Atlantic Monthly Contributors's Blog, page 1011

Is 'Pacific Rim' Still Going to Bomb?

Once the fate of The Lone Ranger is decided—it will likely fall to those oh-so-adorable Despicable minions—the summer box-office attention will swing as mightily as a fighting robot's fist to the fate of Guillermo Del Toro's nearly $200 million monsters-versus-robots epic Pacific Rim. And the buzz, if you can even call it that, has been mighty grim, with a bold Variety story declaring it the next Battleship. But with a marketing blitz that's oscillated between focusing on man and machine, Warner Bros. is hoping, perhaps desperately, to expand the appeal of its teetering blockbuster beyond the geek base and out of the realm of floppitude.

Indeed, the grim predictions out of Hollywood may have been a too-early attempt to shoot down this movie before it really had a chance to stand, according to Jeff Bock of Exhibitor Relations. "Tracking for some of these big summer films a couple weeks out doesn't compare to what the box office is capable of," Bock told The Atlantic Wire in a phone interview Wednesday afternoon. "The fact remains this is a monster film, and films like [Roland Emmerich's] Godzilla and [Peter Jackson's] King Kong—those both opened in the high $40s to 50 million." Bock thinks there's a good chance that both Pacific Rim and its July 12 weekend competitor, Grown Ups 2, could go toe-to-toe and ultimately get outrun by Despicable Me 2, which might conquer the box office, two weekends in a row. Where Bock really thinks Pacific Rim has its best chance is internationally, but the marketers at Warners have been making a massive push to prove that this 3D action-fest isn't just for the Comic-Con set—though Bock does describe it as the "ultimate fanboy flick." 

The newest Pacific Rim trailer—released ahead of the long holiday weekend and no doubt making its way into the previews ahead of Man of Steel and more—doubles down on the Warner Bros. promise: this is not just a movie about monsters versus robots. And it's true—for better or worse, there's a human element to the story, with a seemingly fearless leader played by Idris Elba and a rogue hero played by Charlie Hunnam. We also learn that the humans piloting the world-saving robots from monster invasion actually fight better if their human bond is better, giving the battles some emotional stake, apparently.

[image error]But, before the last-minute run on reality, the human side of Pacific Rim had been hard to come by. Way back in November, the film's campaign started out mysteriously enough, with found-footage-style videos connected to a mysterious viral marketing website, billed as the homebase of the Pan Pacific Defense Corps. But Del Toro didn't keep his monsters a mystery for very long. The first trailer let us see the Kaiju right off the bat. Other trailers we have written about—and it's now almost impossible to count how many TV spots, clips and featurettes are out there—mostly focused on the giant monsters fighting the giant robots, pretty fun stuff that did little to prove that Del Toro had any sort of vision beyond the childlike glee of having a robot come after a monster with an enormous boat. 

But, as Exhibitor Relations' Bock told us, there's an interesting strategy at work. "Almost every clip you see, it's something a little different," he said. More recently, in a dump of clips and featurettes compiled by The Playlist, we get to hear from the movie's humans, beyond just Elba's ubiquitous "we are canceling the apocalypse" speech. That's perhaps part of an effort to get a wider swath of moviegoers into theaters over that opening weekend, despite the lack of big-name stars on the bill. One featurette tells us Hunnam and Rinko Kikuchi's characters will have tragic backstories, and Charlie Day will be a guy who "resents the nerdy scientist stereotype." Hunnam promises a "real story" with "interesting characters" that's only "punctuated" by the enormous robot-monster battles. Yet another featurette features Del Toro describing the concept and artistry behind the Kaiju in the film, appealing to both the geek audience and those who may be interested in the auteur-vision of the man behind Pan's Labyrinth. But, really, it's tough to get a good read on the tone of the film from all these little new hints. Some seem intentionally campy. ("Elbow rocket" was a term that inspired our giggles.) Others try to imbue the film with a seriousness that's probably not all there in a movie that, you know, is still about boat-clutching robots.

Del Toro knows he needs to bring in the people. "We are working on it. We concentrated on the core for a long time- but we are barely started on the campaign. I am seeing the ads now and I am seeing outdoors and we are now supplementing what we did with character or tone," he wrote on a fan site spotted by The Playlist. "We just need to keep working. Our numbers are going up. Not in a minor way. Significant. We are one the right track."

We'll see after the Fourth.

       

The Egyptian Army's Deadline Nears as Anti-Morsi Protests Continue

The death toll climbed in Egypt tonight as the army's deadline for President Morsi approached. And despite those deaths, both institutional sides of the unrest — Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood-led government and the country's armed forces — vowed to put their lives on the line in order to win. 

Egypt's military, the SCAF, has all but promised a military coup if Morsi doesn't agree to share power by 10 a.m. Eastern on Wednesday (5 p.m. in Cairo). So Morsi made a late-night television appearance to reiterate that he's not going anywhere: "If the price for legitimacy is my blood, then I am prepared to sacrifice my blood to legitimacy and my homeland," he said, repeating his belief that the massive protests sweeping the entire country are just the remnants of the old regime. [image error]

The SCAF released their own statement, keeping the stakes high for tomorrow. Armed forces General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi said this, via Reuters: "We swear to God that we will sacrifice even our blood for Egypt and its people, to defend them against any terrorist, radical or fool." The Facebook post from the SCAF was dramatically titled "The Final Hours."

Meanwhile, at least 23 people have died in clashes related to theprotests, by the AP's count. Most of the fatalities were from an incident at Cairo University involving pro-Morsi supporters and security forces. 

Millions of anti-Morsi protesters took to the streets last Sunday, the one-year anniversary of Morsi's inauguration as president, to demand his resignation. Those demonstrations have continued since then. Despite Mursi's defiance of the protesters demands, it's hard to see how his government could survive the current uprising intact. 

Photo: Reuters

       

Edward Snowden Also Wasn't On Evo Morales's Presidential Plane

Bolivian President Evo Morales indicated on Tuesday that he might be interested in giving NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden asylum. As thanks, the leader's plane from Russia home to Bolivia was refused entry to France and Portugal's airspace, allegedly because the countries thought Snowden might be hitching a ride back. Morales is now spending the night in Austria, and Snowden is, apparently, still in the Moscow airport. Neither France nor Portugal have commented, so far. 

Bolivian Foreign Minister David Choquehuanca had some strong words for the countries after the president's unplanned landing in Austria (via Reuters):

"They say it was due to technical issues, but after getting explanations from some authorities we found that there appeared to be some unfounded suspicions that Mr. Snowden was on the plane ... We don't know who invented this lie," he said.

"We want to express our displeasure because this has put the president's life at risk."

Wikileaks was pretty peeved, too: 

The reported actions of France, Portugal and Spain this night will live in infamy.

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) July 2, 2013

Venezuela's Foreign Minister Elias Jaua also jumped in to comment. Venezuela is one of the other countries reportedly considering Snowden's asylum request: 

"All the countries that have denied permission for the flight of our brother president, Evo Morales, must be held responsible for his life and his dignity as president."

Morales was in Moscow for a summit of gas exporters, but he made headlines for a hint during an interview with Russian television that he'd consider Snowden's request, one of 21 the former contractor made in the wake of his flight from the U.S. to Hong Kong to Moscow. And while his options are dwindling as countries distance themselves from the leaker (and from Wikileaks, who have helped Snowden with his asylum quest), Bolivia suddenly became his latest best chance. 

Morales will continue home to Bolivia on Wednesday. The rest of us will have to wait and see which plane Edward Snowden isn't on next. 

       

North Carolina's Anti-Sharia Bill is Now Also Anti-Abortion

The North Carolina Senate is not only considering an anti-Sharia (or Islamic law) bill passed in the state's House earlier this year, they've tricked it out with a whole new issue. House Bill 695, which began as a cookie-cutter ban on the use of foreign law in family law and custody cases, now would implement several restrictions on abortion services in the state. 

The abortion provisions were tacked on to the bill late on Tuesday, which was then re-named the more omnibus-friendly "Family, Faith, and Freedom Protection Act of 2013." Those provisions are familiar to trackers of conservative legislation concerning abortion. They include measures already making their way through the state's legislative process.

The newly dual-issue bill would restrict health care coverage for abortions on plans offered through an Exchange, ban sex-selective abortions, require physicians to be present during a chemical (pill) abortion, and require clinics performing abortions to meet the requirements of an ambulatory surgical center. Currently, according to the News-Observer, just one clinic in the state meets that requirement. North Carolina passed an earlier set of anti-abortion laws in 2011. 

Originally, the bill was a pretty standard piece the newest iteration of anti-Sharia legislation: without naming Sharia, or Islamic law by name (a 2010 ballot measure doing so was eventually ruled unconstitutional in Oklahoma), the bill used a template drafted by anti-Sharia activist David Yerushalmi to restrict the use of "foreign law" in North Carolina courts. Anti Sharia activists believe that Islamic law poses a threat to the U.S. constitution and to American citizens (presumably, the non-Muslim ones), and have pushed for state laws banning it. Opponents to the bills note that the measures are directed specifically at restricting Muslims in spirit if not in letter, could interfere with due process, and might have implications for the state's international business relationships due to the vague wording of the measures. In any case, the less-specific bills are having a much easier time getting through state legislatures. Oklahoma, even after the overturned ballot measure, now has such a law on the books.

The Senate's final vote on the bill is Wednesday. You can read the whole thing below: 

H695v4

(h/t Buzzfeed)

       

White House Delays Key Obamacare Provision for a Year

The administration will give a one-year extension to medium and large businesses to meet the requirements of a major Obamacare provision requiring them to provide affordable healthcare to their employees.  

That "employer mandate," Bloomberg explains, was the subject of protest by a number of employer groups who said the cost and complexity of meeting the law's requirements by 2014 was too burdensome. Now, businesses with more than 50 employees have until 2015 before facing fines for non-compliance, and Obama and company will take another year to simplify the process. Bloomberg's scoop cites two unnamed officials, referencing an apparent Fourth of July news dump intended for release "later this week." The delay will move the implementation of the provision, which conservatives have recently argued is one of the the bill's weakest links, until after the midterms. 

The delay fits into the territory of holiday news dumps, no doubt, because it's basically a giant, well-lit soap box atop a red carpet for opponents of Obama's health care reform. Since taking over the House of Representatives in 2011, Republicans have staged 37 votes to repeal the entire 2010 law. And while today's employer extension leaves other parts of the law intact, including those already in effect, and the still-standing 2014 deadline for the individual mandate, conservatives are happy to step up and talk about how the announcement renders the whole law vulnerable. Here's a sampling (emphasis ours): 

House Speaker John Boehner: "The president's health care law is already raising costs and costing jobs. This announcement means even the Obama administration knows the 'train wreck' will only get worse. I hope the administration recognizes the need to release American families from the mandates of this law as well. This is a clear acknowledgment that the law is unworkable, and it underscores the need to repeal the law and replace it with effective, patient-centered reforms."

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor: "Rather than continuing to delay the predictable pain until another election day has passed, we should scrap this entire law and instead implement patient-centered reforms before any more damage is done to our economy or the health care families depend on. The best delay for ObamaCare is a permanent one." 

Mitch McConnell, Senate Republican Leader: "Obamacare costs too much and it isn’t working the way the administration promised. And while the White House seems to slowly be admitting what Americans already know, and what I hear consistently in my travels around Kentucky regarding the regulatory burden on employers, the fact remains that Obamacare needs to be repealed and replaced with common-sense reforms that actually lower costs for Americans." 

WaPo Columnist Jennifer Rubin: "The Obama administration has undermined its sole claim to greatness." 

The Heritage Foundation: "The problem is not just Obamacare’s employer mandate—the real problem is Obamacare itself." (Heritage, of course, is often cited as an early influencer of Obamacare —something the organization has vehemently denied, not entirely convincingly, since the bill's passage.)

Heard Obama Admin may delay #Obamacare employer mandate for 1 year. How about we delay it all forever? #FullRepeal pic.twitter.com/dGst0dFLpm

— Senator Ted Cruz (@SenTedCruz) July 2, 2013

       

These Stories Are Not About the 'N-Word' and 'Cracker'

[image error]CNN had a remarkable discussion panel this weekend, thanks to the presence of George Zimmerman and Paula Deen in the news, in which the chyron read, "N WORD VS 'CRACKER': WHICH IS WORSE?" The question itself is as stupid as the evidence marshalled: Teens say the n-word in songs! And both words were used on a really old Saturday Night Live skit! But ultimately the question misses the point because these words are not what either case is about.

CNN's Don Lemon said he wanted to have an "honest conversation" about a collection of taboo words: "n----r, honkey, cracker. These words can cause a visceral reaction when people hear them. You may have been flinched when I said them." It then descended into the silliness we've all heard a million times. Lemon spoke to human behavior expert Wendy Walsh, who is white and said her son is biracial. Walsh's son has asked her, "if you're not allowed to say the n-word but daddy is, what's the rule for me?" Their solution was to say "wigga." Columbia University professor Marc Lamont Hill said, "Black people said it because we moved into this post-racial ideology, this color-blind ideology that says, if we don't talk about race, if we don't name race, if we don't speak certain racialized terms, somehow the world will be racially better, and it's not true." He did not think Walsh should feel any confusion about when to use the n-word (never). "Why are white people fighting so fiercely for the right to use the n-word? Let it go."

And then they got to their flimsy premise that equated the controversy over a famous butter-lover harboring racist thoughts and a , and the other is about whether a boy deserved to be shot. a famous chef harboring racial beliefs and an unarmed teenager ending up shot and dead in a gated commuity. But they tried mightily, because of the words. "I think to expect a 19-year-old to know the history of a term like 'cracker' as opposed to a 66-year-old knowing the history of the n-word is a ridiculous comparison," said Tim Wise, who was identified as an anti-racism activist. That's probably the most salient point. Why is CNN lumping together these two stories? One is about What words they used have little to do with either case.

Most of the people attacking Deen — and most supporting her — are so misrepresenting what the case is about that you have to wonder whether it's intentional. On Saturday, the Savannah Morning News' Tom Barton wrote that Deen was the victim of "a modern-day lynching." "Savannah’s celebrity chef has been lynched — figuratively and publicly in the court of public opinion, and without a full and fair accounting of the facts," Barton said. Well, he's right about the facts part. But Barton fails to grapple with the facts, too. The case is not about Deen "saying the n-word 30 years ago." It is not about Deen discriminating against a white person, as Barton suggests: "But what is white-on-white discrimination? An opera lover being forced to listen to country music?" (Har har?) Fox News' Todd Starnes had a similar angle: "Paula admitted she used the word — back in the 1980s — when a black guy walked into the bank, stuck a gun in her face and ordered her to hand over the cash. The national media failed to mention that part of the story." Many other defenders say the focus on a single, youthful indiscretion with one word is overblown. And it is!

[image error]As Daryl K. Washington points out, the Deen case is actually about Deen failing to control her brother, Bubba Hier (at left), who ran her restaurants and treated the black employees poorly. According to the lawsuit, black employees could only use the back entrance, couldn't work in the front of the restaurants, could only use one bathroom, and had to put up with him using the n-word a lot, and in a demeaning way. ("Don’t you wish you could rub all the black off you and be like me? You just look dirty; I bet you wish you could.")

The woman suing Deen, Lisa Jackson, is white. In her first public statement since the controversy, CNN reports, Jackson released a letter through her lawyer, saying, "This lawsuit has never been about the n-word... It is to address Ms. Deen's patterns of disrespect and degradation of people that she deems to be inferior... I may be a white woman, but I could no longer tolerate her abuse of power as a business owner, nor her condonation of Mr. Hier's despicable behavior on a day-to-day basis."

And yet, on story quoting Jackson's letter, CNN placed a video of analysis from Marvette Britto, who was introduced as an "expert" and "brand strategist." Britto, like so many commentators, was fixated on the n-word in the past, not allegations of employee abuse in the present. "I was surprised that Paula Deen didn't take more ownership of the words that she said, of the words that she spoke -- and add context and clarity for her comments for an audience that's very confused by her words."

The reason CNN was comparing the n-word with cracker was because the latter was supposedly uttered by Trayvon Martin. According to the testimony of Rachel Jeantel, Martin referred to George Zimmerman as a "creepy-ass cracker" who was following him. Zimmerman, was carrying a gun, is on trial for shooting and killing Martin, an unarmed teenager, after they met in the street. 

Many people have seized on the term "cracker" as proof that Martin was racist against white people and therefore was threatening enough to justify Zimmerman shooting him. In turn, that has inspired many people sympathetic to Martin to write that cracker really isn't all that bad. "As a born-and-raised Southerner— and a cracker— I feel qualified to offer some insight to those who may be confused by this thorny sociological quandary," Gawker's Hamilton Nolan writes. Cracker is no big deal, he explains:

A racial slur? Sure, technically speaking. A real racial slur? Sadly, no. There are no good racial slurs for white people. Despite the fact that white Americans have committed far more atrocities against the other races of the world than all of those races combined have committed against white people, there is no one single slur in popular usage that can really cut a white person to their soft, marshmallowy core.

Counting the atrocities seems like a weird way to justify a word's sluriness. We wouldn't want to use racial slurs against North Sudanese people even though the North Sudanese people committed genocide against the South Sudanese. At Mediaite, Tommy Christopher noted that "cracker" has some interesting history that's not so racial. In Florida, Christopher writes, "the word 'cracker' isn’t a racial slur at all, but rather, a proud nod to the region’s history, and one’s own ancestry." It's a reference to pre-Civil War Florida cowboys. And at NPR, Gene Demby explains the etymology of cracker, noting that Cracker is an old-fashioned way of building a house in Florida to beat the heat.  Demby writes:

By the early 1800s, those immigrants to the South started to refer to themselves that way as a badge of honor and a term of endearment. (I'm pretty sure this process of reappropriating a disparaging term sounds familiar to a lot of y'all.)

[image error]Like Nolan, I am also from the South. I was called cracker in city elementary school, and it hurt my feelings! You can see my permanent facial expression in that era at right. (Why were you so mean, Victoria T.?!) In my rural high school, which was mostly white, people called each other cracker all the time, as a joke. The difference is using the word to exclude people versus using it to include people. Obviously. Martin was obviously not thinking of a grand Celtic cowboy tradition when he said "cracker."

But that doesn't matter, because cracker is the least important word in the phrase Jeantel testified Martin said. The important part is "creepy-ass"! The critical facts to figure out in the case is whether Zimmerman reacted appropriately to the threat he perceived. Was Martin an aggressive, scary, violent teenager who beat up Zimmerman, leaving him no choice but to use lethal force? Or was Zimmerman aggressively following Martin when he confronted him, and shot him for no good reason? If Martin did indeed say a "creepy-ass" white dude was following him, it indicates he was afraid of Zimmerman.

       

The Fascinating Art of Egypt's Protests

Some of the Egyptian protesters looked a little less cheery on Tuesday than they did a few days ago. But their protest art was still fascinating. The selfies on Instragram showed a self-awareness that they were part of something historic. President Mohammed Morsi said that he's not stepping down, tweeting, "President Mohamed Morsi reaffirms his upholding of constitutional legitimacy, rejects any attempt to act outside of it, calls on the armed forces to withdraw its warning and rejects any domestic and foreign dictates." (Translation by The New York Times.)

Sometimes only video can give you a sense of the scale of the protests. This GIF is from Arabic TV footage.

[image error]

[image error]

[image error]

Anti-Morsi graffiti by shahdshaker:

[image error]

Another shot, with the caption "Leave already you son of a bitch ahhhhh:

[image error]

Another unusual sign in Tahrir Square, posted by abazasuxxx:

[image error]

Another interesting sign, by hazhooz:

[image error]

Some things are universal:

[image error]

Like kids, by noreenelhossary:

[image error]

And kids with fashionable glasses, by rawandorgham:

[image error]

Rebel cat, by mariamelkeretly:

[image error]

But not everything is cute. There are plenty of reminders of how serious the situation is. Plainclothes cops in the Kit Kat neighborhood:

[image error]

Pro-Morsi:

[image error]

Anti:

[image error]

(Non-Instagram photos by Associated Press.)

       

Why So Serious, Vince Vaughn?

When we all saw the teaser for Delivery Man (ha, "we all" — everyone, everywhere saw it), the movie about Vince Vaughn being a sperm donor who finds out he's got like a million kids running around, we assumed (again with this "we" — sorry, I assumed) that it would be some dumb raunchy comedy full of goofs and gags. But now we see the full-length trailer and while there are definitely goofs and gags, there's also emotion. Which, I gotta say, is pretty exciting! Remember when Vince Vaughn was a serious actor, doing movies about people trapped in Thai prisons and stuff? Sure, he got famous for Swingers, but there was a while there when he was doing lots of drama. Then that stopped, around the time of Old School, let's say. But now, so many years later, there's this. The movie appears to be mostly a comedy, but there are tears, actual Vince Vaughn tears, in the trailer. And wistful music and talk about "life" and everything. Very interesting, Vince Vaughn. Very interesting indeed.

Oh brother. James Franco has announced his intentions to direct a movie version of The Sound and the Fury, the William Faulkner novel that's like... the Southern novel. When someone says "Southern novel" lots of people are going to say "Sound and the Fury?" This would be Franco's second Faulkner adaptation, as he had As I Lay Dying at Cannes this year. So... how about that. Who will play Benjy? Hopefully Jonah Hill. And then Dave Franco can be Quentin. Really this thing casts itself. It's going to be great. James Franco is perfect for this. When I heard that someone was going to be making The Sound and the Fury into a movie (again), I immediately thought "I hope it's James Franco." And it is. Thank sweet Dilsey, it is. [Indiewire]

Speaking of adaptations, they're finally getting around to making a feature film out of Lois Lowry's The Giver, a dystopian young adult novel about kids learning about foreplay. No, no, it's about other more complicated stuff. Anyway, the point is that they've just cast young actor Brenton Thwaites in the movie as the lead character Jonas. He'll star opposite Jeff Bridges in the Philip Noyce-directed film. So that could be interesting! They've aged Jonas up a bit, but that might work better for a movie. Are you excited about this? I don't know if I am. I just remember everyone reading this book in like sixth grade and being really into it but the cover always seemed boring to me so I never read it. Now there's a movie, so I never have to! [Deadline]

That Breaking Bad spinoff about Saul Goodman? It's moving forward, according to BB creator Vince Gilligan. They still have to figure some stuff out, like if it takes place before or after the BB storyline (well, I guess that means he doesn't die, spoiler alert, sheesh), but they are planning to pursue this thing. Which could be good? I don't know. Spinoffs are so... haunted by the real thing, y'know? I mean these are smart people, but still. [The Wrap]

Jacki Weaver and Marcia Gay Harden have just been cast in the next Woody Allen movie. They're joining Emma Stone, Colin Firth, Eileen Atkins, Hamish Linklater and Simon McBurney. It's filming in the South of France as we speak, so Jacki and Marcia you'd better get going like right now. I know it sounds like a pain, but go get on a plane to the South of France to film a Woody Allen movie this instant! [Deadline]

       

Clapper's Third Excuse for Misleading Congress About the NSA Is His Best

"Respectfully, Jim." So ends a June 21 letter from James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, to Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, explaining why on March 12 he told a Congressional committee that the NSA doesn't "collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of million of Americans." In his letter, Clapper offers his third version of an excuse: he misunderstood the question. Whichever five-year-old taught our government agencies how to be accountable for their behavior did a hell of a job.

Shortly after the Guardian reported on the existence of the government's collection of phone records and internet traffic through the National Security Agency, attention turned to Clapper's comments. After all, the exchange with Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon (at right) was explicit. Clapper himself includes it in his letter. Here's the Washington Post's transcription.

Wyden: So what I wanted to see is if you could give me a yes or no answer to the question, does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?

Clapper: No, sir.

Wyden: It does not?

Clapper: Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertently perhaps collect, but not wittingly.

True. Except for the metadata (which one could argue is a "type of data") that the NSA collects on every phone customer (which may run into the hundreds of millions) in the United States (the residents of which might be referred to as "Americans").

Clapper's letter explains.

I have thought long and hard to re-create what went through my mind at the time. In light of Senator Wyden's reference to "dossiers" and faced with the challenge of trying to give an unclassified answer about our intelligence collection activities, many of which are classified, I simply didn't think of Section 215 of the Patriot Act. Instead, my answer addressed collection of the content of communications. I focused in particular on Section 702 of FISA, because we had just been through a year-long campaign to seek reauthorization of this provision and had had many classified discussions about it, including with Senator Wyden.

This is actually not a terrible answer. There are two tools the NSA uses for its data collection: amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) which allows the NSA to pull a broad swath of data on non-Americans, and the Patriot Act's Section 215 which allows it to pull those phone records. Clapper answered on the first, not the second.

The reason this was such a good answer may be that it was his third go. On June 9, Clapper told NBC News' Andrea Mitchell that his response was "the most truthful, or least untruthful, manner" he could answer. (That response has become somewhat famous.)

But that was only his first public excuse. As the Guardian reported yesterday, Clapper admitted in private to Wyden that his answer was wrong — at the time of the hearing. Wyden "had a staff member contact the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on a secure phone line soon after the March hearing to address the inaccurate statement regarding bulk collection on Americans," the paper reports. He didn't.

By now, then, having had a chance to workshop his response a few times, Clapper lands a winner. But it doesn't exactly make sense either. Right after the NBC News appearance, Wyden pointed out that he'd sent the question to Clapper in advance, making it somewhat hard to believe that Clapper subsequently misunderstood it. And, of course, the protections on Section 702 are loose enough that the NSA collects data on Americans through it anyway. Maybe not millions, though.

To his credit, shortly after the NSA revelations broke Clapper issued a public statement clarifying points about the NSA's data collection and partially declassifying details of the programs. Later the NSA posted a fact sheet on its website detailing how and when the agency used its authority under Section 702 to surveil Americans. Except that this explainer, too, was factually inaccurate as noted by (you guess it) Ron Wyden. The NSA has pulled it down.

The Director of National Intelligence and the NSA explicitly don't want to share details about the programs they use. Every admission has been grudging and each has been tempered with the threat that it weakens domestic security. We've asked in the past if we can ever know the full extent of the intelligence community's surveillance of the American public. If we have to rely on third-times-the-charm explanations of misinformation that occur only after false information is exposed, it seems likely that the answer to that question is "no." A hard, unqualified no.

Clapper concluded his letter by noting that he'd appeared before Congress for two decades. "But mistakes will happen, and when I make one, I correct it," he wrote, leaving off, "eventually, if needed." Respectfully, Jim.

Clapper's letter

       

The False Origins of In-N-Out's Fake Monkey Style Burger

West coasters, In-N-Out obsessives, and foodies the world over had their hearts broken and their cholesterol levels saved when, after getting trolled by a single food blog into believing the legendary burger joint had created a new secret-menu item, it turned out the Monkey Style burger was one elaborate ruse. The off-the-books burger that could have been — but never was — combined spread, cheese, and grilled onion covered Animal Style fries with a Double Double burger. So, yum, but: bummer.

On Friday morning, FoodBeast's Elie Ayrouth unleashed an investigation into his search for the so-called  Monkey Style burger. In the accompanying video, Ayrouth attempts to order the burgers from an In-N-Out drive-thru, only to be told that In-N-Out doesn't offer them at any of its locations. Here's where things get weird. The video cuts to a "top secret" screen with scrambled voices; we're led to believe that some top secret source has provided our guide a box full of the mythical burgers. 

However, in the video you can clearly see that the burgers are Monkey Style-less as they're handed to Ayrouth:

[image error]

And here:

[image error]

And yet he somehow ends up with this:

[image error]

On Tuesday afternoon, In-N-Out stepped forward to debunk the myth: Carl Van Fleet, the chain's vice president of planning and development, told LAist, "There is no such thing. It seems to be a story that originated somewhere in cyberspace. For a variety of reasons, we're unable to prepare burgers in the manner that a few websites have described as 'Monkey Style'."

So, did Ayrouth, who also happens to be FoodBeast's publisher, draw up this hoax to get attention? He didn't respond to when KCAL9 asked him, but if he did then the plan's working. The Monkey Style burger story and video fooled several outlets, including LAist, the Los Angeles Times, and the Huffington Post. Meanwhile, the rest of us can take solace in the fact that Monkey Style burgers are, well, really just Double Doubles stuffed with Animal Style fries, which you can make for yourself with a couple of napkins. No trolling required.