Segal founded the Philadelphia Gay News – Believes to be one of the oldest of its kind, an LGBTQ weekly – in 1976long before most people even knew homosexuals, even less interested in LGBTQ media. The Stonewall riots, which launched the gay rights movement, had taken place six years earlier. Segal created the publication in the hope of improving communication both within the LGBTQ community and outside.
Over time, Segal's paper has grown in importance and importance. Segal believed in real practice, serious journalism, covering communities traditionally ignored by the mainstream media. Hillary Clinton She wrote an editorial in the publication in 2016, for the first time that a large presidential candidate wrote an editorial for an LGBTQ newspaper. Philadelphia Gay News always exists, providing added value at a time when the average LGBTQ person can sometimes feel as if state of decline.
Segal did more than just find a weekly. He was at Stonewall riots. He was known LGBTQ activist as early as 1972, when he was thrown out of a TV dance contest to dance with a male partner. After this show, Segal began to crush the series of other television programs, or to "zap" them, as I called it. In 1973, Segal jumped ahead of Walter Cronkite, the legendary presenter of the news, with a sign saying "Gays Protest CBS Prejudice".
Later, Cronkite made arrangements for Segal to meet the top management of the CSB and discuss ways to improve their gay coverage. A year later, Cronkite produced a complete segment on gay rights.
Segal founded The National Gay Press Association and the National Gay Newspaper Guild, which serve LGBTQ journalists and LGBTQ newspapers, have been inducted into the Hall of Fame of the National Association of Gay and Lesbian Journalists.
Mashable has been talking to the media pioneer about his accomplishments and his confidence in the future.
This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.
Mark Segal: The obvious answer is to be a participant in Stonewall, but it was the beginning of my life as a "gay activist". At that time it did not exist, nor a salary that went with it. You did it by passion. Although many would like to make (Stonewall) my legacy, personally, my campaign against the media to end the invisibility of LGBTs is high on the list. I think this has been a theme in my life.
I was among those who founded the Gay Liberation Front from the ashes of Stonewall (Editor's Note: The Gay Liberation Front was formed as a group of homosexual activists who organized marches, formed awareness groups and published a newspaper following the Stonewall riots). I created a committee of young homosexuals to deal with the issues facing LGBT youth, including a 24-hour hotline in 1970.
MS: Andy Warhol said everyone would be famous for 15 minutes. Social media has only 15 tweets, or likes. With the Trump administration trying to reduce the gains made by our community, especially with trans questionsit's time to not just scream. We must act.
And as we did at Stonewall and what TAKE ACTION made for AIDS (Editor's note: ACT UP is an organization created in response to the AIDS crisis that prompted the medical community and government to respond.), we must start again. We need to be creative in responding to bigots, bullies and bad guys. We should be united with other communities. This battle does not only concern LGBT people, it concerns the race, it concerns women's rights, immigration rights. Social justice is not just about a cause.
MS: It taught me how to fight back and end invisibility for our community – lessons I learned Philadelphia Gay News award-winning LGBT media. We believe in news and impactful comments.
MS: Until 1967, LGBT media were scarce, mainly newsletters of small "gay rights" organizations. Then in 1967, a raid on a gay bar called The Black Cat in L.A. leads to the discovery of L & # 39; lawyer, the first major national LGBT news publication (Editor's Note: Activists founded The Advocate after the raid inspired the wave of organizing). The majority of LGBT media are born of local activism.
I now hope that LGBT journalism will become more local, local, local … You can get news and national information on thousands of websites on the web. We need original stories that we have and can not be found elsewhere.
MS: For an old man, too.
MS: To help my community learn that she has to see things big, have a great vision and not be afraid to get in front of people for that to happen. This is the spirit of Stonewall.
Read other stories of the month of pride:
(tagsToTranslate) media (t) culture (t) activism (t) lgbtq-rights (t) pride-month-2019 (t) social-good identities (t)</pre></pre>
For those who believe in Ford, to see Kavanaugh on the same list as it is more than an insult: it's a cruel reminder that even at the time of #MeToo, men credibly accused of aggression can nevertheless come to power while being celebrated and celebrated. the most influential people in the world (see also: Donald J. Trump).
Leaving the Republican Majority Leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, praising Kavanaugh's character, citing his "resilience", his "loyal devotion to family and friends" and his "unwavering respect for the law," which comes back to cast a shadow on Ford's claim, but also the profile Senator Kamala Harris, a Democrat, wrote for him.
When we read next to the entry of Kavanaugh, who describes the congressional hearings as "unbridled partisanship", one has the impression that the powerful have once again failed at Ford. Harris writes that Ford made an "unfathomable sacrifice" by testifying and that Kavanaugh's inclusion on the list is another example of how it will surely cost Ford more than most can imagine.
Honoring Ford and Kavanaugh pretty much in the same breath also reveals how much American culture makes it difficult and even difficult to fully believe survivors of sexual assault. There is no difference here in acknowledging Ford's courage and then projecting Kavanaugh from the same heroic angle. Either you believe Ford or you do not believe it.
No proofs that this happens at an alarming rate, the public always finds it hard to accept the fact that accomplished and charming men, who have the trust of their family, friends and peers can also be capable of acts odious. Put Kavanaugh on the The weather 100 reflects a deep collective resistance to admit that predatory behavior has nothing to do with the curriculum vitae or social status of a man; it is his will to abuse the power he holds.
Perhaps The weatherThe own writers have had difficulty answering this question. They argue perhaps that the list does not constitute an endorsement of the individual presented, but a recognition of his influence. They may have feared that the choice between Ford or Kavanaugh would lead to accusations of media bias. Instead, including both numbers led some The critics to see The weatherThis choice is a damning example of the media obsession to present "both sides" of an argument.
TIME magazine presenting Christine Blasey Ford alongside the man who sexually assaulted her is at its height, and I am so tired.
– Jessica Valenti (@JessicaValenti) April 17, 2019
It is also interesting to note that none of the entries actually indicate what happened: Ford accused Kavanaugh and Kavanaugh accused. If you were not familiar with the story, you would not know it. The weather list both a victim and his attacker. It The weather could not bring himself to print these details, or insist successfully that McConnell and Harris include them, suggests that the magazine wanted to avoid controversy as much as possible.
Mashable reaches out to The weather for comments, but the publication has not yet provided an explanation for its decision.
It does not matter why The weather We chose to include Ford and Kavanaugh on the same list. This decision sends a discouraging message to survivors who see that it is possible, even acceptable, to encourage victims who are fighting for justice while saluting the accused as the leader of our time. This unexpected combination of encouragement and foolishness may well convince some victims that making themselves known is not worth the trouble, which has been rendered in a new and painful way.
In this respect, we can only hope that the The weather 100 This list is much less influential than it aspires to be.
The host of Justice with Judge Jeanine on Fox News is off and would have been suspended. After its weekly show was not aired on Saturday night, CNN reported Sunday, via "a source family in the matter," that the network has closed for an indeterminate amount of time.
The move comes one week after Pirro opened his episode of March 9 with a few words for the representative Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) And the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi. At one point during this nearly 10-minute speech, Pirro focused on the Omar hijab, a headgear worn by some Muslim women.
Pirro suggested that Omar's religious beliefs – the total of which is communicated by his decision to wear a hijab, in the eyes of the Fox animator – put it at odds with the United States. Constitution. The flashback came quickly.
As of March 12, at least four advertisers had fledaccording to The Hollywood journalist. Fox even made the rare act of issuing a statement: "We strongly condemn Jeanine Pirro's comments about Representative Ilhan Omar, they do not reflect those of the network and we approached the issue directly with her."
That's all the network had to say on the subject, but the eyebrows raised when the Pirro show was not broadcast on Saturday. Even Donald Trump himself has noticed, spending some of his Sunday morning, executive time on Twitter defend it.
Fox News neither confirmed nor denied any suspension or dismissal in CNN's report, nor did it say whether it would return on March 23 (CNN source noted that Pirro was not fired, so take it to its true value.)
It's worthless: this whole story of songs with Fox News disengaging publicly as unconfirmed reports arise around his internal decisions seems familiar. It reminds me of the new fires that took flight in November 2018 when the network suddenly stopped updating several Twitter accounts, including its main Fox News channel (which still has more than 18 million followers).
All this song and dance seems familiar.
Just as what is happening now, all we know comes from anonymous sources. The reports at the time suggest that the sudden stop of Twitter was a kind of silent protest. This occurred after protesters who showed up at Tucker Carlson, the Fox News host, posted his address (publicly available, please note) on Twitter. The network reportedly felt that Twitter had not acted quickly enough to remove the offending tweets.
That's why the Fox News Twitter account has been silent since November 8th, or an unconfirmed report on the topic you have stated. The network has not said a word publicly about it, but – if you believe the reports, most of which come from reputable news sources, someone (or more people) speaks / talks obviously.
We now see a similar situation taking shape with Pirro. The news of the current repercussions is there, but the network has taken no public action to explain its response outside of a vague condemnation.
Why should he? Think of it from Fox News's point of view. The majority of viewers in the network share Trump's view that the mainstream media is "false information" and an "enemy of the people". They do not trust the media, but they trust Fox.
It is therefore risky for the network to act publicly in these situations, be it to admit an act of protest or to accept responsibility for an embarrassing moment. Information is allowed to "flee" to conventional media sources – "false information", to most Fox viewers – while the network itself says nothing, subtly reinforcing the doubts of its viewers.
It's a real toddler-to-eat-to-eat. "Leaks" manage more mainstream public relations messages for mainstream media, while silence among Fox News viewers just wants to see the network continue to own libraries.
Here is what we know for sure, namely the current and provable facts: Pirro's offensive comments about Omar and, more generally, Islamic beliefs have cost its advertisers dearly. Fox News opposed the madness with a vague promise "we solved the problem with it directly," and then his show was not aired on Saturday.
This is perhaps the extent of Pirro's punishment for this transgression. Instead of getting angry at his seemingly light wrist, I urge you to look at the bigger picture.
Watch what Fox News does and how it works in a post-Trump world. Take note of the controversy that is emerging around the network and really think about who will benefit when internal sources hand over cops to CNN, New York Magazine, or literally any mainstream media not called Fox News.
My brain is melted from a new attack and takes. I realized that I am overwhelmed and that the only way to catch my breath is to cut something. I have therefore opened my podcast application for the last time in the foreseeable future.
This does not mean that I give up listening to things about my trips or my many walks with a hyperactive dog. There is more music available at my fingertips than I could ever hope to hear, and I also donate to audio books to help get those cold and windy walks through the winter of the year. 39; Ohio.
My farewells to podcasts did not come easily. After all, they are extremely interesting and entertaining, like a personalized chat radio station that mixes topics that speak directly to my soul. But the moment has come to give my soul (and my spirit) a break. I have to recover those hours and spend them doing something other than trying to stuff even more information into an already overloaded brain.
The problem is this: I could listen to two-speed podcasts every minute of my week without waking up, but I still would not intend to destroy the stack of all episodes accumulated in my queue. It's the result of something good: my enthusiasm for so many things. But somewhere along the line, things went wrong.
Part of the problem is that I have tried to stay abreast of political news in a particularly volatile environment. I've recently written for this site even on the political podcasts I listenedso there is always something in the queue. All of the analytical discussion of the FiveThirtyEight political podcast to the Associated Press report "Ground game. "
These seem to me essential to keep me informed of the latest news. all goes into the political world. And that does not include the new series of daily news podcasts that breaks down everything that just happened, like the New York Times& # 39; People & # 39;The daily"podcast and the Washington Postis "Post reports.
However, I can really only absorb too much. And I'm certainly not alone. It is an extension of a larger problem that many of us have treated as minds. Burnout on the bad news has been a problem for years but it's even more widespread Now, given the volatility of the news cycle we are experiencing – climate change, North Korea, Trump, etc. It's also nourished by how we consume the news in an endless flow of television, radio, digital video, social media and, yes, podcasts.
There are so many entries that if you do not adjust, you may not be in the flow of information anymore. As a person who lives and writes on the Internet all day, I am extremely aware of this reality and, at least for me, one of the easiest ways to ease the flow is to cut podcasts.
The overload of podcasts has been a problem that people have explored, especially podcasts have become more popular. In August 2017, the ringtone watched why listen for your podcasts on hyper-speed (like, um, I do) really does not help. And in October 2017, Siren Bergman of The Cut explored the pros and cons to stuff all those podcasts in your head in a given week.
None of the suggestions I found for balance worked for me. I have tried listening to many podcasts at double speed and less podcasts at normal speed and I have not offered the solution I was looking for either. Even reducing a significant amount did not go around: I keep coming back for more. I've therefore decided that the best thing for me to do is just leave the cold turkey.
News and politics are not the only things I've done in my headphones. I've been a big fan of music podcasts for years, especially for my favorite jam bands: the Grateful Dead band "Brokedown Podcast"and three Phishrelated podcasts. Throw in "Pod Dylan, "which analyzes a different song from Bob Dylan every episode, and I have hours of great material every week.
You can also add to the stack the countless sports podcasts I subscribe to. There are three different Chicago Cubs podcasts, then half a dozen other baseball podcasts. In addition to that, there are some podcasts on football like "(New Orleans) Saints Happy Hour Podcast, "then the ESPN"30 for 30"Podcast series, collect everything and you get a pile of podcasts that accumulate like in the old numbers of the New Yorker.
That's another problem: these podcasts are supposed to be informative, but they must be fun. Hearing the hosts blow, for example, in front of a terrible episode of the Super Bowl that does not change anything to the in-depth analysis of a breathtaking series of Phish broadcasts, is supposed to help reduce the stress that it accumulates in my brain.
Instead, see the episodes accumulate and know that I will never touch them, only the pressure in my head. And how many sponsored posts can I really listen to before breaking down and getting my own meal kit subscription?
I want to stay informed. I would like to hear the latest analysis of promising prospects for baseball or what exactly Bob Dylan's dark side B means, because that really interests me. But even when I was stopped listening to every episode and I was getting harder, listening to only the episodes I really wanted to check, the stress did not really go away.
At one point, the anxiety of missing something, no matter what, was getting bigger than the excitement of hearing a new episode of a podcast. Every episode I ignored could be a gold nugget that I would never have heard. Was there a great anecdote about Phish's latest Madison Square Garden show about a revelation that will shake up life around 1972 in Dead show in one of the episodes I missed?
This pervasive fear of failure (FOMO) has become the main obstacle both to listen to and finally to give up podcasts.
I want to to follow. At a time when information moves incredibly fast, I want to be at the forefront. In addition, there is also the not insignificant fear of being left behind in cultural conversation.
A few years ago, I was able to follow the zeitgeist "Serial", devouring every episode as soon as it fell. In 2019, there are so many of these podcasts that I probably can not follow. "O-Town"I fell after several episodes and I never caught up with him.Dirty john"and"Slow combustion. "
But I got pissed on it, still downloading the episodes and telling myself that, yes, tomorrow was TOTALLY the day I would dive and catch up with what everyone was talking about on Twitter.
Which peer-driven FOMO podcast should I listen to?
– Derek Hiebert (@derekhiebert) February 19, 2019
The more these episodes accumulated, the more I became stressed. But there are not enough hours in the day. And the truth is that I have a very bad memory. I have probably forgotten more fascinating anecdotes and revelations that I was looking for than in my memories. So what do I really miss in the end?
There is a break point for everyone and I finally got mine shortly after the new year, when the lighter load of holidays has fallen and the cycle of the new has been revived. When Roger Stone was finally charged as part of the Mueller case investigation, the depletion struck just when the press cycle exploded, including included a series of "emergency podcasts" on the subject.
In the days that followed, I watched the deluge of reactionary podcasts arrive, but I found that the urgent need to click on "play" was erasing. Between the news I already gleaned from social media and the stories I read, this fear of missing something was not as strong as it was before.
Maybe it was Trump's overload, maybe it was something about Stone himself – a really disgusting quack – that discouraged me. Anyway, over the days, I did not feel the same desire to learn more. The plug was broken and it was easier to let the other podcasts slide until I realized I was not missing at all.
When I talked about my sabbatical podcast to a friend, they asked me why I let myself go to turkey rather than just shrink? I understand that sounds extreme, but it's a mix of two things: the need to give my brain a break every day and hope for a fresh start.
And I plan to stay there. I've already gone through some audio books and downloaded an extra half dozen in my local library. I have no desire to give up the quieter and more consistent listening experience of these books for a return to the chaotic world of podcasts.
Will anything ever happen to hold me back? Maybe if and when the Mueller report finally falls, I can see it coming back to the pool for an episode or two of analysis. The same goes for a major action of one of my sports teams. (Say, the Cubs have suddenly signed the signature of the star of independent agent Bryce Harper.)
But, for now, I'm done. Maybe my brain will be smooth over the next few months will put me in a better position to return to a reduced podcast entry in time for, say, the 2020 presidential election.
Even in this case, I will have to wade slowly in the shallow end. If I come back, I know I will feel much better about overload and selectivity management, making sure that what I choose would really be good for me and something that I could really appreciate. FOMO, be damned.