It's News to Me

It might be sunny in Happy Valley today, but 200 miles south, Washington D.C. is covered in a foot of snow -- the first major snowfall of the season and its in March. A D.C. native myself (and by D.C. I mean Northern, Va.)
I remember days like this from my childhood -- when the city would be paralyzed and school would be canceled for a few days -- sometimes just for a few inches of snow.
Here's some great photos from The Associated Press of the White House last night and this morning.

I can't even sit still in class because I'm so excited about spring break. And that's all I talk about with everyone I run into during the day. We talk about sandy beaches, cabana boys and the great deals we snagged, because let's be realistic -- we ain't got no money honey.

But now airlines, well one in particular, are trying to make our lives even more difficult.

You could call me a frequent flier, you could also call me a flier with horrible luck. I have lost my baggage at least once every single time I've flown to or from State College, my phone charger once mysteriously disappeared from my luggage and I've been faced with every additional charge known to man. But I've grown from my experiences and now I always carry my charger with me and tried to avoid checking luggage all together (Helpful Hint: If you are checking luggage and you're pushing the weight limit, open your bag on the scale. That can reduce the weight up to 10 pounds).

But now Spirit Airlines Inc. has gotten permission from the Department of Transportation to tack on another $5 to $10 charge -- just for buying a ticket. This "reservation-booking cost" joins the list of numerous other charges and obstacles fliers face these days. This charge will be applied to anyone flying with Spirit who didn't book at an airport counter (Seriously?! Because the last time I checked, we lived in the 21st century and used the Internet for everything).

As of now, other airlines aren't expected to follow suit, unless of course this strategy works. All I know is I'd rather spend that money on a T-shirt that says "Woooo! I went to Mexico!" with two big thumbs up.

-mar

I love reading. I started reading early, and spent most my youth and teen years with my nose in a book (not to revert to cliches or anything). Books spill from my crowded little bookshelf, are stacked precariously on my nightstand and are tucked safely away in boxes and boxes under my bed.

However, don't get the wrong impression; these books aren't the classics you would expect to see in an English minor's bedroom. They aren't by Austen or Tolstoy. They are romance novels. I read them proudly with out shame.

What's more, I will loudly proclaim how much I detest James Joyce. And don't even get me started on Hemingway.

But according to a Reuters article, most Britons are not as secure with their reading habits. A recent survey that was actually commissioned by the organizers of World Book Day, an annual celebration of reading in Britain, found that two out of three Britons had lied about reading a book they did not.

"According to the survey, 65 percent of people have pretended to have read books, and of those, 42 percent singled out 1984. Next on the list came War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy and in third place was James Joyce's Ulysses. The Bible was in fourth position, and newly elected President Barack Obama's autobiography Dreams from My Father came ninth."

The reason the people in the majority gave for the lies was because they wanted to impress the person they were with.

I mean, come on people. Not only should we not lie about what we read, but we shouldn't judge those for what books they choose. I can't tell you how many people have given me "the look." The ... you read romance novels like its your job look. And let me tell you, it's not good.
But we shouldn't have to be ashamed! And if you love to read The Glass Menagerie and The Importance of Being Earnest (actually, that one was quite good), you shouldn't be ashamed either.

The trick is, find something you do enjoy reading, and do it! Read! Read the newspaper, read a trashy magazine, read a literary masterpiece. Or try Suzanne Brockmann, she's my personal favorite.

-- Brianna

Those who lied have claimed to have read:

1. 1984 - George Orwell (42 percent)

2. War and Peace - Leo Tolstoy (31)

3. Ulysses - James Joyce (25)

4. The Bible (24)

5. Madame Bovary - Gustave Flaubert (16)

6. A Brief History of Time - Stephen Hawking (15)

7. Midnight's Children - Salman Rushdie (14)

8. In Remembrance of Things Past - Marcel Proust

9. Dreams from My Father - Barack Obama (6)

10. The Selfish Gene - Richard Dawkins (6)

Anyone who has ever been to New Jersey knows what excessive state government regulation looks like.

For those unaware, consider the insane regulations applied to beachgoers, including having to pay for a "beach tag" just to enjoy a natural resource.

While I'll admit that some government restrictions are necessary in our everyday lives (food safety standards, anyone?), our coastal neighbors really have gone too far this time. They're considering enforcing a state law that prohibits Brazilian waxes.

Think your crotch is not business of the government? Apparently you'd be in the wrong, according to the Philadelphia Inquirer

Evidently going bare down there has been illegal in New Jersey all along, but has been scarcely enforced among the state's many salons. If you believe Cosmopolitan, the procedure is growing ever more popular for men and women alike.

So why would the government care if you like to defy puberty? Apparently one rationale is that health officials are worried the procedure may lead to infections. But using that logic, a whole lot more serious infections could be prevented by banning one-night stands.

All I'm saying is that if this law ever actually takes effect, I'll be doubly glad I'm heading south to Ocean City, Md., this summer. Some things should always be a matter of choice.

- Leslie

As a copy editor, I tend to work late nights and rarely get to catch The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, even though it's one of my favorite (next to Jay Leno). But, while some of you were sunbathing in Mexico or Florida, I finally got a chance to watch Stewart every night last week. I was lucky, too. I got to see the "Weeklong Feud of the Century" between Stewart and CNBC TV Show host Jim Cramer which ended in a "Brawl Street" battle Thursday night.
Here's the video, courtesy of Hulu:

While I've always known Stewart was a smart man, he really showed his understanding not only of the American people, but also of financial matters as he basically eviscerated Cramer during their 20 minute interview.
"I understand that you want to make finance entertaining, but it's not a ... game," Stewart told Cramer, adding in an expletive during the show.
While Stewart's points in the interview were crystal clear, Cramer could only respond to say that him and his network could have done better and should have seen the economic downturn coming. Most interesting, Cramer tried to deny what he had said during an interview, which Stewart then proceeded to show by shouting out, courtroom style, "Roll 210," "Roll 212," playing an interview that was never meant to be broadcast on TV where Cramer talked about the duplicity of the market.
Were Stewart usually makes points through outright mockery, there were times Thursday night when he was downright serious in addressing Cramer. Stewart went where other journalists and reporters often fail to go by calling out Cramer and not taking PR remarks as an appropriate answer --- and in the end, he won as did the viewers who watched the show.
~Kat

"M.W. it."

It's a common phrase heard during our nights on desk. And we all know what it means. It's our short hand for look it up in the dictionary (get it, Merriam-Webster -- I know, we're so clever).

And while in the days of yore, editors may have turned to the hard copy, since we're so technologically friendly these days, we usually have a tab open in our browser devoted to the online version.

Either way, though, no one can deny the awesomeness that is the dictionary (especially a word lover like myself). Apart from the general coolness of the tome, there's another aspect to it that rocks my world -- its ever evolving nature. Especially with the Internet, MW can stay up to date with new words entering our vocabulary daily.

However, I would guess, very few people actually notice these changes. One recent example is the definition of marriage. According to the Associated Press, the dictionary company in 2003 amended "marriage" to include "the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage."

And it sort of slipped under the radar (as the company put it, it's "neither news nor unusual") until a conservative news Web site recently reported on to the change, which brought it to the forefront of activists and conservatists minds. One particular man even created a YouTube video highlighting his concerns with the issue.

The Web site that put the spot light on the word said the company "has resolved the argument over whether the term 'marriage' should apply to same-sex duos or be reserved for the institution that has held families together for millennia: by simply writing a new definition."

While, like many of my posts, I'm not going to comment either way on the general theory behind the addition, I do think it's a wonderful example of the impact of words. We've always known the "pen is mightier than the sword" (sorry) -- but the power of putting something in writing never ceases to amaze me. And I think anything that sparks educated discussion is always a good thing.

Nicholas Kristof has an interesting column in the New York Times this week about what kind of news we read.

He argues that the advent of online news has actually given us a narrower worldview -- that, because we can pick and choose what we read online, we tend to read articles and blogs that express only viewpoints we agree with. He says we're far less likely to take the time to parse through legitimate arguments that refute our own beliefs -- and that the Internet makes it much easier to ignore them.

It's an interesting premise, and I can see where he's coming from. No one likes to be told they're wrong, which is why what Kristof calls "The Daily Me" is so tempting. Why run the risk of having your beliefs questioned and your ideology scorned when you can live in a bubble of like-minded opinions? Why bother fuming over another viewpoint when you can just tune it out entirely?

In my own way, I'm guilty, too -- every now and then, I listen to talk-show hosts with opposing viewpoints because, but only because I find them hilariously terrible, not because I want to expand my worldview. Maybe I should follow Kristof's lead and start reading opinions that I wholly disagree with. Is there a very high chance that I will dismiss it all as ridiculous bunk? Of course. But will I be better for it? Kristof seems to think so, and maybe I will, too.

-- Aubrey

Anyone who is a fan of Jon Stewart or Tina Fey's impression of Sarah Palin has to appreciate the plethora of joys associated with political humor. Luckily, even though the epic 2008 elections are over, the flow of material for satirists hasn't followed Bush out of office.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Al Franken/Norm Coleman bobblehead doll

Poking some much-needed fun at the still-undecided Minnesota Senate race, the St. Paul Saints independent league baseball team plans to give out the two-faced bobblehead at its May 23 home game.

My favorite part? The doll is dressed like Count von Count from Sesame Street (Remember him? "When I'm alone, I count myself. One count!") and is cleverly named "Re-Count."

Where can I get one?

- Leslie

"It is now possible to contemplate a time in the near future when major towns will no longer have a newspaper and when magazines and network news operations will employ no more than a handful of reporters." ~ Time's Walter Isaacson

As Wall Street is seeing bailouts in the hundreds of billions, another important sector in America is being ignored: journalism. In a recent article by The Nation, John Nichols and Robert W. McChesney write extensively about the decline of newspapers and what the government could do about it.

The basis of the pair's argument for government support of newspapers is basically that as an institution newspapers provide for the continuance of America's democracy.

"The founders regarded the establishment of a press system, the Fourth Estate, as the first duty of the state. Jefferson and Madison devoted considerable energy to explaining the necessity of the press to a vibrant democracy. The government implemented extraordinary postal subsidies for the distribution of newspapers."

To prevent this devastating death of newspapers, Nichols and McChesney believe that an annual tax credit for the first $200 spent on daily newspapers should be instituted.

But that's just to start us off.

The authors argue that the $450 million spent annually by the government (lower than in most democracies) on public media should be increased to $60 billion, or $20 billion a year for the next three years.

Now, I'm not sure if government support is the way to go -- after all it could be a slippery slope -- but with fewer and fewer options on the table, I wonder if it should at least be discussed. With the current recession, however, I doubt Congress is going to be ready, willing or able to finance such a large operation, even if there is some economic benefit to be had from keeping journalists out of the unemployment line.

There is, as always, a larger point to this discussion. If newspapers cease to exist, what will happen to journalism? Despite online innovation on the part of newspapers, staffs are still decreasing at a rapid rate -- The Seattle Post-Intelligencer is reducing its paper staff of 165 to one of just 20 individuals to run its online operations. Will these smaller staff lead not only to less coverage overall, but more coverage on topics without real public impact (especially entertainment?). If even smaller staffed online ventures prove unprofitable, will corporations abandon the enterprise all together for the sake of profit?

When I think about the end of newspapers I think about the thousands of papers that were published on Election Day and on inauguration day. Around the world, people celebrated and read about the new United States president -- Barack Obama. And those same people saved their newspapers. In the U.S., papers flew off the newstands, even selling out in some places.

Thirty years from now, we will go through our attic and we will find those papers, tinted yellow by the passing time. And as we leaf through the pages that are beginning to crumble, we will reminisce about the historical events.

But, I wonder, will we also be reminiscing of the days when newspapers still existed?

~Kat

My rent costs me an arm and a leg. Well, it costs me and arm and my parents a leg (they alternate legs each month).

And now that graduation is setting in and my prospects are taking me to New York City, my rent will likely double. So to offset that cost, I've decided to rent my bathroom 3 days a week -- OK kidding, kind of.

Recent trends show that renters and homeowners are increasingly renting space: apartments, rooms, refrigerators, etc. to help them stay afloat. Postings for roommates on Craigslist have increased 60 percent in the last year.

Instead of recalling how many Unsolved Mysteries episodes I have seen that warn, "DO NOT DO THIS!" I say: Share Love/Bathroom and Save Some Money.

-Mar

And the people have spoken. The newest node (Node #3) to the International Space Station will be named (drum roll please)...COLBERT! As in American late night satirist/news anchor Stephen Colbert. That's right. After NASA opened up the naming process for the next module for the ISS, Colbert urged his fans to write-in an entry using his name: Colbert. The Colbert entry beat NASA's suggested "Serenity" by 40,000 votes. Needless to say, NASA will have the final say in the official naming of the space station module.

But why is NASA surprised by these results? This isn't the first time Colbert has utilized his massive fan base to vote for his name to appear on some structure. Recall, the Megyeri Bridge in Hungary. The Hungarian government opened the naming of the bridge to voters via the internet and low-and-behold, Colbert came out victorious, beating out American action hero Chuck Norris.

One must also ask the question, "Is having a part of the International Space Station named after a comedian necessarily a bad thing?" Colbert is known the world over (he is, to say the least, "international"). And he has had a profound impact on the way Americans watch late night television and get their daily news. But more importantly, Stephen Colbert is an icon and would add a certain amount of coolness to the ever boring names of other ISS components, like Unity (Node 1) and Harmony (Node 2).

So NASA, please, seriously take naming the third node "Colbert" in an effort to pimp your interplanetary ride.

-Brandon

I never expected to hear Karl Marx's theories described as "trendy."

But that's how a certain Chinese director, He Nian, is trying to portray the philosopher's works with his "all singing, all dancing" musical version of Das Kapital.

According to the China Daily newspaper, the stage show will be produced in Shanghai, and will be based on the treatise as well as some additional material to make it relevant to today.

"The entertainment and theatrical elements will help ordinary people better understand why the financial crisis is happening," said Zhang Jun, a Fudan University economics professor, who is an adviser on the production in the article.

The director wants to have the audience connect to Marx's ideas, even though the volume was published so long ago.

"We will bring [Marx's] economic theories to life in a trendy, interesting and educational play, which will be fun to watch," the article quoted He as saying.

I'm not sure if I should be impressed or horrified at the lengths the Chinese are going to to reassure their frightened citizens about the economic crisis.

And not to be incendiary or anything, but this seems almost like a grown-up version of the Sesame Street-esque TV program, Children's Club, which teaches Palestinian children to hate Jews - brainwashing through song and dance.

But either way, I don't know if you ever studied Marx - I'm not a particular fan, as I think he was a bitter, ranting loon - but I have to believe if anything would cause someone to roll over in his grave, this would.

An all singing, all dancing version of Das Kapital. Enough said, really.

-- Brianna

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer had a great cartoon today

Basically it summarizes what many of us in the newspaper industry fear: That there is no hope.
To make matters worse, The Associated Press released a list of newspapers yesterday that have cut back on the number of publication days within the last year. The list is even longer than I expected and includes both large papers and those small town papers you've never heard of.
Suggestions for saving the newspaper industry have been few and far between -- minus the bailout proposed last week -- as papers have continued to falter. With no solution or end to the situation in sight, I wonder what papers will survive if we keep heading down this path.
~Kat