Viewers brand Yentob film 'shameful deception' - Times Online

Viewers brand Yentob film 'shameful deception' - Times Online

Too much to bare | Features | Guardian Unlimited Film

Too much to bare | Features | Guardian Unlimited Film
The issues mentioned in the article mirrors what is happening in the Chinese film market, with the most prominent (and recent) example being Ang Lee's movie, Lust, Caution.

----------------------------------
Nicole Kidman is an award-winning actor. So too is Maggie Gyllenhaal. So why do they - and other talented female Hollywood stars - still have to expose their bodies in order to get into the public eye? Kira Cochrane despairs

Thursday September 6, 2007
The Guardian

Flicking through the newspapers yesterday I was stopped in my tracks by an image of the new Vanity Fair cover. This shows Nicole Kidman - two-time Oscar nominee, one-time winner - with a military cap on her head and an open-mouthed expression. Said expression is, I guess, supposed to be a Monroe-esque pout, but just makes her look (though it pains me to say it) completely bloody vacant. Beneath this vacuous visage, for no apparent reason, she is holding her shirt open to expose her white, bra-clad breasts. There is something strangely passionless and perfunctory about the pose - as though, off camera, a doctor has just shown up and told her it's time for an impromptu mammary examination. (Or, indeed, the magazine editor has just told her she is off the cover unless she gets on with it and gets 'em out.) "Nicole Kidman Bares All" screams the coverline.

And this image arrives just a few days after the release of photographs from the new Agent Provocateur advertising campaign, featuring another highly lauded actor mugging shamelessly in her scanties: indie favourite and two-time Golden Globe nominee, Maggie Gyllenhaal. The full series of pictures are due online this Friday as part of a book of "adventures" called, very cheesily, Lessons in Lingerie, in which Gyllenhaal stars as a character called Miss AP. Those released so far show Gyllenhaal, variously: reclining in a basic black push-up bra and pants; gazing coquettishly over her shoulder in lacy knickers and a pair of stockings; cavorting in a bubble bath in a striped one-piece (so heavily styled and made up that she resembles another young actor, Brittany Murphy, far more than herself); her breasts pushed up in a tight pink corset, looking as awkward and unhappy as Kidman; and, in the most provocative shot, trussed to a strange wooden chair, legs spread wide, in just her bra and knickers.

The general take on the Gyllenhaal pictures so far has been that they are fabulously sexy (indeed, the Sunday Times's Style magazine used them as a peg for a piece about "girl crushes"). So why did I find them - and the Kidman shot - so supremely depressing? It can't just be because they feature women as sex objects. After all, there's a constant parade of woman-flesh on the newsstands each day, and while I find the half-clad photos of Hollyoaks stars and Big Brother contestants depressing, too, they don't have the power to surprise these days.

But photographs of genuinely acclaimed actors in their underwear affront me every time, whether it's Angelina Jolie draped in a silk sheet for US Esquire, or her great rival, Jennifer Aniston, baring her breasts for US GQ. There seemed something sad to me about the controversial GQ cover of Kate Winslet a few years ago, not because of her legs being digitally lengthened, but because I couldn't understand why the youngest woman to receive five Oscar nominations had to be togged up in a basque. And as for the Vanity Fair cover of Teri Hatcher, in which the story of her childhood sexual abuse was illustrated with a just-out-of-bed shot of her in nothing but a white top and white knickers, well ... words fail me.

I think what I find so incredibly discomfiting about these pictures is their suggestion that, no matter how talented a woman is, how many plaudits she has received, how intelligent her reputation, how garlanded she has been for depicting one of the most talented writers of the last century while sporting a huge prosthetic conk on her noggin, at the end of the day, if she wants to stay in the public eye, if she wants the magazine covers and the leading roles, she has to be willing to reduce herself to tits and arse.

One of the most blatant demonstrations of this came last year, when Vanity Fair (them again) published their Hollywood issue. Put together by the fashion designer, Tom Ford, the cover featured Scarlett Johansson and Keira Knightley, two talented young actors, completely naked. Rather bizarrely, Knightley was being sniffed by a fully-clad Ford. Inside, it was explained that Ford's appearance had been a last-minute addition and that a "certain young actress" had been slated to appear as part of a "gorgeous female threesome", but hadn't understood the nudity requirement and "bowed out when the clothes started coming off". Said actor was Rachel McAdams, who, at that junction last spring seemed on the brink of stratospheric fame. She had appeared in three successful films in 2005 - Wedding Crashers, Red Eye, The Family Stone - and, some might have argued, was worthy of a fully clad Vanity Fair cover. Since declining to bare all, McAdams' career has gone strangely quiet (she has apparently turned down some offers of sidekick roles), while the fame of Knightley and Johansson has soared. Coincidence? Well, maybe.

That example suggests that it is a simple equation - get your clothes off, see your career rocket - but, of course, it is not. It is a hugely risky business to disrobe (the same people who laud your sexiness will think much less of your talent), and it is a risky business to leave them on (see McAdams, and, no doubt, many other aspiring, principled actors throughout the decades). Actors such as Kidman and Gyllenhaal must recognise this edge of risk, which brings me to another depressing spectre. For many women, it seems, no matter how successful they are, the need to be pleasing to men, to say, "However powerful and clever I might seem, I'm just a playful, bra-baring bunny underneath," trumps everything. Excuse me while I wipe the tears off my keyboard ...

learning from sucess & failure

success

1. chek jawa
2. removal of female quota on medical students
   
3. enactment of laws to target sex offenders who go overseas
   
4. optional rest days in employment contracts for maids
5. amendments to the law for marital rape
6. NMP scheme
   

failure

1. removal of mr brown column in TODAY
   
2. refusal of entry for accredited NGOs to IMF/world bank meetings
3. banning of zahari's 17 years
4. actions leading up to arrests made under ISA
5. actions linked to opposition parties
   

Now to find the common traits...

Fostering Greater Citizen Participation in the Policy Formulation Process

Fostering Greater Citizen Participation in the Policy Formulation Process

blueprint for a new left

From the adbusters editorial from issue 70

• Stop hiding - get back in the public eye - do something a little wild every day
• Go to Kenya, Brazil, India - rub shoulders with the activists there
• Explore visionary ideas - then embrace one of them
• Join a Third Party - then put up the fight of your life
• Work on your morals - admit that whichever way you look at it, abortion is a tragedy (not sure if i agree with this totally...)
  
• Meditate on what happened before the Big Bang
• Live without dead time
  

Me Against the Media: From the Trenches of a Media Lit Class

Adbusters : The Magazine - #70 Blueprint for a New Left
Extract from the article...

So, what can media activists do? I think the first step is to find ways to appeal to members of this generation on the level of the individual. Young people might not initially care about the plight of a Nike worker in Vietnam or a Wal-Mart worker in Houston. They may, however, be concerned with how credit card companies lure in college students, or how college bookstores jack up prices needlessly, or how car insurance companies charge them exorbitant amounts. When I ask students to give examples of how corporations have screwed them over personally, the room fills up with raised hands. This is a good way to show them that although consumerism has brought them happiness in their lives, it has also brought them problems.

A second activist strategy of reaching Generation Y is to find examples in popular culture. Generation Y is all about pop culture. I’ve found that my students are amenable to discussions about how advertisers and media producers consciously create media content that “trains” young people to be consumers. Young people need to know that corporations see them as a market to manipulate, and often will respond to this argument, because who wants to be manipulated? The trick is to find popular culture texts they relate to that have a strong pro-consumerism bent. I’ve had some success in the past with the “Pottery Barn” episode of Friends. In this episode, Rachel lies to her roommate Phoebe and tells her their new furniture is antique. Actually, it came from Pottery Barn, but Phoebe hates commercial furniture. Rachel is caught in her lie when the two walk by Pottery Barn and see most of the furniture in the display window. But then Phoebe sees a lamp in the window and decides she must buy it. Phoebe learns her lesson: commercial furniture is good. Another good source of pro-consumerism media is reality television, a favorite of students and chock-full of product placement.

A third strategy is simply to get young people to talk to their parents about their experiences growing up and how people “back in the day” felt about corporate power and consumerism. These are the children of Baby Boomers, after all, so even if they haven’t been around activism, their parents have. One of my favorite assignments is to get students to interview older family members about popular culture and their past experiences. Students love this assignment.

How to blog anonymously

Reporters sans frontières - Handbook for bloggers and cyber-dissidents
Perhaps it's time to go underground...another webpage from EFF here.

A Reporter at Large: The Black Sites: Reporting & Essays: The New Yorker

A Reporter at Large: The Black Sites: Reporting & Essays: The New Yorker

Merger details revealed

To enable a one-stop shop blog, this blog will be merged with the one at offthebeatenpath. Posts will be transferred over gradually.

Moscow tops in cost of living; London close behind

Moscow tops in cost of living; London close behind

AlterNet: A Call for Direct Action

AlterNet: A Call for Direct Action

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE

the 3 words above are very important...the above committee recently revealed that a statutory board was vetted for the first time by the auditor general in 46 years...what a statistic...

Great Satan sits down with the Axis of Evil

News-World-Middle East-TimesOnline
What a juicy headline...

Web Mashups Turn Citizens Into Washington's Newest Watchdogs -

Wired
Well this is quite wicked, can we have one for Singapore?

Interactive Constitution

National Constitution Center

Government Clarifies AGO'S Findings on Sentosa Cove Land Sales

Ministry of Trade and Industry
--------------------------------
GOVERNMENT CLARIFIES AGO’S FINDINGS ON SENTOSA COVE LAND SALES

1. On 5 Mar 2007, the Minister for Trade & Industry, in his reply to questions at the Committee of Supply for his Ministry’s budget, explained the background on Auditor-General’s findings of the deficiencies in land sales procedures in Sentosa Cove. This press release sets out the facts on the issues highlighted by Auditor-General.

Sentosa Cove

2. Sentosa Cove is a unique development comprising not just condominium parcels, but also individual bungalow lots, hotels, shops and even a marina.

3. Based on past experiences, selling land in such a complex mixed development using the normal government methods would not achieve the best value. Sentosa Development Corporation (SDC) therefore formed a private sector company, Sentosa Cove Private Limited (SCPL), to undertake the land sale, adopting practices commonly used in the private sector to better meet market needs. These have proven to be effective, and Sentosa Cove has done well over the past few years.

4. However, Auditor-General found that such practices do not comply with the Government’s Instruction Manual (IM), which SDC as a statutory board has to follow.

Lapse in land sales procedures

5. There were three non-compliance incidents cited in the Auditor-General’s report.

Audit observation 1

6. For the first incident, 24 bungalow parcels were awarded to a sole bidder, Ho Bee Investments Pte Ltd, at a price below valuation. This tender exercise took place in November 2004, the year after the SARS outbreak. As it was the first en-bloc sale of bungalow plots, it was then unclear how much risk premium developers were prepared to bear for such en- bloc sites.

7. The SCPL thus made a commercial decision, which took into consideration the prevailing market sentiment and the fact that the bid price was still substantially higher than what SDC had paid the State for the land. In addition, being the first en-bloc sale, the valuation process may not have adjusted adequately for the higher perceived risks and uncertainties.

8. SCPL’s key consideration was to maximize the returns from the overall portfolio of land sites in Sentosa Cove, and not that of individual plots. What happened subsequently bears out SCPL’s judgement, as their decision to proceed with the award was followed by the steady build up of market confidence and sales momentum for Sentosa Cove.

Audit observation 2

9. The second incident involved the sale of 33 bungalow land parcels in August 2005 using an “Expression of Interest (EOI)” - an approach commonly practiced in the private sector. SCPL had sent a letter of invitation to all 170 REDAS developers to participate in this exercise, of which only 15 developers indicated interest and subsequently obtained the marketing brief and EOI kit from SCPL. These 15 developers were thus informed of the EOI details, including the award criteria as well as the subsequent extension of the deadline. This is similar to normal tendering procedures, where the practice is to notify only the registered prospects of changes in specifications.

10. In addition, in response to a specific query by some REDAS members during the EOI exercise, SCPL clarified, before the EOI deadline, that they reserved the right to make a counter-offer to the highest bidder should the received bids were below expectations. This was duly made known to all 170 REDAS developers on the same day that the query was received.

Audit Observation 3

11. The third incident involved a former board director who participated in an open tender for land sales at Sentosa Cove after he had retired from the SCPL Board. The tender was launched on 22 October 2003.

12. To put things in context, SDC and SCPL Board members are not disqualified from participating in Sentosa Cove land sales. It would not be fair or practical to do so since we had invited respected individuals with real estate experience to sit on the Board. Instead, to ensure transparency and fair competition, Board members wishing to participate in any sale of sites have to declare their interest in writing, and submit a confidentiality undertaking.

13. In this particular instance, the said director, Mr Chua Thian Poh, completed his term of duty as a board member on 31 Oct 2003. He was thus no longer subject to the disclosure requirement. Notwithstanding that, he declared his interest and submitted a confidentiality undertaking on 2 December 2003, and participated in the open land tender exercise that closed on 3 December 2003. Mr Chua’s company, Ho Bee Developments Pte Ltd, submitted bids for 4 land parcels, and won the tender for 2 plots, as it was the highest bidder (out of at least 3 bids for each parcel).

14. Following the Auditor-General’s observations, SDC has reconciled its sale practices with the requirements of the Government’s Instruction Manual (IM), and obtained MOF’s exemption from certain provisions. SDC will also further review and tighten the procedures for its Sentosa Cove land sales.

Ministry of Trade and Industry
6 Mar 2007

Action stations

Ethical living | Guardian Unlimited Environment

Human Rights Video Project

Human Rights Video Project

Autocratic democracy worked, but will it continue to work?

ST Forum online

2nd Feb 2007

I refer to the article 'Singapore's style of government delivers the goods' (Online forum, Jan 31) by Reza Shifdar Buang. In the article, the writer defends the Singapore Government's adoption of autocratic democracy as producing efficient and effective results.

I agree that liberal democracy is merely one of the many types of political systems that exist. Singapore should not follow Western liberal democracy blindly without having regard to local customs. The Singapore Government has strived to fine-tune policies to suit the distinct needs of Singaporeans. It has developed a form of paternalistic, often described as autocratic, governance which it feels is best suited for society. This has yielded excellent economic results, responsible for the rising standard of living.

Having regard to Singapore's historical context and how the Government came into power, it is understandable that between the competing national interests of economic progress and protection of political liberty, the Government chose the former. As a young nation, Singapore needed strong and fast reforms to curb racial and communist threats. Autocratic democracy and communitarian policies were perhaps the best ways of dealing with the needs of Singapore at that time. For example, it is perfectly reasonable that, unlike Malaysians, Singaporeans do not have a constitutional right to property. It was a necessity to leave that particular right out of Singapore's Constitution because of fears of excessive litigation in the midst of large-scale land acquisition for development. This is especially so because of Singapore's small land size.

However, as the standard of living in Singapore improves dramatically over the past few decades, it appears that the Government's stance in politics has remained stagnant. Undoubtedly, the form of autocratic democracy that the Government has adopted has, up till now, yielded excellent economic results.

Nevertheless, as the electorate matures and Singapore reaches the level of an economically developed country, it is necessary to evaluate whether the current political stance of Singapore continues to serve the needs of society. For example, should Singapore continue to subordinate individual fundamental rights to communitarian values? Should the Government continue to be allowed to act without the checks and balances usually present in a Western democracy?

Without answering these questions, it might be increasingly difficult for the Government to convince the electorate that an autocratic democracy is the best political system for Singapore. To merely gain legitimacy from past economic performance will hardly suffice.

Simply put - autocratic democracy worked, but will it continue to work?

Adrienne Ng Qian Wen (Ms

Football saga imitates real life

Football saga imitates real life

Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study

Guardian Unlimited Environment
Once again, the oil industry has been caught trying to influence scientific research into climate change...