#this is my response to an mdl comment

[kalena-henden]

Taemin's whole life he's been pushed to be the company's next leader with little time to think of anything else because of how busy he was with work. Living with his family allowed for constant reinforcement of those self-sacrificing expectations at home as well. His year in jail gave Taemin a reprieve from both his work and his family. That's alot of time off to reflect on his life and what he wants out of it. One of the things he kept coming back to as he worked out in jail daily is how much he enjoyed training with Hyoshim and missed spending time with her. I'm sure this is what led to him to start looking at her in a romantic light. Which in and of itself is a natural thing.

When Taemin first calls Hyoshim after he's released, she is relieved and happy to hear from him again. She seemed to like him as a person and client. However, when he wants to start spending personal time with her, she begins to show signs of discomfort. This is the disconnect. During her year away from him, Hyoshim worried about Taemin as a person but this did not lead to any romantic awaking on her end. After a few times hanging out with him out of obligation, she only felt increasingly aware of the divide between them. Taemin feels at ease with her in a way he doesn't with his colleagues or even family. You can see it in the way he interacts with her and why he's trying to share about his life with her. Unfortunately for Taemin, Hyoshim doesn't feel the same. A handsome, wealthy man paying attention to her isn't giving her dreams of becoming his Cinderella. His notice feels like a burden she wants to escape. Each interaction keeps confirming that she doesn't want a romantic relationship with him.

The problem is that Taemin has given up his autonomy in every area of his life out of filial duty, exactly like Hyoshim. He's been unable to break free, but holding onto Hyoshim feels like a lifeline. He's about to hit his boiling point. If he lets go of the idea of a romantic relationship with her, I think he actually might break because there is no valve to release the pressure building up in his life. It's why he refuses to give up on her even though he knows she's not interested. He's grasping at his last shred of hope for happiness.

What Taemin doesn't realize is Hyoshim is not the right person for him because she is repeating his mistakes in her own life. They both need someone who will give them the encouragement and support to stand up to their superiors at work and families at home to take control of their own lives. This is the only way for both of them to truly find happiness.

Taeho appears to be the right person for Hyoshim. They challenge each other, making them consider things from a new perspective. Until recently, they've done this in a combative way but moving forward I see them doing this in a more respectful way. This brutal honesty has naturally led to an ease and comfort between them that will pave the way for their romance.

While it's a little early, it appears that the reporter is a good match for Taemin. Their interactions have also been combative and brutally honest. They don't hesitate to speak their minds to each other. Her family business is powerful enough to help him wield that power to help sway his company's board members. Also, she would be no pushover for Taemin's mom to control. Instead, she would flick his mom away like the annoying bug she is, giving Taemin the freedom to do as he pleases. Right now he's bristling at her advances, the way Hyoshim is bristling at his. The looming question is will he see the light before it's too late? Before he does, I think he's going to lash out in the wrong ways that will hurt rather than help him.

[bloomingundertheshadows]

About to put a pretty controversial take about this season on here. Be warned.

I think people are giving producers way too much crap about creating drama this season. On some level, yes, adding the secret date cards and having SM choose the rooms are keep it a secret are them intentionally injecting chaos into the house. I even made a post last week about how producers are wayyyy more active and chaos creating, which I stand by, but I don't think it's somehow ruining the season.

I don't think the date cards or even them keeping the room choices a secret are meddling too much or ruining the contestants' abilities to form relationships. I think there might be something to be said about editing focusing too much on the times contestants are asking 'do you like me' etc, but people are acting like production is actually ruining the season.

And what I'm basically trying to say is what I touched on in my last His Man 3 post - the contestants choices in how they react to a given situation ( i.e SM refusing to just tell Hwi he wants to date) is equally or even more so responsible for the chaos that is unfolding.

I think that if all this stuff happened last season, it would not have been that big of a deal. JS was in a similar position to Hwi, but he was just way more relaxed and unbothered about SH going on other dates. Last seasons cast was just a lot better at not showing external stress and were frankly a lot less anxious. This season they're just much more...fiery I guess is the word? High energy is how I feel watching them.

If anyone is watching The Ampliverse recaps (which you should, they're the highlight of my week), they talked about how there's not anyone right now who has chemistry the was JS&SH or HJ&MS did. That may be a casting issue or it may just be because we're only at episode 6 (didn't get our best dates on His Man 2 until Day 4). And that is 100% playing into what is happening right now where no one is really sure they want to just commit to one person.

Last season, I also think the contestants had the advantage of going on dates they weren't as excited about first. SH went on a date with HJ and SW before JS and MS went on two dates with JS. Tbh, I think that if SH went on a date with JS first, last season would have been hella more stressful than the cozy little season it ended up being.

I would even make the argument that a secret extra date card would have made MS's life so much better because he would have gone on a date with both HJin and HJoon and the totally chaos at the end wouldn't have happened.

Contestants last season were just more decisive in what they wanted. Only like 1-3 people were interested in exploring multiple men. And I think that's just how the cookie crumbles sometimes when you cast. There's only 8 people, so maybe sometimes they just fall into place like last season. Or maybe it's less clear like this season.

I'm not saying production is saint worthy, and there's always room for improvement. The secret missions almost feel tooo on the nose for any given situation, and I wish they were much more random. Like maybe the person who got the least calls gets a special advantage or you just randomly find a card when you're outside smoking. IDK.

But, mdl and the His Man Youtube comment section are basically aflame with people saying they're ruining the show. And I just don't feel like that's an accurate placement of "blame".

I'm sure some people will have made it to the bottom and completely disagree with me. I'm not going to go bat for random TV show producers or put that much work into defending them. It's fine if the added stuff is making the show too high stress or dramatic for you. I was also expecting the show to be much more chill given the tone that last season set.

I also don't want to come off like I'm somehow blaming the very real people contestants on the show for making sometimes (frankly) boneheaded decisions.

But I do think it might be worth everyone asking if PD is actually sabotaging them or if this stress is a consequence of having real people with human emotions and faults be the center of a dating show.

[boyfriendsmalec]

SPOILERS FOR THE EIGHTH SENSE EP 5+6 (and theories on future episodes)

So I have MANY thoughts on the new episodes of The Eighth Sense. But mostly I first wanted to talk on the ending scene(s) since I’m already seeing people starting to get confused about the ocean kiss scene cutting to Jaewon and Jihyun in bed to the scene with Jihyun drowning.

I personally believe those two scenes are future scenes (of course the drowning scene definitely is). I think the “current” timeline ends in the episode with Jaewon and Jihyun kissing in the water. My best guess is that the jump cut is showing their next trip to the beach (the bed scene + the drowning scene). Which probably happens around episode 8/9? I figure episode 7 will be more fluffy with Jaewon and Jihyun first dating and being “official” (including scenes like them holding hands in the car like we saw in the trailer).

Also now knowing the history of Jaewon’s brother, Jaewon’s trauma of seeing his brother dying in front of him and feeling like he couldn’t protect him, we’re seeing the cycle repeat with Jihyun. (However, this time Jihyun will survive. Because no this isn’t a story about Jaewon getting retraumatized by again losing the person closest to him and feeling responsible for it)

Anyway I know there’s people out there who dislike the editing of this show because it confuses them about the timeline. Clearly as we saw in tonight’s episodes we will get things out of order sometimes (like seeing Jaewon’s conversation with his therapist that cut off from a prior episode). But I like feeling as if I’m putting the puzzle pieces together and that not everything is necessarily clearly spelled out for us, that the writers allow the audience to form their own theories.

I know this is just probably me coming from reading MDL comments (where people have been slamming on the editing of this show) but you can’t judge a show fully like this without seeing it in its entirety. I think it’s obvious this show is not filmed like a typical Korean drama in large part due to the influence of a European co-director. And I can say I’ve watched many European shows that similarly have a vibe to The Eighth Sense where you have to put the puzzle pieces together yourself. That not everything is clear in the beginning but it all comes together in the end. And I like that this show is different. I love that I can theorize and pick apart this show (looking at all the posts on color theory, breakdowns of Jaewon and Jihyun’s characters, etc.)

That all being said this show continues to impress and I eagerly await more!

[gillianthecat]

Gonna end my semi-intensive campaign for the best kiss bracket here. I can see the writing on the wall: I've looked at the number of voters in each poll, and not only is this round decided, I can already tell who will win the semi-finals and the finals.

I was having a lot of fun campaigning and analyzing and updating my posts. But it stopped being fun. The one I don't want to win is going to win it all, and in the next round campaigning for OFC over PatPran is going to feel unnecessarily divisive.

I went into it as a fun way to talk about BL kisses, but my hater's heart has emerged a little to strongly, which isn't fun for me.

At some point I may write about my thoughts and feelings about Kinnporsche. Both the show itself, and also the fandom around it; which fascinates and baffles me, and sometimes annoys me, and is pushing me to face the fact that in some ways I can't help but be a contrarian. Seeing something get super popular that I have mixed feelings about, or think is only ok, usually pushes me to the other direction and dislike the thing and see its flaws.

In general I also tend to get tired even of shows I love if I'm overexposed to them. So I have filters even for things I really liked, like The Eclipse, Bad Buddy and Big Dragon because I was reaching saturation point and didn't want to stop liking them.

None of this is self-knowledge that's new to me; I've been thinking about it vaguely all along, but this poll is pushing it to the forefront. Even though I assumed from the beginning KP would win, my feelings about seeing it beating out other shows are stronger than expected.

And on an intellectual level, I am just so fascinated by why it is THE show out of all BL shows that has developed such an enormous fandom. My impression is that most fans of BL are fans of the genre as a whole, or at least multiple shows, but that there are large numbers KP fans who are fans of only that. (I don't know if that's accurate though. I've drafted a poll to try and get some of the demographics of that, though I suspect my reach isn't big enough to get a enough responses to get any real answers about it.)

Don't get me wrong, I was completely absorbed when I binged the first half of the series in late June. And also went a little crazy over vegaspete when I binged the second half after the whole show was out. It was the show that got me talking on tumblr, and in that way was the first show that made me part of a "fandom." So I can see why people get obsessed with it. Just not sure why there are so many more than for other good BL shows.

Is it because iQIYI did such heavy advertising? I actually heard of the show several months before I even heard of BL, and then watched it mainly because iQIYI kept reminding me about it. For me, it became a gateway to BL more generally, but perhaps there are a lot of fans who just stopped with that?

Is there also a large group of people who were watching BL casually but weren't particularly BL fans, and then watched KP and thought it better than anything other BL? I've seen scattered comments with those opinions, but not sure how broad-spread it is. (I suppose if I'm feeling very curious and very brave I could go into the comments and reviews on KP's MDL page, which might give me some idea of numbers.)

With how my ADHD manifests, I don't have the attention span to become devoted to one show at the exclusion of all others, and so I can't really understand the mindset of fans who do fandom like that. (For any show, be it Star Wars or Marvel or The Untamed.) But I guess there are many people who do participate in fandoms that way? And KP is one of the shows that many of that style of fan found?

Is it the mafia plot? (there have been other mafia plots.) Is it how glossy and expensive it all looked, and the truly excellent cinematography? Is it how high heat the sex scenes were? (Were they significantly higher heat than anything previous though? Could be.)

Is there something about Kinn and Porsche as a couple that is particularly compelling to people? (I don't personally think so, certainly not compared to other BL couples. For me their story kinda petered out once they got together. And I found Mile's acting serviceable, but not that compelling, but I do see that he has lots of fans so perhaps it's just me.)

If so, what is unique about them? Enemies to lovers, boss-employee, torn between duty and love—I guess that combo is somewhat unique? I can't think of other shows off the top of my head now at least.

Is it the darkness and danger and plottiness of the mafia story? I know that sort of thing tends to engender obsessive fandoms. Are there other shows that have that too? I can see why if that's your thing, you wouldn't be into more slice of life BL like Old Fashion Cupcake or Semantic Error, or the youthful high jinx of most HS or Uni set shows.

Some combination of all of that? Some luck of timing? Did the advertising have a significantly bigger reach than for any other BL? With KP being my entry point into BL, I'm not able to compare with what the fandom was like before it came out.

Anyway, not sure if this is coherent, and absolutely NOT trying to start discourse. But if you do have theories you feel like sharing about how KP ended up with the fandom it has, I'd love to hear them. Or do you think I'm wrong and its fandom actually isn't unique for BL?

For context, the ten most popular BL shows on MDL are

The Untamed (2019) - 83,572

2Gether (2020) - 60,952

TharnType (2019) - 57,444

Until We Meet Again (2019) - 55,451

KinnPorsche (2022) - 52,838

Where Your Eyes Linger (2020) - 50,310

Semantic Error (2022) - 50,309

Theory of Love (2019) - 49,263

Bad Buddy (2021) - 48,411

Love By Chance (2018) - 46,652

I'm measuring "popularity" by the number of MDL users who list the show as watched. The show on MDL with the most watchers of everything is Goblin (aka Guardian: The Lonely and Great God) with 199,983.

The Untamed I would say has it's own fandom, overlapping with but distinct from BL fans. In some ways (other than heat levels) I can see it as a model of what might make KP so uniquely popular as well - complex plot, violent danger, and angst, and lovers kept apart by circumstance.

Most of the other shows on the list are popular Thai BL from three to four years ago, so it makes sense to me why they've accumulated lots of watchers. Where Your Eyes Linger, at number 6, surprised me, I don't hear much about it on tumblr these days and would have guessed it was much further down. KinnPorsche and Semantic Error are the newest shows on the list, coming out around the same time last year. But although I hear a lot of love for SE, I don't see it having an obsessive one-show fandom like KP does. I do see a lot of very devoted Bad Buddy fans, but again, most of them seem to also be general BL fans.

Addendum: (For the record, my assumption/prediction is that KP and PatPran will win their respective semifinals, and KP will win it all, by at least a 20 percentage point difference.)

[absolutebl]

Top 10 BLs Out of China 

(best BLs from China in no particular order, and all containing problematic tropes or serious censorship or both - triggers all ‘round) 

Addicted Heroin (2016) Viki - Censored mid series but high heat classic BL prior to that, weird ending, still my favorite. Unfinished due to censorship but still very good, well acted and shot, high school set, rich kid falls madly for the genius poor kid in his class, starts an aggressive pursuit, includes kidnapping for love, obsession, stepbrother trope, plus some cheating. 

Word of Honor (2021) Viki & YouTube - Censored wuxia bromance, amorphous ending. Two murder-gay assassins (pining sunshine/tsundere) who manage to be insanely gay for two boys who will never be allowed to kiss. Tropes include: wuxia, soulmates, paranormal, historical, and fantasy elements.

The Untamed Special Edition BL Cut (2020) YouTube - Censored wuxia bromance, amorphous ending. Probubly the best known BL of its kind out of China and responsible for bring many fans to the BL side. 

Guardian (2018) grey - Censored bromance, episodic urban fantasy police procedural, one of the most epic long term pinings in the history of long term pinings. 

Advance Bravely (2017) grey - Bodyguard romance censored mid series, weird ending. I actually kinda like this but it is very much censored has themes of revenge, salvation, infiltration, and domesticity. Hard to find and the rip is terrible. 

My Esports Genius Brother (2021) GaGa - A strangely cute somewhat incomprehensible censored magical realism BL micro series about fated mates who balance each other out and must find the courage to stay together. More here. 

Like Love: I Love You As a Man 1 & 2 (2014-2105) YouTube grey - Pre-censorship with an HEA, also explicit, yeah China once did that. Classic early yaoi style BL college romance for a rich popular jock type and a super nerd. 

Mr. CEO is Falling in Love with Him (2017) grey - Heavily censored bromance that says what it does on the tin, but they basically end up living together. 

S.C.I. AKA SCI Mysteries (2018) YouTube - Out of Hong Kong but they tend to act similar to Mainland China around censorship, this is a police procedural with a censored bromance main couple of police investigators who live together basically as husbands, it’s just not talked about. This is one of the first BLs I ever saw (I found their relationship very confusing). 

Irresistible Love: Secret of the Valet 1 & 2 AKA Uncontrolled Love (2016) YouTube grey - Censored obsession romance but there’s an alt happy ending for the series on part 2, quite violent, lots of tiggers, whipping boy chassis.  

Vids tagged “grey” may no longer have functioning links. Check MDL comment threads to track down. Or leave a comment I may have an updated link. 

Mainland China & BL in Brief 

China’s History with BL is complicated by serious homophobia and censorship, which I’ve posted about before so I’m not going to go into it again in depth. 

Like Japan, most of China’s early stuff is depressing in that they like to kill their queers either with the seme character becoming so obsessed to the point of kidnapping, rape, and murder (the murder-gay trope). Otherwise they end their stuff with separation by accidental death, noble self sacrifice, or some other misery (kill your gays trope). 

China entered the market in a big way with over a dozen movies 2014-2016 featuring either adult or university aged characters, often explicit relations, always obsessive love, and ultimate unhappiness. 

In 2016 Addicted: Heroin released which looked to be an actual BL romance with a high school setting, high heat, and HEA and the censors lost their shizz and shut it down. (There are lots of rumors about what "playing gay” did to the careers of the respective actors, especially the one playing the uke role.) 

Clearly production had already begun on a few 2017 series like Advance Bravely and Beloved Enemy, which then got killed or censored beyond all recognition, and there’s a drop off in movies with any kind of queer content after that.

This in turn resulted in the suppressed bromance long running series of 2018-2019 (SCI, Guardian). The ultimate result of which was wuxia adaptation, The Untamed in 2019. Word of Honor pushed back on the gay, again, but was still censored and not allowed to end (exactly) HEA (by romance standards). (And the uke actor was punished, again, this time ostensibly for other reasons.) 

As China currently stands, BL is either heavily censored into little to no physical contact and couple references or the gay character(s) must die or end up de-facto apart. Basically China’s messaging is:

Stay in the closet or be unhappy and die.

This is why I tend to not be a big fan of Chinese BL.

I know, call me crazy.

If you want more about profound damage done by suppressing gay physical affection on screen and why it’s cruel and unforgivable I go on a serious rant here. 

A list of bromances, sans my negtive thoughts and feels is here. 

This is part of a series on top 10 BLs from each country coupled with a history of BL.

Japanese BL

Chinese BL

Taiwanese BL

Korean BL

Thai BL

Chinese masculinity and the ban on effeminate men 

Where to watch it? Most Chinese BL eventually shows up on YouTube. 

ALL BLS OUT OF CHINA

That I have watched and rated, by date & then rating out of 10 as of June 2022.

2014 Like Love 1: I Love You As A Man: Part 1 - 5 2015 Falling in Love with a Rival: Counterattack - 3 2015 Mr. X and I: Us Against the World - 3 2015 Like Love 2: Nobody Knows But Me - 2 2016 Addicted Heroin - 8 2016 Irresistible Love: Secret of the Valet - 5 2016 Irresistible Love 2: Uncontrolled Love - 6 2016 Fanatic Love - 5 2016 Queer Beauty: Oppressive Love - 3 2016 Ghost Boyfriend 1 - 2 2016 The Male Queen: Han Zi Gao - 1 2016 Lost Love - 1 2016 A Round Trip to Love - 1 2017 Customized Companion - dnf 2017 Glass Heart - dnf 2017 Legend of Long Yang: Rebirth 6 2017 Mr. CEO is Falling in Love with Him - 5 2017 Till Death Tear Us Apart: In This Case A Pleasant Lifetime Alone: Love is in a Blaze - 5 2017 His Cat: His Cat Boyfriend - 5 2017 Advance Bravely - 5 2017 The Fairy Fox - 3 2017 Beloved Enemy - 3 2017 Ghost Boyfriend 2 - 2 2017 Love is Not Easy to Have: Rare Love - 2 2017 Swinging Blossom - 2 2017 Find You In The Crowd compilation - 1 2018 River Knows Fish Heart - 6 2018 Guardian - 6 2018 Past Youth - 2 2018 Ghost Boyfriend 3 - 2 2019 Mermaid's Jade - 4 2019 Broken Youth - 4 2020 The Untamed - 6 2020 Precise Shot - 4 2020 Capture Lover - 4 2020 Youth in the Breeze: People of the Skyy compilation - 3 2021 Word of Honor - 8 2021 My Esports Genius Brother - 7 2021 Every Moment that I Think of You - 5 2022 In Your Heart - 2 

(This post as of mid 2022.)

[heretherebedork]

People often forget that there are two different media. The books and the movies/series. You can't expect everything to be implemented one-to-one, nor can you expect to always agree with everything that is shown. Fandoms can be bad.

Maybe enjoy KinnPorsche without the fandom for now? If you still want to/can watch it ;) Everyone has a right to find something good or bad and to have their own opinion. Don't let the narrow-minded ones annoy you and spoil your fun with things you like (even if that sounds much easier than it is).

It's so wild to me. There's obviously going to be a disconnect between books and dramas and people who seem to think everyone wants to know everything about the book before it happens in the drama feel so... wild to me. It's such a different experience than other fandoms I've been in before this. Absolutely wild.

I will be trying to figure out how to do this so I can still enjoy the show (because, honestly, a great deal of my enjoyment is writing my posts and figuring the show out and, normally, the fandom...) but I'm going to have to be more careful about my engagement just for the sake of my own stress levels, lol.

I will finish it. I don't like not knowing what happens. But I am definitely surprised by the response on here. It feels more like a typical MDL comment section than a tumblr response. Wild.

[bldramagalore]

hello!!! is my day the series worth watching??? the comments on mdl make it seem... not very good... so i wanted to know your opinion on it 😊

Honestly I’m not watching it either. I’ve been keeping an eye on it here on Tumblr and reblogging things here and there but so far there’s nothing really making me want to watch it on a week to week basis so I’ll probably wait till it’s all out and see what the general response is. I’ve also heard not so great things especially about the quality of production and also there was that whole thing with the actors before it aired so we’ll see 😅 Sorry I couldn’t be more helpful anon !

[magzoso-tech]

New Post has been published on https://magzoso.com/tech/instagram-influencers-partied-at-a-saudi-arabian-music-festival-but-no-one-mentioned-human-rights/

Instagram Influencers Partied at a Saudi Arabian Music Festival — but No One Mentioned Human Rights

On social media accounts of the followed and famous, the MDL Beast music festival was a rave true to form: fluorescent face paint, flashing lights and a star-studded lineup of DJs that spun dance music into the wee hours. Officially, the festival was “revolutionary,” “progressive” and “a remarkable first” – superlatives many of its influencer-attendees reiterated in posts seen by millions of followers on Instagram, Twitter and Snapchat during the three-day concert that concluded Saturday.

What didn’t make it into their captions and tweets, however, was any reference to reports that document the human rights abuses of the festival’s host, the government of Saudi Arabia.

The event – along with the stars who were invited and possibly to attend – was organised by the kingdom’s entertainment authority and is part of its sweeping public relations strategy to showcase its cultural change. But critics say it also serves a much more insidious purpose: to rehabilitate Saudi Arabia’s damaged international image after the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, and as the death toll in Yemen, where the country is at war, continues to rise.

The people that did attend have abetted that effort, according to journalists, human-rights experts and the influencers who chose not to go.

Posts from MDL Beast’s high-profile attendees were accompanied by the visual cues that often indicate a paid partnership. Some used the hashtags #ad or MDL Beast partners or brand ambassadors. Many tagged the festival’s Instagram account @mdlbeast in all their flattering photo captions. Festival organizers did not respond to a request from The Washington Post to confirm whether they paid influencers to promote their event.

The American actor Armie Hammer posted a series of photos to Instagram, where he has 1.2 million followers.

“What I just witnessed was truly special,” he wrote. “It felt like a cultural shift. A change. Like Woodstock in the 1960’s.”

But in the days since the event ended, others have been quick to point out the kingdom’s ongoing restrictions of women’s rights and the crackdown on political dissent that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has overseen – even as the government pursues projects like MDL Beast, which would have been unthinkable only several years ago.

The country just recently began to allow women to drive and, in August, a royal decree for the first time allowed women to travel without the permission of their husbands or a male relative. It took months for the government to release women’s rights advocates who it had arrested and detained before those changes on what Amnesty International called “bogus charges.” Loujain al-Hathloul, among the most prominent activists, has been imprisoned for a year and a half.

As Western festivalgoers arrived in Riyadh in varying states of undress, the activist Rana Ahmad said Saudi women, forced to wear abayas and headscarves, would never be able to appear in public so dressed down.

“They enjoy their freedom here, while Saudi women are suffering and watching!” she wrote on Twitter. “It’s really the worst feeling that you can’t be free and treated differently just because you’re a Saudi women!”

The event was the weekend before the government announced that five people would be put to death for the 2018 killing of Khashoggi. The sentence, handed down on Monday, spared the two most senior officials implicated in the case, including an adviser to Mohammed, whom the CIA concluded last year had ordered Khashoggi’s assassination.

Among the most vocal critics of the music festival and its brand ambassadors was Karen Attiah, a Washington Post opinion writer and Khashoggi’s editor at the time of his death.

“The dark side of influencer culture is that it really is the ultimate expression of capitalism. Money over human lives,” Attiah wrote on Twitter. “What good is your platform if you overlook Saudi regime’s murder and torture for a few bucks?”

Attiah, who is writing a book about Khashoggi’s work for The Post, called the influencer’s financial kickbacks “blood money.”

Also vocal in their criticism was the duo behind the Instagram account Diet Prada, which serves as a kind of watchdog over the fashion and beauty industry. In a weekend post, Diet Prada called on its 1.6 million followers to draw attention to the influencers who may have accepted money to promote the festival.

In a statement posted to social media, Ratajkowski said that she turned down a paid invitation to attend and promote the festival even though she has “always wanted to visit Saudi Arabia.”

“It is very important to me to make clear my support for the rights of women, the LGBTQ community, freedom of expression and the right to a free press,” Ratajkowski wrote. “I hope coming forward on this brings more attention to the injustices happening there.”

Transgender model Teddy Quinlivan claimed in an Instagram post that the Saudi government had paid influencers to “positively promote travel and events” to the country and wrote that any influencer who was “promoting tourism to a place [that] openly kills journalists and LGBTQ people” was a “sell out.”

“Extremely, profoundly disappointed to see people on my Instagram feed who traveled to Saudi Arabia as part of their government’s image rehabilitation campaign,” former Out editor and current GQ columnist Phillip Picardi wrote on social media. He encouraged any influencers who were unaware of Khashoggi’s murder or the “ulterior motives” behind the Saudi government’s invitation to call their agent, whose job, Picardi said, is to do risk assessment and research before accepting a paid partnership.

A image of a Glamour UK Instagram story that advertised the MDL Beast festival also circulated. The post was labeled as a “paid partnership” with the event organizers. Representatives from Glamour UK and it’s parent company, Condé Nast, did not respond to a request for comment from The Post.

In response to criticism from the Diet Prada account, Bollywood actress Sonam Kapoor said she wished to “agree to disagree.”

” . . . Let’s appreciate that the whole world is” problematic right now and “any step forward is something that I want to celebrate,” she wrote in an Instagram post. “I was treated with immense respect and love as a Hindu brown female actor.”

American actor Ryan Phillippe has also defended his attendance in the comments of the photos he posted to Instagram from Saudi Arabia. When a user asked him if he was getting paid to post about the festival, Phillippe did not answer the question but said he was traveling to “many places in the mid east.”

“Find me a country without issues, I’ll wait,” Phillippe wrote. ” . . . Things are changing and progressing rapidly in KSA and the people are lovely. Pay attention and quit virtue signaling, princess.”

© The Washington Post 2019

[jernahorizon]

Master Devil Do Not Kiss Me: PSA FAQ

1. Where did you watch this show?

I watched it on YouTube on the official TenCent (or Teng Xun) Channel and other Chinese drama sites for several reasons.

- I can understand Chinese so the problem of “raws” is not a problem for me - Somehow other Chinese sites ended up uploading the last few episodes faster than the YouTube releases (probably because of Tencent’s subscriber early preview option) --> Yes, I have already completed the show (S1+S2)

THE LINKS ARE HERE: (OR SEARCH 恶魔少爷别吻我)

SEASON 1: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMX26aiIvX5oWv-JZEEI6zWTUK0MULOtl

SEASON 2: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLMX26aiIvX5oomrxI-59MznAY1NwsKDdN

2. WHERE ARE THE ENGLISH SUBS? WHERE CAN I WATCH IT WITH ENG SUBS???

Literally the links above have a CC option for ENGLISH with 100% (pretty decent but still not necessarily professional) FAN-PROVIDED SUBS.

To my knowledge Season 1 should be completely subbed and now can be found on other drama sites or DailyMotion as discussed in communities like MyDramaList and more. I’m sure you can just Google it by now.

3. WHERE ARE THE SUBS FOR SEASON 2?? EPISODE X HAS NOT BEEN SUBBED?? WHEN WILL IT BE SUBBED?!??

As aforemnetioned, ALL SUBS are probably FAN-PROVIDED out of the willingness and goodwill of the subbers’ hearts (even including some people around me). The fact that Season 1 was subbed consecutively by 1 particular user in quick fashion was already ASTOUNDING to me. At the rate of all the wonderful and kind effort of the subbers, it’s seriously only a matter of time before it is subbed.

Please. Be. Patient.

4. Can you (whoever in Chinese-speaking community) please help sub it?!?  PLEASE PLEASE I WANT TO WATCH IT. I WILL THANK YOU A LOT FOR IT. / Where else can I watch for Eng subs for Episode X?

I had also seriously considered this endeavour precisely because I wanted to share my love for this drama when the CC option for this show JUST RELEASED. Yet ironically, being asked to sub it simply because I had watched it and understood the raws (amongst other dialogue) actually put off my own motivation to sub it. Because subbers are probably doing it more out of their own desire rather than the “need to be thanked by you” yet YOUR request somehow sounds to like making others obligated to sub it for you. Especially with no consideration whatsoever given to the lives of the subbers being possibly busy and not being paid for their efforts in any other way.

In any case, referring back to Q3, I’m already amazed at how the fanbase already managed to sub the eps SO QUICKLY such that I didn’t even have to contribute much subs. The official YT links (ABOVE) are also honestly probably the fastest way that MORE people can contibute to the subbing all at once. So it’s seriously your best bet at getting subs the quickest. I have no idea where the other posts have been getting theirs in any case.

Conclusion: please refer to the SAME LINKS from Q1. And please be patient. 

Further Clarifications:

5. So wtf is this show about? What tropes does it have? Is it like X (another drama)?

There are seriously many places you can easily find out this information. Such as this MDL page with also the SAME YouTube official links mentioned in Q1.

http://mydramalist.com/22132-master-devil-do-not-kiss-me

DISCLAIMER ABOUT EXPECTATIONS:

Despite its currently increasing popularity, this originated as a pretty OBSCURE WEB-RELEASED CHINESE (not Taiwanese) DRAMA based on a webnovel of the same title (which I have not read). So its standards in terms of its mostly young and new cast, production quality and even filming style MUST BE GIVEN some SLACK.

To put it simply. my friends and I can safely say, it has A LOT OF typical shoujo-manga style romance tropes and can be said to be a combo of Hana Yori Dango (Boys Over Flowers) + Itazura na Kiss and a bit of Fated to Love You (TW version) even. Whatever else dramas comparison I may not have watched, and I’m pretty sure the above SUPER classic dramas may have already covered it.

In any case, my thoughts about this show, specifically for Season 1 have been aptly summarised in this review over here (http://mydramalist.com/profile/jernahorizon/review/28153) OR on posted here on Tumblr which other reviews also seem to cover similar points (as far as I know). 

6. Is there a Season 3? I heard there was a possibility of Season 3?!

So far, at the time of posting, after stalking the relevant Weibo official accounts of the drama, there seems to be TALKS of Season 3, based on S1 and S2′s director’s post comments which HINTED at this. The director responded that he would not be free to direct S3 in any case due to schedule clashes.

HOWEVER, there doesn’t seem to be any confirmation on ANY OTHER information per say as to the CASTING (whether the leads will remain the same) OR when it will be filmed (which is unlikely to be ongoing because Xing Fair the female lead is currently filming something else it seems).

And honestly after finishing Season 2 and I’m actually GLAD that I don’t think S3 is technically needed. (Though I’m also not sure where the story stands now in the canon novel since I have not read it.)

There are serious time-variability to the accuracy of these answers, such that such questions hopefully no longer need to be addressed. These responses are as far as possible based on accurate information at the time of posting. 

If it wasn’t obvious enough, I’ve been giffing this show on Tumblr and plan on continuing in which would also include a huge ass rambling of my thoughts on the finale which I have watched (as explained from Q1 already).

[jessicakehoe]

Models, Actors, Influencers Receive Backlash for Promoting a Music Festival in Saudi Arabia

This past weekend, the MDL Beast music festival took place in Saudi Arabia’s capital Riyadh, within the historical city of Diriyah. Marketed as “the region’s biggest music event,” it drew some of the world’s biggest celebrities, including model Winnie Harlow and actor Armie Hammer. It also attracted global controversy. Here’s the breakdown of what went on at the three-day festival, who was involved and why people are mad.

Who was involved:

J Balvin, Steve Aokie and David Guetta were positioned as some of the festival’s big performers. Among the crowd were celebrities, influencers and models, who were invited to attend and promote MDL Beast on their personal social media platforms. Hollywood actors like Ryan Phillippe, Wilmer Valderrama and Armie Hammer were in attendance, as were models like Alessandra Ambrosio, Halima Aden, Imaan Hammam and Joan Smalls, and Bollywood superstar Sonam Kapoor. Aden and Ambrosio later shared that they were paid to post about the event.

View this post on Instagram

Ready for @mdlbeast ⚡️⚡️⚡️ DAY 2 #soundstorm #mdlbeastpartner

A post shared by Alessandra Ambrosio (@alessandraambrosio) on Dec 20, 2019 at 12:16pm PST

Why people are angry:

The festival was heavily portrayed on social media as a proud moment for Saudi Arabia — a “cultural shift,” according to an Instagram post by Armie Hammer. But these Western influencers and celebrities are being criticized for promoting Saudi Arabia as a tourist destination without mention of its human rights abuses, and the festival itself is receiving backlash for whitewashing Saudi Arabia’s image. (As reported by The New York Times, the country also faced similar backlash in October when a slew of travel influencers were tapped to promote international tourism.)

For some background information, Saudi Arabia was recently reprimanded by the United Nations Human Rights Council for the “continuing arrests and arbitrary detentions of human rights defenders” in the country, as well as for its treatment of Saudi women. Some months later, in September, Saudi Arabia made visas available to non-religious tourists for the first time. Events like the MDL Beast festival are a part of Saudi Arabia’s attempts to boost its economy, promote tourism and polish its international image. None of the country’s human rights abuses were mentioned by the influencers promoting the event on social media, prompting outrage.

The responses: One of the first to call this out was Instagram watchdog Diet Prada. Crediting an anonymous source, the account said that certain guests were offered six-figure payments to attend and geo-tag the location on social media posts, aiding the country’s “propaganda” efforts.

View this post on Instagram

What’s worse than an all white @revolve influencer trip? Cashing big fat checks in exchange for #content creation (aka propaganda) to rehabilitate the image of Saudi Arabia, a country said to be causing “the world’s worst humanitarian crisis”, according to the United Nations. According to anonymous sources, six-figure sums were offered for attendance and geo-tagged posts. ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ Following the government’s pre-meditated murder of journalist Jamal Kashoggi in October 2018 , the arrest of women’s rights activist Loujain al-Hathloul in May 2018, the outing of a gay Saudi journalist and his partner who began receiving death threats from their families (homosexuality is a crime in Saudi Arabia and punishable by death), and countless other human rights abuses, a bevy of supermodels, influencers, celebrities, and musicians convened in Riyadh for the inaugural @mdlbeast . According to @hypebeast , the electronic music festival is “one of the most significant musical events the region has ever seen”. ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ Saudi Arabia has been spending billions to change its image in the west, but this is sure to be the most expensive campaign yet. In a series of Instagram stories posted by transgender model @teddy_quinlivan , it was revealed that fellow model @emrata had turned down the trip, evidently aware of the country’s human rights crisis. “It is very important to me to make clear my support for the rights of women, the LGBTQ community, freedom of expression and the right to a free press. I hope coming forward on this brings more attention to the injustices happening there”, said Ratajkowski in a statement to Diet Prada. ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ Unfortunately, not all shared the same sentiments. There are simply too many attendees to name. Dieters, feel free to tag any attendees you know of… just in case they haven’t been reading the news. • #propoganda #jamalkashoggi #humanrights #humanrightsabuse #lgbtq #lgbtqrights #freespeech #journalism #independent #womensrights #mdlbeast #edm #electronicmusic #supermodel #influencer #content #riyadh #emrata #emilyratajkowski #teddyquinlivan #model #celebrity #dj #electronicmusic #musicfestival #wtf #smh #government #corruption #dietprada

A post shared by Diet Prada ™ (@diet_prada) on Dec 21, 2019 at 2:04pm PST

Phillip Picardi, former Teen Vogue and Out editor, spoke out about the festival’s role in the country’s expanded tourism strategies. He wrote: “Extremely, profoundly disappointed to see people on my Instagram feed who traveled to Saudi Arabia as part of their government’s image rehabilitation campaign.” Picardi later went on to say “a lot of the messaging of the captions is about portraying SA as changed and accepting, and the trips appear to be coordinated with the government or tourism board. You can’t really ‘buy’ that kind of messaging, and how was your experience there tainted by who organized your trip and what you can or cannot say?”

Among the people to comment on Armie Hammer’s social media posts was journalist Yashar Ali, who tweeted about the brutal murder of Washington Post reporter Jamal Khashoggi, which the CIA has concluded the Saudi crown prince, Mohammad bin Salman, was involved in. He also tweeted that “a major film/tv star” was reportedly offered an eight-figure sum to attend, which she declined.

Hope it was worth it @armiehammer

Did you find Jamal Khashoggi’s body while you were there? pic.twitter.com/flmkSEYSuJ

— Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) December 22, 2019

While famous figures continue to speak out about those who chose to attend and promote the musical event, others are in support of the festival’s role in attempting to revamp Saudi Arabia’s image. Musician and author Kristina Bazan (who has 2.2 million followers on Instagram) commented on Diet Prada’s post, arguing that they are only pointing to the negative aspects. Her point stated: “One month ago the Visa law in Saudi was changed, the government of Saudi is trying to bring new energy and dynamic: social media has social resonance. How can we evolve as a globalized world and change things by boycotting areas that need the coming of fresh minds and ideas?”

Model Emily Ratajkowski, who has over 24 million Instagram followers, is acutely aware of the power and resonance of social media, which is why she turned down her paid invitation due to the discomfort she felt with Saudi Arabia’s human rights record. Diet Prada shared a statement they received from Ratajkowski on why she chose not to attend the event. “It’s very important to me to make clear my support for the rights of women, the LGBTQ community, freedom of expression and the right to a free press,” read the statement. “I hope coming forward on this brings more attention to the injustices happening there.”

The post Models, Actors, Influencers Receive Backlash for Promoting a Music Festival in Saudi Arabia appeared first on FASHION Magazine.

Models, Actors, Influencers Receive Backlash for Promoting a Music Festival in Saudi Arabia published first on https://borboletabags.tumblr.com/

[lindamcsherry]

Roundup Cancer Designation Led To Scientists Receiving Threatening Letters From Monsanto

Amid continuing debate worldwide about the potential cancer risks associated with Roundup, a number of scientists indicate that they were apparently threatened by Monsanto, the manufacturer of the widely used weedkiller, which the company has taken the “scorched earth” policy of defending in recent months. 

Environmental Health News published a story on November 20, detailing how Monsanto attempted to strike back at independent researchers after a March 2015 decision by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer, which classified the active ingredient in their blockbuster product as a probable human carcinogen.

The story is the first in a series called “Monsanto Papers,” which was originally published in June in the French publication Le Monde, and was just recently translated to English. The name was later given to a number of damning internal documents from Monsanto, which were revealed as part of the ongoing U.S. litigation against Monsanto by farmers, landscapers and other individuals who indicate they developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma following exposure to Roundup.

The memos and emails suggest that the company has known that its herbicide might be dangerous for years, put out ghostwritten studies that were falsely portrayed as the work of independent scientists, and unduly influenced regulators in the U.S. and Europe to avoid any indication that Roundup is not safe. The company even went as far as writing some parts of the safety reviews for regulators, and asked them to squash government inquiries that they could not write themselves, some of the documents suggest.

After the IARC ruling, the report indicates that Monsanto wasted no time in attacking the IARC and its scientists. A number of international scientists who were part of the IARC’s review of glyphosate received what they referred to as threatening and intimidating letters from Monsanto. While politely worded, the letters order them to turn over all of their files, or preserve them for pending legal action in U.S. court. The company did not send those letters to U.S. scientists who worked with the IARC, however.

The scientists did not take well to the request, with many firing back at Monsanto, calling the company out on what they saw as veiled threats.

“After talking with some of my colleagues, who participated to the IARC meeting, I found your letter intimidating and noxious even though transparency is important,” Consolato Maria Sergi, a pathologist at the University of Alberta wrote in a response letter. “The use of language should be meticulous, respectful and professional. It is impolitic to mention possible consequences without identifying the correct background. I find your approach reprehensive and lacking of common courtesy even by today’s standards.”

While Monsanto attempted to dismiss the IARC report as “junk science,” and challenged the group’s validity and scientific methods at every turn, the Monsanto Papers reveal that the company’s own observer of the IARC’s review, Tom Sorahan, a professor at the University of Birmingham in the U.K., reported back that the IARC had done it right.

Sorahan sent an email to Monsanto saying that the IARC followed proper procedures, were friendly and responded to all of his comments during the final meeting of their review.

Sorahan’s analysis, as the only Monsanto observer who actually attended the IARC final review meeting, is never mentioned in Monsanto’s attacks against the IARC. It’s existence is only likely known due to the release of the Monsanto Papers.

Roundup Litigation

Throughout the U.S., several thousand Roundup lawsuits have been filed against Monsanto by farmers, landscapers, agricultural workers and others regularly exposed to Roundup, alleging that they may have avoided a diagnosis of non-Hodgkins lymphoma or other cancer if warnings had been provided by Monsanto.

Since October 2016, all federal cases have been consolidated for pretrial proceedings as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation, which is centralized before U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria in the Northern District of California.

As part of the coordinated litigation, it is expected that a small group of bellwether trials will be prepared for early trial dates to help gauge how juries may respond to certain evidence and testimony that will be repeated throughout the cases. However, if Monsanto fails to reach Roundup settlements or another resolution for the failure to warn cases, hundreds of individual lawsuits may eventually be remanded back to the federal courts where they were originally filed for an separate trial dates.

The post Roundup Cancer Designation Led To Scientists Receiving Threatening Letters From Monsanto appeared first on AboutLawsuits.com.

[ajabsardar-blog]

Wolfson Calls Plaintiffs’ Push for Woman Talc Master ‘Troubling’

A federal judge who appointed two women to lead the plaintiffs’ team in nationwide talcum powder litigation in New Jersey has called their recent objection to her appointment of a special master “troubling” because it focused on gender.

“The suggestion that gender should play a role in the selection of a special master is completely without merit,” U.S. District Judge Freda Wolfson wrote in an Aug. 18 letter confirming the appointment of retired U.S. District Judge Joel Pisano as special master in more than 2,000 cases alleging Johnson & Johnson’s talcum powder products caused women to get ovarian cancer. Pisano, who served as a U.S. district judge in New Jersey from 2000 to 2015, is now counsel at Newark-based Walsh Pizzi O’Reilly Falanga.

Leigh O’Dell and Michelle Parfitt, who were named in December to head the talcum powder litigation, had suggested the names of three former judges, all of whom are women, to serve as special master instead of Pisano “because this multidistrict litigation involves such a significant and serious women’s public health issue,” according to Wolfson’s letter.

“I find plaintiffs’ objection to be troubling, and not meriting further discussion,” she wrote.

O’Dell, a principal at Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles in Montgomery, Alabama, declined to comment about the matter. But in an Aug. 21 response, she and Parfitt, a senior partner at Ashcraft & Gerel in Alexandria, Virginia, apologized “for any unintended offense.” They asked Wolfson to reconsider the appointment.

They also advanced another argument against appointing Pisano: His firm’s representation of other pharmaceutical manufacturers such as a subsidiary of Merck & Co. Inc. and Pfizer Inc., which has been named in cases linking mesothelioma to cosmetic products made from talcum powder.

The objections to Wolfson’s planned appointment of Pisano come as Johnson & Johnson has filed a motion for the court to oversee the possible testing of 92 containers of its baby powder stored “under lock and key in a controlled physical environment” at a museum at its headquarters in New Brunswick, New Jersey. Johnson & Johnson is claiming that plaintiffs’ attorneys want to test the samples, which span 125 years, for use in thousands of cases across the country as evidence.

“As this court is aware, plaintiffs are currently investigating the link between our clients’ ovarian cancers and talcum powder containing asbestos fibers,” wrote O’Dell and Parfitt, joined by liaison counsel Christopher Placitella, a shareholder at Cohen, Placitella & Roth in Red Bank, New Jersey. “The perception of the litigants and the public dictate that the parties and the court should proceed carefully in selecting a master if there is any question concerning the ties of the proposed master’s law firm to either side.”

The battle over the naming of a special master and the discovery skirmish over bottles of talcum powder at Johnson & Johnson’s museum are the latest developments in the litigation, which includes thousands more cases in state courts in Missouri, California, New Jersey and Delaware. On Aug. 21, a Los Angeles jury handed up a record $417 million verdict. Juries in four Missouri trials have rendered similar verdicts between $55 million and $110 million.

Plaintiffs lawyers in 12 state court cases have asked that Johnson & Johnson to turn over the baby powder samples from its museum. That prompted Johnson & Johnson to file an Aug. 16 motion seeking a protective order over the containers to prevent what it called “destructive testing,” the results of which “may be used to support expert witness testimony in this action and in thousands of pending actions and future actions here and in courts across the country.” The requests could reduce an already limited supply of bottles, threatening Johnson & Johnson’s ability to do its own testing, wrote defense attorney Susan Sharko, a partner at Drinker Biddle & Reath in Florham Park, New Jersey.

In an Aug. 23 opposition, Parfitt called Johnson & Johnson’s “far-reaching request” an attempt to halt discovery and nothing more.

Johnson & Johnson also has supported Pisano’s appointment. In an Aug. 23 letter, Sharko noted that federal rules only prohibited a special master from having a connection to the parties in the case.

Pisano declined to comment about his appointment. In an Aug. 23 letter, he said he had no conflicts. He said he had limited to no involvement in the Pfizer and Merck matters, though he noted that some of his colleagues had represented another defendant in the MDL, Imerys Talc America Inc., a talc manufacturer, while at their former firm, New Jersey’s Connell Foley. He said he would ensure those attorneys were “walled off” from his work on the MDL.

As to not being a woman, he said that he was “associated with a women-owned firm, the majority of my former law clerks are women, I have been married to the same woman for 46 years” and “my dentist is a woman.”

[cassandradodds]

Emails Show Monsanto Conspired to Ghostwrite Glyphosate Studies

In Monsanto Roundup Litigation, Unsealed Court Documents Raise Questions

Newly unsealed court documents show that Monsanto colluded to ghostwrite studies on glyphosate, the main active ingredient in the company’s Roundup herbicide. Court documents also indicate that a high-ranking official at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may have played a questionable role in preventing a government review of glyphosate. Monsanto continues to face lawsuits alleging that its Roundup herbicide caused cancer, specifically non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

The personal injury attorneys at Parker Waichman LLP are closely monitoring events in the Monsanto Roundup herbicide litigation. The firm, which has decades of experience representing clients in lawsuits over environmental health risks, continues to offer free legal consultations to individuals with questions about filing a Roundup lawsuit.

Prior to a regulatory hearing on the safety of glyphosate, Monsanto searched for studies showing that the ingredient is safe for human use. In an email dated Feb. 19, 2015, Monsanto executive William “Bill” Heydens suggested that company employees ghostwrite the studies to save on cost. “…we would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just edit & sign their names so to speak,” he wrote. Heyden, who is the Regulatory Product Safety Assessment Lead, references another instance where the company used this approach for a study published in 2000.

The U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), a consumer advocacy group, commented on these documents in a Mar. 15, 2017 press release. “Monsanto tells us that Roundup is safe because scientists say it is safe. But apparently scientists sign their names, while Monsanto signs the checks,” said U.S. PIRG Toxics Director Kara Cook-Schultz. “This calls into question multiple studies written, or possibly ghostwritten, by agricultural scientists.” The email correspondence also suggests that Monsanto regularly collaborates with other chemical companies to publish scientific papers.

U.S. PIRG is advocating to ban Roundup until data can show that the chemical is safe. “Recent studies from the World Health Organization have linked the chemicals in Monsanto’s weedkiller Roundup to serious health risks. And yet, nearly 250 million pounds of glyphosate-based herbicides like Roundup are used on U.S. farms each year,” the group states on its website.

The emails were unsealed as part of a federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) underway in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California.

Other unsealed documents are also raising questions. Emails suggest that retired EPA official Jess Rowland helped stop the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) from reviewing glyphosate. In an email dated Apr. 28, 2015, Monsanto Regulatory Affairs lead Dan Jenkins recounts Rowland saying something along the lines of “If I can kill this I should get a medal,” referring to the government glyphosate investigation.

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria has indicated he plans to have Rowland testify in the Roundup cancer litigation against Monsanto. “My reaction is when you consider the relevance of the EPA’s reports, and you consider their relevance to this litigation, it seems appropriate to take Jess Rowland’s deposition,” he said at a hearing in San Francisco.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization (WHO), declared glyphosate a probable carcinogen in 2015. Court records suggest that, in addition to blocking a glyphosate review, Rowland informed Monsanto of the review ahead of time, giving the company adequate time to strategize their defense.

What is Medical Ghostwriting?

When a medical study is ghostwritten, it usually means that someone (a corporate employee or a medical communications company, for example) wrote the content and an academic then signs off on the paper. According to the nonpartisan watchdog group Project on Government Oversight (POGO), the scientist sometimes only makes minor adjustments to the ghostwritten content.

POGO notes that medical ghostwriting is unethical because there is a clear conflict of interest. Pharmaceutical companies are paying for studies to be written, when these papers are supposed to be based on independent science alone. When drug makers ghostwrite studies, it can misrepresent the safety and efficacy of a drug to patients and their healthcare providers. The context of an academic paper can be read differently if readers are aware that the original author was a pharmaceutical employee, for instance.

Dr. Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, wrote in a letter to POGO that medical ghostwriting may be considered plagiarism in some cases. “[A] case of ghostwriting involving NIH-funded researchers may be appropriate for consideration as a case of plagiarism; i.e., the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit; or fabrication, i.e., making up data or results and recording or reporting them,” he wrote to POGO.

Monsanto Roundup Cancer Litigation Moves Forward

Parker Waichman notes that litigation continues to mount against Monsanto alleging that its Roundup herbicide causes cancer. Judge Chhabria is overseeing the Roundup MDL in California. The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) consolidates federal lawsuits into an MDL when there are a growing number of lawsuits with common questions of fact.

Transferring similar cases into an MDL makes complex litigation proceed more quickly and efficiently. Similar cases are transferred to one court before one judge, eliminating the need to duplicate pretrial proceedings. In the Roundup MDL, plaintiffs allege that the weed killer caused non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and that Monsanto failed to warn about the risks.

After the IARC released its glyphosate report, California announced plans to list glyphosate as a carcinogen under the state’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, also known as Proposition 65 (Prop 65). In response, Monsanto filed a lawsuit against the State of California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) alleging that the cancer listing invoked several constitutional violations. The California Superior Court however, disagreed and sided with the state.

Filing a Monsanto Roundup Herbicide Lawsuit

Parker Waichman has spent years representing clients in lawsuits over alleged environmental health risks. If you or someone you know is interested in filing a Monsanto Roundup Herbicide lawsuit, speak with one of our environmental attorneys today. For more information, fill out our online form or call 1-800-YOURLAWYER (1-800-968-7529).

from Parker Waichman http://www.yourlawyer.com/blog/emails-show-monsanto-conspired-ghostwrite-glyphosate-studies/

from WordPress https://parkerwaichman.wordpress.com/2017/03/22/emails-show-monsanto-conspired-to-ghostwrite-glyphosate-studies/

[parkerwaichmanlaw]

Emails Show Monsanto Conspired to Ghostwrite Glyphosate Studies

In Monsanto Roundup Litigation, Unsealed Court Documents Raise Questions

Newly unsealed court documents show that Monsanto colluded to ghostwrite studies on glyphosate, the main active ingredient in the company’s Roundup herbicide. Court documents also indicate that a high-ranking official at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may have played a questionable role in preventing a government review of glyphosate. Monsanto continues to face lawsuits alleging that its Roundup herbicide caused cancer, specifically non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

The personal injury attorneys at Parker Waichman LLP are closely monitoring events in the Monsanto Roundup herbicide litigation. The firm, which has decades of experience representing clients in lawsuits over environmental health risks, continues to offer free legal consultations to individuals with questions about filing a Roundup lawsuit.

Prior to a regulatory hearing on the safety of glyphosate, Monsanto searched for studies showing that the ingredient is safe for human use. In an email dated Feb. 19, 2015, Monsanto executive William “Bill” Heydens suggested that company employees ghostwrite the studies to save on cost. “…we would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just edit & sign their names so to speak,” he wrote. Heyden, who is the Regulatory Product Safety Assessment Lead, references another instance where the company used this approach for a study published in 2000.

The U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), a consumer advocacy group, commented on these documents in a Mar. 15, 2017 press release. “Monsanto tells us that Roundup is safe because scientists say it is safe. But apparently scientists sign their names, while Monsanto signs the checks,” said U.S. PIRG Toxics Director Kara Cook-Schultz. “This calls into question multiple studies written, or possibly ghostwritten, by agricultural scientists.” The email correspondence also suggests that Monsanto regularly collaborates with other chemical companies to publish scientific papers.

U.S. PIRG is advocating to ban Roundup until data can show that the chemical is safe. “Recent studies from the World Health Organization have linked the chemicals in Monsanto’s weedkiller Roundup to serious health risks. And yet, nearly 250 million pounds of glyphosate-based herbicides like Roundup are used on U.S. farms each year,” the group states on its website.

The emails were unsealed as part of a federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) underway in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California.

Other unsealed documents are also raising questions. Emails suggest that retired EPA official Jess Rowland helped stop the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) from reviewing glyphosate. In an email dated Apr. 28, 2015, Monsanto Regulatory Affairs lead Dan Jenkins recounts Rowland saying something along the lines of “If I can kill this I should get a medal,” referring to the government glyphosate investigation.

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria has indicated he plans to have Rowland testify in the Roundup cancer litigation against Monsanto. “My reaction is when you consider the relevance of the EPA’s reports, and you consider their relevance to this litigation, it seems appropriate to take Jess Rowland’s deposition,” he said at a hearing in San Francisco.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization (WHO), declared glyphosate a probable carcinogen in 2015. Court records suggest that, in addition to blocking a glyphosate review, Rowland informed Monsanto of the review ahead of time, giving the company adequate time to strategize their defense.

What is Medical Ghostwriting?

When a medical study is ghostwritten, it usually means that someone (a corporate employee or a medical communications company, for example) wrote the content and an academic then signs off on the paper. According to the nonpartisan watchdog group Project on Government Oversight (POGO), the scientist sometimes only makes minor adjustments to the ghostwritten content.

POGO notes that medical ghostwriting is unethical because there is a clear conflict of interest. Pharmaceutical companies are paying for studies to be written, when these papers are supposed to be based on independent science alone. When drug makers ghostwrite studies, it can misrepresent the safety and efficacy of a drug to patients and their healthcare providers. The context of an academic paper can be read differently if readers are aware that the original author was a pharmaceutical employee, for instance.

Dr. Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, wrote in a letter to POGO that medical ghostwriting may be considered plagiarism in some cases. “[A] case of ghostwriting involving NIH-funded researchers may be appropriate for consideration as a case of plagiarism; i.e., the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit; or fabrication, i.e., making up data or results and recording or reporting them,” he wrote to POGO.

Monsanto Roundup Cancer Litigation Moves Forward

Parker Waichman notes that litigation continues to mount against Monsanto alleging that its Roundup herbicide causes cancer. Judge Chhabria is overseeing the Roundup MDL in California. The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) consolidates federal lawsuits into an MDL when there are a growing number of lawsuits with common questions of fact.

Transferring similar cases into an MDL makes complex litigation proceed more quickly and efficiently. Similar cases are transferred to one court before one judge, eliminating the need to duplicate pretrial proceedings. In the Roundup MDL, plaintiffs allege that the weed killer caused non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and that Monsanto failed to warn about the risks.

After the IARC released its glyphosate report, California announced plans to list glyphosate as a carcinogen under the state’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, also known as Proposition 65 (Prop 65). In response, Monsanto filed a lawsuit against the State of California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) alleging that the cancer listing invoked several constitutional violations. The California Superior Court however, disagreed and sided with the state.

Filing a Monsanto Roundup Herbicide Lawsuit

Parker Waichman has spent years representing clients in lawsuits over alleged environmental health risks. If you or someone you know is interested in filing a Monsanto Roundup Herbicide lawsuit, speak with one of our environmental attorneys today. For more information, fill out our online form or call 1-800-YOURLAWYER (1-800-968-7529).

from Parker Waichman http://www.yourlawyer.com/blog/emails-show-monsanto-conspired-ghostwrite-glyphosate-studies/