Final Write Up

The Plan:
To write a daily blog∞ entry about an article appearing in the print version of the New York Times, 4 to 5 times a week. The entries would be opinionated commentary about forementioned articles. I would try for 500 word entries and use several links throughout each post to give the reader more information. I hoped to get a lot of comments, seeing as I was sharing my opinion with the world.

What I Did:
I started out gung-ho, posting everyday. It was really nice to be able to do part of my homework (reading the Times) away from my computer for once. I developed a formula for posting:

Writer
Publisher
Date
Link to online version
Pages in newspaper
One to two sentence summary
Block qoute of text to begin my commentary.

By spring break I began to be burned out on this "formula" as well as creating several links per entry. Often I would complete an entry except for the links, and go back and add them later before I clicked "publish". Finding material was easy, there was normally SOMETHING in the Times that I could rant about for at least two hundred words...

My early postings were long, but also contained a lot of blockquotes. After break I stopped using blockquotes and links so much, only putting them in where I thought them necessary, ie, to prove my point. I started with a goal of about 500 words, which looks really long in a blog. Most people would be scared to read that, even if it was mostly block quotes from another article. I became more concerned about getting my thoughts out than how many words I was actually writing. If I completed my point in 100 words, great, on the same hand, it could take 1000 to get out what I'm trying to say on another topic.

I stopped using the print version of the paper sometime after break, as well. It became a little bit of a hassel to make it to the bookstore everyday, and how many people online would actually go and get their paper to read the article, rather than clicking the link I provided? Even if I did happen to get my paper and read the article that way, I didn't provide the page numbers. Once or twice before I stopped putting the page numbers up I found the article online, and then searched for it in the print edition later.

I also didn't always use the New York Times. I commented about two articles from Glamour, and one day about the recent anorexic/obesity epidemic (which I'm strangely drawn to) after seeing Rachel Ray do a whole show about it, as well as on other tv shows and in magazines. One of my posts was just a repost of a brownie recipie from the Times that was in the top 10 emailed articles for almost a week.

I was hoping to get a lot of comments, which often happens when you put your opinion out there, I got one∞, about the second Glamour I posted. It was a positive comment, and was really nice to know that someone out there was reading, and liked what I was saying.

I thought I would end up following developing stories more, but I found that in a few cases, such as the Imus story, I didn't want to comment on anything until a) I knew as much as I could and b) things had dwindled down. With the Imus story, I really didn't know who he was, so my post about that is mostly a chopped up biography from his wikipedia page. There was a ton of coverage of this story, in the Times and beyond, but I find that I get burned out on a story that gets too much coverage, like the Anna Nicole saga.

Often I would find my articles and start my post, but finnish either later that day, or on a day that week I had more time (like the weekend). My articles weren't always from the same day as the post.

Why I Chose a Blog:
Wikis don't speak to me the same way a blog does. Maybe it's because the format of a blog is similar to a magazine column. Even Cosmo has a regular feature published in their print edition entitled "bedroom blog." Before this class I hadn't kept a very regular blog. I had one attached to my msn livespace as well as my myspace page, but my posting was sporadic at best. Like many people, I never thought of blogs as serious writing medium, at least not for the average person. I had heard of more serious blogs such as the Huffington Post, but I never realized how mainstream they are, especially in journalism. It seems that almost any "reporter" who works at a tv station or newspaper these days has a blog hosted by their employer.

The Look:
I chose the layout for my blog∞ (just from the pre-set templates Blogger had) because I thought the colors were professional, but creative. I did do a little tweeking here and there, like changing the color of the text and the links. I liked having my blog on the right, so that's the first thing people see as they see my page. I had my blogroll and what not on the left, for further exploration. I used my blogroll to promote other news blogs, including Emily's NYT blog. I also created a section titled "interesting links I stubble across" which was two links to pages with people's expressing what I find to be very radical personal opinions.

What I Learned:

• It's hard to post every day.
• No matter how much you like something, you can become burnt out on it.
• It's a good feeling to get comments.
• It's an even better feeling to get positive comments.
• Even if you don't get comments, it doesn't mean that no one is reading.
• Senioritis does not help work ethic at all.
• Neither does nice weather.

What Worked:

• Using the New York Times as inspiration
• Posting at least 4 times a week

What Didn't Work

• Long posts, they just weren't practical
• Posting every week day.
• There's always gonna be a day here or there where spending an hour by the computer just won't happen.

What Would I Change?
My drive. My project proposal had plenty of room for flexibility, but when it came to posting regularly, especially near the end, it was hard to get myself motivated. There was always something else I could have been doing, whether it was legitamate homework, playing silly games, or watching bad TV. But, I did grab my laptop and post while watching said bad TV a lot.

Reflection
The internet is changing journalism, even as we speak. Blogs are major player in this change. It was bloggers that dethroned Dan Rather∞from his top news anchor position in 2004. "New media" has become a way of life. With a computer and an internet connection, you can read the day's news and watch your favorite TV show. (Some networks stream their tv shows, others can be dowloaded from programs like iTunes.) "New media" rolls television, radio and print into one neat little package, all for about $30/month, plus download fees.

Treating the Awkward Years

Jan Hoffman
The New York Times
Tuesday, April 24th, 2007
The Story
The Summary: Doctors specializing in adolescent care can make the most awkward doctor's visit comfortable and helpful.

This is such a good idea. Being a teenager has become so hard. There are so many mixed messages, be honest, but don't do this this or this. You'll get in trouble, we'll yell and scream and make you feel like shit.

The idea of having a doctor that you can speak freely to, and who WON'T tell you parents. Especially when it comes to sex and sexual health. Sex is one of those things that the more you know, the better choices you make. Yet, because of our puritanical heritage, sex is one of the last things parents want to talk about with their kids. Doctors who are comfortable helping teens make good choices about sex and birth control and the benefits of waiting (or not waiting, as the case may be) are a great asset to parents and educators alike.

Even simple things like stretch marks or a period or strange pains can be embarrassing to talk to parents and other adults to, but medical professionals that are comfortable talking to teens, and have the knowledge can be a comfort for a teen, not an embaressment.

The article really focused on how teens often get lost in the shuffle between pediatritions and adult doctors.

That job has become more time-consuming and complex. “Adolescents are not big children and they’re also not little adults,” said Dr. Walter D. Rosenfeld, an adolescent medicine specialist and chairman of pediatrics at the Goryeb Children’s Hospital in Morristown, N.J.

Talking to parents about anything "down there" is hard. Especially if they're really strict about sex and virginity. If you are a virgin, you'll worry that they'll get suspicious and falsely accuse, and if you're not, you'll worry they'll get mad and never talk to you again, saying your bladder infection is because you're a giant dirty whore.

Being a teen is hard. Going to the doctor is hard. Having doctors especially for teens makes things easier.

"They tried to cure me of being gay"

I've been away on a choir tour the last three days. While on the bus, I read magazines.
Stephen Fried
Glamor
May 2007
The Story
The Summary: A woman who struggled with her gay/strait identity her whole life tried "ex-gay" Christian therapy.

Christianity is strict. This is why so many people struggle with religion and real life. Not only do you have to believe, but you have to follow 10 rules, and then we're gonna add in other rules that aren't part of the original 10, but you have to follow those, as well.

Homosexuality is one of those things, like birth control and premarital sex, that people struggle with. They still believe, but there's so much saying "this is wrong" and "if you do this, you're not Christian" "THIS IS A SIN!" But any good Christian literature tells you that we're all sinners. Why is sex one of those sins that's really bad, but not one of the ten commandments? And yet it's not such a bad thing if we "covet thy neighbor's goods."

This woman is still struggling with her conflicting gay and Christian identities. She knows what she believes, and she's told she can't believe that and be true to herself. The radical led conservative Christian movement is making up rules and making people feel guilty for being themselves.

In one breath we're told that Jesus loves everyone, the next is that we're going to hell if we do anything wrong, and then they turn around again and told that God is merciful and forgiving.

Christianity is confusing. It's no wonder there are so many people who say fuck it all, and give up. Honestly, I like church, I like the fellowship and sense of extended family. I don't like organized religion. I don't like someone telling me what I should and shouldn't think do and say. Especially when these are the same people who say a woman's place is in the home, and we should cook and clean and pop out babies as often as we physically can.

Pill That Eliminates the Period Gets Mixed Reviews

Stephanie Saul
The New York Times
Friday, April 20, 2007
The Story
The Summary: A company has released a birth control pill cycle that eliminates the placebo pills, as well as periods.

There were a suprising amount of women who embraced the idea of a period. I've hated it since I got it. Honestly... I think it's nasty.

Since "the pill" came out in the '60s it has freed women. It was the first step in women enjoying sex the way a man does... with out worry of a child. But as research went on, they found other benefits of oral contraceptives, lighter "periods", clearer skin, it lowers the risk of ovarian cancer, and they found out they could skip their periods.

Think about how much of our money goes to personal care items... and we're lucky that tampax hasn't decided to randomly jack up their prices. They could, you know. All the personal care companies could increase prices, and what are we gonna do about it. Nothing! (well, there is the diy version... but I don't think I'd want to wash my reusable maxi pads with the rest of my clothing :S)

I'm actually surprised there's so much opposition. Most people have a "that's fine for you but not for me" attitude, but a few are questioning it. The maker of the documentary "Period: The End of Menstration" Is worried that it's women giving up control of their bodies to a drug. But I see it as taking control away from me. Traditionally, women didn't have many periods in their life time, because they were either pregnant or nursing... say that process is about a year (nine months for the pregnancy, a few more until the baby starts to eat food) and then she would have her period again, once or twice, before becoming pregnant and starting everything over.

Back in the days of the Comstock Laws, it was techinically illegal for a woman to know that sex = baby (well, for a man to tell her that) because that was contraceptive information.

I'm not trying to get uber feminist here... but menstation is one of those uber feminist things. It's strictly feminine... like prostates are strictly masculine. A period is something that controls women, and oral contraceptives are something that turns the tables.

Dr. Constantine cited company-financed research indicating that women often feel less effective at work and school during their periods. They limit sexual activity and exercise, wear dark clothes and stay home more, resulting in absenteeism, she said.

Menstrual suppression may be particularly appealing to women who suffer severe pain, heavy bleeding or emotional problems during their periods. A study by Canadian researchers found that women afflicted by heavy menstrual bleeding give up $1,692 a year in lost wages.

One of the things that makes us ultimately feminine is so gross and makes us feel very unfeminine and disgusting, and smelly. Even pregnancy is gross... too many uncontrolable body functions. We've been taught that body functions (by anyone) are rude.

Women are women because of who they are, not because they bleed every month. Periods are a little earthy/hippy for me. I'll stick to my chemical induced world.

The Biggest Sell Is the Audition

Allen Salkin
The New York Times
Thursday, April 19th, 2007
The Story
The Summary: QVC holds open auditions for hosts in West Chester Pennsylvania.

I found this article interesting because my boyfriend works at HSN, QVC's main competitor. I hear a lot about the goings on at HSN. I hear my boyfriend's ranting about how much better it would be if they listened to him and did a few things his way. (like everyone does about the people they work for)

An open casting call is a risky, you never know what type of psychos will show up. That, and the type of people who host the home shopping shows are scary to begin with. I've heard some strange stories about home shopping hosts. Apparently, a lot of them are prima donas. Rewarded for acting like idiots in front of millions of people.

In the TV world, that is one job I would not want. I work in retail, I'm used to selling stuff to people. But on TV they only get to see it. You don't get to feel or use it. I was just watching Wolfgang Puck on HSN. The host said that the food looked marvelous, perfect every time... because of the pans. No! I think it's because Wolfgang Puck was cooking. It doesn't matter what you're cooking with... if you can't cook, it's gonna turn out like shit.

I've never liked the idea of home shopping. At least with online shopping you can get a product description and (if applicable) and ingredients list. TV home shopping only gives you the good. There's normally some type of negative side to everything. Even my favorite products have some downsides.

And the clothing on home shopping... it's always ugly, grandma clothes... most of which are loungy-types. Gross... those are the clothes that people get fat in. Like sweats and stretch pants.

Home shopping, gross.

Deadly Rampage and No Loss for Words

Alessandra Stanley
The New York Times
Tuesday, April 17th, 2007
The Story
The Summary: Amateur reporters had a major part in reporting yesterday's tragedies.

News has changed. We used to look to strong men to give us the hard facts about recent events (Edward R. Murrow, Peter Jennings, Walter Cronkite) but times they are a changin'. Women have become a staple in today's news reporting. Katie Couric is the first woman to host the evening news for a network station solo (both Barbra Walters and Connie Chung had co-hosted in the past). But the news has also become more emotional, and more fluff lately.

I don't think that its because of women, but because of the 24-hour news cycle. They created the news networks that never went off the air. There wasn't enough hard news to fill 24 hours (or even 16... with replays during the night time) Fluff worked its way into hard news, and ratings went up for those peices. Because of this you have almost 2 months of air dedicated to the Anna Nicole Smith story. If you search Time magazine's archives between August 1st, 1962 and September 1st, 1962 you find eight stories mentioning Marilyn Monroe's name. Not neccessarily about her, but mentioning her name. Her picture wasn't even on the cover of the magazine containing her obituary. (She died August 5th, 1962)

Compare that to the hours dedicated to Anna Nicole Smith on networks such as CNN and FOXNEWS. Everyone paralelled their lives, but the news coverage of their deaths was not.

Truly hard news has become a thing of the past. Even with yesterday's tragedy, we must put every thing in an emotional, personal light. Why can't we have facts like we used to. Human interest stories have run the news for far too long.

I'm not saying there isn't a human side to every story, because there is. But hours after is not the time to show it. Today was far to soon to be interviewing victims, yet there were interviews on TV today. And there is one photo they keep showing and I wish they wouldn't. A guy is a bloody mess as they carry him off the scene. I hate it. Just stop showing it, or at least give us a warning to look away.

I agree with the article. This is a time that America should be speechless... yet no one can shut the fuck up.

Best-Informed Also View Fake News, Study Says

Katharine Q. Seelye
The New York Times
Monday, April 16th, 2007
The Story
The Summary: People who watch fake news are more informed than people who don't.

I like to laugh when I watch TV. As much as I want to be informed, I'd like to be entertained. If I just wanted to be informed, I'd read a newspaper. That being said, I watch The Daily Show and The Colbert Report regularly, and before I had cable... I'd get a lot of my news from Weekend Update. (I was a champion at the Current Events game we played at my elementary/high school.)

Fake news really isn't that fake. The news is real... they report on real stories, they just have a biased and humorous.

I think the people drawn to these shows have a genuine desire to be informed of recent events, but the choose to go outside the mainstream news sources to get it.

The six news sources cited most often by people who knew the most about current events were: “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report” (counted as one), tied with Web sites of major newspapers; next came “News Hour With Jim Lehrer”; then “The O’Reilly Factor,” which was tied with National Public Radio; and Rush Limbaugh’s radio program.

This is the age-old Mass Communication Senior thesis topic. (okay... maybe not age old... but for about the last 10 years?) Every class there's someone who takes the easy way out and decides to do their research on where college students get their news from. (They choose college students because there's a large amount of them readily available, and most professors are willing to give up 5 minutes of class time to allow you to do a survey for academic research) It's nice to see that "fake news" not only rules us academics but those out in the "real world" as well.

There is legitimate news value in The Daily Show and The Colbert Report. It's not made-up news, like The Onion, but a satirical take on the real news. You learn things from it. In fact, you can learn things that you can't from other news programs. (Like the fact that President Bush has used certain phrases, such as "stay the course", repeatedly over the course of his presidency.)

So, here's to "fake" news... because it's not really fake, it's based in truth, and spun to make us laugh.

Virginia Tech Shooting Leaves 33 Dead

Christine Hauser and Anahad O'Connor
The New York Times
Monday, April 16th, 2007
The Story
The Summary: Today's top story. Headline sums it all up.

I really don't know what to say. It only seems appropriate to post it further... just incase someone, somewhere hasn't heard about it yet. It's one of those things that you can't really have an opinion about... of course it's horrible, no one, right or left, is going to argue with you.

I think it's really sad that in order to get people to agree about something in the country, large numbers of people need to die. And even then, there's arguement about something. (9/11?)

Even in tragedies like today's, people want to start playing the blame game.

Take Columbine... all of a sudden it was Marilyn Manson's fault that these boys were as sick as they were. Not the parents, not those who were close and could actually have a real effect on them, but Marilyn Manson, a musician who happens to look really freaky.

Marilyn Manson didn't buy the guns, and Marilyn Manson didn't shut them out. Parents want to be fully responsible for their children until their children f*ck up... then they had nothing to do with it... it was the TV (we bought for him) or the video games (we bought for him) or the music (we bought for him). Stupid breeds stupid, it's as simple as that.

Back to what's important... my (as so many others') thoughts and prayers go out the victim's of today's tragic events and their families.

He’s Not My Grandpa. He’s My Dad.

Thomas Vinciguerra
The New York Times
Thursday, April 12, 2007
The Story
The Summary: The article examines the trend of older men becomming new dads.

It's strange to think about someone as old as my grandpa being my dad, especially since both my grandfathers are gone.

This article goes into some of the psychological issues, such as a young child dealing with their father's illness, and how the man's first set of children feel about his new wife and second set. (The new wife often being young enough to be his daughter) Other issues include (obviously) the death of a parent, and the single parenthood that follows.

The article said that most of these "start over dads" (the article calls them SODs) are rich, most often married to women much younger than them. Most of which are second or even third marriages.

I can't say that I think it's entirely wrong. Having children is a choice. If these May-December couples choose to have children, I can't see anything entirely wrong with it. Most of these men have money, and as long as they leave funds for their children's upbringing I can't see anything absolutely horrible about it.

Yes, there are psychological issues when a child deals with the death of a parent, but on the other hand, it doesn't mean a man who fathers a child at 25 is invincible. Yes the older man has a higher chance of death, but that doesn't make him a bad father. In fact, the article said that one of the perks of being a SOD was that these men spent more time with their children, becuase they were either retired, or at least weren't working as hard as they did in their 20s and 30s. The men also said they were more mellow with their 2nd set of children.

I can't leave the subject with out touching on Hugh Hefner. Not only does he date women that could be his daughter, one of his three girlfriends (Kendra, 21) could be his granddaughter. He has two adolescent sons, and two grown children from his first marriage. He's the ultimate poster-child for this type of lifestyle.

Recipe: Supernatural Brownies*

The New York Times
Wednesday, April 11, 2007

*So... it's Friday, and just for fun, I'm gonna re-post this entire article, which is just a brownie recipe!

Adapted from “Chocolate: From Simple Cookies to Extravagant Showstoppers,” by Nick Malgieri (Morrow Cookbooks, 1998)

Time: About 1 hour

2 sticks (16 tablespoons) butter, more for pan and parchment paper
8 ounces bittersweet chocolate
4 eggs
1/2 teaspoon salt
1 cup dark brown sugar, such as muscovado
1 cup granulated sugar
2 teaspoons vanilla extract
1 cup flour
1/2 cup chopped walnuts or 3/4 cup whole walnuts, optional.

1. Butter a 13-by-9-inch baking pan and line with buttered parchment paper. Preheat oven to 350 degrees. In top of a double boiler set over barely simmering water, or on low power in a microwave, melt butter and chocolate together. Cool slightly. In a large bowl or mixer, whisk eggs. Whisk in salt, sugars and vanilla.

2. Whisk in chocolate mixture. Fold in flour just until combined. If using chopped walnuts, stir them in. Pour batter into prepared pan. If using whole walnuts, arrange on top of batter. Bake for 35 to 40 minutes or until shiny and beginning to crack on top. Cool in pan on rack.

Yield: 15 large or 24 small brownies.

Note: For best flavor, bake 1 day before serving, let cool and store, tightly wrapped.

ENJOY!!!!

CBS Drops Imus Radio Show Over Racial Remark

Bill Carter and Jaques Steinberg
The New York Times
Thursday, April 12, 2007
The Story
The Summary: After about a week of media hoopla, Don Imus gets the boot, completely, from everyone for making sexist and racist comments about the Rutgers' women's basketball team.

So, I know that this story has been developing for the last week, but I didn't know much about it. I didn't even know who Don Imus was, to tell you the truth. I had to do some backgrounding to figure out who he was, and why he was significant enough to matter. So, for everyone like me, who has no idea who he is, I give you Don Imus: a mini biography (courtesy of Wikipedia)

John Donald "Don" Imus, Jr. (born July 23, 1940) is an American comedian, writer, and radio talk show host, best known for his sarcasm and often harsh language. His popular radio show, Imus in the Morning, aired weekday mornings until it was canceled on April 12, 2007[1] following a controversy stemming from comments he made on air which were perceived by some to be racist and sexist.

Imus began as a radio disc jockey in 1966 at radio station KUTY in Palmdale, California after hearing the morning disc-jockey. He immediately walked over to the nearby station and convinced the owner to hire him, saying he could do a better job. At the time he was a brakeman on the Southern Pacific Railroad. He stayed at the station for about two years,[6] leaving in 1968 for a move to KXOA in Sacramento, California. His on-air pranks, such as calling up a restaurant and ordering 1200 hamburgers, made his show immensely popular and boosted ratings.

In 1977, WNBC fired Imus for his cocaine and vodka habits and unprofessionalism; he had missed a hundred days of work in one year.[citation needed]Imus then went to work in Cleveland and cleaned up his act. In 1978, Imus commuted between Cleveland and New York to tape a TV talk show, Imus Plus at WNEW-TV. (The show was nationally syndicated by Metromedia, which owned WNEW at the time). Imus was reinstated in September 1979 as WNBC's morning drive time host.

From 1982 to 1985, the station also employed talk-radio host Howard Stern, and WNBC heavily promoted the pair in print and television ads, which often featured the slogan "If We Weren't So Bad, We Wouldn't Be That Good." Although Stern's show aired later in the day, Imus and Stern often made brief appearances on each other's shows, giving the audience an occasional glimpse of an on- and off-air rivalry that continues to this day.

Now that we're all caught up to speed (is it bad that I'd never heard of the guy until he was fired?) Should this guy have been fired? Personally, I think so. But... there's the First Ammendment. He didn't say anything that would be classified as obscene. It seems like the comment is stated as opinion, and opinion, no matter how wrong, isn't false. Between the First Ammendment and the FCC, Mr. Imus made no infraction.

But I still thing MSNBC and CBS Radio did the right thing. That kind of biggotry can't happen in this country. Mr. Imus just might have a First Ammendment case against them, not that he would win. The First Ammendment only works when one has something intellegent to say. Mr. Imus made his career by saying something stupid. A lot.

Ever-Changing Fame, as Fluid as It Is Fleeting

Caryn James
The New York Times
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
The Story
The Summary: Finally, we know who the father of Dannielynn, Anna Nicole Smith's 7-month-old daughter, is... but is the media circus over yet?

Yay!!! Creepy Howard K. Stern gave up and let DNA test be done... and Larry Birkhead is the real father.

Seemingly, the main event in a media circus that has been going on since Dannielynn's conception is over. Before the her death, before the death of her son, before the birth of her daughter, there was this paternity battle primarily between Birkhead and Stern.

This poor woman's whole life has been a media circus. Granted, she brought a lot of it on herself (the Anna Nicole Show). But even when you do let the public into your life, there are times you don't want them there.

She was a stereotypical "dumb blonde" who married for money. Her story is the thing of "Life Original" movies. Married young the first time, had a child, divorced shortly after. She became a stripper to make money to raise her son. The she sent photos to Playboy, and made it to the big time. Her marriage to Howard J. Marshall was highly scrutinized, and a long court battle with his adult children followed his death.

Just as her life was getting back on track, her son died, and so did she. She was in the media more than ever before.

Her life parallels that of her hero's, Marilyn Monroe. America thought they were sluts. Hollywood took, America hated, and then they died young and mysteriously.

It's the end of the story that had everything. Love, fame fortune, a buxom blonde, a dark evil type, the good guy (not as rich as the bad guy), a baby, an evil step mother (except she was the real mother) and even a prince! Too bad it's not the end of the media coverage.

Good luck in life, Dannielynn and Larry!!!!!

Size 0?

Time to get a little off track. I was watching Rachael Ray today, and the super curvey, super cute awesome cook chick was discussing being a size zero. This has been a topic that's been in the news a lot lately, ever since there have been model deaths due to extreme anorexia.

It seems like Americans are either too skinny or too fat.

Every day we see a commerical for a new weight loss pill, or a new exercise machine. We hear about hot celebrity bodies. It's hard for a normal person to have an AWESOME body.

I gained a significant amount of weight the summer after my sophomore year of college because I was working two jobs, often 12+ hours a day, and would often end up eating McDonald's. Plain and simple, that was my problem. Waaaaay too much fast food. I take full responsibility for it.

Now my goal size is 8... I'm a 10... want to lose about 10lbs and 1 size. I'm struggling. And then I hear stories about these models who are a size 0, and want to be a 00. I see pictures of Lindsey Lohan when she was super skinny, and I wanna vomit... she was HOT in her Mean Girls days. Nicole Richie, too. Who told her to get THAT thin? I liked her when she was a little chunkier. She held her own with Paris Hilton, and I think she really stole The Simple Life

Diet and exercise. Two simple things that every doctor and dietician say are the key to weight loss, yet seem like the hardest things to do. Exercise takes time. Not only the actual time spent exercising, but you have to shower after, and too many showers make my skin dry.

I know that I'm a size 8 with some extra fat that makes me a 10. I wouldn't want to get any smaller than that. I don't get it. I don't get the obsession with being so small. Ask any man, and he'll tell you that a girl who looks like five toothpicks and a ping-pong ball isn't hot. But neither is a girl who looks like the ping-pong ball alone.

America has a obsession with food. Whether it's eating it or not eating it. Food has become a part of our everday lives. It's not just like breathing. We make decisions of when, what and how much we eat. What was once a form of fuel for our bodies has now become something we do for pleasure. It's not so much a fuel as it is an enemy. It's easy to go overboard, to eat too much.

Our culture has divided itself... we're about more calories, but smaller sizes

Romantic Revulsion in the New Century: Flaw-O-Matic 2.0

John Tierney
The New York Times
Tuesday, April 10th
The Story
The Summary: Going back to a study the author originally did in 1995, he examines the pickiness of daters now and 10 years ago and how new forms of dating (speed dating and online dating services) fosters those scrupulous tastes.

I don't see pickiness in dating as a bad thing. If you have incredibly high standards, you're less likely to settle for a bad person. Not saying that being extra picky is a good thing, though. Like everything, there's a balance.

Romance is one of those things that isn't science, but we want to make it into a science. There's biology, sociology and psychology behind relationships, and still we don't have all the answers.

The research behind the article found that money was a large factor in chosing a partner:

They found that a 5-foot-8 man was just as successful in getting dates as a 6-footer if he made more money — precisely $146,000 a year more. For a 5-foot-2 man, the number was $277,000.

It also stated that women are pickier than men. That doesn't make much sense to me. Why did Britney Spears marry Kevin Federline? Why do girls rush to the alter with the first thing that asks them? Women date losers all the time. I don't see many girls who are extra picky. The author does say that New Yorkers are pickier than anyone else, and I do live far, far away from New York.

I don't believe than anyone will find the perfect mate by making lists of traits they do and do not want. I'm a big believer of finding people you're attracted to, and going from there. You might be attracted to a loser... great, dump him. Move on to the next one. There isn't a science to attraction. Compatability might be a science, but attraction isn't. Just because you can live with someone doesn't mean you'll want to sleep with them.

H.P. Tries to Create Printers That Love the Web

Damon Darlin
The New York Times
Monday, April 9th, 2007
The Story
The Summary: HP sees a rising trend to a paperless society, so their trying to get people to print more.

I'm not a huge environmentalist... I like to recycle, and I try my best to shut off a light before I leave a room (doesn't always happen, but I TRY) I also do things like drive a car frequently (most of the time by myself) and drink water from pre-packaged bottles (they're convienent!)

But I'm not a big fan of randomly printing stuff out, just for the sake of randomly printing stuff out. I don't like to kill trees! Why would I want to print out a website? With CRT monitors dying out for easier to read LCD monitors, it's easy to read large blocks of text for long periods of time with out printing them out.

Granted, the use of recycled paper is on the rise, but still. When email first came out and the home computer became as common as telephones there was all this buzz of a paperless society. "We won't need paper anymore! We won't need real mail, we'll be able to correspond by email!" But printing increased.

And now, as HP foresees the use of printers going down, they're trying to increase printing of websites and blogs. (if you're reading this, please DO NOT print it out!!!)

I'm not comfortable with the idea of increased consumption. Don't we use enough in this country? Almost everything is powered by finite resources. We don't need big corporations pushing us to use more. I own a printer, but I don't use it. I haven't had it hooked up to my computer for more than a year. If I need to print something out, I do it at school.

It annoys me when we can't just email our professors assignments. Why should we print out a copy?

Grrrr... DO NOT WASTE

For Your Next Trip, Stock Up on Dental Mitts

Michelle Higgins
The New York Times
Sunday, April 1st, 2007*
The Story
The Summary: The trials and tribulations of liquid restrictions in carry-on bags on airplanes are examined.

I flew for the first time this past January. FIRST TIME EVER... at 21. I was most worried about not packing the right things, and ending up in some holding cell in an airport as a terrorist because I packed a tube of toothpaste that was too big. Because of this, I packed all of my body care in my checked luggage, with the exception of three two-ounce bottles of shower gel, lotion, and splash... back-ups just incase I wound up loosing my checked luggage. I was visiting a friend, so stopping by a Walmart or Target to pick up anything else I might need wasn't too much of an issue.

I made it to Tampa all right, and nothing got lost or majorly damaged. (I did have a shampoo bottle bust on me, but when ever I travel, I put everthing in plastic baggies... for just such an occasion.

One problem for airlines that has developed from the 3oz or less rule is that more people are checking luggage than before. Which is what I ended up doing on my way back. I packed my soft bag that had been my carry-on with dirty clothes (so there wasn't anything breakable in the bag) and checked it. It was a pain to carry two heavy bags around the airport. I was only going home... I really didn't care if my hair was perfect (it wasn't) or if my breath smelled (if you eat or drink anything, all toothbrushing/breath freshening efforts are shot, anyway.)

Trial sizes for traveling have been around forever! I don't know what the big deal is. Most people had smaller bottles of their favorites for traveling in the first place. Who wants to lug around full sized products! Where I work, all of are trial sizes are around 2oz... and come in small enough bottles where one should be able to fit a small arsenol of body care products in a 1-quart bag.

When it comes down to it, all of this is for our saftey. We can't complain too much, and just live with it.

*I found this article online, while finding the link to the previous article... and I liked it :D

Substitute Teacher Tells History Firsthand

Paul Vitello
The New York Times
Wednesday, April 4th, 2007
pgs
The Story
The Summary: A Long Island substitute teacher captivates his middle school audience by telling real tales of his past.

Every had those teacher, whether they were subs of full time. The teacher who had stories in their pockets, and would spend a whole class period way off topic, but, at the same time, you came away knowing more than you would have if class had gone on as planned.

History is a hard thing to understand. I barely remember what it was like before the days of computers and cell phones. I could only imagine how sucky it would be to have to share a phone with my roommates, and then having long distance charges on top of sharing. No thank you.

Having a person who was there who can provide a direct connection to the past which makes it easier for students to understand. You can say "The USA had ration stamps" or you can say "this is what it was like to buy food using ration stamps, and this is what my family did to adapt..."

A first-hand account of an event or time makes it more real. It takes the facts from history and turns them into people and places. Add a good story teller to the equation, and you have a history goldmine, where children enjoy listening to history. History becomes their favorite subject.

This teacher, Mr. Blume, 81, subs everything from math to spanish, and manages to bring personal experiences to every class. As a full time teacher he taught English and Social Studies. He retired in 1983, but now spends an average of 4 days a week subbing at Great Neck North Middle school.

I have a few substitute teachers that stick in my mind. One was Mrs. Oistead... she was a sub for as long as I knew her. I remember not liking her as an elementary student. She was one of those community people who, like Mr. Blume, never really retired.

Another, I can't remember his name at the moment, would bring his guitar to sub. Even if he was subbing shop. He was pretty cool.

Substitute teachers are special people who change the world, with out even knowing it. Especially the ones who retired, and still come back to teaching. (One of my high-school English teachers spent the beginning of her career subbing, as a part-time job while raising her family.)

For Girls, It’s Be Yourself, and Be Perfect, Too and Too Busy to Notice You’re Too Busy

For Girls, It’s Be Yourself, and Be Perfect, Too
Sara Rimer
The New York Times
Sunday, April 1st, 2007
The Story*
The Summary: The trials of female high school seniors at a competetive school are examined as they discuss the pressures of their everyday lives.

Too Busy to Notice You’re Too Busy
Alina Tugend
The New York Times
Saturday, March 31st, 2007
The Story*
The Summary: The author details how our everday lives have become hectic, and whether or not this is a bad thing.

These two articles caught my eye. The first is about the new generation of super-girls. They're athletes, musicians, strait-"A" students, good friends and good daughters, among other things. These girls live hectic lives for the sake of getting into a "brand name" (well known, but not neccessarily Ivy League) college.

But then what? Breaking their backs in college to get into a good grad school or professional program? And after that, course and club work to build a resume to get that awesome job? And what after that, working 80-hours per week, raising a family, being involved in a community.

Enter artcle #2... our lives are busy. Very busy.

if at some point life seems to calm down, then it is time to take on a big construction project, get a dog or have another baby.

I'm in the middle of these two stories. I work 25+ hours per week, plus I'm a full time student, plus I'm trying to eat better and exercise, which means finding time to exercise (luckily, the weather should be getting nicer, which means more bike rides) and I'm trying to find time to cook my own meals. That and I want to move in two months, and I need to pack and find a place to live for the summer, and I still haven't heard from either school I've applied to, so I don't know where I'm even going yet.

There's a "where does it end" feeling to it all. We work really hard in high school to get into college, we work really hard in college to get a good job, we work really hard at our jobs to rake in the big bucks, which we never have time to enjoy, because we're always working so hard.

And then you have the slackers, which makes you want to shoot everyone else and then yourself, because they seem to be getting by just fine, and you work your @$$ off.

I feel inadequit when I read about these girls in high school. I didn't even take the SATs... let alone worried about an external prep coach.

This life had become insane. We've become a nation of extremes. No one's healthy, we're either too fat or too skinny. No one's average, they're either smart or stupid. You either work extra hard, or not at all. What ever happened to getting a BA from the local state school and working 40 hours/week, buying a house on a thirty year morgage, and enjoying life? Even as I type it, I detest the thought. I think we've become a nation of addicts. If it's not drugs or alcohol, it's work or media.

I want a mandatory afternoon nap, or a month of vacation... I want to feel like it's okay to relax.

*I looked at today's paper, I didn't like what I saw. So I started digging online, and found not one, but two articles that I liked... enjoy!

Video Games Conquer Retirees

Seth Schiesel
The New York Times
Friday, March 30th, 2007
pg A21
The Story
The Summary: Senior citizens are joining the video game craze.

When I first saw the title of this article, I got worried. I know people who don't have jobs, don't go to school, but they play video games all day. But they grew up in the '90s... in the midst of the video game era. I don't like the idea of my grandma wasting away her final years in front of the TV playing "God of War." (Although, I don't think I have to worry about my grandma playing video games, she doesn't quite understand how solitare on the computer works)

After reading the article, I love the idea. From retired Roman-Catholic sisters playing mini-games like Bejeweled to seniors playing Wii Bowling instead of regular bowling, games aren't taking over seniors lives, they're enriching it.

Most games (like those for the X-box and the PS3) are created for the young male, with complicated graphics and storylines. The games that seinors are picking up on are the simple games created by companies like PopCap games, or those created for the Nintendo Wii. These games are often refered to as "casual games," mostly because of their simplicity and ease.

A senior who started a Wii bowling league says he prefers Wii bowling to regular bowling because he doesn't have all the aches and pains from the weight of the ball. Yet there's still an element of low-impact exercise to it. My roommate, who owns half a Wii (the other half is owned by her fiance) said she woke up with sore arms after playing Wii boxing one evening.

The Wii has taken the industry by storm. Going back to the principles of early games, when the systems were simple, so the games had to be fun, Wii games are simplistic, but fun. They're also the most interactive home video games. Unlike most systems, there's activity for all of your body, not just your fingers and thumbs.

I'm a big fan of social games. If you can hang out with people, yell, scream, and have general conversation while playing, it's fun. I'm not a big fan solo games that take over your life.

To social, casual games!!!

Up in the Attic, New Millennium Style

Fred E. Bernstien
The New York Times
Thursday, March 29th, 2007
pgs D1&D5
The Story
The Summary: The attic, tradtionally used for storage, is getting a make-over into interesting living space.

I've always love spaces like attics or basements. Little corners of houses where you could hide, they were different and interesting from the norm.

There was a room in my grandma's basement that was an "office." It was actually a very small bedroom that my brothers and I would play office in, it even had an old typewriter. I think that's part of the fun of attics and basements. All of the old things stored there. Things with family history, fun things from the past, just things that aren't part of a normal routine.

The spaces these families created with their attics are incredible, especially the one in Texas. (Check out the article... pictures are attached!)

I love interesting spaces. I think that's part of why I like the house I live in. At one point it was a traditional "Bemidji Skinny" (a thin house located in Bemidji, they were supposedly very popular back in the day) Someone purchased it and, due to its close location to campus, realized they could make money if the split the house into two apartments - up and downstairs. So they created a bathroom and kitchen out of nothing upstairs. We also have a random sink in the back room surrounded by cabinents, we still haven't figured out what they're for, and we've been living here for 1.5 years. After awhile, the owners of our house realized there was wasted land in the backyard, and added on a third apartment, they added on a poorly constructed third apartment. At somepoint, someone decided that it could once again be two apartments instead of three. So we live in a house that has five sinks, 4+ bedrooms, and strange additions everywhere.

I wish you could get pictures of a house through the years before you move into it. Like, this is what it looked like when it was first built, this is what changed in the '72 remodeling, here's what we changed in the 90s... Information like that is sometimes crucial, but also interesting.

I wish I had the money to buy a house and create a space like the ones from this article. They're fantastic!

Overcoming a Frat Party Reputation

Eric Asimov
The New York Times
Wednesday, March 28th, 2007
pgs D1&D6
The Story
The Summary: Beer is growing up, from a frat boy guzzle to sophisticated sip, two Boston brothers are taking a lead in the revolution.

Curious, I traveled to the Boston area last week to meet the Alströms, whose Web site beeradvocate.com has become a lightning rod for the pent-up passions of beer lovers everywhere.

They started it 10 years ago, posting notes on beers they enjoyed or despised. Now it is a full-featured site with news, essays on beer history and styles, forums and voluminous notes on brews from around the world. The Alströms say they have more than 100,000 members. Reversing the usual direction of print to Web, they’ve begun publishing Beer Advocate magazine, a glossy monthly about beer and beer culture.

I've often described myself as a beer girl. "Spirits" have never been my thing, wine is alright, mixed drinks are normally to girly to too "college." There's something about a good beer. It can be -26F outside, but a cold beer is wonderful with a hot meal. I love beer with almost anything cooked on the grill. It's great with steak or chicken or fish or... well, you get the idea.

In fact, both are far more mild-mannered and thoughtful than they might appear online. In person, Respect Beer is neither a demand nor a request but a reasonable approach to a beverage that, given a chance, offers the same sort of pleasure and conviviality as a good glass of wine. But it needs the chance.

“I go to a really high-end restaurant, and they come out with a really nice wine list and a book of cocktails, but the beer list is just something the waitress recites and they’re all awful,” Todd said. Jason adds, “That really disturbs me. But some have caught on and they really get it.”

Beer has been the alcoholic beverage of lower class males, that's just that. With beers like Natty Light for less than $10/case, it almost deserves it. Beer has this cheap aura about it. But not all beers are cheap. In fact, I've come to live by "Life's too short to drink cheap beer." I bought a twelve pack of Miller Lite before Christmas break, I gave 6 to my uncle at Christmas, there are still four in my fridge. I try to give them away when people come over, it doesn't work. I might make beer cheese soup one of these days.

“One of our main goals is trying to raise the image of beer as a whole and bring back the beer culture,” Todd said. “We had a beer culture but Prohibition kind of reset the button.”

The popular image of beer drinkers has always been the industry’s greatest strength and its greatest weakness. The slobbering yahoos at the football game with the bare chests and painted faces; the snarling mud wrestlers battling over “tastes great, less filling,” and the usual array of good ol’ frat house antics are all representations from the mass-market beer industry itself, which has succeeded by aiming low. The cost has been respect, and the result has been a decades-long battle to win it back.

Beer was the first alcohol to come back after prohibition ended, during the Great Depression. Everyone was poor back then. From then on it was the alcohol of the commoner. With that came the slob and the college oafs.

While fraternity behavior is largely associated with beer drinking, serious beer lovers have spent years on the outside of polite society.

Without the pastoral mystique that has been appropriated by wine producers or the suave, sophisticated imagery of the wine drinker, beer lovers have largely retreated to the antistyle precincts associated with such proverbial social outcasts as computer nerds and science fiction fanatics. Bizarre facial hair, unflattering T-shirts and strange headgear are standard equipment among beer geeks.

I know plenty of people who can have a beer or two after work, or with supper. It's here that the normal people and the beer geeks collide. The middle-class man who comes home to a can of Bud Light might be introduced to Sam Adams, and from there become more exploritory with their selections at the liquor store, exchanging quantity for quality.

Everyone can be a bit of a beer freak. It doesn't mean you have to be a complete snob, just be more open. Don't worry about ratings on websites so much, drink what you like. If you like Miller Lite, drink it. I've found that most beer snobs like dark beer. I don't like bitter, dark beer. I'm sorry. My favorite is Leinenkugel's Honey Weiss Bier. It gets horrible ratings, but it's popular here.

Eat, drink, and be merry.

I'm gonna go get a beer.

LIFE Magazine, Its Pages Dwindling, Will Cease Publication

Katherine Q Seelye
The New York Times
Tuesday, March 27th, 2007
pg C2
The Story
The Summary: LIFE magazine is closing, again, this time for good.

Time Inc. announced yesterday that LIFE magazine would cease publication next month, the third time since LIFE’s founding in 1936 that its owner has pulled the plug.

This time, the magazine’s demise looks permanent, largely because LIFE is moving its huge archive of photographs onto the Web, where consumers will be able to download them free.

I wish I would have been around when LIFE was in its heyday. I would have loved to be an editor at LIFE. People don't appreciate great photographs anymore. (or so it seems) The world has become about getting the story, not getting the story well. First it was the clock, now it's the camera... everything has a camera in it. It's not so much about taking a good photograph as it is about having proof. Some sort of evidence that this happened.

Time Inc., part of Time Warner, has been in turmoil with layoffs and an overhaul of its flagship Time magazine as the company shifts its attention to the Internet. It blamed the newspaper business for the demise of Life, which has been carried as a newspaper insert since October 2004.

“While consumers responded enthusiastically to Life, with the decline in the newspaper business and the outlook for advertising growth in the newspaper supplement category, the response was not strong enough to warrant further investment in Life as a weekly newspaper supplement,” the company said in a statement.

This really is the end of an era. Much of American history can be viewed in the photographic archives of LIFE. While the magazine hasn't actually existed for seven years, this final closing of LIFE is like someone dying in the nursing home. You knew it was coming, but you had kind of hoped that it would pull through and be better.

The newspaper supplement racket is hard to be sucessful in, since it isn't soley consumer driven. People can request that their newspaper carry a certain supplement on Sunday, but often newspapers are owned by a larger company that determines that. Our own Bemidji Pioneer is owned by the Fargo Forum. One can only imagine that the parent company makes such decisions.

Although rumors of LIFE’s impending death have persisted over the last two years, Bill Shapiro, LIFE’s managing editor, said that he “started hearing the drumbeat in the last week or so.” Mr. Shapiro had reinvented the magazine to be what he called “an antidote” to grim news headlines, but its reincarnation as a newspaper supplement had come at the wrong time.

“The pall cast over the newspaper industry didn’t make it a sexy sector in which to advertise,” he said.

The magazine began as a weekly and was first closed in 1972. LIFE was revived as a monthly in 1978 and shut down in 2000. In its heyday, it occupied five floors of the Time & Life Building in Midtown Manhattan; today its staff takes up a corner of one floor.

Goodbye LIFE!!! We'll miss you!!!

The Album, a Commodity in Disfavor

Jeff Leeds
The New York Times
Monday, March 26th, 2007
pgs C1&C8
The Story
The Summary: As people buy songs as digital singles rather than in albums the industry is signing artists in the same way.

Last year, digital singles outsold plastic CD’s for the first time. So far this year, sales of digital songs have risen 54 percent, to roughly 189 million units, according to data from Nielsen SoundScan. Digital album sales are rising at a slightly faster pace, but buyers of digital music are purchasing singles over albums by a margin of 19 to 1.

Because of this shift in listener preferences — a trend reflected everywhere from blogs posting select MP3s to reviews of singles in Rolling Stone — record labels are coming to grips with the loss of the album as their main product and chief moneymaker.

The music industry is now embracing the digital single. When Napster was at the height of its popularity the digital single was the music industry's biggest threat. The popularity of mp3 player and the advent of legal digital downloads has made CD almost obsolete.

At the same time, the industry is straining to shore up the album as long as possible, in part by prodding listeners who buy one song to purchase the rest of a collection. Apple, in consultation with several labels, has been planning to offer iTunes users credit for songs they have already purchased if they then choose to buy the associated album in a certain period of time, according to people involved in the negotiations. (Under Apple’s current practice, customers who buy a song and then the related album effectively pay for the song twice).

But some analysts say they doubt that such promotions can reverse the trend.

“I think the album is going to die,” said Aram Sinnreich, managing partner at Radar Research, a media consulting firm based in Los Angeles. “Consumers are listening to play lists,” or mixes of single songs from an assortment of different artists. “Consumers who have had iPods since they were in the single digits are going to increasingly gravitate toward artists who embrace that.”

I love my iPod, and I only have a little one. It's so much easier than a CD player for long trips. I'm not taking my eyes off the road to change a CD (yes I've done it, and yes, I know it's stupid), I'm just blindly grabbing for my iPod while paying perfect attention to my driving. And you can run with them, take them for bike rides, I never liked working ou until I got my iPod. I even have a special playlist for working out. It's full of high-energy songs that help me work harder.

“For some genres and some artists, having an album-centric plan will be a thing of the past,” said Jeff Kempler, chief operating officer of EMI’s Capitol Music Group. While the traditional album provides value to fans, he said, “perpetuating a business model that fixates on a particular packaged product configuration is inimical to what the Internet enables, and it’s inimical to what many consumers have clearly voted for.”

There's really no point in putting the money and energy into a produing a full-length CD when no one will buy it. Maybe K-Fed should have thought of this. Maybe if he would have released a few novelty singles, he would have been a bigger success.

A decade ago, the music industry had all but stopped selling music in individual units. But now, four years after Apple introduced its iTunes service — selling singles for 99 cents apiece and full albums typically for $9.99 — individual songs account for roughly two-thirds of all music sales volume in the United States. And that does not count purchases of music in other, bite-size forms like ring tones, which have sold more than 54 million units so far this year, according to Nielsen data.

One of the biggest reasons for the shift, analysts say, is that consumers — empowered to cherry-pick — are forgoing album purchases after years of paying for complete CD’s with too few songs they like. There are still cases where full albums succeed — the Red Hot Chili Peppers’ double-CD “Stadium Arcadium,” with a weighty 28 tracks, has sold almost two million copies. But the overall pie is shrinking.

The last CD I bought was Jessica Simpson's "A Public Affair" I'm a big "single" person myself. I like to hear the songs I want, with out all the BS. Half the time I skip over half the songs on my iPod.

I also don't normally have the patients to sit through a whole CD by one artist. I like variety, variety is the spice of life. A little bit from column A, a little from B, along with C, D and E as well.

Like the article says, it's a trend. We've gone from the single to the album, and now we're back to the single. In a fifty years, who knows what we'll be listening to. No one could have predicted the iPod in the 80s, the record was just dying out, giving the cassette tape its 15 minutes of fame before the CD took it away. In fact, no other format has had the same run as the record. If digital music lasts as long as records did before falling out of favor, its worth it for the music industry to invest in singles.

Affluent White Families Lead Way in Manhattan Baby Boom

Sam Roberts
The New York Times
Friday, March 23rd, 2007
pg A19
The Story
The Summary: What was once thought to be a place only suitable for people with out children, Manhattan is becoming quite the family place, mostly because of rich white people.

Manhattan, which once epitomized the glamorous and largely childless locale for “Sex and the City,” has begun to look more like the set for a decidedly upscale and even more vanilla version of 1960s suburbia in “The Wonder Years.”

Since 2000, according to census figures released last year, the number of children under age 5 living in Manhattan mushroomed by more than 32 percent. And though their ranks have been growing for several years, a new analysis for The New York Times makes clear for the first time who has been driving that growth: wealthy white families.

We have to face it, it's become fashionable to have children again. Everyone in Hollywood is doing it. A baby was once a killer for a career, now, it's just another person to love and accessorize. A combination of all the modern conveniences and the societal embrace of the working mother has made it more than acceptable for rich people to keep their lifestyles and have children.

Fashion has embraced children as well. A mother can buy a $750 diaper bag that's just as stylish as her purse (and matches quite well). Her son can wear the same pants as her husband (in his sizem, of course).

What those findings imply, demographers say, is not only that the socioeconomic gap between Manhattan and the other boroughs is widening, but also that the population of Manhattan, in some ways, is beginning to look more like the suburbs — or what they used to look like — than like the rest of the city.

This scares me. I grew up in the country, fantasizing about Manhattan. When I finally get there, I don't want it to be over run by toddlers in trendy overalls. I want the city from Sex and the City, I don't want day-care and playdates to out run bars and hot hook-ups.

Compared with those in the rest of the city, the youngest children in Manhattan are more likely to be raised by married couples who are well off, more highly educated, in their 30s and native born.

“This differs from the rest of New York City and the suburbs, where small kids are present among a more diverse array of economic and demographic groups — single-parent families, renters, those in their early 20s with low to middle income,” said William H. Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution.

Educated, career-driven people wait to have children. There's nothing surprising about that. There are people who are content to get married and have children and make that their life. Then there are people who want a good life, and wait to bring children into that life. I don't quite understand the people who choose the first option.

But Fred Siegel, a history professor at Cooper Union, said a growing population of upper-middle-class residents was an asset. “How different it makes Manhattan from other cities,” Mr. Siegel said.

Kenneth T. Jackson, a Columbia University historian, said: “Imagine the reverse — that nobody with money wants to live here, and then you have Detroit. I don’t see how anybody benefits in that circumstance.”

Professor Siegel said that until now, at least the cost of private school and the demand for space prompted many parents to move when their children got older.

Sub-urban life was supposed to be better, wasn't it?

Urban children grew up to be in gangs or druggies or something, didn't they?

Aparently, urban children in the largest city in the country go to private schools and drink $5 coffees with their parents on their way to school.

Mr. Osborne, 44, an expert on the Russian economy for a firm of financial advisors said: “If both parents are working, it actually becomes logistically difficult to live in the suburbs. If you’re 90 minutes away, we just don’t like that feeling.

“Even if we were disposed to — for the usual space, quality of life reasons — to go to suburbs, we would have to consider the practical difficulty.”

This is a wonderful example of how people are giving up less to have children, and said children are benefiting. Their parents have a 20 minute walk to work in the morning, rather than an hour and a half train ride. They get to experience the city. I love "the city" any city... growing up on a farm in the middle of no where, nothing was in walking distance, we had to drive everywhere. There was nothing to see except for fields and other houses for miles.

I'm not saying one is better or worse, but I have a feeling I missed out on something with that lifestyle, that I'm never going to have what I could have if I lived somewhere bigger.

While the number of children of all races between ages 5 to 9 in Manhattan has declined slightly since 2000, the number of white children of that age grew by nearly 40 percent.

David Bernard, 42, and Joanna Bers, 38, run a management and marketing consulting business and live with their 17-month-old twin sons on Fifth Avenue. Both grew up in suburbia.

“I like the idea of raising them in the city because they’re prepared for pretty much anything,” Mr. Bernard said. “The city challenges you; it prepares you for life.”

This whole article reminds me of an particular episode of Sex and the City that, among other things, sums up a lot of my feelings about love, marriage, and children. It's titled "A Woman's Right to Shoes." Carrie attends a baby shower, and is forced to remove her $485 brand-new Manolo Blahniks because her friends don't want stuff tracked into their apartment. When she returns to her shoes, she finds them missing. Her friend sends her home with a pair of ratty tennis shoes, saying she's sure Carrie's shoes will turn up. When Carrie returns the forementioned tennis shoes and confronts her friend about the shoes, the friend offers to pay for them, but refuses to give Carrie the full amount, saying that she "has a real life" and shouldn't have to pay for Carrie's "extravegant lifestyle."

Apparently, being single and have fabulous shoes (among other things) isn't a real life. This story means that there are less Carries, and more mommies. I'd rather be a Carrie.

The Year Without Toilet Paper

Penelope Green
The New York Times
Thursday, March 22nd, 2007
pgsD1&D7
The Story
The Summary: A family in Manhattan is trying to make "No Impact" by only buying food, fresh produce and the like, and making no waste.

Welcome to Walden Pond, Fifth Avenue style. Isabella’s parents, Colin Beavan, 43, a writer of historical nonfiction, and Michelle Conlin, 39, a senior writer at Business Week, are four months into a yearlong lifestyle experiment they call No Impact. Its rules are evolving, as Mr. Beavan will tell you, but to date include eating only food (organically) grown within a 250-mile radius of Manhattan; (mostly) no shopping for anything except said food; producing no trash (except compost, see above); using no paper; and, most intriguingly, using no carbon-fueled transportation.

Mr. Beavan, who has written one book about the origins of forensic detective work and another about D-Day, said he was ready for a new subject, hoping to tread more lightly on the planet and maybe be an inspiration to others in the process.

Also, he needed a new book project and the No Impact year was the only one of four possibilities his agent thought would sell. This being 2007, Mr. Beavan is showcasing No Impact in a blog (noimpactman.com) laced with links and testimonials from New Environmentalist authorities like treehugger.com. His agent did indeed secure him a book deal, with Farrar, Straus & Giroux, and he and his family are being tailed by Laura Gabbert, a documentary filmmaker and Ms. Conlin’s best friend.

I couldn't imagine it! No garbage, no waste (or as little as possible) I know I couldn't do it. I try not to create too much garbage, and we recycle fairly well at my house, but nothing as drastic as this. I couldn't imagine a compost heap inside an apartment. Compost is an outside thing... it's for gardens. I don't think I'd like the smell of rotting food in my house constantly. It's bad enough when the trash needs to be taken out.

Before No Impact — this is a phrase that comes up a lot — Ms. Conlin and Mr. Beavan were living a near parody of urban professional life. Ms. Conlin, who bought this apartment in 1999 when she was still single, used the stove so infrequently (as in, never, she said) that Con Edison called to find out if it was broken. (Mr. Beavan, now the family cook, questioned whether she had yet to turn it on. Ms. Conlin ignored him.)

In this household, food was something you dialed for.

“We would wake up and call ‘the man,’ ” Ms. Conlin said, “and he would bring us two newspapers and coffee in Styrofoam cups. Sometimes we’d call two men, and get bagels from Bagel Bob’s. For lunch I’d find myself at Wendy’s, with a Dunkin’ Donuts chaser. Isabella would point to guys on bikes and cry: ‘The man! The man!’ ”

As drastic as the experiement is, I think everyone could take a few pointers from this family. They basically went from one extreme to the other. There's a happy medium that I think is attainable for everyone. Doing things like switching regular light bulbs for flourescent ones, and cooking more and eating out less, and using carbon-based travel as little as possible(I try to get groceries and run other errands after work, so I'm not making two trips across town) are things that every household can do.

The television, a flat-screen, high-definition 46-incher, is long gone. Saturday night charades are in. Mr. Beavan likes to talk about social glue — community building — as a natural byproduct of No Impact. The (fluorescent) lights are still on, and so is the stove. Mr. Beavan, who has a Ph.D. in applied physics, has not yet figured out a carbon-fuel-free power alternative that will run up here on the ninth floor, though he does subscribe to Con Ed’s Green Power program, for which he pays a premium, and which adds a measure of wind and hydro power to the old coal and nuclear grid.

The dishwasher is off, along with the microwave, the coffee machine and the food processor. Planes, trains, automobiles and that elevator are out, but the family is still doing laundry in the washing machines in the basement of the building. (Consider the ramifications of no-elevator living in a vertical city: one day recently, when Frankie the dog had digestive problems, Mr. Beavan, who takes Isabella to day care — six flights of stairs in a building six blocks away — and writes at the Writers Room on Astor Place — 12 flights of stairs, also six blocks away — estimated that by nightfall he had climbed 115 flights of stairs.) And they have not had the heart to take away the vacuum from their cleaning lady, who comes weekly (this week they took away her paper towels).

Think about how much healthier these people will be after this year. No junk food, their legs will be ripped from taking all the stairs, their arms all buff from carrying baskets of clothes up and down said stairs. A cleaner lifestyle is definately a healthier one. Of course, reader's of the author's blog have criticized the Colins-Beavan's for that:

“What’s with the public display of nonimpactness?” a reader named Bruce wrote on March 7. “Getting people to read a blog on their 50-watt L.C.D. monitors and buy a bound volume of postconsumer paper and show the filmed doc in a heated/air-conditioned movie theater, etc., sounds like nonimpact man is leading to a lot of impact. And how are you going to measure your nonimpact, except in rather self-centered ways like weight loss and better sex? (Wait, maybe I should stop there.)”

I think that awareness is the first step. And, yes, it takes some waste to get the word out there. Overall, I think that these things can only do good. Things have been getting better. Most paper products contain a percentage of recycled paper, many are becoming high content to 100% recycled. More and more people are using flourescent bulbs, one of my roommates and I got our other two roommates to start recycling more. (If I could only get them to shut off the lights when the leave.) People are becoming more aware. It's the day to day stuff that makes the most impact , anyway. It's not everyday most people see a movie or buy a book.

For Orange Zest, Substitute Kool-Aid

Celia Barbour
The New York Times
Wednesday, March 21st, 2007
pgs D1&D2
The Story
The Summary:Recipes on the web have everyone thinking their food critics. Is this a good thing?

Cooks have always adjusted recipes, for all kinds of reasons. Perhaps they didn’t have certain ingredients on hand, so they substituted others. Perhaps they knew that a half teaspoon of cayenne would make a dish too hot for their taste, or that their families preferred chicken to fish. Perhaps they had to observe dietary restrictions. Or perhaps they simply had what they thought was a better idea.

Until recently, recipe tweaks and adaptations took place in the privacy of the kitchen. Not anymore. Cooking Web sites including epicurious.com, recipezaar.com and allrecipes.com (which had unique visitors in February 2007 of roughly 2.4 million, 2.5 million, and 5 million respectively, according to Nielsen/NetRatings) reveal that the urge for cooks to make a dish their own is widespread and passionate.

Has anyone ever made a recipe exactly as it states? Who hasn't made a tweak here and there? Isn't that what cooking's all about? Making it your own? I can't remember a time I haven't made some substitution, it might be something simple (and thrifty) like substiting fresh for dried or canned, or something more complicated, like steaks for chicken.

“Gourmet has 8 test kitchens and 11 food editors,” said Zanne Stewart, media food editor at Gourmet magazine. “Even if we think a recipe is right the first time, we cross-test it. It’s likely to go through a bare minimum of four iterations, really refining it, before it’s written up and passed along to the cross-tester. Then everyone gathers around for the discussions. Is it right? Could it be better?”

So what does Ms. Stewart think of the endless tinkering that cooks boast about on the Web? “It makes me a bit sad, considering how much work went into the original,” she said.

Again... no one makes a recipe exactly as it says. And when a recipe goes from very sophisticated tastes like the chefs and staff at Gourmet to the simpler tastes of the general public, of course they're going to want to make changes. I'm still a little weary of the idea of meat and fruit mingling together in the same dish. I'm getting better, but I like meat and veggies for a meal, and fruit for dessert or snacks. I did grow up on a farm in the midwest, the fanciest thing my mom does with fruit is put apples in her stuffing (which is delicious).

Of course, home cooks were taking charge of recipes long before the arrival of the Internet. And you didn’t need to go online to get feedback from readers.

Susan Spungen, a cookbook author and former food editor at Martha Stewart Living, said magazine readers would call her hoping she could predict how a recipe would turn out if they made substitutions.

“They want me to tell them what will happen if they replace all the butter in the cake with oil,” she said. “I always say, it might be fine, but I haven’t tested it that way, so I can’t be sure.”

Substitutions gone wrong: oh I can relate! I've substituted chicken breast tenders for drummies... they don't take as long to cook, so I ended up burning a lot of little peices of chicken. (but substituting whole breasts worked great!) I've found: the more expensive the recipe, the closer one should follow the recipe. Other times, substitutions work great (I substitute 1/2lb margrine and 1/2lb crisco with a whole pound of butter in my chocolate chip cookies, it only makes them better.)

Television has also had a role to play in bolstering the home cook’s sense of adventure.

“You see Emeril, the most genial guy in the world, making a U-turn in the middle of a recipe, and people think they should cook like that, too,” said Ms. Stewart of Gourmet. “They forget that he’s a highly trained chef.”

It is not uncommon for Web site users to describe such radical departures from an original recipe that the result is a completely different dish.

This woman from Gourmet Magazine is kind of a snob. Just becasue we didn't go to culinary school doesn't mean we're all bad cooks. I bet my grandmother could teach Emeril a thing or two... she never went to culinary school, but she does have 60 years or so of kitchen experience. My mother, on the other hand, has had horrible results when she has messed with recipes. I have a really good lasanga recipe that uses chicken and alfredo sauce (it's divine). She tried to do the same thing, but didn't drain the juice from the chicken mixture, and then added extra sauce. The result was really chunky baked alfredo soup. The taste was okay, and I got to say "I told you so," so I was kinda happy.

As tantalizing as new cuisines and exotic ingredients may be for many cooks, the lure of the familiar is still strong. Arugula, fresh halibut and Parmigiano-Reggiano have been nudging aside iceberg lettuce, frozen fish sticks and Velveeta in supermarkets throughout the country. But many cooks still want to create food that tastes familiar, even if they’re using ingredients that aren’t. So these new ingredients often turn up in recipes alongside garlic powder, Lawry’s Seasoned Salt or Wishbone salad dressing.

It's fun to experiment with new ingredients in old recipes. I've come to prefer the taste of fresh baby bella mushrooms over canned, and I use finely chopped fresh garlic in my spread for my garlic bread. A co-worker introduced me to the mix of a can each of black beans, whole kernal corn and diced tomatoes with chili peppers... I add it to everything... rice, any mexican style hotdish I might make... it's yummy, and it's good on it's own as a dip, as well.

Barbara Kafka, writer and editor of 13 cookbooks, including “Vegetable Love” (Artisan, 2005), applauds the improvisational impulse. “People should make recipes their own,” she said. “Only by doing that will they use them and enjoy them fully.”

“On the other hand,” she added, “some people think that it doesn’t make a difference” which directions you follow and which you ignore. “Laundry starch will not substitute well for cornstarch,” she said dryly.

Now, wait — does she actually know someone who did that?

Indeed she does: “My mother.”

And you can't substitute white vinegar for balsamic vinegar... white vinegar shouldn't even be consumed... it's for cleaning (or maybe canning) purposes only!

Tortillas Like Mamá’s, but This Is No Bodega

Kim Severson
The New York Times
Wednesday, March 21st, 2007
pg D1&D5
The Story
The Summary: A chain of grocery stores in Los Angeles, Los Vegas, and Colorado has become more specialized, catering to several Hispanic cultures.

In the produce section, a dollar will buy you three avocados. The tilapia are sold live. Stacks of fresh tortillas, made from 600 pounds of corn ground in the store daily, are always warm. And maybe, if the local political winds shift, shoppers might one day be able to buy a chicken that was slaughtered and plucked on site a few hours earlier.

The store’s slogan pretty much says it all: “Si es de allá lo tenemos aquí.” Translated, “If it’s from there, we have it here.”

I love the idea of specialty grocery stores, especially with the advent of Walmart Supercenters. Not only can I get the same hamburgers everywhere (McDonald's), the same pasta everywhere (Olive Garden), but there isn' much local flavor in the grocery stores, as well. Even with chain stores, they had a regional feel. Now, every Walmart is the same, and carries just about the same thing. I wish we could get something like this for Scandinavian, Polish and German food.

Rancho Liborio is not the only grocery chain hungry for more affluent shoppers whose families have roots in Mexico, the Caribbean and Central and South America. The 65-store Minyard chain in the Dallas-Fort Worth area is pumping money into its Latino-theme Carnival stores. In Northern California the Super Mercado México chain, based in San Jose, has started buying old Albertsons stores. Publix, one of the biggest grocery chains in the country, is experimenting with Publix Sabor stores in Florida.

Everyone is going to Hispanic themed grocery stores, as they will be the largest "minority" in the United States in a few years.

For decades small markets and bodega-style stores in cities like Los Angeles, Dallas and New York catered to new immigrants looking for lower prices. But larger, more traditional chains are now trying to capture shoppers in those cities, as well as in places like Denver, Atlanta and Minneapolis.

They are finding that it takes more than a few Mexican products mixed in among the ranch dressing and Fruity Pebbles to attract them.

“If you add jalapeños to the produce department, it doesn’t become a Hispanic store,” said Jack Rosenthal, the food service supervisor for the two Rancho Liborio stores in the Denver area. Mr. Rosenthal, who was born in Peru, speaks English, Spanish and German fluently.

A lot goes into specializing a supermarket. I've never gotten the vibe that the "Hispanic" section is actually meant for Hispanics. I kinda feel like it's for white people who want to experiment with Mexican food. I've never gotten a good vibe from the Mary and Jesus candles. They're just kinda creepy.

Attracting Hispanic shoppers is a delicate business, said Juan Guillermo Tornoe, who runs Hispanic Trending, a market research company in Austin, Tex. Buyers for big chains will often go to Hispanic food trade shows, order everything in sight and then wonder why their efforts to market to Latinos fail.

“Well, what are you buying?” he said. “Are you buying hot sauce and expecting to sell it to Cubans?”

"Hispanic" is not a one-item category. It's like saying European or Asian (except it's cross-continental). There are several different cultures wrapped up in that one word. It's not the Tex-Mex food most Americans are used to.

In the meat section at Rancho Liborio, nary a T-bone is to be found. Most people from Mexico and elsewhere in Latin America cook with thinner cuts, so the 10 varieties of beef are stacked like crepes, separated by pink paper. The chicken section is stocked with both the smaller inexpensive yellow-skinned chickens that Jack Rosenthal said are popular with recent immigrants and the plumper white-skinned birds more popular with people who were born here.

When the chain started its expansion into Colorado, the owners had hoped a polleria would be the star attraction. Live chickens would be shipped in every morning, then slaughtered and processed by noon. But the polleria, which has met the federal Agriculture Department’s guidelines, sits unused at the Commerce City store, the first in the chain to open in Colorado, because the idea of chicken slaughtering didn’t go over with some city officials and residents.

YUM!!!! Fresh chicken. That sounds pretty damn cool. I don't see what the problem is. You do the same thing to lobsters. Couldn't they build a smaller building on the grounds, like a butcher shop, and still have fresh chicken daily?

And in fact the Liborio markets are attracting white, black and Hispanic customers. When it comes down to it, a grocery shopper is a grocery shopper.

“It’s not so much the cultural stuff,” said Marie Lopez, a dental hygienist in the Denver area. “Everything here is fresh, and the prices are good. That’s really what I’m looking for.”

I'd totally shop there. I love to try new and authentic recipes, and it's hard to find some of the ingredients at a Walmart, or even a real grocery store, especially in the north. (Sorry Lueken's, your baking department kinda sucks... not your bakery, your baking goods aisle.) It would be really fun to have a specialized market for a cultural sector.

Tracing the Cigarette’s Path From Sexy to Deadly

Howard Markel, MD
The New York Times
Tuesday, March 20th, 2007
pg D5
The Story
The Summary:Cigarrette weren't always smoking cancer sticks, once they were something even doctors did to be cool.

Allan M. Brandt, a medical historian at Harvard, insists that recognizing the dangers of cigarettes resulted from an intellectual process that took the better part of the 20th century. He describes this fascinating story in his new book, “The Cigarette Century: The Rise, Fall and Deadly Persistence of the Product that Defined America” (Basic Books).

In contrast to the symbol of death and disease it is today, from the early 1900s to the 1960s the cigarette was a cultural icon of sophistication, glamour and sexual allure — a highly prized commodity for one out of two Americans.

Back in the day where cigarette's weren't bad for you, when mom stayed home and baked apple pies, dad had a good job (but didn't go to college) and Jr. was a football star. There was so much we didn't know back then, and so much we wish we still didn't know. It's an interesting phenomena how something so desired in the age of the nuclear family has become so horrible in our "age of sin." It's hard to imagine the days when schools had smoking rooms, and no one had a "smoke free class of" shirt. (My class of 2003 was indefinately NOT smoke free)

The years after World War II, however, were a time of major breakthroughs in epidemiological thought. In 1947, Richard Doll and A. Bradford Hill of the British Medical Research Council created a sophisticated statistical technique to document the association between rising rates of lung cancer and increasing numbers of smokers.

The prominent surgeon Evarts A. Graham and a medical student, Ernst L. Wynder, published a landmark article in 1950 comparing the incidence of lung cancer in their nonsmoking and smoking patients at Barnes Hospital in St. Louis. They concluded that “cigarette smoking, over a long period, is at least one important factor in the striking increase in bronchogenic cancer.”

It started in the 1940s, but we didn't have no-smoking laws until just recently. (It really is nice to go into a bar and NOT have smoke everywhere. I like not smelling too bad when I come home at night.) People still didn't know the dangers of second-hand smoke, and no one had made the nicotine connection yet.

In the 1980s, scientists established the revolutionary concept that nicotine is extremely addictive. The tobacco companies publicly rejected such claims, even as they took advantage of cigarettes’ addictive potential by routinely spiking them with extra nicotine to make it harder to quit smoking. And their marketing memorandums document advertising campaigns aimed at youngsters to hook whole new generations of smokers.

This is when the "smoke-free" class and other anti-smoking campaigns began. It fit right in with Nancy Regan's "war on drugs." (This is your brain, this is your brain on drugs) People began to understand the dangers of smoking, finally.

Apparently, the judge, Gladys Kessler of Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, agreed. Last August, she concluded that the tobacco industry had engaged in a 40-year conspiracy to defraud smokers about tobacco’s health dangers. Her opinion cited Dr. Brandt’s testimony more than 100 times.

Dr. Brandt acknowledges that there are pitfalls in combining scholarship with battle against the deadly pandemic of cigarette smoking, but he says he sees little alternative.

“If one of us occasionally crosses the boundary between analysis and advocacy, so be it,” he said. “The stakes are high, and there is much work to be done.”

According to the American Lung Association, 20.9% of adults were current smokers in 2004. According to the article, 50% of Americans smoked back in the day. That's a start. Smoking has become something that people who live in trailer parks do, not high-class individuals, people with money don't smoke anymore. It'll come around, and no one will smoke, eventually.