Why David Geffen is getting the “American Masters” treatment

LOS ANGELES (TheWrap.com) – David Geffen is not a singer. Nor is he a movie star. Nor is he a writer.

Thus he would seem an odd subject for “American Masters,” a series devoted to artists ranging from Willa Cather to Woody Allen.

Yet series creator Susan Lacy claims that the mogul has had a profound impact on American popular culture that equals any of those figures. She pleads her case in “Inventing David Geffen,” which will be broadcast November 20 on PBS. The documentary had its premiere in Los Angeles on Tuesday night.

“He seems like a bit of an odd choice,” Lacy admitted to TheWrap. “But I have a degree in American Studies and I learned that the people with the most influence are often the ones behind the scenes.”

In Geffen, Lacy saw a figure like Alfred Stieglitz, a photographer whose lasting legacy was a series of modernist shows he held at his New York galleries that influenced visual arts in this country and brought cubism to the masses.

Some arm twisting must have been required to get the press-averse Geffen to emerge from semi-retirement to reflect on his career in movies, music and Broadway. Lacy said that part of the reason she was able to convince him to participate is that he was a fan of the series and had participated in her documentaries on figures such as Joni Mitchell.

“It wasn’t hard,” she said. “I knew from other people that he thinks my Leonard Bernstein documentary is one of the best documentaries anyone ever made. Mike Nichols told me that he makes everybody who stays with him watch it.”

In addition to Geffen, the documentary features interviews with his friends and colleagues — an A-list rolodex that includes Tom Hanks, Steven Spielberg, Elton John, Neil Young, Clive Davis, Barry Diller, and Irving Azoff. His sphere was huge, Lacy claims because his influence was tectonic.

By championing musicians such as Jackson Browne and Laura Nyro, Geffen put his own imprint on the emerging singer-songwriter movement in the 1970s. Later, Geffen managed to adapt to shifting tastes, by aligning himself with groups like Aerosmith and Guns ‘N Roses and helping to usher in the heavy metal craze. For more than 30 years, his labels – Asylum Records, Geffen Records, and DGC Records – represented the high-water mark for musicians, who clamored to get in the door.

“He had an incredible eye for talent,” Lacy said. “These people would have eventually found their way. But he helped them get there. He fixed their teeth and allowed them to write music that’s history.”

Though he made his name in music, Geffen also became a force in the theater and film businesses.

He enriched himself by producing hit musicals like “Cats” and “Dreamgirls,” and branched out into movies with memorable pictures like “Risky Business.” In 1994, he co-founded DreamWorks SKG, the studio behind Oscar-winners like “American Beauty” and “Saving Private Ryan.”

“In each decade, he has done something that has affected the culture,” Lacy said. “If I had to boil it down to one thing it would be his genius at business.”

It’s a mastery of deal-making and talent-scouting that has made him a very wealthy man, worth an estimated $ 5.5 billion. It is also a trajectory that Lacy maintains cannot be replicated in a more fractured media landscape, where mega-corporations wield disproportionate influence and are more interested in quarterly earnings than fostering rising stars.

“Even he would say that nobody could do what he did today,” Lacy said. “The times have changed so much. I asked him if he could raise $ 2 billion to start a new studio, and he said ‘absolutely not.’ And record companies, well, we know what happened to them. Behind all the conglomerates and corporations, to find someone with a genuine sensibility like David Geffen‘s would be impossible. He was unique.”

Celebrity News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Read More..

Change Rattles Leading Health-Funding Agency

Major changes erupted at one of the world’s leading health-funding agencies Thursday as it hired a new director, dismissed the inspector general who had clashed with a previous director and announced a new approach to making grants.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Dr. Mark Dybul, who led the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, in 2007.

Dr. Mark Dybul, the Bush administration’s global AIDS czar who was abruptly dismissed when President Obama took office, was named the new executive director of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.

Dr. Dybul, who was selected over candidates from Canada, Britain and France, was backed by the United States, which donates about a third of the fund’s budget, and by Bill Gates, who helped the fund through a cash crisis earlier this year.

He is respected by many AIDS activists in the United States, though there is some lingering controversy about his time in the Bush administration related to abstinence policies and anti-prostitution pledges imposed by conservative lawmakers as well as concerning strict licensing requirements for generic drugs.

The fund, which is based in Geneva and has given away more than $20 billion since its founding in 2002, has been in crisis for more than a year. Some donors shied away after widely publicized corruption scandals, while others, notably Mr. Gates, said the scandals were exaggerated and increased donations.

Its last executive director, Dr. Michel Kazatchkine, quit in January after the day-to-day management duties of his job were given to a Brazilian banker, Gabriel Jaramillo, who was charged with cutting expenses.

By some accounts, 40 percent of the employees soon left, although Seth Faison, a fund spokesman, said the total number of employees declined by only 8 percent. The fund also dismissed its inspector general, John Parsons, on Thursday, citing unsatisfactory work.

Mr. Parsons and Dr. Kazatchkine had privately clashed. Mr. Parsons’s teams aggressively pursued theft and fraud, and found it in Mali, Mauritania and elsewhere. But the total amount stolen — $10 million to $20 million — was relatively small, and aides to Dr. Kazatchkine said the fund cut off those countries and sought to retrieve the money. The aides claimed that Mr. Parsons, who reported only to the board, went to news outlets and left the impression that the fund was covering up rampant theft.

The fuss scared off some donor countries that were already looking for excuses to cut back on foreign aid because of the global economic crisis.

Mr. Parsons did not return messages left for him Thursday.

Dr. Dybul’s appointment was welcomed by the United Nations AIDS program, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, Malaria No More and Results.org, an anti-poverty lobbying group. By contrast, Jamie Love, an American advocate for cheaper AIDS drugs who works in Washington and Geneva, said he expected Dr. Dybul “to protect drug companies.”

The fund also announced a new application process, which it said would be faster and focus more on the hardest-hit countries rather than all 150 that received some help in the past.

In an interview, Dr. Dybul said he felt the fund was “on a strong forward trajectory” after changes were put in place in the last year by Mr. Jaramillo, and now would focus on “hard-nosed implementation of value for money.”

Both the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief and the fund spend billions, but in different ways.

The fund supports projects proposed by national health ministers and then hires local auditors to make sure the money is not wasted or stolen. Pepfar usually gives grants to American nonprofit groups or medical schools and lets them form partnerships with hospitals or charities in the affected countries.

The conventional wisdom is that the Global Fund’s model is more likely to win the cooperation of government officials but more vulnerable to corruption — and also spends less on salaries and travel for American overseers.

Dr. Kazatchkine said he did not expect Dr. Dybul to “Pepfarize” the Global Fund.

“I hope that, after a year of turbulence, the fund finds the serenity needed to move forward again,” he said.

Read More..

United Airlines experiences yet another major computer glitch

A massive computer outage at United Airlines early Thursday stranded passengers across the country.A spokesperson for United tells WGN-TV that the airline is up and running again.

United Airlines, just a week before the year's busiest travel period, experienced yet another major computer problem Thursday morning that delayed hundreds of flights across the country, mostly on the East Coast. Some airline industry observers called for "heads to roll" at the world's largest airline.

The latest glitch involved the dispatch system software that enables Chicago-based United to communicate with airplanes before departure, delivering information on the plane's weight and balance, number of passengers and baggage, said United spokesman Charlie Hobart.

Flights of United's regional jet service, United Express, were not affected.

The outage occurred from about 7:30 to 9:30 a.m. Thursday and resulted in 257 delays directly attributable to the outage and more through the day, along with about 10 cancellations. The airline said it had 636 delays Thursday, far more than its typical number of about 300. The delays affected a relatively small number of the airline's 5,500 daily flights — fewer than 5 percent, Hobart said.

The impact at O'Hare International Airport seemed to be minimal, United and airport officials said.

United has had rampant problems with an unrelated system, its passenger reservation system it switched to in March. In August, the airline had another unrelated network outage that occurred when a piece of communication equipment in a United data center failed and disabled communications with airports and the United website, United.com. That was due to a failure at a United vendor.

The computer problems, especially the reservation system problem that affected flights in midsummer, have had Jeff Smisek, CEO of United's parent company, United Continental Holdings, making public apologies since March. He conceded to Wall Street analysts that operational problems hurt the airline's third-quarter profits as many customers fled to competitors. But he said during an earnings call with analysts in late October that those problems were behind the airline and that he was confident United would perform well during the busy holiday travel season.

Aside from weather-related delays, such as superstorm Sandy and a snowstorm on the East Coast, that seemed true until Thursday's outage. Even on Thursday, United's on-time performance was about 80 percent, meeting its target, a spokesman said.

"It was a software issue that we found and fixed in that two-hour period," United spokesman Rahsaan Johnson said. "It will not happen again."

Hobart said he did not have details about what went wrong.

Joe Brancatelli, a business travel writer at JoeSentMe.com, said the failures point to a larger problem.

Some industry observers said United is out of excuses.

"It is flat-out unacceptable," said Henry Harteveldt, co-founder of Atmosphere Research Group. "This makes United a laughingstock among airlines."

He said airline computer systems are complex and Thursday's problem might be a one-time issue, but the repeated failures are not only embarrassing for United, they "undermine trust in the airline" and "demoralize employees."

"There are clearly failures in the airline's strategy and the airline's execution, and heads need to roll," he said. "United's (chief information officer) should resign or be dismissed."

Hobart said the airline has improved recently.

"Since this summer, we've significantly improved our operational performance, with nearly 85 percent of our flights on time so far this month and nearly 80 percent of flights arriving on time in October, despite operational challenges like Hurricane Sandy," he said. "We understand this outage was frustrating for our customers, and we are enabling them to rebook without penalty and receive a full refund if their flights were delayed by at least two hours."

"Mostly what it says is that (airlines) have got to stop looking at mergers as two route maps you can smash together," Brancatelli said. He contends that the United-Continental merger was not planned properly.

"There are too many things going wrong," he said. Blame rests with "the guys running the show," he said of United's top executives. "The fish stinks from the head."

gkarp@tribune.com

Read More..

'Jihad' ads on CTA buses cause controversy

The controversial ads unveiled on the back of 10 CTA buses Wednesday read, “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man.” They conclude with the words, “Support Copts. Defeat Jihad,” referring to friction between Muslims and Coptic Christians in Egypt.

Within hours of the buses' first runs, messages appeared on Facebook and Twitter denouncing the campaign. Many said degrading a spiritual tenet of Islam -- one that refers to a Muslim's personal quest to become a better person -- amounts to hate speech.

“This whole campaign insinuates Muslims are violent,” said Asaf Bar-Tura, programs director for the Jewish Council on Urban Affairs, which protested the ads on social media Wednesday. “If it's within their legal powers, (CTA) should either not put it up because they incite hate and stereotypical thinking or put a label next to each sign saying `The CTA disagrees with this ad.’ ”

So far, federal judges have sided with the advertisement's sponsor, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, which sued transit authorities in New York City and Washington, D.C., when they initially rejected the ads. Those judges ruled that public forums such as buses and trains can't bar advertising entitled to First Amendment protection.

Pamela Geller, executive director of the initiative, said she believes the Jewish Council has good intentions, but denies that her ad qualifies as hate speech.

"There’s nothing hateful about it," she said in an e-mail. "9/11 was hate. 3/11 in Madrid was hate. ... The Christmas underwear bomber was hate. ... Pushing back against such hate is not hate."

"Perhaps this is the strangest thing of all: their utter lack of awareness, or denial, of the barrel pointed straight between their eyes," Geller said. "It is an odd combination of naivete, brainwashing and self-loathing that I will never comprehend."

Although Geller posted on her blog "Atlas Shrugs" a letter from her lawyer threatening legal action against CTA if they didn’t place the ads, Brian Steele, a spokesman for the CTA, denied that the CTA was threatened with a lawsuit. But the precedents did deter the CTA from rejecting the ads, which are expected to run on different routes each day for the next four weeks.

“While those courts agreed that the AFDI ads violate anti-disparagement or anti-demeaning standards similar to CTA's, that violation in and of itself did not remove AFDI's First Amendment protection to place the ads,” Steele said in a statement.

“CTA understands that this ad may be offensive to our customers,” he added. “While the courts have ruled this ad is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment, we object to its divisive message.”

The estimated ad revenue is about $4,500, a spokesman said.

Meanwhile, Ahmed Rehab, the executive director of the Chicago chapter of the Council on American Islamic Relations, said the group expects to launch its own nationwide ad campaign next week. As part of the campaign called “My Jihad,” individual Muslims define what the spiritual concept means for them.

“I don't feel the urge to fight … I'd rather put out the alternative,” Rehab said. “People can decide what racism is.”

mbrachear@tribune.com
Twitter: @TribSeeker

jhilkevitch@tribune.com
Twitter: @jhilkevitch

Read More..

Judge throws out Justin Bieber paparazzo chase case

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Criminal charges filed against a photographer who pursued teen pop star Justin Bieber at high speeds on a Los Angeles freeway in July were thrown out on Wednesday, striking a blow to California’s crackdown on overly aggressive paparazzi.

Celebrity photographer Paul Raef was the first person to be prosecuted under the state’s 2010 law that criminalizes dangerous driving when taking photos commercially.

Raef was charged in July with two counts of violating the law stemming from a July 6 incident on a freeway in Los Angeles‘ San Fernando Valley.

Dismissing the charges, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Thomas Robinson called the state’s anti-paparazzi law “problematic” and “overly inclusive.”

The law “sweeps very widely and would increase the penalties for reckless driving” in unintended cases, Robinson said.

Robinson faulted the law’s vague definition of commercial photography, saying that it could also apply to a photographer who was speeding to reach an arranged photo shoot with Bieber.

Raef could have faced up to a year in prison and $ 3,500 in fines, if convicted. His attorney, Brad Kaiserman, said the law is “about protecting celebrities.”

A message left with Bieber’s publicist requesting comment was not immediately returned.

Raef still faces lesser charges of misdemeanor reckless driving and failing to obey police orders after he allegedly pursued Bieber, 18, at high speeds. He will be tried on those charges at a later date.

Bieber, who was pulled over by police for driving 80 miles per hour in a 65 mph zone, told officers at the time that he was being hounded by paparazzi, and police said they noticed Raef’s car following the “Boyfriend” singer.

About 30 minutes after the traffic stop, Bieber called police to report that Raef continued to follow him. Police later found Raef and other paparazzi together in downtown Los Angeles.

The Canadian singer received a speeding ticket at the time.

(Reporting By Eric Kelsey, editing by Jill Serjeant and Sandra Maler)

Celebrity News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Read More..

I Was Misinformed: The Time She Tried Viagra

I have noticed, in the bragging-rights department, that “he doesn’t need Viagra” has become the female equivalent of the male “and, I swear, she’s a real blonde.” Personally, I do not care a bit. To me, anything that keeps you happy and in the game is a good thing.

But then, I am proud to say, I was among the early, and from what I gather, rare female users.

It happened when the drug was introduced around 1998. I was 50, but after chemotherapy for breast cancer — and later, advanced ovarian cancer — I was, hormonally speaking, pretty much running on fumes. Whether this had diminished my sex drive I did not yet know. One may have Zorba-esque impulses when a cancer diagnosis first comes in; but a treatment that leaves you bald, moon-faced and exhausted knocks that out of your system pretty fast.

But by 1998, the cancer was gone, my hair was back and I was ready to get back in the game. I was talking to an endocrinologist when I brought up Viagra. This was not to deal with the age-related physical changes I knew it would not address, it was more along the feminist lines of equal pay for equal work: if men have this new sex drug, I want this new sex drug.

“I know it’s supposed to work by increasing blood flow,” I told the doctor, “But if that’s true for men, shouldn’t it be true for women, too?”

“You’re the third woman who asked me that this week,” he said.

He wrote me a prescription. I was not seeing anyone, so I understood that I would have to do both parts myself, but that was fine. I have a low drug threshold and figured it might be best the first time to fly solo. My memory of the directions are hazy: I think there was a warning that one might have a facial flush or headaches or drop dead of a heart attack; that you were to take a pill at least an hour before you planned to get lucky, and, as zero hour approached, you were supposed to help things along by thinking beautiful thoughts, kind of like Peter Pan teaching Wendy and the boys how to fly.

But you know how it is: It’s hard to think beautiful thoughts when you’re wondering, “Is it happening? Do I feel anything? Woof, woof? Hello, sailor? Naaah.”

After about an hour, however, I was aware of a dramatic change. I had developed a red flush on my face; I was a hot tomato, though not the kind I had planned. I had also developed a horrible headache. The sex pill had turned into a bad joke: Not now, honey, I have a headache.

I put a cold cloth on my head and went to sleep. But here’s where it got good: When I slept, I dreamed; one of those extraordinary, sensual, swimming in silk sort of things. I woke up dazed and glowing with just one thought: I gotta get this baby out on the highway and see what it can do.

A few months later I am fixed up with a guy, and after a time he is, under the Seinfeldian definition of human relations (Saturday night date assumed) my official boyfriend. He is middle aged, in good health. How to describe our romantic life with the delicacy a family publication requires? Perhaps a line from “Veronika, der Lenz ist da” (“Veronica, Spring Is Here”), a song popularized by the German group the Comedian Harmonists: “Veronika, der Spargel Wächst” (“Veronica, the asparagus are blooming”). On the other hand, sometimes not. And so, one day, I put it out there in the manner of sport:

“Want to drop some Viagra?” I say.

Here we go again, falling into what I am beginning to think is an inevitable pattern: lying there like a lox, or two loxes, waiting for the train to pull into the station. (Yes, I know it’s a mixed metaphor, but at least I didn’t bring in the asparagus.) So there we are, waiting. And then, suddenly, spring comes to Suffolk County. It’s such a presence. I’m wondering if I should ask it if it hit traffic on the L.I.E. We sit there staring.

My reaction is less impressive. I don’t get a headache this time. And romantically, things are more so, but not so much that I feel compelled to try the little blue pills again.

Onward roll the years. I have a new man in my life, who is 63. He does have health problems, for which his doctor prescribes an E.D. drug. I no longer have any interest in them. My curiosity has been satisfied. Plus I am deeply in love, an aphrodisiac yet to be encapsulated in pharmaceuticals.

We take a vacation in mountain Mexico. We pop into a drugstore to pick up sunscreen and spot the whole gang, Cialis, Viagra, Levitra, on a shelf at the checkout counter. No prescription needed in Mexico, the clerk says. We buy all three drugs and return to the hotel. I try some, he tries some. In retrospect, given the altitude and his health, we are lucky we did not kill him. I came across an old photo the other day. He is on the bed, the drugs in their boxes lined up a in a semi-circle around him. He looks a bit dazed and his nose is red.

Looking at the picture, I wonder if he had a cold.

Then I remember: the flush, the damn flush. If I had kids, I suppose I would have to lie about it.

Read More..

FCC recommends cross-ownership waivers for Tribune Co.

The staff of the Federal Communications Commission has recommended that the agency grant Tribune Co. waivers of so-called media ownership rules, paving the way for the company to emerge from its long-running bankruptcy.

The waivers -- the last major hurdle in the four-year case -- would take effect Friday as long as none of the five commissioners raise serious objections, according to a person at the FCC who wasn't authorized to speak and therefore did not want to be identified.

No vote is required for the waivers to take effect.

The waivers would set the wheels in motion to emerge from bankruptcy, something that can happen as soon as new ownership, a group led by senior creditors Oaktree Capital Management, Angelo Gordon & Co and JPMorgan Chase & Co., can complete the necessary paperwork.

The FCC staff is recommending that the agency grant a permanent waiver to Tribune's ownership of the Chicago Tribune and WGN radio and television stations and that it give  one-year waivers for the Los Angeles Times ownership of KTLA-TV Channel 5 and for similar arrangements in three other markets.

The FCC also is circulating among commissioners a proposal for new media ownership rules that would ease restrictions on consolidations among newspapers and TV and ratio stations, according to FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. That proposal is expected to come up for an agency vote at the next regular meeting.

Once the new rules are in effect, Tribune's new owners could seek permanent waivers in the Los Angeles, New York, Hartford, Conn., and South Florida markets.

Tribune Vice President Shaun Sheehan declined to comment.

Read More..

Hastert uses government office for private business

A Tribune investigation has found that former U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert has used his taxpayer-funded office to conduct private business. Federal law allows former House speakers to maintain a government-financed office for up to five years, but they are not permitted to use the office for financial gain. (Nuccio DiNuzzo, Chicago Tribune / November 14, 2012)

By Katherine Skiba and Todd Lighty




Tribune reporters

11:55 p.m. CST, November 13, 2012

Former U.S. House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert has conducted private business ventures through a little-known government office that has cost taxpayers about $1.8 million, a Tribune investigation has found.

Former House speakers are allowed to maintain a government-financed office for up to five years to wrap up matters relating to their tenure. They are not permitted to use the office for financial gain.

But the Tribune found that a secretary in the ex-speaker’s government office used email to coordinate some of his private business meetings and travel, and conducted research on one proposed venture. A suburban Chicago businessman who was involved in the business ventures with Hastert said he met with Hastert at least three times in the government office to discuss the projects.

Hastert, an Illinois Republican, said he did not misuse the office. “I didn’t work on any private business out of there,” he said.

Court records, interviews and dozens of emails link the Office of the Former Speaker to J. David John, a Burr Ridge businessman who made six of the emails public in a lawsuit in DuPage County. John alleges in his suit that Wheaton College officials and others ruined his business relationship with Hastert, who is not a defendant in the suit.

Read the full story as a digitalPLUS member: Hastert used government office for private business

Read More..

She’s got the voice, now Christina Aguilera looks for hits

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Christina Aguilera has the vocal chops, the look, the strut and millions of new fans thanks to her stint as a judge on TV singing contest “The Voice.”

But can she still sell records?

The singer, who had global hits with “Genie in a Bottle” and the female empowerment ballad “Beautiful” more than 10 years ago, bids to reclaim her status as one of the world’s biggest pop stars with her new album, “Lotus,” released on Tuesday.

Aguilera, 31, says the title and the mixture of dance-pop, ballads and rock-tinged tracks reflect the hopes and disappointments of recent years that saw her 2010 tour for album “Bionic” canceled, a divorce and the box-office flop of her debut feature film, the musical “Burlesque.”

“Lotus represents the unbreakable flower that stands the test of time. No matter the roughest of weather conditions, it remains strong and continues to thrive. (The album) is a nod to my fans who have been here with me the whole journey, and a nod to myself,” she said.

“It is a record of freedom and embracing that…It is very artistic at times, it is very fun at times, it is very free. I think that’s how music and life should be, away from all the negativity,” the four-time Grammy winner said in an appearance at a Billboard Film and TV Music conference in Los Angeles last month.

Aguilera will perform one of the tracks – “Make the World Move” – with her fellow judge Cee Lo Green live on “The Voice” this week for the show’s more than 10 million viewers.

But music industry experts say Aguilera’s popularity on “The Voice” – where her powerhouse performances leave aspiring pop stars in the dust – may not guarantee huge album sales and won’t give the singer a No. 1 hit.

This week also sees new releases from British boy band One Direction and singer Susan Boyle as well as the new “Twilight” film soundtrack.

NOT A BLOCKBUSTER

“I think ‘Lotus’ will certainly debut in the top 10 on the Billboard 200 album chart. But we don’t see it as being a blockbuster out of the gate,” said Keith Caulfield, associate director of charts at Billboard.

“It is a long road to rebuilding Christina as a brand and as a musician, after the last album didn’t so very well,” said Caulfield. “But it’s not always about first week sales.”

Much like Jennifer Lopez on “American Idol,” Aguilera has seen her star rocket in her 18 months on “The Voice.” Just a few months before the TV show made its debut in spring 2011, Aguilera was arrested for being drunk in public in West Hollywood, and her 2010 album “Bionic” had sold a disappointing 312,000 copies.

“‘The Voice’ has reinvigorated her entire career. A lot of people think she is the star of ‘The Voice’ – the judge you tune in for,” said Lyndsey Parker, managing editor at Yahoo! Music.

Yet the first single – “Your Body” – from the new album failed to make a big impact when it was released in September. It peaked at No. 34 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart and never really caught fire on radio.

“It came and went, which surprised me because I think it is a very strong song. And pretty much everything I have heard on this album is strong. I think it’s a real return to form,” said Parker.

“There are very few people in pop who can sing like her. I do think there is a renewed appreciation for great singing that can be done live and that isn’t just about flash. And Christina is coming back to prove that. I think some people are looking at her to take back her crown,” Parker added.

“Lotus” includes duets with both Green and Aguilera’s fellow “Voice” judge, country singer Blake Shelton. It also features the piano-driven ballad “Blank Page,” which is reminiscent of her 2002 hit “Beautiful” and rock-tinged tracks like “Army of Me.”

Aguilera says she hopes to inspire a new generation of singers who were not around in 1999 for her first big hit “Genie in a Bottle.”

“It’s so exciting for me to show them what I do as an artist,” she said. “I’ve been through a lot over the past few years, going through ‘Burlesque,’ a divorce…having a few setbacks….Stuff happens! This is the business. It’s not going to be all cute and pretty and tied up in a bow.

“All of that combined is in ‘Lotus.’ It embraces the woman that I’ve become, and embracing myself coming full circle as a pop star,” she said.

(Additional reporting by Piya Sinha-Roy; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

Music News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Read More..

Kidney Donors Given Mandatory Safeguards

ST. LOUIS — Addressing long-held concerns about whether organ donors have adequate protections, the country’s transplant regulators acted late Monday to require that hospitals thoroughly inform living kidney donors of the risks they face, fully evaluate their medical and psychological suitability, and then track their health for two years after donation.

Enactment of the policies by the United Network for Organ Sharing, which manages the transplant system under a federal contract, followed six years of halting development and debate.

Meeting at a St. Louis hotel, the group’s board voted to establish uniform minimum standards for a field long regarded as a medical and ethical Wild West. The organ network, whose initial purpose was to oversee donation from people who had just died, has struggled at times to keep pace with rapid developments in donations from the living.

“There is no question that this is a major development in living donor protection,” said Dr. Christie P. Thomas, a nephrologist at the University of Iowa and the chairman of the network’s living donor committee.

Yet some donor advocates complained that the measures did not go far enough, and argued that the organ network, in its mission to encourage transplants, has a conflict of interest when it comes to safeguarding donors.

Three years ago, the network issued some of the same policies as voluntary guidelines, only to have the Department of Health and Human Services insist they be made mandatory.

Although long-term data on the subject is scarce, few living kidney donors are thought to suffer lasting physical or psychological effects. Kidney donations, known as nephrectomies, are typically done laparoscopically these days through a series of small incisions. The typical patient may spend only a few nights in a hospital and feel largely recovered after several months.

Kidneys are by far the most transplanted organs, and there have been nearly as many living donors as deceased ones over the last decade. What data is available suggests that those with one kidney typically live as long as those with two, and that the risk of a donor dying during the procedure is roughly 3 in 10,000.

But kidney transplants, like all surgery, can sometimes end in catastrophe.

In May at Montefiore Medical Center in the Bronx, a 41-year-old mother of three died when her aorta was accidentally cut during surgery to donate a kidney to her brother. In other recent isolated cases, patients have received donor kidneys infected with undetected H.I.V. or hepatitis C.

Less clear are any longer-term effects on donors. Research conducted by the United Network for Organ Sharing shows that of roughly 70,000 people who donated kidneys between late 1999 and early 2011, 27 died within two years of medical causes that may — or may not — have been related to donation. For a small number of donors, their remaining kidney failed, and they required dialysis or a transplant.

The number of living donors — 5,770 in 2011 — has dropped 10 percent over the last two years, possibly because the struggling economy has made it difficult for prospective donors to take time off from work to recuperate. With the national kidney waiting list now stretching past 94,000 people, and thousands on the list dying each year, transplant officials have said they must improve confidence in the system so more people will donate.

The average age of donors has been rising, posing additional medical risks. And new ethical questions have been raised by the emergence of paired kidney exchanges and transplant chains started by good Samaritans who give an organ to a stranger.

Brad Kornfeld, who donated a kidney to his father in 2004, told the board that it had been impossible to find good information about what to expect, leaving him to search for answers on unreliable Internet chat rooms. He said he had almost backed out.

“If information is power,” said Mr. Kornfeld, a Coloradan who serves on the living donor committee, “the lack of information is crippling.”

Under the policies approved this week, the organ network will require hospitals to collect medical data, including laboratory test results, on most living donors to study lasting effects. Results must be reported at six months, one year and two years.

Similar regulations have been in place since 2000, but they did not require blood and urine testing, and hospitals were allowed to report donors who could not be found as simply lost.

That happened often. In recent years, hospitals have submitted basic clinical information — like whether donors were alive or dead — for only 65 percent of donors and lab data for fewer than 40 percent, according to the organ network. Although the network holds the authority, no hospital has ever been seriously sanctioned for noncompliance.

“It’s time we put some teeth into our policy,” said Jill McMaster, a board member from Tennessee.

By 2015, transplant programs will have to report thorough clinical information on at least 80 percent of donors and lab results on at least 70 percent. The requirements phase in at lower levels for the next two years.

Dr. Stuart M. Flechner of the Cleveland Clinic, the chairman of a coalition of medical societies that made recommendations to the organ network, said 9 of 10 hospitals would currently not meet the new requirement.

Donna Luebke, a kidney donor from Ohio who once served on the organ network’s board, said the new standards would matter only if enforcement were more rigorous. She noted that the organization was dominated by transplant doctors: “UNOS is nothing but the foxes watching the henhouse,” she said.

Another of the new regulations prescribes in detail the medical and psychological screenings that hospitals must conduct for potential donors. It requires automatic exclusion if the potential donor has diabetes, uncontrolled hypertension or H.I.V., among other conditions.

The new policies also require that hospitals appoint an independent advocate to counsel and represent donors, and that donors receive detailed information in advance about medical, psychological and financial risks.

Read More..