Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn critics. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng
Hiển thị các bài đăng có nhãn critics. Hiển thị tất cả bài đăng

Thứ Tư, 24 tháng 4, 2013

'Mad Men' creator's message to critics: 'Fans don't run the show'

  • MadMen660AP.jpg

    April 23, 2013: From left, Jon Hamm, Kiernan Shipka, Jessica Pare and January Jones from the cast of "Man Men," attend "Mad-ness Returns to the Paley Center" at The Paley Center for Media in New York.AP/Invision

"Mad Men" creator Matthew Weiner has a message for critics of season six of the AMC hit: "Fans don't run the show."

After waiting nearly a year for this month's premiere some viewers have expressed disappointment with the new season. Speaking ahead of a "Mad Men" panel event at the Paley Media Center in Manhattan Tuesday night, Weiner likened fan reaction to the show to the arcade game Whac-A-Mole.

"There's not enough agency advertising. There's too much advertising," Weiner said of previous fan gripes. "There's not enough Betty. There's too much Betty. Who is Megan? Why isn't there more Megan?"

Weiner noted people are still watching and advised fans to "sit back and enjoy where we're going." He said he opened the season in 1968 because he believes it was one of the worst years in U.S. history, and while he remained tight-lipped about where the journey is headed he did promise it "might be a little salacious, but that's what the show is."

Viewers did learn that ad man Don Draper (Jon Hamm) remains tormented and brooding and is now cheating on his new wife Megan (Jessica Pare). Weiner says he believes his lead character remains redeemable despite his flaws.

"We'll have to see what the world hands him and if he's able to confront a problem that's following him around that might actually be him," he said.


View the original article here

Thứ Ba, 9 tháng 4, 2013

Critics slam MSNBC host’s claim that kids belong to community, not parents

  • melissa harris perry msnbc 660.jpg

Parents and media critics were aghast after a host for MSNBC called for collective care of a community's children instead of parents taking care of their kids themselves.

MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry recorded a commercial for the network in which she stated that children do not belong to their parents, but are instead the responsibility of the members of their community.

“We have never invested as much in public education as we should have because we've always had kind of a private notion of children. Your kid is yours and totally your responsibility. We haven't had a very collective notion of these are our children,” she says in a spot for the network’s “Lean Forward” campaign. “So part of it is we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.”

Harris-Perry’s views ignited a firestorm of anger and disbelief.

“The notion that children belong to a state government rather than their own flesh and blood is the most disturbing statement made in recent political times. Melissa Harris-Perry is dead wrong. It’s unfathomable that any true American could make such a pretentious and naively ill statement,” media communications expert, and parent, Angie Olszewski told FOX411’s Pop Tarts column. “The government can’t properly run their own budgets schools and public systems. Why would anybody think they could rear children?”

The Media Research Center’s Director of Media Analysis, Tim Graham, called the MSNBC spot "frightening.”

“It's bad enough that ‘Lean Forward’ already sounds like an ad for Mao's Little Red Book, then to have your network's hosts talk about your children being part of the Collective is just spooky,” he said. “I think most parents disappoint MSNBC with their traditional beliefs that their children are theirs to love and raise as they feel is best. They don't want to surrender their parental rights to the ‘village.’ It's this same contempt for education beginning in the home that spurs many parents into home-schooling.” 

Political pundit Glenn Beck condemned the clip during his radio show Monday, calling it an almost “parody of reality so far beyond what we have ever thought as a nation.” He also said there were plenty of people enamored by the MSNBC host’s theory, who would gladly “hand over” parenting responsibilities.

However, there are also those who argue that Harris-Perry’s comments are a step in the right direction when it comes to tackling the issue of improving education.

“I totally agree that ‘it takes a village.’ Although parents have the greatest influence on their children, society and its messages are powerful. It is up to us as educators and concerned community members to do what we can to make sure those messages are the ones we want our children to hear,” explained school administrator and founder of ParentingGirls.com, Dr. Janet R.Wojtalik. “Unfortunately not all of our families have the 'know how' or the resources to do what is best for their children. They need support.”

D.C.-based political lawyer Margaret Cone concurred, noting that her own family – like most at her own childhood school – actively participated in school activities.

“I was very close to the parents of my childhood friends. They watched out for me,” she continued. “It is society’s responsibility to ensure that the next generation is equipped to handle the ever-changing world. Educating our children is a responsibility that has been grossly ignored to our detriment.”

The clip has received almost half a million YouTube views since it was posted last week, and has drawn quite a mixed bag of responses.

“Excellent example of elitists who think they know how to raise your kids better than you,” commented one while another weighed in: “You nailed it.”


View the original article here

Thứ Ba, 2 tháng 4, 2013

DATA UNDER FIRE: Critics Rip Obama for Using Dated, Disputed Gun Stat

As President Obama prepares to head to Colorado on Wednesday to push gun control legislation, some are calling into question the validity of a key statistic he’s using to tout his message on near-universal background checks.

During several speeches, Obama has said 40 percent of all gun purchases were made without a background check.

But that number is nearly two decades old and comes from a poll with a relatively tiny sample size. Gun rights groups like the National Rifle Association, as well as The Washington Post’s “Fact Checker,” are calling out the president’s stat, saying his numbers on background checks need a background check of their own.

During a speech last week, Obama asked, “Why wouldn’t we want to make it more difficult for a dangerous person to get his or her hand on a gun? Why wouldn’t we want to close the loophole that allows as many as 40 percent of all gun purchases to take place without a background check? Why wouldn’t we do that?”

The oft-cited figure, it turns out, was pulled from a 1997 study done by the National Institute of Justice. In the study, researchers estimated about 40 percent of all firearm sales took place through people other than licensed gun dealers. The conclusion was based on data from a 1994 survey of 2,568 households. Of those, only 251 people answered the question about where they got their guns.

PolitiFact tracked down the co-author of the study, Duke University professor Philip Cook, and asked him if he thought the 40 percent estimate is accurate.

“The answer is I have no idea,” Cook reportedly told PolitiFact. “This survey was done almost 20 years ago.”

The National Rifle Association has questioned the 40 percent claim and says it’s a misrepresentation by gun control advocates to trump up support for universal background checks.

Another problem with the study is the sample size, 251 people, which is relatively small, and the data is open to interpretation.

“With this sample size, the 95 percent confidence interval will be plus or minus six percentage points,” The Washington Post fact-checker wrote on Tuesday. “Moreover, when asked whether the respondent brought from a licensed firearms dealer, the possible answers included ‘probably was/think so’ and ‘probably not,’ leaving open the possibility the purchaser was mistaken.”

When all of the “yes” and “probably was” answers were added together, 35.7 percent of those asked said they did not receive a gun from a licensed firearms dealer. If you round the number up, it becomes 40 percent but because the sample size is so small, rounding the number down to 30 percent could also be accurate, the paper noted.  

But not everyone agrees with The Post’s fact checker.

“While slagging the president may be good for business, the effect of (the newspaper’s) false ruling is to undermine legitimate efforts to keep the public safe, and to obscure the real enemy of reliable data on gun violence,” Tommy Christopher of Mediaite wrote in a rebuttal Tuesday.

“It is possible to conclude that as few as 26.4% of gun owners in that study 'purchased' their gun without a background check, 20.4% if you factor in the margin of error,” he said.

The administration has not responded to questions surrounding the number and why they continue to use it to promote their gun control measures.

The president isn't the only one who's used the 40 percent figure to make a point. Many others stumping for the cause have pulled from the same info pile.

On Jan. 24, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand stated the importance of background checks during a television interview.

“The background checks bill is vitally important.  It’s going to basically say you can’t buy guns without getting a background check. Today, about 40 percent of guns are purchased without a background check.”

Seven months earlier, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg used the same statistic to skewer the National Rifle Association following the Colorado movie theatre massacre.

“There’s a loophole where you can sell guns without a background check,” he said last year, on July 22.  “Forty percent of guns are sold that way.”

For months, both sides of the debate on gun control – from the local level all the way up to the national level -- have accused the other of inflating figures and manipulating data.

Obama, in using an array of stats and studies and polls, has tried to make the case that the Senate is considering common-sense proposals that most Americans support. Amid resistance from some lawmakers, the president is ramping up his campaign for the legislation. He plans to visit Denver on Wednesday, followed by a stop next Monday in Hartford, Conn., the state that was the site of the deadly mass shooting in Newtown in December.


View the original article here

Thứ Sáu, 29 tháng 3, 2013

WHAT TO CUT: Fannie, Freddie have to go, critics say- TAX CALCULATOR: Fannie, Freddie

  • fannie_freddie.jpg

More than five years after the housing bubble burst -- sending the U.S. economy into a tailspin from which it has yet to fully recover -- the two government-backed entities at the heart of the bust remain deeply in debt. 

At a time when the government is struggling just to pay its bills, the sustained troubles of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac continue to lead to calls from many to privatize the mortgage giants. 

"The biggest problem with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is that they are financial institutions with a social mission," said Tom Schatz, president of Citizens Against Government Waste. 

That social mission, critics say, is to heavily subsidize mortgages for people who don't meet sound lending qualifications. "Lower income homes have a tougher time paying mortgages and when the housing market started to go under, that was the first to go," Schatz said. 

Both Fannie Mae, which was founded in 1938 during the Great Depression, and Freddie Mac, created in 1970, had historically been restricted to so-called prime loans -- or high-quality loans. That ended in 1992, under the George H.W. Bush administration, when Congress passed the Safety and Soundness Act, which required the Department of Housing and Urban Development to promote affordable housing. 

American Enterprise Institute scholar Edward Pinto said this "actually planted the seeds of the destruction of Fannie and Freddie" by feeding "the boom and the bust." 

Pinto said that bad choice led to another when, in 1995, the Clinton administration created  the National Homeownership Strategy. "Its cornerstone was doing away with downpayments. So you had now Fannie and Freddie, instead of doing prime loans, were doing progressively more risky and risky loans." 

The George W. Bush administration also pushed low-income homeownership, but sounded alarms about the health of Fannie and Freddie as early as the fall of 2003, when ex-Treasury Secretary John Snow told a congressional committee: "We need a strong, world-class regulatory agency to oversee the prudential operations of the GSE's (government-sponsored enterprises)." 

Some refused to pay heed to Snow's warning. The then-ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, Barney Frank, told Snow: "The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see ... then the less I think we see in terms of affordable housing." 

Today, taxpayers are stuck with the bill for the government's poor judgment. 

"In June 2011, the Congressional Budget Office said that taxpayer liability for Fannie and Freddie had reached $148 billion and could go up to $317 billion," Schatz warned. 

Pinto believes the government further distorts the mortgage market through its 12 federal home loan banks, the Federal Housing Administration, and Ginnie Mae. 

The departments of Agriculture and Veterans Affairs also provide mortgage assistance. 

But Pinto singles out FHA, in particular. "It has really become the escape valve for riskier lending," he said. "They could take the riskiest loan that they'll do, and they'll price it the same in terms of a guarantee fee or an insurance fee as the least risky product they'll do. That's because Congress won't let them price for risk. They basically said we don't want you to price for risk, we want you to have these distortions." 

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., said this was all done "in the name of doing good" but described it as a "misdirected compassion for something that you couldn't actually accomplish."


View the original article here

Thứ Ba, 26 tháng 3, 2013

Jim Carrey responds to critics following controversial 'Funny or Die' video

In a new video for the prankster website Funny or Die, actor Jim Carrey has chimed in on the debate about gun control.

The “Ace Ventura” star mocked in the skit Charlton Heston, the former “Planet of the Apes” actor who later became the president of the NRA. Heston died in 2008 at the age of 84.

In the video, which now has more than 1 million views on the Funny or Die website, Carrey dresses up as Heston and parodies the actor's memorable speech during the 129th annual NRA convention in Charlotte, N.C., during the 2000 presidential election. Heston, NRA president at the time, picked up a rifle and famously said, "So, as we set out this year to defeat the divisive forces that would take freedom away, I want to say those fighting words for everyone within the sound of my voice to hear and to heed, . . . . 'From my cold, dead hands!'"

Carrey sings the tune “Cold Dead Hands” in the video, dressed as a member of a country music band.

"The angels wouldn't take [Heston] up to heaven like he planned/Because they couldn't pry that gun from his cold, dead hand,” Carrey sings.

And while his video has gained its share of fans, it has also gained the actor some negative attention from those who don’t agree with him.

On Fox News’ “The Five” co-host Greg Gutfeld called Carry a “moral coward,” saying Carrey’s video was an attempt to be accepted.  

“He thinks this is biting satire? Going after rural America and a dead man?” Gutfeld said.

Carrey responded to his critics on Twitter, posting several tweets about his views on gun control.

“'Cold Dead Hand' is [about] u heartless motherf***ers unwilling 2 bend 4 the safety of our kids. Sorry if you're offended by the word safety!” he tweeted, later adding: “I'm appalled at [what] I've seen on [this] stream the last few days, all in hatred's defense. No wonder it's so dangerous to be a child today.”

Some users on Twitter chimed in, taking Carrey’s side after a slew of negative tweets about the comedy actor.  

“Always thought Jim Carrey talented and funny but who'd have thought he was so passionate and brave?” one user tweeted.

Another added: “@JimCarrey best thing you did (besides be so funny) was get people to talk. Thank you! Keep going my friend...”

On Tuesday afternoon, Carrey tweeted a calmer message to his fans (and his foes) about the controversial video.

“There r also many fair minded [people] out there and I appreciate their support [but] I love [everyone] whether we agree or not.”


View the original article here

Thứ Tư, 27 tháng 2, 2013

Critics: Michelle Obama used military as Oscar ‘props,' 'human wallpaper'

Michelle Obama’s appearance at the Oscars surprised many viewers, but perhaps even more puzzling were the members of the military that stood behind her as she announced the award for best picture.

Obama made no mention of the group surrounding her as she spoke of this year’s influential films, and critics slammed the appearance, saying she used the military personnel as “props.”

“So...today you young men and women of the US military are to stand looking interested whilst Michelle Obama presents Best Picture #Ofcourse!” one user posted on Twitter.

Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin tweeted a similar sentiment: “Why was Michelle O at the Oscars and why did she use service personnel as props but not thank the military?”

Indeed, in her brief speech about the best picture award, Obama failed to make mention of the men and women standing behind her, leaving many wondering what they were doing there.

On Twitter, some accused the FLOTUS of using the members of the military as “background,” “decoration” and even “human wallpaper.”

Obama has thus far opted not to explain the military’s presence during her virtual Academy Awards appearance, though she did tweet that she enjoyed announcing the top award of the night.

“It was a thrill to announce the #Oscars2013 best picture winner from the @WhiteHouse! Congratulations Argo! –mo,” she wrote early Monday morning.


View the original article here

Thứ Tư, 20 tháng 2, 2013

Angry Wenger takes aim at critics

Arsene Wenger

Arsene Wenger ... 'There are a lot of experts who are not necessarily always right.' Source: GLYN KIRK / AAP

Angered by criticism of Arsenal and claims about his future, Arsene Wenger's irritation boiled over publicly ahead of this week's UEFA Champions League showdown with Bayern Munich.

Arsenal's last chance to end a trophy drought stretching back to 2005 is in Europe after being knocked out of the FA Cup by second-tier Blackburn last weekend.

Wenger was frustrated by continued questions about that loss, and grew angrier when asked about a report claiming he is in talks about a new contract.

"That is the wrong information and I work for 16 years in England,'' Wenger said.

PWDLGDPts
1Man United2621233165
2Man City2615832453
3Chelsea2614752749
4Tottenham2614661448
5Arsenal2612862144
6Everton2610124842
7Liverpool2710981539
8Swansea279108437
9West Brom2611411137
10Stoke267127-533
11West Ham268612-930
12Fulham267811-629
13Sunderland267811-629
14Norwich266119-1529
15Southampton266911-927
16Newcastle267613-1227
17Aston Villa265912-2524
18Reading265813-1523
19Wigan265615-2121
20QPR2621113-2217

"I think I deserve a bit more credit than wrong information that has only one intention: to harm.''

Turning to one reporter, Wenger asked: "Why do you look at me?''

"Because it's your press conference,'' the reporter snapped back.

"I just thought you had given this information out,'' Wenger responded, referring to the report of contract talks.

The Frenchman is facing mounting calls from some Arsenal fans to leave the club he has managed since 1996.

"What is important is not what people say it is what happens on the pitch,'' Wenger said.

"We live in a democracy of experts and opinions, but we have to live with that and cope with that and show we have the mental strength to deal with any opinion.

"There are a lot of experts who are not necessarily always right.''

What is indisputable is Arsenal's Barclays Premier League position: fifth, 21 points behind leader Manchester United and four points behind the fourth spot to qualify for the Champions League.

The only way to qualify for Europe's elite competition for a 16th straight season could be by winning the European Cup for the first time in May.

First, though, Arsenal must negotiate the two-legged last-16 match against Bayern, which has a 15-point lead in the German title race.

"Football is about skill, intelligence and some things as well are a bit unpredictable,'' Wenger said.

We know well what is going on here. What is important is to forget what people say and focus on our strengths.''


View the original article here