NASA 'giddy' over amazing moon views from Artemis 1 Orion spacecraft

By Brett Tingley 

"The results were eye-watering."

A portion of the far side of the Moon looms large just beyond the Orion spacecraft in this image taken on the sixth day of the Artemis I mission by a camera on the tip of one of Orion’s solar arrays.

 (Image credit: NASA)

NASA officials say Artemis 1 mission teams are "giddy" after witnessing how well their Orion spacecraft has been performing so far on its way towards lunar orbit.

Artemis 1 launched at 1:47 a.m. EST (0647 GMT) on Nov. 16, blasting off from Kennedy Space Center in Florida in a spectacular display of the sheer power of NASA's Space Launch System (SLS) rocket. The Orion spacecraft reached Earth orbit shortly after, and then at 87 minutes after launch performed a so-called Trans Lunar Injection burn to send it hurtling towards the moon. On Monday (Nov. 21), Orion performed another burn to send the spacecraft close enough to the lunar surface to leverage the moon's gravity to pull the spacecraft around the moon into a distant retrograde lunar orbit.

After collecting data from that propulsive maneuver, NASA officials held a briefing Monday evening (Nov. 21) to discuss Orion's powered flyby of the moon. Judd Frieling, flight director at NASA's Johnson Space Center, said Orion mission team members are "giddy" with the current performance they are seeing from the spacecraft after the flyby, which saw the spacecraft come within 80 miles of the lunar surface.

Frieling added that flight controllers are so far amazed by the stellar performance they've seen from Orion. "As far as the flight controllers themselves, they're absolutely astounded as well, you know, at these great videos that they're able to get from the Orion spacecraft," Frieling said. "As well as that, you know, they're just happy that all of the hard work and dedication that they've spent for many, many, many years is really paying dividends."

Howard Hu, Orion program manager, said the team has seen "really good performance across the board on all our subsystems and systems and we're certainly really happy with the performance" of the spacecraft so far.

"Today was a terrific day," Hu added. "We're coming in every day and it doesn't seem like work. I mean, it is just fabulous. I want to hear the information that's coming from the spacecraft, learning about the spacecraft and being excited about what we're doing. And it's just, it's just been phenomenal. I've got a big smile every day."

The briefing also discussed the launch of the Artemis 1 mission's Space Launch System rocket on Nov. 16. Mike Sarafin, Artemis 1 mission manager at NASA headquarters, said the SLS rocket performed flawlessly during launch. "The results were eye-watering," Sarafin said. "The rocket performed and/or exceeded expectations." Sarafin added that the "kindler, gentler" fueling procedure that was performed for the successful third launch attempt also produced the results mission managers expected, circumventing some of the issues that plagued previous attempts.

Sarafin also discussed the damage that Launch Pad 39B at Kennedy Space Center suffered during the launch. While much of the damage was expected and similar to other launches, the 8.8 million pounds of thrust produced by the SLS vehicle's core stage and two solid rocket boosters literally blew doors in. "The elevator system is not functioning right now," Sarafin said. "We had the world's most powerful rocket and the pressure basically blew the doors off of our elevators."

Sarafin said that a segment of RTV, the insulating caulking around the base of Orion that was damaged by Tropical Storm Nicole, was found in the infield surrounding the rocket. It's unclear whether it was stripped off during launch or was previously ripped away by Nicole. A strip of that caulking damaged by the storm was a source of worry prior to launch, but mission managers determined it would not be a risk.

The Artemis 1 mission sent Orion towards the moon on a 26-day journey that will see the spacecraft come within 80 miles of the lunar surface at its closest pass, and some 40,000 miles away at its farthest. The mission is designed as a flight test of the Space Launch System rocket, Orion spacecraft and associated ground control systems ahead of the Artemis 2 and 3 missions currently planned for 2024 and 2025, respectively.

After swinging far away from the moon, Orion will make its way back to Earth where it will splash down in the Pacific Ocean on Dec. 11.

"I will rest well on Dec. 11 after splashdown and recovery is complete, as well as these gentlemen and their teams," Sarafin said.

Elon Musk tells remaining Twitter employees no more layoffs 'planned' and HQ will not move to Texas

Kali Hays

Elon Musk has axed thousands of jobs at Twitter. Susan Walsh/AP

Elon Musk held another meeting with Twitter employees.

He told them that layoffs are done, at least for the time being.

Also, Musk gave some details on plans for headquarters and future compensation plans.

Elon Musk is done with layoffs at Twitter, at least for now, and has no intention of moving the company's headquarters from San Francisco.

Musk gave remaining Twitter employees tidbits of good news during an all-hands meeting on Monday at Twitter's San Francisco headquarters, according to two people present. It's Musk's second such meeting since last week when he told workers that bankruptcy was not out of the question for Twitter and first floated his "extremely hardcore" work expectations.

Musk said during the meeting no more layoffs are "planned" to happen. It's the first time Musk has said waves of cuts to the company's headcount are over since he took control at the end of October. Twitter's headcount of full-time employees prior to Musk's ownership was about 7,500 people. That number is now down to 2,300 people, according to a person familiar with the company's operations, after a mass layoff and a mass resignation. The official headcount number could continue to change, however, as resignations continue to be accounted for internally, another person familiar with the company said.

One employee who made it through Musk's layoffs and a spate of firings of perceived critics said Musk's comments were met with "some relief." The meeting came after most employees worked through the weekend for Musk, who posted to Twitter pictures of an early Saturday morning "code review."

Now, Twitter may even start hiring again. Musk said during the meeting he is looking to bring in more engineers, according to one of the people present. Layoffs and resignations have deeply impacted Twitter's engineering ranks, another person at the company said, estimating that as much as 50% of engineering is now gone. Musk on Friday made an urgent call for "anyone" left at Twitter who could write software to meet with him. Engineers who remain with the company are continuing to reach out to coworkers who were laid off or resigned asking them if they're interested in returning to the company because some teams do not have enough people, a current employee said.

Musk also said during the meeting he "does not intend" to move Twitter's headquarters to Texas from San Francisco. Such a move has been speculated on since Musk's other companies, including Tesla and SpaceX, have moved operations there. Musk and some of his younger children and their mothers also live in the state.

Twitter employees were also told that part of their future compensation plans under Musk will include stock grants and be offered and paid out as they are with employees at SpaceX. Although private, that company allows employees to sell grants of stock through private tender offers.

Meta is finally trying to protect teens from 'suspicious adults' on Instagram and Facebook

By Cesar Cadenas

 published about 8 hours ago

Meta changes privacy settings and adds new message notifications

(Image credit: Meta)

In an effort to better protect underaged users, Meta is adjusting the default privacy settings on Facebook and Instagram to limit contact by “suspicious adults.”

Now, whenever a teenager joins Facebook, their account will automatically have more stringent privacy protections. This includes, but is not limited to, deciding who can see their friends list, what pages they follow, and who is allowed to comment on their posts. For accounts created before this update, Meta states(opens in new tab) it will begin pushing those users to adopt those same settings, but won’t force it. If all this sounds familiar, that’s because Instagram implemented very similar changes back in 2021 to protect young people there.

Power to the user

Meta goes on to say it’s working on new ways to stop blocked and reported accounts from contacting underaged 

One way it'll do this on Instagram is by, as part of a test, removing the message button, making it impossible for predatory adults to use Instagram messaging to contact teen users directly.

Plus, the People You May Know recommendations feed on Facebook will also no longer display these flagged accounts.

Coming to both Messenger and Instagram is a new notification encouraging teenagers to use safety tools anytime they feel “uncomfortable” during a conversation. One notification will ask users if they know the person who just messaged them. If ‘No’ is chosen, both apps will bring up a series of actions(opens in new tab) they can take, like blocking the account or reporting them.

According to the announcement, the new Facebook default privacy settings are rolling out today (Nov. 21); presumably, so are the other changes. We reached out to Meta for clarification. This story will be updated if we hear back.

In addition to the update, Meta announced it’s partnering up with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) to create a new platform to “prevent [teenagers’] intimate images from being posted online” and spreading across the internet. It aims to help underaged users “regain control” of these leaked images while also discouraging those acts in the first place.

Mixed messaging

While it’s great to see more security features being added, Meta’s recent track record on privacy has been confusing. On one hand, the company improved Instagram’s blocking system to stop trolls from harassing you further back in October. But at the same time, the platform implemented a new precise location feature that can make users vulnerable to stalkers or theft.

It’s a rather mixed message that could lead to privacy problems for all users; especially teenagers. Because of that, be sure to check out TechRadar’s best parental control app for 2022.

Facebook Will No Longer Ask For Your Political And Religious Views

BYKISHALAYA KUNDU

PUBLISHED 3 DAYS AGO

Facebook will soon remove four information fields from user profiles, including Religious Views, Political Views, Address, and Interested In.


Facebook will soon remove four information fields from user profiles, ostensibly as part of its plans to streamline the platform. Facebook is the world's largest social media network, with 2.96 million users worldwide as of Q3 2022. However, over the past few years, the company has been losing its young userbase, with many of them migrating to newer platforms like TikTok and Snapchat. Under increasing pressure from competitors, Facebook has been implementing several changes, including a heightened focus on short-form videos following a historic plunge in its stock price earlier this year.

While Facebook remains the biggest cash cow for its parent company Meta, it is no longer a priority area for CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Instead, Zuckerberg has been focused on the metaverse over the past few years, investing billions of dollars in the technology despite a lukewarm response from mainstream consumers. The company is believed to have already invested a whopping $36 billion on the project, with billions more expected to be poured into it in the coming years. As part of its persistent bullishness on virtual and augmented reality, Meta has also been launching many VR headsets, including the $1,499 Meta Quest Pro last month.

RELATED: How To Hide Your Facebook Profile From Strangers

A Facebook spokesperson has confirmed to TechCrunch that from Dec. 1, the company will remove four fields from user profiles to make the platform "easier to navigate and use." The four fields are 'Religious Views, Political Views, Address, and Interested In.' The company says it is sending notifications to users, letting them know of the impending change. The messages, however, are only going out to people who have these fields filled out. "This change doesn’t affect anyone’s ability to share this information about themselves elsewhere on Facebook," the spokesperson said.

Facebook's Upcoming Change


The news was first reported earlier this week by social media consultant Matt Navarra, who tweeted a screenshot of Facebook's message about the impending change. The notice also says that the rest of the profile information on the user's bio will remain untouched. As can be seen from the message, Facebook is also giving users the chance to download a copy of their Facebook data in its current state, before the four fields are removed from their profile.

The change will bring Facebook in line with other major social media platforms like TikTok, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat that have a more streamlined profile page and do not ask users for their religious and political views. Since none of these are dating apps, they also don't need users to specify what genders they're interested in for potential partners. As for the address, it is a privacy risk for Facebook users, especially with the various scandals and data leaks that the company has been involved in over the years.

NEXT:How To Delete A Photo Or Video From Your Facebook Story

Source: TechCrunch, Matt Navarra/Twitter

Why Facebook Won't Be Fact-Checking Trump Now That He's Announced Candidacy

Former U.S President Donald Trump announced his 2024 reelection bid on Nov. 15, 2022.

Nur Ibrahim
SNOPES
Published Nov 17, 2022


Ahead of former U.S. President Donald Trump's Nov. 15, 2022, announcement that he would run for reelection in 2024, a Meta memo reiterated that his speeches would be exempt from third-party fact-checking efforts on Facebook.

The memo, which was obtained and reported on by CNN, stated that if Trump were to announce a reelection bid, he would no longer be fact-checked on Facebook's platform by its third-party fact-checkers (Meta is Facebook's parent company). The memo stated that "political speech is ineligible for fact-checking. This includes the words a politician says as well as photo, video, or other content that is clearly labeled as created by the politician or their campaign."

The memo explained: "If former president Trump makes a clear, public announcement that he is running for office, he would be considered a politician under our program policies." This rule applies to all politicians. According to Facebook's official policy, partners in the company's fact-checker program should not rate the following types of content:

Posts and ads from politicians: This includes the words a politician says as well as photo, video, or other content that is clearly labeled as created by the politician or their campaign. In evaluating when this applies, we ask our fact-checking partners to look at politicians at every level. We define a "politician" as candidates running for office, current office holders — and, by extension, many of their cabinet appointees — along with political parties and their leaders. In some cases, we ask fact-checkers to use their expertise and judgment to determine whether an individual is a politician, like in the case of a part-time elected official.

Elaborating on the company's policy, Meta stated:

Our approach is grounded in Facebook's fundamental belief in free expression, respect for the democratic process, and the belief that, especially in mature democracies with a free press, political speech is the most scrutinized speech there is. Just as critically, by limiting political speech we would leave people less informed about what their elected officials are saying and leave politicians less accountable for their words.

[...]

Opinion content is generally not eligible for rating because the fact-checking program is not meant to interfere with individual expression or debate. However, the definition of "opinion" is not meant to give a free pass to content that spreads false information, solely on the basis of how it is presented. Therefore, we ask fact-checkers to use their judgment to determine whether content is actually opinion or rather masking false information in the guise of opinion, and to rate it as appropriate in these circumstances.

This policy is not new. It was on Facebook's website before Trump's announcement. Andy Stone, a spokesperson for Meta, said to CNN, "a reiteration of our long-standing policy should not be news to anyone." In 2019, Nick Clegg, the president of global affairs at Meta, confirmed that the policy had been in place since 2018. Addressing the platform's rules for fact-checking political speech, he said:

We don't believe, however, that it's an appropriate role for us to referee political debates and prevent a politician's speech from reaching its audience and being subject to public debate and scrutiny. That's why Facebook exempts politicians from our third-party fact-checking program. We have had this policy on the books for over a year now, posted publicly on our site under our eligibility guidelines. This means that we will not send organic content or ads from politicians to our third-party fact-checking partners for review. However, when a politician shares previously debunked content including links, videos and photos, we plan to demote that content, display related information from fact-checkers, and reject its inclusion in advertisements.

Trump is currently banned on the platform, though "Team Trump," a page run by his team, is still up. Meta says it will assess the circumstances and possibly consider allowing him back on the platform in January 2023.

Meta pays independent third-party fact-checkers to apply fact-check labels on Facebook and Instagram. These fact-checkers are certified by the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN). (We should note that Snopes is a member of the IFCN but is not a part of the Facebook partnership.) We have reached out to IFCN for more information and will update this post if we hear back.

We also spoke to Jevin West, an associate professor at the University of Washington and a co-founder of the Center for an Informed Public, about this policy.

"The policy is problematic and inconsistent," West said. "You are fact-checking all these other [claims], but you are not fact-checking the things said by people with humongous microphones. You are tying the hands of your fact checkers. [...] Some of the most egregious statements come from our politicians."

This policy is probably in place so that Meta does not "alienate users coming from different sides of the political spectrum," West theorized. He also argued that Meta makes a lot of money on political advertising: "It is hard not to think that this could be part of the reason for this policy as well."

But for West, another Facebook policy was potentially more problematic: the one pertaining to content demotion. As per Meta: "When a politician shares a specific piece of content — e.g. a link to an article, video or photo created by someone else that has been previously debunked on Facebook — we will demote that content, display a warning and reject its inclusion in ads."

West argued that this particular element of the policy could possibly make users more distrustful of information posted on Facebook, as it does not appear to have any transparency behind it. "It is a black box," he said. "There is this idea that they don't want to 'referee political debates,' but but they are already doing that, so why exclude some of the biggest voices?"

Sources:

Duffy, Kate. "Facebook Won't Be Fact-Checking Donald Trump Now He's Announced He's Running for President in 2024." Business Insider, https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-trump-fact-checking-halted-presidential-run-2024-announced-meta-2022-11

 Accessed 16 Nov. 2022.

"How Meta's Third-Party Fact-Checking Program Works." How Meta's Third-Party Fact-Checking Program Works, https://www.facebook.com/facebookmedia

Accessed 16 Nov. 2022.

"Fact-Checking Policies on Facebook." Facebook, https://www.facebook.com/business/help/315131736305613?id=673052479947730 Accessed 16 Nov. 2022.

O'Sullivan, Donie. "Facebook Fact-Checkers Will Stop Checking Trump after Presidential Bid Announcement | CNN Politics." CNN, 15 Nov. 2022, https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/15/politics/facebook-fact-check-donald-trump/index.html

Accessed 16 Nov. 2022.

O'Sullivan, Donie. "Facebook Says Trump Now Suspended until at Least January 2023 | CNN Business." CNN, 4 June 2021,

 https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/04/tech/facebook-politicians/index.html

 Accessed 16 Nov. 2022.

By Nur Ibrahim
Nur Nasreen Ibrahim is a reporter with experience working in television, international news coverage, fact checking, and creative writing.

Iranian World Cup squad declines to sing national anthem, backing protests

Reuters Published November 21, 2022

Iran players line up during the national anthems before the World Cup match against England at Khalifa International Stadium, Doha, Qatar, Nov 21.

 — Reuters

Iran’s World Cup soccer team declined to sing their national anthem before their opening match against England on Monday after many fans back home accused the squad of siding with a violent state crackdown on persistent popular unrest.

The players were solemn and silent as the anthem was played before the match with England at Khalifa International Stadium in Qatar, where thousands of Iranian fans in the stands shouted as the music rang out.

Some jeered and others made thumbs-down gestures.

Team Melli, as the Iranian soccer squad is known, have long been a huge source of national pride in Iran, but found themselves caught up in politics in the World Cup run-up, with anticipation over whether they would use soccer’s showpiece event as a platform to get behind the protesters.


Iran were trounced 6-2 by England in Monday’s Group B opener, but the drubbing was not enough to silence the Iranian fans, who pounded drums and horns throughout the game.

Ahead of the match, no Iranian player had voiced support for the demonstrations by compatriots from all walks of life, one of the most sustained challenges to the cleric elite since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

“All of us are sad because our people are being killed in Iran but all of us are proud of our team because they did not sing the national anthem — because it’s not our national [anthem], it’s only for the regime,” said an Iranian fan attending the World Cup who asked not to be named.

Protests demanding the fall of the ruling theocracy have gripped Iran since the death two months ago of young woman Mahsa Amini after her arrest for flouting the strict Islamic dress code.

Dozens of Iranian public figures, athletes and artists have displayed solidarity with the protesters — but not the national soccer team, until Monday’s match when all team members remained silent when the national anthem was played.

Iranian state television did not show the players lined up for the anthem before the match got underway in Qatar, just across the Gulf from their homeland.

The Iranian squad could not avoid being overshadowed by the anti-government unrest that has rattled Iran’s theocracy, while other World Cup teams were squarely focused on their tactics on the pitch.

In the past, the Iranian soccer team was a source of fired-up national pride throughout the country. Now, with mass protests, many would prefer it withdrew from the World Cup.

Before travelling to Doha the team met with hardline Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi. Photos of the players with Raisi, one of them bowing in front of him, went viral while the street unrest raged on, drawing an outcry on social media.
‘Show solidarity’

“I have mixed feelings. I love football but with all these children, women and men killed in Iran, I think the national team should not play,” university student Elmira, 24, said, speaking by telephone from Tehran before the match.

“It is not Iran’s team, it is the Islamic Republic’s team.

“They could refuse to take part in the World Cup or even refuse to play if they were forced to go, to show that they are part of the nation, to show solidarity with mothers in Iran whose children were killed by the regime [during protests].”

The activist HRANA news agency said 410 protesters had been killed in the unrest as of Saturday, including 58 minors.

Some 54 members of the security forces had also been killed, HRANA said, with at least 17,251 people arrested. Authorities have not provided an estimate of any wider death count.

Iranians are especially outraged because athletes around the world have been speaking out for the demonstrators in Iran while their team has remained largely silent.

“I know it is their job to play football but with all those children killed in Iran, they should have stood in solidarity with the people. Especially when the England team is going to kneel [in solidarity], how can the national team show no solidarity?” high school student Setareh, 17, said by telephone from the northwestern city of Urmia.

“FIFA should not have included the team because of protests in Iran and the regime’s violation of human rights. That did not happen, so then the team should not have gone in order to show solidarity with the protesters.”

Some Iranian fans who went to Qatar for the World Cup made no secret of their solidarity with the unrest.

They carried banners that read “Woman, Life, Freedom” in support of the protests. “Freedom for Iran. Stop killing children in the streets!” shouted one Iranian woman.

Another Iranian woman with the colours of an Iranian flag painted on her face said Iran is a football-crazed nation.

“But this year,” she said, “everything is different, all we care about is this revolution and for people to get their freedom back, and not be scared to just walk on the street, do and dress as they want, and say what they want.”

In the capital Tehran, some banners of the national team have been burned by angry protesters.

Other Iranians like Zeynab Mohammadi wished success for the team. “I will watch the game with my friends at home. I will pray for my team to win,” Mohammadi, 21, said in Tehran, echoing other supporters who took to social media to cheer the players.

However, pictures of children killed in the protests were widely shared by Iranians on Twitter, with messages such as: “They loved football too, but they were killed by the Islamic Republic.”

“Those children took risks for their country and were killed by the regime. The national team should take risks and show solidarity with the nation,” said Hamidreza, 19, a university student in southern Iran.

“For our nation, for Iran, for all those children, men, women killed in the past weeks by the regime, be our voice in Qatar. Show solidarity if you are Iran’s national soccer team.”

DAWN

Hypocrisy’s penalty corner

Jawed Naqvi Published 

November 22, 2022 

THERE’S been severe criticism, primarily in the Western media, of the gross exploitation of migrant workers in Qatar’s bid to host football’s World Cup that began in Doha last week. There’s more than a grain of truth in the accusation, and there’s dollops of hypocrisy about it.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino brought it out nicely by calling out the Western media’s double standards in what is tantamount to shedding crocodile tears for the exploited workers.

The CNN, unsurprisingly, slammed Infantino’s anger, and quoted human rights groups as describing his comments as “crass” and an “insult” to migrant workers. Why is Infantino convinced that the Western media wallows in its own arrogance?

It is nobody’s secret that migrant workers in the Gulf are paid a pittance, which becomes more deplorable when compared to the enormous riches they help produce. As is evident, the workers’ exploitation is not specific to Qatar’s hosting of a football tournament, but a deeper malaise in which Western greed mocks its moral sermons.

As their earnings with hard labour abroad fetch them more than what they would get at home, the workers become unwitting partners in their own abuse. This has been the unwritten law around the generation of wealth in oil-rich Gulf countries, though their rulers are not alone in the exploitative venture.

Western colluders, nearly all of them champions of human rights, have used the oil extracted with cheap labour that plies Gulf economies, to control the world order. The West and the Gulf states have both benefited directly from dirt cheap workforce sourced from countries like India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh and the far away Philippines.

Making it considerably worse is the sullen cutthroat competition that has prevailed for decades between workers of different countries, thereby undercutting each other’s bargaining power. The bruising competition is not unknown to their respective governments that benefit enormously from the remittances from an exploited workforce. The disregard for work conditions is not only related to the Gulf workers, of course, but also migrant labour at home. In the case of India, we witnessed the criminal apathy they experienced in the Covid-19 emergency.

Sham outrage over a Gulf country hosting the World Cup is just one aspect of hypocrisy.

Asian women workers in the Gulf face quantifiably worse conditions. An added challenge they face is of sexual exploitation. Cheap labour imported from South Asia, therefore, answers to the overused though still germane term — Western imperialism. Infantino was spot on. Pity the self-absorbed Western press booed him down.

Sham outrage over a Gulf country hosting the World Cup is just one aspect of hypocrisy. A larger problem remains rooted in an undiscussed bias.

Moscow and Beijing in particular have been the Western media’s leading quarries from time immemorial. The boycott of the Moscow Olympics over the USSR’s invasion of Afghanistan was dressed up as a moral proposition, which it might have been but for the forked tongue at play. That numerous Olympic contests went ahead undeterred in Western cities despite their illegal wars or support for dictators everywhere was never called out. What the West did with China, however, bordered on distilled criminality.

I was visiting Beijing in September 1993 with prime minister Narasimha Rao’s media team. The streets were lined with colourful buntings and slogans, which one mistook for a grand welcome for the visiting Indian leader. As it turned out the enthusiasm was all about Beijing’s bid to host the 2000 Olympics. It was fortunate Rao arrived on Sept 6 and could sign with Li Peng a landmark agreement for “peace and tranquility” on the Sino-Indian borders. Barely two week later, China would collapse into collective depression after Sydney snatched the 2000 Olympics from Beijing’s clasp. Western perfidy was at work again.

As it happened, other than Sydney and Beijing three other cities were also in the running — Manchester, Berlin and Istanbul — but, as The New York Times noted: “No country placed its prestige more on the line than China.” When the count began, China led the field with a clear margin over Sydney. Then the familiar mischief came into play.

Beijing led after each of the first three rounds, but was unable to win the required majority of the 89 voting members. One voter did not cast a ballot in the final two rounds. After the third round, in which Manchester won 11 votes, Beijing still led Sydney by 40 to 37 ballots. “But, confirming predictions that many Western delegates were eager to block Beijing’s bid, eight of Manchester’s votes went to Sydney and only three to the Chinese capital,” NYT reported. Human rights was cited as the cause. Hypocritically, that concern disappeared out of sight and Beijing hosted a grand Summer Olympics in 2008.

Football is a mesmerising game to watch. Its movements are comparable to musical notes of a riveting symphony. Above all, it’s a sport that cannot be easily fudged with. But its backstage in our era of the lucre stinks of pervasive corruption.

Anger in Beijing burst into the open when it was revealed in January 1999 that Australia’s Olympic Committee president John Coates promised two International Olympic Committee members $35,000 each for their national Olympic committees the night before the vote, which gave the games to Sydney by 45 votes to 43.

The Daily Mail described the “usual equanimity” with which Juan Antonio Samaranch, the then Spanish IOC president, tried to diminish the scam. The allegations against nine of the 10 IOC members accused of graft “have scant foundation and the remaining one has hardly done anything wrong”.

“In a speech to his countrymen,” recalled the Mail, “he blamed the press for ‘overreacting’ to the underhand tactics, including the hire of prostitutes, employed by Salt Lake City to host the next Winter Olympics.” Samaranch sidestepped any reference to the tactics employed by Sydney to stage the Millennium Summer Games.

This reality should never be obscured by other outrages, including the abominable working conditions of Asian workers in Qatar.

The writer is Dawn’s correspondent in Delhi.

jawednaqvi@gmail.com

Published in Dawn, November 22nd, 2022

FIFA World Cup 2022: What Budweiser Will Do With Excess Of Beer Piled In Their Warehouse?

Nina Siena / Nov 21 2022,

A last-minute decision to ban alcohol at the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 has left its partner, Budweiser
with a surplus of beer that will go to waste. However, Budweiser said it has come up with a way to clear out its excess stock after it posted a photo on social media.

Fox News reported a follow-up to the shocking decision from FIFA and Qatari officials to ban the sale of alcohol during the much-awaited event which stunned football fans who were set for a long month in the Persian Gulf country. FIFA president Gianni Infantino downplayed the decision, saying “If this is the biggest problem we have, I’ll sign that [agreement],"

The ambiguous post on Twitter had Budweiser playing up on words to attract patrons, "New Day, New Tweet. Winning Country gets the Buds. Who will get them?"

Full details of the promotion have yet to be disclosed, but a spokesperson for Budweiser parent Anheuser-Busch InBev BUD, +0.95% told Marketwatch to stay tuned as more will be revealed as the tournament runs its course. The spokesperson further wrote that Budweiser wanted to bring the celebration from FIFA World Cup stadiums to the winning country’s fans

Infantino placed the blame on the “crowd flows” in Doha, however, the decision appeared to be a resolution from Qatar’s autocratic government as it supposedly tried to appease the conservative Wahabi citizens, who have expressed their disapproval by some events that have accompanied the tournament. Infantino further confirmed the move to be a unanimous decision.

"We tried until the end to see whether it was possible," Infantino said. He continued, saying that fans can survive for three hours a day without an alcoholic beverage. Infantino added that France, Spain, and Scotland were smarter in regard to the ban on alcohol sales in stadiums, and thought FIFA should emulate that policy for the event in Qatar.

Fans will be permitted to buy and enjoy their alcoholic drinks in the evenings at the FIFA Fan Festival. Qatar also puts a strict limit on the purchase and consumption of alcohol, however, its sale has been permitted in hotels and bars for quite some time, outside of tournament-run areas.

MONOPOLY CAPITALI$M REBUFFED

Penguin Random House scraps $2.2 bln deal to merge with Simon & Schuster


Reuters
Publishing date :Nov 21, 2022 

WASHINGTON — Penguin Random House, the world’s largest book publisher, and smaller U.S. rival Simon & Schuster have scrapped a $2.2 billion deal to merge, Penguin owner Bertelsmann announced on Monday.

Bertelsmann, a German media group which owns Penguin, initially said it would appeal a U.S. judge’s decision that said its purchase of Simon & Schuster would be illegal because it would hit authors’ pay.

But Bertelsmann said in a statement that it “will advance the growth of its global book publishing business without the previously planned merger of Penguin Random House and Simon & Schuster.”

Reuters reported on Sunday that the German company was unable to convince Paramount Global, Simon & Schuster’s owner, to extend their deal agreement and appeal the judge’s decision.

The U.S. Justice Department “is pleased that Penguin Random House and Simon & Schuster have opted not to appeal,” Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter said in a statement.

Judge Florence Pan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on Oct. 31 that the Justice Department had shown the deal could substantially lessen competition “in the market for the U.S. publishing rights to anticipated top-selling books.”

With the deal’s dissolution, Penguin will pay a $200 million termination fee to Paramount.

Paramount said on Monday that Simon & Schuster was a “non-core asset” to Paramount. “It is not video-based and therefore does not fit strategically within Paramount’s broader portfolio,” the company said in a filing on the deal’s termination

Unlike most merger fights, which focus on what consumers pay, the Biden administration argued the deal should be stopped because it would lead to less competition for blockbuster books and lower advances for authors who earn $250,000 or more.

Penguin writers include cookbook author Ina Garten and novelists Zadie Smith and Danielle Steele, while Simon & Schuster publishes Stephen King, Jennifer Weiner and Hillary Rodham Clinton, among others.

The U.S. Justice Department filed a lawsuit aimed at stopping the deal in November 2021.

In hearings held in August, the government argued that the largest five publishers control 90% of the market, and a combined Penguin and Simon & Schuster would control nearly half of the market for publishing rights to blockbuster books, while its nearest competitors would be less than half its size.

The top five publishers are Penguin Random House, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Simon & Schuster and Hachette, with Walt Disney Co and Amazon.com Inc also in the market. HarperCollins is owned by News Corp. (Reporting by Diane Bartz and Klaus Lauer; Editing by Tomasz Janowski, Rosalba O’Brien and Muralikumar Anantharaman)

Spain to approve mortgage support for more than 1 million households

Jesús Aguado
Mon, 21 November 2022

Young people walk past an estate agent in Guernica


By Jesús Aguado

MADRID (Reuters) -The Spanish government will approve on Tuesday mortgage relief measures such as extending loan repayments for up to seven years for more than one million vulnerable households and middle-class families, the economy ministry said on Monday.

The ministry said the new measures, which would be given the go-ahead at the government's cabinet meeting, would be adopted pending final negotiations with Spanish banking associations.

In Spain, around three-quarters of the population are homeowners, with most opting for floating-rate mortgages, more exposed to accelerated interest rate rises.

Under the framework, banks will provide mortgage support for vulnerable families through an amended industry-wide code of good practice. The income threshold has been set at 25,200 euros ($25,815).

Vulnerable households will be able to restructure mortgages at a lower interest rate during a five-year grace period, already set in the original 2012 industry-wide code of good practice, which is voluntary but becomes mandatory once lenders adhere to it.

Grace periods allow borrowers to delay payments on the principal of the loan without being charged late fees and not resulting in default or loan cancellation.

The period for cancelling debt has been extended by two years and includes the possibility of a second restructuring, if necessary, the ministry said.

Vulnerable families that spend more than 50% of their monthly income to repay their mortgage, but do not meet the condition set out in the previous code of a 50% rise in their mortgage payments, can take advantage of a two-year grace period.

The government will additionally implement a new code of good practice for middle-class families at risk of vulnerability, setting the income threshold at less than 29,400 euros.

In those cases, lenders must offer the possibility of a 12-month freeze on repayments, a lower interest rate on the deferred principal and an extension of the loan if a mortgage burden represents more than 30% of their income and the cost has risen by at least 20%.

The mortgage relief is expected to come into effect next year.

($1 = 0.9762 euros)

(Reporting by Jesús Aguado; Editing by Emma Pinedo, Sam Holmes and Muralikumar Anantharaman)

Poilievre blasted during Commons debate on cryptocurrency legislation

Mon, November 21, 2022

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre rises to question the government during Question Period, Wednesday, November 16, 2022 in Ottawa. 

(Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press - image credit)

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre faced pointed criticism from MPs Monday during a House of Commons debate on proposed cryptocurrency legislation — with Liberal, NDP and Bloc deputies all accusing the Tory leader of bankrupting some seniors by promoting products like bitcoin.

MPs used the debate on Bill C-249 — a private member's bill first introduced by Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner — to read Poilievre's past statements praising cryptocurrency into the record and blast him for promoting what some called a "Ponzi scheme" that lost money for scores of investors.

With crypto prices in the basement after a series of recent scandals, Liberal MP Kevin Lamoureux said he's surprised the Conservative Party would push now for legislation designed to encourage the sector's growth in Canada.

"How many seniors on fixed income used part of their life savings to invest in something that was recommended by the leader of Canada's Official Opposition party?" said Lamoureux, parliamentary secretary to the House leader.

"The leader said one of the best ways to fight inflation here in Canada is to invest in cryptocurrency. Imagine all those Conservative delegates and possibly others who might have been listening to the Conservative leader?"

"Imagine all the seniors who listened to the Conservative leader?" added another Liberal MP, Stéphane Lauzon. "What position would they be in now?"

Polievre was not in the Commons for the debate.

Bitcoin is trading at roughly $16,000 US — 75 per cent lower than its value in November 2021.

That means if you invested $10,000 in bitcoin at this time last year, you'd have just $2,500 left of that initial investment — an eye-popping loss of value for any financial product.

According to a federal ethics commissioner filing, Poilievre held an investment in bitcoin as of May 4.

He declared an ownership stake in the Purpose bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF), an investment that closely tracks the price of bitcoin. If Poilievre still owns a piece of that ETF, his investment would be worth 60 per cent less than what it traded for in May, when he first disclosed the holding.

Pierre Poilievre/Twitter

"The leader is showing a lack of good judgment by not coming forward and saying to Canadians, 'I made a mistake,' that it wasn't appropriate for people to be investing, speculating," Lamoureux said.

Lamoureux asked the Conservative MPs assembled to raise their hands if they invested in crypto after Poilievre pitched bitcoin during his leadership campaign. No one appeared to raise their hands.

Liberal MPs bought crypto as well

But Poilievre isn't the only MP to declare an ownership stake in crypto.

If Lamoureux had asked the same question of MPs on the Liberal benches, he might have seen more raised hands.

Liberal MPs Joël Lightbound, Taleeb Farouk Noormohamed, Terry Beech, Tony Van Bynen and Chandra Arya have all reported some crypto-related investments to the ethics commissioner. Conservative MP Ben Lobb has also declared a stake in bitcoin.

While Liberal MPs raised the possibility of seniors losing money on bitcoin and other crypto products, research from the Bank of Canada suggests the demographic group that likely lost the most in the recent crypto crash was younger men.

According to the Bank of Canada's bitcoin omnibus surveys, roughly 13 per cent of Canadians owned some sort of bitcoin investment in 2021 — an increase from 5 per cent the previous year.

Bitcoin owners were more likely to be male, aged 18 to 34 years old, with a university degree or a high income, the survey found.

'Whack-job economics'

The survey found 25.6 per cent of Canadians between the ages of 18 to 34 owned some bitcoin last year. Just 2.8 per cent of people over the age of 55 had a stake in bitcoin.

NDP MP Charlie Angus said Poilievre has pursued "whack-job economics" by backing a product that has "vaporized" invested dollars in recent months.

Beyond its poor price performance, Angus said cryptocurrencies are a "dark money system" that can be used for money laundering, to fund terrorist organizations and to support gang activity.

"Who else would want a system where there's no checks and balances and where you can't trace where the money goes?" Angus said.

As criminal elements turn to crypto to launder money, some countries, including Mexico, have passed laws that force trading platforms to track certain large dollar amount transactions.

A 2022 report by blockchain data company Chainalysis found criminals laundered some $8.6 billion US of cryptocurrency last year, a number that is likely a low-ball figure because it doesn't include money from offline crime such as cash from drug trafficking.

Angus picked up on Poilievre's campaign slogan — the then-leadership hopeful said he wanted to make Canada the "freest country on earth" — to say the Conservative leader has encouraged "the freedom to swindle, the freedom to hustle and the freedom to rob people of their savings."

Angus said it was "highly irresponsible" for Poilievre to push crypto when he owned bitcoin assets himself. "He fed on the fear and uncertainty of people by pushing a Ponzi scheme," Angus said.

The bill's sponsor, Rempel Garner, said crypto's recent struggles are exactly why MPs need to develop a federal regulatory framework for this asset class.

The bill, if passed, would compel Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland to consult with the industry and "develop a national framework to encourage the growth of the cryptoasset sector."

If Canada doesn't act, Rempel Garner said, crypto companies will take their business elsewhere, which could cost jobs and investment dollars.

"I want you to understand what investors hear when they listen to this debate," she said. "They say, 'Don't invest in Canada because politicians in Parliament are willing to take cheap political points.'"

Rempel Garner pointed to Vitalik Buterin, the Russian-born Canadian who co-developed ethereum, the second largest crypto platform.

Much of ethereum's early development took place in Canada, she said, but its operations have since moved to Switzerland because that country has a regulatory framework in place.

"All those jobs, all that capital — it's gone," she said.

Rempel Garner said she doesn't want Canada to lose out on a chance to normalize cryptocurrency because of "partisanship."

Conservative MP Larry Maguire made a similar point, arguing the legislation will help the federal government "protect investors" and establish "guardrails" and "stability" for a multi-billion dollar industry.

"There is no better time for Parliament to start this conversation. We cannot let this issue get so polarized that it gets to the point that it's too toxic to discuss it," he said, adding that it would be "short-sighted" and "thoughtless."

As the crypto chaos continues, Liberals remind voters of Poilievre's praise for bitcoin

Story by John Paul Tasker • Thursday, Nov. 17,2022

As cryptocurrency prices plunge and some of the exchanges they trade on pause withdrawals, the federal Liberal government is eager to remind voters that Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre once touted the asset class as a way to "opt out" of inflation.

Cryptocurrencies surged during the pandemic as investors pumped stimulus cheques into the market. But the whole industry faces an uncertain future now that FTX, one of the largest crypto exchanges, is in bankruptcy and its disgraced founder, Sam Bankman-Fried, is facing a series of regulatory probes.

Another exchange, BlockFi, is in disarray. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is also reportedly investigating other major crypto players, Binance and Coinbase, following the FTX implosion.

The result has been massive price pressure on bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies like ethereum.

The price of bitcoin is a fraction of what it was when Poilievre announced in March his plan to make Canada the "blockchain capital of the world" — a reference to the system that records bitcoin and other cryptocurrency transactions.

Speaking at a shawarma shop in London, Ont. that accepts bitcoin as payment, Poilievre told voters earlier this year that "Canada needs less financial control for politicians and bankers and more financial freedom for the people."

"Choice and competition can give Canadians better money and financial products. Not only that, but it can also let Canadians opt-out of inflation with the ability to opt-in to crypto currencies. It's time for Canadians to take back control of their money," he said.

During his run for the Conservative leadership, Poilievre's campaign said he wants to foster "a new, decentralized, bottom-up economy" by creating a more permissive regulatory environment for crypto.

He said he'd work with the provinces and territories to eliminate a "cobweb of contradictory rules" that govern products like bitcoin and blockchain. Poilievre also said he wants crypto to be treated like gold and other commodities for taxation purposes.

And the Conservative leader has put his money where his mouth is.

According to a federal ethics commissioner filing, Poilievre held an investment in bitcoin as of May 4. He declared an ownership stake in the Purpose bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF), an investment that closely tracks the price of bitcoin.

'Terrible advice'

Bitcoin is trading at roughly $16,500 US — nearly 75 per cent lower than its value in November 2021.

That means if you invested $10,000 in bitcoin at this time last year, you'd have just $2,500 left of that initial investment — an eye-popping loss of value for any financial product.

If Poilievre still owns a piece of the bitcoin ETF, his investment would be worth 60 per cent less than what it traded for in May, when he first disclosed the holding.

Poilievre's office did not respond to a request for comment about his current bitcoin ownership.

As the crypto chaos continues, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland has been calling on Poilievre to "apologize" for boosting a product that has cost some investors dearly.

When faced with Conservative claims that massive Liberal deficit budgets have fuelled sky-high inflation, Freeland has hit back by arguing Poilievre can't be trusted with the country's money after touting a product that has tanked.

"Let's talk about some really terrible advice that was offered to Canadians in the spring by the Conservative leader. He urged Canadians to invest in crypto as a way to opt out of inflation. Now, bitcoin has crashed by 21 per cent over the past week and by more than 65 per cent since the Conservative leader first gave Canadians that reckless advice," Freeland said in question period Monday.

"The Conservatives should apologize today for this reckless policy and admit that investing in crypto would have bankrupted Canadians."

Not everyone has been bankrupted by crypto. An investor who poured cash into bitcoin in the early days of the pandemic — and held that position until now — would actually be sitting on a gain. Earlier investors have fared even better.

And crypto could see a rebound — bitcoin went through a similar crisis during the "great crypto crash" of 2018, only to surge in subsequent years.

Regardless, Poilievre has gone silent on the issue since prices started to crater. He hasn't made any more appearances on crypto-themed podcasts.

In February, Poilievre was a guest on a show hosted by a bitcoin trader who has compared central banking policies to slavery.

Poilievre told the show's host, Robert Breedlove, that he and his wife watch his YouTube channel "late into the night."

"I find it extremely informative and my wife and I have been known to watch YouTube and your channel late into the night once we've got the kids to bed," Poilievre said. "And I've always enjoyed it and I've learned a lot about bitcoin and other monetary issues from listening to you."


An advertisement for bitcoin is displayed on a street in Hong Kong on Feb. 17, 2022.© Kin Cheung/AP Photo

Mariam Humayun is an assistant professor of marketing at the University of Ottawa and an expert in bitcoin and cryptocurrency.

She said some "people in the bitcoin space are very, very sceptical" of politicians that "jump on the bandwagon."

"They use a few buzzwords to sound innovative but they don't do the due diligence about what they're actually supporting," she said. "They project their politics onto bitcoin when this technology is really an apolitical thing."

Humayun said some industry types regard politicians like Poilievre as "fair-weather friends" who are all-in on the product when prices are high but disappear when there's a rough patch.

"There's a lot of people who have been affected and they've lost their savings, unfortunately. Social media has supercharged some of these things. There will be a huge reckoning for the ecosystem," she said of the post-FTX collapse crypto environment.

'He's not naive'

J.P. Lewis is a professor of political science at the University of New Brunswick Saint John and the author of The Blueprint: Conservative parties and their impact on Canadian politics.

Lewis said Poilievre touted crypto in part to appeal to a certain segment of the Conservative membership and win the leadership.

"A lot of leadership candidates say things to appeal to the base. He was appealing to a very specific type of Conservative voter with this crypto pitch. I would say, based on Poilievre's style, it would be very surprising for him to back down. He'll just talk about it less," Lewis said.

"He's a political operator at his core. He was well aware what going on these YouTube talk shows would do for this brand. There were benefits and there were risks. He's not naive."

A number of right-leaning and libertarian-minded investors have championed cryptocurrency — a financial instrument that is loosely regulated in the Western world — as a way to reduce government control over money because the supply of cryptocurrency tokens is not set by an authority like the Bank of Canada or the U.S. Federal Reserve.

With its supply limited to just 21 million tokens, bitcoin boosters insist cryptocurrency is a hedge against inflation at a time when central banks are pursuing policies that dilute the value of cash.

Some of these right-wing investors have adopted the "cryptobro" label, a sometimes derogatory term for people who are dogmatic about crypto and its potential to change the world of finance.

"The question is if there will be political ramifications with a general election voter. Will the Liberals be able to stick Poilievre with bitcoin, with the convoy, with the World Economic Forum theories, and will that resonate with the moderate or non-partisan voters that decide elections?" Lewis said.

"This is an old Liberal playbook — scare tactics. We don't know how effective it will be."