« May 2004 | Main | July 2004 »
Thanks for having me on your blog David! Wanted to add a note about this brilliant film I saw last night at the Human Rights Watch Film Festival Closing Night. Identity imposters, The Yes Men take over www.gatt.org and get invited to conferences as official reps from the WTO... the rest is stunning commentary about the state of the world; our relationship to authority, econmics, and justice; and just how gullible people with advanced degrees are.
Some of you have probably already seen this. Concert promoter, Democratic activist and the guy behind the Personal Democracy Forum, Andrew Rasiej has put Giants Stadium on hold for September 1 (the same day Bush will be nominated at the RNC), hoping Bruce will get on board and agree to sing. So far, the Boss is sticking to his guns and saying he won't, but Andrew is hoping this petition will change his mind.
Thanks for that post David - no interruption at all.
Sorry to interrupt Anna, but I have to post this update from the New York Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty:
The New York State Court of Appeals has overturned the death sentence of Stephen LaValle because of an unconstitutional provision in the statute and in the process has emptied New York's Death Row and has put a stop to efforts to seek the death penalty in pending cases. In the process, the Court has invalidated the state's death penalty.The State Legislature will obviously be asked to rewrite the law so that the death penalty can be implemented in New York State. The revised law could turn out to be much, much worse.
Newsday is conducting an e-poll asking whether there should or should not be a death penalty in New York. Please vote at www.newsday.com.
NYADP has prepared an op ed piece that we hope will appear in tomorrow's Newsday. Please consider writing a letter to the editor of any newspaper you read. NYADP is formulating a legislative strategy. We will keep you posted.
Stay tuned for further news.
Moratorium Now!!!!!!
This is the time.
There's also news in the New York Times.
Take a look at Drive-Thru Barbie...
I'm posting a long-winded, hot-headed letter I just wrote and emailed to some elected officials here about a stadium development project proposed for a few blocks away from my Brooklyn apartment (it seems much longer in this blog than it did on paper). Last weekend, the organizers of "develop don't destroy-brooklyn" hosted a community block party and rally in protest of the development. I just got an email saying that the City Council will vote on Monday. See more here. As I say below in the letter, this whole thing -- claiming eminent domain to push people out of their homes, claiming stadium development brings job growth and economic booms -- has been proven wrong time and time again in cities across the country. Plus, on a very personal note, I love my neighborhood and don't want to see it bulldozed over by developers who don't ensure affordable housing or equal opportunity employment who create more breeding grounds for McDonalds.
The Letter:
To Whom it May Concern:
I came home to my Ft. Greene apartment last week to discover the full-color promotional brochure for the “Atlantic Yards” – the name for the new stadium-and-condo complex planned for my neighborhood.
With its full-color spread of smiling faces and laundry list of benefits of the development, it was still just high-priced propaganda. With its tear-out reply card, it was also a bald-faced bribe to get the community “show” its support: Everyone who checked “Yes, I support the Atlantic Yards!” and sent it in was promised free tickets to a basketball game in the proposed new stadium.
What the fancy brochure failed to mention are the dozens of legitimate concerns that citizen groups have voiced about the development through the organizing work of “Develop Don’t Destroy-Brooklyn.”
The fancy brochure failed to mention how these concerns have been silenced by developers. (The one community meeting I tried to attend was canceled without warning, and community members at the recent public forum had to wait five hours to testify, by which point most of the daily media had already left to begin filing their stories).
In cities across the country, we’ve seen the same process unfold: Rich investors and gung-ho developers promise the world in exchange for stadium development – jobs, tax revenue, family entertainment. The stadiums are built. The jobs are fewer than expected, the tax revenue less than predicted, the benefits of entertainment overshadowed by congestion, traffic, noise, and crowds. In Pittsburgh, Seattle, San Francisco, Atlanta, we’ve seen it all before. The verdict on stadium development is in: Stadiums never bring all the benefits developers promise. Why, then, should hundreds of million of public dollars go to this project? Why, then, should hundreds of families lose their homes? Why should our elected officials, those who are supposed to represent the interests of the majority of the community, bow to the demands of high-rolling developers?
One of the defining characteristics of our neighborhood (Ft. Greene and Prospect Heights) is the local, small businesses that make up the commercial real estate here. By bringing in multinational franchises such as Red Lobster, KFC, and McDonalds, the proposed plan would fundamentally change the nature of the neighborhood.
Economists and urban planners have proven the strongest urban economies are localized ones, where dollars circulate within communities. With the influx of these mega-chains we will not only lose local flavor, we will lose our strong, localized economy.
Traffic, already at extraordinarily high levels (haven’t we all been stuck in stop-and-go Flatbush traffic at 3 in the afternoon, 3 in the morning, and every hour in between?), will be worsened by the presence of more than 15,000 visitors on game nights and thousands more in the stadium, condos, and mall slated for development.
Air quality will further be affected by increased congestion and development.
Cultural traditions, on which this borough was built, will be eviscerated with the imposition of high-rises in place of Brownstones and sports bars in the place of corner stores.
It would be a travesty to the cultural legacy and the economic health of this incredible borough – not to mention the democratic process – for Bruce Ratner’s Atlantic Yards plan to be approved.
As a resident of this community, I strongly oppose the plan, as do hundreds of my other like-minded neighbors.
Sincerely,
Anna Lappé
Ft. Greene, Brooklyn
Woke up this morning to this little piece of news: In the fuzzy-logic land of the USDA, French fries are now considered fresh vegetables. Read on... who even knew that there was a Frozen Potato Products Institute?
"The Frozen Potato Products Institute appealed to the USDA in 2000 to change its definition of fresh produce... to include batter-coated, frozen french fries, arguing that rolling potato slices in a starch coating, frying them and freezing them is the equivalent of waxing a cucumber or sweetening a strawberry. The USDA agreed and, on June 2, 2003, the agency amended its [Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act] rules to include what is described in court documents as the "Batter-Coating Rule."
From the South Florida Sun-Sentinel
So for the chapter I'm working on I just trolled through some USDA figures and learned that last year we exported 2.5 billion pounds of beef (officially it's: "beef and veal, measured in carcass weight"), which is about 10 percent of our total production. But get this, we also imported 3 billion pounds of beef the same year. Just a little fact from an international food system that spends more money moving things around than paying farmers and farm workers fair wages. A food system in which you can find yourself in Wisconsin near some of the best dairy farms in the country but not find any local cheese, or live in New York City near some of the best apple orchards and only find Fujis from New Zealand. Now, post-espresso, post-post, I'm back to work.
Just got this news alert from the folks at the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine: Turns out USDA is partnering with Nabisco, McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Taco Bell, and other companies in their fight against obesity. Call me crazy, but aren't those the guys who are making us fat in the first place?
Here's a little piece from the PCRM's latest action alert - trying to get USDA to end its partnership with Nabisco: "the USDA is currently partnering with Nabisco to push kids to eat more Oreos and Chips Ahoy cookies and to drink more milk. The recently completed “Dunk and Win” cookie contest, which awarded $1 million to the holder of a “special Oreo cookie” that, when dunked, turned milk blue, was touted by the dairy industry as “the most successful retail milk promotion ever conducted under the check-off program.”
Apparently this program was so successful, the USDA plans to launch another: "Spell M-I-L-K with specially marked Oreo cookies and win $100,000. A third milk-and-cookies sweepstakes—this one aimed at school children—is set to kick off in August." You can ask the USDA to get real here.
In the same vein as my previous post (about the corporate slam on the Super Size Me director) I thought I'd give a shout-out for a new film that helps us understand that wacky modern-day invention: the corporation.
Appropriately called "The Corporation," the Canadian documentary has been getting lots of buzz since its big splash at Sundance earlier this year. From its website: “The film is a timely, critical inquiry that invites CEOs, whistle-blowers, brokers, gurus, spies, players, pawns and pundits on a graphic and engaging quest to reveal the corporation’s inner workings, curious history, controversial impacts and possible futures.”
Our friend Jane Akre -- who, along with her journalist husband Steve Wilson, felt the corporate pinch (so to speak) when they dared to report on questions about rBGH growth hormone in dairy cows -- writes to us: “You may recall my run in with Fox. It is in the film among many stories of corporate greed run amuck. Many compelling characters, among them Michael Moore, corporate insiders, a couple of CEO's, marketing professionals who brag how you are manipulated...It is very important for our times.” (See the film to learn how her story ends.)
As far as I'm concerned, any film that casts Noam Chomsky and Milton Friedman, has got to be interesting.
For those of you in NYC, it opens at the Film Forum on June 30th, with the filmmakers at the 6pm show. Or check out www.thecorporation.tv for screenings across the country. If your local independent isn’t showing it, don’t hesitate to ask them. They are always open to audience requests.
... okay, now back to work ...
David asked me to spend a week posting to his blog. It seemed a dangerous new form of procrastination for me as I try to finish helping my mother work on the first draft of a remake of her awkwardly titled (but of course brilliant!) 1994 book, The Quickening of America. (She didn't get my reference to Highlander, which up until then had been the only time I'd heard the word quickening before. We're still working on a new title.)
I was just perusing what has been posted recently and thought I'd jump into the Super Size Me fray with a link to this industry-funded slam-Spurlock site. You know you're making an impact when you've got industry PR flacks on your back.
Please welcome guest author Anna Lappé from the Small Planet Institute and the new web site Eat Grub, about food and social justice. She's also the author of the highly recommended Hope's Edge: The Next Diet for a Small Planet. Hello, Anna!
After many weeks of silence, McDonald's is fighting back. The fast-food company will this week embark on a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign to counter the documentary film Super Size Me.
"Val Morgan is asking exhibitors whether they'd be prepared for a one-off fee of AUS$200 ($137) to allow McDonald's to distribute apples to patrons exiting the film as part of the campaign." "I believe McDonald's has spent about AUS$2 million (US$1.4 million) on this national television advertising campaign, which is appreciated," Macki added. "It brings attention to the film from an audience that would probably otherwise never have heard of it."
Posting from Switzerland on his blog, Morgan Spurlock links to the Australian coverage of the McCampaign and talks about his interview with The McDonald's Australia CEO:
"When I was on a radio interview with him in Australia (I think it was B 105 in Brisbane) - he said, and I'm paraphrasing, that Super Size Me is great because it has started a dialogue that needs to be happening. Funny that he's now going to start attacking the movie. ALSO - be sure to track down the Australian copy of Newsweek that features the interview with Guy Russo in it where he says he thinks that "McDonald's and society contributed to obesity." Something you won't hear any CEOs in America saying ..."
It would be cool to track down an audio recording of that interview. Here's the Guy Russo Newsweek interview, and check out the redesign McDonald's Australia home page. The power of documentary film — Morgan Spurlock forced Mickey D's Australian operation to reprogram their entire web site to respond to his film. I wonder if a Guy Russo blog wouldn't be a more efficient way to communicate with customers.
Rather than continue punishing Darius McCollum for his fanatical interest in trains (news article, June 15), why not make use of it?
Finally, a voice of sanity in the coverage of this case. Unfortunately, I'm not sure our criminal justice system would allow such a creative solution.
Related: Boy Steals Train, play about Darius and a longer profile and history of Darius from Harper's magazine.
In the spirit of the Creative Commons license, Jason Kottke read the text of Cory Doctorow's recent DRM conversation into his Powerbook. Let the remixes begin!
I've been pretty fired up about the proposed Red Hook in IKEA.
Ikea And Red Hook's Racial Divide:
"I have to laugh at the groups who say Ikea is splitting the neighborhood," says Judith T. Dailey, a long-time resident of Red Hook in Brooklyn. "The fact is Red Hook has always been split..."The longstanding divide that Judith Dailey alludes to is between residents of Red Hook Houses, a public housing project where about 70 percent of the neighborhood population lives, and homeowners in "The Back." But this division is more than just about turf. The majority of people in Red Hook Houses are people of color, and the most vocal residents of "The Back" seem to be white. Only the public ethic of color blindness allows everyone to politely forget the mention of race as a factor in this division.
"The public ethic of color blindness"? I know of no such thing. It's complicated, but the sides boil down to environmentalists and newer white residents who are against the IKEA and the traffic it would bring, and the more senior residents of color who have been assured first crack at the 600 jobs an IKEA might create.
But the Gotham Gazzette notes that "there's nothing in writing to guarantee local jobs" and in another article quotes Representative Charles Barron:
"There's a difference between economic development and economic exploitation," he continues. "When you give a corporation a tax break to hire us on a minimum wage basis, that's straight up exploitation."
Skyscraper City offers illustrations of one alternative proposal, and "extended urban village."
And Mayor Mike? He's been on the record as tepidly favoring the IKEA: Asked whether a box store was the best use for Brooklyn’s waterfront, Bloomberg said, “There’s no perfect place to site anything.” I predict that the dollars and new jobs involved will win out. From the Brooklyn Rail:
It is not hard to figure out why Ikea is willing to go through so much red tape to operate in Red Hook. Pat Smith says that while opening a new store there is one of the greatest challenges Ikea has yet faced, the fight is well worth it, since management expects the Red Hook location to generate more sales than any other store in the U.S.
I'm only a half way through Mind Wide Open, by Steven Johnson, but I'm already willing to recommend this book to all of my friends, and beyond that anyone who's day to day life involves relationships or critical thinking. In the first chapter, Johnson writes:
The more you understand the brain in light of modern science, the more you realize that the isolated traits you posess aren't really isolated — the brain is full of zero-sum games, where one talent prospers at the expense of another. Sometimes those balancing acts involve related skills; sometimes the connection is more obscure.
I think about this all the time. I spent many hours during the summer of '97 playing Quake. A few things happened as a result - one is that I became scared to turn sharp corners in real life without peeking ("lookahead" in Quake lingo) first, and sounds or visual patterns that were familiar in the game were slightly unsettling. To make matters worse, I was living in an huge off campus dorm straight out of a haunted house movie (indeed, we had Bats in the attic). I now know that this was a natural tension between my brain's amygdala and neocortex. Also that summer, I became a better programmer, forged strong friendships, and generally relaxed more than I have since.
So when the BBC reported that Taxi drivers in London have unusually large brains, I didn't doubt it for a second. Since then, I have been searching for a mental exercise routine to keep me fresh. Johnson visits a few companies developing "neurofeedback" video games to encourage concentration, and I'd be interested in trying them out. He envisions a future in opposition to William Gibson's - instead of a future of over-stimulated citizens living everywhere but nowhere, Johnson suggests that video games that encourage attention could become a "... Walkman for the early 21st century. A Walkman that makes you faster, sharper, more in control. Assuming of course that faster, sharper, more in control is what you want." Quite frankly, this sounds boring to me, I love my morning espresso. Ironically, he cites mentral control of Quake as an example of what brain outputs currently are not capable of.
My first college counselor, who had been one auto-assigned to me by the Oberlin computers, recommended that I go into neuroscience since I had a few credits to burn. She pitched it to me as a mix between Biology and Computer Science, a field that was going absolutely to boom as dramatically as the technology industry had. I quickly dropped her for a CS professor, but now I think maybe she was onto something.
I'm can't vouch for Steven Johnson's understanding of the scientific principles he describes, since I have no one to compare him with. I'm also wary of positing the responsibility of human instincts down into individual sections of the brain - behavior modification surgery (neo-Operation Ivy) can only be so far behind. I'd also like to read an Animal Rights' activists critique of the brain surgery done on rats - surely this is not as conclusive as Johnson makes it out to be.
I wish I knew more about the science behind the brain, and Mind Wide Open seems like a good gateway into this field of study. I'm so happy this book is good, I really hated the last book I read and I had to get that awful taste out of my head -the same thing happens to me with films and issues of The New Yorker. At least now I have a little more insight as to why.
People ask me what I do all the time, and I'm never able to give a good answer. Shira's most recent article documenting the process that goes into launching our yearly Media That Matters Film Festival explains it much better than I ever have.
Recent Comments