this is my old blog

Hello, you've found the archives of my blog. I've now switched over to Wordpress -- this is no longer updated. (I've been on Wordpress for nearly all of 2005, in fact).

However, the comments on blogger did not switch over, and you can find them here.

The address of my Wordpress blog is http://blog.derekrose.com. (This site can be found at http://derekrose.com/blog).

Thanks for reading!

CJR Monitor, part 2

Corey Pein has a piece on the CBS memo flap up that I found rather unconvincing.

"The bottom line, which credible document examiners concede," writes Pein, "is that copies cannot be authenticated either way with absolute certainty."

Hmm. What about Joseph Newcomber's analysis, which seems pretty certain - and convincing - to me? What about Thomas Phinney, who told the Washington Post that it was "impossible" for a typewriter to produce an exact replica of the documents?

Pein doesn't deal with Phinney at all, and chides Newcomber for making a conclusion with "absolute certainty." ("bold bordering on hyperbolic")

Paf! I'm not a fan of Little Green Footballs, but their animated gif is devastating. There's no other reasonable conclusion to draw but that the documents are fakes ...

Pein quotes Newcomber:

Based on the fact that I was able, in less than five minutes . . . to type in the text of the 01-August-1972 memo into Microsoft Word and get a document so close that you can hold my document in front of the ‘authentic’ document and see virtually no errors, I can assert without any doubt (as have many others) that this document is a modern forgery. Any other position is indefensible.

Red flags wave here, or should have. Newcomer begins with the presumption that the documents are forgeries, and as evidence submits that he can create a very similar document on his computer. This proves nothing — you could make a replica of almost any document using Word. Yet Newcomer’s aggressive conclusion is based on this logical error.

Piffle.

1. The document is not just very similar, it identical, pixel-for-pixel!
2. You are able make replicas of many documents using Word, yes. But by using all of the default settings? I've performed the LGF experiment myself ... just opened up a blank document in Word & started typing, and presto, you get a document that matches the "1973" memo. No, this alone doesn't "prove" anything - but it's very very strong evidence.
3. Any analysis is going to look at how easy it is to create the "1973" document by modern methods. This doesn't mean the examiners have "beg[un] with the presumption that the documents are forgeries."

CJR Monitor, part 2

Corey Pein has a piece on the CBS memo flap up that I found rather unconvincing.

"The bottom line, which credible document examiners concede," writes Pein, "is that copies cannot be authenticated either way with absolute certainty."

Hmm. What about Joseph Newcomber's analysis, which seems pretty certain - and convincing - to me? What about Thomas Phinney, who told the Washington Post that it was "impossible" for a typewriter to produce an exact replica of the documents?

Pein doesn't deal with Phinney at all, and chides Newcomber for making a conclusion with "absolute certainty." ("bold bordering on hyperbolic")

Paf! I'm not a fan of Little Green Footballs, but their animated gif is devastating. There's no other reasonable conclusion to draw but that the documents are fakes ...

Pein quotes Newcomber:

Based on the fact that I was able, in less than five minutes . . . to type in the text of the 01-August-1972 memo into Microsoft Word and get a document so close that you can hold my document in front of the ‘authentic’ document and see virtually no errors, I can assert without any doubt (as have many others) that this document is a modern forgery. Any other position is indefensible.

Red flags wave here, or should have. Newcomer begins with the presumption that the documents are forgeries, and as evidence submits that he can create a very similar document on his computer. This proves nothing — you could make a replica of almost any document using Word. Yet Newcomer’s aggressive conclusion is based on this logical error.

Piffle.

1. The document is not just very similar, it identical, pixel-for-pixel!
2. You are able make replicas of many documents using Word, yes. But by using all of the default settings? I've performed the LGF experiment myself ... just opened up a blank document in Word & started typing, and presto, you get a document that matches the "1973" memo. No, this alone doesn't "prove" anything - but it's very very strong evidence.
3. Any analysis is going to look at how easy it is to create the "1973" document by modern methods. This doesn't mean the examiners have "beg[un] with the presumption that the documents are forgeries."

running in the new year

Worked New Year's Eve for awhile, hanging out in Times Square for most of it. Attended the Colin Powell/ Bloomberg presser, then wandered around, collecting quotes. New Yorkers eschew the Times Square ball drop, mostly, but when you've got a press pass and can wander around freely, it's pretty cool. Hope to post pictures later.

But then around 8 p.m. got called to 1 Penn Plaza for a report of a guy with a rifle and decided not to go back once I was sprung.

Caught up with S. and did the Emerald Nuts Midnight Run in Central Park. 27:46 for a four-miler, but it was so packed I couldn't get going at all for the first 600 yards or so.

Thirteen hours later, did a two-loop, 12-mile run through the park - my first semilong run in a month. Had to take advantage of the nearly 60-degree temperature, and my first day off in a while.

I wasn't around for this, but here are some pictures from my brother Adam from over Christmas at our father's new house in Wilmington, N.C.

owl after all

I did the owl story after all! Big spread on page 7. We used Lloyd Spitalnik's great owl photo, at left. Between the owl and the premature ejaculation, this has been a good week.

Right now I am at work for the 13th day in a row ... need that overtime cash.

minute men

So today I had this story on page 10, right next to a story about a 6-foot-3 transsexual cop in Oklahoma City. From my story:

BY DEREK ROSE

DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

It may not have been romantic, but they did it for science.

A group of 166 men suffering from premature ejaculation repeatedly had sex with women who were timing them with stopwatches.

Those taking an experimental new drug showed a newfound stamina: three minutes — up from one.

And hey, guys, don't laugh. That's more than most of you, sexperts say.

"In the movies, everyone lasts for about 20 minutes. In real life it's about 2-1/2 minutes," said Dr. Mark Stein, a urologist at St. Vincent's Medical Center in Manhattan.

As you can imagine, story prompted much discussion in the NYDN newsroom. I wanted the lede (the first paragraph of the story) to be, "Coming soon — a treatment for premature ejaculation?" but that was vetoed by an editor.

I also mulled over, "Timed with stopwatches and primed with pharmaceuticals, the premature ejaculators soon showed a newfound stamina," but that is not really DN style. Co-worker T.C. suggested, "Ready, set — stop!"

And of course the 2-1/2 minute claim also prompted some discussion.

Denis Leary

This is awful funny ... Denis Leary's Comedy Central Mastercard Red Sox commercial spoof.

me and my hat

I guess I need to get a less silly hat, huh? Taken today by NYDN photog Rob Bennett.

very strange

Matt Welsh claims to have had a weird non-sexual dream about me!

earthquake & killer tsunamis

So the earthquake was felt all over the world, including Central Park:
(Click the chart for the complete data)

Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory has a sensor buried there by the 96th St. traverse, apparently.

Real time data is here; select "short form" under frequency and "CPNY" under station to view the Central Park information.

The earthquake hit Saturday at 00:58:50 UTC (7:58 EST)... the shockwaves registered on the Central Park seismograph 20 minutes later, at 01:18 UTC. While U.S. researchers were trying to warn people, the tsunamis hit about two hours after that.

UPDATE 12/27: My story is now online: Shockwaves picked up in Central Park

UPDATE 12/28: Columbia University's Earth Institute has an interesting page of information on the earthquake.

running report

There's good news and bad news on the running front. The good is that despite the recent drop in temperatures, I've run 19 of the last 20 days, and one I missed I lifted at the gym.

The bad is 0 of those 19 runs have been for longer than six miles - I haven't run long since November! Ugh.

Six miles in the park today in 49:18 (8:19 pace). Ran the last two miles with this guy breathing down my neck, but I kicked it out at the end.

when poodles attack

I spent today interviewing this guy whose mother -- a spry 88-year-old -- was killed by her grandson in Crown Heights Christmas Eve. (Today's story here). Apparently after the murder the grandson called 911 and confessed, saying he thought his grandmother was trying to poison him. Everyone in the building said she was an amazing woman, mother and grandmother. Very sad.

I get back to the office, grab some mince pies and champagne and am walking back to my desk when suddenly something comes in contact up against my butt! I'm all shocked and yet out this yell -- "Awwgh!" -- that probably the whole office can hear.

Whirling around, I see -- it's this poodle some guy had brought in, that had jumped up on me from behind!

"What the hell!" I yell at him, still rather shocked. "Jesus Christ!"

Friggin' poodles.

whoooo?

Saw the most amazing sight in Central Park this morning: a boreal owl. I know nothing about birding, but there were a bunch of people pointing telescopes at a large pine tree by Tavern on the Green as I was about to go on a five-mile run, so of course I wandered over. You couldn't see anything with the naked eye; this was smallish owl some 50 feet high, obscured by branches. But some of the telescopes offered a pretty magnificient view. The owl was just sitting there in the tree, where it's apparently been since Sunday. Almost cat-like eyes. Watching it through the telescope, seeing it swivel its head and look straight into the lense -- I almost gasped and it certainly gave me an appreciation of birding. I might do a story if it's still there tomorrow (Christmas - yes I'll be working it).

Apparently this is very very rare - a boreal owl has never been seen before in Central Park, and was last seen in this area in 1962 (in Jersey), writes Vanity Fair author James Wolcott, who visited the owl on Monday. Usually they just don't come this far south.

The picture to the left is an actual photo of the owl by Cal Vornberger; more are here.

In other news, here's a blog by two out-of-shape reporters training for the Big Sur Marathon. And Frank gave me a shout-out here.
UPDATE 12/26: I couldn't find the owl on Saturday, but apparently it has just moved to another section of the park. What with the earthquake n' all, though, I doubt we'll do a story unless it becomes more of a cult phenom.

seeya later ortega

I wanna know that you'll tell me
I love to stay
Take me to the river, drop me in the water
Push me in the river, dip me in the water

--Talking Heads.

So for the past four years I've had the good fortune to sit next to fellow general assignment reporter Ralph Ortega, whose final day is today. Ralph has always been a gentleman and a great co-worker, so as a tribute I've written a little hack-job profile of him for the blog.

philanthropy

My friend and former co-worker Matt Kelly had a piece published in the Boston Globe's Ideas section over the weekend:

MASSACHUSETTS HAS a tough reputation to live down with the rest of the nation: loony-left liberals, lousy drivers, failed presidential candidates. To top it all off, everyone thinks we're cheap bastards, too.

Blame the Generosity Index. Published every November since 1997 by the Catalogue for Philanthropy, a Boston-based group that promotes charitable giving, this index ranks states by average income and then by average donations to charity; the difference between those two numbers is a state's "generosity gap." When you rank states yet again based on that gap, Massachusetts inevitably places dead last or near to it, along with most of New England. ... but it isn't necessarily true.

I did my own small charitable thing today, actually. Unusual for me, I'm not usually much into the whole philanthropy thing. Over the weekend I picked up a couple magazines and some Starbucks coffee and today shipped the package out to a soldier in Iraq from this site. Figure it will get there well after the holidays, but still might be appreciated ...

In other news, I also bought a plane ticket to New Zealand today! I'll be gone Feb. 1 -22, visiting my mom & sister for the first time in two years.

overreaction in minneapolis

This struck me as really extreme.

A Star Tribune reporter was disciplined Thursday after he disclosed that he wrote an e-mail to a Minneapolis police official that contained racially insensitive language.

David Chanen, a police reporter, told editors that he used the term "colored officers" in an e-mail sent Wednesday to Minneapolis Police Inspector Donald Banham, who is black. ...

Gillespie and Chanen said the reporter had intended to use the term "officers of color," but made an error in rushing to send the e-mail. ... Chanen said he reviewed it and "was shocked to learn I had written language ... that is terribly offensive. I was writing the e-mail in haste, but that's no excuse, and I deeply apologize for what I did."

Now, as someone who's half-black ... I think the term "colored officers" is anachronistic, yea, but "terribly offensive" or "racially insensitive"? Why would it be? Black officers in WWII formed "Colored Officers Assocation." One of the largest civil rights groups is the National Association for the Advancement of *Colored People.*

In any case, shouldn't disciplinary action be reserved for truly egregious behavior, not innocent slip-ups?

I posted a comment on the private listserv of the National Association of Black Journalists on Friday and everyone basically agreed with me, so yesterday I sent an email to Paul Gustafson, the author of the story quoted above (cc-ed to Chanen). Gustafson wrote back this morning saying he was going to forward my message to his managing editor -- which isn't what I intended, but maybe I've accomplished something.

Make Time for Time

Time magazine is reporting that Spc. Thomas "Jerry" Wilson came up with his question for Secretary Rumsfeld on his own -- and that Chattanooga Times Free Press reporter Edward Lee Pitts had had urged Wilson to come up with "intelligent questions." After Wilson showed his question to Pitts, the reporter simply "suggested a less brash way of asking the question."

My previous comments stand. It is entirely inappropriate and dishonest for reporters to attempt to influence events and then pretend to report on them "objectively."

On a related note, I'm in the middle of writing a short story about Time's 2004 "Blog of the Year", Power Line. Have already interviewed PL's Scott Johnson (very nice), waiting for John Hinderaker to call me back.
UPDATE: Talked to Hinderaker. The story will be very short, just five inches.
UPDATE 2: Here's the story, even shorter than the version I wrote.

Holiday 4-miler

So 27:36 - 6:54 pace - in the NYRR Holiday Four Mile run this morning. Much better than last week's debacle, but having run nearly a minute faster in another four-mile race last month, I was somewhat disappointed. My time was also four seconds slower than I did in the July 24, 2004 Central Park Health/Fitness 4-miler. Gotta step up the mileage.

Overall, I was 204 out of 1,603 men; 79 out of 589 men aged 30-39; and 226 of 3,105 overall.

buyouts

so i have received my buyout offer in the mail today that that Other New York Tabloid has been reporting about. It's being offered to all the Daily News editorial employees - basically we have until Jan. 3 to decide whether to apply. For those of us like myself who have worked at the News for fewer than five years (I've been here for four), it'd mean 10 weeks of pay in exchange for our resignations, I guess.

brrr

So after Sunday's debacle I was determined to improve my running training. I dug up my Polar heart rate monitor transmitter, which I hadn't been using in months and months, and strapped it to my chest. I headed out the door a half hour early, to give myself more time to run.

Now, backtrack a bit. For the past nearly six years I had been running in the same blue jacket that went to my upper thighs. Then this past spring the jacket finally gave up the ghost, and I had to switch to a nice Nike Storm-Fit jacket. The jacket fits well, but is a few inches shorter.

So anyway, I start running, on what's the coldest day of the year so far (about 25 deg F, with a stiff breeze). But what do I care - I'm all bundled up!

Well, almost.

I quickly discovered I had apparently neglected to insulate ... how do you say it? One ... Very Important Male Organ.

Soon, I'm dashing down a side street, facing a wall and sticking a hand down my pants to warm things up down there. I hope the neighbors didn't see. Sheesh.

I ended up cutting my run short, not even doing my usual distance. As I headed back with my, er, tale between my legs, I pondered whether I needed to splurge on a needed to splurge for a new a new, longer jacket.

(And as Chelle notes - it's not even that cold yet!)

bon voyage

Alex Spiers hits all the right notes in his fare-the-well Pedro column:

To think I did all that,
And may I say, not in a shy way —
Oh no. Oh no, not me.
I did it my way.
— Frank Sinatra, "My Way"

Yes, he did it his way. After an extraordinary seven-year run that featured peerless genius on the mound and both brilliance and eccentricity off of it, Pedro Martinez' Red Sox career came to its conclusion yesterday. Though the possibility of Pedro's departure loomed over the entire season, the finality of his exit nevertheless sounded a cold, wintry chord.

Bill Simmons also has an article up.

CBS can't make anyone happy these days! A number of blogs (here, here, here, here, here and here) are attacking the network for a brief segment they did last week on Social Security. In the course of the story, CBS "fail[ed] to properly identify a typical man on the street as the National Taxpayers Union shill he really is," claims Three Way News. Only, well, that's not true, as you can see from the photo of Tad DeHaven below.


The Washington Monthly's Kevin Drum started the ball rolling with this post. I think the CBS segment could have been better-conceived (a criticism you can also level at most of my work...) but it's just not the case that Mr. DeHaven was presented as "just an ordinary white collar working stiff like you and me" or "some random guy off the street" given his clear identification as an employee of a right-wing outfit.

UPDATE: Just to make clear, you can watch the video here.

lani and the nanny

The Blue Mass Group blog has a post about how Lani Guinier has been characterized as having had a "nanny problem", just like Bernie Kerik. (Stories here, here and here, just for starters).

Only the press is confusing Guinier with Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood. I went back on Nexis and read some of the stories from 1993, and Blue Mass Group is absolutely correct. On June 3, 1993, President Clinton withdrew Guinier's nomination to head the Justice Department's civil rights division, saying he couldn't defend her views on voting rights. (Libertarian lawyer Clint Bolick started the controversy by describing Guinier as a "quota queen" in the WSJ).

I think the misinformation might have started with this AP sidebar. Eugene Volkh says the media isn't just wrong on this, "they're wrong in a way that falsely accuses someone of violating the law. That doesn't speak well of their trustworthiness in other fields." Whoops....

Pedro bye-bye?

Boston media is reporting that Pedro and the Mets have agreed to terms. "It appears Pedro Martinez has pitched his final game in a Red Sox uniform," reports Boston.com.

Larry Lucchino tells the AP, "He will be missed, and we are disappointed to have lost him to the Mets and the National League."

I wonder, though ... maybe they're just trying to call Pedro's bluff? There's been a lot of these "imminent" deals that just haven't materialized from the winter meetings. I'm sure Sox are prepared walk away from Pedro rather than sign him to a bad deal ... but I'm not going to believe Pedro's gone until puts on that purple and blue uniform...

well, what would YOU do with it?

Jud Pierce emails: "after a night of heavy drinking and heavy petting, i had my way with trophy."