Drew is still hot!

How does she do it?

in reference to: Drew Barrymore Photos & Pics | Good To See You Too Drew! (view on Google Sidewiki)

Well of course...

Who doesn't love Betty White?

in reference to: Betty White Scores “SNL” 18-Month Ratings High (view on Google Sidewiki)

Is this a change we can believe in...

I don't see it.

in reference to: KBR to Get No-Bid Army Work as U.S. Alleges Kickbacks (Update1) - BusinessWeek (view on Google Sidewiki)

Journalists have the right...

But if they want people to think they are credible and non-biased, this doesn't help.

in reference to: Angry Journalists Refuse to Review Anti-Obama Book | NewsBusters.org (view on Google Sidewiki)

Why no flood coverage?

This is a good point, more news channels doesn't mean more news coverage - just like more news magazines didn't mean more news. What happens is the networks compete to cover the "big" stories more in depth than each other. In the process other stories are neglected. And don't get me started on media coverage of media coverage.

clipped from www.aim.org So why the cold shoulder? I see two main reasons. First, the modern media may be more multifarious than ever, but they're also remarkably monomaniacal. In a climate where chatter is constant and ubiquitous, newsworthiness now seems to be determined less by what's most important than by what all those other media outlets are talking about the most. Sheer volume of coverage has become its own qualification for continued coverage. (Witness the Sandra Bullock-Jesse James saga.) In that sense, it's easy to see why the press can't seem to focus on more than one or two disasters at the same time. Everyone is talking about BP and Faisal Shahzad 24/7, the "thinking" goes. So there must not be anything else that's as important to talk about. It's a horrible feedback loop.

Anyone got a plan B?

The current one isn't working.

clipped from gawker.com Crap. So that dome that was supposed to end the oil spill got plugged up with crystals of something called "gas hydrates." Now they've had to move the dome off the leak, and are looking for a new fix. [NYT]

Could a hacker take down the whole internet?

The problem with the internet is it doesn't have a central structure, and lacks a strong organizing body. Well, maybe it isn't a problem. Those factors are also what makes it such a powerful tool for communication around the world. The trick moving forward, will be to maintain the loose, freely connected nature of the internet and find some way to protect traffic.

clipped from dailycaller.com In 2008, Pakistan Telecom tried to comply with a government order to prevent access to YouTube from the country and intentionally “black-holed” requests for YouTube videos from Pakistani Internet users. But it also accidentally told the international carrier upstream from it that “I’m the best route to YouTube, so send all YouTube traffic to me.” The upstream carrier accepted the routing message, and passed it along to other carriers across the world, which started sending all requests for YouTube videos to Pakistan Telecom. Soon, even Internet users in the U.S. were deprived of videos of singing cats and skateboarding dogs for a few hours.

Wow 10 years....

Who knew one person could fill a ten years of a magazine with so much self-love?

in reference to: Oprah Winfrey celebrates 10 years of ‘O’ magazine at Radio City by shaving off Dr. Phil’s mustache | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment (view on Google Sidewiki)

Coulter on Media Sympathy for NYC Bomb Suspect

The balance of power...

The article as a whole is a defense of liberal policies over the last 50 or so years. I picked this out, because it struck me as important. Liberal ideas have done a lot for this country, but so have conservative ideas. One taken without the other each can be dangerous, and bad for the country.

clipped from www.mercurynews.com Is liberalism the bastion of perfection? No. Moreover, when liberalism is in power, it needs the contrarian conservative voice lest it become consumed with its own arrogance; and the same holds true for the other side.