Category Archives: Transhuman News

BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) Former U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke misused his position to advance a development project in his Montana hometown and lied to an agency ethics official about his involvement, according to a report from federal investigators released Wednesday.

The investigation by the Interior Departments inspector general found that Zinke continued working with a foundation on the commercial project in the community of Whitefish, Montana even after he committed upon taking office to breaking ties with the foundation.

READ MORE: Outgoing Interior secretary Ryan Zinke defends legacy as he leaves

The report also said that Zinke gave incorrect and incomplete information to an Interior Department ethics official who confronted him over his involvement and that Zinke directed his staff to assist him with the project in a misuse of his position.

The Great Northern Veterans Peace Park Foundation was established by Zinke and others in 2007. Zinke and his wife were in negotiations with private developers for the use of foundation land for a commercial development project that included a microbrewery.

Zinke is a candidate in the June Republican primary for an open Montana Congressional seat, a position he held prior to joining Trumps cabinet.

Zinkes campaign called the report a political hit job and said his familys involvement in the foundation had led to the restoration of land that was made into a park where children can sled.

Investigators referred the matter to the Department of Justice for potential prosecution but it declined to pursue a criminal case, according to the report.

The investigation into the land deal was one of numerous probes of Zinke that began when he was in Trumps cabinet.

In another case, investigators found that he violated a policy that prohibits non-government employees from riding in government cars after his wife traveled with him, but he said ethics officials approved it.

Zinke was cleared of wrongdoing following a complaint that he redrew the boundaries of a national monument in Utah to benefit a state lawmaker and political ally.

During almost two years overseeing the agency responsible for managing 781,000 square miles (2 million square kilometers) of public lands, Zinkes broad rollbacks of restrictions on oil and gas drilling were cheered by industry.

But they brought a scathing backlash from environmental groups and Democratic lawmakers who accused him of putting corporate profits ahead of preservation.

When he resigned, Zinke said it was because of politically motivated attacks that had created a distraction from his duties.

View original post here:
Zinke misused position, lied to ethics official, according to federal investigators - PBS NewsHour

Text size

About the author: Ian Chaffee is a technology and startup media relations consultant based in Los Angeles.

When Spotify signed a reported $100 million multiyear deal in 2020 for the privilege of exclusively streaming Joe Rogans popular podcast, it was only a matter of time before people started firing at the massive target the company put on its own back. Rogans lucrative all sides approach to booking guests and producing content made it easy.

Also unfortunately for Spotify, the controversy is tailor-made for generational division. The all-ages battle royale kicked off with Boomers Neil Young and Joni Mitchell utilizing that most 1960s form of mobilization and persuasionboycott and protestto try and get Spotify to deplatform Rogan. Rogan himself comes from Generation X. He comes off as an inquisitive and nonconfrontational, but also politically incorrect, slacker-wing personality involuntarily thrust into the role of culture warrior when he would rather be doing MMA, DMT, or some other acronymic pursuit. Powerful millennials Daniel Ek and Taylor Swift, despite pleas from all corners, have opted for nonintervention when either could end the business scandal of the day whenever they wanted. The Zoomers dont care and are scrolling through TikTok.

The pressure on Rogan and Spotify intensified last weekend over Rogans repeated use of a racial slur, along with a few other inflammatory statements that cannot simply be dismissed with the counterargument of context. If that isnt enough for Spotify to eat whatever money is needed to ditch Rogan, then surely the risk that other offensive material will be found in the archives of Rogans podcast or comedic output should be. The man was a stand-up comedian first, after all, a line of work that lends itself to easy cancellation (as witnessed by fellow tradeswoman Whoopi Goldberg).

Caught up in its ambitious and now possibly tragic goal of becoming, with apologies to pre-Rogan lightning rod Howard Stern, the king of all audio media, Spotifys biggest mistake was going all-in on podcasts and chasing a market it apparently didnt yet fully understand. It wasnt enough that Spotify changed how we listen to music, it had to change how we consume everything audio. Now it has flown a bit too close to the sun. It chased what must have seemed like an easy user acquisition play in the highly lucrative bro market at the cost of not only cultural blowback, but also neglect of its primary value proposition.

Maybe this is an opportunity for Spotify to reclaim that value proposition. Lost in this debate heated by the flame of its own dumpster fire is that no one, Spotify included, is talking about the companys killer feature, what made it so popular in the first place: leveraging the cloud and the information listeners put into that cloud to create a better and more specialized music-listening experience for its users.

Spotify effectively married the appeal of a voluminous (albeit often pirated) peer-to-peer music library like Napster with the mixtape culture that has been a part of music fandom back to the cassette. While artists may not have been uniformly thrilled with those streaming royalties, whatever Spotify offered was better than nothing, and the end result for the audience was like nothing they had experienced before. If someone wanted to listen to the music from the year 1975 and only 1975 (and not the band The 1975), boom, they could find at least 10 different playlists for precisely that curated by actual human beings, with interesting and unique choices made by those playlist curators.

It might have been tougher for those who virtue-signaled their way out of their Spotify Premium subscriptions over the last week or two if Spotify had shown the same attention to their music product in the last few years that it did to someone like Rogan. A user exodus combined with Spotifys inattention reduces the future potential of the kind of music discovery that made Spotify so special in the first place. It wont be easy for Spotify simply to play Facebooks game of Well, Where Else Are You Going to Go? Competitors like Apple Music are champing at the bit to pick up those cancelers. Spotify handed them a new bit of leverage in positioning themselves as the exciting new streaming-music frontier that can do right by both their artists and listeners.

I dont doubt that Spotify is seriously considering the gravity of this stress test for its platform, its disaffected staff, disappearing subscribers, and strong competitors who now smell blood in the water. But I do wonder if the company has put itself in the best position to make the necessary choice to continue surviving and thriving. That will require much more than just joining the Joe Rogan cancel parade.

Guest commentaries like this one are written by authors outside the Barrons and MarketWatch newsroom. They reflect the perspective and opinions of the authors. Submit commentary proposals and other feedback toideas@barrons.com.

View post:
Spotify Removed Joe Rogan Episodes. It Has Strayed Far from Its Greatest Value - Barron's

The world of The Real Housewives has become increasingly complicated. We have Housewives that are accused of running cults, scams, and schemes. Weve watched women of color endure racial microaggressions from their castmates on-screen. Several Real Housewives have shared problematic posts on social media, ranging from racially charged to anti-vaccine. Its a lot, and for the fans following along, its extra confusing when some cast members are punished for their behavior while others are seemingly left unscathed.

Most recently, this topic came up after The Real Housewives of Salt Lake CitynewbieJennie Nguyen was put on blast for her anti-Black Lives Matter Facebook posts that resurfaced. Although Jennie tried to blame it on her social media team, Bravo eventually fired her. However, their sluggish reaction to the controversy almost became the bigger story. It took nearly a week before they acknowledged that Jennie was a trending topic for all the wrong reasons.

For many fans, the controversy called into question how someone with such hateful content on their public Facebook page could make it through the casting process. And if Jennie got fired for her problematic posts, why is Ramona Singer still allowed to terrorize The Real Housewives of New York City? Across all of the different Housewives cities, where do they draw the line, and how will they prevent this from happening in the future?

In a recent interview with Entertainment Tonight, the head honcho of Housewives, Andy Cohen, gave a status update on all of the franchises. When talking about RHOSLCs season 3 casting shakeup, he admitted that the Housewives casting process is a work in progress.

Listen, I think that were in a time where were producing a show that is about outspoken, sometimes politically incorrect people who are speaking their mind and, you know, we have to be sensitive to issues of racism, Andy said.

And we have to look out for everybody who is not only watching, but who are also on the show, and you know, look theres, every case is different, but we wanna do the right thing, and its a work in progress, he continued.

Now, The Real Housewives has never been a show that we look to as a moral compass, but they should have always been sensitive to issues of racism. Thats not a new concept or a symptom of the 2020s. But, its refreshing to know that there is some intentional work happening behind the scenes so they can weed out some of these bad apples before they ever make it to our screens.

TELL US WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT ANDY SAYING THE REAL HOUSEWIVES CASTING IS A WORK IN PROGRESS? DO YOU THINK BRAVO SHOULD BE MORE CONSISTENT WHEN RESPONDING TO THESE ISSUES?

[Photo Credit: Bravo]

Link:
Andy Cohen Admits Real Housewives Casting Process Is A "Work In Progress" After Jennie Nguyen Firing - Reality Tea

It seems that the past couple of years has been dominated by this idea of being canceled. From reality stars to musicians, political figures, authors, corporate leaders, and everything in between, cancel culture is a reality for celebrities in modern times.

One offensive tweet from 8 years ago or a heated social media conversation from your teenage years could lead you to be instantly abandoned in the public eye. Or perhaps its a more recent exchange or offensive comment that has certain celebs in hot water. Just ask Chrissy Teigen, Ellen DeGeneres, or JK Rowling.

Many celebrities have paid the price for past mistakes and inappropriate comments that live forever online (thank you, Internet). Yes, their inappropriate words and offensive actions triggered these casualties of cancel culture, but what happens next?

What even is cancel culture? Is there redemption after being canceled? Can a public figure really come back from the public declaration that they are over, and how?

The phrase canceled is a buzzword taking the world by storm, reaching into virtually all industries, social media platforms, and cultural worlds. Think of it as the public saying Im done with you to a public figure or business and rejecting them personally and professionally. That might mean abandoning their work, unfollowing them on social media, and taking away their platform to be influential because of something they said or did.

This cancel culture is the phenomenon of eliminating support for these people who have done something offensive or whose ideologies are inappropriate in the public eye.

While this phenomenon is far from new people have been punishing those in positions of fame or power for decades its taken off in recent years. Social media has put the power in the hands and actions of everyday people who can now express their disapproval over behavior that they deem politically incorrect or offensive.

According to Dr. Jill McCorkel, a professor of sociology and criminology at Villanova University, cancel culture is an extension of or a contemporary evolution of a much bolder set of social processes that we can see in the form of banishment. While the methodology of cancel culture may have evolved, what remains consistent is that these steps of canceling someone are designed to reinforce the set of norms, she told the NY Post.

While being canceled might seem pretty final, its not necessarily a death wish to a persons reputation, social influence, or career. It is possible to achieve redemption after being canceled, but it is by no means a simple process or an overnight fix. For most celebrities or public figures battling the dark side of cancel culture, its a long, painful process. Just ask Chrissy Teigen. After being canceled for online bullying via insulting tweets from years ago, it took Teigen a long time and a lot of reflection and isolation just to begin to process her lousy behavior and reconcile what happens next when youre canceled.

Going outside sucks and doesnt feel right; being at home alone with my mind makes my depressed head race, Teigen wrote on her Instagram page after a long social media hiatus. Cancel club is a fascinating thing, and I have learned a whole lot. Only a few understand it, and its impossible to know till youre in it. And its hard to talk about it in that sense because obviously, you sound whiney when youve clearly done something wrong, she continued. It just sucks. There is no winning.

While it may seem as if everyone is either canceling someone else or is being canceled for inappropriate words or actions, the reality is that many Americans are truly confused by cancel culture. Many people dont fully understand what it means, and even if they do, theyre not exactly sure how they feel about the act of calling out others for poor past behavior.

In the fall of 2020, the Pew Research Center asked Americans to share if they are familiar with the term cancel culture and to explain what they think the term means in their own words.

According to their findings, 44% of Americans say they have heard at least a fair amount about the phrase, including 22% who have heard a great deal. That said, an even larger share (56%) say theyve heard nothing or not too much about it, and 38% who responded have heard nothing at all about cancel culture.

Theres also a generational divide, with most adults under 30 being very familiar with the concept. Still, only 34 percent of adults over 50 hear a great deal or fair amount about the phrase.

Clearly, cancel culture is everywhere, and its a genuine issue for celebrities who are being held accountable for their behavior in new and damaging ways. But its also causing a lot of confusion for Americans, especially older adults, who just dont quite get it.

In terms of the purpose of cancel culture, 58% of U.S. adults say that generally speaking, calling out others on social media is more likely to hold people accountable. 17% of respondents believe that calling out others can be a teaching moment that helps people learn from their mistakes and do better in the future, according to the Pew research.

So, for the million-dollar question, is there, in fact, redemption after being canceled? Experts, and the American public, seem to say yes.

If you ask Nathan Miller, founder, and CEO of MillerInk, which helps celebrities and brands navigate crisis, the key to surviving being canceled is about overcoming a large social, personal or professional cost that is imposed on you because of something youve said or done. Its important that you clearly pay for your mistakes, he suggested to CNN.

But how?

The very first step has to be a break a break from social media, from the public eye, from the toxic environments and exchanges that triggered the distasteful behavior in the first place.

A digital detox is a good place to start. Give yourself a break from public appearances, and dont open yourself up to online exchanges just yet. Dont read the insults and criticism right away. Take a step back and just breathe. Take it one day at a time.

Telling a client to drop out of the public eye for a few months isnt a bad idea. Right now, the world is moving so fast, and most people have a very short attention span, explains Ryan McCormick, Co-Founder and Media Relations Specialist at Goldman McCormick, an experienced crisis PR firm based in New York. The likelihood of a global event or national scandal eclipsing what your client had been involved in is reasonably high. Let time heal, he told CNN.

Redemption starts with an apology. You need to own up to what you did wrong, and that means more than just reciting words you dont mean it requires whole-heartedly accepting what you did wrong and saying (and truly meaning) you are sorry.

According to Lori Levine, founder and CEO of Flying Television, a company that forges partnerships between brands and celebrities, celebrities can come back from cancellation. Here in the United States, an apology tour is usually whats needed, she explained to CNN.

After taking time away from the spotlight, these public figures must re-enter the public eye explaining what they have done to work on themselves, rectify their mistakes, and explain why they feel remorseful. And they should be prepared to answer tough questions if they want to redeem themselves.

At the heart of cancel culture is the fact that the public feels betrayed by a celebritys behavior. Someone we thought we supported and whose values we believed in suddenly did something or said something to lose our trust and negate those beliefs.

Its a similar scenario when a trusted loved one does something to betray you or let you down. And as with any mistake in life, if you want to regain peoples trust, you need to be genuine. When you apologize, do it with authenticity.

Be honest about your shortcomings, where you messed up, what led you to those inexcusable actions, and how you plan to make it right and then actually make it right. Put your money where your mouth is. If your plan is to learn, grow and become educated (about whatever topic you are seemingly ignorant or confused about) so that you do not make the same mistakes, then actually embrace opportunities to learn. Reflect. Evolve. Find the silver linings.

As you take a step back, focus on your mental health and your own wellness. Only if you feel good inside and out will you be in any position to bounce back after being canceled. If you really want to right the wrongs your harsh words may have caused, you need to gain some perspective. Remember that while it seems like Americans are quick to cancel others and are eager to see others fail, our culture is even more driven by the comeback. In order to find redemption and move on, you need to do it with a renewed sense of purpose personally, professionally, and publicly.

See original here:
Cancel Culture: Is There an Opportunity for Redemption After Being Canceled? - BELatina

The issue is not whether hijab is central to Islam or not. The issue is that a law made in the seventh century cant and shouldnt be applicable in the 21st century

She is in exile today, as the name of her recent book suggests. And her unfiltered mind and politically-incorrect utterances have gotten her into trouble so many times. But Taslima Nasrin remains committed to telling what she believes is true. As the Karnatakahijabcontroversy takes the nation by storm, with politico-social position deeply divided along ideological-communal lines,Firstpostreaches out to the noted novelist and writer for her thoughts onhijab, Islam and the idea of democracy in India. Excerpts:

Whats your take on the ongoing controversy in Karnatakas Udupi district where a few girls came to a college in ahijab?

I believe an educational institution in a secular country is well within its rights to mandate secular dress codes for its students. There is nothing wrong with school/college authorities telling students to keep their religious identities at home. Schools cant be a place for religious bigotry, fundamentalism and superstitions; the principles of individual freedom, gender equality, liberalism, humanism and scientific temper must be taught there.Hijabs, niqabsandburqashave a singular aim of commodifying women as sex objects. The fact that women need to hide from men who sexually salivate at their very sight is so demeaning and this practice must stop at the earliest.

There is a large section of people who defend the girlshijabact saying that the dress is an inherent part of Islam. Whats your take?

The issue is not whether its central to Islam or not. The issue is that we are living in the 21stcentury and laws made in the seventh century cant and shouldnt be applicable now. We also need to understand that aburqaandhijabcan never be a womans choice. They are worn only when choices are taken away. Its often the family members who force their womenfolk to wearburqa/hijab. We need to understand thatburqa/hijabcan never be an integral part of a person's identity. Aburqaorhijabis akin to the chastity belt of the past; it is as humiliating as a chastity belt!

India's hijab row. PTI

Do you think the Modi government should try to bring the Uniform Civil Code?

I believe any secular state should have Uniform Civil Code in place. Why should any community in a secular state have separate personal laws? Everyone, especially Muslims, must understand that by being a part of the mainstream they can easily fight poverty, and gender and religious discrimination.

You have never shied away from saying that Islam is not compatible with modernity. What makes you take this stringent position?

Look, I grew up in a family of a staunch believer and an absolute non-believer. While my mother was a religious person, my father was an atheist. So, I had the opportunity to experience both sides, and this helped me question things that my mother would push in the name of religion. For instance, I would ask why should I study theQuranwhen I dont understand its meaning and language. Why should we be forced to learn Arabic when we have a beautiful language in Bengali? My mother would say that I should read because Allah would be happy! But then Allah would be knowing Bengali, no? Exasperated, one day my mother told me if I said anything bad about Allah, my tongue would fall off. Curious as I was as an eight-year-old girl, I locked myself in a bathroom and said something foul about Him. But my tongue didnt fall off! At the age of 12, I got hold of a translation of theQuranandHadith, and after reading them I became an atheist. And I continue to remain an atheist till date. Because I find the strands of gender disparity, fundamentalism in all religions, in different degrees of course.

Ideally, you should have been the darling of Left-liberals, but thats not the case. They, in fact, charge you with inciting people, of being unnecessarily rigid and uncompromising. How do you see this?

I am very clear about the fact that these so-called Left-liberals arent the true well-wishers of the Muslim community. If you wish Muslims well, as I do, you would never shy away from telling them the truth whether they like it or not. Todays liberals take a hypocritical position: They dont like fundamentalists, but they also dont approve of criticism of Islam. They play safe. By doing so, they accept the barbarism of all religions. For me, secularism is the complete separation of state and religion.

Another typical double-standard, especially found among Muslim intellectuals, is that while they applaud Hindus and Christians criticising their respective religions, they dont approve of the same for a Muslim. No society can be truly secular if its people are not free to critically examine their own religion.

In your recent bookExile, you mentioned in detail how you were thrown out of Kolkata. Did you ever go back to Kolkata after that?

No, I could never go back to the city I loved so much. Mamata Banerjee and communists hated each other, but when it came to Taslima Nasrin they became one: They both hated me. When Mamata became chief minister, I was hopeful that I would be back in Kolkata. Besides being someone who suffered so much at the hands of Marxists, she was a woman above all. But I was wrong. She seems to approve of the communist action against me.

***

Also Read

Karnataka hijab controversy: Indian democracy enters uncharted territory of grave danger

Opinion | On Hijab Day, the only choice is to drop the cloth for No Hijab Day

Karnataka hijab controversy: Why Modi government should seriously think about Uniform Civil Code

History will not be kind to liberals cheerleading for hijab and burqa

Udupi hijab row: A pre-planned move to stoke communal tension in Karnatakas sensitive coastal belt?

Theres a good case to ban hijab in schools, but Congress cheers orthodoxy

***

What about Bangladesh? Do you miss your place of birth? Are you hopeful of going back there ever again?

I dont see any hope of going to Bangladesh again. Like Bengal, Bangladesh has had women prime ministers for so many decades and yet they had problems with a woman who worked for gender equality faces discrimination, persecution. I am also getting pessimistic because Bangladesh has transformed into a fundamentalist country. When I was staying there, I would not see so many women wearinghijabsandburqas. Now its a normal sight. The country is very much Islamised today.

Read all the Latest News, Trending News,Cricket News, Bollywood News,India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

See the article here:
Interview | Hijab is akin to chastity belt that turn..says Taslima Nasrin as she bats for Uniform Civil Code - Firstpost

Tista' taqra bil-Malti.

Everyone familiar with the popular Wordle game in which you have to put together a five letter word will now experience a change in the game. Until yesterday every person around the world wanted to put together the same word, but this will change.

Now that the New York Times bought this game a fortnight ago, there may be more than one solution per day, depending on which version of Wordle you play. The Times has also taken care to remove words that are considered derogatory or politically incorrect in the list of words you can cut and the list of answers.

Various sources say that if you still have the old game downloaded or have not refreshed the updated page, you will never keep up with your friends and will not compare the results. Many people who play this game on Twitter have written that you have to be careful because it is easy to lose all the fun when you realize that you will not be able to keep up with your friends because you are using a different version of the game.

BE THE FIRST TO RECEIVE THE LATEST NEWS

Download the Newsbook App

Read more:
Wordle will have more than one solution every day - Newsbook