Atlantic Monthly Contributors's Blog, page 1095

New York City Will Pay Over $365,000 for Its Destructive Raid on Zucotti Park

Fans of justice will be glad to hear that New York City will pay for all those books and all that media equipment that the police trashed when it famously raided the Occupy Wall Street camp on November 15, 2011. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York just announced a $366,700 settlement in Occupy's case against the city for the damage caused during the raid as well as all of the legal fees the movement's poured into seeking retribution. Sound like a lot? Let's itemize those expenses for you:

The People's Library ($47,000 in damages, $186,350 in legal fees)

Ray Bradbury probably turned over in his grave, when the New York Police Department went after the 5,500 donated books that Occupy was keeping for the people in Zucotti Park. First covered in the media by The New Yorker, the so-called People's Library was so popular it even earned its own blog in the early days of the movement and maintained it long after Zucotti was empty and the majority of its books destroyed. As Occupy's lawyer put it, the settlement stood for a lot more than books. "This was not just about money, it was about constitutional rights and the destruction of books," Normal Siegel told The Village Voice.

Global Revolutions TV ($75,000 in damages, $49,850 in legal fees)

The only thing almost as bad as burning books is destroying journalists' tools. That's exactly what the NYPD did when they damaged the "computers, wifi hotspots and similarly related live-streaming equipment" of Global Revolutions TV. The $75,000 in damages does not include the well-document instances of police brutality against journalists several of whom were arrested that night while trying to cover the event. Don't worry. That's a separate lawsuit.  

Times Up New York ($8,500 in damages)

This is getting ridiculous. The NYPD even took out the awesome bicycle-powered generators that Occupiers built to keep the lights on at Zucotti. These things popped up after the police took Occupy's regular generators a couple weeks before the raid, though the activists got them back later. The bicycle generators weren't so lucky in the raid, so now the city has to pay.

The only bright side for Mayor Mike Bloomberg and the rest of the city government is that they were slightly successful in blaming Brookfield Properties, the owners of Zucotti Park, for someof the damages. But it's clear who was mostly responsible for the damage. While the city has to pay over 365,000 to the various Occupy affiliates, Brookfield Properties must pay the city just $15,666.67.

Read the full settlement

 

Occupy Wall St. v. City of New York Settlement

       

Why is Immigration Reform So Hard If It Looks So Unanimous?

The Senate will release a bipartisan immigration reform bill by the end of the week — maybe. The "gang of eight" senators working on the legislation can't even agree on whether they'll come to an agreement in time. Arizona Sen. John McCain said Tuesday that "We're shooting for that kind of progress," meaning before the weekend, while Florida Sen. Marco Rubio told a private conference call with the Chamber of Commerce Monday that it could be a "few" weeks. California Sen. Dianne Feinstein says they've reached a "tentative agreement" on the last sticking point, visas for agricultural workers. Rubio will brief GOP senators on where the bill stands on Wednesday.

The Daily Caller's Mickey Kaus noticed something this weekend: If you only watched the Very Serious Sunday political talk shows, you'd have no idea why there's any delay at all. That's because Kaus counted the guests — 10 political officials who supported immigration reform, zero who did not. Not even on Fox News! "You'd think they'd at least find the kookiest anti-amnesty crackpot they could find and put them on," Kaus writes. But the networks did not host any kooks. 

Why is elite opinion so unanimous? There is political agreement — President Obama wants immigration reform, the Republican National Committee's 2012 "autopsy" concluded the GOP must pass immigration reform to start winning presidential elections. There is the alignment of business interests and humanitarian concerns. Undocumented workers do not have easy lives, so bleeding hearts want to make their lives better, and immigration helps the economy, so some businesses want more of it. A report from the conservative American Action Forum says "benchmark immigration reform would raise the pace of economic growth by nearly a percentage point over the near term, raise GDP per capita by over $1,500 and reduce the cumulative federal deficit by over $2.5 trillion."

This is another example of libertarian-leaning elite opinion diverging from regular people opinion. A recent poll found that 60 percent of Republican voters oppose immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship, which some conservatives call "amnesty." Those conservative voters elected Republican members of Congress. And they also donate money to the many political groups who are preparing to lobby hard against the bill: Heritage Action, NumbersUSA, Federation for American Immigration Reform. But you wouldn't know that, watching the kook-free coverage of the immigration debate.

       

Can Saul Have It All?

Today in show business news: AMC is thinking about spinning off a beloved Breaking Bad character, Anne Hathaway lands a huge new role, and Chloe Sevigny has officially been made a detective.

AMC is apparently thinking about developing a spinoff of its award-winning, cult-hit series Breaking Bad, which is set to wrap up this summer. The new show would follow sleazy criminal lawyer Saul Goodman, played with oily charm by Bob Odenkirk. The hour-long series, potentially to be called Better Call Saul, would be a comedy largely, presumably populated by the scuzzy Albuquerque criminal element that Breaking Bad has so ingeniously introduced us to. But, again, this would be a comedy, not some increasingly dark wander into the hell of amorality, the way BB is. So is this a good idea? Odenkirk is great and all, and the character is lots of fun, but what if the show just can't get it right? Will that sully the memory of the character and of the original show? It could! I mean, Joey didn't do much to damage the memory of Friends (look, some of us liked and still like Friends, OK?), but we're not talking about a light sitcom here. We're talking about serious, arty, regularly brilliant television. Shouldn't the whole universe of Breaking Bad collapse and go dark when the show ends, as creator Vince Gilligan initially intended it to? Gilligan is involved with the spinoff idea, but still. Let's just let things lie. Isn't that better? I know AMC is sad to lose the property — they'll lose BB this year, and then Mad Men the next, leaving them with only The Walking Dead as a surefire watercooler sensation. But they're all about the quality, aren't they? That's why they're one of the cool networks? So, they should leave spinoffs and that junk to the broadcast networks. Let Breaking Bad be it for that particular gang of New Mexico. [Deadline]

Speaking of bad ideas, Anne Hathaway has been cast opposite Matthew McConaughey in Christopher Nolan's next big movie, Interstellar. Ughhhhh. OK, I know. Even I will admit that she wasn't that bad in Dark Knight Rises, but come on. Do we really want Anne Hathaway to be this big of a movie star? Do we? Following up a damn Oscar win with a near sure-fire critical and box office hit? Grumble. Grumble I say! This will solidify Anne Hathaway as some sort of A-list big deal and I just... I just don't know if the nation is ready for that. Call me crazy. And call me wrong. But this is how I feel. I'm sorry. I'm sure she's lovely person. (Not that sure.) It's just, as a movie star... I don't know. Was Rachel Bilson busy? Why can't Rachel Bilson have the role? Or any role? [Deadline]

A&E has ordered the pilot Those Who Kill to series, meaning we'll soon be watching Chloe Sevigny play a detective, one who specifically hunts serial killers. Wow. From New York street teen to discoing club kid to repressed Mormon cult wife to transsexual contract killer to savvy detective. That's a lot of change for a mere twenty or so years. Good for her. What's next? President?? Oh god, please someone make something where Chloe Sevigny is the president. Please. The nation needs it. [The Hollywood Reporter]

Natalie Dormer, aka Margaery Tyrell on Game of Thrones (she will be Margaery Tyrell from now, most likely), has been cast as the all-important Irene Adler character on CBS's modern Sherlock Holmes show Elementary. So that could be an interesting arc! Unless of course Sherlock treats all women like he treats Lucy Liu's Joan Watson, in which case poor Irene will simply stand around frowning until she's told to leave the room every five minutes. And she will comply, inexplicably. Hopefully that will not be the case with Irene. Maybe she can teach Holmes to treat Watson better, too. That would be nice. Because otherwise, why is Lucy Liu on this show? Other than the tons of money, I mean? [Entertainment Weekly]

Starz: ("It's Not TV, It's Not HBO, It's Starz") is developing a Vietnam War drama (just like FX is) with Newsroom writer Gideon Yago. Yes, "Newsroom writer Gideon Yago." That is how Gideon Yago is initially introduced in this article. I mean, they eventually do mention his work with MTV, but come on. Am I so old? Is it such an ancient thing to just immediately say, "MTV News nerd-hunk Gideon Yago"? Is that so hard? I mean he's not even one of the original MTV News people. Or even one of the slightly less-old ones. He's not Tabitha Soren! He's not even Serena Altschul! He's from the mid-2000s for heaven's sake. Come on, guys. Know your context. Gideon Yago is not "Newsroom writer Gideon Yago," he is "MTV cutie news guy Gideon Yago." Let's get it right here. Anyway, Vietnam series for him. Good job. [The Hollywood Reporter]

Here's a really gross clip from Eli Roth's upcoming Netflix show Hemlock Grove. It's really gross and really silly, actually. It's a man becoming a werewolf in icky, skin-splitting fashion. And Lili Taylor watches the whole time, smiling. It's a bit dopey looking, the whole thing. I dunno. I'm not sure about this show, you guys.

       

The Blockbuster CBS Ratings for March Madness Are Bad for Your Cable Bill

This year's NCAA Men's Basketball Championship brought drama, buzzer-beaters, Florida Gulf Coast University, Kevin Ware, that Spike Albrecht kid, and the best television ratings in nearly two decades, which only means the $10.8 billion deal that CBS and Turner cut to get all the games again was totally worth jacking up your cable bill for — and might be once again. The entire tournament averaged 10.7 million viewers for its entire set of games, which is up 11 percent from the year before, reports The New York Times's Bill Carter. Monday night's final pulled in 23.4 million viewers, up 12 percent from 2012, which is great for Rick Pitino and Les Moonves, but not so great for our ever increasing cable bills. It's exactly these types of expensive sports that are pushing provider prices way up.

In the case of March Madness, CBS, TBS, TNT, and even TruTV have a point: A lot of people tune in to watch, so the price of a cable package is worth it, even if it balloons because of deals with the NCAA or especially the NFL. That still doesn't mean good sports are worth that much of your money, especially for all the millions of people who pay for cable but didn't watch every last shining moment. (Something like 100 million Americans have pay TV.) The NCAA basketball tournament is that rare event that captures national attention, and not just from niche sports fans who are subsidizing the NFL on TV. And other leagues have even more exorbitant deals than CBS. Here's a roundup of some of the most expensive ones from AdAge today:

Starting in 2014, MLB will roughly double its annual payday thanks to national-TV renewals worth $12.4 billion with ESPN, Fox and TBS. After the 2014 regular season, ESPN will pay an estimated $7 billion to televise college football's new national playoff through 2026. Time Warner Cable will spend an estimated $8 billion over 25 years to create a new regional sports network around the Los Angeles Dodgers, according to Sports Business Journal.

So, yeah, maybe you were one of the 23 million to tune in to the Spike Albrecht show Monday night, and the nail-biter with Louisville made your $90 cable bill totally worth it — or at least the NBA and NHL playoffs coming up will help. But what about the other stuff? And will next year's tournament be quite as compelling? The CBS/Turner deal runs through 2024.

       

Powerball Made $3.1 Million in 24 Hours After Invading California

Powerball, the ubiquitous lottery game, finally arrived in California on Monday, and began to spread its enticing message of easy, instant fortune to residents of the Golden State. That message appears to have been a success: According to a press release distributed by California's lottery authority, more than 700,000 Californians purchased Powerball tickets in the 24 hours since they went on sale, generating approximately $3.1 million dollars in revenue for the Multi-State Lottery Association, the non-profit outfit which administers lotteries in 33 states. The Los Angeles Times broke down the exact odds of winning, and — surprise! — they're not too hot. Californians dreaming of Powerball's giant jackpot have a 1 in 175 million of making their dream come true.

Powerball's West Coast arrival comes two years after California officials initiated talks about bringing the game to the state (in 2005, state officials went with chief Powerball competitor Mega Millions) and five months after they finally signed an agreement, in November 2012, to begin selling the pink tickets at gas stations, bodegas, and grocery stores. The deal makes sense, on the whole: the lottery funnels money to state services, and California is still dealing with the effects of its enormous budget shortfall from just a year ago. And since Powerball is an interstate lottery, it's windfalls — and state contributions — are much larger. (Indeed, Powerball profits will fund 1.5 percent of California's education budget.) Still, enormous lotteries like Powerball continue to attract critics for the role they play in the lives of the poor, who buy tickets — the majority of which are money-losing — at a far greater rate than middle- and upper-income Americans.

       

The Answer to McConnell's 'Nixonian' Tape Paranoia, from an Office Spy

Mitch McConnell knows who's to blame for leaking a recording of a campaign meeting in which his campaign staff disparaged his non-opponent Ashley Judd: liberals, who McConnell says "bugged" his office "in a Nixonian move." According to an expert we spoke with that's possible — but it's almost certainly not the case.

McConnell and the Republicans have been playing Tuesday's ongoing drama cleverly. The Senate Minority Leader called for an FBI investigation and has been unabashed in using the word "bugged," a word that implies some sort of electronic device was left in the office and recorded or transmitted the conversation to outside observers. (As you can see in the video below, he pointed his finger specifically at Progress Kentucky, a liberal group that earlier this month suggested McConnell's wife's ethnicity prompted the senator's policy choices: "As I indicated," McConnell says in the press conference, "last month they were attacking my wife's ethnicity and then apparently unbeknownst to us at the time they were bugging our headquarters in a Nixonian move." His staff later defused that accusation.)

McConnell's team also wasted no time fundraising off the kerfuffle. Visitors are asked to sign a pledge: "I stand with Senator McConnell against illegal wiretapping"

Meanwhile, Sen. Jerry Moran, who heads up National Republican Senatorial Committee, ratcheted up the Nixon references: "Secret recordings, private conversations leaked, reports of bugs — these Watergate-era tactics have no place in our campaigns," Moran said of a Judd campaign that never really existed. "I am glad to read Senator McConnell’s campaign is working with the Department of Justice and the FBI to find answers."

So was McConnell wiretapped? Or, as others (us) have suggested, was it a leak from a campaign consultant?

The first thing we tried to do was determine where McConnell's campaign offices are. News reports suggested it was on Bishop Lane in Louisville; old records indicated either the building below or a nearly-identical one across the street. A call to the campaign office confirmed the address, but not the location inside the building.

We spoke with Frank James, a private investigator with 1st Class Investigations out of Connecticut — though it seems likely that James himself was from an outer borough of New York. How easy would it be for a spy to record conversations in an office? "Very simple."

James outlined how it could work. His first idea was a small device hidden under a table in the meeting room. We asked if that wouldn't be found, and he replied, "Not too many people crawl under tables at meetings."

True. But surely the McConnell team would have searched the room by now. Well, James offered, maybe someone in the room had a pen with a recording device in it. Or glasses. A watch. Person walks in, attends the meeting, walks out with the whole thing recorded.

We suggested that it was unlikely that someone from Progress Kentucky would be invited to a strategy meeting. What other options were there? James indicated that you could put a device in the ceiling or in a light. It could be placed and left there, broadcasting audio or video within a short range; say, to a car in the parking lot. Which would make it much easier to detect. James' firm does sweeps of offices and homes for exactly such devices. While he doesn't find as many as people might think, he does find them.

In short, then, it's trivial to record a conversation. But it is very hard to do so without the device being detected for long — and if McConnell were actually concerned that his office had been bugged, he'd have a crew like Frank James's out there today, holding up whatever device was located in front of every camera he could find. (Update, 10:17 p.m.: As Mother Jones' Clara Jeffery notes, NBC News reported tonight that a sweep of the office turned up no devices.) 

But first the device would have to get there. McConnell accused his opponents of using "Nixonian" tactics — a weird pejorative from a prominent Republican, but one meant to evoke the break-in at the Democratic Party's offices in the Watergate hotel in 1972. That break-in occurred in the middle of the night and was foiled when the burglars were detected by a complex security guard.

It's an apt analogy. Such a break-in is presumably the only way someone could have put a device in the campaign's conference room. Given the provocative nature of the leaked conversation, the room was clearly private and at least somewhat secure. It would be a room almost certainly not easily accessed by the public — particularly if the public is trying to install electronics behind a ceiling tile. Even pretending to be a representatives of the phone company has proven difficult in previous circumstances.

Access to the room is a problem — but it's also one that significantly raises the stakes. There's a big difference between setting up a camera while you're tending bar and violating breaking and entering laws on the off-chance that you'll record a politically interesting conversation. Particularly if you do so knowing that you're leaving evidence behind: the recording device.

Yes, as Frank James indicates, it's easy to record and transmit a conversation. But it's not easy to do it in a facility that's at all secure and without getting caught. The expert who can probably shed the most light on McConnell's claims, though, isn't James, it's Occam. Which is more likely: that a local progressive group broke into McConnell's campaign headquarters and left a sophisticated listening device, spending hours or days in a van in the parking lot monitoring its contents until it had something worthy of passing to Mother Jones — or someone recording the conversation as part of his job accidentally or intentionally let it fall into the magazine's hands?

If you said the former, there's someone who'd be happy if you signed his pledge and maybe made a small contribution.

       

Why Google Fiber and Its High-Speed Clones Are Too Expensive for Your City

If you're not jealous of Austin, which on Tuesday officially became the second lucky city to get access to Google Fiber — the search giant's experimental, super fast, surprisingly cheap fiberoptic Internet infrastructure — you should be, because it's unlikely that your city will ever get the coveted connection service of the future. By mid-next year Austin residents will begin to have Internet access that Google claims runs 100 times faster than the average broadband connection, for "roughly similar" prices to Google's first Fiber test case, Kansas City, a city where Internet bills run a very reasonable $70 per month but which provides a cautionary tale for the expensive realities of Google's project. 

So how much longer until the rest of us join the revolution? Well, we might have to wait forever. Google CEO Larry Page has previously mentioned vague expansion plans for Fiber during earnings calls, calling it a "good business" and not just a "hobby." But it's very unlikely that Fiber will see a country wide release. Most importantly, installing fibertoptic cable is expensive — just laying down Fiber in Kansas City cost $84 million for 149,000 homes... and that was before even connecting the cables to the houses. One estimate pegs "nationwide deployment" at $140 billion, which would wipe out even Apple's big pile of cash reserves. Just another 20 million homes would cost $11 billion, according to other research. 

Of course, that still leaves hope for certain parts of the country. But Kansas City met certain specifications that other cities might not: "We wanted to find a location where we could build quickly and efficiently," Milo Medin, Google's vice president for Fiber, said back when the K.C. pilot program was announced. "Kansas City has great infrastructure." Specifically, Google means the "business friendly" environment that promised to keep the city officials away from Google, according to Forbes's Elise Ackerman. "They didn't dangle tax breaks, but they did deliver access to public rights of way, expedite the permitting process, offer space in city facilities and provide assistance with marketing and public relations," she writes. Kansas City made certain "development agreements" in order to snag the first Fiber deal, such as agreeing to pay for power at city locations and offering space to house Google equipment at no charge. Google also secured guarantees from the city that it would get quick responses on "mundane but important matters," as Technology Review explains. 

Not all cities can or will be as open and willing to this kind of expensive dealmaking as Kansas City or Austin appear to be. The entire state of California, for example, has certain environmental laws that make updating infrastructure difficult, Google's Medin has explained before:

Many fine California city proposals for the Google Fiber project were ultimately passed over in part because of the regulatory complexity here brought about by CEQA [California Environmental Quality Act] and other rules. Other states have equivalent processes in place to protect the environment without causing such harm to business processes, and therefore create incentives for new services to be deployed there instead.

In addition, part of that expensive funding comes from taxpayer money — adding political frustrations to technologically friendly promise. And even if your city does manage to fit all these specifications, a neighborhood can only get Fiber up and running if a certain number of residents in a location apply to be part of the pilot program. 

Google Fiber, of course, is a test for wider applications at new levels of broadband connectivity, and the laboratories for those kinds of tests span the tech world. Indeed, Google is far from the only option for cities looking to jump on the high-speed bandwagon to help industry and get ahead of the curve on America's new technology infrastructure. In fact, AT&T just announced a similar service in Austin itself. Other cities have taken things into their own hands: Chattanooga, Tennessee, for example, got a $111 million federal grant to build out their own fiberoptic network. But Chattanooga's service doesn't come at the nice and low $70 per month that Google can offer because it makes money by getting more people to use the Internet — and not just through sign-ups. Instead, Chattanooga's home-built version of Fiber costs a whopping $300 per month, per household. So for those looking for an affordable but still high-flying option, Google provides the best bet. It just probably doesn't provide it anywhere near where you live. 

       

Kevin Ware Got to Cut Down the Nets

A Fab Five reunion and an unlikely performance from current freshman couldn't stop Louisville from coming from behind to beat Michigan for the NCAA championship. Despite Michigan leading for most of the game, Louisville came out on top in the end with an 82-76 victory over the Wolverines thanks to a big performance from Luke Hancock. Hancock ended up scoring 22 points and was named the outstanding player of the game. Injured Louisville guard Kevin Ware got himself a championship hat, and even a chance to cut down the nets just like his teammates: 

But it was Michigan freshman Spike Albrecht who captured the Internet's attention after hitting four straight three-pointers and amassing a season high 17 points during the first half. This is just a small sampling of the love Albrecht was getting on Twitter: 

spike > @jalenrose

— Rembert Browne (@rembert) April 9, 2013

Spike Albrecht is the Florida Gulf Coast University of Michigan.

— Bruce Arthur (@bruce_arthur) April 9, 2013

Spike Albrecht has caused Trey Burke, national player of the year, to be temporarily benched. Unreal

— Dan Wetzel (@DanWetzel) April 9, 2013

With the number one pick in the 2013 .NBA draft the ___________ take Spike Albrecht #mymanspike

— Tim Butler (@tbutler05) April 9, 2013

Spike Albrecht > Snoopy's cousin Spike

— Gus Ramsey (@GusRamsey) April 9, 2013

DON'T WORRY ABOUT SPIKE'S STAMINA, CLARK, #BASEDSPIKE HAS ELEVEN LUNGS

— Rembert Browne (@rembert) April 9, 2013

It's all cool until Spike turns into a werewolf.

— Jason Gay (@jasonWSJ) April 9, 2013

RT ‏@noahcoslov: Beilein called Spike Albrecht "the most eligible bachelor on campus"…that couldn't be more true right now. #Michigan

— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) April 9, 2013

There's no way to keep up with the Spike Albrecht Twitter mania.

— Joe Posnanski (@JPosnanski) April 9, 2013

BREAKING Ryan Gosling has accepted the role of Spike Albrecht in the movie version.

— Richard Deitsch (@richarddeitsch) April 9, 2013

Spike Albrecht is basically unconscious right now. twitpic.com/ci18zu

— Erik Malinowski (@erikmal) April 9, 2013

spike albrecht out here like i.imgur.com/LJsRJdz.gif?1

— jordan (@jordansarge) April 9, 2013

The way this Spike kid plays is not unlike my core stratagem for NBA Jam, which, gotta say, has not endeared me to world like he has.

— Foster Kamer (@weareyourfek) April 9, 2013

...it was revealed that Spike's exceptionally low weight was because he had been living with coyotes...en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snoopy%27…

— Michael Weinreb (@MichaelWeinreb) April 9, 2013

Spike Albrecht scoring by month:Nov: 12Dec: 13Jan: 9Feb: 8March: 20April: 23 (tonight 17)

— Rob Daniels (@83seemscloser) April 9, 2013

47 People Who Are Sure Spike Albrecht Is Getting Laid Tonight (cc @mattdpearce)

— Jared Keller (@jaredbkeller) April 9, 2013

Spike Albrecht, ladies and gentlemen. bit.ly/10C2cxM

— SB Nation GIF (@SBNationGIF) April 9, 2013

Luke Hancock and Spike Albrecht's dads are standing behind Tim Hardaway and Glenn Robinson and loudly clearing their throats.

— SportsPickle (@sportspickle) April 9, 2013

BEILEIN JUST CALLED SPIKE VS. HANCOCK "STORY LINES," THIS IS THE BEST DAY EVER.

— Rembert Browne (@rembert) April 9, 2013

Spike's mom, Tammy, told me at halftime: "I'm elated, but I want a bigger lead." Then asked me if I knew what "trending" on Twitter meant.

— Nicole Auerbach (@NicoleAuerbach) April 9, 2013

Unfortunately, Albrecht couldn't keep up his first half production. 

Pouring out a juicebox for Spike Albrecht

— Bruce Arthur (@bruce_arthur) April 9, 2013

In related news, the President's     

North Koreans Skipped Work in Kaesong on Tuesday

North Korean workers didn't show up for work at the Kaesong factory complex Tuesday. Don't be jealous, though. This puts the future of the factory site and one of the country's biggest economic sources in jeopardy.

The country followed through on its decision to withdraw its around 50,000 citizens from working in the factories alongside South Korean workers. When they didn't show up on Tuesday, many factories were forced to halt production without their usual North Korean labor force. North Korea's decision to remove its workers from Kaesong ended the last connection of cooperation with the South. The decision won't have a big economic impact in the South, but for North Koreans the factories were one of the country's only remaining sources of currency. North Korea only has one international financial supporter: China, and even they want North Korea to stop threatening to bomb everyone. Should the North Korean workers continue to skip work, some of the companies operating in the complex could shut down. 

       

Colorado Judge Kicks the Decision on Fox News' Jana Winter Further Down the Road

After a day full of criticism in the media, both of the situation and the coverage, Colorado district court Judge Carlos Samour Jr. decided to delay making a decision that would force Fox News reporter Jana Winter to reveal her anonymous sources or face jail time. Samour submitted a decision late Monday evening saying the time was not "ripe" for him to make a decision as to whether or not Winter should have to testify in the James Holmes trial. 

Winters is waiting for Samour to make a decision that could land her in jail. Last July, Winter reported Colorado shooter James Holmes allegedly sent a notebook that was "full of details about how he was going to kill people" to his psychiatrist, Dr. Lynne Fenton, citing law enforcement sources. The judge who was presiding the case, William Sylvester, wasn't happy with this development. He had ordered gag orders on prosecutors, the defense, and police from commenting on the case in public. So when Winter's report came out, the defense and Sylvester wanted to know who her sources were. A number of officers involved in the discovery of the notebook were questioned already but none of them admitted to telling Winter about the notebook. Sylvester has since stepped down from the case and been replaced with Samour, but that doesn't mean much for Winter's fate. She still may be subpoenaed to reveal the source of her story. 

Samour was scheduled to make a decision about the case on Wednesday when the Holmes case is scheduled to have its next day in court. An Aurora detective will be questioned and the defense are hoping that will help them figure out who leaked the details notebook. "If that questioning fails to turn up leads on the leak, then Samour could order the reporter, Jana Winter, to testify. If she refuses, she could face up to six months in jail for contempt of court," the Denver Post reported last week. 

That April court hearing will go ahead as scheduled, but Samour won't decide whether or not Winter will have to testify until he decides whether the notebook will be submitted as evidence. And that decision depends on the direction the defense decides to take their case, Samour writes:

Accordingly, the Court defers on the merits of Winter's motion to quash and the defendant'smotion for sanctions until the Court determines whether the contents of the notebook seized on July 23 are admissible. The Court notes that the notebook's admissibility depends on whether it is protected by the physician-patient privilege or the psychotherapist-patient privilege, an issue that was previously deferred by agreement of the parties until the defendant decides whether he will attempt to enter a not guilty by reason of insanity plea or to introduce expert evidence of his mental condition. 

There's no indication when, exactly, we'll know where this will go. Samour had previously described his decision as presenting Winter with a "Hobson’s Choice." She can reveal her source and potentially ruin her career as an investigative reporter, or she can keep mum like she plans to and serve time in jail. The legalese is a bit more complicated than that, of course. Colorado has a shield law that protects reporters from being jailed for refusing to name sources. There are exceptions, though: should the identity of the source not be obtained by other means, or the information is ruled "directly relevant" to the case, or if the judge decides obtaining the information is more important than the freedom of the press, a reporter can be forced the testify. 

Atlantic Wire contributor Sara Morrison spoke to Winter's lawyer, Dori Ann Hanswirth, for the Columbia Journalism Review. Hanswirth says the defense hasn't "really articulated exactly what Jana’s knowledge is relevant to." But the notebook could have major implications down the road for the defense team, should it be admitted as evidence, Morrison explains: 

Should Holmes decide to plead not guilty by reason of insanity, the notebook, which is currently sealed and in the court’s possession, could be admitted into evidence, but, again, it’s not clear how knowing who told Winter about its existence would make a difference. More likely, the defense would use any proof that law enforcement officials acted improperly as grounds for appeal should Holmes be convicted.

Winter's story captivated a day's worth of press coverage in certain places on the web Monday, particularly because of how little coverage it was receiving in the quote-unquote "mainstream media." Before the weekend, the only outlet really covering the story was Winter's employer, Fox News. The Denver Post would occasionally provide updates, but ultimately the story of the journalist potentially facing jail time wasn't getting the amount of coverage in the major papers that one might expect. Some were saying out loud that it wasn't necessary a liberal media bias, but that it was because of the accumulated disdain for Winter's employer, Fox News. 

"If she worked for mainstream newspapers or CNN, I think the case would have been covered," Judith Miller told Buzzfeed's Hunter Schwarz. "There's a certain reluctance because it's Fox News." Miller once did 85 days behind bars for refusing to give up a source for a 2005 New York Times story. She's now a Fox News contributor. Miller says people were very supportive of me because I was with The New York Times," at the time of her conviction. But the calls of media bias against Fox weren't only coming from inside the Ailes' fortress. A Colorado based CNN reporter, Jim Spellman, got in on the action: 

Observation: If @janawinter ,who may go to jail to protect sources, worked for @nytimes instead of @foxnews the case would be huge.

— jim spellman (@jimspellmancnn) April 7, 2013

And so did Gawker's Jon Cook, of all people. He had previously dealt with Winter over a story she reported about Gawker. He had nothing but nice things to say about her reporting and nothing but nasty things to say about the lack of coverage Winter was getting from the major papers: 

Even when her bosses dispatched her to participate in a calculated hit on Gawker in response to our provocations, she did so fairly and responsibly. The prospect that she may go to jail for doing her job is an outrage. The fact that she has thus far been hung out to dry by a press corps normally quick to cry foul is a direct consequence of the fact that she, and many of her colleagues, have been systematically exploited by Roger Ailes as human shields in their lengthy war on the practice of newsgathering.

Forbes' Rich Ungar chimed in on the matter, too. For him, this is a matter of principle. If the media doesn't defend Winter and she ends up going to jail, it's going to set a terrible precedent and no editor will be allowed to feel bad when one of their reporters is placed in a similar situation:

None of you should be surprised if your lack of support for one of your own —and Jana Winter is one of your own—comes back to bite you in the nose sometime in the future when it is your reporter facing a few months in the pokey.

In the mean time, Winter's story has been picked up in plenty of other places: Politico, Poynter, and Salon, among others. In the mean time, we have to wait for the defense to choose their strategy to decide Winter's fate. We'll keep checking The New York Times to see when someone over there weighs in, too.