“Marriage strategies shifting - Bangor Daily News” plus 4 more |
- Marriage strategies shifting - Bangor Daily News
- Nuclear Power Expansion in China Stirs Concerns - New York Times
- Quotable quotes from Chinese VP's visit to Japan - Investors Business Daily
- YouTube Keeps Video Makers Rolling in Dough - First Coast News
- Dexter Damned (Caution Spoilers!) - Salon
| Marriage strategies shifting - Bangor Daily News Posted: 15 Dec 2009 07:29 PM PST WASHINGTON — History repeats itself. That old maxim is a favorite of those who advocate same-sex marriage in Maine. One month after the passage of a ballot question vetoing the state's 5-month-old same-sex marriage law, activists are beginning to look at what went wrong in a battle that seemed won before any votes were cast and are searching for new tactics for the next round of the fight. Grasping for a new plan of action for Maine and the rest of the country, proponents of same-sex marriage take comfort in history. Betsy Smith, executive director for Equality Maine, an advocacy organization, is one of those who believes in the power and patterns of history. Just as legal bans on interracial marriage were overturned decades ago, and just as religious prohibitions or restrictions on interfaith marriage have weakened over the years, so, she said, will bans on same-sex marriage eventually fall away. "Over a period of time, I think that it is inevitable," Smith said. "I think our country will evolve in its opinion on same-sex couples. I think this goes historically the same way as the ban on interracial marriage or the marriage between faiths. I don't know the timing, but yes, we will be a country, not too many decades from now, that will not deny unions for same-sex couples." On Tuesday, the Washington, D.C., City Council voted to legalize gay marriage in the nation's capital, handing supporters a victory after a string of recent defeats in Maine, New York and New Jersey. Currently, only four states offer marriage licenses for same-sex couples (a fifth, New Hampshire, will do the same on Jan. 1), and a handful more offer some form of spousal benefits to same-sex couples. Twenty-nine states have constitutional amendments restricting marriage to one man and one woman, and 11 more states have laws that define marriage the same way. Sarah Warbelow, the state legislative director for the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights national advocacy group, said she thinks that the battle for marriage will eventually move out of the state arena and into the national spotlight. "One of two things has to happen," Warbelow said. "At some point there aren't going to be any more state courts that are going to interpret their state constitutions to protect same-sex couples, and we're going to run out of states that will pass it legislatively, whether that's because they have a state defense-of-marriage law or they don't feel it's popular enough. "So we're going to stall. When that happens, the federal courts are going to have to be the ones to say that marriage is accessible nationwide — or the federal government is." Both Smith and Warbelow said that they see an inevitable victory for equal rights, probably by way of a majority of states authorizing same-sex marriages, and the Supreme Court ruling that the remaining states must follow suit, the same way that the civil rights movement achieved victory. The gay rights movement, Warbelow said, is actually just the next step in the civil rights movement that began in the 1960s. "Civil rights is a set of legal rights, and we are fighting for civil rights," she said. "It could be a long road, we hope it's a shorter one, and part of what we're hoping to do is to make people understand that the rights we are talking about are real," Warbelow said. "There are very real benefits to getting married." Mark Brewer, an associate professor of political science at the University of Maine, said that the momentum of the battle for gay and lesbian rights has slowed in the wake of the vote on what was popularly known as Question 1. "I think if you would have asked a lot of people whether or not same-sex marriage was inevitable a month ago, I think the answer from most of them would have been yes, and that they saw that momentum headed in that direction," Brewer said. "Now, I don't know. The playing field has changed here over the last four weeks. If I had to go out on a limb, I'd say it probably still is inevitable, but I'm not nearly as certain of that as I was a month ago. "It may take longer at this point, and the venue may change." That venue change is the one that same-sex marriage supporters see: from the states to the federal government. Marc Mutty, who chaired the Stand for Marriage Maine anti-marriage-equality campaign to repeal the state same-sex marriage law, said he doesn't expect the issue to go away anytime soon. "They have vowed that they would be back, and they'd be back as soon as they could," Mutty said of proponents of same-sex marriage. "Equality Maine and their partners have already made it crystal clear this is not the end and they will be back, using all resources they have to forge ahead." Mutty said he's not looking forward to the hard work he sees ahead in defending his camp's November victory while still fatigued from the months of campaigning. "I'm concerned that we'll be dealing with this again, since we've dealt with it so recently," he said. "Even the thought of having to go through this intense legislative battle is certainly not something I look forward to." Despite predictions from activists that same-sex marriage will eventually become a federal issue, Maine's senators don't see it that way. The last time a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage came to the Senate, in the form of the June 2006 Federal Marriage Amendment (also called the Marriage Protection Amendment), Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both Republicans of Maine, voted against forcing a vote. The cloture motion fell short of the required 60 votes. Even though both have been praised by the Human Rights Campaign for their voting records on gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues, neither Collins nor Snowe sees marriage as a federal issue, representatives of the senators said. "I would say that Sen. Collins believes that this issue is best handled at the state level since states have historically had responsibility for defining domestic relationships," Collins' spokesman said. Snowe's spokeswoman pointed out that in 1996 Snowe voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman for federal purposes. Under that law, "it is left to individual states through the legislature or referenda to make their own determinations on this very personal issue," Snowe's spokeswoman said. "Sen. Snowe's position has not changed." Brewer said that in the aftermath of the November vote, both sides of the debate have yet to remobilize and begin campaigning again, to either protest or uphold the veto. "If you are an opponent of same-sex marriage, then you're probably feeling pretty good," he said. "If you're a proponent of same-sex marriage, you're kind of wondering what's going to happen here. I don't think anyone's close to answering that." Smith said that there is no master plan or next step for her organization yet, but that they will continue the individual outreach and conversations that she hopes will make an impression on Maine's voters. "We are educating an entire country, entire culture and entire society," she said. "It takes a while, but that education is happening right now." Whatever the momentum, Brewer, Mutty, Smith and Warbelow all agreed that a change of some sort is coming. Mutty said that polls aren't always linear in predicting voting behaviors, and that attitudes can change. "We've certainly seen a movement in society in this direction [of support for same-sex marriage] that's undeniable," he said. "There's been no question that there's an increase in acceptance. There's speculation that as the older generation dies out, it'll be more acceptable, because old people are less receptive to change than young people." Here is where the decades of uphill struggle that Smith and Warbelow have predicted come in. "The caveat to that," Mutty said, "is that those young people grow up to be old people, so that theory may not hold true in the end."
fivefilters.org featured article: Normalising the crime of the century by John Pilger. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. |
| Nuclear Power Expansion in China Stirs Concerns - New York Times Posted: 15 Dec 2009 07:08 PM PST Sorry, readability was unable to parse this page for content. fivefilters.org featured article: Normalising the crime of the century by John Pilger. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. |
| Quotable quotes from Chinese VP's visit to Japan - Investors Business Daily Posted: 15 Dec 2009 07:08 PM PST Quotable quotes from Chinese VP's visit to JapanBEIJING, Dec 15, 2009 (Xinhua via COMTEX) -- Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping had met with Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama, Emperor Akihito, its Diet leaders, political party chiefs and representatives of China-Japan friendship groups after arriving on Monday in Tokyo for a visit. Following are quotable quotes of Xi in the trip: DURING TALKS WITH PRIME MINISTER YUKIO HATOYAMA "The Chinese government and Chinese leaders attach great importance to China-Japan relations and the purpose of my visit is to further improve the strategic and mutually beneficial relationship." WHEN MEETING EMPEROR AKIHITO "I hope my visit will contribute to the development of friendly cooperation between the two countries and boost the friendship between the two peoples." ON PARLIAMENTARY EXCHANGES "The friendliness and amicability between the peoples of the two countries are vital to a healthy bilateral ties." "The Diet members have important influence on the public. We hope you can help to create a good public opinion environment for the development of bilateral relations." ON SHANGHAI EXPO. "We would like to invite more Japanese friends to the event, and are ready to work together with people from all walks of life in Japan to make full use of the Expo as an opportunity to advance bilateral cultural and human exchanges to a new height." Copyright 2009 XINHUA NEWS AGENCY fivefilters.org featured article: Normalising the crime of the century by John Pilger. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. |
| YouTube Keeps Video Makers Rolling in Dough - First Coast News Posted: 15 Dec 2009 07:22 PM PST LOS ANGELES, Calif. -- If it's Wednesday, it's production day for Shane Dawson. Dawson makes a living producing videos, mostly spoofs of pop culture, that run on YouTube, the Web's most popular online video service. He lives on his split of the advertising revenue. (YouTube won't say how much it gives out.) On Monday, he writes the script. Tuesday and Wednesday are for props and production. On Thursday, he edits. And on Friday, he promotes, tweeting heavily on Twitter and getting the word out through Facebook, MySpace and YouTube e-mail blasts. The new video makes its debut every Saturday at 8 a.m. It's a rigorous schedule. But with the monthly check that YouTube deposits in his account, he gets to work for himself, set his own hours and live in a two-bedroom home in North Hollywood with a spacious backyard and pool. "Thank you, YouTube," said Dawson, 21. Dawson, who has more than 1.4 million subscribers to his two YouTube channels, is one of what YouTube says is "thousands" in its Partner Program, set up to financially entice its most popular producers to keep the pipeline full. While music videos from record labels are consistently the most-viewed videos on YouTube, Dawson and others' homegrown fare are the most-subscribed-to YouTube channels. This means they attract regular, consistent views. "A band won't offer a new video every new week, but the partners will," said James McQuivey, an analyst at Forrester Research. "The channels are a great way for YouTube to create a regular viewing pattern." Despite its position as the dominant home for online video, with more than 100 million viewers monthly, YouTube has yet to turn a profit for Google, which paid $1.65 billion for it in 2006. But Google says YouTube will soon be profitable and that the huge audiences attracted by its independent producers will help it get there. You, too, could make a living producing videos for YouTube, but you'd need to devote massive hours (figure about 75 hours a week) making videos and spreading the word. You must stay in constant contact with the community, via the comments left on your work. And once you finish the video, you'll need to top it with another. And another. And another. "You're only as good as your last video," says McQuivey. "But in the traditional TV world, you produce a pilot, wait to sell the show and then premiere nearly a year later. In the YouTube model, you make a video, post it and hear back from your audience immediately. You get instant feedback. For a producer, that's got to be addictive." BETTER THAN DOING A PART-TIME JOB Dawson won't talk money, but Cory Williams, who produces videos for YouTube on his SMP Films channel, says he sees about $8,000 monthly from YouTube. Justine Ezarik, whose iJustine channel is also popular, says she averages about $75,000 annually. Ryan Higa, whose YouTube channel is the most-subscribed-to on the service, recently called the pay "better than a part-time job." Tom Pickett, YouTube's director of online sales, says YouTube has thousands of partners, many earning "six figures" yearly. "We don't have anybody making a million yet, but the curve continues to grow," he says. "We hope to get there." YouTube attracted 126 million viewers in October and showed 10.5 billion videos, according to measurement service ComScore Media Metrix. (NBC, Disney and Fox's Hulu had 42 million viewers and showed 855 million videos.) Most of YouTube's material comes from its viewers - 20 hours of footage every minute of the day. But YouTube doesn't run ads on submitted videos unless they're from YouTube partners. Beyond producers such as Dawson and Ezarik, YouTube has many big-name music labels and TV producers that provide professional content in exchange for a split of ad revenue. The smaller, independent partners tend to produce topical content, usually parodies of current events or trends. Ezarik makes fun of constant Twitter updates in Statusfaction, set to the Rolling Stones' Satisfaction. Dawson dons multiple wigs to play all or most of the characters in parodies of TV shows Sex and the City, Degrassi High or America's Next Top Model. While the content can often be edgy and unsuitable for prime time, many of the videos attract prime-time-size audiences. Dawson's videos have been viewed more than 150 million times across YouTube. His spoof of the movie Twilight pulled in 5 million views. Ezarik has nearly 300,000 subscribers. Her videos have been viewed more than 64 million times. About 4.8 million viewers tuned in for her take-off of the Black Eyed Peas song I Gotta Feeling. Sponsors on videos of the most-viewed YouTube partners include Disney, eBay, Kodak, Puma, Activision and Samsung. Advertisers have been wary of appearing next to amateur-produced funny animal and kid videos or bawdy teen content. But with partner-produced content, "There's a great comfort level," says Rob Davis, interactive marketing director for ad agency Ogilvy. "The people in the program are a known commodity, and since they're in it to make money, the chances of them doing something non-advertiser-friendly is less." Additionally, the videos pull in those huge audiences. "Advertisers like to fish where the fish are," Davis says. Still, the contributors aren't without controversy. A year ago, Dawson was working in sales for weight-loss company Jenny Craig and made a video on company property that he posted on YouTube. His employers deemed it inappropriate and fired him. A Jenny Craig spokesperson confirmed this. (YouTube has since deleted the video.) With no luck finding a new job, Dawson focused on YouTube videos and trying to get into the Partner Program. Once he was accepted, the checks began arriving. He says he realized that "if I really put a lot of time into this, and build an audience, I could probably actually make a living." MORE TRAFFIC ON YOUTUBE But now she's turned her attention to YouTube, because she gets so much more traffic there. "This is where everyone goes," she says. "It's the biggest audience." She has nearly a million followers on Twitter and 500,000 fans on Facebook. But that doesn't garner checks - YouTube does. Recently, Ezarik parlayed her YouTube notoriety into TV gigs. She had a bit part on a recent Law & Order episode and got hired by MTV and Dick Clark Productions to host online preshows for awards broadcasts. "I work 60 hours a week on videos," she says. "Once I start, I don't go to sleep until I finish, but I love what I do. I have no complaints." Despite the influx of YouTube cash, many of the partners produce their work with off-the-shelf, low-priced consumer video tools. Higa uses a $200 Flip video camera for his videos, while Ezarik opts for a $400 Canon PowerShot point-and-shoot camera set to video mode. "It works," she says. "And it's a lot easier than using a video camera." Dawson works with an $800 Canon video camera from a room with a painted green wall, which he uses as his "green screen," a special-effects tool for superimposing different backgrounds. For her green screen, Ezarik bought a $12 green rug from Ikea and puts it up whenever she's ready to make videos. Both Ezarik and Dawson do all their videos themselves, playing camera operator, lighting director, sound engineer, performer and video editor. Ezarik's big expense: wardrobe changes. "If I wear the same thing three times in a row, people start complaining," she says. McQuivey says the partners are smart to work on low budgets. Video hams such as Dawson and Ezarik should save their money now and invest well, because their shelf lives, like one-hit rock bands, could be short-lived, he says. "This is an ideal job for a certain kind of narcissist at a certain point in their life," he says. "It's like being the most popular kid in high school. It looks like fun, but you have to work the crowd, be seen with the right people, innovate in how you're dressed. This is a grueling, emotionally difficult thing to do, and it won't last forever." ©2009 USA Today. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, rewritten, or redistributed.fivefilters.org featured article: Normalising the crime of the century by John Pilger. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. |
| Dexter Damned (Caution Spoilers!) - Salon Posted: 15 Dec 2009 07:08 PM PST Two days have passed since the "Dexter" season finale and I can't shake my despair about the ending. Poor Dexter, I've been thinking . . . as images of the beautiful dead Rita, afloat in crimson, flash before my eyes. Poor, poor Dexter I say to whoever will listen . . . the inside of my head burning with the memory of his baby's terrified howls; the metalic stench of Rita's pooling blood assaulting my senses. Today at lunch with my friend, June, our conversation naturally turned to "Dexter." She was shaken by the ending, too. We discussed Dexter as if he were a shared patient: his dark passenger's "birth in blood;" his relentless struggle to connect to humans, to feel emotion; and the question of whether Dexter is a sociopath or something else--something completely other. Other won out. My sister asked me yesterday if real sociopaths think like Dexter. No, they don't. Nobody thinks like Dexter. Part of what makes Dexter so compelling is his almost unremarkable otherness. Culture's typical others--i.e., vampires, werewolves, terminators, X-men and such--are so obviously different. Although Dexter hides his strangeness as best he can, we viewers recognize him as something more than a mere human. He is a monster with a heart-- a little like Angel, the vampire with a soul. He is an Avenging Angel--like Castiel, or even the Winchester boys, in Supernatural. He is a Champion--like Batman--whose motives and methods exceed the limitations of human law and convention, yet for this we don't really judge him. We love him. If Dexter were a textbook sociopath who just happened to have a penchant for killing killers we coudn't identify with him or seek to protect him as we do. If he were a guiltless, heartless, self-entitled master of manipulation, we'd feel glee instead of sorrow when his world implodes. We cherish Dexter as a subversive superhero because he does what each of us has probably wanted to do more than once: damn the despicable and garrote the guilty. Dexter does what we cannot -- and he does it fearlessly, all the while keeping on eye on his incorruptibly precious code. For this, viewers need to see him rewarded, and this past Sunday, especially, we needed to see some sign that his happy-ever-after was near. What we saw instead was the inevitable consequence of "Dexter's" Season Four renewal--a shattering endgame in which all that was good in Dexter's life was snatched away, leaving him gutted and forlorn. Put another way, we saw the producers set Dexter up for whatever misery and mayhem awaits him--and us--next year. We really shouldn't have been so surprised. Hardcore episodic TV viewers know that the trick to ramping up dramatic tension is to make situations worse; to confine the protagonist in progressively smaller, more suffocating boxes, close the lid on the last one, and then bash it in with a hammer. The writers did precisely that in Sunday's show. They paid the hefty cost of admission to a fourth season by dragging their lead character and his fans through the darkest dimensions of hell. One can only hope that they will eventually drag us back.
fivefilters.org featured article: Normalising the crime of the century by John Pilger. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from cultural - Bing News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 comments:
Post a Comment