I received this email below from a viewer which explains the person's shock over the Calvin Klein SF Union Square store front display. I went over to make the video above and get your view on the display.
As I've stated in the video, it was not a good idea to approve a store front that is at best questionable. Everyone who's seen the video thus far has a reaction to it, from furled brows to frowns and raised eyebrows, the video does not make for a stoic reaction.
Why someone would do this is a question I will ask Calvin Klein's staffers in the days ahead. Indeed, the worker that talked to me through the glass admitted that she did not the racial overtones in the display until they were pointed out to her.
But for now, read the email below, then take my poll on this certainly controversial Calvin Klein store display.
The email:
Hey Zennie,
I'm kicking myself for not taking a picture (I don't usually use my phone for anything other than a phone, so it escaped me in a moment of anger), but I just got back from the San Francisco Shopping Center where I happened upon an appalling window display in the Calvin Klein store next to Bloomingdale's on the 3rd floor.
Imagine a window full of frolicking monkeys, swinging from tree branches in various playful poses, but instead of monkeys, there are mannequins wearing the latest Calvin fashions. And instead of swinging from tree branches, the mannequins are swinging from ropes finished in nooses at the ends. All of the mannequins are black. It doesn't sound like much, but I'll tell you, those nooses caught my eye in the first place, and it didn't take long to piece it all together.
Why am I sending this to you? Well, you've got a voice on several forums, and could make this very public and embarrassing for Calvin Klein. That anyone could get past the basic design stages of such a display without questioning its bad taste is unbelievable. That such displays are crafted by designers with an eye on every detail makes it even less excusable. That such displays are often dictated to stores by corporate headquarters and duplicated at all locations makes it a disgusting travesty.
If you happen by that store, or know someone in SF who could take some pics for you to post, you could shine a bright light on a very ugly message going out to the thousands of people who pass by that carefully composed collection of symbols. I was deeply offended, but rather than contact Calvin Klein so they can quietly change their windows, I figured I'd contact someone who can give it a bit more exposure.
After laying low in the wake of the Erin Andrews Peephole Video Scandal, ESPN reporter Erin Andrews is coming back to work this Thursday as part of ESPN's telecast of the rivalry battle football game between the University of South Carolina and North Carolina State. But that's not all for the 31-year-old media star.
Erin's appearing on Oprah September 11th to talk about the videotape and how it impacted her. (Though some sites report September 24th; I will get a clarification on this.) Plus, she's not shying away from the camera, having just finished this photo shoot for GQ (before the video issue but out now for some reason), where she gets "dirty" wearing football gear.
Erin Andrews (photo courtesy of GQ)
Meanwhile whatever happened to the person who made the video? No one knows. Some have speculated that the person who did it either knew Erin or covered athletic events. Whatever the case, the person's still out there and the video was sold for profit.
Something tells me the person who did it is going to be identified in a strange way.
Erin's back,... as "trophy girl?"
Meanwhile, with the upcoming GQ photo spread its clear Andrews is not only back in reporting action but has no problem posing before a camera. There's something, er,telling about the photo below where she's on a pedestal while a group of college football players look up to her as if she's, well, a trophy girl.
Erin Andrews (photo courtesy of GQ)
I have to admit I've got a problem with her decision to make that photo in the wake of what happened to her and her increased visibility. As I wrote before, she should really use this moment in time to bring attention to the needs of those less fortunate, not just herself.
Plus, as I said in my video above, I'd prefer to see her in the image I used rather than the one she presents here. It's confusing. She's upset about the nude peephole video of her, goes into hiding essentially, then comes out having done a photo shoot that glorifies her sexuality and male desire for her.
What does Erin want? How does she want to be seen? Is she confused? What does she stand for? If she wants to be the 31-year-old version of Miley Cyrus, she needs to say so and do it. Period. Be authentic. But this confusing set of messages she's sending out is of concern to me.
Reportedly, Erin told Oprah the video was "a nightmare" but it's hard to take Andrews's claims against the video that seriously if, with this GQ photo, she's going to basically swim in the sex-based marketing pool she claims to hate, stating that people think she got her job because of her looks.
Maybe Christine Brennan was right and the whole video peep camera thing was just Erin working to get more publicity. Earlier this year, Brennan basically said that because Andrews was "trading off her looks" she created the problem.
Plus, the timing of the release of the photos, after this scandal, calls the whole video matter into question yet again.
I'm just going with my gut here, but something tells me this whole matter has changed her in a way she may not even see. If she's going to be Miley Cyrus she should stop being confused about it, that word again, and just do it. Personally, she could do a lot of good with her platform, but for now she's just messing around.
In a blockbuster development, Ecuador Judge Juan Nunez, the key legal figure in the Chevron Ecuador environmental damage case, is captured in a video shown here explaining that he plans to rule against the oil giant and for an award of $27 billion "more or less". The judge explains that the verdict will happen and that Chevron will be blocked from filing an appeal of his ruling. In that segment of the video, the Judge explains he's only there to talk about the verdict, not about "the other stuff" which refers to a $3 million payoff request. Later in the video its implied that Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa will benefit from the bribe amount.
On video today I talked to Chevron Media Relations representative Sean Comey about the video and Chevron's investigation.
In the video Judge Nunez, Aulo Gelio ServioTulio Avila ("Avila"), and Pablo Almeida and are talking with two gentleman, Wayne Hansen and Diego Borja who are environmental remediation contractors and in the Judge's chamber in Lago Agrio, Ecuador. Hansen and Borja have pen-installed camcorders in their shirt pockets. Diego Borja has worked for Chevron before, Hansen has not, according to Chevron.
Judge Nunez (on the left)
The idea of the meeting was for the Judge and his political associates to be paid by the environmental company for business that would come to them as a result of the Judge's planned verdict. Here's what the Judge said from the video and the Amazonpost website:
Núñez: “Any other questions for me as a judge?” Hansen: “Oh no, I, I know clearly how it is, you say, Chevron is the guilty party?” Núñez: “Yes Sir.” Hansen: “And the, the, the act (decision) is October or November of this year?” Núñez: “Yes Sir.” Hansen: “And it’s….?” Núñez: “No later than January.” Hansen: “January 2010. And the money is twenty-seven (billion dollars)?” Núñez: “It might be less, and it might be more.”
The Judge says "I have nothing to do with that other part" which is not explained in full but Garcia below fills in "the blanks" later, explaining that the Judge will be paid part of $3 million from the consulants.
Patricio Garcia
The second part of the video has an operative Patricio Garcia (photo from the Amazonpost website) who's reportedly a member of Ecuador's ruling party talking about how the $3 million would be delivered and transfered. This is what was said by Garcia:
Borja: “OK. Of the three million … one million is for the judge?”
Garcia: “Yes.”
Borja: “One million for the presidency…?”
Garcia: “Yes.”
Borja: “And one million for the plaintiffs?”
Garcia: “Yes, that’s right.”
Borja: “But, Loco, for the plaintiffs, who gets the money? Fajardo?”
Garcia: “No. The thing is, we’re going to handle it here.”
Borja: “You mean Alianza PAIS would receive the payment here?”
But there's more to this video than what's reported in the press thus far. The focus here is on President Rafael Correa, who's office is named by Patricio Garcia as a beneficiary of the planned bribe money as is "his sister" as stated in the video above. As of this writing Correa has not issued a statement, but his reputation has already come under attack.
The second part of the video was filmed at Alianza PAIS (which means "Proud and Sovereign Fatherland" according to the Wikepedia listing) Offices June 22, 2009. PAIS is a political movement led by President Correa. Who Patricio Garcia is beyond his appearance in this video and his role in PAIS is still basically unknown as of this writing.
Garcia says that the President's sister Pierina will be helpful (presumably in making sure that the businessmen get their piece of the planned $27 billion pie) and will meet with "The Gringo" (that's Hansen). I checked and "Prierina" is indeeddescribed here as "Pierina Correa, the president's sister and an Alianza País leader in Guayas province". That confirms my assertion that Garcia is tied to the President and his family as he states in the video.
Shocking.
Chevron wants Nunez taken off the case
The implication here is that as Chevron's Comey said in my video above, Chevron wants Nunez taken off the environmental damage case. But given that Chevron has informed the U.S. Department of Justice, the revalation could have deeper implications.
It could cost the country its Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) status, which was just renewed in June of this year. Whatever the case, this news sends a clear message that doing business in Ecuador is not the "clean" experience it should be. Until now, blogs have reported the problems of corruption in Ecuador and with respect to President Correa's involvement in the Chevron case, but now we have visible evidence to back those claims.
The news also forever destroys the claim made by Ecuador lawsuit legal advisor Steve Donziger and others who say that the lawsuit against Chevron has nothing to do with the Ecuadorian Government and is brought by citizens of the Amazon. But Correa has appeared with Donziger in public and has been interviewed about the case.
Right.
One can see that the bribe money's not going anywhere near those groups of people Donziger claims to represent; the political party PAIS would get it and "handle it" as Garcia said in the video. The question is, did Donziger or his associates in Ecuador and America know about this bribe plan? Was he to be one of the plaitiffs that would get the bribe money? In the Amazon Defense Coalition statement today, he does not address the possibility that he may be involved, instead he said "As the facts come out it's going to backfire heavily on Chevron."
Amazon Defense Coalition defends Judge Nunez
Karen Hinton of the Amazon Defense Coalition told Reuters that the video shows Judge Nunez resisting the bribery matter. (This is Hinton's full statement.) In point of fact, the video shows the judge saying that he's speaking in the role of Judge and "does not know about that other matter" which is a way of saying he does know but does not want it to be officially said that he does know. It's called "plausible deniability ."
TAKE THE POLL - http://www.pollsb.com/polls/p2137290-...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/a...
http://zennie2005.blogspot.com/2009/0...
When I learned that teen star and Twitter mogul Miley Cyrus had literally done a number on a stripper pole at the Teen Choice Awards Monday night, two thoughts entered my mind: first, who convinced the 16 year old to do it, second, does this mean a sex tape's in her future too. I say and write that because I learned she and her father Billy Ray Cyrus came up with the dance production idea. So if her dad's cool with his daughter dancing around that pole at her age, the sky's the limit, right?
