Monthly Archives: January 2018

Solicitudes ya disponibles en  Fecha límite es 30 de marzo, 2018
Elegibilidad nacional, incluyendo Puerto Rico
Nuevo: Becados de años anteriores podrán volver a solicitar
31 de enero, 2018, Ciudad de Nueva YorkEl Desfile Nacional Puertorriqueño (NPRDP por sus siglas en inglés) ya está aceptando solicitudes para su Programa Nacional de Becas 2018.
Este año el programa otorgará 100 becas de $2,000 cada una, para un total de $200,000, a estudiantes excepcionales de ascendencia puertorriqueña que están haciendo una diferencia en sus comunidades. Los solicitantes deberán ser graduandos de escuela superior (secundaria) o estudiantes universitarios a tiempo completo en su primer o segundo año (freshman o junior, respectivamente).
Para ser elegible, los candidatos deben:
  • Ser de descendencia puertorriqueña;
  • Tener un promedio general (GPA) de 3.0 o mejor, o el grado equivalente de escuela superior;
  • Ser estudiante graduando de escuela superior o estar matriculado en universidad (niveles freshman a junior), entre las edades de 17 a 25 años;
  • Estar matriculado en una universidad acreditada de dos o cuatro años (requisito para estudiantes ya universitarios);
  • Tener historial de trabajo voluntario o servicio comunitario;
  • Participar en una entrevista con integrante(s) del Comité de Selección.
Por primera vez en la historia del programa, los estudiantes ganadores de becas en años anteriores podrán volver a solicitar, siempre y cuando cumplan con los demás requisitos de elegibilidad.
Para descargar la solicitud de becas, el público puede visitar
El formulario de solicitud completado más el ensayo y biografías, deberán ser entregados por correo electrónico a, en o antes del viernes 30 de marzo, del 2018. Las cartas de recomendación y transcripciones selladas, deberán ser enviadas por correo postal a National Puerto Rican Day Parade, P.O Box 975, New York, NY 10272, en o antes del viernes 30 de marzo, del 2018.  Los materiales enviados después de esta fecha resultarán en la descalificación del candidato.
Las solicitudes de becas deben contener: el formulario de solicitud completado, un ensayo, una biografía escrita, dos cartas de recomendación (una de las cuales debe provenir del lugar donde el estudiante realiza su trabajo voluntario); transcripciones académicas oficiales y una foto. Las cartas de recomendación deberán pedirse a maestros, consejeros, mentores, líderes religiosos y comunitarios, y otros. Las cartas deberán destacar el servicio comunitario voluntario del candidato, la longevidad de la relación con el candidato y las aportaciones particulares del candidato a la comunidad.
NPRDP estableció su Programa de Becas para promover la educación universitaria en la comunidad puertorriqueña.  El año pasado la organización rompió su record en la cantidad de becas otorgadas (100 becas valoradas en un total de $200,000), cifra que han podido mantener en 2018.
Para más información acerca de los programas del Desfile Nacional Puertorriqueño y detalles acerca del próximo desfile en la Quinta Avenida de Manhattan, pautado para el domingo 10 de junio, 2018, el público puede visitar  Facebook: @nationalpuertoricandayparade.  Twitter e Instagram: @PRParadeNYC.

New York has a long and proud history of helping those in need, and with millions in Puerto Rico still suffering, we must continue the fight to help our neighbors recover.

Please join me this Saturday to call on the Federal Government for continued support in Puerto Rico. I will be joined by Governor Rosselló to show representatives in Washington, D.C. that New York stands with our fellow Americans in Puerto Rico.

WHEN: Saturday, February 3rd at 10:15 AM
WHERE: The Belle Center, 104 Maryland St., Buffalo, NY 14201

Please, RSVP below:

President Donald Trump offered a rosy assessment of American life in his first State of the Union address — but several of his points were factually flawed.

“This is our new American moment,” Trump said. “There has never been a better time to start living the American Dream.”

The economy took center stage in Trump’s speech, with mixed accuracy. Trump touted record lows for unemployment levels, middle class relief from the passage of a $1.5 trillion tax cut, and loyalty to his campaign promise to cut red tape. He also exaggerated victories on immigration and ISIS.

Trump’s statements cycled through every Truth-O-Meter rating, except for Pants on Fire. We tallied two False statements, three Mostly False, one Half True, three Mostly True, and one True.

Here’s our rundown of the president’s address, along with notes on his claims’ overall accuracy and additional context. (This story will be updated as we do more fact-checking.)

“Just as I promised the American people from this podium 11 months ago, we enacted the biggest tax cuts and reforms in American history.”

It is False that the tax-cut package passed in December is the largest cut ever, as Trump has repeatedly claimed.

In inflation-adjusted dollars, the recent tax bill is the fourth-largest since 1940. And as a percentage of GDP, it ranks seventh.

“After years of wage stagnation, we are finally seeing rising wages.”

We rated Trump’s claim Mostly False. By the most common measure, wages did go up for the first three quarters of Trump’s presidency, but they fell in the fourth, wiping out all the gains on his watch and then some.

His assertion also ignores that wages — by two different measurements — began their climb during the final years of Obama’s presidency.

“Our massive tax cuts provide tremendous relief for the middle class and small businesses.”

The tax bill does benefit Americans with modest incomes initially, but the wealthy take a disproportionate share.

Every income group will pay less in taxes in 2019. But the benefits of the tax bill would flow disproportionately to wealthier taxpayers.

As some tax breaks expire, lower- or middle-income taxpayers stand to see their gains from the bill evaporate. In all but the top income group, many more taxpayers will see a cut in 2018 than will see one in 2027.

“Since we passed tax cuts, over 3 million workers have gotten tax cut bonuses — many of them thousands and thousands of dollars.”

We rated that claim Mostly True. Americans for Tax Reform, a group that supported the tax reform bill, found that at least 3 million Americans are receiving bonuses that the companies said were related to passage of the tax bill, based on company press releases and news reports.

However, bonuses are a short-term response to the tax bill, which is less important than potential long-term changes, such as whether corporations will build new factories or purchase more machinery.

Economists and labor experts say it will take years to fully assess the economic impact of the tax bill. In this tight labor market, it’s possible that some businesses were already planning to give out bonuses or other financial incentives to retain workers.

“We have eliminated more regulations in our first year than any administration in the history of our country.”

Trump has a point here, but it’s not the whole story. Trump’s use of the Congressional Review Act to roll back regulations did set a record in his first year. Trump had signed 15 Congressional Review Act measures compared with one previously. But experts have told us that other presidents signed laws that cut more rules than Trump.

Examples include the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, as well as President Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan’s deregulation of such previously heavily regulated industries as air travel, trucking, banking and telecommunications.

“We built the Empire State Building in just one year – isn’t it a disgrace that it can now take 10 years just to get a permit approved for a simple road?”

We rated Trump’s claim Half True. The Empire State Building was constructed in one year and 45 days, a little longer than Trump said. He’s off base when he said that permitting takes 10 years. Recent government studies say the permit approval time ranges from 4.6 to 6.6 years. The only study we found that claims a 10-year approval is common comes from an anti-regulation group, which raises questions about its reliability.

“The third pillar ends the visa lottery — a program that randomly hands out green cards without any regard for skill, merit, or the safety of American people.”

We rated Trump’s claim False. While lottery applicants are randomly selected, they must meet education and work experience requirements. They must also be vetted by the United States government before being allowed to come to the United States.

“African-American unemployment stands at the lowest rate ever recorded, and Hispanic American unemployment has also reached the lowest levels in history.

The black unemployment rate is indeed at record lows, and the Hispanic unemployment rate reached the lowest levels in history during Trump’s tenure.

That’s a continuation of an earlier trend. Under former President Barack Obama, the unemployment rate for both groups fell by more than half.

However, economists are skeptical about the ability of presidents to take either credit or blame for conditions on their watch, because many other factors play into economic results.

“In the past, we have foolishly released hundreds and hundreds of dangerous terrorists, only to meet them again on the battlefield — including the ISIS leader, al-Baghdadi, who we captured, who we had, who we released.”

We rated this statement Mostly False. Trump overstated the number of prisoners released from Guantanamo, who were confirmed to have re-engaged in some type of terrorist activity. That number is 122, not “hundreds and hundreds.”

He is also not entirely right that al-Baghdadi was “released” by the United States. The ISIS leader was handed over to the Iraqis in 2004. The Iraqis released him some time later.

A legal contract between the United States and Iraq guaranteed that the United States would give up custody of virtually every detainee; it was signed during the Bush administration. It would have required an extraordinary effort to have held on to Baghdadi.

“One year later, I am proud to report that the coalition to defeat ISIS has liberated very close to 100 percent of the territory just recently held by these killers in Iraq and Syria.”

We rated Trump’s claim Mostly True.

According to data from IHS Markit, a private defense and security research firm, the area controlled by the Islamic State shrunk by 93 percent since January 2015. That’s pretty close to 100 percent.

But Trump’s words link the most recent gains too closely to actions taken during his time in office. The area controlled by the Islamic State shrunk by 89 percent during his tenure. The success also built upon strategy and attacks launched under Obama.

“Chrysler is moving a major plant from Mexico to Michigan.”

Moving isn’t the right word here. We rated Trump’s earlier claim that “Chrysler is leaving Mexico and moving back to Michigan” Half True.

Chrysler does plan to spend $1 billion to shift production of Ram trucks from Saltillo, Mexico, to Warren, Mich. in 2020. But the Mexican plant will start making another kind of vehicle, and the company expects no change in the number of workers there.

“We have ended the war on American Energy and we have ended the war on beautiful clean coal. We are now, very proudly, an exporter of energy to the world.”

We rated this claim Mostly False. The United States remains a net energy importer, a situation that’s not expected to change until midway through the next decade.

When it comes to individual energy sources, the U.S. status as a net exporter of coal and refined petroleum products predates Trump.

“Small business confidence is at an all-time high.”

This is True. The National Federation of Independent Business’s small business optimism index for 2017 beat out the previous record, set in 2004.

“We slashed the business tax rate from 35 percent all the way down to 21 percent, so American companies can compete and win against anyone in the world. These changes alone are estimated to increase average family income by more than $4,000.”

The $4,000 number requires a lot of explanation. As we’ve noted before, the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers looked at other developed countries that have lowered their corporate tax rate. The council’s paper concluded that average household income from wages would increase by between $4,000 and $9,000 as a result of a corporate tax cut, and by between $3,000 and $7,000 for the median household

We heard skepticism, however, from several economists whose work is cited in the council’s paper. For instance, Dhammika Dharmapala, a tax specialist at the University of Chicago Law School, told PolitiFact that the $4,000 figure “is well outside that suggested by the scholarly consensus.”

Among the concerns cited were that companies may not leave as much of the benefits for their workers as the study assumes; that it would take years to harvest gains of that size; that its gains may flow disproportionately to richer Americans; and that the $4,000 figure doesn’t account for tax increases in the bill that could eat into that gain.

“Last month, I also took an action endorsed unanimously by the U.S. Senate just months before: I recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.”

We rated a similar claim about the Senate’s position on the embassy as Mostly True. The Senate reaffirmed the Jerusalem Embassy Act by a unanimous vote six months ago.

However, it’s worth noting that the 2017 Senate resolution also reaffirmed that “the permanent status of Jerusalem remains a matter to be decided between the parties through final status negotiations towards a two-state solution” — a position that Trump rhetorically backed in his speech, but that some believe could be endangered by his decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and move the embassy.

By Allison Graves, Jon Greenberg, Louis Jacobson, John Kruzel, Katie Sanders, Amy Sherman, Manuela Tobias on Tuesday, January 30th, 2018 at 11:50 p.m.



Dejar de hacer excusas.  Empieza a hacer planes.

Ese es el mensaje detrás del segundo Plan Nacional para el Día de Vacaciones. Es un esfuerzo de la industria de viajes convencer a los estadounidenses para que utilicen el 30 de enero como día para programar sus vacaciones del año y aprovechar cualquier tiempo libre remunerado del que tengan derecho en sus trabajos.

Se espera que los destinos, agencias de turismo y otros en la industria de viajes ofrezcan promociones en conjunto con el esfuerzo. Se promocionará en las redes sociales con un hashtag #PlanForVacation.

Alamo, por ejemplo, publicará consejos de planificación de vacaciones y ofrecerá un descuento del 10 por ciento sobre las tarifas base para el alquiler de

autos semanales (reservables del 23 de enero al 6 de febrero, para viajar del 1 de marzo al 30 de agosto).

Las Vegas también está participando en la campaña, planeando un video que muestra a los artistas tomando los trabajos de camarero y traficante de tarjetas. Un par de visitantes a la ciudad recibirán un viaje sorpresa como parte de la promoción, que incluye un pasaje aéreo a Las Vegas desde Allegiant junto con dos noches de hotel y entradas para espectáculos.


The Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority, Matt Urban Hope Center, Buffalo Zoo, and BNMC are announcing a special socks and glove collection for those in need. Socks are the number one item needed for those experiencing homelessness and can provide critical items that can be life-saving.


Leaders from Matt Urban Hope Center, NFTA, Buffalo Zoo, BNMC


Most of us take new socks and gloves for granted, but we know these items bring great comfort to and make a dramatic difference in the lives of those experiencing homelessness. Each year, it’s estimated that between 2.5 million and 3.5 million Americans sleep in shelters, transitional housing and public places not meant for human habitation, according to the National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty. Additionally, a reported 7.4 million people have lost their homes and are living with family or friends due to economic necessity. And 1 million people who are experiencing homelessness have full-time jobs.


Wednesday, January 31, 2018, 10:00 a.m. NFTA headquarters, exterior lot at downtown bus terminal (off Ellicott


181 Ellicott Street, Buffalo

Parking: Pull into the bus lot at 181 Ellicott and you will be directed where to park.


Governor of Puerto Rico Ricardo Rossello attends a news conference days after Hurricane Maria hit Puerto Rico, in San Juan, Puerto Rico September 30, 2017. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

Para convertirse en ley, este proyecto aún debe ser firmado por el gobernador Ricardo Rosselló, quien ya expresó su reparo a una versión inicial del mismo.

Por Osman Pérez Méndez

( San Juan)  El proyecto de ley sobre la libertad religiosa aprobado el lunes en la noche por la Legislatura podría suponer un perjuicio para ciertos grupos de la sociedad, toda vez que permitiría que personas que laboran en las agencias de gobierno puedan optar por no ofrecer algún servicio si consideran que atenta contra sus valores religiosos.

“Esta ley que se aprobó anoche (anteanoche) en realidad lo que hace es dar un privilegio a algunos sectores religiosos. Tiene el riesgo de que empleados se nieguen a ofrecer servicios por motivos religiosos”, opinó la doctora Yanira Reyes Gil, profesora de derecho constitucional de la Universidad Interamericana.

“Se trata, supuestamente, de proteger la libertad religiosa de empleados gubernamentales, pero es un peligro”, detalló Reyes, poniendo algunos ejemplos de cómo podría afectar la ley a las personas y aclarando que la misma aplica a todo personal de agencia de gobierno, desde oficinas hasta centros de servicios médicos.

“Imagínese un policía que vaya a atender una querella y es una pareja homosexual, y decide que no va a tomar esa querella. O un funcionario del registro demográfico, que puede decidir no atender a una pareja gay por motivos religiosos, que es algo que ya ha pasado en los Estados Unidos”, comentó. “Es realmente una licencia para discriminar contra sectores minoritarios. Es algo que se ha usado en otros lugares para discriminar contra mujeres, contra la comunidad LGBTT”.

Otro elemento importante, resalta la doctora sobre el proyecto, “es que dice que el gobierno no podría impedir construcción de bienes inmuebles con fines religiosos. Es una protección específica que podría irse por encima de la ley”.

Inclusive, evaluó Reyes, la ley “podría usarse con defensa en un caso de negligencia del gobierno. Podrían argumentar que no se dio el servicio porque un empleado considera se violenta su derecho a libertad religiosa”.

Para convertirse en ley, este proyecto aún debe ser firmado por el gobernador Ricardo Rosselló, quien ya expresó su reparo a una versión inicial del mismo. No obstante, si llegara a vetarlo la Legislatura podría ir por encima de ese veto como ha hecho con otros proyectos.

El doctor Efrén Rivera Ramos, catedrático de derecho de la Universidad de Puerto Rico, coincide en que “ese texto se presta para muchas cosas. Se presta para querer justificar el discrimen”.

“La ley tiene una definición de ejercicio religioso que incluyen cualquier acto, expresión, hacer o no hacer algo por razón religiosa. Significa que, dependiendo cómo se interprete, una persona podría hacer o negarse a hacer algo”, explicó Rivera.

Sin embargo, acotó el profesor, si alguien dejara de recibir un servicio, “el artículo 8 dice que el Estado tienen que garantizar ese servicio. No se lo puede negar a nadie”.

“Hay una responsabilidad de del Estado de garantizar ese servicio, y si no puede hacerlo, porque son las únicas personas disponibles (y se niegan a darlo por razones religiosas), se justificaría que el Estado pueda obligar a esas personas a dar el servicio si no tiene otra alternativa”, explicó.

“Mi interpretación, es que, si no hubiera otra forma de prestar el servicio, ya sea por premura o porque no hay otra persona disponible o por razones parecidas, entonces el Estado puede ordenar que se dé el servicio porque es un interés apremiante del estado y es lo menos oneroso”, acotó Rivera. “La ley obliga al Estado a proveer un acomodo para el empleado, pero no al punto que se deje de dar el servicio”.

De cualquier forma, opinó el profesor, las cosas “van a depender de las circunstancias de cada caso. Ese texto se presta para muchas cosas, y en última instancia va a depender de la interpretación que dé el Tribunal Supremo, porque creo que va a llegar allí en algún momento. Y en el proceso pues intervienen también las preferencias de los jueces, y quizás condicionen el resultado final”.

Defienden derecho a profesar su fe

Para miembros del sector religioso, no obstante, esta ley llega como una protección a su derecho de expresar su fe, que consideran se ha visto bajo ataques recientemente.

“Lo que se ha levantado es que todo el mundo alega derechos. Y por supuesto, todo el mundo tiene derecho a vivir libremente dentro del marco de la sociedad, en cumplimiento de la ley. Pero también los que profesamos cierta fe hemos visto muchos ataques en tiempos recientes”, comentó la pastora Wanda Rolón, agregando que no cree que algún religioso vaya a usar la ley para discriminar porque “eso no es lo que profesamos”.

“Yo pienso que lo que hace la ley es proteger a quien tiene una fe, de que se le quiera obligar a rendir un trabajo o una labor en contra de sus principios religiosos”, agregó la pastora. “Creo que es una protección para que cada cual actúe de acuerdo a sus principios religiosos. Debemos procurar vivir en una sociedad en la que impere el respeto en todas las áreas”.

No obstante, Rolón expresó que esto no se trata de negar atención a nadie y fue categórica en que para todas las personas “el servicio hay que darlo. Claro que sí, a nadie se le puede negar”.

“Entiendo que el gobierno debe de proteger a todos por igual. Necesitamos una libertad de movernos libres, sin temor a expresar lo que sentimos y nuestra fe”, insistió.

MIAMI (AP) — David Beckham had a speech prepared and well-rehearsed for the event four years in the making, then abandoned his script shortly after taking the confetti-covered stage.

Fitting, since nothing in his quest went as planned.

“Bringing an MLS club to Miami,” Beckham said, “has been a hell of a journey.”

The journey is now complete, in some respects: Beckham has his team, and Miami is back in Major League Soccer.

Beckham and MLS announced Monday that the long-awaited franchise is now born. It took Beckham nearly four years just to get this far with Miami, and there are a slew of details still to come — such as the team name, logo, when it will start play and when the stadium will open.

The biggest hurdle, it seems, has now been cleared.

“Welcome, Miami,” MLS Commissioner Don Garber said.

“Hola, Miami,” Beckham said, a nod to the multicultural makeup of the city.

The team will play in a 25,000-seat, privately funded stadium, though it remains unclear when that will open — a very possible scenario is that the team begins play in 2020, and moves into its permanent home in time for the 2021 season. Part of the deal also is that Beckham’s group will build a training center and an academy focused on developing local players.

“Our pledge to our fans in Miami and around the world is simple: your team will always strive to make you proud on the pitch, our stadium will be a place that you cherish visiting, and our impact in the community and on South Florida’s youth will run deep,” Beckham said.

Beckham is a global icon — in the soccer world, the entertainment world, even the fashion world . He started his career with Manchester United and also played for Real Madrid, Los Angeles Galaxy, AC Milan and Paris Saint-Germain. He was a fixture in international matches for England for years, and won four championships in four different leagues around the globe.

He told a story of how as a 12-year-old, a coach told him that he wouldn’t play professionally or for England. He persevered anyway, became perhaps the biggest name in the game when his playing career was at its peak — and the same doggedness was necessary to get a deal done in Miami, after the quest for a franchise nearly failed several times along the way.

“We’re here because of David,” said Marcelo Claure, one of Beckham’s partners.

Monday’s event — a pep rally, with a few hundred fans in attendance and a red carpet interview area snaking through the media room — was intentionally benign in many respects. The MLS logo for all the signage had a black background, with the word “Miami” printed below it in white. Specific details were few and far between.

“We’ll be the best team,” Beckham said. “When I was awarded the team, there was only one city for me. Only one city, and it was here.”

The idea of the franchise coming to Miami began looking very real last spring, when Miami-Dade County commissioners approved a deal to sell Beckham nearly three acres of county land for $9 million — the last parcel needed for the nine-acre site in the city’s Overtown neighborhood, where the stadium is likely to be built. MLS officials said even then they hoped to announce the team’s official inclusion into the league last summer.

It took a few more months, and there’s still plenty of questions. But for one day, there was also plenty of celebrating.

“My fellow Miamians, finally, we are here,” Miami-Dade County Mayor Carlos Gimenez said. “This announcement has been a long time coming.”

The return of the Miami market to MLS is the latest chapter in the league’s steady expansion .

In 2006, there were 12 MLS clubs and the expansion fee to enter the league was $10 million. Miami becomes the 25th franchise after the addition last month of expansion Nashville — which paid a $150 million entry fee. MLS’ average attendance at matches has also risen nearly 43 percent over that 12-year span.

Beckham’s group didn’t pay anywhere near what Nashville did. As part of former English star’s playing contract with the Los Angeles Galaxy, Beckham had the right to establish an MLS franchise for $25 million. He formally announced Miami as his pick in February 2014.

“Our town. Our city,” said Miami businessman Jorge Mas, another of Beckham’s partners. “Dreams are realized where freedom reigns.”

Dio una entrevista justo después del Mensaje de Estado del Presidente.

La actriz del cine porno conocida como Stormy Daniels concedió una entrevista justo después del mensaje de Estado del presidente Donald Trump y no fue clara de si ella había autorizado y firmado unas declaraciones supuestamente suyas negando haber tenido una relación con el hoy mandatario.

A la actriz y directora se le atribuye que concedió una entrevista a la revista In Touch el 2011 donde decía que en el 2006 conoció a Trump en una actividad de golf. Se alega que luego el magnate y entonces actor de telerealidad en el programa The Apprentice la invita a cenar, que esa cena tuvo lugar en su cuarto de hotel y terminan en una relación sexual, esto en momentos en que ya estaba casado con la hoy primera dama Melania Trump.

Anoche temprano circularon expresiones suyas negando ese encuentro, pero, durante el programa de Jimmy Kimmel Live, que se transmite en Puerto Rico a las 12:30 a.m., 11:30 p.m. hora de la costa este de Estados Unidos, el moderador comenzó su entrevista confrontándola con que la firma en esas declaraciones es diferente a su firma en autógrafos y otros documentos.

“¿Firmaste esta carta divulgada hoy?”, preguntó Kimmel

“No sé, ¿Lo hice?… no parece mi firma, ¿verdad?”, respondió la actriz.

¿Sabes de donde vino (la carta)?, replicó el moderador.

“Yo no sé de donde viene”, sostuvo.

Durante otra parte del programa, la actriz aceptó que concedió una entrevista a la revista In Touch, pero negó que sus expresiones en aquel momento fueran correctamente divulgadas, pero admitió que ha declinado leer la transcripción en la web de sus expresiones.

Daniels respondió con muchas evasivas a las preguntas de Kimmel. Se alega que a la mujer se le pagaron $130,00 para guardar silencio sobre su relación con el hoy presidente,.

Si hubo algo entre Daniels y el presidente, parece la actriz no guarda mucho aprecio por el hoy mandatario, esto a base de su reacción a la lectura de Kimmel de cómo fue su alegado encuentro sexual con Trump.

“Pensaba que esto era un programa de entrevistas no una película de horror”, dijo entre risas.


Despite several minutes of pro-Immigrant, pro-DREAMer posturing during the televised ceremony, the Grammy Awards snubbed the best-selling Spanish-language song of all time. Not once, not twice, but three times, 2017’s ubiquitous hit “Despacito” (by Puerto Ricans Luis Fonsi and Daddy Yankee) was overlooked for trophies by members of the Recording Academy.

First, a review of some numbers. “Despacito” was — by almost every measure — the biggest song of 2017. It sold nearly 7 million track-equivalent copies last year, outpacing runner-up Ed Sheeran (whose “Shape Of You” took home the trophy for Best Pop Solo Performance) by a million units. It tied the record for the longest-running No. 1 on the Hot 100 in history, topping charts for an astounding 16 straight weeks. It’s the only video in history to hit 4 billion views on YouTube, where it not only topped American charts but was also the most-watched video in more than 50 other countries across the globe. It’s the most-streamed song of all time. Just yesterday, “Despacito” became the first Latin song ever to reach RIAA Diamond Certification for U.S. sales of 10 million units or more, an honor fewer than 20 songs in history have achieved.

Luis Fonsi and Daddy Yankee’s chart-obliterating hit was up for three Grammy Awards. In the Best Pop Duo/Group Performance category, the hit lost to Portugal. The Man’s “Feel It Still.” Bruno Mars reigned supreme in the Record of the Year and Song of the Year categories with “24K Magic” and “That’s What I Like,” respectively. Although all winning three songs were objectively great, it’s disappointing that the voting members of the Recording Academy chose not to recognize a song that, by all commercial measures, dwarfed those entries.

In November, fans and music critics alike were celebrating the Recording Academy’s recognition of “Despacito.” As Billboard put it, the last “remotely Latin” nominees to see props in the two major categories were Carlos Santana’s English-language “Smooth” and Ricky Martin’s English “Livin’ La Vida Loca” in 2000. The first (and only) time a non-English song on Song of the Year was at the second Grammy Awards, in 1959, when an Italian song called “Volare” took the top honor.

The “Despacito” snubs speak more to the members of the Recording Academy than to the merit of the song or its performers. Although the Grammy voters may not yet be ready for a Spanish-language Song or Record of the Year, the American public — and fans in the 50 countries around the world where “Despacito” topped sales and airplay charts — know which Record and Song truly reigned supreme in 2017.

If the success of “Despacito” wasn’t enough to make a dent in the major Grammy categories (or even the Best Pop Duo/Group category!), it’s hard to imagine what it will take for a Spanish-language song to win. Here’s hoping it won’t take decades to find out.

Brittany Hodak is co-founder of ZinePak, an entertainment agency that helps brands and celebrities convert consumers into superfans.

Cleveland. Divisiva y causa de candentes debates, el logo del Chief Wahoo será removido de los uniformes y gorras de los Indios de Cleveland de las Grandes Ligas para la temporada del 2019.

La polarizante mascota saldrá así de las gorras y las mangas del uniforme del equipo a partir de ese año, una movida que pondrá fin a la presencia del Chief Wahoo en el terreno aunque eso no silenciará completamente a los grupos que han abogado por su eliminación por considerarla una imagen racista.

La Prensa Asociada fue anunciada de la decisión antes que las Grandes Ligas realicen un aviso formal este lunes.

Luego de largas horas de discusión entre el dueño de los Indios, Paul Dolan, y el Comisionado de las Grandes Ligas, Rob Manfred, los Indios tomarán el extraordinario paso de engavetar la caricatura de un indio de rostro colorado y largos dientes, el cual ha sido utilizado con varias expresiones por el equipo desde el 1947.

Sin embargo, el equipo de la Liga Americana continuará utilizando el logo de Chief Wahoo en sus gorras y la mangas de sus uniformes en el 2018, y la franquicia continuará vendiendo mercancía con la imagen en el noreste de Ohio para poder mantener productos y mercancías para así poder conservar la propiedad sobre la marca.

“Las Grandes Ligas estamos comprometidos con construir una cultura de diversidad e inclusión en el juego”, dijo el Comisionado Manfred en una declaración. “Durante los pasados años hemos dialogado con la organización de los Indios sobre el uso del logo del Chief Wahoo. Durante nuestras constructivas conversaciones, Paul Dolan nos hizo entender que hay muchos fanáticos que tienen un arraigo sentimental con ese logo y su lugar en la historia del club. No obstante, la organización accedió a mi petición de que ese logo no esté más en los terrenos de juego de Major League Baseball, y yo apreció la decisión de Mr. Dolan”.

Sumidos bajo mucha presión para eliminar el logo del Chief Wahoo, la novena lleva años transicionando un poco para alejarse del logo en los recientes años. La novena introdujo un logo de la letra ‘C’ en algunas de sus gorras y retiraron muchos logos del Chief Wahoo en y los alrededores del estadio Progressive Field.

La crítica nacional y el escrutinio con los Indios y su logo creció en el 2016 cuando los Indios llegaron a la Serie Mundial y desde entonces el Comisionado trabajó para que el equipo cambie el logo. Durante aquella postemporada, el equipo incluso recibió una demanda por el uso del Chief Wahoo mientras jugaban en Toronto y el equipo hasta fue prohibido de salir en la televisión. El caso en corte luego fue absuelto por un juez.

La pelea por el uso de Chief Wahoo en Cleveland lleva décadas.

Allí, todos los años grupos de nativos americanos y personas que les apoyan se han unido para protestar en las afuera del estadio antes de cada partido local. Estos han clamado no solo porque el equipo elimine el logo si no también el nombre de los Indios, el cual ellos reclaman es una ofensiva manera de dirigirse a su raza. Pero esos reclamos también se han unido a seguidores del equipo que creen que la novena debe preservar su historia.

El caso de los Indios de Cleveland no es único en el deporte. En la NFL los Redskins de Washington también ha estado bajo una similar presión pero hasta ahora han resistido a hacer cambios. Incluso el año pasado una decisión de la Corte Suprema de los Estados Unidos les dio fundamento para poder preservar su logo.


WP Facebook Auto Publish Powered By :