MAX FEAR

On March 17, 2019 By admin

• Breaking News

The Latest: France closes airspace to Boeing 737 Max 8

HEJERE, Ethiopia (AP) — The Latest on Ethiopian Airlines crash (all times local):

6:50 p.m.

The French Civil Aviation Authority has joined several other nations and closed French airspace to all Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft.

In a statement Tuesday, the authority says that “France is carefully following the progress of the inquiry” relating to the Ethiopian Airlines plane crash in Addis Ababa on Sunday that left 157 people dead.

It says French airline companies do not possess any of the Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft.

But as a precautionary measure, French authorities have decided to “forbid all commercial flights on a Boeing 737 Max departing from, traveling to, or flying across, France.”

___

6:40 p.m.

Irish aviation authorities have suspended all variants of Boeing 737 Max aircraft into and out of Ireland’s airspace as European aviation regulators respond to recent crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia.

Irish authorities say they made the decision “based on ensuring the continued safety of passengers and flight crew.”

The decision comes shortly after UK civilian aviation authorities took a similar step, motivated by the lack of information coming from the flight data recorder involved in the Ethiopian Airlines crash on Sunday.

Experts are chasing details on why the plane crashed shortly after takeoff, killing all 157 on board. But answers could take months and regulators are taking steps in the interim.

___

6:20 p.m.

Germany’s transport ministry says the country is closing its airspace to Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft, following a similar decision by Britain.

The ministry confirmed to news agency dpa on Tuesday comments made by Transport Minister Andreas Scheuer to n-tv television.

The broadcaster quoted Scheuer on its website as saying safety is the priority, and “until all doubts are cleared up, I have ordered that German airspace be closed for the Boeing 737 Max with immediate effect.”

Germany joins a rapidly growing number of nations and carriers either grounding the planes or barring them from their airspace.

___

5:35 p.m.

President Donald Trump is bemoaning the complexity of modern airplanes in the wake of two deadly crashes in the past five months.

Trump tweeted Tuesday that the additional “complexity creates danger” and hinders pilots from making “split second decisions” to ensure their passengers’ safety.

He added that “I don’t know about you, but I don’t want Albert Einstein to be my pilot.”

The president did not specifically mention the crashes but his remarks come after several nations, but not the United States, have grounded the Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft.

The aircraft crashed in Indonesia last year and in Ethiopia on Sunday.

Trump participated in a signing ceremony last month in Hanoi between U.S.-based Boeing and the Vietnamese government.

___

5:15 p.m.

Norwegian Air Shuttle says it has grounded its Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft on recommendation from European aviation authorities after Sunday’s Ethiopian Airlines crash.

The Norwegian carrier has 18 of the planes.

Tomas Hesthammer, the low-cost carrier’s acting chief operating officer, says that “the safety and security of our customers and colleagues will never be compromised, and once authorities advise to cease operations we will of course comply.”

A growing number of airlines and countries around the world have grounded the planes.

___

4:45 p.m.

British regulators have grounded Boeing 737 Max aircraft following the Ethiopian Airlines crash on Sunday.

The UK Civil Aviation Authority says in a statement Tuesday that though it had been monitoring the situation, it had as a precautionary measure “issued instructions to stop any commercial passenger flights from any operator arriving, departing or overflying UK airspace.”

Some five 737 Max aircraft are registered and operational in the United Kingdom, while a sixth had planned to commence operations later this week.

Several countries have now grounded the planes.

Experts are chasing details on why the plane crashed shortly after takeoff, killing all 157 on board. Answers could take months.

___

4:40 p.m.

Malaysian authorities say all flights by Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft into and out of the country have been suspended following two fatal crashes involving the jet in less than five months.

The Civil Aviation Authority said in a short statement Tuesday that no Malaysian carriers operate the Max 8, but that foreign airlines are banned from flying the plane in Malaysia, and from transiting in the country, until further notice.

A number of airlines and countries around the world have grounded the planes after a fatal crash in Ethiopia on Sunday and one in Indonesia last year.

___

4:15 p.m.

Civil aviation authorities in the United Arab Emirates say they have joined U.S. authorities and Boeing “to investigate and collect data” regarding the crash of an Ethiopian Airlines jetliner.

The General Civil Aviation Authority made the announcement Tuesday via the Emirates’ state-run WAM news agency.

It comes as neighboring Oman says it will “temporarily suspend” all Boeing 737 Max aircraft at its airports.

The UAE’s aviation authority says it also contacted Ethiopian Airlines and Chinese authorities.

The statement adds that “the GCAA will not be reluctant to ground the UAE-registered Boeing 737 Max fleet, if required, to ensure the highest standard of aviation safety is achieved.”

The Dubai government-owned carrier FlyDubai uses the 737 Max on its flights.

___

3:55 p.m.

Oman says it is “temporarily suspending” flights by Boeing 737 Max aircraft at its airports after the crash of an Ethiopian Airlines jetliner of the same type.

The Public Authority for Civil Aviation made the announcement Tuesday.

State-owned Oman Air operates five Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft. Oman is a sultanate on the eastern edge of the Arabian Peninsula.

The crash of the Ethiopian Airlines 737 Max 8 on Sunday killed 157 people. A similar Lion Air plane crashed in Indonesia in October, killing 189 people.

Airlines around the world have begun grounding the aircraft as an investigation into Sunday’s crash continues.

___

3:20 p.m.

A pilot who saw the Ethiopian Airlines crash site minutes after the disaster says the plane appeared to have “slid directly into the ground.”

Capt. Solomon Gizaw was among the first people dispatched to find the crash site, which was discovered by Ethiopia’s air force.

He tells The Associated Press that from above “there was nothing to see. It looked like the earth had swallowed the aircraft. … We were surprised!”

He says it explains why rescue officials quickly sent bulldozers to begin digging out large pieces of the plane. He is the managing director of a private flight service.

Sunday’s crash shortly after takeoff from Addis Ababa killed all 157 on board.

___

1:25 p.m.

Ethiopian Airlines says it should take five days to identify the remains of the 157 people killed in Sunday’s crash outside Addis Ababa.

Spokesman Asrat Begashaw tells The Associated Press that “it will take five days to clear everything” and the airline would release more details later Tuesday.

A global team of investigators led by Ethiopian authorities is assembling.

The cause of the crash of the new plane on a clear day remains unknown.

___

12:05 p.m.

Australia has suspended all flights into or out of the country by Boeing 737 Max aircraft, the type that was involved in Sunday’s Ethiopian Airlines crash.

Australia’s Civil Aviation Safety Authority says no Australian airlines operate the aircraft type, but two foreign airlines — SilkAir and Fiji Airways — fly them to Australia.

It says Singapore-based SilkAir has already suspended operation of its 737 Max aircraft.

The Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 Max 8 plane crashed shortly after takeoff, killing all 157 people on board. Five months earlier, a similar Indonesian Lion Air jet plunged into the ocean, killing 189.

The Australian civil aviation authority’s director of aviation safety, Shane Carmody, says that because of the two accidents, the temporary suspension of Boeing 737 Max operations is in the best interest of safety.

___

11:50 a.m.

A South Korean airline says it will suspend operations of its two Boeing 737 Max 8 planes, the same aircraft involved in the Ethiopian Airlines plane crash that killed 157 people.

An Eastar Jet official said Tuesday that the planes will be replaced by Boeing 737-800 planes from Wednesday on routes to Japan and Thailand. She didn’t want to be named, citing office rules.

She says the airline hasn’t found any problems, but is voluntarily grounding Boeing 737 Max 8s in a response to customer concerns. She says the planes will not be used until the completion of a government safety review on the aircraft.

An official from South Korea’s Transportation Ministry says it has yet to find any problems from safety reviews on Eastar’s planes that started Monday.

___

11:15 a.m.

The Mideast budget airline FlyDubai says it will continue to fly Boeing 737 Max 8 aircraft after reviewing a recent U.S. regulator statement about the aircraft.

FlyDubai says that “no further action is required at this time” over the aircraft, a workhorse in the Dubai government-owned carrier’s fleet.

The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration said Monday that while others have drawn similarities between the Indonesia and Ethiopia crashes, the agency was not.

The FlyDubai statement says it remains “confident in the airworthiness of our fleet.” It operates 11 Boeing 737 Max-8 jetliners.

___

10:15 a.m.

A team of U.S. aviation experts has arrived in Ethiopia to join an investigation into Sunday’s crash of an Ethiopian Airlines jetliner that killed 157 people.

As questions grow about the new Boeing plane involved in the crash, the Federal Aviation Administration said late Monday it is at the crash site outside the capital, Addis Ababa, with representatives from the National Transportation Safety Board.

They join an Ethiopian-led investigation that includes authorities from neighboring Kenya and elsewhere.

The plane crashed six minutes into a flight to Nairobi and a growing number of countries and airlines have grounded the new Boeing 737 Max 8 jetliner as a result.

One witness has told The Associated Press that smoke was coming from the plane’s rear before it crashed.

Washington, D.C., Enacts a Phaseout of Gas-Powered Leaf Blowers

On March 16, 2019 By admin

• Breaking News

Back in the fall of 2015, in the first installment in this series, I mentioned that a group of community activists in our hometown of Washington, D.C., had begun an effort to get noisy, hyper-polluting, gas-powered leaf blowers banned in the capital, as has already happened in more than 100 cities across the country.

The reasons for the ban are: the obsolescence of the technology, which is orders of magnitude more polluting than other machines and engines now in common use; the public-health danger, above all to hired work crews, of both the emissions and the damagingly loud noise from the gas blowers; and the rapid advent of battery-powered alternatives, which are quieter and dramatically less polluting.

The purpose of this post is to record how the story turned out:

• From 2015 to early 2018, more than one-third of all the Advisory Neighborhood Commissions in the District, elected bodies covering seven of the eight wards in the District, voted to endorse this mandatory shift.
• In July 2018, the council had hearings on a phaseout measure, sponsored by the council member Mary Cheh.
• Late in the year, the 13-member council passed Mary Cheh’s bill, unanimously.
• D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser then signed the bill, and it will take effect as of January 1, 2022.

The print issue of The Atlantic for April 2019 has an article by me about why this move was in the interest of householders, workers, and the community as a whole. It’s called “Get Off My Lawn.” Here are several additional references:

• To see the testimony that 22 witnesses presented to the D.C. council, go here.
• To see other news dispatches from the group Quiet Clean DC, which was a central part of the move for the D.C. law, go here.
• For reports from a long-established group working on these issues, check out the Quiet Communities site.

You don’t often hear this sentiment, but: Let Washington, D.C., be an example to the nation!

The Profound Emptiness of Beto O’Rourke

On March 16, 2019 By admin

• Breaking News

After months spent teasing his supporters and the political media, Beto O’Rourke surprised absolutely no one Thursday when he officially announced his candidacy for president. “We are truly now more than ever the last great hope of Earth,” he said in a video posted on social media, channeling The Lord of the Rings. “At this moment of maximum peril, and maximum potential, let’s show ourselves and those who will succeed us in this great country just who we are and what we can do.”

These are exactly the kind of empty platitudes we have come to expect from O’Rourke since last year, when his failed, but lively challenge of Senator Ted Cruz turned him from a back-bench, three-term congressman to a national figure (and former congressman). Some have compared him to Barack Obama, with whom he shares a message of optimism and unity. But the comparisons end there. He has all of Obama’s self-assurance with none of his intellectual fortitude, inspirational biography, or oratory power. His rhetoric is as empty as his platform, his paeans to “coming together” the stuff of Obama fanfic.

O’Rourke’s claim to the presidency is based solely on the frenzy surrounding his campaign to unseat Cruz. Over four magical months in the late summer and early fall, O’Rourke made Democrats believe that Texas—which has not had a Democratic senator in a generation—could turn blue. He visited every county in the state, regularly drawing crowds of 50,000 fans, with a message engineered to appeal to both progressives and moderates. “You cannot be too much of a Republican, you can’t be too blue of a Democrat, too much of an independent. You can’t be in prison for too many years, you can’t be too undocumented to be worth fighting for. It is for everyone,” O’Rourke said a campaign stop in Dallas.

It helped his case that Ted Cruz is the most hated man in the Senate. O’Rourke lost anyway, a defeat that looked assured by mid-October. Even O’Rourke seemed to realize it, pivoting his already wide-angled campaign toward increasingly national issues. Many believed that once the midterms were in the rearview, and with his days numbered in the House, O’Rourke would announce his 2020 bid in short order. Instead, he blogged.

Beginning shortly after his loss in November, O’Rourke began posting long, rambling, solipsistic posts on Medium, detailing both his post-election melancholy (“Have been stuck lately. In and out of a funk”) and his continued ability to connect with voters. “What followed was one of these transcendent moments in public life,” he wrote following an event at a Colorado community college. “Something so raw and honest that you want to hold on to it, remember every word … a flow between people.”

O’Rourke’s posts resemble sophomoric creative nonfiction. They’re maudlin, confusing the expression of emotion with profundity. They’re formless, written in a quasi-literary clipped style. And they’re self-serious, filled with banal observations about the experiences that characterize American political life. But these sketches are also littered with stump-speech cliches. In a January, he wrote this entry about a motel owner he met while traveling through Kansas:

I stayed at the Motel Safari, one of these classic Route 66 motels. Mid-century everything. I talked to the owner for a bit. He moved from Tennessee and away from corporate life. Starting over. Giving himself to this hotel that he bought a couple years back. Hasn’t taken a break in more than a year, but is going to close down for the month of February, spend some time back in Tennessee. Take a break, come back stronger.

It’s a clever little paragraph. O’Rourke, ever possessive of a retail politician’s full arsenal, draws out a man’s life story—and seems to be suggesting a parallel with his own. The hard work and struggle of owning a small business in America is not, ultimately, that different than being one of the two or three most popular young Democrats in the country. They both need breaks. They both come back stronger.

O’Rourke catalogued his post-election in other, less bathetic ways. He filmed Instagram live videos of himself eating chips and guacamole in the car, making slime with his children, and even getting a dental cleaning. He skateboarded across a stage, air-drummed in a Whataburger parking lot, never letting people forget he was once in a punk band. An uncool person’s idea of what a cool person is, O’Rourke nevertheless was having fun. If his blog persona resembles a lonely emo teen who just wants the world to see their genius, his video persona is closer to the learned stoner jocks of Richard Linklater’s films. But they have one thing in common: a desperation for attention.

And I haven’t even mentioned his meticulous cultivation of suspense over whether he would run for president. He met with Obama less than two weeks after his midterm loss. He took a campaign-style road trip through the Southwest. He was interviewed by Oprah in Times Square alongside Michael B. Jordan and Bradley Cooper, telling her he would reach a decision by the end of the month. He attended the South by Southwest preview of a documentary about his failed Senate run, Running with Beto. All the while, his team tantalized his supporters. “If you’re on the edge of your seat about Beto’s decision around a potential 2020 run for president, you’re not alone,” read one email sent after his appearance at South by Southwest. “There’s been an outpouring of speculation, excitement, and support from people across the country—everyone eagerly waiting for the news.”

But the way to get people excited about a presidential candidacy is to be an exciting presidential candidate—not to bait them about a potential run for months. America was tiring of his act: He began slipping in the presidential polls. Perhaps sensing he could drag this out no longer, he announced in late February that he had made a decision, and … well, he’d reveal it at some point in the near future.

Then he dragged it out for another two weeks.

Finally, this week, O’Rourke announced he was entering the race. Even this was a multi-day affair, culminating in a swing through Iowa where he gave his spoken-word pitch while standing on coffeeshop countertops. The rollout of his decision also included a fawning profile in Vanity Fair, complete with photographs from Annie Leibowitz. “I honestly don’t know how much of it was me,” he told Joe Hagan, sounding a bit like a band member in Almost Famous. “But there is something abnormal, super-normal, or I don’t know what the hell to call it, that we both experience when we’re out on the campaign trail.” While other Democratic candidates have defined themselves by the policies they support, or their vision for the country, O’Rourke spoke about the nomination as if it was his birthright. “Man, I’m just born to be in it,” he said. “You can probably tell that I want to run. I do. I think I’d be good at it.” He had less to say about whether he’d be any good at running the country.

To be fair, some prominent people think he would be very good at it. People from Obama’s orbit, in particular, have singled O’Rourke out, giving credibility to the comparison. Though not a fan of his blogs, former Obama chief strategist David Axelrod has praised O’Rourke repeatedly, noting his vision “comes from a belief that, through politics, we can achieve a higher purpose.” Former Obama field organizer Lauren Pardi told NBC late last year that “Beto has a special ability—like President Obama did—to make people believe in the best version of America.” Obama himself made the comparison on Axelrod’s podcast late last-year, noting that voters see a similar authenticity in the two. “It felt as if he based his statements and his positions on what he believed,” he said.

But the similarities largely end on that most ineffable political quality of authenticity. Obama launched his political campaign in 2007 by arguing that the bipartisan vote for the Iraq War was a historic mistake, that universal health care was a moral necessity, and that our economic system was dangerously inequitable. O’Rourke lacks any platform whatsoever. He has no signature idea, and we know little about his political positions beyond the mushy centrism he exhibited in Congress. O’Rourke’s decision to spend the last five months blogging could be seen as an attempt to shore up another weakness: His lack of a particularly compelling biography. Spending one’s twenties as an aimless musician, as O’Rourke did, is hardly the stuff of Dreams of My Father.

Instead, the biggest thing that O’Rourke has in common with Obama, the 2008 candidate, is the belief that they can transcend a broken political system with lofty rhetoric about bringing people together. But when Obama spoke about healing divisions, millions of people believed him. And it still didn’t work. Obama came to his senses while in office, as the Republican Party committed itself to bigotry and intransigence, and he now spends his political capital and energy on reforming our broken democracy. Many of the Democratic candidates for president have their own proposals for doing so. O’Rourke just has a blog, and a big beautiful smile that some folks can’t resist. It’s as if the last 10 years of American political life never happened.

FACEBOOK Removes Warren 'Breakup FACEBOOK' Ads…

On March 16, 2019 By admin

• Breaking News

Facebook takes down Elizabeth Warren ads calling for breakup of Facebook

The affected ads, which included a video, directed users to a petition on Elizabeth Warren’s campaign website urging them “to support our plan to break up these big tech companies.” | Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Technology

By CRISTIANO LIMA

03/11/2019 06:32 PM EDT

Facebook has removed several ads placed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign that called for the breakup of Facebook and other tech giants.

The ads, which had identical images and text, touted Warren’s recently announced plan to unwind “anti-competitive” tech mergers, including Facebook’s acquisition of WhatsApp and Instagram.

Story Continued Below

“Three companies have vast power over our economy and our democracy. Facebook, Amazon, and Google,” read the ads, which Warren’s campaign had placed Friday. “We all use them. But in their rise to power, they’ve bulldozed competition, used our private information for profit, and tilted the playing field in their favor.”

A message on the three ads reads: “This ad was taken down because it goes against Facebook’s advertising policies.”

A Facebook spokesperson confirmed the ads had been taken down and said the company is reviewing the matter. The person said, according to an initial review, that the removal could be linked to the company’s policies about using Facebook’s brand in posts.

Technology news from Washington and Silicon Valley — weekday mornings, in your inbox.

By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.

A representative for Warren’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment after POLITICO noticed that the ads had been removed.

More than a dozen other Facebook ads from Warren about her tech proposal were not affected.

The Massachusetts Democrat has staked out an aggressive stance toward Silicon Valley’s biggest companies, going further than many of the other Democratic 2020 candidates.

The affected ads, which included a video, directed users to a petition on Warren’s campaign website urging them “to support our plan to break up these big tech companies.”

The ads were limited in size and reach, with each costing under $100, according to disclosure details listed online.

Missing out on the latest scoops? Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning — in your inbox.

By Jack Shafer

By Adam Wren

By Renato Mariotti

By Jack Shafer

Porn Mums Of British TV

On March 16, 2019 By admin

• Breaking News

The white supremacist who murdered all those Muslims in New Zealand said he did it to defend Western civilization. Well, guess what? Muslims aren’t responsible for a new reality show in which mothers make pornography for their children to watch — this for the sake of fighting “toxic masculinity.”  A state broadcaster in Great Britain is. More:

A group of five mothers were so disgusted by porn they found online they decided to make their own X-rated film that they would be happy to show their children.

The women made their adult movie as part of a Channel 4 TV show called Mums Make Porn.

Although they didn’t star in the video themselves, they helped direct and produce it in a bid to create porn that is realistic and promotes positive attitudes towards sex.

The three-part series follows their journey into the adult entertainment industry, which sees one mother so distressed by internet porn she quits the project altogether.

One mother is reduced to tears by the violent, rape-based content they find and another throws up.

At the end of the programme the women show the video to their children.

To be clear, the mums didn’t star in the film. That’s one taboo they didn’t break. Give it another year or two, though, and somebody will make that movie.

Here’s an interview with Emma Morgan, the show’s executive producer. Excerpt:

What is your response to anybody who doesn’t agree with why you have made the series?

EM: We were shocked by the stats about the impact of free mainstream porn online on the younger generation. It was clear that a lot of young people were accessing porn and were being influenced by it.

We felt it has real purpose to do something meaningful to provoke debate and encourage responsible conversations between parents and their children and draw attention to the issue. Sometimes actions speak louder than words, and we are very proud of the mums and the film that they made and the messages it conveys.

Here’s an interview with the four mums who made the porn film (again, they were producing and directing, not starring in it). Excerpt:

What was your goal making the film?

Sarah-Louise: My daughter said that if her boyfriend saw porn, he might look at an actress and compare. For me, it was about body size and body image. It was very important we showed different body types, diversity and also that there wasn’t a type. You could have different sized breasts, penis and vaginas. They all look different. I wanted to show there was diversity in appearance.

Sarah: For me, it was about communication and consent. I wanted connection.

Emma: I wanted it to be an educational purpose. I wanted to show you could have intimacy and a connection in porn. I wanted them to enjoy each other but have communication with each other. I wanted to demonstrate that in our film as well as consent and body image. I wanted to make porn that we will all get stimulated by and serve everyone.

Anita: Like everyone else, it was about showing young people that it was ok to try things and experiment but to always be aware. I wanted to show reality and show what sex is really like and how you get from A to B. I did not want people to feel ashamed.

How many people have you got in your film?

Sarah-Louise: Four. We have got girl on girl and a boy/girl. We had one chance at this. We wanted to make it good. We wanted to show as much as we could in one film. We have gone for something a little bit different as normally you pick an audience and you pick your film. For instance, if you were a lesbian, you would make a lesbian film. It’s unusual in the porn world, as you don’t normally combine them. We wanted to show you could have the same chemistry with different couples. We try to mirror it as much as possible. No matter what you are into, there are important messages we wanted to get across. The big message is we have communication in our porn film. They ask for things.

Emma: It’s two separate sex scenes but they mirror sexual positions. One is daytime; one is at night. They interlink within the edit. It is all about the build up and exploration of the body and asking.

Sarah: It doesn’t matter about your sexuality. The fundamental thing is consent.

This is not a fringe thing. This is mainstream now. It wasn’t too long ago that parents introducing their children to pornography would have drawn the attention of the police. Now parents make it for them as an enlightened act of liberal charity, and get a celebrated television show about it, broadcast on a BBC state-supported British television channel.

Think about that. Seriously, think about it. Raise yourself out of the boiling pot, frog, for just one minute, and think about what this means.

There is no saving a culture as degenerate as this one, only withdrawing from it, and building up small communities within which to live out the faith (and moral sanity) while it destroys itself. I’m telling you, get started on this right now. Something big is coming. You feel it as well as I do. It is a Weimar Republic feeling. Here’s a passage from a Salon review (2000) of a then-new history of Weimar Berlin’s sex culture:

Whether or not Berlin’s unique brand of decadence was “in the air,” there apparently was the feeling in Weimar culture that anything goes. A quote from Luigi Barzini’s social memoir, “The Europeans,” used by Gordon in the book, illustrates this point particularly well:

“I saw pimps offering anything to anybody, little boys, little girls, robust young men, libidinous women, animals. The story went around that a male goose of which one cut the neck at the ecstatic moment would give you the most delicious, economical, and time-saving frisson of all, as it allowed you to enjoy sodomy, bestiality, homosexuality, necrophilia and sadism at one stroke. Gastronomy too, as one could eat the goose afterwards.”

When this happens here, you may be certain that some liberals will chastise the disapprovers, reminding them that in the 1950s, prudes looked down on Elvis too.

UPDATE: I wasn’t clear that Channel 4, though state-backed, is not technically the BBC. Thanks, British readers, for the correction. I’ve changed this post to reflect that.