Even the brains of people with anxiety states can get used to fear

Jan. 30, 2013 ? Fear is a protective function against possible dangers that is designed to save our lives. Where there are problems with this fear mechanism, its positive effects are cancelled out: patients who have a social phobia become afraid of perfectly normal, everyday social situations because they are worried about behaving inappropriately or being thought of as stupid by other people. Scientists from the Centre for Medical Physics and Biomedical Technology and the University Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy at the MedUni Vienna have now discovered that this fear circuit can be deactivated, at least in part.

In a study by Ronald Sladky, led by Christian Windischberger (Centre for Medical Physics and Biomedical Technology), which has recently been published in the online journal PLOS ONE, functional magnetic resonance tomography was used to measure the changes in the brain activity of socially phobic patients and healthy test subjects while they were looking at faces. This experiment simulates social confrontation with other people without actually placing the individual in an intolerable situation of anxiety.

Permanent confrontation has a diminishing effect on anxiety "The study demonstrated that people with social phobia initially exhibit greater activity in the amygdala and in the medial, prefrontal cortex of the brain, however after a few faces this activity recedes," says Sladky. This contradicts the assumption made thus far that the emotional circuit of socially phobic individuals is unable to adapt adequately to this stress-inducing situation.

Permanent confrontation with the test task not only led to a solution to the "problem" being found more quickly among the patients with anxiety, but also to some areas of the brain being bypassed which otherwise were over-stimulated, a characteristic typical of anxiety. Says Sladky: "We therefore concluded that there are functional control strategies even in the emotional circuits of people with social phobia, although the mechanisms take longer to take effect in these individuals. The misregulation of these parts of the brain can therefore be compensated to a degree."

These findings could, according to Sladky, provide a starting point for the development of personalised training programmes that will help affected individuals to conquer unpleasant situations in their everyday lives more effectively. In Austria, around 200,000 people a year are affected by some form of social phobia. The number of people who suffer this condition without seeking help for it is likely to be very high, since many affected individuals fail to seek assistance or do so only too late as a result of their anxiety.

Cooperation for a better understanding of psychiatric conditions The recent study was developed from interdisciplinary research collaboration between the Centre for Medical Physics and Biomedical Technology (led by Wolfgang Drexler) and the University Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy (led by Siegfried Kasper). The aim of the collaboration project is to arrive at a better, neuroscientific understanding of psychiatric conditions in order to develop new possibilities for diagnosis and treatment.

The five research clusters at the MedUni Vienna Neurosciences and imaging are two of the five research clusters operating at the MedUni Vienna. These specialist areas are increasingly focusing on fundamental and clinical research. The three other research clusters at the MedUni Vienna are cancer research / oncology, allergology / immunology / infectious diseases and vascular / cardiac medicine.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:

---

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materials provided by Medical University of Vienna, via AlphaGalileo.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.

---

Journal Reference:

1. Ronald Sladky, Anna H?flich, Jacqueline Atanelov, Christoph Kraus, Pia Baldinger, Ewald Moser, Rupert Lanzenberger, Christian Windischberger. Increased Neural Habituation in the Amygdala and Orbitofrontal Cortex in Social Anxiety Disorder Revealed by fMRI. PLoS ONE, 2012; 7 (11): e50050 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050050

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.

Source: http://feeds.sciencedaily.com/~r/sciencedaily/strange_science/~3/cHKeHCWZ0BU/130130082451.htm

frank ocean wheres my refund

J.J. Abrams And 'Star Wars': What Do 'Star Trek' Fans Think?

'Some fans are upset,' TrekToday.com's Bonnie Malmat tells MTV News about Abrams' other 'Star' franchise.
By Josh Wigler

J.J. Abrams
Photo: Getty Images

Source: http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1700868/jj-abrams-star-wars-star-trek-fan-reactions.jhtml

Illinois Lottery texas lottery Dell

Pageonce Now Processes $1M In Mobile Bill Payments Each Day And Expects Payment Volume Run-Rate To Hit $1B By Mid-2013

The mobile payments space gets a lot of attention, especially as it seems that a new startup or financial institution launches "a new way to pay, issue rewards or power transactions from a mobile phone" every second, to borrow Leena's words. Yet, while this "fustercluck" draws most of the headlines, there's an equally large opportunity on the slightly-less-crowded side of the "mobile payments" market: Bill pay. Pageonce, the maker of a personal finance service for your mobile device, would seem to be the case-in-point.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/1MeOEpr_tb0/

London 2012 Soccer dwight howard Olympics closing ceremony PGA Championship 2012

Is Private Health Insurance More Costly Than Public Health ...

By John Goodman Filed under Health Alerts on January 9, 2013 with 14 comments

Uwe Reinhardt had a post the other day at The New York Times economics blog comparing Medicare with Medicare Advantage (MA) plans. He basically sifts through the evidence on which is less costly: Medicare (a public plan) or the private MA plans. But while his column is definitely worth reading, it does not go far enough. In fact, given the persistent obsession with this question ? especially by people on the left ? I don?t understand why competent health care economists don?t clear the air of nonsense more decisively.

I consider the titular question of this post a silly question. People who think this is a legitimate issue invariably are making errors in economics or committing errors of logic or misunderstanding? institutional details or (as is the case with Paul Krugman) making all three mistakes in a single editorial. Notice I didn?t say anything about empirical evidence. Tom Saving and I did a bit of that for Health Affairs sometime back. But, we don?t need empirical evidence to resolve issues that arise only because someone hasn?t mastered the syllogism.

To help everyone think through this, I offer five principles.

Principle 1: There is almost nothing the government can do that the private sector cannot do as well or better.

Do you think a surgeon is likely to perform better surgery or more efficient surgery if he gets his fee from the government instead of Blue Cross? How about a nurse? Or a hospital administrator? If the answer is ?no,? and it surely is, what is it about government that could possibly lower the cost of health care? The answer is: almost nothing.

It is sometimes said that government can produce things at a lower cost because the government doesn?t have to earn a profit. But people who say this never learned the concept of profit in Econ 101. Every hospital, every physician?s office, every other health care business requires capital. There is a cost of capital. If there are risks involved (the risk, for example, that aggregate fees will not be high enough to cover outlays) then the cost of capital is higher. These costs have nothing whatsoever to do with whether the entity is public or private.

Here is what is true: accountants do not typically record the cost of capital in the financial statements of public entities. But failure to record a cost doesn?t make it go away. To the contrary, ignoring the cost of capital in public accounting unquestionably makes public ventures prima facie less efficient ? because investment decisions will tend to be made without regard to their real costs.

What about the idea that whole systems (with all their complexity) might work better if they are public rather than private? For example, for years the auto companies have complained that health care costs are so much higher in the United States. than for auto workers across the border in Canada. If so, there is a straightforward remedy.

There is nothing that the Canadian government is doing that the auto companies and the unions cannot do for themselves. As I have written before, the auto companies can form an HMO and tell it to ration medical care the same way the Canadians ration care.

That the auto companies don?t even seriously consider this option (all the while urging government to consider it) is understandable. The reason is cultural. When a Canadian doctor has to ration care, she is likely to tell the patient, ?There is nothing more we can do.? The doctor almost never says, ?We could save you, but the government cares more about money than it cares about you.?

An American doctor, however, might well say, ?We could save you, but your employer cares more about profit that it cares about you? ? thus generating a lot of employee ill will.

This is a cultural issue, though, not an economic one.

Principle 2: The few things government can uniquely do can be done without public insurance.

The advocates of socialized medicine frequently claim that government can use its position as a monopsony (single) buyer of care to negotiate lower provider fees. This is what they envision happens in Canada, for example. In fact, governments usually don?t bargain with medical providers. They simply announce a low price they intend to pay and the suppliers of care can take it or leave it. That?s what happens in the U.S. Medicaid program, for example, and almost a third of doctors decide to leave it ? refusing to accept any new Medicaid patients.

However, and this is key, the government doesn?t need to pay provider fees in order to suppress them. It can simply impose price controls on all providers. In fact, if paying providers below-market fees is socially desirable, that is exactly what the government should do for all patients, not just the patients the government happens to insure. Such an act would not make health care more efficient, however, it would just shift costs from patients to the providers of care.

Remember: shifting costs is not the same thing as lowering costs.

Principle 3: Most public insurance in this country is actually administered by private insurance companies.

I can?t begin to count the number of people I have met who believe that BlueCross is evil because it is private and that Medicare is good because it is public. I usually ask, ?Who do you think runs Medicare?? Following an awkward silence I usually supply the answer: ?It?s BlueCross!? And other insurers.

From the beginning, Medicare and Medicaid have been mainly run by private contractors. Who else was going to do it? The government certainly had no experience doing so.

Now do you think that when BlueCross is called ?Medicare? it suddenly becomes more efficient than when it is called ?private insurer?? If not, then can we put this nonsense aside once and for all?

Principle 4: Most people with public insurance are in private sector health plans.

More than one out of every four Medicare beneficiaries is in a private Medicare Advantage plan and two-thirds [see here, page 13] of all Medicaid enrollees are in private plans under contract with state governments. In the future those numbers will likely rise. In fact, almost all of Medicaid will eventually be contracted out to the private sector as state governments desperately try to cope with the impact of Medicaid on state budgets. Why turn to the private sector? Because of the next principle.

Principle 5: It is only in the private sector that one finds anyone who has an incentive to lower costs without rationing care.

Most providers have an incentive to increase costs rather than lower them. Their incentive is to maximize against the payment formulas of third-party insurers ? whether public or private. And surprisingly, most private insurers also have no incentive to lower costs other than by negotiating lower provider fees. BlueCross, for example, has no incentive to lower Medicare?s costs when it is administering Medicare. When its clients are private employers, BlueCross (for reasons that are historical and institutional, but ultimately because of bad government policies) rarely interferes with the practice of medicine. In Dallas, for example, virtually every hospital in the Metroplex (no matter how efficient or inefficient) is in the BlueCross network.? Similarly just about every doctor (no matter how good or how bad) can be in the BlueCross network if he or she chooses.

However, there are providers who do have an incentive to lower costs and they appear to be responding to those incentives. Surprisingly, they are using some of the techniques the Obama administration says it likes (medical homes, coordinated care, evidence-based medicine, etc.) and that appear not to work well when the government funds pilot programs to try them out. Even more surprising, where these efforts to make medical care more cost effective are most visible is in the Medicare Advantage plans ? the very plans that president Obama and many Democrats in Congress seem to be hostile to.

I have previously reported on the efforts of IntegraNet, which appears to achieve good medical outcomes while holding costs down to about 70% of premium income. (Technically, that?s a 70% MLR.)

Two things are important to keep in mind when comparing what I have just said to the table in Uwe Reinhardt?s post. First, the people who are holding down costs and daily searching for new ways of doing so are not the insurance companies (the Medicare Advantage HMOs) ? at least as far as I can tell. They are separate companies (e.g., independent doctors associations) operating under contract with the HMOs. Second, if what I am saying is true, the real cost of delivering care under the Medicare Advantage program is much lower than anyone realizes and it?s mainly going to the profits of the HMOs and the entities they are contracting with.

That implies that more competition (ah, more privatization!) has the potential to considerably reduce the taxpayer?s future burden.

Source: http://healthblog.ncpa.org/is-private-health-insurance-more-costly-than-public-health-insurance-five-principles/

Kitty Wells Marissa Mayer

Video Marketing, The Dos And Donts For The Average Person

In order to keep up with the business competition in this world, you have to make use of many marketing techniques.

Some businesses go with internet marketing, others go with affiliate marketing or even network marketing.

There is another technique that can be just as useful called video marketing, and you?ll learn how to harness its power in this article.

Make the most of the resources that you have when creating a video for marketing.

Think of all the different people that you know. This can help you to come up with places to shoot your video and people that you can put in it.

The more that you can get done for free the better. Right??

Video marketing can often be informal.

People like marketing efforts that don?t look too forced or slick.

In other words do not try so much to look professional, instead focus more on the quality of the information you will share through your videos.

If you go overboard with your videos, they can seem too much like television commercials, and everyone has learned to tune those out.

If your video is a little ?rough,? that is okay. Make it personal and genuine. You will likely attract more viewers.

When making video, use a three category approach.

You?ll need to use showpiece, workhorse, and long-tail videos.

Showpiece videos simply use visual flare to make the business look presentable.

Workhorse videos give customers an insight as to what the business offers.

Long-tail videos address specific topics more in depth than the other videos.

Do you offer a variety of services in your business?

If so, consider using video marketing to explain the common services in your business.

Make a short video showing each type of service you do and how a customer can determine the level of service they need. This will inform your customer and likely increase sales.

So, show with video all the things that make your services a cut above the rest.

People love to see what goes on behind the scenes so give your viewers what they want. Making an unconventional video that highlights the offbeat side to your business or an insiders look can really help to keep things interesting.

It shows your viewers that you are more than just the products that you sell.

If you end up with a topic which runs really long, cut it into separate videos. For example, a five minute video could be cut into five one-minute long videos and released every business day for a week.

People will come back daily to see what?s next and you?ll have a whole week?s worth of content in one video!

A great way to engage users with video marketing is to leave a few questions unanswered or make your videos thought provoking.

This will encourage your viewers to engage you with comments and will give you a chance to speak to them on a personal level. When you communicate with your viewers, you end up building a bond with them on a personal level.

You want to make sure that you put out videos regularly.

Once people have seen your video and are familiar with it they will more than likely stop watching it. Posting new material will keep your viewers coming back to see what kinds of new things you are promoting.

Use your marketing video to highlight something original about your product or service.

Chances are you are competing with many other companies for customers so you need to show people why your company is different from the rest.

You can also express how your competitors do not meet your level of professionalism without naming names. Doing so can be viewed negatively so be sure to avoid it.

All of the other marketing techniques are great in their own right, but they don?t hold a candle to what video marketing can offer.

Video marketing adds a certain level of success that is unmatched by anything.

This article was packed with video marketing information, so use it to give your business more power.

?

==============================
Share and Comment this Post!!
==============================

Love&Harmony!

Sincerely,

- Freddy Gandarilla
?The Blogging Ninja?

Connect with me!

>>Skype: Freddygc1988

>>https://www.facebook.com/Snoopy240

P.S. Follow me for more valuable content! ? Join Me Today ?if you want to earn money online & work from home!

==================================================================== ====================================================================

Share the Knowledge ? come on!!

Source: http://internet-marketing-blog101.com/video-marketing-the-dos-and-donts-for-the-average-person/

justin beiber

Pan-Arab Al-Jazeera buys Current TV from Al Gore

FILE - In this Jan. 13, 2012 file photo, Former Vice President Al Gore, Current TV Chairman and Co-Founder, participates in the Television Critics Association Winter Press Tour in Pasadena , Calif. Al-Jazeera, the Pan-Arab news channel that has struggled to win space on American cable television, has acquired Current TV, Gore confirmed Wednesday, Jan. 2, 2013. (AP Photo/Danny Moloshok, File)

FILE - In this Jan. 13, 2012 file photo, Former Vice President Al Gore, Current TV Chairman and Co-Founder, participates in the Television Critics Association Winter Press Tour in Pasadena , Calif. Al-Jazeera, the Pan-Arab news channel that has struggled to win space on American cable television, has acquired Current TV, Gore confirmed Wednesday, Jan. 2, 2013. (AP Photo/Danny Moloshok, File)

LOS ANGELES (AP) ? With its purchase of left-leaning Current TV, the Pan-Arab news channel Al-Jazeera has fulfilled a long-held quest to reach tens of millions of U.S. homes. But its new audience immediately got a little smaller.

The nation's second-largest TV operator, Time Warner Cable Inc., dropped Current after the deal was confirmed Wednesday, a sign that the channel will have an uphill climb to expand its reach.

"Our agreement with Current has been terminated and we will no longer be carrying the service. We are removing the service as quickly as possible," the company said in a statement.

Still, the acquisition of Current, the news network that cofounded by former Vice President Al Gore, boosts Al-Jazeera's reach in the U.S. beyond a few large U.S. metropolitan areas including New York and Washington nearly ninefold to about 40 million homes.

Gore confirmed the sale Wednesday, saying in a statement that Al-Jazeera shares Current TV's mission "to give voice to those who are not typically heard; to speak truth to power; to provide independent and diverse points of view; and to tell the stories that no one else is telling."

Al-Jazeera, owned by the government of Qatar, plans to gradually transform Current into a network called Al-Jazeera America by adding five to 10 new U.S. bureaus beyond the five it has now and hiring more journalists. More than half of the content will be U.S. news and the network will have its headquarters in New York, spokesman Stan Collender said.

Collender said there are no rules against foreign ownership of a cable channel ? unlike the strict rules limiting foreign ownership of free-to-air TV stations. He said the move is based on demand, adding that 40 percent of viewing traffic on Al-Jazeera English's website is from the U.S.

"This is a pure business decision based on recognized demand," Collender said. "When people watch Al-Jazeera, they tend to like it a great deal."

Previous to Al-Jazeera's purchase, Current TV was in 60 million homes. It is carried by Comcast Corp., which owned less than a 10 percent stake in Current TV, as well as DirecTV. Neither company announced plans to drop the channel.

In 2010, Al-Jazeera English's managing director, Tony Burman, blamed a "very aggressive hostility" from the Bush administration for reluctance among cable and satellite companies to show the network.

Even so, Al-Jazeera has garnered respect for its ability to build a serious news product in a short time. In a statement announcing the deal, it touted numerous U.S. journalism awards it received in 2012, including the Robert F. Kennedy Journalism Award Grand Prize and the Scripps Howard Award for Television/Cable In-Depth Reporting.

But there may be a culture clash at the network. Dave Marash, a former "Nightline" reporter who worked for Al-Jazeera in Washington, said he left the network in 2008 in part because he sensed an anti-American bias there.

Al-Jazeera English went on the air in November 2006. It moved quickly to establish a strong presence on the Internet, launching web streaming services and embracing new social media services such as Twitter in part to compensate for its lack of a presence on U.S. airwaves.

The English news network has a different news staff and a separate budget from the Arabic network, which launched in 1996. They and the company's growing stable of other Al-Jazeera branded channels are overseen by Sheik Ahmed bin Jassim Al Thani, a member of Qatar's royal family.

Sheik Ahmed took over last year following the abrupt resignation of the company's longtime Palestinian head, Wadah Khanfar, who was widely credited with helping build Al-Jazeera into an influential global brand. In his departure note to staff, he said he was leaving behind "a mature organization" that "will continue to maintain its trailblazing path."

Both the English and the Arabic channels actively covered the protests, violence and political upheaval that have become known as the Arab Spring.

Current, meanwhile, began as a groundbreaking effort to promote user-generated content. But it has settled into a more conventional format of political talk television with a liberal bent. Gore worked on-air as an analyst during its recent election night coverage.

Its leading personalities are former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm and Cenk Uygur, a former political commentator on MSNBC who hosts the show called "The Young Turks." Current signed Keith Olbermann to be its top host in 2011 but his tenure lasted less than a year before it ended in bad blood on both sides.

Current has largely been outflanked by MSNBC in its effort be a liberal alternative to the leading cable news network, Fox News Channel.

Current hired former CNN Washington bureau chief David Bohrman in 2011 to be its president. Bohrman pushed the network to innovate technologically, with election night coverage that emphasized a conversation over social media.

Current TV, founded in 2005 by former vice president Gore and Joel Hyatt, is expected to post $114 million in revenue in 2013, according to research firm SNL Kagan. The firm pegged the network's cash flow at nearly $24 million a year.

___

AP Television Writer David Bauder in New York and AP writer Adam Schreck in Baghdad contributed to this report.

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/386c25518f464186bf7a2ac026580ce7/Article_2013-01-03-Current%20TV-Al%20Jazeera/id-2239d165a5a64c8f83f416414edc4112

woolly mammoth belize resorts nikki minaj grammy performance shel silverstein niki minaj grammy performance grammys 2012 deadmau5

2013 Screenwriting Challenge | Write Your Screenplay

Begin Your New Year WRITE!

With My 5th Annual

2013 SCREENWRITING CHALLENGE

Why The Challenge?

Let?s face it, the holidays are a brutal time for writers.

We all do our best writing when we get into a rhythm. But during the holiday season that rhythm can be impossible to maintain. Schedules get jammed with Christmas parties, gifts to buy, family visits and a little too much vacation time and the next thing you know you haven?t written for a month.

But that?s not the real problem. The real problem is starting up again.

Ideally, writing would be part of your daily routine. As natural as brushing your teeth, getting dressed for work, or drinking your morning coffee.

But for most writers this is rarely the case. Many of us write in fits and starts, waiting desperately for moments of inspiration, and spending most of our time beating ourselves up when that inspiration doesn?t come. And then, just when we get started on a rhythm, something happens to interrupt it.

I?m always amused when I participate in writing panels. Invariably, an eager young student asks a question about building a life as a writer. ?What real writers do is write? insists one panel member after another, striving to out do each other as they speak of their unceasing dedication to their craft.

Having worked with writers for most of my professional life, I know the truth. It doesn?t matter if you?re an Academy Award Winner or a first time writer. Most of what writers do is NOT writing.

What writers really do is PROCRASTINATE.

Writers are brilliant at finding ?important? tasks to interfere with their writing. Set aside a couple hours to write, and suddenly those dirty dishes start to call to you. The next thing you know you?ve cleaned your whole kitchen, scrubbed your shower tiles to a sparkling shine, reorganized your closet, updated your facebook photos, and still not written a single word.

You?re furious at yourself. But at the same time, a part of you feels like you didn?t have a choice. Time just got away from you. ?I?ll write for twice as long tomorrow,? you reassure yourself. But tomorrow comes and four hours seems like an impossible amount of time. Even if you do manage to bang out a few pages, it?s impossible to derive any joy from them. And the next thing you know, you?ve gone a whole week, month, or even year without writing.

Under these circumstances it?s easy to doubt if you?re really a writer at all. You may even be tempted to give up on writing entirely. You feel so blocked that you don?t see any way out. But at the same time you know that giving up on writing would be giving up on the best part of yourself. So what are you supposed to do?

The difference between successful and unsuccessful writers is not that one group never gets blocked. The difference is that successful writers know how to maintain their creative rhythm even when inspiration is not flowing.

Start the New Year right by getting back into the rhythm of writing with this simple challenge.

Jacob Krueger?s
2013 SCREENWRITING CHALLENGE

On January 1st, go out and buy yourself a nice journal. Find something that speaks to your personality, and makes you feel like a writer. It?s okay to spend too much. Think of it as an investment in something you?re going to use every day.

On January 2nd, set your clock to wake you up 15 minutes early, and as soon as you open your eyes, grab your journal and start writing. You have 15 minutes to write as much or as little as comes out.? Don?t worry about editing, planning or even thinking.? Just go ahead and write whatever comes out as quickly as you possibly can. It may be a scene or parts of a scene. It may be a line of dialogue, or a monologue, or just thoughts about your character. It may flow together, or it may not flow together at all. Don?t even try to make it good. Just allow your first instincts to find their way onto the page. And don?t worry about finishing? you only have 15 minutes? so whatever you leave unfinished can become the starting point for the next day?s writing.

You?re going to repeat this process every day until January 30th, writing 15 minutes every morning until writing is such a natural part of your daily routine that it occurs without even thinking about it.? You may find yourself continuing one storyline, or writing a new one every morning. If you get stuck, rewrite the scene from the day before from memory. It?s not important what you write. It?s important THAT you write.

It?s this rhythm that is going to make you a writer. So, if you sleep through one day, find 15 minutes to catch up later. Take your journal with you on the subway. Lock yourself in the bathroom at work. Stay up 15 minutes later that night.? And notice how that 15 minutes in the morning sets you to thinking about your writing all through the day?

On January 31st, you?ll complete the challenge, and read back through your work over the past month. You?ll be amazed at the growth in your writing you?ll see!

Finally, on Thursday, Feb 7th, as part of our monthly Cold Cuts Reading Series we?ll have a party to celebrate the work of everyone who is participating in the challenge, to share our experiences, and to make some new friends. (There will also be a raffle for some super screenwriting prizes!)

You can officially join the challenge by liking our new FACEBOOK PAGE and RSVPing for the Screenwriting Challenge Event, where you can also share your ongoing experiences with your fellow writers!

Happy New Year! And Happy Writing!

Jacob Krueger

Post Tagged with Blog 7 act structure, Conquering Writer's Block, film structure, film writing, films, how to write a screenplay, how to write a script, Jacob Krueger, learn to write a screenplay, movie writing, movies, New York, New York City, plot, procrastination, screen play, screen play structure, screen writing, screen writing workshops, screenplay structure, screenplay writing classes, screenplay writing courses, Screenwriter's Mind, Screenwriting Challenge, screenwriting courses, screenwriting workshops, Script Analysis, script classes, script courses, script structure, seven act structure, three act structure, Write Your Screenplay, writing structure

Source: http://www.writeyourscreenplay.com/2012/12/31/2013-screenwriting-challenge/

j lo sacha baron cohen ryan seacrest