#i’ve officially taken the ‘editor and chief’ role | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

kiranxrys · 4 years

Text

Alone Together Episode 2 Transcript

Okay, I guess I’m going to keep doing these for now! This is a viewer-made transcript of Episode 2 ‘Sources’ of Alone Together: A DS9 Companion performed on the Sid City Social Club. Again, beneath the cut, and again, please let me know if you think there are any errors and I’ll fix them ♥

watch: one | two | three | four

read: one | three | four

ANNOUNCER (ON-SCREEN): ‘Alone Together’ – a DS9 companion, Episode 2 – ‘Sources’. Jake Sisko is forty-four years old. He is now the editor in chief for the Federation News Service and living in the apartment above Sisko’s restaurant with his wife and their two daughters. Jake has clearly matured and carries the weight of the world on his shoulders most days. Nathan took over the restaurant from Joseph when he finally realized he could no longer keep up with day-to-day operations. Nathan continues to use Joseph’s time-honored recipes, but he still forgets to stir the gumbo often enough.

Jake first moved in with his grandfather when he decided to pursue his reporting career on Earth. The great thing about Jake’s father, Benjamin Sisko, being a Bajoran Prophet is that he can always reach out to Jake, Kasidy, or their son. Today Jake’s not-so-baby brother lieutenant junior-grade Joseph Yates-Sisko is an engineer on Deep Space 9. Doctor Julian Bashir has taken on a rather paternal role with the Sisko children, as has Professor Miles O’Brien at Starfleet Academy. Miles has even been known to show up with a bottle of the good stuff from time to time. Quark even keeps in touch with Jake, usually to trade information as much as checking up on Jake. Having dated a Dabo girl, Jake became a rather proficient Dabo player. Quark gives him information and in exchange, Jake doesn’t play so much Dabo when he visits the station.

[fade to black]

RECAP: In our last episode, Garak called Doctor Bashir to Cardassia Prime under a mysterious pretense. Unable to transport to the surface or access medical records from the planetary health authority, Doctor Bashir is at an impasse starting to treat or cure the unknown illness affecting Cardassia.

JULIAN BASHIR (VOICE ONLY): Mission log stardate 73712.6. Castellan Garak has brought me up to speed on the medical situation on Cardassia. A genetically engineered virus has begun sweeping through the populace, seemingly infecting at random. The source remains a mystery. My analysis is quite preliminary at this point.

JAKE SISKO (VOICE ONLY): Julian, is that you? I can’t seem to make visual contact. Please respond.

JULIAN (ON-SCREEN): Jake? Jake, I’m reading your transmission – standby, I’m trying to clean up the signal. Computer, apply a recursive algorithm to the bandwidth filter.

COMPUTER: Working.

JULIAN: Jake! I’m not receiving this transmission under ideal circumstances. Wait- wait a minute, there we go. Is that better?

JAKE (ON-SCREEN): Julian. [laughs] Hi. I tried to contact you on the station.

JULIAN: Yes, I was called away on a priority mission. What can I do for you?

JAKE: Well, uh, Doctor Jabara told me – the medical emergency, right? Is everything okay?

JULIAN: Yes, I’ve only just arrived so there’s a lot of work to be done. It’s good to hear from you, Jake but I’ve a lot to do and I’m a team of one – what can I do for you?

JAKE: Yeah, well, when Doctor Jabara told me I tried to call Kira but she was in consultation with the Vedek Assembly.

JULIAN: Yes, the life of a Kai is a busy one, but I wasn’t called to Bajor.

JAKE: Yeah, um, any chance that this has something to do with what’s happening on Cardassia?

JULIAN: Um… where I am is classified. However it’s simply a humanitarian mission. But what do you mean, what have you heard is happening on Cardassia?

JAKE: Ah, I have my sources.

JULIAN: Jake…

JAKE (LAUGHING): I just have a few questions, Julian. Um… you know me, I won’t take too much of your time.

JULIAN: The last time you had a few questions I spent the next four hours consulting on your latest novel.

JAKE: Yeah, well today I’m contacting you in official capacity for the Federation News Service. And… I’ll make you a deal. You tell me what you know, and I’ll tell you whatever it is that you think I know.

JULIAN (LAUGHING): Look, Mister Editor-In-Chief, you contacted me.

JAKE: Oh, well, you know you can’t blame a reporter for trying.

JULIAN: A doctor isn’t normally the most newsworthy source. The last time I was important to a story was when you were writing a profile of me, right before…

JAKE: Yeah, before we responded to that medical emergency on uh- Ajilon Prime, right?

JULIAN: Yes.

JAKE: I think uh- to be honest, that was the kind of diversion I was looking for for an interesting angle.

JULIAN: Interesting angle?! I’d just proposed one of the most controversial theories of my career – you didn’t think it was interesting enough?! Well no wonder you wrote about yourself! I could’ve explained the theory more clearly if you’d just told me-

JAKE: Yeah, well, you know honestly- you know this really wasn’t about Ajilon Prime and that wasn’t why I changed the story- the focus of the story, Julian. But enough about Ajilon Prime – I want to talk about Cardassia. According to my sources, it is on lockdown. I mean nobody is able to get permission to enter the place or leave the place, from what I heard. And you know Quark told me than Grand Nagus Rom said that business is horrible and he’s completely frustrated. But no one can give me a clear and solid explanation so I was hoping that maybe, you know, given your close relationship with Garak, that um… maybe you could uh- clear things up for me.

JULIAN: Well frankly I’m surprised you were able to get that much information.

JAKE: Interesting.

JULIAN: What is?

JAKE: Well, I mean a second ago when I was bringing up the topic, you know, you seemed a little bit uh- evasive. But now that you know what I know a little bit you seem that you have more that you want to tell me.

JULIAN: Not at all, Jake! I have absolutely nothing further to tell you, other than-

JAKE: Well you’re talking to the editor-in-chief of the Federation News Service, Julian – I know when people are trying to keep a secret from me so… I mean hell, you don’t know what I know!

JULIAN: You’d be surprised – and watch your language.

JAKE: I’m- I’m sorry, I- I just- I just called because I know that there’s issues on Cardassia and… you know, with you being coincidentally called to a medical emergency, and Garak being the Castellan of Cardassia… it didn’t take much for me to kind of do some dot connecting.

JULIAN: Hmm… look, Jake, I really can’t talk about it. Suffice to say, I’ve been called to a priority mission and understandably, I cannot comment on a mission that has only just begun.

JAKE: Julian, I’m not just looking for a story. I want to help. At least I- I think I can help. But I do have an obligation to the truth, and- and I will honor that.

JULIAN: Now that is interesting.

JAKE: What?

JULIAN: You just reminded me of your father for a moment. Had you said ‘looking for a damn story’, I might’ve sworn we were back in his old office.

JAKE: [laughs]

JULIAN: More importantly, how do you think you can help?

JAKE: I heard mumblings about an attempt on Garak’s life a few weeks ago. I had contacted him at his home.

JULIAN: He took your call?

JAKE: Well, you know, Garak checks in from time to time, but in this case subspace communications were a little shaky so he took a call from Bajor’s newly-appointed ambassador.

JULIAN: But you don’t even live on Bajor.

JAKE (LAUGHING): Well, wait a minute, I’m the firstborn of the Emissary so you know, all Siskos are Bajoran citizens. One word from the Kai and I, you know, I kind of landed the job.

JULIAN: [laughs] Well Garak must’ve been surprised to see you on the other side of a diplomatic communicate.

JAKE: Yeah, well, not that he let it on but he did compliment me on my resolution – I think his exact words were uh- [clears throat] ‘Truly the manouver of a Sisko’.

JULIAN: [laughs]

JAKE: Yeah, you know, I told him a source said he might be in danger and… he was alerted as rumor of a coup.

JULIAN: What did he say?

JAKE: Well, he didn’t really say much, you know how he does – he listened, he avoided my questions, he asked about my family, he complimented my last novel and he, you know, he redirected every subject change and then he got me talking about my dad so… I learned more from a rumor than I ever would’ve from Garak. I’ll give him this, though – he’s good.

JULIAN: You don’t know how good. Frankly I don’t even think I know how good he really is.

JAKE: Maybe not but… that’s where it ended, my trail was cold until about fourteen hours ago when I heard that you had left. Anyway, my sources in Cardassia had told me that-

JULIAN: You have sources on Cardassia?

JAKE: Yeah, I have sources throughout the quadrant, Julian, you know that! Anyway, multiple sources on Cardassia said that Garak was uh- hosting a diplomatic conference. He was still trying to smooth things over with the Breen and their trade agreement was developing some cracks, shall we say, along their distribution routes.

JULIAN: Cracks?

JAKE: You know, apparently some Ferengi merchants had sold a couple of Cardassian cargo haulers some second-rate transporter modules, you know, led to some major consignment issues and losses for both sides. They were crying foul, I mean it took some time to figure out who was at fault.

JULIAN: Jake- Jake, this is fascinating, but… what does it have to do with Garak?

JAKE: I thought doctors were supposed to have patience.

JULIAN: Actually, doctors make the worst patients.

JAKE: No, no I’m-

JULIAN: -oh, making a little joke.

JAKE: All right, well I- I was… where was I?

JULIAN: Lost cargo.

JAKE: Right. So the Breen, they weren’t going to get the payments because the cargo never completed the rematerialization routine and basically once they started the transporter sequence, something happened and they ended up with a bunch of organic and inorganic goo all over the place. Cardassians accused the Breen transport captain of deception and vice versa.

JULIAN: Neither race are particularly trusting of others.

JAKE: Yeah, well, that’s right. Um… Cardassians wouldn’t allow the Breen to complete their own analysis and the Breen denied any wrongdoing, so the whole thing is about to become a galactic incident, if Grand Nagus Rom hadn’t been in the middle of an audit-

JULIAN: An audit? Jake, where are you going with this? I really don’t have time.

JAKE: Yeah, yeah I’m getting there, Julian, just bear with me! So being the man that he is, you know, Grand Nagus Rom was completing his annual audit of Ferengi trade practices and discovered uh- the transporter modules were known to be faulty. They came from decaying annex-class prototypes that had been found in an abandoned shipyard. You know, the Ferengi, they came across this stuff and they started scavenging, they tweaked the old module transporter biomatter- I’m sure you’re aware that annex-class ships weren’t known for flawless transporters, and- and those were prototypes.

JULIAN: So you think the Breen tried to assassinate Garak as retribution?

JAKE: Yeah, well, that’s one of three theories that I’ve kind of come by to explain Cardassia’s apparent shutdown. But after this trade embargo, suddenly uh- I don’t know, apparently usage of all medical equipment is subject to state approval?

JULIAN: It doesn’t make sense. The Breen aren’t known for biogenic weapons, they use brute force, with rather advanced weapons technology, but I’ve never heard of any weaponized viruses.

JAKE: Hm… a virus?

JULIAN: [sighs] Jake, I really have to get back to work. If there’s nothing else you can tell me of any use-

JAKE: No, no- Well, just- just let me- bear with me… There’s two other somewhat credible theories that I have that implicate the Andorians and the Romulans.

JULIAN: Romulans?

JAKE: And Andorians.

JULIAN: The Andorians have nothing to gain from Garak’s death.

JAKE: That’s true but their beef is also with the Breen. You know, Andoria’s population and its fleet were completely decimated and they’re still recovering from the Breen assaults during the Dominion War. So, you know, icy moons are not exactly lending themselves to quick procreation.

JULIAN: Well, their colonies are also further apart due to the need for lower temperatures that still fall within the M-class conditions. Plus, Andoria is militaristic – they have great warships, but they don’t devote resources to espionage or underhand methods. Look, Jake, the last time you broke a story about Andoria, you found yourself in front of the Federation Council being threatened with extradition.

JAKE: Yeah… and my evidence convinced them to recall the ambassador before the charges were dropped. Anyways, the Andorians and the Breens may have issues, and the Breens and the Cardassians are resolving this trade dispute-

JULIAN: But the Romulans are the only species you’ve mentioned who have been known to use biogenic weapons.

JAKE: Would they have a reason to want Garak dead?

JULIAN: Well let’s just say that Garak and the Romulans have… past dealings.

JAKE: You mean his past with the embassy?

JULIAN: What are you talking about?

JAKE: Come on, Julian, we all know that he was a member of the Obsidian Order. I mean, he was working as a groundskeeper on Romulus for the Cardassian embassy. He never told you? Garak was no more a gardener than he was a tailor.

JULIAN: Actually, Garak is quite a good tailor.

JAKE: You- you know what I mean. He may be a politician now but as a spy he played many roles. I’m surprised he’s satisfied with, you know, such a quiet life.

JULIAN: World leaders hardly live quiet lives.

JAKE: Yeah, you- you know what I mean.

JULIAN: I do. Jake, listen, I appreciate your insights, at least I have a starting point. If you hear anything else, please let me know.

JAKE: Now that I know where to keep digging I’m sure we’ll be in touch.

JULIAN: Give the girls a hug from me.

JAKE: Julian, one more thing! Sorry, I’m glad you’re still there. [laughs] Before you go I want to say uh- I thought about it a little and I think I’m old enough to say hell now.

JULIAN: You’ll never be old enough to swear, you’re still thirteen! Though I may have some work for you later, I’ll be in touch.

JAKE: Work? A job? No I- I didn’t think I was any really much use at Ajilon Prime – I don’t think you would uh- have any use for me. I couldn’t do any much more than that.

JULIAN: We’ll see. Take care.

ELIM GARAK (ON-SCREEN): Uh, excuse me- are you uh- are you quite finished, Doctor?

JULIAN: Garak? Have you been monitoring us this whole time?

GARAK: Doctor, all communications in and out of Cardassia are currently under my direct control.

JULIAN: Well, we may have a lead.

GARAK: Yes, the Romulans.

JULIAN: You already suspected them?

GARAK: Oh, I’m suspicious of everyone, but- but Jake, you did confirm that specific concern of mine.

JAKE: I’m glad I could help.

GARAK: Indeed. I suspected that the Romulans could be involved. I’ve placed agents on several planets for reconnaissance – only three of the eight are still alive. Never send a boy to do a man’s work.

JAKE: Only three left?

GARAK: Now, remember, Mister Jake, remember, all of this is off the record.

JAKE: Yeah, as long as you’re in danger I’ll respect that.

GARAK: Even after my life is no longer in immediate danger, we may not be able to discuss this particular situation publicly. I’ll- I’ll let you know.

JAKE: Understood.

JULIAN: Garak, how were you able to monitor my communication with Jake? I was barely able to receive his signal at first.

GARAK: I know, I had to run his signal through the same encryption protocols we’re using – it took a moment to reconfigure our local systems to allow us to communicate outside of it. Although your recursive algorithm was a good idea, it never would’ve worked. The bandwidth filter has nothing to do with my encryption protocols.

JULIAN: Five out of eight operatives are dead?

GARAK: Yes, yes, acceptable losses – twenty percent. But this is a bit more, isn’t it? It’s a serious issue, and it requires risk.

JULIAN: Garak, Jake and I figured out in a few minutes of conversation, you really have to learn to trust.

GARAK (LAUGHING): And who would you have me trust, Doctor? An intelligence operative for an alien government and a reporter who shares his secrets as part of his job? Hardly people one should consider trustworthy.

JULIAN: But you have to trust me, Garak.

GARAK: Yes, Doctor, for better or worse, I trust you. But Captain Sisko once told me that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. We all have a weakness, and if it’s the right interrogator who discovers it, the information revealed could devastate sectors of space and destabilize entire worlds.

JULIAN: I never realized you and the Captain discussed philosophy.

GARAK: Well-

JAKE: I never realized you discussed anything with my dad. [laughs]

GARAK: The Captain and I saw each other from time to time – it’s a small station, after all. However, the uh- the good intentions paving the road to hell in this case are the secrets. Knowledge. People see secrets as being malicious little things, but they keep the peace. Secrets are both power and penalty. If everyone was honest, there’d be no need for secrets. If no one shared secrets, the galaxy would be a much happier place. But Doctor, you know the things I know, and in some cases the things we both know are the things we need to ensure that no one knows. Anarchy would reign and the order of the day would be chaos. Trust, especially for people who hold this information, is both a luxury, and a burden of truth.

JULIAN: I hate to admit it, but you’re right.

JAKE: Listen guys, uh- if you ever need to share some of that truth…

JULIAN & GARAK: [laugh]

GARAK: It isn’t, Jake, that I wouldn’t trust you with Mila’s recipes or even- even some wildly outdated intelligence data, but I know you have a hunger for information. And you also feel a great responsibility to let your people know of any threats, and thus, this virus, is a threat. Not only to Cardassians but quite possibly to off-worlders, as well.

JULIAN: Fair point, but Garak-

GARAK: You know Doctor, haven’t we wasted enough time?

JULIAN: You’re right. Jake if you’re willing to keep digging you can focus your investigations on Romulus now. I’ll do some looking myself.

JAKE: I’m on it. [leaves]

JULIAN: Garak, you said that you have holographic systems. An EMH. How sophisticated are your emitters? Could you create some scanning equipment at your location that will be tied into your equipment? By now I suspect you have a closed system like the one you’ve locked your medical professionals up in. Does it have medical databases?

GARAK: I suppose I do and I suppose it does, but… what are you getting at?

JULIAN: Well you were willing to transmit images – if I can’t do the analysis myself, if you had access to the equipment, well, I can at least analyse the results.

GARAK: You- you know Julian, that really hadn’t occurred to me.

JULIAN: Oh yes, well, you wanted the best.

GARAK: That enhanced brain of yours rarely ceases to amaze me.

JULIAN: Let’s get started. We’ll likely need standard biobed with an [uncertain] scanning interface. I need to map your cerebrum to see if we should expect any issues with reasoning. A portable retinal scanner too, will help identify any changes in blood pressure or possible sensory complications. The biobed will also monitor your cardiopulmonary system, which should give me a look at your heart. We may be able to slow the progression until we have a cure.

GARAK: It’s a good thing I had a PADD nearby, Julian – that’s quite a list. With no EMH to conduct the scans, it will take a few minutes.

JULIAN: Well contact me when you’re finished, I want to see if Jake has learned anything.

GARAK: Very well Doctor, I’ll contact you shortly. [leaves]

JULIAN: Jake? Jake?

JAKE (ON-SCREEN): Julian. Yeah, Garak had more than a few enemies on Romulus. There was a proconsul Mirok who opened- who opposed opening diplomatic relations with Cardassia at all. He was poisoned. Uh, subcommander named Ustard, who was the Chief of Staff for the Romulan ambassador. Ustard died in a transporter accident beaming to the Romulan Senate. And the ambassador, well, we all know about the ambassador.

JULIAN: We do indeed. But they’re all dead. Are you suggesting this is a vendetta from someone related to one of those people?

JAKE: Well, anything is possible. I’m more suggesting behavior.

JULIAN: I suppose. But Garak was assigned there – it’s not like he goes around killing Romulans.

JAKE: No, but it sounds more to me like he may have been ordered to kill Romulans… Did you ever meet a Senator Varak or… Vreenak on the station?

JULIAN: Should I have?

JAKE: Well, not really but, you know, Quark would sometimes sell me little tidbits of information. Now let’s just say, I take the occasion break from the uh- Dabo wheel and he would tell me things. Now one of the things he told me about was a Senator Vreenak, who apparently visited the station before the Romulans joined the Dominion War. Now Senator Vreenak… maybe- maybe he was working with my dad to have some kind of negotiation into the entry into the war… I don’t know, I’m not sure, but you know shortly after he would’ve left the station, he… he was lost in a shuttle explosion.

JULIAN: Vreenak also negotiated the non-aggression pact for the Dominion. It’s quite a chance of alliance.

JAKE: And he’s dead.

JULIAN: [sighs] I suppose it’s possible that the Romulan government, or the Tal Shiar for that matter, could be playing a rather long game.

JAKE: Garak is the leader of the world- of his world, you know, Cardassia is in a much better place now and you know, they may even someday join the Federation, who knows? We have a level of isolation to get over but-

JULIAN: Koval.

JAKE: I’m sorry, what?

JULIAN: Jake, I have to go – keep digging. If you hear anything else, let me know.

JAKE: I’ll be in touch.

JULIAN: Thank you.

[pause]

JULIAN: And Garak! If you’re listening, which I expect you are – medication, rest. I’ll contact you shortly.

[fade to black]

[CREDITS]

#ds9 #deep space nine #alone together #(i had to guess some of the names one or two times if you know a more correct spelling for anything do let me know)

30 notes · View notes

karmaalwayswins · 5 years

Text

@writerscreed prompt 120: reconsidering the divine

-----------

Mountaintop Magazine April 2019 Issue

The Interview: Chiron Galanis

Chiron Galanis is a busy horse-man. The son of Zeus (”adoptive” by official records, although unofficially it is strongly rumored Zeus had a more direct role in his conception), Galanis serves as Zeus’s chief advisor on Earth and manager of his social media accounts. Recently, he’s also taken a role as a Special Advisor to the Greek government Office of Cultural Affairs.

We at Mountaintop Magazine were quite pleased when Galanis agreed to take time out of his hectic schedule to sit down with our editor, Brian Kubica, to answer a few questions about life as the right-hand man of the most famous Greek God on the planet.

---

Brian Kubica: I love this jacket you’re wearing. It’s always fascinated me how much differently you and your father present yourselves.

Chiron Galanis: Well, (imitating his father) “Zeus likes to stand out!” He’ll wear pretty much anything if he’s in the mood. I tend to want to keep things a little more quiet and classic. Believe me, a 7′10′’ tall horse-man attracts enough attention without wearing an orange pinstriped suit.

BK: What’s it like being that tall?

CG: I see a lot of bald heads. I miss out on a lot of sexy Italian sports cars because I just don’t fit.

BK: No Ferraris in the garage. Tragedy.

CG: Indeed. Sometimes I get to live vicariously when Hercules (Hercules Brown, superhero -Ed.) brings his around.

BK: Let’s talk about your family for a few minutes. You just mentioned Hercules, but you also have about fifty or sixty living brothers and sisters.

CG: Fifty-three, right now. Number fifty-four’s on the way in three months, with his current wife. I love him, but my father gets around sometimes. I talk to him about modern day birth control, and modern day child support laws, but he doesn’t always listen.

BK: Have you gotten to know all of your brothers and sisters?

CG: I’ve met all of his children with Hera, but a lot of the time they keep to themselves on Mount Olympus, so I don’t know a lot of them very well. On Earth, it gets hard because we’re all such different ages. I mean, my oldest living brother on Earth is 230 years old, and my current youngest sister is 9 months old. I’ve met everyone who comes to the reunion we have every year, but several don’t go for any variety of reasons.

BK: Reasons such as?

CG: I’d rather not say.

BK: Ok. You did say that you spend time with your brother Hercules on a regular basis. Any other brothers and sisters you see frequently?

CG: Athena (Athena Cho-Rodriguez, superhero -Ed.) comes along with Hercules a lot of the time. I’ll be going to Martha’s (Martha Artemis, singer/songwriter -Ed.) studio next week when she’s doing some more recording for her new album.

BK: Two last questions. First, is the Zeus Zeus Zeus thing really true?

CG: It is. A couple of decades ago the Greek government finally made Dad get a driver’s license and passport. We let him fill out the forms. Should’ve known better. He just said, “Zeus is all the name I need. Say the name Zeus and it is me. Zeus is good first name, middle name, last name!!”

BK: And finally...

CG: Of course.

BK: You know it’s coming.

CG: I do.

BK: What’s your current cellphone wallpaper?

CG: It’s a selfie I took with Dad and my sister Helen at the Parthenon. Helen’s six years old and very into cowboys. I guess I spend a fair amount of time with her too.

#writerscreedchallenge #reconsidering the divine #writers on tumblr #proseriot #interview #my stuff

6 notes · View notes

aion-rsa · 3 years

Text

James Bond Movies Ranked From Worst to Best

https://ift.tt/2Y4vnBu

When Ian Fleming first created the character of 007, he settled on calling him James Bond because it was the “dullest name I’ve ever heard.” How ironic that nearly 70 years after that decision, and almost 60 years since the first James Bond movie, Dr. No (1962), that moniker is still associated around the world with thrilling action and exotic danger.

Beginning with the first Bond film from producers Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman, and which starred Sean Connery as the international man of mystery, 007 has burrowed into the global zeitgeist. And he’s never left. There have been 24 canonical Bond films produced by either Broccoli and Saltzman, or their successors Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson, and six actors who’ve donned the tuxedo during that run. Over the years, the debate has been endless over who is the Best Bond, and which is the best Bond movie. Well, we’re here to settle that latter argument once and for all. The entire Den of Geek staff, as well as our readers, have been asked to pick their favorite 007 adventures, and to rank which are the best. Below is the definitive list.

*Editor’s Note: We have chosen to only rank films in the official series and that were produced by Eon Productions. For that reason, unconnected Bond films like Never Say Never Again (1983) and Casino Royale (1967) were not included.

24. Die Another Day (2002)

Like his two most famous predecessors, Sean Connery and Roger Moore, Pierce Brosnan ended his four-film run as James Bond on a particularly low note. In fact, Die Another Day (which was also the 20th film in the official series) has ended up on many lists, including this one, at the very bottom. It is certainly the nadir of the Brosnan era, although whether it fulfills the same role for the entire series is debatable. I might even argue films like Quantum of Solace and A View to a Kill could say “hold my beer” to that dubious honor.

Die Another Day starts off promisingly enough, with Bond captured and tortured in North Korea for 14 months, leading M to decommission him on fears that he may be compromised. But a potentially intriguing thriller involving North Korean double agents and the smuggling of conflict diamonds devolves into a ludicrous romp about an ice palace, giant lasers redirecting sunlight, an invisible car that’s indestructible, and a fight aboard an airplane literally coming apart in mid-air. Throw in one of the series’ worst theme songs (courtesy of Madonna), uninspired performances from a tired Brosnan and Halle Berry, and you ultimately find yourself wishing that the movie itself would die—not another day, but right now. – Don Kaye

23. Diamonds Are Forever (1971)

What is it with Bond and diamonds? This is one of two 007 escapades involving the world’s hardest substance (the other is Die Another Day) and based on that, the series should stick to gold. Diamonds Are Forever marked the return of Sean Connery after a one-film absence from the series, but it’s clear from the start that the doughy-looking star is just phoning in his performance (from which, to be fair, he donated his salary to charity).

Directed by Bond mainstay Guy Hamilton, Diamonds goes for a jauntier, campier tone after the grim ending of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service, with Bond tracking a diamond-smuggling operation that ultimately leads him to arch-nemesis Blofeld (whose murder of Bond’s wife in the previous movie is inexplicably never addressed, not even once). The movie is just entertaining enough that you can keep it on in the background while doing something else, but its dreary ending on an oil rig, dated homophobia (Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint, anyone?), and by-the-numbers vibe make this one a real cubic zirconia. – DK

22. Quantum of Solace (2008)

Quantum of Solace’s biggest crime is that it’s just so dull. From the desert backdrops that were used for the final act to the sterile environments where middling Bond villain Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric) executes his convoluted evil plan, there isn’t really anything interesting to look at in Marc Forster’s first and only 007 film. It’s no surprise, then, that this was the first stumble of the Daniel Craig era—in fact, our readers voted it in dead last place!

Movies

Should the Next James Bond Care About Continuity After Daniel Craig?

By Don Kaye

Movies

007: Ranking the 24 James Bond Villains From Best to Worst

By David Crow

It probably didn’t help that Quantum is one of the few direct sequels in the franchise, meaning that Forster had to contend with the storytelling baggage of the much better Casino Royale. At least you can say Quantum of Solace is the movie that truly established the Craig era’s continuity, with a SPECTRE-like secret organization working against MI6 at every turn, and Bond enduring the heartache of a very bad break up with Vesper Lynd in the last movie. So for a rebound, he and the rebellious Camille Montes (Olga Kurylenko) go to Bolivia. Their mission: stop a coup d’état that could give Quantum a major foothold in South America. What proceeds…isn’t all that fun. – John Saavedra

21. Octopussy (1983)

A clearly aging Roger Moore’s sixth outing as 007 (and second to last) follows the template of its predecessor, 1981’s For Your Eyes Only, with a renewed focus on geopolitical adventure and less reliance on gadgets, effects, and winking humor (although the jokes, when they do come, are more sophomoric and out of place than ever). But whereas Eyes served as a nice palate cleanser for the series, with a straightforward plot and a few offbeat touches, Octopussy is kind of a mess.

While its title is taken from an Ian Fleming short story, the mostly original Octopussy finds 007 drawn into a scheme involving Fabergé eggs, an exiled Afghan smuggler, a rogue Soviet general, and a cult of beautiful women who also run a circus, all tied to a plan to detonate a nuclear warhead on a U.S. airbase in West Germany. As you can tell from that sentence, the story is needlessly, hopelessly complicated, with an endless series of betrayals and switchbacks, the villains don’t make much of an impression either. Nor does Maud Adams in the title role as the leader of the cult; she’s meant to be a newer kind of Bond Girl, but remains ill-defined—as does much of this plodding, uninteresting entry. – DK

20. A View to a Kill (1985)

Roger Moore’s final outing as James Bond went out much like his tenure: strange, inconsistent, but maybe entertaining in a kitschy sort of way. To be sure, A View to a Kill is another one of the franchise’s low points, with Moore being particularly long in the tooth at the age of 58. He more often resembles his leading ladies’ lecherous uncle than he does a tall dark stranger. The overall film likewise suffers from a desperate, out of touch quality. Did anyone really think putting Moore (or his stuntman) on a snowboard while Beach Boys music played would bring in the kids?

Nonetheless, as bad as the movie is, there are bemusing charms, chief among them being the film’s pair of villains, ‘80s yuppie Max Zorin (Christopher Walken) and his henchwoman May Day (Grace Jones). There’s some unconvincing plot tidbits that reveal Walken’s secretly a Russian test tube baby, but that bizarre performance has no nationality. And the jarring contrast of Jones and Moore in bed—where she is totally the dominant—is one for the ages. Throw in a banger Bond song by Duran Duran and some nice character work by Patrick Macnee as Moore’s sidekick who should’ve been in the movie more, and you still have a guilty pleasure. Pity that Barbara Bach declined to cameo, as it might’ve made this a more fitting sendoff for the Moore era. – David Crow

19. Spectre (2015)

After saving the ship from capsizing with Skyfall, director Sam Mendes decided to sink it himself with the extremely convoluted, potentially era-breaking Spectre, a very busy movie that cares more about connecting the Daniel Craig movies into one “cohesive” timeline than its own largely generic spy adventure. Mendes’ attempt to present Ernst Stavro Blofeld as the big bad behind everything from Casino Royale to Skyfall largely falls flat, even if Christoph Waltz puts in a solid performance as the iconic villain. But how much of this is the director and writers’ fault, and how much of it is due to the Broccolis experimenting with the idea of a Bond cinematic universe remains unclear.

Movies

Daniel Craig Doesn’t Think a Woman Should Be James Bond

By David Crow

Movies

Casino Royale and GoldenEye Director on What’s Next for James Bond

By Don Kaye

Either way, it’s all just kind of boring. Even the budding romance between Bond and Madeleine Swann (a cunning Léa Seydoux) doesn’t really work. You can hardly believe Bond has decided to finally leave all this MI6 business behind him for love. And Blofeld’s childhood connection to the Bond family is ludicrous, too. The movie’s plot is ambitious, and completely fails at those ambitions. You’ll need patience for this one, especially if you enjoyed the more standalone Craig offerings, which this movie actively tries to break at every turn. – JS

18. Moonraker (1979)

When The Spy Who Loved Me was released two years before Moonraker, it cemented the actor’s popularity in the role (a first since Sean Connery left the franchise), and established a campy, convivial atmosphere. Looking at that movie’s box office receipts, the now solo Bond producer Cubby Broccoli went “more of this, but also Star Wars.” The result is perhaps the most spectacular misfire in 007’s oeuvre.

With a ridiculous and borderline nonsensical plot contrived solely to create a reason for Moore’s 007 to be sent to space in the third act and participate in laser fights, Moonraker is bombastic and bloated where Spy was amusing and quick-witted. The movie haplessly pinballs between inconsistent tones and styles, like sight gag of returning henchman Jaws (Richard Kiel) doing a double take before going over a waterfall as if he’s he’s Yosemite Sam, and the scene where villain Hugo Drax (Michael Lonsdale) feeds Bond’s latest one night stand to Rottweilers in a particularly brutal chase sequence.

Still, Moore is always affable, and for that matter so is Jaws in the film’s dynamic opening fight scene where the two duel while falling out of a plane. Plus, someone had to invent the trope of a desperate franchise film going into orbit. – DC

17. The Man with the Golden Gun (1974)

Roger Moore and Christopher Lee. James Bond versus Dracula. On paper this should’ve been one of the best 007 films. And for a fleeting moment, as the two performers finally have their duel and Bond stands at 10 paces from Lee’s Scaramanga, it is. Sadly that showdown only takes up a handful of minutes in this otherwise muddled affair.

Still early in Moore’s tenure as Bond, The Man with the Golden Gun finds the actor not yet locked into his interpretation of the role. At times the script even seems to be written for Sean Connery, with Bond displaying a coldness and physicality that seems unnatural to Moore. Otherwise, the movie’s awkward attempts to imitate Bruce Lee films and some rather cruel dumb blonde jokes at Britt Ekland’s expense have aged incredibly poorly. But hey, it paved the way for Hervé Villechaize to be on Fantasy Island. So there’s that. – DC

16. You Only Live Twice (1967)

Sean Connery’s fifth outing as 007 was also his last… until, of course, he made a brief return four years later in Diamonds Are Forever (and again in 1983’s non-canon Never Say Never Again). Unfortunately, the original James Bond doesn’t go out on a high note with this one: Despite its beautiful Japanese locales and the long-awaited face-to-face introduction of supervillain Blofeld (Donald Pleasance), You Only Live Twice (directed by Lewis Gilbert) reaches for epic status but already shows how the Bond franchise was running out of gas after just five years.

Following the bigger adventures and gadgets of Goldfinger and Thunderball, this one aims for the stars, literally, as Bond tries to find out who is snatching American and Soviet spacecraft out of orbit. That leads him to Blofeld and the latter’s massive lair hidden in a volcano, tropes that would be parodied for decades to come.

But You Only Live Twice—the first of many Bond entries to almost completely throw away any connection to the Fleming novel of the same name—has a perfunctory, going-through-the-motions feel and an especially racist, sexist tinge to the proceedings in Japan (even for the 1960s) that bog the movie down. Although it was a box office success, it’s clear that the franchise needed a change. – DK

15. The World Is Not Enough (1999)

The World Is Not Enough is one of the more underrated film in the 007 canon. Yes, it has problems—most notably Denise Richards’ disastrous miscasting as a nuclear scientist, as well as a climactic showdown in a submarine that falls flat. However, here’s the first film on this list that works more often than it doesn’t, and which has some of the best scenes in any Bond film. Most of them involve the film’s true villain, Elektra King (Sophie Marceau).

For the first and only time in a Bond movie, a woman is the big bad. More impressively, she’s able to fool Bond and the audience of her villainy. In this way, the franchise riffs on Bond’s past, including the loss of his wife, to sharp effect. Pierce Brosnan also may never have been better in the role than when he brings his usual levels of extreme suaveness, as well as a steely sadness. All of which culminates with Bond shooting Elektra in cold blood. The action clearly took a little more of his soul, which even M appears to lament.

Movies

The November Man and Pierce Brosnan’s Anti-James Bond Roles

By David Crow

Movies

Can No Time to Die Break the Final James Bond Movie Curse?

By David Crow

Oh yes, this is also the first Bond movie to make Judi Dench’s M a main character. In some ways, her relationship with Brosnan’s 007 is more complex than the mother-son dynamic she cultivated with Daniel Craig, and things never got weirder than her witnessing Bond and Elektra’s passion play. Lastly, the Garbage song and opening sequence are aces. – DC

14. Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)

Pierce Brosnan’s second go in the role of Bond sees the performer both more relaxed and in command of 007’s legacy. The film is typical Eon shenanigans where a supervillain tricks world leaders into a World War III standoff—the UK and China, this time—and it’s sprinkled with similarly boilerplate action sequences. Yet Tomorrow Never Dies has aged pretty darn well since the movie’s main megalomaniac (Jonathan Pryce hamming it up to high heaven) is a blatant caricature of Rupert Murdoch. A Bond movie where 007 takes a media mogul who is triggering an international crisis to juice his cable news network’s ratings, and then feeds this guy to a buzzsaw? So satisfying.

The movie also introduced us to Michelle Yeoh as Wai Lin, who’s still among the most capable “Bond Girls” and really is 007’s equal. She might even be his superior given Yeoh’s natural martial arts talents. (It’s a real shame they didn’t let her or other Hong Kong talent choreograph the fight scenes, however.) The sequence where Bond and Lin fight for control of a motorcycle during a chase, or where Brosnan and Desmond Llewelyn snark during a particularly good Q walk-in, makes this an enjoyable if middling Bond flick. – DC

13. License to Kill (1989)

Timothy Dalton’s second and final outing as a darker, more serious Bond was met with a polarized response from both critics and fans, and remains a dark horse entry in the series. Originally titled Licence Revoked—until the studio learned that typically dumb American test audiences didn’t know what the word “revoked” meant—the movie does indeed find Bond with his licence to kill suspended by M. So he goes instead on a personal mission to avenge the savage mutilation of friend Felix Leiter (David Hedison) and the murder of Leiter’s new wife by a sadistic drug lord (Robert Davi).

It’s nice to see Leiter again (with Hedison encoring in the role after first appearing in Live and Let Die 16 years earlier), and it’s also refreshing to give Bond a more personal motivation this time out. Davi is an effective villain, good old Q (Desmond Llewelyn) gets to spend a lot more time in the field, and the climactic truck chase (staged by director John Glen, still the record-holder with five Bond films on his resume) is one of the series’ best action sequences. Sadly this darker, more violent Bond couldn’t compete with the likes of Batman and Indiana Jones at the box office in 1989, making Licence to Kill the lowest-grossing entry in the series to date—and consigning the Dalton era to the MI6 archives. – DK

12. Thunderball (1965)

When you adjust for inflation, Thunderball gives Skyfall a run for its money as the highest-grossing Bond film ever. It certainly sold the most tickets, coming out at the midpoint of the 1960s and zenith of Bondmania’s global conquest. It’s in that context which allows Thunderball to also be most enjoyable. This is the one which reimagined SPECTRE as a boardroom of baddies sitting in chairs designed to literally fire insubordinate employees; the first film where Bond and the villain swap thinly veiled insults over cards and then the spy steals the fiend’s girl right in front of him; the one where an eyepatch wearing bloke keeps pet sharks in a swimming pool. Bond even uses his jetpack!

That said, other elements have aged far less gracefully. Thunderball is probably the most sexist and misogynistic Bond movie ever produced, which has brought it under fire from even No Time to Die’s director. It’s a problematic film, but even among its dated gender politics, it should be noted henchwoman Fiona Volpe (Luciana Paluzzi) is the first woman in the series to be able to roll her eyes at Bond’s charms and mock his ego, and leading Bond Girl Domino (Claudine Auger) is still one of the series’ best: She uses Bond as much as a disposable toy as he does her. She is also the only woman in the series who kills the villain and saves 007’s bacon. It’s such a good finale it almost makes up for all those dull underwater scuba fights. – DC

11. The Living Daylights (1987)

To this day, some Bond fans would argue that Timothy Dalton didn’t get a fair shake as 007. After just two movies in the late ‘80s, he was down and out, losing his license to kill much earlier than his two major predecessors. But Dalton’s grittier, much darker Bond always faced an uphill battle of building off Roger Moore’s 12-year legacy as the superspy.

All that said, The Living Daylights is a very solid outing for Mr. Bond (and director John Glen’s fourth of five Bond films). 007 once again faces off with his archenemies at the KGB—one of the final 007 films to deal with the Cold War—and in a globetrotting adventure that takes him all over eastern Europe, Morocco, and Afghanistan. And he’s accompanied by Maryam d’Abo’s memorable Kara Milovy, a professional cellist who moonlights as a KGB sniper (sort of). Together, this entertaining duo partake in one of the greatest chase sequences in Bond movie history involving a cello case, a lot of snow, and plenty of bullets. Worth a watch for this scene alone. – JS

10. For Your Eyes Only (1981)

When you think of Roger Moore’s run of Bond films, you likely recall the high camp of cars that turn into submarines and laser guns in space. Which is why, for a while, Moore and Broccoli’s back-to-basics approach in For Your Eyes Only went somewhat overlooked. This decidedly scaled down adventure is the closest Bond came to a real Cold War thriller since From Russia With Love, and the setup is refreshingly simple too: Moore’s Bond is after a missing MacGuffin that the Soviets also want. Both parties then play spy games with local criminal syndicates in scenic Greece and the breathtaking Italian Alps.

Movies

For Your Eyes Only Was Not Supposed to Star Roger Moore

By Don Kaye

Movies

Tenet Is Christopher Nolan’s Unofficial James Bond Movie

By David Crow

The appeal of the movie is how low-key everyone plays it. There are few gadgets, no end-of-the-world stakes, and nothing which looks twee. Even the finale feels like it’s taken out of The Guns of Navarone instead of Return of the Jedi. In fact, the climactic infiltration of a Greek monastery on a high cliff is still a dazzling set-piece, and the resolution of detente between Bond and his KGB counterparts is remarkably graceful. Also Carole Bouquet as Melina, a Greek woman who’s out to avenge the death of her parents while maintaining her perfect flowing black hair, gives the movie just enough dramatic heft to standout in Moore’s run. – DC

9. Live and Let Die (1973)

Roger Moore is no saint in his first Bond outing. This is apparent from the low-key introduction where he’s more interested in hiding a delicate indiscretion with the delightful Miss Caruso (Madeline Smith) than taking an assignment from chief spy M (Bernard Lee). Later Jane Seymour’s spiritual advisor warns, “I know who you are, what you are, and why you have come,” as she peruses the tarot, oblivious to her own sad fate. Bond stacks the deck and seduces the mysticism out of her, robbing the bewitching Bond Girl of her virginity, which gives her the power of precognition. The less venial sins come from cultural appropriation.

This is as mixed a gris gris bag as any you might find at an Oh Cult Voodoo Shop, but it also makes Live and Let Die one of the most memorable of any Bond installments. It’s got snake bite rituals staged by high priest Baron Samedi (Geoffrey Holder), strongarm henchmen fortified with steel, and an archvillain so formidable, he is known throughout the world as Mr. Big (Yaphet Kotto). His plan is to flood cities with free heroin so everyone will get hooked. But the most infectious hooks come from the soundtrack.

The title sequence is by far the best of any James Bond film: sensual, tropical, and brimming with danger. The theme song was written by Paul and Linda McCartney, performed by Wings, and nominated for an Oscar. The score was written by The Beatles’ producer George Martin, and was the first which was not orchestrated by John Barry. B.J. Arnau torches the title song at a nightclub and the end credits. The Olympia Brass Band leads the funeral march, while its trumpeter breaks formation to knife an officially designated onlooker. The many deaths in Live and Let Die are all very creatively executed, but the most fun parts of the film are the simplest of the gadgets. The coffin with the false bottom, the revolving booth at Fillet of Soul, and the magnetic watch. Moore is a fish out of water even before MI6 comes to Harlem. He drops patented 007 double entendre rejoinders without Sean Connery’s knowing wink but gets to play hopscotch with alligators. He would go on to be more comfortable with the part, although not as much fun. – Tony Sokol

8. Dr. No (1962)

The first James Bond movie is still one of the very best of the series. It introduced Sean Connery as the classic version of the British secret agent, and while he got more comfortable in the role in his next several outings, one could argue that he was never better than he is here—suave, brutal, slightly haunted, arrogant, and unrelenting. Almost all the Bond trademarks are established: the humor, the dynamic with boss M (Bernard Lee), the easy sexuality, the incredibly beautiful Bond Girl (Ursula Andress), and the introduction of a self-satisfied, equally arrogant supervillain (Joseph Wiseman in the title role, which would never pass muster today).

The story sends Bond to Jamaica to investigate the death of a fellow agent, only for him to come up against Dr. No. The latter is shooting down American rockets at the behest of SPECTRE, a global criminal organization intent on destabilizing the world and its fragile Cold War balance of power. Largely faithful to Fleming’s novel (which was actually the fifth in his series), Dr. No is almost understated compared to later Bond outings but introduced a hero and a franchise for the ages. – DK

7. Skyfall (2012)

What a home run of a Bond flick. Eschewing the Quantum nonsense from the previous two films, Skyfall hits much closer to home for Bond, Judi Dench’s M (her last time in the role), and the rest of MI6. When a new villain with ties to M threatens the existence of the very agency he swore to protect, an older, more-troubled-than-usual Bond comes out of self-imposed exile to make things right. The result is one of the very best third acts in Bond history, thanks to the wonderful direction of Sam Mendes, who righted the ship for Craig after Marc Forster crashed it into a reef.

Craig puts in a much more complex performance as a Bond who’s been out of the game too long, and Naomie Harris is a very welcome addition as a much more badass Moneypenny (not behind a desk!), but it’s Javier Bardem as cyber-terrorist Raoul Silva who steals this movie. Undoubtedly the best villain of the Craig era, Silva is someone you might even sympathize with (a little) once he reveals his long-buried connection to M. And we learn some huge things about Bond’s past along the way too. This is for sure the one to watch after Casino Royale. – JS

6. On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (1969)

When Sean Connery left the Bond series after 1967’s disappointing You Only Live Twice, it was unclear whether the series could continue with a new face in the role. Not only did the producers come up with a surprising new Bond out of left field in George Lazenby, but he made his debut in what has rightly been reappraised as one of the best films—if not the best—in the entire series. Remarkably faithful to the novel on which it’s based, directed with flair by Peter R. Hunt (a longtime Bond editor making his one and only directorial outing), and portraying Bond in a light we’ve never seen, On Her Majesty’s Secret Service is a classic.

Movies

How Sean Connery’s Singing Voice Helped Him Land James Bond

By David Crow

Games

From Russia With Love’s Game Adaptation Let Sean Connery Be James Bond One Last Time

By Matthew Byrd

While it’s hard to shake off the image of Connery, Lazenby does a much more admirable job that was acknowledged at the time in his sole appearance as 007. He’s less suave, rougher around the edges, and capable of fear and vulnerability, the latter made apparent first in his marriage proposal to romantic foil Tracy di Vicenzo (an excellent Diana Rigg) and then again in the film’s shocking, unforgettable ending. Telly Savalas is the best iteration of Blofeld to date while Hunt stages some of the franchise’s most visceral and exciting action scenes. It’s a damn shame Lazenby bowed out after this. The series might have taken an entirely different course had he stayed. – DK

5. The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)

Roger Moore has his fans and detractors, but it’s impossible to not be smitten with The Spy Who Loved Me. It’s the peak of the outlandish “save the world” Bond movies, and it comes together like a finely strained dessert cocktail. Of course its secret is that despite being about Bond fighting another megalomaniac over some nuclear subs, TSWLM is as much a romantic comedy romp as it is an action flick. Think Ninotchka, but with submarine-cars.

Pivoting on an unlikely romance between British agent 007 and Soviet Maj. Anya Amasova (Barbara Bach), the film follows the pair as they meet cute (she sics men on Bond beneath the Pyramids of Giza), continues as they squabble over a microfilm MacGuffin, and finally sees them get together due to undeniable chemistry. They even have the third act breakup because of a little thing like realizing Bond killed her fiancé in the pre-title sequence. But when that sequence includes the greatest Bond stunt of all-time, with Rick Sylvester skiing off a a real glacier and then surviving by unfurling a Union Jack parachute, such things can be forgiven. After all, nobody does it better.

… And yes, that Carly Simon song is also the best Bond tune. – DC

4. GoldenEye (1995)

“GoldenEye saved James Bond.” This bit of conventional wisdom might be hyperbole, but it’s not far off from the truth either. In 1995, 007 was in a precarious place. The Cold War was over, rosy optimists were declaring “the end of history” in our time, and Bond hadn’t been in a movie since 1989. Worse, the last two films he did appear in were met with a mixed reception by the general public. Pierce Brosnan finally slipped into the tuxedo at a moment where many were opining if Bond was simply obsolete? “A sexist, misogynist dinosaur,” as his new M, Dame Judi Dench, might say.

The film proved all the naysayers wrong. But better than that, Brosnan and director Martin Campbell injected some vital life back in the franchise’s bloodstream. Like several other films near the top of this list, GoldenEye didn’t so much reinvent the formula as refine it with modern style and a fresh perspective. As much a template-setter for a picture perfect 007 adventure in the ‘90s as Goldfinger was to the ‘60s, this film offers a terrific villain in Sean Bean’s 006—Bond’s evil doppelgänger played by a man who could’ve been Bond—a wonderful henchwoman who is also a great Bond Girl via Famke Janssen’s Xenia Onatopp, and the most memorable method of murder this side of Oddjob’s hat. Even the M and Q scenes were crackling, especially because of the introduction of the aforementioned Dench.

Like a finely tailored suit, all the pieces come together for an even more appealing whole. Brosnan wears it well with a slightly wearier and more haunted Bond than we’d previously seen, but one who can still crack a smile while telling double entendres over martinis. When coupled with some of the best set-pieces in the franchise—from a high wire jump off a Swiss dam to Bond driving a tank through the streets of St. Petersberg—we’re left with one of the best action movies of its decade. – DC

3. Casino Royale (2006)

It’s hard to imagine the Bond franchise still thriving today without the commercial and narrative success of 2006’s Casino Royale. As the first hard reboot of the franchise, and the first in Daniel Craig’s tenure as Bond, Casino Royale took viewers back to the relative beginning of James’ career when he was still earning his license to kill and when those kills still meant something. The film replaced camp with understated performance, swagger with sentiment, and fantastical fight scenes with visceral action.

Much of the film’s success is down to the stellar casting. There’s Craig, of course, who imbues Bond with a world-weariness and bitterness that we don’t see nearly as much in the other interpretations. But there’s also Mads Mikkelsen in his English-speaking breakout role as blood-crying villain Le Chiffre, and Jeffrey Wright and Tobias Menzies in memorable supporting roles. Most integral to the film’s success, however, is Eva Green’s Vesper Lynd, who is not only one of the franchise’s best “Bond Girls,” but one of the franchise’s best characters.

On paper Vesper is a classic femme fatale. In execution, she is a complex person in an impossible situation who ultimately outsmarts Bond, even if she doesn’t wholly want to. Because of Vesper, Casino Royale is one of the few Bond films in which James loses—beating Le Chiffre and his boss Mr. White, but losing Vesper, and losing a major piece of his humanity in the process. Until the end, Vesper’s life is autonomous from Bond’s, even after they fall in love, demonstrating an agency rarely given to Bond Girls.

In some ways, it’s ironic that it was a returning Bond director who would properly bring Bond into the 21st century. Martin Campbell had previously directed 1995’s GoldenEye. This was not only Campbell’s second time directing a Bond film; it was also his second time directing a Bond film that was tasked with reinventing the franchise under a new leading man. While GoldenEye successfully did this, Casino Royale did it better. Casino Royale launched Bond into a new pop culture era in a vital way, making Bond relevant not only to longtime Bond fans but to a much broader modern audience. It is not only one of the best Bond films ever; it is one of our best modern action films. – Kayti Burt

2. From Russia With Love (1963)

Following the success of Dr. No, the Bond film series officially got underway with From Russia With Love, one of the rare 007 outings to feature continuity with the previous film while also expanding upon the template established in its predecessor. As with several of the early films, this one was faithful to the Fleming book which it was based on, as SPECTRE, seeking revenge against Bond for the death of Dr. No, creates an elaborate trap for the British agent involving a defector and several assassins.

From Russia With Love is in many ways a definitive Bond adventure, with the film standing right on the edge between Fleming’s grittier books and the more elaborate direction that the cinematic version took. Connery is even more confident and relaxed in the role, while the villains—Lotte Lenya as the vile Rosa Klebb and a young Robert Shaw as the frightening killing machine Red Grant—are two of the series’ best.

The film also introduces Q and his array of gadgets for the first time, makes the first mention of Blofeld, and establishes the pre-credits sequence that is still a part of the Bond template to this date. Whether it’s the all-time best of the series is open for debate, but it certainly has the best fight scene in the franchise between Bond and Shaw’s Red Grant, and the film itself remains right there at the top—with love. – DK

1. Goldfinger (1964)

My favorite scene in Goldfinger is not the one where Gert Fröbe’s titular villain has Bond tied to a table with a laser inching nearer—although who doesn’t love the way Fröbe’s voice rises as he says “No, Mr. Bond I expect you to die”? Nor is it the infamous moment where Bond discovers Shirley Eaton drowned in gold paint. It’s not even the laddish way Sean Connery’s lip curls as he whispers “Pussy” to Honor Blackman.

All of those things are iconic and helped give solid shape to what was previously a fluid definition for Bond and his film series. But for me, the moment where Bond and the franchise became cemented is on a golf course. It’s there that 007 and Auric Goldfinger have made a wager worth one brick of Nazi gold over who wins the next nine holes. Goldfinger of course is a cheat, and has his strongman Oddjob (Harold Sakata) sneak a ball on the green after the boss loses the real thing. But rather than call him on it or beat him despite the crooked handicap, Connery’s Bond just smirks and decides to play a trick on Mr. Goldfinger: He’ll be as dishonest and change balls out again, setting the big guy up to lose his money and his pride—even as both men are keenly aware that they despise each other, and one woman they’ve both romanced in their own broken way has died because of their little games.

It summarizes everything folks love, or love to hate, about Bond: He’s arrogant, reckless, cozy with his enemies, indifferent about his lovers, and just having the goddamn time of his life at every given moment. As per usual, Connery delivers it all with a wolfish grin and internalized chuckle, as if only he’s aware of his inherent superiority.

It’s all laid out in the best Bond movie ever made: The Shirley Bassey theme song that set the standard for every Bond opening titles sequence forever after; the tricked out Aston Martin with an ejector seat; and the wild supervillain plot about irradiating the gold bullion at Fort Knox. Goldfinger sets a perfect table for a perfect Bond movie. And it was on a golf course where Connery’s Bond began to run it. Sixty years on, he’s still winning. – DC

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

The post James Bond Movies Ranked From Worst to Best appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3zO8jnm

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

0 notes

s-leary · 7 years

Text

Fascism Watch, February 9: an entire administration compromised by Russia

(image by Sousa and Sam Machado)

Trump

Travel ban suspension upheld by 9th Circuit, unanimously. The ruling schools Trump on basic points of law.

[T]he Government has taken the position that the President’s decisions about immigration policy, particularly when motivated by national security concerns, are unreviewable, even if those actions potentially contravene constitutional rights and protections. The Government indeed asserts that it violates separation of powers for the judiciary to entertain a constitutional challenge to executive actions such as this one.

There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy. See Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723, 765 (2008) (rejecting the idea that, even by congressional statute, Congress and the Executive could eliminate federal court habeas jurisdiction over enemy combatants, because the “political branches” lack “the power to switch the Constitution on or off at will”). Within our system, it is the role of the judiciary to interpret the law, a duty that will sometimes require the “[r]esolution of litigation challenging the constitutional authority of one of the three branches.” Zivotofsky ex rel. Zivotofsky v. Clinton, 566 U.S. 189, 196 (2012) (quoting INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919, 943 (1983)). We are called upon to perform that duty in this case.

Trump's solicitor general candidate, who would argue the administration's case before the Supreme Court, has dropped out

This morning: Whatever happened to the Trump-Russia story?

This evening: OH HERE IT IS. WaPo has nine sources who say Mike Flynn discussed sanctions with Russian ambassador during the campaign. Flynn has said he didn't. Mike Pence said there had been no contact between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Neither of those assertions is consistent with the fuller account of Flynn’s contacts with Kislyak provided by officials who had access to reports from U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies that routinely monitor the communications of Russian diplomats. Nine current and former officials, who were in senior positions at multiple agencies at the time of the calls, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

(@JasminMuj tweet)

Trump's latest call with Putin went well

When Putin raised the possibility of extending the 2010 treaty, known as New START, Trump paused to ask his aides in an aside what the treaty was, these sources said.

Trump then told Putin the treaty was one of several bad deals negotiated by the Obama administration, saying that New START favored Russia. Trump also talked about his own popularity, the sources said.

Democrat moves to force House debate on Trump’s alleged business conflicts and Russia ties. This is a possible first step toward impeachment.

Kellyanne Conway violated federal ethics law by encouraging people to buy Ivanka Trump's brands

Trump signs three new EOs giving police more authority despite drop in crime, rising violence by police against citizens. British journalists have no problem calling out Trump's hypocrisy.

Remember all those pieces I've posted about how Trump admires Rodrigo Duterte's handling of the war on drugs in the Philippines? HERE WE GO. Trump promises to ramp up the war on drugs in a speech to police chiefs. In other news, Amnesty International says Duterte may have committed crimes against humanity.

Jared Kushner is serving as a shadow State Department.

Kushner, 36, has no traditional foreign policy experience yet has become the primary point of contact for presidents, ministers and ambassadors from more than two dozen countries, helping lay the groundwork for deals. His influence extends throughout the Americas, Europe, the Middle East and the Asia-Pacific region.

Trump administration prepares to execute "vicious" EO on deportations. In addition to last night's deportation of a Phoenix mother, Twitter reports indicate ICE raids in Austin and LA. I'll find better sources tomorrow.

California farmers who voted for Trump fear their field workers will be deported. This happened in Georgia and it was a disaster.

(@SeanMcElwee tweet)

Border agents search WSJ reporter's phone. The WSJ editor is holding a town hall meeting to discuss reporters' frustration over his resistance to portraying Trump negatively.

WH cyber security chief leaves abruptly

(@BraddJaffy tweet, @tedlieu tweet)

Former DNI Clapper says Trump's travel ban is "recruiting tool for extremists"

Congress

Luther Strange to replace Jeff Sessions in the Senate. This allows the Alabama governor to dodge an investigation.

Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley has managed to sideline a key player in the ongoing effort to investigate -- and potentially impeach or prosecute -- him by appointing the state's attorney general to succeed Sen. Jeff Sessions in the US Senate. ... The governor, who denies doing anything illegal, now gets to name Strange's replacement, an opportunity he could use to install an official less interested in pursuing a case against him.

Why did Democrat Joe Manchin vote to confirm Jeff Sessions?

A number of observers noted that Manchin's daughter, Heather Bresch, was chief executive of the pharmaceutical company Mylan when it dramatically hiked the price of EpiPens. The matter is currently being investigated by the Department of Justice, which Sessions will now helm.

Senator Mike Lee says the GOP's ACA replacement plan has to remain secret because it would be unpopular

Senate & House natural resource leaders denounce renewed DAPL construction. Trump, who shut down the White House comment line, says he hasn't had one call about it and doesn't think it was a controversial decision.

Jason Chaffetz had a town hall meeting in his Utah district tonight. He failed to answer questions and left 40 minutes early.

(@andreagrimes tweet)

(@eschor tweet)

(@KyungLahCNN tweet)

Cabinet & Federal Appointees

Unlike most Republicans, Tom Price has a detailed plan to replace the ACA.

Empowering Patients makes the individual market more advantageous for healthier people. It eliminates the essential health benefits package, which mandated that all insurers cover a set of 10 different types of care, including maternity services and pediatric care. Empowering Patients would allow insurers to cut whatever benefits they no longer want to cover — they could stop covering maternity benefits, for example, to make their plans less attractive to women who plan to become pregnant. This would likely benefit healthy people, who generally want less robust coverage at a cheaper price. But it’ll send the cost of more comprehensive plans — the plans sicker people need — skyrocketing. And it could leave someone who wants, say, health insurance to cover her maternity costs completely out of luck.

His confirmation vote has been scheduled for 2a.m. tonight. We see you, Mitch McConnell.

8 reasons Andy Puzder's nomination is a mess

Steve Bannon lost $60 million of Goldman Sachs's money on a World of Warcraft gold farming scheme

#fascism watch #fascism #donald trump #mike pence #mike flynn #jason chaffetz #tom price #andy puzder #steve bannon #kellyanne conway #jared kushner #Rodrigo Duterte #james clapper #mike lee #joe manchin #Luther Strange #jeff sessions #mitch mcconnell

718 notes · View notes

brajeshupadhyay · 4 years

Text

'It's unthinkable': Donald Trump angrily denies report he called fallen US World War I soldiers ‘losers’ and ‘suckers’

Washington: President Donald Trump heatedly denied on Thursday night that he had referred to American soldiers killed in combat during World War I as “losers” and “suckers,” moving quickly to avoid losing support among the military and its allies just two months before an election.

Marching over to reporters under the wing of Air Force One after returning from a campaign rally, a visibly angry Trump rebutted a magazine report that he decided against visiting a cemetery for American soldiers in France in 2018 because he feared the rain would mess up his hair and he did not believe it was important to honor the war dead.

“If people really exist that would have said that, they’re lowlifes and they’re liars,” Trump shouted above the noise of the plane’s engines. “And I would be willing to swear on anything that I never said that about our fallen heroes. There is nobody that respects them more.” He added, “What animal would say such a thing?”

The report in The Atlantic magazine by its editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, attributed the episode to “four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day,” but he did not name them. During a conversation with senior officials that day, according to the magazine, Trump said: “Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.” On the same trip, the article said, he referred to American Marines slain in combat at Belleau Wood as “suckers” for getting killed.

The article also said that Trump’s well-known antipathy for Senator John McCain, R-Ariz. and a Vietnam War hero, was on display after the senator’s death in August 2018. “We’re not going to support that loser’s funeral,” the article quotes Trump telling his staff. He became furious at seeing flags lowered to half-staff. “What the fuck are we doing that for? Guy was a fucking loser,” the president told aides, according to the article.

The report could be problematic for Trump because he is counting on strong support among the military for his reelection bid. He has made his backing for increased military spending, troop pay raises and improved veterans care pillars of his campaign at the same time he boasts of ratcheting down “endless wars” in Afghanistan and Iraq.

But he has also clashed with the military leadership by extending clemency to accused and convicted war criminals, seeking to order active-duty forces into the streets of Washington to crack down on demonstrations and trying to block an effort to change the names of Army bases named for Confederate generals.

A new poll by The Military Times taken before the party conventions last month and released this week showed former vice-president Joe Biden leading Trump, 41 percent to 37 percent, among active-duty troops, a stark departure from the military’s long-standing support for Republicans.

People familiar with Trump’s comments say he has long scorned those who served in Vietnam as being too dumb to have gotten out of it, as he did through a medical diagnosis of bone spurs in his heels. At other times, according to those familiar with the remarks, Trump would marvel at people choosing military service over making money.

Biden, the Democratic presidential nominee, sought on Thursday night to capitalize on the Atlantic article, quickly issuing a statement condemning the president and saying it demonstrated that Trump was not fit for the office. Biden said the article, if true, showed “another marker of how deeply President Trump and I disagree about the role of the president of the United States.”

“I have long said that, as a nation, we have many obligations, but we only have one truly sacred obligation — to prepare and equip those we send into harm’s way, and to care for them and their families, both while they are deployed and after they return home. That’s the foundation of what Jill and I believe,” said Biden, whose late son, Beau Biden, served overseas. “If I have the honor of serving as the next commander in chief, I will ensure that our American heroes know that I will have their back and honor their sacrifice — always.”

Trump’s trip to Paris in November 2018 came at a tense moment for him. Republicans had just lost the House in midterm elections when he flew to France to attend a ceremony marking the 100th anniversary of the end of World War I.

During the trip, he was angered when President Emmanuel Macron of France seemed to rebuke Trump by saying in a speech that “nationalism is a betrayal of patriotism by saying: ‘Our interest first. Who cares about the others?’”

But it was Trump’s failure to go through with a planned visit to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery at the foot of the hill where the Battle of Belleau Wood was fought that drew the most attention.

Aides at the time cited the rain in canceling a helicopter flight, but the president’s absence went over badly in Europe and in the United States. Trump did pay respects to the war dead the next day at the Suresnes American Cemetery outside Paris.

At the time of the visit to France, advisers were blunt in confiding that Trump was in a foul mood and was quizzing aides about whether he should replace John Kelly, a retired four-star Marine general and his White House chief of staff at the time.

Several White House officials at the time said the decision that Trump would not take Marine One to the Belleau Wood cemetery was made by Zachary Fuentes, a deputy White House chief of staff and close aide to Kelly, without consulting the president’s military aide.

Others argued that a motorcade trip by road would have taken too long, at roughly two hours. Administration officials said at the time that Fuentes had assured Trump it was fine to miss the visit. Kelly traveled to the cemetery himself in the president’s place along with General Joseph Dunford, then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Trump insisted on Thursday that it was the weather, not disrespect, that forced the visit to be scrapped. “It was raining about as hard as I’ve ever seen,” he said. “And on top of that, it was very, very foggy. And the helicopter was unable to fly.”

To go by ground, he added, the motorcade would have had to wind its way through congested areas of Paris for more than two hours. “The Secret Service told me, ‘You can’t do it,’” he said. “I said, ‘I have to do it. I want to be there.’ They said, ‘You can’t do it.’”

A half-dozen current and former aides to Trump backed him up with Twitter messages disputing The Atlantic article. “I was actually there and one of the people part of the discussion — this never happened,” wrote Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who was then the White House press secretary. “This is not even close to being factually accurate,” added Jordan Karem, the president’s personal aide at the time.

The reported comments about McCain, though, were consistent with Trump’s publicly expressed view of the senator. In 2015, while seeking the Republican nomination over McCain’s opposition, Trump famously mocked the senator’s military service and 5 1/2 years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, “He’s not a war hero,” Trump said. “He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.”

McCain remained a thorn in Trump’s side after he won the presidency, blocking an effort to overturn President Barack Obama’s health care programme, a vote Trump never forgave and still speaks about with bitterness. When McCain died, aides said at the time, the president had to be shamed into lowering the flags and he was not invited to the funeral.

But speaking with reporters Thursday night, Trump insisted that he respected McCain even though they disagreed.

“I was never a fan. I will admit that openly,” Trump said. But “we lowered the flags. I had to approve that, nobody else, I had to approve it. When you think — just thinking back, I had to approve either Air Force One or a military plane to go to Arizona to pick up his casket. And I approved it immediately. I had to approve the funeral because he had a first-class, triple-A funeral. It lasted for nine days, by the way. I had to approve it. All of that had to be approved by the president. I approved it without hesitation, without complaint.”

He seemed to suggest that The Atlantic’s article came from several former aides that he had in mind. “Probably it’s a couple of people that have been failures in the administration that I got rid of,” he said. “I couldn’t get rid of them fast enough. Or it was just made up. But it’s unthinkable.”

Peter Baker and Maggie Haberman c.2020 The New York Times Company

via Blogger https://ift.tt/3i0em02

#Blogger #followme instagood art friends beautiful prilaga like4like likeforlike fashion na

0 notes

mastcomm · 4 years

Text

Your Tuesday Briefing – The New York Times

Coronavirus’s toll includes economies

China on Tuesday reported 72,436 total cases of coronavirus infections, while the death toll now stands at 1,868. Here are the latest updates and maps of where the virus has spread.

In Europe, where wealthy Chinese tourists have become mainstays of hotels, shops and cultural destinations, the outbreak has dealt a blow to businesses after Beijing banned overseas group tours and many countries restricted or barred entry to people from China.

Flight and hotel bookings have been canceled over fears of the virus, and there has also been a drop in tourists from other nations who want to avoid crowded spaces. Apple cut its sales forecast Monday, as both production and demand for its products have been slowed in China because of the outbreak.

The latest: Australia, South Korea and other countries are preparing to evacuate their citizens from the cruise ship Diamond Princess, which has been quarantined in Japan for almost two weeks. Fourteen evacuated Americans were found to have the virus shortly before they boarded chartered flights to the U.S.

Political fallout over floods in Britain

Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain came under fire after his office said on Monday that he had no plans to visit areas with severe flooding after a storm that battered the country over the weekend.

Storm Dennis, classified as a “weather bomb” by the national weather service, slammed areas that were still recovering from heavy rains and strong winds brought by another storm last week. At least one person has died, while hundreds of others have been forced to leave their homes.

The response: Despite more rain predicted on Wednesday, Mr. Johnson has not called a meeting of the government’s emergencies committee to discuss the situation.

Background: Britain is experiencing more frequent and serious flooding because of global warming, experts say. Mohammad Heidarzadeh, a coastal engineering academic, said floods that were once seen every 15 to 20 years are now occurring every two to five years and that the country’s flood defense systems are “not fit to address the current climate situation.”

Another angle: The pressure is piling up on Mr. Johnson after his office appointed an aide who once said black people have lower I.Q.s than white people. The adviser, Andrew Sabisky, quit on Monday after the ensuing uproar, complaining of “media hysteria.”

U.S. efforts to thwart Huawei in Europe fall short

Germany appears poised to follow Britain in allowing Huawei, the Chinese tech giant, to build next-generation 5G networks, despite warnings from the United States.

U.S. officials have lobbied their allies to ban the company out of fear that its equipment could be used by China to spy on or control European and American communication networks. But as those countries are forced to choose between the U.S., a key intelligence ally, and China, a critical trading partner, some like Britain have taken the risk and cooperated with Huawei.

Context: The Huawei issue is part of a broader fight between the U.S. and China as they vie to dominate advanced technologies. The U.S. is now shifting its approach by looking to cut off Huawei from access to American technology and trying to build a credible competitor — but its officials have often contradicted each other’s ideas.

Quote of note: “Many of us in Europe agree that there are significant dangers with Huawei, and the U.S. for at least a year has been telling us, do not use Huawei. Are you offering an alternative?” asked Toomas Hendrik Ilves, Estonia’s former president. “What is it that we should do other than not use Huawei?”

How China tracked Xinjiang detainees

Going on religious pilgrimages, praying, attending funerals, wearing a beard, having too many children.

These are all acts, among other signs of piety, that would have been flagged by the Chinese government and warranted monitoring or even detention for Uighurs living in the western Xinjiang region, according to a leaked government document that was shared with several news media organizations, including The Times.

The document, one of numerous files kept on more than one million people who have been detained, illuminates another piece of the Chinese government’s coercive crackdown on ethnic minorities and what Beijing considers to be wayward thinking.

Follow-up: Three-fourths of the detainees listed have been released, according to an expert who studied the document. But it also shows that many of those released were later assigned work in tightly controlled industrial parks.

If you have 5 minutes, this is worth it

Too much of a cute thing?

Adorable characters like Hello Kitty are used to sell everything in Japan, and fading towns have long used mascots to lure visitors and investment. Above, Sanomaru, a dog with a ramen bowl on its head, represents the city of Sano.

But as their tax bases dwindle along with their populations, communities are increasingly questioning whether the whimsy is worth the expense.

Here’s what else is happening

Libya arms: The European Union said it would launch a naval and air mission to stop arms from reaching Libya, currently embroiled in civil war. Austria and Hungary had initially objected out of concern that ships could enable more migrants to reach Europe.

Burkina Faso shooting: A gunman attacked a church during Sunday Mass and killed at least 24 people in the country’s northwest, security sources said. It was not immediately clear who was responsible, but jihadist groups have been seeking control over rural areas of the country.

Caroline Flack: Fans of the “Love Island” host, who died by suicide over the weekend, are calling for a new law to stop British tabloids from publishing articles that reveal “private information that is detrimental to a celebrity, their mental health and those around them.”

Snapshot: Above, Michael Bloomberg on the campaign trail. He has risen in the polls after entering the race for the U.S. Democratic presidential candidacy, raising the pressure on political reporters employed by his news media outlet.

Artificial intelligence: Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief executive, met with European Union officials on Monday as the E.U. prepares to release a draft of an artificial intelligence policy. That will have important consequences for tech giants like Apple, Facebook and Google.

What we’re reading: This collection of letters. “British newspapers’ letters pages are a peculiar sort of joy,” writes Peter Robins, an editor in our London newsroom. “Recently, readers of The Guardian have been debating how old you have to be before it’s eccentric to keep boiling up your annual 18-pound batch of homemade marmalade. Bidding started at 77 and has escalated rapidly.”

Now, a break from the news

Cook: Cheesy baked pasta with sausage and ricotta is faster to make than lasagna. (Our Five Weeknight Dishes newsletter has more recommendations.)

Read: “Apeirogon,” the latest novel from Colum McCann, delves into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through the eyes of two grieving fathers. “I think people wouldn’t have trusted it as much if it wasn’t real,” he said.

Watch: It may feel as if Zoë Kravitz has always been famous, but you can now watch her in her first lead role, as the heartbroken Rob in Hulu’s TV adaptation of “High Fidelity.” She spoke with our reporter about her acting and her life.

Smarter Living: We collected a few items that will help you make the most of an off-season getaway.

And now for the Back Story on …

Somalia’s future

Abdi Latif Dahir is The Times’s East Africa correspondent. A Kenyan of Somali descent, he reports in and about some dozen countries. We reached him in Nairobi, to talk about his latest story, about the young Somalis who are filling in the gaps their government can’t.

This is such a powerful story of resilience and hope. How did you find it?

Late last year, there was a big attack in Mogadishu, the worst by Al Shabab in two years. And one thing stood out. Almost all the news stories mentioned that a lot of university students had died, young people who wanted to be doctors or were studying other specialties that would help the country.

On Jan. 1, I flew to Mogadishu, to follow up on the attack and to write about these students and what they mean to Somalia.

My first story was about that, but also on how things had been getting so much better in Mogadishu — and it was all these young people doing it.

What else inspired you?

I went to this crisis center. They were collecting the names of the victims and reaching out to their families. I wanted to sit amongst them and see what it was like. They were checking in, asking the families, how are you today?

And maybe they’d hear that the hospital bill had been paid so that was OK, but the family hadn’t eaten breakfast that day. So they would corral someone to get food over to them.

I wanted to write about the chutzpah to invent these systems, to stay strong with all that was happening.

People could rattle off all these names of people they’ve known who’ve been killed. But then they would say, we want to stay here and be the ones to fix this country. They’re creating tech hubs, and restaurants and delivery services that are thriving. Because of the attacks on hotels and restaurants, it’s safer to stay home, have friends over and order a meal.

How is it being the East Africa correspondent?

I’ve had the job since November. It’s incredible. This is a dynamic, evolving region that’s changing socially, geopolitically, economically. It’s a great place to be a journalist. Honestly, you could write a story every hour.

That’s it for this briefing. See you next time.

— Sofia

Thank you To Mark Josephson and Eleanor Stanford for the break from the news. Andrea Kannapell, the briefings editor, wrote today’s Back Story. You can reach the team at [email protected].

P.S. • “The Daily” was off for the U.S. Presidents’ Day holiday. But try our “Modern Love” podcast. This week’s is titled “When Cupid Is a Prying Journalist.” • Here’s today’s Mini Crossword puzzle, and a clue: Sound made with two fingers (four letters). You can find all our puzzles here. • Last week, we told you that our Visual Investigations team would be answering reader questions. Here’s the YouTube video of them doing just that.

from WordPress https://mastcomm.com/event/your-tuesday-briefing-the-new-york-times-19/

#Event

0 notes

thisdaynews · 5 years

Text

F-Bombs Away!

New Post has been published on https://thebiafrastar.com/f-bombs-away/

F-Bombs Away!

The surprise attack on Hawaii came on a quiet Sunday morning, and it fell to the president of the United States to rally a confused and stricken nation one day later in a momentous address to Congress:

“Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941—a date which will live as totally fucked up—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the naval and air forces of Japan.”

Story Continued Below

That’s the power of language at work. And who can forget the image of an American commander in chief in Berlin on the front lines of the Cold War: “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this fucking wall.”

Let’s be mature about this. Franklin D. Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan both surely dropped a choice word or two in private, even on solemn subjects like Pearl Harbor and Soviet tyranny. Democrat Beto O’Rourke, meanwhile, has not actually signaled that he will make the F-bomb a central part of his rhetorical arsenal in the unlikely event he becomes the next president.

He is, however, apparently hoping that vulgarity will be an engine of his political revival in the Democratic presidential contest. In doing so, he is part of a confluence of factors serving to mainstream what once counted as the most forbidden entry in the roster of four-letter words.

Notice to reader: The examples above are just two of 14 profanities in this story. Editors decided to skip the coy dashes and asterisks and more straightforward [expletive deleteds]. How else to handle it when a candidate for president infuses a policy statement after a horrific mass shooting with the phrase, “This is fucked up”?

On social media and in interviews, O’Rourke’s profanity has proved to be something of a political Rorschach test.

Pro: He has found a searing and even eloquent way of cutting through the madness and violence of the age. The real obscenity, by these lights, is routine mass shootings and the paralytic response they engender from the governing class, to which O’Rourke’s incredulity is a powerfully authentic rejoinder.

Con: O’Rourke’s profanity is risible, a perfect summary of a campaign that even before was mocked for its alleged preening and Wayne’s World affect. Even if the first time he dropped the F-bomb came as a genuine outburst, his repetition on Twitter and now official campaign T-shirts reveals calculation and contrivance—making his vulgarities the opposite of the authenticity they supposedly convey.

Either way, the Texan’s coarse language is a frivolous dimension of a serious question for Democrats: Should progressive leaders confront the rawness and norm-shattering nature of President Donald Trump’s political style with something similar? Or should they stand for a return to standards that used to be assumed for any presidential contender—including language reflecting the gravity of the office, or at a minimum was G-rated?

Before O’Rourke, the public figure who arguably was most notorious for his prolific use of the F-word was Rahm Emanuel, who kept the salty parlance of a political operative even as he became a member of Congress, White House chief of staff, and mayor of Chicago.

Emanuel, who calls himself “a reformed swearer,” acknowledged in an interview, “I’ve got this notorious reputation and I’m not saying that I don’t swear but you’ve never heard me publicly swear. … I actually don’t think it’s the right thing to do.”

“I think people are being exhausted by vulgarity and I think [the candidates] should be engaging people on the future” through the power of ideas, Emanuel explained.

But some other Obama White House veterans were more tolerant of O’Rourke’s rhetorical excesses.

“It’s good for him to show a little emotion and get angry so that people can see exactly where he stands and that he will fight for what he believes in,” said Stephanie Cutter, Obama’s former 2012 deputy campaign manager and cofounder of Precision Strategies.

“Most candidates do talk like this and they talk like this to their teams and at the bar with reporters, and they get credit for being real people and not engaged in some veneer,” said former Obama press operative Ben LaBolt. “Beto has used it to demonstrate outrage about some really outrageous issues that the United States should have been able to solve many years ago, and so his approach would distinguish himself from somebody who would serve in the Senate and say ‘my dear friend’ and ‘my dear colleague.’”

By so frequently crossing a line that once might have been career-ending, O’Rourke is partly changing the political culture, and partly reflecting changes that are already underway.

As far back as September 2014, Trump tweeted: “Every time I speak of the haters and losers I do so with great love and affection. They can not help the fact that they were born fucked up!” More recently, in late March of this year, Trump told a campaign rally that Democrats should stop “defrauding the public with ridiculous bullshit.”

In June 2017, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who recently ended her presidential campaign, tried to stir a conference on technology and democracy by imploring, “If we are not helping people, we should go the fuck home.”

At the start of the year, newly elected Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib made a splash by saying of Trump, “We’re gonna impeach the motherfucker.”

Another newly elected member of Congress, Abigail Spanberger of Virginia, was recently quoted by The Cut noting the annoyance of being asked as a female candidate about her “self-care” on the campaign trail: “I’m like, ��I don’t have fucking self-care! I’m running for Congress.’”

But O’Rourke is the one who has made the word his signature. After making his Texas Senate race surprisingly competitive, before narrowly losing, in 2018, O’Rourke went viral with his concession speech in which he praised supporters, “I’m so fucking proud of you guys.”

When he began his bid for president, O’Rourke was scolded at a campaign stop by a voter who urged him to “clean up his act” and not use profanity in ways were children will hear it. “Point taken, and very strongly made,” O’Rourke replied, promising to “keep it clean.”

But last month, meeting with reporters after the mass shooting in his hometown of El Paso, O’Rourke seemed impatient with what he regarded as the naivete of some questions about Trump’s role in inciting violence. “Members of the press, what the fuck?!” he exclaimed.

There are two facts about the F-word that most people learn early in their teenage years: The reaction it gets depends on context, and its shock value tends to diminish rapidly. O’Rourke’s initial uses of the word did seem a little like a young person at a family dinner:Wonder how the table will respond?

On balance, O’Rourke seems pleased with the reaction, at least among the people he cares most about. After new shootings in Texas, he went on CNN last Sunday morning to say: “We’re averaging about 300 mass shootings a year. No other country comes close. So, yes, this is fucked up.” He also defended his swearing by saying that it was “just honest” and important “to shock the conscience of this country.”

O’Rourke’s campaign also noted that all of the proceeds for his profane T-shirt go to March for Our Lives and Moms Demand.

Brit Hume, the prominent Fox News journalist, commented on Twitter, “As if his sewermouth will somehow give his argument more power.”

But Matt Bennett, a Democratic strategist unaffiliated with any presidential campaign and long-time gun control advocate, believes O’Rourke was rightly trying to shake people and signal that conventional politics isn’t adequate in the context of recurring mass murders.

“I think he’s decided that profanity can help him add emphasis where other language fails,” said Bennett. “Indeed, how else does one underscore their anger with, frustration at, and contempt for public officials who fail to act in the face of such horror? We all have been railing about this for years (decades in my case). How else do we signal that this situation is singularly obscene?”

George Lakoff, a retired Berkeley linguist who has written extensively on how Democrats sometimes lose political arguments by not effectively employing the power of language, was uncertain on the wisdom of O’Rourke’s shattering of old proprieties. “It’s basically saying: This is really important. Pay attention.”

O’Rourke may have grabbed attention, but it’s not clear how long he will keep it, at least based on the power of profanity. Forty-five years ago, the country was shocked by the prodigious use of Oval Office profanity—often as part of contemptuous and vindictive rants against opponents—by Richard Nixon and his aides when the White House tapes were released. The news media, reflecting the standards of the time, didn’t print the words but replaced them with “[expletive deleted].” Anticipating Tlaib by several decades, protesters outside the White House gates carried placards saying “Impeach the expletive deleted!”

But a generation that currently has made a star of Lana Del Ray and her album “Norman Fucking Rockwell” with its hit song “Fuck It, I Love you” isn’t likely to stay shocked, or perhaps even interested, for very long by O’Rourke’s language.

Back in 2004, when then-Vice President Dick Cheney told Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy to “Go fuck yourself” on the floor of the Senate, many news organizations debated internally about how to report the obviously newsworthy exchange—since it involved words that were forbidden by their editorial standards.

Those qualms seem irrelevant in the current climate.

Veteran reporter Nicholas Lemann, a former dean of Columbia University’s school of journalism, said these days, as politics grows more openly coarse, the news media should have no compunction about just reporting exactly what public figures say. The old notion of news organizations as a kind of unifying public square, in which editors had to primly enforce rules to ensure that the most sensitive people in the audience weren’t offended, has gone by the wayside now that every online reader is essentially his or her own editor.

“If they said it, you should quote it,” Lemann advises.

Another journalist, James Fallows, also served as a stint as a speechwriter for Jimmy Carter, who he recalled sometimes swore in private but very rarely.

He sees O’Rourke’s language as a sign of the times.

“As an old guy,” said Fallows, who last month turned 70, “I’ll avoid any decline in civilization, but I guess until recently public figures felt that they had to observe a public-private barrier. … Politicians have always been earthy people, but we are seeing the time, at least for the moment, the earthiness membrane is being pierced or is permeable.”

#F-Bombs #Foreign #Politics

0 notes

gyrlversion · 5 years

Text

Boris Johnsons chaotic path to power finally pays off

LONDON (AP) — Boris Johnson aspires to be a modern-day Winston Churchill. Critics fear he’s a British Donald Trump.

Johnson won the contest to lead the governing Conservative Party on Tuesday, and is set to become Britain’s prime minister on Wednesday.

Like revered World War II leader Churchill, Johnson aims to turn a national crisis — in this case Brexit — into a triumph. Like Trump, he gained his country’s top political office by deploying celebrity, clowning, provocation and a loose relationship with the truth.

“He’s a different kind of a guy, but they say I’m a different kind of a guy, too,” Trump said approvingly last week. “We get along well.”

Maintaining strong relations with the volatile Trump will be one of the new leader’s major challenges. So will negotiating Britain’s stalled exit from the European Union, the conundrum that brought down predecessor Theresa May.

It’s hard to say whether he will rise to the occasion or fail dismally.

Blond, buoyant and buffoonish, the 55-year-old Johnson may be one of Britain’s most famous politicians, but in many ways he is a mystery.

His beliefs? Johnson is now a strong believer of Brexit, but he famously agonized over the decision, writing two newspaper columns — one in favor of quitting the EU , one against — before throwing himself behind the “leave” campaign in Britain’s 2016 referendum over whether it should remain in the bloc.

His plan for Brexit? Johnson says he will lead Britain out of the EU on the scheduled date of Oct. 31, with or without a divorce deal. He says Britain should prepare intensely for leaving without an agreement, but insists the chances of it happening are “a million-to-one against.”

Then again, he also once said he had as much chance of becoming Britain’s prime minister as of finding Elvis on Mars.

Johnson statements are best taken with a grain of salt, it seems.

Historian Max Hastings, Johnson’s former boss at the Daily Telegraph newspaper, has called him “a man of remarkable gifts, flawed by an absence of conscience, principle or scruple.”

Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson was born in New York in 1964, the eldest child of a close-knit, extroverted and fiercely competitive upper middle-class British family. His forebears include Turkish journalist and government minister Ali Kemal, one of Johnson’s great-grandfathers. His sister Rachel has said Johnson’s childhood ambition was to be “world king.”

Johnson attended elite boarding school Eton College, where he began to use his middle name, Boris — his family called him Al — and cultivated the still-familiar image of a quick-witted, slightly shambolic entertainer able to succeed without visibly trying very hard.

At Oxford University, he was president of the Oxford Union debating society, and a member of the Bullingdon Club, a raucous drinking-and-dining society notorious for drunken vandalism.

After university, Johnson became a journalist. He survived being fired from The Times newspaper for making up a quote to become Brussels correspondent for the Daily Telegraph. He specialized in exaggerated yarns about the EU’s dastardly plans to truss Britain in red tape. The Brussels officials who now have to deal with Prime Minister Johnson have not forgotten his role in demonizing the EU.

Johnson biographer Sonia Purnell, who worked with him at the Telegraph, said he had “a talent for self-promotion and an obsession with power that marked him out.”

Then came a stint as editor of conservative-leaning news-magazine The Spectator, frequent television appearances and, simultaneously, election as a member of Parliament.

Stumbles and setbacks were frequent, but quickly overcome. In the 1990s, Johnson shrugged off a leaked recording in which he promised to give a friend, Darius Guppy, the name of a journalist that Guppy wanted beaten up. Later he was fired from a senior Conservative post for lying about an extramarital affair.

He bounced back, just as he has done when called out for offensive words and phrases. Johnson has called Papua New Guineans cannibals, claimed that “part-Kenyan” Barack Obama had an ancestral dislike of Britain and last year compared Muslim women who wear face-covering veils to “letter boxes.” Johnson has dismissed such comments as jokes or plain-speaking, or accused journalists of distorting his words.

In 2008, he was elected mayor of London, becoming a cheerful global ambassador for the city — an image exemplified when he got stuck on a zip wire during the 2012 London Olympics, waving Union Jacks as he dangled in mid-air.

Critics blasted his backing for vanity projects including a little-used cable car, an unrealized “Boris Island” airport and a never-built “garden bridge” over the River Thames.

In 2016, his energy, and popularity — and, critics say, mendacity — played a key role in the EU referendum campaign. Opponents have never forgiven him for the claim that Britain sends the EU 350 million pounds ($440 million) a week, money that could instead be spent on the U.K.’s health service. It was untrue — Britain’s net contribution was about half that much.

After the country’s surprise vote to leave toppled Prime Minister David Cameron, Johnson looked set to succeed him. But he dropped out of the race after a key ally, Michael Gove, decided to run against him.

May won the contest and made Johnson foreign secretary. His two years in the job were studded with missteps. He was recorded saying that a violence-torn Libyan city could become a tourism hub once authorities “clear the dead bodies away,” and worsened the plight of a British-Iranian woman detained in Tehran by repeating an incorrect Iranian allegation that she was a journalist.

In July 2018, Johnson quit the government over his opposition to May’s Brexit blueprint, and became Britain’s Brexiteer-in-chief, arguing that leaving the EU would be easy if the country just showed more “can-do spirit.”

Many Conservative Party members have chosen to believe him. They see Johnson as a politician who can deliver Brexit, win over floating voters and defeat rival parties on both the left and the right.

Critics say he is a Trump-like populist, who uses phrases — like the “letter boxes” slight — designed to push buttons among bigoted supporters.

A recent documentary about former Trump adviser Steve Bannon shows Bannon saying he had spoken and texted with Johnson about a key speech, though Johnson denies Bannon gave him campaign advice.

In policies and style, Trump and Johnson have plenty of differences. Johnson’s championing of “global Britain” contrasts with Trump’s “America First” stance, and the British leader is self-deprecating where Trump is bombastic.

But, like Trump, Johnson is loved by supporters for what they regard as his authenticity — whether or not it is genuine. They forgive his missteps and his messy personal life.

Johnson and his second wife, Marina Wheeler, announced in September they were splitting up after 25 years of marriage that produced four children. Johnson has fathered at least one other child outside his marriages.

Last month police were called to a noisy argument between Johnson and his new partner, Carrie Symonds, at their London home. The fracas dominated headlines for days, but failed to dent his campaign.

This week Johnson is due to achieve the dream of a lifetime by moving in to 10 Downing St. Observers warn that it may be a shock.

“Working a crowd is very different from working a government,” historian Peter Hennessy told the BBC. “He’s a remarkable attack journalist, he’s a kind of written version of a shock jock, I’ve always thought. And you can’t govern that way.”

___

Follow AP’s full coverage of Brexit at: https://www.apnews.com/Brexit

The post Boris Johnsons chaotic path to power finally pays off appeared first on Gyrlversion.

from WordPress http://www.gyrlversion.net/boris-johnsons-chaotic-path-to-power-finally-pays-off/

#Uncategorized

0 notes

realselfblog · 5 years

Text

Patients, Health Consumers, People, Citizens: Who Are We In America?

“Patients as Consumers” is the theme of the Health Affairs issue for March 2019. Research published in this trustworthy health policy publication covers a wide range of perspectives, including the promise of patients’ engagement with data to drive health outcomes, citizen science and participatory research where patients crowdsource cures, the results of financial incentives in value-based plans to drive health care “shopping” and decision making, and ultimately, whether the concept of patients-as-consumers is useful or even appropriate.

Health care consumerism is a central focus in my work, and so it’s no surprise that I’ve consumed every bit of this publication. [In full disclosure, last year when this issue was being curated, I was part of a team that proposed to submit an article for the publication, but our submission was not accepted].

I will weave findings from four of the papers in this post, for purposes of getting to the question I ask in the title above: what is the right noun to use for U.S. patients in 2019 — patients, consumers, people, health citizens?

The paper that asserts “no” to the question comes from Michael Gusmano, Karen Maschke, and Mildred Solomon, all associated with the Hastings Center which does research into bioethics. The authors note that “consumer-driven” health care is, “associated with neoliberal efforts to emphasize market factors in health reform,” de-emphasizing government regulation and financing. This concept can be potentially harmful, they believe, assuming that health care is a traditional market. “A consumer metaphor places disproportionate burdens on patients to reduce health care costs,” they posit, placing the burden of cost containment on patients. While price transparency is a sound concept, it’s not a panacea, the authors contend. “Patient-centered” approaches are constructive because they bring patients’ values into clinical care. Asking consumers to shop for services and be “prudent purchasers” of services? That’s too great a burden to put on patients, which could pressure clinicians to make unsound treatment decisions.

Now consider what happens when consumers (the noun chosen by the authors of the second paper I’m adding to the mix) access data, information and tools for self-management in health care. Karandeep Singh of the University of Michigan (GO BLUE! my alma mater) and colleagues track the growth of consumer-facing digital health tools and initiatives leading to consumers’ engagement with websites and apps. The article plots a brief history of the HITECH Act which fostered EHR adoption among clinicians and hospitals, the Blue Button program at the Veterans Health Administration enabling patients’ access to health data, OpenNotes, patient-generated data through wearable tech and smartphone apps, and consumer-grade medical devices like the AliveCor ECG and KardiaBand accessory for the Apple Watch. Singh et. al. point to limitations of consumers’ universal embrace and sustained use of these digital health tools, including low adoption of patient portals (especially among younger people, members of minority groups, healthy people, and those with less education), patient-generated data lack of interoperability with electronic health records, search engine over-dependence (that is, when “paging Dr. Google” yields sub-optimal results for the patient to act on), and lack of transparent and useful, high-quality data online. The authors call for improved regulation from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the U.S. agency responsible for monitoring claims and the use of personal data out-of-health-context.

Article #3 in my deep dive here extends the second analysis into digital health information, next focusing on Americans’ use of quality information on doctors. Mark Schlesinger of Yale partnered with seven other researchers from RAND and other organizations to explain the history of clinician quality information (“report cards,” patient experience surveys and clinical quality metrics, among the different types of information available to consumers) and results of surveys assessing the impact of this information on a consumer’s choice of physician. The research found that peoples’ exposure to clinician quality information doubled between 2010 and 2015, and more consumers sought quality metrics — albeit, with differences across sub-groups of people (e.g., racial and ethnic minority consumers were better informed that whites over time, and people with more education also saw more of the quality information). The good news: that Americans have become more aware of information comparing clinician quality, and more often seek that information than they have in the past — especially other patients’ comments about doctors. The authors warn, though, that consumers may tend to over-trust and -use that patient-reported information more than some of the objective clinician quality and safety metrics. Furthermore, the difference in information seeking between more educated Americans versus less could exacerbate health disparities and the inequities of health literacy.

Finally, to the fourth paper, looking at the roles of assisters and automated decision support tools in consumers’ health insurance marketplace choices. This study assessed consumers’ search for health insurance marketplace plans extended through the Affordable Care Act, analyzing the experience of 32 “assisters,” trained professionals who help consumers navigate their choice of plans. These people included the official “navigators” conceived and funded by the ACA, certified application counselors, and other people who help consumers identify health insurance plans on the marketplaces. For context, the authors note that over 5,000 marketplace assister programs provided outreach and enrollment to consumers in the third open enrollment period 2015-16. Additional context here is that President Trump cut funding for navigators in federally facilitated marketplaces by over 80%, documented here in a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation. The bottom line of this fourth paper is that consumers need support to understand their health plan choices, but resourcing that support is costly and politically controversial in the current political environment.

Taken together, these four papers from Health Affairs lead to the following themes:

By 2019, patients in the U.S. have been compelled, by both the structure of the ACA marketplaces and the evolving consumer-directed health plan designs adopted by commercial plans and employers. to take on aspects of consumer behavior relative to personal health care choices — related to both health insurance and financing, along with clinician decisions.

Not all patients are willing to or in the moment able to exercise these consumer muscles, whether due to health literacy and education differences, access to digital health tools (including broadband connectivity), or simply lower willingness to engage.

Even when willing and fully armed with digital health tools and information access, being a “health care consumer” can lead people to make sub-optimal decisions for themselves, and potentially find their clinicians in compromised roles when making therapeutic treatment choices.

As Alan Weil summarized in the March 2019 Health Affairs Editor-in-Chief introduction, there are “ups and downs of expecting patients to act as consumers.”

Health Populi’s Hot Points: We can find discussions about health care consumerism in every major health care journal, and the popular press, as well. Just two weeks ago, I read the cover story, “It’s still the prices, stupid,” shown here from the cover of Modern Healthcare dated 25 February 2019.

In the article to which this assertion ties, Harris Meyer talks about the growing push for price regulation in the U.S. — most visibly for prescription drugs, and increasingly for other line items in the medical bill like nursing home care, hospital care, and physician services.

Sixteen pages after the start of the price regulation article in Modern Healthcare, you’ll find another story on hospitals looking for ways to address social needs: housing, transportation, and healthy food access among them. I’ve argued that, instead of allocating over 18% of U.S. GDP to medical care spending, America should reallocate some of these dollars to SDoH. Just today, the New York Times featured an in-depth article on the poor air quality in Pittsburgh, one of the key influences on human health that can be at least as bad for a population as smoking a pack of cigarettes a day — with subsequent negative health and financial impacts on the individual and community.

While our health care trade press re-iterates Uwe Reinhardt’s and Gerard Anderson’s observation that, “It’s the prices, stupid” from back in 2003, closer to peoples’ homes and real lives, Consumer Reports and TIME magazine also try and support Americans’ health consumer muscle/brain) development and ethos.

Here in my curated selection of CR covers, you’ll find research into prescription drug prices, pain pills, over-treatment, picking the right doctor, and protecting one’s privacy.

Many of us who chat via Twitter and LinkedIn, and in health care conferences throughout the year, have wrestled with what we should “call” patients — whether consumers, people, citizens. This is not a new-new question, I assure you. Been there. Asked that.

As my thinking continues to evolve, I will share some of the most recent segment my learning journey. I became a citizen of Italy, and thus the European Union (EU), last year, retaining my U.S. citizenship. When I proudly and humbly took my oath at the Italian Consulate in Philadelphia, I immediately became a health citizen of the EU, along with being covered by the privacy protections of the GDPR. This was one of those lifetime lightbulb moments for me both personally and professionally.

It led me to reinforce my belief in the concept of health citizenship for my fellow and sister Americans. I’ll be sharing more about that with you in my upcoming book on health care consumerism and beyond….so stay tuned for that plotline. For now, please read the entire March 2019 issue of Health Affairs to challenge and inform your own appreciation for and understanding of the patient-vs-consumer debate. Words do matter.

The post Patients, Health Consumers, People, Citizens: Who Are We In America? appeared first on HealthPopuli.com.

Patients, Health Consumers, People, Citizens: Who Are We In America? posted first on http://dentistfortworth.blogspot.com

0 notes

maxihealth · 5 years

Text

Patients, Health Consumers, People, Citizens: Who Are We In America?

The paper that asserts “no” to the question comes from Michael Gusmano, Karen Maschke, and Mildred Solomon, all associated with the Hastings Center which does research into bioethics. The authors note that “consumer-driven” health care is, “associated with neoliberal efforts to emphasize market factors in health reform,” de-emphasizing goernment regulation and financing. This concept can be potentiallyu harmful, they believe, assuming that health are is a traditional market. “A consumer metaphor places disproportionate burdesn on patients to reduce health care costs,” they posit, placing the burden of cost containment on patients. While price transparency is a sound concept, it’s not a panacea, the authors contend. “Patient-centered” approaches are constructive because they bring patients’ values into clinical care. Asking consumers to shop for services and be “prudent purchasers” of services? That’s too great a burden to put on patients, which could pressure clinicians to make unsound treatment decisions.

Now consider what happens when consumers (the noun chosen by the authors of the second paper I’m adding to the mix) access data, information and tools for self-management in health care. Karandeep Singh of the University of Michigan (GO BLUE! my alma mater) and colleagues track the growth of consumer-facing digital health tools, and initiatives leading to consumers’ engagement with websites and apps. The article plots a brief history of the HITECH Act which fostered EHR adoption among clinicians and hospitals, the Blue Button program at the Veterans Health Administration enabling patients’ access to health data, OpenNotes, patient-generated data through wearable tech and smartphone apps, and consumer-grade medical devices like the AliveCor ECG and KardiaBand accessory for the Apple watch. Singh et. al. point to limitations of consumers’ universal embrace and sustained use of these digital health tools, including low adoption of patient portals (especially among younger people, members of minority groups, healthy people, and those with less education), patient-generated data’s lack of interoperability with electronic health records, search engine dependence (that is, when “paging Dr. Google” yields sub-optimal results for the patient to act on), and lack of transparency and useful, high-quality data online. The authors call for improved regulation from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) which is the U.S. agency responsible for monitoring claims and the use of personal data out-of-context.

Article #3 in my deep dive here extends the second analysis into digital health information, focusing on Americans’ use of quality information describing doctors. Mark Schlesinger of Yale partnered with seven other researchers from RAND and other organizations to explain the history of clinician quality information (“report cards,” patient experience surveys and clinical quality metrics, among the different types of information available to consumers) and results of surveys assessing the impact of this information on consumers’ choices of physicians. The research found that peoples’ exposure to clinician quality information doubled between 2010 and 2015, and more consumers did seek quality metrics with differences across sub-groups of people (e.g., recial and ethnic minority consumers were better informed that whites over time, and people with more education also saw more of the quality information). The good news: that Americans have become more aware of information comparing clinician quality, and more often seek that information than they have in the past — especially other patients’ comments about doctors. The authors warn, though, that consumers may tend to trust that patient-reported information more than some of hte more objective clinician quality and safety metrics. Furthermore, the difference in information seeking between more educated Americans versus less could exacerbate health disparities and inequities of health literacy.

Finally, to the fourth paper, on the roles of assisters and automated decision support tools in consumers’ marketplace choices. This study assessed consumers’ search for health insurance marketplace plans extended through the Affordable Care Act, looking into the experience of 32 “assisters,” trained professionals who helped consumers navigate their choice of plans. These people include the official “navigators” conceived and funded by the ACA, certified application counselors, and other pepole who help consumers identify health insurance plans on the marketplaces. For context, the authors note that over 5,000 marketplace assister programs provided outreach and enrollment to consumers in the third open enrollment period 2015-16. Additional context here is that President Trump cut funding for navigators in federally facilitated marketplaces by over 80%, documented here in a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation. The bottom line of this fourth paper is that consumers need support to understand their health plan choices, but resourcing that support is costly and politically controversial in the current political environment.

Taken together, these four papers from Health Affairs lead to the following themes:

As Alan Weil writes in the March 2019 Health Affairs Editor-in-Chief introduction, there are “ups and downs of expecting patients to act as consumers.”

Health Populi’s Hot Points: We see discussions about health care consumerism in every major health care journal, and the popular press, as well. Just two weeks ago, I read the cover story, “It’s still the prices, stupid,” shown here from the cover of Modern Healthcare dated 25 February 2019.

In the article to which this assertion ties, Harris Meyer talks about the growing push for price regulation in the U.S. — most visibly for prescription drugs, and increasingly for other line items in th medical bill like nursing home care, hospital care, and physician services.

Here. you can see CR’s research into prescription drug prices, pain pills, over-treatment, picking the right doctor, and protecting one’s privacy.

Many of us who chat via Twitter and LinkedIn, and in health care conferences throughout the year, have wrestled with what we “call” patients — whether consumers, people, citizens.

I became a citizen of Italy, and thus the European Union, last year, retaining my U.S. citizenship. When I proudly and humbly took my oath at the Italian Consulate in Philadelphia, I immediately became a health citizen of the EU, along with being covered by the privacy protections of the GDPR. This was one of those lifetime lightbulb moments for me both personally and professionally.

It led me to reinforce my believe in health citizenship for my fellow and sister Americans. I’ll be sharing more about that with you all in my upcoming book on health care consumerism and beyond….so stay tuned for that plotline. For now, go read the entire March 2019 issue of Health Affairs to challenge and inform your understanding of the patient-vs-consumer debate.

The post Patients, Health Consumers, People, Citizens: Who Are We In America? appeared first on HealthPopuli.com.

Patients, Health Consumers, People, Citizens: Who Are We In America? posted first on https://carilloncitydental.blogspot.com

0 notes

titheguerrero · 5 years