“In an emotional briefing after the end of the euro zone leaders’ summit here in Brussels, which started approximately at 0500 CET, Greek prime minister George Papandreou took a minute to thank his advisors and made the extraordinary revelation that one of them had suffered a heart attack, but was ‘doing fine,’ while another had suffered a collapse because of high blood pressure.”—
“No one, least of all me, is suggesting that running a newspaper company is a piece of cake. But the people in the industry who are content to slide people out of the back of the truck until it runs out of gas not only don’t deserve tens of millions in bonuses, they don’t deserve jobs.”—
David Carr gives media execs who lay off workers while lavishing bonuses on themselves the SMACKDOWN. Worth a read. (via cmonstah)
This is a really important point that doesn’t get made enough: A lot of big media’s wounds are self-inflicted. To take an example from one truck that ran out of gas, the total compensation for the top 15 people (combined business and editorial) at Newsweek in 2009 (the year it lost $30 million) was more than the entire budget for the Newsweek.com Website.
Unfortunately, the law does not require an evaluation of the claim by an impartial third judge - the opinion of the person allegedly injured is all that is required, in order to impose such correction to any website.
Hence, anyone who feels offended by any content published on a blog, an online newspaper and, most likely, even on Wikipedia can directly request to publish a “corrected” version, aimed to contradict and disprove the allegedly harmful contents, regardless of the truthfulness of the information deemed as offensive, and its sources…
…The obligation to publish on our site the correction as is, provided by the named paragraph 29, without even the right to discuss and verify the claim, is an unacceptable restriction of the freedom and independence of Wikipedia, to the point of distorting the principles on which the Free Encyclopedia is based and this would bring to a paralysis of the “horizontal” method of access and editing, putting - in fact - an end to its existence as we have known until today.
“If the world were merely seductive, that would be easy. If it were merely challenging, that would be no problem. But I arise in the morning torn between a desire to improve (or save) the world and a desire to enjoy (or savor) the world. This makes it hard to plan the day.”—E.B. White (via adamwestbrook)
Fixing global poverty, with less than $100 billion
I’d love to think global poverty could be fixed so easily. The numbers in this article, however, don’t seem to quite add up. How can $1.25 20 years ago still be equivalent to $1.25 today? If that amount allows for an incorrect definition of absolute poverty today, the whole theory falls apart.
Laurence Chandy and Geoffrey Gertz at the Brookings Institution estimate there were around 1.8 billion people worldwide living on less than $1.25 a day in the early 1990s; the figure dropped to 1.3 billion people in 2005 and further to 900 million in 2010. Chandy and Gertz suggest that if we could accurately and directly supplement the income of each poor person in the world to bring his or her daily income up to $1.25, it would have cost $96 billion in 2005. But by 2010, as the number of poor people fell, that cost had dropped to $66 billion. This is something close to an aid official’s dream: a foreign assistance program that actually gets cheaper every year.
Catching up on all the news I missed over the last few days. But can’t say I regret my weekend in any way. Sun, sand, stand-up paddle board surfing and skateboarding. That’s right, I can now (sort of, in a very slow kind of way) ride a skateboard. And in reference to the paddle boarding, I only fell off 4 times. RECORD.
“I want movement, not a calm course of existence. I want excitement and danger and the chance to sacrifice myself for my love. I feel in myself a superabundance of energy which finds no outlet in our quiet life.”—Leo Tolstoy (via newyorkisajungle)