Lá como cá, a mesma situação! / Redes sociais: para o bem e para o mal

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/the-stream/the-latest/2013/10/3/-chiraq-s-virtualturfwar.html

OCT 3

#Chiraq’s virtual turf war

by The Stream Team

(Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)

2013 Getty Images

Are social media and gangster rap culture contributing to gang violence in Chicago? In 2012, rivalry between two gangs played out on social media and some say led to the murder of rapper Lil JoJo. The 18 year old unwittingly chronicled the last moments of his life on YouTube, Twitter and Facebook. Chicago cops monitor social media in hopes of getting ahead of the violence. But is it time for a remix? Can social media and music be used to change the message and end the violence? We discuss at 7:30pmET. 

On today's episode of The Stream, we speak to:

Christof Putzel @ChristofPutzel
Correspondent, America Tonight
america.aljazeera.com

Desmond Patton @SAFElab
Assistant Professor, University of Michigan School of Social Work
safelab.wordpress.com

Cobe Williams @CobeWilliams
National Community Coordinator, Cure Violence
cobewilliams.com

Lance Williams
Assistant Director, Jacob H. Carruthers Center for Inner City Studies
carrutherscenter.squarespace.com

What do you think? Take our poll and leave your thoughts in the comments below.

This post contains graphic material and/or offensive material that may not be suitable for all audiences. 

Chicago's turf war has moved away from building walls, and onto Facebook and Twitter walls in recent years. According to one report, the Chicago police department estimates 80 percent of "all school disturbances result from online exchanges". 

Although Chicago, or #Chiraq, has one of the nation's strictest gun laws, Chicago Police seize more guns than the NYPD and LAPD combined. So far this year, the city has seen 325 homicides. 

Política e jornalismo no banco dos réus no Shutdown ... / america.aljazeera.com/ "We need a more fearless media"

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/10/1/reporting-governmentshutdowndemocracy.html

Shutdown coverage fails Americans

by Dan Froomkin

  

@froomkin

  

October 1, 2013  3:45PM ET

Commentary: We need journalists to hold politicians accountable for extremist actions, not to enable them

Topics:

 

U.S.

 

Shutdown

 

Media

A man reads morning newspapers from around the U.S. at the Newseum in Washington, Oct. 1, 2013. 

Gary Cameron/Reuters

U.S. news reports are largely blaming the government shutdown on the inability of both political parties to come to terms. It is supposedly the result of a "bitterly divided" Congress that "failed to reach agreement" (Washington Post) or "a bitter budget standoff" left unresolved by "rapid-fire back and forth legislative maneuvers" (New York Times). This sort of false equivalence is not just a failure of journalism. It is also a failure of democracy.

When the political leadership of this country is incapable of even keeping the government open, a political course correction is in order. But how can democracy self-correct if the public does not understand where the problem lies? And where will the pressure for change come from if journalists do not hold the responsible parties accountable?

The truth of what happened Monday night, as almost all political reporters know full well, is that "Republicans staged a series of last-ditch efforts to use a once-routine budget procedure to force Democrats to abandon their efforts to extend U.S. health insurance." (Thank you, Guardian.)

And holding the entire government hostage while demanding the de facto repeal of a president's signature legislation and not even bothering to negotiate is by any reasonable standard an extreme political act. It is an attempt to make an end run around the normal legislative process. There is no historical precedent for it. The last shutdowns, in 1995 and 1996, were not the product of unilateral demands to scrap existing law; they took place during a period of give-and-take budget negotiations. 

But the political media's aversion to doing anything that might be seen as taking sides — combined with its obsession with process — led them to actively obscure the truth in their coverage of the votes. If you did not already know what this was all about, reading the news would not help you understand.

What makes all this more than a journalistic failure is that the press plays a crucial role in our democracy. We count on the press to help create an informed electorate. And perhaps even more important, we rely on the press to hold the powerful accountable.

That requires calling out political leaders when they transgress or fail to meet commonly agreed-upon standards: when they are corrupt, when they deceive, when they break the rules and refuse to govern. Such exposure is the first consequence. When the transgressions are sufficiently grave, what follows should be continued scrutiny, marginalization, contempt and ridicule.

In the current political climate, journalistic false equivalence leads to an insufficiently informed electorate, because the public is not getting an accurate picture of what is going on.

---

Journalists have been suckered into embracing 'balance' and 'neutrality' at all costs.

---

But the lack of accountability is arguably even worse because it has the characteristics of a cascade failure. When the media coverage seeks down-the-middle neutrality despite one party's outlandish conduct, there are no political consequences for their actions. With no consequences for extremism, politicians who have succeeded using such conduct have an incentive to become even more extreme. The more extreme they get, the further the split-the-difference press has to veer from common sense in order to avoid taking sides. And so on.

The political press should be the public's first line of defense when it comes to assessing who is deviating from historic norms and practices, who is risking serious damage to the nation, whose positions are based in irrational phobias and ignorance rather than data and reason.  

Instead journalists have been suckered into embracing "balance" and "neutrality" at all costs, and the consequences of their choice in an era of political extremism will only get worse and worse.

One of the great ironies of the current dynamic is that political scientists Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann, who for decades were conventional voices of plague-on-both-your-houses centrism, have now become among the foremost critics of a press corps that fails to report the obvious. Theydescribe the modern Republican Party, without any hesitation, as "a party beholden to ideological zealots."

But as Mann explained in an interview last year, "The mainstream press really has such a difficult time trying to cope with asymmetry between the two parties' agendas and connections to facts and truth."

Even with a story as straightforward as the government shutdown, splitting the difference remains the method of choice for the political reporters and editors in Washington's most influential news bureaus. Even when they surely know better. Even when many Republican elected officials have criticized their own leaders for being too beholden to the more radical right wing.

Media critics — and members of the public — have long decried this kind of he-said-she-said reporting. The Atlantic's James Fallows, one of the most consistent chroniclers and decriers of false equivalence, describes it as the "strong tendency to give equal time and credence to varying 'sides' of a story, even if one of the sides is objectively true and the other is just made up."

New York University journalism professor Jay Rosen argues that truth telling has been surpassed as a newsroom priority by a neither-nor impartiality he calls the "view from nowhere."

Blaming everyone — Congress, both sides, Washington — is simply the path of least resistance for today's political reporters. It's a way of avoiding conflict rather than taking the risk that the public — or their editors — will accuse them of being unprofessionally partisan.

But making a political judgment through triangulation — trying to stake out a safe middle ground between the two political parties — is still making a political judgment. It is often just not a very good one. And in this case, as in many others, it is doing the country a grave disservice.

So, no, the shutdown is not generalized dysfunction or gridlock or stalemate. It is aberrational behavior by a political party that is willing to take extreme and potentially damaging action to get its way. And by not calling it what it is, the political press is enabling it.

We need a more fearless media.

Mais e más informações... !!! Até quando vamos ser enganados pelo PT ? (Poupança Fraterna)

 Confisco   

Bom dia SE PUDER

Veja o que está 'sendo 'aprontado' para NÓS BRASILEIROS.

Projeto de Lei institui uma POUPANÇA FRATERNA - retenção COMPULSÓRIA de parte de sua renda - excedente a limite fixado pelo Ministério da Fazenda.

O projeto tramita na Câmara desde 2002, assim que o PT assumiu a Presidência da República.

Vale a pena PENSAR E REPASSAR...muito poucos sabem disso, inclusive eu que só fiquei sabendo agora.

CONFISCO DE POUPANÇA E SALÁRIOS!!!

O PT conseguiu entrar no poder do Brasil em 2002 e já em 2004 o
partido entrou com um Projeto de Lei completamente COMUNISTA para
obter controle total da parte financeira da população. E ele ainda
encontra-se ativo na câmara aguardando a aprovação. Que no nosso ponto
de vista, na verdade o que estava sendo aguardada era a neutralização
da oposição no Congresso.

O Congresso Nacional decreta:
Art. 1º Fica criado o Limite Máximo de Consumo, valor máximo que cada
pessoa física residente no País poderá utilizar, mensalmente, para
custear sua vida e as de seus dependentes.

§ 1º O Limite Máximo de Consumo fica definido como dez vezes o valor
da renda per capita nacional, mensal, calculada pelo Instituto
Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística – IBGE, em relação ao ano
anterior.

Art. 2º Por um período de sete anos, a partir do dia primeiro de
janeiro do ano seguinte ao da publicação desta Lei, toda pessoa física
brasileira, residente ou não no País, e todo estrangeiro residente no
Brasil, só poderá dispor, mensalmente, para custear sua vida e a de
seus dependentes, de um valor menor ou igual ao Limite Máximo de
Consumo.

Art. 3º A parcela dos rendimentos recebidos por pessoas físicas,
inclusive os que estejam sujeitos à tributação exclusiva na fonte ou
definitiva, excedente ao Limite Máximo de Consumo será depositada,
mensalmente, a título de empréstimo compulsório, em uma conta especial
de caderneta de poupança, em nome do depositante, denominada Poupança
Fraterna.

§ 1º A critério do depositante, sua Poupança Fraterna poderá ser
depositada no Banco do Brasil ou na Caixa Econômica Federal,
podendo ser livremente movimentada, pelo seu titular, entre estas duas
instituições financeiras, as quais desenvolverão seus melhores
esforços para assegurar a correta e eficiente aplicação dos recursos
assim captados.

§ 2º Qualquer pessoa, independente do seu nível de renda, poderá abrir
uma conta de Poupança Fraterna.

§ 3º Caberá à fonte pagadora reter o valor a que se refere o caput
deste artigo, realizando o depósito na Poupança Fraterna, em nome do
poupador, no mesmo dia da realização do pagamento ao beneficiário.

I – A retenção do valor excedente ao Limite Máximo de Consumo, sem a
realização do correspondente depósito na Poupança Fraterna, implicará
multa equivalente a duas vezes o valor retido, além de juros de mora.

§ 4º As pessoas físicas que auferirem rendimentos de mais de uma fonte
deverão, até o quinto dia útil do mês seguinte ao do recebimento,
realizar o depósito do valor dos seus rendimentos, excedente Ao Limite
Máximo de Consumo, na Poupança Fraterna.

I – a não-realização do depósito na Poupança Fraterna, ou sua
realização em valor inferior ao determinado no art. 3º desta Lei, por
período superior a trinta dias, implicarão a automática e imediata
inserção do retentor no cadastro da dívida ativa da União, pelo valor
correspondente a duas vezes a diferença entre o valor depositado e o
valor devido.

Art. 4º Caberá à Secretaria da Receita Federal:
I – a elaboração do cadastro anual dos poupadores compulsórios da
Poupança Fraterna, constituído de todas as pessoas físicas com
rendimento mensal igual ou superior ao Limite Máximo de Consumo;

II – a fiscalização do volume e regularidade dos depósitos,
relativamente à renda de cada um dos poupadores compulsórios.
Art. 5º Os recursos compulsórios aplicados na Poupança Fraterna serão
devolvidos aos seus titulares nos catorze anos seguintes ao período
mencionado no art. 2º, com prestações mensais de valores equivalentes
à metade de cada um dos depósitos realizados, respeitada a ordem em
que os depósitos foram feitos, mais os juros acumulados no período.

§ 1º Os titulares da Poupança Fraterna, ou seus herdeiros, poderão
sacar seus recursos nas hipóteses:
I – de morte do titular da conta, a totalidade dos recursos, conforme
destinação definida no inventário;
II – para aquisição de casa própria para fins de residência
permanente, limitada ao valor de R$ 200.000,00 (duzentos mil reais);
III – de doença grave do titular, do seu cônjuge ou de dependentes
diretos, até o limite dos gastos incorridos com o tratamento;
IV – de aplicação, a partir do terceiro ano de contribuição, em
projetos aprovados pelo Conselho a que se refere o art. 8º desta Lei.
a ) os saques previstos neste inciso serão limitados a 20% (vinte por
cento) do total de depósitos na Poupança Fraterna, efetuados em nome
de depositantes que participem como acionistas do projeto no qual os
recursos sacados serão investidos.
§ 2º Os depósitos efetuados na Poupança Fraterna capitalizarão juros
equivalentes a 95% (noventa e cinco por cento) do valor dos juros
cobrados nos financiamentos concedidos com os recursos nela
depositados.
§ 3º Os depositantes voluntários poderão sacar seus recursos no
decurso de quatro anos, após decorridos dois anos de contribuições.

DUVIDA?!

Entao acesse:


Leia tudo no site da Câmara:
http://www.camara.gov.br/proposicoesWeb/fichadetramitacao?idProposicao=156281
http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=%3ca%20href="
target="_blank">http://www.camara.gov.br/sileg/integras/202553.pdf
http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=%3ca%20href="
target="_blank">http://www.camara.gov.br/sileg/integras/327088.pdf

Obs.: Com medo das recentes paralisações que tomaram conta do País, o
governo pediu aos congressistas para "dar um tempo" e depois
concluirem o Plano de Submissão do povo as Rédeas Governamentais.
************************************************************

Briga de cachorro grande em mundo doidão...! Haja psiquiatra para todos! O senhor juiz tem cão ou gosta de cão?

03/10/2013 - 16:31

COMPARTILHARIMPRIMIR

stiça

Briga de vizinhos pode tirar Facebook do ar no Brasil

Juiz determina suspensão da rede caso conteúdo considerado ofensivo não seja retirado do ar. Discussão começou com briga por causa de cachorro

Rafael Sbarai

Luize Altenhofen, com outros dois cães da raça: Ring, alvo das denúncias, atacou e foi atingido com uma barra de ferro na cabeça (Antonio Milena)

O juiz Régis Rodrigues Bonvicino, da 1ª Vara Cível de São Paulo, determinou nesta quarta-feira que o Facebook retire do ar, no prazo de 48 horas, textos considerados ofensivos a um usuário sob pena de a rede ser retirada do ar no Brasil. O Facebook afirmou nesta quinta-feira, por meio de sua assessoria de imprensa, que "tem por política cumprir ordens judiciais para bloqueio de conteúdo desde que tenha a especificação do conteúdo considerado ilegal". Na prática, isso significa que o material só sairia do ar se a Justiça informasse o link em que está o conteúdo considerado ofensivo — o que não teria ocorrido até agora. A empresa não informou se já recorreu da decisão.

Leia também

Informação demais faz mal à saúde ! BBC News - Italy boat sinking: Hundreds feared dead off Lampedusa

BBC News - Italy boat sinking: Hundreds feared dead off Lampedusa

3 October 2013 Last updated at 18:32 GMT

Share this page

• Email
• Print

• Share
• Facebook
• Twitter

Italy boat sinking: Hundreds feared dead off Lampedusa

The BBC's Alan Johnston: "More survivors, but dozens of bodies too"

Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

• From Lampedusa to BerlinWatch
• Italy rescues 'Syrian' boat migrants
• Pope Francis visits migrant island

At least 130 African migrants have died and many more are missing after a boat carrying them to Europe sank off the southern Italian island of Lampedusa.

A total of 103 bodies have been recovered and more have been found inside the wreck, coast guards say.

Passengers reportedly threw themselves into the sea when a fire broke out on board. More than 150 of the migrants have been rescued.

Most of those on board were from Eritrea and Somalia, said the UN.

The boat was believed to have been carrying up to 500 people at the time and some 200 of them are unaccounted for.

Continue reading the main story

Analysis

Alan JohnstonBBC News, Rome

This marked a tragic end to a long journey from countries as far as Eritrea and Somalia.

Over the years there have been numerous disasters involving migrants off Lampedusa, but seldom on anything like this scale. The island's mayor wept as she took in the scene on the harbour wall.

Furious demands are being made for an end to the dangerous trafficking of people across the Mediterranean. But it is hard to see how the flow could be curbed, with so many people so desperate for a chance to make a new life in Europe, and traffickers in so many ports ready to take their money.

Italian Interior Minister Angelino Alfano said the ship had come from Misrata in Libya and began taking on water when its motor stopped working.

It is thought that some of those on board set fire to a piece of material to try to attract the attention of passing ships, only to have the fire spread to the rest of the boat.

Simona Moscarelli, a spokeswoman from the International Organization for Migration in Rome, told the BBC that in order to escape the fire, "the migrants moved, all of them, to one side of the boat which capsized".

She estimated that only six of about 100 women on board survived, adding that most of the migrants were unable to swim.

"Only the strongest survived," she said.

It is one of the worst such disasters to occur off the Italian coast in recent years; Prime Minister Enrico Letta tweeted that it was "an immense tragedy". The government has declared a day of national mourning on Friday.

"There is no miraculous solution to the migrant exodus issue," said Italian Foreign Minister Emma Bonino. "If there were we would have found it and put it into action."

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

Without the necessary paperwork, the only way for migrants to get to Europe is to put themselves in the hands of criminal gangs”

Andrew HardingAfrica correspondent

• Read more from Andrew

In a separate incident on Thursday, local media reported that around 200 migrants were escorted to the port of Syracuse on the island of Sicily, when their vessel encountered difficulties five miles off the coast.

Earlier this week, 13 migrants drowned while trying to reach Sicily.

'Continuous horror'

Footage from Lampedusa showed bodies being laid out on the dockside.

The mayor, Giusi Nicolini, described the scene as a "continuous horror".

"It's horrific, like a cemetery, they are still bringing them out," she said, according to Reuters.

More than 140 people have been rescued from the shipwreck, officials say

The vessel reportedly capsized after a fire on board

There are believed to have been around 500 people on board the vessel

The bodies of the victims were lined up at Lampedusa dockside