Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

DHEC deja vu

Sunday, November 23rd, 2008

By Becci Robbins

Today The State newspaper wrapped up DHEC Under Fire, an “exclusive” series exposing the failure of the state agency charged with protecting South Carolina’s environment. It was oddly familiar. In 1999, the alternative newspaper POINT ran a similar package. I remember it well; I was managing editor and wrote most of the stories. You can read them here.

This was the introduction we ran:

This issue is dedicated to South Carolina’s environment. Seems that while we weren’t looking, this state became the country’s garbage dump. We hope this issue of POINT gives you something to think about and, just maybe, something to fight for.

By way of full disclosure, readers should know that the publisher and editor of POINT have for the past year been working with grassroots groups from across the state on an initiative to restructure DHEC, the state’s environmental agency.

Some will argue that our connection to the project renders us incapable of covering this story without bias. Perhaps.

But we believe our experience lends us a valuable perspective that we could not have as a member of the “straight” media. For many months, we have been meeting with lawyers, legislators, community leaders and environmental activists, some of whom go way back with DHEC. We have heard them talk with the freedom they would not if they were “on record.” While we have not used any quotes from those meetings or discussed what went on in them, the discussions deepened our understanding of how DHEC works — and how it doesn’t.

Finally, we invite anyone at DHEC, including those who declined to be interviewed, to respond to our coverage in this issue. We will gladly publish any written responses in the next POINT.

While it’s good to see The State finally give DHEC the sort of scrutiny it deserves, it’s too bad it took them so long to do it. Frankly, it’s no surprise. The State, ironically, has a long history of doing what it now accuses DHEC of doing: coddling industry and putting the interests of big business above the public interest.

The paper has been unable, or unwilling, to connect the dots that draw the clear picture of systemic problems that allowed DHEC to operate so irresponsibly and with such devastating consequences. There is no excuse. We sent the newspaper the same press releases we sent the rest of the media informing them about our grassroots campaign and legislation designed to reform the environmental agency. They ignored us. No telling how much pollution went unchecked as a result.

The State’s reporters said they interviewed 200 people to write their recent DHEC series. Not one of them was from the SC Progressive Network, the organization that initiated the move to reform the agency and called the first meeting of legislators and activists to explore the issue. That’s shoddy reporting, at best. At worst, it reveals a pettiness unbecoming of the state’s main newspaper.

POINT cover, Winter 1999

Killing Kids

Friday, August 29th, 2008

Equal Justice Initiative has released a short preview of the upcoming film Cruel and Unusual: Sentencing 13- and 14-Year-Old Children to Die in Prison.

How well do you know your world?

Thursday, July 10th, 2008

Find out by clicking here.

Monday, May 26th, 2008

peaceskeleton.jpg

Mad science

Tuesday, April 1st, 2008

Deconstructing Bunk Reporting in Five Easy Steps
By Beth Skwarecki

Bitch Magazine

British scientists have uncovered the truth behind one of modern culture’s greatest mysteries: why little girls play with pink toys. Is it because toy companies flood whole store aisles with the color? Or because well-meaning relatives shower girl babies with pink blankets and clothing? Nope. According to the men in lab coats, it’s purely biological.

Apparently, women are hardwired to like pink because our cavewoman foremothers spent their days gathering red leaves and berries amongst the trees while their husbands were out hunting. Later, women needed to notice red-faced babies and blushing boyfriends. And why do men like blue? Because it’s the color of the sky.

This evolutionary just-so story takes up three pages of a 2007 issue of Current Biology. To back up the assertion that pink is a universal girly preference worth examining, the authors refer to a 1985 study finding that little girls use more pink and red crayons in their drawings than little boys do.

Dig further, however, and the story completely falls apart. British women do prefer pink, but the author’s claim of a “robust, cross-cultural sex difference” turns out to be neither. The scientists compared British natives with Chinese immigrants to Britain, and glossed over the differences. For example: The girliest color in the British results, a purplish-pink, was in fact the Chinese men’s favorite.

Nowhere do scientific findings get more mangled than when they’re about the differences between men and women. According to the science pages, women aren’t just biologically hardwired to prefer pink to blue. We’re also predisposed to backstab one another in the workplace, cry in the boardroom, and have both lower iqs and less of a sense of humor than men.

Some misleading stories come from bad science, where the study authors’ conclusions aren’t supported by their own data. Others are well-conducted studies whose conclusions mutate upon contact with the mainstream media. Newspapers and websites are prone to playing fast and loose with their reports on studies, often neglecting to reveal salient facts about a study’s sample group or methodology.

The fact is that science articles aren’t designed to be read by non-scientists. College and grad students in the sciences are trained in how to do it: They review papers and discuss them in journal clubs; learn how to question methodologies (Is that sample really big enough? Was that the right test to use?); and learn how to be critical of authors’ interpretations (Do the results really mean what they say they mean?). Students also know to look at context for each study, looking up previous papers on the subject, reviewing the authors’ previous work, and searching out any evidence of bias that might color a study’s findings.

Journalists looking for a quick story, however, do little such research. And in an age where news sites, wire services, and blogs pick up stories with lightning-fast speed, bad research gets around. When London’s Sunday Times reported on a 2007 study claiming that men get dumber in the presence of blond women, the paper got the name of the journal wrong, citing the Journal of Experimental Psychology rather than the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Nearly every subsequent news article repeated the error because they were content to simply reword the Times’ version of the story rather than finding and discussing the study itself.

(more…)

Congressional Democrats Embrace Equal Pay

Thursday, September 13th, 2007

Congressional Democrats are moving rapidly on legislation aimed at overturning a controversial Supreme Court ruling they say eviscerated pay discrimination provisions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Within weeks of the May 29 court bombshell, Congress held hearings on proposals to restore equal pay provisions in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to the status before the ruling, written by the court’s newest justice, Samuel Alito. On July 31, the House of Representatives voted 225-199 to pass a bill, and a Senate companion bill is expected to get hearings this fall.

The business community has lined up against the measure, however, and President George W. Bush pledged a veto if it passes Congress. That could make the issue part of the 2008 presidential campaign.

So far, votes are mostly along party lines: only two House Republicans voted for it, Representatives Chris Shays of Connecticut and Don Young of Alaska. All but six House Democrats voted for it. Two powerhouse Republicans are lead sponsors in the Senate, however: Senators Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Olympia Snowe of Maine, leading Marcia Greenberger of the National Women’s Law Center to predict a more bipartisan prospect there.

“The leadership in both the House and Senate are committed to move this very quickly because the decision has caused an unacceptable gaping hole in civil rights laws,” she said.

House sponsors named their proposal the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007 to honor the Alabama woman who sued Goodyear Tire Company after belatedly discovering she had been paid far less than virtually all her male factory co-workers. A jury found Goodyear’s bias to be so pervasive it awarded $3 million to Ledbetter, who had gotten a top performance award from the company in 1996. Because of a 1991 law capping damage awards, that $3 million was reduced to $300,000.

Then the Supreme Court, now under Bush appointee Chief Justice John Roberts, ruled against her, agreeing with a Bush administration argument that she had filed her lawsuit too late; she would have had to file charges within 180 days of the first discriminatory paycheck she got from Goodyear. The Ledbetter legislation would restore the traditional standard, enunciated by most federal courts and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, that pay discrimination claims had to be filed within 180 days of any discriminatory paycheck – including the last one.

When Ledbetter testified before the House Committee on Education and Labor, she said it would have been impossible for her to meet the Alito-Roberts criteria. She had been hired in 1979 as a line supervisor and said she worked hard for 19 years, did every job the men did, but had no clue she got much less money for the same work.

In her final years at Goodyear, “I got the feeling I was being paid less than the men but there was no way to know. Pay levels were kept strictly confidential.” An anonymous note told her the brutal truth. “I found out I was making $3,700 a month and all the men were earning $4,300 to $5,200 a month.”

The business community was thrilled at the ruling, one of the most favorable they have gotten so far from the Roberts court, but their opposition to the Ledbetter bill is proving to be a tricky sell. The labor policy chief for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Michael Eastman, told the Washington Post that it is a tough issue, since “everyone is opposed to unequal pay for equal work.” So far, business – and the bulk of congressional Republicans – are making a more technical argument: that the Democratic bills would lift the statute of limitations and subject businesses to frivolous claims filed decades after a problem.

The American Bar Association debunked that notion. ABA President Karen J. Mathis said in a June 1 op-ed that the ruling would make Title VII “almost useless in combating pay discrimination in the workforce” because “it is difficult, if not impossible, for an employee to know within six months that pay bias has cheated him or her of a fair paycheck.”

In an Aug. 14 policy position, the ABA urged Congress to overturn the Supreme Court ruling “to ensure that in claims involving discrimination in pay, the statute of limitations runs from each paycheck reflecting an improper disparity.” It said the Supreme Court’s reading of the law “will engender confusion and unfairness. It will deny remedies to many victims of discrimination, encourage subterfuge by employers, precipitate unwarranted claims and generally frustrate the purposes underlying Title VII.”

What happens next depends partly on whether Lilly Ledbetter becomes a household name – and whether grass roots groups connect with the issue. A DakotaWomen site posted a blog recently that criticized Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN) for saying if the bill passed, corporations wouldn’t hire women out of fear they would be sued 40 years from now.

Ledbetter’s House committee testimony was posted on YouTube. People for the American Way posted another of her statements on a separate YouTube site, gambling that the blatant pay disparities she suffered will resonate with many people.

v

Ledbetter says her own experience confirms that connection. “Since the court decision, everywhere I go, women come up to me in the grocery stores, in church, just out in the park and they tell me they understand how I feel. They’ve been there. The same thing happened to them. Because of their sex, they did not get paid equally as the males.”

Peggy Simpson, The Women’s Media Center
12 Sept. 2007

No Comment

Tuesday, August 7th, 2007

0807_lindsay_graham_obama.jpg

This photo of Sen. Lindsey Graham was posted on TMZ’s site, of all places. Almost as interesting as the image – which may or may not be real (consider the source) – are the comments from the rabble. Yikes.

Tyranny

Monday, August 6th, 2007

james-madison-quotejpg.jpg

Picnic Politics

Sunday, July 15th, 2007

Brett Bursey talks about clean elections at a Columbia CLC picninc on July 14. For photos of the event, see our photo gallery on this blog.

Also, send us a photo of you or a friend wearing a penny pin to scpoint@mindspring.com and we’ll post it here.

Fear and Loathing in Slick Pages

Sunday, July 8th, 2007

In the July issue of Jolie, a magazine insert The State newspaper markets to women, Editor Sarah Gilbert Fox writes in her letter to readers, “This month everyone will celebrate the 4th of July, gather at the beach, have BBQ’s, knock back margaritas, and, well, worry about their weight. Which makes me wonder how much independence do we really have? I’m beginning to think we don’t much like freedom, because when we have it we just end up subjugating ourselves to something else, such as the perfect-body image. So what if we’re a size 12, which used to be an average size. If we can’t fit into a size 4, we’re doomed.”

sexism-hurts-everyone.jpg

“It’s all rather shocking,” she writes, “this need to obtain a skinnier self at the expense of a happier self. And it’s a shame to know that these women’s children are constantly exposed to this talk. These daughters hardly have a chance to live a life of self-acceptance.”

She vows to “make a difference” by getting women to stop judging their bodies so harshly or to shut up about it if they can’t.

“I’m a former 82-pound anorexic,” she confides, “and it’s taken me 35 years to get to where I am right now: less boney for sure, but happier, more relaxed, and with enough energy to realize how much I’m really worthy, large or small. Don’t get me wrong – I’m still neurotic and out of touch with most things, but at least body image is not one of them.”

(more…)

TV BS

Thursday, July 5th, 2007

How do you spell hypocrisy? F-O-X (alternate spelling: C-B-S).

This is a real head-scratcher. The same TV networks that have no problem running shows chock full of gratuitous sex and violence draw the line at running condom ads. What’s up with that?

Here’s a recent message from Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America (Planned Parenthood Health Systems of SC is a Network member group):

Here’s a pretty telling story from the world of media. There is a new condom commercial on the airwaves that starts with a bunch of women in a bar surrounded by some men who happen to look like pigs. One of these men then shuffles to the men’s room, grabs a condom from a vending machine, and all of a sudden is turned into a regular guy. But the message at the end is what I like: “Use a condom every time.”

(more…)

Oreo Ed

Thursday, July 5th, 2007

If you haven’t seen the OreoMobile show, which has been touring South Carolina since early June, you have another chance on July 8. The rolling civics lesson will offer its short program at the Unitarian Church in Charleston, 4 Archdale St., at 11:30 Sunday morning. If you’re in the area, check it out. You’ll get some perspective on this country’s budget priorities, some free toys and Oreos. Bring your own milk.

The movable feast stopped at the Network’s board meeting June 9 in Columbia. It was entertaining and appalling in equal measure. The presentation was fun; the statistics frightening.

oreomobile

Activist Aaron Rubin launches a pack of Oreos into the crowd at the Network’s June board meeting in Columbia.

(more…)

Go JayBo!

Monday, July 2nd, 2007

So I read in today’s The State that JayBo is walking across South Carolina, with his sights set on San Francisco. He expects it will take him a year to walk the 2,800 miles and that he will emerge on the Left Coast a new, slimmer Bo. “I get to see wonderful things, meet new interesting people, and yes I will lose weight,” he wrote in his blog on his third day.

I love this story, and I am rooting for JayBo. I know how transformative a long walk can be. In the fall of 2002, I trekked solo across northern Spain. It took me a month to do the 500-mile pilgrims’ trail, known to seekers around the world as the Camino de Santiago. And while the trail was physically demanding – crossing two mountain ranges and the meseta, a vast moonscape that takes days to traverse – I found the biggest challenge was mental. The scariest part was not traveling alone or packs of wild dogs (which I’d read about in Paulo Coelho’s book The Pilgrimage), it was navigating the landscape in my head. With no distractions, no phone, no radio, nothing but the sound of my feet meeting the earth, there I was with myself. Hours upon end, just me and my thoughts.

Terrifying.

(more…)

Remembering Sean Kennedy

Sunday, July 1st, 2007

A vigil to honor the life of 20-year-old Sean Kennedy was held tonight in Columbia. Friends and family shared songs, poetry, prayers and stories with the crowd that gathered at the State House to pay its respects.

It appears that Kennedy, who was beaten after leaving a club in the Upstate in May, was killed because he was gay. The 18-year-old accused of the crime is being held on murder charges in a Greenville jail. The assault has sparked public outrage and renewed pressure to enact hate crimes legislation in South Carolina, one of only four states without such protection. Rep. Seth Whipper (D-Charleston) introduced a bill in March; maybe this tragedy will generate enough heat to move the legislature to act when it reconvenes in January.

Sean Kennedy’s mother, Elke, and sister, Dawn.

Children’s Health Insurance

Thursday, June 28th, 2007

Good news from SC Fair Share today:

The General Assembly has overwhelmingly overridden the Governor’s vetoes of additional SCHIP funding and the proviso expanding SCHIP eligibility from 150% to 200% of the federal poverty level.

This is a great victory for 65,000 children that has taken us a long time to get to. Thanks for everyone who helped today and over the years.

John Ruoff