence Thomas' infamous Supreme Court confirmation hearings and refused to allow for a delay in his confirmation vote. He failed to protect Anita Hill from vitriolic questioning and refused to give credence to FBI investigations into Thomas' behavior. Patti Solis Doyle, Biden's campaign chief of staff in 2008, told Politico in September 2018 that while she considers him one of the strongest contenders in the field, his conduct during the Anita Hill hearings could damage his chances. "If Anita Hill believes she's owed an apology, then she's owed an apology, without question. And he should give one," Solis Doyle said. "Certainly, Joe Biden did not do the harassing. Joe Biden ended up voting against Clarence Thomas. But what was done to Anita Hill in those hearings ... it was unseemly. And as chair of the Judiciary back then, he probably should have taken a bigger role in making Anita Hill feel safe and comfortable, and clearly, she did not feel that way." Biden confronts the ghost of Anita Hill Biden has said he stands by the way he conducted the hearings, claiming there was no way he could have prevented members of the committee from asking inappropriate questions. However, he has expressed regret for the way Hill was treated. Per Vox: "Anita Hill was vilified when she came forward by a lot of my colleagues, character assassination. I wish I could've done more to prevent those questions, the way they asked them," he told NBC. "It takes enormous courage for a woman to come forward." He still tops many lists for the most promising presidential candidate. Joe Biden apologizes again about Anita Hill during the Kavanaugh firestorm New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand announced her intention to run for president on "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert." Gillibrand has branded herself a liberal crusader during her time in the Senate, taking on issues like sexual assault in the military and on college campuses. However, some have expressed concerns about Gillibrand's rapidly changing political views. Before inheriting Hillary Clinton's Senate seat, Gillibrand represented a rural district in upstate New York. While in this position, she was much more politically moderate, particularly on gun control. Per the Washington Post: Gillibrand overhauled her political identity during this period, abandoning the conservative positions that made her popular upstate and embracing or even moving further left than the liberal consensus on guns, immigration, Wall Street and same-sex marriage. As the Democratic Party itself moved left, she staked out positions popular with the party's swelling base of liberals, a posture most evident when she called for abolishing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. She has voted against President Trump's agenda more than any other senator. 'I will stand up for what I believe in' Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand says -- but what she believes quickly changed as she moved from House to Senate Gillibrand has said her changing opinions were based not on political calculation but on exposure to new people and issues. Per Newsday: "I recognized that my focus on the concerns of my upstate district were not enough, I needed to focus on the concerns of the whole state," she said on CBS. "I met with families who were being torn apart because of policies that I did not have enough compassion and empathy for. So I recognized I was wrong." Gillibrand: Regrets past views but ready for Trump California Sen. Kamala Harris has also thrown her hat into the presidential ring, running as a progressive liberal candidate. But many are worried she is much more conservative than she has been portrayed. Before serving in the Senate, Harris was the attorney general for California, where she had a reputation for running a somewhat hardline law-and-order office. In an op-ed for the New York Times, Lara Bazelon, the former director of the Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent in Los Angeles, noted Harris had frequently fought to maintain conservative criminal justice policies and uphold potentially wrongful convictions. Consider her record as San Francisco's district attorney from 2004 to 2011. Ms. Harris was criticized in 2010 for withholding information about a police laboratory technician who had been accused of "intentionally sabotaging" her work and stealing drugs from the lab. After a memo surfaced showing that Ms. Harris's deputies knew about the technician's wrongdoing and recent conviction, but failed to alert defense lawyers, a judge condemned Ms. Harris's indifference to the systemic violation of the defendants' constitutional rights. Kamala Harris was not a 'progressive prosecutor' Harris' campaign disputes these claims, saying they are taken out of context and imply that Harris had control over the actions of every single prosecutor in the state's office. Lily Adams, Harris' spokesperson, told CNN: "In 2004, when most prosecutors were using a tough on crime approach, Senator Harris was starting Back on Track in 2004 which diverted young people charged with first time drug offenses into apprenticeship and training programs instead of decades long prison sentences. When she was Attorney General, she brought accountability to the system with the first statewide training on implicit bias and procedural justice in the country, body cameras to the agents at DOJ, launched multiple pattern and practice investigations and demanded data on in-custody deaths and police shooting be made available to the public." Kamala Harris takes hits on her criminal justice record The Tylt is focused on debates and conversations around news, current events and pop culture. We provide our community with the opportunity to share their opinions and vote on topics that matter most to them. We actively engage the community and present meaningful data on the debates and conversations as they progress. The Tylt is a place where your opinion counts, literally. The Tylt is an Advance Local Media, LLC property. Join us on Twitter @TheTylt, on Instagram @TheTylt or on Facebook, we'd love to hear what you have to say.

Democratic presidential candidates have a long history of missteps and misjudgments. Joe Biden's treatment of Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas hearings could damage his chances. Kirsten Gillibrand's about-face on gun control could also hurt her chances.

ctrlsum

https://www.nola.com/interact/2019/01/can_democratic_presidential_no.html

Can Democratic presidential nominees outrun their baggage?

As the Democratic field for president becomes more crowded every day, every life decision and each vote is coming under intense scrutiny. Most candidates have a long history in government and public service, which can sometimes be fraught with missteps and misjudgments. From Joe Biden's treatment of Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas hearings to Kirsten Gillibrand's about-face on gun control, many worry the candidates will be tripped up by past actions. PERSPECTIVES Joe Biden was the chairman of the Judiciary Committee during Clarence Thomas' infamous Supreme Court confirmation hearings and refused to allow for a delay in his confirmation vote. He failed to protect Anita Hill from vitriolic questioning and refused to give credence to FBI investigations into Thomas' behavior. Patti Solis Doyle, Biden's campaign chief of staff in 2008, told Politico in September 2018 that while she considers him one of the strongest contenders in the field, his conduct during the Anita Hill hearings could damage his chances. "If Anita Hill believes she's owed an apology, then she's owed an apology, without question. And he should give one," Solis Doyle said. "Certainly, Joe Biden did not do the harassing. Joe Biden ended up voting against Clarence Thomas. But what was done to Anita Hill in those hearings ... it was unseemly. And as chair of the Judiciary back then, he probably should have taken a bigger role in making Anita Hill feel safe and comfortable, and clearly, she did not feel that way." Biden confronts the ghost of Anita Hill Biden has said he stands by the way he conducted the hearings, claiming there was no way he could have prevented members of the committee from asking inappropriate questions. However, he has expressed regret for the way Hill was treated. Per Vox: "Anita Hill was vilified when she came forward by a lot of my colleagues, character assassination. I wish I could've done more to prevent those questions, the way they asked them," he told NBC. "It takes enormous courage for a woman to come forward." He still tops many lists for the most promising presidential candidate. Joe Biden apologizes again about Anita Hill during the Kavanaugh firestorm New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand announced her intention to run for president on "The Late Show with Stephen Colbert." Gillibrand has branded herself a liberal crusader during her time in the Senate, taking on issues like sexual assault in the military and on college campuses. However, some have expressed concerns about Gillibrand's rapidly changing political views. Before inheriting Hillary Clinton's Senate seat, Gillibrand represented a rural district in upstate New York. While in this position, she was much more politically moderate, particularly on gun control. Per the Washington Post: Gillibrand overhauled her political identity during this period, abandoning the conservative positions that made her popular upstate and embracing or even moving further left than the liberal consensus on guns, immigration, Wall Street and same-sex marriage. As the Democratic Party itself moved left, she staked out positions popular with the party's swelling base of liberals, a posture most evident when she called for abolishing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. She has voted against President Trump's agenda more than any other senator. 'I will stand up for what I believe in' Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand says -- but what she believes quickly changed as she moved from House to Senate Gillibrand has said her changing opinions were based not on political calculation but on exposure to new people and issues. Per Newsday: "I recognized that my focus on the concerns of my upstate district were not enough, I needed to focus on the concerns of the whole state," she said on CBS. "I met with families who were being torn apart because of policies that I did not have enough compassion and empathy for. So I recognized I was wrong." Gillibrand: Regrets past views but ready for Trump California Sen. Kamala Harris has also thrown her hat into the presidential ring, running as a progressive liberal candidate. But many are worried she is much more conservative than she has been portrayed. Before serving in the Senate, Harris was the attorney general for California, where she had a reputation for running a somewhat hardline law-and-order office. In an op-ed for the New York Times, Lara Bazelon, the former director of the Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent in Los Angeles, noted Harris had frequently fought to maintain conservative criminal justice policies and uphold potentially wrongful convictions. Consider her record as San Francisco's district attorney from 2004 to 2011. Ms. Harris was criticized in 2010 for withholding information about a police laboratory technician who had been accused of "intentionally sabotaging" her work and stealing drugs from the lab. After a memo surfaced showing that Ms. Harris's deputies knew about the technician's wrongdoing and recent conviction, but failed to alert defense lawyers, a judge condemned Ms. Harris's indifference to the systemic violation of the defendants' constitutional rights. Kamala Harris was not a 'progressive prosecutor' Harris' campaign disputes these claims, saying they are taken out of context and imply that Harris had control over the actions of every single prosecutor in the state's office. Lily Adams, Harris' spokesperson, told CNN: "In 2004, when most prosecutors were using a tough on crime approach, Senator Harris was starting Back on Track in 2004 which diverted young people charged with first time drug offenses into apprenticeship and training programs instead of decades long prison sentences. When she was Attorney General, she brought accountability to the system with the first statewide training on implicit bias and procedural justice in the country, body cameras to the agents at DOJ, launched multiple pattern and practice investigations and demanded data on in-custody deaths and police shooting be made available to the public." Kamala Harris takes hits on her criminal justice record The Tylt is focused on debates and conversations around news, current events and pop culture. We provide our community with the opportunity to share their opinions and vote on topics that matter most to them. We actively engage the community and present meaningful data on the debates and conversations as they progress. The Tylt is a place where your opinion counts, literally. The Tylt is an Advance Local Media, LLC property. Join us on Twitter @TheTylt, on Instagram @TheTylt or on Facebook, we'd love to hear what you have to say.

Democratic presidential candidates have a long history of missteps and misjudgments. Joe Biden's treatment of Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas hearings could damage his chances. Kirsten Gillibrand's about-face on gun control could also hurt her chances in the 2016 race.

ctrlsum

https://www.nola.com/interact/2019/01/can_democratic_presidential_no.html

What was Kindertransport?

Getty Images Thousands of children were transported to safety on the Kindertransport, ahead of World War Two Kindertransport was the name given to the mission which took thousands of children to safety ahead of World War Two (1939-1945). It helped 10,000 children to escape from Adolf Hitler's reign of terror in parts of Europe controlled by the Nazis. It is called this as kinder means 'children' in German. It was an extremely difficult experience for these children as they were told that they would need to leave their family and friends behind - and there was a chance they might never see them again. Their parents were not allowed to go with them. To enjoy the CBBC Newsround website at its best you will need to have JavaScript turned on. Feo's story: 'My mother was supposed to follow me to England - but she never made it' Many had to learn a new language, as they didn't speak English, and lots of Jewish children were sent to live in non-Jewish households. The Kindertransport mission unfolded between November 1938 and September 1939, when World War Two broke out. Getty Images At the time, the Nazi party - led by Adolf Hitler (seen in this picture) - were in power in Germany At the time, the Nazis were in power in Germany - and they were making life unbearable for Jewish people. Laws had been made which discriminated against them and many people were being murdered. On 9 November 1938, there was a night of particularly terrible violence against Jewish people. Ninety-one people murdered, 30,000 were arrested and sent to concentration camps, and 267 synagogues were destroyed. It became known as Kristallnacht - the 'night of broken glass' - because there was lots of smashed glass all over the streets from shops that were raided. Despite the Nazis' brutal regime, many countries had not wanted to take in such a great number of Jewish refugees to save them from what they were going through. But after Kristallnacht, the British government agreed that some Jewish children under the age of 17 could temporarily come to Britain to safety. Over the coming nine months, thousands were rescued. The first Kindertransport from Berlin in Germany departed for the UK on 1 December 1938. Getty Images Thousands of children had to leave their parents behind and many of them would never see them again The first train from Vienna left on 10 December in the same year. When the German army entered Czechoslovakia in March 1939, trains were quickly arranged from here too, and transport also took children to safety from Poland in March and August 1939. The last Kindertransport train to leave Germany departed from Berlin on 1 September 1939 - the very same day that Germany invaded Poland. Britain declared war on Germany two days later. To enjoy the CBBC Newsround website at its best you will need to have JavaScript turned on. Kindertransport: One survivor talks about how Kindertransport saved him Up to 10,000 youngsters from Germany, Austria Poland and Czechoslovakia arrived in the UK. Children as young as five years old and up to the age of 17 were taken to safety. Some of the older children who had been rescued went to live in hostels. Meanwhile, younger children were sent to live with foster families. The government did not pay for the children to be looked after, though. Each child had to have a sponsor to do this. Many parents of children who had been rescued on Kindertransport were killed in the war. So lots of children chose to stay in the UK and build new lives for themselves, as they had no family to go home to. Others returned to their original home, while some rejoined their families who had resettled elsewhere, like in the US. While the number of children rescued might not seem very high when you think that millions of Jewish people - including children - were killed by the Nazis, the story is a very important part of World War Two as it was a matter of life or death for the thousands who were rescued. The children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of those who were rescued wouldn't be here today if it wasn't for the mission which took these thousands of children to safety. There is a statue at Liverpool Street Station in London, where the young refugees arrived 80 years ago. Many survivors have talked about their experiences in order to help people to understand what it was like.

Kindertransport was the name given to the mission which took thousands of children to safety ahead of World War Two.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/46877532

What was Kindertransport?

Getty Images Thousands of children were transported to safety on the Kindertransport, ahead of World War Two Kindertransport was the name given to the mission which took thousands of children to safety ahead of World War Two (1939-1945). It helped 10,000 children to escape from Adolf Hitler's reign of terror in parts of Europe controlled by the Nazis. It is called this as kinder means 'children' in German. It was an extremely difficult experience for these children as they were told that they would need to leave their family and friends behind - and there was a chance they might never see them again. Their parents were not allowed to go with them. To enjoy the CBBC Newsround website at its best you will need to have JavaScript turned on. Feo's story: 'My mother was supposed to follow me to England - but she never made it' Many had to learn a new language, as they didn't speak English, and lots of Jewish children were sent to live in non-Jewish households. The Kindertransport mission unfolded between November 1938 and September 1939, when World War Two broke out. Getty Images At the time, the Nazi party - led by Adolf Hitler (seen in this picture) - were in power in Germany At the time, the Nazis were in power in Germany - and they were making life unbearable for Jewish people. Laws had been made which discriminated against them and many people were being murdered. On 9 November 1938, there was a night of particularly terrible violence against Jewish people. Ninety-one people murdered, 30,000 were arrested and sent to concentration camps, and 267 synagogues were destroyed. It became known as Kristallnacht - the 'night of broken glass' - because there was lots of smashed glass all over the streets from shops that were raided. Despite the Nazis' brutal regime, many countries had not wanted to take in such a great number of Jewish refugees to save them from what they were going through. But after Kristallnacht, the British government agreed that some Jewish children under the age of 17 could temporarily come to Britain to safety. Over the coming nine months, thousands were rescued. The first Kindertransport from Berlin in Germany departed for the UK on 1 December 1938. Getty Images Thousands of children had to leave their parents behind and many of them would never see them again The first train from Vienna left on 10 December in the same year. When the German army entered Czechoslovakia in March 1939, trains were quickly arranged from here too, and transport also took children to safety from Poland in March and August 1939. The last Kindertransport train to leave Germany departed from Berlin on 1 September 1939 - the very same day that Germany invaded Poland. Britain declared war on Germany two days later. To enjoy the CBBC Newsround website at its best you will need to have JavaScript turned on. Kindertransport: One survivor talks about how Kindertransport saved him Up to 10,000 youngsters from Germany, Austria Poland and Czechoslovakia arrived in the UK. Children as young as five years old and up to the age of 17 were taken to safety. Some of the older children who had been rescued went to live in hostels. Meanwhile, younger children were sent to live with foster families. The government did not pay for the children to be looked after, though. Each child had to have a sponsor to do this. Many parents of children who had been rescued on Kindertransport were killed in the war. So lots of children chose to stay in the UK and build new lives for themselves, as they had no family to go home to. Others returned to their original home, while some rejoined their families who had resettled elsewhere, like in the US. While the number of children rescued might not seem very high when you think that millions of Jewish people - including children - were killed by the Nazis, the story is a very important part of World War Two as it was a matter of life or death for the thousands who were rescued. The children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of those who were rescued wouldn't be here today if it wasn't for the mission which took these thousands of children to safety. There is a statue at Liverpool Street Station in London, where the young refugees arrived 80 years ago. Many survivors have talked about their experiences in order to help people to understand what it was like.

Kindertransport was a mission which took thousands of children to safety ahead of World War Two (1939-1945) It helped 10,000 children escape from Adolf Hitler's reign of terror in parts of Europe controlled by the Nazis.

ctrlsum

https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/46877532

What was Kindertransport?

Getty Images Thousands of children were transported to safety on the Kindertransport, ahead of World War Two Kindertransport was the name given to the mission which took thousands of children to safety ahead of World War Two (1939-1945). It helped 10,000 children to escape from Adolf Hitler's reign of terror in parts of Europe controlled by the Nazis. It is called this as kinder means 'children' in German. It was an extremely difficult experience for these children as they were told that they would need to leave their family and friends behind - and there was a chance they might never see them again. Their parents were not allowed to go with them. To enjoy the CBBC Newsround website at its best you will need to have JavaScript turned on. Feo's story: 'My mother was supposed to follow me to England - but she never made it' Many had to learn a new language, as they didn't speak English, and lots of Jewish children were sent to live in non-Jewish households. The Kindertransport mission unfolded between November 1938 and September 1939, when World War Two broke out. Getty Images At the time, the Nazi party - led by Adolf Hitler (seen in this picture) - were in power in Germany At the time, the Nazis were in power in Germany - and they were making life unbearable for Jewish people. Laws had been made which discriminated against them and many people were being murdered. On 9 November 1938, there was a night of particularly terrible violence against Jewish people. Ninety-one people murdered, 30,000 were arrested and sent to concentration camps, and 267 synagogues were destroyed. It became known as Kristallnacht - the 'night of broken glass' - because there was lots of smashed glass all over the streets from shops that were raided. Despite the Nazis' brutal regime, many countries had not wanted to take in such a great number of Jewish refugees to save them from what they were going through. But after Kristallnacht, the British government agreed that some Jewish children under the age of 17 could temporarily come to Britain to safety. Over the coming nine months, thousands were rescued. The first Kindertransport from Berlin in Germany departed for the UK on 1 December 1938. Getty Images Thousands of children had to leave their parents behind and many of them would never see them again The first train from Vienna left on 10 December in the same year. When the German army entered Czechoslovakia in March 1939, trains were quickly arranged from here too, and transport also took children to safety from Poland in March and August 1939. The last Kindertransport train to leave Germany departed from Berlin on 1 September 1939 - the very same day that Germany invaded Poland. Britain declared war on Germany two days later. To enjoy the CBBC Newsround website at its best you will need to have JavaScript turned on. Kindertransport: One survivor talks about how Kindertransport saved him Up to 10,000 youngsters from Germany, Austria Poland and Czechoslovakia arrived in the UK. Children as young as five years old and up to the age of 17 were taken to safety. Some of the older children who had been rescued went to live in hostels. Meanwhile, younger children were sent to live with foster families. The government did not pay for the children to be looked after, though. Each child had to have a sponsor to do this. Many parents of children who had been rescued on Kindertransport were killed in the war. So lots of children chose to stay in the UK and build new lives for themselves, as they had no family to go home to. Others returned to their original home, while some rejoined their families who had resettled elsewhere, like in the US. While the number of children rescued might not seem very high when you think that millions of Jewish people - including children - were killed by the Nazis, the story is a very important part of World War Two as it was a matter of life or death for the thousands who were rescued. The children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of those who were rescued wouldn't be here today if it wasn't for the mission which took these thousands of children to safety. There is a statue at Liverpool Street Station in London, where the young refugees arrived 80 years ago. Many survivors have talked about their experiences in order to help people to understand what it was like.

Kindertransport was the name given to the mission which took thousands of children to safety ahead of World War Two. It helped 10,000 children to escape from Adolf Hitler's reign of terror in parts of Europe controlled by the Nazis. It unfolded between November 1938 and September 1939, when World War Two broke out.

pegasus

https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/46877532

Has Usain Bolt retired from football?

Getty Images World-record breaking sprinter, Usain Bolt, has hinted that a football career might not be his thing after all. The runner trialled with a number of football clubs in 2018 following his retirement from sprint athletics. When asked about how his dreams of entering the football world were going, he said "It was fun while it lasted." Bolt was offered a two-year contract with Maltese club Valletta, but turned the offer down in October. He's suggested he is now going to focus more on his businesses. Getty Images Usain Bolt has won many Olympic records and holds the world record for the fastest 100m sprint in 9.58 seconds! I'm just doing many different things ... the sports life is over, so I'm now moving into different businesses, I have a lot of things in the pipeline, so as I say, I'm just dabbling in everything and trying to be a business man now. Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

Usain Bolt has hinted that a football career might not be his thing after all. The runner trialled with a number of football clubs in 2018 following his retirement from sprint athletics.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/46964441

Has Usain Bolt retired from football?

Getty Images World-record breaking sprinter, Usain Bolt, has hinted that a football career might not be his thing after all. The runner trialled with a number of football clubs in 2018 following his retirement from sprint athletics. When asked about how his dreams of entering the football world were going, he said "It was fun while it lasted." Bolt was offered a two-year contract with Maltese club Valletta, but turned the offer down in October. He's suggested he is now going to focus more on his businesses. Getty Images Usain Bolt has won many Olympic records and holds the world record for the fastest 100m sprint in 9.58 seconds! I'm just doing many different things ... the sports life is over, so I'm now moving into different businesses, I have a lot of things in the pipeline, so as I say, I'm just dabbling in everything and trying to be a business man now. Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

Usain Bolt has hinted that a football career might not be his thing after all. The runner trialled with a number of football clubs in 2018 following his retirement from sprint athletics. Bolt was offered a two-year contract with Maltese club Valletta, but turned the offer down.

bart

https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/46964441

How Will J.K. Rowling Continue To Dominate Markets In 2019?

J.K. Rowling has been a household name for over twenty years, and last year alone saw the release of Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald - the second film scripted by the Harry Potter author - as well as the publication of Lethal White, the fourth novel in her bestselling Cormoran Strike series written under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith. Listed as #42 on the Worlds Highest-Paid Celebrities List with estimated earnings of $54 million as of July 2018, a new Wizarding World brand logo was even created in 2018 to identify official works inspired by her fictional world. Box office numbers for Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, the second film in the five-part Fantastic Beasts series, were lower than expected, opening with global takings of $253 million and bringing in a total gross of just over $650 million to date. Fantastic Beasts 3 was due to start production in Summer this year, however, Warner Bros Entertainment recently informed Deadline that production has been delayed until Fall, reflecting the new approach of Warner Bros executives: not rushing big productions. The future success of the series looks pinned on the third instalment, and with an original expected release date of November 2020 (continuing with the trend of the first two films), the delay in production this year could give the time needed to address plot questions raised by the second instalment, and increase the overall profitability of the series. Books continue to be Rowlings strongest suit, and last year the Harry Potter series celebrated 500 million copies sold. In their latest report, U.K. Harry Potter publisher Bloomsbury shared intent to increase focus on Harry Potter as one of its strongest assets. Sales of the Harry Potter series have grown by 31%, indicating the continuing success of Rowlings publications into 2019. Bloomsbury recently announced that Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, illustrated by Jim Kay, will publish on October 8th, and with the upcoming celebrations of Harry Potter Book Night and the 20th anniversary of the publication of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, 2019 looks to be another opportunity for 'special anniversary' sales. Harry Potter and the Cursed Child opened on London's West End in 2016, and on Broadway in 2018. The play recently set a new house record at Broadway's Lyric Theatre, grossing over $2.5 million in ticket sales for the week ending December 30, 2018, passing the high mark set by the two-part play for the week ending November 25, 2018 ($2.3 million). Winning 24 major theater awards in the U.K. and a record-breaking nine Olivier awards and six Tony Awards, the play continues to fill theaters on a daily basis. Having just opened preview performances at The Princess Theatre in Melbourne, Cursed Child will also open at San Franciscos Curran this Fall, followed by Hambergs Mehr! Theater am Gromarkt in 2020, showing no signs of growth slowing down anytime soon. In January 2018, Universal Orlando Resort hosted its fifth annual Celebration of Harry Potter event, an exclusive weekend dedicated to fans of J.K. Rowlings Wizarding World. Universal Orlando Resort recently announced that the event will not take place in 2019, to allow time to work on exciting new experiences for guests to continue to celebrate The Wizarding World, including a new thrill ride on its way to The Wizarding World of Harry Potter Hogsmeade, as well as other experiences that have yet to be announced. With studio tours showcasing the behind-the-scenes of the Harry Potter films based in London and Hollywood, as well as the global touring exhibit Harry Potter The Exhibition, visitors wanting to know more about the film series and get a closer look at the costumes, props, sets and secrets behind the movies are a constant supply of income, with thousands of guests visiting the exhibit each day. Warner Media International Limited (previously Timer Warner Limited) reported in 2017 that the studio tour had made $435.7 million in revenue since opening to visitors in 2012. Warner Bros. Studios Leavesden Limited most recently reported a 15% increase in turnover in the year ending December 2017, as a result of ongoing investment in the companys facilities at Leavesden. The tour itself brought in over 100 million ($128 million USD) of this turnover in 2017 - 69% of the overall turnover. Special events at Warner Bros Studio Tour - The Making of Harry Potter continue to bring new and old guests alike. Introducing The Art Department and Valentines Dinner in the Great Hall will kick off their 2019 programme, and their announcement that a new feature is on the way continues a tradition of marketing plans designed to engage Potter fans. Wizarding World merchandise continues to expand at an almost alarming pace, from new ventures in tech, to various ranges at global retail outlets. Jim Citys 2018 mobile game Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery averages a 4.5 star rating on Apples App Store and Androids Google Play store, and received the Google Play Best of 2018 Fan Favorite award in 5 countries. Hogwarts Mystery is the first mobile app to release under the new label Portkey Games (from Warner Bros Interactive Entertainment), created to bring gamers and fans new gaming experiences that allow them to delve into the magic of the Wizarding World in immersive ways where they can define their own Wizarding World story." In 2019, new mobile game Harry Potter: Wizards Unite will launch under Warner Bros Entertainment, Portkey Games and Niantic. Niantic recently filed that it had raised $245 million in Series C financing leading up to the eagerly anticipated launch of Harry Potter: Wizards Unite, helping ensure that it will be a strong contender to rival Niantic's viral game, Pokmon GO. Official Harry Potter site and digital publishing and e-commerce company, Pottermore Limited recently reported an expected" decrease in revenue and pre-tax profit, with revenue decreasing from 40.3 million ($52.2 million) in the year ending March 2017 to 32.8 million ($42.5 million) in the year ending March 2018. However, the company shows an overall increase in sales from 2015, thanks to a strong sales performance of the Harry Potter eBooks and digital audiobooks, as well as investment in franchise planning with Warner Bros and celebrations of the 20th anniversary of Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone in the U.K.. Digitalisation and updating of Rowling's previous works and companion books, and the sales of special collections have offered the opportunity to bring in higher revenue in recent years, and collaborations with Audible on new projects (such as new audiobook project Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald - Makers, Mysteries and Magic) offer new ways forward in selling fans digital Wizarding World experiences. Overall, 2019 looks to be another year of expanding J.K. Rowling's Wizarding World beyond the Harry Potter books and film series, and marketing strategies capturing the attention of fans worldwide. The delay in Fantastic Beasts 3 production will likely be an opportunity to focus on developing the series in response to negative reviews, whilst new ventures in gaming, publishing, theater and new additions to The Wizarding World of Harry Potter and the Warner Bros Studio Tour will keep the franchise at the forefront of consumers' minds long into 2020 and beyond.

J.K. Rowling is one of the highest-paid celebrities in the world with an estimated earnings of $54 million. The Harry Potter author is expected to continue to dominate markets into 2019.

ctrlsum

https://www.forbes.com/sites/emmapocock/2019/01/23/how-will-j-k-rowling-continue-to-dominate-markets-in-2019/

How Will J.K. Rowling Continue To Dominate Markets In 2019?

J.K. Rowling has been a household name for over twenty years, and last year alone saw the release of Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald - the second film scripted by the Harry Potter author - as well as the publication of Lethal White, the fourth novel in her bestselling Cormoran Strike series written under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith. Listed as #42 on the Worlds Highest-Paid Celebrities List with estimated earnings of $54 million as of July 2018, a new Wizarding World brand logo was even created in 2018 to identify official works inspired by her fictional world. Box office numbers for Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, the second film in the five-part Fantastic Beasts series, were lower than expected, opening with global takings of $253 million and bringing in a total gross of just over $650 million to date. Fantastic Beasts 3 was due to start production in Summer this year, however, Warner Bros Entertainment recently informed Deadline that production has been delayed until Fall, reflecting the new approach of Warner Bros executives: not rushing big productions. The future success of the series looks pinned on the third instalment, and with an original expected release date of November 2020 (continuing with the trend of the first two films), the delay in production this year could give the time needed to address plot questions raised by the second instalment, and increase the overall profitability of the series. Books continue to be Rowlings strongest suit, and last year the Harry Potter series celebrated 500 million copies sold. In their latest report, U.K. Harry Potter publisher Bloomsbury shared intent to increase focus on Harry Potter as one of its strongest assets. Sales of the Harry Potter series have grown by 31%, indicating the continuing success of Rowlings publications into 2019. Bloomsbury recently announced that Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, illustrated by Jim Kay, will publish on October 8th, and with the upcoming celebrations of Harry Potter Book Night and the 20th anniversary of the publication of Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, 2019 looks to be another opportunity for 'special anniversary' sales. Harry Potter and the Cursed Child opened on London's West End in 2016, and on Broadway in 2018. The play recently set a new house record at Broadway's Lyric Theatre, grossing over $2.5 million in ticket sales for the week ending December 30, 2018, passing the high mark set by the two-part play for the week ending November 25, 2018 ($2.3 million). Winning 24 major theater awards in the U.K. and a record-breaking nine Olivier awards and six Tony Awards, the play continues to fill theaters on a daily basis. Having just opened preview performances at The Princess Theatre in Melbourne, Cursed Child will also open at San Franciscos Curran this Fall, followed by Hambergs Mehr! Theater am Gromarkt in 2020, showing no signs of growth slowing down anytime soon. In January 2018, Universal Orlando Resort hosted its fifth annual Celebration of Harry Potter event, an exclusive weekend dedicated to fans of J.K. Rowlings Wizarding World. Universal Orlando Resort recently announced that the event will not take place in 2019, to allow time to work on exciting new experiences for guests to continue to celebrate The Wizarding World, including a new thrill ride on its way to The Wizarding World of Harry Potter Hogsmeade, as well as other experiences that have yet to be announced. With studio tours showcasing the behind-the-scenes of the Harry Potter films based in London and Hollywood, as well as the global touring exhibit Harry Potter The Exhibition, visitors wanting to know more about the film series and get a closer look at the costumes, props, sets and secrets behind the movies are a constant supply of income, with thousands of guests visiting the exhibit each day. Warner Media International Limited (previously Timer Warner Limited) reported in 2017 that the studio tour had made $435.7 million in revenue since opening to visitors in 2012. Warner Bros. Studios Leavesden Limited most recently reported a 15% increase in turnover in the year ending December 2017, as a result of ongoing investment in the companys facilities at Leavesden. The tour itself brought in over 100 million ($128 million USD) of this turnover in 2017 - 69% of the overall turnover. Special events at Warner Bros Studio Tour - The Making of Harry Potter continue to bring new and old guests alike. Introducing The Art Department and Valentines Dinner in the Great Hall will kick off their 2019 programme, and their announcement that a new feature is on the way continues a tradition of marketing plans designed to engage Potter fans. Wizarding World merchandise continues to expand at an almost alarming pace, from new ventures in tech, to various ranges at global retail outlets. Jim Citys 2018 mobile game Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery averages a 4.5 star rating on Apples App Store and Androids Google Play store, and received the Google Play Best of 2018 Fan Favorite award in 5 countries. Hogwarts Mystery is the first mobile app to release under the new label Portkey Games (from Warner Bros Interactive Entertainment), created to bring gamers and fans new gaming experiences that allow them to delve into the magic of the Wizarding World in immersive ways where they can define their own Wizarding World story." In 2019, new mobile game Harry Potter: Wizards Unite will launch under Warner Bros Entertainment, Portkey Games and Niantic. Niantic recently filed that it had raised $245 million in Series C financing leading up to the eagerly anticipated launch of Harry Potter: Wizards Unite, helping ensure that it will be a strong contender to rival Niantic's viral game, Pokmon GO. Official Harry Potter site and digital publishing and e-commerce company, Pottermore Limited recently reported an expected" decrease in revenue and pre-tax profit, with revenue decreasing from 40.3 million ($52.2 million) in the year ending March 2017 to 32.8 million ($42.5 million) in the year ending March 2018. However, the company shows an overall increase in sales from 2015, thanks to a strong sales performance of the Harry Potter eBooks and digital audiobooks, as well as investment in franchise planning with Warner Bros and celebrations of the 20th anniversary of Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone in the U.K.. Digitalisation and updating of Rowling's previous works and companion books, and the sales of special collections have offered the opportunity to bring in higher revenue in recent years, and collaborations with Audible on new projects (such as new audiobook project Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald - Makers, Mysteries and Magic) offer new ways forward in selling fans digital Wizarding World experiences. Overall, 2019 looks to be another year of expanding J.K. Rowling's Wizarding World beyond the Harry Potter books and film series, and marketing strategies capturing the attention of fans worldwide. The delay in Fantastic Beasts 3 production will likely be an opportunity to focus on developing the series in response to negative reviews, whilst new ventures in gaming, publishing, theater and new additions to The Wizarding World of Harry Potter and the Warner Bros Studio Tour will keep the franchise at the forefront of consumers' minds long into 2020 and beyond.

J.K. Rowling is one of the highest-paid celebrities in the world with an estimated earnings of $54 million as of July 2018. The Harry Potter author is expected to continue to dominate the market into 2019 with the release of Fantastic Beasts 3 and the publication of Lethal White.

ctrlsum

https://www.forbes.com/sites/emmapocock/2019/01/23/how-will-j-k-rowling-continue-to-dominate-markets-in-2019/

Can Arsenal Overcome Its Injury Woes?

Hector Bellerin went down like a sniper had taken him out from the roof of the Emirates during the second half of Arsenal's 2-0 win over Chelsea last Saturday. When video replay showed contact with another player didn't cause him to go to the turf, it was clear this injury would be a bad one. The low-key injuries are often the worst. Indeed, you could classify Bellerin's injury among "the worst." The 23-year-old Spaniard ruptured one of his cruciate knee ligaments and will miss the remainder of the season. It's possible he won't be fully recovered for the start of the 2019-20 campaign in August either. But this is far from the first injury Arsenal has faced this season. In fact, the Chelsea match marked Bellerin's return to the starting lineup following a month-long absence because of a calf injury, and now he'll return to a packed injury list. In addition to Bellerin, central defender Rob Holding will miss the rest of the season after tearing his ACL against Manchester United in December, while striker Danny Welbeck is out for the season with a broken ankle suffered in November. That's on top of the run-of-the-mill injuries that have kept players such as full-back Nacho Monreal, midfielder Henrikh Mkhitaryan, full-back Stefan Lichsteiner and central defenders Konstantinos Mavropanos off the pitch. Arsenals first season under a new manager in two decades was always going to be tough and the slew of injuries on the back line have made it all the tougher. Now Unai Emery and his men enter the backstretch of the season as the walking wounded but with the hope they can overcome these injury woes and still make a return to the UEFA Champions League. The biggest issue with all the injuries is that the majority are coming on defense, which was Arsenal's weakest area even when at full strength. The Gunner's 32 goals conceded is the 10th-most in the Premier League this season, and their four clean sheets ranks 15th, while the four teams ahead of them in the EPL table have at least nine apiece. The severe injuries Arsenal has suffered this season would hamper any team. Unluckily, most have also come at the one spot they can ill afford more attrition. Holding's absence has been the toughest to deal with because Arsenal was already thin (and bad) in central defense. While Sokratis of Shkodran Mustafi struggled at the back during the first half of the season, Holding was coming on strong as the lone bright spot and was beginning to solidify himself as an automatic selection at central defender. With Movrapanos and Monreal, who moonlights as a central defender, out at the time of Holding's injury, and Laurent Koscielny just returning from a long injury spell of his own, Arsenal was left with only Sokratis and Mustafi at the back for much of December. Emery was even forced to experiment with Granit Xhaka at center back. Koscielny has now fully recovered and reclaimed his spot in the lineup, having started Arsenal's last four Premier League matches, and that's an enormous boost for the defense. While Koscielny isn't as quick or athletic as he once was, he's a leader with plenty of experience running a defense. Intelligent defending was something the Gunners clearly lacked in the first half of the season, and Koscielny's ability to provide intelligence and a calming presence in the back upon his return has been a tremendous boon. Bellerin's absence is deleterious because of just how good he is when at this best, he's one of the top right-back in the Premier League but Arsenal isn't actually hurting for options at his position. The obvious candidate to replace him is young Ainsley Maitland-Niles, who shifted to Bellerin's post when the Spaniard was stretched off in the Chelsea match. Maitland-Niles, 21, is one of the most promising young talents at Arsenal, and fans have been clamoring for him to get a chance in the starting XI, though none will have wanted it to happen like this. After him, there's the Lichsteiner, a much more experienced and veteran presence, if well past his prime. Between those two, Arsenal should be fine at right-back, but should worst come to worst, Carl Jenkinson is still knocking about at the club and could be used even though he might be the least-talented player at the club. Of the long-term absences, Welbeck's has been the easiest to cope with because of the other options Arsenal has in attack. Welbeck was always going to be used as backup to Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang and Alexandre Lacazette. Without Welbeck, Arsenal is obviously thinner at the front, but not to the point where it's been a hindrance. The Gunners rank third in the league in terms of goals scored (48) and they should stay near the top for the rest of the season barring further injury to attackers. With the impending return of Mkhitaryan, one of the team's best supporting attackers when fit this season, Arsenal's offense could even improve in the coming weeks. Emery has already ruled out signing an emergency replacement for Bellerin, citing the three potential replacement mentioned above. It seems unlikely any players will be signed to replace the long-term injured players if only because of the club's current transfer policy. Emery said recently the club can only loan players this January, and the most prominent reported loan targets Denis Suarez, Ever Banega are midfielders. It seems Arsenal will be dancing with who brought 'em. The bright side for Arsenal is that its injury situation isn't the worst in the league. It isn't even the worst in North London. Tottenham finds itself in a fair bit of trouble as well. While none of Spurs' absences are as long-term as Arsenal's, they will be without Harry Kane and Dele Alli, their two best players, until mid-March. On top of that, Son Heung-Min will be away from the team for the rest of January while competing in the Asian Cup of Nations with South Korea. With plenty of tough matches coming up before Kane and Alli are expected to return from injury including two legs against Borussia Dortmund in the Champions League and a North London Derby Tottenham's season could fall apart over this stretch if it can't cope with their absences. For Arsenal to make the top four this season, it will need help, and these injuries to Spurs' stars may be just the help it needs. But that alone won't be enough. The Gunners must also help themselves first and foremost by playing more solid at the back but also by relying on their world-class attackers. They have the best attack force in the league outside of title favorites Liverpool and Manchester City, and that may well be their saving grace. If Arsenal can stay healthy the rest of the way, it may have just enough firepower for a top-four finish.

Hector Bellerin will miss the rest of the season after rupturing his cruciate knee ligaments. Arsenal has already lost Rob Holding, Nacho Monreal and Danny Welbeck to injuries this season. The Gunners' defense has been their weakest area this season, with 32 goals conceded.

ctrlsum

https://www.forbes.com/sites/cybrown/2019/01/23/can-arsenal-overcome-its-injury-woes/

Who are the Black Hebrew Israelites, the religious group in the viral confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial?

The Black Hebrew Israelites, members of which identify themselves as a historic religious group, has taken center stage after some of its members appeared to be part of a controversial confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. over the weekend. A video of high school students from Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky and Native American activist Nathan Phillips went viral. The students, who were in D.C. to participate in the March for Life, were initially accused of mocking Philips and faced immediate backlash for the alleged behavior. VIDEO SHOWS TENSION BETWEEN NATIVE AMERICANS, HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS BEFORE VIRAL CLIP But just hours after a Catholic diocese in Kentucky threatened to expel several high school students involved in the incident, new footage emerged showing tension developing before the confrontation. And conservatives argued the original clip didn't tell the whole story, with many noting members of the Black Hebrew Israelites appeared to instigate the incident. In one of the varying versions of the story of the encounter he told media outlets, Phillips told The Detroit Free Press one of them spit toward the students. Others were "saying some harsh things," he said, and so he decided to "put [himself] in between that, between a rock and hard place." Additionally, Covington student Nick Sandmann, who was seen in the first video, later said in a statement that four members of the Black Hebrew Israelite movement called the students "racists, bigots, white crackers, f----ts, and incest kids." "They also taunted an African-American student from my school by telling him that we would 'harvest his organs,'" he added. Sandmann, who said one of the students asked a teacher chaperoning the trip for permission to "begin our school spirit chants" to drown out the hecklers, added he was trying to defuse the tense situation by remaining "motionless and calm." He also denied taunting Phillips by making faces at him. Instead, he said he smiled at the protester "because I wanted him to know I was not going to become angry, intimidated or be provoked into a larger confrontation." Following the confrontation, the religious group has been thrust into the spotlight for some of the members alleged behavior at the rally. Heres what to know about the Black Hebrew Israelites. The Black Hebrew Israelites sometimes called Black Jews Black Hebrews and Hebrew Israelites, according to Vox are a controversial offshoot of an American religious movement known as Black Israelism, The Washington Post reported. The movement dates back to the 18th century, if not before. More specifically, the movement is rooted in Black Judaism, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which noted the Black Judaism doctrine states when the Kingdom of Israel was destroyed, the Israelites were first scattered across the African continent and then selectively targeted by enemy African tribes who captured and sold them to European slave traders for bondage in the New World. The principles of the Black Hebrew Israelites vary: the group does not appear to have an official creed. In fact, Lewis Gordon, a professor of Africana philosophy at the University of Connecticut, told The Philadelphia Inquirer some sects within the movement identify as Jews, as Christians, and as neither. Some who identify with the group read the Christian bible, while others read the Hebrew Bible. Some believe Jesus was the Messiah while others do not, according to The Post. Overall, there are dozens of Black Hebrew organizations. Many members continue to follow the teachings of a rabbi who founded a congregation in Harlem, New York, in 1919, according to a 2000 report in The New York Times. However, one belief appears to hold true for the majority of those who identify as Black Hebrew Israelites: African Americans are the literal descendants of the Israelites of the Bible and have been severed from their true heritage, The Post reported. The Post reported a branch known as One West began to form in the 1970s and 1980s, or in the years after the civil rights and Black Power movements. One Westers, according to The Post, saw themselves as radical reformers of earlier generations of Hebrew Israelites who had gone astray. They would troop out to street corners dressed in colorful and ornate capes and leather vivid imaginings of what ancient Israelites might look like transported into the urban culture of New York City. They were also early and eager adopters of new media, hosting local television slots and filming their often-confrontational street ministry. Members of the One West group believe Native Americans and Hispanics, in addition to African Americans, are descendants of the Israelites or the original 12 Tribes of Israel. One prominent offshoot on One West is a group known as House of Israel (HOI). Vox reported this sect of Black Israelites are often seen as the fringe sect and are known for their highly confrontational form of street ministry commonly seen in large cities such as Washington, D.C. and New York. KENTUCKY TEEN IN VIRAL VIDEO SAYS HE DID NOTHING PROVOCATIVE: 'I HAD EVERY RIGHT' TO STAND THERE Members of HOI were reportedly present at the Lincoln Memorial confrontation over the weekend. Some Black Israelite groups, such as HOI, have been labeled as hate groups by organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center. The SPLC reported in 2008 that while most Hebrew Israelites are neither explicitly racist nor anti-Semitic and do not advocate violence, there is a rising extremist sector within the Hebrew Israelite movement whose adherents believe that Jews are devilish impostors and who openly condemn whites as evil personified, deserving only death or slavery. Fox News' Gregg Re and Samuel Chamberlain contributed to this report.

The Black Hebrew Israelites are a controversial offshoot of an American religious movement known as Black Israelism.

pegasus

https://www.foxnews.com/us/who-are-the-black-hebrew-israelites-the-religious-group-in-the-viral-confrontation-at-the-lincoln-memorial?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fnational+%28Internal+-+US+Latest+-+Text%29

Who are the Black Hebrew Israelites, the religious group in the viral confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial?

The Black Hebrew Israelites, members of which identify themselves as a historic religious group, has taken center stage after some of its members appeared to be part of a controversial confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. over the weekend. A video of high school students from Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky and Native American activist Nathan Phillips went viral. The students, who were in D.C. to participate in the March for Life, were initially accused of mocking Philips and faced immediate backlash for the alleged behavior. VIDEO SHOWS TENSION BETWEEN NATIVE AMERICANS, HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS BEFORE VIRAL CLIP But just hours after a Catholic diocese in Kentucky threatened to expel several high school students involved in the incident, new footage emerged showing tension developing before the confrontation. And conservatives argued the original clip didn't tell the whole story, with many noting members of the Black Hebrew Israelites appeared to instigate the incident. In one of the varying versions of the story of the encounter he told media outlets, Phillips told The Detroit Free Press one of them spit toward the students. Others were "saying some harsh things," he said, and so he decided to "put [himself] in between that, between a rock and hard place." Additionally, Covington student Nick Sandmann, who was seen in the first video, later said in a statement that four members of the Black Hebrew Israelite movement called the students "racists, bigots, white crackers, f----ts, and incest kids." "They also taunted an African-American student from my school by telling him that we would 'harvest his organs,'" he added. Sandmann, who said one of the students asked a teacher chaperoning the trip for permission to "begin our school spirit chants" to drown out the hecklers, added he was trying to defuse the tense situation by remaining "motionless and calm." He also denied taunting Phillips by making faces at him. Instead, he said he smiled at the protester "because I wanted him to know I was not going to become angry, intimidated or be provoked into a larger confrontation." Following the confrontation, the religious group has been thrust into the spotlight for some of the members alleged behavior at the rally. Heres what to know about the Black Hebrew Israelites. The Black Hebrew Israelites sometimes called Black Jews Black Hebrews and Hebrew Israelites, according to Vox are a controversial offshoot of an American religious movement known as Black Israelism, The Washington Post reported. The movement dates back to the 18th century, if not before. More specifically, the movement is rooted in Black Judaism, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which noted the Black Judaism doctrine states when the Kingdom of Israel was destroyed, the Israelites were first scattered across the African continent and then selectively targeted by enemy African tribes who captured and sold them to European slave traders for bondage in the New World. The principles of the Black Hebrew Israelites vary: the group does not appear to have an official creed. In fact, Lewis Gordon, a professor of Africana philosophy at the University of Connecticut, told The Philadelphia Inquirer some sects within the movement identify as Jews, as Christians, and as neither. Some who identify with the group read the Christian bible, while others read the Hebrew Bible. Some believe Jesus was the Messiah while others do not, according to The Post. Overall, there are dozens of Black Hebrew organizations. Many members continue to follow the teachings of a rabbi who founded a congregation in Harlem, New York, in 1919, according to a 2000 report in The New York Times. However, one belief appears to hold true for the majority of those who identify as Black Hebrew Israelites: African Americans are the literal descendants of the Israelites of the Bible and have been severed from their true heritage, The Post reported. The Post reported a branch known as One West began to form in the 1970s and 1980s, or in the years after the civil rights and Black Power movements. One Westers, according to The Post, saw themselves as radical reformers of earlier generations of Hebrew Israelites who had gone astray. They would troop out to street corners dressed in colorful and ornate capes and leather vivid imaginings of what ancient Israelites might look like transported into the urban culture of New York City. They were also early and eager adopters of new media, hosting local television slots and filming their often-confrontational street ministry. Members of the One West group believe Native Americans and Hispanics, in addition to African Americans, are descendants of the Israelites or the original 12 Tribes of Israel. One prominent offshoot on One West is a group known as House of Israel (HOI). Vox reported this sect of Black Israelites are often seen as the fringe sect and are known for their highly confrontational form of street ministry commonly seen in large cities such as Washington, D.C. and New York. KENTUCKY TEEN IN VIRAL VIDEO SAYS HE DID NOTHING PROVOCATIVE: 'I HAD EVERY RIGHT' TO STAND THERE Members of HOI were reportedly present at the Lincoln Memorial confrontation over the weekend. Some Black Israelite groups, such as HOI, have been labeled as hate groups by organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center. The SPLC reported in 2008 that while most Hebrew Israelites are neither explicitly racist nor anti-Semitic and do not advocate violence, there is a rising extremist sector within the Hebrew Israelite movement whose adherents believe that Jews are devilish impostors and who openly condemn whites as evil personified, deserving only death or slavery. Fox News' Gregg Re and Samuel Chamberlain contributed to this report.

The Black Hebrew Israelites are a controversial offshoot of an American religious movement known as Black Israelism. Some who identify with the group read the Christian bible, while others read the Hebrew Bible.

pegasus

https://www.foxnews.com/us/who-are-the-black-hebrew-israelites-the-religious-group-in-the-viral-confrontation-at-the-lincoln-memorial?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fnational+%28Internal+-+US+Latest+-+Text%29

Who are the Black Hebrew Israelites, the religious group in the viral confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial?

The Black Hebrew Israelites, members of which identify themselves as a historic religious group, has taken center stage after some of its members appeared to be part of a controversial confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. over the weekend. A video of high school students from Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky and Native American activist Nathan Phillips went viral. The students, who were in D.C. to participate in the March for Life, were initially accused of mocking Philips and faced immediate backlash for the alleged behavior. VIDEO SHOWS TENSION BETWEEN NATIVE AMERICANS, HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS BEFORE VIRAL CLIP But just hours after a Catholic diocese in Kentucky threatened to expel several high school students involved in the incident, new footage emerged showing tension developing before the confrontation. And conservatives argued the original clip didn't tell the whole story, with many noting members of the Black Hebrew Israelites appeared to instigate the incident. In one of the varying versions of the story of the encounter he told media outlets, Phillips told The Detroit Free Press one of them spit toward the students. Others were "saying some harsh things," he said, and so he decided to "put [himself] in between that, between a rock and hard place." Additionally, Covington student Nick Sandmann, who was seen in the first video, later said in a statement that four members of the Black Hebrew Israelite movement called the students "racists, bigots, white crackers, f----ts, and incest kids." "They also taunted an African-American student from my school by telling him that we would 'harvest his organs,'" he added. Sandmann, who said one of the students asked a teacher chaperoning the trip for permission to "begin our school spirit chants" to drown out the hecklers, added he was trying to defuse the tense situation by remaining "motionless and calm." He also denied taunting Phillips by making faces at him. Instead, he said he smiled at the protester "because I wanted him to know I was not going to become angry, intimidated or be provoked into a larger confrontation." Following the confrontation, the religious group has been thrust into the spotlight for some of the members alleged behavior at the rally. Heres what to know about the Black Hebrew Israelites. The Black Hebrew Israelites sometimes called Black Jews Black Hebrews and Hebrew Israelites, according to Vox are a controversial offshoot of an American religious movement known as Black Israelism, The Washington Post reported. The movement dates back to the 18th century, if not before. More specifically, the movement is rooted in Black Judaism, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which noted the Black Judaism doctrine states when the Kingdom of Israel was destroyed, the Israelites were first scattered across the African continent and then selectively targeted by enemy African tribes who captured and sold them to European slave traders for bondage in the New World. The principles of the Black Hebrew Israelites vary: the group does not appear to have an official creed. In fact, Lewis Gordon, a professor of Africana philosophy at the University of Connecticut, told The Philadelphia Inquirer some sects within the movement identify as Jews, as Christians, and as neither. Some who identify with the group read the Christian bible, while others read the Hebrew Bible. Some believe Jesus was the Messiah while others do not, according to The Post. Overall, there are dozens of Black Hebrew organizations. Many members continue to follow the teachings of a rabbi who founded a congregation in Harlem, New York, in 1919, according to a 2000 report in The New York Times. However, one belief appears to hold true for the majority of those who identify as Black Hebrew Israelites: African Americans are the literal descendants of the Israelites of the Bible and have been severed from their true heritage, The Post reported. The Post reported a branch known as One West began to form in the 1970s and 1980s, or in the years after the civil rights and Black Power movements. One Westers, according to The Post, saw themselves as radical reformers of earlier generations of Hebrew Israelites who had gone astray. They would troop out to street corners dressed in colorful and ornate capes and leather vivid imaginings of what ancient Israelites might look like transported into the urban culture of New York City. They were also early and eager adopters of new media, hosting local television slots and filming their often-confrontational street ministry. Members of the One West group believe Native Americans and Hispanics, in addition to African Americans, are descendants of the Israelites or the original 12 Tribes of Israel. One prominent offshoot on One West is a group known as House of Israel (HOI). Vox reported this sect of Black Israelites are often seen as the fringe sect and are known for their highly confrontational form of street ministry commonly seen in large cities such as Washington, D.C. and New York. KENTUCKY TEEN IN VIRAL VIDEO SAYS HE DID NOTHING PROVOCATIVE: 'I HAD EVERY RIGHT' TO STAND THERE Members of HOI were reportedly present at the Lincoln Memorial confrontation over the weekend. Some Black Israelite groups, such as HOI, have been labeled as hate groups by organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center. The SPLC reported in 2008 that while most Hebrew Israelites are neither explicitly racist nor anti-Semitic and do not advocate violence, there is a rising extremist sector within the Hebrew Israelite movement whose adherents believe that Jews are devilish impostors and who openly condemn whites as evil personified, deserving only death or slavery. Fox News' Gregg Re and Samuel Chamberlain contributed to this report.

The Black Hebrew Israelites are a controversial offshoot of an American religious movement known as Black Israelism. Some who identify with the group read the Christian bible, while others read the Hebrew Bible. The movement dates back to the 18th century, if not before.

pegasus

https://www.foxnews.com/us/who-are-the-black-hebrew-israelites-the-religious-group-in-the-viral-confrontation-at-the-lincoln-memorial?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fnational+%28Internal+-+US+Latest+-+Text%29

Has Trump boredom set in?

Take a cue from Democratic political advisers. In the final month of the 2018 campaigns, their candidates mentioned Trump in only 11 percent of their ads. They generally stuck to their plans for the future. That apparently worked for them. It started during the midterm campaign. Democrats stopped talking about President Donald Trump all the time. Now presidential hopefuls are doing the same. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, once a relentless sparring partner on Twitter, all but ignores Trumps goading comments. Perhaps, but the change in approach seems to reflect something more, something beyond mere Trump fatigue. We may have entered the era of Trump boredom. Share your thoughts on the news by sending a Letter to the Editor. Email Share your thoughts on the news by sending a Letter to the Editor. Email letters@seattletimes.com and please include your full name, address and telephone number for verification only. Letters are limited to 200 words. Some of that may come from the sense that hes mattering less. The midterm elections were a repudiation. His poll numbers keep dropping. His latest escalation, closing the government, is eating into his base of ardent supporters. Many who sort of liked him are giving up. The precedent has to be set that a president cant close the government because he didnt get his way on some matter. Throwing the country into turmoil is not a normal negotiating tactic. Americans, meanwhile, are getting nervous about the economy, which has been Trumps pride and joy. Just wait till sluggish growth collides with trillion-dollar budget deficits. Ive been unfollowing Twitter mates who habitually list Trumps old crimes and personal frailties as if they were news. They dont seem to understand that for many, raw anger has turned into acceptance of what he is. Theres no fixing Trump. Hes a problem that needs managing. Enter House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She is a model of self-control. She speaks in the calm manner needed for dealing with people who act on impulse. Mother of five, shes a proven master at containing tantrums. Measured leadership in national politics is exactly what most Americans want. Theres a yearning for normality in their national politics. On this subject, we urge some of the hotheads on the left to modulate their emotions. It is in their interests to play it cool, assuming that their interests center on getting Democrats elected and not building their own brands for a niche audience. Thus, it was pleasant to watch a Golden Globe Awards presentation that didnt bubble over with rage at the man in the Oval Office. The moral preening in the past was hard on the stomach, including for many who agree with the messages. Hollywoods elite should know that celebrity does not necessarily confer superior political insight. Take a cue from Democratic political advisers. In the final month of the 2018 campaigns, their candidates mentioned Trump in only 11 percent of their ads. They generally stuck to their plans for the future. That apparently worked for them. Meanwhile, the serious scandals grow. The older scandals tied to sexual behavior are minor next to the extraordinary, but now thinkable, possibility that a president has been working for a foreign adversary. Continually repeating the smaller misdeeds only distracts from the bigger stuff. What Democrats need is their own media environment in which they control the message. And that means leaving Trump little opportunity to grab attention at their expense. The worse things get for him the more bombastic his diversions will be. An impeachment proceeding would add another layer of chaos on a fatigued American public. New revelations might force that action, but this should not be the Democrats focus at this point. The best day for sending Trump home would be Nov. 3, 2020, Election Day. (Law enforcement may have plans for him later.) Whatever the means for removal, its obvious that time is running out on the Trump years. Dont drown out the sound of the ticking.

Dean Obeidallah: We may have entered the era of Trump boredom.

ctrlsum

https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/has-trump-boredom-set-in/?utm_source=RSS&utm_medium=Referral&utm_campaign=RSS_all

Has Trump boredom set in?

Take a cue from Democratic political advisers. In the final month of the 2018 campaigns, their candidates mentioned Trump in only 11 percent of their ads. They generally stuck to their plans for the future. That apparently worked for them. It started during the midterm campaign. Democrats stopped talking about President Donald Trump all the time. Now presidential hopefuls are doing the same. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, once a relentless sparring partner on Twitter, all but ignores Trumps goading comments. Perhaps, but the change in approach seems to reflect something more, something beyond mere Trump fatigue. We may have entered the era of Trump boredom. Share your thoughts on the news by sending a Letter to the Editor. Email Share your thoughts on the news by sending a Letter to the Editor. Email letters@seattletimes.com and please include your full name, address and telephone number for verification only. Letters are limited to 200 words. Some of that may come from the sense that hes mattering less. The midterm elections were a repudiation. His poll numbers keep dropping. His latest escalation, closing the government, is eating into his base of ardent supporters. Many who sort of liked him are giving up. The precedent has to be set that a president cant close the government because he didnt get his way on some matter. Throwing the country into turmoil is not a normal negotiating tactic. Americans, meanwhile, are getting nervous about the economy, which has been Trumps pride and joy. Just wait till sluggish growth collides with trillion-dollar budget deficits. Ive been unfollowing Twitter mates who habitually list Trumps old crimes and personal frailties as if they were news. They dont seem to understand that for many, raw anger has turned into acceptance of what he is. Theres no fixing Trump. Hes a problem that needs managing. Enter House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She is a model of self-control. She speaks in the calm manner needed for dealing with people who act on impulse. Mother of five, shes a proven master at containing tantrums. Measured leadership in national politics is exactly what most Americans want. Theres a yearning for normality in their national politics. On this subject, we urge some of the hotheads on the left to modulate their emotions. It is in their interests to play it cool, assuming that their interests center on getting Democrats elected and not building their own brands for a niche audience. Thus, it was pleasant to watch a Golden Globe Awards presentation that didnt bubble over with rage at the man in the Oval Office. The moral preening in the past was hard on the stomach, including for many who agree with the messages. Hollywoods elite should know that celebrity does not necessarily confer superior political insight. Take a cue from Democratic political advisers. In the final month of the 2018 campaigns, their candidates mentioned Trump in only 11 percent of their ads. They generally stuck to their plans for the future. That apparently worked for them. Meanwhile, the serious scandals grow. The older scandals tied to sexual behavior are minor next to the extraordinary, but now thinkable, possibility that a president has been working for a foreign adversary. Continually repeating the smaller misdeeds only distracts from the bigger stuff. What Democrats need is their own media environment in which they control the message. And that means leaving Trump little opportunity to grab attention at their expense. The worse things get for him the more bombastic his diversions will be. An impeachment proceeding would add another layer of chaos on a fatigued American public. New revelations might force that action, but this should not be the Democrats focus at this point. The best day for sending Trump home would be Nov. 3, 2020, Election Day. (Law enforcement may have plans for him later.) Whatever the means for removal, its obvious that time is running out on the Trump years. Dont drown out the sound of the ticking.

Democrats stopped talking about President Donald Trump all the time. Julian Zelizer: We may have entered the era of Trump boredom. He says the best day for sending Trump home would be Nov. 3, 2020.

pegasus

https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/has-trump-boredom-set-in/?utm_source=RSS&utm_medium=Referral&utm_campaign=RSS_all

Has Trump boredom set in?

Take a cue from Democratic political advisers. In the final month of the 2018 campaigns, their candidates mentioned Trump in only 11 percent of their ads. They generally stuck to their plans for the future. That apparently worked for them. It started during the midterm campaign. Democrats stopped talking about President Donald Trump all the time. Now presidential hopefuls are doing the same. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, once a relentless sparring partner on Twitter, all but ignores Trumps goading comments. Perhaps, but the change in approach seems to reflect something more, something beyond mere Trump fatigue. We may have entered the era of Trump boredom. Share your thoughts on the news by sending a Letter to the Editor. Email Share your thoughts on the news by sending a Letter to the Editor. Email letters@seattletimes.com and please include your full name, address and telephone number for verification only. Letters are limited to 200 words. Some of that may come from the sense that hes mattering less. The midterm elections were a repudiation. His poll numbers keep dropping. His latest escalation, closing the government, is eating into his base of ardent supporters. Many who sort of liked him are giving up. The precedent has to be set that a president cant close the government because he didnt get his way on some matter. Throwing the country into turmoil is not a normal negotiating tactic. Americans, meanwhile, are getting nervous about the economy, which has been Trumps pride and joy. Just wait till sluggish growth collides with trillion-dollar budget deficits. Ive been unfollowing Twitter mates who habitually list Trumps old crimes and personal frailties as if they were news. They dont seem to understand that for many, raw anger has turned into acceptance of what he is. Theres no fixing Trump. Hes a problem that needs managing. Enter House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She is a model of self-control. She speaks in the calm manner needed for dealing with people who act on impulse. Mother of five, shes a proven master at containing tantrums. Measured leadership in national politics is exactly what most Americans want. Theres a yearning for normality in their national politics. On this subject, we urge some of the hotheads on the left to modulate their emotions. It is in their interests to play it cool, assuming that their interests center on getting Democrats elected and not building their own brands for a niche audience. Thus, it was pleasant to watch a Golden Globe Awards presentation that didnt bubble over with rage at the man in the Oval Office. The moral preening in the past was hard on the stomach, including for many who agree with the messages. Hollywoods elite should know that celebrity does not necessarily confer superior political insight. Take a cue from Democratic political advisers. In the final month of the 2018 campaigns, their candidates mentioned Trump in only 11 percent of their ads. They generally stuck to their plans for the future. That apparently worked for them. Meanwhile, the serious scandals grow. The older scandals tied to sexual behavior are minor next to the extraordinary, but now thinkable, possibility that a president has been working for a foreign adversary. Continually repeating the smaller misdeeds only distracts from the bigger stuff. What Democrats need is their own media environment in which they control the message. And that means leaving Trump little opportunity to grab attention at their expense. The worse things get for him the more bombastic his diversions will be. An impeachment proceeding would add another layer of chaos on a fatigued American public. New revelations might force that action, but this should not be the Democrats focus at this point. The best day for sending Trump home would be Nov. 3, 2020, Election Day. (Law enforcement may have plans for him later.) Whatever the means for removal, its obvious that time is running out on the Trump years. Dont drown out the sound of the ticking.

Democrats stopped talking about President Donald Trump all the time. Julian Zelizer: We may have entered the era of Trump boredom. He says the best day for sending Trump home would be Nov. 3, 2020. Zelizer: What Democrats need is their own media environment in which they control the message.

pegasus

https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/has-trump-boredom-set-in/?utm_source=RSS&utm_medium=Referral&utm_campaign=RSS_all

Could Trump And Hill Democrats Make A Deal To Curb Medicare Drug Prices?

Believe it or not, there is a chance President Trump and congressional Democrats can reach an agreement this year to limit the growth in Medicare drug prices. It certainly wont be easy, given the toxic relationship the president and Democrats have built up in just the past few weeks. But both sides have good reasons to make a deal, and they may not be that far apart on the substance of an agreement. After all, lowering drug prices has been on the Democratic agenda for years while Trump has been talking about the idea since the early days of his presidential campaign. And, as with many issues, he has been extremely flexible about how to do it. At times, hes even seemed to embrace proposals such as allowing Americans to import drugs directly from Canada or even having government negotiate prices with drug makersideas that have strong support among progressive Democrats. Top priority In his first state of the union address, Trump highlighted the subject: One of my greatest priorities is to reduce the price of prescription drugs. In many other countries, these drugs cost far less than what we pay in the United States. That is why I have directed my Administration to make fixing the injustice of high drug prices one of our top priorities. Prices will come down. And the Administration has indeed proposed several initiatives aimed at lowering drug prices. They include a requirement that drug makers disclose prices in their direct-to-consumer marketing. Most ambitious, however, was a proposal by the Department of Health and Human Services to tie US prices for Medicare Part B drugs to the prices in other developed countries that are nearly always lower. The HHS plan is far from ideal. It has many technical problems. And Part B drugs, such as vaccines and chemotherapy, account for a relatively small share of all Medicare drug spending. Still, the idea of benchmarking US prices to those in other countries has significant Democratic support. Similar ideas Indeed, earlier this month, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and two dozen liberal House Democrats introduced a package of bills to lower drug prices. Two of the three are similar to Trump Administration ideas, at least conceptually. The bills would: Peg the price of prescription drugs in the US to the median price in Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Japan; Direct the HHS Secretary to negotiate lower prices for Part D prescription drugs Allow patients, pharmacists, and wholesalers to import drugs from Canada and other major countries. Of course there are differences between the more cautious Trump versions of these ideas and the more expansive Democratic ideas. For example, Sanders would tie all US drug prices to an international benchmark while Trump would limit the idea to Part B drugs only. Still, it is not be hard to see a compromise. Motivating a deal Reaching agreement may be tougher in the Republican-controlled Senate, where key lawmakers have close ties with the pharmaceutical industry. But even there, some lawmakers are looking for deals. For example, the Senate Finance Committees new Republican Chairman, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, has introduced a bill with Minnesota Democrat (and possible presidential hopeful) Amy Klobuchar to allow Americans to buy prescription drugs from approved pharmacies in Canada. OK, a drug deal seems crazy. After all, the government has been partially shut down for more than a month over a largely symbolic argument over a border wall, and the House speaker and the President cant even agree on whether Trump can give his state of the union address in the House chamber next week. Yet, in some ways the current battles over border security and the government shutdown may motivate both Trump and congressional Democrats to show voters that they can reach agreement on an important consumer issue. Presidential politics The drug industry is worried. One lobbyist told me recently that drug makers live in fear that Trump will throw them under the bus and cut a deal with Hill Democrats. The industry is gearing up a major lobbying effort to block a deal, while some firms are quietly working with lawmakers to craft compromise legislation that would allow some benchmarking of prices. There are many good reasons why a deal may not happen: The mercurial president may walk away from a perfectly reasonable compromise or Democrats may not be willing to give a weakened Trump a major political talking point for the 2020 campaign. The two sides may not make a deal, and indeed probably wont. But they could.

There is a chance President Trump and congressional Democrats can reach an agreement this year to limit the growth in Medicare drug prices.

bart

https://www.forbes.com/sites/howardgleckman/2019/01/23/could-trump-and-hill-democrats-make-a-deal-to-curb-medicare-drug-prices/

Could Trump And Hill Democrats Make A Deal To Curb Medicare Drug Prices?

Believe it or not, there is a chance President Trump and congressional Democrats can reach an agreement this year to limit the growth in Medicare drug prices. It certainly wont be easy, given the toxic relationship the president and Democrats have built up in just the past few weeks. But both sides have good reasons to make a deal, and they may not be that far apart on the substance of an agreement. After all, lowering drug prices has been on the Democratic agenda for years while Trump has been talking about the idea since the early days of his presidential campaign. And, as with many issues, he has been extremely flexible about how to do it. At times, hes even seemed to embrace proposals such as allowing Americans to import drugs directly from Canada or even having government negotiate prices with drug makersideas that have strong support among progressive Democrats. Top priority In his first state of the union address, Trump highlighted the subject: One of my greatest priorities is to reduce the price of prescription drugs. In many other countries, these drugs cost far less than what we pay in the United States. That is why I have directed my Administration to make fixing the injustice of high drug prices one of our top priorities. Prices will come down. And the Administration has indeed proposed several initiatives aimed at lowering drug prices. They include a requirement that drug makers disclose prices in their direct-to-consumer marketing. Most ambitious, however, was a proposal by the Department of Health and Human Services to tie US prices for Medicare Part B drugs to the prices in other developed countries that are nearly always lower. The HHS plan is far from ideal. It has many technical problems. And Part B drugs, such as vaccines and chemotherapy, account for a relatively small share of all Medicare drug spending. Still, the idea of benchmarking US prices to those in other countries has significant Democratic support. Similar ideas Indeed, earlier this month, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and two dozen liberal House Democrats introduced a package of bills to lower drug prices. Two of the three are similar to Trump Administration ideas, at least conceptually. The bills would: Peg the price of prescription drugs in the US to the median price in Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Japan; Direct the HHS Secretary to negotiate lower prices for Part D prescription drugs Allow patients, pharmacists, and wholesalers to import drugs from Canada and other major countries. Of course there are differences between the more cautious Trump versions of these ideas and the more expansive Democratic ideas. For example, Sanders would tie all US drug prices to an international benchmark while Trump would limit the idea to Part B drugs only. Still, it is not be hard to see a compromise. Motivating a deal Reaching agreement may be tougher in the Republican-controlled Senate, where key lawmakers have close ties with the pharmaceutical industry. But even there, some lawmakers are looking for deals. For example, the Senate Finance Committees new Republican Chairman, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, has introduced a bill with Minnesota Democrat (and possible presidential hopeful) Amy Klobuchar to allow Americans to buy prescription drugs from approved pharmacies in Canada. OK, a drug deal seems crazy. After all, the government has been partially shut down for more than a month over a largely symbolic argument over a border wall, and the House speaker and the President cant even agree on whether Trump can give his state of the union address in the House chamber next week. Yet, in some ways the current battles over border security and the government shutdown may motivate both Trump and congressional Democrats to show voters that they can reach agreement on an important consumer issue. Presidential politics The drug industry is worried. One lobbyist told me recently that drug makers live in fear that Trump will throw them under the bus and cut a deal with Hill Democrats. The industry is gearing up a major lobbying effort to block a deal, while some firms are quietly working with lawmakers to craft compromise legislation that would allow some benchmarking of prices. There are many good reasons why a deal may not happen: The mercurial president may walk away from a perfectly reasonable compromise or Democrats may not be willing to give a weakened Trump a major political talking point for the 2020 campaign. The two sides may not make a deal, and indeed probably wont. But they could.

There is a chance President Trump and congressional Democrats can reach an agreement this year to limit the growth in Medicare drug prices. Both sides have good reasons to make a deal, and they may not be that far apart on the substance of an agreement.

pegasus

https://www.forbes.com/sites/howardgleckman/2019/01/23/could-trump-and-hill-democrats-make-a-deal-to-curb-medicare-drug-prices/

Could Trump And Hill Democrats Make A Deal To Curb Medicare Drug Prices?

Believe it or not, there is a chance President Trump and congressional Democrats can reach an agreement this year to limit the growth in Medicare drug prices. It certainly wont be easy, given the toxic relationship the president and Democrats have built up in just the past few weeks. But both sides have good reasons to make a deal, and they may not be that far apart on the substance of an agreement. After all, lowering drug prices has been on the Democratic agenda for years while Trump has been talking about the idea since the early days of his presidential campaign. And, as with many issues, he has been extremely flexible about how to do it. At times, hes even seemed to embrace proposals such as allowing Americans to import drugs directly from Canada or even having government negotiate prices with drug makersideas that have strong support among progressive Democrats. Top priority In his first state of the union address, Trump highlighted the subject: One of my greatest priorities is to reduce the price of prescription drugs. In many other countries, these drugs cost far less than what we pay in the United States. That is why I have directed my Administration to make fixing the injustice of high drug prices one of our top priorities. Prices will come down. And the Administration has indeed proposed several initiatives aimed at lowering drug prices. They include a requirement that drug makers disclose prices in their direct-to-consumer marketing. Most ambitious, however, was a proposal by the Department of Health and Human Services to tie US prices for Medicare Part B drugs to the prices in other developed countries that are nearly always lower. The HHS plan is far from ideal. It has many technical problems. And Part B drugs, such as vaccines and chemotherapy, account for a relatively small share of all Medicare drug spending. Still, the idea of benchmarking US prices to those in other countries has significant Democratic support. Similar ideas Indeed, earlier this month, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and two dozen liberal House Democrats introduced a package of bills to lower drug prices. Two of the three are similar to Trump Administration ideas, at least conceptually. The bills would: Peg the price of prescription drugs in the US to the median price in Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Japan; Direct the HHS Secretary to negotiate lower prices for Part D prescription drugs Allow patients, pharmacists, and wholesalers to import drugs from Canada and other major countries. Of course there are differences between the more cautious Trump versions of these ideas and the more expansive Democratic ideas. For example, Sanders would tie all US drug prices to an international benchmark while Trump would limit the idea to Part B drugs only. Still, it is not be hard to see a compromise. Motivating a deal Reaching agreement may be tougher in the Republican-controlled Senate, where key lawmakers have close ties with the pharmaceutical industry. But even there, some lawmakers are looking for deals. For example, the Senate Finance Committees new Republican Chairman, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, has introduced a bill with Minnesota Democrat (and possible presidential hopeful) Amy Klobuchar to allow Americans to buy prescription drugs from approved pharmacies in Canada. OK, a drug deal seems crazy. After all, the government has been partially shut down for more than a month over a largely symbolic argument over a border wall, and the House speaker and the President cant even agree on whether Trump can give his state of the union address in the House chamber next week. Yet, in some ways the current battles over border security and the government shutdown may motivate both Trump and congressional Democrats to show voters that they can reach agreement on an important consumer issue. Presidential politics The drug industry is worried. One lobbyist told me recently that drug makers live in fear that Trump will throw them under the bus and cut a deal with Hill Democrats. The industry is gearing up a major lobbying effort to block a deal, while some firms are quietly working with lawmakers to craft compromise legislation that would allow some benchmarking of prices. There are many good reasons why a deal may not happen: The mercurial president may walk away from a perfectly reasonable compromise or Democrats may not be willing to give a weakened Trump a major political talking point for the 2020 campaign. The two sides may not make a deal, and indeed probably wont. But they could.

There is a chance President Trump and congressional Democrats can reach an agreement this year to limit the growth in Medicare drug prices, says Julian Zelizer. Both sides have good reasons to make a deal, and they may not be that far apart on the substance of an agreement, he says.

bart

https://www.forbes.com/sites/howardgleckman/2019/01/23/could-trump-and-hill-democrats-make-a-deal-to-curb-medicare-drug-prices/

Is it the right time for the Portland Trail Blazers to make a trade?

The Portland Trail Blazers have been one of the best teams out west as we near the midway point of the 2019 NBA season, but with the February 7 trade deadline looming, the Blazers have to consider how their team is equipped to perform in the playoffs after being swept in embarrassing fashion by the New Orleans Pelicans in 2018. Portland has two of the best backcourt scorers in the league in Damian Lillard and CJ McCollum, and center Jusuf Nurkic is finally starting to look like he is back to being the Bosnian Beast fans fell in love with when he first arrived in Portland. Forward Jake Layman has also seen his game develop to a point of being a regular contributor. The Blazers have sung the praises of roster continuity and how it has helped them find regular season success. But the fact remains that when this team hits the playoffs, it falls flat. In the last three seasons, the Blazers have made it out of the first round just once, in 2015-16, and that was in large part due to a rash of injuries the Los Angeles Clippers suffered during that series. Since then, the Blazers have been swept out of the first round twice in a row. So much for that roster continuity. Saddled with a slew of bloated contracts he doled out in 2016, President of Basketball Operations Neil Olshey has seen his hands tied when it comes to signing players in free agency, but the one avenue he does have to explore improving the roster is through trades. With the 2019 NBA trade deadline coming up fast, teams across the league will surely be willing to deal. Sign in and head to the comments section to let us know what you think the Portland needs to do as a franchise to take the next step and give Rip City some hope for playoff success. To get the ball rolling and help you find some ideas, here are just a few of the players rumored to be available as the deadline approaches: - Carmelo Anthony was traded from the Houston Rockets to the Chicago Bulls, but Anthony, who has sat out the majority of this season despite being healthy, will not play a game for Chicago. - The Memphis Grizzlies are reportedly fielding offers for franchise pillars Marc Gasol and Mike Conley, but the Grizzlies will want a lot in return. - The Washington Wizards were in a tailspin to begin the season, and along with their struggles came rumors that the franchise will look to blow up the team and rebuild. That could mean players like John Wall and Bradley Beal might be available for the right offer. Sharp-shooter Otto Porter has been mentioned as a good fit for a team like Portland who are still in need of more three-point shooting and defense on the wing. - Shams Charania of The Athletic reported that there is an early list of teams that will be sellers at the NBA trade deadline and that includes Atlanta, New York, Cleveland and Chicago in the East. Out West, Phoenix and Memphis could be looking to move some players. Post your thoughts in the comments and we may use them in our roundup of Blazers trade targets as the deadline draws closer.

Portland Trail Blazers have been swept out of the first round of the playoffs twice in the last three seasons. The 2019 NBA trade deadline is February 7.

bart

https://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/2019/01/is-it-the-right-time-for-the-portland-trail-blazers-to-make-a-trade.html

Is it the right time for the Portland Trail Blazers to make a trade?

The Portland Trail Blazers have been one of the best teams out west as we near the midway point of the 2019 NBA season, but with the February 7 trade deadline looming, the Blazers have to consider how their team is equipped to perform in the playoffs after being swept in embarrassing fashion by the New Orleans Pelicans in 2018. Portland has two of the best backcourt scorers in the league in Damian Lillard and CJ McCollum, and center Jusuf Nurkic is finally starting to look like he is back to being the Bosnian Beast fans fell in love with when he first arrived in Portland. Forward Jake Layman has also seen his game develop to a point of being a regular contributor. The Blazers have sung the praises of roster continuity and how it has helped them find regular season success. But the fact remains that when this team hits the playoffs, it falls flat. In the last three seasons, the Blazers have made it out of the first round just once, in 2015-16, and that was in large part due to a rash of injuries the Los Angeles Clippers suffered during that series. Since then, the Blazers have been swept out of the first round twice in a row. So much for that roster continuity. Saddled with a slew of bloated contracts he doled out in 2016, President of Basketball Operations Neil Olshey has seen his hands tied when it comes to signing players in free agency, but the one avenue he does have to explore improving the roster is through trades. With the 2019 NBA trade deadline coming up fast, teams across the league will surely be willing to deal. Sign in and head to the comments section to let us know what you think the Portland needs to do as a franchise to take the next step and give Rip City some hope for playoff success. To get the ball rolling and help you find some ideas, here are just a few of the players rumored to be available as the deadline approaches: - Carmelo Anthony was traded from the Houston Rockets to the Chicago Bulls, but Anthony, who has sat out the majority of this season despite being healthy, will not play a game for Chicago. - The Memphis Grizzlies are reportedly fielding offers for franchise pillars Marc Gasol and Mike Conley, but the Grizzlies will want a lot in return. - The Washington Wizards were in a tailspin to begin the season, and along with their struggles came rumors that the franchise will look to blow up the team and rebuild. That could mean players like John Wall and Bradley Beal might be available for the right offer. Sharp-shooter Otto Porter has been mentioned as a good fit for a team like Portland who are still in need of more three-point shooting and defense on the wing. - Shams Charania of The Athletic reported that there is an early list of teams that will be sellers at the NBA trade deadline and that includes Atlanta, New York, Cleveland and Chicago in the East. Out West, Phoenix and Memphis could be looking to move some players. Post your thoughts in the comments and we may use them in our roundup of Blazers trade targets as the deadline draws closer.

The Portland Trail Blazers have been swept out of the first round of the NBA playoffs twice in the last three seasons. The February 7 NBA trade deadline is the perfect time for the Blazers to make a move.

ctrlsum

https://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/2019/01/is-it-the-right-time-for-the-portland-trail-blazers-to-make-a-trade.html

Is it the right time for the Portland Trail Blazers to make a trade?

The Portland Trail Blazers have been one of the best teams out west as we near the midway point of the 2019 NBA season, but with the February 7 trade deadline looming, the Blazers have to consider how their team is equipped to perform in the playoffs after being swept in embarrassing fashion by the New Orleans Pelicans in 2018. Portland has two of the best backcourt scorers in the league in Damian Lillard and CJ McCollum, and center Jusuf Nurkic is finally starting to look like he is back to being the Bosnian Beast fans fell in love with when he first arrived in Portland. Forward Jake Layman has also seen his game develop to a point of being a regular contributor. The Blazers have sung the praises of roster continuity and how it has helped them find regular season success. But the fact remains that when this team hits the playoffs, it falls flat. In the last three seasons, the Blazers have made it out of the first round just once, in 2015-16, and that was in large part due to a rash of injuries the Los Angeles Clippers suffered during that series. Since then, the Blazers have been swept out of the first round twice in a row. So much for that roster continuity. Saddled with a slew of bloated contracts he doled out in 2016, President of Basketball Operations Neil Olshey has seen his hands tied when it comes to signing players in free agency, but the one avenue he does have to explore improving the roster is through trades. With the 2019 NBA trade deadline coming up fast, teams across the league will surely be willing to deal. Sign in and head to the comments section to let us know what you think the Portland needs to do as a franchise to take the next step and give Rip City some hope for playoff success. To get the ball rolling and help you find some ideas, here are just a few of the players rumored to be available as the deadline approaches: - Carmelo Anthony was traded from the Houston Rockets to the Chicago Bulls, but Anthony, who has sat out the majority of this season despite being healthy, will not play a game for Chicago. - The Memphis Grizzlies are reportedly fielding offers for franchise pillars Marc Gasol and Mike Conley, but the Grizzlies will want a lot in return. - The Washington Wizards were in a tailspin to begin the season, and along with their struggles came rumors that the franchise will look to blow up the team and rebuild. That could mean players like John Wall and Bradley Beal might be available for the right offer. Sharp-shooter Otto Porter has been mentioned as a good fit for a team like Portland who are still in need of more three-point shooting and defense on the wing. - Shams Charania of The Athletic reported that there is an early list of teams that will be sellers at the NBA trade deadline and that includes Atlanta, New York, Cleveland and Chicago in the East. Out West, Phoenix and Memphis could be looking to move some players. Post your thoughts in the comments and we may use them in our roundup of Blazers trade targets as the deadline draws closer.

The Portland Trail Blazers have been swept out of the first round of the NBA playoffs twice in the last three seasons. The February 7 NBA trade deadline is the perfect time for the Blazers to make a move. Here are some of the players that have been linked to the Blazers.

ctrlsum

https://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/2019/01/is-it-the-right-time-for-the-portland-trail-blazers-to-make-a-trade.html

Will Baidu Stock Bounce Back in 2019?

One of China's original dot-com rock stars is having a hard time getting back into a good groove. Baidu (NASDAQ: BIDU) shares plummeted 32% last year. Many Chinese growth stocks are showing signs of life in 2019, but Baidu stock is essentially still where it was when the year began. It's been a rough January for China's leading search engine provider. Things kicked off with Baidu CEO Robin Li warning about slowing growth. An analyst downgrade eventually followed. Even a bullish Wall Street pro put out a note detailing near-term negative catalysts, nipping any potential for Baidu to ride the wave of its fellow Chinese growth stocks higher. The stock hit a 35-month low earlier this month. Things appear to be bleak, but the one thing investors have learned in sizing up Baidu volatility over the years is that you can never count out the country's initial dot-com darling. Baidu research executives at Baidu office. More Image source: Baidu. Spring follows winter Baidu's founder-CEO sent a letter to employees three weeks ago, detailing past accomplishments and future challenges. Li notes that the economic slowdown is "as cold and real as winter" in China. He tries to put a positive spin on the setback -- arguing that it's giving Baidu time to cut costs, expand into higher-growth markets, and improve efficiency -- but the takeaway for investors is that growth will slow in the near term. Morgan Stanley would go on to downgrade the stock a few days later. The firm warns that a new investment cycle will weigh on margins as growth rates for its paid-search cash cow start to moderate. Morgan Stanley lowered its rating to the neutral equal weight, slashing its price target on the shares from $230 to $188. Citi analyst Alicia Yap chimed in late last week, sticking to her bullish rating on the stock but lowering her price target from $262 to $205. The new price goal still offers 28% of upside off of current levels, but she also has "Negative Catalyst Watch" on the stock through the next 30 days. She fears that the upcoming fourth-quarter report could come in soft, cuffed to weak guidance for the current quarter. Baidu won't be immune to a slowdown in China. Advertisers will be spending less to reach consumers that will be curbing expenditures if recent measures to accelerate growth in the world's most populous nation fall short. However, it doesn't seem fair that Baidu is trading near its worst levels since early 2016. There is still growth to be had at Baidu. Even if it falls short of its late-October goal calling for 20% to 26% in revenue growth adjusted for recent asset sales -- a real possibility given its cautious tone -- this is still an online pioneer that finds a way to eventually land on its feet. As rough as last year was, Baidu has beaten Wall Street profit targets by a double-digit-percentage margin in each of the past four quarters. Baidu is cheap. Wall Street expectations continue to inch lower, but Baidu is still trading at a mere 15 times this new year's projected profit. If Baidu is trading at a forward earnings multiple in the mid-teens while it makes big investments in future technologies, one can only imagine how cheap the shares will be in retrospect when it's firing on all cylinders again. Baidu will bounce back, as that is what the stock has historically done. We just may have to wait a few weeks before it truly bottoms out after a financial report that is now widely expected to disappoint. More From The Motley Fool Rick Munarriz has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Baidu. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Baidu (NASDAQ: BIDU) shares plummeted 32% last year. The search engine provider has had a rough start to 2019.

ctrlsum

https://news.yahoo.com/baidu-stock-bounce-back-2019-194500596.html

Will Baidu Stock Bounce Back in 2019?

One of China's original dot-com rock stars is having a hard time getting back into a good groove. Baidu (NASDAQ: BIDU) shares plummeted 32% last year. Many Chinese growth stocks are showing signs of life in 2019, but Baidu stock is essentially still where it was when the year began. It's been a rough January for China's leading search engine provider. Things kicked off with Baidu CEO Robin Li warning about slowing growth. An analyst downgrade eventually followed. Even a bullish Wall Street pro put out a note detailing near-term negative catalysts, nipping any potential for Baidu to ride the wave of its fellow Chinese growth stocks higher. The stock hit a 35-month low earlier this month. Things appear to be bleak, but the one thing investors have learned in sizing up Baidu volatility over the years is that you can never count out the country's initial dot-com darling. Baidu research executives at Baidu office. More Image source: Baidu. Spring follows winter Baidu's founder-CEO sent a letter to employees three weeks ago, detailing past accomplishments and future challenges. Li notes that the economic slowdown is "as cold and real as winter" in China. He tries to put a positive spin on the setback -- arguing that it's giving Baidu time to cut costs, expand into higher-growth markets, and improve efficiency -- but the takeaway for investors is that growth will slow in the near term. Morgan Stanley would go on to downgrade the stock a few days later. The firm warns that a new investment cycle will weigh on margins as growth rates for its paid-search cash cow start to moderate. Morgan Stanley lowered its rating to the neutral equal weight, slashing its price target on the shares from $230 to $188. Citi analyst Alicia Yap chimed in late last week, sticking to her bullish rating on the stock but lowering her price target from $262 to $205. The new price goal still offers 28% of upside off of current levels, but she also has "Negative Catalyst Watch" on the stock through the next 30 days. She fears that the upcoming fourth-quarter report could come in soft, cuffed to weak guidance for the current quarter. Baidu won't be immune to a slowdown in China. Advertisers will be spending less to reach consumers that will be curbing expenditures if recent measures to accelerate growth in the world's most populous nation fall short. However, it doesn't seem fair that Baidu is trading near its worst levels since early 2016. There is still growth to be had at Baidu. Even if it falls short of its late-October goal calling for 20% to 26% in revenue growth adjusted for recent asset sales -- a real possibility given its cautious tone -- this is still an online pioneer that finds a way to eventually land on its feet. As rough as last year was, Baidu has beaten Wall Street profit targets by a double-digit-percentage margin in each of the past four quarters. Baidu is cheap. Wall Street expectations continue to inch lower, but Baidu is still trading at a mere 15 times this new year's projected profit. If Baidu is trading at a forward earnings multiple in the mid-teens while it makes big investments in future technologies, one can only imagine how cheap the shares will be in retrospect when it's firing on all cylinders again. Baidu will bounce back, as that is what the stock has historically done. We just may have to wait a few weeks before it truly bottoms out after a financial report that is now widely expected to disappoint. More From The Motley Fool Rick Munarriz has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Baidu. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Baidu (NASDAQ: BIDU) shares plummeted 32% last year. Many Chinese growth stocks are showing signs of life in 2019, but Baidu stock is essentially still where it was when the year began.

bart

https://news.yahoo.com/baidu-stock-bounce-back-2019-194500596.html

Will Baidu Stock Bounce Back in 2019?

One of China's original dot-com rock stars is having a hard time getting back into a good groove. Baidu (NASDAQ: BIDU) shares plummeted 32% last year. Many Chinese growth stocks are showing signs of life in 2019, but Baidu stock is essentially still where it was when the year began. It's been a rough January for China's leading search engine provider. Things kicked off with Baidu CEO Robin Li warning about slowing growth. An analyst downgrade eventually followed. Even a bullish Wall Street pro put out a note detailing near-term negative catalysts, nipping any potential for Baidu to ride the wave of its fellow Chinese growth stocks higher. The stock hit a 35-month low earlier this month. Things appear to be bleak, but the one thing investors have learned in sizing up Baidu volatility over the years is that you can never count out the country's initial dot-com darling. Baidu research executives at Baidu office. More Image source: Baidu. Spring follows winter Baidu's founder-CEO sent a letter to employees three weeks ago, detailing past accomplishments and future challenges. Li notes that the economic slowdown is "as cold and real as winter" in China. He tries to put a positive spin on the setback -- arguing that it's giving Baidu time to cut costs, expand into higher-growth markets, and improve efficiency -- but the takeaway for investors is that growth will slow in the near term. Morgan Stanley would go on to downgrade the stock a few days later. The firm warns that a new investment cycle will weigh on margins as growth rates for its paid-search cash cow start to moderate. Morgan Stanley lowered its rating to the neutral equal weight, slashing its price target on the shares from $230 to $188. Citi analyst Alicia Yap chimed in late last week, sticking to her bullish rating on the stock but lowering her price target from $262 to $205. The new price goal still offers 28% of upside off of current levels, but she also has "Negative Catalyst Watch" on the stock through the next 30 days. She fears that the upcoming fourth-quarter report could come in soft, cuffed to weak guidance for the current quarter. Baidu won't be immune to a slowdown in China. Advertisers will be spending less to reach consumers that will be curbing expenditures if recent measures to accelerate growth in the world's most populous nation fall short. However, it doesn't seem fair that Baidu is trading near its worst levels since early 2016. There is still growth to be had at Baidu. Even if it falls short of its late-October goal calling for 20% to 26% in revenue growth adjusted for recent asset sales -- a real possibility given its cautious tone -- this is still an online pioneer that finds a way to eventually land on its feet. As rough as last year was, Baidu has beaten Wall Street profit targets by a double-digit-percentage margin in each of the past four quarters. Baidu is cheap. Wall Street expectations continue to inch lower, but Baidu is still trading at a mere 15 times this new year's projected profit. If Baidu is trading at a forward earnings multiple in the mid-teens while it makes big investments in future technologies, one can only imagine how cheap the shares will be in retrospect when it's firing on all cylinders again. Baidu will bounce back, as that is what the stock has historically done. We just may have to wait a few weeks before it truly bottoms out after a financial report that is now widely expected to disappoint. More From The Motley Fool Rick Munarriz has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool owns shares of and recommends Baidu. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Baidu (NASDAQ: BIDU) shares plummeted 32% last year. The search engine provider has had a rough start to 2019. But there is still growth to be had at BaidU, even if it falls short of its goal for revenue growth adjusted for recent asset sales.

ctrlsum

https://news.yahoo.com/baidu-stock-bounce-back-2019-194500596.html

Is 2019 The Year That Robot Delivery Takes Over The Retail World?

2019 will be a watershed year for autonomous delivery, predicts Lex Bayer, the CEO of Starship Technologies, one of the world leaders in delivery robots. Its easy to see why Bayer makes the case for autonomous delivery so boldly. Delivery vans clog up our roads, pollute our air, and are not cost efficient. So last year saw even more retailers ask themselves why they werent trying the futuristic alternative. As the sight of a robot, drone or even a robot dog out for delivery becomes more familiar, heres why autonomous will make a viable alternative to our usual last-mile delivery options, but wont become widespread...yet. The appeal of autonomous delivery for retailers In the U.K., youll find some of Starships bots wheeling around Milton Keynes, fulfilling grocery and food orders for Tesco and the Co-op. In America, they recently announced a partnership with George Mason University that will allow food to be delivered by their robots to anywhere on campus. It is about trying to find a way to cut through all the traffic on the roads and find a more efficient way of delivering goods, said Simon Liss, managing director of the innovation agency for retail, Omnifi. Bayer argues that robots are beginning to meet those needs. As our shopping habits have developed to favor online orders, retailers have been faced with mounting delivery numbers and ever diminishing time frames within which they need to make sure the parcel arrives. McKinsey estimates that the number of packages needing to be delivered every year could rise to more than 25 billion in the U.S. over the next ten years. Increased demand is placing a significant strain on retailers as they struggle to find delivery methods that don't eat into their profits. Thats where robots could 'step' in, so to speak. Starships robots can dramatically reduce the end-to-end costs involved in the last mile, Bayer explained. Whats more, as consumers become more environmentally-conscious, they want shops to offer them delivery options which wont impact on their carbon footprint. Electrically-powered robots are an attractive alternative as they take vans and trucks off the road, thereby reducing congestion and the levels of harmful gases in the air. Why customers love the idea of a robot delivering their orders Consumer interest in robots is initially by the novelty of the technology, though that soon wears off. What gives autonomous delivery staying power is the convenience and reliability it can offer shoppers. Having a robot deliver your weekly food shop is a time-saver. Whether shoppers still go into store to shop or whether they get an online order, with robots they will be able to get items delivered to their front doors when and where they want them at low cost, Bayer explained. Starships robots have already completed more than 25,000 deliveries globally. And Bayer is confident that number will increase: We predict that 1 million autonomous deliveries will be completed before 1 million people ride in autonomous vehicles, he said. But there are still a few major hurdles to making robot delivery the go-to option. Scaling up to operate within a city appears to be the biggest challenge. I cannot see it happening in London, said the innovation agency head, Simon Liss. The U.K. has a chaotic road system and to have an army of small capacity robots trundling around our streets will cause all sorts of issues, both practical and legal. But autonomous vehicles and autonomous deliveries dont have to be positioned as enemies. They could be complementary. Once self-driving vehicles become a part of our everyday lives, Liss sees them taking on delivery responsibilities.Large self-driving vehicles could be dropping off packages along their journey, he said. Multi-purpose autonomous vehicles would be cost-effective, and their size would give them capacity to carry many more packages than the current robots can. Only once robot delivery companies have cracked how to make their technology scalable to cities and densely populated urban areas will their popularity soar as retailers begin to take their viability seriously. So although neither autonomous vehicles or robots appear ready to completely take over in 2019, the obvious benefits for retailers and consumers mean we can expect them to integrate further into shoppers' lives this year.

2019 will be a watershed year for autonomous delivery, says Starship Technologies.

ctrlsum

https://www.forbes.com/sites/annaschaverien/2019/01/23/robot-autonomous-delivery-starship-technologies/

Is 2019 The Year That Robot Delivery Takes Over The Retail World?

2019 will be a watershed year for autonomous delivery, predicts Lex Bayer, the CEO of Starship Technologies, one of the world leaders in delivery robots. Its easy to see why Bayer makes the case for autonomous delivery so boldly. Delivery vans clog up our roads, pollute our air, and are not cost efficient. So last year saw even more retailers ask themselves why they werent trying the futuristic alternative. As the sight of a robot, drone or even a robot dog out for delivery becomes more familiar, heres why autonomous will make a viable alternative to our usual last-mile delivery options, but wont become widespread...yet. The appeal of autonomous delivery for retailers In the U.K., youll find some of Starships bots wheeling around Milton Keynes, fulfilling grocery and food orders for Tesco and the Co-op. In America, they recently announced a partnership with George Mason University that will allow food to be delivered by their robots to anywhere on campus. It is about trying to find a way to cut through all the traffic on the roads and find a more efficient way of delivering goods, said Simon Liss, managing director of the innovation agency for retail, Omnifi. Bayer argues that robots are beginning to meet those needs. As our shopping habits have developed to favor online orders, retailers have been faced with mounting delivery numbers and ever diminishing time frames within which they need to make sure the parcel arrives. McKinsey estimates that the number of packages needing to be delivered every year could rise to more than 25 billion in the U.S. over the next ten years. Increased demand is placing a significant strain on retailers as they struggle to find delivery methods that don't eat into their profits. Thats where robots could 'step' in, so to speak. Starships robots can dramatically reduce the end-to-end costs involved in the last mile, Bayer explained. Whats more, as consumers become more environmentally-conscious, they want shops to offer them delivery options which wont impact on their carbon footprint. Electrically-powered robots are an attractive alternative as they take vans and trucks off the road, thereby reducing congestion and the levels of harmful gases in the air. Why customers love the idea of a robot delivering their orders Consumer interest in robots is initially by the novelty of the technology, though that soon wears off. What gives autonomous delivery staying power is the convenience and reliability it can offer shoppers. Having a robot deliver your weekly food shop is a time-saver. Whether shoppers still go into store to shop or whether they get an online order, with robots they will be able to get items delivered to their front doors when and where they want them at low cost, Bayer explained. Starships robots have already completed more than 25,000 deliveries globally. And Bayer is confident that number will increase: We predict that 1 million autonomous deliveries will be completed before 1 million people ride in autonomous vehicles, he said. But there are still a few major hurdles to making robot delivery the go-to option. Scaling up to operate within a city appears to be the biggest challenge. I cannot see it happening in London, said the innovation agency head, Simon Liss. The U.K. has a chaotic road system and to have an army of small capacity robots trundling around our streets will cause all sorts of issues, both practical and legal. But autonomous vehicles and autonomous deliveries dont have to be positioned as enemies. They could be complementary. Once self-driving vehicles become a part of our everyday lives, Liss sees them taking on delivery responsibilities.Large self-driving vehicles could be dropping off packages along their journey, he said. Multi-purpose autonomous vehicles would be cost-effective, and their size would give them capacity to carry many more packages than the current robots can. Only once robot delivery companies have cracked how to make their technology scalable to cities and densely populated urban areas will their popularity soar as retailers begin to take their viability seriously. So although neither autonomous vehicles or robots appear ready to completely take over in 2019, the obvious benefits for retailers and consumers mean we can expect them to integrate further into shoppers' lives this year.

2019 will be a watershed year for autonomous delivery, says Starship Technologies CEO Lex Bayer. But there are still a few major hurdles to making robot delivery the go-to option. Scaling up to operate within a city appears to be the biggest challenge.

bart

https://www.forbes.com/sites/annaschaverien/2019/01/23/robot-autonomous-delivery-starship-technologies/

Is 2019 The Year That Robot Delivery Takes Over The Retail World?

2019 will be a watershed year for autonomous delivery, predicts Lex Bayer, the CEO of Starship Technologies, one of the world leaders in delivery robots. Its easy to see why Bayer makes the case for autonomous delivery so boldly. Delivery vans clog up our roads, pollute our air, and are not cost efficient. So last year saw even more retailers ask themselves why they werent trying the futuristic alternative. As the sight of a robot, drone or even a robot dog out for delivery becomes more familiar, heres why autonomous will make a viable alternative to our usual last-mile delivery options, but wont become widespread...yet. The appeal of autonomous delivery for retailers In the U.K., youll find some of Starships bots wheeling around Milton Keynes, fulfilling grocery and food orders for Tesco and the Co-op. In America, they recently announced a partnership with George Mason University that will allow food to be delivered by their robots to anywhere on campus. It is about trying to find a way to cut through all the traffic on the roads and find a more efficient way of delivering goods, said Simon Liss, managing director of the innovation agency for retail, Omnifi. Bayer argues that robots are beginning to meet those needs. As our shopping habits have developed to favor online orders, retailers have been faced with mounting delivery numbers and ever diminishing time frames within which they need to make sure the parcel arrives. McKinsey estimates that the number of packages needing to be delivered every year could rise to more than 25 billion in the U.S. over the next ten years. Increased demand is placing a significant strain on retailers as they struggle to find delivery methods that don't eat into their profits. Thats where robots could 'step' in, so to speak. Starships robots can dramatically reduce the end-to-end costs involved in the last mile, Bayer explained. Whats more, as consumers become more environmentally-conscious, they want shops to offer them delivery options which wont impact on their carbon footprint. Electrically-powered robots are an attractive alternative as they take vans and trucks off the road, thereby reducing congestion and the levels of harmful gases in the air. Why customers love the idea of a robot delivering their orders Consumer interest in robots is initially by the novelty of the technology, though that soon wears off. What gives autonomous delivery staying power is the convenience and reliability it can offer shoppers. Having a robot deliver your weekly food shop is a time-saver. Whether shoppers still go into store to shop or whether they get an online order, with robots they will be able to get items delivered to their front doors when and where they want them at low cost, Bayer explained. Starships robots have already completed more than 25,000 deliveries globally. And Bayer is confident that number will increase: We predict that 1 million autonomous deliveries will be completed before 1 million people ride in autonomous vehicles, he said. But there are still a few major hurdles to making robot delivery the go-to option. Scaling up to operate within a city appears to be the biggest challenge. I cannot see it happening in London, said the innovation agency head, Simon Liss. The U.K. has a chaotic road system and to have an army of small capacity robots trundling around our streets will cause all sorts of issues, both practical and legal. But autonomous vehicles and autonomous deliveries dont have to be positioned as enemies. They could be complementary. Once self-driving vehicles become a part of our everyday lives, Liss sees them taking on delivery responsibilities.Large self-driving vehicles could be dropping off packages along their journey, he said. Multi-purpose autonomous vehicles would be cost-effective, and their size would give them capacity to carry many more packages than the current robots can. Only once robot delivery companies have cracked how to make their technology scalable to cities and densely populated urban areas will their popularity soar as retailers begin to take their viability seriously. So although neither autonomous vehicles or robots appear ready to completely take over in 2019, the obvious benefits for retailers and consumers mean we can expect them to integrate further into shoppers' lives this year.

2019 will be a watershed year for autonomous delivery, says Starship Technologies CEO Lex Bayer. But there are still a few major hurdles to making robot delivery the go-to option, says Omnifi's Simon Liss. The appeal of autonomous delivery for retailers is convenience and reliability.

ctrlsum

https://www.forbes.com/sites/annaschaverien/2019/01/23/robot-autonomous-delivery-starship-technologies/

Has Abbott's Acquisitive Miles White Made His Last Big Deal?

Entering his third decade as chief executive of Abbott Laboratories and with his successor waiting in the wings, Miles White feels no immediate pressure to make another big deal for the diversified healthcare company. Abbott, White says, is doing just fine growing the businesses it has. We certainly don't see gaps right now that we have to fill with M&A, Abbotts chairman told analysts on a conference call Wednesday morning to discuss the companys 2018 earnings and outlook for this year. The 63-year-old White has transformed Abbott since he became CEO in 1999, spinning off its pharmaceutical division six years ago into the fast-growing drug maker Abbvie and building a new empire with established drugs, implantable medical devices, nutritional products and diagnostic tests. Abbott sales rose nearly 12% to $30.6 billion last year, the company said Wednesday. Though White hasnt announced any retirement plans, hes likely to hand off the company in better shape than he inherited 21 years ago. Last year, White named long-time Abbott executive Robert B. Ford, who is 45 years old, as the companys president and chief operating officer. Its the first official No. 2 executive and chief operating officer Abbott has had in more than a decade and Ford is expected to succeed White at some point. The elevation of Ford came after a series of sizable acquisitions. In 2017, Abbott closed on its $5.3 billion acquisition of medical test maker, Alere and last year paid down a whopping more than $8 billion debt accumulated from its $25 billion purchase of device maker St. Jude Medical, which closed in January 2017. The Alere and St. Jude deals contributed to the largest debt load Abbott has had in its 131-year history, approaching nearly $28 billion at the end of 2017. With our recent strategic shaping completed, our focus in 2018 was on running the company we've built, and the result was an excellent year by every measure, White said. All four of our major businesses performed well, contributing to overall organic sales growth of more than 7%, which is above the initial guidance range we set at the beginning of last year. So White indicated to Wall Street analysts he doesnt think its a good time for Abbott to be looking at mergers and acquisitions even though the company generated more than $6 billion in cash flow last year and returned $2 billion to shareholders. Though Abbott is no longer in the brand name pharmaceutical business, the company is churning out individual products that are achieving blockbuster status, a moniker Wall Street uses when a treatment surpasses $1 billion in sales. For example, Abbotts diabetes care business grew by 35% in 2018 thanks to its FreeStyle Libre glucose monitoring system . The product, which surpassed $1 billion in global sales last year, is considered unique in that it measures glucose continuously for two weeks. During the fourth quarter, we added 300,000 new users, White said of Freestyle Libre. "As of the end of 2018, there are now approximately 1.3 million active users worldwide, of which approximately 2/3 are type 1 diabetics and 1/3 are type 2. FreeStyle Libre is an example of Abbotts focus in 2019. You make much higher return on your organic growth, White said. The growth we're getting from all of our businesses and even St. Jude is coming out of pipeline, and it's coming out of our own organic development. So we're able to return a pretty good sales and profit growth rate across the business.

Abbott CEO Miles White says there's no need to make another big deal. White has transformed Abbott since he became CEO in 1999.

ctrlsum

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2019/01/23/has-abbotts-acquisitive-miles-white-made-his-last-big-deal/

Has Abbott's Acquisitive Miles White Made His Last Big Deal?

Entering his third decade as chief executive of Abbott Laboratories and with his successor waiting in the wings, Miles White feels no immediate pressure to make another big deal for the diversified healthcare company. Abbott, White says, is doing just fine growing the businesses it has. We certainly don't see gaps right now that we have to fill with M&A, Abbotts chairman told analysts on a conference call Wednesday morning to discuss the companys 2018 earnings and outlook for this year. The 63-year-old White has transformed Abbott since he became CEO in 1999, spinning off its pharmaceutical division six years ago into the fast-growing drug maker Abbvie and building a new empire with established drugs, implantable medical devices, nutritional products and diagnostic tests. Abbott sales rose nearly 12% to $30.6 billion last year, the company said Wednesday. Though White hasnt announced any retirement plans, hes likely to hand off the company in better shape than he inherited 21 years ago. Last year, White named long-time Abbott executive Robert B. Ford, who is 45 years old, as the companys president and chief operating officer. Its the first official No. 2 executive and chief operating officer Abbott has had in more than a decade and Ford is expected to succeed White at some point. The elevation of Ford came after a series of sizable acquisitions. In 2017, Abbott closed on its $5.3 billion acquisition of medical test maker, Alere and last year paid down a whopping more than $8 billion debt accumulated from its $25 billion purchase of device maker St. Jude Medical, which closed in January 2017. The Alere and St. Jude deals contributed to the largest debt load Abbott has had in its 131-year history, approaching nearly $28 billion at the end of 2017. With our recent strategic shaping completed, our focus in 2018 was on running the company we've built, and the result was an excellent year by every measure, White said. All four of our major businesses performed well, contributing to overall organic sales growth of more than 7%, which is above the initial guidance range we set at the beginning of last year. So White indicated to Wall Street analysts he doesnt think its a good time for Abbott to be looking at mergers and acquisitions even though the company generated more than $6 billion in cash flow last year and returned $2 billion to shareholders. Though Abbott is no longer in the brand name pharmaceutical business, the company is churning out individual products that are achieving blockbuster status, a moniker Wall Street uses when a treatment surpasses $1 billion in sales. For example, Abbotts diabetes care business grew by 35% in 2018 thanks to its FreeStyle Libre glucose monitoring system . The product, which surpassed $1 billion in global sales last year, is considered unique in that it measures glucose continuously for two weeks. During the fourth quarter, we added 300,000 new users, White said of Freestyle Libre. "As of the end of 2018, there are now approximately 1.3 million active users worldwide, of which approximately 2/3 are type 1 diabetics and 1/3 are type 2. FreeStyle Libre is an example of Abbotts focus in 2019. You make much higher return on your organic growth, White said. The growth we're getting from all of our businesses and even St. Jude is coming out of pipeline, and it's coming out of our own organic development. So we're able to return a pretty good sales and profit growth rate across the business.

Abbott CEO Miles White says there's no need to make another big deal. Abbott sales rose nearly 12% to $30.6 billion last year, the company said Wednesday.

ctrlsum

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2019/01/23/has-abbotts-acquisitive-miles-white-made-his-last-big-deal/

Has Abbott's Acquisitive Miles White Made His Last Big Deal?

Entering his third decade as chief executive of Abbott Laboratories and with his successor waiting in the wings, Miles White feels no immediate pressure to make another big deal for the diversified healthcare company. Abbott, White says, is doing just fine growing the businesses it has. We certainly don't see gaps right now that we have to fill with M&A, Abbotts chairman told analysts on a conference call Wednesday morning to discuss the companys 2018 earnings and outlook for this year. The 63-year-old White has transformed Abbott since he became CEO in 1999, spinning off its pharmaceutical division six years ago into the fast-growing drug maker Abbvie and building a new empire with established drugs, implantable medical devices, nutritional products and diagnostic tests. Abbott sales rose nearly 12% to $30.6 billion last year, the company said Wednesday. Though White hasnt announced any retirement plans, hes likely to hand off the company in better shape than he inherited 21 years ago. Last year, White named long-time Abbott executive Robert B. Ford, who is 45 years old, as the companys president and chief operating officer. Its the first official No. 2 executive and chief operating officer Abbott has had in more than a decade and Ford is expected to succeed White at some point. The elevation of Ford came after a series of sizable acquisitions. In 2017, Abbott closed on its $5.3 billion acquisition of medical test maker, Alere and last year paid down a whopping more than $8 billion debt accumulated from its $25 billion purchase of device maker St. Jude Medical, which closed in January 2017. The Alere and St. Jude deals contributed to the largest debt load Abbott has had in its 131-year history, approaching nearly $28 billion at the end of 2017. With our recent strategic shaping completed, our focus in 2018 was on running the company we've built, and the result was an excellent year by every measure, White said. All four of our major businesses performed well, contributing to overall organic sales growth of more than 7%, which is above the initial guidance range we set at the beginning of last year. So White indicated to Wall Street analysts he doesnt think its a good time for Abbott to be looking at mergers and acquisitions even though the company generated more than $6 billion in cash flow last year and returned $2 billion to shareholders. Though Abbott is no longer in the brand name pharmaceutical business, the company is churning out individual products that are achieving blockbuster status, a moniker Wall Street uses when a treatment surpasses $1 billion in sales. For example, Abbotts diabetes care business grew by 35% in 2018 thanks to its FreeStyle Libre glucose monitoring system . The product, which surpassed $1 billion in global sales last year, is considered unique in that it measures glucose continuously for two weeks. During the fourth quarter, we added 300,000 new users, White said of Freestyle Libre. "As of the end of 2018, there are now approximately 1.3 million active users worldwide, of which approximately 2/3 are type 1 diabetics and 1/3 are type 2. FreeStyle Libre is an example of Abbotts focus in 2019. You make much higher return on your organic growth, White said. The growth we're getting from all of our businesses and even St. Jude is coming out of pipeline, and it's coming out of our own organic development. So we're able to return a pretty good sales and profit growth rate across the business.

Abbott CEO Miles White says there's no need to make another big deal. Abbott sales rose nearly 12% to $30.6 billion last year, the company said Wednesday. White has transformed Abbott since he became CEO in 1999, spinning off its pharmaceutical division into the fast-growing drug maker Abbvie.

ctrlsum

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2019/01/23/has-abbotts-acquisitive-miles-white-made-his-last-big-deal/

Can Democrats prevent shutdowns by refusing to reward the tactic?

From Day One of the longest government shutdown in history, Democrats have stuck to their guns: First, open the government. Then negotiate over border security. Their unwavering message has been that the president must not be allowed to hold federal workers hostage to get what he wants. Shutdowns must not be rewarded as a political tool. On Thursday, Democrats will have an opportunity to put this reasoning to a test in the Senate, where lawmakers will vote for the first time on reopening the government since the partial shutdown began more than a month ago. Senators will vote on dueling measures: President Trumps plan, which would fund the government through September and includes $5.7 billion for a wall; and the Democrats plan, which would fund the government through Feb. 8, allowing time to negotiate border security. It has no wall money. Both measures seem destined to fail in the polarized Senate. But even if Democrats prevail in their demand, its far from clear that this stand would deter future shutdowns. Government closures have become weaponized, observers say, and thats not likely to change. Indeed, just one year ago, Democrats themselves forced a shutdown, though brief, over immigration. Recommended: Art of the deal: In politics, Trump finds negotiations a different ballgame The Democrats demand to open the government first is just part of the game, says Patrick Griffin, who was legislative director for President Bill Clinton during the previous record-holding shutdown of 21 days. It works until it doesnt work, he says. You use it when it serves your purpose. The message also has served to keep Democrats unified. Not all Democrats oppose more funding for physical barriers along the border even if they object to a concrete wall. Its a good argument because its about a fundamental framing, as opposed to a component that people may agree or disagree on, says Democratic pollster Celinda Lake. Plus, people overwhelmingly agree the shutdown is Trumps fault. In a speech on Saturday, Mr. Trump stepped back from demanding a $5.7 billion wall as a 2,000-mile concrete structure from sea to sea and instead called for barriers in select high priority locations, in exchange for three years of protected status for Dreamers and certain other immigrants. Democrats have rejected the offer, pointing out that it also would place new restrictions on asylum seekers who are minors. Despite being presented by the president as a compromise, the proposal was not made in consultation with Democrats. Still, a group of centrist House Democrats reportedly wants Speaker Nancy Pelosi to offer the president a vote on his border wall and other security measures by the end of February, while allowing amendments to protect Dreamers after the government is opened up. And some Democrats could support steel slats, a description that the president has been using. I think in some places it might be appropriate, yes, Rep. Jahana Hayes, a Democratic freshman from Connecticut told reporters last week, referring to slat fencing. I want the border to be secure. Each shutdown has its own character including, in this case, a dispute over whether the president will give his State of the Union address in the House on Jan. 29. The president insisted in a letter to Ms. Pelosi today that he would; she wrote back that the House will not consider it until the shutdown ends. Each shutdown also has its own political pain, and that will determine its next use as a political tool for leverage, says Mr. Griffin. He points to the three-week shutdown over the holidays in the winter of 1995-96, when then-Speaker Newt Gingrich (R) of Georgia went to the mat to balance the budget in seven years through dramatic cuts. Mr. Clinton offered a different plan: 10 years without those cuts. In the end, Republicans were forced to admit defeat, and Clinton won reelection. It would be more than 17 years before congressional Republicans would again trigger a shutdown, this time over the Affordable Care Act. Their approval rating plummeted after that 16-day standoff in October 2013, instigated by the tea party caucus (one of its former members, Mick Mulvaney, is now the presidents acting chief of staff). But interestingly, that drop in approval did not last, and a year later, Republicans still vowing to repeal Obamacare took over the Senate.

Democrats have stuck to their guns: First, open the government, then negotiate over border security. But even if Democrats prevail in their demand, its far from clear that this stand would deter future shutdowns.

ctrlsum

https://news.yahoo.com/democrats-prevent-shutdowns-refusing-reward-tactic-211629215.html

Can Democrats prevent shutdowns by refusing to reward the tactic?

From Day One of the longest government shutdown in history, Democrats have stuck to their guns: First, open the government. Then negotiate over border security. Their unwavering message has been that the president must not be allowed to hold federal workers hostage to get what he wants. Shutdowns must not be rewarded as a political tool. On Thursday, Democrats will have an opportunity to put this reasoning to a test in the Senate, where lawmakers will vote for the first time on reopening the government since the partial shutdown began more than a month ago. Senators will vote on dueling measures: President Trumps plan, which would fund the government through September and includes $5.7 billion for a wall; and the Democrats plan, which would fund the government through Feb. 8, allowing time to negotiate border security. It has no wall money. Both measures seem destined to fail in the polarized Senate. But even if Democrats prevail in their demand, its far from clear that this stand would deter future shutdowns. Government closures have become weaponized, observers say, and thats not likely to change. Indeed, just one year ago, Democrats themselves forced a shutdown, though brief, over immigration. Recommended: Art of the deal: In politics, Trump finds negotiations a different ballgame The Democrats demand to open the government first is just part of the game, says Patrick Griffin, who was legislative director for President Bill Clinton during the previous record-holding shutdown of 21 days. It works until it doesnt work, he says. You use it when it serves your purpose. The message also has served to keep Democrats unified. Not all Democrats oppose more funding for physical barriers along the border even if they object to a concrete wall. Its a good argument because its about a fundamental framing, as opposed to a component that people may agree or disagree on, says Democratic pollster Celinda Lake. Plus, people overwhelmingly agree the shutdown is Trumps fault. In a speech on Saturday, Mr. Trump stepped back from demanding a $5.7 billion wall as a 2,000-mile concrete structure from sea to sea and instead called for barriers in select high priority locations, in exchange for three years of protected status for Dreamers and certain other immigrants. Democrats have rejected the offer, pointing out that it also would place new restrictions on asylum seekers who are minors. Despite being presented by the president as a compromise, the proposal was not made in consultation with Democrats. Still, a group of centrist House Democrats reportedly wants Speaker Nancy Pelosi to offer the president a vote on his border wall and other security measures by the end of February, while allowing amendments to protect Dreamers after the government is opened up. And some Democrats could support steel slats, a description that the president has been using. I think in some places it might be appropriate, yes, Rep. Jahana Hayes, a Democratic freshman from Connecticut told reporters last week, referring to slat fencing. I want the border to be secure. Each shutdown has its own character including, in this case, a dispute over whether the president will give his State of the Union address in the House on Jan. 29. The president insisted in a letter to Ms. Pelosi today that he would; she wrote back that the House will not consider it until the shutdown ends. Each shutdown also has its own political pain, and that will determine its next use as a political tool for leverage, says Mr. Griffin. He points to the three-week shutdown over the holidays in the winter of 1995-96, when then-Speaker Newt Gingrich (R) of Georgia went to the mat to balance the budget in seven years through dramatic cuts. Mr. Clinton offered a different plan: 10 years without those cuts. In the end, Republicans were forced to admit defeat, and Clinton won reelection. It would be more than 17 years before congressional Republicans would again trigger a shutdown, this time over the Affordable Care Act. Their approval rating plummeted after that 16-day standoff in October 2013, instigated by the tea party caucus (one of its former members, Mick Mulvaney, is now the presidents acting chief of staff). But interestingly, that drop in approval did not last, and a year later, Republicans still vowing to repeal Obamacare took over the Senate.

Democrats have stuck to their guns: First, open the government, then negotiate over border security. But even if Democrats prevail in their demand, its far from clear that this stand would deter future shutdowns. The message also has served to keep Democrats unified.

ctrlsum

https://news.yahoo.com/democrats-prevent-shutdowns-refusing-reward-tactic-211629215.html

How Does Today's Digital Media Environment Influence The Way We Behave?

originally appeared on Quora: the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. Answer by Douglas Rushkoff, author and host of Team Human, on Quora: First off, for those who dont know exactly what a media environment is, its the social, mental, and economic environment engendered by a particular medium or technology. The smart phone isnt just the device in your pocket, but the entire environment it creates around it - from people walking in the street without looking up, to surveillance, to never getting to be truly alone, and so on. The digital media environment seems to be characterized by two main features: everything is discrete, and everything is in memory. By discrete, I mean 1/0, yes/no. No matter how smooth or anti-aliased things may look, everything is still in one place or another. Here or there. Like a snap-to grid. You cant be in the middle. We can get greater resolution, for sure. But its either here or there. So we get lots of definitions and boundaries. Lets build a wall. By memory, I mean the way that all digital processing happens in memory. RAM. Processors are really just different forms of memory. And, likewise, the digital media environment is a place where everything is remembered, and with perfect fidelity (even if it doesnt come back to us or get disseminated accurately). Every email you wrote is there, somewhere. Someday, as accessible as a text file. Your old friends show up on Facebook - people who would have receded into the distance of the past - now as crisp and clear as if you hadnt left them behind twenty years ago. The digital media environment leads people to think back - really to false memories. Make America Great Again. Or lets restore Britain to its prior glory, by separating from Europe. The European Union is too messy for the digital age. As for people, psychologically, a lot of what happens to us is really just a subset of those two features. We are often disoriented because were trying to be here and there at one time. Or were trying to be on one side of an artificial distinction or another. Or were trying to maintain multiple instances of ourselves at the same time. But for the most part, the digital media environment makes us see differences over similarities - opposition - and long for some remembered past. This question originally appeared on Quora - the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+. More questions:

Answer by Douglas Rushkoff, author and host of Team Human. The digital media environment leads people to think back - really to false memories.

pegasus

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2019/01/23/how-does-todays-digital-media-environment-influence-the-way-we-behave/

How Does Today's Digital Media Environment Influence The Way We Behave?

originally appeared on Quora: the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. Answer by Douglas Rushkoff, author and host of Team Human, on Quora: First off, for those who dont know exactly what a media environment is, its the social, mental, and economic environment engendered by a particular medium or technology. The smart phone isnt just the device in your pocket, but the entire environment it creates around it - from people walking in the street without looking up, to surveillance, to never getting to be truly alone, and so on. The digital media environment seems to be characterized by two main features: everything is discrete, and everything is in memory. By discrete, I mean 1/0, yes/no. No matter how smooth or anti-aliased things may look, everything is still in one place or another. Here or there. Like a snap-to grid. You cant be in the middle. We can get greater resolution, for sure. But its either here or there. So we get lots of definitions and boundaries. Lets build a wall. By memory, I mean the way that all digital processing happens in memory. RAM. Processors are really just different forms of memory. And, likewise, the digital media environment is a place where everything is remembered, and with perfect fidelity (even if it doesnt come back to us or get disseminated accurately). Every email you wrote is there, somewhere. Someday, as accessible as a text file. Your old friends show up on Facebook - people who would have receded into the distance of the past - now as crisp and clear as if you hadnt left them behind twenty years ago. The digital media environment leads people to think back - really to false memories. Make America Great Again. Or lets restore Britain to its prior glory, by separating from Europe. The European Union is too messy for the digital age. As for people, psychologically, a lot of what happens to us is really just a subset of those two features. We are often disoriented because were trying to be here and there at one time. Or were trying to be on one side of an artificial distinction or another. Or were trying to maintain multiple instances of ourselves at the same time. But for the most part, the digital media environment makes us see differences over similarities - opposition - and long for some remembered past. This question originally appeared on Quora - the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+. More questions:

Answer by Douglas Rushkoff, author and host of Team Human. Digital media environment seems to be characterized by two main features. Digital media environment leads people to think back - really to false memories.

pegasus

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2019/01/23/how-does-todays-digital-media-environment-influence-the-way-we-behave/

How Does Today's Digital Media Environment Influence The Way We Behave?

originally appeared on Quora: the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. Answer by Douglas Rushkoff, author and host of Team Human, on Quora: First off, for those who dont know exactly what a media environment is, its the social, mental, and economic environment engendered by a particular medium or technology. The smart phone isnt just the device in your pocket, but the entire environment it creates around it - from people walking in the street without looking up, to surveillance, to never getting to be truly alone, and so on. The digital media environment seems to be characterized by two main features: everything is discrete, and everything is in memory. By discrete, I mean 1/0, yes/no. No matter how smooth or anti-aliased things may look, everything is still in one place or another. Here or there. Like a snap-to grid. You cant be in the middle. We can get greater resolution, for sure. But its either here or there. So we get lots of definitions and boundaries. Lets build a wall. By memory, I mean the way that all digital processing happens in memory. RAM. Processors are really just different forms of memory. And, likewise, the digital media environment is a place where everything is remembered, and with perfect fidelity (even if it doesnt come back to us or get disseminated accurately). Every email you wrote is there, somewhere. Someday, as accessible as a text file. Your old friends show up on Facebook - people who would have receded into the distance of the past - now as crisp and clear as if you hadnt left them behind twenty years ago. The digital media environment leads people to think back - really to false memories. Make America Great Again. Or lets restore Britain to its prior glory, by separating from Europe. The European Union is too messy for the digital age. As for people, psychologically, a lot of what happens to us is really just a subset of those two features. We are often disoriented because were trying to be here and there at one time. Or were trying to be on one side of an artificial distinction or another. Or were trying to maintain multiple instances of ourselves at the same time. But for the most part, the digital media environment makes us see differences over similarities - opposition - and long for some remembered past. This question originally appeared on Quora - the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+. More questions:

Douglas Rushkoff: The digital media environment leads people to think back - really to false memories. The digital media environment makes us see differences over similarities - opposition - and long for some remembered past. The digital media environment leads people to think back - really to false memories.

pegasus

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2019/01/23/how-does-todays-digital-media-environment-influence-the-way-we-behave/

How Are Government Workers Affected By The Shutdown?

originally appeared on Quora: the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. Answer by Adam Roseman, Co-founder and CEO at Steady, on Quora: A custodian from NASA contacted my offices looking for help finding part-time work. After two decades on the job, hes found himself furloughed as part of the longest shutdown in U.S. history. He needs help. There are about 800,000 federal workers like him. Theyre receiving no paychecks, even though more than half have to keep working anyway. Thousands are applying for state unemployment benefits, which may provide partial pay for a limited time. Theyll then have to go through the bureaucratic hassle of paying back those benefits if they get back pay when the government resumes. But the big picture is this: Government workers have had the rug pulled out from under them. Its the latest sign that workers in todays economy are without stability. Even as disruption has led to all kinds of changes in traditional businesses in recent years, federal government work has maintained a reputation of being relatively stable. Workers have turned down higher paying jobs in the private sector in hopes of finding job security in the public sector. Now, many of these workers across the country are having second thoughts - and discovering its not so stable after all. As all these workers find themselves suddenly looking for sources of income, theyre facing the difficult realities of the modern economy - a reality that differs greatly from the rosy pictures often provided by news reports and so-called jobs numbers. Were in the gig economy, and businesses of all kinds have become increasingly reliant on hiring contractors and part-time workers. Theyre counted as employed in official government numbers, even if theyre not making enough money to pay their bills. In fact, 78% of U.S. workers live paycheck-to-paycheck. Nearly all the jobs created between 2005 and 2015 were made up of temporary work, a study by Harvard and Princeton professors. An estimated 94 percent of the net employment growth in the U.S. economy during that period occurred in alternative work arrangements, which include temporary help agency workers, on-call workers, contract workers, and independent contractors or freelancers, the study said. Millions of Americans are working part-time because they can't get full-time work. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that nearly 5 million people were working part-time in December for economic reasons, which include slack work or unfavorable business conditions, inability to find full-time work, or seasonal declines in demand. Now, furloughed government workers are entering the fray as well, looking for side hustles, from bartending to Uber driving. One veteran diplomat described in the Washington Post is doing her day job of analyzing a nation in economic upheaval for the State Department, unpaid, while also pet sitting and doing product reviews so she can make some money. As these federal employees enter the pool of gig workers in larger numbers, theyre creating a larger available workforce for companies that want cheap temporary labor. Its another stage in what weve seen all too much of for years now: economic changes that empower corporations and disempower individuals. Some of these federal employees, like the NASA janitor, began their government jobs decades ago, when things were different. For them, suddenly facing this new economy can come as a shock, whether theyre looking for gig work during the shutdown or seeking a job in the private sector. The longer a shutdown continues, the more likely people are to look for new jobs - particularly since President Trump said hes prepared to to keep the government closed for months or even years. These are steep challenges facing federal workers as they try to keep themselves and their families fed and housed, both now and in the future. Its why a White House economic adviser was wrong when he said some workers were better off in some sense as a result of the shutdown. His argument was that theyd get the holidays off, and then eventually get back pay. But the threats to their livelihoods mean workers told to stay home, and those forced to keep working without pay, are very simply not better off. No one should suggest otherwise. A government office recently faced criticism after suggesting furloughed workers seeking legal advice consult your personal attorney, as though they have the money to hire one. The same office also expressed regret after tweeting a letter from several years ago suggesting furloughed workers offer to do manual labor for their landlords. While this advice may have been well intended, this isnt what workers need from their employers. Its time for the government, and all employers, to empower workers with the security, stability, dignity, and respect they deserve. After all, NASA custodians helped put a man on the moon. This question originally appeared on Quora - the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+. More questions:

About 800,000 federal workers are furloughed as part of the longest shutdown in U.S. history.

bart

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2019/01/23/how-are-government-workers-affected-by-the-shutdown/

How Are Government Workers Affected By The Shutdown?

originally appeared on Quora: the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. Answer by Adam Roseman, Co-founder and CEO at Steady, on Quora: A custodian from NASA contacted my offices looking for help finding part-time work. After two decades on the job, hes found himself furloughed as part of the longest shutdown in U.S. history. He needs help. There are about 800,000 federal workers like him. Theyre receiving no paychecks, even though more than half have to keep working anyway. Thousands are applying for state unemployment benefits, which may provide partial pay for a limited time. Theyll then have to go through the bureaucratic hassle of paying back those benefits if they get back pay when the government resumes. But the big picture is this: Government workers have had the rug pulled out from under them. Its the latest sign that workers in todays economy are without stability. Even as disruption has led to all kinds of changes in traditional businesses in recent years, federal government work has maintained a reputation of being relatively stable. Workers have turned down higher paying jobs in the private sector in hopes of finding job security in the public sector. Now, many of these workers across the country are having second thoughts - and discovering its not so stable after all. As all these workers find themselves suddenly looking for sources of income, theyre facing the difficult realities of the modern economy - a reality that differs greatly from the rosy pictures often provided by news reports and so-called jobs numbers. Were in the gig economy, and businesses of all kinds have become increasingly reliant on hiring contractors and part-time workers. Theyre counted as employed in official government numbers, even if theyre not making enough money to pay their bills. In fact, 78% of U.S. workers live paycheck-to-paycheck. Nearly all the jobs created between 2005 and 2015 were made up of temporary work, a study by Harvard and Princeton professors. An estimated 94 percent of the net employment growth in the U.S. economy during that period occurred in alternative work arrangements, which include temporary help agency workers, on-call workers, contract workers, and independent contractors or freelancers, the study said. Millions of Americans are working part-time because they can't get full-time work. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that nearly 5 million people were working part-time in December for economic reasons, which include slack work or unfavorable business conditions, inability to find full-time work, or seasonal declines in demand. Now, furloughed government workers are entering the fray as well, looking for side hustles, from bartending to Uber driving. One veteran diplomat described in the Washington Post is doing her day job of analyzing a nation in economic upheaval for the State Department, unpaid, while also pet sitting and doing product reviews so she can make some money. As these federal employees enter the pool of gig workers in larger numbers, theyre creating a larger available workforce for companies that want cheap temporary labor. Its another stage in what weve seen all too much of for years now: economic changes that empower corporations and disempower individuals. Some of these federal employees, like the NASA janitor, began their government jobs decades ago, when things were different. For them, suddenly facing this new economy can come as a shock, whether theyre looking for gig work during the shutdown or seeking a job in the private sector. The longer a shutdown continues, the more likely people are to look for new jobs - particularly since President Trump said hes prepared to to keep the government closed for months or even years. These are steep challenges facing federal workers as they try to keep themselves and their families fed and housed, both now and in the future. Its why a White House economic adviser was wrong when he said some workers were better off in some sense as a result of the shutdown. His argument was that theyd get the holidays off, and then eventually get back pay. But the threats to their livelihoods mean workers told to stay home, and those forced to keep working without pay, are very simply not better off. No one should suggest otherwise. A government office recently faced criticism after suggesting furloughed workers seeking legal advice consult your personal attorney, as though they have the money to hire one. The same office also expressed regret after tweeting a letter from several years ago suggesting furloughed workers offer to do manual labor for their landlords. While this advice may have been well intended, this isnt what workers need from their employers. Its time for the government, and all employers, to empower workers with the security, stability, dignity, and respect they deserve. After all, NASA custodians helped put a man on the moon. This question originally appeared on Quora - the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+. More questions:

About 800,000 federal workers are furloughed as part of the longest shutdown in U.S. history. Millions of Americans are working part-time because they can't get full-time work.

bart

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2019/01/23/how-are-government-workers-affected-by-the-shutdown/

How Are Government Workers Affected By The Shutdown?

originally appeared on Quora: the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. Answer by Adam Roseman, Co-founder and CEO at Steady, on Quora: A custodian from NASA contacted my offices looking for help finding part-time work. After two decades on the job, hes found himself furloughed as part of the longest shutdown in U.S. history. He needs help. There are about 800,000 federal workers like him. Theyre receiving no paychecks, even though more than half have to keep working anyway. Thousands are applying for state unemployment benefits, which may provide partial pay for a limited time. Theyll then have to go through the bureaucratic hassle of paying back those benefits if they get back pay when the government resumes. But the big picture is this: Government workers have had the rug pulled out from under them. Its the latest sign that workers in todays economy are without stability. Even as disruption has led to all kinds of changes in traditional businesses in recent years, federal government work has maintained a reputation of being relatively stable. Workers have turned down higher paying jobs in the private sector in hopes of finding job security in the public sector. Now, many of these workers across the country are having second thoughts - and discovering its not so stable after all. As all these workers find themselves suddenly looking for sources of income, theyre facing the difficult realities of the modern economy - a reality that differs greatly from the rosy pictures often provided by news reports and so-called jobs numbers. Were in the gig economy, and businesses of all kinds have become increasingly reliant on hiring contractors and part-time workers. Theyre counted as employed in official government numbers, even if theyre not making enough money to pay their bills. In fact, 78% of U.S. workers live paycheck-to-paycheck. Nearly all the jobs created between 2005 and 2015 were made up of temporary work, a study by Harvard and Princeton professors. An estimated 94 percent of the net employment growth in the U.S. economy during that period occurred in alternative work arrangements, which include temporary help agency workers, on-call workers, contract workers, and independent contractors or freelancers, the study said. Millions of Americans are working part-time because they can't get full-time work. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that nearly 5 million people were working part-time in December for economic reasons, which include slack work or unfavorable business conditions, inability to find full-time work, or seasonal declines in demand. Now, furloughed government workers are entering the fray as well, looking for side hustles, from bartending to Uber driving. One veteran diplomat described in the Washington Post is doing her day job of analyzing a nation in economic upheaval for the State Department, unpaid, while also pet sitting and doing product reviews so she can make some money. As these federal employees enter the pool of gig workers in larger numbers, theyre creating a larger available workforce for companies that want cheap temporary labor. Its another stage in what weve seen all too much of for years now: economic changes that empower corporations and disempower individuals. Some of these federal employees, like the NASA janitor, began their government jobs decades ago, when things were different. For them, suddenly facing this new economy can come as a shock, whether theyre looking for gig work during the shutdown or seeking a job in the private sector. The longer a shutdown continues, the more likely people are to look for new jobs - particularly since President Trump said hes prepared to to keep the government closed for months or even years. These are steep challenges facing federal workers as they try to keep themselves and their families fed and housed, both now and in the future. Its why a White House economic adviser was wrong when he said some workers were better off in some sense as a result of the shutdown. His argument was that theyd get the holidays off, and then eventually get back pay. But the threats to their livelihoods mean workers told to stay home, and those forced to keep working without pay, are very simply not better off. No one should suggest otherwise. A government office recently faced criticism after suggesting furloughed workers seeking legal advice consult your personal attorney, as though they have the money to hire one. The same office also expressed regret after tweeting a letter from several years ago suggesting furloughed workers offer to do manual labor for their landlords. While this advice may have been well intended, this isnt what workers need from their employers. Its time for the government, and all employers, to empower workers with the security, stability, dignity, and respect they deserve. After all, NASA custodians helped put a man on the moon. This question originally appeared on Quora - the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+. More questions:

About 800,000 federal workers have been furloughed as part of the longest shutdown in U.S. history. Millions of Americans are working part-time because they can't get full-time work. Nearly all the jobs created between 2005 and 2015 were made up of temporary work.

bart

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2019/01/23/how-are-government-workers-affected-by-the-shutdown/

Did drones really interfere with flights at Newark airport?

The FAA had initially said the drones were spotted near Teterboro Airport, about 17 miles north of Newark Liberty International Airport. A day later, agency officials said the drones were operating about nine miles from the Newark airport in airspace used by incoming flights. One day after reports of drone activity near Newark Liberty International Airport temporarily halted flights, there are questions about whether the unmanned objects spotted in the New Jersey sky were indeed drones. Officials with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said that at 4:44 p.m. on Tuesday, they received two reports of possible drones operating near the Newark airport. One came from a Southwest pilot and the other from a United pilot who saw what each believed was a drone in the air as they prepared to land at Newark. However, an FAA spokesman said Wednesday, the agency has been unable to independently confirm the sightings. We continue to work with local law enforcement to find additional evidence, the spokesman said. The agency had initially said the drones were spotted near Teterboro Airport, a smaller facility about 17 miles north of Newark. On Wednesday, they said the drones were operating about nine miles from the Newark airport in airspace used by incoming flights. Industry experts, however, are pushing back against the reports. The objects could have been balloons, plastic bags or space junk, they said. Brendan Schulman, spokesman for DJI, the worlds largest drone-maker, said the pilots likely saw something in the air and that its unlikely it was a drone. One reason, Schulman said: The drones were reportedly flying at 3,500 feet. Under FAA rules, drones are not permitted to fly higher than 400 feet. And while its possible for them to fly higher with FAA permission, Schulman said its highly unlikely. He said previous reports of drones flying near Gatwick and Heathrow airports in London have made people more predisposed to assuming when they see something in the air, its a drone. Theres certainly cases of knuckleheads flying drones where they shouldnt be, but we have strong reservations on (the Newark) report, he said. There has been case after case after case of someone who saw a drone in the air that turned out to be a bat or a balloon or a plastic bag. Federal officials are wrestling with how to regulate drones as their numbers continue to grow. Government officials estimate that more than 1 million are already in use.

FAA received two reports of possible drones operating near the Newark airport.

pegasus

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/did-drones-really-interfere-with-flights-at-newark-airport/?utm_source=RSS&utm_medium=Referral&utm_campaign=RSS_nation-world

Did drones really interfere with flights at Newark airport?

The FAA had initially said the drones were spotted near Teterboro Airport, about 17 miles north of Newark Liberty International Airport. A day later, agency officials said the drones were operating about nine miles from the Newark airport in airspace used by incoming flights. One day after reports of drone activity near Newark Liberty International Airport temporarily halted flights, there are questions about whether the unmanned objects spotted in the New Jersey sky were indeed drones. Officials with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said that at 4:44 p.m. on Tuesday, they received two reports of possible drones operating near the Newark airport. One came from a Southwest pilot and the other from a United pilot who saw what each believed was a drone in the air as they prepared to land at Newark. However, an FAA spokesman said Wednesday, the agency has been unable to independently confirm the sightings. We continue to work with local law enforcement to find additional evidence, the spokesman said. The agency had initially said the drones were spotted near Teterboro Airport, a smaller facility about 17 miles north of Newark. On Wednesday, they said the drones were operating about nine miles from the Newark airport in airspace used by incoming flights. Industry experts, however, are pushing back against the reports. The objects could have been balloons, plastic bags or space junk, they said. Brendan Schulman, spokesman for DJI, the worlds largest drone-maker, said the pilots likely saw something in the air and that its unlikely it was a drone. One reason, Schulman said: The drones were reportedly flying at 3,500 feet. Under FAA rules, drones are not permitted to fly higher than 400 feet. And while its possible for them to fly higher with FAA permission, Schulman said its highly unlikely. He said previous reports of drones flying near Gatwick and Heathrow airports in London have made people more predisposed to assuming when they see something in the air, its a drone. Theres certainly cases of knuckleheads flying drones where they shouldnt be, but we have strong reservations on (the Newark) report, he said. There has been case after case after case of someone who saw a drone in the air that turned out to be a bat or a balloon or a plastic bag. Federal officials are wrestling with how to regulate drones as their numbers continue to grow. Government officials estimate that more than 1 million are already in use.

FAA received two reports of possible drones operating near the Newark airport. One came from a Southwest pilot and the other from a United pilot who saw what each believed was a drone in the air.

pegasus

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/did-drones-really-interfere-with-flights-at-newark-airport/?utm_source=RSS&utm_medium=Referral&utm_campaign=RSS_nation-world

Did drones really interfere with flights at Newark airport?

The FAA had initially said the drones were spotted near Teterboro Airport, about 17 miles north of Newark Liberty International Airport. A day later, agency officials said the drones were operating about nine miles from the Newark airport in airspace used by incoming flights. One day after reports of drone activity near Newark Liberty International Airport temporarily halted flights, there are questions about whether the unmanned objects spotted in the New Jersey sky were indeed drones. Officials with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said that at 4:44 p.m. on Tuesday, they received two reports of possible drones operating near the Newark airport. One came from a Southwest pilot and the other from a United pilot who saw what each believed was a drone in the air as they prepared to land at Newark. However, an FAA spokesman said Wednesday, the agency has been unable to independently confirm the sightings. We continue to work with local law enforcement to find additional evidence, the spokesman said. The agency had initially said the drones were spotted near Teterboro Airport, a smaller facility about 17 miles north of Newark. On Wednesday, they said the drones were operating about nine miles from the Newark airport in airspace used by incoming flights. Industry experts, however, are pushing back against the reports. The objects could have been balloons, plastic bags or space junk, they said. Brendan Schulman, spokesman for DJI, the worlds largest drone-maker, said the pilots likely saw something in the air and that its unlikely it was a drone. One reason, Schulman said: The drones were reportedly flying at 3,500 feet. Under FAA rules, drones are not permitted to fly higher than 400 feet. And while its possible for them to fly higher with FAA permission, Schulman said its highly unlikely. He said previous reports of drones flying near Gatwick and Heathrow airports in London have made people more predisposed to assuming when they see something in the air, its a drone. Theres certainly cases of knuckleheads flying drones where they shouldnt be, but we have strong reservations on (the Newark) report, he said. There has been case after case after case of someone who saw a drone in the air that turned out to be a bat or a balloon or a plastic bag. Federal officials are wrestling with how to regulate drones as their numbers continue to grow. Government officials estimate that more than 1 million are already in use.

FAA received two reports of possible drones operating near the Newark airport. One came from a Southwest pilot and the other from a United pilot who saw what each believed was a drone in the air as they prepared to land at Newark. The agency had initially said the drones were spotted near Teterboro Airport, a smaller facility about 17 miles north of Newark.

pegasus

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/did-drones-really-interfere-with-flights-at-newark-airport/?utm_source=RSS&utm_medium=Referral&utm_campaign=RSS_nation-world

Is there a 'circular' solution to the world's food problems?

ROME (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - The pesticide exposure, antibiotic resistance, air and water pollution and other factors caused by industrial food production could kill 5 million people a year by 2050, a new report said. That is four times the number of deaths caused by traffic accidents globally. Preventing that from happening requires producing food locally, using eco-friendly methods, eliminating waste and designing and marketing healthier products, said a foundation set up by record-breaking British sailor Ellen MacArthur. Redesigning the food industry into a so-called circular economy model would reduce health costs, save land and water and create new business opportunities, said the report, launched Thursday at the World Economic Forum. Cities could be important catalysts in this change as 80 percent of all food is expected to consumed in cities by 2050, it said. Under the current linear system, food enters cities where it is processed or consumed and only a small portion of the resulting organic waste, in the form of discarded food, byproducts or sewage, gets used again. In a circular economy, raw materials and byproducts are reused and very little is wasted. Cities would need to source food produced locally in ways that regenerate the ecosystem, distribute the surplus to those who cannot afford it, and turn byproducts into new products from fertilizer to feed to materials for bioenergy. The benefits could be worth $2.7 trillion a year to the global economy, according to the report. In contrast, the extractive, wasteful, and polluting nature of current food production costs society $5.7 trillion a year globally, through costs to human and environmental health, the report said. What you eat matters, but how it has been produced matters as well. You could very well be eating healthy, but still be exposed to the negative impacts because of the way food is produced, said Clementine Schouteden, the reports lead author. We are at an absolutely critical point, she told the Thomson Reuters Foundation from Davos. Scientists are increasingly calling for systemic changes to the way food is being produced and consumed, saying industrial farming has led to a food system that contributes to climate change, cripples the environment and causes a malnutrition crisis. Agriculture, forestry and other land uses are responsible for a quarter of the greenhouse gas emissions heating up the planet, according to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Meanwhile, one third of all food produced, worth nearly $1 trillion, is wasted globally every year, FAO figures show, even as 821 million people go hungry and one in eight adults are obese. Last week, scientists unveiled for the first time what they say is an ideal diet for the health of the planet and its people, recommending a doubling of consumption of nuts, fruits, vegetables and legumes, and a halving of meat and sugar intake.

Report: Industrial food production could kill 5 million people a year by 2050. Redesigning the food industry into a so-called circular economy model would reduce health costs.

ctrlsum

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-agriculture-davos/is-there-a-circular-solution-to-the-worlds-food-problems-idUSKCN1PI003