By Al Schumann on Thursday January 12, 2012 07:33 PM
Via zunguzungu.
Should the NY Times engage in journalism? Seriously. The ombudsdude wants to know.
I think this falls into the category of questions that can only be answered physically.
Comments (8)
It wold only make managing the society more difficult. Better to aim towards a seamless coherence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Futurological_Congress
Posted by Boink | January 12, 2012 8:48 PM
Posted on January 12, 2012 20:48
woldwudhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-language_spelling_reform
Posted by Boink | January 12, 2012 9:57 PM
Posted on January 12, 2012 21:57
No great spine possessed by the WaPo's ombudsdude either:
Posted by sk | January 12, 2012 10:32 PM
Posted on January 12, 2012 22:32
I think the (useless, self-indulgent and -aggrandizing) Public Editor's column should simply be called Navel Gazing.
Posted by Chomskyzinn | January 13, 2012 5:14 PM
Posted on January 13, 2012 17:14
Should the New York Times engage in journalism?
Hell if I know. Should Rod Stewart have gone disco?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRdml1iGwns
Posted by Mike Flugennock | January 14, 2012 12:43 AM
Posted on January 14, 2012 00:43
Should the New York Times be a... "truth vigilante"?
F'crissakes, I thought they were a goddamn' newspaper.
Oh, well... sigh... Iiiif ya' think I'm sexy, aaaand ya' want my body...
Posted by Mike Flugennock | January 14, 2012 12:48 AM
Posted on January 14, 2012 00:48
Mike, if you're gonna post a disco tube then plz at least post one with a sexy lady playing the bass in it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvIydHPhb98
Posted by Drunk Pundit | January 14, 2012 2:44 AM
Posted on January 14, 2012 02:44
The New York Times... It's like thunder, lightning. The way it loves us is frightening. You better knock... on wood.
Posted by antonello | January 14, 2012 2:08 PM
Posted on January 14, 2012 14:08