Still, women have an advantage with male doctors
Michael Smerconish - On cable TV and talk radio, a push toward polarization - 0 views
-
"Any conversation about political polarization would be incomplete without a look at the media's role in shaping opinions. From my view on the front lines, I have seen a rapid escalation of extreme dialogue -- sadly, something sure to guarantee high ratings. Indeed, Campbell Brown's departure from her CNN show last month marks another tombstone in the graveyard of moderate, thoughtful analysis."
Bill Keller's self-defense on "torture" - Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com - 0 views
-
In response to the Harvard study documenting how newspapers labeled waterboarding as "torture" for almost 100 years until the Bush administration told them not to, The New York Times issued a statement justifying this behavior on the ground that it did not want to take sides in the debate. Andrew Sullivan, Greg Sargent and Adam Serwer all pointed out that "taking a side" is precisely what the NYT did: by dutifully complying with the Bush script and ceasing to use the term (replacing it with cleansing euphemisms), it endorsed the demonstrably false proposition that waterboarding was something other than torture. Yesterday, the NYT's own Brian Stelter examined this controversy and included a justifying quote from the paper's Executive Editor, Bill Keller, that is one of the more demented and reprehensible statements I've seen from a high-level media executive in some time (h/t Jay Rosen):
The Truth about 'Class War' in America | Common Dreams - 0 views
-
The tax structure imposed by Washington on the US over the last half-century has seen a massive double shift of the burden of taxation: from corporations to individuals and from the richest individuals to everyone else. If the national debate wants seriously to use a term like "class war" to describe Washington's tax policies, then the reality is that the class war's winners have been corporations and the rich
"Hot Coffee" Documentary Exposes Corporate Attacks on Consumer Rights, Features Expert ... - 0 views
-
What Really Happened? Stella Liebeck, 79-years-old, was sitting in the passenger seat of her grandson's car having purchased a cup of McDonald's coffee. After the car stopped, she tried to hold the cup securely between her knees while removing the lid. However, the cup tipped over, pouring scalding hot coffee onto her lap. She received third-degree burns over 16 percent of her body, necessitating hospitalization for eight days, whirlpool treatment for debridement of her wounds, skin grafting, scarring, and disability for more than two years. Despite these extensive injuries, she offered to settle with McDonald's for $20,000. However, McDonald's refused to settle for this small amount and, in fact, never offered more than $800. The jury awarded Liebeck $200,000 in compensatory damages - reduced to $160,000 because the jury found her 20 percent at fault - and $2.7 million in punitive damages for McDonald's callous conduct. (To put this in perspective, McDonald's revenue from coffee sales alone was in excess of $1.3 million a day.) The trial judge reduced the punitive damages to $480,000, but did state that McDonald's had engaged in "willful, wanton, and reckless" behavior. Mrs. Liebeck and McDonald's eventually settled for a confidential amount. The jury heard the following evidence in the case: McDonald's Operations Manual required the franchisee to hold its coffee at 180 to 190 degrees Fahrenheit; Coffee at that temperature, if spilled, causes third-degree burns (the worst kind of burn) in three to seven seconds; Third-degree burns do not heal without skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability of the victim for many months, and in some cases, years; The chairman of the department of mechanical engineering and bio-mechanical engineering at the University of Texas testified that this risk of harm is unacceptable, as did a wid
Panic of the Plutocrats - NYTimes.com - 0 views
-
It remains to be seen whether the Occupy Wall Street protests will change America's direction. Yet the protests have already elicited a remarkably hysterical reaction from Wall Street, the super-rich in general, and politicians and pundits who reliably serve the interests of the wealthiest hundredth of a percent.
(Marketing Drugs With Sexy Sales Persons) CorpWatch : US: Gimme an Rx! Cheerleaders Pep... - 0 views
-
-
a book lampooning the industry, "Hard Sell: The Evolution of a Viagra Salesman."
-
Stories abound about doctors who mistook a sales pitch as an invitation to more. A doctor in Washington pleaded guilty to assault last year and gave up his license after forcibly kissing a saleswoman on the lips.
- ...17 more annotations...
Responsible consumerism | Manila Bulletin - 0 views
-
The multinational manufacturing giants were trying to cope with changes in technology and demographics which threatened to make them obsolete. Top managements in publicly owned US companies, regardless of size and performance, cowered under the threat of the corporate raider and his ultimate weapon, the junk bond.
-
Corporate capitalism promised that the large corporation would be run in the interests of the greater number of stakeholders. Instead, it was being pushed into a subordinate role – away from its market standing, its technology, and its basic wealth-producing capacity and into immediate earnings and next week’s stock price. A Marxist would call this turn of events “speculator’s capitalism.”
-
Meantime, Bill Gates has come up with a solution as to how billions of dollars generated through capitalism can help people in the poor nations which the world has forgotten. He termed it creative capitalism. He believed that some corporations have identified brand-new markets among the poor for life-changing technologies like cell phones. Others have seen how they can do good and do well at the same time.
- ...5 more annotations...
1 - 8 of 8
Showing 20▼ items per page