House approves $9.7 billion in Sandy disaster aid

WASHINGTON — Responding to the political storm over delays in disaster aid to the Northeast, the House on Friday approved a $9.7-billion flood insurance bill, the first segment of a possible $60-billion Superstorm Sandy recovery package.

The measure’s approval comes after New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Rep. Pete King of New York, among others, publicly slammed House Speaker John Boehner, a fellow Republican, for putting off a vote on a relief measure in the closing days of the 112^thCongress.

The 354-67 vote sent the bill to the Senate, where it could be approved by the end of the day. 

But Democrats were still fuming that it has taken 68 days for the House to act – and that a  broader relief bill still must be approved.

"Talk about fiddling while New York City burns,’’ said Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-N.Y.), calling the delay an "embarrassment’’ to the House. 

"How dare you come to this floor and make people think everything is OK,’’ Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-N.J.) told Republicans.

Rep. Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.), among the Northeast lawmakers who complained earlier this week about congressional inaction on a relief bill, called the vote a "key step in getting critical federal assistance to the residents, businesses and communities devastated by Hurricane Sandy.

“This week’s events make it clear that the need for help is real and that any additional delays in providing federal aid will be met with fierce resistance from myself, members of the delegation, and Gov. Christie,’’ he added.

The larger aid package, due to come before the House on Jan. 15, would fund such things as repairing roads, the electric grid, transportation system and Liberty Island, where the Statue of Liberty has been closed since the storm hit, and shoring up defenses against future storms.

That measure, expected to cost $51 billion, could still run into resistance from conservative lawmakers, some of whom have sought to offset the new spending with budget cuts elsewhere.

The conservative Club for Growth urged a no vote on the flood insurance measure, saying, "Congress should not allow the federal government to be involved in the flood insurance industry in the first place, let alone expand the national flood insurance program's authority."

The measure approved Friday  would increase the borrowing authority for the national flood insurance program to cover insurance claims for flood damage.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency has warned that without congressional action, funds available to pay claims would be exhausted next week.   

Sandy, which was a hurricane before the center of the storm made landfall  Oct. 29 in New Jersey, caused more than 125 deaths in the United States.

ALSO:

Sandy Hook students 'happy to see their friends'

House Democrats call for inquiry into beached Alaskan oil rig

New York state, county officials revolt over map of gun-permit holders

Richard.simon@latimes.com

Read More..

CIA Official Who Destroyed Torture Tapes Squirms at <em>Zero Dark Thirty</em> Abuse

Jose Rodriguez thinks the new movie about the hunt for Osama bin Laden is “well worth seeing.” But the retired CIA veteran has reservations about its gut-churning portrayal of the CIA’s treatment of detainees. Which is rich, coming from the man who destroyed the video footage documenting many of those brutal agency interrogations.

In an op-ed for the Washington Post on Friday, the former chief of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center and its clandestine service takes issue with Zero Dark Thirty’s torture scenes. Those scenes are admittedly hard to watch. They show terrified, disoriented and bloodied detainees kept awake for days on end by having their arms painfully suspended from the ceilings of secret jails; stuffed into tiny wooden boxes when they don’t cooperate with their inquisitors; and waterboarded on soiled mattresses while interrogators bark questions. They also largely match up with the minimal public disclosure of how the post-9/11 program actually operated.

But they offend Rodriguez, who describes himself as “intimately involved in setting up and administering” a program he has steadfastly denied amounted to torture. Most CIA detainees weren’t subject to what he euphemistically calls “enhanced interrogation.” Those who were experienced “harsh measures for only a few days or weeks at the start of their detention.” And director Kathryn Bigelow left out all the bureaucratic red tape CIA interrogators encountered: “To give a detainee a single open-fingered slap across the face, CIA officers had to receive written authorization from Washington.”

Except there’s a problem with Rodriguez’s account that he sidesteps in calling the film inaccurate. While at the CIA, Rodriguez himself destroyed nearly 100 video recordings of brutal interrogations, including those of two al-Qaida figures who most definitely were subjected to “harsh measures,” Abu Zubaydah and 9/11 architect Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. If Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal are in the dark about torture — like the rest of the country — Rodriguez is a big part of the reason why.

It took a Justice Department inquiry to reveal even the outlines of the destruction of the torture tapes. In 2009, the government disclosed that Rodriguez in 2005 ordered the destruction of 92 videotapes of interrogation footage totaling hundreds of hours’ worth of footage. As the New York Times noted, Rodriguez’s order came at a time when “Congress and the courts were intensifying their scrutiny of the agency’s detention and interrogation program.” The destruction was a deliberative process: Rodriguez wrote in his memoir last year that he used a shredder packing “five spinning and two stationary blades” capable of chewing through “hundreds of pounds of material in a single hour.”

Rodriguez claims he ordered the destruction on his own after his bosses vacillated on whether the tapes ought to be destroyed. His stated rationale for liquidating evidence that was relevant to a potential criminal investigation was to protect his interrogators. It had the effect of destroying a major aspect of the historical record. When Rodriguez swears in his op-ed that the torture program worked as he says it did, he left observers with few independent ways to check his claims.

Ultimately, a Justice Department special prosecutor opted to abandon criminal cases against CIA interrogators who had received authorization from senior government officials for the interrogation program. Rodriguez himself never faced criminal charges for the destruction of the tapes.

Despite the destruction, Rodriguez’s insider account isn’t the only one that has survived. Phil Zelikow, a former aide to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, told Danger Room last year that the CIA’s brutal interrogations amounted to “war crimes,” an assessment he conveyed during an internal 2006 debate about the CIA program. One of the CIA interrogators involved in the program’s early days has lamented that he “destroyed a man’s life” through the abusive techniques.

There are other reasons to doubt aspects of Rodriguez’s accounts. He writes that “When the detainee became compliant, the techniques stopped — forever.” But three powerful senators who helped helm a four-year classified study of the CIA program, Dianne Feinstein, John McCain and Carl Levin, wrote to the CIA on December 19 that “The CIA detainee who provided the most accurate information about the courier [to Osama bin Laden] provided the information prior to being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques.”

Feinstein, McCain and Levin have now turned their focus to the CIA’s cooperation with a movie that they believe conveys the mistaken impression that torture led to the killing of Osama bin Laden. Rodriguez makes no secret of what he thinks about Congress prying into the CIA’s dark corners. He singles out a scene in Zero Dark Thirty when an agency employee threatens to alert a congressional committee about her boss’s seeming failures. “Now that,” Rodriguez writes, “would be torture.”

Read More..

Actor Dempsey: Coffee chain bid appears successful

SEATTLE (AP) — Actor Patrick Dempsey said it appears his bid to buy a small coffee chain has prevailed in a bankruptcy auction that included Starbucks Corp.

Late Thursday night, Dempsey announced that his company, Global Baristas LLC, made the winning bid for Tully’s Coffee. He noted in a KOMO-TV interview that a bankruptcy judge will have the final say on Jan. 11. Still, Dempsey tweeted “We got it! Thank you Seattle!”

Dempsey’s company will pay $ 9,150,000 for Tully’s and complete the purchase later this month after the court hearing, he said in a statement.

“I’m thrilled that we won and I’m even more excited about saving Tully’s Coffee and its hundreds of jobs,” he said. “Tully’s is a great company with committed employees, and with its base in Seattle, one of the world’s greatest cities, I’m confident we will be able to successfully build the brand and help grow the economy. “

Tully’s Coffee has 47 company-owned locations in Washington and California. The company, with more than 500 employees, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in October.

Dempsey, who gained the nickname “McDreamy” on the TV show “Grey’s Anatomy” set in a fictional Seattle hospital, has said he wants to rescue the chain.

“Seattle has been very good to me over my career, and I am honored to have the privilege to own Tully’s and work closely with the company’s employees,” he said in his statement.

After Thursday’s auction, Starbucks spokesman Zack Hutson confirmed his company participated and “is currently in a back-up position” for some of Tully’s assets. The final certification of the winning bid won’t occur until the Jan. 11 bankruptcy court hearing, Hutson said.

“We have to wait until next week to make sure everything — I believe the 11th — to make sure it’s all finalized,” Dempsey told KOMO-TV.

The Starbucks spokesman said his company made an offer for 13 of Tully’s company-owned stores in the Puget Sound region plus 12 outlets at Boeing Co. sites. Hutson said another bidder made an offer for all other assets — and is in a back-up position for those.

Also in the running was Baristas Coffee, which operates a chain of drive-thru espresso stands featuring female employees in skimpy outfits.

Both Starbucks and Tully’s are based in Seattle.

The auction process was not public.

Entertainment News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: Actor Dempsey: Coffee chain bid appears successful
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/actor-dempsey-coffee-chain-bid-appears-successful/
Link To Post : Actor Dempsey: Coffee chain bid appears successful
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..

Scant Proof Is Found to Back Up Claims by Energy Drinks

Energy drinks are the fastest-growing part of the beverage industry, with sales in the United States reaching more than $10 billion in 2012 — more than Americans spent on iced tea or sports beverages like Gatorade.

Their rising popularity represents a generational shift in what people drink, and reflects a successful campaign to convince consumers, particularly teenagers, that the drinks provide a mental and physical edge.

The drinks are now under scrutiny by the Food and Drug Administration after reports of deaths and serious injuries that may be linked to their high caffeine levels. But however that review ends, one thing is clear, interviews with researchers and a review of scientific studies show: the energy drink industry is based on a brew of ingredients that, apart from caffeine, have little, if any benefit for consumers.

“If you had a cup of coffee you are going to affect metabolism in the same way,” said Dr. Robert W. Pettitt, an associate professor at Minnesota State University in Mankato, who has studied the drinks.

Energy drink companies have promoted their products not as caffeine-fueled concoctions but as specially engineered blends that provide something more. For example, producers claim that “Red Bull gives you wings,” that Rockstar Energy is “scientifically formulated” and Monster Energy is a “killer energy brew.” Representative Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, a Democrat, has asked the government to investigate the industry’s marketing claims.

Promoting a message beyond caffeine has enabled the beverage makers to charge premium prices. A 16-ounce energy drink that sells for $2.99 a can contains about the same amount of caffeine as a tablet of NoDoz that costs 30 cents. Even Starbucks coffee is cheap by comparison; a 12-ounce cup that costs $1.85 has even more caffeine.

As with earlier elixirs, a dearth of evidence underlies such claims. Only a few human studies of energy drinks or the ingredients in them have been performed and they point to a similar conclusion, researchers say — that the beverages are mainly about caffeine.

Caffeine is called the world’s most widely used drug. A stimulant, it increases alertness, awareness and, if taken at the right time, improves athletic performance, studies show. Energy drink users feel its kick faster because the beverages are typically swallowed quickly or are sold as concentrates.

“These are caffeine delivery systems,” said Dr. Roland Griffiths, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University who has studied energy drinks. “They don’t want to say this is equivalent to a NoDoz because that is not a very sexy sales message.”

A scientist at the University of Wisconsin became puzzled as he researched an ingredient used in energy drinks like Red Bull, 5-Hour Energy and Monster Energy. The researcher, Dr. Craig A. Goodman, could not find any trials in humans of the additive, a substance with the tongue-twisting name of glucuronolactone that is related to glucose, a sugar. But Dr. Goodman, who had studied other energy drink ingredients, eventually found two 40-year-old studies from Japan that had examined it.

In the experiments, scientists injected large doses of the substance into laboratory rats. Afterward, the rats swam better. “I have no idea what it does in energy drinks,” Dr. Goodman said.

Energy drink manufacturers say it is their proprietary formulas, rather than specific ingredients, that provide users with physical and mental benefits. But that has not prevented them from implying otherwise.

Consider the case of taurine, an additive used in most energy products.

On its Web site, the producer of Red Bull, for example, states that “more than 2,500 reports have been published about taurine and its physiological effects,” including acting as a “detoxifying agent.” In addition, that company, Red Bull of Austria, points to a 2009 safety study by a European regulatory group that gave it a clean bill of health.

But Red Bull’s Web site does not mention reports by that same group, the European Food Safety Authority, which concluded that claims about the benefits in energy drinks lacked scientific support. Based on those findings, the European Commission has refused to approve claims that taurine helps maintain mental function and heart health and reduces muscle fatigue.

Taurine, an amino acidlike substance that got its name because it was first found in the bile of bulls, does play a role in bodily functions, and recent research suggests it might help prevent heart attacks in women with high cholesterol. However, most people get more than adequate amounts from foods like meat, experts said. And researchers added that those with heart problems who may need supplements would find far better sources than energy drinks.

Hiroko Tabuchi contributed reporting from Tokyo and Poypiti Amatatham from Bangkok.

Read More..

An Inquiry Into Tech Giants’ Tax Strategies Nears an End

Congressional investigators are wrapping up an inquiry into the accounting practices of Apple and other technology companies that allocate revenue and intellectual property offshore to lower the taxes they pay in the United States.

The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations inquiry now drawing to a close began more than a year ago and involves at least a half dozen technology companies, according to people with firsthand knowledge of it, who declined to be identified.

Those people said the subcommittee had subpoenaed or otherwise asked the companies to explain methods they used to avoid domestic taxes. They said Apple had become a focus of the inquiry and was cooperating with the subcommittee, which is expected to issue wide-ranging recommendations that are likely to play a significant role in Congressional tax code negotiations.

Apple’s domestic tax bill has drawn the interest of corporate tax experts and policy makers because although the majority of Apple’s executives, product designers, marketers, employees, research and development operations and retail stores are in the United States, in the past Apple’s accountants have found legal ways to allocate about 70 percent of the company’s profits overseas, where tax rates are often much lower, according to corporate filings.

Apple, in a statement on Thursday, said the company was “one of the top corporate income taxpayers in the country, if not the largest.” The statement said the company “conducted all of its business with the highest of ethical standards, complying with applicable laws and accounting rules.”

It is unclear how broadly Senate investigators are looking into the technology industry, if any laws are thought to have been broken and how many companies are involved. The subcommittee is also known to be looking at Google, Hewlett-Packard, Microsoft and firms in such fields as biotechnology.

The subcommittee, which is overseen by Senator Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, has been interested in the impact on the budget deficit of offshore tax strategies. Representatives from Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard testified at a subcommittee hearing on the subject in September. Both companies were criticized sharply by Senator Levin for using accounting rules to allocate revenue to other nations to avoid paying taxes in the United States.

“This subcommittee has demonstrated in hearings and comprehensive reports how various schemes have helped shift income to offshore tax havens and avoid U.S. taxes,” Senator Levin said at that hearing. “The resulting loss of revenue is one significant cause of the budget deficit, and adds to the tax burden that ordinary Americans bear.”Apple has long been a pioneer in developing innovative tax strategies that lessen its domestic taxes. At the September hearing, Senator Levin said the investigation indicated that Apple had deferred taxes on over $35.4 billion in offshore income between 2009 and 2011.

Tech companies are able to easily shift “intellectual property, and the profit that goes along with it, to tax havens,” said a former Treasury Department economist, Martin A. Sullivan. “Apple went out of its way to try and ensure that its tax savings didn’t attract too much public attention, because tax avoidance of that magnitude — even though it’s legal and permissible — isn’t in keeping with the image of a socially progressive company.”

In its statement, Apple said it paid “an enormous amount of taxes” to local, state and federal governments. “In fiscal 2012 we paid $6 billion in federal corporate income taxes, which is 1 out of every 40 dollars in corporate income taxes collected by the U.S. government,” it said. In the 1980s, Apple was a pioneer of an accounting technique known as the “Double Irish With a Dutch Sandwich,” which reduces taxes by routing profits through Irish subsidiaries and the Netherlands and then to the Caribbean. Today, that tactic is used by hundreds of other corporations — some of which directly imitated Apple’s methods, say accountants at those companies. More recently, Apple has moved revenue to states like Nevada and overseas nations where the company pays less, or in some cases no, taxes.

Almost every major corporation tries to minimize its taxes. However, technology companies are particularly well positioned to take advantage of tax codes written for an industrial age and ill-suited to today’s digital economy.

Some profits at companies like Apple, Google, Amazon, Hewlett-Packard and Microsoft emerge from royalties on intellectual property, like the patents on software. At other times, products are digital, such as downloaded songs or movies. It is much easier for businesses with royalties and digital products to move profits to low-tax countries than it is, say, for grocery stores or automakers.

Although technology is now one of the nation’s largest and most highly valued industries, many tech companies are among the least taxed, according to government and corporate data. Over the last two years, the 71 technology companies in the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index — including Apple, Google, Yahoo and Dell — reported paying worldwide cash taxes at a rate that, on average, was a third less than other S.& P. companies’, according to a New York Times analysis. (Cash taxes may include payments for multiple years.)

Companies report their cash outlays for income taxes in their annual Form 10-K, but it is impossible from those numbers to determine precisely how much, in total, corporations pay to governments.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: January 3, 2013

An earlier version of this article included outdated information on Apple’s tax payments. The company paid $6 billion in federal corporate income taxes in fiscal year 2012, according to a company statement on Thursday; it did not pay $3.3 billion “last year.” (That was the amount of cash taxes the company paid in fiscal year 2011.)

Read More..

Bieber urges crackdown on paparazzi after photographer's death

Justin Bieber and his collection of exotic cars have been tantalizing targets for celebrity photographers ever since the young singer got his driver's license.

A video captured the paparazzi chasing Bieber through Westside traffic in November. When Bieber's white Ferrari stops at an intersection, the video shows the singer turning to one of the photographers and asking: "How do your parents feel about what you do?"

A few months earlier, he was at the wheel of his Fisker sports car when a California Highway Patrol officer pulled him over for driving at high speeds while trying to outrun a paparazzo.

This pursuit for the perfect shot took a fatal turn Tuesday when a photographer was hit by an SUV on Sepulveda Boulevard after taking photos of Bieber's Ferrari. And the singer now finds himself at the center of the familiar debate about free speech and the aggressive tactics of the paparazzi.

Since Princess Diana's fatal accident in Paris in 1997 while being pursued by photographers, California politicians have tried crafting laws that curb paparazzi behavior. But some of those laws are rarely used, and attorneys have challenged the constitutionality of others.

On Wednesday, Bieber went on the offensive, calling on lawmakers to crack down.

"Hopefully this tragedy will finally inspire meaningful legislation and whatever other necessary steps to protect the lives and safety of celebrities, police officers, innocent public bystanders and the photographers themselves," he said in a statement.

It remained unclear if any legislators would take up his call. But Bieber did get some support from another paparazzi target, singer Miley Cyrus.

She wrote on Twitter that she hoped the accident "brings on some changes in '13 Paparazzi are dangerous!"

Last year, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge threw out charges related to a first-of-its-kind anti-paparazzi law in a case involving Bieber being chased on the 101 Freeway by photographer Paul Raef. Passed in 2010, the law created punishments for paparazzi who drove dangerously to obtain images.

But the judge said the law violated 1st Amendment protections by overreaching and potentially affecting such people as wedding photographers or photographers speeding to a location where a celebrity was present.

The L.A. city attorney's office is now appealing that decision.

Raef's attorney, Dmitry Gorin, said new anti-paparazzi laws are unnecessary.

"There are plenty of other laws on the books to deal with these issues. There is always a rush to create a new paparazzi law every time something happens," he said. "Any new law on the paparazzi is going to run smack into the 1st Amendment. Truth is, most conduct is covered by existing laws. A lot of this is done for publicity."

Coroner's officials have not identified the photographer because they have not reached the next of kin. However, his girlfriend, Frances Merto, and another photographer identified him as Chris Guerra.

The incident took place on Sepulveda Boulevard near Getty Center Drive shortly before 6 p.m. Tuesday. A friend of Bieber was driving the sports car when it was pulled over on the 405 Freeway by the California Highway Patrol. The photographer arrived near the scene on Sepulveda, left his car and crossed the street to take photos. Sources familiar with the investigation said the CHP told him to leave the area. As he was returning to his vehicle, he was hit by the SUV.

Law enforcement sources said Wednesday that it was unlikely charges would be filed against the driver of the SUV that hit the photographer.

Veteran paparazzo Frank Griffin took issue with the criticism being directed at the photographer as well as other paparazzi.

"What's the difference between our guy who got killed under those circumstances and the war photographer who steps on a land mine in Afghanistan and blows himself to pieces because he wanted the photograph on the other side of road?" said Griffin, who co-owns the photo agency Griffin-Bauer.

"The only difference is the subject matter. One is a celebrity and the other is a battle. Both young men have left behind mothers and fathers grieving and there's no greater sadness in this world than parents who have to bury their children."

Others, however, said the death focuses attention on the safety issues involving paparazzi

"The paparazzi are increasingly reckless and dangerous. The greater the demand, the greater the incentive to do whatever it takes to get the image," said Blair Berk, a Los Angeles attorney who has represented numerous celebrities. "The issue here isn't vanity and nuisance, it's safety."

richard.winton@latimes.com

andrew.blankstein@latimes.com

Read More..

Watch Live: FTC Ends Google Antitrust Probe

10:24 AM

Please enable JavaScript to view this KnowledgeVision player.

The Federal Trade Commission is announcing what the agency is calling the resolution of its antitrust investigation into Google. The probe has focused on allegations denied by Google that the company doctors its search results unfairly to benefit its own products. The FTC was also investigating claims that Google unfairly restricted licensing of certain patents obtained when the company bought Motorola’s mobile division.

Read More..

Putin gives tax exile Depardieu Russian citizenship

MOSCOW (Reuters) – Russian President Vladimir Putin has granted citizenship to Gerard Depardieu, the French movie star who is quitting his homeland to avoid a tax hike on the rich, the Kremlin said on Thursday.

The “Cyrano de Bergerac” actor bought a house across the border in Belgium last year to avoid a new tax rate for millionaires in France planned by Socialist President Francois Hollande but said he could also seek tax exile elsewhere.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Depardieu had applied for citizenship after Putin told reporters last month the actor would be welcome in Russia. “The citizenship could not have been granted to him without (such an) appeal,” Peskov added.

Russia has a flat income tax rate of 13 percent, compared to the 75 percent on income over 1 million euros ($ 1.32 million) that Hollande wants to impose in France.

Asked, whether Depardieu had plans to move to Russia, Peskov said it was up to him and was “absolutely not mandatory”. Putin did not speak to Depardieu before taking the decision, he added.

Depardieu’s publicist Francois Hassan Guerrar told Reuters he did not want to comment on the Russian announcement.

Depardieu, 63, had told friends he was considering three options to escape France’s new tax regime: settling in Belgium, relocating to Montenegro, where he has a business, or moving to Russia, French daily Le Monde reported in December.

Depardieu has also said he plans to hand in his French passport and social security card.

“Putin has already sent me a passport,” Le Monde quoted the actor as jokingly saying in December.

WELCOME IN RUSSIA

Depardieu is well-known in Russia where he has appeared in many advertising campaigns. He worked in the country in 2011 on a film about the eccentric Russian monk Grigory Rasputin.

In 2012 he was one of several Western celebrities invited to celebrate the birthday of Ramzan Kadyrov, Chechnya’s Kremlin-backed leader.

Muscovites said they would welcome Depardieu. “He is a normal guy, he is fond of drinking too, I suppose, the Russian way, so let him come here,” said resident Lev Nikolaevich.

Putin has in the past touted good relations with France, which he visited in the summer, but the two nations have disagreed sharply on Syria and Putin is a frequent critic of the West. He had a tense summit with the EU last month and wants the bloc to move faster toward visa-free travel.

Russia does not require people to hand in their foreign passports once they acquire a Russian one. Many Russians have citizenship of other countries and travel without problems.

Depardieu could also request Belgian nationality but has not yet made such a request, said Georges Dallemagne, head of Belgium’s parliamentary committee that oversees naturalizations.

“As a Russian he could certainly remain in Belgium, he would possibly need the necessary visas but for a short period he could stay here,” said Dallemagne.

“He would need to request a residency permit for longer stays but as a Russian he should be able to get that. It depends on certain factors,” Dallemagne added.

France’s Constitutional Council last month blocked the planned 75 percent tax rate due to the way it would be applied – but Hollande plans to propose redrafted legislation which will “still ask more of those who have the most”.

(Writing by Megan Davies; Additional reporting by Steve Gutterman, Nikolai Isayev and Alexander Fedorov in Moscow, Catherine Bremer in Paris and Robert-Jan Bartunek in Belgium; Editing by Andrew Heavens)

Celebrity News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: Putin gives tax exile Depardieu Russian citizenship
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/putin-gives-tax-exile-depardieu-russian-citizenship/
Link To Post : Putin gives tax exile Depardieu Russian citizenship
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..

Advertising: Planet Fitness Sheds Aspirational Approach

COMMERCIALS for gyms tend to feature actors who look like Calvin Klein underwear models, with physiques that most will not achieve no matter how long they spend on an elliptical machine.

Planet Fitness, a national chain of about 600 fitness clubs, is introducing a campaign that mocks fitness fanatics, especially those whose devotion infringes on others.

A new commercial opens with a slight woman who is curling small dumbbells in a drab gym as a brawny man berates her like a drill sergeant.

“If you can’t handle a big girl’s workout, the little girl’s gym is right across the street!” shouts the man, a whistle hanging around his neck and his hands balled into fists, as the woman appears to be on the brink of tears. “If you were committed to this workout the way you committed to that morning doughnut, you’d be puking out your ears right now!”

The spot cuts to a flashing light and siren and the words “Lunk Alarm,” and then to the same woman in street clothes being given a tour of a Planet Fitness facility.

“And that’s why I don’t like gyms,” she says.

“Well,” begins the employee showing her around, “we’re not a gym — we’re Planet Fitness.”

The ad closes with a voice-over, which says: “No gymtimidation. No lunks. Just $10 a month.”

The ad, by Red Tettemer & Partners in Philadelphia, will be introduced widely on Jan. 10. Three other spots in the campaign follow the same structure, opening with overbearing gym rats and closing with assurances that Planet Fitness is more laid back.

Planet Fitness will spend an estimated $10 million to $12 million on the campaign. It spent $15.8 million on advertising in the first nine months of 2012, more than the $14.9 million it spent in all of 2011, according to Kantar Media, a unit of WPP.

Rather than being just a narrative device in the spots, lunk alarms have actually been fixtures at Planet Fitness gyms. Members who exhibit lunk behavior, which the company defines on posters in its facilities as grunting, dropping weights loudly and being judgmental, are subject to a public shaming when a manager at the facility sounds the alarm.

In some cases, Planet Fitness even revokes memberships, as it did at a location in Wappingers Falls, N.Y., in 2006. Albert Argibay, a bodybuilder whose exertions were considered grunting by Planet Fitness, but which Mr. Argibay countered in news accounts as merely heavy breathing, kept lifting after he was told to leave, and was eventually escorted from the premises by police officers.

While the slogan “No Gymtimidation” is being introduced with the new campaign, the company has for years promised what it calls a “judgment-free zone.” That, in the words of the Planet Fitness Web site, “means members can relax, get in shape, and have fun without being subjected to the hard-core, look-at-me attitude that exists in too many gyms.”

Jamie Medeiros, director of marketing at Planet Fitness, said that only about 15 percent of Americans belonged to gyms, and that the company was focused not on trying to lure consumers from other facilities but on enticing those who had avoided gyms altogether.

“We go after the 85 percent who don’t belong to a gym now or who have never belonged to a gym,” Ms. Medeiros said.

While many chains sell protein powders and a wide range of supplements, Planet Fitness takes the counterintuitive approach of serving the type of food that dieters typically avoid.

Every month members are treated to pizza on the first Monday night and bagels on the second Tuesday morning, while Tootsie Rolls are handed out daily.

“The common person doesn’t have time to work out every day, and they may not aspire to the type of person who has six-pack abs and eats egg whites,” Ms. Medeiros said. “But we want to be the type of facility that people want to go to as opposed to, ‘Oh my god, I have to go to the gym today!’ ”

The company has thrived even during the economic downturn, growing to four million members today from about 3.2 million a year ago, according to Ms. Medeiros. About 60 percent of its members are women, much higher than what Ms. Medeiros said is the national average of 20 percent.

Health clubs, like cellphone carriers, tend to sell one- or two-year contracts, but Planet Fitness instead has a month-to-month plan, at $10 monthly, which the company believes knocks down a barrier to joining.

Among consumers who exercise, 71 percent agreed with the statement that fitness clubs were too expensive, according to a survey by Mintel, a market research firm. As for the atmosphere, only 27 percent said that they enjoyed the social aspects of gyms.

When brands hire celebrity endorsers and attractive models, marketers typically refer to the advertisements as aspirational, meaning that consumers do not see themselves reflected in the ad as much as an ideal to which they aspire. But Steve Red, the chief creative officer of Red Tettemer & Partners, said the aspirational approach can backfire when it comes to promoting health clubs.

“I’m never going to get to be that washboard-stomach, super-cut guy that I see in the Equinox ads,” said Mr. Red, referring to the chain of upscale gyms. “There are a ton of gym brands that are all about being cut and sinewy and having a six-pack, but I would argue that approach is not aspirational — it’s inaccessible.”

Read More..

In Victory for Google, U.S. Ends Antitrust Investigation

WASHINGTON — The Federal Trade Commission on Thursday found that Google had not violated antitrust or anticompetition statutes in the way it structures its Web search application — handing a big victory to the search giant in its ongoing dispute with regulators.

But the commission found that Google had misused its broad patents on cellphone technology, and ordered Google to make that technology available to rivals.

Google’s competitors, including Microsoft, have pressed vigorously for federal officials to bring an antitrust case involving its search business. Last year, an F.T.C. staff report recommended that the commission bring such a case.

The F.T.C. found that although Google sometimes favors its own products when producing search results with its ubiquitous search engine, its actions were “not undertaken without legitimate justification,” said Jon Leibowitz, the F.T.C. chairman.

Google agreed, however, to take certain actions to address what Mr. Leibowitz called “the most problematic business practices,” those that “relate to search in search advertising.”

The trade commission’s inquiry has been going on for at least a year and a half. Google disclosed in June 2011 that it had received formal notification from the commission that it was looking into Google’s business practices.

Google has long defended its search business, saying that it offers results that are most relevant to consumers and that the “competition is just a click away.” It contends that users who believe a Google search is not meeting their needs can easily move to another search engine, like Microsoft’s Bing.

Google has also said that the barriers to entry into the search business are so low that it cannot abuse its market power, even though it has more than a 70 percent share of the search business in the United States.

Companies that rely on Google to drive traffic to their sites have complained that Google adjusts its search algorithm to favor its own growing number of commerce sites — including shopping, local listings and travel.

But the trade commission faced an uphill battle in proving malicious intent — that Google changes its search algorithm to purposely harm competitors and favor itself. Antitrust lawyers say anticompetitive behavior cannot be proved simply by showing that a change in the algorithm affects other Web sites and causes sites to show up lower in results, even though studies have shown that users rarely look beyond the first page of search results.

The commission was pressing to wrap up its case before Monday, when a new commissioner will be sworn in, a development that could have affected the result of the Google investigation. Joshua D. Wright, a professor at George Mason University, was confirmed by the Senate this week to take one of the two Republican spots on the five-member commission. Mr. Wright had previously said he would recuse himself from any Google matters for two years, because he has done work for or about the company including co-authoring a paper arguing that Google has not violated any antitrust statutes.

Mr. Wright will replace J. Thomas Rosch, a commissioner since 2006. If the Google case were not settled by Monday, the commission faced the prospect that a vote on whether to charge Google would deadlock at 2-2.

The commission voted 4-1 to settle the patent charges, and voted 5-0 to close its antitrust and competition investigation.

“The F.T.C.’s credibility is eroded when confidential details of internal discussions are revealed to the media, as has continually been the case in the investigation of Google,” Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, said in a Nov. 26 letter to Mr. Leibowitz, the commission chairman. Mr. Wyden also said there was plenty of evidence that adequate competition exists in the search business. He cited the recent introduction of competitors like DuckDuckGo, which has a no-tracking privacy policy inspired by some consumers’ complaints about the tracking of consumer behavior that Google and other search engines perform.

“Compared to almost any other market in the history of antitrust regulation, online search has effectively zero barriers to entry,” Mr. Wyden said.

Read More..