One reason GMAIL sucks.

I think there are few, but this is one.

My heart is tattooed in monospace gothic - I'll settle for a default courier new.

"Anyone who knows me knows that alliteration is very important to me as well."

Clemens told Congress on Feb. 13 that his family has been vital to him during his career.

"Anyone who has spent time around me knows that my family is and has always been my top priority," it said in a portion of the opening statement he delivered. "My wife, Debbie, and my sons -- Koby, Kory, Kacy and Kody -- mean more to me than anything in the world."

It makes sense that a pitcher would choose K's.

Too bad he can't spell some of them with a backwards K.

Source.

"The Wire" inspired evaluation.

I took the exit interview, and if you've seen all that you want of The Wire, then you should too. There are some spoilers there, so come back and take it if that need arises.

The quote from the exit interview, is printed verbatim and ver-capital letters:

The internet is skimming the froth of commentary from the first-generation news gatherers like The Sun. They have parasitically achieved immediacy and relevance by co-opting the debate, the humor, the rage, and the provocation that results from the news product--WITHOUT ACTUALLY INVESTING OR COMMITTING IN ANY SERIOUS WAY TO THE SYSTEMIC ACQUISITION OF THAT NEWS.

So that I'm not accused of skimming the froth too much, the context is down below. But I realized that I have been a spoiled brat with the social commentary -- that most of what I do is find -- no I don't even find them -- the interesting and quirky news-bits find me through my reader and "GMAIL suggested news" links; and ultimately I put a link and short post about them and feel immediacy and relevance because some guy in the Square State might read it.

My cursor is hovering over the "delete BLOG?" butt-con.

Right over the question mark.

Right over my heart.

.
.
.

DS: Some people have critiqued the lack of presence of the internet in the Season 5 story. For them, allow me to offer the deleted scene that would have incorporated the profound impact of the internet on the goings-on in our story set at the mythical Baltimore Sun:

INT. GARDEN APARTMENT/ANYWHERE - DAY

A white MALE, thirties, unshaven, sits in his underwear typing on a desktop computer. C.U. on computer screen. As he links to Baltimore Sun coverage off the newspaper's web site, creating a link on his own blog. The MALE scratches his left testicle, then satisfied, begins typing. C.U. on the moving cursor as commentary ensues.

CUT TO: EXT. DRUG CORNER/WEST BALTIMORE - DAY

Or whatever . . .

You just said it exactly. The internet is skimming the froth of commentary from the first-generation news gatherers like The Sun. They have parasitically achieved immediacy and relevance by co-opting the debate, the humor, the rage, and the provocation that results from the news product--WITHOUT ACTUALLY INVESTING OR COMMITTING IN ANY SERIOUS WAY TO THE SYSTEMIC ACQUISITION OF THAT NEWS.

And the parasite is killing the host. Is the internet a marvelous tool in myriad ways? Of course. Is it the future? No doubt. But thus far it is not a responsible or viable alternative to a major metropolitan newspaper.

The scene above is, believe it or not, the power that the internet holds over newspapers at this point. It is the economic preamble to the story of Season 5. But to mistake it for the story itself, for the drama, is silly. The critique that The Wire undertook this season is to ask the same question--the only meaningful question--that one would ask about the media and its role in our version of Baltimore. If these problems depicted in previous seasons do exist--and they do--and if many of the trends and events depicted actually occurred--yep, many did--how effective is the highest end of local journalism at acquiring and delivering an account to readers? How are they covering the city? And that question is the same in 1972 as it is in 2008.

Could we have included a line about a reporter filing to his blog as well as the first edition. Sure, though it changes nothing in the premise. We could have also shown reporters staring at the internet in the newsroom. Look! Zorzi's reading Romenesko. It's accurate. But so is a detective filing out vehicle-use reports.

The impact of the internet is profound as preamble. Newspapers have not yet figured out how to coexist with it. But do not claim that this is because the internet is doing the job of newspapers. When bloggers begin showing up with notepads or laptops at council meetings and courthouses, in London or Moscow or Fallujah, then we'll talk.