Michael Novakhov (Mike Nova): The Guardian World News on 7/26/12

Thursday, July 26, 2012

The Guardian World News on 7/26/12

Drug taking among 16- to 24-year-olds at lowest level since 1996

via The Guardian World News by Alan Travis on 7/26/12

Cannabis is the most popular drug among all age groups, official figures show, but use has fallen by more than a third since 1996
Illicit drug use among young people aged 16 to 24 has been stable over the past year at about 1.3 million, or 19% of the age group, and remains at its lowest level since records began in 1996, according to official figures published on Thursday.
The 2011-12 annual survey of drug use, measured by the Crime Survey for England and Wales, shows that cannabis remains the most commonly used illicit drug among young adults, followed by powder cocaine, which appears to have passed a peak of popularity.
The annual drug data from what used to be the British Crime Survey shows that the government's ban on the "legal high" mephedrone, a synthetic stimulant, appears to have had some impact: there has been a slight decline in the level of use reported in the past year, from 1.4% to 1.1%.
The long-term trend among adults aged 16 to 59 show that nearly 3 million people have used an illicit drug in the last year, again, mostly cannabis. This year's mostly stable figures confirm the long-term decline in the popularity of ecstasy, hallucinogens such as LSD and magic mushrooms, and amphetamines.
The proportion of adults who have used cannabis in the last 12 months has fallen from 9.5% in 1996 to 6.6% in 2009-10 and appears to have steadied at 6.9% on the most recent 2011-12 figures.
This overall picture of illicit drug use stabilising at its lowest levels since 1996 is confirmed in new Department of Health data published on Thursday on patterns of smoking, drinking and drug use among school pupils aged 11 to 15 in England. The long-term steady decline in all three continued last year, with 140,000 regular smokers, 360,000 regular drinkers and 180,000 saying they had taken drugs in the previous month.
A quarter (25%) of 11- to 15-year-olds have tried smoking at least once. This has more than halved compared with the 53% recorded in 1982, when the annual survey began. The proportion of schoolchildren who have never had a drink by the age of 15 has also risen from 39% in 2003 to 55% last year.
As for illicit drugs, the proportion of pupils aged 11 to 15 who have taken them fell further last year, from 18% to 17%, continuing a long-term decline from 29% for this age group in 2001. The most popular drug remains cannabis, followed by poppers and magic mushrooms.
The crime survey figures show that, among adults, the most commonly reported age when they first tried cannabis was 16. Most people don't try cocaine or ecstasy until they are 18. It also shows that most have stopped smoking dope by the time they are 18 and stopped taking cocaine or ecstasy by the time they are 25.
The survey results also show that most people – 58% – got the drugs they used either at someone else's home or their own home and from someone who was well known to them, such as a friend, neighbour or colleague. Only one in five – 21% – got hold of them at a bar, pub, club, party or rave.

Alan Travis

Gun control laws: Who is right – Obama, or Romney?

via World news and comment from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk by on 7/26/12

Obama has called for more thorough background checks for any gun purchase and restrictions to keep 'mentally unbalanced' individuals from buying weapons, calling it 'common sense'. Romney said he didn't think the US needed new laws. Who is right?

French website reveals waiters' tricks to make customers part with money

via World news and comment from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk by Kim Willsher on 7/26/12

Serving peanuts, listing wines in a certain order and clearing plates quickly are all ways to get diners to order more
The Parisian "garçon" with his brasserie apron and brusque attitude already gets a bad press in France and abroad.
Now French journalists have stuck the knife in further by revealing the wiles and tricks employed by staff of Gallic eateries to make diners part with their cash.
In an article headlined: "Seven serving tips to increase the bill", the website Rue89 claims the waiter or waitress who slaps a free bowl of peanuts on the table or asks: "Still or sparkling water?" is – quelle surprise – probably after your money.
Ever wondered why you have been given a draughty table next to the door, window or on the terrace in a deserted restaurant? Rue89 says it is probably to make the place look busy and attract more customers.
Once seated, the "closed" question: "An apéritif, or straight on to the wine?" makes it more difficult for customers to ask for a jug of free water on which there is no profit margin. Listing wines in a certain order encourages diners to order an expensive bottle; thus the waitress who says: "Sauvignon, chardonnay, chablis?" is banking on the customer not remembering the first two and not wanting to ask her to repeat the question, says the report. It adds that servers who keep filling your glass with wine or sparkling water are almost certainly trying to sell another bottle.
Alexia, a waitress in a "chic brasserie", told the website: "I serve the water regularly so the bottle is finished bang in the middle of the meal, then I suggest another bottle. Almost always, the customer orders."
Another trick of the restaurant trade, says the report, is serving salty snacks with pre-meal drinks to make customers thirsty and serving the occasional glass "on the house" to detain diners at the table if business is slack. Once the main course is finished, clearing the plates and glasses quickly may make the customer feel obliged to order more. Likewise, plonking the desert menu on the table is more successful than reeling off a list of puddings, it found.
"You would think it wouldn't make much difference, but in fact it's key," Romain, a waiter, told Rue89.
Finally, a server with their eye on a good tip will deliver the bill with an "everything OK?" and, if paid in cash, will return lots of small change that is easier left than a banknote.
Aurélie Viry, a teacher with AV-Conseil, which offers catering and hostelry courses, says serving is not just about taking orders and delivering plates.
"Everything that can be sold means more profits. It's all about how it's proposed. We're not forcing the customer, who can always say no," Viry says.
So the next time a French waiter suggests: "Un petit apéritif, Monsieur, Madame?" … you have been warned.

Kim Willsher

New York Times narrows losses in second quarter of 2012

via World news and comment from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk by Dominic Rushe on 7/26/12

The company operating the US paper of record lost $88.1m in the second quarter of 2012, but has improved since last year
The New York Times narrowed its losses in the second quarter of 2012 as the newspaper group increased the number of its paying subscribers.
The group made a net loss was $88.1m in the second quarter, compared with a net loss of $119.7m, in the same period last year. Revenues rose 0.6% to $515.2m, driven by increases in circulation and digital subscriptions, but were wiped out by a $194.7m write-down on About.com, an information and advice site the group bought for $410m in 2005.
Print advertising revenues fell 8% and digital advertising revenues decreased 4%, led by declines at About.com. Circulation revenues rose 8.3%.
The number of paid digital subscriptions stood at around 532,000 at the end of the quarter, up 13% from 472,000 on March 18, 2012, the one-year anniversary of the introduction of subscriptions for NYTimes.com. The Times does not disclose how many of these are newspaper home-delivery customers who get a digital subscription for free.
"Our second-quarter results reflect our ongoing strides in repositioning the Times Company for an increasingly multi-platform future," said Arthur Sulzberger Jr, chairman and chief executive officer.
The New York Times offers free access to a limited number of articles per month. Last April it cut the number of free articles from 20 to 10, a move Sulzberger credited with contributing to the rise in subscribers.
The New York Times has been searching for a new chief executive since the abrupt departure of former CEO Janet Robinson late last year. According to the Times, the board has now made "significant progress" in its search and could announce a successor as early as September.

Dominic Rushe

Mitt Romney calls Ed Miliband 'Mr Leader' - video

via World news: World news + Video | guardian.co.uk by on 7/26/12

US presidential candidate Mitt Romney addresses Ed Miliband as 'Mr Leader' during a press conference in London

Close up: Dark Knight, still rising

via Culture | guardian.co.uk by on 7/26/12

Catch up with the last seven days in the world of film

The big story

As predicted, The Dark Knight Rises continued to dominate headlines this week, with other film releases struggling to make their presence felt.
Much of the news surrounding the film centered on the terrible events in Colorado. Following the mass killing at the late-night showing of the film, Warner Brothers took the decision to cancel the Paris premiere, disclosed plans to make a "substantial" donation to charities supporting victims of the killings and, as a mark of respect, delayed the reporting of opening box office figures.
Once the numbers were made public, box office analysts confirmed that The Dark Knight Rises had debuted with the third highest US opening of all time last weekend, $160.9m. The figure was lower than expected, but still enough to put it firmly in the 'massively successful' category.
However, despite hefty takings and an enthusiastic response from critics, it's looking unlikely that The Dark Knight Rises will win big come Oscar-season. Following a screening for Academy Award voters at the Samuel Goldwyn theatre in Beverly Hills last weekend, one audience member told the Hollywood reporter: "People were kind of disappointed. It wasn't because of [Colorado]. I just don't think that this picture will get any nominations [beyond technical nods]."
Time will tell if that's correct – but, judging from the comments of Guardian readers who've seen the film, it sounds like Academy voters' views don't chime closely with the majority of cinema-goers.

In the news

Jeremy Renner may play Julian Assange in WikiLeaks film
The Dark Knight Rises fails to impress Oscars judges
Simon Ward, actor, dies aged 70
Looper to open Toronto international film festival
Mira Nair's 9/11 drama to open Venice film festival
The Dark Knight Rises makes box office record – but set to be down on predictions

My favourite Hitchcock

Peter Bradshaw on Psycho
Killian Fox on Rear Window
Philip French on The Lady Vanishes
Tony Paley on The 39 Steps

On the blog

Why Dr Seuss continues to charm America
How co-ops can save local cinema
Cine-files: Broadway, Nottingham
Clip joint: amusement parks
The Dark Knight Rises bats Spider-Man away at the UK box office
The Dark Knight Rises, and takes Imax with him
The Dark Knight trilogy as our generation's Godfather

Watch and listen

The Guardian Film Show: Dr Seuss' The Lorax and Searching for Sugar Man
Ping Pong: watch the table tennis documentary on demand
Trailer review: The Tall Man comes up short on terror
Man of Steel trailers: a hitchhiker from another galaxy
The Master trailer: will Paul Thomas Anderson's film inspire devotion?
Looper: watch the trailer

In the paper

In this Friday's G2 Film & Music Kira Cochrane goes behind the scenes at the BBFC, who celebrate their 100th anniversary this year, Phil Hoad maps out the future of the global blockbuster, and Joe Queenan writes on what happens when you realise you like an actor you thought you hated.
On Saturday The Guide meets Mila Kunis and Seth McFarlane, stars of forthcoming comedy Ted.

And finally

Marriage equality weighed as part of official Democratic platform

via World news and comment from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk by Karen McVeigh on 7/26/12

Many Democratic leaders want to include support as a plank in the party platform, but its inclusion still faces some hurdles
A growing number of Democratic leaders are urging the party's national committee to approve a platform that would officially embrace marriage equality at the party convention in September.
Already, polls show that a majority of Democrats support same sex marriage, but the party has so far avoided explicit calls for its legalization.
The Freedom To Marry campaign said it is hopeful that the recent groundswell of support, in the wake of President Barack Obama's public endorsement of marriage equality in May, will translate into a plank in the 2012 party platform.
Debbie Wasserman Shultz, the Democratic National Committee chair, gave the campaign a boost when she said last week she expected marriage equality to be part of the official platform. Her endorsement follows that of Antonio Villaraigosa, Los Angeles Mayor and convention chairman, and those of a number of co-chairs of the president's re-election campaign.
Evan Wolfson, the director of Freedom to Marry, which has been working for months on a petition addressed to party leaders asking them to include such a plank, said: "Very important public figures have spoken up including people speaking of changing their minds on the issue, including the President.
"The impact of the plank is that it puts the Democratic party squarely on record. Not just the President, not just in one year. It creates greater opportunity for more party leaders and party officers to take a stance in the election still to come and policies still to come."
So far, 42,715 supporters have signed Freedom to Marry's petition, including 22 senators and 11 state Democratic party chairs. More than 20 state Democratic party organizations have incorporated pro-marriage positions into their platforms. They include states that traditionally swing "red" or "purple," like Kentucky, Pennsylvania, and Texas.
The final decision of whether marriage equality is on the platform is up to a committee, but support by Wasserman Schulz is seen as a key part of the process.
Wasserman Schultz, who represents Florida's 20th district, told Philadelphia Gay News: "I expect marriage equality to be a plank in the national party platform. President Obama has declared his support for it ... Now, our platform committee process is a people-powered process. We have a platform committee, and the platform is developed by our Democratic activists and the platform committee members, so they'll go through a process. I hope that marriage equality, and expect that marriage equality, will be part of our platform."
The inclusion of a marriage equality plank is not a done deal, however. In a recent piece in the Washington Blade, which asked 15 members of the drafting committee whether they would support such an endorsement, found mixed responses.
The next step for Freedom to Marry is to testify at a DNC drafting committee hearing next week.
"There is work to be done,' said Wolfson."They have invited the public to testify. They have invited Freedom to Marry to testify, as part of the televised process."
He said that marriage equality's inclusion in the platform was by no means a certainty, but that he hoped that campaigning, along with s shift in public opinion towards equal rights in marriage, will inform the decision.
"Over the last year and a half we have seen a majority of Americans nation-wide support same sex marriage," he said. "In the 1990's, 27% of Americans supported same sex marriage. It is now 54%. In 16 years support has doubled.
"We have seen Republicans as well as Democrats change their views. These are shifts in public opinion and political opinion. Now we want to take that momentum and carry it into legal and political change."
No one from the DNC was available for comment, but Tad Devine, a Democratic consultant who was a senior advisor to John Kerry's Presidential campaign in 2004 and to Al Gore's in 2000, said there was a "very good chance" support for marriage equality would appear on the party platform.
Citing shifting public opinion, Devine said it could be seen as Democrats sending a "strong signal" to constituents who support equality.
He said: "Attitudes have really shifted on the issue of marriage equality. It's a position that enjoys much more public support than in the past. It was a polarizing social issue in the past, but it doesn't have the kind of intensity that moves voters one way or another."
Devine believes that the activist make-up of the platform committee provides another reason the plank is likely to be adopted, as they are more likely to be progressive or liberal-leaning. Asked about the potential pitfalls of such a move, Devine said that Democrats who disagree with it are not beholden to every plank in the party platform.
"There are Democrats who get elected in very conservative places in this country. They can say, 'Listen, I disagree with the party. I believe in civil unions.'
"There are systems of checks and balances. Just because the party says something doesn't mean it is made into law."

Karen McVeigh

Obama calls for US gun control laws to be tightened in wake of Aurora shooting

via The Guardian World News by Adam Gabbatt on 7/26/12

President affirms right to bear arms but says assault rifles do not belong in the hands of citizens, drawing contrast with Romney
Barack Obama has addressed the issue of gun control for the first time since the Colorado shootings, appealing for "a consensus around violence reduction" and suggesting assault rifles "belong on the battlefield".
The president's comments came as Mitt Romney said the US does not need new gun laws and argued that instead "changing the heart of the American people" might be the way to avoid future tragedy.
Gun control is a sensitive topic for both candidates, although on Tuesday a study showed widespread support for some forms of tighter gun laws among gun owners and even National Rifle Association members.
"I believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms," Obama said on Wednesday night. "But I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not on the streets of our cities."
It was the first time Obama has addressed the issue of gun control since the Aurora shootings. Speaking to the National Urban League Conference in New Orleans, the president did not make specific proposals but raised the issue of violent crime in the US.
"Every day and a half the number of young people we lose to violence is about the same as the number of people we lost in that movie theater," Obama said. "I'm going to continue to work with members of both parties and with religious groups and with civic organisations to arrive at a consensus around violence reduction."
Obama's speech in Louisiana came as Mitt Romney said more restrictive gun laws would not have prevented the events in Aurora, where 12 people were killed and 58 injured during an attack on a movie theatre.
"Political implications, legal implications are something which will be sorted out down the road," Romney told NBC's Brian Williams in an interview in London. "But I don't happen to believe that America needs new gun laws. A lot of what this young man did was clearly against the law. But the fact that it was against the law did not prevent it from happening."
As governor of Massachusetts Romney banned assault weapons like the AR-15 used in the Aurora shooting. He described them as "instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people" as he signed the bill outlawing them in 2002.
"Well, this person shouldn't have had any kind of weapons and bombs and other devices, and it was illegal for him to have many of those things already. But he had them," Romney said during the interview on Wednesday night. All the guns used in the shooting were purchased legally.
"And so we can sometimes hope that just changing the law will make all bad things go away. It won't. Changing the heart of the American people may well be what's essential, to improve the lots of the American people."
Gun control is a topic traditionally given a wide berth during an election year. Both Romney and Obama refused to discuss tighter controls in the immediate aftermath of the shooting in Colorado. Yet on Tuesday a study commissioned by a group of US mayors who are campaigning for tighter gun controls showed that there is actually significant support for some tighter measures among gun owners.
Republican pollster Frank Luntz carried out the research, which found that rank-and-file NRA members support positions that are opposed by the organisation's leadership, including a ban on selling guns to people who appear on terror watchlists and introducing a law requiring gun owners to report missing or stolen weapons to police.

Adam Gabbatt

Florida at the forefront as states plan fresh assault on voting rights

via World news and comment from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk by Ed Pilkington on 7/26/12

Rights groups cry foul as Florida and others impose severe restrictions that target poor and black voters disproportionately
Voting rights groups are struggling to hold back a tide of new laws that are likely to make it harder for millions of Americans to vote in the presidential election in November and could distort the outcome of the race for the White House.
Since January 2011, 19 states have passed a total of 24 laws that create hurdles between voters and the ballot box. Some states are newly requiring people to show government-issued photo cards at polling stations. Others have whittled down early voting hours, imposed restrictions on registration of new voters, banned people with criminal records from voting or attempted to purge eligible voters from the electoral roll.
The assault on voter rights is particularly acute in key swing states where the presidential race is likely to be settled. Five of the nine key battleground states identified by the Republican strategist Karl Rove have introduced laws that could suppress turnout – Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, Ohio and Virginia.
Between them, the states that have imposed restrictions account for the lion's share of the 270 electoral college votes that Barack Obama or Mitt Romney must win to take the presidency. Sixteen of the states that have passed new voter restrictions between them hold 214 electoral votes.
"We are seeing a dramatic assault on voting rights, the most significant pushback on democratic participation that we've seen in decades," said Wendy Weiser of the non-partisan thinktank the Brennan Center for Justice, and the co-author of the definitive study of US voter suppression in the 2012 election cycle. "These laws could make it harder for millions of eligible American citizens to participate, particularly in swing states."
The epicentre of the attack sweeping across America is Florida, which has a long history of voter suppression. With a famously evenly balanced population that in 2000 elected George Bush by an official majority of only 537 out of almost 6 million votes cast, even relatively minor distortion of electoral turnout could have huge implications not just for the result in Florida but, given the state's prominent role in determining the outcome of recent presidential elections, the whole of the US, and – by extension – the world.
Florida Republicans have made several blatant attempts to suppress turnout this election cycle. One of the first acts of governor Rick Scott when he took office in 2011 was to reimpose what is in effect a lifelong voting ban on anyone convicted of a felony - including 1.3 million Floridians who have fully completed their sentences.
"There are over a million people in Florida who no longer have the full rights of citizenship and right to vote," said Baylor Johnson of Florida ACLU. "One million people – that's the White House for a generation, which gives you an idea of why they are trying so hard to stop people voting."
The felony trap is just a small part of it. Over the past 18 months the Republican-controlled state government in Florida has introduced a rash of new restrictions. They include a reduction in early voting hours that will hit black communities that made disproportionate use of the opportunity through their churches; changes to the rules that will make it harder for those who change address to vote and could catch hundreds of thousands of families who have lost their homes through foreclosure; and attempts to erase thousands of voters from the electoral roll through a "purge list" that was so flawed that the state's electoral supervisors refused to touch it.
"Florida has proven to be a testing ground for voter suppression techniques across the country. It's ground zero of this stuff," said Hilary Shelton who heads the NAACP's Washington bureau.
Republican lawmakers in Florida and the other 18 states that have gone down the road of voter restrictions this election cycle insist they are motivated by a concern to prevent fraud. When the governor of Texas, Rick Perry, introduced a voter ID law last year he did so using his emergency powers, saying the rule change would "appropriately help maintain the integrity and fairness of our electoral system".
Yet studies into the extent of fraud at the polls have found cases few and far between. "You are more likely to find someone struck by lightning than someone who carries out impersonation fraud to cast an improper vote," Weiser said.
Occasionally the veil has slipped, revealing what might be a deeper motivation for Republican lawmakers. Last month, Mike Turzai, leader of the Republicans in the Pennsylvania assembly, addressed a rally of party members about the state's new voter ID law that could ensnare more than 750,000 registered voters who do not possess the necessary photo cards recognised under the new rules.

"Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania. Done," said Turzai.
'I don't have a problem making it harder'
A leading New Hampshire Republican, William O'Brien, speaking to the party faithful earlier this year at a time he was attempting to pass a law that would have prevented many college students voting in the state, gave an inkling of his thinking. Students were "foolish," he said. "Voting as a liberal. That's what kids do … they just vote their feelings."
True to form, it was a Florida Republican, Mike Bennett, who put it most succinctly, saying during a debate about the state's voter clampdown that he wanted to make democratic participation easy. "I don't have a problem making it harder. I want people in Florida to want to vote as bad as that person in Africa who walks 200 miles across the desert. This should not be easy."
Not all the steps taken to turn the November presidential election into a walk across the Saharan desert are as comical as Georgia's. As the Jackson Free Press discovered, under the state's new rules, voters would need to produce a certified birth certificate in order to get a photo ID, but would need to produce a photo ID in order to get a certified birth certificate.
Georgia's catch-22 is currently on hold pending federal approval for its voter ID law. The US department of justice has been taking a robust stance this year, blocking attempts to suppress the turnout in Texas and South Carolina, while civil lawsuits are pending in Pennsylvania and several other states.
But with the presidential election less than four months away, electoral observers are watching closely to monitor the effects of restrictions that almost invariably hit poor people, black and other ethnic minorities, elderly people and students. The added burden falls in a variety of ways: poor people, for instance, often do not have cars, and so find the trip to an office issuing ID cards more onerous. African American men have higher rates of felony convictions and therefore fall into the felony trap – in Florida about one in five black men have been disenfranchised effectively for life.
For observers of Florida's long history of electoral discimination, this all sounds far too familiar for comfort. Before the 1965 Voting Rights Act, Florida, mirrored by others across the south, deployed a number of techniques to prevent black people voting.
There was the poll tax that allowed everybody to vote, as long as they could afford the tax (many African Americans couldn't); a literacy test that allowed whites to vote with a simple cross while blacks had to recite the preamble to the constitution word perfect before they could cast their ballot; and "multiple annexations", where voters had to travel to several offices over distances of 100 miles or more just to ensure they could vote.
Such egregious barriers are in the past, but the rash of new laws erecting hurdles in the 2012 election cycle has chilling echoes. "We are looking at a return of discriminatory policies at state level," the NAACP's Shelton said. "Jim Crow might be dead and buried, but James E Crow Esq. is very much alive and kicking."