procrastinate marsh: November 2012

Friday, November 30, 2012

The pros and cons of business social media automation

This is a guest post by Mike Morgan, Founder and Director of?High Profile Enterprises?? SEO and Content Strategy Consultants. Mike has been collaborating with?TrinityP3?on an SEO, Social Media and Content Strategy since early 2011.

Social media automation has got a bad rap!

Unfortunately it is often seen in the same light as the huge amount of spam on the web.

Is social media automation adding to the spam avalanche?

I?m sure you have experienced the frustration of spending valuable time sifting through the spam folder in your email account, just in case you missed something important or is that me being obsessive? (Yes, I diary to check spam twice a week and have often found extremely important messages among the invitations to claim my multi-million dollar windfalls and my top position on Google cheap SEO services!)

Maybe you have a blog and despite installing all the captchas, filters and deterrents you still get an unbelievable amount of spam disguised as comments or trackbacks.

Or you actually check your DMs on Twitter? Get rich quick schemes and thousands of followers here (usually offered by people with 5 followers).

So, how does social media automation get confused with these spammy techniques?

It is mainly because there are a number of tools available that allow users to abuse the very essence of social media. Growing numbers super fast, setting up robot accounts, blasting out messages to unsuspecting users are irritations we all have to endure.

So social media automation is a bad thing, right?

No, wrong!

How can social automation actually benefit both businesses and audiences?

Some level of automation is essential to your effectiveness.

If your strategy is based around content marketing and SEO then you will need to utilise some of the brilliant tools available.

Your social business strategy should be a combination of content sharing, conversation, outreach, customer service, brand development, relationship building and demonstration of thought leadership.

You should also show your altruistic leanings by sharing other people?s content more than your own (and your own content should not be relentlessly self-promotional).

Give value, give value, share solutions to problems, engage with other users and of course give value?

So, how could your company possibly give this amount of attention to many different social channels seven days a week?

The answer is in scheduling the right aspects of your social strategy and you can be sure there are definite no-go-zones for automation.

We have to remind ourselves that the internet is a 24 hour a day, 365 day a year entity and if your business is not purely local then your audience is spread across multiple time zones.

Most social platforms have a very fast decay rate with Twitter being one of the fastest for your piece of well-crafted wisdom to disappear into the ether ? going, going, gone! Facebook is around the 2-3 hour mark and LinkedIn is a little longer depending on the level of connectivity of your audience.

The astute business will target specific content to different time zones based on the application and relevance of the information for that audience.

It?s probably not a great idea to have people rostered around the clock to post 24 hours a day so this is where automation can be really useful.

This is apart from the fact that sharing a large number of posts in a short time-span will annoy your audience as you will inevitably fill their timelines/feeds. You will get unfollowed, un-Liked, dis-connected?

So you need to pace yourself.

An interesting side-note:

Monitoring mentions online has become a huge industry as businesses attempt to manage positive and negative comments about their brand on the web. This has evolved into employing entire departments who monitor the internet across multiple platforms 24 hours a day and who have highly evolved reaction strategies for the various levels of brand threat.

Sounds almost like science fiction doesn?t it?

The power of collaborative social scheduling

Being able to schedule is useful ? choose your time, the accounts to publish on, test variable titles and track click through rates, collect data on optimum times for posting and the level of engagement, track retweets and shares across multiple accounts and most of all?

Some of these tools allow for multiple members of a team to collaborate through the same system.

If there are several contributors to a content/social strategy then it is critical for each team member to know what the others are posting through the company social networks. Obviously there will be guidelines and responsibilities in place but there are always areas where people will be operating in similar areas and some crossover will be inevitable.

The potential for more diverse contributors with varying areas of expertise and areas of interest also adds to the reach of your accounts as there can be many more points of connection with the audience. This of course has to be balanced with a consistent voice or the individuals have to be clearly identified each time they post.

The more complex tools allow every member of a team to see who has responded, who has posted and the level of engagement from every action.

But what about the social media disaster?

The potential for the social media screw-up is always there ? hanging around in the background with malicious intent ? and this is another reason why many are afraid of using social media tools.

Who doesn?t secretly enjoy each and every publicised social media disaster ? is it the purest form of schadenfreude?

Many of these are caused by accidental publishing to the wrong social account using tools like the ones I am discussing.

This year we saw KitchenAid posting an unbelievably repugnant tweet about Barrack Obama?s grandmother dying which was supposedly meant to be ?posted on the tweeter?s personal account. (what? and that?s OK?)

And then there was the wildly offensive tweet from Stubhub?which is possibly a disgruntled employee posting on the wrong account or ?the account had been hacked?? (Yeah right!)

And who could forget the Red Cross? great recovery from their own beer fueled tweet mistake?in 2011? (Nice work Red Cross!)

So there is the potential for widely broadcasted stuff-ups but in my opinion all of the companies who have erred in this way employed junior staff to operate sensitive social media activities and probably deserve the flogging they received for not allocating a higher level of responsibility to the management of these highly public channels.

Enough said?

3 great social media tools for differing levels of application

First up I need to stress that using these tools is not?instead of?social engagement. It is supplementary and should be seen as the most effective method for content sharing.

It is still essential for you or your representatives to be constantly checking in and monitoring and responding to mentions, comments, likes, shares and all other social signals.

It takes real people in real time with a real voice to make a social account human.

Guess what ? people don?t talk to robots! (do you get those automated insurance phone calls?)

Let?s start with probably the most high profile of the social tools ? a pretty amazing startup from Canada called Hootsuite.

Hootsuite

Hootsuite is the cream of the affordable enterprise social media solutions.

It is used by McDonalds, Pepsico, Sony Music, Mashable and thousands more. It is particularly suitable for large teams, multiple teams, multiple accounts and is also pretty good for small business as well.

For the small business the free version allows 5 social profiles and unlimited scheduling. This is a nice little time-saving tool and a good introduction to the possibilities of social automation.

The Pro version gives you many more features for 10 bucks a month including unlimited accounts and an extra user to the management team.

Each additional management member will incur monthly fees but overall the cost is relatively low.

The enterprise version allows for up to 500,000 team members ? yes seriously!

If you are contacted as a VIP (usually through social media scoring) you are assigned a personal Hootsuite VIP representative which is hugely helpful when gaining an understanding of a fairly complex system. Excellent idea Hootsuite!

Overall I have found the customer service aspect of Hootsuite to be very good.

The only negative is the occasional bugginess with some of the social platforms and with browsers. I have experienced issues with both Chrome and Firefox at different times. (mind you so have the other social tools I am talking about here)

And of course there is still the potential to post to the wrong account.

Data? You can choose multiple format reports with all manner of graphs documenting every action on your chosen shortened URLs so analytics are to the forefront of this platform. Very impressive.

Buffer

Buffer is really one of the (relatively) new kids on the block and has risen to prominence on the back of one of the best guest posting strategies I have seen with co-founder Leo Widrich getting through a massive amount of content creation. Their own blog is definitely worth checking out ? great stuff!

Their tagline is ?A smarter way to share? and this is what they have focused on.

BufferApp is a favourite of many top bloggers and you will find a Buffer share button alongside Tweet, Like, +1, In or Pin on many major sites.

Buffer is great for scheduling tweets and for some scheduled posting on LinkedIn and Facebook.

You can set up a free version for your personal account and you can schedule times for tweets across a normal week. Then every time you add to the ?Buffer? the content will slot into the next available time.

Personally I find there are limitations with this method as you do not have a lot of flexibility if you would like a time sensitive post to hit your channels at a specific date and time.

There is also an ?awesome? version which gives you unlimited posts, 12 social profiles and 2 team members for 10 bucks a month.

Overall BufferApp is a really useful tool when you are trawling the web or checking your reader accounts as it takes a single click to add to your scheduling. No messing around ? a nice simple concept here.

Data? Not a whole lot that I can figure but they do let you know when your buffer runs out for each account with an email reminder.

Crowdbooster

Here is one that you will probably not have heard of ? Crowdbooster.

This social media sharing tool was developed by 3 Stanford graduates and gained funding from an impressive startup funding model called YCombinator where the recipient gets funding to get things moving from a new Silicon Valley base for the first 3 months of operation. Then they get to present their results for further investment.

Check out some of YCombinator?s startup recipients ? Dropbox, Reddit, Weebly, Disqus and Scribd.

I wrote a fairly comprehensive review of Crowdbooster here?but to paraphrase it Crowdbooster has a number of useful attributes for a small team and a small number of accounts.

You can schedule tweets into the future, choosing the date and time. Crowdbooster automatically shortens URLs (Hootsuite doesn?t in the standard dashboard) so that all you have to do is populate the share field with the title and full URL and Crowdbooster does the rest.

The reporting is really good ? best tweets, most impressions, new followers, top retweeters and also lets you know if any influential Twitter user has followed you (based on Klout score).

You can modify the data to look at a particular period and compare with others. Obviously this one is built by data nerds?

Here is the final summing up paragraph?

Social media automation is good for you ? it is good for your business ? it is good for the data analysts looking for ROI on your social efforts.

But it must be handled carefully and correctly ? the risks of brand damage are definitely there.

TrinityP3 uses all three of these social tools for varying functions of the content and social strategy and that is the interesting thing about social software. You can use several applications in a collaborative manner?to attain the best results and you can customise reporting and management to suit your business needs and team size.

And when I put on my SEO hat ? all I see is consistent social signals from shares and interaction 7 days a week, hugely increased content profile through extended reach and of course a large number of natural links from related sites around the web. Win. Win. Win.

I would be interested to hear what other social media automation tools you have tried or still use. Share your favourites or horror stories with a comment.

And don?t forget to share with your social networks by hitting the buttons at the top if you have enjoyed this post. Thank you.

Source: http://www.trinityp3.com/2012/11/social-media-automation/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=social-media-automation

game change own stacy francis tournament brackets 2012 ncaa basketball tournament walt what time is it

'Bigfoot' is part human, claims study based on purported Sasquatch DNA

Because the Texas veterinarian has released no information at all about her findings (nor have they been examined by outside experts), it's impossible to evaluate the validity of her conclusions.

By Benjamin Radford,?LiveScience Bad Science Columnist / November 27, 2012

Tom Biscardi, CEO and founder of BIGFOOT Inc., holds up a picture he claims is the mouth of Bigfoot, in 2008. The claims were later revealed to be a hoax.

Kimberly White/Reuters

Enlarge

Genetic testing confirms the legendary Bigfoot is a human relative that arose some 15,000 years ago ? at least according to a press release issued by a company called DNA Diagnostics detailing supposed work by a Texas veterinarian.

Skip to next paragraph

' + google_ads[0].line2 + '
' + google_ads[0].line3 + '

'; } else if (google_ads.length > 1) { ad_unit += ''; } } document.getElementById("ad_unit").innerHTML += ad_unit; google_adnum += google_ads.length; return; } var google_adnum = 0; google_ad_client = "pub-6743622525202572"; google_ad_output = 'js'; google_max_num_ads = '1'; google_feedback = "on"; google_ad_type = "text"; google_adtest = "on"; google_image_size = '230x105'; google_skip = '0'; // -->

The release and alleged study by Melba S. Ketchum also suggests such cryptids had sex with modern human females that resulted in hairy hominin hybrids, but the scientific community is dubious about her claim.

"A team of scientists can verify that their five-year long DNA study, currently under peer-review, confirms the existence of a novel hominin hybrid species, commonly called 'Bigfoot' or 'Sasquatch,' living in North America," the release reads. "Researchers' extensive DNA sequencing suggests that the legendary Sasquatch is a human relative that arose approximately 15,000 years ago."

For her study, Ketchum obtained three "whole nuclear genomes from purported?Sasquatch?samples. The genome sequencing shows that Sasquatch mtDNA is identical to modern?Homo sapiens, but Sasquatch nuDNA is a novel, unknown hominin related to?Homo sapiens?and other primate species." (Mitochondrial DNA, or mtDNA, is the DNA that resides in the cell's energy-producing structures, and is typically passed down from mothers, while nuclear DNA, nuDNA, resides in the cells' nuclei and is passed down from both parents to offspring.)

"Our data indicate that the North American Sasquatch is a hybrid species, the result of males of an unknown hominin species crossing with female Homo sapiens," the statement reads. [Infographic: Tracking Belief in Bigfoot]

Any proof?

It's a fascinating theory.

So where's the evidence? Well, there is none. Not yet, anyway: Ketchum's research has not appeared in any peer-reviewed scientific journal, and there's no indication when that might happen. If the data are good and the science is sound, any reputable science journal would jump at the chance to be the first to publish this groundbreaking information. Until then, Ketchum has refused to let anyone else see her evidence.

Of course the?history of Bigfoot?is rife with exaggerated and premature claims about?proof of the creature's existence. For decades, various types of evidence have been offered as final, definitive proof, ranging from Bigfoot hair to blood to dead bodies. Without exception, the evidence has always been hoaxed, misidentification or inconclusive.

Because Ketchum has released no information at all about her findings (nor have they been examined by outside experts), it's impossible to evaluate the validity of her conclusions. But an important clue can be found in her statement that "Sasquatch mtDNA is identical to modern?Homo sapiens."

If the mitochontrial DNA is identical to?Homo sapiens?(i.e., modern humans), then this suggests one of two options. The first, endorsed by Ketchum, is that Bigfoot ancestors had sex with women about 15,000 years ago and created a half-human hybrid species currently hiding across North America. [Rumor or Reality: The Creatures of Cryptozoology]

There is, however, another, simpler interpretation of such results: The samples were contaminated. Whatever the sample originally was ? Bigfoot, bear, human or something else ? it's possible that the people who collected and handled the specimens accidentally introduced their DNA into the sample, which can easily occur with something as innocent as a spit, sneeze or cough. No one outside of Ketchum's team knows how this alleged Bigfoot DNA was collected, from where or by whom. It could have been collected by the world's top forensics experts, or by a pair of amateur Bigfoot buffs with no evidence-gathering training.

Confirming it's Bigfoot

How did the team definitively determine that the samples were from a Bigfoot? Did they take a blood or saliva sample from?a living Bigfoot? If so, how did they get that close, and why didn't they simply capture it or photograph it? If the samples were found in the wild, how do they know it wasn't left by another animal ? or possibly even a hunter, hiker or camper who left human genetic material?

Previous alleged Bigfoot samples subjected to DNA analysis have been deemed "unknown" or "unidentified." However, "unknown" or "unidentified" results do not mean "Bigfoot." There are many reasons why a DNA sample might come back unknown, including that it was contaminated or too degraded by environmental conditions. Or it could simply mean that the animal it came from was not among the reference samples that the laboratory used for comparison. There is no reference sample of?Bigfoot DNA?to compare it with, so by definition, there cannot be a conclusive match.

Ketchum also issued a statementrequesting that the U.S. government immediately recognize Bigfoot as "an indigenous people and immediately protect their human and Constitutional rights against those who would see in their physical and cultural differences a 'license' to hunt, trap, or?kill them." Since no Bigfoot has ever been hunted, trapped or killed, it's not clear that the creatures ? if they exist ? require any special federal protection.

Ketchum's is not the only genetics-based project intended to find Bigfoot. Earlier this year, researchers from Oxford University and the Lausanne Museum of Zoology announced they were collecting samples of?alleged Bigfoot and Yeti hair?for genetic identification. Oxford geneticist Bryan Sykes collected materials from the public from May through September, and is currently conducting DNA analysis. Once the results are in, he plans to submit his results to a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

If Ketchum has the definitive proof she claims, the world will soon know about it, and Bigfoot will be proven once and for all. On the other hand, if the evidence never appears, or is inconclusive and flawed, the search will continue.

Benjamin Radford is deputy editor of?Skeptical Inquirer?science magazine and author of six books, including?Tracking the Chupacabra?and?Scientific Paranormal Investigation: How to Solve Unexplained Mysteries. His website is www.BenjaminRadford.com.

Source: http://rss.csmonitor.com/~r/feeds/science/~3/sLmn4Gt2_j4/Bigfoot-is-part-human-claims-study-based-on-purported-Sasquatch-DNA

tim tebow Long Island Medium Alfonso Ribeiro cbs sports adam sandler cbs College Football Scoreboard

Boehner joins filibuster fight against Democrats

WASHINGTON (AP) ? House Speaker John Boehner joined fellow Republicans in the Senate on Thursday in their battle to stop Democrats controlling that chamber from curbing filibusters, threatening to ignore bills the Senate sends him if Democrats have abused GOP senators' rights to slow consideration of legislation.

The threat by Boehner, R-Ohio, represents an unusual escalation across the Capitol building of a bitter partisan fight that has been brewing in the Senate for weeks. It also underscores a Republican effort to retain as much power as they can next year, when Democrats will control the White House and Senate and Republicans will lead only the House.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has said that on the first day of the new Congress in January, he may take the unusual step of using a simple majority vote to limit filibusters.

Usually it takes a two-thirds vote to change Senate rules. A simple majority would mean Democrats could change the filibuster rules without GOP support, and the threat has infuriated Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and other Republicans. Democrats will control the new Senate 55-45, including one Democratic-leaning independent.

Boehner said that Reid's threat "is clearly designed to marginalize Senate Republicans and their constituents while greasing the skids for controversial, partisan measures."

He added, "Any bill that reaches a Republican-led House based on Senate Democrats' heavy-handed power play would be dead on arrival."

Though the rules change would not occur until next year, Boehner suggested that it might poison the atmosphere even sooner, "at a time when cooperation on Capitol Hill is critical."

President Barack Obama and congressional leaders of both parties are currently bargaining over deficit-cutting measures that would avoid the so-called fiscal cliff of big tax increases and deep spending cuts scheduled to begin in January unless lawmakers find a way to avert them.

Minority parties in the Senate use filibusters ? parliamentary delays ? to slow or kill legislation. They can only be ended by 60 votes ? a margin neither party can achieve without some cooperation from the other side.

Democrats say Republicans are abusing filibusters by resorting to them too frequently, and statistics show minority Republicans have increasingly used the tactic in recent years. Reid's plan would forbid the use of filibusters when a bill is initially being brought to the Senate floor for debate and require filibustering senators to actually be on the Senate floor, a long-abandoned practice.

"It is a shame to see Speaker Boehner join Sen. McConnell's desperate attempt to double down in the status quo of Republican-led gridlock in Washington," said Reid spokesman Adam Jentleson.

Republicans say they have used filibusters more because Reid blocks them from presenting amendments. Reid, in turn, says Republicans use too much time pushing amendments that make political statements or that are designed to derail bills.

The battle has prompted numerous sharp exchanges on the Senate floor in recent days between Reid and McConnell.

Neither side has ruled out negotiating a solution to the dispute.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/boehner-joins-filibuster-fight-against-democrats-035715231--politics.html

occupy congress juan williams victor martinez alcatraz cruise ship martin luther king jr. zappos

Thursday, November 29, 2012

Was Arafat poisoned?

Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat died in 2004, but the cause of death has yet to be determined. Samples were taken from Arafat's corpse on Tuesday; investigators hope to determine whether he was poisoned by spring 2013.?

By Jihan Abdalla,?Reuters / November 27, 2012

In this 2004 file photo, Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat pauses during an emergency cabinet session, at his compound, in Ramallah. The remains of former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat were exhumed on Tuesday as part of a probe into his death.

AP Photo/Muhammed Muheisen, File

Enlarge

Forensic experts took samples from?Yasser Arafat's corpse in the?West Bank?on Tuesday, trying to determine if he was murdered with the hard-to-trace radioactive poison, polonium.

Skip to next paragraph

' + google_ads[0].line2 + '
' + google_ads[0].line3 + '

Palestinians witnessed the funeral of their hero and longtime leader eight years ago, but conspiracy theories surrounding his death have never been laid to rest.

Many are convinced their icon was the victim of assassination by Israeli agents, and may have been poisoned wittingly or unwittingly by a Palestinian. They may remain convinced of that, whatever the outcome of this autopsy.

Arafat's body was uncovered in the grave and samples removed without moving the corpse. The tomb was resealed in hours and wreaths placed by Palestinian leaders including Prime Minister?Salam Fayyad.

The head of the Palestinian investigation committee, Tawfiq Tirawi, said the procedure went smoothly. A Palestinian medical team took samples and gave them to each of the Swiss, French and Russian forensic teams.

"We need proof in order to find those who are behind this assassination and take it to the ICC (International Criminal Court)," he said.

"Israel?is occupying our land, and assassinations are not new, they have committed several, publicly and secretly ... what's to stop them from assassinating?Abu Ammar (Arafat)?"

French magistrates in August opened a murder inquiry into?Arafat's death in?Paris?in 2004, after a Swiss institute said it had discovered high levels of polonium on clothing of his which was supplied by his widow,?Suha, for a television documentary.

"The state of the body was exactly what you would expect to find for someone who has been buried for eight years," Health Minister?Hani Abdeen?told a news conference. "There was nothing out of the ordinary."

Results in spring 2013?

Jordanian doctor?Abdullah al Bashir, head of the Palestinian medical committee, said about 20 samples were taken and analysis would take at least three months.

"In order to do these analyses, to check, cross-check and double cross-check, it will take several months and I don't think we'll have anything tangible available before March or April next year," said?Darcy Christen, spokesman for Lausanne University Hospital in Switzerland that carried out the original tests on?Arafat's clothes.

Source: http://rss.csmonitor.com/~r/feeds/csm/~3/MkEKuJlBhC0/Was-Arafat-poisoned

ann curry euro 2012 Colorado Springs pga tour Nora Ephron mario balotelli mario balotelli

UK judge issues damning press verdict

Britain's Lord Justice Brian Leveson pauses as he delivers a statement following the release of the Leveson Inquiry report at the Queen Elizabeth II Centre, London, Thursday, Nov. 29, 2012. After a yearlong inquiry full of sensational testimony, Lord Justice Leveson released his report Thursday into the culture and practices of the British press and his recommendations for future regulation to prevent phone hacking, data theft, bribery and other abuses. (AP Photo/Dan Kitwood, Pool)

A man carries copies of the Leveson Inquiry report as he leaves the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre where Lord Justice Brian Leveson released his report, after a year long inquiry, into the culture and practices of the British press and his recommendations for future regulation to prevent phone hacking, data theft, bribery and other abuses, London, Thursday, Nov. 29, 2012. (AP Photo/Kirsty Wigglesworth)

Britain's Lord Justice Brian Leveson delivers a statement following the release of the Leveson Inquiry report at the Queen Elizabeth II Centre, London, Thursday, Nov. 29, 2012. After a yearlong inquiry full of sensational testimony, Lord Justice Leveson released his report Thursday into the culture and practices of the British press and his recommendations for future regulation to prevent phone hacking, data theft, bribery and other abuses. (AP Photo/Dan Kitwood, Pool)

Britain's Lord Justice Brian Leveson, center back, delivers a statement following the release of the Leveson Inquiry report at the Queen Elizabeth II Centre, London, Thursday, Nov. 29, 2012. After a yearlong inquiry full of sensational testimony, Lord Justice Leveson released his report Thursday into the culture and practices of the British press and his recommendations for future regulation to prevent phone hacking, data theft, bribery and other abuses. (AP Photo/Dan Kitwood, Pool)

LONDON (AP) ? Britain needs a new independent media regulator to eliminate a subculture of unethical behavior that infected segments of the country's press, a senior judge said Thursday at the end of a yearlong inquiry into newspaper wrongdoing.

Lord Justice Brian Leveson said a new regulatory body should be established in law to prevent more people being hurt by "press behavior that, at times, can only be described as outrageous." But Prime Minister David Cameron balked at that idea, warning that passing a new law to set up the body would mean "crossing the Rubicon" toward state regulation of the press.

Leveson issued his 2,000-page report at the end of a media ethics inquiry that was triggered by revelations of tabloid phone hacking and expanded to engulf senior figures in politics, the police and Rupert Murdoch's media empire.

His proposals will likely be welcomed by victims of press intrusion and some politicians, who want to see the country's rambunctious press reined in. But some editors and lawmakers fear any new body could curtail freedom of the press.

Cameron welcomed Leveson's proposal for a new regulator with powers to settle disputes, order corrections and fine offenders.

But he said that asking legislators to enshrine it in law meant "crossing the Rubicon of writing elements of press regulation into the law of the land."

"I believe that we should be wary of any legislation that has the potential to infringe free speech and a free press," Cameron told lawmakers in the House of Commons. "In this House which has been a bulwark of democracy for centuries, we should think very, very carefully before crossing this line."

Leveson insisted in his report that politicians and the government should play no role in regulating the press, which should be done by a new body with much stronger powers than the current Press Complaints Commission.

He said "what is needed is a genuinely independent and effective system of self-regulation."

But Leveson said it was "essential that there should be legislation to underpin the independent self-regulatory system."

"The ball moves back into the politicians' court: they must now decide who guards the guardians," he said.

He said the new body should be composed of members of the public including former journalists and academics ? but no serving editors or politicians. It should have the power to demand prominent corrections in newspapers and to levy fines of up to 1 million pounds ($1.6 million).

Critics of the tabloid press generally welcomed the report.

Former Formula One boss Max Mosley, who sued Murdoch's News Corp. for invasion of privacy over claims he had taken art in a Nazi-themed orgy, said Leveson's report went in the right direction, although "I would have liked to see more."

Campaign group Hacked Off said Leveson's proposals "are reasonable and proportionate and we call on all parties to get together to implement them as soon as possible."

Cameron set up the Leveson inquiry after revelations of illegal eavesdropping by Rupert Murdoch's now-defunct News of the World tabloid sparked a criminal investigation and a wave of public revulsion.

The furor erupted in 2011 when it was revealed that the News of the World had eavesdropped on the mobile phone voicemails of slain schoolgirl Milly Dowler while police were searching for the 13-year-old.

Murdoch shut down the 168-year-old newspaper in July 2011. His U.K. newspaper company, News International, has paid millions in damages to dozens of hacking victims, and faces lawsuits from dozens more, from celebrities, politicians, athletes and crime victims whose voicemails were hacked in the paper's quest for scoops.

Leveson heard evidence from hundreds of journalists, politicians, lawyers and victims of press intrusion during months of hearings that provided a dramatic, sometimes comic and often poignant window on the workings of the media. Witnesses ranged from celebrities such as Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling and Hugh Grant ? who both complained of intrusive treatment ? to the parents of Dowler, who described how learning that their daughter's voicemail had been accessed had given them false hope that she was alive.

Leveson said that the ongoing criminal investigation constrained him from accusing other newspapers of illegal behavior, but argued there was a subculture of unethical behavior "within some parts of some titles."

While many editors have denied knowing about phone hacking, Leveson said it "was far more than a covert, secret activity, known to nobody save one or two practitioners of the 'dark arts.'"

More broadly, he said newspapers had been guilty of "recklessness in prioritizing sensational stories almost irrespective of the harm the stories may cause."

"In each case, the impact has been real and, in some cases, devastating," the judge said.

The hacking scandal has rocked Britain's press, political and police establishments, who were revealed to enjoy an often cozy relationship in which drinks, dinners and sometimes money were traded for influence and information.

Several senior police officers resigned over the failure aggressively to pursue an investigation of phone hacking at the News of the World in 2007. But Leveson said that "the inquiry has not unearthed extensive evidence of police corruption.

Leveson said over the past three decades, political parties "have had or developed too close a relationship with the press in a way which has not been in the public interest."

He acquitted senior politicians of wrongdoing, but recommended that political parties publish statements "setting out, for the public, an explanation of the approach they propose to take as a matter of party policy in conducting relationships with the press."

Cameron is under intense pressure from both advocates and opponents of a new law to set up a press regulator. He is also tainted by his own ties to prominent figures in the scandal.

Former Murdoch editors and journalists charged with phone hacking, police bribery or other wrongdoing include Cameron's former spokesman, Andy Coulson, and ex-News of the World editor Rebekah Brooks, a friend of the prime minister.

Coulson and Brooks appeared in court Thursday on charges of paying public officials for information.

Cameron called on the press to implement Leveson's proposals quickly.

"While nobody wants to see full statutory regulation, the status quo is not an option," he said. "The system of press regulation we have is badly broken and it has let down victims badly."

___

Online: http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/

Jill Lawless can be reached at http://Twitter.com/JillLawless

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/cae69a7523db45408eeb2b3a98c0c9c5/Article_2012-11-29-Britain-Phone-Hacking/id-a38db8a5371647a393d5dc76e977ad76

Resident Evil 6 arnold schwarzenegger pirate bay revenge revenge once upon a time once upon a time

Tacoma, Wash., Drops Tax Break for Big Nonprofit Hospitals ...

November 28, 2012, 9:38 am

The Tacoma, Wash., City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to levy the city?s full business and occupation tax on its two largest nonprofit hospital networks, The News Tribune reports. The move means the MultiCare and Franciscan health systems, which had paid 0.1 percent of revenue for the tax, will now pay 0.4 percent, as do commercial entities.

Tacoma, which is facing a $66-million budget shortfall, expects to raise about $5.5-million in 2013-14 by eliminating the partial tax break. ?No one takes joy in raising taxes on anyone,? Mayor Marilyn Strickland said. ?But this is where we are right now as a city.?

Tacoma health-care nonprofits had paid no business tax at all until February, when the 0.1 percent rate was imposed on those with annual gross incomes of at least $30-million. Smaller health-care nonprofits will remain fully exempt.

This entry was posted in News-updates. Bookmark the permalink.

Source: http://philanthropy.com/blogs/philanthropytoday/tacoma-wash-drops-tax-break-for-big-nonprofit-hospitals/58560

Heptathlon London 2012 shot put London 2012 Track And Field Jordyn Wieber michael phelps Kerri Strug Ledecky