Tag Archives: journalist

Breath – James Nestor

READ GREEN WITH E-BOOKS

Breath

The New Science of a Lost Art

James Nestor

Genre: Life Sciences

Price: $14.99

Expected Publish Date: May 26, 2020

Publisher: Penguin Publishing Group

Seller: PENGUIN GROUP USA, INC.


No matter what you eat, how much you exercise, how skinny or young or wise you are, none of it matters if you’re not breathing properly. There is nothing more essential to our health and well-being than breathing: take air in, let it out, repeat 25,000 times a day. Yet, as a species, humans have lost the ability to breathe correctly, with grave consequences. Journalist James Nestor travels the world to figure out what went wrong and how to fix it. The answers aren’t found in pulmonology labs, as we might expect, but in the muddy digs of ancient burial sites, secret Soviet facilities, New Jersey choir schools, and the smoggy streets of São Paulo. Nestor tracks down men and women exploring the hidden science behind ancient breathing practices like Pranayama, Sudarshan Kriya, and Tummo and teams up with pulmonary tinkerers to scientifically test long-held beliefs about how we breathe. Modern research is showing us that making even slight adjustments to the way we inhale and exhale can jump-start athletic performance; rejuvenate internal organs; halt snoring, asthma, and autoimmune disease; and even straighten scoliotic spines. None of this should be possible, and yet it is. Drawing on thousands of years of medical texts and recent cutting-edge studies in pulmonology, psychology, biochemistry, and human physiology, Breath turns the conventional wisdom of what we thought we knew about our most basic biological function on its head. You will never breathe the same again.

View original post here – 

Breath – James Nestor

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, oven, Pines, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Breath – James Nestor

Video: Rep. Alan Grayson Freaks Out on Politico Reporter

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) clashed with a Politico reporter following a DNC event in Philadelphia on Tuesday afternoon, threatening to report the journalist to the Capitol Police and saying he hoped the reporter would be arrested. Grayson, currently running for the Democratic Senate nomination in Florida, had shown up to an event on tech in politics hosted in Politico‘s DNC event space, sitting in the front row, on the very same day that the publication published a detailed examination of a history of domestic-abuse allegations leveled against Grayson by his ex-wife.

Following the event, Politico reporter Edward-Isaac Dovere tried to question Grayson about the article, and things quickly turned hostile.

Originally posted here: 

Video: Rep. Alan Grayson Freaks Out on Politico Reporter

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Video: Rep. Alan Grayson Freaks Out on Politico Reporter

Watch John Oliver Dismantle the Stupid Way the Media Covers Every Scientific Study

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Does coffee cause cancer—or help prevent it? What about red wine? These are some of the vital questions that scientists have long struggled to answer, with journalists by their side to misreport the findings.

For the media, scientific studies can be a great source of stories: Someone else does all the work on reaching a conclusion that appears to directly affect something your audience cares about (often their health). What’s more, that conclusion comes with a shiny gloss of indisputable factuality: “This isn’t just some made-up nonsense—it’s science! It must be true.” We’ve all seen how scientific conclusions that were carefully vetted by other scientists can be reduced or distorted beyond recognition for the sake of TV ratings or story clicks. I’m sure I’ve done it myself.

The systemic failure of science communication by mass media is the topic of John Oliver’s latest diatribe, and he really nails it. There are a variety of problems all mashed together:

  1. Journalists often don’t take the time, or have the skills, to actually read through, comprehend, and translate scientific findings that can be very technical. After all, scientific papers are written for other scientists, not for the general public, so it takes a certain amount of training and effort to unpack what they mean. But that’s, like, hard and boring, and it’s not as if your audience will know any better if you screw it up.
  2. Journalists like big, bold conclusions: “X Thing Cures Cancer!” Scientists don’t work like that. Most peer-reviewed papers focus on very narrow problems and wade far into the weeds of complicated scientific debates. That doesn’t mean studies are all too esoteric to be be useful (although some undoubtedly are). It means that scientists draw their overarching conclusions about the universe based on a broad reading of entire bodies of literature, not individual studies. Single studies rarely yield revolutions; instead, our understanding evolves slowly through tedious, piecemeal work. Scientists want to understand the forest; journalists often just want to show you, dear reader, this one REALLY AWESOME IMPORTANT tree they just found. Those conflicting interests can lead to misleading reporting.
  3. Not all studies are created equal; some contain a variety of inadequacies that should give you pause about the conclusions. But journalists often do a poor job of reporting on these inadequacies, either because they don’t do enough reporting to know the inadequacies exist or because reporting them would undermine the big, bold conclusion the reporter wants to tell you about. Some studies have extremely small samples sizes. Some relied on rats or monkeys or whatever, but the journalist doesn’t explain that the conclusion might not be the same for humans. Actual studies that were published in peer-reviewed journals are often given equal air time to “studies” that some activist/lobbying group/bozo in his garage threw together. Some studies lack important context or conflict with preexisting science—something that journalists often fail to point out.

All these failures lead to confusion and erode the public’s trust in scientists. As Oliver points out, bad reporting about scientific research on the health effects of smoking was a major tool of the tobacco industry in its fight against smoking regulations. The same kind of thing happens all the time now with climate change research. See, for example, the so-called global warming “hiatus.” Over the last couple of years there has been a healthy debate in the scientific community about whether global warming slowed down over the last decade, and if so, why. In part because of sloppy reporting, the debate was misrepresented by climate change deniers as evidence that global warming doesn’t exist at all—which was never what climate scientists were arguing. (That debate is ongoing; Scientific American has a good update on the latest.)

The important thing to remember is that any one individual study isn’t worth very much and can never really “prove” anything. It’s not as if Charles Darwin wrote one study about evolution and rested his case at that. It took years of additional research by other scientists to validate his theory. In fact, as Oliver notes, the intense public pressure for scientists to come up with big, bold discoveries actually undermines a very important step in the scientific method: reproducing the results of other scientists. Replicating someone else’s study is a good way to find out if the original was a fluke or a genuine finding. Recall the scandal from the fall when dozens of psychology papers were found to fail a reproducibility test, thus casting serious doubt on their conclusions. That kind of fact-checking doesn’t happen enough—a trend some observers have called a “crisis of credibility”.

As a general rule (one that I’m sure to have broken as much as anyone), journalists should avoid making too big a stink about individual studies, at least without serving them with a very large grain of salt. Kudos to Oliver for reminding us why that’s important.

Taken from:  

Watch John Oliver Dismantle the Stupid Way the Media Covers Every Scientific Study

Posted in alternative energy, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, solar, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Watch John Oliver Dismantle the Stupid Way the Media Covers Every Scientific Study

A Journalist Was Just Manhandled and Detained at a Trump Rally

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Videos posted on Twitter earlier this afternoon show a photographer for Time magazine being violently thrown to the ground by a member of Donald Trump’s security team, possibly a US Secret Service agent. Morris, an award-winning photojournalist who has covered war zones, struggles back to his feet and is led away by several other security team members.

It’s not clear what precipitated the incident, which happened at a Trump rally at Virginia’s Radford University, but the confrontation appears to have occurred inside the enclosure usually reserved for members of the press.

A uniformed police offer and other men in suits can be seen leading Morris away from the scene.

Another video shows the journalist being handcuffed by uniformed police offers. Morris says he was briefly detained and then released.

Gabby Morrongiello, a reporter for the Washington Times who was covering the rally, tweeted that the incident occurred when the Time photographer attempted to leave the press corral to take photos of protesters.

A spokesman for the Secret Service did not respond to a request for comment about the episode.

Update: Another perspective on the takedown.

Excerpt from: 

A Journalist Was Just Manhandled and Detained at a Trump Rally

Posted in Anchor, FF, Gandhi, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A Journalist Was Just Manhandled and Detained at a Trump Rally

At Least 51 of My Colleagues Have Been Murdered Since 2003

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Chamelecón is a neighborhood in San Pedro Sula, Honduras, where the streets are lonely and the houses are marked. On one side of the street, two initials stand out on the walls: MS, the familiar scrawl of one of the most feared gangs, or maras, in Honduras: Mara Salvatrucha. Just across the street, another block of homes have the number 18 written on them—the tag for Barrio 18, the rival gang that also has taken up refuge in Chamelecón.

In recent years, the 50,000 people who live in the neighborhood have been terrorized by the maras. It’s a lawless place where entering means risk—especially for a journalist. But that’s my job, so I went to Chamelecón to try to bring this world to my readers at the Diario la Prensa, the newspaper I’ve worked at for the past 10 years in San Pedro Sula, a city that some experts consider to be the most dangerous in the world.

I always go out reporting with a photographer and a driver, and this story was no different. On our way there, we passed through a bunch of the barrios and colonias controlled by the gangsters. People told us not to go beyond the school, because no one would be able to protect us there. But that didn’t stop us. Our mission was to take photos, get a better look at these abandoned streets, and explain how the gang bangers dominate turf and change the lives of thousands of families there.

It was two in the afternoon, and when we arrived a few teens on bikes, and some more hanging out on the street corners, sounded the alarm. Immediately one grabbed his cell. He was a bandera—that’s what they call the kids who tell the gang leaders that there are strangers present. My photographer was taking some shots from inside the vehicle when, just a few minutes later, one of the banderas approached. “What are you looking for?” he asked. We tried to explain our work, but he didn’t give us time to say anything. “You’d better leave, or there will be problems.”

“Being a journalist in Honduras is for the brave,” my friends like to say—and even more so when you’re reporting on violence, corruption, or drug trafficking. Honduran reporters always have their adrenaline pumping. The constant hustle for what we call la nota roja—the crime beat, more or less—can make us feel numb, especially on those days when 10 or more people die violent deaths.

Going beyond the official story can be like signing your own death warrant. Reporting on the underworld can mean only halfway telling the truth, since telling the whole truth can make you a target for criminals. Since 2003, for example, the Honduran human rights commission has counted at least 51 murders of journalists and media professionals, the majority of them in radio and television. The vast majority of their killers remain free.

In fact, investigating that world once forced me to leave the country. Like other journalist friends, I fled for a time after receiving some threats related to a story I’d worked on. Journalists in Honduras have sought asylum elsewhere, and even have looked to the Inter-American Court for Human Rights for protection. That is a reality that we face daily. Fear always surrounds us.

Still, sometimes you have to face it head-on. A few months ago, I wrote a series about hitmen and decided I needed to actually sit down with one face-to-face—not exactly an easy job. After several tries, I was finally able to negotiate an interview after a number of calls. The hitman made the rules.

The day arrived. Over the phone the killer told us the route, which brought us outside the city of San Pedro Sula; each kilometer was more uncertain than the last. We traveled about 30 killometers to a lonely place. My cellphone rang, breaking our silence—it was him, telling us to move a few more meters up ahead. We kept going, but no one was there. Then another call came, and this time he told us to stop the car and for all of us to get out.

Scared, we did as he told us. We didn’t know if he was going to attack us. Five minutes passed before we heard the sound of a motorbike, and we saw an armed man draw closer. He was tall, heavyset, with a hard face. From the moment he arrived he inspired fear, and the relatively short interview felt like it went on forever. I could feel the chill in his words. At 34, he confessed that he’d killed 17 people, and he said he’d continue killing to earn a living. At the end of the interview, he took the motorbike and left. On the ride back to the city, I couldn’t help but think about how we face death every single day.

Many people have asked me why I don’t stay in the United States or go to another country. I’ve thought about it, sure. When you’re always looking over your shoulder when you walk down the street, or when you don’t know whether to cover something because of the potential repercussions, you just want to go somewhere where you can feel safe, where you can do your job without being afraid.

In the end, though, I chose la nota roja. Sometimes it means you can’t tell the whole story, and sometimes it means telling the truth and putting yourself at risk. Here in Honduras, you learn to live with that fear.

Continue reading here: 

At Least 51 of My Colleagues Have Been Murdered Since 2003

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on At Least 51 of My Colleagues Have Been Murdered Since 2003

Obama Understands That Presidents Can’t Make Empty Threats

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank is upset at President Obama’s “passivity” in foreign affairs. Specifically, he’s upset that Obama hasn’t threatened Iran with reprisals for its sham trial of his colleague Jason Rezaian on charges of spying.

I don’t blame Milbank. If I were in his shoes I’d be plenty enraged too. And yet, that still doesn’t make this right:

Obama said … nothing. He didn’t go to the briefing room and make a statement. He didn’t even release a written statement.

….Where was the demand that Iran immediately release Rezaian and the two or three other Americans it is effectively holding hostage? Where was the threat of consequences if Tehran refused? How about some righteous outrage condemning Iran for locking up an American journalist for doing his job? Even if Obama’s outrage came to nothing, it would be salutary to hear the president defend the core American value of free speech.

There are times when presidents should vent a little outrage, and maybe Obama should do it more often.1 But the fundamental truth about threats is that you don’t make them unless you’re willing to carry them out—and that goes double for presidents. If Obama had done what Milbank asked, and then failed to follow up, he’d open himself up to justified contempt. But if he did follow up, he’d be allowing America’s foreign policy to be dictated by the fate of a single person. Like it or not, a president can’t operate like that. He has bigger responsibilities than Donald Trump does.

Since neither of these options is acceptable, all that’s left is to take the course Obama has decided on: say nothing and allow his State Department to work behind the scenes. That’s not very emotionally satisfying, but it’s the right thing to do.

1Though Obama has publicly called for the release of all American prisoners in Iran on more than one occasion. “We are not going to relent until we bring home our Americans who are unjustly detained in Iran,” he said shortly after the Iran nuclear deal was announced. “Journalist Jason Rezaian should be released. Pastor Saeed Abedini should be released. Amir Hekmati, a former sergeant in the U.S. Marine Corps, should be released.”

Originally posted here:  

Obama Understands That Presidents Can’t Make Empty Threats

Posted in Casio, FF, GE, Jason, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Obama Understands That Presidents Can’t Make Empty Threats

Remembering Powerhouse Photographer Mary Ellen Mark

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

I found out about the death of photographer Mary Ellen Mark the way we learn about the passing of anyone these days—Facebook. My feed is currently flooded with condolences, remembrances, and laminations for Mark, who died yesterday at age 75.

Mark was a powerhouse photographer, a true legend. Her early ’80s project on homeless youth, Streetwise, remains a canon of documentary photography. In the late ’80s and ’90s, Mark’s work graced the pages of Mother Jones numerous times. Art Director Kerry Tremain made great use of her, both picking up archival images and making assignments such as portraits of journalist I.F. Stone and hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons.

Mark’s work was also featured early in the Mother Jones Fine Prints and Portfolios program, which led to the creation of the Mother Jones Documentary Photo Fund. Her print was part of the New York Portfolio I, alongside other heavy hitters like Nan Goldin, Duane Michaels, Ralph Gibson, and Inge Morath. (Sorry, we no longer have any of the print portfolios.)

No doubt there will be many eulogies and recollections of Mark and the impact she made on photography, particularly on social documentary photography, the kind of photography that’s been our bread and butter here.

Though it’s a just a shallow slice of her deep legacy, here’s a collection of some of Mark’s work for Mother Jones.

I.F. Stone, September 1989

Russell Simmons, November 2003

Mother Jones 15th anniversary issue, 1991

Story on Ms. magazine, November 1990

Story on Ms. magazine, November 1990

Jessica Mitford and Maya Angelou, November 1992

“Hollywood’s Washington” cover, January 1991

And here’s a short piece that Leica produced on Mark:

Visit site: 

Remembering Powerhouse Photographer Mary Ellen Mark

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Remembering Powerhouse Photographer Mary Ellen Mark

Don’t call Uber and Lyft “ride-sharing,” says AP

Fare economy

Don’t call Uber and Lyft “ride-sharing,” says AP

By on 15 Jan 2015commentsShare

Henceforth, the services offered by companies like Uber and Lyft are not to be referred to as “ride-sharing,” because that is a load of crap, according to a new update to the AP Stylebook, a.k.a. the journalist’s bible. Instead, services that “let people use smartphone apps to book and pay for a private car service” are to be called “ride-hailing” or “ride-booking services.”

Thank you, AP, for confirming this misuse of English. Sharing means partaking of, using, experiencing, occupying, having, or enjoying with others, according to Merriam-Webster. Carpooling is sharing. So is picking up a hitchhiker, using Craigslist rideshare, even co-owning a car when it’s done without a middlecorporation.

These share-washing companies are just taxi services that aren’t subject to regulations that protect drivers and riders. Much has been written about how they exploit their drivers (there’s even a lawsuit in Boston). And while your Uber driver (who hopefully isn’t a creep) will be happy to tell you how much he or she loves the work, drivers interviewed for a Jacobin article on the subject say they lie about that because they can be “deactivated” (fired) if they don’t average 4.7 out of 5 stars from customers. Off the clock, one employee calls Uber an “exploiting pimp” that takes 20 percent of his earnings, treats him like shit, cuts prices whenever it wants, and tells him to fuck off if he complains.

Hey, at least these corporations are keeping drunk drivers off the road!

Ultimately, though, calling ride-hailing apps “sharing” distracts attention from actual, uncommodified sharing, which is what this was all supposed to be about in the first place, no? For-profit transportation services are part of what we should call “the bullshit sharing economy.” Can we put that term in the AP Stylebook?

Source:
The AP bans the term “ride-sharing” for Uber & Lyft

, Greater Greater Washington.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

sponsored post

Use energy wisely and save money

How the power of positive energy turns you into a climate superhero.

Get stories like this in your inbox

AdvertisementAdvertisement

Link:  

Don’t call Uber and Lyft “ride-sharing,” says AP

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, solar, Ultima, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Don’t call Uber and Lyft “ride-sharing,” says AP

Profiles in Mainstream Media Courage

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Laura Poitras, the journalist who first worked with NSA leaker Edward Snowden and later wrote groundbreaking stories with Glenn Greenwald about the stunning growth and reach of the US surveillance state, describes her initial interaction with the mainstream media:

Other journalists were afraid to work with Snowden.

There’s a strong culture of fear among journalists right now, because the government is cracking down on both journalists and sources….We involved Washington Post journalist Bart Gellman when Snowden wanted to release one document early, and Gellman used the Snowden archive to break the PRISM story about mass electronic surveillance. He was going to come with me to Hong Kong to meet Snowden, and the Post became very nervous and pulled out. They told me not to go. I felt like I couldn’t live with myself if I didn’t go, so I went.

As they say, read the whole thing.

Read the article:

Profiles in Mainstream Media Courage

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Profiles in Mainstream Media Courage

California Farms Are Sucking Up Enough Groundwater to Put Rhode Island 17 Feet Under

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

California, the producer of nearly half of the nation’s fruits, veggies, and nuts, plus export crops—four-fifths of the world’s almonds, for example—is entering its third driest year on record. Nearly 80 percent of the state is experiencing “extreme” or “exceptional” drought. In addition to affecting agricultural production the drought will cost the state billions of dollars, thousands of jobs, and a whole lot of groundwater, according to a new report prepared for the California Department of Food and Agriculture by scientists at UC-Davis. The authors used current water data, agricultural models, satellite data, and other methods to predict the economic and environmental toll of the drought through 2016.

Here are four key takeaways:

The drought will cost the state $2.2 billion this year: Of these losses, $810 million will come from lower crop revenues, $203 million will come from livestock and dairy losses, and $454 million will come from the cost of pumping additional groundwater. Up to 17,100 seasonal and part-time jobs will be lost.
California is experiencing the “greatest absolute reduction in water availability” ever seen: In a normal year, about one-third of California’s irrigation water is drawn from wells that tap into the groundwater supply. The rest is “surface water” from streams, rivers, and reservoirs. This year, the state is losing about one-third of its surface water supply. The hardest hit area is the Central Valley, a normally fertile inland region. Because groundwater isn’t as easily pumped in the Valley as it is on the coasts, and the Colorado River supplies aren’t as accessible as they are in the south, the Valley has lost 410,000 acres to fallowing, an area about 10 times the size of Washington, DC.
Farmers are pumping enough groundwater to immerse Rhode Island in 17 feet of it: To make up for the loss of surface water, farmers are pumping 62 percent more groundwater than usual. They are projected to pump 13 million acre-feet this year, enough to put Rhode Island 17 feet under.
“We’re acting like the super-rich:” California is technically in its third year of drought, and regardless of the effects of El Niño, 2015 is likely to be a dry year too. As the dry years accumulate, it becomes harder and harder to pump water from the ground, adding to the crop and revenue losses. California is the only western state without groundwater regulation or measurement of major groundwater use. If you can drill down to water, it’s all yours. (Journalist McKenzie Funk describes this arcane system in an excerpt from his fascinating recent book, Windfall.) “A well-managed basin is used like a reserve bank account,” said Richard Howitt, a UC-Davis water scientist and co-author of the report. “We’re acting like the super-rich, who have so much money they don’t need to balance their checkbook.”

Continued: 

California Farms Are Sucking Up Enough Groundwater to Put Rhode Island 17 Feet Under

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on California Farms Are Sucking Up Enough Groundwater to Put Rhode Island 17 Feet Under