According to a recent infographic from the research team at Learnstuff.com, it most certainly is.

In my journalism pursuits, I have come across many circumstances where women were not paid fairly. In an article I penned for Women News Network last year about AB889, the controversial California “Babysitter Bill”,  I interviewed several women who were domestic workers being paid shockingly low wages. While it is common knowledge that these practices exist in the United States, it appears there is little being done to make any changes. Mujeres Unidas Y activas and the Domestic Worker’s Coalition have jumped hurdle after hurdle in attempt to stamp their bill into a law. The abuse is obvious and the wages, below what would legally be considered poverty level in this country. Yet most opponents are concerned about the administrative costs of the bill.

Although, I would concur that the subject of fair pay affects both men and women in different ways, it is certain there is a gap for women.

The question remains: what are the root causes of pay gaps? Are they solely based on discrimination or are there other factors behind the statistical curtain we are not readily observing? The stats are easy to compile as pay data is objective enough to examine efficiently, yet researchers are still asking themselves the age-old question of why there are gaps. Many believe the reasons are discrimination, salary negation tactics, maternity leave policies and family policies.

Clearly, there is not one isolated factor. Until we can identify the causes, the gaps will continue.

Sharpen those negotiating skills ladies!

Newsweek announced this week that it will transition to an all-digital format in early 2013. As part of this transition, the last print edition in the United States will be their Dec. 31 issue. Currently, 39 percent of Americans say they get their news from an online source, according to a Pew Research Center study released last month. It appears society is drifting away from the print realm and into digital.

This is a giant leap for digital mankind and certainly a sign that we are on the verge of a massive shift in the information era. Is this the first omen foretelling the death of print?

“The tempo of the news and the Web have completely overtaken the news magazines,” said Stephen G. Smith, editor of the Washington Examiner and the holder of an unprecedented newsweekly triple crown _ nation editor at Time, editor of U.S. News and World Report, and executive editor of Newsweek from 1986 to 1991.

Where once readers were content to pick up a copy of the latest news magazine issue in the grocery store check out line, they now can find much of what they need almost instantaneously, on their smartphones and tablet computers. Where once advertisers had limited places to spend their dollars to reach national audiences, they now have seemingly unlimited alternatives.

Newspapers have also felt the pains of digital age transition and have been forced to move towards multimedia and web-based content to keep hold of shrinking readerships. In 2009, U.S. newspaper circulation hit its lowest level in seven decades, as papers across the country lost 10.6 percent of their paying readers from April through September, compared with a year earlier.

In 2009, USA Today lost 17 percent of its circulation from the year before. Rounding out the five largest papers, the New York Times lost 7 percent of its daily paid circulation, The Los Angeles Times lost 11 percent and The Washington Post lost 6 percent. The San Francisco Chronicle lost nearly 26 percent of its paid daily readers, and the Dallas Morning News and Newark Star-Ledger each lost about 22 percent.

The losses have only increased in the last few years.

Newweek’s decision to move to digital content is not only a bold and progressive move- but also a wise business decision in response to a rapidly evolving industry on shaky ground.

Sample of an Obama graphic shared hundreds of thousands of times on Pinterest

In the olden days before the rise of the digital era, the critical mass relied on poll results to gauge which presidential candidate was in the lead. The polls, such as Gallup, were published on the front page of newspapers where most campaign news appeared. Campaign fundraising was also achieved through a close network of generous partisan donors that volunteers contacted by good old-fashioned landline phone.

While polls are still widely consulted and revered, the digital age has transformed how presidential candidates interact with audiences and raise funds. It has also bridged the red tape gap between constituents and candidates.

Since the 2008 presidential race was the first election after the Facebook and Twitter boom, its activities via social media are the only benchmarks we have to gauge social media outreach and effectiveness of both party’s campaigns. Not only was the 2008 election one of historic proportions with the first African-American candidate, it was the first election to utilize the power of social media. Welcome to campaigning in the digital age: where crowdsourcing and crowdfunding are rampant, effective and the hot new communication method.

The very “democratic” practice of crowdsourcing is vastly becoming the determinant for the news topics that gain front page exposure and those that do not. This practice of asking a large collection of individuals online to help gather information or produce ideas is the digital age way of letting “the people” chose which content they would like to see. We have transitioned to an age where news is produced on demand rather than off of the agendas of large media companies or the sole discretion of editors. Companies crowdsource video submissions and reporters review trending topics on Twitter to gather story ideas- so why would candidates not engage just as equally? The shift has changed focus to what the people are talking about and the candidates are soaking up the chatterous dialogue for key messaging points in their speeches, media and advertisements.

The Democrats were the reigning digital media champions in the 2008 election. The party mobilized supporters, organized digital communities and raised $600 million from three million people through barackobama.com; an excellent use of crowdfunding as Obama continuously touted that his campaign was funded “by the people” since his republican rival was funded through corporate America. Crowdfunding not only provided a vital monetary resource for the Democrats, but also proved the extent of participation party constituents offer to campaigns. Mark Zuckerberg is credited with getting Obama elected to office as the Yes We Can campaign spread like fire in an arid forest across Facebook and especially YouTube. Obama’s campaign films specifically created for YouTube were watched for 14 million hours, equivalent to a broadcast TV spend in excess of $47 million, more than nine times his Republican presidential rival. The democrats have always boasted a “for the common people” mission and it is readily apparent in their social media utilization.

Sample Romney ad shared on Pinterest with nearly 60,000 shares

But 2008 only placed Facebook and Twitter in the candidate media toolbox. 2012 is an all out attack with even more new tools like Pinterest, Google Plus and kickstarter, opening more communication outlets and to more targeted demographics. For example, an overwhelming majority of Pinterest users are women (80% according to TechCrunch) and 80% of content are actually repins instead of new images. Behind the scenery of the Pinterest quotes, status updates and Twitpix are the true testament of targeting campaign messaging: the analytics.

The explosion of social media has also offered very specific web metrics with data so accurate the CIA is probably wondering who stole their research methods. Such specific metrics allow campaign managers to target the “opinion leaders” by providing psychographic information based on social media utilization. They know which sites get the most traffic from their crowdfunders and crowdsourcers and thus can solicit them directly.

The digital age has also changed the way we interact with candidates that were previously blocked by an invisible red tape. Recently Obama opted to participate in ‘hangouts’ on Google Plus to answer questions and hold virtual town hall style sessions with the general public. Over 200,000 people also recently tuned in to Reddit to see Obama take part in what’s known as an “AMA” — Ask Me Anything. He personally answered over 1,000 questions, no minions intervened, ranging from politics, to philosophy, to Washington’s secret beer recipe directly engaging with the participants.

The crowdsourcing and crowdfunding emergence in the 2012 election produces an endearing symbiosis for us members of the critical mass and for candidates: we get the information we demand; the information we need to make decisions. Candidates get more donations, more interaction with constituents, more face time, better benchmarking analytics and ways to directly target opinion leaders.

Thanks for the win-win digital age.

The digital age has undoubtedly turned the journalism profession on its head.

Print publications have weathered massive layoffs and many are still hanging by a meager thread. In fact, many journalists are working jobs outside the profession in public relations or other corporate media related fields.

So what is this emergence of brand journalism? Is it public relations masquerading as the objective angle driven ethical profession of journalism?

Brand journalism brings together skills from traditional journalism, marketing, public relations, customer service and brand management. It is journalism content produced on behalf of a brand,  cause or idea. The content produced uses all the skills and techniques of traditional journalism to present information that a particular audience requires or desires. The basic idea behind this eight year old craft is to dovetail journalistic practice with traditional media, and overall promotional and marketing strategy.

The key to successful brand journalism is to make the content feel and look like real journalism- not marketing or advertising attempts. Brand journalism has the unique ability to focus on what an audience wants, not on what a particular entity, company or cause wants to communicate. It shifts the focus of a company driven message to an informative consumer tailored message. The central focus in the communications then becomes the person you desire to communicate with, not what the brand or company wants to say.

For those with the belief that brand journalism is just PR must recognize that public relations and brand journalism have very different functions. Brand journalists should be concerned with alerting people to new trends, crafting narratives, bridging the gap between internal and external experts and communications. Think about it this way: Sales and marketing typically think in terms of customers and buyers; brand journalists think in terms of audience. It is an audience driven craft.

What about the question of objectivity? Isn’t the practice of journalism for a particular brand defeating that purpose? Not necessarily, especially since the communications goal is still the same. In traditional advertising and marketing the objective is to inform and persuade an audience. Brand journalists write content concerning their brands that is informative and audience driven. One example would be a narrative piece about a recent development in how their brand changed the lives of its audience. What they can bring to a brand, cause or entity is an authentic style that sounds less like a sales pitch and more like a conversation. With a background in research and interviewing, a journalist pushes to introduce third-party data and outside voices into an organization’s content.

Over time, this can help enhance a brand’s credibility as a legitimate source for information. But that credibility will erode quickly if the brand’s parent organization does not remain above-board and transparent with its followers.

My personal opinion is journalism is attempting to evolve in the digital age and this is one of the new paths the profession is taking. If the content produced is produced with the common goal of informing a brand’s audience and not attempting to persuade or push them into a particular direction, then it can be validated as journalism. The message of the content should always be to inform and give readers useful and meaningful information.  The audience should always come first. Nobody has to engage with the content an entity delivers and produces. Let’s face it: in the digital age consumers are quite picky about what they give their precious time and attention to. Giving them what they want is the only sure way to successfully communicate.

Read some examples of successful brand journalism. Notice the goal is to deliver information and not to persuade a brand’s audience.

Android users have hundreds of thousands of apps to choose from, many of which are free. The CamScanner is one freebie no Android user would pass up! Handy as all get-out, CamScanner gives you the ability to photograph and then password protect important single or multipage documents – like receipts, driver’s licenses, health insurance cards and spreadsheets and save them as PDFs. It functions a bit like a smart phone scanner and fax machine. From your Android phone you can crop or enhance the document PDF using advanced image processing technology and send it via SMS, email, or upload it to a cloud server like Google Docs, Box or Dropbox. You can also tag the document for easier searchability. Google Play users rated this handy app an impressive 4.5!

Get it now on Google Play

The new third generation iPad, offered at a starting price of $499 is all the rage these days! It features a stunning and vibrant retina display, a 5MP isight camera and ultrafast 4G LTE. If you’re in love with gadgets and have heard all the latest buzz about the Apple iPad you’re probably thinking about acquiring one, yes?  Read on to discover 3 pros and cons of the latest addition to the Apple tablet family:

PROS

The world’s largest app and media store is at your fingertips.
Like its predecessors, the iPad third generation includes all the celebrated and built in Apple-designed apps for basic functions like web browsing, navigation maps, music, photos and video media, and YouTube. According to Apple, the number of apps available in the App store have now swelled to over an already impressive 500,000. This gives you access to apps concerning just about anything you fancy. Happy choosing!

The resolution is so stellar it will make your eyes water .
You’ll be staring at this screen quite a bit- so it’s a good thing the iPad third generation took a tech genetic turn for the better with an impressive retina display featuring a 2048-by-1536 resolution and  3.1 million pixels- all offered without sacrificing size and shape. To put this display into perspective: it has four times the number of pixels as iPad 2 and a million more than an HDTV. Now that’s vibrant!

It’s a bird, it’s a plane, it’s 4G capabilities!
4G is the next emerging generation of internet connectivity speed and is currently avaliable in certain smart phones. iPad third generation certainly offers it! You can connect to the web, download content, and stream video at lightening fast speeds. 4G is of course optional through AT&T and Verizon. 4G average speeds are targeted to be in the 100Mbps to 1Gbps range. This is roughly 10 to 100 times, depending on your location, faster than 3G networks. With 4G, a 4-minute MP3 download could take you only seconds.

Cons

It’s still a gadget, not a Macbook or laptop.
The iPad is undoubtedly cool because it makes your life easier on many levels. It is, however, still a gadget and not an actual computer. Even though you can buy one of those cute little keyboards for it and type notes- it will not give you all the word processing functions a MacBook Pro can offer or most other laptops for that matter. So before you start jumping up and down with the thought of the laptop being obsolete- hold on to your black rimmed geek glasses: homosapiens are not quite there yet.

The resolution is stellar, yet multimedia may choke your storage.
There is no such thing as a free lunch, so naturally that stellar retina display would have to come with a price. Movies and other multimedia with apps optimized for the screen may take up more storage space, potentially forcing you to pay a higher price for more memory. In fact, even leveling up the screen’s brightness will cost you in precious battery life.

While the iPad third generation plays 1080p video files with no delay hiccups, other video files can shrink its capacity. For example, a 3.99GB new release movie can siphon quite a bit of memory. If you plan to store and use a lot of HD media, you will likely have to spring for a more expensive model with extra capacity.

The 4G is great, if you pay for it.
To attain the 4G capabilities mentioned earlier, you will have to purchase a plan through AT&T or Verizon to allow your device to achieve 4G speeds. This is, of course, optional and not required as the device comes with built in WiFi.

Yesterday was a proud day on capitol hill for bipartisanship.

Chief Justice John Roberts, a conservative appointed by President George W. Bush, sided with the Supreme Court’s liberal wing in upholding the 2010 Affordable Care Act.

Allegedly the already-insured will benefit from the ACA in its steps to stop insurance companies from cancelling coverage in the event of illness.

For Americans whose job does not offer health insurance or who have been denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition, the ACA aims to offer health plans for people with pre-existing conditions who have had trouble finding care. Its ultimate goal is to increase coverage for Americans under these conditions in 2014.

The law helps small businesses pay for health insurance for their employees in addition to supporting programs that will help increase the number of primary care physicians, nurses, physician assistants and other health care professionals.

The majority opinion was written by Chief Justice John Roberts, who held that the law was a valid exercise of Congress’s power to tax since the ACA will require non-exempted individuals to maintain a minimum level of health insurance or pay a tax penalty.

From healthcareandyou.org here are some parts of the ACA and the changes expected to appear by 2014:

Affordable Healthcare Act

Present changes

• Young adults can now stay on their parent’s health plan up to age 26.
• Some small businesses with fewer than 25 employees can get help paying for the cost of providing health insurance.
• Insurance companies can’t deny health coverage to kids with pre-existing conditions.
• Adults who have been uninsured for at least 6 months and have been denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition may now get coverage.
• Insurance companies can’t place dollar limits on the health care they cover in your lifetime.
• Those in the Medicare Part D “doughnut hole” get a 50 percent discount on name-brand prescription drugs and a 7 percent discount on generic prescription drugs.
• Those in Medicare can get preventive services and screenings, such as mammograms and colonoscopies, at no cost to them.
• New health plans must offer preventive and screening services, such as mammograms and colonoscopies, at no cost to the patient.

Down the Road

• Insurance companies won’t be able to deny coverage to anyone with a pre-existing condition.
• Health insurance will cover essential health benefits and coverage will be guaranteed for nearly all Americans.
• Most Americans will be required to purchase health insurance if they don’t already have it – and depending on your income, they may get help paying for it.
• Insurance companies won’t be able to place dollar limits on the care they cover in a single year.
• Americans without health insurance will be able to buy it through state-based marketplaces called exchanges.
• More Americans will have access to health coverage and medicaid.

So what most of this debate ultimately boils down to is the issue of whether or not Congress has the constitutional power to tax. At the heart of every piece of litigation or governmental debate there is always a simple underlying issue. In this situation it appeared not the be the most obvious issue- the number of uninsured people. It appears the upholding of ACA hinged on simple taxation provisions.

Revealed by the records of 14,000 law enforcement agencies,  murder declined overall by 1.9 percent from 2010 figures. Rape, robbery and aggravated assault declined by 4 percent nationwide. These findings, including other data are present in the FBI report.

Could we have finally made a shift towards a more peaceful society? Were the occupy protests really beneficial afterall? The FBI listed a number of factors including a weak economy, an aging population, increased immigration and a more robust police presence across the country.

After a year of economic turmoil and uprooting of political systems globally in 2011, isn’t it about time for some ‘peace on earth’ initiatives? Now that savage humanity hath roared, it appears it is tired and exhausted. Far too wiped out to be criminal.

Nancy Pelosi in San Francisco April 2012

The ideology is to ensure that all Americans have access to quality, affordable health care and to significantly reduce long-term health care costs. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has determined that it will provide coverage to 32 million more people, or more than 94% of Americans, while lowering health care costs over the long-term. This historic legislation will reduce the deficit by $143 billion over the next ten years, with $1.2 trillion in additional deficit reduction in the following 10 years.

Nancy Pelosi in San Francisco May 2012

Conservatives criticized Pelosi and other liberals for their “spending frenzy”, but I have to say this: We have to do SOMETHING. Our current system is broken and corrupt. If this is a step in even some, any, direction to ensure that citizens of this country have equal access to healthcare then it is an avenue worth exploring.

Aside from the debates of whether or not this act is worth an ounce of consideration and implementation, sub debates questioned what the Affordable Healthcare Act can actually DO regarding healthcare discrimination on the basis of gender. According to the Washington State-based progressive group Fuse, the differences between health insurance prices for women and men pre- and post-ACA are staggering:

Looks like its time for a change….

Myself at the United Nations general assembly

After attending the first week of the United Nations 56th annual session of the Commission on the Status of Women at United Nations headquarters in NY, NY  I walk away from the experience humbled and driven with a more comprehensive understanding of key problems facing women globally.

Unfortunately much of what I witnessed, the stories I was told and the pictures I saw do not point to a more progressive world for women. In fact, it made me feel that global women’s rights and empowerment appear to be in some cases stagnant and in others even regressive.

Bineta Diop and myself on WNN panel discussion at UNCSW56

My intention is not to be a pessimist and in the realm of women’s rights journalism, advocacy and activism alike, it is our duty to be optimistic no matter how many stories we digest of abuses. Why be in the fight if you are not in it to win it? From our perspective the average person would see the world as a choking, bleeding entity but not to women like myself and the others at UNCSW56. We see hope in the challenges facing ourselves and our global sisters. We see the problems, but we are actively engaged to uncover solutions.

I sat through panel after panel of presentations and forums from progressive women’s groups who came to NYC from all corners of the world to share this information at the United Nations. All were part of NGO organizations working exclusively to combat the injustices of gender inequality. I met women from Iran, Sudan, Uganda, Taiwan, Afghanistan, Norway and so many other countries. I conversed with them one on one about their programs and goals and was moved to know that people like them, kindred souls, existed.

I apply the term “regressive” in reference to women’s rights and gender equality worldwide because in recent history we, as humanity, have taken so many steps backwards. Countries where women once prided themselves in an existence of equality now degrade and shame them solely on the basis of gender.

I sat through a presentation on Female Genital Mutilation at UNCSW56 where I was informed an estimated 92 million girls in Africa under the age of ten underwent the procedure.  I attended because “50 Women” features the story of a young African woman named Bita who underwent the reluctant procedure as a young child. I was also informed that the practice of FGM has not declined, only increased in the region of Sub Saharan Africa where Bita (Senegal) is from.

Afghanistan is an example of a country where women had more equal rights only to watch them dissipate over the past several decades. Prior to the Soviet occupation and the subsequent years of war, women had significant rights and educational and professional opportunities, especially in Afghanistan’s larger cities. The 1996 takeover by the Taliban pushed Afghan women’s rights back decades and arguably even centuries, effectively banning women and girls from all forms of public life. Even after the 2001 overthrow of the Taliban and the implementation of a new United Nations-appointed government in Afghanistan, the situation of women’s rights is one of much strife and debate. The return to a place of equal rights in post-Taliban Afghanistan has been a slow and often arduous process.

In 1977, women composed 15 percent of loya jirga members in the Afghan government. Today, they compose nine percent. Before the Taliban came to power ten years ago, Afghan women composed 50 percent of government workers, 70 percent of schoolteachers and 40 percent of doctors in Kabul and this is unfortunately no more the case.

There is an inherent difference in countries where women have virtually never had rights and countries where they had them and then lost them. I saw far too much evidence of this at UNCSW56 and was not expecting to witness such declinations as what I anticipated to witness was progress.

Fortunately the presence of women like Leymah Gbowee, Nobel Prize winner and freedom Fighter during the Liberian civil war, breathed hope into the experience.

In her discussion in the above video, she highlights the importance of the church and other religious entities in the realm of human rights and brings a stark yet candid observation in the role of religion and the advancement of humankind, namely women. Her criticism is accurate in that not only are religious entities serving as oppressors to women in many ways, they also tend to be self-serving entities instead of serving the communities and people they claim to serve.

“Most of the vices out there exist in the church” she spoke at UNCSW 56, “how can the church speak out against politics of the world when Bishops are changing constitutions to be Bishops for life”.

She continued to state: “Its important for the church to go back to being the social justice church it was meant to be”.

I attended UNCSW56 with my Muslim African sister, Bineta Diop. As we exited the premises we were accosted by christian fundamentalists. The women showed us a book of photos of poor children in Bangladesh and went on to tell us that they entered the impoverished country to “tell the poor about Jesus and feed them”.  We actively listened to their case until they challenged my Muslim sister and her belief in Islam. We told them we were no longer interested in the conversation and left.

After that experience, Bineta and I attended a panel discussion and forum on Islam and women’s rights which particularly examined and dissected the role of fundamentalist Islam in the oppression of women.  Leymah’s words became very apparent:

First, charity should never be the guise for promoting religious ideals. If one desires to help the poor, they must do it in the absence of religious propaganda, otherwise they are taking advantage of the desperate and hungry.

Second, Leymah speaks the truth about contemporary religious entities- many appear to serve themselves. When I interviewed boona Cheema (India), an ordained minister she spoke extensively about the absence of the church in the realm of social justice. She emphasized, after the Unitarian Church refused to accept her ministry to the poor and homeless, that the church has drifted away from the original community values it once promoted and has become very self serving. I am not saying this is the case for all religious entities. I have witnessed truly selfless, humanitarian acts by very religious individuals. Through history it is an undeniable fact that the church has unfortunately exploited and served corrupt interests time and time again.

Religious Fundamentalism  was one phenomenon I observed at UNCSW56 in need of radical reformation. In many ways, under the curtain of fundamental beliefs, we are only serving to oppress instead of aid. Such is the case with women in Afghanistan, with Female Genital Mutilation and with religiously motivated pro-life campaigns which threaten to stifle our reproductive rights.

Bineta Diop and myself on a panel discussion at UNCSW56

Bineta Diop and I participated in a panel discussion facilitated by Women News Network on the usage of technology for the advancement of rural women. Our room heated up as women from all over the world were present in our audience. We actively engaged them to uncover common barriers to technology in their countries: Iran, Uganda, Ghana, Afghanistan etc.. and discussed applicable solutions to these barriers. Bineta discussed government imposed taxes on mobile phone usage in Senegal and generated audience feedback:

Additional panels included “50 Women” contributor Mona Motwani. A civil rights attorney and non profit co founder, Mona ventured to the United Nations after spending the last 5 years of her life disabled by Lyme disease. After successful completion of her treatment, she rose to the occasion to speak at UNCSW56:

I would love to have returned from the United Nations filled with idealism, but this is not the case. In fact, what I ingested was a solid spoonful of harsh reality. It honestly is disappointing to me in many ways, yet I see the hope in the eyes of all of the women I met despite their troubled circumstances.

Why disappointing? As humanity we can do more. We are better than what we have become. Although we are capable of alot of darkness, we are also capable of a lot of light. Just as equally as we are capable of hatred, we are capable of compassion.  There is a strong need to forgo the self absorption and the obsession with petty day to day occurrences and realize that we are all part of much greater problems of a serious and deadly nature. We are not progressing our world, in many ways we are stifling it. Facing reality in this circumstance is not easy and I hate to be the woman with the more “negative” angle but it is practical and truthful.

Our elders believed the world would advance. In many ways it has, but in many others is has not. Such self serving interests and digressions will ultimately cost us in the long run.

If I walk away from UNCSW56 with one message to the world it is this: Begin in the grassroots of your communities and open your eyes the key problems plaguing your own community. Ask yourself what change you can influence. Right now, the strongest change agents concerning women are stirring underground in the grassroots. They are not our politicians, our churches, or our financial institutions- they are groups of ordinary citizens with a will and objectives.