Mediaboss Marketing

NEW YORK CITY Unless undocumented New Yorkers came to the city by way of Mars, they are human beings, not aliens, a new bill says.

Queens City Council Member Francisco Moya pitched a new bill Thursday that would replace the words "alien" and "illegal" immigrant" with "noncitizen" in official documents, records show.

"'Alien' is an outdated, politically loaded euphemism for 'noncitizen'a clear and unambiguous word," Moya, a Democrat, explained on Twitter. "It's time we remove 'alien' the City Charter and Administrative Code and bar referring to human beings as 'illegals' in future laws or city materials.

Moya's bill, first introduced in December, is not the first to address the loaded language around U.S. citizenship.

City Council passed legislation in 2019 to threaten to call immigration officials or use "illegal alien" as a slur.

View post:
Aliens Come From Other Planets, Not Other Nations, New Bill Says - New York City, NY Patch

By Ted O'Neil |The Center Square

Of all the public policy issues the top-tier Democratic presidential hopefuls have addressed, health care most likely stands out as the one that separates them the most.

While they agree on expanding health insurance coverage for more Americans, they remain split on how to accomplish such a goal, in particular over the issue of "Medicare For All."

Two candidates in particular, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, have been the most vocal in wanting to establish a single-payer system in which everyone would automatically be enrolled in an insurance plan where all medical expenses are paid for by taxpayers.

Their vision is to basically eliminate all private health insurance.

Former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg has taken the stance that private insurance should remain in place but eventually be discontinued, while former Vice President Joe Biden prefers to see private insurance remain in place but wants to make improvements to the Affordable Care Act. The ACA, often referred to as Obamacare, was a major policy victory during Biden's time in office as President Barack Obama's vice president.

With the Iowa caucuses scheduled to kick off the Democratic presidential nomination process on Feb. 3, followed by the New Hampshire primary on Feb.11, The Center Square summarizes the top four candidates' views on health care below.

Bernie Sanders

Sanders has long advocated for what many have referred to as "socialized medicine" and the elimination of private insurance.

"Yes, we should essentially eliminate private health insurance," Sanders said. "Private insurance as it exists today is nothing more than confusing morass designed to make people jump through hoops before they can get the care they need."

Sanders also supports creating a public option to allow people to buy into state Medicaid programs regardless of income, saying "Until we manage to Medicare For All, we should be giving states the tools they need to provide affordable, comprehensive coverage to their residents."

On the question of illegal immigrants receiving government-run health care, Sanders said in a tweet last June that "If you are a human being, regardless of your immigration status, you have a right to health care."

Sanders also supports increasing paid time off beyond 12 weeks under the Family and Medical Insurance Leave Act, allowing the government to produce and sell generic drugs and allowing prescription drugs to be imported from other countries.

An analysis by the Mercatus Center of a 2017 Medicare for All bill filed by Sanders found that the plan would increase federal spending by at least $32 trillion over 10 years, from 2022 through 2031.

Elizabeth Warren

Warren holds many of the same views as Sanders, and tweeted last year: "Yes, I would support government-run insurance. Health care is a basic human right, and we fight for basic human rights. We need #Medicare For All."

Warren also supports expanding the public option and similarly co-sponsored a bill introduced by Sanders that would provide government-run health care for illegal immigrants.

Warren also said she is a co-sponsor of the FAMILY Act which guarantees 12 weeks of paid leave in certain circumstances.

"I also have a plan to require federal contractors to extend a $15 minimum wage and benefits - including paid family leave, fair scheduling and collective bargaining rights - to all employees."

Like Sanders, Warren also favors the government manufacturing and selling generic drugs and allowing prescription medication from other countries.

Warren said her plan would cost an additional $20.5 trillion over 10 years and would be paid for by a wealth tax.

Joe Biden

As mentioned earlier, Biden wants to improve the Affordable Care Act, "instead of starting from scratch and getting rid of private insurance."

Biden has also said he supports a public option for buying insurance through state Medicaid programs.

"Whether you're covered through your employer or on your own, you should have the choice to buy into a public option plan for Medicaid," he has said. "If the insurance company isn't doing you right, you should have another choice."

Biden also supports government-run health care for illegal immigrants.

"You cannot let people who are sick, no matter where they come from, no matter their status, go uncovered," he said during the very first Democratic debate last year.

Biden, calling on personal experience, has said he favors 12 weeks of paid family leave.

"When I lost my first wife and baby daughter in a car accident, I became a single parent to my two young sons. I've taken care of an aging parent. I know how hard it is to raise a family and take care of a sick family member."

Biden's health care plan does not explicitly support the government making and selling generic drugs, but it does propose giving samples to private generic manufacturers.

Biden also supports importing prescription drugs from other countries "to create more competition for U.S. drug corporations ... as long as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has certified that those drugs are safe."

Pete Buttigieg

Buttigieg has not come out in favor of ending private insurance, but he also has not ruled it out under a Medicare For All plan.

"I don't see why it requires that," he said.

Buttigieg also supports a public option for Medicaid regardless of income, but wants to see caveats placed on the ability of illegal immigrants to obtain insurance.

"Undocumented immigrants should be able to buy coverage through the public option," his campaign has said. "I would expect that you'd have to be a citizen to qualify for subsidies."

The candidate also said his plan would "provide subsidies to everyone who is eligible for them under the ACA, including U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents."

Buttigieg is on the same page as Biden in calling for 12 weeks of paid family leave, saying "Caregiving responsibilities for grandparents, grandchildren, siblings and other chosen family members will be included."

Buttigieg does not support the government making and selling generic drugs, but is OK with importing them "in a way that ensures safety and quality."

Link:
Where the top Democratic candidates stand on health care - Kiowa County Press

KOTA KINABALU: An illegal immigrant was arrested after trying to escape from a Road Transport Department (JPJ) roadblock at KM23 of the Lahad Datu-Sandakan road at around 10.30am on Friday (Jan 10).

The 20-year-old had tried to ride his motorcycle through the roadblock, but the attempt failed when the suspect lost control and hit the JPJ vehicle before landing up in a ditch.

Lahad Datu police chief Asst Comm Nasri Mansor said the suspect became aggressive with JPJ personnel, and a brief struggle took place before he was captured.

"The suspect did not have any valid travel or identity documents and did not have a licence," he said,

He confirmed that the JPJ had lodged a police report on the incident and added that the police were investigating the suspect for restricting a government officer from carrying out his duties and for acting in a manner that could have caused injury to the government officers under Section 186 and 323 of the Penal Code.

ACP Nasri also said the suspect would also be handed over to the Immigration Department for further action as he had entered the state illegally.

In a 43-second video that went viral on social media, two JPJ personnel were seen trying to overpower the suspect in a drain.

The JPJ has since said that it is carrying out an internal investigation into the incident.

See original here:
Illegal immigrant nabbed while trying to escape JPJ roadblock in Sabah - The Star Online

The minds behind the Fox series Party of Five didnt want to revive the show for the usual reasons.

Nostalgia sells, of course, and new versions of Will & Grace, Veronica Mars, and Roseanne scored (again) with audiences. Amy Lippman, who created the 90s hit Party of Five with Chris Keyser, told the TVs Top 5 Podcast that she needed a better reason to bring the story back to primetime TV.

The nations immigration crisis, and a hearty case of Trump Derangement, gave her team all the rocket fuel required.

Party of Five, debuting Jan. 8 on Freeform, doesnt feature five children whose parents die in a car crash as in the original version. This familys children are separated from their illegal immigrant parents when ICE agents deport them back to Mexico.

Lippman broke down the shows creative process, vowing that the series wouldnt be as political as it sounds. Her own words clashed with that description throughout the interview.

She said the genesis of the project began before President Trumps shocking 2016 election day victory. In the early stages, the story morphed from the car accident leaving the kids without parents to an immigration-based drama.

That gave the reboot a fresh coat of creative paint. Still, she worried the show wouldnt get on-air quickly enough to mirror reality.

We kept saying, lets get going on it because the situation may resolve itself in some way that means were sort of writing after the fact, were behind on it. And we wanted to be relevant, Lippman says.

I dont think any of us anticipated we would find ourselves debuting the show right in the middle of this crisis, she says of the current immigration battle.

Lippman concedes the show has a strong viewpoint on illegal immigration, but reveals the president wont be part of the conversation, at least not directly.

That, she confirms, was by design.

We dont mention the president or the administration throughout the [first] season, she says, a measure taken as an ideological olive branch. Wed like to reach everyone with the show because we think it has something to say regardless of where you are on the political spectrum.

Obviously were on the side of families, and families staying together seems very important to us, she says. Does that imply Americans who support border enforcement are anti-family?

Lippman also described the diversity of her writers room, including one colleague who made a dramatic change following Trumps victory.

After the election, one of the writers in our room went out and became a dual citizen of the country that her parents were born in, Lippman explains.

I said, why? I dont understand.Youre an American. You have a passport. Youre not even a naturalized citizen. You were born in this country. Why would you do that?

She said, I dont feel safe.

Lippman continues the writers thoughts on the dual citizenship decision.

I feel like even though Im completely here legitimately, in this climate it feels like it could all go away. Maybe people would begin to investigate how did my parents come over, or my grandparents? And that that could all unravel for me, Lippman recalls.

And thatfeeling of insecurity, and a feeling that prejudice and bias against you, is not my experience, Lippman says. I couldnt have done the show this season without beingsurrounded by people who had that perspective.

Early Party of Five reviews strain to describe the show as apolitical. Thats the line peddled by the liberal siteVulture.com.

Until it doesnt.

Make no mistake: All of this is political. But Party of Five humanizes the political and makes the audience see the deeply personal impact that the decisions made by the administration have on the lives of young people who are trying their best to do the right thing every day.

The Washington Post quotes lines from the first few episodes as preachy as a Michael Moore screed. Heres what an ICE official says to the parents as they round them up for deportation.

You think the rules dont apply to you? Things have changed, Mr. Acosta. I need to see your papers, the man growls.

Naturally, this critic frames the story as a welcome plea for open borders.

The show gives American viewers a solid, up close experience of how easily U.S. immigration policy (and its blunt enforcement) can tear apart a good, law-abiding family.

They broke the law by entering the country illegally, a point the critic clearly ignores.

The WaPo critic also contends the show isnt overly political and then quotes the family saying the immigration officials dont care who we are.

Nothing political or incendiary there. Never mind that these officials are just doing their jobs and enforcing the law.

Lippmans podcast interview eventually gives away the game.

She admits to wanting the shows audience to care so deeply for the family in question that they reconsider their views on immigration

If you embrace the family, maybe thats a path to understanding the political situation from a different perspective, she says.

A version of this article is also published on HollywoodInToto.com.

Excerpt from:
'Party Of Five' Relaunch Fueled By Trump Derangement Syndrome - The Daily Wire

Adjudged marketing innovator by Time magazine and business innovator by BusinessWeek, Rishad Tobaccowala, chief growth officer at Publicis Groupe, has written his first book, Restoring The Soul Of Business: Staying Human In The Age Of Data. Published by Harper Collins, it will be released in the US on 28 January. In New Delhi for its India launch, the Chicago-based advertising veteran spoke about the inspiration behind the book, the importance of balance between creativity and data, and the decline in advertising. Edited excerpts from an interview:

What inspired you to write this book?

There were two reasons. One was external demand, and the other was the internal belief that there was a right time to write it. As I went around the world either helping clients or speaking at various events, people were surprised that I had never written a book. I was told I had an interesting perspective on various topics. They wanted me to share it more broadly. Also, whether it was in the US, Europe, India or China, people were asking me the same 12 questions such as how do you extract meaning from data? How do you upgrade your mental operating system? Or, how do you manage change?

That was the external reason. The internal reason was, because of the rise of technology and data, a great amount of wealth was being created by companies like Facebook, Amazon and Apple, among others. But more companies were focusing on the left brain part of work, on math. The focus was on what I call the spreadsheet (profit, losses, productivity), and not enough on the story of the company which is the culture, emotion and its people. Because of this, the business was getting hurt. The society was getting hurt. Today, social media companies are highly profitable. From a consumer perspective they are giving great products for free. But for a citizen, there is a negative impact.

Their platforms are feeding polarization and hate. Also, when you start focusing on the numbers, you become very short-term oriented. A consulting firm got into trouble as people said they represented drug companies and were helping them sell addictive drugs. So people asked, where are the ethics and the values of a company? So I said that the soul of the business is the story and not just the spreadsheet. A successful company has to combine data, technology and emotion.

Would you say that data has helped build companies like Amazon and Facebook?

The success of many of these companies has been built on three big factors: First, they were innovators and pioneers. These were ideas-driven companies and not data-driven companies. The iPod was an idea. iPhone was an idea. Social network in Facebook was an idea. Second, their business models were built on a combination of data and networks. So they use data and, once they have a certain amount of scale, its very hard to beat them. If you go for search and you keep going to Google, Google has more information, and it can search better. If all your friends are on Facebook, WhatsApp or Instagram, what are you going to do anywhere else? Thats called the network effect. Third, not Apple, but all the other companies are giving really amazing value for money. Google is free. Facebook is free. Amazon gives low prices and a lot of bundling. Consumers want things fast, good and cheap. These are innovative companies with ideas, that is, the right brain. Then they have data and networks, that is, the left. So they are not just data-driven companies. That is what I am trying to remind people.

Can you go wrong with data?

You can go very wrong. Although you cannot run a business without it, there are a lot of questions that data cannot answer about the culture of your company, what your talent feels about the company, or what your customers feel about the company.

So data can lead you to the wrong conclusions if it is outdated. Or, people sometimes dont behave the way data tells you that they behave. People choose with their heart and then use numbers to justify what they just did. If we did not choose with our hearts and we chose only with the numbers, then there would be no luxury brands, which are some of the most powerful companies. If only the numerics work, then there should be no Taj or Oberoi. No BMWs or Mercedes. When people tell me its all data, I say most decisions are made through the heart.

Are companies relying less on market visits for insights and more on online data?

They are doing both. The ability to listen to consumers has changed dramatically. In the past, you could carry out a few market visits, (analyse) a few focus groups. Now you have the ability to look at peoples social and search behaviour, and begin to get interesting information which you didnt have before. I have invested in an interesting company called QualSights. They do qualitative at scale. They basically tell people to put on the video on their phone while they shop. They collect thousands of videos all over the world, and then use AI and data to show patterns. Now you can do this globally, quickly, in peoples homes and other places because of technology.

How has the consumer changed in the age of social media?

On the positive side, they are connected with more people than they have ever been before. It might be a light form of connection. I remain connected to my class of 1974 because we have a Whats-App group. I can reach out to colleagues all over the world.

The semi-good part is, we start curating our lives. Sometimes we start thinking of what we do not because of what we want to do but because of how it will look on social media. For instance, in the US a lot of people are now renting clothes because they dont want to be seen in the same clothes on Instagram. So you have businesses like Rent the Runway (a subscription fashion service for women to rent designer clothes) come up.

The bad side is that you live in that world and forget the world you are currently living in. Often people around a table are all looking at their phones. The good part of social media is you get connected, the semi-good part is you curate your life, the bad part is you lose focus, connection and relationships.

How will things change for companies with data privacy becoming a big issue globally?

Privacy will be a huge issue and it will, at some stage, be settled by the government. Its very hard today to be anonymous. But different governments have different perspectives on this. The Chinese government doesnt care about privacy. They are using a lot of facial recognition and trying to track everybody. In Germany they are very privacy oriented. So the way data is controlled will differ from country to country.

You once mentioned that advertising will decline. What will replace it?

I was referring to the US market. Markets like India and others are still healthy for both print and TV. In the US, the opportunity to advertise to people will decline 20-25% in the next five years which is pretty significant. Many newspapers in America have gone out of business. Even for a big newspaper like New York Times, there are more online readers than there are for its print edition. In a newspaper format, everyone will see all your ads. In the digital format there are few opportunities to show people ads. You cant show too many ads digitally because people will get worked up. They dont click on them, they stop going to the site or use ad blockers. Also, now more and more people are spending time in an ad-free environment like Netflix, HBO and Amazon Prime. So the opportunity to show ads has declined significantly.

Besides, who are you exposing your ad to? If you are relatively wealthy you can afford all these subscription services. If you are less wealthy and cant afford these services, then you are also not in the market for some products. If you are selling a car or a travel holiday, then these are not the people who can afford that. So the people I want to advertise for are not available. India may be different now, but it is moving in that direction.

The future is not just about advertising but connecting in new ways with people. So our focus is on marketing transformation and business transformation, which is why we bought companies like Epsilon (a first-party data company) and Sapient which is about digital and technology.

See original here:
The soul of a business is the story, not the spreadsheets: Rishad Tobaccowala - Livemint