Mourning In America

A New York Democrat on politics, journalism, and the Mets

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?
Friday, June 24, 2005
Your Loss, My Gain Today's NY Times reports:
With its standards under scrutiny, the BBC, Britain's state broadcaster, said on Thursday that it would use a time delay mechanism in live coverage of some news events to prevent broadcasting "really distressing, upsetting images."

In a related story, Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. announced an agreement with the BBC to provide "really distressing, upsetting images" for live broadcast on News Corp.'s Fox network. [rim shot]

In truth, a spokeswoman for Murdoch's Sky News channel confirmed that that organization has long been equipped with similar time-delay technology. And their priorities for using it are well-placed. To limit images of violence or gore? Well, no. Read on:

The last time it was used, the Sky News spokeswoman said, was during President Bill Clinton's impeachment trial in 1999. The device was used because "the nature of the questions would be explicit," the spokesman said.

Wouldn't want the world to think that those House managers were just a bunch of sex-obsessed potty mouths...

Tuesday, June 21, 2005
Pay No Attention to the Reaper in the Corner What a difference a day makes. Sunday, Mike DeJean failed once again to turn in a credible pitching performance for the Mets. His explanation? His teammates were trying too hard:
"If anything, we've got guys with their foot too hard on the pedal who need to back it off a little and have some fun," DeJean said. "It's a game, and we're acting like it is life or death."
Monday, DeJean learned that while Sunday's game may not have cost anyone their life, it did cost him his Mets career:
The Mets released reliever Mike DeJean, who gave up four runs to the Seattle Mariners on Sunday, raising his earned run average this season to 6.31. He had a 1.69 E.R.A. in 17 appearances with the Mets last season.

Somebody Buy Fred Barnes a Dictionary He writes in the Weekly Standard about the filibuster compromise:
The fight over judges showed again the fecklessness of Reid. He mischaracterized the upshot of the Gang of 14 deal because he actually believed it was a triumph for Democrats.

According to, feckless means "Lacking purpose or vitality; feeble or ineffective." The alternative definition is "Careless and irresponsible." Neither of those definitions fit with Barnes' next sentence. He's not criticizing Reid for failing to fight hard enough. He's saying Reid's too dumb to see that he got outfoxed. Ironic, no?