Mediaboss Marketing

Brazils democratic institutions are under attack. Since taking office, the Jair Bolsonaro administration, helped by its allies on the far right, has systematically undermined cultural, scientific and educational institutions in the country, as well as the press.

Early on, prominent members of Bolsonaros political party started a campaign to encourage university and high school students to covertly film their teachers and denounce them for ideological indoctrination. This persecution campaign, ominously called School Without Party, created a sense of intimidation and fear in educational institutions in a country barely three decades out of an oppressive military regime. Last month, Bolsonaro suggested that the state should censor textbooks to promote conservative values.

The Bolsonaro administration has made it clear it will not tolerate deviation from its ultra-conservative politics and worldview. Last year the administration fired the marketing director of Banco do Brasil, Delano Valentim, for creating an ad campaign promoting diversity and inclusion, which was then censored by the government. Later that year, as Brazils Amazon forest burned at an alarming rate, Bolsonaros administration retaliated against scientists who dared to present facts. Ricardo Galvo, the former director of Inpe (National Institute for Space Research), was removed from his post for releasing satellite data on deforestation in the Amazon.

The government is also dangerously hostile to the media. On 21 January this year, the federal prosecutors office opened a baseless investigation into the American journalist Glenn Greenwald and his team for participating in an alleged conspiracy to hack the cellphone of Brazilian authorities. The prosecution, a clear attack on freedom of the press, was a response to a series of exposs that Greenwald and the Intercept published concerning possible corruption in Bolsonaros inner circle.

This is not an isolated case. Government officials throughout the country, from regional courts to the military police, have taken it upon themselves to ideologically defend Bolsonaro and curtail free expression. In 2019 alone, there were 208 reported attacks on media and journalists in Brazil.

On 16 January, Bolsonaro and the then special secretary for culture, Roberto Alvim, filmed a joint broadcast that laid out their ideological plans for the country. They praised the conservative turn and the resumption of culture in the country. The next day, Alvim went further: during a video segment to announce a new national arts award, he made apparent allusions to Nazi principles and lifted phrases from the Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels.

Domestic outrage and international condemnation caused Alvim to step down. But Alvim was merely giving voice to Bolsonaros far-right political project, which continues in full force: a continuous affront to freedom of expression, justified in the name of national culture. Public institutions that represent Brazils multicultural heritage the Superior Council of Cinema, Ancine, the Audiovisual Fund, the National Library, the Institute of National Historical and Artistic Heritage (Iphan) and the Palmares Foundation for Black Culture have faced censorship, funding cutbacks and other political pressure.

The Brazilian film-maker Petra Costa, director of the documentary The Edge of Democracy, currently has a chance of becoming the first female Latin American director to win an Oscar. Yet Bolsonaros secretary of communication recently used his official Twitter channel to disseminate a video attacking Costa as an anti-patriot spreading lies about the Bolsonaro government. Similarly, the feature films Bacurau, Invisible Life and Babenco received international acclaim at the Cannes and Venice film festivals, but Bolsonaro has declared that no good films have been produced in Brazil for a long time.

The Bolsonaro government is also working to reverse several important social achievements of the last two decades, including affirmative action. Between 2003 and 2017, the proportion of black students entering Brazilian universities increased 51%; the Bolsonaro regime wants to roll back this progress. Bolsonaro and his ministers routinely disparage ethnic minorities and the LGBTQ+ community all while ignoring the violence and criminality of rightwing paramilitary militias.

This is a government that has no development plan for its people. Instead, the Bolsonaro regime is engaged in a dangerous culture war against contrived internal threats. It denies global warming and the burning of the Amazon, despises leaders who fight for the preservation of the environment, and disrespects the culture and environmental preservation carried out by indigenous communities.

We fear that these attacks on democratic institutions may soon become irreversible. Based on the most extreme and narrow conservative principles, Bolsonaros project is to change the content of school textbooks and Brazilian films, restrict access to funding for scholarships and research, and intimidate intellectuals, journalists and scientists. We ask the international community to:

Pressure Brazil to fully respect the universal declaration of human rights, and thereby respect freedom of expression, thought and religion.

Finally, we call on human rights bodies and the international press to put a spotlight on what is happening in Brazil. This is a grave political moment. We must reject the rise of authoritarianism.

View original post here:
Democracy and freedom of expression are under threat in Brazil - The Guardian

Americas two major political parties have collapsed.

The triumph of Donald Trump in 2016 was a sign of many things, but first and foremost it was a rejection of the Republican party by Republican voters. Democratic voters are poised to perform the same exorcism today using Bernie Sanders as their vehicle.

It is difficult to understate how radical these departures are.

The nomination of Trump in 2016 and the potential nomination of Sanders in 2020 would mean that both political parties turned their backs on their most recent two-term presidents. It would mean a wholesale rejection of everything each party had stood for as recently as a few years ago.

This is not normal.

Ronald Reagan is understood as having transformed the Republican party, but in the summer of 1980, he was actively discussing the possibility of having former president Gerald Ford join his ticket as the vice president. (Ford would go on to speak at the 1988 and 1992 Republican conventions.)

When George H.W. Bush ran for president in 1988, Reagan loomed over the entire affair as a promise to America that Bush would continue his legacy. Indeed, Reagan, H.W. Bush, and Ford remained beloved figures in Republican politics: Every four years the party would genuflect before their images at the national convention.

Once in a while a former nominee or president would hang in the background, or participate only by video, or appear as part of a B-roll package. But even when they skipped the convention, as George W. Bush did in 2012, they werent banished. The party embraced every former Republican president and nomineeBob Dole, George W. Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney. Right up until 2016.

In 2016 the only living former Republican presidential nominee willing to support Donald Trump was Dole. And Trump clearly wanted no part of them. Republican voters, asked to take sides in this divorce, threw in their lot with Trump. As a matter of style, ideology, and history, it was a complete rejection of Republicanism as it had existed as recently as eightor even fouryears prior. At a primary debate in South Carolina, Trump suggested he was willing to see George W. Bush impeached for the Iraq warand Republican voters sided with the Bad Orange Man.

To take it a step further: It is unlikely that any of the three former Republican presidential nominees alive today will ever be welcomed to speak at another Republican National Convention. Because the party has not just moved on from themit has turned its back.

This state of affairs would merely be an object lesson about the power of demagogues and the fragility of institutionsexcept that its happening again.

Four years ago, Barack Obama was universally beloved by Democrats. He was finishing an eight-year administration that was regarded by the party as hugely successful. There had been no wars; the economy had been steadily improving for nearly the entirety of his term; Obamas term had been decidedly liberal, if not overtly progressive.

Then Obamas hand-picked successor, Hillary Clinton, lost the 2016 election. His vice presidents candidacy in the 2020 election is in deep trouble. And the favorite to win the nomination is a democratic-socialist who didnt even belong to the party until he decided to run against Hillary Clinton and whose campaign is fixed around an explicit rejection of the Obama era.

This is not normal, either.

Take Jimmy Carter. By just about every measure, he was a failed president. Yet the Democratic party never cast him out. Just four years after losing to Reagan, Carter was addressing the DNC from the podium in Chicago. He was welcomed back in 1988 and given a prime-time speaking slot in 1992 even as Bill Clinton was consciously transitioning the party away from Carters brand of 70s liberalism.

Bill Clinton was impeached and disgraced when his vice president, Al Gore, ran for the White House in 2000. Clinton was frustrated that Gore didnt use him more on the campaign trail, but it wasnt like the almost-former president was being disavowed: He delivered a major address at the 2000 convention in Los Angeles, to rapturous applause from the crowd. Then he was back at the 2004 convention. And 2008. And 2012. And 2016. Always the belle of the ball.

Historically, the Democrats have been less worshipful of their losersno one ever asked for Fritz Mondale or Mike Dukakis to come in for curtain calls. But in 2008, John Kerry was up on stage in Denver helping to put Obama over.

And Obama, obviously, did everything he could to help Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Yet here we are, four years later, and Democratic voters are moving toward a candidate who complains that no matter who is elected president, things always stay the same. Who complains about the party on whose ticket he is running. Who promises a revolution.

A serious question: If Bernie Sanders is the nominee, will Obama, or the Clintons, or any former Democratic presidential nominee attend the convention and speak on his behalf? Would Sanders even want them to?

After all, Bernies revolution is, explicitly, a revolution against them and the Democratic party they built.

Having one political party hijacked by an outsider with no ties to the partywho turns every living presidential nominee into a persona non gratawould be strange.

Having two of them hijacked in that manner would be indicative of something quite important.

Having these hijackings occur over a single four-year period should terrify us.

Political parties are mediating institutions. They temper passions within the electorate because they have entrenched, legacy structures of personnel and tradition and ideology. They are, in a sense, part of the democracy of the deadone of the mechanisms by which we give over parts of our agency in the present to the vast numbers of people who came before us, won triumphs, made mistakes, and learned lessons.

The story of our ageif I had a nickel for every time Ive written thisis the failure of our institutions.

But our political parties havent just failed. Theyve collapsed. Almost simultaneously.

Thats not good. But whats really bad is that the parties didnt just implode and disappear, leaving room for new institutions to flower and replace them.

No.

What has happened is that the parties have become zombie institutions, retaining the support personnel and dumb-pipe logistical power they once had, but without any connection to the traditions and ideologies that once anchored them.

Neither the Republican nor the Democratic party is really even a party anymore. Theyre both ghost ships, floating in the fog, waiting for some new pirate to come aboard and take control every four years so that they can use its abandoned cannons to go marauding.

If America were Sweden, none of this would really matter. But we are a country of 330 million souls, with the most dynamic economy on earth and the most disproportionate military advantage humanity has ever seen.

And we are in the process of knowingly destroying the political parties that make governing this leviathan in a responsible manner marginally possible.

The reason we should be terrifiedand I wish I had a nickel for this, toois not because of Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders. They are only symptoms.

All they did was ask their fellow Americans whether or not theyd like to destroy their political institutions. Its The People who said yes.

The problem is us. Always.

Link:
The Democratic Party Is Collapsing. Just Like the Republican Party Did. - The Bulwark

Last month, at a Martin Luther King Day event in Harlem hosted by the Reverend Al Sharpton, Congressman Adriano Espaillat, representing New Yorks 13th district, had something to say about bike infrastructure: Affordability and gentrification are ripping our neighborhood apart, he said. And you see the stress of high rent. Now you got Starbucks. And bike lanes. And sushi. Wheres my rice and beans?!

The next day, on January 21,rideshare company Lyft hosted an event at the Harlem YMCA to announce its new LyftUp program, which will provide free one-year Citi Bike memberships to 16 to 20-year-olds in the YMCA network. Lyft, whichoperates New York Citys bike share program as well as those in other major U.S. cities, is partnering with NBA great LeBron James, who showed up to the event to surprise 50 local teens who would be receiving free access to Citi Bikes.I was at thepress conference, along with my nine year-old son (whos really lucky to have such a cool dad). The kids receiving the memberships were absolutely electrified when LeBron James entered the room. So was I, and I dont even follow basketball.My hand shook as I recorded his short speech.

While he didnt address the devastating effects of Starbucks or sushi, James did have a very different take on bikes and bike lanes. Once the screaming died down, he spoke to the kids about the role bikes played in his own childhood. I was a kid, growing up in the inner city of Akron, Ohio, riding bikes, he said. What a bike did for me was to be able to travel across the city with my friends, get from my home to school or get to basketball practices or football practices and be able just to travel, breathe the fresh air, be able to clear your mind at times...a segue to be able to do so many things that can also carry you for the rest of your life.

Furthermore, James addressed the safety and the importance of bike lanes, which in lower-income neighborhoods can be a lot harder to come by.Safety is always first, and for the city to understand that bike lanes are very important for the kids safety, he said. For adults that want to ride, too. So this is very important.

When the kids all gathered for a group photo, James came sliding across the wood floor into the shotthe very antithesis of Espaillats pompous podium posturing. Sure, the cynic in me registered that all of this was essentially a photo op put together by a tech company with a $14 billion market cap, but so what? Bikes need more of this. When was the last time you saw anyone even remotely excitinglet alone one of the most talented and successful athletes on the planetstand in front of a bunch of kids and articulate the sheer sense of freedom and exhilaration that comes from riding a bike? (Im talking about America by the way, not Belgium or the Netherlands. And sorry, David Byrne doesnt count.) Here in New York City, when it comes to young people and bikes, the approach by local government seems to alternate between making corny entreaties to kids (think helmet giveaways), and confiscating their bikes as soon as they start actually having fun with them. So an introduction from pro BMX and YouTube sensation Nigel Sylvester, followed by a video of kids getting rad on bikes, and finally a surprise appearance by King James himself, was all rather invigorating.

Lyft partners with LeBron James and UNINTERRUPTED to announce the new LyftUp initiative expanding transportation access for communities in need. (Photo: Craig Barritt/Getty Images Lyft)

James exuded sincerity, and whats more, his bike bona-fides are quite sound. He grew up riding. He famously commuted by bike while playing in Miami, even joining Critical Mass. Hes given away hundreds of bikes to kids in need. He even owned a stake in Cannondale for a while, which says more about his love of bikes than anything else, because only someone completely besotted with cycling would be crazy enough to invest in a bike company.

Far more important, James is not just promoting bicycling, but the bicycles potential to serve as an inflection point in a young persons life. His words resonate with anybody who grew up riding. Our bikes were our first taste of freedom, and exploring our neighborhoods was in part how we learned to chart a course through life. But as our roads become increasingly hostile and ridership among children continues to decline, fewer kids get to experience this sense of independence and agency. We owe it to our kids to return that joy and freedom to them.

Teens I spoke to at the event said that theyll use their memberships to ride to school, practices, and the Y. One 16-year-old told me he hasnt had a bike in two years, and that this would finally allow him to start riding again. Granted, we needmoreprograms like this, times a million, but at least its a start.

Odds are LeBron James was unaware of Espaillats comments the day before, but either way James certainly dunked on him. The idea that bikesarguably the healthiest, least expensive, and most accessible mode of transport on the planetare somehow classist and elitist doesnt hold up under any kind of scrutiny. Who better to send up this absurd notion than LeBron James? Bikes and bike lanes dont hold people and neighborhoods back, they help move them forward. Give kids better access to both and theres no telling what theyll accomplish.

The rest is here:
LeBron James Is the New Hero of Bike Shares - Outside

The various iterations of The Dick Cavett Show, especially the late-night ABC show which ran from 1969-1975, have been a deep resource for Cavett and director Robert Bader to look back on some of the serious issues that riled the country in the late 60s and early 70s. First they collaborated on how the shows often influential guests and intellectual discourse contributed to the discussion surrounding the Vietnam War, then they did another documentary about the shows extensive coverage of Watergate. Now, the two of them examine the unlikely friendship between Cavett and one of his most frequent guests: boxing legend Muhammad Ali.

The Gist: Ali was on Cavetts show over a dozen times between 1969 and his last fight in 1981. When he first appeared in 69, he was in the middle of a period where his heavyweight championship was stripped from him and he was threatened with prison over his refusal to enter the military draft. The first third of Ali & Cavett: The Tale Of The Tapes goes over the steps that led the former Cassius Clay to that point, from his association with the Nation of Islam, and how Elijah Mohammed and Malcolm X both tried to get Ali to align with eachs faction within NOI. Through interviews with Al Sharpton, Juan Williams, Larry Merchant and others and of course, Cavett we go in-depth into Alis state of mind then, who was influencing him, and how Cavett shockingly thought that the champ, who he had already established a strong rapport with, was using his nimble verbal skills to ramble on about someone elses agenda.

But once Alis boxing license was restored by the New York Supreme Court in 1970 (he was still appealing his federal conviction, which wouldnt be cleared until a year later), Alis appearances on Cavetts show were more of a balance of boxing talk and talk about the always touchy racial issues on which Ali had strong opinions. We see clips of Ali talking about all sorts of stuff, not the least of which trash talking his biggest rival, Joe Frazier. We even see the infamous appearance before the first Ali-Frazier fight where the two of them almost come to blows, then gang up on Cavett and lift him out of his chair.

From Alis comeback, where he regained the heavyweight crown after defeating a young, stronger George Foreman, the show takes a turn. We see light moments, like Cavett at Alis woodland training camp in Pennsylvania, to darker moments, like after Ali lost the title to Leon Spinks in 1978. Cavett and the other experts all wonder if his later fights, and the fact that he got hit harder during those than during his younger days, is what led to the Parkinsons syndrome that eventually led to his death in 2016.

What Movies Will It Remind You Of?: The film covers a lot of the same ground as 2019s HBO doc Whats My Name: Muhammad Ali, though it does concentrate more on the years 1964-1981. Theres definitely more of an examination on his relationships with Elijah Mohammed, Malcolm X, Louis Farrakhan and others in the Nation of Islam. Its likely because Cavett challenged him on the racial diatribes Ali often went on in those years, as well as let him talk about why he objected to going to Vietnam.

Performance Worth Watching: Alis life is fascinating to us, and its always fascinating to show how he transformed from the young Ali fast-talking, witty, unafraid to speak his mind, but considered by much of white America to be dangerous and subversive to the thirty-something Ali, who had slowed down but was still witty and, more importantly, a pop culture icon.

Memorable Dialogue: Sometimes he almost seemed like a brother to me, says Cavett, who once wrote that at times he considered Ali his best friend.

Our Take: What surprised me the most about Ali & Cavett: The Tale Of The Tapes is that the first third of the film has very little Cavett in it. For a film that is promoting itself as looking at Alis career through his appearances on Cavetts various shows, it felt like a curious choice that we would be going over the period of time before Cavetts show started in such depth (they did meet when Cavett was a writer for The Jerry Lewis Show in the mid-60s, but their friendship started in earnest when Ali started going on the shows Cavett hosted).

In this case, an e-mail response from Bader, after I interviewed Cavett, brought some light to the choice: I felt the audience would be confused without the background on Alis early interest and involvement with the Nation of Islam if my story began with his first Cavett interviews. So many of the critical events in Alis story occurred just before Dick got his show. But Ali was appearing on those early Cavett shows in response to the public reaction to many of those earlier events.

Once that part kicked in, it was fascinating to watch, especially as we see Alis icon status kick into high gear after the first Frazier fight. It was also fascinating to see those first signs that Ali might have stayed in the ring too long, even after he captured the heavyweight crown for the third time in the Spinks rematch. And what was the most fascinating was the stories Cavett told about the time Ali stayed over his house in Montauk, and the overall picture of how the two of them bonded to where they became more than just host and guest.

Our Call: STREAM IT. While we think Ali & Cavett: The Tale Of The Tapes could have given the context behind Alis first Cavett appearances a little quicker, its still a wonderful look at an unlikely friendship and a bit of insight into Alis mindset in the second stage of his boxing career.

Joel Keller (@joelkeller) writes about food, entertainment, parenting and tech, but he doesnt kid himself: hes a TV junkie. His writing has appeared in the New York Times, Slate, Salon, VanityFair.com, Playboy.com, Fast Company.com, RollingStone.com, Billboard and elsewhere.

StreamAli & Cavett: The Tale Of The Tapes On HBO Go

StreamAli & Cavett: The Tale Of The Tapes On HBO NOW

Follow this link:
Stream It Or Skip It: 'Ali & Cavett: The Tale Of The Tapes' On HBO, A Documentary About Muhammed Ali Told Through His Talks With Dick Cavett -...

Despite violence breaking out at a vigil for the slain rapper, Nipsey Hussle, local residents will carry on his movement of community investment. USA TODAY

A grand jury has indictedEric Holder for the shooting death ofGrammy-nominated rapperNipsey Hussle, theLos Angeles County District Attorneys Office announced.

Holder was indicted May 9 on one count of murder, two counts each of attempted murder and assault with a firearm and one count of possession of a firearm by a felon,spokesman Greg Risling said in a statement Tuesday, after the indictment was unsealed.

It includes allegations that Holder "personally used a handgun and caused great bodily injury and death."

Prosecutors previously charged Holderwith the same counts, but the indictment means they can skip a preliminary hearing and head to trial.

Nipsey Hussle murder investigation: Everything we know so far

Eric Ronald Holder Jr., 29, who is accused of killing of rapper Nipsey Hussle, appeared for arraignment in Los Angeles with attorney Christopher Darden on April 4, 2019. Darden has since withdrawn from the case, citing death threats.(Photo: Pool, Getty Images)

The 29-year-old suspect pleaded not guilty to all charges Tuesday and is due back in court for a pretrial hearing in June. His bail has been set at$6.53 million.

Holder faces life in state prison if convicted.

He's accused of gunning downHussle,33, whose real name was Ermias Asghedom, outside of the rapper's clothing store in South Los Angeles on March 31. Two others were wounded during the incident.

Holder was arrested April 2 after a nearly 48-hour manhunt.

Related:DJ Khaled releases Nipsey Hussle's final music video 'Higher'

Authorities say the man suspected of fatally shooting rapper Nipsey Hussle has been arrested. Police say 29-year-old Eric Holder was captured Tuesday in Bellflower, near Los Angeles. (April 3) AP Entertainment

Earlier this month, Holder'shigh-profile lawyer, Christopher Darden, filed a motion to withdraw from the case, citing death threats. Holder will now be represented by an attorney in the public defenders office, according to thedistrict attorney's office.

Contributing: Maria Puente, The Associated Press

Related:Christopher Darden wants out as lawyer for Nipsey Hussle accused shooter Eric Holder

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2019/05/21/nipsey-hussle-suspect-eric-holder-indicted-shooting-death-rapper/3760243002/

Read the original:
Nipsey Hussle suspect Eric Holder indicted in shooting ...