September 2009 Archives

Within moments of the release of footage of what is now being called the "Panama ET", speculations of its origin ran rampant especially throughout the web. The tabloids jumped on the story, and the video was widely broadcast generating reactions from viewers worldwide. Perhaps the largest response to the video came from Twitter users, whose identifications of the creature ranged from assertions it was an alien to a hoax. Sensationalistic tweet updates about the unidentified creature discovered in Panama snowballed, circulating links to videos and pictures of the story on the Internet.

According to local TV station, Telemetro, the group of four teenagers first found the creature while playing near a cave in the community of Cerro Azul in Panama City. Fearing an attack, they used sticks and rocks to kill it, and then tossed its body in the water. The group later returned to the site and retrieved the creature's dead body to photograph it.

Zoologists in Panama were unable to identify the creature's origin only observing that it resembled a dead fetus; others speculated it could be an animal with a genetic defect. Fraudulent or not, this bizarre case is being investigated by local authorities, but no official announcement has been made as to whether they plan to conduct DNA tests on the creature to classify its species.

While scientists are no closer to a conclusion, the "get it first, no matter if it is right" people keep writing screaming headlines and/or tweeting about the story; the video is available online on the websites of TV stations such as WSOC.TV, WBALTTV from Baltimore, WFTV.com and even on CNN. Check it out, tweet your own conclusions and keep me posted on that one, please!

After having received international acclaim as the culinary master behind London's Shoreditch House and Cecconi's Restaurant, what made you decide to open Cecconi's in West Hollywood?

The opportunity to come to America and explore a new and exciting market. There are so many opportunities here in the restaurant business. London was great, but the market there was a little bit saturated.

Was it a risky decision?

Yes, definitely. Opening an Italian restaurant in America, in the middle of a recession, when most of the other restaurants are suffering or closing was the biggest risk I ever took in my career. But, it has worked out perfectly.

So what is Cecconi's recipe for success?

It's all the about the basics at Cecconi's. We buy the best ingredients; we serve great food combined with an amazing atmosphere and affordable prices. 

What are the most pleasant and difficult aspects of cooking Italian food in West Hollywood?

The Californian and the Italian climates are very similar, which allows us get really good produce year around. The biggest difficulty was to adjust our menu to the West Hollywood and Beverly Hills' clientele's particular palate.

What dish is a hit and what is a flop at Cecconi's?

When we first opened, in February, we had a chicken tortellini, served in a hot chicken broth, on the menu, that was just beautiful. Everyone that had it loved it. I got great feedback about it but for some reason it wasn't a big seller, so I substituted it for meat angolotti, which is now the most popular dish on our menu. It's served with shaved truffles on top and it's a beautiful dish as well.

What would you recommend that a dieting diner order in your restaurant?

There are plenty of options; we almost don't use butter, even our desserts are designed to appeal to health conscious people. The menu offers carpaccios, tartares and a selection of salads. I can also say that our pizzas have about 800 calories, while the average American pizza has between 1400 to 2000 calories.

What is your favorite restaurant in Los Angeles?  

Terroni on Beverly Boulevard, because of the food and the foosball table.

What was the most challenging meal you had to make? Why?  

Last year during Art Basel in Miami, I had to cook for 300 people on the beach, for three nights, without running water, electricity or a kitchen. It was a crazy task, but it turned out to be a big success.

What was your worst kitchen nightmare?

A gas line was cut at Cecconi's London at 8 p.m. on a Friday night; the restaurant was full and I had to improvise what to serve 200 people for dinner without using gas. We decided to serve oysters' platters, but the oyster chef cut himself badly and had to be taken to the hospital. Then a storm at Soho House New York last year; the open roof top was full of customers when a thunderstorm hit the city and you can imagine what happened.

Who/what has had the greatest influence on your cooking?

My boss (Nick Jones, co-owner of Soho House), my customers, my friends, my wife and my family- all people with a lot of passion for food.  And I also read a lot of cook books.

When did you decide you wanted to be a chef? 

When I was about 9 years old in Catholic school, in Italy, the teacher asked us to draw what we would like to be in the future. I drew a fisherman and a cook. I started cooking in my uncle's trattoria, near Turin, when I was 13.

             Wednesday night US President Obama's speech to a joint session of congress on the status of health care prompted a divide between the US and International media. This leads to the question- is the media providing the general public with enough information to allow them to thoughtfully participate in the debate? President Obama himself, accused cable talk show hosts of misrepresenting the content of his healthcare plans in an effort to discourage public support for reform, stating, "some of people's concerns have grown out of bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost", stated the Huffington Post.

            With its extensive coverage, BBC was successful in its mission to inform the public on both sides of the debate. Their coverage included Obama's full speech, the public anpress' reaction to it, a section of Q&A, as well as an analysis, in which Jonathan Beale, BBC correspondent from Washington, said: "the speech may have also come too late as positions are already entrenched and some of Mr. Obama's supporters wonder why he did not do this months ago." At the same time, Mark Mardell, BBC North America editor, wrote on his blog: "He (Obama) attempted to reclaim the flag for the Democrats, against critics who say he is not only wrong but unpatriotic in his plans."

                       March against Obama's agenda in Washington (Associated Press).           

            On his home turf, President Obama was met with greater criticism. The Los Angeles Times editorial was unforgiving in its reaction asserting, "the hard part, in terms of both policy and politics, is finding a way to pay for the expansion in coverage. And on that most contentious issue, unfortunately, Obama argued that Congress could cover most of the cost by attacking waste, fraud and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid [existing federal health programmes for the elderly and poor] - a pain-free path that's as unrealistic as it is alluring... he left some of the hardest questions unanswered.". This negative account was offered alone rather than the more balanced analysis provided by BBC.

             While major players in mainstream media, like BBC and the Times tend to be more diplomatic and less extreme in what they will publish, bloggers and smaller independent publications have the freedom to criticism the government more aggressively.  Pijamasmedia.com targets Obama's speech as "High-Stakes Political Game", while correspondent Victor Hanson writes: "Bottom line? Obama should just borrow from the Republican plan, assure the Democrats he's extending coverage to those uncovered, and then, and only then, go back to his eagle routine and soar with it in the stratosphere with "I alone hoped and changed health care.". Without having to worry about ad sales or answering to the big conglomerates with their own political restrictions and alliances, bloggers unafraid to tackle even the most controversial issues give the general public much less filtered information.

             The digital age has made publishing accessible to and by the masses. Gone is the need for expensive equipment, superfluous manpower, and restrictive superiors. If one can walk into a public library, with a few simply clicks, a blog can be created and the individual's thoughts can be circulated to an infinite audience.

Distribution, lead-time, and the high cost of printing to name a few have long been technological barriers of publishing. The methods of getting the printed document circulated locally, domestically and more so internationally has long been a hindrance. The digital revolution has broken these barriers. With the advent of blogging and social media outlets it has never been easier to get information to the public. One is able to post a link to their blog on their facebook, myspace, or other social network. They can twitter about it or even record themselves reading it aloud over Youtube, all with relative ease.

But can anyone be a journalist? According to Clay Shirky the answer is yes. "Like driving, journalism is not a profession -- no degree or certification is required to practice it, and training often comes after hiring [...]" Although some people disagree with Shirky's opinion, thanks to the web, it's impossible to deny that anyone can publish journalistic material anytime. The digital revolution has given a voice to the masses, removing the exclusivity that once limited who or what type of person could express their opinion in a public forum. It has allowed the general public the ability to question authority or suggest varying points of view, without the approval of an editor or publishing entity. The content of a story and the quality of the writing are what determine whether their point or not its considered journalism. Not every video posted on YouTube is journalism, nor is every tweet a news story. Publishing raw data is different than publishing accurate information with context, analysis and judgment. But no matter the content, today, the Internet definitely allows writers to reach larger audiences more efficiently and with much less expense.

Blogs, Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, just to name a few, have reduced the old limitations of publishing and rapidly became major players in this the new media model.  While journalism is being reinvented, authors and the general public alike enjoy the benefits made possible by the "digital revolution". Will it replace traditional journalism? Will newspapers become extinct? Will this model be able to support itself economically? What's going to happen next? While the picture is still unclear, the reliance on the printed word is a thing of the past.

Blogging became a plataform for writers to get their stories published fast and at no cost. "Julie and Julia" (2009), the Sony Pictures film based on the "two true stories" of Julia Child and Julie Powell, illustrates how bloggers can obtain instant visibility through the Web. Chef Child had to find a publishing house before getting her book published in 1961, while aspiring chef Powell, got hers published after launching a culinary blog in 2009.

Web journalists also have the chance to develop their own digital identity and credibility without the requirements and limitations of an actual employed position, which would have been unlikely ten years ago. Furthermore, blogs and social networks like Twitter have turned into reporting tools enabling anyone, without being a journalist or an expert, to tell stories on the Web, investigate crime, and otherwise serve the community in numerous fashions.

            The Internet has made broadcasting information more time and cost efficient. Today, a story can instantly travel across the globe. Why would a viewer wait for a broadcast news show, or the following day's printed-paper, if the same information is available on the web immediately? Why would a writer need a publishing house, if he or she could simply publish their work online, giving readers instant and fast access? The high cost of printing needing to be offset by cash-flow producing vehicles like advertisements lead to further limitation as it created a new entity to be accountable to. At times pressure from big advertisers has dictated what could be printed, especially when dealing with a highly controversial topic. Censorship in other forms served as a barrier to publishing. As long as the writer had an editor to answer to, who in return was often only the messenger of an agenda set by the large media conglomerate who likely owned the particular publication, the writer lacked full freedom of speech.