DiscussionDIVAS

We're making it easier for you to stay on top of the news

2008-08-29T16:53:13Z

Get the basics and the big picture.
Our WeeklyDIVA email breaks down one hot topic in the news—everything you need to know about what’s happening now and why.

Feel smarter in five minutes or less.
We read all the latest news and synthesize it into one brief, pithy email that’s readable in just a few minutes.

Show 'em what you know.
The WeeklyDIVA is delivered every Friday morning (no email overload here!), just in time for you to survive a cocktail party, dinner with friends, or that next job interview.

Visit our archives: U.S. | World Affairs | Business | Science & Energy | Style & Culture

A play for the Hillary vote?

2008-08-29T16:52:13Z

Following the coronation/angst-fest of the Democrats’ fete in Denver, most people were expecting a fairly convention-al Republican gathering in Minneapolis, starting on Monday.

That all changed early Friday, when John McCain picked Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. With the Democratic ticket of Barack Obama and Joe Biden building momentum, McCain lived up to his maverick image and picked an outside-the-box running mate, a political unknown who could inject even more drama into an already remarkable race.

A long shot gets the nod
Palin—who was only elected governor in 2006—was thought to be something of a dark horse in the veepstakes, behind more traditional picks like Mitt Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts and successful businessman, and Tim Pawlenty, the governor of Minnesota, a rising star with working-class roots.

Depending on how you look at it, McCain’s decision to pick Palin was either a bit desperate or absolutely inspired. At 44 she brings youth to the Republican ticket (McCain turns 72 on Friday). She’s also a staunch conservative Christian, which might help McCain shore up support from the religious right—a crucial voting bloc for the GOP. What’s more, she has a reputation as a reformer and is big on oil drilling, echoing a theme that McCain has been pushing in his campaign.

Now to the obvious: she’s a she. Many see the choice of Palin as move by Republicans to siphon off some disgruntled Hillary Clinton supporters from the Democrats. Whether that will work is very debatable. She’s staunchly anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage, and a big NRA supporter, all things that won’t sit well with most Hillary voters.

The big picture
Palin of course is a historic choice, only the second woman on a major-party ticket in American history, following Geraldine Ferraro’s unsuccessful try as vice president on the Democratic ticket in 1984.

After Obama’s rousing acceptance speech Thursday night, McCain was obviously looking for something to jolt his campaign heading into the Republican convention—and only time will tell if Palin will succeed in providing that.

By this time next week, the gloves could come off—the tickets will be set with the VP nominees, often the attack dogs, in place. What’s been a relatively mild race could turn “swift boat” quickly. Already the campaign camps are taking swings: McCain’s come under fire for owning eight homes and Obama has been accused of being unpatriotic.

And we're still waiting

2008-08-22T14:55:34Z

As we write this note, we’re still waiting for Barack Obama to name his vice presidential pick, despite weeks of speculation, false leads and outright absurd gossip. The news could come any minute now, before the Democratic National Convention kicks off on Monday.

The thing is, the VP selection dance is really all about rumors—it’s a process used to test ideas and generate buzz. And each possible candidate plays an important role in driving overall votes. So, ahead of Obama’s pick, here’s a look at the players:

The contenders
Obama is said to be seriously considering a number of potential running mates, each with different assets and baggage:

Delaware Senator Joseph Biden would bring foreign policy experience.
Tim Kaine is the governor of Virginia, a hugely important swing state.
Evan Bayh is a senator from Indiana, also a large and important swing state.
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson has strong foreign policy credentials, and would also presumably bring in the Latino vote.

Of course there’s also Obama’s former rival, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who could bring about 18 million votes (that’s the number she got in the primary). But she also brings plenty of controversy, including hubby Bill, who hasn’t exactly endeared himself to Obama over the past year.

Other rumored but less likely contenders include Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed (solid military man), Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (rising star in a conservative state and a female), and former Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn (perennially rumored, never picked).

The Decision with a capital “D”
Although pollsters say a VP nominee rarely is a deciding factor in an election (remember Dan Quayle?), the pick represents the first important presidential decision a candidate makes. Conventional wisdom says the veep should round out the ticket, making up for some perceived shortcoming.

In Obama’s case, many say he is light on experience, and Republican rival John McCain has hammered him over foreign policy credentials. So, an older, experienced politician may join him on the ticket.

That said, he may chuck all that out the window and really surprise us. And wouldn’t that be fun (think Caroline Kennedy)?

Lots of pomp, lots of pageantry (lots of hot air)
Starting Monday we’ll get back-to-back weeks of conventions. The Democrats host theirs Monday through Thursday in Denver followed by the Republicans in Minneapolis. No actual news ever comes out of these things—they’re mainly an excuse to introduce the candidate (and VP) and fire up the troops. Oh, and maybe party a bit too.

The big picture
Party conventions signal the start of the stretch run of the presidential campaign, when voters really start paying attention and making up their minds. Typically candidates enjoy a so-called post-convention “bounce” in the polls, meaning their favorability surges. Campaigns hope the bounce is big enough to propel a candidate to victory in November. Right now, the polls show a race that is too close to call. Who will get the bigger bounce coming out of the conventions? Pull up a seat and watch!

Georgia-Russia conflict explained

2008-08-15T13:30:33Z

Although the conflict between the Republic of Georgia and its northern neighbor Russia is taking place far away, the clash is unnerving, conjuring up images of the Cold War and signaling a new Russian aggressiveness. Here’s a brief explanation of what’s happening:

The unhappy breakup—background on the conflict
With just 4.5 million people, Georgia is one of 13 countries that became independent when the Soviet Union fell in 1991. It’s strategically located in the Caucasus region, at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, and its relations with Russia have been tense in the past. (See our “Lessons from Borat” posting on former Soviet countries.)

The current conflict arose from a region of Georgia called South Ossetia, which has long clamored for its own independence and found support from Russia.

The news
Late last week after multiple skirmishes in the region, Georgian troops launched an offensive against South Ossetian separatists. Russia quickly joined the fight on behalf of the separatists, in part to assert its power but also to spite the U.S., which supports the democratic government of Georgia. Their forces overwhelmed the Georgians and pushed out of South Ossetia into Georgia proper. Despite a cease-fire agreement reached earlier this week, Russian troops remain in Georgia and the outcome is uncertain.

Implications beyond the region—why this conflict matters
This is not your average regional spat—the conflict has major implications for the global balance of power. Georgia was loudly and proudly allied with the United States, which sponsored the tiny country for membership in NATO. This angered Russia, which is not a part of NATO (a military alliance), and considers its membership a security threat. The U.S., the Europeans and other former Soviet states such have all sided with Georgia in the current conflict, calling on Russia to withdraw.

Oil is also a big part of the story. Georgia is located near the Caspian Sea, an important oil and gas producing region that feeds Europe. The U.S. successfully backed a recently completed pipeline running through Georgia—deliberately skirting Russia—in an effort to keep Moscow from having too much control over energy resources. Once again, this angered Russia.

The big picture
More than anything, the war in Georgia seems to reflect Russia’s determination to reassert itself as a world power. Ten years ago the country was in shambles, reeling from the hangover left by decades of socialist rule. Thanks to high oil prices, Russia is now flush with money, confident and willing to flex its political and military muscles.

Moreover, no one is exactly itching to confront Moscow, mainly because Europe is so reliant on Russia for oil and natural gas. And the U.S. already has its hands full in Iraq and Afghanistan, so there’s not much America can do for its ally Georgia other than protest. The U.S. may have some economic and diplomatic influence, but it's a delicate situation as Russia is key to another delicate situation with Iran. For now, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice—an expert in Russian politics—is in the region to help broker a solution.

China under the microscope

2008-08-08T15:16:11Z

If you saw the American athletes arriving in Beijing this week donning scary-looking face masks to keep the city’s famous pollution from corroding their finely-tuned lungs, then you probably got a feel for just how political these 2008 Summer Olympics promise to be.

Of course that’s not new news—-in the run up to the Games we’ve heard plenty about China’s environmental woes and serious human rights issues. But there’s a ton more to this vast, fascinating country, and we have a brief primer for you.

The population problem
One of the world’s oldest civilizations, China is also the most populous—with 1.33 billion people it makes up about one-fifth of the world’s population. To stem its booming population, the government introduced the strict, somewhat controversial “one-child” family planning program in 1979, leading to 400 million fewer people today. However, as a result, China is also one the world’s most rapidly aging countries.

Despite many areas of intense, grinding poverty, life expectancy is 73 years (compared with 78 years in the U.S) and the literacy rate is 91%.

Religious “freedom”
You may have seen the news that President Bush will be worshiping Sunday at a “government sanctioned” Christian church. The issue here is that while China’s Communist government is officially atheist, it allows just five “registered” religions and limits how many people can join those churches. Other unregistered churches may be reportedly repressed. Surveys show tens or even hundreds of millions of Buddhists, Taoists, and lesser numbers of Catholics, Protestants and Muslims live in China.

The Asian economic tiger
China has been ruled for nearly 60 years by a Communist government but starting in late 1970s, the government instituted a series of liberal market-oriented reforms, introducing private ownership, encouraging free enterprise and opening the economy to foreign trade. The result is something of a paradox: a vibrant but tightly-controlled, capitalist economy. China’s economy has been surging at a torrid pace for years, growing more than 11% in 2007. Its economy is now the second largest in the world, behind only the United States.

Of particular note to many Americans, China also holds a lot of our debt, owning more than a half trillion dollars worth of U.S. treasury securities. This is second only to Japan.

About that pollution …
All that economic growth–-think factories and coal-fired power plants belching out smoke and fouling the waters—has led to serious, dangerous environmental issues. The World Bank says China has 20 of the world's 30 most polluted cities, mostly because of coal use and cars. A recent article in The New Yorker says the country adds about four coal-fired plants each month!

The big picture
China wants to win the gold medal count this year. In 2004 it came in second to the U.S. tally of 36. Since being awarded the Olympics, China’s sports ministry has been on a mission to identify potential athletes, sending them to state-run sports academies for training. They’re particularly focused on events such as rowing and canoeing where high medal counts might help knock Americans from the top spot.

China also wants to showcase itself to the world as newly modern, dynamic, and somewhat more open. Although press freedoms are already being curtailed, and the government is not likely to tolerate any real protesters, the new “Bird’s Nest” National Stadium, and the “Water Cube” National Aquatics Center have already been hailed as architectural marvels. It is this face that China wants the world to see.

Of fat and fuel: What is trans fat?

2008-08-01T14:30:08Z

While one use of hydrogen is being widely touted as an alternative way to fuel your car, another use of it became illegal in the last week in California—trans fats.

Yes, those pesky trans fats we hear so much about, and probably know annecdotally that they are bad for us, are actually oils pumped with hydrogen to create a more flavorful, longer-lasting oil with which to cook and bake. They’re also called partially hydrogenated oils. Think Crisco. Think margarine and fast food. Think bad. (It’s okay to sigh here, wishing away things that taste good.

The problem with trans fats is that they actually lower levels of “good cholestrol” and increase levels of “bad cholesterol” and thus increase the risk of coronary heart disease. Two years ago the U.S. required they be listed on nutrition labels. They’re different from saturated fats, which come mainly from animals but also some plants (these also cause high cholesterol).

The California way
California is making an all-out assault on unhealthy food. Last Friday the state banned the use of trans fats in all restaurants and, on Wednesday, Los Angeles barred any new fast-food restaurants from opening in South L.A., a low-income area of the city. Poor people are disproportionately overweight.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger—body builder turned actor turned politician—signed the state ban on trans fats, which will take effect in 2010. Interestingly, the Food and Drug Administration says the biggest source of transfats in adults comes from packaged baked sweets—cookies, cakes, pies, etc,. and says the average daily adult intake of trans fats is 5.8 grams.

New York gets in on the action
In May New York City passed a law requiring big chain fast-food restaurants to post calorie counts next to menu items. Most began complying earlier this week. The city banned trans fats at restaurants two years ago.

But obesity rates are still rising
Just recently the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that obesity rates ticked up about 2% from 2005, qualifying a quarter of the U.S. population as obese. Obesity means a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or above. (We wrote about the difference between overweight and obese last year.) Mississippi has the highest obesity rate, while Southern states overall rated as the heaviest; Colorado ranks the leanest.

The big picture
While their intent is simply to improve citizens’ health, these laws raise serious questions about just how involved the government should be in policing health habits. Perhaps the fact that U.S. health care costs are expected to double to $4 trillion in just eight years and that over 60% of Americans are overweight or obese, is reason enough to try a more radical approach. And the U.S. is certainly not alone. In Japan, the government is trying to police waistlines to make people qualify for health insurance.

But perhaps one area we need to spend more time addressing is the link between poverty and obesity. Southern states, where more people are overweight, have higher poverty rates. And as food costs soar, some argue that high prices of food will only to add to America’s waistlines.

Read how the May Clinic defines trans fats.
Check your BMI.
The CDC has an amazing graphic that shows the progression of Obesity rates in the United States since 1992. It’s worth looking taking a look.
The American Heart Association breaks down the differences in fats.

Comment: How would you address obesity in the United States?

Summer vocabulary: Stagflation

2008-07-25T22:24:42Z

Intermixed with all the usual words of summer—bikini, barbeque, beach, sunscreen—there are some new terms this year. They include “staycation,” a vacation where you stay at home or nearby to save money, and “stagflation,” one we haven’t heard in a while, and which may leave you wondering what exactly it means.

It’s funny, to pick our weekly topic we run ideas by people—friends and colleagues—to determine if it’s interesting or relevant or neither. When it came to stagflation, we got a lot of quizzical looks and yes, it is a real word, and it’s a bit scary.

Stag + flation
You’re probably familiar with inflation (when the cost of goods rises and the dollar doesn’t go as far as it used to). Then, take “stag” and think stagnant, or stagnation. Combine them and you’ll have the meaning of stagflation—when the cost of goods rise and the economy fails to grow. It’s an economic state that tends to occur when oil prices and unemployment rates are high.

The last time the United States saw stagflation was back in the 1970s.

Why you’ll hear more about it

About every six weeks the Federal Reserve takes a pulse of the economy by asking its 12 regional banks to survey businesses in their region. The latest of these surveys, known as the Beige Book, came out on Wednesday and said the economy is slowing and prices are rising. Some smelled stagflation.

The big picture

The Fed says although it’s not concerned about stagflation, it is worried about good old-fashioned inflation. Next week we’ll get the first read of second quarter GDP, which will tell us how much the economy grew between April and June. It’s expected to show slight growth. Unemployment so far is holding relatively steady but seems to be the big wild card. If it climbs and people can’t keep up with rising costs, they won’t be traveling or going to restaurants, all things that fuel the economy. And therein lies the fear of stagflation for some economists: If it goes on long enough it can lead to a recession, another economic state that everyone hopes to avoid, when the economy shrinks, people lose their jobs, and so on.

Here are some tips for wading through stagflation.

Here’s more on what it might mean for you.

Housing giants explained - Fannie & Freddie

2008-07-18T14:47:38Z

As Fannie and Freddie headlines dominate, if you find your self still scratching your head over what it’s all about (we were), here’s a primer, DIVA-style: short and snappy.

What happened?
Financial markets and investors shuddered as a New York Times story revealed the nation’s two largest mortgage supporters—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—were under “growing financial stress.” Last Sunday the U.S. Treasury was ready with $300 billion to shore them up if needed. This gesture reassured the markets.

Why were they in trouble?
Think of this like a game of hot potato—when the music stops, the person holding the potato loses. In this case, the potato is debt.

Fannie and Freddie (these are nicknames) are mandated by Congress to make it easier for banks and lenders to make loans to home buyers. They do this by buying loans made by banks and taking on all associated risk if the loans aren’t paid back. The bank is off the hook and has the cash to make more loans (and money).

To cash flow themselves and make money, Fannie and Freddie bundle up the loans into different assets that they sell off to other financial institutions. But, and this is a big but, they also guarantee the underlying loans will be repaid. If they aren’t Fannie and Freddie, are left holding the hot potato.

If their risk exposure gets too big, they may not be able to buy loans from banks (their role), thus paralyzing the home loan market. The best explanation of their risk exposure and how it has ballooned is here in this NYT graphic.

Congress founded Fannie but it’s not a government entity
Congress chartered Fannie in 1938 as part of The New Deal to encourage banks to lend to borrowers who may have been considered credit risky. It went public in 1968, and Freddie (also public) launched in 1971 to keep Fannie from becoming a monopoly.

In an odd hybrid relationship, these two publicly held private corporations are government regulated and operate with the perception that the government will always have their backs, which in fact is not guaranteed. They have responsibility to the nation and also to make money for their shareholders, creating a tense dynamic.

The big picture
Together Fannie and Freddie own a staggering amount of mortgages—about $5 trillion. Over time their risk exposure has grown as the number of loans grew and the number of mortgage defaults skyrocketed. Fannie and Freddie say they are in good shape but in a rough patch. Just the chance, however, that these two entities could collapse sent the shudder—without them mortgage rates would spike and home prices, already off about 20% in the last year in many markets, could fall. Their like an important engine keeping the housing market rolling whose health is important to the stability of the markets. Problem is, they may have become too important and now you’ll probably see lots of politicians calling for more government oversight of these two giants.

Sisterly love

2008-07-04T14:46:29Z

As Americans participate in traditional Fourth of July activities this holiday weekend, another tradition unfolds across the Atlantic: sisters Venus and Serena Williams will again make their way to Center Court at Wimbledon on Saturday to battle for the championship. It’s the third time they’ll meet against each other for the championship, and certainly a match to enjoy with the traditional Wimbledon snack, strawberries and cream—and maybe a burger from the grill.

Promoting American Tennis

The Williams sisters’ on-court rivalry has done a lot to promote American tennis, especially since the Russians and Serbs have claimed the top five women’s spots in 2008. In fact there are just eight American women ranked in the top 100. Serena ranks 6th in the world, while Venus ranks 7^th, but Venus is also the 2007 defending Wimbledon champion. To earn her place in the finals, Serena beat Zheng Jie from China, the first Asian woman to make it to the semi-final round at a Grand Slam tennis competition.

Off the court the sisters influence the game in other ways—both sisters run their own design companies. Venus specializes in interior design and Serena runs a clothing company.

Women and Tennis

The first Lawn Tennis Championship was held in 1877 at the All England Club Croquet and Lawn Tennis Club in Wimbledon, England. Originally a host to Gentlemen’s Singles, the private club opened up the championship to Ladies’ Singles in 1884. Interestingly, two other sisters, Maud and Lillian Watson, played against each other in white corsets and petticoats at the 1884 finals.

In general, tennis has been good to women when it comes to equal pay, thanks in large part to the efforts by pioneer Billie Jean King. She raised interest in women’s tennis when she defeated Bobby Riggs, a tennis star and showman who claimed the female game was inferior in what was promoted as The Battle of the Sexes in 1973. Wimbledon, however, was the last championship tournament to offer equal pay for women’s finals—it began doing so just last year.

The Big Picture

While most sports watching on holidays such as Thanksgiving and New Year’s are dominated by all male sports, it’s refreshing to see two women take center stage as we celebrate our nation’s independence. Good luck to Venus and Serena this weekend and Happy Fourth of July!

Water-lily pond

2008-06-27T05:14:30Z

On Tuesday at a Christie’s auction in London, “Le Bassin aux Nymphéas,” a rarely seen painting of Claude Monet’s beloved water lilies sold for a record $80.4 million, smashing the painter’s own record and proving to the world that the art market, unlike the stock market, is alive and well.
Bidding was described by news outlets as “intense” and “standing room only,” going to “a blond woman in the front row,” who represented an anonymous buyer.

The painting, which was expected to collect about $50 million, last sold at auction in 1971 for $320,000 and remained in private hands since then. Christie’s called the piece “one of the great rarities of Impressionist and Modern art,” and highlighted that it was “signed, dated and sold” by Monet—apparently another rarity. The work is part of a series of four from 1919.

All about water lilies
In the early 1830s, Monet moved to Giverny, northeast of Paris. There he created magnificent gardens and built the water-lily pond, the almost exclusive subject (250) of his later works. Lilies were just one of his many series—the Rouen Cathedral, haystacks, Waterloo Bridge—where he depicted the same subject in different light, time and season.

More about Monet (1840-1926)
Monet began his career drawing caricatures as a teenager in Le Havre, France. Under the mentorship of Eugene Boudin, a painter of landscapes, Monet developed a predilection for painting out of doors. During his life he collaborated with other well known Impressionists such as Camille Pissarro, Pierre-Auguste Renoir and Alfred Sisley.

His work, and the Impressionist movement he pushed forward, centered on the use of spontaneous, staccato brushwork to capture light and form within natural scenes. Interestingly, the term Impressionism stems from a work by Monet, "Impression: Sunrise," which a critic deemed an "impression," or unfinished.

In his later years, Monet suffered from cataracts which limited his ability to distinguish colors and most likely contributed to the dark and red browns used in "The Japanese Bridge" he painted at Giverny in the early 1920's.

The big picture
The art market of late has been on fire, and Tuesday’s auction—combined with a week of London are auctions at Christie’s and Sotheby’s—could reap $1 billion. Despite sentiment that the dismal stock market and other economic woes could dent art prices, new wealth from places like Russia is helping buoy the market. And that sounds like another good Diva topic for another week!

In this corner we have...

2008-06-20T11:09:23Z

If you found yourself near a TV on Wednesday morning, you might have seen Michelle Obama hosting "The View," complete with fist bumps all around. Part of the campaign's attempt to recast her image, it was by most accounts a success, and a sure sign that the presidential campaign--the real deal--is finally underway.

The candidates want to save you pain at the pump
If the recent wall-to-wall media coverage is any indicator, soaring gas prices may be the most important issue in the 2008 campaign. Whether or not Barack Obama and John McCain can really do anything them is seriously debatable, but that doesn't mean they won't at least try to look like they can.

This week McCain called for the federal government to lift its ban on offshore oil drilling, a ban he used to support. He also wants to add more oil refineries and nuclear power plants, and said in a speech that "conservation serves a critical national goal"--a statement that is unusual only because it came from the mouth of the Republican presidential candidate. He also supports a federal gas-tax holiday.

Obama, in contrast, opposes offshore drilling and instead wants to hit the oil companies with a windfall profits tax, which McCain opposes. Obama also supports government subsidies for alternative fuels such as ethanol.

Hold the public financing, please
While we're all paying through the nose to fill our cars, the other big political news this week centered on something we won't be paying for. Obama announced that he will not be accepting federal funds--taxpayer dollars--to run his campaign, the first time a major party candidate has ever done that in the general election.

Under a system that's been around since 1976, a candidate can accept federal money--this year $84.1 million--as long as he refuses private donations and agrees to not spend any more than what the government gives him. It's designed to keep special interest money out of campaigns. Obama calls the system "broken" and says he would be at a disadvantage because the Republican National Committee, a fundraising machine, can spend as much as it wants for McCain.

The thing is, Obama is also a fundraising rock star. Through the end of April, he had raised $266 million for the general election, compared with $93 million for McCain. So Obama doesn't need the federal money, and now he can spend as much as he wants. Problem is, last year he suggested he would take public financing, so the McCain campaign hammered him, saying he had "broken his word."

The big picture
It's only June. We've still got five months to go, and this campaign is already getting interesting. We can only hope the candidates continue to stay on the issues and have a real debate about their policy differences. That would be refreshing. Keep your fingers crossed!

Honk if you're a Christian

2008-06-13T05:02:59Z

The state of South Carolina is set to begin churning out “I Believe” license plates, complete with a cross and stained-glass window, thanks to a unanimous vote by the state legislature and a swift signature from the governor.

It’s the first of its kind in the country, decidedly Christian, and sure seems to blur the line between church and state—not mention alienate those of other faiths.

Meanwhile, religion is heating up on the campaign trail, with both John McCain and Barack Obama courting religious voters. Because we try to keep these postings short, we’ll do a roundup of where the candidates are in terms of support from a variety of religious groups over the next few weeks and months. This week, we’ll use the “I Believe” news to look at their standing with some Christian groups.

McCain and the religious right
For years we’ve been hearing about the role of conservative Christians and evangelicals in political campaigns. These groups were key to the success of President Bush in 2000 and 2004.

However, many of these groups are on the fence about McCain. Some religious conservatives say they are considering not voting at all, or want a better understanding of where he falls on hot-button issues and whom he will pick as a running mate.

So McCain is strengthening his rhetoric, criticizing California ’s gay marriage ruling and touting his anti-abortion stance. However McCain, an Episcopalian turned Baptist, also knows he may need to temper his religious talk to attract moderate and independent voters.

Obama and religion
Obama, who has not been shy about talking about his faith, is doing his share of religious courting as well. He met on Tuesday with Christian leaders in Chicago, including some conservative religious leaders like Bishop T.D. Jakes, who heads up a huge church in Dallas. His campaign is expected to try to court evangelicals and Catholics too.

In this election, you may hear more about the “religious left”
If you have a few minutes, read this Q&A conducted by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. Some say liberal or progressive religious groups are a growing voice in U.S. politics. According to Pew research, the so-called “religious left” could account for as much as a quarter of the adult population.

The big picture
As Obama and McCain begin their dance to attract religious voters, both have already been tripped up by clergymen. McCain had to distance himself from Rev. John Hagee, who made statements that were perceived as anti-Catholic. Obama’s former pastor, the now notorious Jeremiah Wright, has become a cable news fixture for saying he thinks the U.S. government was responsible for spreading HIV, among other things. Obama recently resigned from the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago in the wake of Wright’s statements and after another minister there who mocked Hillary Clintonmocked Hillary Clinton. Meanwhile, patently false but painfully persistent rumors continue to circulate on the Internet that Obama is a Muslim.

What do women want?

2008-06-06T13:41:21Z

Hillary Clinton's run for the White House may have folded this week, but she certainly succeeded in advancing the cause of women as much as any politician in U.S. history. And while we're excited for the upcoming race between Barack Obama and John McCain, we'll never forget the image of a strong woman on the campaign trail. We hope to see another viable female candidate in every presidential election to come.

The question is, are the rest of us up to the challenge? Earlier this week The New York Times media columninst David Carr penned an interesting piece musing about the success of the "Sex and the City" movie (it took in about $55 million in its first weekend at the box office) and the rise of female-targeted web sites. The Times headlined his column aptly, "Slumber Parties Go Digital."

As my sister said, Carr's argument is not rocket science: Coverage of celebrity pregnancies, fashion, weddings and shoes is as popular online as it is in the women's magazines that many of us have a love-hate relationship with. His final analysis: The revolution for women on the Web so far is "shallow, but one that carries deep implications."

What do women readers want?

A few months ago, while lunching with a successful startup CEO, I asked for ideas on how to get better distribution for our site and The WeeklyDIVA, which, as you know, attempts to help busy women stay on top of the news. He said, "Don't women want horoscopes?"

Recently I asked the CEO of a growing and popular women-focused Web site why all the topics focused on "living" and "beauty." Where's the hard news, I asked? “It's an interesting question,” he said—it has to be filtered for the one thing women don’t have: time.

Then, just in the last week, I expressed to a friend of mine, another startup CEO on this recipient list, that we were trying to figure out how to grow our subscriber list. He says I’m unique, and not everyone shares my interests or passions for the news, which may make it difficult.

Really? Can it be that all those women out there that I know with one, two and three degrees don't care about the news and the lives that are impacted by events in their communities or in places far away? Is it really all just about cosmopolitans and lipstick for women?

Is there a place for content like The WeeklyDIVA?

At the WeeklyDIVA, we think it's about lipstick, cosmos—and using our brains. It's about feeling connected to the news, despite being so wrapped up in a new product launch, or so busy wiping baby food off the floor, that we didn't have time to read headlines about the housing market's collapse or why the lawyers in Pakistan were being attacked, and what that means for our lives.

In the end we know there is a place for The WeeklyDIVA in the sphere of women because we know you read it and we know you refer it to your friends. Naturally, as we grow we need resources. But you are our main resource—you and the other women out there who may be inaccurately categorized as just “horoscope" readers. This revolution on the Web for women does not have to be shallow. But the only way it won’t be is if we don’t let it be.

Tell us what YOU think: What do women want? And be sure to read David Carr's column.

Best,

Stacey

editor, The WeeklyDIVA

We'll be back with news next week. We just couldn't let this one go!

Into college, no testing

2008-05-30T19:02:24Z

As graduation bells ring across the country, high school seniors may be cheering, but so may juniors after learning that two more colleges dropped SAT and ACT testing requirements for admission this week.

About 750 schools are now “test optional.” The latest schools to drop the tests as necessary for admission are Smith College and Wake Forest University. U.S. News & World Report ranks Wake Forest as the 30^th best university in the country, and Smith as the 17^th best liberal arts college, so we’re not talking obscure institutions here. So far, though, most schools that have dropped SAT and ACT have been smaller outfits. The University of California schools considered dropping the tests in 2001 but in the end did not.

Why are schools dropping the tests?

In 2006 American students posted the lowest average score on the SAT in 31 years.

The scores dropped again in 2007. The College Board, which administers the test, says the drop in scores was due to changes in test-taking habits, but there has been much debate through the years over whether these tests truly predict academic success – and hence if colleges and universities should use them as a benchmark for admission.

Others question the fairness of the test, saying that some students are at an inherent disadvantage because of their background—income level, parents’ education, quality of high school, etc. Wake Forest says they hope to attract a broader pool of applicants by eliminating the tests.

U.S. college graduate statistics

Just 30% of U.S. adults over the age of 25 say they have a bachelor’s degree
College graduates make about $25,000 more annually than those with high school diplomas
33% of women 25-29 years old had earned a BA in 2007 vs 26% of men

See the January press release and data here.

The big picture

We don’t know yet whether this is the start of a trend. While some students may opt not to take the SAT, others are agonizing over whether to take both it and the ACT, to give them a leg up. Interestingly, another education issue came under scrutiny this week—President Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act, which imposes sanctions on schools that fail to meet certain performance standards. In a speech in Colorado, Barack Obama outlined plans to revamp the program while McCain sees its Merits (read about their stances here). Bottom line, test or no test, getting more kids into college is important, and so is improving their education along the way.

BBQ Zingers for the long weekend

2008-05-23T15:16:16Z

If the long weekend finds you at a barbeque or just lounging with friends, here are a few news zingers to keep the conversation rolling.

Where are you going?
For the first time since 9/11, Americans are sticking closer to home for Memorial Day. With the average cost for a gallon of gasoline at $3.83, up 20% over this time last year, who can blame them? Interestingly, those companies that refine oil, turning it into gas for your car, aren’t making quite as much money despite the record-high prices. Why? Because the cost of oil—hitting a record $135 per barrel—is pushing up their raw materials costs and cutting into profit. But those that find the oil and harvest it are rolling in cash. Congress grilled them about it this week, in fact. If you’re flying, good luck. Thanks to high oil prices, American Airlines announced this week they’re cutting flights, the number of planes, oh, and charging $15 for the first checked bag. At least United is only charging for the second ($25)! Can we say bike, anyone?

Oil and polar bears
Speaking of oil, one week after polar bears were placed on the endangered species list, Alaska announced plans to challenge the ruling. State Gov., Sarah Palin, and other elected officials believe the listing may impede oil exploration and drilling in areas where the bears live along the Alaskan coast. The challenge came anyway, despite an added provision in the act that offers oil and gas industries flexibility in the management of a threatened species. Polar bear numbers are currently considered healthy, but scientific evidence indicates that retreating sea ice, a vital element to polar bear's survival, will continue to rapidly decrease. Some studies indicate that the loss of the mammal's hunting grounds will contribute to extinction by 2050. See an interactive graph of retreating sea ice over the past four years.

Give peace a chance
As we head into the long holiday weekend that marks the beginning of summer, there is some hopeful news coming out of the Middle East (for once!). On Wednesday, the Israelis confirmed they have entered into indirect peace talks with neighbor and long-time enemy Syria. There is plenty of bad blood; they have fought each other in three wars and have not had real peace talks since 2000.

Syria is seeking the return of the Golan Heights, which Israel captured in their 1967 war, while Israel wants Syria to end its support for militant groups such as Hezbollah, and also to drag Syria away from its ties to Iran, whose leader has called for the destruction of Israel. A peace treaty would elevate Syria’s standing in the Western world, while providing Israel with much-needed regional security.

The negotiations won’t be quick or easy, and the outcome is far from certain. The Israeli prime minister, dogged by a corruption scandal, is on shaky ground politically, while the U.S. is said to be cool to the talks, seeking to keep Syria isolated. Keep your eye on this one …

Have a great weekend!