Global Pulse host Erin Coker has spent the last two weeks strutting the red carpet, interviewing filmmakers and stars for the San Francisco International Film Festival. The festival produces daily coverage for their Scoop Du Jour mini-site. Here, Erin speaks with legendary actor Robert Duvall, directors John Waters and Walter Salles, writer/producer James Schamus and others at SFIFF's Award Night.

Click here to check out all of Erin's videos for SFIFF.

This week marks the beginning of the San Francisco International Film Festival, a must for Link TV fans in San Francisco. On the Link TV blog we'll let you know about some great films screening at the festival that you should look out for in the future, regardless of the city you're in. One of the best things about living in a city like San Francisco is the opportunity to see an international line up of films year round, but we all hope that the Internet will give us more and more chances to connect with world cinema and documentaries.

Earlier this year I was at South by Southwest in Austin, and reviewed the documentaries Marwencol and Life 2.0, which are both screening at SFIFF this week. Marwencol offers not only a glimpse back into our childhood world of make believe, as told through a moving personal story, but stands up as an exploration of folk art and its delicate relationship to the world of its creator.

Also screening this week is The Oath, a riveting documentary portrait of Abu Jandal, Osama bin Laden's bodyguard of four years, and Jandal's brother-in-law Salim Hamdan, who was released from Guantanamo after the landmark case Hamdan v. Rumsfeld Supreme Court. Director Laura Poitras was given striking access to Abu Jandal, and follows him with her camera, even when she's not there in person, as he teaches young students about jihad, drives his taxicab, and slowly reveals to us his past actions and dreams. Jandal is a study in the uneasy balance between religion, pride, and truthtelling - the more we're let into his charismatic world, the less we're able to trust what we're hearing. PBS' POV will premiere The Oath in September.

On the latest Global Pulse episode, host Erin Coker reviews world coverage of the budget crises in both California and Greece. Watch the episode below and share your thoughts!
   
Going to the DMV is never a joyful experience. Due to the budget crisis the trip has become even more excruciating. The State of California has closed DMV offices on the first and third Friday of every month in an effort to save money. This means the offices are more crowded on operating days. This also means it takes even longer for the staff to call your magic number. This might not sound like much, but when you’ve been flipping through a tattered three month-old edition of Better Home and Gardens for two hours, it can feel like a lifetime.

Californians are having to learn to get used to these inconveniences. The budget crisis has affected virtually every interaction citizens have with the state. Bus schedules are slower. State employees are getting their salaries cut. And while all Californians are affected to one degree or another, perhaps the most impacted are students of the state's public universities.

When I started attending San Francisco State in 2004, semester student fees for residents was $1,256.00. In the past six years that number has nearly doubled to $2,370.00. The problem isn’t just that students are now paying more for their education, but that they’re getting less in return. Luckily I had finished school by the end of 2008, before most of the effects of the budget cuts had really been felt. However, for many of my friends still studying at SFSU the budget cuts have taken a toll.

Nicole Dixon is a Cell and Molecular Biology major who started work on her degree in 2004. She’s found it impossible to complete her degree within four years due to budget cuts. “I haven’t been able to get the classes I need each semester. When I did get into classes it was because I had to fight my way in and plead with professors to let me crash them.” She’s also noticed that the budget cuts have affected the quality of her education, “We’ve had fewer classes. Professors have to get all the material crammed into a semester with five less instruction days due to furloughs.”

Even the classrooms themselves have been impacted by the budget crisis. “There aren’t enough chairs in classes. Professors won’t print handouts anymore. There aren’t even markers in some classes to write on the whiteboard,” Dixon said. When asked if she would do it all again she remarked, “Knowing that I couldn’t graduate in at least six years seems unacceptable for a four-year degree. I would have rather gone somewhere where I knew I could get my classes. I thought I’d be in dental school by now.” Nicole isn’t alone. Many Californians are beginning to look for education elsewhere, as the public universities in California continue to face budget cuts.

With attendance being capped at many Cal State Universities, many students don’t even have access to the educational opportunity I had only a few years ago. As bad as California’s economy is now, how will California look twenty years down the line when it doesn’t have the same educated workforce that made it such an innovative place to begin with? The deficit is huge and cuts have to be made, but education is an important investment. It’s not only an investment for students who want better jobs, but also for a state that must continue to nurture its human capital.

Today the San Francisco Film Society announced its program for the upcoming San Francisco International Film Festival. This event is always a must for Link TV viewers in San Francisco, and the festival often features work by directors featured on Link! But this year there's an extra connection -- Link TV partners Method, who created the initial design work for Link's ViewChange.org (beta launching in June), created the festival's trailer and designed all the print materials, including the program. 

You can browse the film selection, and watch the trailer, on the SFIFF website. Documentaries include Marwencol and Life 2.0, both covered on this blog when they screened at South by Southwest earlier this month.

Do you have a health care story? Visit Link TV's Real Conversations webcam site and tell us about it.

Health care reform is the hottest topic in U.S. news media this summer. One question that arises in this debate is whether the government should spend the money to overhaul the old system, or use the money to pay off federal deficits?
 
As one of the 47 million uninsured Americans, I think that the health care system in the U.S. is terrible. I earn barely enough to cover my expenses, and at the end of the month, I am left with very little extra cash to spend on something as important and necessary as health insurance.
 
I looked into buying insurance, and since I’m very healthy with no prior medical conditions, I expected to see insurance premiums of $50 - $85 a month. I was shocked to find that the lowest premiums started at $150 - $200, excluding dental or vision!! There was no way I could afford those prices.
 
Fortunately, I live in San Francisco, a very conscious and progressive city, where two years ago the City and County introduced a program called "Healthy San Francisco." This program covers primary care for all city residents, and the pay structure is based on income. I have now been with this program for one year and, although it doesn’t include major medical care, I’m happy.
 
But I began to wonder what would happen if I broke my leg. Would I be able to afford the hospital bills, or would they bankrupt me? A survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation [PDF link] found that: "Every week, thousands of Americans file for bankruptcy related to medical costs [and] 42% of adults report having problems accessing health care due to cost." I definitely favor a system of health care that benefits everyone, especially those that cannot afford it. After all, the rich will always be able to afford health care whether it is universal or not.

Here’s a cartoon that says it all.
 
How do other developed countries manage their citizens’ health care? PBS Frontline’s "Sick Around the World" website describes how five of the world’s developed nations go about taking care of their sick.
 
A completely socialized health care system might not work in the U.S., but universal care with regulated options that are based on fair-market values just might work. While providing access to all, it will create motivation for insurers and providers to offer the best service they can.
 
In this week's Global Pulse episode, Health Care: America and the World, host John Hamilton asks for your health care stories. Share your thoughts at Link's Real Conversations site!

An Interview from the Sustainable Brands Conference ’09 with Kellie A. McElhaney, PhD, UC Berkeley

PART FOUR: Teach Them Well  & Let Them Lead The Way

Now, if you’ve read the other three parts of this blogpost, you already can see why I’m a huge fan of Kellie McElhaney. Yet, perhaps the biggest reason Kellie is a superstar to me is because she is the rockstar mother of two impressive little girls, who are both part of the same generation I am proud to consider myself a part of – the Millenials. Also know as Generation Y, the Millennials are the largest generation in American history. Born between 1978 and 2000, we are 95 million strong, compared to the 78 million Baby Boomers. A new book, Generation We, explains the emerging power of our Millennial Generation, and shows how WE (and older people who think the way WE do) are poised to change our nation and our world for the better. Take a look at this video or visit www.gen-we.org to see how WE are “politically, socially, and philosophically independent, and are spearheading a period of sweeping change in America and around the world”.

Kellie’s older daughter Isabel (who is nine years old, but Kellie says if you ask her she will tell you she is 9 & 7/8ths, ha ha) is quickly becoming Lioness material, in her own efforts to lead the charge of Gen-We. Little Miss Isabel was very disturbed when a tank-top that her mother had ordered from J. Crew arrived in two large cardboard boxes!!!  She decided to take a picture of the thoughtless packaging and include it with her perturbed letter to the CEO of J. Crew, Mickey Drexler.  Get excited for this one ladies and gentleman.  Little Miss Izzy is a sock-knocker-offer!

(Send this to Mickey Drexler, Okay mama?)

Dear Mr.Drexler,

I have something to tell you about J-Crew. Sorry, it's not the best thing about your company. But, your company is great.

Do you know the story called " The Giving Tree"? Well, in the story, that one tree gives up everything to the boy. Everything. Apples, wood, branches, and even the tree stump. Trees' are very valuable, and if we use them like the boy did, we won't have any. None. Zip. Nada. You probably don't get my point yet, but that's what I'm about to explain.

Packaging isn't the hardest thing. As a matter of fact, it's pretty easy. But sometimes you have to give the easier things more thought. And packaging, is an example. When you are packaging your products, what do you think about?  Do you just do it, and get it done? Or do you stop and think how you can make it even better? A big company like J-Crew affects the world in many ways.

My mom got a tiny shirt, in two big boxes. A way to make that issue better, is this: when you package your next products, think about this: Instead of giving her two, give her one. Or you can find a box that is big enough the product fits, but small enough it doesn't have enough room to get up and walk around.

I think if you try this, you will end up not spending as much money on boxes, as well as gas for your trucks, not killing as many trees and getting better feedback from customers, kids, mail men, anybody.

Sincerely,

Kellie's* daughter, Isabel

P.S. I am nine, please respond and, don't take this personally, because it's not only you.

* Kellie McElhaney, author of JUST GOOD BUSINESS

***

This is the photo Isabel took of the J. Crew packaging that the clothing company used to send one tank top to her mother.  She included it in the letter that she sent to J. Crew’s CEO, Mickey Drexler.

Isabel (right, age 9) and her little sister Juliana McElhaney (age 7).

Now, first of all, I’d like to comment on how impressed I am by the fact that this little girl knows the difference between affect and effect! You can tell she’s a real smarty. And secondly, how about that letter?! I wish we could get her in front of Mr. Drexler personally so she could put him on the spot and ask, “Do you get it yet?” Haha!

When Kellie found out that I wanted to post a whole separate piece on her daughter, she asked me to be sure to not give her too much credit for Isabel. “She really is just a product of her generation. She learns a lot just from growing up in today’s world” said Kelly. A true Millenial, and truly one to follow. I’ll be sure to loop you in as I do.

Having said that, Isabel has still not received any response from Mickey, though she did get two standardized and faceless responses from J. Crew telling her to let “them” know if there is anything else “they” can help her with – to which she responded verbally to her mother, “Yeah! Can you help get me a real response and improve your packaging, hello!?!?!”.

They decided to send Mickey a copy of The Giving Tree, and a copy of Kellie’s book, Just Good Business, The Strategic Guide to Aligning Corporate Responsibility & Brand. Sounds like J. Crew isn’t ready to engage, but hopefully one day… they will. Until then, it’s our job to keep inviting them into the dialogue. I’m so razzled by Isabel’s work, and am making it my goal to do something of similar value this week. However, I might let myself consider this blog enough for now! Time to catch a few Z’s.  Let me know what you decide to take on. I can’t wait to hear about it!

Part One: A Force of Nature

Part Two: Being Effective Is More Important Than Being Right

Part Three: The Rules of Engagement

Back to the CSR Blog homepage

An Interview from the Sustainable Brands Conference ’09 with Kellie A. McElhaney, PhD, UC Berkeley

PART THREE: The Rules of Engagement

Kellie could tell that just like everyone else at Link TV, I am very nervous about how we are going to start accepting corporate sponsorship. I mean, what drew me to want to work for Link TV in the first place was the boundless freedom that our network shelters. No allegiances means no obligations. At Link TV our only obligation has been to tell the truth. 

Similarly, working in academia, Kellie has created a situation for herself where even though she just received a ten million dollar grant from Dow Chemical (which she admits a lot of people really freaked out about), she is protected by academic freedom. So Dow, according to Kellie, in no way can tell her what kind of research Berkeley can publish even if it’s negative towards the company! She suggested that when we start to work with corporations, Link TV must also write in some sort of journalistic freedom clauses, “Something that states clearly to the sponsor what it means for Link TV to accept money from them– here’s how it’s going to be used, here’s the disclaimers, and if we come across some negative information about you (the sponsor), we are going to have to run it, and hopefully you would be responsive.” According to Kellie, a company like Nike would want to respond, because they don’t want to see a chill in the debate, “They know that is how fallacies get spun into realities.”

That last comment prompted me to tell Kellie that I’ve heard that the more money a corporation has, the more they are able to "greenwash" themselves. I explained that it has been difficult for Link TV to really trust even the most reputable rating systems for CSR in our research. Kellie’s response took me by surprise: “You know, I just read a really interesting statistic that greenwashing is more of a phenomenom that media has construed and less of a reality. There are very few companies who are lying, it’s just a stupid strategy. You could lie on your product and there will be one hundred Youtube videos within a minute, or seven thousands tweets, within a MINUTE that will get the truth out! So even though there are bad people in the world, there are very few who will lie or spend money on branding that is a lie, because if they do it they are going to get caught.”

One of Kellie’s rules, which she is pretty adamant about, is to never work with the corporate handlers, whose jobs she says are to often times obscure the truth. She advises going straight to the company itself, ideally the head of CSR, illuminating that PR agencies and the branding people typically don’t know what the company’s CSR strategy is. 

This lack of holisticity made me wonder if I personally have mistaken corporate ignorance for corporate greed, which reminded me to tell Kellie that KoAnn Skrzyniarz, creator of the Sustainable Brands Conference, had told me that she truly believes there are just as many good people in the corporate world as there are bad ones. Kellie said she actually thinks there is more good than bad to corporations, “They have probably just become a little passive in assertive their goodness. Good people don’t get press.”

She reminded me again of the Cisco example, and how she believes Cisco of course would not want to be seen as bad just because they laid off janitors. “They probably have really good numbers on why they had to lay them off, but mainstream media now only provides one sided exposés about why companies do what they do. I’ve always thought media has been part of the problem, so I’m glad you want to be part of the solution.”

As Kellie said, “There is definitely an element of fear, and definitely an element of risk, but it’s going to be different from company to company.” She explained how Walmart tends to be pretty risk-averse, but how even they are changing. “I mean they are in their shareholder meeting this week and it’s all on Youtube and Twitter— It’s amazing how much they are opening up.” 

So we’ve got to be brave and open up too. Trust me, it wasn’t easy to write this!  It didn’t necessarily feel right, but it does feel effective— and that’s the empowering, self-sustaining energy that delivers us down from our towers and onto the grounds where a foundation needs to be built for a better future. Our mission here at Link TV has always been to create cross-cultural understanding.  We cannot stop tearing down fences when it comes to corporate culture. With corporations becoming larger than countries and part of all countries, this type of dialogue is perhaps the most powerful one we will ever have on Link TV.

Part Four: Teach Them Well  & Let Them Lead The Way

Back to the CSR Blog homepage

An Interview from the Sustainable Brands Conference ’09 with Kellie A. McElhaney, PhD, UC Berkeley

PART TWO:  Being Effective Is More Important Than Being Right

One of the things Kellie tries to practice in her personal life in addition to her profession is to “focus on being effective instead of being right”. She told me how when she was growing up, if someone had shown her a chart of the 100 Top Economies in the World, they would’ve all been countries. But now it only takes until you get to number 22 before you see Walmart’s ranking. This means the size of Walmart’s business activity is larger than over 70% of the countries in the world! “So to ignore them and to exclude them, and say, ‘we’re not going to work with them’ is probably not an effective strategy”, Kellie explains. “It might not feel like the right strategy in terms of pure, journalistic freedom, but if our focus is to open up discussion and dialogue, and to do so effectively, we cannot afford to alienate anybody”, says Kellie. Dialogue is really the missing link, which is great to hear since that’s why we decided to call our network by that name, for that very solution extends itself to all of the world’s dilemmas.

But do corporations really want to be dissected by the people, in particular, the informed and influential viewers of Link TV— Us steely citizens who have been digesting the bulbosity of uncompromising programming such as Who Killed the Electric Car and The Corporation?!

Kellie truly believes our corporate neighbors do want to engage and respond to our questions and concerns.  According to her, many of these behemoths value opportunities to rise above the noise and differentiate themselves from their competitors, even if it means having to sit in a hotseat. I was sure to warn her, proudly, that Link TV viewers are people who would truly crank up the heat to sweltering levels...

However, what we’ve been coming to realize is that although the hottest fire yields the purest gold, it is only the coolness of finding solutions that solidifies that gold into something worth its weight. What I’m trying to say here is that these problems we bring to light on Link TV will not be solved on a meaningful scale if we breed
an “us against them” mentality. Link TV has grown to admit that we really need to work together, like David & Goliath. It’s a scary place to be when you’re taking your first step into this unknown territory— Ask Adam Werbach! As the interview continued, Kellie helped me to have faith that we are doing the right thing, in our choice to be effective.

Kellie understandably likes to explain that the effective way to engage is to approach from a position of mutual interest. She uses the giant technology company Cisco as an example. It just so happened that before our interview, KQED had called Kellie and asked her if she could comment on a story about Cisco, and how one of the janitorial services they had been subcontracting had just laid off one of their workers. Justice for Janitors had already started waging a big political campaign against Cisco, and KQED wanted to know if Kellie thought that was an effective strategy.

Kellie’s killer response was that “It depends on what the goal is. If you want Cisco to engage with you, then no.  Why not just have a conversation? Instead of starting out from a polarized position and saying, ‘Cisco, you are evil! You are laying off the poor working man’, why not approach them in the spirit of mutual concern and figure out how it might be possible to come together around that common agenda. They will not agree all of the time, but you don’t just break up because you have one disagreement.”

I started to imagine how Link TV could facilitate this type of dialogue. I agree with Kellie when she rhetorically exclaimed, “where has it ever been written that it is inherently socially irresponsible to lay somebody off?” She pointed out that the world goes through economic cycles. We are obviously in a recession right now. Kellie continued, “Cisco is laying off their own people, so it makes sense that everyone who contracts to Cisco is going to have to lay some people off too.” 

What would it be like if Cisco had the chance to explain this on Link TV? How would you respond? Tell us what you think! You are the missing link!

And I’m a closet rapper  ; )

Part Three: The Rules of Engagement

Back to the CSR Blog homepage