Bob_Grip's Blog

Senator Ted Kennedy has done it.

So has Mitt Romney, Chris Matthews, Wolf Blitzer and Dan Rather.

The New York Times has even written a story about it.  Click here to read it.

Tonight, I joined the list of those who accidentally said Osama instead of Obama. (Just Google "anchor confuses obama osama" and you'll see what I mean.)

It was not intentional of course, and it came when I was trying to read a story from my back-up copy instead of the teleprompter.  As I tried in vain to maintain eye contact with the camera, I made the mistake.

Believe me, I do my best not to make mistakes, but occasionally they happen.

Do I regret it happened?  Yes.

As I have been told, you can't unring that bell.  

Twenty years ago, WALA sent me and a team of newspeople to cover both the Democratic and Republican National Conventions.  It was part of a group effort by the company that owned us at the time, Knight Ridder.  I anchored our coverage, live by satellite (no mean feat back then), introducing stories put together by our reporters, photographers and producers.  I also selected sound bites from the various featured speakers to be played during our late newscast, and the following morning during a wrap-up I taped and fed back to Mobile.

The Democrats met in Atlanta at the Omni as they prepared to nominate Michael Dukakis, the Massachusetts Governor.  It was my first time covering a national political convention and it was an exciting time for me.  Our group (all the Knight Ridder television stations) had a limited number of "floor passes", which as the name suggests, would give you access to the convention floor and the delegates.  We had to share them in 15 minutes increments, which barely gave you enough time to squeeze past the hoard of delegates and reporters, say hello to someone, and fight your way back.  The rest of the time, we had seats in our news perch, high above and to the right of the podium.

Say you don't remember the Democratic convention of 1988?  Sure you do, or at least have heard of what happened there.  

For example, I remember the late Ann Richards, then state treasurer and soon to be Governor of Texas, using her most pronounced Texas drawl to refer to George Herbert Walker Bush as the man born with a "silver foot in his mouth".  And then there was the young Arkansas Governor who droned on for so long, that he got the biggest cheer when he said, "In conclusion...". That was of course, Bill Clinton, who probably saved his political career by going on the Tonight Show to talk with Johnny Carson about it. I honestly don't remember what Dukakis said during his acceptance speech.  That may have been a sign right there.

By the way, the 1988 Democratic convention was the place where Joe Biden received exactly 2 votes for the nomination.

The following month, all of us took the shorter drive to New Orleans, for the Republican National Convention and the nomination of the current President's father.  As opposed to the Democratic convention, where the WALA crew was scattered in rundown hotel rooms across downtown Atlanta, in New Orleans we stayed at the Hilton on Riverwalk.  Much nicer accommodations!

This was the convention where George H.W. Bush unveiled his "Thousand Points of Light", and coined the phrase that led to his demise 4 years later, "Read my lips..no new taxes!"

It was during the Republican convention that one member of the Knight Ridder staff brought our attention to an article in a financial magazine that quoted the president of the corporation saying Knight Ridder was thinking about selling off its television division.  It is probably why, when the convention was over, somebody from corporate invited all of us (and there were a lot of us from all the Knight Ridder stations) to "Breakfast at Brennan's".  The bill must have been tremendous, but a meal never tasted as good.

As Tropical Storm Fay approaches the Gulf Coast, Fox 10 News is ready to provide the information you need to keep you and your family safe, whether it's through Fox 10 or this website, fox10tv.com.

Next year could be more challenging, after analog television goes away and television stations across the country switch to digital transmission.

I've brought up the issue before, here on this blog.  What happens to the family with a battery-powered analog TV that can't pick up a signal?  Or the portable radio that can no longer pick up television audio?

Here's the response to those questions I just received from the Federal Communications Commission.

A battery-powered analog television will not receive local broadcast station transmissions after the February 17, 2009 transition deadline unless it is connected to a digital-to-analog converter box.  Like televisions, digital-to-analog converter boxes require electrical power to operate. 

There are currently no battery-powered digital-to-analog converter boxes on the market.  We understand that a company called Winegard plans to offer a battery adaptor for their DTV converter, and they are targeting the end of August.

In addition, new battery-powered digital televisions are currently available in retail stores and online.  These televisions can receive digital broadcasts without additional equipment.  They are marked with words such as “Integrated Digital Tuner,” “Digital Tuner Built-In,” “Digital Receiver,” “DTV,” “ATSC,” or “HDTV.”  A few models are currently on the market, and manufacturers are developing additional models.

Bottom line?  If that old, battery powered TV or portable radio that currently picks up TV audio is your only lifeline to emergency information, start looking for a replacement before the 2009 hurricane season. 

I just received my 2 "credit cards" for digital TV converter boxes.  You should apply now, too.

The plastic cards, issued by the U.S. Government are worth $40 each toward the purchase of a device that will allow your old fashioned (analog) television to receive state-of-the-art (digital) television signals.

Don't wait until the last minute to apply for them.  You can be sure there will be a run on the boxes as we get close to the cutoff date for analog broadcasting next February.

To me, even if you have satellite or cable, it makes sense to get a converter box anyway.  How many times has your cable signal unexpectedly disappeared?  At least if you have a converter box, you can hook it up to your rabbit ears or outdoor antenna, and you're good to go.

Remember, analog TV goes away forever in February, 2009.

For more information, go to http://www.dtv2009.gov .

Every couple of years, the Pew Research Center for People and the Press releases a study on how people get their news.  If you ever wondered why newspapers like to take cheap shots at television, the first line of this AP story will give you the answer:


      NEW YORK (AP) - Fewer Americans are reading newspapers and are
instead getting their news online, but television remains the
leading source of news in the country, according to a survey
released Sunday.
      Not surprisingly, younger people tend to get more of their news
on the Internet, while older folks use traditional media such as
television and newspapers, the Pew Research Center's biannual
survey on news consumption habits said.
      Pew said the results show an increasing shift toward online news
consumption, but that there is now a sizable group of a more
engaged, sophisticated and well-off people that use both
traditional and online sources to get their news.
      The Pew researchers referred to these people as "integrators,"
and says they account for 23 percent of those surveyed, spending
the most time with the news on a typical day.
      "Like Web-oriented news consumers, integrators are affluent and
highly educated. However they are older, on average, than those who
consider the Internet their main source of news," the survey said.
      It is this group that advertisers typically like to target,
which helps explain why newspaper publishers have seen sharp
declines in ad revenues as spending shifts online.
      Pew found that the largest group of news consumers - 46 percent
of those polled - have a "heavy reliance" on television for their
news at all times of the day. This group is the oldest, with a
median age of 52, and least affluent, with 43 percent unemployed.
They are unlikely to own a computer or go online for news.
      Overall, among those who get some of their news from TV, fewer
are watching the 6:30 broadcast network newscasts, and instead
opting for cable news sources such as CNN or Fox News Channel.
CNN's audience is now majority Democratic, while 39 percent of Fox
News viewers are Republicans, 33 percent Democrats, with the
remainder independent or didn't specify.
      The group that relies most on the Internet for news is the
youngest at a median age of 35. It is also the smallest, at 13
percent of those polled. Fewer than half of them watch television
news on a regular basis. Eighty percent of this group has a college
education and they are twice as likely to read an online newspaper
than a printed version.

  The emergence of this group and the shift among integrators
online led to an overall decline in the percentage of people who
said they read a newspaper the day before, to 34 percent from 40
percent two years ago, the researchers found. That is also
reflected in a shift in the industry that has seen circulation
figures slip in recent quarters.
      The beneficiary of less print newspaper consumption has been
other online news sources, with about 25 percent of the people
surveyed saying they go to an Internet site for news at least three
times a week. That's up from 18 percent in the 2006 survey.
      Pew found that consumers of online news tend to be more educated
than those who get their news from traditional sources, with 44
percent of college graduates saying they read news online every
day. Just 11 percent of those who topped out with a high school
education go online for news.
      About one-third of those younger than 25 said they get no news
on a typical day, up from about 25 percent in 1998.
      The survey was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates
International. It polled 3,615 adults 18 years or older by
telephone between April 30 and June 1, and has a margin of error of
2 percentage points.

   I would be less than honest if I didn't acknowledge that the percentage of people who watch local TV news is also down.  That is why we spend so much time and effort updating our website throughout the day, and trying to include as much video as possible, something that newspaper sites are trying to do, if you notice..

Why did it take so long for the MSM (mainstream media) to pick up on the John Edwards' scandal? Phil Bronstein of the San Francisco Chronicle may have said it best. "Most MSM in general had stayed away, picking at it with their noses held, as if looking for something valuable in a moldy dumpster," said Bronstein.

I think it comes down to elitism.  You can be sure if one of the networks or the wire services ran with the story first, everyone would have converged on the story.  But since the story broke in the National Enquirer, no one in the MSM wanted to be seen following up the Enquirer's lead.

Clark Hoyt, the Public Editor for the New York Times wrote this weekend, "I do not think liberal bias had anything to do with it. But I think The Times  — like The Washington Post, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times, major networks and wire services  — was far too squeamish about tackling the story."  He continued, "But The Times did not try to verify it, beyond a few perfunctory efforts, which I think was wrong....I think it was a mistake for Times editors to turn up their noses and not pursue it." Hoyt quoted the Times' executive editor.  “There was a tendency, fair or not, to dismiss what you read in the National Enquirer,” Keller said. “I know they are sometimes right.” 

The Times, with all its reporters and resources, could have tried to independently verify the story.  It just didn't want to.

John Edwards was clearly more than just your run-of-the-mill adulterer. If you remember, he made his family a cornerstone of his presidential campaign. During his interview with ABC News (an interview he requested, perhaps because he knew it would air while most of the world was watching the opening ceremonies of the Olympics) he said of his affair, "It happened during a period after she [his wife, Elizabeth] was in remission from cancer, that's no excuse in any possible way for what happened." How he could possibly think that makes it any more acceptable is beyond me.   

Was Edwards telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth during the interview?  He wasn't under oath, so there is no way of knowing.  But I do believe he was telling the truth when he tried to explain why he chose to betray his wife and family.  He had to do with the allure of political power.

Edwards said, "... I went from being a senator, a young senator to being considered for vice president, running for president, being a vice presidential candidate and becoming a national public figure. All of which fed a self-focus, an egotism, a narcissism that leads you to believe that you can do whatever you want. You're invincible. And there will be no consequences. And nothing, nothing could be further from the truth." 

It was an unusual project for a seventh grader.

During my first year in junior high school, we had to do book reports and, in conjunction with our art teacher, had to produce a cover for the report that illustrated the theme of the book.  I chose a book at that been in the news a lot back then.  It was called, "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich" by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, a Russian survivor of Stalin's death camps.

The book was Solzhenitsyn's first-hand account of living and nearly dying in a labor camp.  He was sent there because of an innocuous comment he made about Josef Stalin in a letter.  The book was a rare look behind the "Iron Curtain" as it was called then, and took the wind out of the sails of anyone who still had a romantic vision of life in Soviet society.

I had always enjoyed History class, so the book was a natural for me. I used construction paper to make a brown building for the cover that was surrounded by thin, copper wire which I had knotted in places to resemble barbed wire.  I got an A.

I kept reading Solzhenitsyn and following his career, including his expulsion from the Soviet Union, his exile in the United States and, after the fall of Communism, his return to Russia.

During graduate school, Solzhenitsyn became a topic, not of a book report, but of a research paper based on the author's "hero" status in the United States.  My premise was that, if most Americans actually read his books instead of just buying them and storing them on a bookshelf, they might be shocked.  Solzhenitsyn did not believe the Soviet Union would readily adjust to western-style democracy, because it simply wasn't in Russian tradition.  They went from being ruled by the Czars to ruled by the Soviets.  Democracy, as we knew it, was simply not in their DNA.

Secondly, Solzhenitsyn condemned the western-style business model that required higher and higher profits, year after year.  He believed an expectation of infinite growth was not sustainable, and could lead to its collapse.

His death this past weekend was his ultimate triumph.  He outlasted the regime that did its best to humiliate and destroy him.

Once in a while, I come across an article that I can't wait to share.  This is one of them.

In Friday's issue of The Chronicle of Higher Education, Thomas H. Benton writes about a number of books that offer opinions about declining standards in education, and the dumbing down of America.

He points to Naomi S. Baron's book, Always On: Language in an Online and Mobile World, which blames electronic communication for impairing "students' ability to write formal prose...it discourages direct communication, leading to isolation, self-absorption, and damaged relationships."

As Benton continues, "..the prevalence of multi-tasking--of always being partly distracted, doing several things at once--has diminished the quality of our thought, reflection, self-expression, and even, surprisingly, our productivity."

Sound familiar?

He cites another author who claims extensive use of the Internet is rewiring our brains for "skimming" rather than sustained concentration needed to read books or listen to lectures.

To quote from Benton again, "It seems that our students are dumb and ignorant, but their self-esteem is high so they are impervious or hostile to criticism".

Finally, he sees too many students that are, in his words:

    *Primarily focused on their own emotions — on the primacy of their "feelings" — rather than on analysis supported by evidence.
    *Uncertain what constitutes reliable evidence, thus tending to use the most easily found sources uncritically.
    *Convinced that no opinion is worth more than another: All views are equal.
    *Uncertain about academic honesty and what constitutes plagiarism.
    *Unable to follow or make a sustained argument.
    *Uncertain about spelling and punctuation (and skeptical that such skills matter).
    *Hostile to anything that is not directly relevant to their career goals, which are vaguely understood.
    *Increasingly interested in the social and athletic above the academic, while "needing" to receive very high grades.
    *Not really embarrassed at their lack of knowledge and skills.
    *Certain that any academic failure is the fault of the professor rather than the student.

As a part-time college teacher, I can tell you his observations are on target.  I once had a failing student tell me that I couldn't fail him, because his family was coming for graduation (he didn't graduate).  I had 2 other students who saw no problem with one copying from the other one, saying she just "wanted to help".  Others drop hints that, "I have straight As coming into your class...", trying to guilt me into giving a high grade.

What do you think?  Is Benton on target?  If so, what should be done about it?

When you think of southern literature, authors like Truman Capote, Harper Lee, William Faulkner and Flannery O'Connor come to mind.  Each in his or her own way wrote about the extreme characters found here in the Deep South.  A story that broke overnight in Mobile might have interested all of them.

It has to do with a murder.  Not your usual, all-too-common murder.  Just consider the elements of the story:

• The suspect's name is Anthony Hopkins.
• The body of a woman was found in a freezer in his home.
• It might be the body of his wife, who disappeared three years ago, but was never reported missing.
• He's also accused of sexually abusing a family member.
• And, police arrested Hopkins in Jackson, Alabama where he was in the middle of hosting a revival.

I can't wait for the New York Times to get a hold of this story.

UPDATE:  As if those details aren't enough, after watching Renee Dials' story tonight about Hopkins appearing with his children as a musical ensemble, something clicked that sent the story climbing up the creepy-meter for me.

I introduced Anthony Hopkins during an event.

He and his children provided musical entertainment for a non-profit group for which I served as the MC.  I remember the family, dressed neatly and behaving perfectly, and the story of how he was raising the children after his wife "died at childbirth", as we were told. 

To me, my Mom was a pretty typical TV viewer; she liked what she liked because she liked it.  While she was living in Connecticut, I would ask her what newscast she watched.  She'd tell me and I would try to find out why.  

"Was it the quality of the writing or reporting?", I asked, "The way the graphics looked?".

No, it wasn't any of the explanations I brought up.  "I like that person," she would tell me.  "She dresses well", or "He has a nice smile".  She wasn't watching a newscast so much as inviting some old friends to visit each day.  (This may be why she also enjoyed watching HSN and QVC).

Those running this year's political campaigns know the power of images all too well.  The importance of imagery may be the only thing on which Chris Matthews on MSNBC and Bernard Goldberg on Fox agree.  The campaign that exploits this power of images may be the one that wins the upcoming election.

Speaking of that, I was watching a news show that talked about the latest poll numbers in the presidential campaign, and it struck me how misleading those figures are.

We don't elect a president by simple majority, as Al Gore could tell you.  A candidate has to win in the electoral college which may be why the candidates won't spend a lot of time stumping for votes in Alabama (they may come here for money, but that's a different part of the campaign).  Alabama is expected to go Republican. Period.

Florida is a different story.  It's leaning Republican, but not entirely in that column.

Rasmussen Reports keeps track of voter preference in terms of  the electoral college vote.  Right now, Barack Obama is leading, but there are still months to go before the only poll that really counts, the one on Election Day.

Newspapers across the country are hurting and the Internet is to blame.  That's the bottom line of a study conducted by the Project for Excellence in Journalism.  Read it and see for yourself....The bold type is mine....
 
     NEW YORK (AP) - The many and deepening cuts at newspapers across
the country are starting to take a toll on their content, according
to a study being released Monday.
      The challenge newspapers must meet immediately is to find more
revenue on the Internet, according to the Project for Excellence in
Journalism's study, called "The Changing Newsroom: What is Being
Gained and What is Being Lost in America's Daily Newspapers."
      Newspaper managers need to "find a way to monetize the rapid
growth of Web readership before newsroom staff cuts so weaken
newspapers that their competitive advantage disappears."
      Stories are shorter overall, the study found, and staff coverage
tends to focus on local and community news.
      "America's newspapers are narrowing their reach and their
ambitions and becoming niche reads," the study said.
      Even when foreign and national news makes it into the papers, it
is being relegated to less prominent pages.
      "To make the front page, it has to be a significant development
or a story that we can see through Florida eyes," said Sharon
Rosenhause, managing editor of the Fort Lauderdale-based South
Florida Sun-Sentinel and a longtime newspaper executive.
      The reasons for the newsroom cutbacks are well known: Newsprint
costs have jumped, and advertising and circulation revenue have
quickened their descent this year as advertisers follow readers
online. Newspaper Web sites capture only a small fraction of the
revenue lost as they sell fewer print ads, which fetch more money.
      "The seams and threads are beginning to show in U.S. journalism
even though newspapers are by far the greatest source of news,"
Lou Ureneck, chairman of the journalism department at Boston
University, said Friday.
      The PEJ study surveyed senior newsroom executives at more than
250 newspapers and interviewed editors at papers in 15 cities to
document the way these cuts have affected newsrooms and the quality
of their product.
      The results show that papers carry fewer stories on foreign and
national news and devote less space to business, science and arts
reporting, and many have reduced the crossword puzzle and
eliminated television and stock listings.
      Many editors said they must ask reporters to cover more beats,
reducing their ability to produce authoritative stories. Others
said, in what may create a vicious circle, that staff cutbacks
reduce their ability to shape coverage to fit their communities'
needs, and Ureneck said that coverage is shrinking.
      "This is a strategic move not driven by lack of demand but (by)
a revenue model that is broken," Ureneck said.
      Still, 56 percent of the editors surveyed said their news
product is better than it was three years ago because coverage is
more targeted.
      "There's an improvement in enterprise, in investigations and in
the coverage of several core beats," the study quoted an unnamed
editor of a large metropolitan daily talking about his staff's
coverage, not the makeup of the paper overall.
      Local news is "very essential" to their product, according to
97 percent of editors surveyed, and they said that's where they're
putting a larger share of their shrinking resources.
      "They are giving a greater piece of a smaller pie to local
news," Ureneck said. That makes sense because where they can
"develop the most expertise and strongest bond with readers is
covering the local community."
      The newsroom is much younger than three years ago, and reporters
are more technology savvy and able to meet the demands of print and
online stories, according to the study.
      Editors once leery of producing content for the Web are
increasingly embracing its potential to diversify readership and
improve journalism, even if it sometimes saps print resources.
      "Editors feel torn between the advantages the Web offers and
the energy it consumes to produce material often of limited or even
questionable value," the study said.
      The Web speeds delivery of news, allows interaction with readers
and opens nearly infinite space for news.
      "The downside is that is has eroded the advertising base in
print publications, and that is by far the main source of revenue
to pay for large news staffs," Ureneck said.
      Editors see the ability to track readership of any specific
story online as an advantage for improving content. It provides an
"indisputable link between strong editorial content and the kind
of higher readership that attracts advertisers," the study said.
      The editors, 97 percent of whom said they are active in trying
to develop new revenue streams, can then convince the advertising
sales staff to become more targeted in selling to the Web.
      Many said, though, that they were uncertain improved editorial
content would ensure a bright future - especially since most
organizations failed to anticipate the changes that have wracked
newsrooms in recent years.
      Only 5 percent of the editors surveyed said they were confident
they could predict what the newsroom would look like in five years.
      "I feel I'm being catapulted into another world, a world I
don't really understand," Virginian-Pilot editor Denis Finley told
PEJ. "Things are happening at the speed of light."
      The results of the survey, conducted online by Princeton Survey
Research Associates International between Jan. 29 and Feb. 29,
include responses from over 50 percent of U.S. papers with 100,000
or more in circulation and more than 30 percent of papers with
50,000 to 100,000 in circulation.

After trying for hours Friday to successfully update the software on my first generation iPhone, I finally managed to connect to the iTunes Store to get it to unbrick the phone.

One of the biggest pluses is the ability to receive "push" e-mail; i.e. when mail is sent to you, it is immediately forwarded to the iPhone.  In the past, you had to either check the mail manually, or tell the iPhone to check all the accounts every 15, 30 or 60 minutes.

Another plus is the AppStore.  Apple claims there are 500 apps you can either download for free or purchase.  To be honest, I have little interest in most of the apps I've seen so far with the following exceptions:

• MLB.com.  This low cost app ($4.99) enables you to receive updates on baseball games in progress PLUS allows you to view video highlights, even while the game is underway.  They look pretty good when viewed on the EDGE network, and great when on a WiFi connection.
• AOL Radio.  This free app allows you to listen to local radio stations from across the country.
• Pandora.  This free site translates to the iPhone very well.  You tell Pandora the kind of music you prefer, e.g. Bob Dylan, and it programs a "station" complete with Bob Dylan songs, and songs of that genre.

Battery life on the first generation iPhone seems no better or worse with this latest software version.
 

UPDATE:  The launch turned into a nightmare.  The AP reports that the demand for new iPhones, and the release of updated software for the original iPhone overwhelmed the iTunes Store.  The Apple Support boards are filled with angry comments from new and old customers who wound up with an iBrick instead of an iPhone. 

Would I like a new iPhone 3G?  Absolutely.  It's cheaper than the old one (at least initially), but for the time being, the first generation iPhone will have to do.

First, 3G speed.  It ain't here (at least in Mobile).  AT&T told me on July 1 that the new, higher internet speed "should be operational by the end of the month".  (Will customers have to pay the higher price for data, even though 3G isn't available?)  So, if you expect to get faster, over-the-air internet service immediately, you will be disappointed.

Two, battery life.  In watching Walt Mossberg's review on The Wall Street Journal website, he claimed that while accessing the 3G network,  the iPhone's battery drained by the end of the business day.

Three, text messaging is no longer included in the monthly rate.  With the older phone, the price included 200 text messages.  (Maybe AT&T's "Family Rate" will cover this.  I haven't seen if it will, or it won't).

Yes, call clarity is supposed to be phenomenal, and the App Store feature will expand the iPhone's use almost beyond imagination.  But, when it comes to this iPhone, iPass, at least for now.

This was the view from our seats at Hank Aaron Stadium Saturday night, right before the first pitch on Fox 10 Night.   There was a downpour right before the game; in fact, it had to be delayed because of the shower.  But in the end, as you can see, there was a payoff (besides seeing Cary Chow throw a strike during the ceremonial first pitch)!.

It's impossible to please everyone when you're on television and here's a case in point.  It comes from a Fairhope woman:

"Bob Grip, you should be ashamed of youself. Of course Bob you need to keep you financially rewarding job. Yor are such a seasoned newsman!
Tonight on 5 o'clock news you made the comment about Michelle Obama being a hospital administrator and lawyer and Cindy McCain as an heiress to a beer distributorship. Very true but very well edited and presented as information to the ignorant population who watch you. I rarely watch your (news) station and now I remember why. You either have your own agenda or you are nothing but a mouthpiece/puppet for those who own Fox....I will be sure to support another news station besides yours. Enjoy rubbing shoulders on the 4th. That's probably what you do best."

A "seasoned" newsman?  I guess that's better than being described as "aged" :).

She felt that pointing out the differences between the two potential First Ladies in a story about how people view them is unfair.  Keep in mind, she admits the information is true.  Perception is subjective; it's like the old story of the blind men trying to describe an elephant.  Each person will "see" what he or she wants.   Some will see more than what's there.

Do I have my own agenda?  No. 

I am a mouthpiece/puppet for those who own Fox?  Keep in mind, while we are a Fox affiliate, no one from Fox tells us what to put on our air.  I know some people will find that hard to believe, but it's true. (If you assume that the heiress comment is intended to make Mrs. McCain look bad..which was not the intention..why would that be allowed on our air "if" we were a "mouthpiece/puppet" for Fox?)

As for "rubbing shoulders on the 4th", I guess that must be all the rich and powerful people with whom I will be spending time on the holiday.  Actually, I will be "rubbing shoulders" if you will, with my co-workers while I'm working on the Fourth.

Like I said, you can't please everyone :).