Immune system cancer found in young 9/11 officers – Associated Press

Immune system cancer found in young 9/11 officers – Associated Press
NEW YORK (AP) — Researchers say a small number of young law enforcement officers who participated in the World Trade Center rescue and cleanup operation have developed an immune system cancer. The numbers are tiny, and experts don’t know whether there is any link between the illnesses and toxins

Obama calls health care part of ‘new foundation’ – Mohave Daily News
WASHINGTON – Using better-than-expected jobs numbers to press his top domestic priority, President Barack Obama is arguing that overhauling the health care system is essential to the country’s economic well-being. Republicans said the high unemployment rate – 9.4 percent in July – shows how families

At least 40 killed in Iraq bomb blasts – Belfast Telegraph
At least 40 people have been killed in a series of bomb explosions across Iraq this morning. The deadliest of the attacks was a double truck bombing in Khazna village, near the northern city of Mosul, which killed at least 23 people. The blast appeared to target a Shi’ite ethnic group called the

G.M. to Try Selling New Cars on eBay – New York Times
General Motors and eBay are expected to announce Monday that hundreds of G.M.’s California dealers will let consumers haggle over the prices of new cars and trucks through the online marketplace. G.M. last month had put out a statement heralding such a partnership, but at the time, eBay denied

Students push for radio station of their own

Students push for radio station of their own
Plans are in the works for a new student-run radio station run through KCUR.

Student Sarah Troyer took on the idea of the new radio station as her final project for a class with Patty Cahill, general manager of KCUR.

The vision of the radio station was originally born in basketball player Brian Goettinger who graduated this year.

Announcements and a Follow Up

One of the groups sponsoring KC Johnson’s address, Duke Students for and Ethical Duke (not to be confused with the equally estimable Duke Students for an Ethical Durham) is a new group dedicated to making sure that the appalling treatment of certain Duke students by the administration and a few of their professors is not forgotten and does not go unaddressed. They are pledged to “defend the dignity and the academic and legal rights of Duke students, both individually and collectively, whether threatened by other students, faculty, or administrators alike.” Here is an article from the Chronicle.

This is a very encouraging development. The fact that the number of groups focusing attention on these issues is growing and not decreasing with time should indicate to the trustees and administration that these issues are not going to go away. It is also good that the students themselves are getting involved. We at FODU are certainly concerned for Duke as an institution. However, most of all, we have done what we have done for the students. Those of us who are alumni want present students to enjoy what we enjoyed while at Duke: a university committed to the care, nurturing and dignity of ALL students. Those who are parents want these things for their children.

Follow up to Duke and the Police

First, a Duke official contacted me after I posted the last update and took issue with two statements I made there. I repeated information that had been told to me personally and which had also been widely reported. However, this official says these two statements are inaccurate and offers an alternative view. As the other bloggers in this case have done, I reproduce this person’s comments below in order to allow a fair opportunity to reply. I also appreciate this person’s willingness to respond and engage us in a dialogue, something lacking among Duke officials up to this point.

1) No one in the university “hired” Wes Covington. In fact, I was the unfortunate agent who brought him into contact with the players. When I met with them on March 17th and first learned of the police search, I was surprised and concerned that they had neither told their parents about it nor retained counsel. I told them to call their parents and consult with them about a lawyer. I said that I would also find out if there was anyone locally who could help them. I then asked Sue Wasiolek for a recommendation and she pointed me to Covington. I was the one who passed his name along to the four captains. They met with him at least once that I am aware of but to the best of my knowledge, he was never formally retained by any of them. I would be surprised if anyone in the administration other than Wasiolek knew anything about this until much later. By 3/24 (the day after the NTO was served) he was entirely out of the picture as far as I know.

2) The persistent rumor about “student/teacher privilege” is somewhat inaccurate. This came up in a meeting between the captains and Trask, Pressler [and] Alleva . . . on 2/24. By then, the players had all retained counsel and been advised not to speak about the matter without the presence of counsel. Trask had been sent down to athletics (I think) to assess the situation and report back to Allen Building. When he asked the players to tell him everything that had happened, they responded that they had been advised not to speak (in fact, they were dying to tell anyone who would listen what had (or hadn’t) happened). Trask responded that they could call their lawyers to come over and that he would wait for them. The players (specifically, David Evans) then said they would go ahead without representation. At that point, Trask said “We could argue that it (their account of the evening of 3/13) is a protected educational record. We might lose that argument.” The players then went on to detail what had happened at the party. Incidentally, it was clear . . . that Trask was absolutely certain that nothing had happened and that the players were innocent; I’m not sure that he played much of a role in what ensued in the following weeks.

Either way, my larger point remains unchanged. Officials of Duke University–and, in a couple of cases at least, I do think genuinely–were indicating to the players their belief in their innocence at the same time that the University was surreptitiously passing protected personal information about them out the back door to police officers with questionable motives and disputed integrity.

The problems with Mike Nifong and his conduct were manifest as I mentioned in the last post. However, Duke had every reason to be very suspicious of the motives of the police as well. Before that interview with the victim occurred, the original police investigator assigned to the case spoke with Sergeant Mark Gottlieb and they agreed that he would take over the case. As detailed last September in both the News and Observer and the Chronicle, Sergeant Gottlieb had been the subject of numerous allegations involving the violation of the rights of Duke students and use of thug-like tactics against them because of some particular animus he had against Duke students. Days before the lacrosse case incident, Durham Police Department officials had moved Gottlieb from patrol to investigations in District 2 apparently in response to these complaints. Duke officials had been notified of the complaints against Gottlieb no later than February. Now Gottlieb was back chasing Duke students, having in his own words “adopted” the lacrosse case. And into Gottlieb’s very hands, Duke personally delivered this protected information without a subpoena.

Second, in the comments, someone asked why turning the key card data over to the police was prejudicial to the players. Sure it was illegal, but how did it harm them? A good investigator will gather as much information as possible and then form a theory. However, that is not how it is always done. Some police investigators unfortunately do not go wherever the evidence takes them. Instead, they make up their mind what happened and then go out and try to find evidence that supports their theory while ignoring all else. Sometimes they will even make up evidence. Even “good” cops sometimes do all this. No better illustration of these problems can be found than the way Durham police actually conducted the lacrosse case investigation.

Let me be clear. There is nothing inherently sinister about police. Most police officers are dedicated, honest professionals who want to make a difference in the community. As in every human organization, there are some who do not live up to these ideals. In the middle are a bunch of people who see police work as just another job. Even under the best circumstances, the role of a defense attorney, as with any other type attorney, is to protect against the worst case scenario. They do that by forcing police to establish probable cause and preventing opportunities for fishing expeditions.

In investigating an alleged crime, the police must establish two things: whether a crime occurred and who did it. In the context of the lacrosse case, the police had skipped over the first step and were already trying to find three people to indict. This was despite their initial skepticism about the accuser’s story. In fact, throughout the entire case, they specifically avoided looking for corroborating evidence to test the accuser’s claims, evidently afraid of what they would find. Remember that the application for the Nontestimonial Order sought by police stated that the dna evidence would “immediately rule out any innocent persons, and show conclusive evidence as to who the suspect(s) are. . . .” Yet, the police did not wait for the results of the DNA testing to come back before inducing Duke to give them the keycard information. The keycard data helped police establish who was at the party and, more importantly, who was not. As described in the Pressler/Yeager book, the police were afraid that the accuser would pick someone out of the lineup who was not at the party and that is exactly what she did.

It is not that information protected by FERPA can never be obtained by police. All police have to show is that they have some particular need for the information, i.e. that it would be helpful to them in their investigation. That is a very low threshold, yet the police and Nifong were unable to make that showing with regard to the key card data. That they were unable to do so demonstrates that no legitimate reason existed for them to have this information.

CfP: Communication Pedagogy in the Age of Social Media

CfP: Communication Pedagogy in the Age of Social Media

Communication Pedagogy in the Age of Social Media

Over the course of the last few years, social media technologies such as blogs, microblogs, digital videos, podcasts, wikis, and social networks, have seen a dramatic increase in adoption rates.

To date, Internet users have uploaded roughly 80 million videos to YouTube and launched approximately 133 million blogs worldwide. Because of their ability to connect people and to facilitate the exchange of information and web content, social media technologies not only provide a powerful new way to interact with one another, but they also present exciting new pedagogical opportunities.

Earlier this year, the New Media Consortium and the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative released the 2008 Horizon Report, which seeks to identify new technologies capable of affecting the way we teach and learn. Among the critical challenges outlined by this year’s report is the need for universities to equip students with new media literacy skills and to develop curricula that “address not only traditional capabilities like developing an argument over the course of a long paper”, but also “how to create meaningful content with today’s tools.” (The New Media Consortium, 2008, p. 6).

Considering that these tools center around the ideas of collaboration, participation, and conversation, they should hold special interest to communication researchers and educators alike. As a result, this special issue seeks to examine the pedagogical applications of social media technologies, especially with regard to the communication classroom.

Examples of best practices in social media adoption in all areas of communication education are welcome, as are case studies or empirical research analyzing the effectiveness and/or effects of incorporating social media technologies into the communication classroom.

Research examining the role these technologies play in the social construction of a collective knowledge pool would also fit within the scope of this special issue.

The special issue is scheduled for publication in the first half of 2010. Deadline for completed manuscripts is June 15, 2009.

Submissions should be electronic (.doc or .rtf format) and must conform to the specifications of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 5th ed. Place author’s contact information in an email to the editor only, not on the title page of the submission.

Issue Editors:Corinne Weisgerber, Ph.D. and Shannan H. Butler, Ph.D. / St. Edward’s University

Send inquiries and submissions to: corinnew@stedwards.edu

Source

[http://www.cios.org/www/ejc/calls/socmedia.htm]

Announcements and a Follow Up

One of the groups sponsoring KC Johnson’s address, Duke Students for and Ethical Duke (not to be confused with the equally estimable Duke Students for an Ethical Durham) is a new group dedicated to making sure that the appalling treatment of certain Duke students by the administration and a few of their professors is not forgotten and does not go unaddressed. They are pledged to “defend the dignity and the academic and legal rights of Duke students, both individually and collectively, whether threatened by other students, faculty, or administrators alike.” Here is an article from the Chronicle.

This is a very encouraging development. The fact that the number of groups focusing attention on these issues is growing and not decreasing with time should indicate to the trustees and administration that these issues are not going to go away. It is also good that the students themselves are getting involved. We at FODU are certainly concerned for Duke as an institution. However, most of all, we have done what we have done for the students. Those of us who are alumni want present students to enjoy what we enjoyed while at Duke: a university committed to the care, nurturing and dignity of ALL students. Those who are parents want these things for their children.

Follow up to Duke and the Police

First, a Duke official contacted me after I posted the last update and took issue with two statements I made there. I repeated information that had been told to me personally and which had also been widely reported. However, this official says these two statements are inaccurate and offers an alternative view. As the other bloggers in this case have done, I reproduce this person’s comments below in order to allow a fair opportunity to reply. I also appreciate this person’s willingness to respond and engage us in a dialogue, something lacking among Duke officials up to this point.

1) No one in the university “hired” Wes Covington. In fact, I was the unfortunate agent who brought him into contact with the players. When I met with them on March 17th and first learned of the police search, I was surprised and concerned that they had neither told their parents about it nor retained counsel. I told them to call their parents and consult with them about a lawyer. I said that I would also find out if there was anyone locally who could help them. I then asked Sue Wasiolek for a recommendation and she pointed me to Covington. I was the one who passed his name along to the four captains. They met with him at least once that I am aware of but to the best of my knowledge, he was never formally retained by any of them. I would be surprised if anyone in the administration other than Wasiolek knew anything about this until much later. By 3/24 (the day after the NTO was served) he was entirely out of the picture as far as I know.

2) The persistent rumor about “student/teacher privilege” is somewhat inaccurate. This came up in a meeting between the captains and Trask, Pressler [and] Alleva . . . on 2/24. By then, the players had all retained counsel and been advised not to speak about the matter without the presence of counsel. Trask had been sent down to athletics (I think) to assess the situation and report back to Allen Building. When he asked the players to tell him everything that had happened, they responded that they had been advised not to speak (in fact, they were dying to tell anyone who would listen what had (or hadn’t) happened). Trask responded that they could call their lawyers to come over and that he would wait for them. The players (specifically, David Evans) then said they would go ahead without representation. At that point, Trask said “We could argue that it (their account of the evening of 3/13) is a protected educational record. We might lose that argument.” The players then went on to detail what had happened at the party. Incidentally, it was clear . . . that Trask was absolutely certain that nothing had happened and that the players were innocent; I’m not sure that he played much of a role in what ensued in the following weeks.

Either way, my larger point remains unchanged. Officials of Duke University–and, in a couple of cases at least, I do think genuinely–were indicating to the players their belief in their innocence at the same time that the University was surreptitiously passing protected personal information about them out the back door to police officers with questionable motives and disputed integrity.

The problems with Mike Nifong and his conduct were manifest as I mentioned in the last post. However, Duke had every reason to be very suspicious of the motives of the police as well. Before that interview with the victim occurred, the original police investigator assigned to the case spoke with Sergeant Mark Gottlieb and they agreed that he would take over the case. As detailed last September in both the News and Observer and the Chronicle, Sergeant Gottlieb had been the subject of numerous allegations involving the violation of the rights of Duke students and use of thug-like tactics against them because of some particular animus he had against Duke students. Days before the lacrosse case incident, Durham Police Department officials had moved Gottlieb from patrol to investigations in District 2 apparently in response to these complaints. Duke officials had been notified of the complaints against Gottlieb no later than February. Now Gottlieb was back chasing Duke students, having in his own words “adopted” the lacrosse case. And into Gottlieb’s very hands, Duke personally delivered this protected information without a subpoena.

Second, in the comments, someone asked why turning the key card data over to the police was prejudicial to the players. Sure it was illegal, but how did it harm them? A good investigator will gather as much information as possible and then form a theory. However, that is not how it is always done. Some police investigators unfortunately do not go wherever the evidence takes them. Instead, they make up their mind what happened and then go out and try to find evidence that supports their theory while ignoring all else. Sometimes they will even make up evidence. Even “good” cops sometimes do all this. No better illustration of these problems can be found than the way Durham police actually conducted the lacrosse case investigation.

Let me be clear. There is nothing inherently sinister about police. Most police officers are dedicated, honest professionals who want to make a difference in the community. As in every human organization, there are some who do not live up to these ideals. In the middle are a bunch of people who see police work as just another job. Even under the best circumstances, the role of a defense attorney, as with any other type attorney, is to protect against the worst case scenario. They do that by forcing police to establish probable cause and preventing opportunities for fishing expeditions.

In investigating an alleged crime, the police must establish two things: whether a crime occurred and who did it. In the context of the lacrosse case, the police had skipped over the first step and were already trying to find three people to indict. This was despite their initial skepticism about the accuser’s story. In fact, throughout the entire case, they specifically avoided looking for corroborating evidence to test the accuser’s claims, evidently afraid of what they would find. Remember that the application for the Nontestimonial Order sought by police stated that the dna evidence would “immediately rule out any innocent persons, and show conclusive evidence as to who the suspect(s) are. . . .” Yet, the police did not wait for the results of the DNA testing to come back before inducing Duke to give them the keycard information. The keycard data helped police establish who was at the party and, more importantly, who was not. As described in the Pressler/Yeager book, the police were afraid that the accuser would pick someone out of the lineup who was not at the party and that is exactly what she did.

It is not that information protected by FERPA can never be obtained by police. All police have to show is that they have some particular need for the information, i.e. that it would be helpful to them in their investigation. That is a very low threshold, yet the police and Nifong were unable to make that showing with regard to the key card data. That they were unable to do so demonstrates that no legitimate reason existed for them to have this information.

Al Capone’s Alcatraz-Inspired Song For Sale – Wbaltv.com

Al Capone’s Alcatraz-Inspired Song For Sale – Wbaltv.com
CHICAGO — He never sang to the feds, but it turns out Al Capone had a song in his heart. All it took was a stint in Alcatraz to bring it out. Now, more than 70 years later, the tender love song that the ruthless crime boss penned while sitting in the pen is being recorded and released on CD. And an

Obama, Calderon talk of anti-cartel action – AP – Guardian Unlimited
MEXICO CITY (AP) — President Barack Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon are pledging to work together on challenges confronting both countries. A main focus for Obama is the battle against the Mexican drug cartels, and the drug-related violence plaguing the border region. He says it isn

Mall operator General Growth Properties files for bankruptcy protection – Newsday
FILE – In this Aug. 20, 2004 file photo, shoppers stroll through Faneuil Hall Marketplace in Boston. General Growth Properties, which owns more than 200 malls including Faneuil Hall in Boston and the South Street Seaport in Manhattan, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection Thursday, April 16

Mall operator General Growth Properties files for bankruptcy protection – Newsday

Mall operator General Growth Properties files for bankruptcy protection – Newsday
FILE – In this Aug. 20, 2004 file photo, shoppers stroll through Faneuil Hall Marketplace in Boston. General Growth Properties, which owns more than 200 malls including Faneuil Hall in Boston and the South Street Seaport in Manhattan, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection Thursday, April 16

No charges against CIA officials for waterboarding – Newsweek
Recommended (6) Obama Team Divided Over Release of Torture Memos Obama Feeling Pressure to Investigate Torture Terror Watch: Obama’s Torture Dilemma Red Cross: What Did U.S. Do With Terror Suspects? Coming Soon: Declassified Bush-Era Torture Memos Holder Hedges on Bush Interrogators (WASHINGTON

Obama, Calderon talk of anti-cartel action – AP – Guardian Unlimited
MEXICO CITY (AP) — President Barack Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon are pledging to work together on challenges confronting both countries. A main focus for Obama is the battle against the Mexican drug cartels, and the drug-related violence plaguing the border region. He says it isn

U.S. sailors who thwarted pirates back with families – Santa Rosa Press Democrat
OXON HILL, Md. — An exultant Maersk Alabama crew has returned to rejoicing families in America and the ship’s captain awaits his own hero’s reception in the states after a five-day ordeal as a captive of Somali pirates. “I’m just so relieved and overwhelmed that it’s over,” third engineer John

Softball team suffers from errors

Softball team suffers from errors
Admittedly, the Summit League schedule hasn’t been gentle on the UMKC Women’s Softball team, but sooner or later the Roos had to face the top seeds.

This season it was sooner.

League play opened in mid-March against the number two seed (Western Illinois), followed by the one and three spots in quick succession.

Announcements and a Follow Up

One of the groups sponsoring KC Johnson’s address, Duke Students for and Ethical Duke (not to be confused with the equally estimable Duke Students for an Ethical Durham) is a new group dedicated to making sure that the appalling treatment of certain Duke students by the administration and a few of their professors is not forgotten and does not go unaddressed. They are pledged to “defend the dignity and the academic and legal rights of Duke students, both individually and collectively, whether threatened by other students, faculty, or administrators alike.” Here is an article from the Chronicle.

This is a very encouraging development. The fact that the number of groups focusing attention on these issues is growing and not decreasing with time should indicate to the trustees and administration that these issues are not going to go away. It is also good that the students themselves are getting involved. We at FODU are certainly concerned for Duke as an institution. However, most of all, we have done what we have done for the students. Those of us who are alumni want present students to enjoy what we enjoyed while at Duke: a university committed to the care, nurturing and dignity of ALL students. Those who are parents want these things for their children.

Follow up to Duke and the Police

First, a Duke official contacted me after I posted the last update and took issue with two statements I made there. I repeated information that had been told to me personally and which had also been widely reported. However, this official says these two statements are inaccurate and offers an alternative view. As the other bloggers in this case have done, I reproduce this person’s comments below in order to allow a fair opportunity to reply. I also appreciate this person’s willingness to respond and engage us in a dialogue, something lacking among Duke officials up to this point.

1) No one in the university “hired” Wes Covington. In fact, I was the unfortunate agent who brought him into contact with the players. When I met with them on March 17th and first learned of the police search, I was surprised and concerned that they had neither told their parents about it nor retained counsel. I told them to call their parents and consult with them about a lawyer. I said that I would also find out if there was anyone locally who could help them. I then asked Sue Wasiolek for a recommendation and she pointed me to Covington. I was the one who passed his name along to the four captains. They met with him at least once that I am aware of but to the best of my knowledge, he was never formally retained by any of them. I would be surprised if anyone in the administration other than Wasiolek knew anything about this until much later. By 3/24 (the day after the NTO was served) he was entirely out of the picture as far as I know.

2) The persistent rumor about “student/teacher privilege” is somewhat inaccurate. This came up in a meeting between the captains and Trask, Pressler [and] Alleva . . . on 2/24. By then, the players had all retained counsel and been advised not to speak about the matter without the presence of counsel. Trask had been sent down to athletics (I think) to assess the situation and report back to Allen Building. When he asked the players to tell him everything that had happened, they responded that they had been advised not to speak (in fact, they were dying to tell anyone who would listen what had (or hadn’t) happened). Trask responded that they could call their lawyers to come over and that he would wait for them. The players (specifically, David Evans) then said they would go ahead without representation. At that point, Trask said “We could argue that it (their account of the evening of 3/13) is a protected educational record. We might lose that argument.” The players then went on to detail what had happened at the party. Incidentally, it was clear . . . that Trask was absolutely certain that nothing had happened and that the players were innocent; I’m not sure that he played much of a role in what ensued in the following weeks.

Either way, my larger point remains unchanged. Officials of Duke University–and, in a couple of cases at least, I do think genuinely–were indicating to the players their belief in their innocence at the same time that the University was surreptitiously passing protected personal information about them out the back door to police officers with questionable motives and disputed integrity.

The problems with Mike Nifong and his conduct were manifest as I mentioned in the last post. However, Duke had every reason to be very suspicious of the motives of the police as well. Before that interview with the victim occurred, the original police investigator assigned to the case spoke with Sergeant Mark Gottlieb and they agreed that he would take over the case. As detailed last September in both the News and Observer and the Chronicle, Sergeant Gottlieb had been the subject of numerous allegations involving the violation of the rights of Duke students and use of thug-like tactics against them because of some particular animus he had against Duke students. Days before the lacrosse case incident, Durham Police Department officials had moved Gottlieb from patrol to investigations in District 2 apparently in response to these complaints. Duke officials had been notified of the complaints against Gottlieb no later than February. Now Gottlieb was back chasing Duke students, having in his own words “adopted” the lacrosse case. And into Gottlieb’s very hands, Duke personally delivered this protected information without a subpoena.

Second, in the comments, someone asked why turning the key card data over to the police was prejudicial to the players. Sure it was illegal, but how did it harm them? A good investigator will gather as much information as possible and then form a theory. However, that is not how it is always done. Some police investigators unfortunately do not go wherever the evidence takes them. Instead, they make up their mind what happened and then go out and try to find evidence that supports their theory while ignoring all else. Sometimes they will even make up evidence. Even “good” cops sometimes do all this. No better illustration of these problems can be found than the way Durham police actually conducted the lacrosse case investigation.

Let me be clear. There is nothing inherently sinister about police. Most police officers are dedicated, honest professionals who want to make a difference in the community. As in every human organization, there are some who do not live up to these ideals. In the middle are a bunch of people who see police work as just another job. Even under the best circumstances, the role of a defense attorney, as with any other type attorney, is to protect against the worst case scenario. They do that by forcing police to establish probable cause and preventing opportunities for fishing expeditions.

In investigating an alleged crime, the police must establish two things: whether a crime occurred and who did it. In the context of the lacrosse case, the police had skipped over the first step and were already trying to find three people to indict. This was despite their initial skepticism about the accuser’s story. In fact, throughout the entire case, they specifically avoided looking for corroborating evidence to test the accuser’s claims, evidently afraid of what they would find. Remember that the application for the Nontestimonial Order sought by police stated that the dna evidence would “immediately rule out any innocent persons, and show conclusive evidence as to who the suspect(s) are. . . .” Yet, the police did not wait for the results of the DNA testing to come back before inducing Duke to give them the keycard information. The keycard data helped police establish who was at the party and, more importantly, who was not. As described in the Pressler/Yeager book, the police were afraid that the accuser would pick someone out of the lineup who was not at the party and that is exactly what she did.

It is not that information protected by FERPA can never be obtained by police. All police have to show is that they have some particular need for the information, i.e. that it would be helpful to them in their investigation. That is a very low threshold, yet the police and Nifong were unable to make that showing with regard to the key card data. That they were unable to do so demonstrates that no legitimate reason existed for them to have this information.

QReportBuilder releases 2009 edition for QuickBooks

QReportBuilder releases 2009 edition for QuickBooks
Last year Alpha teamed up with FLEXquarters.com LLC to bring you QReportBuilder for Intuit’s QuickBooks. Well, this year we’ve done it again, with the release of the QReportBuilder 2009.

The press release hit the wire today, and we’re excited to show you all that’s in store for QReportBuilder users this year.

LAS VEGAS & BURLINGTON, Mass. – (BUSINESS WIRE) — QReportBuilder, the report writer that produces the most sophisticated business reports QuickBooks users have ever imagined, is giving users unprecedented insight into their business dynamics with the release of QReportBuilder 2009, as part of their joint development project with Alpha Software Inc. and FLEXquarters.com Limited. QReportBuilder 2009 is the first multi-purpose report writer designed expressly for Intuit’s QuickBooks complete line of products.

The newest addition of the popular report builder comes with an array of customer requested, new report design features, such as drill down reporting, that takes reporting to a higher level. For the first time ever, users have the option of including “hotspots” in their custom reports. These buttons preview any other report from within that report to display more detail on a specific item.

“Hotspots will give QuickBooks users never-before-seen power and vision,” says Al Buchholz, QReportBuilder premier consultant and Instructor. “Imagine reviewing reports of customers and their outstanding balances over 60 days. With our new hotspots feature, users will now be able to click on the balance amount to bring up a list of those invoices that make up the customer’s balance. This single feature, as well as over 40 other features in our new edition, will give business owners more of something they never have enough of: time and power.”

Other new features include:

* Drill down reports
* Relocate able data mart
* Alignment guides in report design mode that automatically align fields and labels
* Super Controls providing new data types available on the report including html pages, improved image interface, calendar data picker, and more.

For a complete list of all QReportBuilder features, please see Alpha Software’s original QReportBuilder press release.

QReportBuilder 2009 also includes the addition of QReportBuilder Runtimes at a reduced price, making QReportBuilder 2009 the most affordable QuickBooks report writer on the market for both small and large companies, and adding even greater value to QuickBooks by extracting hidden data to better understand your everyday business dynamics. The new Runtime options reduce costs to just $100. It’s especially attractive for Intuit consultants, whose customers would rather run reports designed by consultants, than design their own. Users also still have the option of purchasing the full development license for $299, which includes the ability to design and execute custom reports.

QReportBuilder has earned Intuit’s QuickBooks Silver Developer Status, and is now a featured product on the Intuit Solutions Marketplace. To achieve Intuit’s Silver Certification, QReportBuilder underwent rigorous testing by Intuit’s testing lab and QuickBooks’ development team. By earning Silver Certification, Alpha Software and FLEXquarters.com Limited have demonstrated their extensive knowledge of QuickBooks’ data architecture and their ability to build software that seamlessly integrates with QuickBooks accounting systems.

QReportBuilder 2009 supports QuickBooks USA versions 2002-2009, QuickBooks U.K. or Canadian versions 2003-2009, and the QuickBooks Online Edition. It was built by Alpha Software, using the Alpha Five Version 9 Reporting Engine and the FLEXquarters.com Limited QuickBooks QODBC connectivity product, to produce a report writer capable of developing custom reports not available in QuickBooks.

For more information on QReportBuilder 2009, QuickBooks, Alpha Software, or FLEXquarters.com, please contact Mark Kuznar at Mark@QReportBuilder.com.

ABOUT QREPORTBUILDER

QReportBuilder is a joint development project of Alpha Software Inc. and FLEXquarters LLC. QReportBuilder is the first reporting engine designed expressly for Intuit’s QuickBooks, and supports all QuickBooks versions from 2002 through 2008. Built by FLEXquarters LLC using Alpha Software’s Alpha Five Version 8 Reporting Engine, QReportBuilder unlocks the business intelligence value in QuickBooks data through sophisticated, customizable reporting that’s easy for anyone to use.

UMKC swept away in second half

UMKC swept away in second half
It was a special moment when, before the start of the game last Monday, junior guard Chazny Morris stepped out in front of the crowd.

She was honored as only the ninth person in UMKC history to score 1,000 or more points in her career.

Morris surpassed the mark Jan.

Beasiswa S2 USA: Master Programme in Advance Management Studies at JAIMS
THE FUJITSU ASIA PACIFIC SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM
A full-tuition Scholarship For Management Training in Hawaii.

Fujitsu is a leading provider of customer-focused IT and communications solutions for the global marketplace, established the Fujitsu Asia Pacific Scholarship Program in 1985. The Scholarship was established to enhance international understanding and cross-cultural communication through management education and training. Fujitsu is committed to promoting the development of both technology and human resources at global level.

East-West Knowledge Leader Program (EWKLP)
An intensive three-month Graduate diploma program at JAIMS in Honolulu, Hawaii. JAIMS is a nonprofit postgraduate institute that has been a pioneer in intercultural management education since 1972. Over 22,000 participants from 59 countries have come to JAIMS to learn skill essential for success in the international arena.
JAIMS

* Intercultural Business Leadership
* Global Marketing
* Cross-Cultural negotiation and Problem-solving
* Business Plan Development and Entrepreneurship
* Business Communication
* One-week field study in Japan

Program Information: www.jaims.org

Application Deadline: January 31st, 2009

Please send your application letter and CV to:
PT. FUJITSU INDONESIA
Wisma Kyoei Prince 10thFloor
Jl. Jend Sudirman Kav.3-4
Jakarta 10220
Indonesia
Attn: Mr. Raditya Padmawangsa
Ms. Ella Lamzia
E-mail: scholarship@id.fujitsu.com
Scholarship information: www.fujitsu.com/scholarship

Final Impact: What Factors Really Matter?

Final Impact: What Factors Really Matter?
Columbia University Libraries. Information Services. Scholarly Communications Program / Fostering Innovation in Scholarly Communication /

Research Without Borders: The Changing World of Scholarly Communication

Final Impact: What Factors Really Matter?

October 30 2008 / 3:00 pm to 5:00 pm EDT/

Columbia University Medical Center / Hammer Health Sciences Center / 701 W. 168th Street / Room 401

A panel discussion on the debate about the best way to rank the importance and influence of scholarly publications.

Panelists:

• Marian Hollingsworth, director of Publisher Relations at Thomson Reuters and former assistant director of the National Federation of Abstracting and Information Services [Start: 4:15]
• Jevin West, an Achievement Awards for College Scientists Fellow at the University of Washington’s Biology Department and head developer for Eigenfactor.org [Start: 20:10]
• Johan Bollen, a staff researcher at Los Alamos National Laboratory and the principal investigator of the MESUR project [Start: 61:45]

Columbia University Librarian Jim Neal introduces the talk [Start: 00:00]

A/V Available at

[http://scholcomm.columbia.edu/content/final-impact-what-factors-really-matter] [Duration: 106:02 minutes]

>>PDF/PPT Slides NOW Available [01-05-09]< <

Source

[http://scholcomm.columbia.edu/?q=content/multimedia]

Also Available As A Podcast

[http://deimos3.apple.com/WebObjects/Core.woa/Browse/columbia.edu.1786272348]

Related

“The Scholarly Communication Program is pleased to present a speaker series for the 2008-09 academic year on today’s pivotal issues in scholarly communication. Six events will explore how scholars and researchers can take advantage of new and powerful ways of creating, sharing, reusing, and preserving knowledge.”

[http://scholcomm.columbia.edu/content/events]

Research Without Borders: The Changing World of Scholarly Communication Programs Also Available As A Podcast

[http://deimos3.apple.com/WebObjects/Core.woa/Browse/columbia.edu.1786272348]

Research Without Borders: The Changing World of Scholarly Communication Facebook Global Group

[http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=26968639503]

Science in the 21st Century: Science, Society, and Information Technology
Science in the 21st Century: Science, Society, and Information Technology
September 8th-12th 2008, Perimeter Institute, Waterloo, Ontario


Times are changing. In the earlier days, we used to go to the library, today we search and archive our papers online. We have collaborations per email, hold telephone seminars, organize virtual networks, write blogs, and make our seminars available on the internet. Without any doubt, these technological developments influence the way science is done, and they also redefine our relation to the society we live in. Information exchange and management, the scientific community, and the society as a whole can be thought of as a triangle of relationships, the mutual interactions in which are becoming increasingly important.

[http://www.science21stcentury.org/]

TOPICS

Web/Web 2.0.

• Communication, Social and Information Networks, Wikis, Blogs, Information Overflow, and the Illusion of Knowledge

Globalization

• Collaboration and Competition in the Scientific Community, the Global Village, the Limits of Growth, Science and Democracy

Open Access

• Scientific Publishing, Science Journalism, Framing, and the ‘Marketplace of Ideas’

Sociology

• Ethics, Morals, Trends, and Their Impact on Scientific Directions, Organization of Our Communities, Fragmentation, Feedback, Selection, and the Ivory Tower.

Miscellaneous and Other

• Teaching, Information Storage, Resilience and the Next Generation

PROGRAM

Preliminary Schedule (July 11st)

MONDAY / SEPTEMBER 8 2008

9:15 / REGISTRATION

9:45 / Hossenfelder, Sabine / Opening/

10:00 / Hossenfelder, Sabine / Introduction

11:00 / Orzel, Chad / Talking to My Dog about Science: Weblogs and Public Outreach

12:00 / LUNCH

14:00 / Distler, Jacques / Blogs, Wikis, MathML: Scientific Communication

15:00 / COFFEE BREAK

15:30 / Willinsky, John / Open Access Is Public Access

16:30 / Discussion / The Fall of the Ivory Tower: Science Gets Closer to the Public

18:00 / RECEPTION

19:00 / Pang, Alex / Mapping Science in the 21st Century

TUESDAY / SEPTEMBER 9 2008

10:00 / Hannay, Timo / TBA

11:00 / Ginsparg, Paul / Next-Generation Implications of Open Access

12:00 / LUNCH

14:00 / Nielsen, Michael / Cultural Openness and Its Connection to Online Innovation in Science

15:00 / COFFEE BREAK

15:30 / Odlyzko, Andrew / The Evolution of Scholarly Communication and the Supreme Power of Inertia

16:30 / Discussion / The Future of Scientific Collaboration

18:00 / Meeting (Alice Room) / IT Tools for Science

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10 2008

10:00 / Collins, Harry / TBA

11:00 / Fuller, Steve (per video) / TBA

12:00 /LUNCH

14:00 / Kaiser, David / Toil, Trouble, and the Cold War Bubble: Physics and the Academy since World War II

15:00 / COFFEE BREAK

15:30 / Smolin, Lee / Science as an Ethical Community

16:30 / Discussion /Power and Progress: Democracy and Ethics in Science

19:00 /CONFERENCE DINNER

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 11 2008

10:00 / Noveck, Beth / TBA

11:00 / Weinstein, Eric / TBA

12:00 / LUNCH

14:00 / Wellman, Barry / Networked Individualism and the Triple Revolution: Networks, Internet and Mobility

15:00 / COFFEE BREAK

15:30 / Börner, Katy / 21st Century Science Maps

16:30 / Discussion / Information Flow and Overflow: How the Internet Changes Our Lives

19:00 / Discussion / Scientific Utopia: Alternative Forms of Scientific Institutions

FRIDAY / SEPTEMBER 12 2008

10:00 / Wilson, Greg / Can the Web Make Scientists Brush Their Teeth?

11:00 / Neylon, Cameron / Science in the Open /or/ How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love My Blog

12:00 / LUNCH

14:00 / Zivkovic, Bora / Summary / Closing Discussion

15:00 END OF CONFERENCE

[http://www.science21stcentury.org/program.html]

ABSTRACTS

[http://www.science21stcentury.org/abstracts.html]

PARTICIPANTS

[http://www.science21stcentury.org/participants.html]

REGISTRATION

[http://www.science21stcentury.org/registration.html]

HOST

Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics

[http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/]

Do Search and Direct Marketing Mix? You Bet!

Do Search and Direct Marketing Mix? You Bet!
Many of my readers have been wondering about the role search marketing plays in direct marketing campaigns. This recent articles sheds some light on the subject.

The marketing role of search is to capture prospective customers who actively seek information in three generally applicable groups: brand, product and category information. Prospective consumers are searching for information at various stages of their conversion process. Each marketer approaches these categories differently. Many ignore a specific group because of notions about search and how it should be used. These mar­keters miss out on huge opportunities because the rules by which search is utilized are set by the marketplace.

A prospective customer uses search in several ways. Many begin searching for product information on a general level, typing words like “cell phone” or “jewelry” into a search engine to locate products they may want to purchase. These words describe a category of products and have a great amount of searches associated with them, often called “head” terms. Most prospective customers don’t convert on head terms; they move to more specific terms.
In the case of someone looking to purchase a cell phone, this progression might lead to terms representing a particular type.

These product-level terms narrow the prospective customer’s consideration set and provide a price, features and benefits com­parison.

The final step in most search and purchase experiences is the search for the chosen product’s brand. A consumer would search for Verizon Wireless for cell phones or Cartier for jewelry. The prospective customer purchase at this point is usually associ­ated with the branded keyword, sometimes giving dis-proportion­ate weight to such names.

Should marketers spend their time and energy on branded terms, because of their place in the conversion process? Should they ignore the head terms and the product terms because the majority of conversions take place on the branded terms? The answer is no. Most marketers have figured out that a portfolio approach, which takes the high-cost head terms and low-cost brand terms and balances the keywords to arrive at a desirable success metric, is best. Many search marketers simply absorb the higher cost of head terms and reach consumers at every stage of the process.

Some marketers have avoided this approach and assign a cost to the brand, product and head terms, separately. This effec­tively reduces the sum a direct marketer would spend on all but the most efficient terms. Marketers should always opt for a portfolio approach, rather than restricting their campaigns to only one phase of the conversion process.

Andrew Lovasz is search marketing director for Moxie Interactive.

Next Page »