Want to know how your hospital ranks in safety? Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grades (formerly known as Hospital Safety Scores) are assigned to more than 2,600 general acute-care hospitals across the nation twice annually. The Safety Grade is becoming the gold standard measure of patient safety.
Leapfrog works under the guidance of a seven-member Blue Ribbon Expert Panel to select 30 measures and develop a scoring methodology. The Expert Panel is made up of patient safety experts from across the country — MDs and PhDs from major universities, such as Stanford University and Johns Hopkins University.
The data for Leapfrog’s scoring are national performance measures from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), the Leapfrog Hospital Survey, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the American Hospital Association’s Annual Survey and Health Information Technology Supplement.
Taken together, those performance measures produce a single letter grade (A, B, C, D) that represents a hospital’s overall performance in keeping patients safe from preventable harm and medical errors. The Leapfrog Hospital Safety Grade methodology has been peer reviewed and published in the Journal of Patient Safety.
Note: A hospital must have enough safety data available for Leapfrog’s experts to issue it a letter grade. At this time, Leapfrog is unable to assign a grade to military or VA hospitals, critical access hospitals, specialty hospitals, children’s hospitals, outpatient surgery centers, etc. Leapfrog is studying ways to rate them in the future. To find out the safety grade of your hospital:
Click here or go to http://www.hospitalsafetygrade.org/your-hospitals-safety-grade/about-the-grade.
At the top of the page is a green horizontal bar “How Safe is Your Hospital?”. Select your city/state or search by your zip code.
You’ll be surprised by the ratings. As an example, a hospital in Fort Smith, Arkansas — Mercy Hospital — has a top “A” grade, whereas a hospital in San Francisco, CA — Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center (formerly, San Francisco General Hospital) — is rated the lowest grade of “D”.
So what grade did your hospital get? ~Eowyn
From Bloomberg: Facebook Inc. said it won’t punish employees who take time off to join pro-immigrant protests on May 1. And, in a nod to security staff, janitors, shuttle-bus drivers and others who work for Facebook contractors on campus, the company also said it will investigate if any of its vendors illegally crack down on their employees’ protest rights. “At Facebook, we’re committed to fostering an inclusive workplace where employees feel comfortable expressing their opinions and speaking up,” a spokesman wrote in an emailed statement. “We support our people in recognizing International Workers’ Day and other efforts to raise awareness for safe and equitable employment conditions.”
Facebook notified employees of its policy in a posting on an internal forum April 14. A spokesman said it applies regardless of whether workers notify the company ahead of time. The Menlo Park, California, company also said it would re-evaluate its ties to any vendor if it breaks the law that protects workers’ rights to organize and protect themselves.
“It’s important not just to the engineers and H-1B holders that are traditionally thought of as the immigrants in tech but also to folks who are subcontracted but work side-by-side on those campuses,” said Derecka Mehrens, co-founder of Silicon Valley Rising, a union-backed coalition. “Immigrants play a critical role in the tech sector — both as engineers and coders but also in keeping tech campuses running smoothly.” Many tech companies have been vocal in their opposition to aspects of Trump’s agenda. Facebook has criticized Trump’s immigration moves. At a rally in January at Google’s headquarters in Mountain View, California, CEO Sundar Pichai and co-founder Sergey Brin spoke against Trump’s executive order that closed U.S. borders to people from several majority-Muslim nations. Both companies, along with Apple Inc., Microsoft Corp. and Intel Corp., are among more than 120 firms that signed a February court filing opposing the travel ban.
Read the rest of the story here.
I’m sure we can trust Facebook to be accurate and unbiased. Really. Seriously.
From Yahoo: Facebook is going to start fact-checking, labeling, and burying fake news and hoaxes in its News Feed, the company said Thursday.
The decision comes after Facebook received heated criticism for its role in spreading a deluge of political misinformation during the US presidential election, like one story that falsely said the Pope had endorsed Donald Trump. To combat fake news, Facebook has teamed up with a shortlist of media organizations, including Snopes and ABC News, that are part of an international fact-checking network led by Poynter, a nonprofit school for journalism in St. Petersburg, Florida.
Starting as a test with a small percentage of its users in the US, Facebook will make it easier to report news stories that are fake or misleading. Once third-party fact-checkers have confirmed that the story is fake, it will be labeled as such and demoted in the News Feed. A company representative told Business Insider that the social network will also use other signals, like algorithms that detect whether a story that appears fake is going viral, to determine if it should label the story as fake and bury it in people’s feeds.
“We’ve focused our efforts on the worst of the worst, on the clear hoaxes spread by spammers for their own gain, and on engaging both our community and third party organizations,” Facebook News Feed chief Adam Mosseri said in a company blog post on Thursday.
A team of Facebook researchers will also review website domains and send sites that appear to be fake or spoofed (like “washingtonpost.co”) to third-party fact-checkers, a Facebook representative said. Of the 42 news organizations that have committed to Poynter’s fact-checking code of ethics, Facebook is starting out with the following four: Snopes, Factcheck.org, ABC News, and PolitiFact. The Associated Press will also be a fact-checking partner.
“We are only involved to the extent that Facebook relies on the list of signatories to our code of principles as a starting point for the organizations it chooses to verify,” a Poynter representative told Business Insider. “Facebook is the only organization certifying third party fact-checkers on its platform.”
Facebook has given its four initial fact-checking partners access to a tool that will let them label stories in the News Feed as fake, a Facebook spokesperson said. The person said Facebook is not paying the organizations to fact-check.
The websites that Facebook determines to be fake news organizations or spoofed domains will also not be able to sell ads on the social network. Owners of fake-news sites can make thousands of dollars per month through internet ads. Facebook has repeatedly said that it’s not a media company, but rather an open technology platform that relies on media publishers and its users to share accurate information.
“We do not think of ourselves as editors,” Patrick Walker, Facebook’s head of media partnerships, said during a recent journalism conference in Dublin. “We believe it’s essential that Facebook stay out of the business of deciding what issues the world should read about. That’s what editors do.”
Not only is the federal government’s National Security Agency (NSA) tracking our emails, phone calls, snail mail, and money transactions, now comes news that Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook, a non-government privately-owned business, is tracking you online and also listening to your cell phone! WLFA ABC10 reports that USF Professor Kelli Burns warns, “I don’t think that people realize how much Facebook is tracking every move we’re making online. Anything that you’re doing on your phone, Facebook is watching.” It all starts with enabling the microphone feature in your cell phone’s settings. Once you do, choose your words carefully because Facebook will be listening.
For that matter, Facebook actually admits all this in an online statement:
“We use your microphone to identify the things you’re listening to or watching, based on the music and TV matches we’re able to identify.”
Facebook’s eavesdropping ostensibly is to match ads to the user. Facebook listens for certain buzz words in phone conversations, then places certain ads in your Facebook feed which match your interests front.
WLFA ABC10 confirmed this with a test by having Professor Burns enable the microphone feature on her cell phone, then talk aloud, phone in hand: “I’m really interested in going on an African safari. I think it’d be wonderful to ride in one of those jeeps.”
Less than 60 seconds later, the first post on her Facebook feed was a safari story that seemed to pop up out of nowhere. The story even mentioned a jeep. Then a car ad also appeared on her page.
USF graduate student Danielle Quichocho is not surprised by Facebook’s eavesdropping and is planning her thesis around this very topic. She said, “It’s all about the bottom line, and if this is a way to fatten that bottom line, they’re gonna do it. If you agree to the terms and conditions, then you know what to expect. The internet is forever! You leave a footprint there. They’re going to find it. That’s just how it is.”
It gets worse.
Zach Epstein reports for Fox News that even people who don’t have a Facebook account will now be tracked.
On May 26, 2016, Facebook announced that it is changing the way its advertising works on third-party websites and apps called Audience Network.
Until May 26, Facebook’s off-site ads were only shown to Facebook users. Now, that will no longer be the case.
As reported by The Wall Street Journal, Facebook’s off-site ads will now be shown to people who are not registered Facebook users. That means webgoers without Facebook accounts will now be tracked by Facebook so that the ads they’re served will be “better targeted to their tastes.” Facebook can track a user across most or even all of the web pages he or she visits. That information is then stored and analyzed by Facebook so that advertisements served by Facebook’s Audience Network partners are more likely to be relevant to these users.
It’s rich that Zuckerberg slams Trump for “blocking free expression” when Facebook specifically blocks FOTM’s gun control posts.
Via Daily Mail: Mark Zuckerberg took aim at Donald Trump in his keynote speech at Facebook’s F8 developer conference on Tuesday. Without naming the GOP frontrunner, the Facebook CEO slammed Trump’s plan to build a wall between the US and Mexico. His thinly-veiled dig came during a speech about freedom of expression and immigration as he warned America risks cutting itself off from the world. ‘As I look around and I travel around the world, I’m starting to see people and nations turning inward, against this idea of a connected world and a global community,’ he said.
‘I hear fearful voices calling for building walls and distancing people they label as others. For blocking free expression, for slowing immigration, reducing trade, and in some cases around the world even cutting access to the internet.‘
Self-righteous hypocrite Zuckerberg
Immigration, he told the audience in San Francisco’s Fort Mason center, fuels economic success. ‘Instead of building walls we can help build bridges,’ he added as he mentioned Facebook’s plans to launch a plane that will provide internet signal to disconnected parts of the world.
He concluded: ‘It takes courage to choose hope over fear. People will always call you naive but it’s this hope and this optimism thats behind every important step forward.’
Zuckerberg has not given his backing to any specific candidate, but this is not the first time he has hit out at Donald Trump.
In February, the president of Zuckerberg’s pro-immigration lobby group FWD.us, Todd Sculte, described Trump’s policies and ‘horrible and fatal’ in an interview with CNBC ahead of the Iowa caucus. ‘For the first time, a major party [is] putting forth people who are saying they are going to round up and deport 11.5 million people; they’re going to eliminate high-skilled immigration,’ Schulte said. ‘And look, that may get you a win or second place in the Iowa caucuses. That is just a horrible and fatal position in a general election.’
He later tweeted: ‘Trump’s a hack, runs for [sic] policy specifics. Be it immigration, trade, foreign policy – answer is always he’s a strongman, others are weak. On immigration, he wandered into something awful that credentialed past apostasies as ok – rounding up every last undocumented immigrant.’
According to FEC records read by Inc, Zuckerberg received a reimbursement from Marco Rubio’s campaign after the Florida senator dropped out of the race. His words on Tuesday come just days before the New York primary, which Trump is expected to win easily.
Riiiight….because ISIS just needs a hug or something.
From The Daily Mail: Billionaire Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has called for ‘understanding, empathy and love’ in order to defeat terrorism. Zuckerberg wrote to his followers on the social media site in the wake of a series of bombings by various terrorist groups that killed dozens and injured hundreds in Ankara, Brussels and Lahore.
He said: ‘Each of these attacks was different, but all had a common thread: they were carried out with a goal to spread fear and distrust, and turn members of a community against each other.
‘I believe the only sustainable way to fight back against those who seek to divide us is to create a world where understanding and empathy can spread faster than hate. Where every single person in every country feels connected and cared for and loved. That’s the world we can and must build together.’
Poor ISIS…they just need some TLC
Earlier this month 37 people were killed and 125 wounded in Turkey’s capital Ankara when a car bomb planted by the Kurdistan Freedom Falcons detonated in Guvenpark, in the city’s south. Then three suicide bomb blasts in the Belgian capital of Brussels killed 35 people and wounded another 300 after ISIS fighters attacked the city’s airport and a subway station.
That attack was followed by another bomb blast in Lahore, Pakistan, after an Al Qaeda affiliated splinter-group detonated a bomb in a crowded park, claiming to have been targeting Christians.
Since the bomb and gun attack in Paris last year that killed 130 people, Facebook has offered users a ‘check in’ feature to tell friends they’re safe if they live in the vicinity of such an atrocity. However the social media site was derided online following the Lahore bombing, after offering users living thousands of miles away from the region the opportunity to report they were safe.
Zuckerberg, the world’s sixth richest man, did not address that issue in his post, instead merely acknowledging the feature had been put to use frequently in the recent past. He added: ‘We activated Safety Check in Pakistan after a bomb targeted children and their families in a park in Lahore.
‘Over the last two months, we have activated Safety Check several times for acts of terror – including in Turkey and Belgium – so people in the area can let friends and loved ones know they’re safe.’ Instagram, the photo sharing company owned by Facebook, also came under fire recently for promoting a potential ‘war crime’ after an account surfaced allegedly showing Iraqi soldiers fighting ISIS in the Middle East.
Dubbed ‘Iraqi Swat’, the account regularly uploaded images purporting to show captured ISIS fighters and giving followers the opportunity to vote on whether they lived or were killed. Gideon Boas, a former legal officer at the ICC for Yugoslavia, told reporters that the images ‘unquestionably’ appeared to show a war crime.
A spokesperson for Instagram said: ‘Content which contains serious threats to public or personal safety is not allowed on Instagram. We removed this content as soon as it was reported to us.’
Read the whole story here.
The Huffington Post, the liberal website founded by Arianna Huffington, has a branch in Germany, also called The Huffington Post (HuffPo).
In an article (originally published on August 14, 2015 and updated through August 16), HuffPo (Germany) published the names and photos of people who had commented on social media opposing the ongoing “refugee-migrant” invasion. If you post a comment on their website or Facebook page or any social media, you will be named.
The lead author of the article is HuffPo (Germany)’s chief editorSebastian Matthes. The article begins by referring to a prior HuffPo article praising Germans who welcomed the “refugees.” Soon after that article was published, HuffPo was flooded with “hateful” comments by people opposed to Germany’s migrant policy, such as “Europe did not invite the parasites,” “our women are harassed,” “kick them out,” and “Sabrina and her ilk should be sold to the ISIS, where they can enjoy the benefits of Islam wholeheartedly.”
It is also claimed that individuals who were quoted in the article received hate mail. One of them asked HuffPo to delete his name because he feared for his family’s safety. HuffPo continues (my paraphrase of Google’s translation of the German article):
Now, we can do what we Germans have been doing for too long — we can dismiss the haters as “crazy idiots” and just look the other way. For years, we failed to recognize and confront xenophobia and racism. But no more.
The Internet has become a violent mob who act contrary to the values of our Basic Law. It is time for us to defend democracy and confront the haters by revealing their faces and names. In so doing, we are simply exercising the same freedom of expression that they espouse.
Below is a collage of their faces:
The rest of the HuffPo article is a long list of the names and comments made by those who oppose Germany’s generous migrant policy. Pamela Geller points out the gravity of what HuffPo did:
If you post a comment on their site or Facebook or any social media, you will be named. The Huffington Post is a global news organization. This is putting a target on anyone’s head that refuses to go along with the leftist/Islamic war on freedom. These are the lengths the left will go to impose the sharia (Islamic law) on the unwilling.
I have long said the media is the enemy. It’s why I refer to them as the enemedia. They abdicated their role as a news gathering entity and morphed into an activist organization viciously pursuing an anti-freedom agenda.
Germans that are posting anti-refugee posts on Facebook or any other social media site, are being shut down. Facebook, Twitter, etc, and their faces and accounts are being posted. It’s a witch hunt.
[German] Chancellor Merkel is working Mark Zuckerberg to censor anti-invasion FB posts.
Daily Mail: Facebook is ‘illegally’ tracking people’s internet searches across the web, even if they do not have an account with the social network. The technology company is using so-called internet ‘cookies’ – little pieces of tracking data – to collect information about people’s activity online, each time they visit a website which features a Facebook button. Academics in Belgium claim that Mark Zuckerberg’s social network is breaching EU privacy laws by placing the tracking cookies on computers without the user’s consent to log their browsing data.
Facebook buttons are on more than 13 million ordinary websites, including those run by the government and the National Health Service, and allow users to do things such as ‘like’ a website, or ‘share’ the link on their own Facebook page.
A new report from the University of Leuven and a Brussels university claims that Facebook is tracking internet users in Europe for two years even if they have expressly opted out. Facebook has more than 1.3 billion users but there are millions more visits from people who are not signed up. The researchers say Facebook is putting tracking cookies on internet users’ laptops, PCs and phones when the visit facebook.com – so they can target them with online advertising. This includes anyone clicking on a fan page or other pages still available without a login, or even when they visit some of the 13 million pages with a Facebook module on it and do not click on it.
The company first plants a tracking cookie on a user’s computer whenever they visit a website hosted on facebook.com, such as a page for a friend’s birthday party, a fan page for a celebrity, or for a brand or shop. After that, any web page they visit which features a Facebook button will relay information back to the social network.
And the problem only becomes worse if they try to protect their privacy online, by ‘opting out’ of allowing web companies to track them. Under EU privacy law websites must gain consent before using a cookie, with few exceptions, and websites must ask users to accept cookies when they visit for the first time. Privacy campaigners have today accused Facebook of taking ‘staggering’ liberties by behaving in this way, and suggested that people can only really protecting themselves if they stop using the internet.
But cookies are also used to gather information about what websites people have visited, at which times of day, so that companies can target them with carefully tailored adverts. This practice, known as ‘behavioural advertising ‘, means that users who research a particular car online, for example, would then see an advert for the same car when they visit an unrelated website.
Users can theoretically stop companies from tracking their information in this way by clicking an ‘ad choices’ button, featured on many websites. Once they click that button, people are invited to pick and choose which internet companies are allowed to track them, or just ban them altogether. However, researchers said today that Facebook takes the request to ‘opt out’ of online tracking as a cue to plant an extra cookie on people’s computers instead. The special cookie, called ‘datr’, gives that person’s computer or smartphone a unique tracking number, and allows Facebook to follow its activity for the next two years.
Report author Brendan Van Alsenoy told the Guardian: ‘European legislation is really quite clear on this point. To be legally valid, an individual’s consent towards online behavioural advertising must be opt-in. Facebook cannot rely on users’ inaction – not opting out – to infer consent. As far as non-users are concerned, Facebook really has no legal basis whatsoever to justify its current tracking practices.’
The report’s authors said that those who make the effort to opt out of getting Facebook cookies are given one as a result. Co-author Günes Acar said: ‘If people who are not being tracked by Facebook use the ‘opt out’ mechanism proposed for the EU, Facebook places a long-term, uniquely identifying cookie, which can be used to track them for the next two years.’ ‘If you take measures to protect your privacy from Facebook, you are actually going to be followed more on the internet,’ said Rob Heyman, another of the authors of the report.
Privacy campaigners said today that Facebook seemed to have forgotten that people are private citizens, rather than money-making machines. ‘It is both staggering and disappointing that Facebook feels the need to track non-Facebook users, people who don’t want to interact with the social platform,’ said Renate Samson, chief executive of the lobby group Big Brother Watch.
‘Just because internet companies can do something doesn’t mean that they should do it. This takes it a big step further than what [European Commission Attorney Bernhard] Shima was saying, which is that if you don’t want to be spied on, you should opt out of Facebook. Actually, you need to opt out of the internet.’ Mr. Shima said last week that people should close their Facebook accounts if they want to ensure that US security services are not spying on their information.
Facebook today said that the report was inaccurate and the researchers had persistently ignored their request to meet. A Facebook spokesman said: ‘This report contains factual inaccuracies. The authors have never contacted us, nor sought to clarify any assumptions upon which their report is based. Neither did they invite our comment on the report before making it public. However, we remain willing to engage with them and hope they will be prepared to update their work in due course.’
‘Earlier this year we updated our terms and policies to make them more clear and concise, to reflect new product features and to highlight how we’re expanding people’s control over advertising. We’re confident the updates comply with applicable laws including EU law.‘
Two peas in a pod…
Facebook was last month accused of acting in violation of EU privacy laws by the same academics who claimed they had just expanded its old policy, not changed it, which Facebook denied. The group claimed the social media site ‘placed too much burden’ on users, rather than protecting themselves.
‘If a Facebook user opts out, Facebook promises to stop collecting or using browsing information for the purpose of showing ads. Running a number of tests, we confirmed that Facebook still tracks its users when they visit a webpage containing Facebook social plugins, even after the user “opts out”,’ the researchers concluded. Facebook tracks its users across websites even if they do not make use of social plug-ins, and even if they are not logged in.’
In January an Austrian court said it will consider a class action against Facebook by 25,000 people who are claiming their privacy has been breached.
The David v Goliath case is being spearheaded by law student Max Schrems, who wants Mark Zuckerberg’s social media site to compensate him and his supporters with a symbolic £400 each. A hearing in Vienna on April 9 will consider whether the lawsuit is admissible.
Mr. Schrems began his legal challenge last June, claiming that Facebook supplied personal information to the US Prism spy programme. Over the next few months 25,000 people added their names to the lawsuit. The programme is the U.S. secret service’s worldwide monitoring and data mining system and was exposed by whistleblower Edward Snowden last year.
Mr. Schrems is claiming damages of £397 (€500) per supporter, meaning that if the case was expanded and the activists won, Facebook would have to pay out a total of £23.8million.