from Boing Boing: Eighty years after its founding as one of the first prosumer publications for the then-expensive hobby of photography, Popular Photography is ceasing both print and online operations following the next issue.Modeled after Popular Mechanics and similar periodicals, many factors did them in: the confluence of phone cameras, the shift to video, the demise of print, the ubiquity of free how-to guides and consumer reviews, and tepid attempts to stay relevant as media moved from print to web to mobile.
Jeff Wignall, a photo magazine contributor for 40 years, told PetaPixel that management at parent company Bonnier was also to blame, saying the magazine's cause of death "is partly that the parent company just did not see the value of a photography magazine." He added:
Cell phone cameras, you have to admit, played a big part in this, but if Bonnier wanted to save the photo magazine there were ways to do it. Their website was very lame, they started it up at one point, and seemed like they had a lot of energy flowing into it for a while but that was several years ago. Then they seemed to have abandoned the website and the only way, ironically, for a print magazine to survive is if it has a good partnership with an online edition of the magazine. Without that there is a sort of breakdown in communication between the print reader and the online person.
Here is the winner of their final readers' contest, shot by Aaron Feinberg. The news gives it additional symbolism.
from The Guardian: Through marches and dogged pursuit of elected officials, people across the US have helped to block some of the administration’s most anti-progressive policies Despite Donald Trump’s claim that his administration is running like a “fine-tuned machine”, activists have already managed to score victories against some of the most anti-progressive policies of the president and his Republican allies.
Through rallies, marches and dogged pursuit of elected officials, people across the country have helped to block some of Trump’s initiatives, and draw attention to government missteps.
Here are some of activists’ most dramatic wins so far:
Puzder withdraws from labor secretary consideration
Andrew Puzder, the chief executive of CKE Restaurants, was Trump’s first choice to run the Department of Labor, but he withdrew himself from the running in February after complaints from Democrats and labor groups.
Hundreds of activists protested at Carl’s Jr and Hardee’s restaurants – owned by CKE Restaurants – on 12 January. They sought to draw attention to Puzder’s vocal opposition to minimum wage increases and his controversial business record.
In Washington Democrats held press conferences denouncing Puzder’s record. Under his leadership CKE restaurants ran sexualized advertising campaigns, and Puzder himself wrote in 2011 that “we believe in putting hot models in our commercials because ugly ones don’t sell burgers”.
Republicans back off effort to sell 3.3m acres of public land
In early February, Congressman Jason Chaffetz withdrew a bill that would have ordered the incoming secretary of the interior to sell off 3.3m acres of national land, after hundreds of protesters and 20 outdoor industry groups criticised the law.
People gathered at statehouses in New Mexico and Montana to demonstrate against House bill 621, which would have seen land in 10 states available for sale.
#GrabYourWallet sees companies dump Trump
The campaign was launched in October 2016, in response to Donald Trump’s infamous boasts that his fame allowed him to sexually assault women; specifically, to “grab them by the pussy”.
GrabYourWallet lists dozens of companies which have ties to the president – either by selling his or his family’s products, or by endorsing him during the election campaign.
Since the campaign started a number of companies have dropped Ivanka Trump’s clothing line, including Shoes.com, Shopstyle and most recently Nordstrom. In addition to delivering a financial hit to Ivanka Trump, the campaign succeeded in upsetting the president, who tweeted that his daughter had been “treated so unfairly” by Nordstrom.
Temporarily blocking the immigration executive order
Trump’s 27 January executive order suspending immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries sparked protests across the country. Thousands of people gathered at airports in New York City, LA, Chicago, Detroit, Indianapolis, Ohio, Orlando and elsewhere as travellers were detained.
At the same time groups including the American Civil Liberties Union and National Immigration Law Center filed lawsuits against the executive order.
On 3 February a federal judge ordered a temporary halt on the ban, restoring travel for refugees and people from the excluded countries, and on 9 February the ninth circuit court of appeals upheld that ruling. Trump on Monday issued a new executive order, which contained a number of revisions.
The congressional recess is traditionally a time for elected officials to hold town halls for their constituents. People took advantage of this to turn out in droves to events, questioning both Republicans and Democrats about their commitment to Obamacare, to the environment and more.
The actions were successful in two ways. Many congressmen and women decided not to host events, enabling activists to draw attention to their lack of interaction with voters. Even Republicans, including New Jersey governor Chris Christie, criticized their colleaguesfor not facing their constituents.
Separately, elected officials said that the attendance and tough questioning at town halls and other events was having an effect. Representative Mo Brooks, from Alabama’s fifth congressional district, was among those to note the impact.
“In my opinion, the massive obstructionist nature of the protests, particularly the disruption of town hall meetings, is having an effect on a good number of our more liberal, big government, weak-kneed, squishy-spined Republican senators and House members,” Brooks said. He predicted that the constituent opposition might even stop Republicans from repealing Obamacare.
#DeleteUber leads to people deleting Uber
More than 200,000 people reportedly deleted their Uber accounts after the company did not participate in a taxi drivers’ strike at JFK airport. The strike had been called in response to Trump’s executive order banning immigrants and refugees from seven Muslim-majority countries.
As well as continuing to run cars to and from the airport, Uber tweeted that it had “turned off” surge pricing during the strike, seemingly taking advantage of the taxi drivers’ action.
Uber’s CEO, Travis Kalanick, had joined Trump’s economic advisory council in December 2016, but decided to step down following the furore.
from The Washington Post: Here's what happened after President Trump fired off a tweet accusing former president Barack Obama of wiretapping Trump Tower before the 2016 election. (Monica Akhtar/The Washington Post)
THE MORNING PLUM:
President Trump is now wallowing in fury, we are told, because he can’t make the Russia story disappear; he can’t stem the leaks to the media; and he can’t seem to realize his promises. Some reports tell us that unflattering comparisons to Barack Obama’s early accomplishments are “gnawing at Trump,” while others say he went “ballistic” when Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from the Russia probe, because it telegraphed capitulation to Trump’s foes.
But all of these things are connected by a common thread: Trump is enraged at being subjected to a system of democratic and institutional constraints, for which he has signaled nothing but absolute, unbridled contempt. The system is pushing back, and he can’t bear it.
On Monday morning, the latest chapter in this tale — Trump’s unsupported accusation that Obama wiretapped his phones — took another turn. Trump’s spokeswoman said on ABC News that Trump does not accept FBI Director James Comey’s claim — which was reported on over the weekend — that no such wiretapping ever happened.
As E.J. Dionne writes, this episode is a “tipping point” in the Trump experiment. Trump leveled the charge based on conservative media. Then, after an internal search for evidence to back it up produced nothing, the White House press secretary called on Congress to investigate it and declared the administration’s work done. While the previous administration did wiretap, the problem is the recklessness and baselessness of Trump’s specific allegations, and the White House’s insistence that the burden of disproving them must fall on others — on Congress and on the FBI. Trump’s allegations must be humored at all costs, simply because he declared them to be true — there can be no admission of error, and worse, the White House has declared itself liberated from the need to even pretend to have evidence to back up even Trump’s most explosive claims.
This is more than disdain for the truth. It represents profound contempt for our democratic and institutional processes. In this sense, it’s only the latest in what has become a broader pattern:
When the media accurately reported on Trump’s inaugural crowd sizes, the White House not only contested this on the substance in a laughably absurd manner. It also accused the press of intentionally diminishing Trump’s crowd count, thus trying to delegitimize the news media’s institutional act of holding Trump accountable to factual reality.
After getting elected, Trump continued to repeat the lie that millions voted illegally in the election, undermining faith in American democracy. When the media called out this falsehood, the White House threatened an investigation to prove it true, which hasn’t materialized, in effect using the vow of investigations as nothing more than a tool to obfuscate efforts to hold him accountable.
After a court blocked Trump’s travel ban, Trump questioned the institutional legitimacy of the “so-called judge” in question. He also cast the stay as a threat to our security, even though the ban has no credible national security rationale, something that has now been demonstrated by leaks from the Department of Homeland Security (exactly the sort of leaking that has Trump in a fury). Senior adviser Stephen Miller flatly declared that the ban would be reintroduced in part to demonstrate that Trump’s national security power “will not be questioned,” thus declaring the explicit goal of sweeping away institutional checks on it. And then the White House delayed introduction of the new ban in order to continue basking in good press from his speech to Congress, thus undercutting its own claim that this is an urgent national security matter.
Trump continues to hold court at Mar-a-Lago, using the power of the presidency to promote his own resort, whose membership fees sink money into his own pockets. The White House publicly intervened in a business dispute involving Trump’s daughter and even tried to steer customers her way, an act which Kellyanne Conway embellished by cheerfully sticking a rhetorical middle finger in the face of anyone who finds such behavior troubling.
We’re witnessing a level of total disdain for basic democratic and institutional processes that defies description, and perhaps calls for a new vocabulary. But the story does not end here. As Benjamin Wittes and Quinta Jurecic explain in a great piece, the almost comical lack of good faith that Trump and the White House are showing toward our processes is inspiring an escalation in institutional pushback — from the courts, the media, government leakers, and civil society — that is having much more of a constraining effect than Trump ever could have anticipated. Indeed, the Trump White House’s ongoing conduct is itself producing the very systemic resistance that now has Trump in such a rage.
* BIG MAJORITY WANTS SPECIAL PROSECUTOR ON RUSSIA: A new CNN poll finds that nearly two thirds of Americans want a special prosecutor to examine potential contacts between Russia and the Trump campaign, including a large chunk of Republicans:
Among Republicans, a majority feel Congress can handle the investigation, but a sizable 43 percent support the call for a special prosecutor, as do majorities of Democrats (82 percent) and independents (67 percent). Overall, the poll finds that 65 percent would rather see a special prosecutor handle the investigation, while 32 percent think Congress is capable of handling it.
Meanwhile, the poll finds that Trump’s approval has barely budged — it’s 45 percent — which is odd, since pundits told us that his awesomely “presidential” speech would give him a bump.
The revised order is expected to remove Iraq from the list of countries whose citizens face a 90-day U.S. travel ban. That follows pressure from the Pentagon and State Department … Other changes are also expected, including making clear that all existing visas will be honored and no longer singling out Syrian refugees for an indefinite ban. Syrian refugees will now be treated like other refugees and be subjected to a 120-day suspension of the refugee program.
It’s hard to say whether this one will fare better in court, but it’s worth noting that two Department of Homeland Security documents have now leaked undercutting the case for it.
President Trump signed a new executive order on March 6, banning travelers from six majority-Muslim countries seeking new visas from entering the U.S. for 90 days and halting the refugee program for 120 days. Here's how it stacks up with the old travel ban. (Jenny Starrs, Danielle Kunitz/The Washington Post)
If it was a criminal wiretap, it would mean that the Justice Department had gathered sufficient evidence to convince a federal judge that someone using the phone number or email address probably committed a serious crime. If it was a national security wiretap, it would mean a federal judge on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court had a basis to believe the target was probably an agent of a foreign power, like Russia.
It seems unlikely at best that this happened, but it’s kind of amusing that Trump is alleging it, given what it would really mean in practice.
There’s nothing the Republicans would be willing to offer that could get Trump the eight Democratic Senators he needs to fund the wall … The way Democrats see it, if they can block the wall, they’d crush a central feature of Trump’s political identity. And … Schumer would thrill the Democratic base (though less so the red-state Democratic senators up in 2018).
Okay, but if Democrats really want to deal Trump a big blow on immigration, they should block funding for his proposal to add 10,000 agents to carry out mass deportations.
The hackers’ targeting of left-leaning groups — and the sifting of emails for sensitive or discrediting information — has set off alarms that the attacks could constitute a fresh wave of Russian government meddling in the U.S. political system … Some of the groups are associated with causes now under attack by the Trump administration.
Republicans have belatedly discovered what some of us tried to tell them all along: The only way to maintain coverage for the 20 million people who gained insurance thanks to Obamacare is with a plan that, surprise, looks a lot like Obamacare. Sure enough, the new plan reportedly does look like a sort of half-baked version of the Affordable Care Act … it’s enough like Obamacare to infuriate hard-line conservatives, but it weakens key aspects of the law enough to deprive millions of Americans … of essential health care.
But Republicans will be able to claim they finally liberated the country from Obamacare after seven long years of darkness and oppression, so who cares about the details?
* AND THE QUOTE OF THE DAY: Trump spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders, on NBC this morning:
“If the president walked across the Potomac, the media would report that he couldn’t swim.”
How long until Trump’s Ministers of Disinformation bash the media for refusing to report that he can walk on water?
Tibetan Buddhists have suffered deep persecution by the Chinese government. John Oliver sits down with the Dalai Lama to discuss China, the conditions in Tibet, and horse milk.
On any given day 50,000 youth are incarcerated in America’s juvenile justice system. Seemingly harmless names like “training schools” and “academies” are used to obfuscate an archipelago of youth prison environments sprawled across the US where minors are subjected to restraints, brutal violence, and the use of solitary confinement. A group called the Youth First Initiative is taking aim at these facilities with a simple demand, #NoKidsInPrison
Youth First is a growing national constellation of organizations from Kansas, Virginia, Connecticut, Wisconsin, and New Jersey that launched in 2015 with a goal of closing youth prisons. The coalition’s tireless efforts have already lead to commitments to close 5 facilities in 4 states, with many more joining a growing list of facilities under scrutiny from state and federal authorities. This Friday, the Larned Juvenile Correctional Center in Kansas will close after 45 years of operation. The closure of this medium/high security facility, designed to imprison 170 youth, marks a significant victory for Kansans United for Youth Justice, part of the Youth First Initiative.
Today’s political climate underscores the importance of Youth First’s work. While youth incarceration has been on the decline for over a decade (due in part to the efforts of Youth First and myriad other juvenile justice advocates) signals from Trump Administration and Attorney General Jeff Sessions raise concerns that the youth prison complex may see renewed vigor.
This short film about Youth First’s efforts was produced by our partners at Balestra Media on behalf of Youth First, with direction from Sparrow’s cofounder Andy Stepanian, Christina DiPasquale of Balestra Media and Jeffrey Wirth of Burning Hearts Media. A full credit list is included below.
It is with a large tip of my heavy metal hair to the excellent Hint Magazine for hipping me to what appears to be a rather bizarre fashion phenomenon afflicting Asian people. The trend in question (or questionable trend if you prefer) concerns the seeming affinity for people of all ages (including children) to wear offensive catchphrase-style t-shirts that are printed in English. Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem whatsoever with anyone who believes their sexy parts taste like Pepsi-Cola and who chooses to wear a t-shirt declaring this to be so. But things get a little murky when the person wearing said shirt (which you’ll see below in all its obnoxious glory) is worn by a teenage boy who most likely has NO idea what the shirt is saying about his, ahem, vagina.
Is there a valid explanation for why an elderly Asian man who probably speaks no English might want to wear a t-shirt with a cartoon rooster proudly declaring “There’s nothing like a stiff cock to wake you up in the morning!”? Sure. There must be. But I have no idea what it is. Can you think of a reason why a child would be wearing a shirt that says “Who the Fuck is Jesus?” Though it’s a valid question, most five-year-olds clearly wouldn’t ponder such a pressing theological question because cartoons are a kids number one priority.
Some of the wearers of these offensive tees were snapped wearing them on the streets of New York City, and presumably know what these humorous slogans mean, adding another layer to the mystery. All I can say is this—the nasty message shirts you’re about to see below are, you guessed it, pretty NSFW.
Because of course this kid is a fan of Dead Kennedys.
