What ESPN Doesn't Want You To Know (For Some Reason)

So if you head over to ESPN.com right now, the website of the self-proclaimed Worldwide Leader in Sports, there's a story you won't find coverage of.

Sure, there's plenty about Hideki Matsui's walk-off home run last night, a blown call in the A's game, the Cotto/Pacquiao fight coming in November, and the latest rumors about where Roy Halladay will wind up.

But there's something missing.

Here's what I saw when I looked at Deadspin this morning.

Oh, no.

No.

Say it ain't so, Ben.

(That's me doing my Jim Nance impersonation, a man who, along with Bob Costas and the rest of the dinosaurs, speaks about Roethlisberger--a mediocre quarterback who just happens to be lucky--like they're golf buddies instead of, you know, strangers.)

Now, it looks like NBC Sports is who broke the story.

WATE in Pittsburgh saw fit to cover it, along with The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

Along with Yahoo Sports.

And Sports Illustrated, and by default, CNN.

But for some reason, the Worldwide Leader just didn't see fit to put it above the fold, so to speak.

Now, unless this turns out to be a hoax or erroneous, in which case I'll apologize, not covering the news of sexual assault charges being brought against the star QB of the defending Super Bowl champions isn't just a case of dropping the ball, it's damn-near criminal. And let's see what other athlete-friendly sportswriters like Peter King have to say about this. We'll see if the the media goes after Big Ben (oh, the places that nickname can go now) with the same vigor that they went after Kobe.

But for right now, shame on you, ESPN.


More soon.

JS

Degenerates Hell-Bent On Tripping Up God

Before I left for vacation last week, I had an interesting conversation with a couple of friends during lunch one day that revolved around this notion--if you could ask God (god) one question, what would you ask?

We can up with some vanilla questions (Is there really a heaven?), some I-forgot-you-are-God,-not-a-genie questions (What's tomorrow's winning lottery numbers?), and some tougher questions (What is the one thing I can do that will guarantee me not getting a spot on the eternity train?).

As we talked, we kept trying to out-think each other. In some ways, I look back now, and I think we were trying to out-think God. We wanted to get Him (I'm not going to debate God's gender here--I'm using the masculine for argument's sake. I still proudly wear my homemade God Is A Woman t-shirt, although it's been washed so many times it now reads od s oman) to answer a question He wouldn't want to answer, to reveal some truth that was otherwise unknown. My first response was that I'd ask who killed JFK, so that I would then be able to profit immediately off the information. I thought this was pretty good until one of us said, "Yeah, because everybody would believe you--the guy claiming to know who killed JFK, thanks to some timely information from God."

And we laughed, and kept pushing ourselves (and God) and eventually the conversation ended almost as quietly as it started.

I'm not sure why I'm thinking about that conversation today. Maybe its because vacation is just about over and work looms in the morning. Or maybe its because sometimes its important to voice our concerns regarding the unknown. Maybe because its what validates our existence as humans--continuing to push what we know together with what we think, so that we can then make sense out of the results.

Or maybe we're just a bunch of degenerates hell-bent on tripping up God.

Either works for me.

I'll tell you one thing you can believe in though--The Sunday Review.

*

-via The New York Times: This became front page news early this morning (maybe even late last night?) and it seems like it will be another one of those stories that people don't fully understand, but still manages to stick around for a while. Looks like Dick "Make Sure The Safety's On" Cheney ordered the C.I.A. to withhold information from Congress regarding a secret counterterrorism program. Nobody is yet to disclose what the program involved, but this surely will get some fists pounding and fingers pointing. I'll withhold judgement until I hear what was actually involved, but I can say for sure that I'm not usually a fan of those in charge hiding things from our Congressional Representatives, and by extension, us. And I'll use a bit of Republican/Bushian logic--if you're not doing something wrong, why would you have to hide it?

-via The New York Times: This is a really great piece by Michael Powell about the film critic Andrew Sarris, who is, as the title suggests, "a survivor of film criticism's heroic age." I love the lead sentence so much--it's so New York Times-y:

The aging duelist sits in his Upper East Side apartment and contemplates all that is past, the polemics and late-night arguments and denunciations in one magazine or another.

-via The New York Times: Found in the NY Region section, this is a beautiful collection of real-life stories that is being updated weekly. Here's the description from the Times itself:

New York is a city of characters. On the subway and in its streets, from the intensity of Midtown to the intimacy of neighborhood blocks, is a 305-square mile parade of people with something to say. This is a collection of a few of their passions and problems, relationships and routines, vocations and obsessions.

-via The New York Times: Just to show you I'm not a hard-hearted man, and it's not all dollars and cents (that was a Godfather reference, sorry) I'm including this piece by Jack Curry about the long and winding (and non-rotating and fluttering) career of Red Sox knuckleballer Tim Wakefield. Wakefield, who despite having a more than stellar career, was finally selected to his first All-Star game, at the ripe old age of 42.

-via The New York Times: This is from the Sunday Magazine and there's nothing too special about it--it's a piece by Susannah Jacob for the Lives column and its called Pancake Chronicles. Anybody who has worked a shitty job should read it. I doubt you'll regret it.

-via Gizmodo: I don't shop at Best Buy much, but when I do, I'm always left wondering if maybe they need to focus a bit more on employee training. And by if, I mean, for the love of Christ, please. Apparently the fine folks at the best gadget blog on the net agree. The Seven Types Of Employees You Meet At Best Buy is funny, sad, and most of all, true.

-via Gizmodo: Best Buy CMO Barry Judge responds with a blog post entitled: The One Type Of Gizmodo Blogger. Well played, Barry.

-via ESPN's Page 2: I'm sure you've heard about Dunkgate--Lebron James getting dunked on by Xavier's Jordan Crawford in a Nike basketball camp training game, and the subsequent confiscation of the video evidence by Nike officials. Well, here's Jemele Hill's take on the situation. I think people might be getting on Lebron a bit too much about this, but maybe I'm just biased. It is worth noting that Nike has pointed out that not allowing video to be shot at their summer basketball camps has been a rule for the past twenty years.

-via The Boy Genius Report: This is Part I of BGR's review of the first smartphone that isn't an iPhone to excite me in a while--the BlackBerry 9630, or Tour. If for some reason, the iPhone was outlawed tomorrow and I had to keep my AT&T contract, I'd go with the BlackBerry Bold. But if the iPhone was outlawed tomorrow, I'd assume AT&T would go belly-up in a month and then I wouldn't have to honor my contract, so I would then go back to Verizon and get the Tour.

-via The Boy Genius Report: This is Part II (newer) of BGR's review of the Tour.

-via The Unofficial Apple Weblog: iPhone Wi-Fi issues have been popping up all over the place since the release of OS 3.0 (I'm included in that group) and it was only a matter of time before Apple responded. I'm in the process of following their four steps to remedy the situation, but I'm also in the group that hopes this will be addressed in the coming OS 3.1 update.

-via The New York Daily News: I'm not a Bill Madden fan by any stretch of the imagination, but his piece today on why injuries should not be used as an excuse for the sad state the Mets currently find themselves in is a doozy. The only positive thus far in the Mets season is the fact that everyone else in their division--defending World Series champs included--sucks almost as much as they do, meaning they still have a shot to lose in the ALDS.

-via Lifehacker: Tired of giving your money to blood-sucking corporate entities in exchange for a shitty cup of coffee? No, I'm not either, at least not completely, but here's ten tips that will help you to find some kind of independence. DIY Life--it's the new reality TV.

-via Michael Ruhlman: One thing I am tired of is food that requires a Chemistry degree in order to read the ingredients. The best part of Ruhlman's Cherry Pie recipe? The six-item ingredient list: flour, butter, water, cherries, sugar, and corn starch. Love it.

And speaking of Ruhlman, he always has awesome photography highlighted on his blog, usually done by his wife, Donna. Here's a shot of his desk that I got a chuckle out of:



Important note--Donna didn't take that one. Ruhlman took it himself. With his iPhone.

*

In the biggest news of all, I picked up a sweet new pair of kicks, and for a song. Here's the pics:





Those are Nike AJF 3's in flint gray/varsity maize/silver. It's a crazy Jordan/Air Force 1 fusion that were rolled out about a year ago. Craziest part? They retail for $115 on pickyourshoes.com.

How much did I pay?

$60.

Got to love those deals.

*

That's all for now. My vacation may be just about finished, but I've still got a Sunday to enjoy. Hope you do the same as well.


More soon.

JS

A Prescribed Fire

So, I'm on vacation this week, technically since this past Thursday, which in some way is the explanation behind my sporadic posting. It's been encouraging to get a couple of notes from readers (and friends), expressing interest in my take on certain situations and even in my Sunday Review (sorry, Alicia). What's worse is that I've had a couple of things lined up to pontificate on, and still didn't post, and so maybe here's my chance to rectify things.

I've never wanted to make this blog about myself. I'd much rather have it go through my experiences, rather than be defined by them. But I've been thinking a lot lately, for a variety of reasons, and I've been trying to slow it down, settle back, enjoy my time, and live life to the fullest, all while racing a race that had no clear start, has no clear finish, and for the moment, I can't see anyone racing beside me, and it's terrifying, because I've no idea if that means I'm too far behind, or that much in the lead.

I'm currently working my way through Blake Bailey's biography of John Cheever, and it's been quite the experience. All those thinking about leading a life of letters should be forced to swallow this book straight, no chaser at some point. I'm terrified and excited for my future, and I've got that split of nausea and adrenaline going, and I'm questioning just about every decision I've made, writing-wise, thus far.

Sometimes, when a forest catches fire, rather than work to extinguish the flames as quickly as possible, the fire is allowed to burn in a controlled state. Sometimes, these fires are even planned--they are referred to as "prescribed fires." The process of burning everything down to the roots is healthy for the ecosystem. Changes occur, all with its own value.

So consider me currently undergoing a prescribed fire, teeter-tottering on the edge of favorable wind patterns.

And don't be too shocked to find this in a story at some point.

Nothing is sacred.

*

So the reason this sob-fest is adorned with a poster of Public Enemies is because Danielle and I saw it yesterday. On a numbered scale, I'd give it a 7. On a letter scale, I'd give it a B-. On a See It/Don't See It/Rent It/Netflix It scale, I'd give it a Rent It.

The acting is first-class, the dialogue is relatively cringe-free (and I'm being cynical here), and the action is well done--well shot and well executed. The shoot-outs in Public Enemies were presented in a way I'd never seen before. That being said, I had two major issues:

-First, the movie was shot with digital cameras. And while I understand that Michael Mann has done this before, I could not get past the "something's different/it's super clear!/but it seems wrong" feeling for most of the film. Public Enemies should have been sepia-toned (think Saving Private Ryan's green feel or Mystic River's blue feel). It should have been gritty (there are lots of shots of flat, dusty roads and fields, and men wearing three piece suits in the middle of summer, yet I never felt dirty or sweaty). Instead, it felt like a 48 Hours crime reenactment--every motion and glance was crystalline. And the fact that mostly hand-held cameras were used only highlighted the strange digital element, as nothing ever seemed to be out of focus (intentional or not).

-Second, and even bigger than the digital cameras, is the fact that Public Enemies is--flat--for lack of a better word. There are no underlying themes, goals, or victories. What you see is what you get. And if that sounds appealing to you, here's the kicker--this is exactly why Public Enemies will fall through the cracks.

I recognize that not everybody goes to the movies looking for "a bigger meaning." Fine. Trouble is, Public Enemies is far too slow for a shoot 'em up/chase movie, and doesn't dig deep enough to be something more. We get a bunch of big names--John Dillinger, Melvin Purvis, Baby-Face Nelson, Pretty Boy Floyd, Edgar J. Hoover, Frank Nitti--but nothing more.

No rationales, no explanations.

And we know they exist. There's a reason Dillinger became a folk hero. There's a reason this period was punctuated by celebrity thieves. There's a reason the FBI entered the modern era then, and there were reasons behind the actions of those involved.

By doing some reading, I found out those reasons.

Just don't go see Public Enemies expecting to find them.

*

This has been an interesting summer, movie-wise, already:

-First, we had Lou Lumenick's review-embargo breaking (negative) review of Public Enemies, which then became a retraction, which then became a story. I wonder if such a big deal would have been made had it been a positive review?

-Then (or maybe before) came Transformers: The Revenge of the Fallen. If you smelled something funny the past few weeks, it was most likely the shit storm that was rained down upon T:RotF by critics, including this scathing piece by Roger Ebert, which begins:

"Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" is a horrible experience of unbearable length, briefly punctuated by three or four amusing moments.

-Then (or maybe before all of this. God, my sequencing is off today), is the turmoil that the G.I. Joe movie has been going through. The director was fired, or maybe just PNG'd from the set, or maybe had creative control stripped, or whatever. Regardless, none of the three can be all that good. Here's one of the many articles available chronicling the sad tale.

-Last, but certainly not least, came the news that the nominee pool for the Best Picture Oscar would be increased from five to ten. Surely this was done for monetary reasons (Now out on Blu-ray and DVD, the Academy-Award nominee...), but I'm yet to decide how I feel about this. Only time will tell.

*

That's all for now. I've got a vacation to enjoy. Be good, everyone.

More soon.

JS