“Bennifer” buried as Ben Affleck’s star soars

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – It has taken 10 years of hard work and indie movies, but Ben Affleck finally has moved past his “Bennifer” nightmare.

Affleck, 40, once a tabloid staple who risked becoming a laughingstock during his romance with Jennifer Lopez and their movie flop “Gigli,” is back on top in Hollywood, winning accolades for his work both in front of and behind the camera.

Fifteen years after Affleck shared an Oscar with Matt Damon for their first screenplay, “Good Will Hunting,” buzz is building over a likely second Academy Award nomination next month. It would be Affleck’s first since 1997.

“Finally, people now are ready to go, ‘Wow! He’s at the very top of the food chain,’” Damon told Reuters.

Affleck’s latest film “Argo,” a part-thriller, part-comedic tale of the real-life rescue of six American diplomats from Iran in 1980, this week picked up five Golden Globe nominations and a nod from the Screen Actors Guild for its top prize of best ensemble cast.

The film, which Affleck directed, produced and stars in, has also delighted critics and brought in some $ 160 million at the worldwide box office.

In “Argo,” Affleck’s clean-cut looks are hidden under a long, shaggy 1970s hair cut and beard as he plays CIA officer Tony Mendez, who devised a fake film project to spirit six hostages out of Tehran after the Islamic revolution.

The kudos Affleck is now receiving follows the embarrassing headlines he attracted over his 2002-2004 romance with Lopez.

“It was tough to watch him get kicked in the teeth for all those years because the perception of him was so not who he actually was,” Damon said.

“It was upsetting for a lot of his friends because he’s the smartest, funnest, nicest, kindest, incredibly talented guy. … So that was tough. Now I’m just thrilled. … He deserves everything that he’s going to get,” he added.

With a huge, pink diamond engagement ring for Lopez and gossip about matching Rolls Royces, the pair dubbed “Bennifer” starred in the 2003 comedy romance “Gigli,” which earned multiple Razzie awards for the worst comedy of the year.

SELLING MAGAZINES NOT MOVIES

Damon, by contrast, was seeing his career surge with “The Bourne Identity,” “Syriana” and “The Departed.” But he recalls Affleck’s pain.

“He said (to me), ‘I am in the absolute worst place you can be. I sell magazines, not movie tickets.’ I remember our agent called up the editor of Us Weekly, begging her not to put him on the cover any more. Please stop. Just stop,” Damon said.

About a year after splitting with Lopez, Affleck married actress Jennifer Garner, had the first of three children with her, and started writing and directing small but admired movies like “Gone Baby Gone” in 2007 and 2010′s gritty crime film “The Town.”

Last month, Affleck was named Entertainment Weekly’s entertainer of the year, largely on the back of “Argo.”

The actor-turned-director said that managing the various tones of the film was his hardest challenge.

“I had to synthesize comedic elements and the political stuff and this true-life drama thriller story. … It was scary and it was daunting,” Affleck told Reuters, saying he powered through by “overworking it by a multiple of ten.”

A trip to the Oscars ceremony in February is now considered a shoo-in by awards pundits, but Affleck is not convinced that success is sweeter the second time around.

“It’s harder. On the one hand, coming from obscurity, you have a neutral starting place. Because of the tabloid press and over exposure, I was starting from a deficit,” he said.

“It can be very unpleasant to be in the midst of a lot of ugliness. But I just put my head down and decided … I was going to work as hard as I could, and I never let the possibility enter my mind that I might fail – at least consciously. Subconsciously, I knew I could fail and I was really scared, so it made me work harder.”

(Additional reporting by Zorianna Kit; Editing by Will Dunham)

Celebrity News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Read More..

School Yoga Class Draws Religious Protest From Christians

T. Lynne Pixley for The New York Times

Miriam Ruiz during a yoga class last week at Paul Ecke Central Elementary School in Encinitas, Calif. A few dozen parents are protesting that the program amounts to religious indoctrination.

ENCINITAS, Calif. — By 9:30 a.m. at Paul Ecke Central Elementary School, tiny feet were shifting from downward dog pose to chair pose to warrior pose in surprisingly swift, accurate movements. A circle of 6- and 7-year-olds contorted their frames, making monkey noises and repeating confidence-boosting mantras.

Jackie Bergeron’s first-grade yoga class was in full swing.

“Inhale. Exhale. Peekaboo!” Ms. Bergeron said from the front of the class. “Now, warrior pose. I am strong! I am brave!”

Though the yoga class had a notably calming effect on the children, things were far from placid outside the gymnasium.

A small but vocal group of parents, spurred on by the head of a local conservative advocacy group, has likened these 30-minute yoga classes to religious indoctrination. They say the classes — part of a comprehensive program offered to all public school students in this affluent suburb north of San Diego — represent a violation of the First Amendment.

After the classes prompted discussion in local evangelical churches, parents said they were concerned that the exercises might nudge their children closer to ancient Hindu beliefs.

Mary Eady, the parent of a first grader, said the classes were rooted in the deeply religious practice of Ashtanga yoga, in which physical actions are inextricable from the spiritual beliefs underlying them.

“They’re not just teaching physical poses, they’re teaching children how to think and how to make decisions,” Ms. Eady said. “They’re teaching children how to meditate and how to look within for peace and for comfort. They’re using this as a tool for many things beyond just stretching.”

Ms. Eady and a few dozen other parents say a public school system should not be leading students down any particular religious path. Teaching children how to engage in spiritual exercises like meditation familiarizes young minds with certain religious viewpoints and practices, they say, and a public classroom is no place for that.

Underlying the controversy is the source of the program’s financing. The pilot project is supported by the Jois Foundation, a nonprofit organization founded in memory of Krishna Pattabhi Jois, who is considered the father of Ashtanga yoga.

Dean Broyles, the president and chief counsel of the National Center for Law and Policy, a nonprofit law firm that champions religious freedom and traditional marriage, according to its Web site, has dug up quotes from Jois Foundation leaders, who talk about the inseparability of the physical act of yoga from a broader spiritual quest. Mr. Broyles argued that such quotes betrayed the group’s broader evangelistic purpose.

“There is a transparent promotion of Hindu religious beliefs and practices in the public schools through this Ashtanga yoga program,” he said.

“The analog would be if we substituted for this program a charismatic Christian praise and worship physical education program,” he said.

The battle over yoga in schools has been raging for years across the country but has typically focused on charter schools, which receive public financing but set their own curriculums.

The move by the Encinitas Union School District to mandate yoga classes for all students who do not opt out has elevated the discussion. And it has split an already divided community.

The district serves the liberal beach neighborhoods of Encinitas, including Leucadia, where Paul Ecke Central Elementary is, as well as more conservative inland communities. On the coast, bumper stickers reading “Keep Leucadia Funky” are borne proudly. Farther inland, cars are more likely to feature the Christian fish symbol, and large evangelical congregations play an important role in shaping local philosophy.

Opponents of the yoga classes have started an online petition to remove the course from the district’s curriculum. They have shown up at school board meetings to denounce the program, and Mr. Broyles has threatened to sue if the board does not address their concerns.

The district has stood firm. Tim Baird, the schools superintendent, has defended the yoga classes as merely another element of a broader program designed to promote children’s physical and mental well-being. The notion that yoga teachers have designs on converting tender young minds to Hinduism is incorrect, he said.

“That’s why we have an opt-out clause,” Mr. Baird said. “If your faith is such that you believe that simply by doing the gorilla pose, you’re invoking the Hindu gods, then by all means your child can be doing something else.”

Ms. Eady is not convinced.

“Yoga poses are representative of Hindu deities and Hindu stories about the actions and interactions of those deities with humans,” she said. “There’s content even in the movement, just as with baptism there’s content in the movement.”

Russell Case, a representative of the Jois Foundation, said the parents’ fears were misguided.

“They’re concerned that we’re putting our God before their God,” Mr. Case said. “They’re worried about competition. But we’re much closer to them than they think. We’re good Christians that just like to do yoga because it helps us to be better people.”

Read More..

Microsoft Battles Google by Hiring Political Brawler Mark Penn

SEATTLE — Mark Penn made a name for himself in Washington by bulldozing enemies of the Clintons. Now he spends his days trying to do the same to Google, on behalf of its archrival Microsoft.

Since Mr. Penn was put in charge of “strategic and special projects” at Microsoft in August, much of his job has involved efforts to trip up Google, which Microsoft has failed to dislodge from its perch atop the lucrative Internet search market.

Drawing on his background in polling, data crunching and campaigning, Mr. Penn created a holiday commercial that has been running during Monday Night Football and other shows, in which Microsoft criticizes Google for polluting the quality of its shopping search results with advertisements. “Don’t get scroogled,” it warns. His other projects include a blind taste test, Coke-versus-Pepsi style, of search results from Google and Microsoft’s Bing.

The campaigns by Mr. Penn, 58, a longtime political operative known for his brusque personality and scorched-earth tactics, are part of a broader effort at Microsoft to give its marketing the nimbleness of a political campaign, where a candidate can turn an opponent’s gaffe into a damaging commercial within hours. They are also a sign of the company’s mounting frustration with Google after losing billions of dollars a year on its search efforts, while losing ground to Google in the browser and smartphones markets and other areas.

Microsoft has long attacked Google from the shadows, whispering to regulators, journalists and anyone else who would listen that Google was a privacy-violating, anticompetitive bully. The fruits of its recent work in this area could come next week, when the Federal Trade Commission is expected to announce the results of its antitrust investigation of Google, a case that echoes Microsoft’s own antitrust suit in the 1990s. A similar investigation by the European Union is also wrapping up. A bad outcome for Google in either one would be a victory for Microsoft.

But Microsoft, based in Redmond, Wash., has realized that it cannot rely only on regulators to scrutinize Google — which is where Mr. Penn comes in. He is increasing the urgency of Microsoft’s efforts and focusing on their more public side.

In an interview, Mr. Penn said companies underestimated the importance of policy issues like privacy to consumers, as opposed to politicians and regulators. “It’s not about whether they can get them through Washington,” he said. “It’s whether they can get them through Main Street.”

Jill Hazelbaker, a Google spokeswoman, declined to comment on Microsoft’s actions specifically, but said that while Google also employed lobbyists and marketers, “our focus is on Google and the positive impact our industry has on society, not the competition.”

In Washington, Mr. Penn is a lightning rod. He developed a relationship with the Clintons as a pollster during President Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign, when he helped identify the value of “soccer moms” and other niche voter groups.

As chief strategist for Hillary Clinton’s unsuccessful 2008 campaign for president, he conceived the “3 a.m.” commercial that raised doubts about whether Barack Obama, then a senator, was ready for the Oval Office. Mr. Penn argued in an essay he wrote for Time magazine in May that “negative ads are, by and large, good for our democracy.”

But his approach has ended up souring many of his professional relationships. He left Mrs. Clinton’s campaign after an uproar about his consulting work for the government of Colombia, which was seeking the passage of a trade treaty with the United States that Mrs. Clinton, then a senator, opposed.

“Google should be prepared for everything but the kitchen sink thrown at them,” said a former colleague who worked closely with Mr. Penn in politics and spoke on condition of anonymity. “Actually, they should be prepared for the kitchen sink to be thrown at them, too.”

Hiring Mr. Penn demonstrates how seriously Microsoft is taking this fight, said Michael A. Cusumano, a business professor at M.I.T. who co-wrote a book about Microsoft’s browser war.

“They’re pulling out all the stops to do whatever they can to halt Google’s advance, just as their competition did to them,” Professor Cusumano said. “I suppose that if Microsoft can actually put a doubt in people’s mind that Google isn’t unbiased and has become some kind of evil empire, they might very well get results.”

Nick Wingfield reported from Seattle and Claire Cain Miller from San Francisco.

Read More..

The last call for a skid row era at King Eddy Saloon

Wire-thin and slumped like a question mark, James Maley nurses a watered-down whiskey at the battered bar inside the King Eddy Saloon. Around him a boisterous crowd presses in. Maley taps a cracked fingernail nervously on his glass and stares warily at the newcomers.

They've come to see novelist John Fante's son, Dan Fante, read at the bar that inspired his father's 1939 classic "Ask the Dust." They're also here to experience skid row's last dive bar before it shuts down for renovations on Sunday.

"If this happened every day, I would never show up," says Maley, who lives in transitional housing a few blocks away.

Other time-worn regulars, many with leathery skin, bad teeth and watchful eyes, nod in agreement. The bar provides home and family for those who have neither. They come for community and to spend what little money they have on plastic pitchers of beer and $2.50 gin and tonics.

PHOTOS: Last Call at King Eddy Saloon

When the Fante reading ends, the interlopers quickly disperse.

"There go the slummers," says John Tottenham, a poet who has been coming to the King Eddy since the 1980s.

Chances are the crowds will be back when the bar reopens under new management. The owners plan to use old photos to restore the bar's Midcentury look. They hope to renovate the abandoned speak-easy in the basement and open the bar's windows that are covered by stucco, letting natural light into the place for the first time in decades.

They haven't finalized their plans, but one thing is for sure. Drinks won't come cheap at the new King Eddy.

The bar is located on the corner of 5th and Los Angeles streets in the King Edward Hotel, which was built in 1906 and was a tony destination for visitors to what was once a thriving commercial district. The hotel now provides low-income housing for many of King Eddy's regulars.

The pre-Prohibition era King Eddy is painted black. With neon beer signs providing most of its light, the room is dim and gloomy. Its black-and-white checkered floor is grimy. Plastic beer flags hang from the ceiling and the place smells of stale smoke and disinfectant.

The bar itself, shaped in a square, commands the center of the room, with cracked vinyl banquettes lining the perimeter. A glassed-in smoking space is set off to the side. Behind the bar is a tiny fluorescent-lighted kitchen where prepackaged burgers, pizza and sandwiches are heated in a microwave. A beer and burrito would set a person back only $4.

Next week, Maley and the other dislodged drinkers will have to find another bar, but they face a new downtown landscape of high-end mixology bars, restaurants and Brazilian waxing salons.

"I haven't the faintest idea where they'll go," says bar manager Bill Roller, 75, who has worked at the King Eddy for more than 30 years.

King Eddy opened in 1933 and has one of the oldest liquor licenses in the city. It was favored not only by Fante, but also by writers such as Charles Bukowski and James M. Cain for its lack of pretension and colorful clientele.

PHOTOS: Last Call at King Eddy Saloon

"The King Eddy Saloon is the last stand in a world that's completely lost to us — and that's skid row in the 1950s sense, a place where itinerant and semi-skilled laborers could find work seasonally," says downtown historian Richard Schave, who founded the Los Angeles Visionaries Assn., which staged the Fante event.

The bar has been owned by the same family for three generations. Dustin Croick took over in 2008 after his father, Rob, was badly injured in a car accident on his way home from the bar one night. Rob Croick, who has since died, managed the King Eddy for his father, Babe, who bought the bar in the 1960s with money he earned running downtown parking lots.

"This place has been a dive bar since I've been coming here as a kid with my dad, ordering milk and sitting on that stool," says Dustin Croick, 27.

In recent years, Croick has been trying to attract a more mainstream clientele. He started a website that played up the bar's hard-luck roots and featured a catchphrase he coined: "Where nobody gives a … about your name." He tried to lure the producers of the television show "Bar Rescue" to shoot a segment there, but the building's previous owners would not allow the filming.

Read More..

Why We Fight to <em>Keep</em> Registered Sex Offenders Online

Believing that human trafficking is worsened by the internet’s anonymity, the sponsors of California’s Proposition 35 thought they had a simple solution to combatting the problem: require convicted traffickers to register as sex offenders. Then require all individuals on California’s sex offender registry to disclose their online identities and service providers.

The measure passed in the November election with 81 percent voter approval. This isn’t surprising, since Prop. 35 also increases criminal penalties for trafficking, uses criminal fines to fund victim services organizations, and mandates more law-enforcement training on human trafficking. But the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the ACLU of Northern California sued, challenging the constitutionality of the reporting requirements – and this Monday, a federal court will hear arguments about whether it should continue to block the measure’s implementation.

Because in its zeal to restrict free speech online for some, Prop. 35 actually restricts free speech for all.

In a way, making the legal arguments is going to be the easy part. The harder battle is convincing the hearts and minds of those who aren’t on the California sex offender registry to understand the implications of passing such laws. Especially if people believe that the EFF and ACLU, in fighting this measure, are defending pedophiles.

Challenging Prop. 35 isn’t about defending “pedophiles” – not everyone on the registry is a pedophile, let alone a sex trafficker. More importantly, challenging Prop. 35 is really about defending free speech online.

The government needs to keep its hands off internet speech, allowing the web to remain a place where ideas and expression can flow freely. Anonymous speech is an important First Amendment right, and has always been a way to promote a robust exchange of ideas – allowing people to speak their minds freely without worry about retaliation or societal isolation.

This includes even unpopular speech by unpopular speakers.

The right to free speech is not determined by balancing the societal costs and benefits of the speech or speaker, as the Supreme Court emphasized recently. That balancing was already done long ago when our country decided the benefit of restricting the government’s ability to silence people or ideas outweighed the costs. That judgment can’t now be changed just because people don’t like some speech or speakers.

Excluding wholesale a group of people from speaking anonymously questions the judgment of having this robust freedom in the first place. No one will ever agree with every speaker or every message, so everyone must have the ability to participate in online speech.

But it’s not just organizations like EFF and ACLU who should worry about this: You should worry, too. When the government starts gathering online profiles for a large class of people, everyone needs to be concerned. As history shows, what starts as small data collection inevitably grows.

Just consider the evolution of the DNA Act: It now authorizes law enforcement to take DNA samples from anyone in the criminal justice system. When Congress first passed the law over a decade ago, it allowed DNA collection only from people convicted of violent federal crimes like murder. But over time, Congress expanded the law, allowing collection of DNA from individuals convicted of any crime – violent or not. And then Congress expanded it again to require DNA collection from any arrested individual not yet convicted of a crime. In other words: DNA collection now includes people who are still presumed innocent. States soon followed the federal government’s lead, helping to create the massive DNA repository that exists today … almost 10 million samples and growing.

It’s not just organizations like EFF and ACLU who should worry: You should, too.

It’s therefore critical to nip these speech restrictions in the bud before they expand.

Eliminating one group’s ability to speak online sets a very dangerous precedent for everyone. It’s also a serious attack on one of the most fundamental rights of our Constitution, which becomes clear when examining the legal issues of Prop. 35 more closely:

It violates the First Amendment. By eviscerating the right to speak anonymously anywhere on the web, the measure allows law enforcement to capture usernames on sites not remotely connected to criminal activity – like Yelp or Amazon.com. It also eliminates the ability to speak anonymously on newspaper comment sections or political websites. And because it applies to all registrants, and California has a lifetime registration requirement that applies retroactively, Prop. 35 even restricts the speech of individuals whose convictions were years ago. It restricts the speech of those who did not even use the internet to commit their crimes.

It is overbroad and unconstitutional. Laws that prohibit speech are required to be narrowly tailored for their policy goals. But Prop. 35 fails this test miserably because the reporting requirement captures too much speech from too many people. According to the California Attorney General’s estimate, it would affect over 74,000 people who would have to turn over all of their online identifiers, aliases, and usernames to law enforcement.

It has vague definitions. The measure doesn’t clearly specify what “internet service providers” and “internet identifiers” are. Is a registrant required to report only the ISPs they currently use, or every one used throughout his or her lifetime? Does a registrant have to turn over the access code they get at Peet’s Coffee to access free Wi-Fi? Is a registrant who operates an at-home Wi-Fi network for family members an “internet service provider?” It’s impossible to know what the reporting requirements are, yet the punishment for failing to report the information is up to three years in prison.

The government needs to keep its hands off internet speech.

Yes, anonymous speech can lead to uncomfortable and offensive comments – this is probably even more true on the web and with online speech. But that’s the cost of maintaining strong speech rights for everyone. Technology doesn’t change those rights.

Online technology might not even be where the problem lies: Studies have demonstrated that technology-facilitated crimes accounted for only 1 percent of all arrests for sex crimes against children. That same study found that only 4 percent of the people arrested for technology-facilitated crimes against minors were registered sex offenders.

Thinking of Prop. 35 in rational, logical and legal terms – not just emotional ones – leads to one inescapable conclusion: Free speech will be the only casualty in this attempt to stop human trafficking.

Read More..

Shawn Levy’s 21 Laps signs new first look deal with Fox

NEW YORK (TheWrap.com) – Fox has signed a new three-year first look deal with director/producer Shawn Levy‘s 21 Laps, the production company behind “Night at the Museum” and “The Watch,” the companies announced on Wednesday.

21 Laps is already based at Fox, having supplied the studio with several comedy titles over the past few years. While its most recent, “The Watch,” disappointed at the box office, the company has otherwise provided a steady supply of hits.

The original “Night at the Museum leads the pack with $ 570 million at the global box office, while the sequel surpassed $ 400 million.

“Shawn’s boundless energy, ambition and effortless creativity make him the perfect partner,” Emma Watts, Fox’s president of production, said in a statement. “We are lucky he continues to call Fox his home.”

21 Laps has a couple of projects due for release in 2013 – “The Internship,” starring Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson, and “The Spectacular Now,” starring Miles Teller and Shailene Woodley.

Levy directed “The Internship,” his first job since “Real Steel,” which Disney released. That film debuts June 7.

21 Laps also has several projects in development, including a third installment of “Night at the Museum” and “Project Aloha,” which Levy plans to direct from a script by Nick Stoller. It is also at work on projects beyond Fox, such as “Story of Your Life,” a sci-fi thriller that Nic Mathieu will direct.

In signing a new deal with Fox, 21 Laps also announced a series of promotions. Billy Rosenberg moves up to the Senior Vice President level from Vice President while Dan Cohen rejoins the company from Mandeville as VP.

TV News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Read More..

HealthBridge Managemant Ordered to Reinstate Striking Workers

A federal judge in Hartford has ordered a Connecticut nursing home chain to reinstate nearly 600 workers who have been on strike since July 3, and to rescind the pension and health care cuts it had imposed.

Judge Robert N. Chatigny of the United States District Court in Connecticut ruled on Tuesday night that the nursing homes’ owner, HealthBridge Management, had broken the law by refusing to bargain in good faith and by imposing the cuts before a true negotiating impasse had been reached.

Judge Chatigny issued an injunction that ordered HealthBridge to reinstate the workers by next Monday, even if it means ousting hundreds of the replacement workers hired to run the nursing homes after the strike began.

“Everybody is quite happy about the decision,” said Vern Scatliffe, a nurse’s aide, as he picketed outside Danbury Health Care Center, one of the five nursing homes — the others are in Milford, Newington, Stamford and Westport — where the workers walked out to protest the cuts HealthBridge had imposed. “The judge’s order is a big relief to me. I can now go back to work and earn my living again.”

Saying the company was disappointed by the judge’s decision, Lisa Crutchfield, a HealthBridge spokeswoman, said it had filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, asking it to overturn the injunction.

“We are acting in the best interests of our residents — their well-being is paramount to us,” she said. Ms. Crutchfield said the order to reinstate the strikers would “expose residents to the very people who sought to do them harm” during the walkout. HealthBridge has accused the strikers of several acts of sabotage, including changing the names on several patients’ doors and wheelchairs and switching the names of some residents in Alzheimer’s units.

Deborah Chernoff, a spokeswoman for the strikers’ union, the New England Health Care Employees Union, said it had opposed any sabotage. She suggested that the allegations themselves were suspicious, noting that they were first made two weeks after the strike began.

The strike began after HealthBridge declared the negotiations deadlocked and then imposed changes that included freezing the workers’ pensions, requiring many to pay at least $6,000 more a year for family health coverage and eliminating six paid sick days and a week’s vacation for many workers.

Two weeks after the strike began, the striking employees, who belong to a branch of the Service Employees International Union, offered to return to work, but the company refused to take them back. Judge Chatigny said it was “just and proper” to reinstate them “because there is a pressing need to restore the status quo” from before the company made the changes, which he found to be illegal.

The judge acted only after the National Labor Relations Board’s office in Hartford sought an injunction.

David Pickus, president of the strikers’ union, said, “This ruling is a decisive victory for workers and a sign that HealthBridge cannot get away with its unfair and illegal treatment of its employees.”

Read More..

DealBook: Best Buy Gives Founder More Time to Make a Bid

Best Buy plans to give its founder a reprieve from holiday shopping.

The electronics retailer said on Friday that it would give its founder, Richard Schulze, until Feb. 28 to make a takeover bid for the company. That will give Mr. Schulze and his private equity partners the chance to review holiday sales before making their bid.

Best Buy cautioned that its founder may not make a bid, and that it may turn down any offer that is made.

Shares of the retailer tumbled nearly 17 percent in morning trading on Friday, to $11.75, as investors appeared worried that the chances of a successful takeover were growing remote.

Mr. Schulze remains the single biggest shareholder, with a roughly 20 percent stake, but analysts and investors have questioned whether he can line up the requisite equity and debt financing.

He has reached tentative agreements to partner with a number of leveraged buyout firms to aid him in his campaign, a person briefed on the matter said. But any offer is unlikely to come close to the $8.8 billion that he initially floated.

The announcement comes as shares in Best Buy have fallen steadily in recent months, down 33 percent over the last three months. Even with the holiday shopping season in full swing, the retailer is expected to struggle against online competitors like Amazon.com and bigger rivals like Wal-Mart Stores.

Analysts suspect that consumer will continue to use Best Buy stores as “showrooms” to play around with products, before buying them more cheaply elsewhere. That’s despite efforts by the company’s relatively new chief executive, Hubert Joly, to entice shoppers with redesigned stores and improved customer service.

The company said last month that its same-store sales fell yet again, as it reported a $10 million loss in its third quarter.

Read More..

Fed to tie interest rate to job gains

WASHINGTON — The Federal Reserve said it will continue aggressive measures to stimulate the economy and made a major policy shift to focus more directly on boosting the job market.

Fed policymakers said they would keep interest rates at historically low levels until unemployment drops below 6.5%.

It's likely to keep the Fed's short-term interest rates at historically low levels well into 2015.

The move marked the first time that Fed policymakers have tied themselves to an explicit unemployment goal. It appeared to end the long-running debate within the central bank over how aggressively to target the nation's lagging job market.

The jobless figure was 7.7% in November, and the Fed's new forecast doesn't see that dropping below 6.5% for about three years.

The decision was made easier by the slow pace of inflation, which remains below 2% on an annual basis. Critics of the Fed's policies have argued that efforts to stimulate the economy would lead to inflation, but so far, that has not happened, and Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke has argued that the risk is much smaller than the dangers posed by high unemployment.

"The conditions now prevailing in the job market represent an enormous waste of human and economic potential," Bernanke said Wednesday during a news conference after the central bank's last policy meeting of the year.

Under its new policy, the Fed would let its inflation outlook rise to 2.5% before taking action to curtail it — giving the nation's employers more time to create jobs.

The move to link interest rate policies directly to the jobless rate is meant to give the public and businesses greater confidence about how long interest rates will remain exceptionally low, and that by itself could act as a kind of stimulus to the economy.

The new push got a warm welcome from both economists and Wall Street.

Economist Bernard Baumohl at the Economic Outlook Group said the previous time frame for action was "self-defeating because it provided no incentive for employers to start spending any time soon to avoid higher interest rates. It just didn't create any sense of urgency to accelerate investments or increase the rate of hiring."

The Fed has kept its federal funds rate, which influences rates for credit cards, mortgages and business and other loans, near zero since December 2008. Unemployment has been near 8% or above since early 2009.

Bernanke and his colleagues also decided Wednesday to continue the controversial large-scale bond-buying programs in the new year. Specifically, the Fed will buy $40 billion of mortgage-backed securities and $45 billion of long-term Treasury bonds a month.

The purchases are intended to drive down long-term interest rates to spur spending, investment and lending, boosting economic activity as well as hiring.

The central bank launched the purchase of mortgage-backed securities in September to give a lift especially to the housing market, which Fed policymakers said Wednesday "has shown further signs of improvement." They said they would continue to buy bonds until the job market "improved substantially."

The Fed, which has a dual mandate to maximize employment and keep inflation in check, also forecast a somewhat stronger growth for next year.

Its policy statement Wednesday noted a slowing in U.S. business investment and "significant downside risks" in the global economy, but made no mention of the so-called fiscal cliff, the automatic federal budget cuts and tax hikes scheduled to take effect beginning Jan. 1.

In a 75-minute news conference, however, Bernanke said it was clearly evident that concerns about the fiscal impasse already had hurt the economy, weakening business investments and consumer confidence.

He said that whatever the Fed did, it was not enough to offset the full effects of a U.S. economy failing to resolve fiscal issues. But he was cautiously optimistic: "I actually believe that Congress will come up with a solution, and I certainly hope they will."

For years, the Fed didn't give any indication of its future interest-rate path and only in recent years signaled what it might do by using somewhat vague language. In June 2011, the Fed said that it would keep rates exceptionally low for an "extended period." In August 2011, policymakers said no change was likely until at least mid-2013. And that date has since been extended twice, to late 2014 and then mid-2015.

Read More..

Bright Eyes: Smart Snow Goggles Measure Your Radness

Snow goggles used to be so simple: a tinted lens to block the sun, and a strap to hold it to your head. All we asked of the shades was that they wouldn't fog up, and that they'd keep the sun's glare from scorching our eyes.

Today, ski and snowboard goggles have more digital functionality than your first car. Now you can keep track of your speed, elevation and other stats right there on the slopes with in-goggle digital displays, record all your stoke-worthy achievements with integrated high-def POV cameras, and pair your goggles to your phone via Bluetooth, where they can interface with various apps.

We took four of the most tech-loaded goggles out for some runs at Squaw Valley, in the mountains near Lake Tahoe, and checked the specs. The good news: none of us went snowblind. — Billy Brown

Photos by Ariel Zambelich/Wired

Read More..