The media have recycled the same headlines following Dutch elections for about a decade now, and similar observations are regularly trumpeted in international newspapers. Part of me thinks they actually just run the same articles, updating the picture, changing a few names, and maybe touching up a few percentage points. The political landscape is changing in the Netherlands, it is true. “How could this happen in this bastion of a liberal democracy?” commentators ask in an accusing tone.

I shall go against the international headlines and some of the Dutch media when I say to you, please remain calm. This sudden explosion of intolerance and fragmented politics is nothing new; we have been reading about it for decades. The myth maintained by international media outlets and perhaps the Dutch bureau of tourism, which parrots the Netherlands as an open-minded leftwing paradise, has long kept a smoke screen over the well-established and not always tolerant tradition of smaller parties, extremist or moderate, left or right, which rise up suddenly, gain power and occasionally disappear into obscurity as fast as they came.

The international press summed up the results of yesterday’s Dutch legislative elections as a major victory for the far-right, anti-Islam and ironically named Freedom Party (PVV). They are also quick to point to the two cities (out of the entire country!) where the PVV managed to top the polls in local elections. But while The Hague, where the PVV is now the second-largest party, is certainly a city of international and national importance, gaining control of it, along with the little-known city of Almere, does not equal an electoral sweep.

The PVV’s sporadic success is significant not so much because of the small number of votes they won, but because of the xenophobic, nationalist rhetoric that has managed to get them votes. While this development grabs the headlines, several Dutch political parties on both the centre and the left have made just as many – if not more – gains. In the cities of Utrecht and Nijmegen, the Green-Left party (GroenLinks) gained enough to become the largest party. The more moderate D66 party made the biggest gains nationwide, becoming the largest party in Leiden, Haarlem, and Hilversum. The socially progressive and fiscally conservative party’s success was far greater than that of the PVV, but since they don’t say controversial things about the Muslim faith or try to convince people that the country is being taken over, they’re just not as fun for the front page.

[read full text]

Naturally for the sake of learning and first hand reporting, I want to do more than bring you information from the comfort of my always interesting Amsterdam life… I want to travel.  Nevermind wanting, when you’ve got family and a life in 2 other countries besides the one you dwell in, travelling isn’t a luxury it is a necessity somewhere behind food, shelter, and clothing on the life-list of what is needed.  But while I’d normally be looking at flights to Portugal for the spring or summer to visit my family and take care of my responsibilities there, this year presents a bigger challenge than ever in the last 8+ years. While I’d like to fly off to New York to visit family and speak at The Next Hope this July, again looking at the options, it is looking increasingly unlikely.

Whether it is for good reasons or not, airlines across the board are raising their prices. With flights within Europe and crossing the Atlantic (that I know of) costing double what they did last year.  And combined with a general decrease in my already extra-modest income this year, even flying at normal rates would have posed a budgetary challenge for this alternative voice in the media wilderness.

All this to say, suddenly the road ahead looks foggier than I had expected.  And while ironically I’ll soon announce several exciting journeys to new corners of the globe, those will be funded by third parties. Because the truth is the combination of my intercontinental life choices, journalistic goals, and an economy that sees little monetary value in what I (or anyone these days) do.. makes for a very difficult road ahead.

What’s the plan then? I’m working on it…

Speaking about the situation for children in Mongolia, UNICEF reports that more than 400,000$ is needed in essential medical and humanitarian supplies, in addition to at least 300,000$ in order to reach those living in remote and now isolated regions of the vast country. In total, around 63,000 children are in need of assistance from either the national government or international organizations as a result of this crisis. Temperatures are currently hovering around -40 to -50C and are expected to stay that way into April.

While in Mongolia I will not likely be in any remote regions of the country, but I will still be asking people and putting out content about what I find out in regards to this terrible situation. Thankfully even in a part of the world that doesn’t get much mainstream media attention EVER, there are citizen journalists at work even there.  One great project associated with my friends at Global Voices Online is called Nomad Green (who I hope to meet with in April).  It features voices in both Mongolian and English, writing about these and other developments relating to quality of life in Mongolia.

Image by flickr member: Mezilla

Friends and readers in the Amsterdam area and beyond, I’ve been hard at work planning, reading, and organizing the details of a reading-performance even in honor of Howard Zinn and his greatest work – A People’s History of the United States.  I will be MC’ing the event, doing my best to run it just as well as Howard used to, hoping I do him justice.  Speakers will include some wonderful native and non-native english speakers from my network of friends here in Amsterdam. Speeches and text as far back as 1542 and as recent as 2005 will jump between some of the great voices that are rarely taught in school or mentioned in mainstream media. And as if that weren’t enough, I will most likely be singing a few songs related different eras in A People’s History.  (brace yourselves)

For those outside of the Netherlands I will not be streaming it because I have enough to worry about. But audio/video recordings will be made available as podcasts, so that you can join share in this event afterwards.  Here are the vital details:

Howard Zinn Reading-Performance Night. Selections from A Peoples History of the US.
16 February
20:30 – 22h
at Schijnheilig -  the lovely new Squat-Gallery-Creative Space
Passeerdersgracht 23-bg
Amsterdam

Robert McChesney and John Nichols are two people that have taught me alot about how the global media works and doesn’t work.  Their writing has accompanied me throughout my journey as the independent and admittedly unorthodox type of journalist that I try to be.  So when they talk, I take it seriously. Last week they were guests on Radio Open Source to talk about their vision of the future of journalism in a digital age. I’m now listening to this program for the third time, still trying to decide what they’re telling us and how I feel about that vision.

Ultimately I recommend anyone and everyone out there listen to the program so you get the details directly from them and not from me translating it the way I understand it.  But I’ll just go over the part I like best and I feel its close to the “third way” of funding journalism in the future, that I’ve been looking for.

According to McChesney and Nichols, the idea is that a free press will not just happen naturally, if there is no funding for citizen and community media, the government should take steps to make sure it can exist and compete with commercial or any other media.  To do so, they envision every citizen getting 200$ (in the US case) in federal money to put towards a non-profit non-commercial media outlet of their choosing, every year.

Thus if there’s a local radio station or newspaper doing work you appreciate and want to see continue, you put your annual money on them.  Say you live in a place, a community where you wish there was some kind of community project, you could pool money amongst the people of the neighborhood and start a new non profit media center.  In the case that you fund something one year and in that year it doesn’t do what you feel is a good job or ceases to produce anything of use, in the following year you can put your money somewhere else.

At first I thought this plan was an old plan that had been laid out and debunked long ago. But listening to it now, this might really be something. A chance to get around the profit motive that has choked out so much good reporting. It doesn’t mean there won’t be commercial media, those would continue to exist much in the way they do now. In fact McChesney points out that in the nations where the most money is given in subsidies to non-commercial media, the private sector is the most robust! Beyond that such a system would encourage philanthropists, including some people I know, to start new projects in non commercial media and gain support from the public.

Give the program a listen, after 3 listens I have finally recognized that this is not just the same old discussion about what will happen to media.. there are possible answers here.

Howard Zinn has died and I never got a chance to thank him in person. I never got a chance to let him know, like so many throughout the world, I will continue to speak out, I will continue to try and give voice to the voiceless. I would have liked to tell him in person, but instead I will just continue the tradition…

“People in all countries need the spirit of disobedience to the state. The state that is not a metaphysical thing. But a thing of force and wealth. And we need a kind of declaration of interdependence among people in all countries of the world who are striving for the same thing.” – Howard Zinn 1970

This has become the state of the American mediasphere, while over in the EU we still have in place relatively strong regulations preventing that kind of advertisement. Until now.

Ok perhaps the “until now” part makes things seem a little to dire, I would have done better to say that at this moment in time, the EU may relax its rules on Pharmaceutical and medical advertising.  Relaxing doesn’t mean we’ve got old people holding hands and discussing pills to lower their cholesterol on TV. But what we do have is a potential break from the clear policy of no medical advertising in the media.

The information is not easy to come by, perhaps due to its complexity or vagueness, so it is not exactly being discussed by the major news outlets.  What I’ve been able to gather at this point breaks down this way:

• The change in policy would “allow pharmaceutical companies to provide information directly to consumers”
• This was proposed in 2008, but put away soon thereafter due to strong criticism from member states.
• The information they provide would have to be factual, objective, and not seek to advertise prescription drugs.
• Any such information will go through a committee or a panel that will decide if it meets standards.

Of course many questions remain which I will now pose to various stakeholders and associations, regarding such a change.  Is this taking the EU down the same path as the United States, towards bombarding citizens with clever and appealing visuals regarding what they should choose for when it comes to health and medicine? Is there a push now within EU institutions to pursue this as early as this year? While I’m at it, just how powerful and influencial is the pharmaceutical lobby in Brussels?

Hopefully very soon Ill have some answers which you’ll be able to find right here in a future post.

Besides all the great ideas and the very talented and fun individuals taking part in this event, what I find most interesting is that whether it be through annual events or permanent creative spaces, this community feels more and more open and engaged with  other communities in society. From science, to art, to politics, or history… the list of intersection and cooperation with the hacking community continues to grow. A development which I would describe as positive when compared to being an isolated, ignored, or intimidated group of thinkers.

For the past 4 years I’ve wandered around these congresses and marveled at everything around me.  Above all at how much individuals can create together, without a profit motive,  out of sheer interest and curiosity (and maybe some bragging rights). They take this massive bland building, and they make it into a living, breathing organism that functions in a very efficient and exciting manner.

Looking at all the banners and listening to all the languages being spoken, it seems more clear than ever that hackers have entered a new era where they are not afraid of being judged, and will not be shamed because of their interests and abilities.  It begins perhaps, as it has for many minority groups in history, with taking back their word that was twisted into something derogatory – hacker. And it continues with the establishment of creative spaces, all over the world, where people can meet and work on their projects.

It’s safe to conclude that at 26C3 last week, I was watching history be made…. again.

A text message from my friend from HacDC: I’ll be right there.

Rushing over from his job, he’s glad to see us and unlocks the doors, turning on the lights and revealing a good sized room with a long table, and indeed, plenty of computer and machine parts scattered in different corners of the place.  He explains to us what usually happens on the average week at HacDC and that there aren’t typically people hanging around working on projects during the day. “We don’t have students, unemployed or self-employed people like you might see at other hacker spaces in the US or in Europe. Here in DC all our people are very busy with their jobs and they don’t hang out much unless for a specific event.”

I thought about those words and what I had seen of the DC world over the few days I was in town. As someone who visits here only every other year for the past decade, I’ve long noticed that people in this town are among the busiest people I know. Even when they’re relaxing in a café or chatting at a party late at night, they’re talking about what they are busy with during the day.  A pretty big different from other cities I know where people work as freelancers or consultants and take time during the week to do something completely different or simply relax in the middle of the day.

While I watch all the busy Washingtonians getting on the metro with their heads already buried in their smart phones, I think about the Climate Change Conference going on in Copenhagen at that very moment.  Here we sit on a comfortable and efficient metro system, while out the window I can see traffic jams and parking lots. Hardly any of my good friends in DC have cars, and if you ask them about the Climate Conference, they’re concerned and quite informed.  But as I watch everyone inside and outside the train, busy in their hectic work worlds that seem so demanding, Copenhagen and climate change seem pretty far away.

Writing this several days later, I now know about the “deal” world leaders reached at Copenhagen.  Naturally, opinions on what the results are worth, vary.  The critical and experienced voices on the ground at the conference are talking about the deal as coming up well short of what is needed to stave off the severe effects of climate change in the near future.  We needed a strong and comprehensive deal, that goes for those us on the metro in Washington or those working the fields in Thailand, but our leaders came back with something less than what we needed.

Lot’s of reasons can be and are being listed to explain why they came up short in Copenhagen.  Myself I think back to my Washington visit, and all those busy people. Surely I don’t know everyone’s story and I can’t know what they’re really worried about. But when it comes to the Climate Conference of 2009, like many places around the world, the nation’s capital that I observed seemed to have its focus elsewhere.

Observers are calling it a largely political gesture, as most people either don’t travel between the two cities or take the bus instead. Yet be it political, commercial, or whatever they want to call it, the result at the end of the day, is the restoration of a once vital and treasured connection between two great cities.  Or as they put it in the international press, another small step towards reconciliation.

When I finally do return to that region, one of my main goals will be to ride that train, and record my observations to share with those who can’t be there, and would like share in the experience.

This odd juxtaposition reminded me of other scenarios we see every day in this world: where we should be moving forward, planning for the future, daring to find solutions to problems and sometimes taking risks in order to achieve those solutions. Yet where we often don’t do it, or choose to stop short of actually trying something new or difficult in the name of playing it safe, not risking whatever it is we have now.

Some would call it, being realistic. Like when a nation announces that, despite the immenent and extreme damage we know the planet will suffer thanks to global warming that we helped cause, they won’t strive for big reductions in the production of green house gases. Instead making symbolic or more modest promises, which even if they are achieved would still fall short of what is needed to really make real progress in the struggle to slow if not hault the rising sea levels, the extreme melting of icecaps, etc.

This is of course what New York City Mike Bloomberg called it when he announced the city would not be implementing an aggressive campaign to reduce the amount of energy that large buildings use. He gave in to the pressure applied by building owners who were outraged because of the costs the reform would have involved. Once again, instead of taking the difficult path in order to move forward and implement some serious changes, building owners and Bloomberg decide its too risky.

Maybe they are being realistic, but I keep thinking of that Concorde, sitting there mounted in the take off position, a fitting metaphor for how this world functions, so much potential and ability, pointing towards the sky, but nailed to the ground.

Seems like a great project with more meaning than your average video up on youtube of cats falling off chairs or someone singing along to their favorite music. Not that all that has no meaning, it just seems that oneminutejr says alot more about culture and life in very simple and diverse ways.

I use the term “so-called” because 20 years ago this condition did not exist. So of course neither did the now famous blue pills and their descendants. This fact was one of the main points underlined in both Michael Schaap’s hilarious and informative film “The Erectionman” (aka The Viagraman in the Netherlands) and Liz Canner’s Orgasm Inc.

Michael’s film focuses on the male universe as it relates to the erection. I’m sure some people squirm at the topic, but it is no secret that since the dawn of time human behavior and human history has been highly influenced by that all-important phenomenon. Indeed during this film Michael takes us back in time to how different civilizations related to erections and generally the occurrence of impotence. Eventually it brings us to the present where even the word impotence is now taboo. Replaced by the pharmaceutal industry and doctors affiliated with the industry, by the term erectile disfunction. Why the new term? For both marketing and regulatory purposes. The marketing part should be obvious, there is plenty of embarassment connected with the term impotence, so if you make a more scientific name there will be more willingness to come forward.

The regulatory function of inventing a new condition is the most interesting aspect of both of these films. In the case of erectile disfunction, in order to market their famous blue pill Pfizer and other pill makers needed it to be approved by the FDA. However the FDA will only approve the drug if it treats an actual condition. Enter the multipronged communications and marketing strategy by the big drug companies. With their legions of doctors and funny ads that make people believe that there is a condition involving men’s erections that plagues society and can be cured with help from their pills.

Liz Canner completes the equation of this manufactured industry, by looking at the development of female viagra. She again looks at what companies are doing in their quest to develop a drug that will enable women to have orgasms who have until then been unable. The name of the new condition in order to justify the development of the drug – Female Sexual Disfuction (FSD).

Surprisingly at the conclusion of the film we learn that female viagra, known specifically as Intrinsa, got rejected by the FDA in the US. Yet somehow the drug has been approved by the European Union, though it has only been used in some very specific and extraordinary circumstances.

Perhaps my favorite conclusion that in many ways applies to both films was put forth by Michael as he lamented something like “.. at some point I realize I’m entirely dependent on commercial entities in order to have pleasure… “

In an analysis of this verdict and its impact on freedom of expression and the press, especially for bloggers and different types of citizen journalists, Ali asks the questions:

How do Azerbaijani youth activists and citizen journalists feel? Are they scared? Will this verdict cause them to be less outspoken and critical in the future?

According to Ali, when their sentence was handed down, Emin declared to the court that it was an honor for him to be imprisoned for his ideals.

Meanwhile the total amount spent by the US alone on the occupation of Afghanistan will total 223 billion dollars this year.  According to Jo Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes’ research, both wars combined have cost 3 trillion dollars.

Military experts and political leaders continue to argue about how best to resolve the conflict in Afghanistan, how best to spend  the hundreds of billions of dollars for fighting their war. Yet we know what it takes to stop hunger, we know how to feed people, and we don’t do it.

After hearing such testimony I feel a great sense of shame and disappointment that 20 years later, we still have walls dividing cities, nations, and people. And while you’d think these walls would be on the verge of being torn down like the Berlin wall was not long ago, instead they get longer and they build more of them.

Which begs the question, have we learned anything since the fall of the wall?

The first case will come this week with the arrest of two Azeri video journalists in jail since July 8th when they were assaulted and arrested.  Both Emin Milli and Adnan Hadji-zadeh are citizen journalists and were extremely active in organizing youth online before being taken in to custody.  They’ve been charged with hooliganism, though it is not clear why or what that means in Azerbaijan. Their trial, which has generated international concern and criticism, has been repeatedly delayed.

Later this week my guest on the podcast will be Ali S. Novruzov, Azeri blogger and concerned citizen who has been following this issue since the beginning. Together we will talk about how this all happened, the situation for citizen journalists and journalists in general in Azerbaijan, and much more.

The stated purpose and provisions of the law are not altogether unfamiliar ones, though in this era of dying newspapers and hyper consolidation of media companies, we don’t see them get put into effect very often. What am I talking about? Let me list the guts of the law, as I’ve understood it from both Argentine and international media channels, blogs, and tweets:

1. This new media law is meant to replace the existing one adopted during the military dictatorship of the 70’s and 80’s.
2. Two-Thirds of the Radio and TV spectrum will be reserved for non-commercial stations.
3. Establishes 7 member commission to oversee licensing, made up of 2 designated by the executive branch, three by congress, and 2 by a Federal body representing provincial governments.
4. Requires TV companies to carry channels operated by universities, union, indigenous groups and other non-governmental organizations.
5. Requires more frequent licensing approvals
6. 70 percent of radio and 60 percent of tv content must be produced in Argentina.

This list is what I’ve compiled and understood as a non-native Spanish speaker who has never set foot in Argentina, though I have observed the political and social situation via the internet for the past decade.  No doubt Argentines and critical observers on both sides will have different interpretations and details about the situation.

That said, putting aside the surrounding debate, the stated purpose and many of the provisions of the media law are interesting for anyone concerned about issues such as media consolidation, diversity, representation, non-profit journalism and culture.  Such issues have long been debated within institutions like the European Parliament as well as national governments throughout the world. Many of the details within the text of this law were no doubt inspired by several European provisions that seek to nurture a diverse and dynamic public media sector.

On the other side there is concern about how this will be carried out in Argentina. The fear that this will empower the government in a dangerous manner and benefit only those with money who happen to be close to the executive branch. Others simply believe that the market should determine what happens to Argentine media, where for example the media corporation Clarin owns 44% of the media market share (more than 250 newspapers, radio stations, tv channels, cable stations). In their eyes this law is not only dangerous but it would severely damage their very successful and prestigious communication business.

While continuing to read and follow this issue, I will get in touch with some interesting people on the ground in Argentina who could join me for a podcast in an effort to learn more about what is happening with the world of media in that country.

Bananas! is the story of the Banana industry’s use of a chemical known as Nemagon, a highly toxic chemical compound used for spraying banana trees throughout the 60’s and 70’s.  The pesticide has grave effects on the health of any mammal, as it caused massive levels of male sterility among banana workers, as well as high levels of cancer.  Despite knowing the effects of the pesticide on humans, companies including Dole (one of the world’s largest banana growers) sprayed fields anyway without informing or making any effort to protect workers.

The film focuses not only on the banana industry but on the case of Juan “Accidentes” Dominguez, a lawyer representing 12 Nicaraguan banana workers suffering the effects of Nemagon, taking on Dole.

The emergence of the film naturally drew criticism and threats from Dole, who claim their own investigators determined most of the claims in the film to be fraudulent.  They threatened legal action against the film, but according the film’s website, those suits have been withdrawn.

I had not heard about this film before today, and I have only begun to read specifically about Nemagon. But I very much intend to see the film when it comes to Amsterdam next month, as well as interview the director and perhaps some other parties involved in this issue.  I’m sure you’re hoping I talk to Dole… I’ll see what I can do, large corporations don’t normally have time for we the independent reporters out there.

If you’re curious, here’s the trailer.

BANANAS!* trailer from WG Film on Vimeo.