NEW YORK TIMES standards editor Philip Corbett recently issued a memo to NYT’s reporters and editors concerning the use /abuse of anonymous sources.

The document, posted on Gawker, is interesting reading for media watchers. I can’t speak to what’s going with most other papers, but I read the NYT a fair bit, and now that I think about it, it does seem like they use nameless sources liberally.

Corbett – who maintains one of my favourite news-nerd blogs, After Deadline – says the most common problem involves “the question of what explanation, if any, we offer the reader for why a source wants to be anonymous.”

“Saying that a source insisted on anonymity because he was ‘not authorized’ to speak is usually stating the obvious, and is of little or no help to a reader. Yet we’ve used that formulation nearly 300 times in the past year.”

Writers and editors should be providing readers with more information, says Corbett (seen at left), “a thoughtful sentence or paragraph, describing the pressures or concerns of the people involved in a situation, may give readers greater insight than a terse phrase.”

Some examples he offers: ”out of fear for his safety;” “out of fear of retaliation from X;” “because the company has threatened to fire workers who speak to the press;” “to avoid antagonizing Official X.”

Would be interesting to know how many of those 300 aforementioned uses of nameless source would’ve been thwarted by this requirement.

The crucial concern for the reader, Corbett says, “is how to judge the source’s credibility.”

With this in mind, he suggests reporters and editors try and say as much as possible about how a source knows what it knows (“Was he at the meeting?” / “Have they seen the document?”), and account for any motivation, bias or interest the source might have (“Does she favor/oppose the bill?” / ”Was he fired by the company?”)

He warns NYT staffers about the potential damage overuse of anonymous sources can cause: “While anonymous sources are sometimes crucial to our journalism, every time we rely on anonymity, we put some strain on our credibility with readers.”

Yeah, kind of like cable news shows labeling everything “Breaking News,” or print products slapping “Exclusive” on even the most mundane stories – eventually the audience can grow weary and wary.

Nameless sources should be used to provide “newsworthy information that we can’t report any other way … not for trivial, obvious or tangential information, or for quotes that add little of substance,” Corbett says. “And it should not be used as a mask for personal attacks.”

It really makes you wonder whether NYT’s overuse of nameless sources has been out of necessity, or if –  as Corbett’s memo kind of implies –  it’s simply an issue of lazy reporting.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

IT’S MY BIRTHDAY today, so rather than write a serious, thought-provoking post, I thought I’d indulge in a little fantasizing about what may just be the greatest food invention of all time: deep-fried beer.

You heard me right: ravioli-like pieces of salty pretzel dough filled with beer and dunked into a deep fryer. My god, sweet dreams are made of these.

“It tastes like you took a bite of hot pretzel dough and then took a drink of beer,” inventor Mark Zable, who’s entering his recipe in the Texas state fair’s 2010 fried food competition, told the Toronto Star.

Sounds like a bit of paradise right there.

The winning recipe at the Texas state fair competition last year was fried butter, another devilish delight that, as it turns out, debuted this summer at the Canadian National Exhibition in Toronto. From what I hear, it’s all the rage at the moment.

And if that’s any indication of what to expect next year here in the T-dot, my 32nd b-day might well be spent at the CNE, chowing down on a heaping plate of deep-fried beer.

Oh sure it’s a heart attack just waiting to happen, but to quote Canadian 80s rockers Trooper – and who doesn’t every once in a while? – “we’re here for a good time, not a long time.”

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

BEFORE TIGER WOODS

Reporters started things off with a few run of the mill golf-related queries: “Drive well today?”; “How many drivers will you hit out there?”; “Have you made the decision now to change your swing?”

But this was no ordinary media availability for Tiger. That same day, Wednesday, People Magazine had published an exclusive interview with his now ex-wife Elin, a big scoop that was dominating the news.

New York Post columnist Andrea Peyser — who admits she knows “as much about golf as I do about divorce” — was in attendance, and decided to dig deeper than the golf-beat writers had.

“Tiger, in today’s People Magazine Elin describes the end of your marriage like a death where she feels grief, she hopes to forgive one day,” she said. ”I’m wondering, do you still love her?”

Not a question golfers typically field at press events, to be sure.

“I wish her the best in everything,” Woods replied. “You know, it’s a sad time in our lives. And we’re looking forward to … how we can help our kids the best way we possibly can. And that’s the most important thing.”

Unsatisfied with Tiger’s talking points, Peyser persisted: “Do you still love her?” she asked, again.

Woods repeated his previous statement, “That’s the most important thing,” and thus successfully dodged Peyser’s attempts to probe his heart. He did go on to discuss the impact the domestic implosion was having on his game, however.

I get that Peyser was looking for a great quote when she asked Tiger if he still loved Elin, and perhaps she saw herself as representing all the jilted women out there who empathize with poor Elin’s plight and want to rip Tiger’s head off.

Even if she does write for the sensationalistic Post, though, Peyser’s manipulative question had no place at a golf tournament press conference; leave that gossipy shite for People and US Weekly.

Besides, the answer should be pretty obvious: A guy who truly loves his wife doesn’t go out and shag boatloads of barfly bimbos.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

WITH THE

Most of this reporting is naturally focusing on Katrina’s aftermath and the botched response that continues to impact the area; notably the work done by CNN’s Anderson Cooper, who’s returned to the region semi-regularly over the years to “keep them honest.” He’s there now, actually.

It’s troubling that Gulf Coast residents are still struggling to return to normal five years later. BP dumping a monster load of oil into the Gulf didn’t help matters.

And yes, Katrina was a catastrophe that exposed some disturbing realities; namely, that the U.S. government failed to fulfill its primary duty: to protect the American people; and that black folks apparently are still regarded as second-class citizens in certain parts of the nation.

But natural disasters happen nearly every week somewhere around the world, resulting in far more destruction and higher body counts than Katrina – most recently the floods in Pakistan. Yet these barely register on the radars of most U.S. media.

Of course, everything is more important when it happens in and to America, that’s just the way it is. And it’s inevitable that news organizations will be milking the Katrina anniversary as much as possible. Still, I’m tired of hearing about it.

That said, I think if the U.S. media were to provide broader perspective in its coverage, it just might help to break the country out of its cocoon-like view, if only for a minute or two.

Instead of resorting to the same old solemn, overwrought, melodramatic coverage of post-hurricane New Orleans, perhaps an enterprising television network or newspaper could send reporters to Pakistan to, I don’t know, compare/contrast the impact of the disaster there to that of Katrina.

What are the common threads? Strength in the face of great adversity; lack of help for the poorest citizens; government incompetence, etc. Whatever they may be, it could all make for one of those ”teachable moments.”

On second thought, this would never work.  The vast majority of Pakistan is Muslim – and lord knows the “ground zero mosque” brouhaha has shown us how dangerous it is to invoke Islam in the context of a great American tragedy.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Hatian-American hip-hop star Wyclef Jean made a huge media splash earlier this month when he announced on Larry King Live that he was running for president of his native land, effectively positioning himself as the saviour of that earthquake-ravaged country.

Only one teeny tiny problem: Clef doesn’t meet the requirements for those seeking to become president; namely, candidates must have resided in the country for five consecutive years before the date of the elections – a rule designed to thwart carpetbaggers like Jean.

Apparently Wyclef figured the rules don’t apply to him; that because he has been serving as a goodwill ambassador for Haiti in recent years, he’s as good as legit.

There was another problem with the whole ‘Wyclef for President’ thing. Other than a high profile and some musical talent, the ex-Fugees frontman has little else to offer Haiti, a dirt-poor country he fled when he was a kid. As the Associated Press noted:

“(Jean) had no political organization, not much of a following beyond his fans of his music and only a vague platform, casting himself as an advocate of Haiti’s struggling youth and saying he would ask reconstruction donors to help the country’s dysfunctional education system.”

Oh, and then there’s the whole matter of his charity’s dodgy financial management.

So yeah, Wyclef – not exactly presidential material.

Jean, who was lovin’ all the media attention when he wanted to be regarded as Haiti’s messiah, was less forthcoming over the weekend, not surprisingly.

The only update he offered was via Twitter, his latest dispatch on Sunday: “Tomorrow our Lawyers are appealing the decision of the CEP. We have met all the requirements set by the laws. And the law must be Respected.”

Clef should just do the right thing and give up the gambit. It wasn’t a good idea in the first place. And Haiti, still limping from the devastating January earthquake, hardly needs yet another weak, crappy government.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

You might recall back in 2008 when pics published of a shirtless president-elect on vacation in Hawaii created a media maelstrom. “FIT FOR OFFICE: Buff Bam is Hawaii hunk,” is how the New York Post played it on its cover. Much was made about his ”glistening pecs.”

This time around, the White House press office apparently decided it was better to avoid a similar situation, so they corralled the media in a hotel while the prez frolicked in the surf with his family.

Needless to say, this didn’t go over well with the photographers and reporters traveling with Obama, who were peeved to discover that their access to the chief — and his pecs — had been circumvented.

But I suppose the White House couldn’t afford the risk of having this become an overblown spectacle — or pectacle – again.

After all, this was not a true vacation for Obama; the president was taking a dip in the Gulf of Mexico to send a signal to tourists that it was OK to do the same; that BP hadn’t destroyed everything in the area – just some things, like jobs, and wildlife.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

SELF-PROCLAIMED “geek comedian” Tom Scott has a funny-cause-it’s-true bit on his blog that really sticks it to crappy newspapers: Journalism Warning Labels.

“It seems a bit strange to me that the media carefully warn about and label any content that involves sex, violence or strong language — but there’s no similar labeling system for, say, sloppy journalism and other questionable content,” he writes. “I figured it was time to fix that, so I made some stickers.”

Scott claims he’s been putting them on copies of papers on the London Underground; he even offers readers a printable sheet of stickers via PDF.

Anyone with a connection to the news business would find these spot on — painfully, in some cases. In addition to the label I featured at the top, here are a few of the other better ones:

And this label I think we’ve all wanted to stick on an article, or three:

I didn’t know who Tom Scott was, though I gathered he wasn’t the same guy who played sax for the likes of Joni Mitchell and Steely Dan in the 70s. I looked around his blog for a bit. He’s a pretty funny guy, and seems to enjoy taking the piss out of the media.

Indeed, on the blog there’s a video of him and his buddy racing around London trying to appear in the background of as many television news “stand-ups” as possible during the unveiling of the — wait for it — federal budget (?!).

It’s inane and ridiculous, yes, but I happen to like that kind of stuff and ended up watching the entire 12-minute feature:

UPDATE: Steven Slater offered reality show

There’s really nothing left to say about the whole Slater and the slide incident, so I figured I’d just feature what I believe to be the two best things I’ve seen on the interwebs relating to the JetBlue flight attendant’s hilarious/ridiculous “meltdown” the other day.

The first, a Slater-modified version of the back-of-the-seat emergency evacuation instruction card:

And the second, a computer-animated dramatization of the incident from Taiwan’s NextMedia Animation studio, complete with siege music and a not-so-subtle inference to Slater’s (presumed) homosexuality:

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Related: Steven Slater, AWOL flight attendant, and the folk hero playbook

THE COVER

The magazine’s front features a disturbing image of an 18-year-old Afghan woman who had her nose and ears cut off as punishment for fleeing an arranged marriage with a member of the Taliban (fucking savages).

The accompanying headline is no less provocative: “What Happens if We Leave Afghanistan.” No question mark. As in, that’s a fact — at least the way Time sees it.

The New York Times notes:

Reaction to the Time cover has become something of an Internet litmus test about attitudes toward the war, and what America’s responsibility is in Afghanistan. Critics of staying in Afghanistan call it “emotional blackmail” and even “war porn,” while those who fear the consequences of abandoning Afghanistan see it as a powerful appeal to conscience.

Not sure I see the logic this headline implies: that such barbaric violence will be the consequence of the U.S. and its allies – including Canada – finally ending their missions in Afghanistan. Indeed, as some critics have noted, this woman’s heinous mutilation occurred while coalition forces were in the field.

Time managing editor Richard Stengel posted a statement on the magazine’s website explaining his cover decision:

I apologize to readers who find the image too strong … but bad things do happen to people, and it is part of our job to confront and explain them. In the end, I felt that the image is a window into the reality of what is happening — and what can happen — in a war that affects and involves all of us.

I would rather confront readers with the Taliban’s treatment of women than ignore it. I would rather people know that reality as they make up their minds about what the U.S. and its allies should do in Afghanistan.

Shocking as the cover is, I think Time has succeeded in using it effectively to do its journalistic duty. It’s renewed debate about the war at a time when it sometimes seems as if people here in the West would prefer to act like it’s not still raging.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

THIS ZANY STORY gives new, weird meaning to the old adage “dog is man’s best friend.”

Jerry Douthett of Rockford, Mich. had an infected toe. Yet despite pleas from his wife, Rosie, a nurse, Jerry refused to go to the doctor to get it looked at.

A few weeks ago, the couple were out celebrating Rosie having become an American citizen. Party man Jerry downed “five or six” beers before heading to the Mexican joint next door for what he described as “huge” margaritas, which Jerry proceeded to, in his words, “kill.”

They headed home, and Jerry passed out. (Sheesh, Rosie was probably expecting a bit more of a celebration than that, if you catch my drift…)

Jerry eventually woke up to find that his dog, Kiko, had apparently gnawed off part of his toe. “It wasn’t an aggressive attack,” he said. ”He pretty much just ate the infection, so he saved my life.” (I’ll pause so you can clean the vomit off your monitor.)

At the hospital later on it was discovered that his infection had reached the bone, and doctors were forced to amputate what was left of Jerry’s toe.

Rosie surmised that the pooch thought her hubby’s nasty-ass toe “was a dead animal laying on the bed.” Lovely.

Despite randomly biting off part of his owner’s foot, though, Kiko remains in the family. Rosie should ditch her disgusting husband instead.

Here’s the local news report:

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

“We have lost sight of so many significant aspects of our age because they cannot be boiled down to bite-sized news nuggets,” he wrote. “The problem is not the new technology of the news, but rather how quickly we have been enslaved by it.”

Specifically, Shapiro is miffed about how conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart set off the Shirley Sherrod firestorm.

On his website, Breitbart posted a couple of short videos of a speech by Sherrod – a regional official with the U.S. Department of Agriculture – cherry-picking several of her statements and presenting them out of context, thus making Sherrod appear racist.

The resulting brouhaha led to her being forced to resign her position at the USDA. She was later vindicated and offered another job in government. Sherrod has said she now plans on suing Breitbart.

Breitbart‘s explanation of why he rushed to publish the materials without seeing the full video first – “I couldn’t wait to get this story. I knew from past experience that I had a news cycle to get this out” – has left Shapiro seething about what he calls a “publish-or-perish approach to fact-checking.” On a larger level, he bemoans the “slippery ethics of the blogosphere” in an age when “being first trumps being accurate.”

“Deprived of context, facts do not speak for themselves,” Shapiro said. “Analysis and interpretation of the news are needed to spur comprehension – and not just as an excuse for ideological rants and as a way to rack up cheap political points.

“The news of government, politics and the world is too important to be instantly consumed like a shopaholic racing through a mall. Our democracy simply cannot survive if we fail to see the forest for the tweets.”

Shapiro thinks that slowing things down is part of the solution. “With the news media in the midst of a wrenching transition, there have to be protected spaces somewhere – whether on the Internet or on cable TV – for millions of citizens to savor and contemplate the news.”

I can appreciate what Shapiro is saying. I’ve often thought it would be nice to return to a time when things were less crazed in the news business, if only for a little while. And he’s right that blogging creates a host of ethics concerns, given that the majority of bloggers aren’t necessarily duty-bound to adhere to standards of fairness and accuracy.

But to seriously believe that a “slow news movement” could take hold today is absurd. The ship has sailed and there’s no going back. Even Shapiro (pictured left) acknowledges this: “Maybe it is folly to dream that in the quest to be well-informed, Americans will voluntarily drop out of the ever-pulsating media culture that brings out the worst in all of us.”

Both those who produce news and those who consume it have grown accustomed to the new way of doing things. Slowing the machine down now — even if it might ensure more accuracy in reporting and blogging – is simply impossible. People expect their news delivered pronto these days, and those who gather and produce it are willing to do all they can to stay in business at a time of industry upheaval.

Like it or not, fast is the new slow.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

During a concert Friday at the Verizon Amphitheatre, birds in the rafters pooped on the band and their equipment. After one of the droppings ending up in bassist Jared Followill’s mouth, the group ended the show.

“They couldn’t deal any longer,” their publicist said. “It’s not only disgusting, it’s a toxic hazard. They really tried to hang in there.”

Yech — sucks to be the bassist.

“We had 20 songs on the set list, by the end of the show, I would have been covered from head to toe,” Followill (right) said afterward, noting that the opening acts – The Postelles and The Stills – had been thoroughly crapped upon during their shows.

So it’s not like the pigeons hate Kings of Leon or anything. They weren’t discriminating Friday night.

And here I was thinking those shit-hawks were just sick of hearing “Sex on Fire.”

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

The Scottish brewery made headlines this week for producing a 55%-alcohol beer, ominously named the End of History.

“This blond Belgian ale is infused with nettles from the Scottish Highlands and fresh juniper berries,” the proprietors say on their blog.

Only 12 bottles of the stuff have been made. Oh, and did I mention that each one comes stuffed in either a dead stoat or the corpse of a grey squirrel?!

This is not a joke. Here’s the promo clip:

“The striking packaging was created by a very talented taxidermist and all the animals used were road kill,” the company reassures customers. “This beer is an audacious blend of eccentricity, artistry and rebellion; changing the general perception of beer one stuffed animal at a time.”

If you think that sounds intriguing enough to try, you’re too late. Those dozen bottles sold out right away and the brewer doesn’t plan to produce any more.

The dead-animal thing is a rather odd/gross marketing gimmick, but BrewDog says it’s goal is to “push the boundaries and challenge people’s perceptions about what beer is and how it can be enjoyed. We ultimately want to show people that there is an alternative to the mainstream, generic beers and make other people as passionate about craft beer as we are.”

End of History is BrewDog’s latest, and last, in a line of extreme-alcohol beers that also includes Tactical Nuclear Penguin (32% ABV) and Sink the Bismarck! (41% ABV). Whoever is in charge of naming these things deserves a raise.

The thought of drinking beer with that much alcohol sounds nasty to me, but apparently these super-brews are meant to be sipped slowly, like a fine whiskey.

BrewDog describes the End of History bottles – the ones that come in dead squirrels and stoats – as “at once beautiful and disturbing.”

I’ll say. I don’t know what’s more disturbing: the idea of drinking 55%-alcohol beer out of a stuffed rodent, or paying more than $1,000 for the pleasure. Fortunately, it looks like I’ll never get the chance to decide.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Even if the iPhone4 doesn't work properly, it's still nice to look at.

NEW YORK TIMES media columnist David Carr had an interesting piece in last Sunday’s paper looking at the role Consumer Reports played in the iPhone4-reception debacle.

The magazine said it can’t recommend the phone because of issues with the antenna, which wraps around the outside of the device. If the phone is held a certain way, dropped calls can result.

In an effort to manage this mess – Antennagate – Apple is offering to send iPhone4 buyers free “bumpers,” cases that wrap around the edge of the phone and appear to mitigate the problem. (Consumer Reports had suggested using duct tape.)

Apple CEO Steve Jobs at first denied there was an issue, and blamed the media for blowing the whole thing “so out of proportion that it’s incredible.” But he was forced into addressing the criticism, Carr notes, largely due to the editorial authority of Consumer Reports:

“The iPhone’s antenna problems might have remained a dust-up between Apple fanboys and skeptical bloggers except that Consumer Reports — that stolid, old-media tester of everything from flooring to steam mops for the last 74 years — came out with a report detailing the issue and concluding that ‘due to this problem, we can’t recommend the iPhone 4.’

“The article in Consumer Reports was devastating precisely because the magazine (and its Web site) are not part of the hotheaded digital press. Although Gizmodo and other techie blogs had reached the same conclusions earlier, Consumer Reports made a noise that was heard beyond the Valley because it has a widely respected protocol of testing and old-world credibility.”

Jobs acknowledged the impact of being dissed by the venerable mag: “We were stunned and upset and embarrassed by the Consumer Reports stuff,” he said, “and the reason we didn’t say more is because we didn’t know enough.”

Carr thinks the matter “is a reminder that media that are unsupported by advertising can often have an impact that more traditional publishing, or even the most tech-savvy, enterprises don’t.”

It was a coup for Consumer Reports, to be sure, even though they were simply doing what they always do. But I doubt the wacky-antenna hullabaloo will have much of an impact on this phone phenom’s sales. Apple has already sold more than three million iPhone 4s in the U.S., and on July 30 will begin peddling them in 17 other countries, including Canada.

Even if Apple doesn’t completely solve the reception problem, they can rest assured that Canadians, no strangers to crappy wireless service, likely won’t notice a difference.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Related: Jobs is both a genius and a jerk

Not the most pleasant creature, but it's ours.

CANADA GEESE are a complete and utter nuisance.

They happen to bear this country’s name, and, as such, have come to be seen as a national symbol of sorts, along with Mounties, beavers and maple syrup. But our default national bird can also be quite a pain, particularly beyond our borders.

Recall Canada geese were responsible for bringing down Capt. Chesley “Sully” Sullenberger’s US Airways Flight 1549 in January 2009 (to be fair, though, they could also be credited with helping him become an American hero, at least for a few weeks, until another one came along.)

Sadly, last week 400 geese in Brooklyn’s Prospect Park were rounded up and gassed over concerns they were endangering airplane flights.

Canada geese also shit a ton and always seem to leave piles of poo in their wake. And so in Oregon recently, another 109 of them were gassed, because “the birds had become a pest in local parks, and many people were disgusted by the goose droppings,” the Canadian Press reports.

I don’t like to hear about any animals being gassed, even if it’s a cull carried out by civic authorities in an effort to mitigate a problem. But I understand that it sometimes has to be done, and I suppose that’s the most humane way to do it. It happens here in Canada, too.

What baffles me, though, is what happened in New Jersey earlier this week when police discovered 18 geese that had been beaten and shot in the head in a parking lot near a pond. I realize we’re talking about New Jersey, the a-hole of America, but still, who does that?

Not surprisingly, the matter has sparked outrage here in the Great White North — Goosegate, it’s being called.

The controversy is for good reason — can you imagine if a Canadian were to slaughter a bunch of bald eagles, the national bird and quintessential symbol of the United States? Methinks the long-predicted American invasion of this ”freedom-hating” nation would be imminent.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Related: Honk if you love the Canada Goose

THREE BONEHEADS

If you’ve never heard of it – and haven’t read Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises – the bull run is a super popular annual event that essentially involves a bunch of idiots hustling down narrow cobbled-stone streets attempting to outrun a pack of stampeding bulls.

Apparently it’s quite the thrill. Not sure I see the appeal, though.

It’s not uncommon for participants to be trampled or gored, and the Pamplona bull runs have killed 15 people since 1911 — most recently last year. Seems like a pretty good example of social Darwinism hard at work.

All risks to humans aside, I don’t think it’s fair to be subjecting the bulls to this spectacle. Surely they can’t be happy about being coaxed into taking part.

Small wonder so many people get gored, then. If I were a bull in Pamplona, I’d be looking to shove my horn up some stupid tourist’s ass too.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

THERE ARE

It’s under the latter category you can place Tamara Broomfield (seen at right), a Toronto-area devil woman who fed her two-year-old son cocaine for more than a year, almost killing him at one point with an overdose.

The single mother, 28, was convicted last year for administering cocaine to her son, and of aggravated assault endangering life and assault causing bodily harm.

At the sentencing hearing yesterday, the judge described Broomfield’s actions as ”gross parental abuse over a prolonged period of time against a vulnerable and defenceless child.

“As a result … her son Malique has sustained permanent and irreversible brain damage causing him to be dependent on others for the rest of his life.”

You might think this crazy woman should be put away for life – or trotted out in front of a firing squad, if this were Utah – yet she received only a seven-year prison sentence for such horrifying abuse of her own child.

The mother, who has no criminal record or history of drug addiction, never provided an explanation for why she did what she did, prompting the Crown attorney to describe her simply as “evil.”

Broomfield – a.k.a. the worst mother on earth – maintains she is innocent and plans on filing an appeal, her lawyer said. The mind races to think what she could possibly come up with by way of a legit defence.

In the meantime, I’m thinking female castration is in order for Tammy. Given that parents aren’t required to get child-bearing licences, it’s really the only sensible way to save another kid from being coked up and beaten by this psycho.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

One big pile o' disgustingness.

APPARENTLY THINGS got a wee bit crazy yesterday at the annual Nathan’s International July Fourth Hot Dog Eating Contest in Coney Island. 

So-called competitive eater Joey “Jaws” Chestnut won the championship after stuffing 54 hotdogs and buns down his throat in 10 minutes. Alas, the San Jose man fell short of his goal to eat 70 dogs in 10 minutes to beat his 2009 record of 68. 

Shortly after the victory, in a scene that sounds straight out of pro wrestling, not pro eating, Chestnut’s arch rival and six-time champion Takeru Kobayashi – who hadn’t entered the contest owing to a contract dispute with the organizer, Major League Eating — stormed the stage. 

Despite the crowd’s chanting “Let him eat! Let him eat!” however, the world’s No. 3 professional eater, nicknamed “The Tsunami,” was cuffed by police, dragged off stage and booked on trespassing charges. 

Wow, who knew hot dog eating contests could be so dramatic?

I realize this event is incredibly popular, but I have to say, the thought of eating 54 hot dogs in 10 minutes, let alone five hot dog dogs in 10 minutes, makes me retch. Why not have a boot eating competition instead?

I’ve always wondered what happens with these guys afterward. Do they just shove a finger down their throats and yack those tubesteaks back up? Or do they suffer through horrible stomach aches, and then the next day hold on for dear life as they sit down for their morning constitutional?

Either way, it’s kind of digusting and doesn’t seem worth the prize — yes, even if it is the hallowed Mustard Belt.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com 

Here in Ontario, beer and liquor stores are government-controlled. That means they’re closed on holidays, every last one of ‘em. It’s a stupid system, and as with so many other services in this country, there’s no real alternative.

If you want a cold one on Canada Day to help celebrate our nation’s 143rd b-day, you have to plan ahead.

This poster made me laugh. Couldn’t believe the completely inappropriate use of quotation marks. Such flagrant grammar abuse normally irks me, but this was so ridiculous it ended up bringing a smile to my face. Why is “Closed” in quotes?

I also like how down at the bottom, “Don’t” is underlined in “Please Don’t Drink and Drive!” – as if somebody might otherwise mistake it for “Do!” Sure hope not. Toronto has seen enough chaos on its streets lately.

Anyway, happy “Canada Day” everyone.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Ghana fans: Lovin it.

CAN’T SAY I know all that much about football/soccer. Like most, though, I’ve been taking in the World Cup action whenever I can.

In a multicultural city such as Toronto, you simply can’t avoid the hoopla, and it’s been fun to watch the various ethnic communities around town reacting as their teams win or lose. (That said, I won’t miss the Koreans’ car horns blaring on the street outside my apartment.)

It’s not shocking to see most of the teams that have reached the quarter-finals. Brazil, Spain, Germany and Argentina etc. are the usual contenders. But I was surprised to see Ghana had made it through, by beating the U.S. no less.

Ghana is only the third African nation ever to make it to a World Cup quarter-final; Cameroon did it in 1990 and Senegal in 2002. Heck, Ghana didn’t even qualify for the World Cup until 2006. “Now they carry the colours of Africa as well as 23 million Ghanaians,” the Daily Telegraph noted the other day.

Indeed, the governing party of South Africa — whose own team was a big fat dud on home turf – has apparently asked the Ghanaian team, the Black Stars, to change their name to “Black Stars of Africa.”

And of course, Ghanaians are going nuts for their rip-roaringly successful squad, which warms the heart — I’m not sure this West African nation gets many other chances to shine on the world stage.

They should live it up while it lasts. As I say, I’m no soccer aficionado, but I’m pretty sure that with Uruguay and the Netherlands / Brazil standing in their way on the road to the final, Ghana’s World Cup days are numbered.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Isner: battered then beaten.

WIMBLEDON IS BIG on traditions. But this week’s marathon match has me thinking it’s time for some changes. 

Most tennis fans loved the 11-hour, three-day epic between John Isner and Thiemo de Bakker. It was decided 70-68 in the fifth set – the longest match in professional tennis history. 

I don’t really get it. Maybe it’s because this endless battle was between two nobodies, and it was only the first round.

Or perhaps it’s the fact it left the victor, Isner, so destroyed that he could barely cope at his match the following day – he lost in straight sets and got knocked out of the tournament. “I’ve never been this exhausted,” he said afterward. 

What good is that for the game? As John Lloyd wrote in the Daily Mail the other day: 

“Imagine if that had been Andy Murray on court for 11 hours, or Roger Federer or (Rafael) Nadal? The tournament would then be dealing with the incalculable loss of one of the favourites instead of waving Isner from the premises not much more than a dozen hours after he had been celebrated as the Marathon Man of SW19.” 

Like Lloyd, I think the time has come for Wimbledon to institute a fifth set tiebreak. According to tournament rules, a tiebreak game is played if the score reaches 6–6 in any set except the fifth. They should change this, if only, as Lloyd puts it, to “prevent another man going from hero to zero, as Isner did.” 

How about using a tiebreak to decide fifth sets in qualifying rounds, then not have it in the final rounds when the competition really matters. 

I realize purists see this as sacrilege. But it’s not like everything is sacred at the All England Club. After all, in 2009 they installed a retractable roof at centre court. No one seemed too upset about ending the glorious tradition of rain-outs at Wimbledon. 

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com 

Sexymoto: In happier times (Jasper National Park, May 2009).

SEXYMOTO IS no mo.

My first-ever new car was involved in a pretty brutal accident a couple of weeks ago. Don’t feel like getting into too much detail here. Suffice it to say it was pretty rough, it wasn’t my fault (100 per cent not my fault, according to my insurance company) and no one was hurt too badly.

But if you must know, some dumb chick in a Volkswagen Tiguan was attempting to turn left across three lanes of traffic on Yonge Street, one of Toronto’s busiest drags. She cleared the first two lanes, but either didn’t see me coming in the third, or thought she could make it.

Regardless, I didn’t spot her until she darted in front of me at the last second and I plowed into her pretty much at full speed – a quintessential T-bone.

Fortunately, no one was seriously injured – except for poor Sexymoto, my beloved 2008 Honda Civic. I was informed a few days ago that she is a write off.

So I visited her for one last time to collect my belongings. It didn’t look good. In the light of day, the extent of the damage done was painfully clear: bent frame, messed-up engine and a pretty mashed front end.

The fact it didn’t turn out much worse – for me and for her — is in large part a testament to Honda quality (too bad I’d just spent a fair chunk of change to repair some minor damage that seemed major at the time… sigh).

My “galaxy grey” baby will now no doubt be stripped for parts and sent to the wrecker – or fixed by a sketchy shop and sold to some poor unsuspecting sucker.

I took photos for posterity, grabbed the all-season floor mats — hey, I bargained hard for those — and said my final goodbyes to the first car I ever loved.

As I drove away in my rental Ford Focus (argh) I had myself a little cry. Sexymoto deserved better than this, I thought in between sniffles. But hey, she had a good run, including an awesome trip across Canada last spring, and served me well for two and a half years.

There is a silver – or galaxy grey – lining. Though I’ll be a regular visitor to the chiropractor for the next few months, I did get a pretty fat write-off cheque from my insurance company. So this week I’m taking delivery of a brand new Honda Civic, which I’ll be christening Sexymoto II.

But I’ll never forget my first.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

The station — which will be fed by the Sun Media chain of newspapers – is promising “hard news” and “straight talk” when it launches Jan. 1.

“English Canada today … is ill-served by the incumbent specialty news channels,” Quebec CEO Pierre Karl Péladeau said at the station’s launch Tuesday. “We see a real opportunity in offering Canadians something new, something better, something distinct. It’s time to shake up the players of the existing Canadian broadcasting system.”

“We’re taking on the mainstream media,” one of Peladeau’s lieutenants added. “We’re taking on smug, condescending, often irrelevant journalism, we’re taking on political correctness. We will not be a state broadcaster, offering boring news by bureaucrats for elites and paid for by taxpayers.” (He’s referring to CBC, in case it wasn’t painfully obvious.)

Sun TV News will be “controversially Canadian,” the guy said, no doubt prompting snickers from folks outside of Canada who consider “controversially Canadian” an oxymoron. “Canadian TV news today is narrow, it’s complacent and it’s politically correct. It’s bland and boring. Our aim is not to bore people to death, we’ll leave that to the CBC.”

Zing!

Sun TV News is being characterized by some as “Fox News North.” Indeed, much of the chatter surrounding its launch has focused on the left- versus right-wing media thing. I’m more interested in the competition this new network will create on Canadian airwaves.

I can’t really say much about CTV’s all-news network; it’s so far up the cable dial I rarely see it, unless I stumble across it (and when I do, I don’t linger long). 

I do watch CBC News Network, though. The fact that it’s seen as left-leaning doesn’t matter much to me. But I tend to agree with that Quebecor exec: most of the time it’s pretty boring and kinda lame, despite any recent attempts to recast itself as hip and cool (hey look, the anchors stand up now, and they tweet!)

So if this new Sun channel can offer a bit of competition, lighting a fire under CBC’s tight ass, I’m all for it.

It may turn out that Canadians don’t want their news seasoned with opinion and delivered by loudmouth personalities a la Fox News. But we should at least have the choice — a rather novel concept in this country.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Apple CEO Steve Jobs. (Photo: Asa Mathat | All Things Digital)

EARLIER THIS MONTH at the D8 Conference near Los Angeles, Apple CEO Steve Jobs discussed the impact of his company’s latest gadget: the vaunted iPad.

In an interview, Jobs was asked whether this new technology – which, among other things, provides print-news organizations with a tool to offer digital content in a more engaging and interactive fashion than through conventional websites – will “save journalism.”

“One of my beliefs very strongly is that any democracy depends on a free healthy press,” Jobs said (a cliche, sure, but always nice to have the notion reinforced). “News gathering and editorial organizations are really important.”

What he said next came as a bit of a surprise to me, though, given how inextricably linked Apple is to the new-media world:

“I don’t want to see us descend into a nation of bloggers, myself. I think we need editorial more than ever right now.”

This triggered an enthusiastic round of applause from the audience, which presumably included more than a few traditional journos (the likely source of most of that clapping).

But then it probably behooves Jobs to side with mainstream news organizations here. His company stands to make a fair bit of dough by partnering with them on developing apps for the iPad, among other pursuits.

“Anything that we can do to help the New York Times and the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal and other newsgathering organizations find new ways of expression, so that they can afford to get paid, so they can afford to keep their newsgathering and editorial operations intact – I’m all for,” the Apple CEO said.

“What we have to do is figure out a way to get people to start paying for this hard-earned content. And so this provides us a potential opportunity to provide them even more value than just a web page and to start to charge a little bit for that.

“I’m trying to get these folks to take more aggressive postures than they charge for print because they don’t have the expenses of printing, they don’t have the expenses of delivery – and to charge a reasonable price and go for volume,” he added. ”Because I think people are willing to pay for content.”

Nice one Steve-o. I agree. And I would kill to see Jobs debate new-media guru Clay Shirky — Mr. “Information Wants to be Free” — on the whole pay-for-content thing, and on the future of the news business in general in the Internet age.

It would be an entertaining match-up. As I’ve said before in this space, my money’s on the Apple chief.

>> Here’s the clip from the interview:

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

What a strange goal to end it all, though. Other than Chicago forward Patrick Kane — who scored – no one in Wachovia Center, nor anyone watching at home on TV, knew where the puck had gone. The red light didn’t go off. Talk about anti-climactic. The moment wasn’t made any better by the dead silence of the Philly crowd:

The Hawks don’t give a hoot how it happened, though – they’re the frickin’ champions baby!

Truth be told, it’s the television announcers who got screwed last night, at least the CBC Hockey Night In Canada crew I was watching. When Kane scored in overtime, the broadcasters were left sounding puzzled, dumbfounded – the dudes had no idea where the puck had gone. Awk-ward.

Man, sucks to have covered the playoffs for the past few months — let alone to have busted your hump all your career — comforted by the knowledge it will all pay off when you get to call that Stanley Cup-winning goal … except the winning goal is crap, no one sees it go in, and you’re left looking, and sounding, like a butt-head.

But anyway, that’s all she wrote for the 2009-10 hockey season. Canadians can now focus on enjoying our four-week summer (ooh, and awaiting the NHL entry draft!). And all eyes here in Toronto now turn back to the Leafs, who’ve officially just become the shitiest of the Original Six teams.

The clock is ticking, boys.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

NOTE TO KISS and the KISS Army: it’s over.

I’m sure it was fun while it lasted — far too long, IMO — but alas the time has come to wipe off the clown makeup, lose the body armor and ditch the platform boots.

I realize old Gene wants to squeeze a few more dollars out of his washed-up troupe of mimes (and wag his nasty lizard tongue for the umpteenth time no doubt).

And I don’t mean to rain on the parade of the KISS Army, even if I think they have no taste and/or are having trouble letting go of the past – a time when KISS, and they themselves, were a lot cooler.

No doubt they’re overjoyed that their beloved cock-rockers are back for yet another round.

But c’mon guys, the moment has passed. Make way – now it’s Lady Gaga‘s turn to be the freak show.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

ON MONDAY Toronto began the erection (tee hee) of security fencing for the upcoming G20 summit.

Lockdown time is drawing nigh, and the city can start looking forward to having a sizable portion of the downtown core sealed off — and to coping with the traffic restrictions and road closures that will screw over residents and businesses in the affected areas.

Suppose it’s pointless to wonder why we’re being made to endure all this ridiculousness.

The G20 – which runs June 26-27 (the G8 will be held north of the city two days before) – is one of the most high-profile global summits, and that means a great deal to Toronto, which sees itself as world class.

All politics, pomp — and protests – aside, though, it’s really just another big meeting, a glorified schmooze-fest that generates little in the way of meaty policy.

So basically Toronto will be placed under martial law for a few days so the G-gang can slap one another on the back and churn out a few toothless memos of understanding (and enjoy a stupid $2 million fake lake).

Meanwhile, just as tourist season heats up, popular local attractions like the Royal Ontario Museum, CN Tower and the dome (Rogers Centre) will be off limits to visitors.

Indeed, the Blue Jays were forced to move their series with the Philadelphia Phillies from Toronto to Philly over concerns about security measures. As such, Toronto fans have been denied the chance to see ex-Jays ace Roy Halladay in action, weeks after he pitched a perfect game.

It’s not that big a deal, I guess, but it’s only one example of how residents and visitors to this fair city are being kicked in the gonads just so Toronto can have the honour of hosting the G20 summit.

Most grating is the fact that all this inconvenience comes at a staggering cost: over $1 billion, an obscene price tag at a time when our government can hardly spare a dime. Our federal deficit is swollen, never mind that the rest of the world is still struggling to recover from a crippling recession.

And in this age of green chic, how about all the carbon that will be puked into the atmosphere to jet these big wigs to T.O. for a bunch of “valuable discussions.”

Our ”leaders” need to get real. The G20/G8 summits are a tremendous waste of time and money. These guys should just have one big Skype conference call and be done with it.

It still won’t achieve anything, but at least it’ll be cheaper.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Related: G20 Summit: Why face time still matters

THE TTC, Toronto’s perpetually shit-upon transit operator, which nonetheless refers to itself as ‘the Better Way,’ has taken another public relations hit.

This week its merchandise store in Union Station shut down, I can only assume because nobody wants to buy anything with a TTC logo on it – certainly these days.

But, as the Toronto Star reports, transit commission vice-chair Joe Mihevc sees the store’s closure as an opportunity to take a different tack. He thinks the TTC’s image “needs a makeover in conjunction with its current customer service improvement exercise.”

One of Mihevic’s suggestions is something along the lines of the London Underground‘s “Mind the Gap”-branded merchandise : “Why not have a moving billboard — and a T-shirt is a moving billboard — for folks who want to celebrate transit?” he said.

Not sure about that. Unless you’re an ironic hipster, I can’t see why would you would want to be a walking ad for the TTC. If you were to prance around with a TTC tee on, though, what exactly would you be saying about yourself?

A few suggestions:

•That you’re unreliable.

•You’re a poor communicator and generally a mean-spirited grouch.

•You don’t care if you piss people off, and you piss people off a lot.

•You’re dirty and rarely clean yourself; all too often you smell like urine.

•You never have any money, so you resort to extorting and taking advantage of people to get some.

•You may suffer from narcolepsy from time to time.

•And you constantly break down, but never tell anyone what’s wrong – you just sit there, and wait for them to figure it out.

Feel free to add to the list…

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

HAVING CAUSED THE

Its account, @BPGlobalPR, “exists to get BP’s message and mission statement out into the twitterers!” according to the brief bio.

A few of @BPGlobalPR’s recent tweets:

I’ve gotta say, at night the gulf really doesn’t look that bad. #bpcares

Our company psychiatrists say now is the time to move onto the last phase of experiencing a tragedy, acceptance mixed with forgetfulness.

Can we just start calling it the oilcean and move on please? #bpcares

OMG This isss ridciulsus. playing a drinking gamee where we drink a shot everytme we seeee an oily birdddd!!! LOL! so wasted!!11 #pbcares

OK, so it’s not actually BP sending out these updates, though I wonder how far from the truth they are.

UPDATE (June 10): A BP parody is asked (by BP) to declare that it’s not real

Israel, under fire for its violent assault on an aid flotilla Monday, is now in a big, sticky mess all its own. So it’s taken a page out of BP’s damage control book, and has also launched a Twitter account: @IsraelGlobalPR

IsraelGlobalPR couldn’t resist taking a shot at fellow whipping boy BP the other day: At least our Top Kill was successful, @BPGlobalPR

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

LOOKS LIKE

I feel bad for the guy because I appreciate the work he does, even if he can at times be a softball interviewer.

King’s had a great run, but maybe the time has come for him to step aside, or at least do something that doesn’t require him to compete nightly with the loud-mouthed hosts on other cable channels, such as Sean Hannity on FOX News and Joy Behar on CNN’s sister station, HLN.

As the New York Times noted recently: “‘Larry King Live’ is the last trace of an earlier age of cable TV, one that had little interest in the opinions of its hosts.”

King’s a legend, but increasingly these days he comes across as a crusty old guy, and I’m betting he probably scares children — but not women, it seems, considering he’s had more wives than another famous King, Henry VIII.

What’s more, I get irritated by his handlers’ desperate attempts to make the 76-year-old host seem more hip and “with it.” When he tells his viewers to check out his blog, download his show’s latest podcast, or follow him on Twitter, it just rings hollow. I can’t imagine Larry busting out his BlackBerry to fire off some tweets to his peeps.

I don’t mean to disparage the Suspendered One, who’s had a hell of a career, but I’ve thought for years now that there needs to some fresh blood at 9 p.m. on CNN. (King has said in the past that he would want Ryan Seacrest to be his successor.)

Whether King stays or goes, though, CNN is in a tough spot at the moment with all of its nightly hosts, who seem unable to beat other cable-news blowhards. CNN’s ratings in prime time are down almost a third compared with 2009.

Campbell Brown — who competes against Bill O’Reilly of FOX News and Keith Olbermann of MSNBC — bowed out a few weeks back. “Shedding my own journalistic skin to try to inhabit the kind of persona that might coexist in that line up is simply impossible for me,” she said upon announcing she was quitting her show. “It is not who I am or who I want to be; nor is it who CNN asked me to be at any point.”

The fact is, people these days want opinions and bombast when they watch cable news stations. And while it’s noble for CNN to continue to attempt to offer what it considers objective reporting and news presentation, this could prove to be a fatal calculation.

Because apparently the world wants less Larry King and more Bill O’Reilly.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

UPDATE (June 2): “Larry King Live” scores lowest monthly viewer total in nearly 20 years

YOU CAN’T HELP

At the moment she’s in deep caca, if you will, over the re-emergence of a video clip of her from 1996 – long before she was Mrs. Sarkozy – in which she reads from the “Hot International Love and Sex Guide,” apparently a book of essential erotic phrases translated into seven languages.

Sounds great. Unfortunately for Bruni 2010, one of those phrases happened to be, according to Gawker, which managed to find the clip and post it: “Put your finger in my bottom.”

“We need these kinds of books because we’re travelling all around the world, we’re meeting new people and we want to know what to tell them in case we get into bed with them,” she told the hosts of the show, which, incidentally, went by the name “Eurotrash.”

The Elysée Palace was quick to react this week, pushing to get the video yanked off YouTube.

No doubt this is embarrassing for Bruni, not to mention her country. But it’s hardly the end of the world, and it’s not like this is the first time damage control was required to deal with Bruni’s colourful, “free-spirited” past.

For better or worse, though, at least Bruni is far more interesting than any of the lame-o wives of prime ministers here in Canada; other than perhaps Margaret Trudeau, who partied with Mick Jagger – just like Bruni, funnily enough.

But Trudeau was an exception. And that’s fine with me. I’d rather our PMs’ wives are a bit dull; sure beats having to hear them talk about fingers and their bottoms.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

This week I finally got around to getting a few estimates done for the repair, and it ain’t pretty; I’m looking at $1,200 to undo the self-inflicted damage to my “galaxy grey” Honda Civic (aka: Sexymoto).

As I was leaving one of the body shops the other day, the manager handed me his card. When I glanced down at it I almost pissed my pants:

Tough break.

I feel bad for the guy. Can you imagine growing up a Schmuck? And who would want to marry a Schmuck? Probably someone who intends on keeping her maiden name.

BTW: Schmuck is derived from the Yiddish word for penis (shmok); in English it means a “foolish or contemptible person” – a dick, in other words.

Now Kyle was nothing of the sort. He didn’t seem foolish and in fact was quite helpful. And I liked his manner; not a contemptible guy at all.

Unfortunately, I won’t be getting the work done at his shop. Shame, because I would have loved to call him up and say, “Hey Schmuck, my car ready yet?” or tell people “Yeah I got my car fixed last week by this Schmuck.”

Instead, some other schmuck is going to do it for cheaper.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

26 candidates are vying to run this place; only six are getting mainstream media attention.

TORONTO STAR columnist Royson James wrote last week about how the mainstream media has picked six front-runners to focus on in the city’s mayoral race and effectively discarded the 20 other candidates as “unworthy of our attention.”

“It’s not that we’ve examined them all, interviewed them, tested their ideas and found them wholly untried and, as such, only six are suitable for the most rigorous of tests during a 10-month election campaign,” James wrote rather honestly.

“No, with some fairly weak criteria, we’ve lazily made our choices and told the electorate these are the ones worth considering.

“We’ve fallen back on our experience, which teaches that among the 26 are kooks and crazies, bigots and dumbbells, mad egomaniacal attention-seekers who can barely get themselves out of bed. And, as such, we blithely ignore all but the established candidates.”

And these anointed six have been the only ones given a place on stage during most of the major mayoral debates thus far, while the rest have effectively been shut out.

Like it or not, this is the way the mainstream media (MSM) usually approaches coverage of elections; certainly the debates, which, as James notes, can “become too cumbersome when opened up to all comers” – a “26-ring circus.”

Besides, it’s more fun to cover/follow an election when it’s treated like a horse race

But some argue that it’s anti-democratic and arrogant of the mainstream media to act as a gatekeeper; to choose which of the candidates deserve the spotlight and ignore the rest.

I’m confused by this. After all, we’re constantly hearing that the advent of blogs and social media such as Twitter, YouTube and Facebook has made the MSM less relevant; how these tools are breaking the MSM’s monopoly on news delivery and giving power to the people.

So then why should it matter that these fringe candidates have been snubbed by the mainstream press?

Would-be mayors can communicate directly with the people better than they ever could before. And voters who want to review the positions of all 26 would-be mayors can simply bypass the MSM and inspect the candidates for themselves online.

The information is right there at your fingertips, folks. If you’re too lazy to go look for it, though, don’t carp about how the MSM is – or isn’t – doing its job.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

I’

But you gotta be impressed by the Montreal Canadiens. Going from 8^th in the Eastern Conference to bumping off Sid the Kid and the Pittsburgh Penguins, the defending Stanley Cup champs? Pretty awesome stuff.

Not to mention the fact that the Habs also knocked out Alexander ‘Great 8′ Ovechkin and his Washington Capitals – the top team in the NHL this season – in the first round.

Montreal has much to be proud of (but what’s up with the looting?)

As I drove home from work yesterday, the Canadiens’ unlikely post-season triumph was generating quite a bit of heated discussion and debate on Toronto talk radio.

At issue: can Leaf fans — despite having a team that has played more golf than hockey during the last five post-seasons – possibly root for our arch-rival, given they’re the only Canadian team left in the running for the Stanley Cup?

Some callers said yes, of course, we’re all in this thing together. Go Canada go! Not surprisingly, though, most said hell no – your team is your team, and you stay loyal to them no matter what; you certainly don’t lend your support to those fuckers from Montreal – in Leafs Nation, that’s heresy.

Fair enough. And let’s be honest, few elsewhere in this nation would cheer for Toronto if the Leafs made it this far. Indeed, contempt for those of us living at the “Centre of the (Canadian) universe” runs deep. I’m pretty sure most Canadians would bet against the Leafs if the situation were reversed, merely out of spite.

So I’ve got mixed feelings about Montreal’s prospects for success in the upcoming rounds of the Stanley Cup playoffs.

I love the Leafs (for whatever reason), and they’ll always be my team.

And I’m miffed I won’t be able to see more of Ovechkin or Crosby competing for the Cup and displaying their remarkable talents. (What’s more, when it comes to selling hockey in the U.S., losing the game’s two biggest stars can’t be good for business.) But these guys clearly didn’t want it badly enough, and they got what they deserve: an early exit from the post-season.

Still, while there’s now way I’m going to suddenly become a vocal supporter of the Canadiens, I’m not going to wish them ill, either. Though I have no problem saying I don’t want them to make it all the way.

Montreal is the last Canadian team to have won the Cup, way back in ’93. And I’m holding out hope that the next one to do it will be the Maple Leafs, who haven’t hoisted the holy grail since 1967.

I may be crazy, yes,  but as the Canadiens have just proven, this game can be full of big surprises.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

White: Funnier than most SNL guest hosts half her age.

BETTY WHITE’S appearance on Saturday Night Live last weekend has garnered rave reviews.

And she totally deserves the accolades; the 88-year-old delivered a better comedic performance than most SNL guest hosts in recent years. Indeed, her great work has prompted calls for her to be made a permanent cast member.

It’s true that most of the laughs resulted from placing this affable octogenerian in sketches filled with jokes about either sex (funny, cause she’s 88), poo (MacGruber!) or White being old. Still, the Golden Girl killed.

For me, though, one of the heartiest chuckles came during Weekend Update. I’d post the video here, but stupid Hulu doesn’t work here in Canada…

Update anchor Seth Meyers: “On Monday federal agents investigating the attempted Times Square bombing arrested Pakistani-born U.S. citizen Faisal Shahzad, better known by his terrorist nickname, Mohammed al-Corey Feldman.”

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

This makes for a handy primer on the last half-century or so in British politics. It’s also interesting to witness the evolution of the paper’s design through the years.

Here’s the front page of the Manchester Guardian (as it was originally named) from July 27, 1945, just months after the war ended in Europe:

As the Guardian notes: “The only hint of general election news on the front page … is an advertisement in the top-left-hand corner for Goulburn’s, ‘Manchester’s premier food purveyors’, who adopt the punning slogan ‘RESULTS OF (S)ELECTION!’ The rest of the front is, as usual, filled with classified ads.”

By June 19, 1970, things had changed, both on the political front (Conservatives defeating Labour, a nice parallel considering the predicted outcome of the current contest…) and appearance-wise at the Guardian:

The Guardian takes stock: “The increased use of images, the bylines now appearing on each front-page story and the heavier masthead all stem from the paper’s relaunch the year before.”

Finally, here’s how the paper played things today as Britons get set to cast their votes:

My what a difference 65 years makes to the look of a newspaper. 

Given all the upheaval in the industry of late, though, you have to wonder: when the next British election comes along, will papers and their front pages still be around to tell the story?

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Sex-ed Monty Python style: Is this what parents fear?

PURITAN PARENTS have prevailed yet again here in Ontario.

Last year, the complaint of one parent was enough to get ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ banned in Brampton schools.

Now the province has scrapped plans for a new phys-ed and health curriculum that would have provided kids with sex education at an earlier age. Religious groups had objected to some of the proposed new content.

They don’t agree with children learning about homosexuality in Grade 3, nor do they want Grade 6 kids hearing about vaginal lubrication; ditto for anal sex in Grade 7, despite it being taught “in the context of explaining infection transmission, and helping confused adolescents sort out what constitutes sexual activity,” the Toronto Star reports.

It’s understandable parents might get squeamish about these matters. But to object to them being discussed in schools is ridiculous and irresponsible, particularly in an era when hyper-sexed content is available online and pretty much anywhere else a kid looks.
Parents are being absurd if they think that not discussing with children certain realities about sex and sexuality will somehow help or protect them. It does the opposite.

There are plenty of parents who are more than willing to talk to their kids about the birds and bees. But many others are either too naïve, scared or sanctimonious to do it.

Which is exactly why schools should be allowed to do the talking on certain matters, whether some parents like it or not.

As the Star story notes: “Families need to teach children values related to sexuality, expectations about behaviour and provide guidance. Schools need to deliver up-to-date facts that most parents don’t have at their fingertips on topics such as sexually-transmitted infections or contraception.

“Factual information provided in school can be ‘a corrective to the false and distorted information they pick up from the outside world,’” Alex McKay, a research co-ordinator with the Sex Information and Education Council of Canada, told the paper.

Exactly. Maybe kids being taught about anal sex in school makes some parents queasy. But it sure beats them hearing about it from “Billy’s older brother” or stumbling upon a clip of ‘Rump Humpers’ online.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Oh the memories...

LAST WEEKEND’S New York Times Magazine had a column about the possibility of tapes – a medium assumed by most to be long-gone – making a comeback.

Unlike with the cassette’s generational counterpart, the vinyl album, the majority of us would probably be happy never to see tapes again. We don’t miss their inferior sound and tendency to deteriorate rapidly; not to mention the constant threat of them being eaten up and spit out by some piece of crap stereo.

But, as NYT reporter Rob Walker notes, with the passing of the cassette we’ve lost a cherished ritual: the mix tape.

These days, you pick a bunch of tracks in your iTunes library, create a playlist, burn the disc (or put it on your iPod) and within minutes — bam! — you’ve got yourself a mix. It’s all so darn convenient.

It was a different experience with a mix tape, though. I know I devoted more time to the process, going to often painful lengths to ensure the tracks I picked were the right ones.

It wasn’t enough simply to have great songs. On the better mix tapes, the sequence flowed well; maybe it had a theme, your very own concept album. If you were the mood-setting type, you’d blend slow and fast tunes, heavy and softer.

The trick then was to fit those tunes onto the two 45-minute sides of the tape. This meant sitting by the stereo for the entire 90 minutes — sometimes longer, or shorter if you had tape-to-tape “high-speed dubbing” — to get it just right.

All in all it was quite the exercise, and I think I placed greater value on the end product (the sheer excitement of finally having a new mix to pop into my Walkman!) The gratification wasn’t instant, so maybe that made me appreciate my mix tapes more.

Walker captures the experience well:

“The process involved a level of engagement for both the maker and recipient that can’t be matched by more convenient computer-enabled methods… The carefully picked batch of songs transformed a sorry piece of plastic into a precious object.”

Most of my precious plastic objects remain in a box on my shelf. If I could just find a tape player…

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Related read: Giving 20th century technology to 21st century kids

On Tuesday, just before the Ukraine parliament approved an agreement to allow the Russian Navy to remain in the port of Sevastopol until 2042, opposition legislators began tossing eggs in protest and then smoke bombs were set off.

Things got so eggy in there that the speaker had to be shielded with umbrellas, which, unless it was raining in Kiev that day, are apparently kept around for moments just like this.

The parliamentarians then proceeded to brawl (I dig this crazy place!):

I’m sure there are plenty of Republicans in the U.S. who would love nothing more than to toss a bunch of eggs – or any number of other projectiles – at Nancy Pelosi, then reach across the aisle to punch out a health care lovin’/freedom-hating/socialist Democrat or two.

But as screwed up as things might be down there (very), I can’t see this kind of mayhem occurring in Washington. Never mind Canada — such behaviour is far too passionate and visceral for our boring politicians. Besides, there’s really no need to hurl anything at lawmakers here, they’re always wearing egg on their faces anyway.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

BTW: This brought to mind my all-time favourite egg-chucking moment, from the 2001 British general election, which provoked the now infamous “Prescott punch.”

If you haven’t seen the eye-popping video of the ill-considered lap dance – shot by a student who had a camera, a possibility this pair might have wanted to consider before they got down to it on the gymnasium floor – behold:

The other day an official with the Winnipeg school division said she wasn’t sure why they did this. “It was humorous at first,” one of the Churchill High students told CBC, ”but when they continued it was disturbing.”

Seriously. These teachers need to give their heads a shake. Seems to me a pretty simple and obvious rule should apply here: Don’t perform a lap dance in front of your students. Ever. It’s a high school pep rally, not a club.

That means no matter how desperately you want to seem cool, pigtails lady, it’s inappropriate to thrust your crotch at a male teacher, then slap his butt (is it just me, or does she actually pretend to stuff bills into his boxers?) Likewise, it’s unacceptable behaviour, football jersey guy, for you to straddle and grind on her, and then plant your face in her crotch (really?!)

Don’t feel bad for these banished boneheads, though. I’m sure they have a bright future. Having grabbed so much attention after their clip got posted on YouTube and went viral, it’s probably only a matter of time before they get their own reality show — or at the very least a Winnipeg strip club gig.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Did this happen because God was pissed off about Obamacare?

WHEN I READ yesterday about that Muslim cleric who blamed Iran’s earthquakes on promiscuous women, I promptly dismissed him as just another foaming-mouthed religious zealot – a guy who probably (secretly) would love nothing more than to have it off with a promiscuous woman.

“Many women who do not dress modestly … lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which increases earthquakes,” the cleric, Hojjat ol-eslam Kazem Sediqi, was quoted as saying in a sermon.

Oh Hojjat ol-eslam, you so crazy!

It’s not only Islamic fundamentalists who are a bit unhinged, of course. There are plenty of nutjobs in the West spouting off similarly ridiculous views.

Like Rev. Pat Robertson, who blamed Haiti’s poverty on a “deal with the devil” the country made to free itself from French rule. And then there’s Oxycontin-popping Rush Limbaugh, who believes the eruption of Eyjafjallajokull in Iceland is a sign that God is pissed off about U.S. health care reform.

I’m not religious, so I’m rather confused by this whole “God is punishing us with natural disasters” line of thinking. If he (or she) is indeed a vengeful God, and is using these catastrophes as a way of warning us to behave, then why does he keep giving us so many chances?

By the logic of the Iranian cleric/kook, God is sort of like a parent who keeps threatening consequences but doesn’t follow through with serious disciplinary action. It’s as if God’s saying, ‘Now listen young lady, I’m going to give you to the count of 10 to stop showing off the goods I gave you, or else.”

Except the “or else” isn’t really that severe, relatively speaking. An earthquake or eruption here or there won’t stop people from sinning. So I’m wondering, Hojjat ol-eslam, if God is so angry about the way we’re doing things down here, why doesn’t he just wipe us out and be done with it?

Or at the very least, God should make it clear that these disasters are in fact his doing. Because I have trouble with loony Muslim clerics and assclowns like Pat Robertson and Rush being the ones to interpret what’s going on here.

Perhaps God could simply send along a note each time he wreaks havoc, letting us know we’re getting on his nerves. Heck, he could do it via Twitter: “@thealmightyone: Dear people of Earth: This was all my doing. Now behave yourselves or I swear, to myself, that I’m gonna take this planet out. Peace and love, God.”

I wouldn’t be snickering then.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Updates:

April 27: Women strut their stuff for Boobquake

April 23: Thousands join cleavage protest of Iranian cleric

A RECENT New York Times story looked at how some news organizations have been re-examining whether online commenters should be given anonymity – or a “digital disguise,” as reporter Richard Perez-Pena says.

Anyone who reads comments on news stories (and who doesn’t) knows that the anonymous ones tend to be useless and obnoxious – the kinds of things no one would have the balls to say to another person’s face.

Message boards, especially those not monitored well, can become, as columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. puts it, “havens for a level of crudity, bigotry, meanness and plain nastiness that shocks the tattered remnants of our propriety.”

To improve the situation, the Times reports, news organizations in both the old guard (Washington Post) and the new (Huffington Post) are looking at ways to downplay anonymous comments, and give prominence to those tied to names (real or not), or ones from recognized and trusted commenters.

Many sites require people to register before they post a comment. Some review comments before approving them, or they monitor and remove offensive ones after the fact. When readers submit letters to newspapers, they usually have to give a name and contact info for verification.

What WaPo/HuffPo are looking at sounds like a less over-lordy, more democratic way to deal with anonymous posts: readers rate the comments, and they’re ranked according to popularity. In an ideal world – mine at least – this means well-informed, insightful people are given top billing.

There are potential issues – as the Times notes, “when users help rank things online, sites may have to guard against a concerted campaign by a small group of people voting one way and skewing the results.”

Still, I’m all for taking steps to thwart anonymous commenters – and I don’t think, as some argue, this is anti-free speech.

It’s a beautiful thing when the public is engaged and shares perspectives in an intelligent and relatively civilized manner. (Though I do sometimes wonder if we need to be hearing from what seems like absolutely everybody…)

The problem with anonymity in comment sections: it’s a veil; it gives people cover to spit out venomous, ad hominem attacks against a reporter, or the subject of a story, or often against other commenters.

When anonymity abounds, the “conversation” we’ve been urged by news organizations to join can fast turn into an off-topic sideshow, a forum for nutjobs, half-wits, conspiracy theorists and raging malcontents to spout stupid shit.

I think it makes sense for HuffPo/WaPo to allow readers to vote for comments, presumably on the basis of their overall usefulness, and then to position them appropriately. Hopefully that means anonymous ones get pushed to the bottom.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

You can’t blame them — our dumpy/frumpy/lumpy PM is not the most photogenic guy on earth — witness this shot with Nickelback frontman/douchebag/convicted drunk driver Chad Kroeger, taken on the steps of 24 Sussex Drive, the prime minister’s residence in Ottawa (can’t Harper at least wear a mirdle?):

This cute bromance pic was snapped the other day when Nickelback was in the nation’s capital for a show (which for them amounts to churning out the same nauseating cock-rock tune over and over again, only with slightly different lyrics.)

But I digress…

No one’s going to argue with the WaPo’s news sense the morning after they rocked the Pulitzers — and I’m the last guy to boost our PM – but surely Harper makes for a more appealing front-page-shot option than Conan O’Brien’s doppelganger, Finnish president Tarja Halonen:

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Tiger didn’t suffer much at his highly anticipated press conference Monday and so far during competition hasn’t been subjected to heckling from the gallery.

Considering how hard it is to get a ticket to The Masters, I doubt people would be dumb enough to jeopardize their good fortune by shouting something (hope someone does, though.)

Thank goodness, then, that folks have taken to the skies to punk The Cheetah.

One plane flew over Augusta National with this sign (a reference to Woods claiming during his February apology that  he’d “drifted away” from Buddhism — a lame attempt to explain his sex-a-rama):

urbandictionary.com defines bootyism as “a religion originating in the east (coast) encouraging the endowment of large quantities of (female) booty, getting booty, banging booty, etc.” Sounds like what Tiger probably meant.

Here’s another great banner that was flown overhead:

I agree — the whole notion of a sex addict is a joke, another half-assed way for Tiger to rationalize his behaviour.

I understand we live in an era when going into rehab is the best way to earn public redemption. But Tiger’s not a sex addict. He’s just an egomaniacal horndog who wanted sex all the time and didn’t care what he had to do – or who — to get it.

Prior to the Masters, PETA, taking a different approach to the teasing, did a great job turning Tiger’s sex romp into a teachable moment:

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Dude, you're so not.

I CAN ONLY snicker when stories like these surface.

A Nova Scotia woman wanted a tattoo of the phrase “You’re so beautiful” put on her arm.

(Straight off, I don’t get it. Is she referring to herself as beautiful, or someone else and she thinks her arm is the best place to declare this? Or is some dude paying to have this permanently inscribed on her, a sort of redneck way of marking his territory?)

Anyway, the tattoo artist plugged the words into a computer, showed the preview display to the client, and then proceeded to stencil the phrase on her arm.

It was only after the deed was done that this chick discovered the tattoo just carved onto her had a rather unfortunate typo. It actually read, “You’re so beatiful.”

The botched-tat victim subsequently sued her grammatically-challenged artist.

I damn near snorted out my cereal milk when I read about all of this. It’s pretty funny, in a tragic sense. 

As a matter of professional and personal course, I place loads of value on the importance of correct spelling.

The tat artist should probably know how to spell a basic word like beautiful — or at least use spell check or something — but we all make mistakes. Some are just more permanent than others.

I’ve seen enough egregious typos in newspaper headlines to realize that nobody’s perfect, even those who need to be so as not to get fired.

But c’mon: if you’re the one who’s about to get a frickin’ tat, don’t you think you should probably double check the spelling first? Even if you’re wasted or whatever, bring a pal along to make sure you’re not about to permanently brand yourself a dumbass.

The small claims court apparently saw things along these lines; it ruled against the botched-tat girl, saying she was the “author of her own misfortune” (nice one judge!) for failing to correct the misspelled word before it was inked on her arm.

The typo victim subsequently tried to fix the tattoo error, according to reports. At least she realizes a beatiful tat isn’t beautiful – it’s pitiful.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

>> Oddee.com has a list of 10 misspelled tattoos that is good for a few more chuckles.

The exhibit lines the walls of the Gladstone Hotel.

IF YOU’RE A fan of architecture, especially the old industrial kind, you should check out Building Storeys, a fabulous photo exhibit at Toronto’s Gladstone Hotel until the end of the month.

This is the second year for the show, billed as a “visual documentation and anecdotal exhibit of our city’s heritage buildings and sites.” Heritage Toronto has teamed up with two photo groups – Shadow Collective and DK Photo Group – to present the 2010 edition.

By showcasing Toronto’s industrial past and revealing the “hidden beauty” of various sites around the city – some defunct, some still operating – organizers hope to encourage the conservation of these grand public works buildings.

You may be surprised how lovely a wastewater plant, locomotive shop or a linseed oil mill can appear through the lenses of these talented photogs.

I don’t have to be convinced of the allure of old industrial architecture, mind you. I once walked halfway across London to visit the imposing art deco Battersea Power Station that’s pictured on the cover of Pink Floyd’s 1977 opus, Animals. (Most dudes thought the flying pig was cool; I dug the power station.)

The Gladstone Hotel makes for an interesting setting for Building Storeys. The photos line the walls of this Victorian hotel, which was built in 1889 and is itself quite an architectural gem (now that it’s been restored, effectively washing away its scuzzy dive-bar/flophouse past).

Being in the hotel was a strange experience: checking out photos as folks popped in and out of their rooms. With no crowds on the day I went, at certain points I found myself struggling to focus as I tried to block out the sounds of guests showering, farting, watching TV or, yes, taking a dump.

And the housekeeping carts parked outside the rooms, unless they were supposed to be part of the exhibit, also served as a reminder that we were strolling through the hallway of a working hotel.

I suppose it all ended up being part of the charm. And the show was great, an impressive collection of photos that offers a poignant look at Toronto’s industrial architecture. These buildings rarely get noticed; when they do, they’re generally not regarded as things of beauty. Building Storeys begs to differ.

Here’s a sampling of some of the shots from the show:

‘Central Control’ | Artist: Robert Dyke

‘A Matter of Proportion II’ | Artist: Timothy Neesam

‘Hearn Reflections’ | Artist: Toni Wallachy

‘Roundhouse #2′ | Artist: Mathew Merrett

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Being away was great. Getting there and back was a pain, though.

Indeed, given the frustrating state of air travel nowadays – having to line up three times for three different security checks … really?!; random scheduling changes; discovering they’ve lost your bag – it’s a wonder I came home with my sanity intact.

Far as I’m concerned, the only thing that makes the experience worth it? Getting the chance to peruse SkyMall. If you aren’t familiar with it, SkyMall is a essentially a catalogue of stuff you never thought you’d need. Truth is, most of it is useless crap.

A sampling of some of the items from the “Early Spring 2010″ edition of SkyMall that left me scratching my head:

The Roll-Up Electric Piano: “Learn to play the piano anytime, anywhere!” SkyMall urges you to take this “fully functional electric piano everywhere you go to practice your skills or entertain your friends and guests.”

Entertain? Yeah, right. I can just see this guy’s friends and guests when he whips out his roll-up piano: “Aw shit, Jerry’s unrolling that goddamn tiny piano again. He can’t even play that stupid-looking thing.”

The Zombie of Montclaire Moors Statue: This one I find extremely difficult to comprehend. Why would I ever want some “dead person” sticking out of my “garden plot, office (huh?) or family room corner (wah?!)” as SkyMall suggests. I’m pretty sure this thing is marketed directly to hoarders.

The zombie is so realistic, SkyMall boasts, “you’ll swear you can hear him breathing!” Now that’s messed up … why would I want this? If I actually had a garden, I’d be better off spending the $89.95 on a nice plant, not on some disturbing fake dead-guy buried beside my petunias.

In case the zombie isn’t strange enough for you, SkyMall also offers “Bigfoot, the Garden Yetti Statue” (pictured at right). Er, there’s nothing more to say here.

Another garden item, the Saint Francis bird feeder, is plain scary. He may well be, as SkyMall notes, the “Patron Saint of the environment and animals.” That doesn’t mean I want him standing in my garden, freaking everybody out at pool parties.

For roughly the same price as an iPhone, you can own SkyMall’s Cell Phone Watch, which bears an uncanny and uncool resemblance to a calculator watch circa 1986. Unless they’re dying to rock the David Hasselhoff/Knight Rider look, who’s buying a Cell Phone Watch?

But wait, there’s more… SkyMall also offers a range animal-related items.

There’s the Dog Dazer, a device that transmits an “uncomfortable yet non-harmful, high-frequency sound audible only to dogs … a simple 1 to 2 second burst startles the dog and deters its approach from as far away as 20 feet.”

Oh crap! Sure hope that Dog Dazer works...

You’d better hope so. I mean, sucks to be the guy who shells out $59.95 for this thing only to end up getting his arm and cojones chewed off by a rabid dog that’s apparently not deterred by the device.  (If you want to be extra safe, or you’re paranoid, there is also the “Dog-Off Deluxe,” which comes with a personal alarm that’s designed to “startle potential human attackers.”)

Tired of that mutt next door yelping until all hours of the night? Why not try SkyMall’s Ultrasonic Barking Dog Deterrent. Disguised as a bird house, its “harmless ultrasonic tone,” which is inaudible to humans, “startles the animal into silence.” That sounds nice.

PupSTEP Plus: “For pets who need help getting up onto furniture … their favorite couch, chair or bed for a well-deserved nap.” I love pets, don’t get me wrong, but should we be helping them to get onto furniture? Other than the owners, is this something anybody enjoys: sharing the couch with somebody’s dirty old mongrel? And when does a pet ever really “deserve” a nap? Isn’t napping all most of them do?

The Indoor Dog Restroom: First of all, dogs aren’t supposed to have “restrooms.” They crap and pee outside, that’s how it works. You don’t need to fork over $149.95 for the Indoor Dog Restroom (replacement mats only $64.95!) Just walk the frickin dog, you lazy bum. I’m sure he’d prefer a tree/hydrant anyway.
***
Not so sure I want to fly again anytime soon, but if I do, I’m heartened to know there’s a chance SkyMall will be waiting in the seat-back pocket. And that almost makes air travel worth it.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Toronto got knocked a bit in the local press for not turning its lights down all that much during Earth Hour; the local hydro company recorded a 10 per cent power drop during this year’s event vs 15.1 per cent in 2009.

Still, these photos offer a nice juxtaposition of downtown views. Judging from them, it actually looks like Toronto made a half-decent effort – and maybe, just maybe, saved a bunch of little birdies in the process.

Here’s how the downtown core looked Saturday night:

Before Earth Hour:

During Earth Hour (8:30 p.m., March 27, 2010):

PHOTOS: © Bill Ivy/WWF-Canada

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

The show, in actuality part of a documentary that looked at how far people would go if ordered to administer potentially deadly shocks, based its premise on the famous Milgram psychological experiments of the 1960s.

In those tests, 62 per cent of the subjects obeyed orders to mete out painful shocks to a man they couldn’t see. This “victim” was an actor, but the subjects didn’t know it.

Similarly, in the French game show/documentary, players were told to give a deadly shock to another participant for answering trivia questions incorrectly. The more wrong answers given, the more the voltage increased, all the way up to 460 volts.

As with Milgram’s experiment, the victim in the French show was also an actor, but contestants were unaware of this.

In this case, a whopping 80 per cent of the players obeyed instructions to punish him using the maximum voltage, despite his apparent screams of agony; only 16 of the 80 players refused.

Both experiments reveal something very disturbing about how easily people will follow orders from an authority figure or from someone they view as trustworthy (a game show host?!)

This doesn’t bode well for if/when the next Hitler comes along.

I find the whole matter baffling. I’m not the most strong-willed person in the world, at the same time, I can’t imagine I could ever be forced to shock someone – possibly to death – simply because I was ordered to (on a game show no less.)

Maybe if someone literally had a gun to my head, things could get a bit more complicated. But having someone in a position of authority tell me to do something that could potentially harm or snuff someone out? Forget it.

Perhaps I’m blowing this out of proportion.

With the French “game show,” it could be that the allure of 15 minutes of fame supersedes any compassion people might have; the kind of moral code that would prevent someone from pumping a poor bastard full of high voltage.

Actually, considering the world we live in today, maybe this isn’t so shocking after all.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

"Joey, you ever seen a grown man naked?"

SO SAD TO hear that Peter Graves died over the weekend.

Graves was best known for playing Jim Phelps in the television series Mission: Impossible, but that was a bit before my time. I’ll always remember him as Captain Oveur from the movie Airplane!, easily one of my all-time fave flicks (and regarded in some circles as among the best comedies ever made).

To this day, I am reduced to tears of laughter when I watch the scene in which Graves’ pedophile character Captain Oveur peppers a young boy visiting the cockpit, Joey,  with a series of bizarre questions; queries that start out somewhat prosaic and get progressively more absurd/creepy:

“Joey, have you ever been in a cockpit before?” … “You ever seen a grown man naked?” … “You ever hang around a gymnasium? … “Do you like movies about gladiators?” … “Have you ever been in a Turkish prison?”

(I’d include a clip of this, but Paramount Pictures has yanked all of them off YouTube over copyright issues… booooo Paramount.)

It was comedy gold, but also a provocative scene that would likely never see the light of day in today’s super-sensitive/hyper-politically-correct world. Graves himself said later that he balked upon first reading the script, certain the role would ruin his career.

It did anything but – he ended up reprising the role in Airplane II – in fact, it helped a serious and respected actor enjoy a new life sending up the earnest characters he played in earlier years. Graves showed off more of his deadpan/satricial comedy chops in this Geico ad:

Graves hasn’t received the kinds of tributes and send-offs typically afforded to more high-profile actors. Which is unfortunate. For me, though, he will live on each time I bust a gut watching Captain Oveur perv on young Joey.

Now there’s something I never thought I’d write…

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

ON SLATE THE

Manjoo was focusing on “non-voice phone usage – texting, e-mailing, Web browsing, and other activities that you can do at the same time as chatting with someone else.”

Fiddling with phones when you’re with company has become more or less socially acceptable these days. That said, having had an iPhone for about three months now, I’m all too aware of the addictive and dependency-creating nature of the device – that nagging sense that if it’s not with you, you could be missing out on something huge. (Is it even possible not to have your iPhone/BlackBerry with you?)

Needless to say, I never felt this way when I had a piece of crap old school phone that could barely manage a text message, nor for the two decades of my life that didn’t involve the use of a cell phone. Remember when it was OK to be unavailable for an hour or two?!

Anyway, we can’t turn back time or progress. And my iPhone has changed my life for the better, certainly in helping me stay on top of matters both professional and personal. It’s an expensive device, but damn convenient to have.

Manjoo isn’t debating any of this.

He’s asking readers if there should be boundaries about when and how we use the devices in social situations. I love my phone, but I also acknowledge that it’s usually hard for me to focus on much else when it’s in my hands.

Majoo presents some scenarios to help determine the ground rules:

1. You and your partner plopped down on the couch to eat cold pizza while watching a rerun of Law & Order? Would it be OK to check your e-mail then?

I say yes. It’s informal; as Majoo notes, there’s another distraction in the mix anyway; it’s not as if you’re looking deeply into each other’s eyes and the phone risks ruining the romantic vibe. You’re watching Law & Order and eating pizza… you should feel free to check your e-mail.

2. You and your significant other are at a neighborhood diner. Can you check your phone here? How about if you’re at McDonald’s? What about a white-tablecloth joint? Or say you’re taking a long walk in the park together on a sunny day. What’s acceptable in that setting?

Go for it. People can’t get uptight about etiquette at McDonald’s. At a white tablecloth joint? Perhaps whipping out your phone is a bit tacky here; ditto for the long walk in the park. Things might be different, though, if both parties have phones and there’s a mutual understanding about when/where they should be used.

3. Now let’s replace your spouse with other people. You’re at the movies on a second date, and as you wait for the theater to go dark you get a text from a friend asking how the date is going. Do you reply? How about if the text comes during the movie? Second date?

My gut says no. Maybe if you go take a leak, then it’s cool to check in with your buddies. But a second date can end either wonderfully or unsuccessfully … can you afford to run the risk of affecting the outcome by texting “Sooo getin action 2nite” to your boys in the middle of a dark theatre with her right beside you?

Manjoo’s final scenario to consider:

4. You’re at a birthday dinner with a dozen people you don’t know very well and don’t really care to impress—do you make pointless small talk with the unemployed stock trader sitting beside you, or do you read your Twitter feed?

Definitely read your Twitter feed. Talking to a stock trader, especially a whiny unemployed one, doesn’t sound very enticing.

***

It’s an interesting exercise, but in reality I think it would be impossible to come up with rules of cell phone etiquette that can possibly apply to everyone.

In the end, I think it comes down to a person’s personality. Those who are generally conscientious and have some semblance of social grace will probably recognize if/when it’s OK to check their phone and when it’s not.

People who are rude, self-absorbed and generally clueless about their own behaviour are probably going to check their phones regardless of whether it’s inappropriate or tacky. Classless buttheads generally don’t care all that much about etiquette.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

I ENJOY WATCHING

Yes, I also enjoy ogling all the Hollywood hotties strolling down the red carpet, decked out in their finest evening wear.

And while it’s nice to feel a part of some big event by watching it live, after Sunday’s glacially paced show, I’m seriously wondering if I wouldn’t have been far better off digitally recording the whole thing and then fast-forwarding through the boring crap (ie. the bulk of the show).

I don’t know who enjoys watching a three-and-a-half hour Academy Awards broadcast, but it sure ain’t me. Nothing should go on this long; of all people, you’d think those working in the film industry would get this.

The show should be condensed into one hour of star-gazing and award-giving. Heck, I could even tolerate two hours: one for all the red carpet glitz and glamour, the other for the awards and the odd montage of great performances, tributes to those we lost in 2009 etc.

But then for heaven’s sake, be done with it.

Everything else, including utterly boring stuff such as highlight reels from the governors’ awards banquet and a report on what went down at the scientific and technical awards ceremony (really?!), can be dumped online for anyone who cares to watch (nobody other than the mothers of the nominees, methinks).

Ditto for things like Doogie Howser’s lame Vegas-style opener, that inexplicable interpretive dance set to a soundtrack of best original song nominees (or whatever that was), not to mention all those irritating, long-winded, melodramatic acceptance speeches.

Bottom line: the Oscars should be a celebration of all that makes Hollywood great (movies and glamour), not a showcase for what makes it so utterly loathsome (super-sized egos and heaps of bullshit).

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Is our national anthem politically incorrect?

JUST WHEN YOU thought there was nothing left for people to get uptight about, along comes a real gem to file under “Political correctness gone ridiculously wrong.”

In Wednesday’s throne speech, Canada’s government said it would be looking into a proposal to change the lyrics of the national anthem.

“Our Government will … ask Parliament to examine the original gender-neutral English wording of the national anthem,” the Tories said in the speech. The anthem, O Canada, includes the line “True patriot love in all thy sons’ command.” 

Now, with reports that some women have been offended by these lyrics and a perceived gender bias, comes this talk about changing them. Not to ‘All thy daughters’ command,’ though; rather, a reversion back to the original 1911 lyrics, “True patriot love thou dost in us command.” 

I have no clue what dost means. I had to look it up. Apparently it’s old English for “do.” Well, obviously “thou dost” dost not roll of the tongue very easily. I can’t sing it (I tried); how is some little kid or a non-English-speaking immigrant going to manage? 

Changing the anthem is a silly idea. Our government should not spend a single minute looking into it. 

If they were to end up changing it, though, surely they can’t stop at just “sons.”  If they’re going to be nit-picky and super-sensitive about this, they ‘d also better change the line, “God keep our land, glorious and free.”

After all, not all of us worship ”God” or even a god. The lyrics will have to be changed to “Deity-of-your-choosing (and if you’re not religious, that’s cool) keep our land glorious and free.” 

Ha! Try singing that at the next hockey game. 

And what about this “free” business? I mean, are we really free? What is freedom, anyway? What’s more, by boasting about our freedom, don’t we risk offending those who live in oppressive countries? Better adjust that part, too, just to be safe. 

A reader on thestar.com the other day went a step further: “Why don’t we all just hum the tune into kazoos so no one will be offended?” he suggested. 

Or how about we leave the anthem just the way it is?  

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com 

Yippee! Common sense has prevailed… 

UPDATE: Public outcry convinces Tories ‘O Canada’ lyrics OK

King Crosby

WORST OLYMPICS EVER, EH? Well how do you like us now, you tea-sucking hacks?

Sure the Vancouver 2010 Winter Games had its share of mishaps / challenges / tragedies – capped off by a closing ceremony that was embarrassing at points; giant inflatable beavers… really? – but man, events-wise, what a spectacular finish.

Sid the Kid prevailed in overtime in the men’s hockey final, securing gold for the home side and sending Canadians into a state of sheer pandemonium mixed with immense relief (maple relief, as the L.A. Times put it). We confirmed hockey is in fact our game, even if the rest of the world probably doesn’t give a hoot.

Far as Canadian hockey lore is concerned, Crosby’s goal will no doubt go down as one of the greatest ever, alongside Paul Henderson’s in 1972 and Mario Lemieux’s in 1987.

In the afterglow of the Games, there’s been much discussion of how Canada has redefined itself, to the world and to ourselves, over these past two weeks, giant inflatable beavers and Nickelback notwithstanding.

Certainly in the context of winter sports, we’ve signaled we’re a force to be reckoned with. While it sounds cliched – given the endless parade of ads pandering to our patriotism over the last 16 days – Canadians have at long last come to believe we can be a nation of winners.

More important, we feel comfortable saying this loud and proud; boastfulness we’re not typically known for. In a sporting sense, and perhaps in a broader context, this has been a big national moment. Inspiration and pride abound.

We’re not used to garnering international attention, particularly from our neighbours to the south. With the Olympics, though, we did … well, Vancouver/Whistler did, and how. Indeed, it was amusing to observe all the foreign journalists belatedly coming to realize there’s something noteworthy about this nation; admirable and endearing, even.

We’ll likely go back to being unremarkable in their eyes now, but it sure was nice while it lasted. This nation loves external validation. As the world turns their attention back to other matters, though, you have to hope something has fundamentally changed for Canada and Canadians as a people.

Sure, declaring at the outset that we would own the podium was a bit brash, and certainly out of character for us, but it was the right thing to do. And if gold medals are the measure, we certainly did own it: most gold medals of these Games and most golds won at any Winter Olympics ever. Go syrup suckers!

Still, when things weren’t looking so rosy a week ago, critics said it wasn’t prudent of our organizers to have vowed we’d dominate; that this put an excessive amount of pressure on our athletes.

I don’t get this. They’re athletes, for Chrissake – their job involves performing under pressure. That’s what they do. Besides, for too long Canadians have been satisfied with merely good efforts and personal bests.

So maybe what this experience has taught us is that we can be winners, especially at the Winter Olympics. After all, who loves snow more than us iceholes? We live in igloos and travel by dogsled, right?

Success in sport is not just about mindset, though, of course. It also has a lot – everything? – to do with money. We were successful in Vancouver largely because government saw reason to pump tons of cash into building a winning squad for 2010. Needless to say, this hasn’t been the case in the past.

So here’s hoping our leaders fully recognize what these Games did to lift our national spirit and that they — along with sponsors – continue funding our amateur athletes in such a fashion, and not just when the spotlight is on us as host country.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper had better do so, given the oodles of time he just spent chillaxing at the Olympics with Wayne Gretzky when he should have been back in Parliament.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

THE ADS HAVEN’T even run yet, and already they’re creating a controversy in France.

Folks there are in an uproar over the unveiling Monday of an anti-smoking ad campaign that features images of teenagers basically blowing cigarettes – complete with a dirty old man’s hand pushing on their heads. 

To make the point clear, the caption reads, ”Smoking means being a slave to tobacco.” (You know, just in case you might mistake the message for: “Smoking: As good as blowing a dirty old man.”)

The creator of the ads says they are meant to shock teens into not smoking. So far, though, apparently all they’ve done is piss everybody off in France.

I’m not sure these ads will achieve their stated purpose. Indeed, as a women’s liberation activist told Le Parisien newspaper: “Far as I know, practising fellatio doesn’t cause cancer.”

What’s more, I suspect the sexual innuendo in the ads is more shocking to parents than kids. Indeed, teens today probably think blowjobs are cool – they make you look older, you know, just like cigarettes.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

That's gotta hurt.

A CZECH WOMAN is suing a local hospital after a foot-long spatula-like instrument was left inside her abdomen following a gynecological operation last fall.

How does that happen?

I can understand a doctor dropping his keys in there, or a wedding ring, or in the olden days, a smoke. But a f#&king foot-long medical instrument? Not exactly easy to miss, or so you’d think.

The mind races to wonder how these clowns could just sew her up without noticing the huge BBQ flipper sitting in her abdomen. Were they drunk? Considering it was a gynecological procedure, she’s lucky that thing wasn’t left somewhere else.

When the woman confronted the medical staff – after living with the pain for five months! – they initially tried to deny anything was done wrong; apparently they didn’t even report one of the instruments used in the operation had gone missing.

They also denied the victim an x-ray when she complained about the insane pain, claiming the procedure would needlessly expose her to radiation, according to media reports.

Now I’m no doctor – and I don’t play one on TV – but I figure the golden rule of being a surgeon, other than ‘Don’t kill people,’ would have to be ‘Don’t leave foot-long medical instruments inside patients.’

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Olympics? More like a prison camp.

ANGER ABOUNDED in Vancouver this week over the Olympic cauldron being cordoned off behind a ghetto-riffic chain-link fence and concrete barricades. As if the British press needed one more reason to dub these the worst Games ever.  

Organizers relented somewhat and eventually cut a slit in the fence to allow for photos, albeit shots that couldn’t include people in them. The fence was also moved closer to the cauldron. On Saturday it was reported the system would be replaced by Plexiglas (now why didn’t they think of that to begin with?)  

For all the huffing and puffing in the fence debacle, there hasn’t been much talk of why the cauldron, that all-important symbol of the Games – lit by no less than the Great One, Wayne Gretzky, who rode through pissing rain in the back of a pick-up truck to do so – was walled off to begin with.  

For years now anything Olympic in nature has been the target of protesters in British Columbia, most of these activists part of an anti-poverty movement. The gang has vandalized the Olympic countdown clock in downtown Vancouver several times. The group also attacked Premier Gordon Campbell’s constituency office in the name of their anti-Olympic crusade.  

I don’t know what the flame security situation has been at previous Olympic Games, but I believe the cauldron is usually not as accessible as it is in Vancouver. So the position of the cauldron at street level at the 2010 Games could be seen as a progressive move on VANOC‘s part, bringing the cauldron, and in theory the spirit of the Olympics, closer to the masses.

But vandalism concerns mean the flame was put behind that godawful looking fence – the cauldron looked like it was in a friggin demilitarized zone, not an Olympic city – and folks were understandably peeved they couldn’t snap unobstructed shots with the Olympic emblem, even if it does look more like a steel campfire than a cauldron. 

I get that protesters think the Games and the worldwide attention they command offer an excellent opportunity to spread their message and raise awareness about issues that concern them. And I happen to agree that it’s probably not the most prudent thing for governments to spend such insane amounts of taxpayer money on the Olympics, even with all the spin-off benefits.  

Activists are being silly, though, if they believe that somehow if not for the Olympics all this money would simply be funneled into social housing initiatives. We all know it wouldn’t. Maybe that doesn’t matter to protesters, though. I’m sure it’s lots of fun to throw paint, vandalize and be anarchisty all the same.  

It’s just too bad the flame had to be fenced off because of it, and that people who pay a pretty penny to come experience the Olympics lose the chance to snap a decent, unobstructed photo with the cauldron.  

Even if it is kind of ugly, that flame wants to be free.  

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

>> RELATED: Ian Brown: Putting up fences, just another outside game

Obviously this is a smart move, as those who behold B.C.’s beauty on TV during the Games might well decide to make it their next vacation destination. These are the kinds of economic spin-offs organizing commitees talk about when trying to sell skeptical populaces on the virtues of pursuing an Olympic bid.

Not to be outdone, Ontario’s tourism industry has been getting in on the Olympic advertising blitz as well, airing ads – complete with crappy, out-of-tune ”alt-rock” bands – claiming “There’s no place like this.”

Ontario’s my home province. I was born and raised here and think it’s a fine spot. But honestly, “No place like this?” That’s kind of pushing it. Sure we have some strong points (Niagara Falls, Algonquin Park, Muskoka and the Great Lakes, for example) but they’re few and far between, literally.

British Columbia, now there’s a place that’s truly unlike anything I’ve ever seen. Indeed, though the province’s licence plate tagline – ‘The best place on Earth’ – is a tad obnoxious, you’d have trouble proving otherwise, at least, if we’re talking natural beauty.

Ontario, though? I actually think there are plenty of “places like this” – New York state, Ohio and Michigan, to name just a handful of unflattering geographic counterparts.

Olympic broadcasts provide a great platform for advertisers to pander to Canadians and stoke our patriotism, ceaselessly reminding us of the ties that bind us – basically hockey and Tim Hortons coffee.

But Ontario’s tourism peeps need to get real. I mean, save those advertising dollars for a better time, like when we’re not being directly compared to B.C. Because no one watching the Olympics, if given the chance/choice, would opt to come to this province when they could frolic amid the mountainy majesty of Canada’s westernmost province.

Ontario is the economic and political powerhouse of the nation, the place where all the important decisions are made. But when it comes to beauty, B.C. is this country’s dominant force.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

GOLDEN BOY: Moguls skier Alexandre Bilodeau in fine form.

CANADA IS basking in the afterglow of Alexandre Bilodeau’s triumphant winning of the country’s first-ever Olympic gold medal on home turf.

TV networks have been playing the victorious performance on repeat and have pumped up their patriotism; Twitter’s all abuzz (a Canadian is a trending topic!); and there’s even word the Royal Canadian Mint will be creating a 22-karat gold coin in honour of Bilodeau and this national sporting milestone.

Canadians don’t do hero-worship, but we’re making an exception for this guy.

The first-ever at-home gold medal is obviously a big deal for the host country. It’s also helped a bit to lift the shadow cast by the death of Georgian luger Nodar Kumaritashvili  on Friday (well, maybe not for the Georgians).

The media was quick to jump on reports that there had been concerns voiced in the past about the luge track being too dangerous. Sorry, but it’s not like luge is a safe sport to begin with; these guys rocket down an icy course at speeds of over 100 km/h with nothing to protect them but a helmet – and skeleton racers do it face first!

Kumaritashvili’s death was tragic, of course, but as U.S. slider Tony Benshoof pointed out: “Luge is a tough sport. It takes a long time to master … at the end of the day, we’re going 95-98 miles an hour and we’re six inches off the ice. We get down a mile of track in 45 seconds. There’s an inherent risk.”

Bilodeau’s gold medal performance has also helped us forget about the embarrassing botched cauldron lighting at the opening ceremonies Friday night. This, combined with the warmer, rainy weather playing havoc on proceedings, made me think that events were conspiring to trip up the Winter Games before they had a chance to begin.

Even the entourage of U.S. vice-president Joe Biden – who was in town for a weekend of Games-watching (doesn’t he have somewhere to be?) – managed to get into a car accident on the way to watch women’s hockey.

Ah, but see we can forget all that now. Bilodeau has won Canada its first home-soil gold and in doing so has vanquished a sad stigma: that this country had never won gold at the two previous Olympics we’ve hosted.

It’s particularly sweet that Bilodeau won the gold by knocking off douchebag Dale Begg-Smith – a Canadian who moved to Australia because of some business interests and then opted to compete for the Aussies at the 2010 Games. Ha – the turncoat will have to settle for silver.

Winning gold is great. The big question, though: will Canada continue in its success and ‘own the podium’ as promised? Could we even handle that? After all, as Charles McGrath observed in an excellent piece on Canada and its Olympic medal quest, we’re not used to being or celebrating winners:

Theirs is a vast country that in many ways is run like a small town, with small-town values, and it has a highly developed culture of modesty, if not a collective inferiority complex. The athletic record in general is a little underwhelming, and some Canadians think that is because their countrymen prefer that, considering a good effort just as valuable as a trunkload of trophies, maybe better.

True, but it’d be nice to have a trunkload of trophies.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

SIGH. C’MON ADAM

A sex scandal has forced Adam Giambrone, Toronto’s political boy wonder — a 32-year-old city councillor / transit commission chairman / mayoral hopeful / lady-killer all wrapped into one — to pull out … of the city’s mayoral race, that is.

He really had no choice after the Toronto Star on Tuesday exposed the extra-curricular relationship he’s been having with a university student. (Giambrone’s living with someone, but for “political reasons,” the other woman claimed Giambrone had told her. “‘It is important for the campaign,” he said.)

How could this young “concubine,” as the Star described her, prove it? Take a wild guess. Yup: text messages. Now how clichéd is that?!

Apparently Giambrone didn’t heed the No. 1 post-Tigergate rule for cheaters: Don’t text messages such as: “I still think of you when I need … um … stimulation;” and: “You’re also good-looking naked” — as Giambrone apparently did — if you don’t want to have it come back and bite you in the penis.

Actually don’t text anything, you dumb horn-dog.

This scandal is a bit deeper than simply yet another male politician who can’t keep it in his pants. Truth is, I don’t particularly care if Giambrone is a player who prowls Toronto bars after hours looking for his aforementioned “stimulation.” He’s a big boy, that’s his business.

But I’m a voter, and he’s a public figure in charge of something that matters a lot in this city: the transit system, which right now is in a state of disarray and in need of some serious leadership. Can he provide this, especially after what’s just gone on?

How Giambrone handled both his affair and the fallout from it tells you something about his character/integrity (sketchy) and what kind of judgment he has (poor, at least on an inter-personal/emotional level, which isn’t unimportant for a politican).

That he would still expect to be seen as a credible candidate for mayor is absurd. Giambrone realized this and dropped out of the race Wednesday afternoon. No word on whether he’ll stay on as head of the transit commission, though there are calls for him to resign from the post.

The exit speech didn’t go so smoothly. Have a look:

Apparently Giambrone’s botched outgoing address – in which he appears to lose his nerve and bolt before he’s finished it – was the result of having left a page of the speech on the city hall printer (doh!), his people insisted.

A while later, his aide stepped in and announced he would be finishing the speech “in Adam’s voice” – a novel idea, until it quickly became apparent this really wasn’t working:

“There are weeks that change your life,” the guy started off, “and this week has definitely changed…” (Pause. Enter his inside voice: ‘Wait, shit, this didn’t change my life… this has nothing to do with me. Oh, why did I say I’d read it in his voice. Crap. Abort! Abort!) …

“I’m going to change my mind,” the spokesman then said, somewhat sheepishly. “I’m going to read it in my voice.” Probably a good idea, you know, considering the gist of the address is that Giambrone’s pecker derailed his political ambitions.

Never mind the spokesman, though, what does Giambrone have to say for himself? No one knows, because he got on the first plane out of here, headed for a vacation, apparently.

Ha. Can’t you just see Giambrone and his GF chilling on a beach somewhere right now? Yeah, awk-ward.

Actually, she probably doesn’t want to go anywhere near a beach with stud boy and his eye of the “Tiger.”

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

If you haven’t seen the clip already – probably unlikely: it’s had over 3 million views on YouTube – an Australian bank worker is caught on live television ogling photos of a scantily clad Victoria’s Secret model during a colleague’s interview on interest rate hikes (possibly the most un-sexy topic there is).

The guy in the background is having a great time: he’s chewing gum, leaning back in his chair, chatting with his workmates – the conversation likely something along the lines of, ‘She’s hot, is she? Alright, yeah, send me the pics.’

Whatever he’s saying, the dude seems oblivious to the fact he’s on camera.

Indeed, after he opens the e-mail, he takes a good five to 10 seconds to give each shot careful examination/salivation before moving on to the next. In the middle of pics two and three he can be seen saying something to a colleague (presumably, ‘Oh mate, you gotta check this sh*t out.’)

Near the end of the analyst’s interview, the guy in the background seems to finally realize what’s just happened and turns to the camera with a big goofy grin.

With the worker facing possible disciplinary action, the ogled object in question, Aussie-born Victoria’s Secret model Miranda Kerr, has come out in defence of her red-faced fan.

And why not? Far as she and the horny bank guy are concerned, they both benefit from her exposure.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Osama: Save the Earth, death to America!

OSAMA BIN LADEN is back in the news, and not just because he’s released one of his tirades against evil America.

He has issued a new tirade, only this time Osama’s got a new focus for his ire. In a taped message aired on Al Jazeera last week, the Titan of Terror blames the U.S. and other industrialized nations for … wait for it … causing climate change.

“The effects of global warming have touched every continent,” Osama says in the message, sounding like a university professor. “Drought and deserts are spreading … floods and hurricanes unseen before the previous decades have now become frequent.”

He continued: “George Bush Jr., preceded by Congress, dismissed the agreement to placate giant corporations. And they are themselves standing behind speculation, monopoly and soaring living costs.”

The King of Jihad says the only way to prevent climate change from becoming a full-blown disaster is by, of course, destroying America. A familiar theme of his to be sure, but Osama’s not talking about blowing planes out of the sky or leveling buildings.

That was sooo last decade.

Rather, this time Osama wants his followers to ruin America by crippling its economy through the boycotting of U.S. goods and the greenback.

“People of the world, it’s not right for the burden to be left on the mujahideen in an issue that causes harm to everyone,” he said. “Boycott them to save yourselves and your possessions and your children from climate change and to live proud and free.”

Osama has addressed climate change before. But analysts note this is the first time he has dedicated an entire taped message to the topic.

Indeed, his new rant didn’t deal with any of his usual fave topics: the need for jihad to avenge injustices against Muslims, wiping Israel from the face of the Earth, etc.

So what gives?

Perhaps Osama figured his same old diatribes against the West weren’t having the same effect they used to. Maybe he’s attempting to broaden his appeal; expand his base.

Makes sense, I suppose. After all, his peeps have been shrinking: getting killed off by predator drones in the mountains of northwest Pakistan, burning their balls on airplanes above Detroit and what not.

Still, who knew Osama was so concerned about climate change? Does it even matter when you hang out in a cave?

It makes you wonder what kind of world we’d be living in if Al Gore had become president back in 2000.

Would Osama have been all: “Well Al, you are the leader of a very evil nation, but you’ve got some darn good ideas about tackling climate change. Loved you in An Inconvenient Truth, by the way. What moisturizer do you use?

“C’mon, Let’s forget about all this jihad business. How could I stay mad at you, Al? Listen, come to my cave, we’ll grab some beers, non-alcoholic of course, and talk global warming.”

Instead we got Dubya. And we all know how that turned out.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Apple CEO Steve Jobs introduced the iPad after months of speculation and carefully calculated media leaks.

THE BIG NEWS of the past week – at least for those of us who await Apple’s latest toys with bated breath – was the unveiling of the much ballyhooed iPad tablet.

The unfortunate name choice aside – are there no women working in the Apple marketing department? – print media people have been debating the possibility the iPad could be the salvation for the struggling newspaper and magazine industries.

Most folks scoff at the notion that they should ever be made to pay for the news they read online; it’ll never happen, they say – unless you’re talking about niche products such as the Financial Times or the Wall Street Journal.

But is it possible that the iPad could enhance the digital news-reading experience to such a degree that it just might give people a good reason to pay for the pleasure?

Perhaps it’s akin to my rationale for still buying CDs in the age of digital music: I’ll shell out the dough for them if they offer value-added features – quality liner notes, attractive packaging, photos, DVD extras, etc.

The iPad seems to represent the best of both worlds, combining the visually appealing design/layout of a printed news product with the interactive features of the internet, such as video, web browser/links and e-mail (On the flip side, it doesn’t support Flash and doesn’t have a camera.)

This Sports Illustrated demo offers a sense of how awesome the tablet experience could be:

For someone like me, who finds it difficult to read long-form articles online, having them laid out like they are in an actual physical newspaper/magazine might make things more enjoyable and tolerable.

(Then again, one of the reasons it’s hard for me to get through lengthy articles on the web is because of all the distractions that beckon me every second… e-mail, Twitter, Facebook, and the list goes on.)

The iPad certainly looks cool, but is it going to be the solution to getting people to pay for online news?

It counts for something that Apple CEO Steve Jobs was joined at the iPad launch by the New York Times’ digital operations chief, who unveiled a NYT app for the new gadget. (And it’s worth noting that a week earlier the Times announced it would be introducing a pay wall in 2011.)

Apple helped rescue record companies from certain demise in the face of digital file sharing when it introduced the iTunes micro-payment system that has proven to be wildly successful.

Something similar has been proposed for online news operations, but so far the idea has been met with skepticism.

If newspapers and magazines are going to survive in the brave new digital media world, they’ll need to figure out how to get people to pay.

It may seem an impossible feat, but if any two companies are going to find a way to make such a business model work, I’d put my money on the New York Times and Apple.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

>> FORTUNE: How tablets will change magazines, books, and newspapers

>> 10 sages read the future of print

Free transit for everyone!

In keeping with the spirit of the times, the picture, snapped by a passenger and posted online via Twitpic, went viral, and this poor schmuck fast became the focus of worldwide ridicule.     

At first, news reports cautiously described him as “apparently” sleeping. But I think it’s pretty darn obvious that’s exactly what he was doing.     

Locals reacted with understandable indignation. Most have mild contempt for the TTC, even on a good day. The sleepy ticket guy incident comes just weeks after a fare hike. And this isn’t the first time a TTC agent has been caught napping.   

I’m not sure what’s more amusing: that this ticket collector got busted for snoozing on the job, or that the transit union came to his defence by suggesting it was somehow the riders who were in the wrong.     

“The reports that passengers were laughing at him as they passed by the booth makes this even more disturbing,” the union president was quoted saying.     

The snoozing ticket collector was suffering from a medical condition, he said. And why didn’t passengers tap on the glass to rouse sleepy head from his slumber? 

My guess is because they’d rather laugh at him. I know I would. I mean buddy’s not just nodding off – he’s passed right out, mouth open and everything. 

Making this situation all the more absurd, when the sleeping employee was eventually reached by the media, he had the nerve to criticize the chuckling masses for having their priorities “a little mixed up.” 

“When you knock Haiti off the front page,” he said, “you know something’s wrong.”      

Sure this guy has a medical condition – it’s called narcolepsy, and it should disqualify him from a job that involves the collecting of money and tickets, not to mention ensuring the safety of passengers in the station. 

I feel bad when workers get replaced by machines. But stories like these make me think it might be for the best. 

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com 

>> TTC sleeper back on job 

>> Sleepy TTC in need of wake-up call 

>> We’re sorry, says the TTC

I WAS QUITE excited last week when I read about the launch of this new symbol, the SarcMark, a punctuation mark to indicate sarcasm. 

As someone who spends quite a bit of time dealing in sarcasm – the so-called lowest form of wit – versus actual genuine sentiment, I can definitely see how this will come in handy. 

I’m forever getting into trouble with folks who don’t understand (appreciate?) my preferred approach to communication – and that’s even when they’re able to see my facial expressions and body language. 

Though I try my darndest to steer clear of people who can’t handle sarcasm, alas, avoiding these lame-os all together is near impossible. 

Some might suggest here that sarcasm is actually not-so-thinly-veiled rudeness and that I’m just being a dick. They’re probably right, but hey, if the truth hurts, maybe sarcasm hurts a bit less? 

Online, as many of us have no doubt discovered, irony can often fall flat, or worse, can end up being misinterpreted and deeply offending someone (and then live on in digital perpetuity). 

In my earlier e-mailing days, I thought it might help to add the word sarcasm in brackets to help avoid any misunderstandings. 

To wit: Did you catch that George W. Bush speech? Man, he’s so intelligent and well-spoken (SARCASM) 

More recently, emoticons and web short-hand have come in handy when conveying sarcasm, particularly in text messages or while instant messaging. As in: 

that Xmas sweater looks great on u! – LOL … or: yeah, let’s order pizza. gr8 idea – u could really use the xtra calories! : ) … or:  ur baby’s sooo cute – its face def does not look like a can of smashed assholes - j/j (just joking). 

I suppose you can also throw in ‘Not!’ at the end of your statement to indicate insincerity, but that’s kind of old school. And besides, it’s a device better used in actual speech: Wow, Glitter was a great movie – NOT! 

It’s hard to know what works best. So I think it’s handy that we now have the SarcMark. Check out the promo video: 

I hope this will eventually become standard on every computer keyboard. 

After all, it’s really important to me that I don’t offend people anymore. 

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Reporters in Haiti: In search of the most heartbreaking story.

EVERY DAY, as the extent of post-earthquake devastation in Haiti becomes clearer, planeloads of journalists from around the world continue to descend on the Caribbean island, looking to get their piece of one the biggest disaster stories in years.

But judging from the ongoing coverage, on television especially, many of these reporters seem a bit too interested in outdoing one another with tales of the unspeakable tragedy and utter chaos being visited upon the Haitian people.

As they fan out across the ravaged island in search of the most “gripping” and/or “heartbreaking” stories, these journos clearly have that old newsroom axiom at top of mind: If it bleeds it leads.   

Indeed, sometimes it seems as if the shell-shocked earthquake victims are little more than a pitiful backdrop for reporters who are shooting to win awards for Best Disaster Coverage.   

I really wouldn’t be surprised if just before they go on air, these reporters give their subjects specific instructions on how to create pathos for the camera:   

“You were in the earthquake, right? Terrific. OK – now just stand there and try and look really scared and hungry. And sad. No, look sadder. Perfect. Oh and if you can, go loot a store or something. Remember, the vibe we’re going for is desperate and frantic; savage, basically. Got it? Great. Roll ‘em!”   

I find disaster coverage often ends up exposing the ambitious, narcissistic side of journalists.   

Viewers/readers are supposed to believe these reporters and news anchors flock to Haiti because they care about the suffering of the people there and want to tell their harrowing stories.   

But the coverage can often ring hollow; it can come across as self-promoting and vain.

Most of these reporters likely have good intentions, and they’re doing tough work in brutal conditions. But let’s be honest: they’re attracted to Haiti first and foremost because it’s a big fat feather in their professional caps.  

As a journalist myself, I can’t act like this is shocking. I doubt I’d handle things all that differently if I were in the same situation. A big story is a big story, after all, and your primary mission is to cover it better than anyone else.   

It’s just grating that this usually means reporters end up dealing in far too much melodrama and over the top sensationalism.   

I’m sure that on some level, the correspondents in Haiti want to tell these stories to effect change/prompt action. And hey, if they can get an award/big promotion in the process, everyone wins, right?   

Well, not everyone…   

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

As if Haiti didn't have it bad enough already.

THE IMAGES and news reports coming out of post-earthquake Haiti are gut-wrenching, to put it mildly.

So disturbing, this really makes you wonder about the way the world works; how a country already so godforsaken can end up getting razed like this, with significant parts of the capital Port-au-Prince reduced to rubble and tens of thousands feared dead.

How is it that the two greatest natural disasters in recent memory – this one and the 2004 Asian tsunami – ended up hitting some of the most vulnerable places on the planet?

One of countless disturbing images.

As I follow the blanket coverage of the devastation from thousands of miles away – anyone else find themselves staring at CNN for hours on end? – I feel useless; hopeless I can do anything significant to help.

(This isn’t the time/place to ask why no one seemed to care about Haiti before it got ravaged…)

I’m donating money to the relief effort. That’s a given; about the only thing I can think of that might make any difference at this point. I say “might” because I’m not entirely convinced donated money always ends up going to the right places.

Suppose it comes down to which organization you choose. Obviously there are a number of reputable relief/aid groups on the ground there, attempting what seems to be the near-impossible: to bring Haiti back from the brink.

It’d be nice to believe that in the long run this disaster and the resultant aid money will spur reconstruction in Haiti, giving the hard-luck nation the chance to get adequate infrastructure and properly constructed buildings.

Yet something tells me this is wishful thinking (isn’t New Orleans still limping more than four years after Hurricane Katrina?) In all likelihood things are going to get much much worse for impoverished Haiti. After all, the country’s daunting challenges run far deeper than simply infrastructure.

I probably shouldn’t look at things this way right now; such cynicism isn’t helpful. Besides, what I think doesn’t matter.

My money does, though. Just hope it ultimately does more than make only me feel better.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

>> Tips for safe and efficient Haiti donations 

>> How not to help Haiti

Conan and Jay: Pitted against one another by NBC.

THE MEDIA has been abuzz this week with news that NBC will bump Conan O’Brien and The Tonight Show up to midnight and move Jay Leno back to his 11:35 slot.

I think they’re making a big mistake.

I understand that the ratings for both men have been weak, and that Jay performed better than Conan against David Letterman as host of the Tonight Show. And Leno has been languishing with his new 10 p.m. show (and not delivering enough viewers to the local news that follows).

Still, booting Conan is a short-sighted move that could end up driving him and his talent into the arms of another network (Fox appears to be the likely suitor). Nothing against Leno here – he’s a funny guy – but far as I’m concerned, Conan is the future of late night; my generation’s Johnny Carson.

Not at NBC, apparently.

As David Carr noted in the New York Times: “The message to the younger talent is one thing — wait for a turn that may never come or may be taken back at any second — but the message to younger audiences is even clearer: a legacy industry will default to legacy assets and ride them down to the bitter end.”

I think viewers just needed a bit of time to get used to Conan in his new capacity. The poor guy has had less than a year to prove himself as Tonight Show host – he only started June 1, and already NBC is going to shuffle him along? He deserves better than that.

>>UPDATE (Jan. 12): Conan O’Brien says he won’t host ‘Tonight Show’ following Leno

It took Conan a while to catch on when he became host of Late Night back in the 90s. I remember when I first started watching his show; I felt I had made this incredible discovery because it seemed like nobody else was tuning in.

I marveled at how funny and original Conan was – and wacky, of course; he could be so out there sometimes (take the ‘Clive Clemmons Inappropriate Response Channel,’ for example… who comes up with this stuff?)

Conan wrote 'Marge v Monorail.' Nuff said.

Incidentally, the Simpsons episodes he wrote and/or produced were some of the best ever, including “Marge vs. the Monorail” and “Homer Goes to College”

Mr. Short Term Memory

Before that, Conan also created memorable sketches while working as a staff writer for Saturday Night Live in the late 80s. Some notable ones include “Mr. Short-Term Memory” (“He shouldn’t have stood under that pear tree…“) and” “The Girl Watchers,” memorably performed by Tom Hanks and Jon Lovitz: “He-llo… aaaand goodbye.”

Late Night with Conan O’Brien was great, too, obviously. Given the crappy time slot, Conan didn’t take himself too seriously; not seriously at all, in fact. This made for great television.

When he got the Tonight Show gig, though, I suppose he had to tone it down a bit. I admit, I didn’t watch him that much in his new new role (am I partly to blame for this whole poor ratings mess? Do they even count Canadian viewers?)

It seems like Conan has become a bit more debonair/less wacky to suit the Tonight Show. That maturing might have been inevitable. But it’s also what might have gone wrong for him. He messed with his formula for success; alienated his base.  It’s just not the same.

On Twitter the other day, someone said, “If I were Conan O’Brien, I would have the Masturbating Bear as my only guest for an hour every night until NBC fired me.” He’s referring, of course, to one of Conan’s many, and might I add brilliant/ridiculous, recurring characters:

I’m with this guy. Forget NBC, Conan – you’re too good for them. Move to Fox, return to your roots, and take on Letterman and Leno directly. In addition to Masturbating Bear, I suggest you toss in a few more throwbacks:

•If They Mated:

Mercifully, Suri turned out not to be the scariest looking baby ever.

•Horny Manatee:

A momentary cultural phenomenon.

•More “lip” interviews with the likes of Mike Tyson, Arnold Schwarzenegger – and definitely Bill Clinton (Conan: Is it true that you asked Monica Lewinsky to lie in her deposition? Clinton: No, I told her to lie there in dat position.)

Here’s another good one:

•Last but not least, of course, bring back Pimp Bot 5000 (who combines “the classic stylings of a 1950s robot with the dynamic flair of a 1970s street pimp.”)

It was better when Pimpbot 5000 was around.

Let’s see who wins the ratings war then.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Harper: Taking advantage of Canadians' apathy.

IT’S HARD TO get all that excited about Canadian politics, even during an election. 

Whether it’s because nothing genuinely thrilling ever happens in Ottawa – compared to Washington or London, at least – or it’s simply that Canadians are apathetic about how our country is run, the fact is no one seems to care all that much about the goings-on in our capital. 

This sad truth was brought into sharp relief this week as the Liberal Party, Canada’s official opposition, attempted to stir up public outrage over Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s suspension, or proroguing, of Parliament until March (once the Vancouver Winter Olympics are over). 

Ignatieff: Not an attractive alternative.

The Liberals – led by Michael Ignatieff, who despite all his efforts has never gained much traction with Canadians – are accusing Harper of shutting down Parliament in an effort to avoid answering questions about a scandal over the torture of Afghan detainees. 

Whatever Harper’s reasons for halting the political proceedings in Ottawa, and despite the furor the Liberals have tried, and failed, to generate over the matter, the whole thing seems to have been greeted by Canadians with little more than a shrug and a yawn. (Mind you, there has been a Facebook group launched in protest – oooh, yeah, that oughta show that pesky PM!) 

It’s kind of curious. I can’t imagine Americans or Brits not giving a hoot if their leader suddenly pulled a move like this. Harper’s actions are really quite audacious, as satirist Rick Mercer noted in an opinion piece in the Globe and Mail this week: 

Snow days don’t apply to adults unless you happen to be the Prime Minister of Canada, who with one phone call has the ability to give every member of Parliament two months off…

Our Parliament has been suspended for no other reason than the Prime Minister simply can’t be bothered with the relentless checks and balances that democracy affords us. 

He doesn’t want to have to stand in the House of Commons and hear anyone question him on any subject. I don’t blame him. Parliament is filled with jackals, opportunists and boors. The problem is, like it or not, they were elected. 

It’s obnoxious that our PM knows he can get away with such antics scot-free. But as radio host John Moore wrote in his National Post blog, Harper “enjoys an uncanny skill at divining what the people don’t care about.” 

And he’s obviously well aware of what I’ve said before in this space: the one and only thing Canadians do care about collectively as a nation is hockey – and there’s been plenty of that to focus on lately. 

Canadians were more concerned with our junior team's showing than with Harper's antics.

Indeed, our team’s performance over the last few weeks at the World Junior Hockey Championship in Saskatoon, Sask. – including a heartbreaking loss to the American squad Tuesday night – was of far greater concern to most canucks than a bunch of lame politicians giving themselves an extended vacation. 

That Harper can pull such a move with seemingly no consequences underscores another reality about this country: our governments usually enjoy free rein simply because there is a lack of a viable alternative. Ignatieff is nowhere near adequate, polls suggest. And the left-leaning New Democratic Party never has and likely never will form government at the national level. 

Harper realizes this, and he seems to be taking full advantage. After all, long as there’s hockey on TV, he knows Canadians have far more important things to focus on than what he’s up to – even if it is basically putting democracy on hold. 

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

>> The Economist weighs in: Harper goes prorogue: Parliamentary scrutiny may be tedious, but democracies cannot afford to dispense with it

I’ve always thought these people were just a tad nutty – especially the dudes, who surely must spend the next week waiting for their frozen genitalia to descend from their stomachs.

Of course most of the groups that organize the events, such as Toronto’s Polar Bear Club, do so to raise money for charity, which is admirable, and the participants should be commended for making one heck of a personal sacrifice.

Some of these folks say that jumping into ice-cold water is an excellent way to get rid of a New Year’s Eve hangover.

Don’t know about you, but I prefer the cure that involves lots of fluids, a couple of Advils and a greasy breakfast. My genitalia does, too.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab: Accused of trying to blow up a plane on Christmas Day.

INTERESTING HOW the public’s response to terrorism has evolved over the past decade.

In the aftermath of Sept. 11, most of us were a bit unnerved and easily convinced that another attack could be imminent.

Each time there was even a hint of something bad happening – anthrax in the mail, the shoe bomber, etc. – fears were stoked anew (with glee, in the case of newscasters, who breathlessly reported on raised threat levels).

But following reports of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s botched attempt to blow up a plane over Detroit on Christmas Day – as if Detroit hasn’t had it bad enough – the public’s reaction was less, ‘Oh crap, we’re under attack!’ and more, ‘Damn, this is going to make it so much more inconvenient to fly now.”

And it has. With security stepped up at airports around the world in the past few days, there have been serious delays, worse than what could usually be expected during the hectic holiday travel season.

Transport Canada has issued a no carry-on policy on all flights from Canada to the U.S., with a few exceptions for vital things such as small purses, items for infant care, medication and containers “carrying life-sustaining items.”

You also can’t get out of your seat with an hour remaining in the flight. (Does that mean they’ll now be providing an adult diaper in the seat-back pocket along with the barf bag?)

Thanks a lot, Umar!

This would-be attack – thwarted by a faulty rig, not by airport security – underscores a disconcerting reality: all those ridiculous measures that were supposed to have made us safer, and therefore worth all the inconvenience and irritation, couldn’t stop terrorism from happening, or almost happening, in this case.

(That the Dec. 25 plot was able to get to the point of execution is evidence of a a deeper problem, of course. An angry President Obama on Tuesday called it a “systemic failure” in the national security apparatus.)

Umar had quite the package.

Fact is, terrorists will keep coming up with ways to beat the system; they’re crafty like that. Abdulmutallab apparently had the explosive material sown into his underwear (now that takes balls).

There has been talk that a full-body scanner might have helped catch the guy before he got on the plane. So we can probably expect these things will be commonplace in most airports going forward, much to the delight of perverted security personnel.

Until then, passengers are being subjected to pat-downs and dog-sniffs. And I’m sure it’s only a matter of time before there’s a new pre-flight routine: ‘Take off your belt, your shoes, and oh yeah, your pants. (Insert sound of latex glove snapping.) Now bend over and take a deep breath, boy.”

Er, road trip, anyone?

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

A year of fakers, wannabes and frauds

 THE WASHINGTON BUREAU chief for the Toronto Star, Mitch Potter, had a great piece in last Saturday’s paper: ‘This year the joke was on us.’ 

Potter declared 2009 a year of “false news” – capping an entire decade of faux news and “reality” shows; a decade that, appropriately enough, began with overwrought Y2K doomsday predictions that never amounted to anything. 

2009 was an especially noteworthy year for hoaxes and fakers, though; several of which have been chronicled here, including the Balloon Boy and the White House party crashers. Culprits in both these incidents aspired to be reality TV stars – emblematic of this era of instant fame and instant gratification. 

Sure these people were pathetic in their shameless pursuit of their 15 minutes, true, but they were pretty harmless (in the case of the White House crashers, that’s a damn fortunate thing). 

There were also the less than amusing fakers, however, particularly Bernard Madoff, the scumbag who made off with billions of other people’s money; folks who thought they were investing in something real, but turned out to be a Ponzi scheme that may be the largest investment fraud in Wall Street history.  

Tiger: Dropped his pants, destroyed his image.

And let’s not forget about that other big fake, Tiger Woods.

“His sham beatific image, questioned by almost no one until it collapsed, is nothing if not the farcical reductio ad absurdum of the decade’s flimflams,” is how Frank Rich of the New York Times put it in a column that bids farewell to a “dreadful year and decade.” 

“If there’s been a consistent narrative to this year and every other in this decade,” Rich writes, “it’s that most of us … have been so easily bamboozled.” 

Scams, hoaxes – they’re nothing new. 

But Potter says they have been given greater focus in this era by a media that has become more obsessed than ever with getting the news out fast and first – no matter what the cost (usually accuracy and credibility, which once were hallmarks of journalism). 

“The hoaxes that punched hardest this year had this in common,” Potter writes. “They exploited an emerging vulnerability in the faster-than-thou news cycle, making monkeys of reporters under unprecedented pressure to Twitter first and ask questions later.” 

Potter laments the end of an era when actual human beings “manned the infogates, favouring stories that actually affect our lives … Today, the filter with the greatest sway is Most Viewed/Email list – and good luck to the traffic-defying editor who argues otherwise.” 

Potter talked to Washington Post reporter Howard Kurtz, who notes the media is making the job of these hoaxers way easier: 

In the age of blogs and Twitter, media folks are so anxious to get everything online so quickly that the first line of defence has melted away. In the not-too-distant past a reporter might make a phone call, at least, and be able to shoot down the hoax before it saw the light of day …

The other dimension of it is this echo-chamber effect, where as soon as one website pulls the trigger to report fake news a whole bunch of others pile on. But each one of these incidents leaves the media looking slightly silly. 

Given the super-short attention spans of the masses these days, most hoaxes and fakers are usually forgotten about by the time the next one comes along. 

But the egg left on the face of the media tends to stick around. 

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Drug ads usually contain as many warnings as they do actual information about the drug. Surely you’ve seen those Viagra ads that talk about erections that might last longer than four hours (talk about too much of a good thing).

While legally required, I think these disclosures often do more to harm a drug marketing effort than help it.

In the Chantix ad, for example, we meet Lisa, a 29-year smoker from Fayetville, N.C. – who is not an actor, we’re informed.

It starts off as your typical ad for a smoking cessation product: Lisa talking about her battle with smoking; how it dominated her life; all the excuses she made for not quitting; how she never thought she’d quit.

But then Chantix came along and gave her the “extra help she needed to get through the tough time.”

Then comes the part where they have to list the potential side effects.

Right off the bat they hit you with some pretty bad ones: changes in behaviour, hostility, agitation, depressed mood and “suicidal thoughts or actions.”

If that’s not disturbing enough to make smokers opt to keep smoking, the announcer carries on:

“Some can have allergic or severe skin reactions to Chantix, some of which can be life threatening.”

Life threatening skin reaction?! What’s with this drug and threatening your life? Isn’t it supposed to help save your life?

Wait, there’s more.

At this point – assuming the smoker hasn’t already changed the channel (or more than likely gone for a cigarette) – the narrator rounds out what is now a horrifying laundry list of Chantix side effects:

“Patients also reported trouble sleeping and vivid, unusual or strange dreams.”

OK well, at least that doesn’t sound deadly.

Apparently this drug, which is marketed by drug giant Pfizer, has had quite a controversial history, which explains why there is a litany of disturbing side effects listed.

My questions: What nicotine addict in his or her right mind would want to take Chantix after seeing that ad? And which drug is the lesser of the two evils?

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

He had the perfect life, women say, so why did Tiger 'screw' it all up?

THE LAST THING anyone wants to read is more stuff about Tiger Woods and his fall from grace.

I realize this, but I just got cable hooked up in my new apartment and, for better or worse, I’ve been catching up on the latest celebrity gossip these past few days.

And it’s near impossible to avoid the blanket coverage of the sordid (but wildly entertaining) Woods affair.

With Tiger’s iconic image in tatters and sponsors either dropping him or, like the golfer himself, taking an indefinite breather, pundits and celebrity-watchers have been speculating about what it all means for his future. I thought I’d add my two cents.

Trump predicts a triumphant return for Tiger.

To be honest, I don’t think it’s going to matter all that much in the long run. I agree with what Donald Trump said on Larry King Live the other night: Tiger is going to return and ”has a chance to be bigger and better than ever.”

It just probably won’t be women celebrating his comeback.

As the Tiger ordeal has carried on – and boy is it ever carrying on; every day another mistress seems to come out of the woodwork in search of her 15 minutes – it is, not surprisingly, women who seem to have taken the greatest exception to Tiger’s behaviour.

They empathize with the plight of his wife Elin and see Tiger as just another man who can’t control himself (which he is, of course). Why, they ask, would a guy who seemingly had the perfect life throw it all away just to get with a bunch of bimbos? Argh, why do men do that?!

Diane Dimond: Not a fan of Tiger.

On CNN’s Reliable Sources Sunday, Diane Dimond, a correspondent for Entertainment Tonight, summed up what is surely the general consensus on Tiger amongst women at the moment:

“A man who wantonly goes out and is with barfly women while his wife is home pregnant is not a man to be voted the best of anything,” she said, referring to Woods being named Athlete of the Decade by the Associated Press. ”I don’t care that he can play golf. In the game of life, Tiger Woods is a loser.”

I don’t think it’s the same reaction for men. While most won’t admit it (to their wives or girlfriends, at least), the majority of guys probably won’t have much trouble eventually looking past Tiger’s indiscretions and welcoming him back with open arms.

Maybe it’s because they’re more interested in his golf exploits than his barfly conquests. Or perhaps it’s that some are actually envious of Tiger and view him as an even bigger legend now that he’s been shown to be such a male whore. (Men are scum, I know).

In the long run, I suspect Woods will be given the ‘boys will be boys’ treatment. Like it or not ladies, it’ll be that same old double standard at work.

To women, Tiger will forever be just another scumbag cheater.

To men, he’ll remain one of the great players of our time – in more ways than one, apparently.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

>> Bonus Christmas joke: What’s the difference between Tiger Woods and Santa Claus? Santa stops at three hos.

As the video shows, this is the same hapless (hopeless? useless?) goaltender, Vesa Toskala, who in a game against the New York Islanders last March let in a goal that was shot from 197 feet down the ice.

One could argue that was simply a bad break. Last night’s blunder, however, was inexcusable.

Toskala is not solely responsible for the Maple Leafs’ struggles. With the worst save percentage and worst goals-against average in the National Hockey League, though, he’s obviously a huge part of the problem.

Still, there’s plenty of blame left to go around the Leaf locker room.

If you’re not a fan of hockey – Canadians’ only reason for living in wintertime – the Maple Leafs are hockey’s Boston Red Sox circa 2003. The team hasn’t won a Stanley Cup since 1967.

And with goaltending like that, Lord Stanley’s mug ain’t coming back to Toronto any time soon.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Spin the dreidel: Good times on Hanukkah

“PUT ON YOUR yalmulka,” Adam Sandler famously sang, “here comes Hanukkah.”

From sunset on Dec. 11 to eight days later on the 19th, Jews around the world are celebrating this end-of-year holiday by lighting menorahs, spinning dreidels, and, best of all, mowing down on delicious latkas (deep fried potato pancakes, served with oodles of sour cream and apple sauce… yum!)

I’m the son of a Jewish father and my mother was raised Catholic (and didn’t convert), so growing up, I did both Hanukkah and Christmas. Friends used to remark about how lucky I was because I got double the gifts. Much as I would have loved that, it didn’t quite work that way.

Maybe because of the time of the year that the holidays fall, most folks typically view Hanukkah as the equivalent to Christmas.

It’s really not, though. For one thing, it’s far from the most significant of Jewish holidays. Certainly Yom Kippur, Rosh Hashanah and Passover rank above it. The Oxford English Dictionary defines it as a “lesser Jewish festival.”

Christmas, on the other hand, is unquestionably the ultimate Christian holiday. No Christ, no Christians – and no Christmas.

Hanukkah is alright, don’t get me wrong, but past the age of eight – when the thrill of dreidels and gelt begins to wear off – it’s just not that exciting.

To be fair, Christmas does get a lot of help in the hype department because it’s such a commercially driven holiday. Still, it tends to have a timeless, almost universal appeal – if you filter out the whole religious part, that is.

Indeed, my father and some of my Jewish friends, part of the gang that’s usually gathered at my family’s Christmas dinner table, always get a kick out of celebrating the holiday (Heck, Dad’s been known to don a red sweater for the occasion.)

They have a great time taking part in all the activities and traditions that come with Christmas, corny as some of those may seem to the Grinches out there. It’s a mixture of fun and fantasy, the kind you don’t tend to get with Hanukkah.

Jon Stewart, referring a few years ago to an “experiment” celebrating both holidays with his two-year-old kid (he’s married to a Catholic), put it more succinctly: “Christmas blows the door off of Hanukkah.”

Here are a few specific reasons I can think of why Christmas might have Hanukkah licked.

To start with, Hanukkah is a tad thin in the symbol department: a dreidel and menorah are all I can come up with. It is the Festival of Lights, but it’s not really much of a festival, at least not in North America from what I can tell.

How can Judas Maccabeus compete?

The holiday is also lacking in mythology and icons. Judas Maccabeus is a legend, but he’s no match for Santa Claus, Frosty the Snowman and Scrooge (there is Hanukkah Harry, though…) And where the Christmas back story is easy to understand, Hanukkah’s is kind of confusing.

Pop culture-wise, there aren’t many memorable Hanukkah movies (Eight Crazy Nights?); no catchy Hanukkah tunes come to mind, either, other than ‘I Have a Little Dreidel,’ perhaps. (This is ironic, considering Jews wrote a number of the big Christmas anthems, including ’White Christmas,’ ‘Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer,’ ‘Let It Snow, ‘Silver Bells,’ and ‘The Christmas Song.”)

And in the end, as devilishly delightful as those latkas might be, I don’t think they can compete with a full-blown Christmas feast – the kind best enjoyed with my Jewish father and friends. Positively sacrilicious.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Careful what you chew.

A UKRAINIAN CHEMISTRY student died last weekend after half of his face got blown off, apparently by explosive chewing gum.    

It sounds like a morbid twist on an ad you might have seen during Saturday morning cartoons back in the day; or a scene from a James Bond movie.    

Turns out that this one is a true and bizarre story.    

Media reports say the student was working on his computer one night. His parents say they heard a “loud pop” at some point and entered the room to find the man with the lower part of his face blown off.    

A forensic exam showed the gum was covered with an “unidentified chemical substance,” news reports say, “thought to be some type of explosive material.”    

The 25-year-old apparently liked dipping his chewing gum in citric acid (…who does that?). Police found a pack of this kind of gum next to another one that had the explosive material on it.    

“Investigators suspect that the student simply confused the packets and put gum covered with explosive material into his mouth,” the media report said.    

Confused the packets? Really?    

If he was indeed aware of the exploding gum, what exactly was the guy planning on doing with it? Killing someone other than himself?   

I don’t know, maybe that’s how they roll in Ukraine when it comes to taking people out: forget guns and knives, blow the motherfucker’s face off with a stick of gum!    

Seriously, though, if this guy wasn’t trying to murder someone else, or himself, and did in fact know about the pack of blow-up gum, why didn’t he do a better job of labelling it? 

He must have really wanted to experience some explosive flavour…   

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Isn't it arrogant of us to assume we're alone?

THE BRITISH MILITARY has shut down its UFO investigation unit after more than 50 years, Reuters reports.  

The MOD says it could no longer justify the cost of running the service given it had “found no evidence of a threat to Britain or proof of the existence of extra-terrestrials, despite the public sending thousands of reports of UFOs to a ministry hotline and email address.”  

“There is no defence benefit” in investigating such reports, the MOD concluded. “It would be an inappropriate use of defence resources.”

I was a bit saddened to hear this. Ever since I was a kid, I’ve been intrigued by the idea of UFOs and the possibility of life on other planets. 

Nobody did spooky like Robert Stack

In the late 80s/early 90s I was obsessed with the show Unsolved Mysteries, which dealt lots with paranormal activity and was only made better by the smooth-talking but slightly scary host, the great Robert Stack (he of Airplane! and The Untouchables fame).  

In particular I loved the episodes that dealt with UFO sightings. I remember one that reenacted what the scientists encountered – or were encountered by – at Roswell. From then on I was a full-on alien freak (inside, at least).  

At school I’d look for books on UFOs in libraries; I liked getting spooked by the grainy old black and white photos of alleged sightings of unidentified flying objects.  Even today I dig listening to the late-night radio show Coast to Coast AM.  

I’ve always thought it was arrogant of us to assume we’re the only ones in this vast universe.  It’s too bad the MOD has concluded it’s not worth pursuing/monitoring the matter any longer.

On the other hand, with them out of the loop, perhaps we’re due for a close (and unexpected) encounter with the third kind.

Just thinking about it makes me feel like a kid again.   

 ryan@roadtostarrdom.com 

You got some 'splainin to do mister.

ANOTHER DAY, another famous guy busted cheating on his wife.

Tiger Woods, usually the subject of stories that focus on his golf prowess – and the face of oodles of products – can now be added to the long list of celebrity men who can’t keep it in their pants.

Woods drove his SUV into a fire hydrant and a tree last week, and shortly after it was revealed he had cheated on his wife (possibly with multiple women).

This has set off a media firestorm. Indeed, judging from the blanket coverage the story’s received, and the countless watercooler conversations it’s spawned, this is far sexier stuff than some climate change summit or an Afghanistan troop surge.

>> UPDATE (Dec 12): Golf world in shock as Tiger takes indefinite break

In case you’ve been under a rock for the past week, here’s the Associated Press’s post-accident video report:

Tiger, who up to this point has been quite successful at keeping his private life out of the tabloids – his yacht is named ‘Privacy’ – has suddenly become gossip mag fodder.

In the wake of the SUV incident, and just before the furor created once the infidelities were revealed, Tiger and his handlers sought to kill the story, insisting it was private family business.

Once Tiger was outed as a “cheetah” (as the New York Post’s brilliant headline put it), all hopes of any privacy were dashed. Much as he’s tried to avoid the spotlight at this excruciating moment, Tiger’s had to accept that his celebrity cuts both ways.

“Although I am a well-known person and have made my career as a professional athlete,” he said in an apology on his website, “I have been dismayed to realize the full extent of what tabloid scrutiny really means. For the last week, my family and I have been hounded to expose intimate details of our personal lives.

Letterman: Not a saint, but not pushing products either.

When David Letterman broke the story about his own extra-curricular activities, I argued that it’s really none of our beeswax what the guy does backstage. As television viewers, we make a decision to turn on the Late Show and watch him. Letterman has never put himself forward as someone who was above reproach, or an icon to be emulated. And Dave’s not trying to sell us every product under the sun.

Tiger is different. Yes, we can choose not to follow him and his often remarkable golf exploits. But he also makes cajillions of dollars each year endorsing a plethora of products. He is widely regarded as “the world’s most marketable athlete.”

His name and his face are used by advertisers as they try to convince us he’s the kind of guy we should aspire to be like; and can start doing so by buying a Buick SUV, using Nike golf equipment, wearing Tag Heuer watches, drinking bucket loads of Gatorade, shaving with Gillette razors, and the list goes on.

Now that Tiger’s been reduced to a punchline, he can’t expect to be taken seriously as a spokesman (like with Bill Clinton, there’ll always be that salacious sub-text). And he certainly can’t expect people are all of a sudden going to lose interest in what he’s up to, particularly if it’s messing around with some cocktail waitress (one of several of his conquests, apparently).

If Tiger wanted to keep his private life private, he should have kept his SUV on the road - and his pecker in his pants.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Related: Tiger offers wife $60 million to stay

UPDATE (Dec. 9): Cracks beginning to appear in Tiger Inc.

A mummified cat was found in the ceiling of the humane society during the raid.

A RAID on the Toronto Humane Society last Thursday has resulted in animal cruelty charges against a handful of agency employees, including its president and chief veterinarian.

The action was prompted in large part by a Globe and Mail investigation that revealed diseased animals who were left to die in their cages because of what the paper calls the shelter’s “much-too restrictive euthanasia policy.”

The Globe also obtained pictures of cats and dogs living in their own excrement, among other disturbing details.

Investigators carrying out the raid last Thursday found something particularly horrifying: a mummified cat in a cage. Here’s how the Toronto Star described the scene (I nearly vomited in my mouth when I first read this):

… a tip led investigators to pull panels from a ceiling on the second floor, where they discovered the body of the caged animal. Its skin stretched thin over frail bones. Its organs turned to thick dust, the remains of a feast for maggots. The cat was sealed in a live trap, the door closing after it was lured by food, above a high-traffic area. Its weakening cries would have mixed with the chorus of animals below.

The Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, which carried out the raid, said it also discovered expired pet food, years-old apparently, that was being fed to sick cats. Since the raid five of the animals have been put down: a puppy, a dog, two cats and a raccoon.

One former humane society veterinarian told reporters touring the building post-raid that sick animals were not given pain medication. She said she’d resigned because management often overruled her professional decisions and because the facility was understaffed.

The humane society denies these charges. “The animals are under excellent veterinary care, they receive all medicines, all treatments, all procedures necessary to make them better,” a spokesman said.

What’s at issue here is a fundamental difference of opinion about what’s best for animals sick with inoperable conditions: Should they be kept alive as long as possible, no matter the cost (physical and financial); or should they be put out of their misery?

The Humane Society trumpets its low euthanasia rates, presumably in an effort to attract donations from those who are firmly in that former camp. (Critics point out that these numbers are so low because many animals are left to die slow painful deaths in their cages.)

I think keeping any animal alive that’s suffering from an incurable condition is cruel, plain and simple. It is the exact opposite of humane.

I’ve had a number of pets over the years – dogs, cats, heck guinea pigs. The decision to put them down rather than let them continue living in pain is never an easy one to make. You love these furry little creatures; they’re a part of your family and you can’t fathom life without them.

But soon you come to the realization that this is not about you or your needs; it’s about doing what’s right for a poor, helpless animal.

If those who are supposed to be caring for suffering animals don’t get this, maybe they themselves deserve to be locked in cages and left to rot.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

UPDATES

Dec 1: Humane society warned by province

Dec 1: Wildlife taken from humane society

By now most folks have likely heard about the Virginia couple who managed to slip through White House security Tuesday night and crash President Obama’s first state dinner.

Biden didn't seem bothered by the uninvited guest.

The pair went on to mingle with the likes of White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel and Vice President Joe Biden, who is seen copping a feel in a photo the woman, Michaele Salahi, posted on her Facebook page (dirty old veep…)

It subsequently was discovered that Salahi, a former Washington Redskins cheerleader, is being considered for the new Bravo reality series, ‘The Real Housewives of D.C.’ (Of course, right? We had to expect that a reality show was a factor here.)

Apparently the couples’ vehicle was turned away at first – presumably because their name wasn’t on the guest list – but they hopped out and proceeeded on foot. Reporters on scene observed that the pair were followed by a camera person and a makeup woman who got out and fixed the woman’s hair and powdered the man’s forehead.

How they actually ended up crashing the state dinner is the focus of an investigation. Regardless, the stunt was an audacious one; sneaking into the White House is no small feat – at least I thought so.

Many want this couple to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. While such shameless self-promoters irk me, and the White House is no place to attempt to grab your 15 minutes, these two social climbers are really not the issue here. As many noted about Balloon Boy’s father, they are merely symptomatic of a society that’s obsessed with celebrity.

The disconcertingly poor security at the White House needs to be the focus.

Obama: Faces greater threats than most presidents.

The president of the United States will always be a target. The fact that Obama is the first black president and is at the helm during a time of economic turmoil and global terrorism means he’s under even greater threat. Back in 2007, he became the first presidential candidate to receive Secret Service protection.

How strange that it’s impossible to get through security at an airport without proper documents, or to get into a cheesy nightclub if you aren’t on the guest list.

Apparently, though, all it takes to slip through the Secret Service, which we’ve been led to believe is the tightest security apparatus in the world, is a fetching bottle-blonde in a sari.

Perhaps the Secret Service should enlist more women. At least they only think with one head.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

UPDATES

Dec. 9: State dinner crashers walked all over social guide

Dec. 2: E-mails show Salahis had no state invite

Dec. 1: Don’t call us White House crashers, couple says in interview

Who has it better: airline passengers or captive cattle? I'm thinking cattle.

ON TUESDAY the U.S. Department of Transportation fined three airlines a total of $175,000 for stranding passengers overnight on a tarmac in Rochester, Minn. last August.

This is the first time airlines have been fined for something like this.

The incident involved passengers being held for hours inside a tiny airplane, with crying babies and overflowing toilets and apparently no water or air conditioning, (it’s hard to say which of these would be worse when you’re stuck on a plane).

Lahood: Vowing to strengthen passenger protections.

“I hope that this sends a signal to the rest of the airline industry that we expect airlines to respect the rights of air travelers,” said Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood. “We will also use what we have learned from this investigation to strengthen protections for airline passengers subjected to long tarmac delays.”

Good stuff. We need way more of this kind of accountability when it comes to air travel.

Canada doesn’t fine its airlines (our transport minister should take note of the actions of his American counterpart). Though the federal government did introduce an airline passenger bill of rights in 2008.

Among other things, ‘Flight Rights Canada’ states that “passengers have a right to punctuality.” If a flight delay exceeds 90 minutes, “the airline will offer passengers the option of disembarking from the aircraft until it is time to depart.”

I should hope so. Passengers pay good money to fly but all too often – and I’m speaking from a vast amount of personal experience here – end up getting treated like third-class citizens or captive animals.

Actually, captive animals have it better. They don’t have to deal with surly flight attendants.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

The ROM and its new addition: building of beauty or one of the world's ugliest?

TORONTO, the city that wants so badly to be considered world class, was dealt a bit of a blow in that quest the other day.

The website www.virtualtourist.com put the city’s Royal Ontario Museum on its list of world’s ugliest buildings.

The ROM opened a new addition two years ago. The Daniel Libeskind-designed aluminum and glass structure, which shoots out in sharp angles, contrasts sharply with the existing museum.

This architectural contrast is the primary reason virtualtourist.com gave for ranking the ROM the eighth ugliest building in the world (it beat out only a library in Kosovo and some yet-to-be built hotel in North Korea on the Top 10 list):

What I.M. Pei’s pyramid is to the Louvre, so is the relatively new Michael Lee-Chin Crystal to the Royal Ontario Museum. While many praise the glass structure, just as many are troubled by the incongruity to the original, more traditional museum that still sits directly beside it.

Some readers on the Toronto Star’s website concurred.

“It’s like sticking Godzilla’s head onto Pam Anderson’s body,” is how one commenter described it. (I’m not sure Pamela Anderson could ever be considered an apt analogy for a museum/heritage building – an inflatable bouncy castle, maybe – but I think I get his point.)

Well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There are just as many, like me for one, who think the ROM addition is a striking architectural achievement worth celebrating. And if the new building is being likened to the Louvre pyramid, that’s good company to be in.

For too long Toronto has been plagued by boring, ugly, conservative architecture. Thankfully times are changing and the ROM addition is one of many projects cropping up around town that take some chances, architecturally speaking.

The folks at virtualtourist.com should be real tourists and come check it all out.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Related: City’s new architecture frees Toronto the timid

The other day a 22-year-old Romanian burglar got caught with his pants down, literally, after he attempted to climb through the window of a supermarket in a small Portugal town.

The would-be thief became trapped halfway through the opening and ended up stuck for 11 hours with his lower half left dangling for all to see. His pants came off as he wriggled to get loose.

While firefighters worked to free this idiot, locals gathered to gawk and laugh at him and his tight black undies.

>> Here’s video of the hilarious scene:

The putz was eventually rescued and taken into police custody (wonder if he’ll be charged with ‘half-assed break and enter’).

Silly old bear.

The video of the incident made me recall a Winnie the Pooh movie I watched when I was a kid. Pooh devours 10 jars of Rabbit’s ‘hunny’ and gets lodged in the door on the way out because he’s grown too fat.

Of course, the difference between Pooh and the worst burglar on earth is that Pooh is a cartoon; a tubby little cubby stuffed with fluff.

The would-be thief is a human being. He should have at least enough logic to gather he wouldn’t fit through that tiny window.

But maybe the guy was broke and hungry and all alone in a foreign land. Perhaps he was breaking into the store in a desperate effort to get something to eat. Too bad for him that he apparently wasn’t thin enough to pull off the heist.

What an unfortunate kick in his black-undied butt.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Look out 2012, here comes Sarah Palin

SHE’S BA-ACK – and with a vengeance. Sarah Palin’s new memoir, ‘Going Rogue: An American Life‘, hits stores Tuesday. (Should have been called ‘Mavericky: How I Thought the Election Was All About Me and Helped Kill Whatever Chance John McCain Had of Winning It’).

The Baracuda has returned. She never really left, of course. Since failing in her bid with McCain for the White House, and resigning as governor of Alaska in the summer, Palin has served as a vocal conservative counterpoint to the American left, staying in the thick of things by sharing her views – mainly through her Facebook page – on the issues of the day. (She helped perpetuate that whole death panel thing, for example.)

Dobbs for president? He certainly looks the part.

With her book hitting stores this week, you’d have to think Palin is taking a first major step toward a 2012 presidential bid. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that Palin could get the nod from the Republicans for the nomination. After all, the party is currently bereft of any notable new contenders. (Though perhaps Lou Dobbs could be one now – he certainly looks presidential.)

UPDATE (Nov. 25): Lou Dobbs weighs Senate run, as a steppingstone

Palin, when she’s not raging against the “liberal media,” has a certain folksy charm and conservative views, all of which is appealing to them there down-home ‘real Americans.’  And it turns out she’s not as clueless as she seemed in her disastrous interviews with Katie Couric during last year’s election.

Why wouldn’t the Republicans go with Palin? President Obama is up against it these days, with two wars, a battered economy, health care reform and climate change. So far, though, he’s had few victories to speak of and has left many supporters wondering what happened.

Crazy though it may seem, is it possible disenchanted independent voters (those who decide elections) would give up on Obama and opt for Sarah Barracuda?

For now at least, there are few signs of that being a possibility. A recent Gallup survey found that 63 per cent of voters would not seriously consider Palin for the White House in 2012. And while she may be popular among Republicans, only 28 per cent of independents – those who make or break elections – think she is qualified to be president.

I can't see the difference, can you?

Still, politics and certainly elections are driven by personality, and Palin has plenty of chutzpah (I have to admit, though, I find it hard sometimes to decipher whether who I’m seeing on television is actually Sarah Palin or Tina Fey… more often than not it’s Fey.)

Plus, for what it’s worth, she’s apparently sexy enough to inspire a new porn series: “Who’s Nailin’ Paylin?” (with both “Obama” and “Joe the Plumber” making appearances as co-stars).

Let’s see Mike Huckabee or Mitt Romney beat that. On second thought, let’s not.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Related:

AP says Palin’s book goes rogue on some facts

Why women can’t let Sarah Palin go

Palin calls Newsweek cover ‘sexist’ and ‘degrading‘

Canada's Vimy Ridge memorial in France.

NOVEMBER 11 IS Remembrance Day in Canada and a host of other nations. It marks the day in 1918 that World War 1 formally ended with the signing of the armistice.

When I was in school, every Nov. 11 we would gather for an assembly and observe two minutes of silence at 11 a.m. Usually someone would read the poem In Flanders Fields, followed by a bit of elegiac music. Then it was over.

Even at a young age I understood what we were paying tribute to. And I felt grateful for the soldiers who had made the ultimate sacrifice on distant battlefields all those years ago so that I could live in freedom.

Still, as the years went by, and the wars faded farther into the past, I think it became harder for younger people to fully appreciate what we were commemorating; to feel a tangible connection to those veterans.

It certainly didn’t help that in the intervening post-war years, successive Canadian governments slashed military spending and reduced troop levels. In the process they also managed to diminish the reputation of our men and women in uniform.

Canadian soldiers landing at Juno Beach.

Indeed, however unfairly, the Canadian Forces – who stormed Juno Beach on D-Day and helped to liberate France and Holland, among other notable achievements - had become the butt of many a joke. The military came to be regarded more as wimpy peacekeepers than proud warriors who were at the ready to defend our nation.

Thanks to Afghanistan, though, things have changed. Now there is a renewed respect for our military. And rightfully so – they’re doing a difficult job in an awful, unforgiving place, and doing it admirably.

What’s more, with 133 Canadian soldiers having died so far and close to a thousand wounded while fighting in that godforsaken country (to prop up a corrupt, ineffectual government) the harsh realities of war and the immense sacrifices made by our troops are brought home nearly every night on the news.

Honouring fallen soldiers of wars old - and, unfortunately, new.

So now when Canadians pin on a poppy every November, we’re not only honouring the brave men who died on the battlefields of Europe all those years ago. We’re also paying tribute (sadly) to a growing list of newly fallen soldiers, including the latest, Sapper Steven Marshall, 24, who was killed Oct. 30 by a roadside bomb.

I feel ill every time I hear about the death of another one of our troops. I just hope it helps kids - and adults for that matter - to remember why Nov. 11 still matters, and never forget it.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Pan Am Games: We'll take em!

This will be the first time Toronto hosts a serious international sports event, with the exception of the 1992 and 1993 World Series and the odd indoor track and field championship, or something of similar calibre.

A number of infrastructure projects will get done around town now. New sports facilities, too. There will be lots of other economic spin-offs for Toronto and surrounding municipalities. Though taxpayers will ultimately end up with the big honking bill, of course.

But never mind all that right now. It’s time to rejoice. Winning the Pan Am Games means Toronto is no longer a loser, at least that’s what politicians and the local papers are saying.

Let’s not get too excited here, though. The Pan Am Games are a B-list event at best– they’re not the Olympics. Montreal, Calgary (and soon Vancouver) got to host the Olympics, the biggest of all international sporting events. Despite Toronto’s world class aspirations, the city faltered in its two Olympic bids.

Lastman: Afraid of being eaten by Kenyans.

It didn’t help back in 2001 when, with Toronto vying to host the 2008 Summer Games that ultimately went to Bejing, then-mayor Mel Lastman (a furniture salesman turned politician who was quite possibly crazy) managed to spark global outrage.

Shortly before leaving for Mombasa, Kenya, on a mission in support of the city’s Olympic bid, Lastman said to a reporter: “What the hell do I want to go to a place like Mombasa?… I’m sort of scared about going out there … I just see myself in a pot of boiling water with all these natives dancing around me.”

Who cares if the Pan Am Games are a poorer cousin of the Olympics. At least Toronto didn’t offend an entire confident this time. Here’s to small victories.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

>> Watch the video Toronto’s delegation presented in Guadalajara:

Could Canadians handle a King Chuck?

THIS WEEK’S visit to Canada by Prince Charles and Lady Camilla has renewed an age-old debate about whether Canada’s constitutional monarchy should be replaced by an elected head of state.

A former British colony, Canada still retains a significant connection to the Crown, right down to having the Queen E. on our currency. (The governor-general is our resident head of state, the Queen’s viceroy here; but the GG is largely a ceremonial position.)

Friends of mine in England were amused recently when I pulled out a Canadian $20 bill with the Queen’s face on it. I think they enjoyed feeling like they were still our colonial rulers or something.

Canadians have had a lasting fondness for Queen Elizabeth II.

The majority of Canadians seem to hold Queen Elizabeth II in high regard – or are indifferent to her at worst – so the idea of cutting ties with the monarchy has never gained much momentum. There’s a sentimental attachment to her. When the Queen came to the throne back in 1953, Canada was in its adolescence, still trying to figure out who it was in the post-war world. We weren’t British, but not American either. (Unfortunately, it’s an identity crisis that endures to this day.)

In the not-so-distant future, though, the Queen will be gone, and I’m pretty sure Canadians do not feel the same affection for Prince Charles. Indeed, the Toronto Star had a poll that showed 49 per cent of Canadians viewed Charles “unfavourably” (Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, fared marginally better: only 51 per cent didn’t approve of her.)

Diana: Would she have helped keep the royals relevant?

Perhaps things would be different had Diana lived and stayed with Charles. I’m sure she could have given the institution of the royal family renewed staying power in the former colonies. They’re perfectly intelligent and gracious people, Chuck and Camilla, they just don’t have anything close to the same appeal as Diana (could anybody?)

But this is not really about people or personalities. The fact is, it’s high time Canada officially grows up and elects its own head of state (I’m guessing that would be a president?)

I realize ditching the Crown is a lot easier said than done and that a change like this would be complex and complicated to carry out.

It doesn’t have to be the end of everything. Just because we’re breaking free, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t retain certain things. The legal system we inherited from the British, for example. Or our membership in the Commonwealth, an affiliation that offers obvious advantages.

And we still have the cultural ties and places whose names pay homage to the old empire (Prince Edward Island, British Columbia, Alberta, Victoria, Regina, and the list goes on…)

Let the sentimental attachments prevail, but when Queen Elizabeth II’s reign comes to an end, Canada should move toward electing our own independent head of state.

It might not help to solve our identity crisis, but it’s a start. And it sure beats having King Chuck on our $20 bill.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

>> Related: Monarchy in Canada would end with Charles, film argues

Ostensibly, this scanner will show if people are packing explosives or any other weapons that might slip through a conventional metal detector.

Oooh... scanner porn.

Officers will view this three-dimensional image in a separate room, and won’t actually see the traveler he or she is “inspecting” on the screen.

And apparently the images can’t be stored or captured in any way, limiting the chances they’ll end up on some fetish porn site for people who get off on vaguely defined nude airport security images (hey, there’s no accounting for taste).

The manufacturer of the scanners claims the majority of passengers prefer such a full-body scan to having to undress or be patted down.

I have my doubts about this system.

Perhaps it’s because I don’t have much faith in the professionalism or competence of those charged with handling security at airports. They might well be perfectly upstanding citizens, but there are always bad apples (read: perverts) in every bunch.

So what’s to say a bored, underpaid and quite possibly undersexed security dude isn’t going to kick back to enjoy a little scanner-porn on his coffee break.

And if he likes what he sees, maybe he’ll decide he’s in the mood to explore a few cavities; or at the very least ask for some hot girl’s number. After all, he’ll know exactly what he’s in store for.

Who’s the security threat then?

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Harper: Doesn't want to hear what the news media says about him.

CANADIAN PRIME MINISTER Stephen Harper created a bit of a stink last week when he told a business luncheon that “I don’t like to watch Canadian news.”

The PM, leader of the Conservative Party, said he doesn’t enjoy hearing what “everybody else is saying about me, so my hobby is to watch politics elsewhere … mainly American news.”

Harper is well-known for having not-so-thinly veiled contempt for the press. He’s had a rocky relationship with those who cover him since taking office nearly four years ago.

Perhaps not surprisingly then, the bulk of the outrage over his comments has come from the Canadian news media (as well as opposition politicians, obviously, who have seized on the opportunity to portray Harper as out of touch).

I’m neither a Harper supporter nor a detractor (though I’m not sure the other parties offer a better alternative at the moment). Regardless, I think the reaction to his statement the other day is a tad overblown.

I don’t necessarily believe it’s cool for the PM to admit he doesn’t watch Canadian news, but most of us, if we’re honest, would acknowledge that the subject matter on offer here is generally not all that exciting, despite CBC’s efforts to jazz things up.

But just because Harper doesn’t tune into the Canadian news to follow the political coverage, doesn’t mean he’s uninformed. He is the top dog after all. The guy gets the inside line on the stuff that matters; it’s not like he needs to watch the evening news to know what’s up.

Truth is, it seemed there were just as many people on blogs and in comments sections last week who were with the PM on this one: they don’t watch Canadian news either.

It might be unfair to say that it’s because our news is boring. All I know is that many times I’ve left this country for weeks on end and returned only to find that nothing all that exciting/significant happened while I was gone.

I mean really - what is Harper missing by not tuning into Canadian news? Polar bear trapped on ice floe? Cold snap leads to run on parkas? Beaver population surpasses moose? Maple syrup shortage sparks panic?

Why would the PM bother with this trivial pap when he could just flip on Fox News or CNN and get the latest on Balloon Boy.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Williamson: Wouldn't want to see him nude, but did he break the law?

I PITY Eric Williamson, the Springfield, Va dude who was arrested earlier this week for indecent exposure after some lady walking her kid to school spotted him in his kitchen making coffee buck naked and called police.

The woman claims Williamson, 29, deliberately exposed himself, twice. (Apparently the house is located across from a school-bus stop.) And police say Williamson may have been involved in at least one other incident like this.

“I wasn’t wearing any clothes,” he admitted, “but I was alone, in my own home and just got out of bed. It was dark and I had no idea anyone was outside looking in at me.”

>> Watch the news report here:

I feel bad for Williamson. I mean, who doesn’t enjoy being in the buff in your own home when you have the chance? There’s something liberating about it. Didn’t Alanis Morrisette recommended walking around naked in your living room? (Wonder if that would hold up as a defence – ‘Your honour, Alanis said it was OK…’)

Granted, Williamson probably should have thought to close the curtains/blinds, especially if kids are walking past the house on a regular basis. Still, I’m with the people who think the woman who called police is a no good busybody/peeping tom.

Looking at Williamson’s mugshot, I can see why someone might be scared shitless to see this dude in his birthday suit, but he’s no criminal. If he were truly a flasher, wouldn’t he have walked out onto the front lawn to show the world his goods?

A man’s house is his castle, as the saying goes, and he can do what he damn well pleases inside it. Isn’t that freedom? And what’s wrong with the naked body anyway? Williamson’s might be really hairy and disgusting, but it’s the way God made him. This woman needs to get over it.

I just hope Williamson doesn’t ever decide to cook bacon in the nude. No doubt that would teach him to put on a house coat.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Toronto District School Board education director Chris Spence.

TORONTO SCHOOL board education director Chris Spence on Tuesday announced plans for a boys-only public school, a so-called ’Male Leadership Academy’ that would offer an alternative learning environment for underachievers.

This boys-only school would be a first for Ontario. Up until now, the all-boys thing has largely been the domain of private and Catholic schools here.

The idea with the all-boys academy is to help youngsters who are disengaged at school – whether due to learning challenges or behavioural issues (often the result of absentee fathers and a lack of positive male role models) – avoid slipping into downward spirals and jeopardizing their futures (or more immediately, to ward off the possibility of a kid marching into school one day and busting a cap in someone’s ass).

“The real objective is to cast a critical eye on how we reach and teach our boys,” Spence said upon releasing a report, ‘A Vision of Hope,’ which in addition to the all-boys school also calls for single-sex classes and programs.

“In most situations, a co-ed environment will be the best environment (but) there’s going to be individuals who will thrive in a single-sex setting … we understand that students learn in different ways … trying to provide those kinds of ways is important.”

Spence – a former Canadian Football League player, BTW – has come under fire for proposing what some see as a segregationist approach to education, dividing a school population versus bringing it together. Spence counters that no one would be forced into going to these schools.

While an all-boys school might not technically constitute segregation, I think it’s a lousy idea all the same. Boys need to be around girls, as distracting as they might be at times (and God bless them for that). Dealing with girls is part of becoming a normal, functioning member of society.

If a kid can’t concentrate at school with girls around and he never learns to, how will he cope when he enters the real world? My bet is he either becomes an introvert who women scare the crap out of, or he becomes a sex-crazed freak who wants to hump anything remotely female (animals included). Either way, not healthy.

High school can be a bit rough, but that's life.

I’ve always thought the same about all-boys private schools or Catholic schools: How do these boys learn to be men unless they’re forced to go through the awful awkwardness of puberty right alongside girls? Anyone who went to high school knows: it can be downright excruciating at times and there is no shortage of horrifying moments – and they usually have something to do with a member of the opposite sex. But you get through them and hopefully come out stronger for it. This is the point of school, after all – to prepare you for life.

I understand these all-boys schools and classes might help to boost the academic performances of young men and to curb their bad behavioural tendencies, which is laudable, of course. (Perhaps a more pressing concern should be the fact that only 10 per cent of Ontario’s elementary teachers are male.)

But school is not just about the education you receive in books and classrooms. A large part of it is also about socialization; getting to know and understand the opposite sex – intellectually, emotionally and, eventually, if you’re lucky, sexually. Taking girls out of the equation creates an artificial learning environment.

How can we expect young boys to understand and respect girls if they are isolated from them at an early age? More important: What use is an otherwise good education if you end up failing Women 101?

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

Busted: Dickie Stormchaser and Balloon Boy

Sheriff Jim Alderden said Sunday that Richard and Mayumi Heene – the Fort Collins, Colo. couple who days ago reported their six-year-old son Falcon had floated away in a wayward helium balloon – “put on a very good show for us, and we bought it.” (The police might have bought it, I don’t think many others did, though.)

“It has been determined that this is a hoax, that it was a publicity stunt,” the sheriff said, “and we believe we have evidence at this point to indicate that this was a publicity stunt in hopes to better market themselves for a reality show.”

Of course they did. My lord. Dickie Stormchaser and his weird wife should definitely be made to pay the entire bill for their son’s “rescue” operation. Their children should be taken from them and put in the care of people who aren’t goddamn crazy.

And forget charges. This nutjob couple should be put in a faulty hot air balloon and sent out over the Rockies in the dead of winter and left to fend for themselves. Come to think of it, that could make a great reality show…

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

>> And now, just in time for Oct. 31: Balloon Boy, the Halloween costume

Balloon Boy meets the media.

That would be Falcon Heene, the six-year-old Colorado kid who reportedly floated away in a homemade helium balloon on Thursday, setting off a massive search operation and a media frenzy – only to turn up safe in his attic hours later.

Falcon’s parents (who names their kid Falcon?) told authorities he hid for fear of being punished for playing with his dad’s balloon; apparently Falcon thought he may have been responsible for it breaking loose from its tethers and taking off, police said.

But things got a bit fishy afterward when Falcon was asked in an interview why he didn’t respond to his name being called during the search. Falcon replied: “You guys said… that, um, we did this for the show.”

>>Watch:

Yikes. Out of the mouth of babes, right?

It remains unclear whether this was a hoax/publicity stunt. But Falcon’s father Richard clearly loves the spotlight. Twice he got the family on the ABC reality show Wife Swap, apparently to plug a documentary he’d done.

Turns out the company that produces Wife Swap had been working with the Heenes on a show of their own, but nothing ever came of it. The family had also pitched TLC an idea for a reality program (Richard is an avid stormchaser).

When the balloon incident went down – or up, I suppose – Richard’s first call was to the local news station, then the FAA, and eventually 911. Way to have your priorities straight there Dick.

On Friday, with the media ritualistically camped outside the Heene home, one of the other sons cracked the front door open to inform reporters that the family – after doing the morning TV show rounds, interviews during which Falcon vomited – wouldn’t be talking anymore. “My dad said he’s tired of this show,” the kid said.

Not for long, though, eh Richard? Hoax or no hoax, we all know where this is headed. We’ve just witnessed the birth of America’s next reality show, a new family of freaks to obsess over for a bit and then cast aside.

Good riddance Jon and Kate and your eight. Welcome ‘Dickie Stormchaser and Balloon Boy. ‘

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

UPDATE (Oct. 18): Charges pending in Balloon Boy saga

Nightmare on wheels.

The law requires that drivers use a hands-free device when on their cellphones. Sending e-mail or texting behind the wheel will be outlawed, as will fiddling with GPS units or iPods. Ditto for DVD players and video games (who plays video games while they drive?!)

Those who violate the new law could face fines of up to $500.

In adopting the cell phone driving ban, Ontario joins three other Canadian provinces, three U.S. states and more than 40 other countries.

I’m usually not a fan of Nanny State antics. But I also fully understand that drivers who use handheld devices are way more likely to be in a crash – four times as likely, according to a Transport Canada study.

Not that anyone who’s ever driven behind a 17-year-old while she’s yakking on her cell or texting with her BFFs needs a study to tell them that. Indeed, it can be downright scary how out of it some people can be despite the fact that they’re operating a two-ton homicide machine.

The new law will help to curb this kind of behaviour. Still, as critics point out, just because you have Bluetooth and can speak hands-free, doesn’t mean you’re going to be less distracted. You’re still talking on the phone, after all, and your mind is not fully focused on the road. (And what about people who eat and drive, or girls who put on make-up behind the wheel? There’s no law to address the danger these folks pose.)

If governments want to eliminate the problem all together, they should probably outright ban the use of cell phones while driving – whether it’s hands-free or not. I wouldn’t be happy about it, but I’d adjust.

And I’d be comforted by the knowledge that other people on the road are focusing on job #1: getting somewhere without killing anybody – or me, more specifically.

ryan@roadtostarrdom.com

>> Related: Gizmos to beat the cellphone driving ban