Tag Archives: research-center

Race Matters: “Black Twitter” Recognized As The Social Networking Site Hires Marketing Guru To Help Advertisers Market Products

They can’t deny the clout we carry around these e-streets Twitter Hires Marketing Vet To Help Advertisers Gain Access To Minorities Via Complex Maybe DJ Quik had it right in 1995 when he rapped: “If it don’t make dollars, it don’t make sense.” That could explain Twitter’s reluctance to acknowledge its most popular community, Black Twitter, until now. Yesterday it was announced that Twitter plans to capitalize on its racially diverse user base. According to a recent report by the Pew Research Center, black, Hispanic, and Asian-American users account for 41 percent of Twitter’s 54 million users. For some, this might seem like a revelation. For others, this is old news. Over the last seven years, as Twitter has become deeply embedded into our daily lives, Black Twitter, too, has grown into a cultural phenomenon of sorts. We first wrote about the social network’s subgroup in 2012, and have since covered the community time and again. From #PaulasBestDishes to #BlackBuzzFeed, Black Twitter has consistently provided an outlet to air grievances (the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman trial), analyze new shows (Scandal, Drake on SNL), and shoot the shit with friends. “Perhaps the most significant contribution of Black Twitter is that it increases visibility of black people online, and in doing so, dismantles the idea that white is standard and everything else is ‘other,’” wrote Soraya Nadia McDonald for the Washington Post. “It’s a radical demand for acceptance by simply existing—or sometimes dominating—in a space and being yourself, without apology or explanation.” That Twitter decided to hire marketing veteran Nuria Santamaria as its multicultural strategist to help better target black, Hispanic and Asian-American users may or may not be the solution to increasing engagement among non-white users. “Maybe Twitter doesn’t know how to talk about Black Twitter,” wondered Nitasha Tiku. They DEFINITELY don’t know how to talk about “Black Twitter” Regardless, Santamaria plans to target Twitter’s Hispanic population first. The Wall Street Journal reports: “Advertisers want to know more about racial and ethnic minorities on Twitter, from basic numbers to the languages in which they tweet … Twitter’s share of Hispanic users roughly parallels the U.S. online population, but it is a fast-growing, increasingly affluent ethnic group. Hispanics are also more easily identified because of their language. Twitter doesn’t ask users about race or ethnicity but categorizes them into ‘interests’ based on their tweets and whom they follow.” How do you feel about Twitter’s new business move? Will you be enraged if you start getting fried chicken, watermelon, and Jordan ads coming down your timeine?

Originally posted here:
Race Matters: “Black Twitter” Recognized As The Social Networking Site Hires Marketing Guru To Help Advertisers Market Products

Some Morning Fug: Kanye Gifts Kim A Really Not-Beautiful-Dark-Twisted-Birkin Bag For Christmas

What do you get for your fianceé who has everything? A fugly azz bag apparently! Kimmy Cakes proudly posted her “unique” Christmas present from boo thang Kanye West on her Instagram Thursday. Here’s an uncensored look: The hashtag George Condo is for the artist, who collaborated with Kanye on his “Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy” album art and also handpainted Kim’s new Birkin. We know KimYe hit some stores yesterday, hopefully she took this ish back! Would you rock it???

More:
Some Morning Fug: Kanye Gifts Kim A Really Not-Beautiful-Dark-Twisted-Birkin Bag For Christmas

Race Matters: Study Shows Black Fathers Are Just As Involved With Their Kids As Other Races

What baby daddy drama ? Black Fathers Are Just As Involved With Their Kids As Other Races Via LA Times reports: Defying enduring stereotypes about black fatherhood, a federal survey of American parents shows that by most measures, black fathers who live with their children are just as involved as other dads who live with their kids — or more so. For instance, among fathers who lived with young children, 70% of black dads said they bathed, diapered or dressed those kids every day, compared with 60% of white fathers and 45% of Latino fathers, according to a report released Friday by the National Center for Health Statistics. Nearly 35% of black fathers who lived with their young children said they read to them daily, compared with 30% of white dads and 22% of Latino dads. The report was based on a federal survey that included more than 3,900 fathers between 2006 and 2010 — a trove of data seen as the gold standard for studying fatherhood in the United States. In many cases, the differences between black fathers and those of other races were not statistically significant, researchers said. The findings echo earlier studies that counter simple stereotypes characterizing black fathers as missing in action. When it comes to fathers who live with their kids, “blacks look a lot like everyone else,” said Gretchen Livingston, a senior researcher at the Pew Research Center who has previously studied the topic. And in light of the negative stereotypes about black fathers, “that is a story in itself.” “People think they don’t care, but we know they do,” said Joseph Jones, president of the Center for Urban Families, a Baltimore advocacy group that works with African American fathers. “We see how dads are fighting against the odds to be engaged in the lives of their children.” Sit down haters! Black dads are taking care of their responsibilities like any other race!

Read the original post:
Race Matters: Study Shows Black Fathers Are Just As Involved With Their Kids As Other Races

Race Matters: For The First Time In History…Study Shows That Blacks Voted At A Higher Rate Than Eligible White Voters

We gon’ make it Study Show Black Voter Turnout Higher Than White In 2012 Election Via MSNBC It looks like the GOP’s plan to suppress liberal-skewed voters backfired. The 2012 presidential election may have been the first time blacks voted at a higher rate than whites, according to a new study by the Pew Research Center—despite several Republican-controlled state legislatures passing new voter identification laws. African-Americans made up 12% of the eligible electorate this year, yet they accounted for 13% of total votes cast. This is the second presidential election in a row in which black voters “over-performed” (they did so in 2008 by the same proportion). Whites’ turnout rate—votes cast as a share of eligible voters—declined in both 2012 and 2008, though whites’ share of the eligible electorate is also shrinking. Whereas other minority groups have seen increased electoral clout largely because of population growth, blacks’ growing share of the vote in recent presidential elections is due to mounting turnout rates. More hispanics and Asian-Americans voted in 2012 than ever before, but their turnout rates continue to lag behind that of the general public. That’s amazing considering the trouble that some GOP’ers went through to ensure that “we” wouldn’t show up in November. In the year leading up to the election, many GOP-led state governments attempted to pass bills aimed at requiring photo identification at the polls, restricting early voting, and curtailing voter registration efforts. Many black community leaders argued such voter suppression would disproportionately disenfranchise poor, minority, and elderly voters. While some Republicans claimed the measures were necessary to prevent voter fraud, others outwardly admitted to passing voter restrictions in hopes of hurting Democratic candidates. There will be no firm verdict until the U.S. Census Bureau publishes its post-election survey on voter turnout next spring, but Pew’s circumstantial evidence shows that attempts at voter suppression failed to keep blacks from the polls—and may have even inspired progressive voters to turn out in higher numbers. This is very promising news for the future of the Black voice in politics, but let’s not let the excitement and participation die with Barry O’s re-election. Let’s continue to vote and be involved in the process in future elections as well! Image via AP

Follow this link:
Race Matters: For The First Time In History…Study Shows That Blacks Voted At A Higher Rate Than Eligible White Voters

Race Matters: Interracial Marriage Is At An All Time High In US…Blacks Are Substantially More Likely To Marry Whites

Interracial marriages in the U.S. have climbed to 4.8 million — a record 1 in 12 — as a steady flow of new Asian and Hispanic immigrants expands the pool of prospective spouses. Blacks are now substantially more likely than before to marry whites. A Pew Research Center study, released Thursday, details a diversifying America where interracial unions and the mixed-race children they produce are challenging typical notions of race. “The rise in interracial marriage indicates that race relations have improved over the past quarter century,” said Daniel Lichter, a sociology professor at Cornell University. “Mixed-race children have blurred America’s color line. They often interact with others on either side of the racial divide and frequently serve as brokers between friends and family members of different racial backgrounds,” he said. “But America still has a long way to go.” The figures come from previous censuses as well as the 2008-2010 American Community Survey, which surveys 3 million households annually. The figures for “white” refer to those whites who are not of Hispanic ethnicity. For purposes of defining interracial marriages, Hispanic is counted as a race by many in the demographic field. The study finds that 8.4 percent of all current U.S. marriages are interracial, up from 3.2 percent in 1980. While Hispanics and Asians remained the most likely, as in previous decades, to marry someone of a different race, the biggest jump in share since 2008 occurred among blacks, who historically have been the most segregated. States in the West where Asian and Hispanic immigrants are more numerous, including Hawaii, Nevada, New Mexico and California, were among the most likely to have couples who “marry out” — more than 1 in 5. The West was followed by the South, Northeast and Midwest. By state, mostly white Vermont had the lowest rate of intermarriage, at 4 percent. In all, more than 15 percent of new marriages in 2010 were interracial. The numbers also coincide with Pew survey data showing greater public acceptance of mixed marriage, coming nearly half a century after the Supreme Court in 1967 barred race-based restrictions on marriage. (In 2000, Alabama became the last state to lift its unenforceable ban on interracial marriages.) About 83 percent of Americans say it is “all right for blacks and whites to date each other,” up from 48 percent in 1987. As a whole, about 63 percent of those surveyed say it “would be fine” if a family member were to marry outside their own race. Discuss… Source Photo: WENN More On Bossip! Quote Of The Day: Country Singer Miranda Lambert Says Chris Breezy “Needs To Be Put Back In His Place” A Verrrry Special Night: These Celebrities May Possibly Have Been Conceived Righhht Around Valentine’s Day Rosa Acosta And Her Cakes Wish Us All A Lovely Happy Valentine’s Day Hey Big Spender: Studies Show That The Average American Will Spend $126 On Valentines Day, Will You Be One Of Them???

Continue reading here:
Race Matters: Interracial Marriage Is At An All Time High In US…Blacks Are Substantially More Likely To Marry Whites

And on Your Left … It’s the Chilean Miners!

Filed under: Chilean miners , Paparazzi Photo , Chilean Miners The rescued Chilean miners have totally gone Hollywood. The miners and their families — who are in L.A. for CNN’s Heroes gala this weekend —

NYT’s Charles Blow: Obama Is Not Good For Jews

“Is President Obama good for the Jews?” asked New York Times columnist Charles Blow Saturday. His answer was quite surprising: “For more and more Jewish-Americans, the answer is no.”  In his piece marvelously titled “Oy Vey, Obama,” Blow referred to Thursday’s Pew Research Center report finding “33% of Jewish voters identify with or lean toward the Republican Party, up from 20% in 2008.” From there, Blow went where a liberal columnist for the New York Times typically dares not: This is no doubt a reaction, at least in part, to the Obama administration having taken a hard rhetorical stance with Israel, while taking “special time and care on our relationship with the Muslim world,” as Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, put it in June. If that sounds like courtship, it is. Some of the president’s most ardent critics and some of Israel’s staunchest American defenders – two groups that are by no means mutually exclusive – have seized on what they see as the administration’s unfair and unbalanced treatment of Israel and have taken their denunciations to the extremes. After addressing some recent events – the Administration’s denunciation of Israeli settlements last September, the White House urging Israel to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in April, and May’s Gaza flotilla incident – Blow shared with his readers some more data on this issue: Fair or not, these criticisms are crystallizing into a shared belief among many: Obama is burning bridges with the Jewish community in order to build bridges to the Muslim world. There is very little independent polling, aside from Pew’s party identification polling, to help us understand how American Jews see the president, his stance toward Israel and the political implications. So in that vacuum, pollsters with partisan leanings have been spinning their findings like dreidels. In April, the Republican polling firm McLaughlin & Associates released a survey that they said showed that only 42 percent of American Jews would vote to re-elect President Obama. He captured 78 percent of the Jewish vote in 2008. Recently, the democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg and the Israel Project, a nonprofit in Washington, conducted a poll that they said found American support of Israel was dropping like a rock. Wherever the truth lies, it is fair to say that it doesn’t bode well for Obama. Indeed it doesn’t, although it’s quite shocking to read such a conclusion in a column by one of the Times’ most liberal contributors.

Go here to read the rest:
NYT’s Charles Blow: Obama Is Not Good For Jews

Time Deputy Managing Editor: America’s ‘Obsessed’ with ‘an Enemy That May No Longer Exist’

Radical Islam, schmadical Islam. “[N]ine years after 9/11, the fight over the mosque near Ground Zero shows how obsessed we remain with an enemy that may no longer exist.” That’s the argument from Time magazine deputy managing editor Romesh Ratnesar in his August 17 online Viewpoint essay entitled, ” The ‘Ground Zero Mosque’ Debate: Exaggerating the Jihadist Threat. ” “The mosque’s critics and champions both say their goal is to counter radical Islam,” Ratnesar noted, arguing that both sides are all wet: The prevalence of such rhetoric on both sides of the mosque debate makes it seem as if the struggle against global jihadism hangs in the balance. The truth is that Osama bin Laden and his ilk face much bigger problems. The story of the past decade in the Muslim world is that of the widespread rejection — or “refudiation,” to borrow a phrase — of terrorism. A study by the Pew Research Center earlier this year found that support in Muslim countries for suicide bombings has fallen precipitously from post-9/11 levels. One-third of Pakistanis believed terrorism was justified in 2002; now just 8% do. For all our anxiety about the rise of religious extremism, no government in the Arab world has been toppled by forces sympathetic to al-Qaeda since 2001. And though some militant Muslims surely wish us harm, their ability to actually inflict it has eroded; it has been more than five years since the last successful al-Qaeda attack in the West. The eclipse of al-Qaeda has come about largely through revulsion at the jihadists’ indiscriminate slaughter of fellow Muslims, from Indonesia to Iraq. And yet we have failed to notice. Of course, while these development are welcome news, it doesn’t mean the threat of radical Islam is completely eradicated. Indeed, like cancers that go into remission, radicalism can spring back with a vengeance after suffering losses in a given period of time. But Ratnesar seems to think the worst is over and that the way to beat radical Islam is to pretty much “move on” from the issue: However the [Ground Zero mosque] dispute is ultimately resolved, its impact on the “threat” posed by radical Islam will be negligible. That’s because the threat is receding on its own. Allowing a place of worship to be built in lower Manhattan will constitute neither an American triumph nor a defeat. It will simply tell the world that this nation, wisely, has decided to move on. Photo of Ratnesar from his eponymous website .

Continue reading here:
Time Deputy Managing Editor: America’s ‘Obsessed’ with ‘an Enemy That May No Longer Exist’

American Public: Too Much Chelsea, Not Enough Real News

If you thought the media’s obsession with Chelsea Clinton’s July 31 wedding went a little overboard, you’re not alone. A new poll has found that a majority of Americans think there was too much coverage of the wedding at the expense of real news. The News Interest Index Survey, conducted July 29 through August 1 by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press,  found  that 58 percent of respondents felt there was “too much” coverage of the Clinton wedding. As the Culture and Media Institute  reported , the three broadcast networks – ABC, CBS and NBC – aired 87 stories about Clinton’s nuptials between July 25 and August 1. That represented a 48-percent increase over coverage of former first daughter Jenna Bush’s wedding in 2008. Networks had reporters on the scene in Rhinebeck, N.Y., and brought in gossip columnists and celebrity wedding planners to dish on the event. But at what cost? Other news happened over the weekend, after all, including continued drama in the Gulf of Mexico and fallout over the leak of classified documents related to the war inAfghanistan, as well as economy and immigration issues. Americans noticed, according to the survey. While half believed the media delivered the “right amount” of coverage on the oil spill, pluralities felt there was “too little” coverage of the “Afghan War Diary” leak (41 percent) and the economy (42 percent).

What Physics Says About Smooth Balls

It’s probably not all that surprising that this year’s World Cup has had its share of controversial goals, controversial offside calls, controversial foul calls, and controversial foul non-calls. A bit more surprising is the controversy caused by the tournament’s ball. Adidas created the Jabulani especially for the South African World Cup. It’s made from thermally bonded panels, instead of the traditional 32 panels of pentagons and hexagons. That makes it a lot smoother, but has given the players fits. “You might think if you make a ball very, very smooth, it will fly through the air better than a ball that is rough,” says John Eric Goff, chair of the physics department at Lynchburg College and author of Gold Medal Physics: The Science of Sports. You might think that, but you’d be wrong. “As the air goes around a sphere, or one of these sports balls, it forms a little layer near the surface of the sphere called the boundary layer,” says Goff. A rough surface makes that boundary layer break down at lower speeds. “And what that means is the drag force on the ball, the air resistance, goes down slightly,” he says. With only eight panels, you might think the Jabulani would be much smoother than a traditional ball, but you’d be wrong. Adidas has added grooves on the Jabulani that make up for the missing seams. Still, there seems to be less drag, less air resistance on a Jabulani when it’s traveling very fast than on a traditional ball. But more difficult than speed for player’s to get used to is what’s called the knuckling effect. This is when the ball starts behaving erratically because the boundary layer is breaking down at different places around the ball. “There is an ideal speed for the maximum knuckling effect,” says Rabindra D. Mehta, chief of the Experimental Aero-Physics Branch at the NASA Ames Research Center in California. For a traditional soccer ball it’s around 30 miles per hour. But for the Jabulani, it’s more like 40 or 45 mph. So it’s flying more erratically at faster speeds. Incidentally, despite what you might have seen in blogs or newspaper reports, NASA has not investigated the Jabulani. Mehta says he and some colleagues did a demonstration of the aerodynamics of flying objects for local school children, and used the Jabulani as an example. “There’s a lot of media coverage with all sorts of crazy headlines claiming NASA is doing this and that. We’re not doing anything,” says Mehta. “We just wanted to demonstrate soccer ball aerodynamics to children.” That may be so, but it’s hardly a headline grabber. added by: TimALoftis