Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. مزید جانیئے

 Add this video to your website by copying the code below. مزید جانیئے

 ہہم، سرور تک پہنچنے میں ایک مسئلہ تھا۔ دوبارہ کوشش کریں؟ بنیادی ٹویٹ شامل کریں میڈیا شامل کریں

 ٹوئٹر کا مواد اپنی ویب سائٹ یا ایپلی کیشن میں ایمبیڈ کر کے، آپ ٹوئٹر کے ڈیولپر اقرارنامہ اور ڈیولپر پالیسی سے اتفاق کر رہے ہیں۔

 پیش منظر ||||| Tweet with a location

 You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more ||||| Focused crawls are collections of frequently-updated webcrawl data from narrow (as opposed to broad or wide) web crawls, often focused on a single domain or subdomain. ||||| WASHINGTON — The presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee paid for research that was included in a dossier made public in January that contained salacious claims about connections between Donald J. Trump, his associates and Russia.

 A spokesperson for a law firm said on Tuesday that it had hired Washington-based researchers last year to gather damaging information about Mr. Trump on numerous subjects — including possible ties to Russia — on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the D.N.C.

 The revelation, which emerged from a letter filed in court on Tuesday, is likely to fuel new partisan attacks over federal and congressional investigations into Russia’s attempts to disrupt last year’s election and whether any of Mr. Trump’s associates assisted in the effort.

 The president and his allies have argued for months that the investigations are politically motivated. They have challenged the information contained in the dossier, which was compiled by a former British spy who had been contracted by the Washington research firm Fusion GPS. ||||| The Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped fund research that resulted in a now-famous dossier containing allegations about President Trump's connections to Russia and possible coordination between his campaign and the Kremlin, people familiar with the matter said.

 Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained Fusion GPS, a Washington firm, to conduct the research.

 After that, Fusion GPS hired dossier author Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community, according to those people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

 Elias and his law firm, Perkins Coie, retained the company in April 2016 on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Before that agreement, Fusion GPS's research into Trump was funded by an unknown Republican client during the GOP primary.

 The Clinton campaign and the DNC, through the law firm, continued to fund Fusion GPS's research through the end of October 2016, days before Election Day.

 Fusion GPS gave Steele's reports and other research documents to Elias, the people familiar with the matter said. It is unclear how or how much of that information was shared with the campaign and the DNC and who in those organizations was aware of the roles of Fusion GPS and Steele. One person close to the matter said the campaign and the DNC were not informed by the law firm of Fusion GPS's role.

 Former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele compiled the dossier on President Trump’s alleged ties to Russia. (Victoria Jones/AP)

 The dossier has become a lightning rod amid the intensifying investigations into the Trump campaign's possible connections to Russia. Some congressional Republican leaders have spent months trying to discredit Fusion GPS and Steele and tried to determine the identity of the Democrat or organization that paid for the dossier.

 Trump tweeted as recently as Saturday that the Justice Department and FBI should "immediately release who paid for it."

 Elias and Fusion GPS declined to comment on the arrangement.

 A DNC spokeswoman said "[Chairman] Tom Perez and the new leadership of the DNC were not involved in any decision-making regarding Fusion GPS, nor were they aware that Perkins Coie was working with the organization. But let's be clear, there is a serious federal investigation into the Trump campaign's ties to Russia, and the American public deserves to know what happened."

 Brian Fallon, a former spokesman for the Clinton campaign, said he wasn't aware of the hiring during the campaign.

 Marc E. Elias of Perkins Coie represented the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. (Matt McClain/The Washington Post)

 "The first I learned of Christopher Steele or saw any dossier was after the election," Fallon said. "But if I had gotten handed it last fall, I would have had no problem passing it along and urging reporters to look into it. Opposition research happens on every campaign, and here you had probably the most shadowy guy ever running for president, and the FBI certainly has seen fit to look into it. I probably would have volunteered to go to Europe myself to try and verify if it would have helped get more of this out there before the election."

 Some of the details are included in a Tuesday letter sent by Perkins Coie to a lawyer representing Fusion GPS, telling the research firm that it was released from a client-confidentiality obligation. The letter was prompted by a legal fight over a subpoena for Fusion GPS's bank records.

 People involved in the matter said that they would not disclose the dollar amounts paid to Fusion GPS but that the campaign and the DNC shared the cost.

 Steele previously worked in Russia for British intelligence. The dossier is a compilation of reports he prepared for Fusion GPS. The dossier alleged that the Russian government collected compromising information about Trump and that the Kremlin was engaged in an effort to assist his campaign for president.

 U.S. intelligence agencies later released a public assessment asserting that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to aid Trump. The FBI has been investigating whether Trump associates helped the Russians in that effort.

 [FBI once planned to pay former British spy who authored controversial Trump dossier]

 Trump has adamantly denied the allegations in the dossier and has dismissed the FBI probe as a witch hunt.

 Officials have said that the FBI has confirmed some of the information in the dossier. Other details, including the most sensational accusations, have not been verified and may never be.

 Fusion GPS's work researching Trump began during the Republican presidential primaries, when the GOP donor paid for the firm to investigate the real estate magnate's background.

 Fusion GPS did not start off looking at Trump's Russia ties but quickly realized that those relationships were extensive, according to the people familiar with the matter.

 When the Republican donor stopped paying for the research, Elias, acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC, agreed to pay for the work to continue. The Democrats paid for research, including by Fusion GPS, because of concerns that little was known about Trump and his business interests, according to the people familiar with the matter.

 Those people said that it is standard practice for political campaigns to use law firms to hire outside researchers to ensure their work is protected by attorney-client and work-product privileges.

 The Clinton campaign paid Perkins Coie $5.6 million in legal fees from June 2015 to December 2016, according to campaign finance records, and the DNC paid the firm $3.6 million in "legal and compliance consulting'' since November 2015 — though it's impossible to tell from the filings how much of that work was for other legal matters and how much of it related to Fusion GPS.

 At no point, the people said, did the Clinton campaign or the DNC direct Steele's activities. They described him as a Fusion GPS subcontractor.

 Some of Steele's allegations began circulating in Washington in the summer of 2016 as the FBI launched its counterintelligence investigation into possible connections between Trump associates and the Kremlin. Around that time, Steele shared some of his findings with the FBI.

 After the election, the FBI agreed to pay Steele to continue gathering intelligence about Trump and Russia, but the bureau pulled out of the arrangement after Steele was publicly identified in news reports.

 The dossier was published by BuzzFeed News in January. Fusion GPS has said in court filings that it did not give BuzzFeed the documents.

 Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said that Steele was respected by the FBI and the State Department for earlier work he performed on a global corruption probe.

 In early January, then-FBI Director James B. Comey presented a two-page summary of Steele's dossier to President Barack Obama and President-elect Trump. In May, Trump fired Comey, which led to the appointment of Robert S. Mueller III as special counsel investigating the Trump-Russia matter.

 Congressional Republicans have tried to force Fusion GPS to identify the Democrat or group behind Steele's work, but the firm has said that it will not do so, citing confidentiality agreements with its clients.

 Last week, Fusion GPS executives invoked their constitutional right not to answer questions from the House Intelligence Committee. The firm's founder, Glenn Simpson, had previously given a 10-hour interview to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

 Over objections from Democrats, the Republican leader of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Devin Nunes (Calif.), subpoenaed Fusion GPS's bank records to try to identify the mystery client.

 Fusion GPS has been fighting the release of its bank records. A judge on Tuesday extended a deadline for Fusion GPS's bank to respond to the subpoena until Friday while the company attempts to negotiate a resolution with Nunes.

 Julie Tate contributed to this report.

 Read more:

 What the Trump dossier says — and what it doesn’t

 Hillary Clinton’s disingenuous dossier outrage

 Trump suggests FBI may have ‘paid for’ dossier alleging Russia ties ||||| FILE - In this March 21, 2016, file photo, attorney Marc Elias, one of several lawyers who appeared in the in the case of Wittman v. Personhuballah, stands on the plaza of the Supreme Court in Washington.... (Associated Press)

 FILE - In this March 21, 2016, file photo, attorney Marc Elias, one of several lawyers who appeared in the in the case of Wittman v. Personhuballah, stands on the plaza of the Supreme Court in Washington. Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped fund a political... (Associated Press)

 FILE - In this March 21, 2016, file photo, attorney Marc Elias, one of several lawyers who appeared in the in the case of Wittman v. Personhuballah, stands on the plaza of the Supreme Court in Washington. Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped fund a political... (Associated Press) FILE - In this March 21, 2016, file photo, attorney Marc Elias, one of several lawyers who appeared in the in the case of Wittman v. Personhuballah, stands on the plaza of the Supreme Court in Washington.... (Associated Press)

 WASHINGTON (AP) — Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped fund political research into President Donald Trump that ultimately produced a dossier of allegations about his ties to Russia, a person familiar with the matter said Tuesday night.

 The revelation is likely to fuel complaints by Trump that the dossier, which the president has derided as "phony stuff," is a politically motivated collection of salacious claims. Yet the FBI has worked to corroborate the document, and in a sign of its ongoing relevance to investigators, special counsel Robert Mueller's team — which is probing potential coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign — weeks ago questioned the former British spy, Christopher Steele, who helped compile the claims in the dossier.

 The dossier, which circulated in Washington last year and was turned over to the FBI for its review, contends that Russia was engaged in a longstanding effort to aid Trump and had amassed compromising information about him. Trump has repeatedly dismissed the document as false and in recent days has questioned on Twitter whether Democrats or the FBI had helped fund it.

 Trump has also attacked the findings of the FBI, NSA and CIA that Russia waged a large-scale influence campaign to interfere in the election. The FBI and the CIA have said with high confidence that the effort was aimed at hurting Clinton's candidacy and helping Trump. The NSA found the same with "moderate" confidence.

 The person familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss confidential client matters, said the arrangement was brokered by Marc Elias, a lawyer for the campaign and the DNC, and his law firm of Perkins Coie.

 The deal began in the spring of 2016, when the firm was approached by Fusion GPS, the political research firm behind the dossier, and lasted until right before Election Day, according to the person. When Fusion approached Elias, it had already been doing research work on Trump for a client during the GOP primary. The identity of the original client has not been revealed.

 It's unclear what Fusion GPS had dug up by the time law firm hired them in April 2016. According to a copy of the dossier published by BuzzFeed this year, the earliest report from Steele dates to June 2016, two months later. It was not immediately known how much money Fusion received or how many others in the Clinton campaign or DNC were aware that the firm had been retained.

 Elias did not immediately return an email seeking comment, and representatives of Fusion GPS declined to comment. The Washington Post first reported the arrangement.

 Clinton campaign officials did not immediately comment, but in a statement, a DNC spokeswoman said chairman Tom Perez was not part of the decision-making and was unaware that Perkins Coie was working with Fusion GPS.

 "But let's be clear, there is a serious federal investigation into the Trump campaign's ties to Russia, and the American public deserves to know what happened," the statement said.

 Former Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said on Twitter that he regretted not knowing about Steele's hiring before the election, and that had he known, "I would have volunteered to go to Europe and try to help him."

 "I have no idea what Fusion or Steele were paid," he wrote in another tweet, "but if even a shred of that dossier ends up helping Mueller, it will prove money well spent."

 According to a letter obtained by the AP Tuesday night, representatives of Fusion GPS reached out to the firm in early March 2016 to express interest in continuing research on Trump it had begun "for one or more other clients during the Republican primary contest."

 At that time, the Clinton campaign was looking toward the general election and was pivoting attention to Trump, the emerging Republican front-runner. The person said Trump, by virtue of his extensive international business dealings, was seen as a natural target for complicated opposition research abroad.

 Perkins Coie then engaged Fusion GPS in April 2016 "to perform a variety of research services during the 2016 election cycle," according to the letter.

 The dossier created a political firestorm in January when it was revealed that then-FBI Director James Comey had alerted Trump to the existence of allegations about him and Russia. Since then, Trump has repeatedly attacked the document and Republicans in Congress have worked to discredit it, even issuing a subpoena that seeks to force the disclosure of Fusion GPS's bank records.

 The letter, sent Tuesday by the general counsel of Perkins Coie to a lawyer for Fusion GPS, was intended to release the research firm from its obligation to keep confidential the identity of the law firm client.

 ___

 Associated Press writers Chad Day and Ken Thomas contributed to this report.

 ___

 Read the letter: http://apne.ws/UK0Ojir |||||

Write a summary.

– Funding for research included in the explosive dossier on President Trump's Russia connections came from none other than the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, per reports in the Washington Post and the New York Times. A letter filed in court Tuesday details how research firm Fusion GPS began working in April 2016 for a law firm employed by the Clinton campaign and the DNC to gather damaging information on Trump. According to the letter, Fusion GPS had already been doing research on Trump on behalf of one of the Republican's primary opponents before it was hired by Perkins Coie, the firm of Clinton campaign lawyer Mark Elias. Trump has long slammed the dossier compiled by British ex-spy Christopher Steele as politically motivated "fake news." In a tweet last week, Trump wondered whether the FBI, the Democrats, Russia, or all three had funded it. He's now expected to repeat conspiracy allegations, though sources tell the Post and the Times that Clinton and DNC officials were unaware of the role of Fusion GPS. The AP reports the FBI has corroborated parts of the dossier, which alleges Russia worked to help the Trump campaign and amassed compromising information on him. Former Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon tweeted that if he'd known about Steele's role, he would "have volunteered to go to Europe and try to help him." He added that if the information compiled by Steele helps Robert Mueller's investigation, anything paid to him and Fusion GPS would be "money well spent."


Gracelyn Mae Violet Griffin’s birth certificate will always be a conversation starter.

 That’s because in the spot for “location,” it reads, “Born in Chick-fil-A,” according to a Facebook post from her father, Robert Griffin.

 Her dad, who isn’t a doctor, is listed as the attending physician.

 Robert Griffin detailed the Tuesday night of a lifetime in that Facebook post. It all started, he wrote, when Team Griffin pulled into the Chick-fil-A parking lot to drop off their other two daughters with a family friend, on their way to University Hospital.

 SIGN UP

 Be the first to know. No one covers what is happening in our community better than we do. And with a digital subscription, you'll never miss a local story. SIGN ME UP!

 His wife, Falon Griffin, was already in labor, and the Chick-fil-A was closed, but Falon desperately had to go to the restroom. The couple banged on the restaurant’s glass doors around 10:30 p.m., and staff members cleaning up for the night let Falon, who was 38 weeks pregnant at the time according to KSAT, and her husband inside.

 last night I delivered our baby girl IN THE BATHROOM AT A CHICK-FIL-A! Here’s what happened: Maggie and I loaded up the... Posted by Robert Griffin on Wednesday, July 18, 2018

 When Falon began to scream, the night took a sharp turn for everyone involved.

 “I’m about to dial 911, I open the door and she’s just screaming,” Brenda Enriquez, the Chick-fil-A store director, told KSAT.

 Robert came running. There was no way the ambulance was going to get to them quickly enough.

 “I can see just the top of Gracelyn’s head, just barely crowning, but I knew we couldn’t go anywhere,” Robert told KENS. “So I told [Falon], ‘Sweetie, we’re gonna do something great, and we’re gonna do it right here and we’re gonna do it right now.’”

 So, with his wife “straddling the toilet,” they did, Robert wrote. When their daughter’s shoulders emerged, Robert could see that the umbilical cord was wrapped around her neck — twice.

 Robert and Falon Griffin delivered their baby girl, whom they named Gracelyn Mae Violet Griffin, in a bathroom stall Tuesday night at a Chick-Fil-A restaurant in far north San Antonio. Robert Griffin Instagram screenshot

 “[I] didn’t want to alert my wife,” Robert wrote on Facebook. “So [I] just told her, ‘Try to relax for a minute,’ and I was somehow able to unwrap the cord from the baby’s neck.”

 The ordeal lasted just six minutes. Robert wrapped Gracelyn in his “Trump 2020” T-shirt before the paramedics arrived, he wrote.

 “I think it’s pretty ironic that a proud conservative, Christian family would have a baby in a Chick-fil-A, and wrapped in a Trump 2020 T-shirt! BOOM #maga,” he wrote

 Robert’s post has been shared more than 76,000 times as of Friday morning, and more than 26,000 people have commented on it. The couple told KSAT that Chick-fil-A was already one of their favorite restaurants and that prior to giving birth to Gracelyn, they had bought her a “Little Nugget” onesie.

 Ben Stover, the franchise owner of the Chick-fil-A along U.S. 281, told KENS that baby Gracelyn will get free Chick-fil-A for life, and has guaranteed her a job when she turns 16. Plans for her first birthday party — yes, it will be chicken-nugget-themed — are already in the works.

 SHARE COPY LINK A Chick-fil-A employee in Austin, Texas, was praised after he rushed to save a choking customer on Saturday, June 23. The customer was fine after the food was dislodged from his throat. ||||| SAN ANTONIO — Robert and Falon Griffin were driving to San Antonio's University Hospital, when Falon told her husband she desperately needed to use a bathroom. The family pulled into the Stone Ridge Chick-fil-A off Highway 281 and Evans. They had no idea this bathroom break would change their lives.

 "Chick-fil-A was closed, it was way past 10," Robert said. "We were able to bang on the door, because she kept saying she kept saying she had to go to the bathroom."

 "And I was very insistent," added Falon with a laugh.

 Even though employees were off the clock, they let the 38-week pregnant mother inside.

 Falon's bathroom pit-stop quickly turned serious. "I couldn't hold anything in," Falon said.

 "I can see just the top of Gracelyn's head, just barely crowning, but I knew we couldn't go anywhere. So I told her, 'Sweetie, we're gonna do something great, and we're gonna do it right here and we're gonna do it right now,'" Robert said.

 The Chick-fil-A employees, who the Griffins guess couldn't have been more than 25 years old, were quick to act under pressure.

 "I hear high pitched screaming and I was like, okay - this is serious. This is happening. And I got on the phone with a 9-1-1 dispatcher," Brenda Enriquez said.

 Brenda is the restaurant's drive-thru director. She's used to delivering orders - but not orders like this. "Assistance to the dispatcher over what color is the baby, is it crying," she said.

 Meanwhile, Robert handled the delivery of his daughter's birth - which wasn't without some scary obstacles. Gracelyn's umbilical cord was twice wrapped around her neck. Robert was able to unwrap the cord, and his daughter took her first breath of air.

 "I couldn't control it," Falon said. "I was basically straddled the toilet - I wasn't even sitting down. I was literally standing giving birth, with one hand on the wall and one hand holding her head."

 The entire process lasted just six minutes, estimates the Griffin family.

 Robert's Facebook post sharing the story has gone viral - receiving thousands of "likes" and "shares" since Wednesday. The parents are grateful for the Chick-fil-A employees who helped handle the surprise situation.

 Baby Gracelyn is receiving some special presents to commemorate her birth. Chick-fil-A has gifted her free Chick-fil-A for life, and has guaranteed her a first job when she turns 16.

 But perhaps the best present here is something that can't be wrapped: a beautiful friendship for life. |||||
What is a one-paragraph summary of the above article?

– A Texas family knew they had a new addition on the way, but they had no way of knowing where the baby girl would make her first appearance: in a Chick-fil-A bathroom. Per KENS5, Robert Griffin and his wife were on their way to the hospital in San Antonio when they stopped at a Chick-fil-A to drop their kids off with a friend in the parking lot. Falon Griffin was already in labor, but she told her husband she desperately needed to use the restroom. In order to do so, they had to bang on the Chick-fil-A door, because it was already closed for the night. Employees let them in and, before long, they alerted her husband that something seemed wrong. "The manager said 'she’s in the restroom and she’s screaming,'" Griffin wrote in a Facebook post about the whirlwind delivery. "So there we were.....my wife and I in a tiny stall in the bathroom." As the baby's head crowned and the delivery showed no signs of slowing down, Griffin described how he had to calmly ask his wife to stop pushing for a moment when he realized the umbilical cord was wrapped around the infant's neck. "I was somehow able to unwrap the (cord) from the baby’s neck. With two more strong pushes, and using my shirt for a towel, out came Gracelyn Mae Violet Griffin," Griffin wrote. As the Star-Telegram notes, Griffin suggested there was also someone else in that bathroom, at least in spirit. “I think it’s pretty ironic that a proud conservative, Christian family would have a baby in a Chick-fil-A, and wrapped in a Trump 2020 T-shirt! BOOM #maga," he wrote. The chain has promised Gracelyn free Chick-fil-A for life and a job when she turns 16. (The company's politics have stirred up controversy.)


News article:

Photo

 The parent of the in-flight shopping magazine SkyMall said on Friday that it had filed for bankruptcy protection, citing in-flight Wi-Fi access as one of the factors luring shoppers away from its quirky catalog of travel products, pet toys and garden gnomes.

 The company, Xhibit, said that it would sell off its online retail business and other assets.

 “Historically, the SkyMall catalog was the sole in-flight option for potential purchasers of products to review while traveling. With the increased use of electronic devices on planes, fewer people browsed the SkyMall in-flight catalog,” Xhibit said in a filing to the Securities and Exchange Commission disclosing its Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

 Founded in 1990 to cater to airplane passengers with time and money to spare, SkyMall catalog’s often featured wacky product offerings and provided comic relief for travelers riffling through the seat pockets for light reading.

 Its 2014 holiday catalog offered a Santa Claus Sculptural Glass-Topped Holiday Table for $129; and $1,000 Serenity Pods for cats and dogs, fitted with a wireless sound system and LED lights, which promised to gently rock them to sleep. More sensible offerings included travel-related items like passport wallets or wrinkle-free resort wear.

 Photo

 SkyMall’s eclectic lineup contributed to its downfall, its bankruptcy filing suggested.

 “Because SkyMall historically did not narrowly tailor its product offerings, SkyMall faced well-established competitors in every market vertical, as well as competition from significant, broad-based e-commerce providers, such as Amazon.com and eBay.com,” the filing said.

 Many of SkyMall’s competitors have greater, or vastly greater, resources, longer histories, more customers and higher brand recognition.”

 Advertisement Continue reading the main story

 The costs of carrying printed SkyMall catalogs also made them increasingly unattractive to airlines, the company said. Delta’s contract with SkyMall ended Nov. 30, and Southwest Airlines told Xhibit in December that it would not carry the catalog beyond April of this year, according to the filing. By the end of December, SkyMall faced “a severe liquidity crisis,” it said.

 Sales from Southwest travelers alone made up about 7 percent of its overall merchandise sales and the negative impact on its bottom line could be even greater, the company had warned in an earlier statement.

 Still, Paul Swinand, an analyst for Morningstar who covers the retail industry, called the bankruptcy filing surprising.

 Photo

 “That would seem like it’s a monopoly business,” he said. “Nobody competes with them. Where the SkyMall fell flat was with mobile. If people are on their phones, they’re not browsing the SkyMall catalog.”

 Scott Wiley, Xhibit’s acting chief executive, said in a statement that he was “extremely disappointed in this result.” Mr. Wiley replaced the former Xhibit chief, Kevin Weiss, who resigned from the company last year as its woes mounted.

 He said Xhibit was “hopeful that SkyMall and the iconic ‘SkyMall’ brand find a home to continue to operate as SkyMall has for the last 25 years.”

 In its filing, Xhibit listed assets of $1 million to $10 million, and liabilities of $10 million to $50 million. Delta, American and US Airways were listed among its creditors.

 The SkyMall business generated revenue of about $33.7 million in 2013 and $15.8 million for the nine months ended Sept. 28, according to the filing. Debtors estimate that total creditor claims are approximately $12 million, according to the filing ||||| SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch)—There’s still time to get that special tortilla baby blanket from SkyMall, of course, but the in-flight catalog’s bankruptcy filing is just the latest black eye for an industry that has lost ground for more than a decade.

 The mail-order industry generated $71.4 billion in revenues last year, down 6% from five years ago, according to estimates from analysts at IBISWorld. The analysts predicted a drop to $61 billion in revenues, or 14%, by 2019.

 The main reason? A dwindling customer base and the relentless competition from the likes of Amazon.com Inc. AMZN, -1.29% and other online retailers.

 After all, that same resin yeti sculpture some may consider adorning their lawn with can be found at Amazon. In many cases, e-commerce companies offer more convenience, quicker transactions and more thorough product information than traditional mail order catalogs, IBISWorld analysts said.

 Not to mention price: the yeti sculpture is actually cheaper at SkyMall’s site than on Amazon, but broadly speaking, e-retailers’ prices are “highly competitive,” the analysts said.

 Mailing costs have also increased, coinciding with a growing consumer backlash against unsolicited mail and concerns about paper waste.

 SkyMall and parent company Xhibit Corp. US:XBTC executives couldn't be reached for comment. The company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Thursday, and in filings in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Phoenix, acting Chief Executive Scott Wiley cited e-commerce as one of the reasons for his company’s financial dire straits.

 In addition, air travelers increasingly snubbed SkyMall’s catalogs in favor of their electronic devices, he said. SkyMall is looking for a buyer and will attempt to a scaled-down business operating during the process.

 Don’t dismiss mail-order businesses just yet. The industry has thrived for decades, and some companies have embraced online retail and mobile platforms to expand their customer bases, IBISWorld said.

 Survival will hinge on their ability to identify a target audience through demographic data and advertise their niche products to specific customers through catalogs and digital methods, the analysts said. ||||| SkyMall, whose in-flight shopping catalogs have long been a staple of airline travel, has filed for bankruptcy protection, blaming changing consumer habits and the loss of contracts from two major carriers, Delta and Southwest.

 Xhibit Corp XBTC.PK, SkyMall's parent, on Friday said it hoped to sell its main assets, including the SkyMall online retail business, in April through a court-supervised auction, and then complete an "orderly wind-down" of its affairs.

 It also said it suspended its retail catalog operations on Jan. 16, laying off 47 of its 150 employees.

 Xhibit and SkyMall filed for Chapter 11 protection from creditors on Thursday night in the U.S. bankruptcy court in Phoenix, their hometown. The debtors, including several affiliates, face $12 million of creditor claims.

 Founded in 1989, SkyMall said it sold more than 30,000 products it calls "cool stuff," including novelty items ranging from personalized socks to dog beds to a $2,499 football helmet signed by Notre Dame players and coaches. It says it reaches 650 million air travelers a year.

 But in a court filing, Chief Financial Officer Scott Wiley said financial strains grew as travelers spent less time in the air browsing catalogs and more time on their smartphones and laptops, and amid increased competition from online rivals such as Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O) and eBay Inc (EBAY.O).

 Wiley also said Delta Air Lines Inc (DAL.N) ended its contract with SkyMall on Nov. 30, and Southwest Airlines Co (LUV.N) planned to stop carrying the catalog on April 1.

 SkyMall revenue totaled $33.7 million in 2013, but only about $15.8 million in the first nine months of 2014, a court filing shows.

 The case is In re: SkyMall LLC, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Arizona, No, 15-bk-00679.

 (Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York) ||||| My parents didn’t love each other anymore, so at 10-, 7-, and 2-years-old, we flew unaccompanied between Idaho and LA for visits. We may not have had chaperones or the security of an intact nuclear family, but we had one essential comfort: The SkyMall catalog.

 As the eldest sibling, it fell to me to read the descriptions to my brothers. I ad-libbed.

 “THIS is the garden gnome we’d need if we lived by ourselves in the forest. We’d set this up outside our rotted out tree trunk to warn away bad guys.”

 “What bad guys?” little 7-year-old Ben would ask.

 “Uh, that bad guy,” I’d say, pointing to some smelly adult on the plane.

 We devoured every page–even the ones with the posters of slogans we didn’t understand. Why is that cat hanging in there, we wondered?

 My favorite was the convertible furniture section. I was big into playing house at the time, pretending I had no parents and was in charge of my own destiny. The centerpiece of said destiny was surely going to be that magic-looking bureau that actually opened up into what the catalog called a liquor cabinet but looked to me more like where a witch stored her potions. I was no dummy; I knew what liquor was, and I knew people abused it and went to something called “Ah” to deal with that, so I figured instead of liquor I’d hide way better things, like makeup and food. Or magic potions if I ever came across any.

 When my dad would pick us up at LAX, we’d bring our copy of SkyMall, dog-eared, pored over.

 “Dad, can we get the life-size tiger for your house?”

 I can only imagine how much he wanted to laugh in our faces, but divorce does a tricky thing to parents: it makes them never want to say no to you. That year, he let us pick our Christmas gifts from SkyMall. All of them. Literally. I have no memory of what we actually chose. He flew us back to Idaho so we could spend the holiday together and I just remember the elation of picking up the phone in the back of the headrest on the Delta plane and calling a human being from the air. The line cracked, but from down deep below the thin air, a woman’s voice said, “Hi, thanks for calling SkyMall.” Outside the window, smog and clouds skidded past and I was talking on the telephone to a human being who was going to send us presents!

 The possibilities in life were limitless.

 That was the only time I ever bought anything out of the catalog, but Ben spent a good decade ordering Christmas presents from its pages. He did this for two reasons: first, he saw it as a sort of tradition, beginning on that trip in 1991; and second, he inevitably was flying to whichever parent we were spending the holidays with and hadn’t thought about a gift for anyone yet.

 Before the Internet, before Amazon, SkyMall was the best option for slackers with no cash but a credit card furnished by family guilt.

 “Mom, I bought you a bunion strap and a stepping stool for your dog!” Ben would say, never able to keep his gifts a secret until Christmas day.

 “YOU bought it? How?”

 “With your credit card.”

 “Oh. That credit card is for emergencies, honey.”

 “It was a Christmas emergency, Mom.”

 There was no answering that.

 SkyMall was our babysitter. Our distraction. When we got older we delighted in mocking the absurdity of it, how ridiculous and unnecessary was everything in its pages. In this way, we explained to each other that we were maturing, that we weren’t dumb little kids anymore. When I became a teenager–embarrassed by everything and everyone–I’d tease the boys for liking anything in the catalog.

 “That is SO pointless,” I’d say.

 “OK, we can stop looking at it,” Ben would say.

 “No, no,” I’d protest. “Harry is having fun.” Harry, wide-eyed and three years old would narrow his eyes into a look that seemed to say, “I know I’m being used.”

 SkyMall was a tradition. An absurd, capitalistic embodiment of everything that was shallow and wrong with our lives, and yet it also brought us comfort. No matter if the plane was delayed, or we were stuck alone on a layover, missing whichever parent we were leaving, missing the friends and the life we were leaving behind each time we went between homes, it was there to make us laugh. To let us roll our eyes. To surprise us with a new level of novelty and frivolity.

 SkyMall, that stupid wonderful completely American wonder that, with its insistence that you take your own free copy, announced it was your right as a human in the ‘90s to never not be shopping. Never not be consuming.

 Of course, I didn’t think about how genius it was for them to tap into such a captive audience, stuck with nothing to do but wait. I never felt manipulated back then. I was a kid. Now it’s not hard to see how the business model wasn’t sustainable into the aughts and beyond.

 When I fly now I try to write. Or sleep. Or squirm. Or, who am I kidding, look at Twitter. I haven’t noticed a SkyMall on the last 10 planes I’ve flown but I’m sure it was there, slick and expectant in the seat back flap, amid the wrappers and detritus of former travelers. Waiting for someone to notice it.

 I’m sorry I paid $7 for inflight Wi-Fi instead of reading you, little shopping catalog. Forgive me. |||||
What is a shorter version of the above article?

– It was just a matter of time: The company behind SkyMall, the inflight magazine that pitched air travelers stuff they didn't need, has filed for bankruptcy. It could go no longer compete now that people are allowed to fire up their smartphones and tablets on the plane, especially against the likes of Amazon. Xhibit Corp. has suspended the catalog but hopes it might survive in a bankruptcy deal. Business writers can't resist picking out their favorite items for sale: Wall Street Journal: "If a bankruptcy deal doesn’t happen, some flyers will be sad to see the seller of Bigfoot Garden Yeti statues (which retails for $2,250 for the life size model) and Litter Robots (a robotic self-cleaning cat litter box for $359.99) go the way of other now-defunct retailers." MarketWatch: "There’s still time to get that special tortilla baby blanket from SkyMall, of course, but ..." Reuters: "(N)ovelty items ranging from personalized socks to dog beds to a $2,499 football helmet signed by Notre Dame players and coaches." New York Times: Its story mentions "a Santa Claus Sculptural Glass-Topped Holiday Table for $129; and $1,000 Serenity Pods for cats and dogs, fitted with a wireless sound system and LED lights, which promised to gently rock them to sleep." USA Today: The company "that entices airline travelers with offers for iFetch ball launchers for dogs and mini clap-on alarm clocks, is ..." Wired: This is more of an ode, and apology, from SkyMall adorer Emily Dreyfuss. "I’m sorry I paid $7 for inflight Wi-Fi instead of reading you, little shopping catalog. Forgive me. "


News article:

Update: Our beautiful Charlie has been blessed with hundreds of thousands of supporters from around the world. We are so incredibly grateful for all your continued love and support, and would like to take this opportunity to advise you of what we shall be doing with the money raised for Charlie’s cause.

 In the following weeks we will be setting up The Charlie Gard Foundation: a foundation that will help other children with mitochondrial diseases, and rare childhood illnesses. Too many children are losing their fight against rare medical conditions, which emphasises the need for more research, and we hope we can help deliver this through Charlie’s foundation.

 We also intend on becoming a hub of information for parents that may find themselves in a situation like ours. There needs to be more clarity for parents about parental rights when it comes to making life-saving decisions about their children. Access to medical treatment, and expert clinicians, should never be denied if funds are available. We will be looking at ways in which we can help make things clearer for families and hospitals alike.

 We feel that the foundation will be a lovely legacy for Charlie, and we hope that you will all continue to support us in honouring the life of our little warrior as he helps other poorly children and their families.

 It also gives us great pleasure to announce that gofundme.com have been so touched by our cause that they have kindly donated £10,000 towards Charlie’s foundation. A wonderful gesture from the team, and we are extremely grateful for their generosity. All existing donations from our gofundme fundraising account – and any new donations – will now go towards Charlie’s foundation.

 From the bottom of our hearts, we thank you all for your support.

 The C Team (Connie, Chris and our angel Charlie)

 It’s with great sadness that we have to inform you that Charlie passed away earlier this afternoon. Connie has released a brief statement: ‘Our beautiful, little boy has gone. We are so proud of you, Charlie.’

 We ask that everyone respects the family’s privacy at this difficult time, but we would all like to say a huge thank you to everyone for your continued support. ||||| This is an undated hand out photo of Chris Gard and Connie Yates with their son Charlie Gard provided by the family, at Great Ormond Street Hospital, in London. The president of the United States has... (Associated Press)

 This is an undated hand out photo of Chris Gard and Connie Yates with their son Charlie Gard provided by the family, at Great Ormond Street Hospital, in London. The president of the United States has... (Associated Press)

 LONDON (AP) — A terminally ill British child has attracted the attention of both the president of the United States and the pope. More than 1.3 million pounds ($1.68 million) has been raised to help 11-month-old Charlie Gard travel to America for treatment.

 But little has changed for baby Charlie, who suffers from a rare genetic disease that has left him brain damaged and unable to breathe unaided. The life support he is receiving at a London hospital soon will be turned off over the objections of his parents, who want to take him to the United States for experimental therapy they believe could prolong his life.

 A succession of judges has backed specialists at Great Ormond Street Hospital who say the treatment won't help Charlie and may cause him to suffer. Britain's Supreme Court ruled it's in the boy's best interests to be allowed to die with dignity. The European Court of Human Rights last week rejected an appeal from Charlie's parents, Chris Gard and Connie Yates, exhausting their legal options.

 They have been spending time with Charlie before he is taken off life support.

 By wading into the case in recent days, President Donald Trump and Pope Francis have given Gard and Yates new hope and shined an international spotlight on an ethical debate that pits the rights of parents to decide what's best for their children against the authorities with responsibility for ensuring that people who can't speak for themselves receive the most appropriate care.

 "The world is watching," reads the headline across the top of charliesfight.org, the website dedicated to Charlie's cause. "Two of the most powerful men in the world want to give Charlie Gard his chance."

 Great Ormond Street Hospital said Tuesday there were no new updates in Charlie's care.

 Trump tweeted Monday that he would be "delighted" to help Charlie, who is suffering from mitochondrial depletion syndrome, which causes progressive muscle weakness. The president's comment came after Pope Francis issued a statement saying the parents' rights to treat their son "until the end" should be respected.

 The Vatican children's hospital studied whether it was possible for Great Ormond Street to transfer Charlie to Rome. But Bambino Gesu hospital President Mariella Enoc said she was informed that the board of the London hospital said Charlie cannot be moved for legal reasons.

 However, the matter was still being examined Tuesday.

 "I was contacted by the mother, who is a very determined and decisive person and doesn't want to be stopped by anything," Enoc told reporters.

 Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin has said the Holy See will do everything it can to overcome legal obstacles to bringing Charlie to Bambino Gesu for treatment.

 "Overcome these problems? If we can do it, we will do it," Parolin said.

 The fight over keeping Charlie alive is not about money. Charlie's parents have used a crowdfunding website to raise the money needed to pay for his treatment in the U.S. Instead, it revolves around an ethical debate about what's best for the child.

 Under British law, it is normal for courts to intervene when parents and doctors disagree on the treatment of a child — such as cases where a parent's religious beliefs prohibit blood transfusions.

 The rights of the child take primacy, rather than the rights of parents to make the call. It is a principle that applies even in cases where parents have an alternative point of view, according to Britain's Court of Appeal.

 And Britain's courts have been consistent in this case. Three courts agreed that the experimental treatment would be futile and may "well cause pain, suffering and distress to Charlie." The parents then took their case to the European Court of Human Rights, which refused to intervene and endorsed the British judges' decision.

 "This was a decision about what is best for this child," said Claire Fenton-Glynn, an academic at the University of Cambridge who studies children's rights. "This is an incredibly difficult decision for the court, and it's not one that the doctors or the court have taken lightly."

 "It's this terrible, terrible situation," she said. "It's a horrible thing to have to decide."

 In the United States, such disputes are normally negotiated between parents and doctors, according to Arthur Caplan, head of the division of bioethics at New York University Langone Medical Center in New York City. A family's ability to afford endless care usually poses a bigger obstacle than ethical disagreements.

 Even the Vatican had difficulty with Charlie's case, as was clear in the conflicting messages that at first came from the Holy See. The pope's top bioethics official initially suggested that while the parents' wishes should be respected, they must also be helped to accept the limits of medicine.

 After an outcry from conservatives, Pope Francis issued a statement of his own, insisting on the need to respect the wishes of the parents to "accompany and treat" their son to the very end.

 Caplan said Charlie's situation is a reminder that medicine and technology can't fix everything, even in wealthy countries with cutting-edge technology.

 "It is a strong belief in the U.S and U.K. that medicine has one more trick up its sleeve," Caplan said. "It's like an article of faith. But it's almost never true at the end of life." ||||| A New York City hospital has offered to help Charlie Gard, a terminally ill British 11-month-old who U.K. and European courts have prevented from being treated abroad.

 Gard suffers from a rare genetic condition that has left him brain damaged and unable to breathe on his own. His parents tried to bring him to the U.S. for an experimental treatment, but that effort that was blocked by the courts after doctors said it would not help him.

 Both Pope Francis and President Trump have offered to help Gard, with Mr. Trump weighing in on the matter with a tweet earlier this week.

 If we can help little #CharlieGard, as per our friends in the U.K. and the Pope, we would be delighted to do so. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 3, 2017

 In a statement Thursday night, New York Presbyterian Hospital and Columbia University Irving Medical Center said it had agreed to admit Gard.

 "New-York Presbyterian Hospital and Columbia University Irving Medical Center have agreed to admit and evaluate Charlie, provided that arrangements are made to safely transfer him to our facility, legal hurdles are cleared, and we receive emergency approval from the FDA for an experimental treatment as appropriate," the hospital said in a statement.

 "Alternatively, if approved by the FDA, we will arrange shipment of the experimental drug to Great Ormond Street Hospital and advise their medical staff on administering it if they are willing to do so."

 British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson announced earlier this week that he supported the courts' decisions.

 "The foreign secretary said this was a deeply tragic and complex case for all involved, and said it was right that decisions continued to be led by expert medical opinion, supported by the courts, in line with Charlie's best interests," Johnson's spokesman said in statement.

 Undated photo of Charlie Gard provided by his family, at Great Ormond Street Hospital, in London. Family of Charlie Gard via AP

 Editor's Note: This story has been corrected to report Charlie Gard's correct age. |||||
What is a shorter version of the above article?

– A New York City hospital says it has "agreed to admit and evaluate" Charlie Gard, the terminally ill British baby whose case has attracted the attention of Pope Francis and President Trump. New York Presbyterian Hospital and Columbia University Irving Medical Center says it can admit 11-month-old Charlie, provided he can be safely transferred, "legal hurdles are cleared, and we receive emergency approval from the FDA for an experimental treatment," CBS reports. Charlie is currently in London's Great Ormond Street Hospital, and the New York hospital says another option would be to send the experimental drug there if the FDA approves, reports the Washington Post. The Vatican has also offered to bring Charlie, who has a rare genetic disease, to Rome's Bambino Gesu hospital for treatment, but British courts have ruled that the boy should be kept in the UK and taken off life support because further treatment would only prolong his suffering. "The world is watching," website charliesfight.org says. "Two of the most powerful men in the world want to give Charlie Gard his chance." But despite the offers of help, the legal situation has not changed for Charlie, who could be taken off life support at any time, the AP reports. Legal experts say British courts dealing with the " terrible, terrible situation" have decided that overruling his parent's wishes is the best thing for the child.


News article:

These crawls are part of an effort to archive pages as they are created and archive the pages that they refer to. That way, as the pages that are referenced are changed or taken from the web, a link to the version that was live when the page was written will be preserved.Then the Internet Archive hopes that references to these archived pages will be put in place of a link that would be otherwise be broken, or a companion link to allow people to see what was originally intended by a page's authors.The goal is to fix all broken links on the web . Crawls of supported "No More 404" sites. ||||| In this Feb. 11, 2011 file photo, Rep. Robert Andrews (D-N.J.), left, accompanied by Rep. Tim Bishop (D-N.Y.), speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. Andrews announced Tuesday that he is resigning from Congress after 23 years. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)

 In his 23 years in Congress, Rep. Robert E. Andrews (D-N.J.) has written 646 different pieces of legislation. That is a vast array of bills, covering a vast number of subjects: children’s pajamas, relations with Taiwan, commemorative coins and trade duties on licorice.

 But all of Andrews’s bills had one thing in common.

 They didn’t become law.

 Only four of Andrews’s hundreds of bills have ever passed the House of Representatives. But none of them passed the Senate, so none made it to the president’s desk.

 Even in Congress, where the vast majority of bills fail, that is an unusually awful batting average. By those numbers, Andrews would be America’s least successful lawmaker of the past two decades.

 Andrews, 56, said Tuesday he would resign in two weeks, taking a position at the law firm Dilworth Paxson. In an interview Tuesday, he insisted that these statistics don’t capture his true record in Congress.

 The reason, he said, is that the classic idea of how lawmaking works — an idea becomes a bill, the bill gets a debate, and the debate ends with a vote — does not mean much on today’s Capitol Hill.

 “ ‘I’m Just a Bill on Capitol Hill’ is not the way this works. Freestanding bills almost never happen,” Andrews said, referencing the “Schoolhouse Rock” cartoon about how a bill sings and dances its way through Congress.

 Instead, lawmaking is now done with massive pieces of legislation crammed full of ideas that might have little to do with one another. What looks like failure, Andrews said, is actually his success at working the new system.

 “You should ask yourself how many of the ideas that were a seed planted in the bill that germinated in a larger bill. That’s the way this really works,” he said. In all, he estimated, about 110 of his ideas have become law after being stuck into somebody else’s bill.

 Andrews has spent the past two decades as a semi-liberal backbencher with no real leadership roles in the House. Andrews’s legislative clout was reduced sharply when Republicans took the House in 2011, and also by lingering allegations that he used campaign funds to pay for personal and family trips.

 But a look at Andrews’s bills shows that his lawmaking ambitions have been enormous, even when his power was not.

 Since Andrews arrived in Congress, no other representative has introduced more bills. In second place is Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.), followed by Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.) and former congressman Ron Paul (R-Tex.).

 But all of those other lawmakers have managed to pass something into law sometime in their career. Maloney has had nine bills signed into law. Young has had 76. Rangel has had 38. And even Paul had one, a minor bill to convey a piece of federal property in Galveston, Tex.

 Andrews has not. The closest he has come has been to watch a senator introduce a bill similar to one of his and then see that Senate bill become law. That’s happened twice, according to Joshua Tauberer, whose site govtrack.us allows users to track and compare vast amounts of data on Congress.

 Although it was the companion bills to Andrews’s that were enacted, Tauberer said, he should get some credit for their success.

 “Only one of the two companion bills will actually become law, but the work to get either enacted may have been shared by the two sponsors equally,” Tauberer said. “It’s helpful to keep companion bills in mind when quantifying legislative activity.”

 In one case, in 1992, both Andrews and Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.) introduced bills to name a federal courthouse in Camden, N.J. Lautenberg’s version was the one the president signed.

 Also, in 1999, both Andrews and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) introduced bills that changed the rules governing benefit plans run by churches. It was Sessions’s bill that, after significant amendments, became law.

 The many other bills submitted by Andrews have, over the years, included 11 related to Taiwan, often seeking to show U.S. support for that country in its disputes with China. He has sponsored five bills to mint a commemorative coin in honor of Korean immigrants. And he has introduced at least 30 bills that would lower duties on chemicals used in manufacturing — everything from licorice extract to methoxycarbonyl-terminated perfluorinated polyoxymethylene-polyoxyethylene.

 And he struck out every time.

 At least on paper.

 “People think . . . well, you introduce a bill, and then you walk around and try to get people to co-sponsor it” and then it passes, Andrews said. “You know, that happens about as often as a black swan.”

 Instead, Andrews says, he introduces bills so that he has legislative language ready for an opening. That opening, usually, is what Hill staffers call a “moving vehicle” — a giant piece of legislation that, unlike most of Congress’s inert bills, actually has a chance of passage.

 “What happens in 90 percent of the [cases] is that certain bills move because they have to,” Andrews said — often because some important deadline is about to expire. “And those bills carry with them hundreds of ideas, or thousands of ideas that people have worked on over the years.”

 Andrews said he has learned how to get his ideas on board by stockpiling legislative language that can be easily picked up and inserted into larger legislation.

 As evidence of his success, he cited changes to the military health-care program Tricare and rules about insurance coverage of orthotic devices. Some other ideas have changed government policy without being passed in any form: In 2012, Andrews trumpeted a decision by mortgage firms Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to require prompt decisions on short sales. Andrews’s actual bill to require that change had died on Capitol Hill. |||||
What is a shorter version of the above article?

– New Jersey Democrat Rob Andrews made a surprise announcement today that he'll be giving up his House seat as of Feb. 18 to join a Philadelphia law firm, reports Philly.com. And while it's big news in Jersey, Andrews isn't exactly a household name nationally. Still, the Washington Post observes that he's got a legislative track record remarkable in its own way: Over 23 years, not one of the 646 pieces of legislation Andrews authored has become law. All the more impressive is that no representative has introduced more bills than him in that span. Sure, most bills fail in Congress, but "by those numbers, Andrews would be America’s least successful lawmaker of the past two decades," writes David Fahrenthold. Andrews, described as a "semi-liberal back-bencher," defends himself by saying that modern lawmaking these days is done through massive pieces of legislation, not through individual bills. By his own reckoning, Andrews estimates that 110 of his ideas have become law in that fashion. If he wants to eliminate the goose egg, however, maybe he can rename a post office in his final two weeks?


News article:

A slew of right-of-center websites are promoting a new video of leaked raw footage that alleges “proof” that CBS’ Evening News anchor Katie Couric was mocking then Alaska Governor Sarah Palin on the day she was announced as John McCain‘s running mate.

 But what evidence is there that she was making fun of Palin? Not much actually.

 Before launching into the break-down of what may or may not be the “smoking gun” in the following video, it’s important to place it in the proper historical context. Roughly two years ago, GOP Presidential candidate John McCain truly shocked the news world with the surprise announcement of Palin as his running mate. It’s almost hard to imagine that, back then, very little was known about Ms. Palin and her very unique backstory.

 The unearthed video appears to be people watching and commenting on raw and unedited footage of Couric rehearsing news copy as well as recording interstitial promotional spots and recording voice over tracks. And the proof that she’s “mocking” Palin? Well let’s let the editors at Conservatives4Palin.com explain:

 As you can see, the video shows Katie Couric preparing to go on the air on the day John McCain announced Governor Palin as his running mate. It shows some tantalizing hints of Couric’s attitude toward the Governor–when talking about first Trig, then Track, Couric says “where the hell do they get these [names]?…” At that point the producer running the sound board shut off the sound because he or she didn’t want to have Couric’s disdainful and contemptuous view of Governor Palin’s children captured on even an internal CBS tape that they never expected would see the light of day. You can tell this by the “OMG!” reaction of the CBS news employees who were in the control room as Couric said that about the Governor’s kids. This video also shows Couric taking a shot at female basketball players and at Governor Palin’s hometown, one of the fastest growing areas in the country, and the fifth largest city in Alaska.

 So the “smoking gun” is Couric’s comment after reading off the names of Todd and Sarah Palin children, asking “where the hell do they get these (names)?” Clearly for some that is evidence of bias and mockery from Couric. But considering that, at the time that this was recorded, Couric almost certainly knew very little about the former Governor. And regardless of where one finds his or herself on the political spectrum, Palin’s kids DO have unique names. So, presuming that this is the first time that one is reading the names of the Palin’s children, “what the hell” is not an unsurprising response.

 The post in Conservatives4Palin continues to present this footage in a a broader and, ostensibly, more damning context:

 It’s not just what was said by Couric in her discussion of Governor Palin, but also the way CBS framed the narrative of Governor Palin’s life in their story. The script covers moose burgers, her kids, her being a former beauty queen and being on the cover of Vogue. Sarah Palin was a sitting governor, and at that time, before the Obama campaign and their allies in the press spent months relentlessly smearing her good name, she had the highest approval ratings of any governor in the country.

 This line of thinking reveals a lack of understanding of relationships between news outlets and political campaigns. While the news copy was clearly crafted by the writers at Evening News, they were almost certainly given a set of details by the campaign. So to criticize the bullet points that Couric lists as evidence of her bias neglects the fact they were most likely provided by the McCain campaign. Further, if there was any frustration with the framing of Palin’s background and selection as VP candidate, surely Palin and her handlers would not have agreed to the now notorious and candid interview in which Palin did not list to Couric the titles of magazines that she regularly read.

 Katie Couric is a well-regarded and very well-respected journalist, known just as well for her self-effacing style and sharp sense of humor. And the video clip seems to support her reputation as a “don’t take yourself too seriously” news anchor. Bottom line, to call this proof of her mocking Palin just falls way short of its mark. ||||| "Where the hell do they get these names?"

 Sarah Palin allies are circulating the above August '08 footage of their bete noire, Katie Couric, digesting exactly who John McCain picked as his running mate and trying to get a handle on the unique names of her children.

 It'll be interesting to see if Palin herself seizes on the clip. Given her fixation on media coverage generally and Couric particularly as well as her Momma Grizzly tendencies, it would seem quite tempting. ||||| Video: Couric makes fun of Palin while taping before 2008 convention

 posted at 2:15 pm on August 4, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

 Via C4P and The College Press, the video of the day on the right shows Katie Couric taping some promo spots for CBS News coverage of the Republican convention in 2008 on the day that John McCain announced his selection of Sarah Palin as running mate. The tape appears genuine, although it’s difficult to know when the YouTube version was taken; the camera was pointed at a monitor during the playback (which is why the black bars appear, as refresh rates differ between the monitor and the camera). Did a CBS News employee shoot this while watching the satellite feed, or did a C-band satellite owner get a now-rare unencrypted feed from CBS at the time? Why did it take two years for this to come out? I assume these questions will eventually get answered, but for now, Couric’s snobbish reaction to Palin, the names of her children, and mooseburgers is pretty instructive:

 Couric was hardly the only person to make a snide comment about the tradition of names in Palin’s family, and Sarah Palin herself talked about their efforts to find unique names for their children during the campaign. Couric may have been first, however, even if it was in a presumably off-air moment. People make similar comments about Hollywood celebrities and the names they select for their children, but that usually doesn’t extend to major network news anchors. The comments themselves aren’t an indictment as much as they are a window into the first biases that formed in Couric’s mind, to such an extent that she felt it necessary to share them with her co-workers — and why the McCain campaign bet badly on having Palin give her first major interview to CBS News.

 In the wake of the Sherrod disaster, it’s also worth pointing out that this is an edited clip; there is at least one cut in this video, and quite obviously we don’t have everything Couric said off air for context. It’s entirely possible that Couric also made approving comments about Palin at other moments on that day, which either didn’t get captured or were cut out. Likely? Well …

 We have contacted both CBS and Governor Palin’s staff for comment on this tape, and will update if we receive any statements.

 Update: CBS has an official non-statement statement on the clip through a CBS News spokesperson: “It must be a slow news day for this video to be getting so much attention.” We’re hearing from other sourcing that CBS isn’t disputing that this is Couric in an off-air setting, and that they won’t pursue how it got out.

 Related Posts: ||||| By the Editors

 The following video was sent to C4P’s tips account.

 Update:

 “It must be a slow news day for this video to be getting so much attention.”

 We’re hearing from other sourcing that CBS isn’t disputing that this is Couric in an off-air setting, and that they won’t pursue how it got out.

 As you can see, the video shows Katie Couric preparing to go on the air on the day John McCain announced Governor Palin as his running mate. It shows some tantalizing hints of Couric’s attitude toward the Governor--when talking about first Trig, then Track, Couric says “where the hell do they get these [names]?...” At that point the producer running the sound board shut off the sound because he or she didn’t want to have Couric’s disdainful and contemptuous view of Governor Palin’s children captured on even an internal CBS tape that they never expected would see the light of day. You can tell this by the “OMG!” reaction of the CBS news employees who were in the control room as Couric said that about the Governor’s kids. This video also shows Couric taking a shot at female basketball players and at Governor Palin’s hometown, one of the fastest growing areas in the country, and the fifth largest city in Alaska.There’s a larger story here, of course.It’s not just what was said by Couric in her discussion of Governor Palin, but also the way CBS framed the narrative of Governor Palin’s life in their story. The script covers moose burgers, her kids, her being a former beauty queen and being on the cover of Vogue. Sarah Palin was a sitting governor, and at that time, before the Obama campaign and their allies in the press spent months relentlessly smearing her good name, she had the highest approval ratings of any governor in the country. She was also responsible for getting the largest energy project in North American history underway after several decades of interminable delays in Alaska. She was a courageous corruption-busting whistleblower who turned in the leader of her own party in Alaska for his corrupt practices. She was a fiscal conservative who made the largest veto cuts in Alaska history, reined in the reckless waste, cut her own expenses, sold the governor’s private jet, let the personal chef go, and put away billions of dollars in savings for Alaska for a rainy day. She was a tough CEO who went toe to toe with the Big Oil companies and fought to get the best deal for Alaskans, the resource owners she represented. And she did all of this as a woman from a modest background who was entirely self-made – without the benefit of a rich or influential father or husband.But what in this impressive biography did CBS News and Couric choose to focus on? Moose burgers and beauty pageants.By their choice of the framing of the story, it’s evident Couric and CBS had an agenda here: They wanted to diminish Governor Palin because her impressive record of accomplishments towered over the non-existent record of the guy at the top of the Democrat ticket.We know from the JournoList archives that the national press viewed Governor Palin as a threat to their anointed candidate whom they sought to elect with ferocity and determination. We don’t even need to see Couric’s snarky comment about Governor Palin’s children to know that CBS News and Couric were not interested in covering who Sarah Palin was or what her qualifications were, but rather in caricaturing her to influence the election in favor of their favored candidate.As Governor Palin would say, “may the light continue to shine” to expose this sickness at the heart of our corrupt and biased mainstream media.Once again Sarah Palin has been vindicated.Ed Morissey at Hot Air has an "official non-statement statement" from CBS:Yesterday must have been a slow news day at CBS. How else might one explain a major news organization picking up a story about how Sarah Palin's Facebook comments are handled? Then there was the coverage of an impending divorce for the Palins, a falsehood that originated on Palin-hating blogs. Must have been a slow news day that day too. And all those days that Levi Johnston was interviewed on CBS. Must have been slow news days, as well.There seem to be a lot of slow news days over at CBS.Hot Air also says:That's quite a non-defense of their star that CBS has put up. Of course, with her bottom-of-the-barrel ratings and her efforts to blame all her troubles on her bosses, rumor has it that Couric's not long for CBS. Maybe they don't want to waste their efforts on an unprofessional sinking ship.* Bumped |||||
What is a shorter version of the above article?

– Right-leaning websites such as Conservatives4Palin are jumping on a 2008 video they say shows Katie Couric "mocking" Sarah Palin. In the footage, taken the day Palin was picked to be the VP candidate, Couric struggles off air with the names of the candidate's kids. "Where the hell do they get these names," she asks after reading off "Trig" and "Track." The site also accuses Couric of being generally dismissive of Palin throughout her initial coverage, with a focus on "moose burgers and beauty pageants." Some other reactions: "The comments themselves aren’t an indictment," but the video does allow us to watch the seeds of bias get planted in Couric’s mind, "to such an extent that she felt it necessary to share them with her co-workers," writes Ed Morrissey for Hot Air. "The McCain campaign bet badly on having Palin give her first major interview to CBS News." The criticism is off base, writes Colby Hall at Mediaite. Keep in mind that Palin was virtually unknown at the time, "and regardless of where one finds his or herself on the political spectrum, Palin’s kids DO have unique names." And any other "bullet points" about Palin's life highlighted by CBS undoubtedly came from the McCain campaign. "To call this proof of her mocking Palin just falls way short of its mark." Still, it will be interesting to see if Palin seizes on the tape, notes Ben Smith at Politico. Given her "fixation" on the media in general and Couric in particular, "it would seem quite tempting."


News article:

Joe Francis $20 MILLION LOSER In Steve Wynn Lawsuit

 Exclusive Details

 just got hammered by a jury in's defamation lawsuit -- the jury socked him with a $20 million verdict.If you recall ... Wynn was suing Francis for defamation, claiming the "" guru made bogus claims that Wynn threatened to have him killed and buried in the desert over a gambling debt.The judge nailed Francis to the tune of $5 mil for statements made to a TMZ producer in a courtroom hallway ... talking smack on Wynn.The jury added $11 mil for defamatory statements Francis made on "Good Morning America."All tolled, the verdict is for $20 mil.The jury will now decide if Francis gets hit with punitive damages .. and that could be an additional $60 mil.Francis is worth a reported $150 million.Francis tells TMZ he believes the judge made 2 reversible and appealable errors -- one of which was allowing Wynn to add the 'GMA' claim at the end of the trial. Francis also believes some of the statements that allegedly constitute defamation were made in a court proceeding where Francis was seeking a restraining order against Wynn and were therefore privileged. ||||| A Los Angeles jury on Monday awarded casino mogul Steve Wynn $20 million, after it found that he had been defamed by "Girls Gone Wild" creator Joe Francis.

 Wynn had sued Francis over the latter's claims that Wynn had threatened to have him killed and buried in the desert. Testifying last week, Wynn called the accusation a "terrible lie" that could potentially hurt his reputation and that of his eponymous company.

 "He's unrepentant, vicious, out-of-control," Wynn said of Francis.

 But since Wynn filed suit in 2010, Francis has maintained that the threat was real. He said music mogul Quincy Jones, his neighbor and a longtime friend of Wynn's, told him that Wynn wanted Francis dead in an email.

 In court, Jones said that Wynn never threatened to kill Francis, and that Jones had never told Francis that Wynn had.

 Francis' team has never produced the email; Wynn said that's because it doesn't exist.

 The Wynn-Francis feud stretches over a number of years and multiple lawsuits. Francis attorney David Houston has suggested that their fraught history is what riled Wynn enough to threaten Francis.

 Francis made the death-threat accusations while warring with Wynn over a roughly $2-million gambling debt Francis had racked up. Francis and Wynn also battled in court over Francis' accusations that he was plied with prostitutes and drugs during his betting spree. (A Nevada judge sided with Wynn in a lawsuit over those claims.)

 In questioning Wynn, Houston tried to prove that the mogul, considered a sort of elder statesman in the gaming industry, was capable of spouting off threats. Houston played part of an interview from the 1980s in which Wynn told TV reporter Meredith Vieira that he'd choke her if she didn't include certain information in her report.

 "I think you heard her laugh," Wynn said.

 "Or gasp," Houston replied.

 ALSO:

 Glendale bear still in a cage; move to Colorado on hold

 Amanda Bynes charged in two alleged hit-and-run incidents

 Marines accused of assaulting man outside gay bar in Long Beach

 — Harriet Ryan and Ashley Powers

 Photo: Joe Francis, left, and Steve Wynn. Credit: Associated Press file photos |||||
What is a shorter version of the above article?

– Lots of girls are going to have to go pretty wild to pay off Joe Francis' legal bills: A jury has awarded casino mogul Steve Wynn $20 million in his slander suit against the Girls Gone Wild soft-porn tycoon, reports the Los Angeles Times. Francis had publicly claimed that Wynn threatened to have him killed and buried in the desert over a $2 million gambling debt, but the jury decided that the allegations were false and Wynn had been slandered. The jury will now decide whether to hit Francis with punitive damages, which could be as much as $60 million, TMZ reports.


Image: Getty

 Bolivia has rejected an “offensive” donation of 100,000 chickens from Bill Gates, saying the billionaire philanthropist should apologize for not knowing that Bolivia already has enough poultry.

 Advertisement

 “How can he think we are living 500 years ago, in the middle of the jungle not knowing how to produce?” said César Cocaric, the country’s minister of development, said about Gates’ gift. “Respectfully, he should stop talking about Bolivia and once he knows more, apologize to us.”

 Gates announced the chicken initiative earlier this month, writing that “It’s pretty clear to me that just about anyone who’s living in extreme poverty is better off if they have chickens” because they’re cheap, a good investment, eggs keep kids healthy, and women can sell them. The idea was to donate 100,000 chickens to high-poverty countries. It’s certainly not the strangest of the tech billionaire’s world-saving ideas, considering he’s drunk water made from poop.

 Advertisement

 Of course, this means the gift of the chickens saddles your country with a designation that is not exactly flattering, which might be especially hard to swallow for a leftist, anti-imperialist government like Bolivia’s.

 The chickens especially could be seen as an insult since, according to a report from the Bolivian Institute of Foreign Trade, the poultry industry (including both eggs and chickens) grew by 35% from 2008 to 2014. The minister has a point when he says the country does know how to produce. As Cocarico said, Bolivians “do not need any gifted chicks in order to live, we have dignity.” You hear that, Bill?

 [The Verge] ||||| The per capita egg consumption in Bolivia increased from 130 units to 143 units last year, meanwhile chicken meat consumption rose from 35 kilos to 38 kilos per capita. The production of both poultry products therefore has increased significantly in the last five years.

 According to a study by the Bolivian Institute of Foreign Trade (IBCE) during 2013 egg production in Bolivia exceeded 1,500 million units and recorded a growth of 11% over 2012.

 The department of Santa Cruz is the largest egg producer, with 59% share in total and an offer of 881 million units for the whole country. Cochabamba followes with 522 million units and in the rest of the country 101 million units are produced.

 The Cooperativa Agropecuaria Integral San Juan de Yapacaní (CAISY) focuses on the poultry, with the sector representing about 80% of the economic movement of the cooperative. The cooperative has a total of 71 poultry partners with an average production of 20 million eggs per month, which are sold in the cities of La Paz, El Alto and Santa Cruz de la Sierra. This represents approximately 30% of the supply of the domestic market.

 The union is concerned about the quality from the first stage of production, which is the distribution of laying pullets to their partners, so they import directly genetic line ISA Brown from Brazil.

 In the period 2008-2013, broiler production reached more than 939 million birds, obtaining a peak in 2013 of 180 million, according to the report of IBCE. Half of the total supply of Bolivia comes from Santa Cruz, meanwhile Cochabamba represents 42%.

 Production of broiler meat increased from 294,000 tons in 2008 to 396,000 tons in 2013, i.e. an increase of 35%. The data show that per capita consumption in six years grew by 23%. For example, until 2008, each person consumed 31 kilos per year, but in 2012 it reached 35 kilos and management passed to 38 kilos, the report said. ||||| The Small Animal That’s Making a Big Difference for Women in the Developing World

 Melinda Gates Blocked Unblock Follow Following Jun 7, 2016

 Chickens in America have it rough. They’re the symbol of cowards. They’re the butt of corny cross-the-road jokes. Every kind of mystery meat is supposed to taste exactly like them.

 But if you ask a woman in a developing country about chickens, she’s likely to show a lot more respect. That’s because a chicken can mean the difference between a family that merely survives and one that thrives.

 For one thing, chickens are a good source of income. In fact, chickens are known in international development circles as “the ATM of the poor,” because they are easy to sell on short notice to cover day-to-day expenses.

 Furthermore, eating chickens (and eggs) is good for you. In fact, they contain seven essential micronutrients like calcium and vitamin A.

 But there’s another, less intuitive way that chickens make life much better for poor people. In most developing countries, raising chickens is considered women’s work, and the money from selling chickens and eggs belongs to women to spend as they choose.

 In Burkina Faso where the national dish is Poulet Bicyclette, people eat a lot of chicken and poultry is a big part of their economy. Even a single chicken can make a big difference in the life of a poor farmer.

 Usually, men control a family’s income. Men take cash crops like cocoa and cotton to market. The more milk a cow produces, the more likely it is that men will sell the milk and decide what to do with the proceeds. Chickens are the exception. Many men think chickens aren’t worth their time because the income from them is small and sporadic. So women fill the gap.

 Why is this such great news? Because the evidence shows that when women control money, they are more likely than men to spend it on priorities that help fight poverty, like education, health, and nutrition. I come across a lot of statistics in my line of work, and maybe the one I’ve been most impressed by is this: When a woman controls the family’s income, her children are 20 percent more likely to live past the age of 5.

 Behind that abstract percentage stand millions of women who sacrifice to make sure their families have what they need. When I visit poor communities and speak with women about their lives, they tell me about the daily struggle to give their children a chance at a better life than they had. And a lot of times, one of the most powerful weapons in that struggle is a small flock of chickens.

 In India, our foundation works closely with an amazing organization called Pradan, which is staffed by Indians who know intimately what life is like for the people we’re trying to help. So I put a lot of stock in the fact that Pradan is currently running a project to help women raise chickens. They’re focused on the details of the business — how to use credit to get started, organize into cooperatives to fetch better prices, and work with animal health workers to keep flocks healthy. But before they dig into these specifics of “how,” Pradan always explains the “why” of its work. The chicken business, they say, “gives the woman farmer an income from her labor while giving her the dignity and control of an owner.”

 Dignity and control. These prerequisites of empowerment can be hard to come by for women in developing countries. But when women are able to express their dignity and seize control, sometimes with the help of their chickens, they transform their lives — and the lives of everyone around them.

 My husband agrees with me when it comes to chickens. That’s why Bill has launched a campaign to get the message out. Follow the link to learn more. ||||| Gain a global perspective on the US and go beyond with curated news and analysis from 600 journalists in 50+ countries covering politics, business, innovation, trends and more. |||||

Write a summary.

– Bill Gates recently offered to donate 100,000 hens to poor countries around the world, but one South American nation looked his gift chickens in the mouth and began squawking. "How can he think we are living 500 years ago, in the middle of the jungle not knowing how to produce?" Cesar Cocarico, Bolivia's development minister, told reporters, per Reuters. "Respectfully, he should stop talking about Bolivia." Cocarico also described Gates' poultry philanthropy—mainly extended to impoverished nations in sub-Saharan Africa—as "offensive," saying Gates should "apologize" once he's done a little more research into how well Bolivia does on the chicken front by itself, the Financial Times reports, via the Verge. He has a point: The country produces about 197 million chickens annually, with the ability to ship about 36 million of them to other nations, a local poultry group says. And data from the Bolivian Institute of Foreign Trade notes the country saw a significant increase in the production of chicken meat and eggs from 2008 to 2013. Gates announced his "Coop Dreams" program earlier this month, noting he'd met, through his work with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, plenty of poor people who raised the birds and that "it's pretty clear to me that just about anyone who's living in extreme poverty is better off if they have chickens." He goes on to say that chickens are a cheap investment with easy maintenance and decent ROI, the eggs they pop out help keep kids healthy, and they "empower women" (a belief his wife apparently shares). "It sounds funny, but I mean it when I say that I am excited about chickens," his post concludes. An enthusiasm obviously not shared (at least when it comes to his donation) by what Gizmodo labels Bolivia's "leftist, anti-imperialist government." Bolivians "do not need any gifted chicks in order to live—we have dignity," Cocarico sniffed. (But what about chickens with dinosaur legs?)


Write a summary based on this article:

Since its launch in March 2009, the MBA has trained nearly 3,000 students and farmers to spread the "positive beef message," offering online lessons on how to combat PETA and organizing a Twitter and Facebook " Food Fight " against its "campus critics." Daren Williams, the communications director for the National Cattlemen's Beef Association , helped start the MBA with $240,000 from the Beef Checkoff program , the beef industry's PR wing. He says the MBA's "focus has really become young people on the big land-grant campuses," from which more than one-fifth of future farmers and industry leaders will emerge.

 "Pollan," Flores tells me over beers at Dupus Boomer's, a campus bar, "is really our enemy right now." More than 35,000 college students were assigned one of his books last year; The Omnivore's Dilemma is one of the most widely read titles on US campuses. Flores and her fellow big beef advocates hope to counter that. "In the future," she says, "we're the ones who are going to tell you about your beef."

 Carrin Flores is a cattle rancher's fantasy come true: An attractive 26-year-old with stylish eyeglasses and glossy lipstick, she's unabashed about her love of cows. "They are so cute. Their cute little tongues. Oh, and their eyelashes," she says. "But I also friggin' love to eat them." She cooks beef four nights a week and can list dozens of ways she likes it: T-bone, tri-tip, boneless rump roast...Flores, a graduate student in veterinary medicine at Washington State University-Pullman , plans to work in the beef industry when she finishes. But she's already a graduate of the Masters of Beef Advocacy (MBA), an industry-funded program that trains college students to fight back against critics of big agribusiness, like Michael Pollan .

 "Some of what you are hearing is organic, grassroots debate—they have different opinions about agriculture and beef production—and that's good for a democracy," says Pollan, who teaches journalism at the University of California-Berkeley (where I was his student). Yet he's wary of the interests behind the campaign, noting that a PR firm funded by McDonald's reportedly urged elementary schools not to let Fast Food Nation author Eric Schlosser speak to kids.

 Asked if the MBA is just a phony PR campaign for Big Ag, Flores is emphatic: "We're not Astroturf. We're just worried about our futures in agriculture." The dozen or so MBA grads and young farmers I spoke to shared similar anxieties. "We know the environment is in crisis and we don't want to contribute to that," says Crystal Young, a recent graduate of Kansas State University, where she received degrees in animal science and journalism. "But we're also farmers, so the hard thing for us is to take into account all the criticisms of conventional agriculture, and to also continue to feed the world on the scale we are doing now. I think a lot of young people are primarily worried they won't be able to have a career in farming at all in the future."

 And therein lies the irony of the MBA: The concerns that have prompted Flores and her peers to get organized are the same ones that have catapulted Pollan to such acclaim. The next generation of farmers realizes that the days of oil-fueled, corn-fed, resource-intensive agriculture are numbered. Beef consumption is the lowest it's been since 1961. Just 8 percent (PDF) of the nation's farmers are under 35.

 "Things are changing—half of my family are vegetarians," Flores says. We've just watched Pollan speak to a gym of 3,500 or so cheering fans and a handful of fuming, pink-cheeked cowboys. "Pollan was really impressive up there," she tells me, finishing her beer. "But I can't escape the fact that, ultimately, his message is that we're unsustainable." ||||| Announcing…

 The Masters of Beef Advocacy

 The American beef industry is proud to produce wholesome, nutritious beef for consumers across the world. Consumers love juicy flavorful steaks and burgers, however many have questions about how beef is produced, from pasture to plate. Tough questions like "is beef raised on factory farms?" and "are cattle pumped full of antibiotics?" are commonly flashed across television and newspaper headlines and social media sites and leave a lasting impression on viewers.

 The average consumer is two generations removed from agriculture and has very little first-hand experience with food production. And they are hungry for information. It's up to us, the beef community, to engage them in conversations and answer their questions about how beef is raised, from pasture to plate. By completing the new and improved checkoff-funded MBA 2.0 courses, beef community members can sharpen their conversation skills and equip themselves with the information and confidence they need to answer tough questions about beef production.

 The new modules will address environmental sustainability, beef nutrition, animal welfare and beef safety while taking users through the beef lifecycle, from pasture to plate. The courses also offer historical context on the evolution of the U.S. beef industry from the time the first cattle were brought to North America to today.

 MBA 2.0 will also be available on DVD form to allow agriculture educators, state beef representatives and other youth leaders to incorporate the modules into their curriculum.

 Earn Your MBA

 The checkoff-funded MBA program is a self-directed online training program designed to equip beef producers and industry allies with the information they need to be everyday advocates for the beef industry. MBA students will be required to complete five courses in beef advocacy, including:

 • The Beef Community

 • Raising Cattle on Grass

 • Life in the Feedyard

 • From Cattle to Beef

 • Beef. It's What's For Dinner

 Enter the Real World

 Once you have completed all five courses you will continue to have access to the five courses on the checkoff-funded MBA Classroom site, as well as the latest talking points, fact sheets and presentations you need to be successful beef advocates. You also will be invited to join the Masters of Beef Advocacy Alumni Facebook group – a virtual community for MBA graduates to share success stories with each other, Through these sites graduates will be encouraged and equipped with tools to reach out to broader audiences in their communities by:

 • Giving presentations – schools, civic organizations, etc.

 • Getting active in the online environment – posting comments/video on Web sites, blogging, etc.

 • Participating in media interviews – print and/or broadcast media

 Enroll Today!

 All beef producers and others in the beef community with a genuine interest in promoting the beef industry are invited to enroll in the new checkoff-funded MBA 2.0 program. You can enroll as part of a group/class or complete the program on your own schedule. THERE IS NO COST TO PARTICIPATE!

 Request a Classroom Kit!

 Have a group or organization that needs to complete the Masters of Beef Advocacy program in a classroom setting? Complete this form to request an MBA Classroom Kit.

 To enroll, fill out an application online. For more information, send an e-mail to have your question answered promptly. |||||

– The beef industry realizes it's taken a beating in the public relations department from the likes of Michael Pollan, and it's attempting to lay the groundwork for a comeback. An industry-funded online program called the Masters of Beef Advocacy has trained 3,000 students and farmers in the art of spreading a "positive beef message" since last year, reports Mother Jones. Of late, its focus is on college students at big agriculture schools. "Pollan is really our enemy right now," says a 26-year-old grad student in veterinary medicine who's taken the MBA course and maintains it's not a defacto PR campaign. "We're just worried about our futures in agriculture." Asked for response by MJ, Pollan acknowledged the genuine disagreements on beef production and agriculture that exist, but was wary about the industry's funding of the program. He noted that McDonald's reportedly paid a PR firm to discourage schools from allowing Fast Food Nation Eric Schlosser to speak.