Gadling

To save weight, airline removes life vests

Grant Martin — 2008-08-25T08:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Business, Airlines, News

In an attempt to cut as much weight as possible from their aircraft, Jazz Airlines, a subsidiary of Air Canada, recently decided to pull all life vests from their aircraft. Now, in the unlikely event of a water landing, passengers will be advised to use their floating seat cushions for buoyancy.

Will this affect the safety of the passengers? Well, purely from the flotation standpoint, life vests have an advantage in that they don't need to be held onto, which can be tough to do when you're in ice-cold Canadian water. They also help the passenger's body face upward, out of the water versus the opposite position that holding a seat cushion would require (an article on TheStar has better diagrams). But government regulators don't require one or the other.

How much do these life vests weigh? About a half kilogram. For the seventy five people that might be on this Jazz aircraft, that's a total of thirty-eight kilograms or about eighty three pounds per flight.

It seems to me that there's enough swing in the passenger and luggage loads such that the weight shouldn't make much of a difference. Suppose a men's rugby club books a dozen tickets instead of a middle school girl's gymnastics team. Each one of those guys could weigh three times as much as the girl. What do you do about that?
Sure, many domestic airlines no longer have life vests, but for the eighty pounds of weight saved, is it really worth the drama and customer disgust?

10 tips for smarter flying

5 steps to smarter packing

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Talking Travel with global development researcher Chris Blattman

Aaron Hotfelder — 2008-08-20T09:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Business, Blogs, Africa, Talking Travel

Besides being a professor at Yale and an expert on poverty and global development, Chris Blattman is widely-traveled and maintains an insightful and entertaining blog. Recently I asked Chris a couple questions related to the ethics of traveling in the developing world, and what the average person can do to reduce poverty.

1. These days, more and more people are combining vacations with volunteering. They might pay a fee to live with a host family, work in an orphanage or on a farm, and return home feeling quite good about where they've been and what they've done. But do these "volunteering vacations" really do anything to improve the lives of people in the host countries?

I call it "development tourism" and I've had an ongoing debate on its merits with blog readers. Most of all I think we should recognize that the short volunteering vacation probably does more for us than the recipient. Development tourism has value, most of all because it expands a visitor's appreciation for life in a poor country. But we should not fool ourselves into believing that we can have much "impact" in just a few days or weeks. Neither should we convince ourselves this is the best use of charitable funds; the cost of the travel alone could find better uses. Plus, it's not as though there is a shortage of semi-skilled labor in poor countries ready to dig wells and build homes (more cheaply too).

I say, let's call these what they are: experiential vacations-- better than splurges in tropical resorts, but not quite impactful. The distance from development tourist to the true do-gooder is not that far, however. To make the leap, I usually recommend four options: go for weeks (or months) rather than days; go with the intent to learn, not to "save" anyone; don't displace the local private sector with your work; and identify a local community organization and continue to raise money for them when home. Sending children to school is a fine idea. But helping families or community organizations to set up income-generating activities (a small poultry or piggery operation, a grinding mill, a brick-baking outfit) is inexpensive yet can generate a stream of income for years of school fees.

2. What's your take on the ethics of visiting so-called "rogue" states-- places like North Korea, Zimbabwe, Myanmar, and the like? Are travelers helping the local populations or are they inadvertently supporting oppressive regimes?

It's difficult for me to see how one supports an oppressive regime through holiday travel. Tacit approval? Not likely. Generating income for a corrupt government? The amount is probably miniscule, and if anything supports the local private sector and a civil society far more. Should either die, the fates of these countries' citizens can only get worse. Besides, any miniscule harm seems likely to be countered by the exposure you give citizens to a freedom fry-eating foreigner, and the changed impressions you bring back with you to your own country. What are we to do? Leave these countries to meet only the oil and mining executives, foreign mercenaries, and Coke bottlers?

3. Billions of dollars pour into Sub-Saharan Africa every year, but the problems there seem as intractable as ever. Is this the fault of corrupt governments, profligate NGOs, or is this simply not enough money?

In twenty years, I may write a book on the subject, and it will still be inadequate, despite three decades of soul-searching and study.

I usually like to make three points, however. First, at the height of the industrial revolution in the US and Europe, per capita economic growth was never more than one or two percent per year. For most countries in most of history, development was and is slow business. And Africa has been decolonized for a mere half century. The high-octane growth in China and South Korea are the exceptions, not the rule. If we maintain four or five percent growth in Africa, as many nations have accomplished in the last decade, then incomes will double every 15 or 20 years. That's not a bad goal.

Two, the difference between a poor country (say, $2000 per head) and a middle income one (say, $12000 per head) is simple: one has a manufacturing sector and one does not. Something like forty percent of Kenya's GDP comes from the 5 percent of the workforce: those in light and medium industry. That sector is crucial. Most African nations won't have a self-sustaining education and health system until they build some sort of industrial tax base. What's needed to get there? Reliable roads and electricity are a start. Reducing the red tape faced by business can help too. But realistically, I believe real wages in Asia will probably have to rise before it becomes profitable to produce in Africa. The faster China and India get rich, the sooner we'll see a transformation in Africa. In the meantime, preferential trade and tax treatment by the US and Europe for African goods could help foster industry and technology transfer. So could aid directed to developing commodity processing facilities and other programs that take raw material extraction upstream.

Last, stability matters. Roller coaster aid flows, commodity prices, trade privileges, capital investment, and political instability derail growth episodes before gains can be solidified. Thinking less about levels of assistance and more about volatility is not a bad start. Especially when capricious donor countries add to the ups and downs.

In the end, the debate about too much or too little foreign aid is, in my view, still too detached from reality. Most of the people writing about it have never lived in a developing country for more than a few weeks at a time, rarely leave the capital when they do, and almost never talk to businessmen. I am guilty of this myself sometimes.

4. Finally, I always advise travelers that the best way to improve the lives of the world's poor is to visit them and spend money. Is it as simple as that? Is there anything else for the traveler who's concerned about poverty to do?

On a two-week trip to a foreign country, it's best to keep your goals modest. Actually, make that microscopic. Realistically, any good you achieve beyond supporting the tourist industry will be purely accidental. I suppose you could seek resorts and hotels that support rather than emasculate the local workers, but that's not an easy thing to find out. Try the development tourism tips above. But I always like to encourage people to consider a sea change: dedicate yourself to a year, a decade, or even a lifetime of learning and effort to end poverty. There are few more rewarding ways to live your life.

Be sure to check out Chris' blog here.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Stephen Colbert's tour of the Cantons of America

Jerry Guo — 2008-08-13T16:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism

I've been waiting for an excuse to slip a Colbert Report video clip here, and this is my chance. Stephen Colbert has had a running joke about how horribly backwards the various cities/villages/"incorporated outhouses" of Canton are in the states.

He first started by taking a jab at Canton, Ohio, which caused a media brouhaha. While "apologizing," he happened to insult Canton, Georgia, and then the ones in Kansas, Texas, South Dakota, etc.

Here's a clip from last night's show.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

China busing in government-trained "cheer squads" to fill empty seats at Olympics

Aaron Hotfelder — 2008-08-13T15:40:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Asia, China

Just like the Oscars have "seat-fillers" to hide the empty seats when people go to the bathroom, the Chinese are busing in state-trained "cheer squads" to fill the surprising numbers of empty seats at the Olympics.

Dressed in identical bright yellow t-shirts, the cheer squads are meant to improve the Olympic atmosphere and avoid embarrassing television shots of all the no-shows at the Games. As the Washington Post notes, "The U.S. softball team played in a stadium only about 30 percent full on Tuesday, while the day before, 10 of 18 venues did not reach 80 percent capacity."

Officials blame the poor crowds on everything from the weather to strict visa regulations to spectators not wanting to watch the less exciting sports.

Beijing hotel owners, who were expected to be some of the biggest beneficiaries of the 2008 Olympics, have been underwhelmed by the amount of business the Games have brought. From the Washington Post: "'Business is worse than at this time last year,' said a receptionist at a 22-room hotel in Beijing's Chongwen district, where rooms cost $28 a night. 'It's the season for traveling and last year the hotel was full. The Olympics should have brought business to Beijing, but the reality is too far from the expectation.'"

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Hack your local subway

Grant Martin — 2008-08-13T13:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Transportation

Frequent travelers on any metropolitan subway system know that the two major means for fare tracking and billing are via magnetic strip and Radio Frequency Identification (RFID). And every nerd and his RPG character know that those systems can be both readable and exploitable.

To see how secure the Boston subway system was, several MIT students decided to run an analysis on the security of the infrastructure; what they found was a little disturbing. By simply wandering into unlocked doors, opening unlocked cabinets and peering around they were able to find keys to the system, get access to network hardware and find and copy employee identification.

On looking into the security of the magnetic and RFID systems, they were able to reverse engineer the code on the magnetic stripes and reconfigure the data to post $653 to a subway card. Similarly, the group analyzed the RFID contents and were able to disassemble the code.

The students point out that numerous transportation systems around the globe use these systems and technology.

Naturally, all of this quite illegal -- the students were just illustrating a point to the MBTA that there are security vulnerabilities in the system that can fairly easily be exploited. Hopefully, they and the company that makes subway infrastructures perks up and makes some serious security changes as a result of this reserach.

Check out the full 87 page presentation on the execution hosted at MIT.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

The case of the traveling gnome finally solved!

Jerry Guo — 2008-08-12T10:20:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism

Murphy, a 8 lb gnome, returned to the doorsteps of an old Gloucester couple with a bag of photos and immigration stamps hailing from Mozambique, New Zealand, Singapore, Laos, Australia, and some dozen other countries. In an attached note, he wrote:

Hello! First of all I feel I should explain my prolonged absence. A gnome's life is full of time for reflection, and whilst surveying your garden one summer morning, I began to get itchy feet.

I came to the conclusion that the world is a big place and there is more to life than watching the daily commuter traffic, and allowing passing cats to urinate on you. So I decided to free myself from the doldrums of the Shire and seek adventure. My travels have taken me across three continents, 12 countries and more time zones than I can possibly remember.

There have been high points, low points, and positively terrifying points. But I have survived - small thanks to the companion with whom I have shared all these moments.

Now the caper has been solved. Read more about the 22-year-old law grad who took Murphy on a worldwide tour.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Don't like the look of a neighborhood? Build a wall around it.

Grant Martin — 2008-08-11T14:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Asia, China

You have to give the Chinese credit for trying to clean up Beijing during the 2008 Olympics. Their methods, while borderline authoritarian, have resulted in a significantly cleaner and friendlier looking China -- the perfect reflection of a global economic superpower that should be hosting the games.

Several weeks before the games, officials attempted to curtail pollution by shutting down or constraining many of the factories in the region. While air quality has still been poor -- one out of three cyclists in a recent race had to drop out because of the conditions -- rain and cooler temperatures are now helping the conditions improve.

Other measures taken have had broader, more ominous impact among the resident population. At the same time that factory pollution cuts were mandated, residential vehicle traffic was also halved to cut down on emissions. Commuters were forced to take other transportation to work and trains and buses hemorrhaged with passengers as millions of Chinese jockeyed through Beijing trying to get to work.

In another district of the capital, developers decided that a particular neighborhood reflected poorly on the image of the country. Their solution? Build a wall around it. Despite the fact that multiple businesses and storefronts faced the street, an eight foot wall was erected around the region, blocking out the questionable content and creating a cleaner, more "tourist friendly" look.

Take a look at this brief video put together by the Boston Globe. Would you be happy with a wall like this in front of your storefront? .

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Great American Road Trip: Travel books for the road-3 of 4: So Many Enemies, so Little Time

Jamie Rhein — 2008-08-07T11:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Arts and Culture, History, Learning, Stories, Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Books

#3. So Many Enemies, So Little Time: An American Woman in All the Wrong Places--Elinor Burkett

When I chose this book as one of my road trip to Montana books, the title caught my attention. As an American woman, also hooked on travel, I wanted to delve into someone else's experiences. What I found is a book that taught me much--always a delight when on the road.

Excerpt:

But as I trudged to school each day and ambled through the markets, I couldn't find the face of hatred. I saw worry that a flood of Afghan refugees might flee north, washing extremists across the border. I heard fear that homegrown fundamentalists might be emboldened by the fires lighting Manhattan's night. Mostly, I sensed the same resignation that had engulfed everyone I knew, all across the plane, that we were captives to forces we had not yet begun to dissect.

Elinor Burkett is a woman who is not afraid to take chances when she travels, but is not fool-hardy. As a journalist, she knows how to make and use her connections to help her access people and places.

When she and her husband Dennis traveled to Kyrgyzstan to live after she received a Fulbright to teach journalism at a college there, their purpose was to shake up their lives a bit so that they didn't settle into complacency. They wanted some more adventures under their belt. After September 11, there was worry across the globe for what exactly that might mean, but the two of them decided to stay put.

Since I was pregnant living in India at the same time, wondering what my family and I should do when faced with a few of the same questions of safety, reading Burkett's take on her decisions and what was happening in her world added depth to my own experiences.

Burkett's book has several storyline threads. One of them is what it's like to teach journalism in Kyrgyzstan when students do not have questioning authority is also part of their make-up. This also reminded me of my own working in another country experiences. I felt better about my own reactions after Burkett's account.

Burkett tidily weaves together details about Kyrgyzstan's history, politics and topography with her musings and observations about the people and her experiences about what it's like to set up house there.

Along with her time in Kyrgyzstan, Burkett and her husband traveled to Afghanistan after 9/11 where she interviewed several women about the effects of living in Afghanistan. She also spent time in Iran, Iraq, Mongolia, China, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. As an aside, which really isn't an aside, but one that Burkett doesn't rest on too often is she is Jewish.

One of the things I really, really, really liked about this book is how much I learned and came to see the places Burkett traveled as those filled with engaging people who are nuanced and, for the most part, good. Burkett is has an authoritative voice that I trust. I believe that her impressions are not histrionic and ones developed to make a sale. This is one smart, on the ball woman who is not all full of herself.

I was also touched by how close she became with several of her students and they with her.

Burkett also doesn't sugar coat how complicated it can be to be from one culture with different values trying to understand other cultures. She also sticks to her own convictions throughout, although this does not mean she changes her perceptions. It means she knows who she is and stays true.

For book 1 of 4, click here.

Book 2 of 4, click here.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Is Clear Security secure?

Grant Martin — 2008-08-06T08:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Transportation, Airports, News

If you've passed through airport security at more than a few airports in the past year, you've probably noticed Clear security lanes. The Cliff Notes version of their service is that they take a retina scan, store some info and let you get through screening faster -- for a fee, of course.

I have to admit, I don't know anyone that uses it. Most business travelers I know fly either in First Class (so don't have to go through the long security line) or plan well enough in advance to anticipate long security lines (so don't worry about it). And I think that some people are concerned about giving biometric and personal data to a third party to store in a database -- you know, that whole privacy thing.

But surely a security company would keep tight control over and even encrypt that private data, right? Not necessarily. According to cbs5tv, a Clear laptop at San Francisco International airport was boosted the other day, along with the personal data of over 30,000 members in the system. New applications are on hold while the company that operates the checkpoint, Verified Identity Pass Inc., tracks down the notebook.

I'm glad I didn't apply for a Clear Pass last year.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

A definitive look at the airlines' rule 240

Grant Martin — 2008-08-04T11:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Airlines

Our good friend over at Airfare Watchdog, George Hobica, rolled up his sleeves this past week and dug deep into the muck of rule 240, the near-mythical term dictating how an airline needs to treat you in the case of a cancellation or misconnection. It's kind of a tricky rule to wrap your head around, so I'll let George explain it for you here:

"Rule 240 originally stated that in the event of a cancellation or flight misconnection, the airline would have to put you on their next flight out, or, if that wasn't "acceptable," on the next flight out of a competing airline if that flight would get you to your destination sooner, all at no additional cost to you. If only first class was available on the other airline, then they had to upgrade you. This only applied in circumstances under the airlines' control, such as crew failing to show up, or mechanical problems."

Back in the day each airline had one of these rule 240's, but since deregulation in the industry many have stricken this rule from their operations. Each carrier, however, now has some derivative, which is where Airfarewatchdog came in and compared the differences.

It's a handy guide if you ever get marooned by the airlines on the road and need to leverage a trip back. But a word of warning from a frequent traveler if you want to invoke rule 240 or some manifestation thereof: make sure you do your homework, know your airline, its rules and how they can apply them - you need to stay on the offensive if you're going to get what the carriers have promised you.

Grab a scotch, take a deep breath and start reading the rules per airline over at Airfarewatchdog.com here.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

TSA pulls pants off of elderly man during search

Grant Martin — 2008-07-27T23:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Airports, News

It always never fails to amaze us what sort of crazy screening the TSA is doing on everyday passengers. You've probably seen the pictures of the security officer frisking the nun at Detroit's airport and were thinking what we were thinking -- what is a nun going to sneak into an airport? But the TSA can't discriminate against anyone based on their race, color, creed or age, so they have search even the most innocent looking people just like everyone else.

A 71 year old man was recently searched because he had a prosthetic knee, and the TSA officer went so far as to remove the man's pants in plain sight of the checkpoint to insure that he wasn't hiding anything. Check out the news coverage of the incident below -- we'd be angry too!

10 tips for smarter flying

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Belize it or not: Living in harmony with M&Ms (monkeys and mosquitoes)

Iva Skoch — 2008-07-22T21:15:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Belize, Ecotourism, Budget Travel

You can't visit Central America and not make at least some effort to see the monkeys. That's just wrong. Monkeys are way too cute to be missed.

Like Costa Rica, and other countries in this region, Belize is also trying to brand itself as an ecotourism destination.

The Community Baboon Sanctuary, a conservation project in which over 200 private landowners in Belize have voluntarily pledged to conserve their land for the protection of the Black Howler Monkey (called 'baboon' in the local Creole dialect) habitat, is well-worth the trip inland. It's only about an hour drive from Belize City.

But, there is a but.

Mosquitoes. Mosquitoes. Mosquitoes.
Before I begin talking about how cute the monkeys are, I am going to say this: I had never, ever before, seen so many mosquitoes before visiting the Community Baboon Sanctuary (CBS). Anywhere.

The closest I had ever come to this kind of mosquito infestation was in Venice. (Camping outside a city built on a swamp is not a good idea, note to self.)

I was covered in insect-proof gear from head to toe. Still, I had mosquito bites on my face and hands: the only two areas not protected, even though they were sprayed with high-percentage DEET repellent.

The thing is, these mosquitoes are not only tough, but completely DEET-resistant. My watch, on the other hand, wasn't. DEET killed it (or its surface and band) right away.

What I particularly dislike about mosquitoes is how selective and discriminating they are in the people they attack. Our guide, Shane (see the first picture), was barefoot, wearing shorts and a T-shirt and did not get a single mosquito bite. How is that possible? Are the locals immune?

Clearly, it's jealousy speaking. I am always the person with the record-breaking number of bites, no matter how much Vitamin B and gin'n'tonic I consume.

What? Gin and tonic doesn't work, you say? Sure it does. It makes you more at peace with the unfair world of mosquitoes and their poor victims. In extreme conditions such as this, that's all you can ask for.

I go on about mosquitoes, but don't let me discourage you from visiting the CBS. But be prepared. Wear long pants (and stuff them into your socks), long-sleeve high-thread shirt and boots. A head-cover of some sort wouldn't be a bad idea.

Chances are the mosquitoes might not be as bad when you go. We went during the rainy season, which generally means more mosquitoes in the jungle. The guides will give you a mosquito whip-type-thing, made from a certain type of palm tree, that you can use "as a tail" to repel insects (see picture). It works pretty well. At the very least, you'll get an idea what it's like to be a horse.

Enough about mosquitoes.

Baboons aka Black Howler Monkeys
CBS is truly a special place. The goal is to sustain the habitat of the Black Howler Monkey, which--hence the name--is the second loudest animal in the world, after the lion. The result has been an innovative project which offers promotes the economic development of the participating communities and provides a unique opportunity for visitors to experience the rainforest and witness baboons in the wild.

The landowners, all 200+ of them, benefit directly from the Sanctuary thanks to ecotourism, aka you. Many more benefit indirectly through the educational programs. The population of the Black Howler Monkey in the Sanctuary has risen to over 2,000 monkeys. And, you'll get to see them up close, and -- if you are lucky like us -- feed them a banana.

The Sanctuary was founded by Dr. Robert Horwich, an American primatologist and Fallet Young, a landowner in the village of Bermudian Landing, in 1985 with the initial participation of 12 landowners. In 1998, the Women's Conservation Group was formed, which currently manages the CBS.

The entrance fee is $7US. It includes a walk with a guide and lots of quality time with the M&Ms.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Beijing forces vehicle traffic to halve, subways choke

Grant Martin — 2008-07-22T11:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Arts and Culture, Asia, China, News

The great thing about running a communist state is that you can dream up and enforce any crazy rule you want -- and the people can't do anything about it.

China, scrambling to clean up its image as the Olympics draw closer, has been making changes to the landscape left and right -- beautifying Beijing, planting flowers and cleaning up the streets.

This week, in an effort to clean up the chronically bad air conditions, the government decided to cut down on vehicle pollution by forcing half of the population to take public transportation. Odd and even ending license plates are now supposed to alternate days that they're able to drive in the city -- and violators are faced with a stiff fine.

As a result, half of the population that formerly commuted by automobile and motorcycle is now trying to cram into the city's public transportation system. The resulting load on the subway system was recently so great that authorities had to shut down several lines to prevent the suffocating crowds -- passengers were only allowed get off of the trains for a while. Perhaps the volumes are a bit larger than the Chinese had predicted.

What would happen to you if you were suddenly forced to take public transportation to work or class? Could you walk far enough to reach the bus or train stop and make it to your morning appointments? Would you let your government prevent you from driving every other day of the week?

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

U.S. Senate votes to repeal HIV travel ban

Aaron Hotfelder — 2008-07-17T16:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, News

The US Senate, whose public approval rating has been hovering around the high single digits, has finally done something right.

After fifteen years on the books, a law allowing border officials to refuse entry to HIV-positive visitors to the United States may finally be repealed. The bill, already passed by Congress, will be sent to the president's desk in the near future. He is expected to sign it.

As we wrote four months ago, the US is one of only a dozen countries-- including Saudi Arabia, Libya, and the Sudan-- with such a law. Even China decided last year to relax its restrictions on HIV-positive travelers.

The passage of the bill was a bipartisan effort, headed by Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) and Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR).

Andrew Sullivan of the Atlantic, whom we quoted in our previous post calling the ban "anachronistic and stigmatizing," is understandably elated. Sullivan is an HIV-positive British citizen who lives in America-- he was the recipient of a hard-to-obtain entry waiver-- and says he wants to become an American citizen, but cannot because of his HIV status. Sullivan writes:

"Barring some unforeseen event, the HIV Travel Ban - a relic of the days when HIV was a source of fear and stigma and terror - is finally over... I'm not exaggerating when I say that it's one of the happiest days of my whole life. For two and a half decades, I have longed to be a citizen of the country I love and have made my home. I now can. There is no greater feeling."

So a thumbs up to Congress, for once.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Gay travel: South Carolina in an uproar over advertising campaign

Jeffrey White — 2008-07-15T08:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, North America, United States

South Carolina is outraged over an advertisement campaign by Amro Worldwide, a UK specialist in gay and lesbian travel, which labeled the Palmetto State "so gay" in a series of posters throughout the London Underground.

Looking to boost its profile among the UK's gay and lesbian community, Amro devised its 'so gay' campaign nearly a year ago and reached out to various U.S. tourism boards last October to see if they would participate.

Shortly thereafter, Atlanta, Boston, Las Vegas, New Orleans and Washington, D.C. confirmed their participation. Last November, South Carolina jumped on board.

The campaign debuted at Underground stations in Leicester Square and Covent Garden during London's recent Gay Pride Week celebrations. For South Carolina, the posters touted the state's gay beaches and Civil War-era plantations.

Apparently, it seems that South Carolina tourism officials didn't really understand what they was agreeing to. At first, top officials said the campaign sent a positive message to gay travelers. But as outrage increased, they now say they knew nothing about the campaign and are disavowing participation, according to MSNBC.com, refusing to pay the campaign's promoter, Out Now, the $5,000 fee for the posters.

The low ranking official in the state's department of parks, recreation and tourism department who got the state involved with the campaign in the first place has resigned.

Oran Smith, the president of a South Carolina conservative activist group, tells MSNBC.com: "I think with today's economy, we have to be really smart with our tourism dollars, and South Carolina's market, very clearly, is the family-friendly market. So if we want to spend our dollars in a way that's wise, we need to go after our market, and our market is families."

Amro Worldwide wants to know what all the fuss is about. The view among many in the gay and lesbian community is that being 'so gay' is not the putdown it perhaps once was, but rather a positive thing, the company says.

Just don't expect Main Street South Carolinians to agree. One Charleston resident who spoke to MSNBC.com says, "We're so gay? Nah. Wrong state. Go to California."

It's worth noting that the other U.S. destinations involved in the campaign are not complaining.

Dispatches from around the world

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Tim Harford debunks the oil speculation myth

Aaron Hotfelder — 2008-07-14T08:20:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Business, Transportation

Over at Slate, Tim Hardford, the "Undercover Economist" and a favorite economist of mine*, tells people to stop blaming speculators for high oil prices. It's an often-repeated myth that oil speculators-- investors who bet on whether the price of oil will rise or fall-- are responsible to a large extent for the increase in oil prices.

Some of the major airlines even spammed their customers last week, asking them to raise a stink to their elected representatives about these greedy, America-hating speculators.

Harford contends that some speculators-- the profitable ones-- actually help stabilize the price of oil. For this he calls them "veritable philanthropists." He writes: "When they think oil is going to become more expensive, they buy and hoard oil, or they buy oil futures, encouraging others to buy and hoard. This raises oil prices when they are relatively cheap and lowers them when they are relatively expensive."

So it's the bad speculators we need to worry about then? Not so fast. "True, when speculators make mistakes, that is destabilizing. But in the case of oil prices, it's hard to see that speculators are playing much of a role. For one thing, inventories don't seem to be rising. If the inventory data are correct, consumers were burning all that $135 oil."

So maybe it's our fault for using so much oil. But how satisfying is it to blame ourselves?

[*Yes, I have a favorite economist-- actually several. They're like my baseball players.]

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Commenters attack snarky TSA blogger

Aaron Hotfelder — 2008-07-10T10:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, United States, Airports

The TSA blog: I read it so you don't have to.

Yesterday I highlighted some fun bits from the Q&A over at the TSA blog about the new ID requirements for flying. As promised, here are some entertaining and insightful posts from the comments following that exchange.

One commenter wonders whether the "No Fly List" isn't more trouble than it's worth: "What kind of threat do they pose if they have already been screened for weapons? They going to punch a hole in the plane?"
Chris (the TSA blogger) writes in the comments that his original snark was merely an attempt "to bring some levity to a long drawn-out discussion of a serious matter while providing some insight into why we think ID is important." Another commenter responds: "Christopher, while I understand your intent, you did not succed at either of your goals. Address the hard queston with some real answers, let Leno and Letterman handle the comedy."

Questions to ponder next time you're waiting to hand over your ID at the airport:

"Why is a guy who says he lost his ID less dangerous than a guy who says he prefers not to show his ID?"
"I show up a the airport and say I forgot my ID, because I have memory loss. You ask me questions I can´t answer because I have memory loss. Can I fly?"
"Let´s say I turn up at an airport and say I forgot my ID, and that my name is John Smith. There are probably a few thousand John Smiths. How will you 'establish my identity'?"

Finally, here's a lengthy but incisive comment from one Trollkiller.

"If the TSA lawyers are so cock sure of the legality of this new policy then that means they have done the research on it. The information I am asking for should be on hand and easily retrievable.

All I am asking for is the TSA lawyers to show their work. Believe it or not, I would much rather be proven wrong than to think that an agency of MY government is knowingly perpetrating an illegal act on 2,000,000 people a day.

I have repeatedly stated my argument clearly, citing the section of the law that I believe disallows the forced ID check to be used as a criterion for granting access to a sterile area.

You are pretending that I am just sitting on the web with my tin foil hat screaming "it's wrong, just wrong, it's a conspiracy man, they are out to get us...." That is just silly, we all know it is the tin foil underwear that protects us.

All silliness aside, Christopher, I have done all the work for the TSA lawyers. They don't have to guess at what I am asking...

The definitions in Title 49 Part 1540 § 1540.5 limit screening to a search and inspection FOR weapons, explosives, and incendiaries as THE condition for granting access to a sterile area.

Adding a forced ID check as a criterion for granting access to a sterile area is not permitted as it falls outside the search and inspection FOR weapons, explosives, and incendiaries.

I am going by the section of law that YOU cited as justification for the TSA's illegal act. You can not keep part of the law and discard the part you don't like."

Well said! This is, in case you couldn't already tell, the best comment thread ever. Sorry, Gadling faithful.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Snarky TSA blogger answers all your stupid questions about the new ID requirement

Aaron Hotfelder — 2008-07-09T09:20:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, United States, Airports

Grant reported a couple weeks ago on the TSA's new ID requirement for airline passengers. In case you missed it, last week the snark-tastic security whiz named Christopher over at the TSA's Evolution of Security blog (sort of) answered your questions about the new rule. Here are some highlights from the Q&A:

Q: So it only took 48 hours before the first reported instance of a question about political affiliation being required [to verify identitiy after a passenger forget his ID]. I'll make two predictions: 1) The TSA employees who did this will never be reprimanded in any serious manner; the worst thing they will face will be some additional "training".

A. Nostranonymous, I think Kip [Hawley, TSA's head honcho] was pretty clear when he wrote, "It's unequivocally not our policy to use political, religious, or other sensitive personal topics as identity validation. If it happened, it was wrong and will not be repeated."

The person that did this made a mistake and has been corrected. Hope you never make a mistake at your job.

[The person has been corrected? If that's not accountability, what is? Also, "hope you never make a mistake at your job"? What the hell kind of a statement is that? If an employee in any other job responded in such a flippant way to a customer complaint, you can be sure he'd be "corrected" by his boss real quick.]

Q: If requiring ID is truly instrumental in keeping the flying public safe, why did it take the TSA until June of 2008 to institute that policy?

A: Good question. We've been increasing layers of security for years and now that TSA officers check documents at every airport in the country, we've effectively moved the issue and are trying to address this threat.

[Wait, what? What does that mean?]

Q: ONCE AGAIN, I CHALLENGE THE TSA TO PROVE THE TWO SECTIONS OF 1540 THAT THEY CITE (§ 1540.107 & § 1540.105 (a)(2) ) GIVE THEM ANY AUTHORITY OR RIGHT TO DEMAND AN ID AS A CONDITION OF ACCESS TO A STERILE AREA .

A. MY VOICE IS GETTING TIRED FROM SCREAMING. Our attorneys interpret ATSA as saying we can do this, we think it's important so we're doing this. I'm not an Internet-based attorney but I probably could play one on TV.

[Oh, your attorneys said it was ok? I'm sure it's fine then.]

The voluminous comments, as you might expect, are even more entertaining. More on that later.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Update: Dept. of Homeland Security weighs forcing passengers to wear stun gun bracelets on airplanes

Jeffrey White — 2008-07-07T15:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, United States, Airlines, Video, Airports, Consumer Activism

Back in March, Gadling blogged about a firearm training system, Lamperd, which had patented a bracelet that worked like a stun gun when activated.

At the time, Lamperd was lobbying the Transportation Security Administration to make it mandatory for all airline passengers to wear one, with the thinking that it was the best way to thwart a terrorist.

Well, here's an update.

The Department of Homeland Security, ever the shepherds watching over their flocks, appears to be seriously weighing making this bracelet mandatory and has sent a letter to Lamperd encouraging the company to draft a formal proposal for integrating its bracelet into flight security.

That's right. Your tax dollars are funding the R&D arm of DHS, which wants to develop technology that acts essentially as a GPS attached to your wrist, allowing the government to track pretty much everywhere you go once you check in for your flight, and giving the flight crew the ability to waylay you if you get out of hand.

O.K., that might be overstating it: Officials say the bracelet would only be activated in the event of a terrorist attack. But still....

Here is a promotional video for the bracelet that piqued DHS's interest.

The Washington Times today quotes a letter from DHS's Paul S. Ruwaldt, of the Science and Technology Directorate, in which he writes to Lamperd saying, "To make it clear, we are interested in...the immobilizing security bracelet and look forward to receiving a written proposal."

The Times says the letter was written on Federal Aviation Administration letterhead.

The Times goes on to detail what the bracelet could do. It would:

Eliminate the need to carry a boarding pass
Contain personal data about you, including your travel history
Monitor the whereabouts of both you and your luggage after check-in
Employ Electro-Musclar Disruption technology that could immobilize a passenger for nearly 10 minutes

Now, with all the idiotic things passengers have been doing on planes of late, I could maybe get behind employing some kind of bracelet stun gun.

But seriously, I consider all this with some foreboding. I mean, slipping a bracelet on a little kid that could deliver a shock powerful enough to make an electronic dog fence zap seem like a pinprick is a scary thought. What if a flight attendant accidently activates one of them?

What do you think? Would mandatory bracelets like these make air travel safer, or is this just another way for the government to look over our shoulders?

What other strange things have been found on planes?

Click the image to read the bizarre story...

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Spirit Airlines: Workin with the commies

Grant Martin — 2008-06-30T14:00:00+00:00

Filed under: Activism, Business, Cuba, Airlines, Transportation, News

Remember that trade embargo that the US has against all of Cuba? The one that forces you to drive to Tijuana to pick up Cuban cigars and the one that prevents you and your family from stopping in Havana on your annual cruise? Yep, that embargo.

We as Americans have been forbidden from trading with the Socialist nation for over forty years now, as our good buddy Fidel Castro kept the country under lockdown and its population in poverty. Our "sanctions," which have recently come under increased scrutiny, are meant to punish the totalitarian government and encourage democracy in the island nation. How well that's working is another debate.

But our trade embargo sure isn't stopping Spirit Airlines from doing business with the Cubans. They've been paying the government regularly to use Cuban airspace on their flights over the Carribbean -- something that spokeswoman Misty Pinson claims was not premeditated, saying: ``Spirit Airlines never had the intention of violating any requirements or laws to carry out its international operations.''

How does your morality buzzer NOT go off when you're writing checks to Cuba? Aren't all business transactions with the communist state illegal?

Needless to say, the embattled airline is now coughing up 100G's in fines for illegal payments to the Cubans. Better to fly around next time.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments