SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: FJB who wrote (729284)7/26/2013 6:56:20 PM
From: joseffy2 Recommendations

Recommended By
FJB
TideGlider

  Respond to of 1576742
 
Obamacare Call Center Will Not Offer Healthcare Benefits to Employees
..............................................................................................................
nationalreview.com ^


Obamacare Call Center Will Not Offer Healthcare Benefits to Employees By Eliana Johnson July 26, 2013 6:27 PM

In order to ensure Americans understand how to access the benefits available to them when many provisions of the Affordable Care Act go online October 1, the Obama administration announced last month that it is setting up a call center that will be accessible to Americans 24 hours a day.

One branch of that call center will be located in California’s Contra Costa County, where, reportedly, 7,000 people applied for the 204 jobs. According to the Contra Costa Times, however, “about half the jobs are part-time, with no health benefits — a stinging disappointment to workers and local politicians who believed the positions would be full-time.” The county supervisor, Karen Mitchoff, called the hiring process “a comedy of errors” and said she “never dreamed [the jobs] would be part-time.”

The Times indicates that a job posting advertised all of the jobs as full-time, and one call center employee, who said no reason for the apparent change was provided, told the paper, ”It reminded me of that George Clooney movie where he goes around the country firing people (‘Up in the Air’). The woman said, ‘I know you were led to believe you would be full-time, but things have changed…You are actually ‘part-time intermittent.’”

The Contra Costa employees are currently in training, and the call center — one of three based in California — is set to go live on October 1.



To: FJB who wrote (729284)7/26/2013 7:14:51 PM
From: joseffy2 Recommendations

Recommended By
Brumar89
FJB

  Respond to of 1576742
 
Did ABC News Deceptively Edit Zimmerman Juror’s Controversial Interview?

An Unlikely Source Is Calling Them Out

......................................................................................
Jul. 26, 2013 Jason Howerton


This image released by ABC shows host Robin Roberts, left, with Juror B29 from the George Zimmerman trial, center, and attorney David Chico on “Good Morning America,” in New York on Thursday, July 25, 2013. Credit: AP

ABC News is being accused of deceptively editing, or at least misrepresenting (intentionally or not), some of the comments made by Juror B29, the lone “nonwhite” juror in the George Zimmerman murder trial.

Further, the media as a whole are being accused of manipulating some of her statements.

These allegations come not from a conservative news source, but rather from Slate.com.

The key phrase latched onto by most media outlets, due to its sensational nature, was “George Zimmerman got away with murder” — words that were, in fact, said by Juror B29. But the full unedited video of the comment, in context, tells a different story, claims Slate’s William Saletan.

Here’s his case (emphasis added):

ABC News hasn’t posted a full unedited video or transcript of the interview. The video that has been broadcast—on World News Tonight, Nightline, and Good Morning America—has been cut and spliced in different ways, often so artfully that the transitions appear continuous.

So beware what you’re seeing
. But the video that’s available already shows, on closer inspection, that Maddy has been manipulated and misrepresented.

Here are the key points.

[...]

The phrase “got away with murder” was put in her mouth.

N
ightline shows ABC interviewer Robin Roberts asking Maddy: “Some people have said, ‘George Zimmerman got away with murder. How do you respond to those people who say that?’

Maddy appears to reply promptly and confidently: “George Zimmerman got away with murder. But you can’t get away from God.”


But that’s not quite how the exchange happened. In the unedited video, Roberts’ question is longer, with words that have been trimmed from the Nightline version, and Maddy pauses twice, for several seconds, as she struggles to answer it. “… George Zimmerman … That’s—George Zimmerman got away with murder. But you can’t get away from God.”

You have to watch her, not just read her words, to pick up her meaning. As she struggles to answer, she looks as though she’s trying to reconcile the sentiment that’s been quoted to her—that Zimmerman “got away with murder”—with her own perspective. So she repeats the quote and adds words of her own, to convey what she thinks: that there’s a justice higher than the law, which Zimmerman will have to face. She thinks he’s morally culpable, not legally guilty.

Anti-Zimmerman media personalities, like Al Sharpton and essentially anyone else at MSNBC, have pointed to the interview as proof that Zimmerman actually got away with murder, even the juror is admitting it! One MSNBC guest even personally attacked the juror, yelling “shame on you!” while reacting to the ABC interview.

Saletan goes on to note a number of other key portions of Juror B29's much-talked about sit-down with ABC. His points include:

She stands by the verdict: “ABC’s online story about the interview ends with Maddy asking, “Did I go the right way? Did I go the wrong way?”

But that’s not the whole quote.

In the unedited video, she continues: “I know I went the right way, because by the law and the way it was followed is the way I went. But if I would have used my heart, I probably would have [gone for] a hung jury.”

Saletan also explains that the juror making the distinction that Zimmerman was guilty of “killing” Trayvon Martin, but that’s not the same thing as murder or manslaughter, which requires evidence proving it was malicious and/or intentional.

She thinks the case should have never gone to trial: At one point, Roberts asked the juror “whether the case should have gone to trial,” she replied, “I don’t think so. … I felt like this was a publicity stunt.”

Race wasn’t discussed, and she didn’t focus on it: “When the verdict was announced and she was released from sequestration, she was dismayed to discover the national outrage. ‘I didn’t know how much importance’ was attached to the trial, she says, ‘because I never looked at color. And I still don’t look at color.’”

Saletan goes on to debate the “value of colorblindness,” but correctly concludes that the juror stayed focused on the evidence in the case, not on what race and other factors meant to the general public.

Saletan makes several other interesting points on why he feels “Juror B29 is being framed.” To be clear, the Slate writer does not appear to take a position defending Zimmerman or supporting the anti-Zimmerman position in his analysis.

The full, unedited video or transcript of the Juror B29 interview had yet to be released on Friday afternoon, Slate notes. Here is the most complete version available.

video platform video management video solutions video player

To read Saletan’s entire report (and we recommend you do), click here.





Oh, my goodness. A network news outlet doctoring video to fit a narrative? Is anyone surprised?