Cablevision Sues Viacom Over Bundled Channels



You pay too much for pay TV because your cable company is forced to purchase channels in bundles from media companies like Viacom — if it wants to offer MTV, it has to pay for CMT Pure Country and Teen Nick as well. Now one cable provider has had enough, and is suing for the right to purchase channels à la carte.


Cablevision, a New York-based cable TV provider, filed an antitrust lawsuit against Viacom on Tuesday in federal court hoping to stop the media conglomerate from forcing Cablevision to pay for channels its customers don’t watch. In order to secure rights to broadcast Nickelodeon, Comedy Central, and MTV, the company states that Viacom has unfairly bundled less-popular ancillary channels.


The pay-TV provider names 14 channels that it says Viacom coerced it into including in its lineup by threatening massive financial penalties. By forcing the company to buy all the channels, Cablevision says Viacom is unlawfully “block booking” — a form of tying that conditions of the sale of a package of rights on the purchaser’s taking of other rights.


The actual lawsuit isn’t available yet, but Cablevision released the following statement:


“The manner in which Viacom sells its programming is illegal, anti-consumer, and wrong. Viacom effectively forces Cablevision’s customers to pay for and receive little-watched channels in order to get the channels they actually want. Viacom’s abuse of its market power is not only illegal, but also prevents Cablevision from delivering the programming that its customers want and that competes with Viacom’s less popular channels.”


Viacom isn’t the only media company that forces pay-TV providers to purchase bundles of channels in order to secure high-value offerings. Disney’s ESPN network comes with a slew of ESPN channels that providers need to purchase.


The 14 channels Cablevision feels it shouldn’t have to carry are: Centric
, CMT,
 MTV Hits,
 MTV Tr3s,
 Nick Jr., 
Nicktoons, 
Palladia, 
Teen Nick, 
VH1 Classic, 
VH1 Soul, 
Logo, 
CMT Pure Country, 
Nick 2, and 
MTV Jams.


Cablevision is seeking a permanent injunction against Viacom making the licensing of ancillary channels part of the deal when licensing the channels people actually watch.


Viacom has responded to the legal action by Cablevision with the following statement:


“At the request of distributors, Viacom and other programmers have long offered discounts to those who agree to provide additional network distribution. Many distributors take advantage of these win-win and pro-consumer arrangements. Reflecting the highly competitive cable programming business, these arrangements have been upheld by a number of federal courts and on appeal. Viacom will vigorously defend this transparent attempt by Cablevision to use the courts to renegotiate our existing two month old agreement.”


This isn’t the first time bundled channels have been dragged into the courts. A group of pay-TV subscribers filed a class-action suit against programmers alleging that consumers were forced to accept bundled packages of channels. The suit was thrown out because the plaintiffs had failed to allege cognizable injury to competition.


If Cablevision’s lawsuit succeeds, it may be the end of unwatched channels filling your subscription lineup and could potentially lower your pay-TV bill. It’ll also be bad news for fans of Centric. Whatever that is.


Read More..

Advanced Breast Cancer May Be Rising Among Young Women, Study Finds





The incidence of advanced breast cancer among younger women, ages 25 to 39, may have increased slightly over the last three decades, according to a study released Tuesday.




But more research is needed to verify the finding, which was based on an analysis of statistics, the study’s authors said. They do not know what may have caused the apparent increase.


Some outside experts questioned whether the increase was real, and expressed concerns that the report would frighten women needlessly.


The study, published in The Journal of the American Medical Association, found that advanced cases climbed to 2.9 per 100,000 younger women in 2009, from 1.53 per 100,000 women in 1976 — an increase of 1.37 cases per 100,000 women in 34 years. The totals were about 250 such cases per year in the mid-1970s, and more than 800 per year in 2009.


Though small, the increase was statistically significant, and the researchers said it was worrisome because it involved cancer that had already spread to organs like the liver or lungs by the time it was diagnosed, which greatly diminishes the odds of survival.


For now, the only advice the researchers can offer to young women is to see a doctor quickly if they notice lumps, pain or other changes in the breast, and not to assume that they cannot have breast cancer because they are young and healthy, or have no family history of the disease.


“Breast cancer can and does occur in younger women,” said Dr. Rebecca H. Johnson, the first author of the study and medical director of the adolescent and young adult oncology program at Seattle Children’s Hospital.


But Dr. Johnson noted that there is no evidence that screening helps younger women who have an average risk for the disease and no symptoms. We’re certainly not advocating that young women get mammography at an earlier age than is generally specified,” she said.


Expert groups differ about when screening should begin; some say at age 40, others 50.


Breast cancer is not common in younger women; only 1.8 percent of all cases are diagnosed in women from 20 to 34, and 10 percent in women from 35 to 44. However, when it does occur, the disease tends to be more deadly in younger women than in older ones. Researchers are not sure why.


The researchers analyzed data from SEER, a program run by the National Cancer Institute to collect cancer statistics on 28 percent of the population of the United States. The study also used data from the past when SEER was smaller.


The study is based on information from 936,497 women who had breast cancer from 1976 to 2009. Of those, 53,502 were 25 to 39 years old, including 3,438 who had advanced breast cancer, also called metastatic or distant disease.


Younger women were the only ones in whom metastatic disease seemed to have increased, the researchers found.


Dr. Archie Bleyer, a clinical research professor in radiation medicine at the Knight Cancer Institute at the Oregon Health and Science University in Portland who helped write the study, said scientists needed to verify the increase in advanced breast cancer in young women in the United States and find out whether it is occurring in other developed Western countries. “This is the first report of this kind,” he said, adding that researchers had already asked colleagues in Canada to analyze data there.


“We need this to be sure ourselves about this potentially concerning, almost alarming trend,” Dr. Bleyer said. “Then and only then are we really worried about what is the cause, because we’ve got to be sure it’s real.”


Dr. Johnson said her own experience led her to look into the statistics on the disease in young women. She had breast cancer when she was 27; she is now 44. Over the years, friends and colleagues often referred young women with the disease to her for advice.


“It just struck me how many of those people there were,” she said.


Dr. Donald A. Berry, an expert on breast cancer data and a professor of biostatistics at the University of Texas’ M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, said he was dubious about the finding, even though it was statistically significant, because the size of the apparent increase was so small — 1.37 cases per 100,000 women, over the course of 30 years.


More screening and more precise tests to identify the stage of cancer at the time of diagnosis might account for the increase, he said.


“Not many women aged 25 to 39 get screened, but some do, but it only takes a few to account for a notable increase from one in 100,000,” Dr. Berry said.


Dr. Silvia C. Formenti, a breast cancer expert and the chairwoman of radiation oncology at New York University Langone Medical Center, questioned the study in part because although it found an increased incidence of advanced disease, it did not find the accompanying increase in deaths that would be expected.


A spokeswoman for an advocacy group for young women with breast cancer, Young Survival Coalition, said the organization also wondered whether improved diagnostic and staging tests might explain all or part of the increase.


“We’re looking at this data with caution,” said the spokeswoman, Michelle Esser. “We don’t want to invite panic or alarm.”


She said it was important to note that the findings applied only to women who had metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis, and did not imply that women who already had early-stage cancer faced an increased risk of advanced disease.


Dr. J. Leonard Lichtenfeld
, deputy chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, said he and an epidemiologist for the society thought the increase was real.


“We want to make sure this is not oversold or that people suddenly get very frightened that we have a huge problem,” Dr. Lichtenfeld said. “We don’t. But we are concerned that over time, we might have a more serious problem than we have today.”


Read More..

Media Decoder Blog: SFX Entertainment Buys Electronic Dance Music Site

SFX Entertainment, the company led by the media executive Robert F. X. Sillerman, has agreed to buy the music download site Beatport, part of the company’s plan to build a $1 billion empire centered on the electronic dance music craze.

Mr. Sillerman declined on Tuesday to reveal the price. But two people with direct knowledge of the transaction, who were not authorized to speak about it, said it was for a little more than $50 million.

Beatport, founded in Denver in 2004, has become the pre-eminent download store for electronic dance music, or E.D.M., with a catalog of more than one million tracks, many of them exclusive to the service. It says it has nearly 40 million users, and while the company does not disclose sales numbers, it is said to be profitable.

The site has also become an all-purpose online destination for dance music, with features like a news feed, remix contests and D.J. profiles. Those features, and its reach, could help in Mr. Sillerman’s plan to unite the disparate dance audience through media.

“Beatport gives us direct contact with the D.J.’s and lets us see what’s popular and what’s not,” Mr. Sillerman said in an interview. “Most important, it gives us a massive platform for everything related to E.D.M.”

Since the company was revived last year, SFX has focused mostly on live events, with the promoters Disco Donnie Presents and Life in Color; recently it also invested in a string of nightclubs in Miami and formed a joint venture with ID&T, the European company behind festivals like Sensation, to put on its events in North America.

In the 1990s, Mr. Sillerman spent $1.2 billion creating a nationwide network of concert promoters under the name SFX, which he sold to Clear Channel Entertainment in 2000 for $4.4 billion; those promoters are now the basis of Live Nation’s concert division.

Matthew Adell, Beatport’s chief executive, said that being part of SFX could help the company extend its business into live events, and also into countries where the dance genre is exploding, like India and Brazil.

“We already are by far the largest online destination of qualified fans and talent in the market,” Mr. Adell said, “and we can continue to grow that.”

Read More..

Mike Piazza softens stance on Dodgers' Vin Scully









PHOENIX—





— Calling Vin Scully "a class act" and saying he had "the utmost respect" for him, Mike Piazza on Monday defended what he wrote in his recently released autobiography about the Hall of Fame broadcaster.

In his book, "Long Shot," Piazza described Scully as instrumental in turning the fans of Los Angeles against him during the contract stalemate that led to his trade to the Florida Marlins in 1998. Piazza wrote that Scully "was crushing me" on the air, a charge Scully vehemently denied.





"I can't say that I have regrets," Piazza said. "I was just trying to explain the situation."

The former All-Star catcher was at the Dodgers' spring-training facility with Italy's World Baseball Classic team, for which he is a coach. Scully was also at the complex, to call the Dodgers' 7-6 victory over the Chicago Cubs.

"I'd love to see him," Piazza said.

The two didn't meet.

"I always liked him," Scully said. "I admired him. I think either he made a mistake or got some bad advice. I still think of him as a great player and I hope he gets into the Hall of Fame. I really do. Whatever disappointment I feel, I'll put aside."

Scully declined to comment further on Piazza or his book.

Piazza complimented Scully as he tried to defend what he wrote.

"Vin is a class act; he's an icon," Piazza said. "To this day, I have the utmost respect for him. But the problem is, you have to go back in time and understand that at that point in time in my career with the Dodgers was a very tumultuous time. I was more or less telling my version of the story, at least what I was experiencing. And I said at the end of the book, it's not coming from a place of malice or anger. I think anybody who remembers that time knows it was a very tumultuous time."

Piazza said his intent wasn't to blame Scully.

"I don't think anybody who read the passage from start to finish felt that way," Piazza said. "Anybody who reads it knows it wasn't me blaming. That was definitely not the only factor. There were other factors. The team made the mistake, I made the mistake, of speaking publicly."

Piazza acknowledged that he never heard Scully's broadcasts and that his impressions of them were based on what he heard from others.

"My perception was that he was given the Dodgers' versions of the negotiations, which, I feel, wasn't 100% accurate," Piazza said.

In his book, Piazza also took issue with how Scully asked him about his contract demands during a spring-training interview. Piazza said Monday that he was "taken aback" by the line of questioning because he previously hadn't talked publicly about the negotiations.

To reach the practice fields at Camelback Ranch on Monday, Piazza had to pass through a gantlet of Dodgers fans. Piazza said he wasn't nervous.

"I did a book signing a couple of weeks ago in Pasadena and the fans were really nice," he said.

Piazza denied that he hadn't returned to Dodger Stadium in recent years out of fear of being booed, as Tom Lasorda told The Times last month.

Piazza said he always associated the Dodgers with the O'Malley family, which sold the team to News Corp. in 1998.

"Since then, obviously, they've taken on a different identity," Piazza said.

Piazza was noncommittal about visiting the ballpark in the future. "We'll see," he said. "I'll never say never."

Wouldn't it be harder to return now that his portrayal of Scully has upset fans?

"I don't know," he said. "I can't answer that."

Piazza also spoke about falling short of being elected to the Hall of Fame in his first year of eligibility.

"I definitely couldn't lie and say I wasn't a little disappointed," he said.

He is hopeful he will one day be inducted. "I trust the process," he said.

Piazza wouldn't say whether he thought Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens deserved to be in the Hall of Fame. Both players, who have been linked to performance-enhancing drugs, also were denied election.

Piazza has denied using performance-enhancing drugs and has never faced detailed allegations that he did. Asked if he was upset that the indiscretions of others might have altered others' perceptions of him, he replied, "Unfortunately, that's the way life is sometimes. I can't control and worry about what people think."

dylan.hernandez@latimes.com





Read More..

Hot Trend: Tapping the Power of Cold to Lose Weight


I’m in the fetal position at the bottom of a swimming pool. Water temperature: 60 degrees Fahrenheit. In my lap there’s a 20-pound weight anchoring me in place. All I’m wearing is a Speedo, a nose plug, goggles, and a snorkel resembling an oversize asthma inhaler. The mouthpiece connects to two 4-foot hoses feeding out of the water and into a PC-sized box next to a laptop.


After 20 minutes in the water, I’m shivering intensely. But that doesn’t bother me so much as the headache. It feels like a set of pliers is clamping the back of my neck while someone pricks my temples with icy-hot needles.


My suffering is natural, I tell myself. It could even be good for me.


Now a hand from above reaches into the water and slaps the side of the pool. It’s my torturer, Ray Cronise, signaling that time is up. A former NASA material scientist who spent 15 years overseeing experiments aboard shuttles at Marshall Space Flight Center, Cronise is putting me through a battery of tests at his home in Huntsville, Alabama. That snorkel contraption—a $30,000 piece of lab equipment—is analyzing my breathing to chart how the cold water affects my metabolism. (It tracks inhaled and exhaled carbon dioxide and oxygen, a proxy for the amount of fuel I’m burning.) Cronise believes exposing the body to cold can be a radically effective spur for losing weight. He’s doing this home-brewed research in hopes of formulating a Weight Watchers-style algorithm, app, or wearable device that can help people safely harness what he’s convinced is the transformative power of cold.





Cronise got the idea back in 2008 while watching a TV program about Michael Phelps. The coverage claimed that, while training, the Olympic swimmer ate 12,000 calories a day. At the time, Cronise was on a diet of 12,000 calories per week. (He was carrying 209 pounds on his 5’9″ frame and wanted to get back down to 180.) Something didn’t add up. Even if Phelps had an exceptionally high metabolism and swam three hours a day, he still should have turned into a blob. Then it hit Cronise: Phelps was spending hours every day in water, which was sucking heat from his body. He was burning extra calories just to maintain his core temperature of 98.6.


That fall, Cronise grew obsessed. He avoided warmth altogether: He took cool showers, wore light clothing, slept without sheets, and took 3-mile “shiver walks” in 30-degree weather wearing a T-shirt, shorts, gloves, and earmuffs. In six weeks he shed 27 pounds, nearly tripling his weight-loss rate without changing his calorie-restricted diet.


Cronise set off a full-blown weight-loss fad. In 2010, he talked about his self-experimentation in a presentation, and then the Pied Piper of body-hacking, Tim Ferriss, name-checked Cronise and prescribed 20-minute ice baths in The 4-Hour Body. When the book came out, ABC’s Nightline aired a segment on Ferriss and “thermal dieting.” Right on cue, bloggers began documenting their own cold-exposure experiences. On websites and forums like Fatburningman.com, diehards started sharing tips on making DIY ice packs. “My body,” one guy confessed after sleeping with ice-filled Ziplocs on his abs, “felt like it had been beaten with heavy sticks.” Today the trend has gone truly mass: Best-selling diet books like Six Weeks to OMG: Get Skinnier Than All Your Friends urge readers to take cold baths. On Today, Kathie Lee Gifford praised a company called FreezeAwayFat, which sells Lycra bike shorts with pockets for frozen gel packs. Her personal review: “My belt is now one notch smaller.”


Just one problem: There’s not much rigorous science behind any of this. It’s exceedingly difficult to quantify how environmental temperature affects an individual’s metabolism. Studies have shown cold exposure can boost the metabolism anywhere from 8 to 80 percent, depending on a slew of variables including the degree and duration of the exposure, whether you’re shivering, your diet, and physiological factors like age, gender, and fat mass.



Scientists are racing to separate the real science from the pseudo. They’re investigating the precise mechanisms by which the body adjusts to cold temperatures and reaching new insights into the ways our bodies burn fat. They’re even trying to come up with a new kind of weight-loss pill—a longtime ambition of the pharmaceutical industry—that can mimic those processes and make us thinner faster, with less effort.


But Cronise doesn’t have plans for a pill or institutional backing or VC funding. He’s not waiting around for peer review. He wants to see results—now. That’s why he’s got me submerged in his cold plunge pool. He’s conducting his own experiments, trying to figure out how much cold affects metabolism, how best to administer the cold, and for how long.


After 20 minutes in the pool, I emerge from the water, but I’m still breathing through the snorkel. Cronise wants to monitor me for any sustained acceleration of my metabolism for at least 30 minutes. I’m watching a firefly flicker through a lush maple tree as I sit on the deck in sticky 87-degree Southern air. I can’t stop shivering.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 View All

Read More..

Oscars telecast review: Guys, it’s not about you






NEW YORK (TheWrap.com) – Would it shock you to learn that this year’s Oscars producers also produced “Chicago“? Not at all? OK.


Self-referencing was the order of the evening Sunday at an overstuffed Oscars telecast where host Seth MacFarlane and producers Craig Zadan and Neil Meron decided the ceremony was All About Them.






That was the only explanation for a lengthy opening sequence centered on how MacFarlane would fare as host, and numerous reminders throughout the show of how much we all enjoyed “Chicago.”


Thanks, guys, but we kind of took care of praising “Chicago” when it won Best Picture in 2002.


The Oscars are always a treasure trove of hilarious narcissism – it’s inherently obnoxious to hear some of the richest and best-looking people alive praise one another and themselves.


This year had plenty of the usual silliness – as when best supporting actor Christoph Waltz praised Quentin Tarantino for going on a “hero’s journey” to make films. And it won’t exactly reduce Hollywood’s sense of self-importance that no less than Michelle Obama handed out the Best Picture. (“Argo” won.)


Inflated egos are to be expected. But we can usually count on the producers and host to share the spotlight. Not so this year.


You can’t really blame MacFarlane for turning the opening into a “Family Guy” episode, with all of his show’s requisite pop culture references, parody songs and gay panic jokes. MacFarlane brought in William Shatner to play Captain Kirk critiquing the show from the future.


The “Ted” director and star made it all of eight minutes before his first gay joke. He sang a song about actresses’ “boobs” with the Gay Men’s Chorus of Los Angeles, then clarified that he isn’t a member.


“Oh, trust me,” Captain Kirk said from the future. “In July 2015, you join the chorus.”


The theme of the night was celebrating musicals, but it was hard to find anything else consistent about the ceremony. Like many an overstuffed blockbuster, the three-and-a-half-hour show refused to leave anything out.


Studio slates are so dominated by CGI monstrosities that Oscar voters now nominate pretty much every grown-up movie they see for Best Picture. Rather than make hard decisions, they give us a grab bag.


And so we get extended ceremonies like this one, which somehow always manage to cull names from the “In Memoriam” segment, but not boring parts of the show. Key figures like the host and producers are allowed to protect their vanity pieces, and viewers just have to deal.


We were occasionally rewarded for our patience. Shirley Bassey and Adele gave spectacular performances of Bond songs from five decades apart. Jennifer Hudson delivered another excellent rendition of “And I Am Telling You I Am Not Going” from “Dreamgirls.” And we learned that Channing Tatum and Charlize Theron are good dancers.


But of course they are.


Catherine Zeta Jones did a commendable job on “All That Jazz” from “Chicago” – but couldn’t we have left it at that? The producers also reunited their cast as presenters – to remind us once again how much we apparently still cherish their decade-old film.


Near the end of the ceremony, Tarantino made his hero’s journey to the stage to accept his well-deserved award for Best Original Screenplay and remind us of the importance of writers.


One thing the best writers do is keep it short. Maybe next year should be a tribute to writers.


Movies News Headlines – Yahoo! News





Title Post: Oscars telecast review: Guys, it’s not about you
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/oscars-telecast-review-guys-its-not-about-you/
Link To Post : Oscars telecast review: Guys, it’s not about you
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment




Read More..

DealBook: Confirmation Hearing for Mary Jo White Said to Be Scheduled for March

Mary Jo White appears poised to face a Senate confirmation hearing next month, a crucial step for the former federal prosecutor on her path to becoming the top Wall Street regulator.

Ms. White, whose nomination to lead the Securities and Exchange Commission has lingered for over a month, plans to testify in March before the Senate Banking Committee, three Congressional officials briefed on the matter said on Monday. The committee has not set a firm date for the confirmation hearing, the officials said, though lawmakers have tentatively scheduled her to appear the week of March 11.

At the hearing, one official said, Ms. White will most likely join Richard Cordray, who is in line to become director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. In January, when the White House nominated Ms. White to the S.E.C. spot, it reappointed Mr. Cordray to a position he has held for the last year under a temporary recess appointment.

The Senate last year declined to confirm him in the face of Republican and Wall Street opposition to the newly created consumer bureau. Republicans are likely to voice similar skepticism at the hearing next month.

While some officials have quietly expressed concerns about Ms. White’s role as a Wall Street defense lawyer, her nomination is not expected to face major complications. An S.E.C. spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The timetable laid out on Monday offers Ms. White additional weeks to prepare. Over the last couple of weeks, she has received multiple briefings from agency staff members about new securities rules and the structure of the stock market, an official said. The briefings will in part prepare her for the confirmation hearing, which is expected to cover a broad scope of topics.

While Ms. White is a skilled litigator, she lacks experience in financial rule-writing and regulatory minutiae, a potential stumbling block for her nomination. Lawmakers also expect to raise questions about her movements through the revolving door that bridges government service and private practice. Some Democrats, a person briefed on the matter said, will question whether she is cozy with Wall Street.

In private practice, Ms. White defended some of Wall Street’s biggest names, including Kenneth D. Lewis, a former chief of Bank of America. As the head of litigation at Debevoise & Plimpton, she also represented JPMorgan Chase and the board of Morgan Stanley. Her husband, John W. White, is co-chairman of the corporate governance practice at Cravath, Swaine & Moore, where he represents many of the companies that the S.E.C. regulates.

(Ms. White has agreed to recuse herself from many matters that involve former clients, while her husband has agreed to convert his partnership at Cravath from equity to nonequity status.)

Despite some reservations, she is expected to receive broad support on Capitol Hill. When President Obama nominated her last month, Senator Charles E. Schumer of New York was one of several Democrats to praise her prosecutorial prowess, calling her “tough as nails” during stints as a federal prosecutor in Brooklyn and as the first female United States attorney in Manhattan.

While she handled some white-collar and securities cases, her specialty was terrorism and organized crime. As a federal prosecutor in New York City for more than a decade, she helped oversee the prosecution of the crime figure John Gotti and directed the case against those responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. She also supervised the original investigation into Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda.

Read More..

California GOP faces steep road back








SACRAMENTO — The Republican Party has become so pathetic in California that it can't even find a candidate to run for governor next year.


Correct that. It isn't even looking. Wouldn't know where to begin.


The party's in no position to recruit anyway. It has little to offer. Certainly not a brand name, not in a state where the GOP steadily has been losing market share. Definitely not money. The party's deep in debt.






Actually, neither major party historically has had to recruit top-of-ticket candidates. They're usually lined up begging, jockeying for position to win the party's nomination.


Republicans will hold a state convention next weekend in Sacramento. Normally, there'd be a parade of gubernatorial wannabes fighting for the mike and opening up hospitality suites during the silly hours. But not this time.


This convention apparently will have all the excitement of a Saturday at the dump. The big event will be the election of a former Republican legislative leader, Jim Brulte, as the new state chairman.


Brulte wants to rebuild the party from the ground up. That includes recruiting local candidates and building a farm system for major office.


But no one can name a Republican who would have a snowball's chance of beating Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown next year — at least someone who might run.


The name of former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice always is tossed out. But everyone concedes that's fantasy. She's committed to education reform, a Brown vulnerability. She loves her life in academia at Stanford, however, and shuns smelly state politics.


Another name is U.S. Rep. Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield, the Republican whip. As a former Assembly GOP leader, he understands Sacramento and perhaps could make it work. But he's not going to surrender his No. 3 party leadership post in Congress.


One big red flag for any Republican is Brown's remarkable strength. He seems practically unbeatable in his expected quest for a record fourth term as governor. (In October, he'll surpass Gov. Earl Warren's record for years served in the office.)


A Field Poll last week showed that Brown's job approval rating among voters has risen to an eye-popping 57%. Moreover, 61% said he "can be trusted to do what is right." And 56% thought he "deserves credit for turning around the state's finances."


But — pointing to some weakness — 57% also said that Brown "advocates too many big-government projects that the state cannot afford" (bullet train). And 47% said he "favors organized labor too much" (public pensions).


So there are some sores for opponents to peck away at. And, after all, he will be 76.


Brown probably can't be bounced from office, however. So forget about trying to find a Republican winner. Just settle for a credible candidate who can pass the laugh test.


Ideally, the candidate would be someone relatively young who runs on the high road — avoiding the gutter — and finishes in position to wage a successful encore race when Brown gets booted by term limits in 2018.


Being a Latino could be a plus, attracting voters from a growing ethnic group that has been repulsed by what it perceives as GOP immigrant bashing.


But who? Remember we're not looking for electability. What's needed is credibility — to carry the colors without embarrassing the party.


That excludes one legislator who has expressed interest, Assemblyman Tim Donnelly of San Bernardino County. He's a former Minuteman who rails against illegal immigration and was placed on probation for trying to bring a loaded firearm onto an airplane. He called it an "honest mistake."


"He'd be a really horrible candidate, worse than no candidate," says Republican analyst Tony Quinn.






Read More..

UK’s BRIT Awards slammed as celebration of bland






LONDON (Reuters) – “Sensible” and “sober” are words not normally associated with rock and roll, but they summed up how music critics viewed Wednesday night’s BRIT Awards ceremony at the London O2 Arena.


Viewing figures for commercial broadcaster ITV1, which aired British pop’s biggest night live, were the highest for a decade, so organizers, advertisers and the acts who performed were unlikely to care too much about what experts thought.






Gordon Smart, showbusiness editor at the Sun tabloid, summed up the mood, writing: “Well, rock’n'roll is officially dead. Where have all the rock stars gone?”


The big winner on the night, one that was widely predicted, was Scottish singer-songwriter Emeli Sande, who picked up the coveted British album award for “Our Version of Events”, her debut which was the UK’s top seller of 2012.


She also won the best British female honor, and English singer Ben Howard was the only other multiple winner, claiming the male solo artist and breakthrough categories.


“Welcome to the new boring,” said Daily Telegraph music critic Neil McCormick, describing Howard, Sande and other winners Mumford & Sons (best group) and One Direction (BRITs Global Success Award).


“All – to different degrees – extremely talented, vibrant, emotional, committed, entertaining musical performers beloved of enormous audiences,” he wrote. “And all as dull as dishwater.”


He concluded his review with a rallying cry: “I just hope there is some young punk out there, watching that, thinking the music business needs a right royal kick up the posterior.”


CASH BEFORE CUTTING EDGE


The BRITs have long had a reputation for putting commercial success above artistic originality, and 2013 was no exception.


Will Hodgkinson of The Times newspaper said the lack of spark at the glitzy ceremony perhaps reflected broader economic and social concerns in Britain.


“When times are hard people behave well and hang on to their jobs, which is why the high jinks and chaos of the past, like Jarvis Cocker wiggling his bum at Michael Jackson, was sadly absent,” he said.


In one of the most frequently recalled moments of BRITs history, Cocker invaded the stage while Jackson was performing in 1996 before being escorted away by security.


Even last year had a frisson of controversy, when Adele’s speech was cut short to make way for Blur to perform, prompting her to raise her middle finger.


Adele picked up another award in 2013 – best single for Bond theme tune “Skyfall” – but she did not attend, preferring to rehearse for her upcoming performance at the more widely viewed Oscars ceremony on Sunday.


Nick Hasted, writing in the Independent, said what was most “depressing” about the BRITs was how they were dovetailing with other awards like the Mercury Prize and the BBC’s “Sound of…” poll identifying up-and-coming talent.


“As it shrinks, the music industry is becoming ever more adept at controlling what enters the mainstream,” Hasted said. “The moribund album charts, lacking inspiration and challenge, show how well they’ve succeeded.”


Critics did have more positive things to say about many of the performances, which included Justin Timberlake and Taylor Swift from the United States and Sande, Howard, Mumford & Sons, One Direction, Muse and Robbie Williams from Britain.


And there was good news on the TV viewing front. According to the Guardian, the average audience was just over 6.5 million, a 27.8 percent share and the highest since 2003.


(Reporting by Mike Collett-White; editing by Stephen Addison)


Music News Headlines – Yahoo! News





Title Post: UK’s BRIT Awards slammed as celebration of bland
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/uks-brit-awards-slammed-as-celebration-of-bland/
Link To Post : UK’s BRIT Awards slammed as celebration of bland
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment




Read More..

‘Bloodless’ Lung Transplants for Jehovah’s Witnesses


Eric Kayne for The New York Times


SHARING HOME AND FAITH A Houston couple hosted Gene and Rebecca Tomczak, center, in October so she could get care nearby.







HOUSTON — Last April, after being told that only a transplant could save her from a fatal lung condition, Rebecca S. Tomczak began calling some of the top-ranked hospitals in the country.




She started with Emory University Hospital in Atlanta, just hours from her home near Augusta, Ga. Then she tried Duke and the University of Arkansas and Johns Hopkins. Each advised Ms. Tomczak, then 69, to look somewhere else.


The reason: Ms. Tomczak, who was baptized at age 12 as a Jehovah’s Witness, insisted for religious reasons that her transplant be performed without a blood transfusion. The Witnesses believe that Scripture prohibits the transfusion of blood, even one’s own, at the risk of forfeiting eternal life.


Given the complexities of lung transplantation, in which transfusions are routine, some doctors felt the procedure posed unacceptable dangers. Others could not get past the ethics of it all. With more than 1,600 desperately ill people waiting for a donated lung, was it appropriate to give one to a woman who might needlessly sacrifice her life and the organ along with it?


By the time Ms. Tomczak found Dr. Scott A. Scheinin at The Methodist Hospital in Houston last spring, he had long since made peace with such quandaries. Like a number of physicians, he had become persuaded by a growing body of research that transfusions often pose unnecessary risks and should be avoided when possible, even in complicated cases.


By cherry-picking patients with low odds of complications, Dr. Scheinin felt he could operate almost as safely without blood as with it. The way he saw it, patients declined lifesaving therapies all the time, for all manner of reasons, and it was not his place to deny care just because those reasons were sometimes religious or unconventional.


“At the end of the day,” he had resolved, “if you agree to take care of these patients, you agree to do it on their terms.”


Ms. Tomczak’s case — the 11th so-called bloodless lung transplant attempted at Methodist over three years — would become the latest test of an innovative approach that was developed to accommodate the unique beliefs of the world’s eight million Jehovah’s Witnesses but may soon become standard practice for all surgical patients.


Unlike other patients, Ms. Tomczak would have no backstop. Explicit in her understanding with Dr. Scheinin was that if something went terribly wrong, he would allow her to bleed to death. He had watched Witness patients die before, with a lifesaving elixir at hand.


Ms. Tomczak had dismissed the prospect of a transplant for most of the two years she had struggled with sarcoidosis, a progressive condition of unknown cause that leads to scarring in the lungs. The illness forced her to quit a part-time job with Nielsen, the market research firm.


Then in April, on a trip to the South Carolina coast, she found that she was too breathless to join her frolicking grandchildren on the beach. Tethered to an oxygen tank, she watched from the boardwalk, growing sad and angry and then determined to reclaim her health.


“I wanted to be around and be a part of their lives,” Ms. Tomczak recalled, dabbing at tears.


She knew there was danger in refusing to take blood. But she thought the greater peril would come from offending God.


“I know,” she said, “that if I did anything that violates Jehovah’s law, I would not make it into the new system, where he’s going to make earth into a paradise. I know there are risks. But I think I am covered.”


Cutting Risks, and Costs


The approach Dr. Scheinin would use — originally called “bloodless medicine” but later re-branded as “patient blood management” — has been around for decades. His mentor at Methodist, Dr. Denton A. Cooley, the renowned cardiac pioneer, performed heart surgery on hundreds of Witnesses starting in the late 1950s. The first bloodless lung transplant, at Johns Hopkins, was in 1996.


But nearly 17 years later, the degree of difficulty for such procedures remains so high that Dr. Scheinin and his team are among the very few willing to attempt them.


In 2009, after analyzing Methodist’s own data, Dr. Scheinin became convinced that if he selected patients carefully, he could perform lung transplants without transfusions. Hospital administrators resisted at first, knowing that even small numbers of deaths could bring scrutiny from federal regulators.


“My job is to push risk away,” said Dr. A. Osama Gaber, the hospital’s director of transplantation, “so I wasn’t really excited about it. But the numbers were very convincing.”


Read More..