Attention Mad Scientists!

Fostering a culture of bio-security...following this article is a quick list of some of the most feared bioterrorism threats..."So many things going on in the world. Did ya ever stop to think who gets a say over the scientists?"

This article discusses a government introducing a limit access law (fines and jail terms will apply if not followed) of handling pathogens and toxins. That will help with terrorism intentionally releasing bio-hazards and will protect Canadians from lab workers from making mistakes. These regulaions will apply to 3500 facilities. There was new regulations to protect set in place but died because of "new elections". The problem is about scientist fostering a bio-security method just as much as itis about renewing regulations for bio-stuff.

Stakeholders - Public Health Agency of Canada, the 3500 canadian labs, the government sector that answers to bio-stuff, new elections.

The PUBLIC RELATIONS issue is about the Stakeolders making statements that clearly tell the world that they are responsible for biohazzards and it's control throughout Canada. If a tragedy or mitake occurs they will have to have a plan ready to satisfy the public, and by the sounds of this article they are not prepared and we see an example here of how "elections changes policy".

The audience is to scientist, and to the public.

The message is that bio-stuff is real, is gettn shipped all the time, and that regulations and laws are still on the table as such chemicals are being handled without being monitored.

glossary

pathogens - (pāth'ə-jən) Pronunciation Key n. An agent that causes disease, especially a living microorganism such as a bacterium or fungus.

toxins - tox⋅in – noun any poison produced by an organism, characterized by antigenicity in certain animals and high molecular weight, and including the bacterial toxins that are the causative agents of tetanus, diphtheria, etc., and such plant and animal toxins as ricin and snake venom.

Monkey Business

Peurto Rico is wanting to get rid of 2000 monkeys and are shipping them to Iraq, where Iraq is going to accept them but that they clearly state that shooting them is more humanethan lethal injection. A hand full of zoos are going to help pay for the shipping. There are many quotes from different places-natural resources rep, the people for ethical treatment of animals, peurto rico rangers department...-this story is somewhat short but ery informative as to gathering information from many sources, identifying the main source for a PR specific is difficult but I think this article is a good example displaying research sources. The names given were all names of people having to take the responsibility of such a decision.
The stakeholder here would be the US Miliatry seeing as they seem to have the largest financial investments at stake involving the zoo as to where these monkeys are being taken to. The message is for the people to inform bizzarro news, cuz the article doesnt really gives specifics.

United States Military dollars spent on MONKEYS of no use!!!

US military money poured into a Baghdad Zoo?

Here's What I Say About "VIEWING"

This article brings to light the thoughts around viewing tv shows on line or on TV, providing the convenience of when and where! Stakeholders would be the Cable Companies as mentioned in the article, and movies sales...The message is to the people proposing that an addition to your cable bill that may enable easier on line access to your favorite shows for more convenience. Yet I understand that the cable companies need a futuristic plan to not loose money.

Business about VIEWING

This artile is in the Associated Press, all about TV and the online viewers and the future possibilities of viewing "when and where?"

If you like it then you shoulda put a ring on it!!!

what the hell

Craziness

check ths crazyness on you tube peoples!!!

I found an article today about a teen charged for sniper shooting cuz Jo said "Find an article!"

Facebook Terns of Service

[ Facebook backs down ]
February 18, 2009 By Associated Press
In an about-face following a torrent of online protests, Facebook is backing off a change in its user policies while it figures how best to resolve questions like who controls the information shared on the social networking site.
The site, which boasts 175 million users around the world, quietly updated its terms of use—its governing document—a couple of weeks ago. The changes sparked an uproar after popular consumer rights advocacy blog Consumerist.com pointed them out Sunday, in a post titled “Facebook’s New Terms Of Service: ‘We Can Do Anything We Want With Your Content. Forever.’”
Facebook has since sought to reassure its users this is not the case. And on Wednesday morning, users who logged on to Facebook were greeted by a message saying the site is reverting to its previous terms of use policies while it resolves the issues raised.
Facebook spelled out, in plain English rather than the legalese that prompted the protests, that it “doesn’t claim rights to any of your photos or other content. We need a license in order to help you share information with your friends, but we don’t claim to own your information.”
Tens of thousands of users joined protest groups on Facebook, saying the new terms grant the site the ability to control their information forever, even after they cancel their accounts.
This prompted a clarification from Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s founder, who told users in a blog post Monday that “on Facebook, people own their information and control who they share it with.”
Zuckerberg also acknowledged that a “lot of the language in our terms is overly formal and protective of the rights we need to provide this service to you.”
But this wasn’t enough to quell user protests, prompting the site to also create a group called “Facebook Bill of Rights and Responsibilities,” designed to let users give input on Facebook’s terms of use. It also apologized for what it called “the confusion around these issues.”
“We never intended to claim ownership over people’s content even though that’s what it seems like to many people,” read a post from Facebook on the bill of rights page.
Originally published in Marketing Magazine, February 2009