Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Last night HBO premiered I Am An Animal: The Story of Ingrid Newkirk and PETA. Since its inception, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has made headlines and raised eyebrows. They are almost single-handedly responsible for the movement against animal testing and their efforts have raised the suffering animals experience in a broad spectrum of consumer goods production and food processing into a cause célèbre.

PETA first made headlines in the Silver Spring monkeys case, when Alex Pacheco, then a student at George Washington University, volunteered at a lab run by Edward Taub, who was testing neuroplasticity on live monkeys. Taub had cut sensory ganglia that supplied nerves to the monkeys’ fingers, hands, arms, legs; with some of the monkeys, he had severed the entire spinal column. He then tried to force the monkeys to use their limbs by exposing them to persistent electric shock, prolonged physical restraint of an intact arm or leg, and by withholding food. With footage obtained by Pacheco, Taub was convicted of six counts of animal cruelty—largely as a result of the monkeys’ reported living conditions—making them “the most famous lab animals in history,” according to psychiatrist Norman Doidge. Taub’s conviction was later overturned on appeal and the monkeys were eventually euthanized.

PETA was born.

In the subsequent decades they ran the Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty against Europe’s largest animal-testing facility (footage showed staff punching beagle puppies in the face, shouting at them, and simulating sex acts while taking blood samples); against Covance, the United State’s largest importer of primates for laboratory research (evidence was found that they were dissecting monkeys at its Vienna, Virginia laboratory while the animals were still alive); against General Motors for using live animals in crash tests; against L’Oreal for testing cosmetics on animals; against the use of fur for fashion and fur farms; against Smithfield Foods for torturing Butterball turkeys; and against fast food chains, most recently against KFC through the launch of their website kentuckyfriedcruelty.com.

They have launched campaigns and engaged in stunts that are designed for media attention. In 1996, PETA activists famously threw a dead raccoon onto the table of Anna Wintour, the fur supporting editor-in-chief of Vogue, while she was dining at the Four Seasons in New York, and left bloody paw prints and the words “Fur Hag” on the steps of her home. They ran a campaign entitled Holocaust on your Plate that consisted of eight 60-square-foot panels, each juxtaposing images of the Holocaust with images of factory farming. Photographs of concentration camp inmates in wooden bunks were shown next to photographs of caged chickens, and piled bodies of Holocaust victims next to a pile of pig carcasses. In 2003 in Jerusalem, after a donkey was loaded with explosives and blown up in a terrorist attack, Newkirk sent a letter to then-PLO leader Yasser Arafat to keep animals out of the conflict. As the film shows, they also took over Jean-Paul Gaultier‘s Paris boutique and smeared blood on the windows to protest his use of fur in his clothing.

The group’s tactics have been criticized. Co-founder Pacheco, who is no longer with PETA, called them “stupid human tricks.” Some feminists criticize their campaigns featuring the Lettuce Ladies and “I’d Rather Go Naked Than Wear Fur” ads as objectifying women. Of their Holocaust on a Plate campaign, Anti-Defamation League Chairman Abraham Foxman said “The effort by PETA to compare the deliberate systematic murder of millions of Jews to the issue of animal rights is abhorrent.” (Newkirk later issued an apology for any hurt it caused). Perhaps most controversial amongst politicians, the public and even other animal rights organizations is PETA’s refusal to condemn the actions of the Animal Liberation Front, which in January 2005 was named as a terrorist threat by the United States Department of Homeland Security.

David Shankbone attended the pre-release screening of I Am An Animal at HBO’s offices in New York City on November 12, and the following day he sat down with Ingrid Newkirk to discuss her perspectives on PETA, animal rights, her responses to criticism lodged against her and to discuss her on-going life’s work to raise human awareness of animal suffering. Below is her interview.

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

File:Tuna.jpg

This Tuesday, at a wholesale auction at the Tsukiji fish market in Tokyo, a 512-pound bluefin tuna was sold for over sixteen-million yen ($177,000 USD). The great fish was bought and then shared by the owners of a local sushi restaurant and a Hong Kong-based dining establishment. This tuna is the most expensive fish sold on record since 2001, when a 440-pound tuna was sold for over twenty-million ($220,000) at the very same market.

When asked by local media outlets why he decided to purchase this giant tuna, the Hong Kong restaurateur said, “I want[ed] to make an impact on the Japanese and Hong Kong economies by buying the highest-priced tuna.”

This locally caught tuna was among over two-thousand others bought and sold at this bustling fish market. Japan is the world’s largest consumer of seafood per annum. With tuna being a major staple of their cuisine, the Japanese eat nearly eighty-percent of all commercially caught bluefin.

However, tuna consumption in Japan has declined over recent years due to the change in the spending habits of its people as a result of economic downturns from the most recent recession.

“Consumers are shying away from eating tuna…We are very worried about the trend,” a spokesperson for the Tsukiji market told the Associated Press.

In addition to the lack of demand and declining tuna stocks, fishermen and wholesalers worldwide are worried by the possibility of tighter fishing regulations that will be sanctioned and enforced by the Japanese government. Despite this promise, many environmentalists say that this is not going far enough; they say that the only way to curb the inevitable extinction of the Pacific bluefin tuna is to initiate a trade ban on the fish altogether.

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Within 24-hours of posting a web advertisement for an upcoming hackathon in Boston, Massachusetts, web startup Sqoot has lost four sponsors for the event, in what has been described as the “worst startup PR crisis in recent history.” This caused them to postpone the event and apologize in response to thousands of tweets that opposed the advert and found its content sexist.

On March 20, Sqoot, an API provider that delivers daily deals like Groupon and Gilt City, posted an online advert for their upcoming Boston API Jam. The advert promoted various perks for the event, including an in-house DJ, cocktails, food trucks and access to women: women specifically there to serve beer to attendees. As soon as the ad was posted to Eventbrite, many on Twitter expressed concern. Over 3,000 tweets later, the advert was deemed sexist by many and Twitter users both condemned Sqoot and contacted the sponsors of the event. The ad, which Alex Williams of SiliconANGLE described as “bizarre” and “misogynist,” was quietly changed on Eventbrite by Sqoot, removing the mention of women as beer peddlers.

In a matter of hours, four sponsors had pulled out from the Boston event: CloudMine, Apigee, Heroku, and MongoHQ. Shortly thereafter, Sqoot offered two apologies: a brief apology which was then followed by a more detailed apology stating that they desired to have a “good party” that was not a standard hackathon experience of pizza and keynote speakers. Sqoot stated that they “aimed to call attention to the male-dominated tech world through humor and intended to be inclusive, the gravity of our wording was just the opposite. Our words completely undermined our intentions and went further to harm the world we’re trying to have a positive impact on.” Other sponsors such as Constant Contact and Simple Relevance remained as sponsors.

Shanley Kane, director of product management at Basho Technologies, supported the sponsor withdrawal and didn’t just consider the advertisement sexist, but also homophobic by ostracizing gay men by promoting a seemingly “straight” agenda for the event. Kane also believed that Sqoot had the “false assumption that women would not attend the event at all,” by promoting it with a male targeted spin. In an industry that is dominated by men, it can be assumed that more men would attend the hackathon than women, but, the advertisement ostracized women even more from attending. And this wasn’t Sqoot’s first foray into straight male targeted marketing. Blog posts like “Sqoot Makes You Yelp!” featuring the Yelp logo on a woman’s backside and “Sqoot Goes Topless” featuring an image of a topless woman, are meant to promote the opening of Yelp’s API and company transparency.

Alex Williams believes that the Sqoot situation shows that sexism within the tech industry is broad and growing. “Women are marginalized and treated more as objects than as colleagues. The trend is a disturbing one and poses a serious threat to the health and diversity of the tech sector.” Techli’s Kathryn Hough chocked it up to immaturity, “Someone needs to tell young founders that frat house behavior is not acceptable in the business world. If Sqoot’s business collapses for a few sentences of sexist copy, I hope that other young founders get to see the wreckage before following them off the plank.”

Lukas Blakk, a release engineer and advisory board member for The Ada Initiative, a non-profit that tries to increase female participation in technology and open source, believes that having a code of conduct in place is a necessity for businesses, and for those businesses who don’t “you’ve got a ticking time bomb in your organization’s future.” Social media is giving businesses a new challenge when it comes to marketing. When it comes to the criticism fielded by the public towards businesses regarding sexist content, fellow Ada Initiative board member and database analyst Selena Deckelmann agrees that businesses need to step up to the challenge and respond appropriately. “…companies need to develop the skills necessary to respond with grace and understanding, even when under intense, negative scrutiny. Silencing, gas-lighting and ignoring the messenger tactics no longer work when a social network quickly spreads information, and occasionally, outrage.”

Is there a future for Sqoot? Mike Maney believes Sqoot can recover. Maney, head of influencer management for Alcatel-Lucent, acknowledges that Sqoot will have a long way to go to regain their credibility amongst the tech industry and the clientele they serve, “But, the work they’ll have to do to undo the self-inflicted damage […] is going to require a massive effort.”

Friday, September 7, 2007

According to the highest ranking police officer in New South Wales, the cast and crew of Australian TV show, The Chaser’s War on Everything could have been shot during a prank staged in Sydney where they breached APEC security.

The comedians staged a fake motorcade to gain access to the APEC restricted area in Sydney’s CBD. It is believed that the motorcade was waved through security checkpoints on Macquarie Street and ended up just metres from the hotel where United States President George W. Bush was staying. Police moved in on the group when one of the pranksters emerged from a vehicle dressed as Osama bin Laden.

Police commissioner Andrew Scipione said the prank could have resulted in someone being injured. “The reality is… (they) put security services in a position where they might have had to take an action no one would want.”

“We have snipers deployed around the city. They weren’t there for show, they mean business, that’s what they were there for,” said Mr Scipione.

Mr Scipione was annoyed that the stunt had been carried out. He said “I’m angry, I’m very angry that this stunt happened, it was a very dangerous stunt.” The commissioner also said that the comedians had already been warned about carrying out pranks during APEC. “The people that were involved were told – we told them, we sent them maps, … We made it very clear that they shouldn’t do stunts, particularly those that were going to be dangerous,” said Mr Scipione.

Neil Fergus, senior executive for Intelligent Risks and former intelligence chief for the Sydney Olympics spoke out against those responsible for the prank. He reinforced that the prank could have ended up in someone being hurt and commended the police for dealing with the situation in the way they did.

“People can talk over each other on radios and there can be confusion, so the police response – I think – was terrific,” he said.

“And thank God it was what it was. You’ve only got to look at the experience that a very professional police service had in London when a young Brazilian was tragically shot by anti-terrorism forces.”

“So I think the police are to be commended with the professional way that they did identify the incursion, the restraint that they showed in handling it and the fact that what we’re talking about today is a bad and irresponsible joke, instead of a more tragic set of circumstances.”

The show’s executive producer Morrow denied placing anyone in danger.

“Was it irresponsible? I wouldn’t think so. Hard to say,” he said.

“No, no. We had no intention of harming anyone. Sorry guys … Lucky it was us and not Al Qaeda.”

Sunday, April 27, 2008

Canada’s largest public transit system is expected to resume service Sunday evening after the Ontario provincial government ordered striking Toronto transit workers back to work today. Service was shut down when transit workers suddenly walked off the job on Friday, having just voted to reject a labour contract deal made the previous weekend.

The provincial legislature met in an extraordinary Sunday afternoon session to pass Bill 66, the Toronto Public Transit Service Resumption Act, 2008 which not only orders the transit work to resume, but includes follow-up arbitration to resolve outstanding disagreements between transit management and its unions. The largest union affected is Local 113 of the Amalgamated Transit Union, but the legislation also affects workers unionised under International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Lodge 235, and the Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 2.

Union members who defy this law could be fined C$2000 per day, while the union itself would risk a daily fine of C$25,000. However, ATU Local 113 president Bob Kinnear indicated that his union would respect the law and return to work while supporting the choice of Kevin Burkett as arbitrator. Wages were not an issue for union members, who voted against the earlier draft contract out of fears regarding compensation for on-the-job injuries, and for maintenance workers’ job security.

Toronto’s subways, streetcars and buses will operate on a limited service for Sunday evening, with full service expected as the work week begins Monday morning.

Sunday, April 24, 2005

New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) announced last Wednesday that it has agreed definitively to merge with Chicago-based Archipelago Exchange (ArcaEx) and form a new publicly traded, for-profit company known as NYSE Group. This announcement was followed two days later by NASDAQ®, which independently announced a definitive agreement to purchase Instinet Group.

Archipelago and Instinet are innovative e-trading (electronic trading) companies, and formerly were the two largest American rivals to NYSE and NASDAQ, in recent years taking increasingly large portions of their market share. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and other regulatory agencies still have to review and approve the transactions, particularly with respect to US securities law and antitrust law, in order to ensure that the marketplace remains lawful and competitive.

Other pending issues for NASDAQ include obtaining the approval of Instinet shareholders, as well as customary closing conditions. NYSE must obtain the approval of its members and Archipelago shareholders.

These changes, a reaction to increased e-trading competition and a changed regulatory environment, will result in NASDAQ and NYSE trading each other’s shares and attempting to grab market share, which many hope will drive down transaction costs and ultimately benefit consumers. However, at least one commentator, Dan Ackman writing in Forbes, has noted that the trading commission at the NYSE currently averages less than a nickel (US$0.05) per share, and was less enthusiastic about potential efficiency gains from electronic trading at the exchange.

The transactions are also intended to make the two leading American stock exchanges more globally competitive with such exchanges as the London Stock Exchange, the Frankfurt Stock Exchange, the Toronto Stock Exchange, and the Australian Stock Exchange located in Sydney.

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Tarja Turunen, a Finnish symphonic rock artist best known for being the former frontwoman of symphonic power metal band Nightwish, has been scheduled to appear at the 25th anniversary concert of heavy metal vocalist Doro Pesch. Pesh, like Turunen, first gained fame fronting a band, in her case Warlock.

Doro and Tarja are now also confirmed to be planning to record duets with each other. Doro will feature on Tarja’s next solo album, while Tarja will sing a role in Doro’s upcoming 25th-anniversary album.

Tarja announced the planned duets at the same time as confirming her appearance at the December 13th concert in Düsseldorf, Germany’s ISS Dome, where she says she will perform “a new song and an old song”. At the same time, Norwegian symphonic metal band Leaves’ Eyes have also been confirmed for the event.

When making the announcements Tarja also said “there will be a co-operation between me and Doro in the future” although it was unclear if this refers to a more permanent arrangement or simply that which has been announced now.

Saturday, August 27, 2005

Accused of EPO doping by the French cycling daily L’Équipe in a four page story on Aug. 23, cyclist Lance Armstrong appeared on CNN’s Larry King Live TV show Aug. 25, saying he did not trust the French testers or the French testing system, and that his urine was manipulated to falsely accuse him of doping.

Dr. Christiane Ayotte, director of a Montreal doping detection laboratory said that ethically critical and important scientific questions were raised by the EPO doping allegation against seven-time Tour de France winner Armstrong.

USA Cycling official Gerard Bisceglia said these L’Équipe charges were unfair and lacked credibility. Bisceglia is chief executive of USA Cycling, principal authority over Armstrong for cycling sports in the United States.

L’Équipe released Paris lab data allegedly finding banned EPO in five year old samples of Armstrong’s urine, originally taken after he won the 1999 Tour de France. No official source would confirm medical identification of Armstrong as provider of the anonymously tested urine, and to do so would be a violation of World Anti-doping Agency (WADA) regulations.

Armstrong suggested motivation for such manipulation is a French national hatred of all non-French sport winners, and specifically because a French rider has not won the Tour de France for a quarter century. As evidence of malice toward him, Armstrong cited a French newspaper poll in which he was named the third most hated sportsman in France.

Dr. Ayotte is Doping Control director at Canada’s Institut National de la Recherché Scientifique in Montreal, which is a WADA certified lab nearest to WADA’s Montreal headquarters. Ayotte is also a world class scientific authority and instructor on sports doping detection. Dr. Ayotte’s expert opinion has significant influence on the outcome of WADA regulatory decisions.

L’Équipe reported that the EPO detection method used was experimental, which raises a scientific question. All experimentally based forensic evidence is subject to the close scrutiny of scientific opinions before it can be used in a disciplinary or legal proceeding.

Ayotte expressed surprise that chemical testing of 1999 urine could have been done in 2004 at the French national anti-doping laboratory at Châtenay-Malabry. She said that she routinely instructs all doping laboratory organizations, that previously detectable EPO protein deteriorates and disappears after two or three months, even if the urine is frozen.

Ayotte thinks that a new statistical mathematics model was used to reanalyze numerical data resulting from earlier chemical testing. “My interpretation is that retesting itself must have been conducted in 2000 or in 2001, but the results were reviewed using the new mathematical model that is now being developed in Paris.”

Ayotte does not question whether the new type of analysis is correct; rather she questions the ethics of long-delayed test results.

The first ethical problem is that this adverse finding cannot be confirmed with second samples. There are normally available two urine samples, “A” and “B”. The Châtenay-Malabry EPO findings were based on Armstrong’s “B” samples. Armstrong’s “A” samples were depleted in 1999 for tests that did not include EPO, because no EPO test was available that year.

Without addressing the ethics problem, Dick Pound, the head of WADA, said. “You can count on the fingers of one hand the times a “B” sample has not confirmed the result of the “A” sample”.

Both France and USA officials observed that L’Équipe’s unofficial adverse finding was not consistent with WADA regulations. French Sports Minister Jean-François Lamour said that without the “A” samples, no disciplinary action could be taken against Armstrong. USA official Bisceglia confirmed that WADA regulations require a confirming “A” test to prove guilt.

The second ethical problem, according to Ayotte, is that an athlete charged with doping long after the athletic event, has no way to submit to additional testing to disprove an adverse finding. This same ethical problem was also stated by USA official Bisceglia.

The third ethical problem for Ayotte is that L’Équipe disclosed Armstrong’s medical identity. “It seems to me,” Ayotte continued, “that this whole thing is breach of the WADA code. We are supposed to work confidentially until such time that we can confirm a result. By no means does this mean that we sweep a result under the carpet, but it has to meet a certain set of requirements.”

In a further ethical complication, the medical identification of Armstrong is completely unofficial and is made only by L’Équipe. Ayotte characterized the disclosure as “leaked”.

Châtenay-Malabry’s lab refused to confirm L’Équipe’s claim that the urine samples belonged to Armstrong. Nor is it likely that Châtenay-Malabry will ever identify Armstrong, because WADA regulations require that all single “B” samples used for experimental testing must remain permanently anonymous. Ayotte said, “I’m worried, because I have a great deal of respect for my colleagues in Paris. I am concerned that they did not cover their backs before being dragged into a very public issue of this kind.”

Lance Armstrong has responded on his LanceArmstrong.com website, branding L’Équipe’s reporting as being “nothing short of tabloid journalism.” Armstrong says: “I will simply restate what I have said many times: I have never taken performance enhancing drugs.”

Further confusing public understanding of the EPO doping claim is Armstrong’s statement in his autobiography, It’s Not About the Bike: he said he received EPO during his cancer chemotherapy treatment. “It was the only thing that kept me alive,” he wrote.

Armstrong last received chemotherapy EPO in late 1996. Apparently speaking from his knowledge of conventional EPO testing, Armstrong agrees that traces of 1996 synthetic EPO should not have been present in his 1999 urine. There are now tests to distinguish natural from synthetic EPO. But it remains an unresearched scientific question whether the sensitivity of the experimental new method could detect use of synthetic EPO from three years previously. By scientific analogy, the polymerase chain reaction process can detect as little as a single molecule of DNA.

Jean-Marie Leblanc, the director of the Tour de France, said that Armstrong owes cycling fans an explanation. Armstrong subsequently provided an explanation claiming urine test manipulation.

Leblanc also said; “For the first time—and these are no longer rumors, or insinuations, these are proven scientific facts—someone has shown me that in 1999, Armstrong had a banned substance called EPO in his body.”

“When people start using comments like, ‘irrefutable scientific evidence,’ that’s a pretty strong statement to make,” said Bisceglia, “when the person you’re making it about has never been given the opportunity to refute the statement. You’re making claims about something that took place in 1999. Based on what I’ve read, it’s pretty clear that any opportunity to have a black-and-white resolution to this case has been destroyed.”

Bisceglia said that USA Cycling, the governing body in the United States, lacks the officially required evidence, and therefore will not investigate the L’Équipe report.