INSIDE HIGHER EDUCATION - May 28, 2014
By Anonymous
This is a story about race and gender in the academic job market.
Before I begin I should probably explain that I went on the market as
an associate professor. Why did I do this to myself? Briefly, my family
and I live very far from our relatives. Also, I am currently the
lowest-paid tenure-track faculty member in my department and was told by
the man paid to manage me that if I wanted a raise I would probably
need to get a new job or at least an offer that might prompt a
counteroffer.
So I went on the job market and was lucky enough to score a campus
interview for an assistant professor position at an liberal arts college
in an ideal location. Let's just call this place Rich Liberal Arts
College (RLAC). If I got a job at RLAC my family and I would be very
close to our relatives. We’d be very close to several major cultural
centers where my daughters and I could go to museums and see concerts
and shows on a regular basis. And, most promising, this entry-level
position would pay me over $10,000 more per year than I am currently
making in my tenured position (plus more after tenure).
READ MORE.....
Wednesday, May 28, 2014
China sentences 55 people in mass Xinjiang trial
BBC - MAY 28, 2014
The defendants, who appeared to be from the region's Muslim Uighur
community, were presented to a stadium holding about 7,000 spectators.
Three of the prisoners were sentenced to death.
Chinese officials have blamed militant Uighur groups for a growing number of violent attacks across the country.
Photos from the open-air trial showed police trucks parked near a running track. Prisoners wearing orange vests stood in the back of the vehicles, surrounded by armed guards, their heads bowed.
READ MORE....
Three of the prisoners were sentenced to death.
Chinese officials have blamed militant Uighur groups for a growing number of violent attacks across the country.
Photos from the open-air trial showed police trucks parked near a running track. Prisoners wearing orange vests stood in the back of the vehicles, surrounded by armed guards, their heads bowed.
READ MORE....
Maya Angelou, Lyrical Witness of the Jim Crow South, Dies at 86
By MARGALIT FOX
The New York Times - MAY 28, 2014
Maya Angelou, the memoirist and poet whose landmark book of 1969, “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings” — which describes in lyrical, unsparing prose her childhood in the Jim Crow South — was among the first autobiographies by a 20th-century black woman to reach a wide general readership, died on Wednesday in her home. She was 86 and lived in Winston-Salem, N.C.
Her death was confirmed by her longtime literary agent, Helen Brann. No immediate cause of death had been determined, but Ms. Brann said Ms. Angelou had been in frail health for some time and had had heart problems.
As well known as she was for her memoirs, which eventually filled six volumes, Ms. Angelou very likely received her widest exposure on a chilly January day in 1993, when she delivered the inaugural poem, “On the Pulse of Morning,” at the swearing-in of Bill Clinton, the nation’s 42nd president, who, like Ms. Angelou, had grown up poor in rural Arkansas.
READ MORE...
The New York Times - MAY 28, 2014
Maya Angelou, the memoirist and poet whose landmark book of 1969, “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings” — which describes in lyrical, unsparing prose her childhood in the Jim Crow South — was among the first autobiographies by a 20th-century black woman to reach a wide general readership, died on Wednesday in her home. She was 86 and lived in Winston-Salem, N.C.
Her death was confirmed by her longtime literary agent, Helen Brann. No immediate cause of death had been determined, but Ms. Brann said Ms. Angelou had been in frail health for some time and had had heart problems.
As well known as she was for her memoirs, which eventually filled six volumes, Ms. Angelou very likely received her widest exposure on a chilly January day in 1993, when she delivered the inaugural poem, “On the Pulse of Morning,” at the swearing-in of Bill Clinton, the nation’s 42nd president, who, like Ms. Angelou, had grown up poor in rural Arkansas.
READ MORE...
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
Violence against women is Europe’s secret shame
By Serena Kutchinsky
Prospect - March 21, 2014
Does gender equality trigger gender violence? A controversial new report suggests that certain EU nations might be experiencing a backlash
What is gender violence? When does aggressive behaviour become unacceptable? Is it when a door slams in someone’s face; a push turns into a shove; a gesture spirals into a slap; banter becomes abuse; “no” is taken to mean “yes”? On paper we know the answers but in reality the distinctions are still deeply blurred. The question played on my mind earlier this month as I sat in the sterile surrounds of the European Parliament in Brussels, listening to new research which exposes the shocking scale of gender violence in modern Europe. Compiled by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), who interviewed 42,000 women from 28 member states, it revealed that one in three women has been either physically or sexually abused (8 per cent in the last 12 months). I have always believed that the closer we come to a gender equal society, the less gender violence there will naturally be. The coverage of this emotive issue in the western media confirms this view—it is typecast as endemic to other parts of the world. We hear much of the traumas of women in conflict-ravaged countries such as Syria, Afghanistan and Sudan, but there appears to almost be a vow of silence in reporting cases closer to home. This report shatters those cosy preconceptions about our supposedly civilised society, revealing for the first time the scale of this human rights abuse across Europe and highlighting the fact that it typically goes unreported and undetected by the authorities.
READ MORE....
Prospect - March 21, 2014
Does gender equality trigger gender violence? A controversial new report suggests that certain EU nations might be experiencing a backlash
What is gender violence? When does aggressive behaviour become unacceptable? Is it when a door slams in someone’s face; a push turns into a shove; a gesture spirals into a slap; banter becomes abuse; “no” is taken to mean “yes”? On paper we know the answers but in reality the distinctions are still deeply blurred. The question played on my mind earlier this month as I sat in the sterile surrounds of the European Parliament in Brussels, listening to new research which exposes the shocking scale of gender violence in modern Europe. Compiled by the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), who interviewed 42,000 women from 28 member states, it revealed that one in three women has been either physically or sexually abused (8 per cent in the last 12 months). I have always believed that the closer we come to a gender equal society, the less gender violence there will naturally be. The coverage of this emotive issue in the western media confirms this view—it is typecast as endemic to other parts of the world. We hear much of the traumas of women in conflict-ravaged countries such as Syria, Afghanistan and Sudan, but there appears to almost be a vow of silence in reporting cases closer to home. This report shatters those cosy preconceptions about our supposedly civilised society, revealing for the first time the scale of this human rights abuse across Europe and highlighting the fact that it typically goes unreported and undetected by the authorities.
READ MORE....
Monday, May 26, 2014
Are human rights activists today’s warmongers?
By Stephen Kinzer
The Boston Globe - May 25, 2014
Almost everyone likes the idea of human rights. The phrase itself is freighted with goodness. Supporting human rights is like supporting world peace.
The modern human rights movement began as a band of outsiders, fighting governments on behalf of the faceless and voiceless. President Jimmy Carter brought it into the American foreign policy establishment by naming an outspoken assistant secretary of state for human rights. This meant that concern for the poor, the brutalized, and the imprisoned would be heard in the highest councils of government.
Now, several decades after the human rights movement traded its outsider status for influence in Washington, it is clear that this has produced negative as well as positive results. The movement has become a global behemoth. Sometimes it functions as a handmaiden to the power it was once dedicated to combating.
The most appalling result of this process in the United States is that some human rights activists now regularly call for using force to resolve the world’s problems. At one time, “human rights” implied opposition to war. Now some of the most outspoken warmongers in Washington are self-proclaimed human rights advocates.
READ MORE....
The Boston Globe - May 25, 2014
Almost everyone likes the idea of human rights. The phrase itself is freighted with goodness. Supporting human rights is like supporting world peace.
The modern human rights movement began as a band of outsiders, fighting governments on behalf of the faceless and voiceless. President Jimmy Carter brought it into the American foreign policy establishment by naming an outspoken assistant secretary of state for human rights. This meant that concern for the poor, the brutalized, and the imprisoned would be heard in the highest councils of government.
Now, several decades after the human rights movement traded its outsider status for influence in Washington, it is clear that this has produced negative as well as positive results. The movement has become a global behemoth. Sometimes it functions as a handmaiden to the power it was once dedicated to combating.
The most appalling result of this process in the United States is that some human rights activists now regularly call for using force to resolve the world’s problems. At one time, “human rights” implied opposition to war. Now some of the most outspoken warmongers in Washington are self-proclaimed human rights advocates.
READ MORE....
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
New ITUC Global Rights Index - The world’s worst countries for workers
International Trade Union Confederation - 19 May 2014
A global leaderboard in the race to protect workers’ rights was released today at the ITUC World Congress in Berlin. The ITUC Global Rights Index ranks 139 countries against 97 internationally recognised indicators to assess where workers’ rights are best protected, in law and in practice.
“Countries such as Denmark and Uruguay led the way through their strong labour laws, but perhaps surprisingly, the likes of Greece, the United States and Hong Kong, lagged behind,” said ITUC general secretary Sharan Burrow. “A country’s level of development proved to be a poor indicator of whether it respected basic rights to bargain collectively, strike for decent conditions, or simply join a union at all.”
The International Trade Union Confederation has been collecting data on the abuse of trade union rights around the world for the past 30 years. Now for the first time the ITUC Global Rights Index presents carefully verified information from the last 12 months in an easy-to-use format so that every government and business can see how their laws and supply chains stack up.
Cambodia’s labour law fails to cover many civil servants, there are undue restrictions on the right to elect union representatives, and in 2013 the government responded with lethal force to demonstrators seeking a decent wage and working conditions. This resulted in Cambodia receiving a score of 5 in the Rights Index – the worst possible rating other than for those countries where the rule of law has completely broken down.
In the Middle East, Qatar is yet to allow unions at all for its many migrant workers, while in Latin America, Guatemala was one of the worst places to be a worker, with no guarantee of rights.
Key findings:
A global leaderboard in the race to protect workers’ rights was released today at the ITUC World Congress in Berlin. The ITUC Global Rights Index ranks 139 countries against 97 internationally recognised indicators to assess where workers’ rights are best protected, in law and in practice.
“Countries such as Denmark and Uruguay led the way through their strong labour laws, but perhaps surprisingly, the likes of Greece, the United States and Hong Kong, lagged behind,” said ITUC general secretary Sharan Burrow. “A country’s level of development proved to be a poor indicator of whether it respected basic rights to bargain collectively, strike for decent conditions, or simply join a union at all.”
The International Trade Union Confederation has been collecting data on the abuse of trade union rights around the world for the past 30 years. Now for the first time the ITUC Global Rights Index presents carefully verified information from the last 12 months in an easy-to-use format so that every government and business can see how their laws and supply chains stack up.
Cambodia’s labour law fails to cover many civil servants, there are undue restrictions on the right to elect union representatives, and in 2013 the government responded with lethal force to demonstrators seeking a decent wage and working conditions. This resulted in Cambodia receiving a score of 5 in the Rights Index – the worst possible rating other than for those countries where the rule of law has completely broken down.
In the Middle East, Qatar is yet to allow unions at all for its many migrant workers, while in Latin America, Guatemala was one of the worst places to be a worker, with no guarantee of rights.
Key findings:
- In the past year, governments of at least 35 countries have arrested or imprisoned workers as a tactic to resist demands for democratic rights, decent wages, safer working conditions and secure jobs.
- In at least 9 countries murder and disappearance of workers were commonly used to intimidate workers.
- Workers in at least 53 countries have been dismissed or suspended for attempting to negotiate better working conditions.
- Laws and practices in at least 87 countries exclude certain type of workers from the right to strike.
Monday, May 19, 2014
Living as Slaves: How the Poorest Nepali Workers Get Exploited in the Richest Arab Nation
By Sadichchha Pokharel
Truthout | Op-Ed - Monday, 19 May 2014
A 24-year-old Nepali man queues by the boarding gate at Tribhuvan International Airport in Kathmandu. Along with his 30 kg suitcase, he carries a much heavier load - a $1,700 loan to be paid back to the recruitment agency, pending school fees for his children, promised gold bangles for his wife and hospital expenses for his aging parents. Doha, Qatar, is going to be his big break, his chance to put an end to generations of poverty his family has endured. Or so he thinks. Soon, his hopes of realizing his dreams among the bright lights of the booming foreign city are going to be replaced by the dark image of reality - a dusty sheetless mattress in a stuffy overcrowded bedroom, a cockroach-infested kitchen without clean drinking water, long hours of unpaid work under a deadly 50-degree sun (122 degrees fahrenheit) and a life of slavery. But he doesn't know that yet. The agency did not tell him.
There are hundreds of others like him on the same queue, carrying identical baggage, shiny green passports in hand. Every year, a staggering 100,000 Nepali youth flock to Qatar in search of a better life in the Arab nation. Many of them are tricked by corrupt recruitment agencies that charge extremely high fees and make false promises of a better future for the workers and their families. In reality, most of these men and women are practically sold to a kafeel, a sponsor, under the traditional kafala system that binds workers to their employers. Their documents get confiscated; they do not receive their wages for months; they are not allowed to quit their jobs and are forced to live under appalling unhygienic conditions. If they so much as ask for their wages, they risk getting thrown into jail. Ultimately, these men and women end up being trapped in a life of slavery miles away from home, with no means of escape.
Read more....
Truthout | Op-Ed - Monday, 19 May 2014
A 24-year-old Nepali man queues by the boarding gate at Tribhuvan International Airport in Kathmandu. Along with his 30 kg suitcase, he carries a much heavier load - a $1,700 loan to be paid back to the recruitment agency, pending school fees for his children, promised gold bangles for his wife and hospital expenses for his aging parents. Doha, Qatar, is going to be his big break, his chance to put an end to generations of poverty his family has endured. Or so he thinks. Soon, his hopes of realizing his dreams among the bright lights of the booming foreign city are going to be replaced by the dark image of reality - a dusty sheetless mattress in a stuffy overcrowded bedroom, a cockroach-infested kitchen without clean drinking water, long hours of unpaid work under a deadly 50-degree sun (122 degrees fahrenheit) and a life of slavery. But he doesn't know that yet. The agency did not tell him.
There are hundreds of others like him on the same queue, carrying identical baggage, shiny green passports in hand. Every year, a staggering 100,000 Nepali youth flock to Qatar in search of a better life in the Arab nation. Many of them are tricked by corrupt recruitment agencies that charge extremely high fees and make false promises of a better future for the workers and their families. In reality, most of these men and women are practically sold to a kafeel, a sponsor, under the traditional kafala system that binds workers to their employers. Their documents get confiscated; they do not receive their wages for months; they are not allowed to quit their jobs and are forced to live under appalling unhygienic conditions. If they so much as ask for their wages, they risk getting thrown into jail. Ultimately, these men and women end up being trapped in a life of slavery miles away from home, with no means of escape.
Read more....
Study: Both Public, Police View Black Kids As Older, Less Innocent Than Whites
NewsOne - Mar 11, 2014
By Michael Arceneaux
If I were to tell anyone of color with a clue that White children are given the benefit of the doubt and Black kids are not, I imagine the response would be, “And water is wet.”
Indeed it is, but it’s always good to know something you know to be true anecdotally confirmed and conflated with analysis. According to new research published by the American Psychological Association, Black boys as young as 10 are proven to not be given the same presumption of childhood innocence as their White peers. Instead, they’re considered to be much older than what they are, perceived to be guilty, and face police violence if accused of a crime.
The study, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, sought to examine the extent to which the racial bias exists and how significant the consequences are. Speaking on the report, Phillip Atiba Goff, PhD, explained, “Children in most societies are considered to be in a distinct group with characteristics, such as innocence and the need for protection. Our research found that Black boys can be seen as responsible for their actions at an age when White boys still benefit from the assumption that children are essentially innocent.”
Read more....
By Michael Arceneaux
If I were to tell anyone of color with a clue that White children are given the benefit of the doubt and Black kids are not, I imagine the response would be, “And water is wet.”
Indeed it is, but it’s always good to know something you know to be true anecdotally confirmed and conflated with analysis. According to new research published by the American Psychological Association, Black boys as young as 10 are proven to not be given the same presumption of childhood innocence as their White peers. Instead, they’re considered to be much older than what they are, perceived to be guilty, and face police violence if accused of a crime.
The study, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, sought to examine the extent to which the racial bias exists and how significant the consequences are. Speaking on the report, Phillip Atiba Goff, PhD, explained, “Children in most societies are considered to be in a distinct group with characteristics, such as innocence and the need for protection. Our research found that Black boys can be seen as responsible for their actions at an age when White boys still benefit from the assumption that children are essentially innocent.”
Read more....
Sunday, May 18, 2014
Life and death as a female editor
After the departures of Jill Abramson from the New York Times and Natalie Nougayrède from Le Monde, Amanda Wilson – the only woman to lead the Sydney Morning Herald in its 180-year history – outlines the perils of editing while female.
By Amanda Wilson
theguardian.com, Sunday 18 May 2014
Media is a tough world. It’s tough on executives who work in it and manage the 24/7 demands of news. It is especially tough on women who want to work their way up the greasy pole of management.
Getting to the top, becoming the first female leader of a venerable news media institution, does not come with any soft landings. You have to be game to take it on, for all the personal flak that will come your way. And no one ever has to tell you to lean in, because there’s no other way to do it.
Women vacate the editor’s chair as unceremoniously as men. Two years ago at Fairfax I walked away from my job as editor of the Sydney Morning Herald – the first (and only) woman to have held the job in the paper's 180 years of continuous publication – at the same time the Herald’s publisher, Peter Fray, and the Age’s editor-in-chief, Paul Ramadge, departed. I had been editor for 18 months.
Sylvie Kauffmann, who was appointed editor-in-chief of Le Monde in 2011, a few days after I achieved my career milestone at the Herald, lasted just a year at the helm before stepping down. Last week Le Monde’s Natalie Nougayrède resigned after a power struggle with management just a year after the staff ballot that put her in the job.
Read more.....
By Amanda Wilson
theguardian.com, Sunday 18 May 2014
Media is a tough world. It’s tough on executives who work in it and manage the 24/7 demands of news. It is especially tough on women who want to work their way up the greasy pole of management.
Getting to the top, becoming the first female leader of a venerable news media institution, does not come with any soft landings. You have to be game to take it on, for all the personal flak that will come your way. And no one ever has to tell you to lean in, because there’s no other way to do it.
Women vacate the editor’s chair as unceremoniously as men. Two years ago at Fairfax I walked away from my job as editor of the Sydney Morning Herald – the first (and only) woman to have held the job in the paper's 180 years of continuous publication – at the same time the Herald’s publisher, Peter Fray, and the Age’s editor-in-chief, Paul Ramadge, departed. I had been editor for 18 months.
Sylvie Kauffmann, who was appointed editor-in-chief of Le Monde in 2011, a few days after I achieved my career milestone at the Herald, lasted just a year at the helm before stepping down. Last week Le Monde’s Natalie Nougayrède resigned after a power struggle with management just a year after the staff ballot that put her in the job.
Read more.....
"Pushy": As NY Times Fires 1st Woman Exec. Editor, Decades-Long Bid for Newsroom Equality Continues
Democracynow.org - May 16, 2014
We look at the firing of Jill Abramson, the first female executive editor of The New York Times in its 160-year history, who had reportedly complained about earning less pay than her male predecessors. This apparently amplified unattributed characterizations that Abramson’s management style was "brusque" and "pushy," which critics took issue with since similar behavior from men in similar roles is often accepted, and even encouraged. "Jill put many, many women in top positions and was a role model for the younger women and all women at The New York Times," says our guest Lynn Povich, who was the first female senior editor in Newsweek’s history. "We know how upset they are to see the way in which she was dismissed." Povich also discusses the status of women in the media, which she helped shape when she led a lawsuit in 1970 against Newsweek for hiring women only as researchers, and rarely promoting them to reporter or editor. Following a victory in the case, women working at Time, Reader’s Digest, The New York Times, NBC and the Associated Press also sued their employers. Povich recounts the story in her book, "The Good Girls Revolt: How the Women of Newsweek Sued Their Bosses and Changed the Workplace." Since leaving Newsweek in 1991, she has been editor-in-chief of Working Woman magazine and managing editor/senior executive producer for MSNBC.com.
We look at the firing of Jill Abramson, the first female executive editor of The New York Times in its 160-year history, who had reportedly complained about earning less pay than her male predecessors. This apparently amplified unattributed characterizations that Abramson’s management style was "brusque" and "pushy," which critics took issue with since similar behavior from men in similar roles is often accepted, and even encouraged. "Jill put many, many women in top positions and was a role model for the younger women and all women at The New York Times," says our guest Lynn Povich, who was the first female senior editor in Newsweek’s history. "We know how upset they are to see the way in which she was dismissed." Povich also discusses the status of women in the media, which she helped shape when she led a lawsuit in 1970 against Newsweek for hiring women only as researchers, and rarely promoting them to reporter or editor. Following a victory in the case, women working at Time, Reader’s Digest, The New York Times, NBC and the Associated Press also sued their employers. Povich recounts the story in her book, "The Good Girls Revolt: How the Women of Newsweek Sued Their Bosses and Changed the Workplace." Since leaving Newsweek in 1991, she has been editor-in-chief of Working Woman magazine and managing editor/senior executive producer for MSNBC.com.
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: We turn now to The New York Times's dismissal of its top editor, who was the first woman to hold that position in the newspaper's 160-year history. Executive Editor Jill Abramson was replaced Wednesday in a surprise move by publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr., just two-and-a-half years after her appointment. During her tenure, the Times won eight Pulitzer Prizes. She has been replaced by Managing Editor Dean Baquet, who became the first African American to take up the post. Both Abramson and the Times have signed non-disparagement agreements, and Sulzberger has insisted her firing was due to, quote, "an issue with management in the newsroom." Abramson reportedly had complained about earning less pay than her male predecessor, Bill Keller.
Read more....
8 Stories of Civilians Killed by U.S. Drone Strikes in Yemen
By Abubakr Al-Shamahi
Policymic - May 9, 2014
A drone was hovering overhead all morning. There were one or two of them. One of the missiles hit the car. The car was totally burned. Four other cars were also struck. When we stopped, we heard the drone fire. Blood was everywhere, and the people killed and injured were scattered everywhere," said Abdullah Muhammad al-Taysi in an interview with Democracy Now. What al-Taysi describes here is not a gruesome scene from a war zone — it is a wedding that took place in the Yemeni city of Rad'a, a happy celebration that turned bloody, thanks to a strike carried out by a drone operated by the U.S. military. The attack resulted in 12 deaths, including al-Taysi's son, Ali Abdullah Muhammad al-Taysi. He wasn't the first loved one to be killed by a drone strike, and he won't be the last. We don't know the exact number of civilians killed by missiles fired by drones, but up to 132 civilians may have been killed between 2002 and 2014. "It is a lot like playing a video game. But playing the video game for four years on the same level," said one former operator of Predator drones.
Read more....
Policymic - May 9, 2014
A drone was hovering overhead all morning. There were one or two of them. One of the missiles hit the car. The car was totally burned. Four other cars were also struck. When we stopped, we heard the drone fire. Blood was everywhere, and the people killed and injured were scattered everywhere," said Abdullah Muhammad al-Taysi in an interview with Democracy Now. What al-Taysi describes here is not a gruesome scene from a war zone — it is a wedding that took place in the Yemeni city of Rad'a, a happy celebration that turned bloody, thanks to a strike carried out by a drone operated by the U.S. military. The attack resulted in 12 deaths, including al-Taysi's son, Ali Abdullah Muhammad al-Taysi. He wasn't the first loved one to be killed by a drone strike, and he won't be the last. We don't know the exact number of civilians killed by missiles fired by drones, but up to 132 civilians may have been killed between 2002 and 2014. "It is a lot like playing a video game. But playing the video game for four years on the same level," said one former operator of Predator drones.
Read more....
Why Jill Abramson Was Fired
By Ken Auletta
The New Yorker - May 14, 2014
At the annual City University Journalism School dinner, on Monday, Dean Baquet, the managing editor of the New York Times, was seated with Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., the paper’s publisher. At the time, I did not give a moment’s thought to why Jill Abramson, the paper’s executive editor, was not at their table. Then, at 2:36 P.M. on Wednesday, an announcement from the Times hit my e-mail, saying that Baquet would replace Abramson, less than three years after she was appointed the first woman in the top job. Baquet will be the first African-American to lead the Times.
Fellow-journalists and others scrambled to find out what had happened. Sulzberger had fired Abramson, and he did not try to hide that. In a speech to the newsroom on Wednesday afternoon, he said, “I chose to appoint a new leader of our newsroom because I believe that new leadership will improve some aspects …” Abramson chose not to attend the announcement, and not to pretend that she had volunteered to step down.
As with any such upheaval, there’s a history behind it. Several weeks ago, I’m told, Abramson discovered that her pay and her pension benefits as both executive editor and, before that, as managing editor were considerably less than the pay and pension benefits of Bill Keller, the male editor whom she replaced in both jobs. “She confronted the top brass,” one close associate said, and this may have fed into the management’s narrative that she was “pushy,” a characterization that, for many, has an inescapably gendered aspect. Sulzberger is known to believe that the Times, as a financially beleaguered newspaper, needed to retreat on some of its generous pay and pension benefits; Abramson, who spent much of her career at the Wall Street Journal, had been at the Times for far fewer years than Keller, which accounted for some of the pension disparity. Eileen Murphy, a spokeswoman for the Times, said that Jill Abramson’s total compensation as executive editor “was directly comparable to Bill Keller’s”—though it was not actually the same. I was also told by another friend of Abramson’s that the pay gap with Keller was only closed after she complained. But, to women at an institution that was once sued by its female employees for discriminatory practices, the question brings up ugly memories. [Update: On Thursday, Sulzberger gave his staff a memo on what he said was “misinformation” on the pay question. “It is simply not true that Jill’s compensation was significantly less than her predecessors,” he wrote. “Her pay is comparable to that of earlier executive editors.”] Whether Abramson was right or wrong, both sides were left unhappy. A third associate told me, “She found out that a former deputy managing editor”—a man—“made more money than she did” while she was managing editor. [Update: The man in question, John Geddes, was in fact the managing editor of news operations.] “She had a lawyer make polite inquiries about the pay and pension disparities, which set them off.”
Read more...
The New Yorker - May 14, 2014
At the annual City University Journalism School dinner, on Monday, Dean Baquet, the managing editor of the New York Times, was seated with Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., the paper’s publisher. At the time, I did not give a moment’s thought to why Jill Abramson, the paper’s executive editor, was not at their table. Then, at 2:36 P.M. on Wednesday, an announcement from the Times hit my e-mail, saying that Baquet would replace Abramson, less than three years after she was appointed the first woman in the top job. Baquet will be the first African-American to lead the Times.
Fellow-journalists and others scrambled to find out what had happened. Sulzberger had fired Abramson, and he did not try to hide that. In a speech to the newsroom on Wednesday afternoon, he said, “I chose to appoint a new leader of our newsroom because I believe that new leadership will improve some aspects …” Abramson chose not to attend the announcement, and not to pretend that she had volunteered to step down.
As with any such upheaval, there’s a history behind it. Several weeks ago, I’m told, Abramson discovered that her pay and her pension benefits as both executive editor and, before that, as managing editor were considerably less than the pay and pension benefits of Bill Keller, the male editor whom she replaced in both jobs. “She confronted the top brass,” one close associate said, and this may have fed into the management’s narrative that she was “pushy,” a characterization that, for many, has an inescapably gendered aspect. Sulzberger is known to believe that the Times, as a financially beleaguered newspaper, needed to retreat on some of its generous pay and pension benefits; Abramson, who spent much of her career at the Wall Street Journal, had been at the Times for far fewer years than Keller, which accounted for some of the pension disparity. Eileen Murphy, a spokeswoman for the Times, said that Jill Abramson’s total compensation as executive editor “was directly comparable to Bill Keller’s”—though it was not actually the same. I was also told by another friend of Abramson’s that the pay gap with Keller was only closed after she complained. But, to women at an institution that was once sued by its female employees for discriminatory practices, the question brings up ugly memories. [Update: On Thursday, Sulzberger gave his staff a memo on what he said was “misinformation” on the pay question. “It is simply not true that Jill’s compensation was significantly less than her predecessors,” he wrote. “Her pay is comparable to that of earlier executive editors.”] Whether Abramson was right or wrong, both sides were left unhappy. A third associate told me, “She found out that a former deputy managing editor”—a man—“made more money than she did” while she was managing editor. [Update: The man in question, John Geddes, was in fact the managing editor of news operations.] “She had a lawyer make polite inquiries about the pay and pension disparities, which set them off.”
Read more...
Saturday, May 17, 2014
So you want to talk about racism
by Kai Cheng Thom
Visual by Alice Shen
The McGill Daily – January 9, 2014
To: Liberal White People
Everywhere, the World
Re: Talking about Racism and the Politics of Guilt and Love
“‘Those white things have taken all I had or dreamed,’ she said, ‘and broke my heartstrings too. There is no bad luck in the world but whitefolks.’” Toni Morrison, Beloved
Dear Well-Intentioned Liberal White People (WILWP),
So you want to talk about racism. Well, you should know: it’s going to hurt. To talk the truth about race and racism is a kind of surgery which cannot be anesthetized, sterilized, made painless and easy to consume. You need to feel something. Many things, actually: anger, sadness, fear, guilt, resentment, envy, despair – because that is what real relationships with real human beings are like, and I want you to experience me as a real human being. I don’t want to be a tool, a doll, a fetish, a caricature, a charity case, a monster, or a capital-E Expert in Interracial Politics anymore. You cannot really love any of those things. And I want you to love me; it’s what you taught me to want. I dare you to listen. I dare you to love me.
As a writer, performer, student, and community member engaged in critical dialogue on race and racism, there are certain questions that I am often asked by white people in my life: Why am I responsible for something that my ancestors did (i.e. colonization, slavery, forced migration, cultural genocide)? How long is long enough to feel guilty? If white people are always getting it wrong, why can’t you just tell me how to not be racist? If I don’t want to be an oppressor, what is my place in the struggle for racial liberation?
WILWP, here’s the thing: if you can’t figure it out on your own, I got nothin’. Over the years I have certainly learned a lot of academic theory, a lot of critical history, a lot of postmodern terminological jargon, and if pressed, I could formulate answers to these questions. I could talk about the ways in which the history of European colonization of Asia, the Americas, and Africa continue to shape the socioeconomic realities of the present. I could pull out Peggy McIntosh’s list of white privileges. I could refer you to pre-eminent critical race theorists, and I could cite statistics.
Read more..
Visual by Alice Shen
The McGill Daily – January 9, 2014
To: Liberal White People
Everywhere, the World
Re: Talking about Racism and the Politics of Guilt and Love
“‘Those white things have taken all I had or dreamed,’ she said, ‘and broke my heartstrings too. There is no bad luck in the world but whitefolks.’” Toni Morrison, Beloved
Dear Well-Intentioned Liberal White People (WILWP),
So you want to talk about racism. Well, you should know: it’s going to hurt. To talk the truth about race and racism is a kind of surgery which cannot be anesthetized, sterilized, made painless and easy to consume. You need to feel something. Many things, actually: anger, sadness, fear, guilt, resentment, envy, despair – because that is what real relationships with real human beings are like, and I want you to experience me as a real human being. I don’t want to be a tool, a doll, a fetish, a caricature, a charity case, a monster, or a capital-E Expert in Interracial Politics anymore. You cannot really love any of those things. And I want you to love me; it’s what you taught me to want. I dare you to listen. I dare you to love me.
As a writer, performer, student, and community member engaged in critical dialogue on race and racism, there are certain questions that I am often asked by white people in my life: Why am I responsible for something that my ancestors did (i.e. colonization, slavery, forced migration, cultural genocide)? How long is long enough to feel guilty? If white people are always getting it wrong, why can’t you just tell me how to not be racist? If I don’t want to be an oppressor, what is my place in the struggle for racial liberation?
WILWP, here’s the thing: if you can’t figure it out on your own, I got nothin’. Over the years I have certainly learned a lot of academic theory, a lot of critical history, a lot of postmodern terminological jargon, and if pressed, I could formulate answers to these questions. I could talk about the ways in which the history of European colonization of Asia, the Americas, and Africa continue to shape the socioeconomic realities of the present. I could pull out Peggy McIntosh’s list of white privileges. I could refer you to pre-eminent critical race theorists, and I could cite statistics.
Read more..
Thursday, May 15, 2014
American Citizens Fear Being Tortured By Their Own Government More Than Chinese Citizens
By Ben Mathis-Lilley
The Slate - May 14 2014
Amnesty International surveyed citizens of 21 nations to ask whether they feared they would be tortured if taken into custody in their home country—and found, among other results, that residents of the United States were more concerned about being tortured by their own government than residents of China. The breakdown by country, via Foreign Policy:
Read more....
The Slate - May 14 2014
Amnesty International surveyed citizens of 21 nations to ask whether they feared they would be tortured if taken into custody in their home country—and found, among other results, that residents of the United States were more concerned about being tortured by their own government than residents of China. The breakdown by country, via Foreign Policy:
More Than One Billion People 'Hold Anti-Semitic Views', Says ADL
The Huffington Post UK | 14/05/2014
By Jessica Elgot
One in four people worldwide hold anti-Jewish prejudice, and Europe has more people with anti-semitic views than Asia or Sub-Saharan Africa, new research has shown.
Researchers for the US-based Anti-Defamation League asked participants questions about 11 Jewish stereotypes - and found them to be anti-semitic if they found more than six of them to be true.
The UK has just 8% of people holding anti-semitic views, one of the world's lowest. But the lowest was in the south-east Asian country of Laos, where prejudice was expressed by just 0.2% of the population.
Read more......
By Jessica Elgot
One in four people worldwide hold anti-Jewish prejudice, and Europe has more people with anti-semitic views than Asia or Sub-Saharan Africa, new research has shown.
Researchers for the US-based Anti-Defamation League asked participants questions about 11 Jewish stereotypes - and found them to be anti-semitic if they found more than six of them to be true.
The UK has just 8% of people holding anti-semitic views, one of the world's lowest. But the lowest was in the south-east Asian country of Laos, where prejudice was expressed by just 0.2% of the population.
Read more......
Report: 750 Million Lack Access to Clean Drinking Water
Relevant Magazine - May 12, 2014
The World Health Organization and UNICEF have updated their report examining global access to clean drinking water and found that 748 million people around the world still live without it. They estimate that 90 percent of them live in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. The positive side of the report is that since 1990, more than 2 billion people have received clean water access. Part of the aim of the report is to look at the current status of the Millennial Development Goals—one of which is providing clean water access to people in need—which have a targeted completion date of 2015. As you can see from this chart posted by Mashable from Statista, there has been major progress made in the last 24 years, but there is still a long way to go.
Read more....
The World Health Organization and UNICEF have updated their report examining global access to clean drinking water and found that 748 million people around the world still live without it. They estimate that 90 percent of them live in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. The positive side of the report is that since 1990, more than 2 billion people have received clean water access. Part of the aim of the report is to look at the current status of the Millennial Development Goals—one of which is providing clean water access to people in need—which have a targeted completion date of 2015. As you can see from this chart posted by Mashable from Statista, there has been major progress made in the last 24 years, but there is still a long way to go.
Read more....
A Modern Day Slave Plantation Exists, and It's Thriving in the Heart of America
By Laura Dimon
Policymic - May 8, 2014
It was 1972. Thousands of American troops were battling communist forces in Vietnam. Nixon had won re-election by a landslide, but Watergate would soon usher in his demise. Space travel and technology were advancing rapidly. Change was brewing across America, but one place stood still, frozen in time: Louisiana State Penitentiary, commonly known as Angola. When Robert King arrived that year, he felt as though he'd stepped into the past.
Angola sits 50 miles northwest of Baton Rouge. It's the largest maximum-security facility in the United States and one of the country's most notorious prisons. In the book The Life and Legend of Leadbelly, the authors wrote, "Tough criminals allegedly broke down when they received a sentence to Angola. ... None of them wanted to be sent to a prison where 1 of every 10 inmates annually received stab wounds and which routinely seethed with black-white confrontations."
Read more....
Policymic - May 8, 2014
It was 1972. Thousands of American troops were battling communist forces in Vietnam. Nixon had won re-election by a landslide, but Watergate would soon usher in his demise. Space travel and technology were advancing rapidly. Change was brewing across America, but one place stood still, frozen in time: Louisiana State Penitentiary, commonly known as Angola. When Robert King arrived that year, he felt as though he'd stepped into the past.
Angola sits 50 miles northwest of Baton Rouge. It's the largest maximum-security facility in the United States and one of the country's most notorious prisons. In the book The Life and Legend of Leadbelly, the authors wrote, "Tough criminals allegedly broke down when they received a sentence to Angola. ... None of them wanted to be sent to a prison where 1 of every 10 inmates annually received stab wounds and which routinely seethed with black-white confrontations."
Read more....
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
Human Rights Qatar announces changes to labour law
Plan to abolish sponsorship system and exit permits for expats unveiled, but no timeline set for implementation.
Sam Bollier
Al-Jazeera - 14 May 2014
Doha, Qatar - The Qatari government has announced several changes to its controversial labour system amid international criticism of its treatment of foreign workers. At a joint press conference in Doha on Wednesday, Qatar's Ministries of Interior and Labour released plans to ease restrictions on foreign workers' terms of employment. The proposals include abolishing the country's "sponsor" system, under which workers are bound to a single employer for the duration of their residence, giving expatriates greater latitude to change jobs and leave the country. Qatar's exit permit system, in which workers are currently required to obtain their employers' consent before being allowed to leave the country, "will now be replaced with an automated system through the Ministry of Interior", said a press release from the conference. However, no deadline was set for implementing the proposals. The proposals to change the labour system must first be evaluated by the Shura Council, Qatar's legislative branch, before being ratified. "We hope that this [the reforms] will be soon, but no timeline has been fixed," said Muhammad Ahmed Al Atiq of the Ministry of Interior at the press conference.
Read more...
Sam Bollier
Al-Jazeera - 14 May 2014
Doha, Qatar - The Qatari government has announced several changes to its controversial labour system amid international criticism of its treatment of foreign workers. At a joint press conference in Doha on Wednesday, Qatar's Ministries of Interior and Labour released plans to ease restrictions on foreign workers' terms of employment. The proposals include abolishing the country's "sponsor" system, under which workers are bound to a single employer for the duration of their residence, giving expatriates greater latitude to change jobs and leave the country. Qatar's exit permit system, in which workers are currently required to obtain their employers' consent before being allowed to leave the country, "will now be replaced with an automated system through the Ministry of Interior", said a press release from the conference. However, no deadline was set for implementing the proposals. The proposals to change the labour system must first be evaluated by the Shura Council, Qatar's legislative branch, before being ratified. "We hope that this [the reforms] will be soon, but no timeline has been fixed," said Muhammad Ahmed Al Atiq of the Ministry of Interior at the press conference.
Read more...
Western glorification of torture making it ‘acceptable’ - Amnesty
Russia Today - May 13, 2014
More than one-third of people around the globe - increasingly fortified by a fear of terrorism and glamorized by American TV shows – see justification for the use of torture, Amnesty International said on Tuesday.
Since 1984, 155 countries have signed up to the UN Convention against Torture. However, at least 79 of these countries still engage in torture, according to human rights group.
And the actual number of countries that engage in torture techniques is probably higher, since ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’, as the US military euphemistically calls the practice, generally occurs behind closed doors.
However, Western attitudes to the use of torture are changing with the times.
The Amnesty poll found that nearly 29 percent in the UK thought torture was "sometimes necessary" and "acceptable." That is a higher rate compared with Russia, for example, where 25 percent agreed with the practice.
Read more....
More than one-third of people around the globe - increasingly fortified by a fear of terrorism and glamorized by American TV shows – see justification for the use of torture, Amnesty International said on Tuesday.
Since 1984, 155 countries have signed up to the UN Convention against Torture. However, at least 79 of these countries still engage in torture, according to human rights group.
And the actual number of countries that engage in torture techniques is probably higher, since ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’, as the US military euphemistically calls the practice, generally occurs behind closed doors.
However, Western attitudes to the use of torture are changing with the times.
The Amnesty poll found that nearly 29 percent in the UK thought torture was "sometimes necessary" and "acceptable." That is a higher rate compared with Russia, for example, where 25 percent agreed with the practice.
Read more....
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
US, Papua New Guinea, Oman are only nations without paid maternity leave
Russia Today - May 14, 2014
The United States is one of only three countries in the world that does not offer a monetary supplement to new mothers on maternity leave from their jobs, according to a United Nations study.
The report, prepared by the UN’s International Labor Organization, found that the only two other nations that do not provide cash benefits during maternity leave are the absolute Persian Gulf monarchy Oman and Papua New Guinea, where violence against women is such an epidemic that 60 percent of men have acknowledged committing rape, according to the UN data.
The world’s other 182 nations surveyed offer new mothers on maternity leave either a government payment – akin to Social Security – or require employers to continue to supply at least some percentage of the woman’s pay.
Paid paternity leave for new fathers is offered in 70 countries. Norway, for instance, recently extended its paternity leave to 14 weeks, the UN found.
The US also offers new mothers fewer weeks of maternity leave than any other Western country, the study found.
US law requires employers to offer new mothers as many as 12 weeks of unpaid leave. In New Zealand, leave offered is 14 weeks, while Australia’s is 18 weeks. Switzerland allows new mothers to take 18 weeks off, while paying them 80 percent of their salaries through a government program similar to US Social Security.
Read more....
The United States is one of only three countries in the world that does not offer a monetary supplement to new mothers on maternity leave from their jobs, according to a United Nations study.
The report, prepared by the UN’s International Labor Organization, found that the only two other nations that do not provide cash benefits during maternity leave are the absolute Persian Gulf monarchy Oman and Papua New Guinea, where violence against women is such an epidemic that 60 percent of men have acknowledged committing rape, according to the UN data.
The world’s other 182 nations surveyed offer new mothers on maternity leave either a government payment – akin to Social Security – or require employers to continue to supply at least some percentage of the woman’s pay.
Paid paternity leave for new fathers is offered in 70 countries. Norway, for instance, recently extended its paternity leave to 14 weeks, the UN found.
The US also offers new mothers fewer weeks of maternity leave than any other Western country, the study found.
US law requires employers to offer new mothers as many as 12 weeks of unpaid leave. In New Zealand, leave offered is 14 weeks, while Australia’s is 18 weeks. Switzerland allows new mothers to take 18 weeks off, while paying them 80 percent of their salaries through a government program similar to US Social Security.
Read more....
Nobel Peace Laureates to Human Rights Watch: Close Your Revolving Door to U.S. Government
The leading human rights organization's close ties to the U.S. government call its independence into question.
By Adolfo Pérez Esquivel and Mairead Maguire
Information Clearing House - May 12, 2014
The following letter was sent to Human Rights Watch's Kenneth Roth on behalf of Nobel Peace Prize Laureates Adolfo Pérez Esquivel and Mairead Maguire; former UN Assistant Secretary General Hans von Sponeck; current UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Richard Falk; and over 100 scholars.
Dear Kenneth Roth,
May 12 2014 "ICH" - Human Rights Watch characterizes itself as “one of the world’s leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights.” However, HRW's close ties to the U.S. government call into question its independence.
For example, HRW's Washington advocacy director, Tom Malinowski, previously served as a special assistant to President Bill Clinton and as a speechwriter to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. In 2013, he left HRW after being nominated as Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights & Labor under John Kerry.
In her HRW.org biography, Board of Directors' Vice Chair Susan Manilowdescribes herself as "a longtime friend to Bill Clinton" who is "highly involved" in his political party, and "has hosted dozens of events" for the Democratic National Committee.
Currently, HRW Americas' advisory committee includes Myles Frechette, aformer U.S. ambassador to Colombia, and Michael Shifter, one-time Latin America director for the U.S. government-financed National Endowment for Democracy. Miguel Díaz, a Central Intelligence Agency analyst in the 1990s, sat on HRW Americas' advisory committee from 2003-11. Now at the State Department, Díaz serves as "an interlocutor between the intelligence community and non-government experts."
In his capacity as an HRW advocacy director, Malinowski contended in 2009 that "under limited circumstances" there was "a legitimate place" for CIA renditions—the illegal practice of kidnapping and transferring terrorism suspects around the planet. Malinowski was quoted paraphrasing the U.S. government's argument that designing an alternative to sending suspects to "foreign dungeons to be tortured" was "going to take some time."
HRW has not extended similar consideration to Venezuela. In a 2012 letterto President Chávez, HRW criticized the country's candidacy for the UN Human Rights Council, alleging that Venezuela had fallen "far short of acceptable standards" and questioning its "ability to serve as a credible voice on human rights." At no point has U.S. membership in the same council merited censure from HRW, despite Washington's secret, global assassination program, its preservation of renditions, and its illegal detentionof individuals at Guantánamo Bay.
Read more......
By Adolfo Pérez Esquivel and Mairead Maguire
Information Clearing House - May 12, 2014
The following letter was sent to Human Rights Watch's Kenneth Roth on behalf of Nobel Peace Prize Laureates Adolfo Pérez Esquivel and Mairead Maguire; former UN Assistant Secretary General Hans von Sponeck; current UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Richard Falk; and over 100 scholars.
Dear Kenneth Roth,
May 12 2014 "ICH" - Human Rights Watch characterizes itself as “one of the world’s leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights.” However, HRW's close ties to the U.S. government call into question its independence.
For example, HRW's Washington advocacy director, Tom Malinowski, previously served as a special assistant to President Bill Clinton and as a speechwriter to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. In 2013, he left HRW after being nominated as Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights & Labor under John Kerry.
In her HRW.org biography, Board of Directors' Vice Chair Susan Manilowdescribes herself as "a longtime friend to Bill Clinton" who is "highly involved" in his political party, and "has hosted dozens of events" for the Democratic National Committee.
Currently, HRW Americas' advisory committee includes Myles Frechette, aformer U.S. ambassador to Colombia, and Michael Shifter, one-time Latin America director for the U.S. government-financed National Endowment for Democracy. Miguel Díaz, a Central Intelligence Agency analyst in the 1990s, sat on HRW Americas' advisory committee from 2003-11. Now at the State Department, Díaz serves as "an interlocutor between the intelligence community and non-government experts."
In his capacity as an HRW advocacy director, Malinowski contended in 2009 that "under limited circumstances" there was "a legitimate place" for CIA renditions—the illegal practice of kidnapping and transferring terrorism suspects around the planet. Malinowski was quoted paraphrasing the U.S. government's argument that designing an alternative to sending suspects to "foreign dungeons to be tortured" was "going to take some time."
HRW has not extended similar consideration to Venezuela. In a 2012 letterto President Chávez, HRW criticized the country's candidacy for the UN Human Rights Council, alleging that Venezuela had fallen "far short of acceptable standards" and questioning its "ability to serve as a credible voice on human rights." At no point has U.S. membership in the same council merited censure from HRW, despite Washington's secret, global assassination program, its preservation of renditions, and its illegal detentionof individuals at Guantánamo Bay.
Read more......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)