January 19, 2018

No Image

The Week in Movie News: DC Named 'Flashpoint' Directors, DiCaprio Reuniting With Tarantino and More

Need a quick recap on the past week in movie news? Here are the highlights:

BIG NEWS

DC tapped new directors for Flashpoint: Warner Bros. is moving forward on its Justice League spin-off focused on The Flash (Ezra Miller) and has just hired Vacation directors John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein to helm the DC superhero feature, which is called Flashpoint. Read more here and find additional DC Expanded Universe news here and here and here.

GREAT NEWS

Leonardo DiCaprio will reunite with Quentin Tarantino: After playing a villainous supporting role in Django Unchained, Leonardo DiCaprio will re-team with Quentin Tarantino playing an aging actor in the filmmaker’s next project, set in 1969 amidst the Manson Family murders. Al Pacino also might join the cast. Read more here.

SURPRISING NEWS

Lucasfilm had just one reason to dismiss the Star Wars Expanded Universe: Lucasfilm’s Leland Chee finally revealed why the Star Wars Expanded Universe novels, comics and other materials were made non-canon ahead of production on the new movies, and it all has to do with Chewbacca. Read more here and check out a new Star Wars rumor here.

EXCLUSIVE BUZZ

Sundance 2018 Preview: We’re at the Sundance Film Festival starting this week, so we picked out some of the movies we’re excited about. Read the list of titles, including Reed Morano’s I Think We’re Alone Now (pictured above), here.

COOL CULTURE

The movies that inspired Phantom Thread: Similar to the list of influences Paul Thomas Anderson shared with us recently, there’s a new video highlighting classic movies that inspired Phantom Thread. Watch it below and see another video showcasing the career of star Daniel Day-Lewis here.

[embedded content]

MUST-WATCH TRAILERS

Tomb Raider focuses on family: The Tomb Raider reboot starring Alicia Vikander has a new trailer, which highlights the title character’s search for what became of her missing father. Watch here:

[embedded content]

Black Panther has an entourage: The highly anticipated next Marvel movie has a new TV spot focused on Black Panther’s extended family and friends and features some spectacular action. Watch it here:

[embedded content]

Red Sparrow is packed with action: The upcoming Jennifer Lawrence-led spy thriller Red Sparrow also promises a lot of action in a new TV spot. Check it out here:

[embedded content]

and

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Sexual Assault Survivor Speaks Out Against Former USA Gymnastics Doctor

Former gymnast Rachael Denhollander was the first woman to file a criminal complaint against Larry Nassar, the former doctor for USA Gymnastics. Nassar has admitted to sexually assaulting minors.

Chris Carlson/AP

hide caption

toggle caption

Chris Carlson/AP

Rachael Denhollander was 15 the first time she went to see Larry Nassar, then the doctor for USA Gymnastics. Denhollander didn’t tell anyone of authority about how he sexually assaulted her until years later, in 2004, when she was working as a gymnastics coach.

Nassar has admitted to sexually assaulting minors. He has been sentenced to 60 years in prison for charges related to child pornography, but has not yet been sentenced in a state case for sexually assaulting the athletes.

The sentencing hearing for the Ingham County, Mich., case started on Tuesday. As NPR previously reported, before issuing Nassar’s sentence, Judge Rosemarie Aquilina is giving all of those assaulted by Nassar a chance to speak. Olympic gold medalists Aly Raisman and Jordyn Wieber spoke on Friday and condemned the abuse and actions of Nassar, as well as what they see as the inaction and inability to protect athletes from USA Gymnastics and the U.S. Olympic Committee.

Olympians Simone Biles, McKayla Maroney and Gabby Douglas also have said they are survivors of sexual abuse by Nassar.

Denhollander was the first person to file a criminal complaint against Nassar in 2016. That led to more than 100 women coming forward saying they also had been victims of his abuse. Denhollander contacted The Indianapolis Star after the paper published an investigation about sexual abuse within USA Gymnastics.

Denhollander testified for nearly three hours during the preliminary examination for the child pornography case against Nassar, and she will be the last of at least 120 women to speak during the sentencing hearing, which continues next week.

She says while she’s not sure of exactly what she will say, she will address Nassar and those watching.

“This is the greatest sexual assault scandal in sports history,” Denhollander says. “Larry is arguably the most prolific pedophile in history. And it is imperative that we learn some very serious lessons from what has happened here.”

Denhollander spoke with All Things Considered host Mary Louise Kelly about the abuse she experienced, the trial and her feelings toward gymnastics today.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.


Interview Highlights

On women speaking at the sentencing hearing

It really is an empowering thing. It is an incredibly difficult thing to face your abuser, but to see all of these survivors able to stand up and to look Larry in the eye, and to speak the truth about what he did, and to put the shame and the blame and the guilt exactly where it belongs — on Larry and on Larry alone — is an incredible thing to witness.

On when she first told someone about the abuse

I first spoke up to an authority figure in 2004. I was coaching gymnastics at that point and one of the young gymnasts that I coached was going to be sent to him for treatment for hip pain. She was only 7 or 8, and I thought I couldn’t let that happen. So I did disclose parts of the abuse — not all of it, but parts of the abuse — and told the coach at the gym that he had sexually assaulted me under the guise of treatment, and that no gymnast should be seeing him.

On what happened when she spoke out

The response to that was not malicious in any way shape or form — I consider that coach a good friend still to this day — but she didn’t know what to do with it. And so she did continue to send gymnasts to Larry up until the point that she stopped coaching at that gym.

On if Nassar’s behavior was an open secret

Absolutely … many of the dancers, the gymnasts, the people who saw him would talk about the treatments. And the conclusion was, “Well this must be medical treatment, because he’d never be allowed near us if it wasn’t.” And as a 15-year-old that was my thought process.

As I lay on that exam table, it was very clear to me that this was something Larry did regularly. I knew if it was something Larry did regularly — that he was seeing girls every day, including our elite gymnasts — that there was no way someone had not described before what Larry was doing.

And so the only conclusion that I could come to was that it had to be a legitimate medical treatment, because surely the adults that heard the description of what he was doing would have done something if it wasn’t, and he would have never been near me. And that thought process caused me to lay still.

On how she views gymnastics now

The sexual assault itself does not color my view of gymnastics — I think it is an incredible, beautiful sport, that there is so much good that can come from it. But the way USA [Gymnastics] has created a culture in gymnastics absolutely has colored my view. Because the reality is that Larry is not the problem, Larry is the symptom of the problem. The reason Larry was able to have access to so many children for so long is because you had two major institutions who looked the other way.

NPR’s Kat Lonsdorf produced the audio for this story. NPR’s Wynne Davis adapted it for Web.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Facebook Moves To Decide What Is Real News

Facebook says it will ask its users decide which news organizations they think are high quality and it will favor news from the most trusted sources.

Noah Berger/AP

hide caption

toggle caption

Noah Berger/AP

Facebook is rolling out a major change to its News Feed: pushing up news articles that come from “high quality” sources, and pushing down the others. The move signals that, in an effort to combat the problem of fake news, the social media giant is willing to play a kind of editorial role — making decisions based on substance, not just how viral a headline may be.

CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in a post to his Facebook page:

“There’s too much sensationalism, misinformation and polarization in the world today. Social media enables people to spread information faster than ever before, and if we don’t specifically tackle these problems, then we end up amplifying them. That’s why it’s important that News Feed promotes high quality news that helps build a sense of common ground.”

The company asserts that its own executives will not pick and choose favorites. Rather, they’ll let the users decide what counts as a trusted source.

Spokesman Todd Breasseale says in an email: “As part of our ongoing quality surveys, we asked a diverse and representative sample of Facebook users across the US to gauge their familiarity with, and trust in, sources of news. A source’s broad trust is one of many signals that determine stories’ ranking in News Feed. We boost links from sources with high trust scores and demote links from sources with low trust scores.”

The Internet has plenty to say in response to the announcement. On Twitter:

I wonder how many Facebook executives would let their food get cooked the same way? Something tells me they’d rather trust a chef.

— Bill Hangley, Jr. (@BillHangley) January 19, 2018

Prediction: people from all parts of the political spectrum will, through their confirmation bias lens–see the results as “censorship.”

— Ron Dufresne (@RonDufresne) January 19, 2018

Facebook recently announced other reforms that, the company estimates, will result in less news in the News Feed overall — from the current 5 percent down to an estimated 4 percent.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Missouri Faces Costly Dilemma: How To Treat Inmates With Hepatitis C?

Jymie Jimerson collects Willie Nelson memorabilia in her home in remembrance of her late husband, Steve, who was a fan.

Alex Smith/KCUR

hide caption

toggle caption

Alex Smith/KCUR

In a corner of Jymie Jimerson’s house in the town of Sparta, in southwest Missouri, she has set up a kind of shrine. It has Native American art representing her Cherokee heritage alongside Willie Nelson albums, books and photos in remembrance of her late husband.

There’s a copy of Willie’s mid-’70s LP Red Headed Stranger. “When Steve was young, he had red hair and a red beard, so he always really identified with Willie’s Red Headed Stranger,” Jimerson says. “I try to keep it up there as a reminder of better days.”

Her husband, Steve Jimerson, was sentenced to life in prison in 1996 for his role in the shooting deaths of two men. Jymie says her husband’s life had been ravaged by drug abuse. But after he entered prison, he got off drugs and become a mentor for other inmates.

“Once he got inside, recovery became his life,” Jymie says. “And that was his passion until the day he died.”

Steve died on Jan. 6, 2017, of complications from hepatitis C, a liver infection that’s especially widespread among prison inmates. He was 59.

While the disease is common among the incarcerated, treatment with the latest hepatitis drugs isn’t.

Civil liberties groups in Missouri and at least seven other states are now suing to get more inmates treated with new-generation hepatitis C drugs that are highly effective but also very costly.

After Steve Jimerson was diagnosed with hepatitis C while in prison, Jymie says he was on the lookout for news of treatment advances.

In 2013, Gilead Sciences introduced Sovaldi, the first of a new generation of drugs called direct-acting antivirals that can cure hepatitis C and with fewer side effects than the previous treatments. But the excitement was dampened by the drug’s price. A full course of treatment cost $84,000.

In 2016, around 5,000 inmates in Missouri’s inmates had hepatitis C, and no more than 14 of them received the drugs, according to internal state data obtained by the MacArthur Justice Center in St. Louis.That’s about 15 percent of the 32,000 people incarcerated in Missouri’s prisons.

Jymie says that her husband wasn’t given direct-acting antivirals. By the fall of 2016, Jimerson’s health was deteriorating rapidly, and he grew pessimistic about the prospects for a cure.

“He told me that if someone had to die to get the DOC [Department of Corrections] to change their policy, he was OK with it being him,” Jymie says.

As recently as 2012, scores of Missouri inmates were being treated with older hepatitis C drugs, including one called interferon that is notorious for its debilitating side effects.

But in 2013, the Federal Bureau of Prisons started changing treatment guidelines to replace the old hepatitis C drugs with new ones.

Many states follow those guidelines, including Missouri, according to a spokesperson from Corizon Health, the private company that provides health care for Missouri’s inmates.

But the updated guidelines gave prisons more leeway to decide when it’s appropriate to provide treatment. And asMissouri phased out the old drugs, it hasn’t used the new drugs nearly as often. That has left only a handful of inmates getting any hepatitis C drug treatment at all.

In December of 2016, the American Civil Liberties Union and MacArthur Justice Center sued to get the Missouri Department of Corrections to provide direct-acting antiviral drugs to inmates with hepatitis C who qualify for treatment.

ACLU lawyer Tony Rothert says the state’s current treatment practices violate the Constitution’s Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause.

“The Supreme Court has said that in the context of medical care, that means that prisons cannot be deliberately indifferent to serious medical needs,” Rothert says. “Hepatitis C fairly easily satisfies this test, because if left untreated, there’s a fair chance that you will die.”

Advocates making this argument got a big boost for their case in November, 2017, when a federal judge in Florida ordered that state’s prisons to start providing direct-acting drugs to its inmates at least until that state’s case goes to trial in August.

“It was a great victory for people who are incarcerated and have hepatitis C because now we have a federal judge who said, ‘Look, this is just unconscionable,’ and the state is going to have to do something about it,” says Elizabeth Paukstis, public policy director of the National Viral Hepatitis Roundtable.

In July, 2017, the Missouri lawsuit took a leap forward when the judge overseeing the case certified it as a class action on behalf of state inmates with hepatitis C. The Missouri Department of Corrections and Corizon, which are defendants in the lawsuit, have appealed that ruling.

Both the Missouri Department of Corrections and Corizon declined to comment on the suit or answer questions about their hepatitis C treatment protocols beyond saying they are following federal guidelines.

But if Missouri and other states are required to offer the new drugs, they would face a huge problem, says Gregg Gonsalves, an assistant professor of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health. “Even if they wanted to treat patients, they would break the bank. They would run out of money to treat every other medical condition,” he says.

For example, if Missouri gave the 2,500 inmates that the ACLU says are candidates for Harvoni, the acting antiviral drug it now uses, the cost would exceed $236 million, based on its list price. That far exceeds the Department of Corrections’ entire budget for inmate health.

Gonsalves says the emergence of newer, cheaper drugs could help, and some state prison systems have managed to negotiate discounts.

Even at a lower cost, though, providing these drugs on a large scale could still cost states a fortune. But advocates insist it’s worth it to stop the disease from spreading.And a 2015 study showed that as many as 12,000 lives would be saved if inmates across the country were screened and treated; preventing liver transplants and liver disease would save money in the long run.

“The impetus for treating infectious disease in the prison system is that it’s a population you can reach, it’s a population you can cure, and it’s a population you can help prevent onward infections from,” Gonsalves says.

Jymie Jimerson understands that many people might be skeptical about providing expensive health care for prison inmates. But she hopes they can see them as more than people convicted of crimes.

“I’m not condoning what they did. I’m not condoning criminals,” she says. “What I’m saying is, they’re human beings. And there are hundreds, hundreds of first-time offenders that this medication would cure them. So that when they went home, they could actually spend time and enjoy a little bit of life with their families.”

This story is part of a reporting partnership with NPR, KCUR and Kaiser Health News. You can find Smith on Twitter: @AlexSmithKCUR.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)