Image 01 Image 03
Sign In or RegisterLogout

March 2014

Posted by William A. Jacobson on March 21, 2014 11 Comments
Anne Helen Petersen announced that she is leaving academia to join Buzzfeed. https://twitter.com/annehelen/status/447045864305868800 Who is Anne Helen Petersen? Someone who holds a Ph.D in 2011 from UT-Austin in Media Studies, and teaches Feminist Media Studies, among other things.  Here's her Whitman College faculty description:
Anne Helen Petersen received her Ph.D. from the University of Texas in Austin, Texas, where she wrote her dissertation on the industrial history of celebrity gossip and spent a lot of time eating breakfast tacos.  At Whitman, she teaches classes in television, stardom, feminist media studies, and theory.  She has published articles in the Journal of Film and Video, Television & New Media, Feminist Media Studies, Celebrity Studies, and Film & History, authored several book chapters, and writes a regular column on classic Hollywood for The Hairpin.  Her first book, Scandals of Classic Hollywood, is forthcoming from Plume/Penguin in 2014.   You may find her blog, “Celebrity Gossip, Academic Style,” at annehelenpetersen.com.
Why is Petersen joining Buzzfeed?  Here's a portion of an interview announcing the move (emphasis added):
I’ve known for some time that my work, and the sort of audience I love writing for, is not a very good fit for academia, but I thought that I could wedge/force/hipcheck my way into a position that would reconcile the type of work that I wanted to do with the teaching that I love. But as a friend of mine said amidst her time on the market, “academia is drunk”—not belligerent or irresponsible so much single-sightedly focused on things that may or may not ultimately matter. In other words, no one wanted to hire me! I want to be super explicit about that because I think people will assume that because of all the writing I do, both on and off the internet, that I somehow had some cornucopia of choices and was like “show me the money.” OH MAN I WISH. I get so much satisfaction from teaching, but there was no way to keep doing so—and continue the writing I find fulfilling—and make a sustainable salary. BuzzFeed gives me the platform and support to do the type of writing (and reach the type of audiences) that I love, but can also provide me with a living wage.... Oh I was, but “fully funded” is a myth, especially at state schools, even “state Ivies” like the University of Texas. You have a salary, but that salary just about pays your rent, and then you get nickeled-and-dimed for all sorts of fees, insurance, buying food that’s not rice, and somehow surviving the summer, when you’re not getting paid but are expected to do scholarship and research. DON’T GO TO GRAD SCHOOL KIDS....

Posted by Andrew Branca on March 21, 2014 29 Comments
On Thursday, March 20, 2104, the Florida House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly (93-24) in approval of HB-89 (the so-called "warning shot" bill), and HB-7029 (the so-called "Pop-Tart" bill). These developments are reported in the Bradenton Herald, and other news sources (h/t to commenter pjm--thanks!). The Florida Senate has not yet taken a full vote on its parallel "warning shot" version of the House bill (SB-448), but their bill has easily passed their Criminal Justice committee (5-0), Judiciary committee (9-0), and Rules committee (12-1, and which made some modest changes to conform with the House bill).  The full state senate is scheduled to vote on SB-448 next Wednesday. We have previously covered this "warning shot" bill in some detail here Florida “Warning Shot” Bill Advances, as well as exploring how a "warning shot" had nothing whatever to do with the Marissa Alexander case (Angela Corey Reminds FL Legislators of Facts of Marissa Alexander Case and The Myth of Marissa Alexander’s “Warning Shot”) and fisking a hilariously error-filled post on the bill by Adam Weinstein over at Gawker (Gawker analyzes Florida’s “Warning Shot” bill, implosion follows). This local news story is a good example of how the media misunderstands and misreports the nature of the "warning shot" bill:

Posted by William A. Jacobson on March 21, 2014 23 Comments

Giving California Crazy a run for its money. From @SGLawrence: This Prius was parked in Edgewater, the hottest, newest and trendiest section of Miami, Florida, where condominiums are now being snapped up for $400-$600/square foot. (A bargain, still, compared to South Beach and some sections of downtown...

Posted by William A. Jacobson on March 20, 2014 23 Comments
University of North Carolina at Wilmington professor Michael Adams has won his discrimination lawsuit, in a jury verdict rendered today. The judge now will rule on damages. The Jury Verdict form and Judgment are embedded at the bottom of this post. Adams was the professor who wrote the viral response to another professor who called Adams an "embarrassment" to higher education. The case involved claims that Adams was subjected to discriminatory retaliation for expressing his Christian religious and politically conservative views. We have uploaded the Amended Complaint and Answer to the Amended Complaint. Alliance Defending Freedom, which represented Adams, described the case as follows:
Dr. Mike Adams, a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina–Wilmington, frequently received accolades from his colleagues after the university hired him as an assistant professor in 1993 and promoted him to associate professor in 1998. At the time he was an atheist, but his conversion to Christianity in 2000 impacted his views on political and social issues. After this, he was subjected to intrusive investigations, baseless accusations, and the denial of promotion to full professor even though his scholarly output surpassed that of almost all of his colleagues. In a lawsuit filed against the university on Adams’ behalf, Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys contended that the university denied Adams a promotion because his nationally syndicated opinion columns espoused religious and political views that ran contrary to the opinions held by university officials.
The jury found that Adams' "speech activity [was] a substantial or motivating factor in the defendants' decision to not promote" Adams, and that the defendants' would not have reached the same decision "in the absence of the plaintiff's speech activity". Adams v UNC - Wilmington - Jury Verdict Form Answers The Judge now will resolve the damages, as set forth in the Judgment:

Posted by Mandy Nagy on March 20, 2014 18 Comments
President Barack Obama on Thursday announced a new round of expanded sanctions in response to Russia’s intervention in Ukraine. The additional sanctions target 20 Russian officials and influential individuals, as well as a Russian bank, according to Obama's statement and a list published by the Treasury Department.  These follow an initial round of sanctions announced earlier in the week that targeted 11 Russian and Ukrainian individuals. Speaking from the South Lawn of the White House Thursday, the president again denounced Russia’s recent actions in Ukraine, including its move to annex Crimea, and he outlined additional sanctions the United States would be imposing in response. “Over the last several days, we’ve continued to be deeply concerned by events in Ukraine,” Obama said. “We’ve seen an illegal referendum in Crimea, an illegitimate move by the Russians to annex Crimea, and dangerous risks of escalation, including threats to Ukrainian personnel in Crimea and threats to southern and eastern Ukraine as well.  These are all choices that the Russian government has made, choices that have been rejected by the international community, as well as the government of Ukraine.” “And because of these choices, the United States is today moving – as we said we would – to impose additional costs on Russia. Based on the executive order that I signed in response to Russia’s initial intervention in Ukraine, we’re imposing sanctions on more senior officials of the Russian government. In addition, we are today sanctioning a number of other individuals with substantial resources and influence who provide material support to the Russian leadership, as well as a bank that provides material support to these individuals.” The president’s announcement came shortly after Russia's lower house of parliament on Thursday approved a treaty to annex Crimea from Ukraine. From Reuters:

Posted by David Gerstman on March 20, 2014 7 Comments
Israeli homes built on land captured in the 1967 war is the perennial go-to blame game for Palestinians' hard line at negotiations.  But it's just a negotiating ploy as to which Western leaders are all to eager to engage. The other day, for example, David Weinberg wrote in Blame those Damn Settlements that removing the settlements would not alter threats to Israel or Muslim rejectionism of a Jewish national entity:

If it wasn't for the settlements, you see, the Palestinians undoubtedly would recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas would formally forgo the so-called "right" of return for Palestinian refugees. Hamas and Fatah would bury the hatchet. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry would win the Nobel Peace Prize, twice. And the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement would stop seeking to demonize and delegitimize Israel.

If it wasn't for the settlements, the Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Hassan Rouhani would announce an end to Iranian nuclear enrichment activities and the dismantlement of all related nuclear facilities. The Iranians would also stop shipping missiles to the Islamic Jihad and Hamas.

After his litany, Weinberg, of course, acknowledged that he was being facetious and observes, "Settlements are an issue for negotiation, a solvable matter of dispute." It is easier to use settlements as an excuse for the lack of peace. Doing so, lets the Palestinians off the hook.  It assumes that Israel has a partner for peace.

When he met with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas earlier this week, that's the approach that President Obama took. Obama said:

Posted by A.F. Branco on March 20, 2014 7 Comments

Note: You may reprint this cartoon provided you link back to this source.  To see more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here. Branco’s page is Cartoonist A.F.Branco...

Posted by William A. Jacobson on March 19, 2014 14 Comments
Face it, Obama has structured key portions of U.S. foreign policy on Vlad Putin playing nice. Iran nukes? Check. Syria chemical weapons and civil war? Check. Egypt shifting allegiances? Check. Nuclear arms treaty compliance? Check. Central and Eastern Europe territorial integrity? Check. On what key issues does Putin need Obama? Yeah, now Vlad is threatening to leave the relationship and take all the prized possessions with him. Via AP, Russia warns West it may change its stance on Iran:
Russia may revise its stance in the Iranian nuclear talks amid tensions with the West over Ukraine, a senior diplomat warned Wednesday. Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said, according to the Interfax news agency, that Russia didn't want to use the Iranian nuclear talks to "raise the stakes," but may have to do so in response to the actions by the United States and the European Union. The statement is the most serious threat of retaliation by Moscow after the U.S. and the EU announced sanctions against Russia over its annexation of Ukraine's Crimea region. Ryabkov, who is Russia's envoy to the Iranian talks, said that Russia considers the "reunification" with Crimea as far more important than the developments surrounding the Iranian nuclear program.
The featured image, a Branco Cartoon from September 2013, still rings true. So does this photoshop that made the rounds:
MORE POSTS
Accessibility by WAH