南昌都有那些双相情感障碍医院(南昌那里看精神) (今日更新中)

After a brief flirtation with resurrection, Nickelodeon's "Double Dare" is back -- for real, this time.The game show favorite will return to the network this summer to give "a new generation of kids the chance to compete in the messiest and most physically challenging competition of their lives," Nickelodeon announced Wednesday.The decision to bring the series back comes about a year and a half after Nickelodeon paid tribute to the game show with a 30th Anniversary special."Double Dare" ran on Nickelodeon from 1986-93 and was revived for brief run in 2000.The original show was hosted by Marc Summers and co-hosted by Robin Marella.It is not yet known who will host the new iteration. Though, Nickelodeon said the revived series "will feature appearances from blasts from the past, long-time 'Double Dare' fans and stars from today."On "Double Dare," two teams compete against each other for prizes by answering trivia questions and completing some often-messy physical challenges, all culminating in a run of the show's kid-friendly obstacle course. (Think: human hamster wheel and a giant gunk-filled nose.)A specific premiere date has not been announced.The-CNN-Wire 1183

A: Santa's lead flying reindeerB: wife trying to get rid of me before Christmas pic.twitter.com/Cvmha58rVM— Tim McGraw (@TheTimMcGraw) December 8, 2020 169

Ahead of the election, many social media sites are tightening things up. Many platforms are trying to make sure what you're searching for, what you're seeing and what you're reading is factual.Pick a platform or a search engine and it's not hard to find what you're looking for.“Remember in 2016, no one took social media seriously on either side,” said Jason Mollica, a professor of communications at American University in Washington DC.He teaches digital and social media analytics and public relations. He analyzes just how we communicate. These days, a lot of our conversing is over the internet. As the election inches closer, Mollica and his students are watching and discussing what's happening on social media platforms.“It’s not that much different but the stakes are higher, not from the perspective of voting but as in what these socia lnetworks are trying to do or not do it the wake of what happened in 2016,” Mollica said.Take Facebook for instance. The social site has been under scrutiny and they know it. Mark Zuckerberg posted from his own account about what changes the site is making, including informational posts about voting and how and where to vote. Facebook will block new political ads in the final week before the election, and they say they'll be working with officials to remove misinformation about voting.There are also rules against COVID-19 threats surrounding voting.Twitter is also taking a stand. Mollica says you might see something trending but if there's a problematic post, the original content will likely be pulled.“We’re not gonna allow this content to continue is something is shared by Joe Biden or Donald Trump or any political party,” Mollica said. “They’re going to make sure it’s taken down because they want to mitigate the negative news or the false news that comes out from certain accounts.”Twitter says it has election teams focusing on integrity, and the company is launching initiatives to help users find original sources of information. You'll also be able to report misleading information.“This isn’t censorship,” Mollica said. “This is something where social networks are saying, ‘Look, we understand we’re a news cycle.’ At least from Twitter’s perspective, they share news. They want to be a place where people get news. They’re looking… from a standpoint of you wouldn’t see that on a television station necessarily, why should you see that on twitter?”And Google, the site many turn to to search for anything and everything, has modified its autocomplete policies, removing predictions that could be viewed as claims for or against a specific party. And that is no easy task.“Think of a search giant like google. They can’t pull content off the internet but they can definitely take key words from search results and say we’re not going to show those to people,” Mollica said.Donald McLaughlin, co-founder of the Denver Based CP-Cyper said, it’s not that internet content is missing. Google has just made information harder to find. McLaughlin says, however, it doesn't mean that you can't find it on other search platforms.“Use a different search engine,” McLaughlin said. “There is Bing, DuckDuckGo, a few others that are meant to be less persuasive, less filtered that will give you exactly what you search for versus what they want you to see or what they think you want.”“So, Google trying to mitigate it somehow is a great start but you think about it’s basically putting a small cork in a huge hole and it’s still leaking and you can’t really stop it,” Mollica said.Most experts would agree it’s unfortunate that it has come to this.“We’ve gotten to a place now where misinformation does spread like wildfire on social media. People will sensationalize to get likes to get people to follow them and really doing the research to vet whether something is true or not is very important,” Mollica said.He says that's true whether you're buying a car, or voting. And while the internet giants can only do so much, it’s a big step on the keyboard as we move toward the election. 4053

After dipping below a million new claims a week for the first time since March, jobless claims are back up above that mark.The U.S. Department of Labor just reported at least 1.1 million people filed new jobless claims last week, while there were another 14.8 million continuing claims.For all those on unemployment, what is not back is the 0 pandemic unemployment assistance. Instead, President Trump signed an executive order for Lost Wage Assistance, while Congress is still in a stalemate over a new stimulus package.Until the president’s order kicks in, after states apply for the help and get approved, everyone on unemployment is being forced to live off their respective state's normal unemployment benefit. In many states, the average benefit payout is meager, at best.“The national average for unemployment dropped from nearly 0 a week to just 8 a week in June of this year, because so many low wage workers were losing their jobs,” said Andrew Stettner, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation.Stettner has been heavily researching and analyzing unemployment benefits with the New York and D.C.-based independent think tank. Part of his research and analysis shows low-wage workers could be getting far less than that average state weekly benefit. For example, in a state like Hawaii, some low wage workers could be getting the state’s minimum payout of just a week right now. In other states like Louisiana, Connecticut, North Carolina, Nevada, Oklahoma, and Delaware, minimums aren’t much higher, ranging between to per week.“All but nine states have minimum benefits below 0 per week,” Stettner added.Understanding states’ minimums and how little some workers could now be getting per week is important because it will impact their eligibility for the president’s executive order.“If you don’t get more than 0 in unemployment benefits a week from the state, you can’t get Trump's new Lost Wage Assistance,” explained Stettner.Lost Wage Assistance is an additional 0 a week from the federal government for those on unemployment and is supposed to be available until Dec. 27, 2020. Essentially, right now, it is the only stopgap in place to help those unemployed, but it won’t help those who may need help the most. That’s why many are urging Congress to quickly come to an agreement on the next stimulus bill that helps everyone struggling.“I think there is the will to continue federal unemployment employment benefits, Trump’s executive order. Trump’s executive order promises them through December 27, but there is not enough money to fulfill that promise. So, I think there is the will to do the right thing but there is a lot getting in the way,” said Stettner. 2718

A woman in Texas was sentenced Wednesday to a five-year prison term for voting illegally in the 2016 presidential election while on supervised release for a tax fraud conviction.When she voted in the 2016 election, Crystal Mason had already served almost three years in prison for her fraud conviction but had not yet completed her sentence and was still serving a three-year supervised release period, according to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.Convicted felons lose their voting rights in Texas until they complete their full sentences, including parole and probation.Mason reportedly told the court, however, that she was not aware of that prohibition and had not been informed that she was ineligible to vote until her sentence was complete."She voted in good faith," Mason's defense attorney J. Warren St. John said in an interview. "I don't think she should be going to prison for that." Her attorney has already filed an appeal. "I think Texas law is extreme in terms of sentencing people to prison for voting violations," he said.Mason signed an affidavit in order to cast a provisional ballot, which stated that it is a violation of the law to vote if you are a convicted felon, but Mason did not see that part of the ballot, St. John said."Ms. Mason was never asked if she was a convicted felon by the election judge nor did she indicate that she was a convicted felon," her attorney said. "Ms. Mason voted in good faith that she could legally vote because she was never notified by any government agency that it was against the law to vote."Prosecutors argued that Mason either intended to vote illegally or should have been aware that she was not eligible to vote, according to The Fort Worth Star-Telegram. Matt Smid, a prosecutor with the Tarrant County District Attorney's Office, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The Star-Telegram reported at the time of her indictment that Mason believed she was being targeted for her vote -- which she said she cast for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.During the 2016 campaign, Donald Trump regularly said that the election was "rigged" against him, and after he won the presidential election, he claimed without evidence that massive voter fraud had cost him the popular vote. 2260

来源：资阳报