Mediaboss Marketing

The magazine feared no subject under Sperling. Its coverage included an array of contentious topics like shoreline development and climate change.

Natasha Kassulke succeeded Sperling. Lost in the transition was the magazine's license to cover all things water and earth.

DNR Secretary Cathy Stepp often meddled. Under Walker's handpicked cabinet member an article about the state's endangered pine martens was killed. In 2015, a story on climate change and its impact on Wisconsin animals was kiboshed.

A search of the magazine's archives shows there hasn't been a story regarding climate change or global warming in the past three years.

Walker now wants to kill the publication once and for all.

His recently submitted budget has it ceasing publication in 2018. Cost savings of $300,000 annually and allowing the DNR to better focus on managing natural resources have been Walker's justifications for the move.

Since the magazine pays for operations and staff through subscriptions, some Badger State residents say Walker's logic is bunk. Anti-environmental politics is the culprit behind scotching the journal, they counter.

Kassulke worked at the magazine for about 15 years. She stepped down as editor last summer.

"When Walker's administration came in," she says, "I was required to show all stories, all text, all photos to the entire department leadership team for review. And through that process, I have several stories that were either edited [down], changed, or at times even killed."

In February, Kassulke's story about feedlots and drinking water was supposed to be included in a magazine insert. It still hasn't been published.

"My gut tells me [halting the magazine] is part of a continuing agenda to create a vacuum and black out information on very important environmental issues and an anti-science agenda," she says.

DNR spokesperson Jim Dick has repeatedly denied editorial content played a role in the decision.

Original post:
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker goes from censorship to killing state nature magazine - City Pages

Legislative History

America has a long and dialectical history when it comes to gun rights. The Second Amendment to the Constitution pronounces, A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Held as a protective measure against tyranny, the right to own guns was enshrined in the Constitution after the American Revolution. As guns and society have evolved over the last two hundred years, however, the United States has had to adapt its treatment of firearms. The early 20th century saw a rise in gun crime, with mob violence and tommy guns bringing firearms to national attention. To combat this rising crime wave, Franklin Delano Roosevelt enacted the first restrictive federal gun legislation in 1934, establishing machine gun taxes and beginning the first registry of sales. After a slew of high-profile assassinations in the 1960s, such as the Kennedy brothers deaths and the murder of Martin Luther King Jr., Lyndon B. Johnson pursued enhanced gun control legislation. His Gun Control Act of 1968 was the foremost federal firearm regulation of its time, placing ownership restrictions on convicted criminals, mentally ill individuals, and more.

Each step forward in gun control legislation tends to produce retaliatory pushback. Congress reacted to Johnsons restraints in the 1980s, enacting legislation to limit the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms powers. However, tighter restrictions on machine guns were also passed at that time, which remain in effect to this day. The 1990s brought renewed action on restricting access. Although barred from creating a federal registry of ownership, The Brady Act of 1993 established the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NCIS) to help prevent unlawful sales. Shortly thereafter, Congress passed a 10-year federal ban on semi-automatic weapons. Yet, by the early 2000s, restrictions on federal gun sale data were passed and efforts to reauthorize the semi-automatic ban failed. Gun manufacturers were also granted immunity from civil lawsuits on gun crime, and in 2008 District of Columbia vs. Heller ruled that individuals can own guns for personal use. The Supreme Court upheld this ruling for state and local jurisdictions as well, overturning several city-wide handgun bans. Today, gun laws range from state to state, while meaningful federal action has failed to respond to a growing number of mass shootings.

Gun Violence in the United States

On average, the United States experiences about 33,000 gun deaths per year, approximately 12,000 of which are homicides. Over 50% of these homicides are young men, two thirds of whom are black. Of particular interest when it comes to media coverage, however, are mass shootings. In 2016 alone, there were 385[1] total mass shootings, defined here as four or more people shot in a single event. Furthermore, the number of mass shootings in America has risen significantly in recent years; between 1982 and 2012, the country experienced fewer than 200 reported mass shootings. To put this in context, the United States has about 5% of the worlds population, but represents 31% of all mass shootings between 2000 and 2012. The United States also has the highest rate of gun ownership per capita, with about 89 firearms per 100 people. Clearly, the United States has a problem, a problem that is linked to its widespread availability of guns, as well as a myriad of cultural and political factors.

High profile mass shootings have dominated news coverage in recent years. The Sandy Hook massacre is particularly important to more recent debates on gun control, when outrage sparked after twenty children and six adults were murdered in 2012. The San Bernardino shooting, during which two shooters killed fourteen people in 2015, recently brought gun control back into the national eye after the Sandy Hook killings. The 2016 Orlando shooting, when a gunman murdered forty-nine people at Pulse nightclub, remains the deadliest shooting to date. These murders, along with hundreds of other mass shootings, necessitate a national debate on rights and safety.

The Gun Control Debate

Currently, the American gun control dispute is polarized, and tends to separate along party lines. Gun control advocates point to the statistics, arguing that too many Americans are killed each year in gun-related incidents, and restricting access to firearms could reduce these numbers. The central argument states that the average person should not be able to use semi-automatic or assault weapons, and sensible restrictions can save lives. Most gun control advocates are not aiming to take away everyones guns, especially not from law abiding citizens, but aspire to create a more efficient system to keep guns out of dangerous hands. The data to support the efficacy of these policies is inconclusive, however.

On the other hand, opponents of gun control argue that firearm ownership is a matter of individual freedom. Pointing to the Second Amendment, they assert that individual rights to bear arms are protected by the Constitution, and more recently by Supreme Court legislation. An armed population is safer from crime and victimization, and armed citizens can even stop a mass shooter, they argue. Similarly, data on whether or not guns make the population safer from attack, or help prevent mass shootings, is incomplete. One reason there is so much uncertainty around the efficacy of gun control legislation is that Congress has essentially banned gun research by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention by prohibiting studies that could promote gun control, and refusing to appropriate funds even after President Obamas executive order for gun research.

Public opinion is generally split between the two camps. Pew Research Center finds that the gap between supporting gun control versus gun ownership, historically favoring control by wider margins, has converged. As of August 2016, 52% of the American public now supports gun rights over control, versus 46% supporting control. However, measures like background checks and expanded restrictions for people already on federal watch lists enjoy broader public support, while the American people remain divided when it comes to banning specific weapons and munitions.

Overall, Americas relationship with firearms is complicated, with a long history of changing public opinion and dialectic legislative controls. However, high numbers of gun deaths and rising incidents of mass shootings necessitate a more immediate conversation and a closer look at how we treat firearm.

[1] This number is debated according to different definitions of mass shooting. Mass Shooting Tracker puts this number at 476 mass shootings and 604 dead in 2016, using a slightly more inclusive definition of a single outburst of violence in which four or more people are shot.

Read more from the original source:
Georgetown Public Policy Review / The American Media's Impact on ... - Georgetown Public Policy Review

Thu, Feb 16, 2017, 18:03 Updated: Fri, Feb 17, 2017, 07:26

US president Donald Trump speaks during a news conference at the White House in Washington, DC. Photograph: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

US president Donald Trump confirmed his intention to unveil new measures on immigration next week, as he lashed out at the out of control media in an impromptu press conference at the White House.

In a rambling address that lasted more than one hour and fifteen minutes, Mr Trump jumped from topic to topic, criticising a number of media channels for their low audience ratings and highlighting his victory in the election.

Noting that 80 per cent of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decisions are overturned, Mr Trump criticised last weeks decision by an appeals court to uphold a temporary ban on his executive order restricting travel into the US from seven Muslim-majority nations and suspending the USs refugee resettlement programme.

He pledged to announce a new order which would be very much tailored to what I consider to be a very bad decision.

The press conference, which was scheduled an hour in advance, was ostensibly organised to announce Mr Trumps new nominee for US labour secretary, R Alexander Acosta, following Andrew Puzders withdrawal from the nomination process on Wednesday.

However, Mr Trump, who appeared on his own without press advisers or officials, used the opportunity to lambast the media several times, singling out the failing New York Times in particular for criticism.

He said that he had inherited a mess at the White House and accused the media of carrying biased stories about his presidency, arguing that no one believes the media anymore.

I turn on the TV, open the newspapers and I see stories of chaos - chaos, he said.

Yet it is the exact opposite. This administration is running like a fine-tuned machine, despite the fact that I cant get my cabinet approved.

The press has become so dishonest that if we dont talk about it we are doing a tremendous disservice to the American people, he said, adding: The press are out of control. The level of dishonesty is out of control.

Mr Trump, who took questions from numerous reporters, denied claims that he has close ties to Russia, saying: I have nothing to do with Russia.

Asked if members of his administration had frequent contact with Russian intelligence officials, as claimed in media reports earlier this week, Mr Trump replied: Nobody that I know of.

He also repeated his belief that former national security adviser Michael Flynn, whom he fired on Monday night, was a fine man, clarifying that he had dismissed Mr Flynn because he had misrepresented his conversation with the Russian ambassador to vice-president Mike Pence.

The press conference came as restaurants and other businesses across the US shut their doors and thousands of demonstrators took to the streets in its cities in a walkout aimed at protesting Mr Trumps immigration policies.

Activists called on immigrants to stay home from work, avoid shopping and skip classes in A Day Without Immigrants, in an effort to highlight the vital role they play in American society.

Nominee heckled

Earlier, Mr Trumps nominee to become the next US ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, was heckled in the Senate during his confirmation hearing.

Mr Freidman, the son of an Orthodox Rabbi who is in favour of Israeli settlements, apologised for his previous incendiary comments, including his criticism of liberal American Jews. Five former US ambassadors to Israel have written to the Senate urging senators to reject Mr Trumps nominee, saying that he holds extreme, radical positions on issues such as Jewish settlements and the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Nonetheless, Mr Friedman is expected to be passed in the Senate, where Republicans have a majority.

As controversy continued over the Trump administrations links with Russia, US defence secretary James Mattis appeared to play down any suggestion of closer military ties between Washington and Moscow following a meeting at Nato headquarters in Brussels.

We are not in a position right now to collaborate on a military level. But our political leaders will engage and try to find common ground, he said.

He also said he accepted that Russia had interfered in democratic elections.

Asked about Russian interference in the US presidential elections, Mr Mattis said: Right now, I would just say theres very little doubt that they have either interfered or they have attempted to interfere in a number of elections in the democracies.

Additional reporting: Reuters

Visit link:
Trump attacks 'out of control' media in rambling address - Irish Times

Taking inspiration from a popular baby name of recent times, New Generation Homes has dubbed one of its latest displays The Atticus, a moniker matching the homes individual style.

With a vision to create a 12.5m-wide design that doesnt compromise on space, New Generation Homes has well and truly knocked this project out of the park with clever design and functional zoning.

Sales Manager Chris Hopkin said the home fulfilled the brief with a dedicated indoor and outdoor entertaining wing, plus separate retreats for the parents and children.

Its certainly a home that your future self will thank you for, he said. The Atticus maximises well-defined living areas without sacrificing space.

We wanted to create a social home for people who love to entertain, yet still have an opportunity to completely unwind.

Making a strong statement from the street, the home offers a clean, sophisticated exterior that can appeal to buyers with astute tastes.

The large front window on the master suite provides light and design flair, Mr Hopkin said. The PrimeLine cladding above and under the window adds a subtle industrial touch and the contrasting render completes what is a very striking design statement from the street.

The parents retreat is welcoming and opens up immediately off the entry.

It is one of the biggest spaces we have in our range with a dedicated sitting area near the front window, large master suite, his and hers walk-in robes and an indulgent ensuite, Mr Hopkins said. Plus it offers all the privacy away from the childrens wing at the rear of the home plus the main entertainment zones.

With the potential to double as an activity zone, a home theatre sits opposite the kitchen and adds yet another social space to the homes wonderful interior. Couple that with a feature bar in the kitchen, and there is no shortage of prestige and functionality. The Atticus makes for a food lovers heaven and leaves no room for disappointment, with a uniquely shaped and superbly executed kitchen.

The C shape makes it a room in its own right, but we have cleverly flipped the design so that it overlooks the living, dining and alfresco areas meaning that it is a very social hub too, Mr Hopkins said.

Storage space is also maximised here with full height pantries framing the fridge/ freezer recess and additional storage in the bar.

It is framed nicely with a new feature in our range a bar with built-in wine rack and cabinetry for extra storage. The bar is Essastone with waterfall edges to the top, back and sides, meaning it looks seamless and adds a sense of class to an already refined design.

This home is open Mondays 2-5pm, Wednesdays 3-5pm, Saturdays and public holidays 1-5pm and Sundays 12-5pm.

Original post:
Social networking - The West Australian

Human survival has witnessed humongous technological advancement. Three decades ago, we communicated with our colleagues and family through postcards and letters. But then, our way of communication changed from letters to emails through the .

Since the advent of internet, our lives have become more fascinating and compelling than earlier. Internet made everything effortless, whether it be our studies or something else that is difficult to find in books. Through social networking, our ties with our next of kin have become much more intense than they used to be.

Some social networking sites were founded on the mechanism they would connect people staying far away or travelling around the globe. Through these sites,people could be in touch with each other irrespective of the time and place. However, as everything else, social networking also has a negative and positive aspect. Despiteuplifting the standard of living of people, it has started , tumultuously plundering our lives. This could also be true that social networking has had more negative effects than positive.

To make it easier to understand, let take the example of the most popular social networking websites i.e., Facebook, Instagram and SnapChat.

With the advent of the Facebook, the youth that is supposed to be the power of any nation, is now much more interested in gossip and late night conversation on Facebook rather then on physically meeting colleagues and friends. They spend hours and hours on chatting. They have lost their ability to utilise their energy in pursuing their career. A small faction of the youth actually knows the relevance of social networking websites but a large portion is unable to figure out whenthey are being arising from the virtual world.

They put their heads into the number oflikes and followers than about the issues trending on the websites and they believe their fabricated lives more and more. This mess has got students nurtured over years, addicted to it. They waste their potential while they scroll down their Facebook newsfeed and on it.

For more efficient means of enjoyment and amusement, they are interested in possessing electronic gadgets, spending thousands of rupees on iPads, laptops and smartphones.

We cannot ignore the truth, for whosoever has tasted its pseudo-pleasure, Facebook has retained the possession over their minds. Every second person in this world is addicted to it. As soon as the day begins, what every person on Facebook does is to check other peoples status messages and see if anyone new has started following them. Research says that the addiction to social media is higher than the level of addiction to cigarettes and alcohol. Meanwhile, some conspiracy theories claim it to be a Zionist plot and the conspiracy of the corporate world. Usually every person finds their bliss on Facebook. The following limits are sky-rocketing on a day to day basis. Facebook is the largest social network in the world with 1.86 billion active users in which 1.15 billion are the mobile daily active users.

Followed by Facebook, Instagram has a fine position in the social media market. Those who tired of Facebook, shifted their stands to Instagram. This site has various modifications like sharing photos i.e., posting your photos and following other people while having followers of your own. More importantly, it has one remarkable feature that Facebook doesnt provide, no one can download any photo from anywhere. With this change, one feels their private space more protected than that on Facebook. However, this doesnt affect Facebooks market because the users previously only on Facebook now have an additional account on Instagram. So from now, the hours dedicated to social media in an individuals life increase since, instead of maintaining one account, they now maintain two.

This legacy has been carried forward by SnapChat, taking up the remaining space left for the victims me time. Snapchat has secured its importance in the heart of social media victims in such a way that people have difficulty in quitting social networks because of FOMO (fear of missing out). I was appalled when I observed that snap chat is emphatically used for the sake of . This is a matter of concern as I have talked about only three prominent social media networking sites.We cannot anticipate the amount of addiction for the rest of other like Whatsapp, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, Tumblr and Telegram.

When technology didnt have deep roots, we were fascinated about it and now when it is rooted in our very minds we find ourselves in quandary with regards to our bliss and happiness. When the Internet was in afostering stage we found pleasure in it, but now that it has been nurtured completely we are trying to get away from it, finding escape somewhere in nature for peace and harmony in our lives. It has made anxiety a way of life for civilians.

No one can be left out from this drift because almost everyone has joined at least one of the social networks. It is time that we take a break from all the mess and chaos and ask ourselves, what are we trying to get from this intangible virtual world? Why we are wasting our precious life in ? Is it really worth it to continue doing whatever we have been doing since a long period of time? Shouldnt we only limit ourselves to enjoying social media rather than be a addicted to it ?

Before raising our voices against atomic bombs, we should understand what really is a weapon of mass destruction.

__

Visit link:
How Social Media Is Making People Less Social - Youth Ki Awaaz