# data[].attributes.body
Students:
Ana Carolina Abdala
Ana Caroline Silva

Class: 1201

# data[].attributes.body
If I were President, I would create a kind of goal for all employees, giving a bonus if you reached the goal. So the employees would work more focused, and help both the company and the employee.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Think back to the days you were in school. It's likely you had a goal to work hard enough to get the best grade you could (if you're type A, chances are you aimed for the A). But once you moved into the work world, the guidelines for goal-setting probably became a bit more difficult.

Even though evidence shows that people perform best when they're given goals to achieve - at work, home or school - a large percentage of employees still feel like they lack specific goals at their jobs.

So given that it's a win-win for both the employer and employee to set goals, what's the best way your company can motivate employees and create meaningful targets? The following guidelines can help:
Communicate the company's mission and goals
It's not surprising that the goals of an organization are often extremely different from those of the individual. To make sure employees are engaged in the goal-setting process, "the goals really have to be aligned with the mission, vision and strategy of the organization," says Dr. Maynard Brusman, a business consulting psychologist and executive coach.

Continue Reading Below

ADVERTISEMENT

To that end, there must be a well-defined and communicated mission embedded in the company culture so that both the employer and employees are starting on the same page. "When the employee understands the strategic objectives of the firm, then they are setting their goals against the target goals of their company," says John Millikin, clinical professor in the management department at the W.P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University.
Initiate a collaborative conversation
Research shows that employees will respond much better to goal-setting if they have participated in the process. The bottom line is that there needs to be dialogue between the employer and the employee.

"The goal is for both parties to have a say and ultimately for the manager to have a final say as to what is most important," says Brad Karsh, president of JB Training Solutions. Within the conversation, find out what intrinsically motivates people. "You have to get buy-in from the employees," says Brusman.
Set SMART goals
A well-known acronym in the human resources business, SMART stands for Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant (to the job and business) and Time-bound (or Time-related - there are variations). Use this as a guide when working with employees to set goals.

It's especially important for the goals you set to be specific, otherwise "an employee might think they have hit the goal when they didn't really achieve what you had in mind," says Deb Brown, a business coach in South Florida. To help achieve the agreed-upon targets, it may be necessary to break up the larger goals into smaller ones that are achieved per quarter, month, week or day.
Be a role model
Nobody appreciates leaders who operate under the philosophy of "do as I say, not as I do." "I've seen resentment build when the leaders aren't doing anything," says Daniel Crosby, corporate psychologist and leadership development consultant. "The leader sets the ceiling for organizational goals," he says.
Create recognition programs
We all like to be rewarded for a job we've done well. Why wait for the annual performance review to comment on the success of employees in your goal-setting program? To that end, "establish a clear system of recognition or rewards for people who are meeting those goals every step of the way," says Brown.

In addition, realize that the process is dynamic for both the company and the individual. As the goals of an organization change, so should those of the employee, says Millikin. Finally, it's OK to push your employees, as they have high expectations in the workplace as well. "A lot of studies have shown that employees set higher goals than their managers," says Crosby.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Think back to the days you were in school. It's likely you had a goal to work hard enough to get the best grade you could (if you're type A, chances are you aimed for the A). But once you moved into the work world, the guidelines for goal-setting probably became a bit more difficult.

# data[].attributes.body
If I was president I'd improve hospitals in the public network, because public health is chaos. Invest in improving for those who have better income, because private network patients are attended faster than public network patients.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The federal government should send a "please explain" to the states and territories and ask why patients with private health insurance are being treated in public hospitals an average of three weeks faster than those without, a leading health economist with the Grattan Institute has said.

Data released by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) on Wednesday shows there were about 10.6 m admissions to Australia's hospitals in 2015-16, with about 59% of these occurring in public hospitals.

These statistics are really concerning

Grattan Institute's Stephen Duckett

The report also for the first time reveals how elective surgery waiting times for public hospitals vary by funding source. Elective surgery refers to any surgery that a doctor or health professional believes to be clinically necessary but which can be delayed for at least 24 hours.

Public patients had a median waiting time of 42 days for elective surgery, compared with just 20 days for patients who used private health insurance to fund all or part of their public hospital admission, the data show.

But under the Australian health care agreements, wait time for elective surgery should reflect priority to those in most urgent need of care, regardless of health insurance status.

"These statistics are really concerning," Stephen Duckett from the Grattan Institute said.

"The data also show that there is an even more stark difference in wait time depending on procedure. Public patients waiting for cataract procedures are waiting almost four months, whereas those with private insurance are waiting two weeks."

But the chief executive of the Australian Healthcare and Hospitals Association, Alison Verhoeven, warned against finger-pointing or jumping to conclusions.

"While the AIHW has highlighted the difference in median waiting times for a group of patients that represents 6.9% of all patients admitted to public hospitals for elective surgery, the key issue is that public hospitals need to be appropriately funded to treat all patients on their waiting lists," she said.

"There are valid reasons for using private health insurance in public hospitals, including the lack of availability of private hospital care in some regional areas, visiting officer practice rights in public hospitals, and patient choice of clinician, all of which are longstanding fundamental features of our health system.

The figures in the report were crude and told an incomplete story, she said.

Private health insurance is a key pillar of a universal health system, the head of the Australian Medical Association, Dr Michael Gannon, said. But he said he was concerned by the AIHW data.

"These arrangements do not in any way contribute to universal healthcare and it's entirely unfair," he said.

"It is at odds with the Medicare agreement and is not a good use of the private health insurance rebate. It's a core principal of medical ethics that treatment should be delivered according to clinical need and not insurance status."

He said those without private health cover were often already vulnerable, and that a spot on the waiting list should "never be taken away from an uninsured patient who needs care by someone simply jumping the queue".

But a fellow at the Centre for Policy Development and policy analyst, Ian McAuley, said the data was more evidence that private health insurance should be scrapped altogether in favour of a single insurer.

"Really, just get private insurance out of the way," he said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Private patients treated faster in public hospitals than public patients, data show

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The federal government should send a "please explain" to the states and territories and ask why patients with private health insurance are being treated in public hospitals an average of three weeks faster than those without, a leading health economist with the Grattan Institute has said.

# data[].attributes.body
If I were President I would  a treatment of discarded waste that is precarious and the consequences are bad for the environment and life in general. The best use of this huge amount of waste can bring many benefits and advantages to the population and the environment, turning trash into energy everywhere in the world with the intention of reducing the amount of inadequate disposal in the environment and reusing this waste .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As nations around the globe observe Earth Day, one of the most daunting issues facing the world is the mounting waste problem, which impairs public health, pollutes the environment and threatens to drown some poor countries in toxicity.

More than half the world's population does not have access to regular trash collection, a grim statistic given the amount of garbage produced globally.

Some experts say the globe's trash troubles are at a crisis level. Here are a look at the problem and some possible solutions:
See the most-read stories this hour >>
What is the scope of the waste problem?

Each year, nations generate 1.3 billion tons of waste. That's expected to soar to 4 billion tons by 2100, according to Ede Ijjasz-Vasquez, senior director for the World Bank's Social, Urban, Rural and Resilience Global Practice.

A man who scavenges for a living takes a rest next to a Marabou stork on top of a mountain of garbage at the dump in the Dandora slum of Nairobi, Kenya. (Ben Curtis / Associated Press)

The United States, China, Brazil, Japan and Germany are the leading trash generators. The U.S. produced about 228 million tons of waste in 2006, a figure that climbed to 254 tons by 2013. China (with a population around four times larger than that of the U.S.) is close behind, with 190 million tons of waste per year.

The more urbanized and industrialized a country becomes, the more trash it produces, Ijjasz-Vasquez said. The United Nations Environment Program predicts the amount of waste will probably double in lower-income African and Asian cities as a result of population growth, urbanization and rising consumption.

"There is no end in sight to this trend," the U.N. agency says. "Public waste systems in cities cannot keep pace with urban expansion; rapid industrialization is happening in countries that have not yet developed the appropriate systems to deal with hazardous and special wastes."

Ijjasz-Vasquez said developing nations tend to spend more on collection than on disposal, but collection is still not efficient. South Asia and Africa have the lowest level of efficient waste collection, according World Bank statistics.
Join the conversation on Facebook >>
Why are many Americans oblivious to being serial waste generators?

"Because we're not seeing it, we think it's not a problem," said Mark Dancy, president of WasteZero, one of the nation's largest waste reduction companies.

Unlike most utilities, such as gas, water and electricity, that are charged depending on how much is used, it works differently for waste.

Because most cities and towns charge a flat fee for trash service or include it within the property tax, most Americans pay little attention to the amount of waste they are discarding, he said.

Heavy equipment operators use machinery to compact and shape mountains of trash at L.A. County's Puente Hills Landfill. (Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)

"By taking our waste away from us so efficiently, it makes us more inclined to dispose more," said Joshua Reno, an assistant professor of anthropology at Binghamton University, who studies trash.

Reno, who spent a year working as a paper picker at a mega-landfill on the outskirts of Detroit exploring our relationship with garbage, said that although the country has no shortage of space for its trash, even the best-run landfills can stress the environment.

Unregulated or illegal dumpsites serve about 4 billion people and hold more than 40% of the waste worldwide, according to the World Bank.

What are the threats and ramifications of the global trash problem?

The threat of waste to the environment, health and safety is huge. And so are the financial and social ramifications, waste experts say.

Pollution runs into rivers and seeps into ground water. Flooding is caused by garbage clogging drains, and the atmosphere can be poisoned by the toxic discharge from trash.

When waste is not collected, the frequency of illness such as diarrhea doubles and acute respiratory infection - linked to the burning of waste - is six times higher, Ijjasz-Vasquez said.

In less developed nations, uncollected waste is typically heaviest near less affluent neighborhoods and slums. For scavengers, discarded food in the heaps of trash provides sustenance and a livelihood.

Rag pickers, as they are called, scavenge for food and recyclable materials at New Delhi's 70-acre, 100-foot-high Ghazipur landfill. ( Rick Loomis / Los Angeles Times )

At the same time, those who forage through the dumps expose themselves to hazards such as lead and mercury and infectious agents.

Trash also causes a financial burden. Cities in developing countries spend 20% to 50% of their budgets dealing with waste management, a hardship for cash-strapped nations, Ijjasz-Vasquez said.

In the U.S., about $200 billion a year is spent on solid waste management and lost energy resources from disposing trash, according to Dancy.

So what's the solution?

"Many people think it is just about getting an incinerator and it's all fixed," said Ijjasz-Vasquez. "This is part of the solution, but technical and engineering solutions are not a silver bullet."

The key is ensuring the waste actually gets collected for disposal, Ijjasz-Vasquez said. "You can't do anything if you have a fancy landfill and there's no way to get the waste there."

Changing behavior so that people and societies are encouraged to reduce and recycle waste is also crucial.

Since 2000, the World Bank has contributed about $4.5 billion to support 329 solid waste programs around the globe. They include projects such as basic trash collection and disposal, reuse and recycling, and initiatives aimed at changing habits related to waste.

A woman collects aluminum cans from the garbage after Brazil's Carnival parade at the Sambadrome in Rio de Janeiro on Feb. 9, 2016. (Leo Correa / Associated Press)

In some countries, informal waste workers have been given formal employment opportunities in waste management.

In the United States, where recycling programs have been operating in full force for years, some experts believe the answer to reducing waste lies in charging for its disposal by weight or other metrics.

WasteZero promotes a bag-based "pay-as-you-throw" program. Used in more than 800 cities and counties across the country, the program charges residents a set fee in cash for each bag they dispose of at a drop-off location.

The program has resulted in an average waste reduction of 44% and often doubles recycling rates, according to WasteZero's statistics.

"When you charge for something, people use less of it, and in this case it's less trash," Dancy said.
ALSO Happy Earth Day! 6 places to celebrate in California this weekend The Paris climate accord is about to be signed. Here's what happens next Obama's environmental agenda faces obstacles at home

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The world's trash crisis, and why many Americans are oblivious - Los Angeles Times

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As nations around the globe observe Earth Day, one of the most daunting issues facing the world is the mounting waste problem, which impairs public health, pollutes the environment and threatens to drown some poor countries in toxicity. More than half the world's population does not have access to regular trash collection, a grim statistic given the amount of garbage produced globally.

# data[].attributes.body
If I were President I would improve public schools, so that everyone has access to a quality education. We know that quality public education is not so good.  We all have to have access to an independent quality education of our social class, and the Government should ensure its population.  This, we will have more successful people, which will do well not only for the image of the country and the economy also.

# data[].attributes.body
They have the highest profit margin in the world, however, any crises that mourn the government and threaten to lay off employees if the government does not reduce rates. Lower your profit margin, right? My opinion is: Turn around. Do not you want to lower the price, invest in electric cars and make whole cars? Someone will.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The future will be rocky for auto companies unable to improve returns on capital.

The global auto industry is more challenged than many people realize. On the surface, performance is strong. Worldwide sales reached a record 88 million autos in 2016, up 4.8 percent from a year earlier, and profit margins for suppliers and auto makers (also known as original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs) are at a 10-year high. Nonetheless, viewed through the lens of two critical performance indicators, the industry is in serious trouble.

First, total shareholder return (TSR): Over the last five years, the annual rates of return that the S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average achieved for investors (including dividends) were 14.8 percent and 10.1 percent, respectively. In that period, average auto maker TSR was only 5.5 percent. Second, return on invested capital: In 2016, the top 10 OEMs returned an anemic 4 percent, about half of the industry's cost of capital. The leading 100 suppliers have done a little better, just beating their costs of capital to enjoy a small positive return, after many years of negative net returns.

These numbers almost outweigh the positive sales and earnings results. They paint a picture of a sector that is a less attractive or less lucrative place to invest than other industries. This assessment suggests that there will be relatively few winners in the auto industry during the next five years and beyond. Those that do stand out will be the companies that harness their limited capital resources in creative ways, to navigate a still-unfolding and unfamiliar landscape.

To be sure, rates of return on capital have been a problem endemic to the auto industry for years, which is one reason for the many bankruptcies - or near liquidations - among OEMs and suppliers, particularly in the past decade or so. Surviving automotive companies have famously bent over backward to save pennies on every car or component they make. However, the situation is becoming more dire: The cost of capital is unlikely to come down from its already low inflation-adjusted levels, and new capital outlays are rising for advances in, among other areas, connected car and autonomous driving technology.

Indeed, what is particularly notable about the current wave of innovation in automobiles is not so much the speed with which it has emerged (though that is remarkable) as the breadth of the innovation - how much it is altering the basic contours and features of the traditional automobile and amplifying the difficulty and cost of manufacturing cars. Ubiquitous electronics, a variety of digital services, and novel powertrains and connectivity systems are hastening the need for expensive new parts, components, and functions. For OEMs, the price tag is high - as much as 20 percent greater than the cost of the previous generation of automobiles.

The front seat may be reoriented to face the back seat, so passengers can converse as they would in their living rooms.

Twitter LinkedIn

Consider the car's interior, until recently a relatively stable component in terms of engineering and value to the automobile. Now, interior surfaces are potential real estate for ambitious enhancements of safety or entertainment. New technologies such as 3D laminated glass, haptic sensors, and augmented reality heads-up displays - which offer drivers alerts, safety aids, and warnings on invisible screens embedded in the windshield - have entered the vocabulary of traditional suppliers. Large navigation and entertainment display screens in the dashboard offer Web-based information and media as well as data arrays picked up from networked roads and other cars. The autonomous car will further up the ante, and soon. It will change the "living space" dimension of automotive interiors. The front seat may be reoriented to face the back seat, so passengers can converse as they would in their living rooms while the car cruises to a destination. Or seats could face a windshield that's become a large movie screen. Little wonder, then, that vehicle electronics could account for up to 20 percent of a car's value in the next two years, up from only about 13 percent in 2015.

Innovative software developments may make tomorrow's vehicles exceptionally expensive: OEMs and suppliers must earmark resources for acquiring new technology and recruiting experienced technical talent. Many of the new features going into cars require the expertise of software engineers, who by and large prefer the ostensibly more dynamic work environments of Silicon Valley startups to those of the automotive industry. As a result, some of the recent mergers and acquisitions in the automobile sector were undertaken to augment in-house technical knowledge and capabilities. For instance, German supplier ZF Group, which paid US$12.4 billion in 2015 to acquire TRW in order to expand into the electronic safety and connectivity market, took a 40 percent stake in vehicle radar supplier Ibeo Automotive Systems in 2016.

Taken as a whole, innovation-related challenges are reshaping traditional auto industry structures and relationships - in particular, by threatening the existing distribution of profits and the boundaries between OEMs and Tier One or Tier Two suppliers, as well as between automotive and tech companies. Some suppliers will fold, as their business goes away completely, and others will struggle because changes in technology content will bring OEMs or non-automotive suppliers into their markets as new competitors. Decisions about investments and industry alliances that are being made now will determine the dominant positions of tomorrow.

The rising cost of safety and environmental regulations is also a concern for the industry. In the U.S., potential regulatory relaxation under the new administration has stirred at least some hope that higher costs associated with tightened emissions standards might arrive more slowly or even be avoided. However, there is a question whether a change in federal U.S. regulations would make a significant difference because individual U.S. states - and the whole of Europe - can continue to push for stricter standards. In addition, the regulatory requirements in other parts of the world are quickly catching up to those in the more regulated countries. For instance, China now has emissions standards for large cities similar to Europe's, with only a brief (one- or two-year) grace period for smaller cities. Moreover, the real environmental challenges that underlie these trends are not going away and will ultimately have to be confronted.

A new road map

Considering these disparate pressures on costs, there is no easy formula that OEMs or suppliers can use to improve their return on capital. The solution will likely come from a combination of actions. Part of the answer lies in consolidation, which reduces industry capital requirements by eliminating competition and combining two manufacturing and design footprints into one. To a degree, these goals explain 2016's robust supplier M&A volume, continuing the trend of the previous year's record deal value, according to PwC's Global Automotive M&A Deals Insights Year-end 2016 report.

However, consolidation is not the only solution - and in fact not even an attractive solution for companies struggling to fund new innovations. Auto makers in particular will need to examine other strategic channels for relief. We believe that OEMs should consider three actions:

Share platforms and manufacturing. When the goal is to improve efficiency in capital outlays, a good place to start is with platform (or chassis) and powertrain investments. Now that each auto maker is designing and building its own engines, transmissions, and related equipment, the amount of duplication within the industry is extraordinary. This is especially wasteful because consumers rarely buy cars for the platform - instead, they focus on such attributes as styling, quality, and reliability. Many OEMs, of course, already "repurpose" platforms across brands and models. However, platform sharing among OEMs is rare. One of the few examples is Nissan's deal with Daimler to jointly develop the MFA platform, which is used on Nissan's Infiniti QX30 model and Mercedes' CLA and GLA models. In the U.S., GM and Ford are jointly designing a new 10-speed transmission (their second generation of transmission collaboration). In both cases, the companies expect cost savings, particularly in R&D and materials procurement.

If auto makers expanded their cooperative efforts, the industry would essentially be smart-sizing, the way the airplane manufacturing sector has over its long history. In the very beginning of aeronautics, the Wright Brothers and companies that grew in their wake made their own engines. Before long, a group of separate businesses emerged to produce engines, each of them competing to improve and advance the equipment. As aircraft engine technology advanced rapidly, jet engines became the dominant design - and having a spate of companies making the same part proved costly. The industry responded by consolidating, resulting in just a few independent aircraft engine manufacturers and a more efficient supply market.

The similarity to having many OEMs and suppliers producing virtually the same automobile transmissions is clear. An approach like the aircraft industry's may lead to potentially more valuable auto partnerships than platform sharing: namely, jointly manufacturing vehicles. This, too, is already happening in isolated cases. The difficulty of eking out profits from small cars long ago prompted Toyota and Groupe PSA to share production at a plant in Kolin, in the Czech Republic. Similarly, we have seen rebadging across brands in markets where sales volume is low. For instance, Renault, Nissan, and GM have been cooperating in manufacturing some light commercial vehicles, virtually identical products sold under three different brands.

By removing excess capacity and concentrating supply, these collaborative solutions offer some of the same benefits as industry consolidation - in particular, improvements in capital efficiency and capital returns.

Offload more development work to technology suppliers. Many automotive companies are highly involved in developing the new technologies their customers want - whether it is the human-machine interface for infotainment, autonomous features, or the components for electrification. OEMs need to identify which aspects of a vehicle's digital features they can hand off to tech industry partners that have more expertise in designing and producing digital components and software.

In these relationships with Silicon Valley, OEMs can retain a proprietary hold on interfaces as well as on connectivity and infotainment systems that distinguish them from competitors. Some early initiatives (such as BMW i Ventures, a venture capital fund based in Silicon Valley, and Toyota Connected, a partnership with Microsoft) offer glimpses of how the auto-tech ecosystem might work.

Redesign distribution models.Upward of 15 percent of a car's cost typically goes to distribution. There is of course some variation by country and segment; for instance, fleet sales are less expensive than retail. However, the percentage is generally higher than it needs to be. Although OEMs are locked into dealer relationships in the U.S. and Europe by complex and often antediluvian rules, they should begin to explore and lobby for approaches that will reduce their costs by using more efficient channels to reach car buyers. These changes in the distribution system should ultimately aim to cut costs by minimizing the number and expense of retail outlets and using technology for better inventory control.

Savings could come from selling via Web channels. In the U.S., OEMs are barred from bypassing dealerships, a prohibition that electric carmaker Tesla is campaigning to eliminate. Rather than opposing Tesla, as some auto makers have, U.S. OEMs should view this potential change as an opportunity to innovate. OEMs are finding that as customers use the Internet to research car purchases, they do less shopping in person. Car buyers are now visiting between one and one-and-a-half dealers before buying a car, compared with visiting four or five a generation ago. Using analytics to assess this data for demographic and location trends, auto makers hope to gain savings from inventory and dealer facilities management. They can target customer preferences more effectively and place the appropriate mix of retail formats in the right areas.

Improving the dealer model would be a plus for OEMs and a relief for customers, who by and large want a haggle-free, simple experience - and can't seem to find one. That is why in the U.S., the auto sales program of warehouse club Costco, which represents consumers in negotiations with car dealers, has become popular. Costco assisted on almost half a million car purchases in 2015, comparable to the volume at some of the country's top dealership groups.

Broadly speaking, OEMs have more leeway than suppliers to implement aspects of this road map - largely because they are at the top of the food chain and in a better position to influence ground rules than those below them. Given these constraints, suppliers should focus on two areas. First, they should position themselves in a profitable part of the vehicle ecosystem. Whether the end product is differentiated or a commodity, suppliers need to be sure they have the best organizational and operational capabilities for their niche in the current and future industry structure. Second, they need to optimize their business model. For suppliers of commodities, this involves a relentless focus on minimizing costs. For other suppliers that are able to differentiate their products or operations - through technology innovation, patents, an advantageous manufacturing footprint, or superior logistics and supply chains - the challenge is to build upon these assets by creatively upgrading them while enjoying the benefits of the price premium. In short, suppliers must recognize the world they inhabit and make sure that they can effectively navigate it.

Auto makers often expend too much energy - and money - on vehicle design and components of vehicles that have little impact on customers' decisions.

Twitter LinkedIn

The sheer number of OEMs (and suppliers) in many segments has in the past prompted hasty partnerships and investments. Poor decisions have been made in an effort to avoid falling behind competitors rather than to maintain a logical, suitable path for growth. In many cases, an OEM would hear about a hot market and establish a plant or distribution arm there, only to find out that its models and brands were not a good fit for that region. Auto makers often expend too much energy - and money - on vehicle design and components of vehicles that have little impact on customers' decisions. (That's why when an auto maker exits a disappointing market, as GM is hoping to do through the proposed sale of its European operations to PSA, industry returns on capital tick up.)

For companies in any industry, deciding what to invest in is complicated. In the auto sector, where we are already witnessing revolutionary product changes and where more are certain to come, it is especially difficult. So viewing the sector through the lens of return on capital is absolutely critical. The current low rates of return are unsustainable in this environment, and improving returns will ensure that the industry can continue to attract the capital it requires to create the types of vehicles customers want most.
PwC US senior associate Kunal Arora contributed research and analysis.

Our new book on Fit for Growth
A practical approach to business transformation.
Find out more

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The future will be rocky for auto companies unable to improve returns on capital. The global auto industry is more challenged than many people realize. On the surface, performance is strong. Worldwide sales reached a record 88 million autos in 2016, up 4.8 percent from a year earlier, and profit margins for suppliers and auto makers (also known as original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs) are at a 10-year high.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it's politicians, not people who should listen to someone here. Because today they speak and hear nothing. We hear and are never heard. So I reversed it. Put these guys in a room 8 hours a day. Who wants to talk to them goes there and they are bound to listen. There are no selfish with people, babies on their lap and vague debates on TV.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
by Nancy Watzman
Guest post by Kalev Leetaru
Today the Internet Archive announces a new interactive timeline visualization-the Television Explorer -that lets you trace how any keyword-think "emails", "tax returns", "alt-right"-has been covered on U.S. television news over the past half-decade.
See the Television Explorer, a new tool for exploring TV News.
Over the past year and a half, the GDELT Project and the Internet Archive's Television News Archive have worked closely together to visualize how U.S. television news has covered the contentious 2016 political campaign.

One of the tools we created was the 2016 Candidate Television Tracker, which used closed captioning to count how many times each of the presidential candidates was mentioned on television and offered a day-by-day timeline showing the ebbs and flows of who was " winning" the free media wars. (Answer: President-elect Donald Trump.) This tool was used by such media outlets as The Atlantic, The Washington Post, FiveThirtyEight, and The Guardian, among many others.

Now we are adapting this tool to allow more sophisticated searches: rather than just the presidential candidates, now you can trace television news coverage of any keyword of your choosing. You can even run advanced searches that find words in conjunction with other works or phrases, such as finding mentions of Hillary Clinton that also discuss her email server. All search results are available for download via CSV and JSON export, making it possible for data journalists, researchers, and advocates to fine tune their analysis of the data.

When searching, you get back a visual timeline showing how often that word or phrase has appeared on American television news over the past half-decade. Nearly two million hours of television news totaling more than 5.7 billion words from over 150 distinct stations spanning July 2009 to present (though not all stations were monitored for the entire period) are searchable in this interface.

Unlike the Internet Archive's Television New Archive interface, which returns results at the level of an hour or half-hour "show," the interface here reaches inside of those six and a half years of programming and breaks the more than one million shows into individual sentences and counts how many of those sentences contain your keyword of interest. Instead of reporting that CNN had 24 hour-long shows yesterday that mentioned Donald Trump one or more times, the interface here will count how many sentences uttered on CNN yesterday mentioned his name-a vastly more accurate metric for assessing media attention.

Explore how CNN covered the presidential campaign of 2012 versus 2016 and understand just how big of a media event this year's election really was. See precisely when Edward Snowden burst onto the scene and how Wikileaks got more coverage during the 2016 presidential election than its debut in 2010. Watch the seasonal spikes of Thanksgiving, or see how ebola received little attention, even as thousands died in Africa, becoming a topic only after the first Americans became infected.

Using the "near" search feature, plot coverage of Wikileaks that also mentioned either "Podesta," "email," or "emails" nearby and discover that FOX paid far more attention to the DNC and Podesta email hacks than CNN, MSNBC, CNBC or Bloomberg. In contrast, CNN focused more intensely on the Trayvon Martin shooting (Aljazeera America and Bloomberg were not yet being monitored by the Archive), while Aljazeera led coverage of the Michael Brown and Eric Garner deaths.

Search for " ivory" to see that Aljazeera America (which ceased operation in April 2016) devoted vastly more of its coverage to elephant poaching in Africa than any other monitored national network. It also paid the most attention to " Africa" and to the " refugee" crisis. On the other hand, Bloomberg has devoted much more of its time to " China" and to the economic crisis in " Greece " last year.

We look forward to seeing what people do with this new tool Please share your favorite searches on Twitter with the hashtag "#internetarchivetvsearch". If you have any questions, please email kalev.leetaru5@gmail.com or nancyw@archive.org.
Kalev Leetaru is an independent data journalist.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Political TV Ad Archive " New research tool for visualizing two million hours of television news

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
by Nancy Watzman Guest post by Kalev Leetaru Today the Internet Archive announces a new interactive timeline visualization-the Television Explorer -that lets you trace how any keyword-think "emails", "tax returns", "alt-right"-has been covered on U.S. television news over the past half-decade. See the Television Explorer, a new tool for exploring TV News.