May 20, 2016

No Image

Best of the Week: Harley Quinn Got a Spinoff, We Broke Down the DC Movies Shakeup and More

The Important News

DC Delierium: Harley Quinn is getting a spinoff with more female DC characters.

Marvel Madness: Jeff Goldblum and Karl Urban joined Thor: Ragnarok. Michael Keaton is back to being a villain in Spider-Man: Homecoming.

X-Citement: Mr. Sinister might be the villain in Wolverine 3.

Bond Bonanza: Daniel Craig is reportedly done playing James Bond.

First Look: Fast 8 revealed a glimpse of Charlize Theron’s new villain role.

Remake Report: Jennifer Lawrence might be in the female Ocean’s Eleven reboot. Nicholas Winding Refn will redo Witchfinder General.

Franchise Fever: Dwayne Johnson is heading up a new Robert Ludlum cinematic universe franchise. Shane Black says the new Predator will be a detective movie.

Sequelitis: Tetris the Movie will be the first in a trilogy. Transformers 5 has been titled Transformers: The Last Knight. And Josh Duhamel is returning to the franchise.

New Directors, New Films: Emily Carmichael will direct a new Amblin movie for Steven Spielberg and Colin Trevorrow.

Casting Net: Helen Mirren will star in Winchester. Margot Robbie will co-star in Goodbye Christopher Robin. Dwayne Johnson will star in Doc Savage.

Box Office: Captain America: Civil War had another great weekend.

Festival Circuit: Cafe Society and The BFG were among the most talked about movies at Cannes. Neon Demon received mixed buzz at Cannes.

The Videos and Geek Stuff

New Movie Trailers: Ghostbusters, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows, Personal Shopper, The Purge: Election Year, Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping, Sausage Party, Loving, Indignation, Don’t Think Twice, Powerless and the Lethal Weapon TV show.

Behind the Scenes: The Conjuring 2, Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping and Finding Dory.

Watch: New Warcraft videos that help set up the movie.

Learn: Why Steven Spielberg thinks his sequels aren’t good.

Watch: Johnny Depp surprises Alice in Wonderland fans at Disneyland.

See: Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe amusingly deal with their angry producer. And a cartoon version of The Nice Guys.

Watch: A profile on actor Oscar Isaac.

See: Margot Robbie pay homage to American Psycho.

Watch: An honest trailer for Wreck-it Ralph.

See: Classic ’80s records remade for X-Men: Apocalypse. And a commercial for Xavier’s School for Gifted Youngsters.

Watch: A short X-Men fan film about Storm.

See: Why the aliens in the Predator movies are the worst hunters.

Watch: A fake trailer for Drive 2: The Uber Years.

See: This week’s best movie posters.

Watch: A defense of Star Wars: The Force Awakens remixing the first movie.

Our Features

Comic Book Movie Guide: Exploring the undersea prison from Captain America: Civil War.

Geek Movie Guide: A list of geeky movies that didn’t need sequels.

Comic Book Movie Guide: A breakdown of the DC movies shakeup.

Home Viewing: Here’s our guide to everything hitting VOD this week. And here’s our guide to all the new indie and international films on video this month.

and

MORE FROM AROUND THE WEB:

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Nigeria, You Win! Your Development Plan May Be The 'Best In History'

Lariat Alhassan had lots of great paint to sell but no office where she could meet clients. And then she heard an ad on the radio that seemed too good to be true.

Lariat Alhassan had lots of great paint to sell but no office where she could meet clients. And then she heard an ad on the radio that seemed too good to be true. Courtesy of Lariat Alhassan hide caption

toggle caption Courtesy of Lariat Alhassan

In 2011, Lariat Alhassan had a business in Abuja, Nigeria. Larclux Paint was the name. She sold house paint. And industrial paint. Textured paint. Paint that fills in cracks in your walls. It was a paint company. But a really small one.

“The employee I had was just me. I was the production manager. I was the marketer. I was delivery person. I was everything,” says Alhassan, laughing. “Except the security.”

That was the company. A woman in her late 20s and a security guard watching over a factory space she rented to make the paint.

Customers liked her paint. They would try it out, and say “This seems great. I’d like to place a big order. We’ll come to your office to sign the papers,” she recalls. And that is when things would get awkward.

“I kept telling them, no, no, no. You call me and whenever you want, I’ll be there. I will just be there,” she says.

She didn’t have an office. Just her car. At this point the clients would often just back out. She couldn’t afford an office without more clients. She couldn’t get more clients without an office. She felt trapped. Stuck.

That was back in 2011. And then one day, she was at home listening to some music on the radio, when these ads came on. It seemed as if the radio was talking right to her, she recalled. It was for some sort of program to help small businesses.

“It may be small today but it won’t be after You Win! the youth enterprise and innovation competition,” said one ad. (You can hear it in the episode of Planet Money.)

The government was having a nationwide contest to give out US$58 million to young Nigerians trying to start or grow a small business,no experience necessary. Almost no strings attached. Just go to the website and sign up, said the ad.

Alhassan thought it was too good to be true.

“I just wanted to make sure I was safe and I wasn’t going to be conned” she said.

But it was no scam. The government really was giving away millions of dollars. Ngozi Okonjo Iweala, was the finance minister for Nigeria at the time. Her team set up the program. It was part of a massive nationwide plan to boost youth employment. About half of the young people didn’t have jobs, according to the World Bank.

“Everyone wants to run something, start their own business. Be their own boss,” says Iweala. “But the entrepreneurs often operate in an informal way. A lot of them are young people. And they want to expand their businesses but don’t know how.”

This is a problem around the world: How to get a small business to become a medium-size business that can become a big business. Because if you can figure out how to do that … you can make a dent in all kinds of other problems: unemployment, poverty. You name it. But in the developing world, small businesses rarely take off like that.

One problem is just money. In someplace like the United States, if you have a two-person paint company and need to rent out office space or warehouse space, you can just take out a small business loan.

In the developing world, in places like Nigeria, it is very hard to get that kind of loan. When a whole business is just a person with a trunk full of supplies, it is hard for lenders, like a bank or the government, to tell the good businesses from the bad ones. It is risky making those kinds of loans. So d small businesspeople can’t get loans.

The idea that Iweala and her team came up with to boost employment took all of this into account. It was a massive business contest the likes of which nobody in Nigeria had seen before. The amount of money they wanted to give away per person — roughly $50,000 — was out-of-this-world high. About 25 or 30 times the average annual income for a Nigerian at the time.

Iweala shopped the idea around the Nigerian government. People had all sorts of questions. How is the government going to decide which people to give the money to? And how will they make sure people don’t divert the funds to some other use?

Iweala and her team’s solution was to ask the entrants to submit a business plan: a few sheets of paper with an idea, maybe a chart or two, a budget. The government would read them all, pick the best ones and hand out the money.

Not everyone in the government was convinced that could work. Iweala remembers her colleagues saying things like, “These people have never written business plans.”It’s one thing if you say you’re going to invite 40 people, 50. But we’re talking [about] thousands.”

But Goodluck Jonathan, the president of Nigeria at the time, liked the idea right away. He gave it the greenlight.

There were still problems to confront. How do you pull something like this off in Nigeria — a country where trust in government is notoriously low.

People outside the government, the people who would to apply to the contest, also needed convincing. “They said, ‘Oh we’ve had so many government programs,’ and ‘It starts with promises and at the end of the day it’s never implemented,’ “says Iweala.

Then there was the worry that people running the contest would just give the money to friends and family. “That was the even bigger skepticism,” says Iweala.

So Iweala’s team had to make sure it was really clear how winners were getting picked … and who was doing the picking. For the initial review of applications they lined up graders from a local business school. And all the names of the applicants were removed before grading.

About 24,000 people applied to the contest, which was also supported by other federal ministries, the World Bank, the U.K.’s Department for International Development and Nigeria’s private sector.

For the second round, the accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers was brought in to do part of the scoring. And the British Plymouth Business School did quality assurance. The applicants knew all of these checks and balances were in place, which upped their trust.

But that still left the hard question, how to score it Who were the best candidates to get the money? Was it the very best, or would that be wasted money because those people might succeed anyway and not need the money? And how could you tell the difference between the 1,200th and the 1,201st candidate in any meaningful way?

This is where they reached out to a researcher at the World Bank. “I typically come in when people have an idea and they want to know if it will work,” says David McKenzie.

At this point, in mid-2011, Iweala wanted to launch the program in two months. McKenzie met with a few team members in in the cafe of the J building at the World Bank in Washington, D.C. to hash out ways to grade the entrants and measure the results.

One idea was to just rank every entry and pick the best. From his research, McKenzie suggested a different course of action: Pick the winners somewhat randomly Sure you can look at the business plans and pick out the very best. And the very worst. Those are usually obvious. But after you have the outliers, he argued, just make it luck of the draw. It’ll save a lot of trouble.

Plus if you do it randomly, you can measure the impact of winning by looking at the control group of non-winners, says McKenzie.

That was the plan.

They gave the contest the name: the YouWiN! Competition. And in late 2011, they started getting the word out. With ads, lots and lots of ads – in print, on TV and on the radio.

And that’s how Alhassan, the paint seller, came to hear an ad for YouWiN! coming out of her bedside radio that day.

“Lots of people did not believe it,” she says. But after hearing it a second and a third time, she said to herself: “Lariat, why don’t you pick up this opportunity? Try. Try, and see if it will work out for you.”

She took out her old laptop, plugged in her modem and went online and applied. A little while later she was one of the 6,000 invited to the next round. Where everyone would write their business plans.

The government provided some help. The applicants were invited to four day trainings held around the country. When Alhassan describes it, she said it felt like thousands of people packing into something like a concert hall. There were all kinds of applicants: A baker without enough machinery. A chicken farmer thinking of expanding to catfish and snails. Someone trying to start a computer school. Musicians. Dentists. People will all kinds of business plans.

“Boy it was intense. From morning to evening,” says Alhassan. But they did get lunch. “And breakfast,” she says, laughing.

Then she was asked to take what she just learned and write up a formal business plan. This was the real test. The real competition.

She sent it in and went home to wait. A little while later she got an email. Congratulations, it said.

“I felt I couldn’t even control my emotions. I started jumping on my bed,” she says. “My sister said what is wrong with you, have you won the lottery? I said yes. Yes. Yes.”

Alhassan got 10 million Naira, for her business — equivalent to $65,000.

She brought on marketers. Salespeople. She bought them a car to get around, to get the word out. She got a truck for deliveries so it wasn’t all out of her own trunk anymore. And she rented a proper office and a showroom. She decorated it with furniture she could be proud of.

“I can confidently say [to customers] now, ‘Please come to my office. You can come here. What time? I’ll be ready for you. I’ll be waiting for you,” she says.

Well, you might look at this and say, of course she was able to do this. She was given $65,000 — and it wasn’t even a loan.

The real question is how her business does down the road — and all the other businesses as well, from the dentists to the chicken farmer who wants to expand into catfish. Was it worth it for the government? Did it create jobs?

The World Bank analyzed the YouWiN! Competition impact over three years and published a report a few months ago.

The report looked at the 1,200 winners of the contest and found they had created 7,000 jobs, real jobs that stuck around three years later. The competition cost $60 million to run. So that means each job cost about $8,500 to create, a way cheaper investment than any other program studied in the report.

Chris Blattman, an economist at Columbia University who researches poverty and global development, thinks the results are pretty remarkable.

“I remember reading it [and] my eyes [kept] kind of popping out of my head,” he says. The thing that stood out to him most was that the winners, as a group, seemed to use the money pretty well. They didn’t waste it. He says it was easier than expected to find small businesses that could use a big pile of cash to grow. Maybe way more people are constrained by not having enough capital than we think.

Nigeria has had two more rounds of the YouWiN! Competition. The latest round had more than 100,000 applicants and 1,500 winners.

As good as the first round was, 7,000 new jobs is still a small number in a country of 170 million people. It’s clearly not going to solve the problem of unemployment.

But Blattman says, these results are extremely promising. So promising he wrote a euphoric blog post in October with the title: “Is This The Most Effective Development Program In History?”

But is it?

He stresses the question mark at the end of the title. It may not really be the best in history, he says, but he’s quick to add: “It’s probably the best I’ve seen so far. In history, it’s the best one we’ve measured.”

That’s something, considering that in so many cases of job creation programs, nobody measures the results at all.

Big thanks to Jeff Mosenkis at the Institute for Poverty Action for all the help behind the scenes on this story.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Oklahoma Governor Vetoes Bill That Would Criminalize Performing Abortions

Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin vetoed a controversial abortion bill Friday. The measure would have made it a felony for doctors to perform abortions.

Transcript

AUDIE CORNISH, HOST:

Late today, the governor of Oklahoma did something she’s never done before. She vetoed an abortion bill. Republican governor Mary Fallin describes herself as the most pro-life governor in the nation. She’s signed 18 anti-abortion laws. But this latest one even she agreed would’ve been struck down by the courts.

We’re joined now by reporter Rachel Hubbard of member station KOSU in Oklahoma City. And Rachel, first just tell us about the bill and what made it specifically controversial.

RACHEL HUBBARD, BYLINE: Well, Audie, let me just read part of the bill. And I’m quoting here. (Reading) No person shall perform an abortion upon a pregnant woman. A person that violates this section shall be guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not less than one year in the state penitentiary.

And that bill goes on to say any physician that does perform an abortion won’t be able to renew a medical license or ever get one again in the state of Oklahoma. And as you can imagine, some doctors in the state weren’t too happy about this. Doug Cox is a physician who says criminalizing doctors is outrageous.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

DOUG COX: As a physician, I’ve dealt with things that the Legislature never deals with – real-life conversations that take place behind closed doors. And I resent the Legislature trying to step in and interfere, put the government standing between me and my patients.

HUBBARD: Now, Audie, here’s the thing about Doug Cox. Not only is he a doctor. He’s also a Republican lawmaker who serves in the State House. He describes himself as pro-life and says he’s never performed an abortion he doesn’t plan to. But he was still against this bill.

CORNISH: So help us understand how this bill got passed by the Republican-led legislature in Oklahoma.

HUBBARD: Well, Oklahoma is a super conservative, very pro-God, very pro-gun state, and they really value state’s rights. People here just don’t like anybody to tell them what to do. One of the authors of the bill is State Representative David Brumbaugh. He says since the Legislature approved this bill yesterday, there’s been a frenzy and frankly a misunderstanding. He says the bill is about licensing, and licensing of physicians is a state’s right, he says.

DAVID BRUMBAUGH: We’re trying to, you know, weather this storm by doing the right things because it’s not a federal issue. It’s a state issue. And the state has an interest in the public safety and health of its citizens, and that’s what this bill’s about.

HUBBARD: Now, Audie, the Center for Reproduction Rights was quick to weigh in on this bill when it passed yesterday. It’s sued Oklahoma eight times over its abortion laws in the past few years and has threatened to do so again if the governor had signed the bill.

CORNISH: Now, why did governor Fallin decide to veto this abortion bill? As we said, this not something she’d been known to do.

HUBBARD: Right. The governor released as statement this afternoon after she vetoed the bill. She didn’t disagree with the principle of making abortion illegal. In her carefully worded message, she said two things. One – the definition of a felony was so vague that it couldn’t withstand a constitutional legal challenge. And second was that she does support a reexamination of the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision of Roe versus Wade which legalized abortion, but she conceded that this legislation just couldn’t accomplish that, saying only the appointment of a conservation pro-life justice to the U.S. Supreme Court could get that done.

CORNISH: So what happens next?

HUBBARD: Well, the Oklahoma Legislature can try to override the veto, but that’s not likely to happen. It really didn’t have a lot of support in the House of Representatives initially. Some 30 lawmakers abstained from the first vote. And the Oklahoma Legislature is winding down anyway. It ends a week from today. There’s still no budget. They’re likely headed to a special session. So we’ll have to wait and see if this bill makes a return appearance.

CORNISH: That’s Rachel Hubbard of member station KOSU. She joined us from Oklahoma City. Thanks so much.

HUBBARD: You’re welcome.

Copyright © 2016 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Poll Finds Most Native Americans Aren't Offended By Redskins Name

NPR’s Audie Cornish talks to Washington Post reporter John Woodrow Cox about his paper’s poll that shows 9 out of 10 Native Americans aren’t offended by the name of the Washington football team.

Transcript

AUDIE CORNISH, HOST:

A new poll from The Washington Post finds that a vast majority of Native Americans they surveyed aren’t offended by the name of Washington’s NFL team, the Redskins. Five-hundred-and-four self-identified Native Americans across the country took part. It’s getting a lot of attention because, over the last few years, there’s been a vocal campaign to change the name of the team. I spoke with Washington Post reporter John Woodrow Cox about it.

JOHN WOODROW COX: The key question was one written, actually, into the Annenberg – the famous Annenberg poll from 2004 that basically asked people if they were offended by the Washington Redskins’ name. We wanted to understand if Native Americans’ opinions had changed over time, over the past twelve years, because that poll has been very controversial. It’s been used quite a bit by the team as justification for keeping the name. So we replicated that question exactly. That was the first question. And only 1 in 10 of Native Americans we asked that question to said, in fact, that they were offended by the name.

CORNISH: Tell us a little more about what people had to say because I know that you guys actually did some follow-up calls to find out their opinions.

COX: We did, yeah. It was really fascinating. One of the more memorable people I talked to was a man by the name of Charles Moore (ph). He’s a member of the Oneida tribe of Wisconsin, which is related to the New York Oneida tribe that has fought this. He’s 73 years old. He’s a physician. And he was somebody who said that he understood why people had an issue with the name, why they were offended by it, but that he didn’t at all and that he looked at it as a very low priority, that among the things that Native Americans were struggling with, that was not anywhere near the top of his list. And he even argued that the National Football League has bigger problems than the name of this team. Others have said the same. I talked to a woman in North Dakota by the name of Barbara Bruce (ph). She’s 70 years old, and she’s been a teacher for four decades. And she said that she liked the name. She saw it as something to be proud of.

CORNISH: Reaction from the team owner Dan Snyder in a statement – he said, we’re gratified by this overwhelming support from the Native American community, and the team will proudly carry the Redskins name. What do you make of that read of this poll?

COX: I think that’s a stretch. We didn’t ask people if they supported the name. Certainly in our anecdotal follow-up interviews, there were people who said they felt honored. Some people said that native imagery in sports at least represented them in some ways in a society where they often felt overlooked. But that was all anecdotal. I think to say that Native Americans support the name – that’s not something, certainly, that our poll asked or found.

CORNISH: Critics of your survey say that it doesn’t change the debate. And I want to get your opinion on that. I mean, what does this do? Is this suddenly a non-offensive term?

COX: I think that the debate won’t end with this at all. I think that the people who’ve been working on this for decades are going to continue to fight. Suzan Harjo has been fighting this since the 1960s. I don’t think she’s going to stop, and nor do I think the Oneida Indian Nation or the National Congress of American Indians – I don’t think any of those groups are going to stop. And they’ve – they’ve argued, too, that the dictionary defines this as a racial slur. And I’ve also, you know, heard people argue that, regardless of the number of Native Americans who are offended, they’ve said that well, isn’t it enough that 1 in 10 are offended? That’s certainly one of the arguments that they’ve made. So I don’t expect the poll to end the debate.

CORNISH: John Woodrow Cox of The Washington Post, Thank you so much for speaking with us.

COX: Thank you.

Copyright © 2016 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)