Mediaboss Marketing

The media pile-on atop Sen. Ted Cruz (RTexas) for his comments Wednesday characterizing mock Nazi salutes at school board meetings as First Amendmentprotected speech is not, unfortunately, an aberrational event when it comes to news coverage this fall of parents publicly registering their discontent with various contentious K-12 policies.

Not a day goes by without the media comparing raucous school board meetings to the January 6 Capitol Hill riots, attributing the increase in parental outrage to racism and/or manipulation by cynical puppet masters, conducting laughably one-sided fact-checks, using the phrase "Republicans seize" unironically, and taking at face value education-establishment claims that all curricular and organizational changes made in the name of racial equity are merely about being more accurate in the teaching of history.

Sometimes most or even all of these boxes can get checked off in a single article or broadcast segment. Such as on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360 Wednesday night, when, after a minutes-long, head-shaking lecture from Cooper about how "facts are facts," CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin came on to provide this tendentious explanation for why school board politics have become heated enough to animate GOP senators and change the trajectory of next week's Virginia gubernatorial election.

"It's really important to remember why we are talking about school boards at all: because it's about white supremacy, and that's on the rise in the Republican Party," Toobin charged. "The reason school boards are controversial is that some school boards have dared to teach that, you know, civil rights and African American rights have not been so great in this country over the centuries, like when we had slavery and when we had Jim Crow. And that has so outraged the Republican Partytelling the truth about race in Americathat they feel the way to win elections and to win the governorship in Virginia, is to demonize these school boards for daring to tell the truth about race in America. And that's really the core of what's going on here."

The progressive journalist Zaid Jilani, who lives in northern Virginia and teaches part time there, retorted on an episode of The Fifth Column podcast Wednesday that Toobin's vision bore no resemblance to what he's experienced on the ground.

"Those debates actually have been happening for a number of months, before this all became like a national thing," Jilani said. "There were debates about some of the selective high schools, andshould they use testing to get people in, should it be a holistic process. There were debates about curriculum, there were debates about COVID and masking. And I don't think at any point in those debates did any white supremacists show up. I didn't see anyone in a Klan hood."

There is something revealingly incongruous about a news organization that in one breath conducts hair-splitting fact-checks deferring to the government's of view ("In fact, there's no mention of 'parents'at all in the memo, none," Cooper said triumphantly Wednesday, about the controversial October 4 Justice Department directive to have federal agents be on the lookout for antischool board violence), then in the next being content to nod along when a colleague accuses citizen participants in democracy and a major political party of being primarily motivated by white supremacy.

Since this issue is not going away anytime soon, particularly if Republican gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin upsets Virginia power pol Terry McAuliffe in the governor's race next week, it's worth being on the lookout for recurrent media framing devices that distort the depiction of an important set of debates. (K-12 instruction amounts to about 20 percent of all state and local government spending, don't forget.) The point is not to be steered toward my admittedly idiosyncratic school policy preferences, but rather to become via pattern recognition a more discerning consumer of news.

Here are two of the most common ways the media warp school board politics.

1) Exaggerating the incidence of violence.

On October 22, in an article picked up widely and also adapted by the Associated Press, Minnesota Public Radio made this alarming assertion: "Violent school board meetings and threats toward school board members [in Minnesota] over these issues have caused dozens of board leaders to quit their positions." Do note the serial pluralization.

Were there really multiple acts of violence, and multiple threats, causing "dozens" of board members to quit, in a state known for its niceness? The 757-word article did not explicitly list any; there was one hyperlink to a June piece that mentioned "someone had recently threatened on a community Facebook page to rush the podium" at one meeting, but no such bum-rush took place.

I was able to find one violent incident in Minnesota, from late September, when two members of the public who were on opposite sides of a school masking policy debate got into a brief scuffle that was broken up by a police officer.

What seems to be happening much more than citizen-on-official violence, or credible threats thereof, is a recurring reaction of bewilderment on the part of the (often volunteer) school board members in the face of vein-throbbing parental outrage and doubtlessly some pretty bizarro vox-populi rants. Some board members are spooked, some don't consider the emotional conflict worth the hassle, and some, like Mankato, Minnesota, School Board Chair Jodi Sapp, think the way out of the mess is to declare that this "is not a meeting that belongs to the public," and then require any citizen speaker to state his or her name and home address into a microphone:

There have been indeed acts of personal violence and physical intimidation at school board meetings this summer and fall. But how many?

In its notorious but still successful letter of September 29 requesting "immediate" federal law enforcement assistance "to protect our students, school board members, and educators who are susceptible to acts of violence," the National School Board Association (NSBA) mentioned and linked to 20 discrete incidents, using such summative language as "attacks against school board members and educators," and "acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials."

How many of the 20 incidents included a physical altercation? The bulk of them (I count 13) were meetings disrupted by shouting or defiance of mask policies. As best as I can reckon, the NSBA letter contained two references to people coming to blows: a guy in Illinois punching the school official who was escorting him out, and the now-infamous (and still-disputed) case in Loudoun County, Virginia, where the father of a girl who had been sexually assaulted in a school bathroom went berserk after hearing the superintendent say that, "To my knowledge, we don't have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms."

The Loudoun County arrest in particular has stoked local, state, and national outrage, with all the wild-eyed truth bending that comes with it. (The NSBA letter misportrayed the incident as being tied to discussion of "critical race theory andequity issues"; conservatives have since inaccurately blamed the attack on the school's transgender bathroom policies.) And the personalized vitriol directed at Loudoun officials has been particularly vile, worthy of heightened law enforcement attention. Still, a violent reaction from a lone father distraught over his daughter's assault seems a poor fit for a national trend story.

There have been other acts of violence not listed in the NSBA letterthere were reportedly multiple fights in a Missouri parking lot after a September meeting on masking, for example. But the fact that we're still counting on one hand, maybe two, the number of times people at our near testy school board meetings this year have thrown hands, in a country of 14,000 or so school boards, suggests a far more modest contextual presentation of the conflicts than we have seen in the press.

"GOP Demands Justice Department Back Off Threat To Protect School Board Members From Violent Mobs," ran the headline this week at Above the Law. Such lopsided hyperbole, and contempt for swaths of the citizenry, has (along with restrictive blue-state educational COVID-19 policies) driven at least a half-dozen school-opening advocates I follow on Twitter away from a Democratic Party they've spent their lives voting for. And it may yet push voters in Democratic Virginia to vote Republican for governor.

2) Claiming that parental outrage is a contrived, ginned-up "culture war" untethered from real-world concerns.

"Fox News can't get enough of these congressional hearings in which GOP lawmakers bashAG Merrick Garlandover manufactured controversies," wrote CNN Senior Media Reporter Oliver Darcy this week in the Reliable Sources newsletter.

"Fox News helped amplify (if not create) a furor at school board meetings several months ago," wrote Washington Post columnist Philip Bump last week. "Over the summer, this had the (intended) effect of establishing a tea-party-like movement from the base upone that, like the tea party a decade ago, was carefully cultivated and tended.It's an issue that was formed fromthe sheer energy of the culture warmore than anything else."

I do not recall Fox having such pull in San Francisco and New York City. Yet both cosmopolitan capitals have been the site of intense school board politicsnot for months, but for years. Three of the seven board members of the San Francisco Unified School District are facing a recall vote this coming February, with backers of the effort (per Ballotpedia's write-up) "frustrated that schools in the district remained closed for nearly a year in reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic," and also "upset that the board had spent time voting to rename 44 buildings in the district rather than focusing on opening schools."

From 20092020, Ballotpedia counted between 18 and 38 school board recalls per year, targeting between 46 and 91 members. In 2021 those numbers have more than doubled84 recalls aiming at 215 officials. Now close your eyes and think real hard: What other motivations might recallers have besides the enjoyment of responding "How high?" when Fox News yells "Jump!"?

"The combination of extended Covid-related school closures; mask mandates; an increasingly extreme race- and gender-focused curriculum; and the removal of tests, honors classes and merit-based admissions has created a bumper crop of engagedand, in many cases, enragedparents rightfully concerned about what is happening in their children's schools," wrote Manhattan-based school activist and City Council candidate Maud Maron, a "lifelong liberal," over at Bari Weiss' Substack on October 11.

During the 19+ months of the COVID-19 pandemic, and particularly since the fall of 2020, the United States, particularly in its biggest cities, has been a global outlier when it comes to keeping schools closed, masking children, and (soon enough) mandating vaccines for 5-year-olds. These comparatively extreme policies, driven largely by the strength of teachers unions in parts of America's decentralized schooling system, have understandably motivated some parents to get more involved in the decision-making process.

And one of the things that they discover there is that the education establishment, particularly but not only in big cities, has only accelerated recent trends of junking Gifted & Talented programs, removing selective entrance exams, constructing "controlled choice" admission systems, and centering curricula around "anti-racist" themes, all in the name of "equity." These choices are divisive in the most placid of times, which a pandemic is decidedly not.

"We should call this controversy what it isa scare campaign cooked up by G.O.P. operatives" and others to "limit our students' education and understanding of historical and current events," American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten told The New York Times last week.

Well, no. As I have been writing about for two years now, the equity-based policy changes, and the way some education officials have bulldozed the concerns of affected parents, was already beginning to alienate families away from public schooling before the onset of the pandemic. Combined with the aforementioned COVID-19 restrictions, these radical alterations are fueling a K-12 exodus.

Sometimes media outlets cover these topics with nuance and detail. Other times they spend an inordinate amount of time fact-checking the semantic difference between the academic term critical race theory and the co-opting of the term by conservative activists as a negative political branding exercise. (A branding exercise, to be sure, that has led to bad policy results, such as a Texas Republican lawmaker this week compiling a list of 850 books that"might make students feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress because of their race or sex.")

As I can testify from grisly firsthand experience, there are kooks at just about any public meeting (it takes one to know one), and those who are being motivated by the apocalyptic likes of Tucker Carlson are likely to have a heightened sense of crazy. But it's a category error to characterize most participants at school board gatherings as being driven there by national media. These politics, and relationships, are local.

So when former President Barack Obama sneers that, "We don't have time to be wasted on these phony trumped-up culture wars, this fake outrage, the right-wing media's peddles to juice their ratings," as he did by McAuliffe's side on Saturday, it's an insult to every last one of us who has dragged ass out to the local school meeting because we care about policies affecting our kids.

See the original post:
Journalist Butchery of School Board Protests Upending Politics in Virginia and Elsewhere - Reason

Ever since the Unite the Right rally, in 2017, Virginias politics have been in flux. Is the state, like Charlottesville, a place under threat from reactionaries, or is it, also like Charlottesville, a place that has fought them back? This past week, two developments have pointed toward some resolution: a civil trial against the rallys organizers began, and the city of Charlottesville released six proposals to take ownership of the Confederate monuments that drew the extremists in the first place. The Statuary Park at Gettysburg proposed displaying the monuments alongside other Civil War statues, though it didnt want the bases (too expensive) and suggested that the city help it apply for a grant to cover the transportation costs. A man named Frederick Gierisch, from Utopia, Texas, sent a handwritten letter volunteering to display them on his ranch, noting (according to an excellent report from Erin OHare of Charlottesville Tomorrow) that I dont believe the left will be happy until all history is destroyed which is a shame because it is our history whether good or bad. The lone local proposal came from Charlottesvilles Jefferson School African American Heritage Center, which proposed to melt down the statues into bronze ingots, hold the ingots in reserve for six months of community engagement, and then allow artists to create a new work to be gifted back to the city. There was something politically ingenious about the proposal, which synthesizes the radical call to destroy the statues and more moderate discomfort with the idea. Were not forgetting history, were saying that these monuments were an inadequate statement about our values, a prominent local activist and University of Virginia professor named Jalane Schmidt, who helped conceive the plan, told Charlottesville Tomorrow.

A third event, coming next week, will more immediately define Virginia: the election of the states governor, after an increasingly tight race between the former Democratic governor Terry McAuliffe and a first-time Republican candidate, Glenn Youngkin. The previous gubernatorial election, in 2017, featured Corey Stewart, a cartoonish right-winger who lives in a restored plantation and campaigned on the preservation of Confederate heritage; Ed Gillespie, the former chair of the Republican National Committee; and Ralph Northam, a subdued pediatric neurologist who ran as a moderate Democrat and won, only to be immediately undermined, when conservatives found that Northam had included on his page in his medical-school yearbook a photo of two men, one in blackface and the other in K.K.K. robes. (Northam apologized for appearing in the photo, without specifying which of the two men was him.) This year, the characters are insiders: McAuliffe came to prominence as a backslapping old Bill Clinton fund-raiser and confidant. Youngkin is a former co-C.E.O. of the Carlyle Group, the Washington private-equity firm, who initially appeared to be a pre-Trump type of candidate. The better-known McAuliffe was initially favored (Joe Biden won Virginia last fall by nearly ten per cent), but throughout the past month the polls tightened: several showed Youngkin within the margin of error, or tied, and one (from Fox News) had the Republican leading by eight percentage points. The outcome seems to hinge less on the candidates than on the depth of a conservative backlash to progressive cultural politics.

That fight has been centered in Loudoun County, the far suburbs of D.C., where Democratic officials have come under sustained pressure from a former Trump Administration official named Ian Prior, who leads a local political-action committee called Fight for Schools. Prior has challenged the school-division leadership over two recent culture-war touchstones: the teaching of critical race theory and the provisions made for transgender students in public schools, eventually championing a very murky allegation of sexual assault on school grounds. Prior himself has become a regular on Fox News, which has often featured stories about these events. And, in the final phase of the gubernatorial campaign, Youngkin took up the cause, calling for the resignation of several school-board officials in Loudoun County and arguing that activists have seized control of Virginias schools. The tactic worked: Youngkin drew even in the polls, and Axios reported that McAuliffes campaign was bordering on panic. The Washington Post reported that the National Republican Senatorial Committee intended to emphasize education issues like these in 2022. Former Vice-President Mike Pence scheduled a last-minute rally in the Virginia suburbs of D.C. to address educational freedom. (That phrase carried an ironic twist: Republicans like Pence who had long used the terminology of freedom to argue that local decisions should not be challenged at the state or federal level were now arguing exactly the opposite.) Ian Serotkin, a member of the Loudoun County school board who was supported by the local Democratic Party, told me ruefully, I think its the second coming of the Tea Party.

The political-organizing campaign conducted in Loudoun County by Prior and the other conservative activists has been skillful. According to Serotkin, it began last spring, amid general conservative fears about the teaching of critical race theory in schools, when members of the public began to ask the school board whether anything like this was happening in Loudoun County. Several members of the school board, Serotkin among them, belonged to a Facebook group called Anti-Racist Parents of Loudoun County (the sort of identification that became much more common after Charlottesville). After conservative activists discovered that some members of that group had been making a list of the names of people asking questions about C.R.T., they launched recall campaigns against the school-board members who belonged to it. (One member resigned; the other four, including Serotkin, face recall petitions.) Loudoun County school-board meetings grew louder and more contentious, especially as the board considered a measure that would allow transgender students access to activities and facilities that match their gender identity. At a meeting in June, a fight broke out; police arrested two conservative activists and broke up the meeting, declaring it an unlawful assembly.

Prior, who had served as deputy director of public affairs in the Trump Justice Department, was good on TV and good with a sound bite. In the spring, he told Fox News that hed been targeted by a chardonnay Antifa for pushing the case against critical race theory, and then that an army of moms was leading the conservative campaign in Loudoun County. In August, he claimed on the network that more than a thousand Loudoun County students had transferred to private schools since 2020 because of the school boards progressive agenda. (The decline has been more general than he suggested; public-school enrollment dropped by three per cent nationally in 2020, a change that was generally attributed to the pandemic, not politics.) At a press conference this fall, Prior argued that conservatives were being belittled in the county, in a way that might have invited sympathy from Fox News viewers. Weve been met with silence, mockery, claims of engaging in dog-whistle politics, and attacked as racists, bigots, facistspretty much anything that ends with -ist. In August, as Priors campaign was mounting, a forty-eight-year-old man named Scott Smith, who had been arrested at the June school-board meeting, claimed that his daughter had been raped in a girls bathroom at Stone Bridge High School by a boy wearing a skirt. (The boy was eventually found guilty of sexual assault by a juvenile-court judge.) Some of the politically relevant facts of the case remain unclearwhether the trans-access policy, which had not yet been adopted, had anything to do with the attack, or what the assailants gender identity isbut it served a particular purpose, emphasizing that there was an acute danger in liberal leadership of public schools.

Youngkin had spoken about Loudoun County before, but after the Stone Bridge story broke he really jumped in, calling for the resignation of the county schools superintendent and the entire school board. Meanwhile, the Youngkin campaign was airing an ad in which a Fairfax County mother named Laura Murphy, positioned before a fireplace, recalls her son showing her his reading assignment with some of the most explicit material I could imagine. Murphy said that she showed the assignment to conservative lawmakers, who passed a bill asking schools to alert parents when potentially offensive material was being assigned in class. There was an ironic note here, in that conservatives were blaming McAuliffe for denying them a trigger warning. There was also a telling one, when it turned out the text to which Murphy objected was Toni Morrisons Beloved.

There was a burning intensity the last four years for people to vote, McAuliffe told the Washington Post, a little more than a week before the election, lamenting the challenge he faced in turning out Democrats. It was Trump, Trump, Trump. People lived with it constantly. It infuriated and disgusted so many people. Its not there in the same intensity.

The change in the White House has presented a challenge for Youngkin as well: he needs the support both of a conservative base that adores Trump and moderate voters who abhor him. Youngkin navigated the problem by avoiding the topic of the former President or, when it couldnt be avoided, dodging it, at one point declining to say whether he would have voted to certify the results of the 2020 electionand then, the following day, saying that he would have. In October, a Richmond-area radio host staged a rally in support of Youngkins candidacy, at which attendees pledged allegiance to a flag that was said to have been carried at the Capitol during the January 6th insurrection. Youngkin, distancing himself, claimed that the rally was weird and wrong. The education issue gave a board-room Republican Youngkin a talking point with Trump-like appeal, without Trump himself. In its own way, it was as ingenious a political solution as the Charlottesville ingots.

Ten days before the election, Barack Obama arrived in Richmond, where he addressed a crowd of about two thousand at Virginia Commonwealth University. Theres a mood out there, the former President said, meaning among conservatives. We see it. Theres a politics of meanness and division and conflict, of tribalism and cynicism. He went on to depict Youngkin as if it were the Obama-Romney campaign all over again: You cant run ads telling me youre a regular old hoops-playing, dishwashing, fleece-wearing guy, but quietly cultivate support from those who seek to tear down our democracy. Either he actually believes in the same conspiracy theories that resulted in a mob, or he doesnt believe it, but hes willing to go along with itto say or do anything to get elected.

But politics have changed since 2012. Elections are more ideological now, and candidates are less in control. Virginias politics lately have not only been shaped by figures like McAuliffe and Youngkin but by Ian Prior and Jalane Schmidt. Obama was right to see opportunism and deceit in the Republican campaign to spook moderate voters about supposed radicalism in suburban schools. But its also the case that progressives are proposing some things that are genuinely new: to change the way that gender, race, and history are understood and taught. The monuments finally came downthe question now is what happens next.

See the original post:
The Virginia Governors Race Will Be the Latest Verdict in the Culture Wars - The New Yorker

Overwatchs Sombra already has some amazing cosmetics, but this Mad Hatter outfit for Mexicos most wanted is the Halloween Terror skin we never knew we needed.

While Overwatchs extensive cast of misfits encompasses characters from all walks of life, Mexicos finest hacker, Sombra, has become a fan favorite.

The subject of many an interesting skin concept, weve even seen the queen of all things digital rep New Yorks Democratic representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezs iconic tax the rich Met Gala dress.

Trading in her brief stint in politics for something a lot less serious, this new skin idea from designer Luca Albrecht transforms Sombra into Alice In Wonderlands Mad Hatter and its just in time for Halloween.

Inspired by the Mad Hatter from Lewis Carrolls 19th Century fairytale Alice in Wonderland, Sombra has traded in her cyberpunk-style armor for an eclectic Victorian-inspired outfit.

Donning a navy blue tailcoat with a violet collar, she sports a bright pink bow around her neck with a golden stopwatch necklace. In the middle of her back another clock is attached to her coat, while a rainbow strap loops around her body to tie the mismatch of colors together.

Instead of leggings shes gone for the iconic striped socks often associated with genderbent Hatter cosplays, with deep blue thigh-high lace-up boots rounding out the look.

Its adorable little top hat is the icing on this beautiful teacake, though, with orange and green feathers sprouting out from the base and the signature playing card tucked gently into the buckle that holds everything in place.

Mad Hatter Sombra skin concept from Overwatch

Overwatch fans are certainly hoping to be invited to this tea party, as Lucas idea has been greeted with a wave of positivity.

No I dont think you understand. Imobsessed, writes one fan, while others pointed out that it would go well with Ashes Mardi Gras skin.

While Sombras never late for a very important date, she never compromises her style. Perhaps if you look through the looking glass youll be able to catch this Mad Hatter even when shes in stealth, but otherwise watch out Wonderlands inhabitants arent always the friendliest.

Originally posted here:
Mad Hatter Sombra skin idea is the Halloween Terror look Overwatch needs - Dexerto

The stakes rose this week with the release of a UN report that says the world is on track for a rise of 2.7 degree Celsius in average global temperature above pre-industrial levels over this century. The planet has already warmed by about one degree Celsius. In 2015, leaders agreed to limit that rise to 1.5 degrees.

But COP26 also brings together scientists, political activists and others to plot innovative strategies they hope can pressure both political and business leaders to show more progress in both these areas.

There are many reasons why climate progress is difficult.

Reducing emissions will demand economic sacrifices that no one is eager to make. To meet the targets agreed to in the Paris Climate Accord in 2015, all countries need to reduce carbon emissions to net zero, putting no more carbon into the atmosphere than they cut, by 2050. That requires an historic financial investment in new forms of energy that reduce or eliminate carbon emissions.

It's not easy to agree on how burdens should be shared. "Why should we make big sacrifices," ask emerging powers China and India? "The industrial revolutions in America and Europe created these problems. Why should we stunt our growth to clean up your mess?" "True enough," Europeans and Americans respond, "but you're both emitting so much carbon these days that we can't solve the problem without you."

Poorer countries ask, "What about us? We didn't create or exacerbate this problem, but rising sea levels and dangerously erratic weather patterns threaten our future. Who's going to pay for that?"

The climate change challenge is global, but the politics that limit solutions remain mainly national, and politicians tend to prioritize the need to boost growth and win elections over long-term, global commitments.

As a result, summit promises must be taken with a mountain of salt. These annual summits began in the early 1990s, but there was no major agreement until the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, and that deal fell apart after the US Senate refused to ratify the treaty.

Soaring economic growth in China and India have multiplied the carbon emissions pumped into the atmosphere.

In 2015, the Paris Climate Accord brought new pledges for emissions reductions to reach the net-zero target, but newly elected US president Donald Trump immediately withdrew the US from the commitments it made in that agreement. Though Biden pledges that America and its climate ambitions are back, no one knows what will happen after the next US election.

In addition, world leaders pledge only to meet specified targets. They don't have to explain exactly how they'll hit them. And they know that future leaders will be seated at the table when the bill arrives for payment. Their pledges are referred to as legally binding, but no one can force powerful polluting nations to honor their commitments.

So, why should we care about COP26? There will be no single historic breakthrough at this gathering, for all the reasons above. But the global scientific consensus is that climate change cannot be ignored, and progress matters, even if promises are only partly kept. These are annual meetings (the pandemic postponed the 2020 gathering until now) and any step in the right direction is far better than no progress at all.

COP26 is especially important because negotiators will be working to hash out details for the so-called Paris Rulebook, a new set of rules on how progress is reported and how carbon markets can be created that allow the buying and selling of emissions reductions among countries.

Over the two weeks of this summit, we'll write in more detail about what is and isn't happening, and we'll assess the conference's final statement to judge just how many incremental steps forward have actually been taken.

Go here to read the rest:
Have governments lost control of the digital world? - GZERO Media

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEOctober 29, 2021Contact:ODH Office of Communications(614) 644-8562

Breast and Cervical Cancer Project (BCCP) Eligibility Expanded

New state budget provision takes effect expanding access to treatments for breast and cervical cancers.

COLUMBUS The Ohio Department of Health (ODH) is announcing a recent expansion in eligibility for the Breast and Cervical Cancer Project (BCCP) which allows BCCP to cover treatments for women diagnosed with breast and cervical cancer.

If found early, nearly all breast and cervical cancers can be treated successfully. BCCP helps eligible women receive lifesaving screenings and treatment, said Bruce Vanderhoff, MD, MBA, director of the Ohio Department of Health. With the support of the Ohio General Assembly and Governor Mike DeWine, more women now have access to treatment options for breast and cervical cancers.

Ohio now offers treatment for a woman who meets all the following conditions, in addition to those Ohioans who are already eligible by diagnosis through BCCP:

The woman is younger than 65 years of age.

The Ohio Department of Health BCCP will be the access point for these women and will assist them with applying for BCCP Medicaid for treatment coverage. Partners, including BCCP enrollment agencies, will assist with enrollment and managing new treatment clients. Eligibility will be determined through BCCP in cooperation with the Ohio Department of Medicaid.

A woman should not be denied access to life-saving treatment simply because she walked through the wrong door, said Molly Guthrie, senior director of public policy and advocacy at Susan G. Komen. Thanks to the leadership of Senator Gavarone and the Governors office, a breast cancer patients access to care will no longer be contingent on where she received her screening.

The American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network (ACS CAN) is proud to have worked with lawmakers through the budget process to expand eligibility to this critical program, and thanks the Ohio Department of Health for its quick action to implement this expansion, said Leo Almeida, ACS CAN government relations director.

Women interested in BCCP can call 1-844-430-BCCP for more information.

This announcement coincides with Breast Cancer Awareness Month, an annual observance in the month of October, encouraging women to get screened for breast cancer.

About1in8womenwill develop breast cancer in their lifetime. The U.S. Preventative Service Task Forcerecommendsbiennialscreeningmammogramsfor women ages 50-74 years old, with earlier screening recommended for women with certain risk factors.

The Ohio Department of Healths Ohio Cancer Incidence Surveillance System collects data and statistics, and works with the Comprehensive Cancer Control Program to reduce the burden of cancer for Ohioans. Learn more ontheComprehensiveCancerControlProgramwebsite.

###

About the Ohio Department of HealthThe Ohio Department of Healths mission is advancing the health and well-being of all Ohioans by transforming the states public health system through unique partnerships and funding streams; addressing the community conditions and inequities that lead to disparities in health outcomes; and implementing data-driven, evidence-based solutions.

Visit link:
Breast and Cervical Cancer Project (BCCP) Eligibility Expanded - Ohio Department of Health