Get over Kim and Kanye already and give these significant people the credit they deserve.

While it’s possible to debate whether Kim and Kanye are talented or not, it’s not really arguable about whether they have reached media over saturation. They certainly have. They may be trending on social media, on the cover of all the magazines, and even a topic on mainstream news, but we can all agree that we are giving these two just too much attention. Their five minutes was up like four years ago.

And the only reason the Kim and Kanye PR machine can keep up this momentum is because warm bodies are falling for it. Choose to use your influencing power for good and eschew Kim and Kanye for folks who are actually deserving of your attention; some truly fascinating people who are making a difference in the world.

5 Fascinating People to Pay Attention to Instead of Kim and Kanye

 1. Gene Baur

Image: Farm Sanctuary

Gene Baur is the co-founder of Farm Sanctuary, an animal rescue, advocacy, and education organization started in 1986 with the mission of helping farm animals. Farm Sanctuary made the news in 2015 when Jon and Tracey Stewart partnered with the organization to open a fourth location on their New Jersey farm.

2. Misty Copeland

Image: Misty Copeland

Misty Copeland is the principal dancer for the American Ballet Theatre, the first African American woman to be promoted as principal in the company’s 75-year history. Her rise to fame wasn’t always a straightforward journey, though. Copeland shared her story in her “New York Times” bestseller, “Life in Motion”, which came out in 2014. Copeland is committed to breaking even more barriers in the world of dance and to being a role model to dancers and others who don’t fit the mold.

3. Bryan Stevenson

Image: Bryan Stevenson

Bryan Stevenson is a lawyer, social justice activist, and founder of the Equal Justice Initiative Stevenson has earned national acclaim for his work in the criminal justice system calling out bias against the poor and minorities. He has received national attention for his work challenging bias against the poor and minorities in the criminal justice system. Stevenson is the author of “Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption”, a New York Times bestseller profiling the inequalities of the criminal justice system by highlighting Stevenson’s work on behalf of Walter McMillian, a young man sentenced to die for a murder he insisted he did not commit.

4. Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Image: Wikipedia Commons

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was named as the second female Justice of the Supreme Court by President Bill Clinton in 1993. In addition to being a legal champion for women’s rights, both before and after her appointment, Ginsburg has gained a cult following, including being the subject of the blog the Notorious R.B.G. She is considered to be an all around badass for continuing to serve even after having some health issues.

5. Ta-Nehisi Coates

Image: Nina Subin

Ta-Nehisi Coates is an author, journalist, and educator. He’s worked for and contributed to The Atlantic, The New York Times, Time, The Washington Post, and numerous other publications. His first book was a memoir called, “The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood”, but it’s his second book that has gained him the most attention. “Between the World and Me” is a compelling story told in the form of a letter written to the author’s teenaged son about the feelings and realities of being black in the United States. It was awarded the National Book Award for nonfiction in 2015.

Related on EcoSalon

Yes, You Really Should Watch Kim Kardashian’s Strobing Tutorial

Link Love: The PETA Ad You Need to See + Vegan Faces + Kim’s Arse

5 Tips to Navigate Ello, the Anti-Facebook Social Network

Image: Kim Kardashian and Kanye West via Eastfjord Productions / Shutterstock.com

The post 5 Important People Who Aren’t Kim and Kanye (But So Worthy of Your Attention) appeared first on EcoSalon.

Column Love food? Love learning about it? Love talking about it? Then maybe you’ve been thinking about how to launch a podcast about food. We learn how from Emily Dilling of Paris Paysanne.

While we live in an age where content is churned out faster than you can blend together a kale smoothie (sorry), and the amount of that content has turned us into people with very short attention spans, I do think that in the end quality content will win out over quantity. As a writer, there is no way to continue your craft without believing that there is someone out there who is going to read your story, and read all of it. The internet age may have given us the fast food version of content – lots of it, whenever we want it, and most of it bad – but there are so many good things that the digital age has done for us as well. Podcasts is one of them.

I love telling stories, reading them and listening to them, and a good podcast has the power to not only inform, but also put you in a better mood. Why? I think it’s because for a half hour or so, you are focused, listening and concentrating on a specific topic. Sure, you might multitask a little and clean the house, or prep the evening’s dinner, but anyone who has listened to a podcast will know that to get the most out of them, you have to be paying attention. You must slow down and make some time to immerse yourself in the story.

My good friend Emily, who runs the blog Paris Paysanne, and has a book coming out this fall, recently launched a podcast, and besides loving all the work she does and wanting to get more people to listen to her show, I also wanted to know more about the process of making a podcast.

This was partly for selfish reasons (I too think I could make a good podcast, just like 99.8% other Internet users), but also for reasons related to the more common good (refer back to that 99.8%). I thought it would be helpful to find out how she went about starting a podcast about food, in the hopes that maybe we could all learn a little something.

So without further ado, let’s learn how to start a podcast about food. As the name of her blog indicates, Emily is Paris-based, but don’t let that intimidate you: this information can be used no matter where you are in the world.

What inspired you to launch the Paris Paysanne podcast?

I think the inspiration came from listening to other podcasts. I just really love podcasts and grew up listening to radio shows on NPR and that style of reporting and storytelling interested me. I liked the idea of taking a departure from writing and experimenting with a different form of media as well. There are very few Paris-based podcasts in English that focus on the subjects that I’m interested in and I wanted that to change, so I figured I’d have a go at it!

What are the basics that someone needs to have for starting a podcast?

You can geek out on fancy, expensive equipment or you can keep things very simple and cheap. As a beginner on a very limited budget, I opted for the cheap and simple route. Basically you need a microphone and editing software. I’ve used a few different microphone setups; you can buy inexpensive ones that you can attach to your iPhone, or just use your iPhone’s internal mic, the quality is totally acceptable.

If you’re using your phone to record, you’ll have to download an app to record with – the Apple files aren’t compatible with editing software, so you’ll need something like Wavepad to use when you record, which is a little annoying because you can only record small files – this is probably the main setback of depending on your iPhone as a microphone. I was lucky that my boyfriend had an older model of a Zoom H2 microphone that he lets me use, and I’m really happy with the quality (you could probably find this kind of microphone for not too expensive used). Then you just need to download Audacity, which is free audio editing software and you’re good to go. You could potentially not spend any money to set up your beginner podcast studio- isn’t that awesome?

What would your Podcasting 101 tips be?

First get comfortable with your material and the software you’ll be using. If you have no experience at all editing (even editing video is useful experience) then you’ll probably have a hard time producing a large, complex podcast at first- set your sights on something simple and maybe do a story that you won’t necessarily share with the world before getting down to your on-the-record stuff.

Think about how the medium changes the way you report/story tell. Interviewing people with a microphone is different than just having a chat with them for two reasons: 1) they’re constantly aware of the fact that they’re being recorded and 2) you’re going to be editing the conversation later. With those two things in mind, you have to modify your behavior and interactions slightly. I usually set up interviews by telling people that I’ll do lots of non-verbal agreement/encouragement (“uh huhs”, “for sures”, and “totallys” are great ways to validate your interlocutor’s points, but super hard to edit around if they overlap what the person you’re interviewing is saying) I also tell them that since this is recorded and not live, they can start sentences over, look things up, and do whatever they need to express themselves in a way they’re happy with.

Finally, when it comes to editing have fun. Honestly it’s so weird, editing makes me SO HAPPY. I don’t know why and didn’t expect that to be such a pleasurable process- I think it’s just that I like weaving things together and putting together the final product. There are so many examples out there of good editing, so no lack of inspiration. Mix in different media- I think you can use up to 10 seconds of any song for free- or other sounds to create a cool audio experience for your listener. Setting scenes with ambient sound, for example, is something you just can’t do when you’re writing, so why not go wild when working with audio?

In terms of crafting your stories, how do you go about it?

I’m still figuring that out. I’ve only done 4 episodes of the Paris Paysanne Podcast and I didn’t go into it with any criteria other than seeking out and interviewing people in the Paris food scene that I think are amazing and have something important to share with the community. So I just reach out and do the interviews, I try to get a good variety of subjects covered- a different food market every episode and then two segments on two different aspects of the Paris food scene, be it craft beer, craft coffee, local chefs, food writers, whatever. I also don’t have set questions, I like keeping things pretty informal and seeing what evolves during our conversation. That may seem lazy, and maybe I need to tighten the model up a bit, but I love being open about the people, length, and content of the podcast because I’m in charge of everything and can produce whatever I want! Which feels so good! Especially after having story pitches turned down, or writing in a style that is meant to be for a certain audience. For the podcast, I just think of the audience being me and my friends, and if other people like what I’m doing, that’s even better.

Since launching your podcast, anything you have learned along the way that has been useful?

Yes. I think the first thing I learned is that you have to get yourself going on projects by whatever means necessary. I think I wanted to start a podcast for almost a year and just never did it. Then I started telling people I was going to do it and was sort of obliged to follow through. The pilot episode was the result of me asking three friends if I could interview them, knowing full well that once I had those recordings I wasn’t just going to let them sit and gather dust. So I learned that if I feel accountable for doing something, I’ll make myself get it done. I’ve also learned that having a project that isn’t directed or censored by anyone but you is totally liberating and stimulating- now I have a fairly immediate way of sharing the stories and knowledge of the awesome people around me. If I meet someone cool at a party, I can just set up an interview and then whoever listens to the podcast can meet this cool person, too! It makes me excited about working in the information diffusion trade, which can sometimes be a disheartening gig.

What food podcasts do you listen to for inspiration?

I actually don’t listen to a ton of food podcasts- I really like KCRW’s Good Food podcast and the Cherry Bombe podcast on Heritage Radio, but I think most of my inspiration comes from creative and masterfully edited shows like This American Life, Radio Lab, and The Heart, to name a few. I don’t do storytelling like that on my podcast- though I’d like to try to do a few episodes in that style every once in awhile- but those podcasts are representative of productions that make me love this medium so much, and they make me want to aspire to make a better podcast every time!

Related on EcoSalon

Mental Illness is on Notice: The Mental Illness Happy Hour Podcast Changes Everything

The Food Magazine for Feminists is Here: Render

4 Sustainable Fashion Films: The Power of Storytelling to Captivate and Convince

Image: Patrick Breitenbach

The post How to Start a Podcast About Food: Foodie Underground appeared first on EcoSalon.

A tiny house, a farm and the good life. But are you really willing to commit?

Back to the land. Off the grid. Minimalism. Tiny living. Intrigued by any of those words and phrases?

Of course you are. In our modern, fast-paced world of consumerism, we have come to crave respite from our everyday routines, and in the bright age of all-you-could-ever-want media, lifestyle magazines and blogs give it to us.

Who hasn’t flipped through an issue of a magazine on green living with tips on urban farming and thought to themselves, “I want to grow my own food”? Who hasn’t watched a short video about a tiny house and thought to themselves, “I want to live like that”? Who hasn’t read an article on consumerism and thought to themselves, “it’s really time that I minimized”?

We’ve all done it, and we’ll continue to do it. This type of media fuels our aspirations. We all want to be eat and live better, be healthier and wiser, choose a path of intention rather than mindless consumption, so we keep reading, clicking and watching, and for a few brief moments we feel better about ourselves. We feel powerful. We feel in control of our lives. Yes, I too can choose to get rid of most of my wardrobe and commit to only seven articles of clothing!

But the danger lies in the fact that consuming this kind of media is a noncommittal act; few of us take the inspiration and turn it into action.

We are living in a moment where we need change. Actually, we needed it a long time ago, which means that the change we face now is going to have to be radical. We are going to have to live with less. We are going to have to grow some of our own food. We are going to have to change our consumption patterns. Advocating for simplified lifestyles is therefore essential; a reminder that such living is in fact perfectly normal and achievable, not just a fringe activity for the leftist nut jobs.

But the execution is more about glitz and glam than it is reality. I was recently reading a New Yorker profile about the woman behind the magazine Modern Farmer. I  love Modern Farmer. As an urbanite with a ridiculous craving to jump ship and move back to the countryside, it speaks to me. Yes, I want to learn more about goats! But I’d like to think that I am self-aware enough to realize the privilege that I have to read a few articles while drinking my mug of single-origin French press while waiting for my organic chocolate kale cake to bake in the oven. I don’t have to go and put my hands into the dirt, I have a CSA farmer for that. Does this make me enlightened or just full blown bobo?

A farmer told the New Yorker reporter that Modern Farmer was less farm magazine and more of “a fashion magazine for farming.” In fact, Ann Marie Gardner, the founder and editor, herself has described the magazine as “the farming magazine for media professionals.”

Fashion magazines have clothes we’ll never buy, car magazines have cars we’ll never drive, and architecture magazines have homes we’ll never live in. They’re aspirational. But we continue to consume them like starving pigs at a trough.

It’s like when you walk into the cookbook section of a bookstore, all those books with the beautiful pictures of the healthiest food alive. I will eat better! I will make more food! I will learn how to bake bread! But then real life gets in the way, and despite the amount of cooking media – be it print or on television – the hard to swallow reality is that we’re eating worse than ever, and it’s going to take more than just a new cold pressed juice bar to change that.

At their core, aspirations are a good thing; they are what push us to take action. But in a world of easy-to-consume media, we never get to the action part. We click, we share and we move on. I liken it to a friend who once made a comment about people sharing inspirational quotes online. A quote is only inspirational if it actually inspires you to do something. Simply passing it along doesn’t count.

We want to minimize. We want to grow our own food. We want to choose a life of intention. But the risk is that this desire is only skin deep. These lifestyles aren’t glamorous. At times, they’re downright hard. Just ask a farmer. Or someone that actually sold all of their belongings to live out of their van.

Do we aspire to take action or does our action simply go as far as a collection of well shot cabin and tiny house porn on a Pinterest board? My idealistic self would like to believe it’s the former. Because ultimately, we have to believe in change in order to make change. Maybe one day we will in fact have gotten rid of all of the McMansions, and when that day comes, we can surely celebrate.

In the meantime, we have to acknowledge that we’re romanticizing lifestyles while doing nothing to make them a reality. We don’t need to put the blame on the media; we need to put the blame on ourselves. The over glorification is all our own doing.

Sustainability is dirty work; it isn’t just buying a pair of 100 percent hemp yoga pants and carrying around a reusable water bottle. Read a book called “Getting Green Done” if you don’t believe me. We have to take real action, and we should have taken it yesterday.

Let’s not just obsess over these lifestyles, let’s start living them. Not everyone needs to drop everything and become a farmer, but we would do ourselves and our communities a favor if we started acknowledging how essential farmers, and growing food, truly are to our livelihood. We could live without Madison Avenue; we couldn’t live without carrots. Let’s build tiny houses, but not as a second or third home, or as a guest house out the back; lets build them as our only homes. Let’s have a life of less fashion and more substance.

And let’s acknowledge the true impact of our everyday lifestyles – what we eat and what we buy – so that we can start making real change.

Every day we have the chance to do better. It’s time to make sure that we’re not just talking about it, but that we’re actually doing it.

Related on EcoSalon

Minimalist Living: Our Problematic Obsession With Small Spaces

Tiny House Living Goes Waterfront: Think Houseboats

My Tiny House Adventure: Have I Lost My Mind?

Image: Tammy Strobel

The post So You Want to Live in a Tiny House and Be a Farmer? Our Obsession with Lifestyles Most of Us Will Never Commit To appeared first on EcoSalon.

ColumnDisgusted by overwhelming portions of salacious fare served up on the Internet? In today’s “click, monitor, push” information-marketing world, what we “see” is about more than algorithms—it’s about who we are.

I looked at a leaked photo and saw a naked celebrity. To be honest, while I didn’t realize what was on the other end of the hyperlink, there was probably enough information surrounding it that I should have known better. It was an impulse move (part curious, part prurient, part lazy) and I’m a little disgusted with myself for not thinking through my click. It’s not something I’m continuing to beat myself up about, but nevertheless, the event was indeed criminal and my choice was complicit. I’m sorry I did it.

I’m usually better than that when it comes to sensationalism and/or potential privacy breaches (of celebs or otherwise). I didn’t watch the Ray Rice wife-beating elevator video or the ISIL beheadings, I avoid “Read this Fucking Story!” headlines like the plague and I try to train a hypercritical eye on anything dubbed “trending.” I do this because at the end of the day, I know that in many ways I am what I click, and I do my best to exert at least a modicum of control over my intentions and actions when it comes to media consumption.

The consumption-equals-self concept (I think it began with “you are what you eat”) is not a new phenomenon, particularly in the media marketplace. I’m one of those before-and-after folk who, unlike the digital natives, came of age without an Internet, reading paper-based things and taking in what I could through a mere four or six channels on a rabbit-eared television set. Even then, though, I knew that my media interactions had implications beyond the ink stains on my fingers and my Sonny & Cher-strained eyeballs. I knew that my choices percolated up to sinister marketing meetings where decisions were made as to who I was (i.e., my demographic) and what I would be sold going forward.

In some ways, it seemed like a fair deal. I spoke with my choices. The powers that be listened and responded. Quid pro quo, right? (I confess that I secretly wished we were a Nielsen family.) But, still, there was something safely delayed about these transactions. It took time for Madison Avenue, the networks and the rest to understand my habits, construct customized offerings and deliver what I seemed to be willing to view. I assumed I’d eventually get more of what I thought I wanted, but the Mad Men and Media Merchants were somehow remote; there was some solace in the lack of immediacy.

Today’s media is a different beast. Think the above mindspace-commerce formula on steroids. Better still, on crack. As I busily click away, information is instantaneously gathered, crunched and fed back to me in the form of related content. If I click on naked celebs, violent videos, popular tripe and crap like that, then boom!—more naked celebs, violent videos, popular tripe and crap like that. Simple, even for us nerds who know nothing about how the intertubes do the voodoo they do.

Today, we are each in the business of creating sophisticated DIY echo chambers of information. There’s a one-to-one relationship between our surfing and its feedback, with virtually no play in the wheel. Liberal information for liberals. Conservative for conservatives. Shopping for shoppers. Not slowly but surely, but here and now, again and again, in real time until you buy or, as the case may be, buy in.

Smile for the Clickbait

Okay, so it’s no secret, nor is it surprising, that countless soulless algorithms are digesting my info and creating a customized and finely tuned online media environment just for me. And this isn’t always a bad thing. Aside from my Nielsen aspirations, I’m okay when options for that end table I’ve been valiantly surfing for or the first-edition Hemingway I’ve been staring at for months on eBay magically appear in my Facebook feed. And who needs to see those inane (not-my-bent) political ravings or overzealous (not-my-belief-system) religious messages. Not me. And through tech wizardry, I don’t have to, right? Huzzah!

But there’s more to it than that, isn’t there? If we stare a little cross-eyed at our newsfeeds (wherever they reside), we can see what amounts to a selfie—a homemade portrait that depicts something between an accurate view of who we are and some distorted caricature of our likeness. Beyond the algorithmic give and take, the scrolling image reflects something about us and our desires. It’s been said that, if nothing else, we can decide what we pay attention to. In the end, such choices amount to no small thing.

This is not to say that these choices are always easy ones. When the video surfaced of NFL running back Ray Rice assaulting his wife in an elevator, for example, I faced a decision: To click or not to click? No? Maybe, but consider that its going viral led to a much-needed culture storm that continues to reverberate beyond the football league; the phenomenon of millions of people watching that recorded crime translated into critical knowledge and a subsequent national uproar.

But managing my relationship with information is also critical. Can I understand an issue without joining an ugly horde of voyeurs? Can I develop an internal brain-muscle memory that tells me that when I look at something I’ll be participating in a media marketing measurement system that will not only blow back to my own info trough but to the world’s as well?

Consider the birth of widespread disintermediated information flow, which in large part came in the form of the website known as Digg. The site (and its once-ubiquitous share buttons) was a prototype for grander social media to come (Facebook, Twitter and the like) and a crucial turning point in the democratization of editorial decision-making. (Full disclosure: My brother was CEO at the time.) In its 2009 heyday, Digg boasted 45 million users.

It more or less worked like this: When you came across something on the Web that interested you, you could Digg it by clicking a button associated with the story. This acted essentially as a thumbs-up vote, which would then determine its rise or fall on the Digg homepage. This meant users chose what was top-priority news and what wasn’t. The upside was enormous: Events previously buried by jaded, ignorant or bought editorial gatekeepers could jump to the top of the pops.

As with most big ideas, however, there’s a double edge to this otherwise gallant swordplay. If the world is watching, say, the Arab Spring or a maybe an important political debate, and that activity is instantly measured and widely promoted based on its popularity, that’s a good thing. But what about mob rule? I remember when naked Paris Hilton photos rose to the top of the Web world (with Digg’s help, by the way). What else was happening on that day? I wonder.

Mirror, Mirror

In a world (go ahead, say it like the guy on the movie trailers—there’s a dubious air about all of this) where we clickers increasingly decide what’s news, what’s worth looking at and what’s not, we more or less get exactly what we deserve. We can debate all millennium about the advantages or disadvantages of such people power (mob rule?) or algorithm-based marketing (stalking?), but the truth is, in one form or another, these formulas have been in play since well before the penny press—and they’re here to stay. Bitching about it is kind of like cooking dinner and then complaining that the chef is a talentless hack who’s serving up a bunch of slop.

What’s important, then, is how what we see on our screens is up to us as a culture of users—which, of course, means it’s ultimately up to us as individuals. There’s black and white—I should not have opened the naked celeb link. It shouldn’t have taken much thought to know what I was doing and thus supporting. And then there’s nuance—I can follow certain stories (domestic violence vis-à-vis Ray Rice or Middle East policy vis-à-vis the ISIL insanity) without voting for the dissemination of grotesque and sometimes even criminal bits and bytes on the Web.

What’s required for navigating this, on a personal level, is taking a moment to reflect before we open a link. Why do we blindly click? Do we think about the blowback that will be mainlined not only into our own info-intake valves, but into our culture as a whole? All told, our impulses are too often sadly unmediated: Curious. (What’s everyone going on about?) Prurient. (“She’s kind of hot. What’s behind this curtain?”) Lazy. (Cool! Click!) Going forward, I’m going to try to do a better job of casting my brain-space ballot. And the next time I feel the urge to get all indignant about “information” that comes my way, I’ll keep this in mind: Often, we get just what we ask for.

Scott Adelson is EcoSalon’s Senior Editor of HyperKulture, a monthly column that explores opening cultural doors to initiate personal change. He is also the author of InPRINT, which reviews and discusses books, new and old. You can reach him at scott at adelson dot org and follow him @scottadelson on Twitter.

Related on EcoSalon

HyperKulture: Multiple Personality Order – Embracing Your Inner Yours

HyperKulture: Living in the Past – You Can’t Go Back… Why Would You Want To?

HyperKulture: Making Space for Your Inner Homebody – A Case for the Great Indoors

HyperKulture: You May Ask Yourself, ‘How Did I Get Here?’ – The Pitfalls of Passion Drift

HyperKulture: Yes Means Yes Means What? – Miley, Rihanna and Me

Images: Chris Gilmore (top), SamahR (middle) and Eiti Kimura. 

The post Beyond the Algorithms – Don’t Look Now, But You Are What You Click: HyperKulture appeared first on EcoSalon.

ColumnJill Abramson, The New York Times’ top dog, and first female executive editor, was fired.

We should have seen this coming. Jill ABRAmson. Bra is right there in her name!

As the scandal started to unfold, it seemed like a clear case of sexism at work. The New Yorker reported that the trouble for Abramson may have escalated when she found out that her pay and her pension benefits as both executive editor and, before that, as managing editor, were less what her male predecessor received.

An associate told the magazine that when she spoke up, it reinforced her reputation as “pushy,” a term used almost exclusively to talk about women.

Issues surrounding “significant” pay discrepancy have been widely disputed by the Times, and the New Yorker has since updated its report. But, what we’re left with is another “pushy” broad pushed out of the C-suite. And, so far, that seems to be a story that’s sticking.

The Times reportedly wanted her departure to be less dramatic than it has been, but Abramson insisted they fire her — because that’s what was happening. It was the truth and she wanted the truth to be out there. Pushy indeed! Now, because of social media and Abramson’s daughter, #pushy is now a hashtag, joining the ranks of #BanBossy.

As the scheduled keynote speaker at Wake Forest University’s graduation this week, Abramson had to do something all editors are familiar with: a rewrite. According to the Washington Post, a Wake Forest official said the original draft of her speech focused on the importance of media freedom.

While I imagine she wasn’t conceptualizing her topic in this way, it’s interesting to think about media freedom in terms of her right as a woman leading her field to run her newsroom — hard-assed news guys are legendary — as she saw fit.

All of this has gotten me thinking about my own experience in various editorial settings. So, in solidarity with Jill Abramson and women everywhere, I offer you this list of four anecdotes from my professional life between 2000 and today to illustrate that shit like this happens to the Jills of the world, and also to the Libbys.

1. As the Editor-In-Chief of a magazine, I worked directly for the publisher. He referred to me exclusively as “Girl.” When we disagreed about something, he would say, “Girl, you’re a cunt.” Sweet, right?

2. I once received this unsolicited performance review from a superior at an office party: “It’s not you I don’t like, it’s your face.” My read on this was that it was a version of, “Why don’t you smile?” which is something I hate. I was part of an opinionated, smart leadership team — consisting mainly of men — and many of us were quick with an eyeroll. As far as I know, I was the only one made to justify my physical reactions to conflict.

3. A publisher I worked for owed me three months’ pay. When I finally refused to stop working until I received said payment, he pointed out that the company wasn’t doing well and he had a wife and family to support. He kind of trailed off waiting for me, I think, to put my right to get paid to the side to support him in his plight as a big manly provider. This illustrates one of my favorite recurring sexism at work themes: the idea that women work for fun, not for money.

4. I worked for one media company where drinking heavily was just kind of what we all did on group outings. One night, I overheard a middle-aged male VP say this to a group of 20-something female employees: “I’m feeling kind of hand-jobby.”

What I learned from all of these experiences is that even when you’re working with primarily good people — which most of these guys actually were — gender bias sneaks in. In some cases, it punches you in the gut.

As leaders, we can’t laugh it off when we’re called a bitch for disagreeing with something, when we’re labeled as pushy or reprimanded for being too difficult.

When we are hired to lead, we must be allowed to be leaders.

I’m not an insider in the Jill Abramson scandal, and I am not saying that she was fired because she is a woman. I don’t know. But I do know that in her speech to the new graduates, her first public comment on her departure from the Times, she said to, “Show what you’re made of.”

Maybe her speech was actually about media freedom after all.

That Happened is Libby Lowe’s weekly column for EcoSalon analyzing media, news and pop culture through a feminist lens. Keep in touch with Libby @LibbyLowe.

Related on EcoSalon

Feminism According to Sheryl Sandberg

Working Girl to Work-Wife: Sexism at Work

Equality and Your Paycheck: That Hasn’t Happened

Image: Alexander Torrenegra Creative Commons 

The post The NYT Fired Jill Abramson: That Happened appeared first on EcoSalon.

Why are we all part of Alec Baldwin’s public good-bye?

Whether you agree or disagree with Alec Baldwin is irrelevant.

The shallow media has had a dazzling run slashing actor Alec Baldwin. Following his altercation with a TMZ paparazzi, Baldwin has been hit with an outcry of criticisms and cold shoulders from the public, and the media and entertainment industries. His personal New York Magazine article published yesterday was a lay-it-all-on-the-line account of his life over the last few years, and why that was the last time he will “talk about [his] personal life in an American publication ever again.”

But why should we really care?

Alec Baldwin’s daily life — coffee runs, bike rides — all the things you and I do outside of our four walls without interruption, is literally someone’s job to document and sell. Baldwin (and all celebrities) has been trailed by photographers and videographers, just to capture an inside snapshot. And the worse the image, the better the story, the higher the paycheck.

His public ‘I’m Done’ statement speaks beyond him and his career. Between the lines of the essay, a power struggle of human dignity vs. entertainment lurks.

As fun as it may be sometimes to get an inside human glimpse of celebrity life of these beautiful, talented and wealthy individuals, it is nothing but entertainment. And yet, isn’t it ethically wrong for someone’s personal life to be entertainment? Their lives are filled with as much a mixture of doubt and joy as anyone’s.

For all the mindfulness that has entered our culture, so has the degradation of respect for privacy.

Think about it. The shallow media (which has grown to include most major media outlets that used to focus more on straight news) lives off celebrities’ personal, often sacred moments. Like when Valentino issued a press release promoting the designer’s handbag that Amy Adams was spotted carrying into Philip Seymour Hoffman’s funeral.

People, just like you and me, are experiencing their most hurtful human events, not only internally, but throughout news feeds around the globe.

Moreover, this form of media is distracting us from what is really news, like pivotal events that are happening around the world, such as the uprising on the streets of Kiev.

Rather than informing ourselves on how to create a better world we are matching ourselves up to people. It’s petty. So, no wonder why people are saying our generation needs a good ass kicking, and Alec Baldwin is saying good-bye to public life. We are criticizing rather than encouraging. Degrading rather than supporting.

“The heart, the arteries of the country are now clogged with hate,” says Baldwin in his statement.

And in today’s viral society the exposure happens quicker and more often.

“You’re out there in a world where if you do make a mistake, it echoes in a digital canyon forever,” said Baldwin.

Luckily, the truth is, we all have a choice as to which voice we will let resonate.

Related on Ecosalon

Consciousness and Compassion In Our (Stimulated) Universe

Celebrity Kids Vs. Paparazzi: A Bystander Tells All

image: Wikicommons

The post What Alec Baldwin’s ‘I’m Done’ Letter Is Showing Us About Media (and Ourselves) appeared first on EcoSalon.

ColumnIs feminism’s next battleground in kitchens and restaurants?

In case you missed it, Time magazine recently ran a cover story titled “The Gods of Food.” The online media world of course erupted when it was quickly discovered that these “gods” of food were just that: gods. The list of the culinary elite failed to include a woman.

If you thought the under representation of women was just at Fortune 500 companies and politics, think again. Boy’s clubs are everywhere. But what’s worse is how the media exacerbates this cycle. As Amanda Cohen, chef at Dirty Candy put it in the New York Times, “The reality of the situation is that there are lots of women in professional kitchens, and there always have been, but for some reason the press choose not to cover them.”

It’s a problem of under representation in the industry itself, but it’s also a problem of image and how the media portrays women.

I wrote about this topic last week for an online French publication (if your college French is up to par, attack it here), because if you think the U.S. is the only one experiencing this problem, you’re wrong. At around the same time the “Gods of Food” article came out, so did “Génération New French Bistrot” in L’Express, a French weekly. Again, no ladies to be found. But there was “Eat Girls: La nouvelle génération des chefs” that Madame Figaro published, a selection of very talented and well-respected female chefs.

The only problem? The main photo was all of the women decked out in skintight black outfits – a mini skirt here, a pair of pleather pants there – and lips bright red with lipstick. Not only are these women talented, the article pointed out, but they are “cool and sexy.” I’ll tell you one thing: red lipstick isn’t a kitchen utensil that will help you get food out the door to hundreds of customers when you’re running a restaurant.

Pair that photo next to the lead image of “Gods of Food” and you can see the problem: sexy women, professional men. A gender stereotype that is exacerbated in all domains.

“But wait! We’re women, we’re supposed to be sexy! If we’re not sexy, are we still women?” That’s what the media would like to have us believe.

I saw an article last week with tips on transitioning from the kitchen to the dinner table. Yes, it was in fact a piece on how to cook a fabulous Thanksgiving dinner and still manage to look hot at the dinner table. From chef to host in 5 minutes flat! Once you’ve gotten rid of the apron, you’ll need two coats of volumizing mascara and some lip stain in case you were wondering.

Therein lies the problem. (And for the record, your college feminism professor is squirming right now.)

Culturally, when it comes to food, we’re often stuck in a 1950s image of women. It was almost like the copyright on a Better Homes and Gardens article from 1951 just ran out and the website decided to reprint it, with a few tweaks here and there to accommodate for modern makeup tips.

No matter how progressive we think we are, we continue to be bogged down in gender roles. Women put daily food on the table. They make meals. Men, however, cook professionally. They make works of art.

As Michael Pollan wrote in his recent book “Cooked”:

“Since ancient times, a few special types of cooking have enjoyed considerable prestige : Homer’s warriors barbecued their own joints of meat at no cost to their heroic status or masculinity. And ever since, it has been socially acceptable for men to cook in public and professionally – for money… But for most of history most of humanity’s food has been cooked by women working out of public view and without public recognition. Except for the rare ceremonial traditions over which men preside… cooking has traditionally been women’s work, part and parcel of homemaking and childcare, and therefore undeserving of serious – i.e. male – attention.”

So, until we start to work on our gender imaging, and think about feminism in the kitchen, we can expect more of the same.

As Adeline Grattard, one of the female chefs featured in the Madame Figaro article told Grub Street, “I don’t think it helps us — the opposite in fact. We’re not ‘women.’ We’re chefs. Putting the female part at the forefront is a negative thing… It discredits our importance in the métier.”

Exactly. They are chefs. Not sexy chefs. Not cool chefs. Just chefs. They should be respected for what they do, and the mass media should be challenged to diversify its coverage of the food industry and when it talks about women, do it in a way that honors their work not their looks.

Don’t want sexism in the food industry? Support chefs not because they’re famous and mega stars and a magazine assured you that an 18 course tasting menu simply was the “in” thing right now, but because their food is good, because they are innovative and doing things differently and because they are skilled, talented and passionate about their jobs.

Related on EcoSalon:

Foodie Underground: Foodie Feminism

14 Feminist Books Someone Should Write

11 Influential Eco Chefs Who Are Changing the Way We Think About Food

This is the latest installment of Anna Brones’ weekly column at EcoSalon: Foodie Underground, an exploration of what’s new and different in the underground movement, and how we make the topic of good food more accessible to everyone. More musings on the topic can be found at www.foodieunderground.com.

Image: Lori L. Stalteri

The post Feminism in the Kitchen: Foodie Underground appeared first on EcoSalon.

Our planet is changing, and the question to ask now is: how much?

From melting Arctic ice to sea level changes, the scientific evidence is piling up that global warming isn’t a distant threat – it’s all around us. We are now at the halfway mark in the 100-month predicted window of action to prevent a rise of 2 degrees Celsius, beyond which a climatic “domino effect” is likely to kick in, an increasing unpredictable reinforcing mechanism that is too complex for climate scientists to predict.

At this halfway point, the Guardian has turned to its columnists, its readers and to learned public figures to ask “what would you suggest we do next?” The answers, which can be accessed from an interactive splash-page, range from pragmatic acceptance to staunch support for hardline measures, from personal goals to yardsticks our governments must adhere to, it’s 50 pieces of fascinating, timely reading.

Access it here.

Image: http://heatherbuckley.co.uk

The post Call To Action: 50 Steps To Deal With A Changing World appeared first on EcoSalon.

A magazine that’s paying attention to what’s good in the world.

The current state of global affairs is overwhelming, and if traditional news and media had their way, we would be convinced that we live in a dismal and dangerous world. Fortunately there are some outlets that are pushing back against the norm. The Intelligent Optimist is one of them.

You might know The Intelligent Optimist under its former name: Ode magazine. Not just a magazine, it’s a community of people who believe that more is going right than wrong in the world.

As Jurriaan Kamp, Editor-in-Chief, puts it:

Intelligent optimism is a way of life. In fact, it is the way of life until we lose it. Many of us do. Somewhere, at some particular point in time, our disappointments and failures become too overwhelming, and we give up. Fear and insecurity arise, and we start surrendering to pessimism. Some will argue that it is wise to be realistic, and they see the optimist as unrealistic. I argue that optimism—intelligent, not mindless, optimism—is the only realistic strategy for life.

With the new name comes a launch party, and if you are in the San Francisco area, you will be sure to want to put it on your calendar.

WHAT: The Intelligent Optimist Launch Party

Headlining the event will be one of the most sought-after speakers in the world, Boston Philharmonic Orchestra conductor Benjamin Zander, whose TED talk has attracted almost 3 million viewers. Zander has given the keynote address at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, and his latest recording, with London’s Philharmonic Orchestra, was nominated for a Grammy Award.

Zander is also the co-author of The Art of Possibility, hailed as a landmark work on the triumph of human creativity’s potential. “To be an intelligent optimist, you have to master the art of possibility,” he says. But what is the art of possibility? Zander’s answer will have audience members alternately rolling in the aisles and dabbing their eyes.

WHERE: Fort Mason Center

WHEN: Wednesday September 26, 2012, 7-8:30 pm (you can also catch the event live on webcast)

WHY: Because there’s a lot of good going on in the world, and it’s time we started paying attention to it.

You can score a free digital copy of the first digital issue of The Intelligent Optimist here.

The post Celebrate Possibility at The Intelligent Optimist Launch Party in San Francisco, September 26 appeared first on EcoSalon.

ColumnRead something different. Sustain your mind.

I’m reading Beloved by Toni Morrison. It’s a good thing too, and not just because it’s a brilliant novel. The truth is that I never got around to this acclaimed classic for all the wrong reasons. In fact, looking back on why this book escaped me brings up something I think I’ve always been aware of, but tend to avoid talking about.

Why have I not read Beloved? A great many people consider it to be a—if not the—Great American Novel. Published in 1987, the book depicts slavery, its aftermath, and its impact on African-American families—specifically mother-daughter relationships. It’s beautifully written, and as arresting and powerful as anything I’ve ever read. It won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 1988 and is consistently on every “best books of all-time” list worth its salt. Yet sadly, it’s within all these points that I find my answer.

Truth be told, and as dry as it sounds, I’m a white, middle-class man. While I fancy myself a progressive thinker, Morrison’s book challenges my fiction comfort zone—that is to say, my “go to” list of what I normally choose to read. It’s not that I ever thought Beloved wouldn’t be a quality read—it’s just that I can be lazy. I’ve always thought of the book as intensely female- and family-oriented, and, of course, it’s focused on an excruciating, criminal and evil part of our cultural heritage. It’s not that I purposely choose to avoid these perspectives and subjects—it’s just that given the choice, I’ll usually default to something “more my speed.” My easy brain says: “Right. Pass. Maybe one day.”

Now I think I do better than most when it comes to reading outside my box. My reviews come in around the 50/50 men-to-women ratio and I even wrote a piece encouraging a good-faith gender exchange of reading material. But the fact remains: My bookshelves are crammed with people like me—white, middle-class men. (Ouch.) Yes, among my collected authors are writers of different genders, ethnicities and sexual orientations. I even have a couple books by conservatives. Hell, I have dozens of books by people who aren’t even like me!

Dozens!

(Yeah. I own many hundreds of books.)

Taking Action

Here’s how I came to be reading Beloved (and how I almost, stupidly, passed on the great book yet again): A couple of weeks back I was writing an InPRINT column on historical fiction. My plan was to mention some examples in the essay portion of the story, and then recommend 10 terrific titles. Because of my audience (and yes, because I have at least some commitment to broadening my brain), I went through my usual drill before choosing which books to include and asked myself: How many of these are by men and how many by women? How many are by African Americans or other people of color? Have I included writers with varying sexual orientations? Then a similar examination of plot lines, characters and themes: Is there a healthy mix? “Hmm. I should add another woman… and another person of color. I got it! Beloved! Two birds with one stone!” Off I went to my local bookstore.

On the way I began to have second thoughts. Was I manipulating my list for gender, race and political reasons? Was I forcing myself to read something that I might not ordinarily pick up because it was the “correct” thing to do? Was I being reactive to the fact that our media and publishing culture has been both sexist and racist in its coverage and promotion of the fiction we read?

“Yes, yes and yes!”

And so I stepped on the gas. And yes, Beloved is an amazing book. (I’ll let you know more about it when I’m finished.)

A Challenge For Us All

It is true that we live in a world that’s biased, bought and paid for when it comes to the fiction that’s proffered in our bookstore windows and on our computer screens. Indeed, this applies to almost all of the information we’re encouraged to take in these days (see what passes as “news”). The largest media outlets, book publishers and bookstores all, for many reasons, seem to have made little progress when it comes to breaking through diversity barriers in terms of gender, race and sexual orientation. And while that could be the biggest story in fiction today, there’s one place we can all start to address the issue—with our own choices.

Each of us can personally challenge ourselves to actively reach out and encounter who and what takes us outside what we know. For those of us who love fiction, there is no excuse not to read about the world from a point of view other than our own. Indeed, it is through the eyes of others that we can best gain a more robust perspective of our culture—its subjective truths and glories and failings as they apply to more than just our own insular lives. For this white boy that includes following a Nobel Prize-winning, master storyteller into the tragic life of an African American mother and slave. Where might it lead you?

________________________

With your help, InPRINT would like to run a follow-up to this column. We’d like to hear from you about your experiences reading a story by someone representing a point of reference or view outside your box. Better still, go out and get such a book now. Take some action to broaden your horizons, and then tell us about it. You can reach us at InPRINT@ecosalon.com.

Editor’s note: News & Culture contributor Scott Adelson’s biweekly column, InPRINT, reviews and discusses books new and old, as well as examines issues in publishing. You can reach him at InPRINT@ecosalon.com.

ALSO CHECK OUT:

InPRINT: Once Upon a Time: Great Historical Fiction – 1 Genre, 10 Novel, 5 Centuries

InPRINT: John Irving is Angry – Again.

InPRINT: You Want Erotic? The Countless Shades of Anaïs Nin

InPRINT: Albert Camus and the Biggest Question of All

InPRINT: Gatsby, Paradise and the 1% – F. Scott Fitzgerald’s Pre-Occupation

Top image: cliff1066TM

The post InPRINT: A Novel Challenge – Take Action and Read Outside Your Box appeared first on EcoSalon.