Bio and disclosures: Retweets mean I think you should see this -- usually but not always an endorsement.
Maybe mention this to Pelosi and the rest of the House leadership?
RT @peterbakernyt: Trump administration dismantles or pares back post-9/11 programs aimed preventing terrorism involving WMD. “We’re not as…
In today's column, @NickKristof picks up on @economist's accurate slam on the radical-right words and policies of extremists who call themselves "convervative". I hope Kristof (& his colleagues) will take this to heart and use accurate language.
"sloppy" is the kindest possible word for this category...
RT @timjacobwise: 1/ If the Dems blow this election it will not be because they were "too far left on policy" or because they "weren't left…
Am I being picky? Look, this was the lead story in the Sunday New York Times Business section. It's more than 2,500 words long. Were I the editor, I'd have used a few hundred of those words to answer those questions. /20
Meanwhile, I'll beg all journalists to always do that in their own pieces. Context matters, and we need much more of it. /end
Again, the story is interesting. But it doesn't fully justify the headline "Safe Deposit Boxes Aren’t Safe" -- and the holes and inconsistencies leave readers with vital, unanswered questions. 19/
Should Congress and states require banks to do better by their customers? Yes. The "contracts" we sign are grossly one-sided, though some seem better than others. But suppose banks responded by abandoning the market altogether? Then what? 18/
How do these alternatives compare in cost and/or risk to a safe deposit box? Who knows? Certainly the story doesn't look into this. Why didn't the editor ask the reporter to fill this obvious hole in the piece? 17/
Insurance is one alternative. It adds to the cost of box rental, and I'd guess there are exclusions. Since the Times cites someone selling this insurance as a source, this feels like an obvious follow-up. Maybe it was "cut for space," as we used to say. 14/
In a more complete report, we'd also find out if perhaps we can buy what are called "riders" on our homeowners/renters policies covering safe deposit box losses. Again, no hint. (I'm going to ask my carrier about this tomorrow.)
Another approach would be to hide your valuables inside your home, or buying a home safe and putting them there, or some such notion. There are obvious risks associated with that course, needless to say, not least a fire or burglar, etc. (This is why we rent boxes, right?) 16/
That would be somewhat more worrisome. Even if it's true, however, the odds would remain way, way in favor of the box renter -- a 99.736% likelihood of no problem. But -- next question -- what's are the alternatives? What do they cost, and what are the risks in those cases? 13/
That would mean a roughly 1 in 25,000 chance every year that safe deposit renters will lose belongings at a scale they feel they need to report it to authorities. I wouldn't want that to happen to me. But those are pretty decent odds in the renter's favor, right? 10/
For an initial calculation, we'll use the "few hundred" big losses reported to authorities. I'll be generous and say there are 500 where the bank was negligient or some kind of natural disaster damaged the vault, or a crook broke in and stole everything, or the like. 9/
When I think about it, I'm much more reassured than panic-stricken to believe there's a 99.996% -- give or take a couple of thousandths of a percent -- likelihood that our possessions will still be there the next time we open the box. 11/
Even if we use the highest number provided by the seller of safe-deposit-box insurance -- 33,000 losses, and attribute them all someone else (not the renter) -- a typical box renter's chances of a loss would be 1 in 379. 12/
Speaking of context, the story doesn't do the math. The story cites "an estimate" (no source) of 25 million boxes, and half are said to be empty. (Really? I called or drove to 5 bank branches before I found an available box that had room for more than just a few documents.) 8/
But wait, the story also quotes a source -- who sells insurance coverage for safe deposit boxes -- estimating that "around 33,000 boxes a year are harmed by accidents, natural disasters and thefts." So which is it? Again, where was the editor? 6/
Also keep in mind that the case studies in this story -- that is, the people who lost seriously valuable things -- are the exceptions, not the rule, when it comes to amounts lost. Seems like a stronger disclaimer to that effect would add context. 7/
That, of course, is related to the "how likely is it you'll losing your stuff for any reason" question. But it's hard to answer, because while the story is a good read, it's a bit sloppy. It needed tougher editing. 4/
The story initially says that a "few hundred" people report missing or damaged items to authorities, and banks are at fault in some of those cases. What authorities? There's no hint in the article. The editor should have asked. 5/
A case in point is the featured story in today's @nytimes business section -- "Safe Deposit Boxes Aren't Safe" -- showing how some people who've put their valuables in these bank boxes have had those valuables go missing. Customers are screwed even when it's banks' fault. 2/
How often it's the bank's fault isn't answered. Banks shouldn't have impunity for wrongdoing, but the story should at least give us a sense how common this is -- or ask pointed questions of financial regulators about why no one knows. 3/
One of journalism's most common practices is to highlight a problem, but then fail to address two fundamental, obvious questions: First, how common is this problem, i.e. how likely is it that average person will be affected? Second, what can the average person do about it? 1/
The Republicans believe -- and they're doing everything possible (e.g. voter suppression, stacking the courts, etc.) to ensure -- that they'll be in power for the foreseeable future. They may bring the republic down, in which case their illegitimate acts will have won.
Pathetic "journalism" R1ZfPxuEb7aACgwi5i8zk_prVCQ3JbfH2hx461-9piLOsbQv7x42SuCmf8&utm_term=.688658d039cf
Oh the ratio...
RT @joanwalsh: This sad, shallow man. He can't face her. He can't face the atrocities that are happening in his name. He's just jealous of…
No respectable journalism organization will ever hire one of these people...
Spent a good part of the day today watching the brilliant web mashup, "Apollo 11 in Real Time" -- and feeling awed at humanity's possibilities. America reached her pinnacle on July 20, 1969. May we aspire to genuine greatness again, and get there.
This summarizes the House Democrats' fundamental cowardice in the face of a national emergency.
Well, CBS just skipped a few hours of its no-longer-real-time Apollo 11 streaming replay from 1969...
Walter Cronkite shows the special edition of the NY Times, July 20, 1969:
An embarrassment to journalism...
One of the most striking things in CBS News' moon landing coverage is how little time Walter Cronkite was on screen -- contrast this to the egomaniac-anchors of today.
50 years ago, in America's finest moment (so far), the Eagle landed:
Moon landing + 50 years. On left is the brilliant "Apollo 11 in Real Time" mashup -- -- and on the right is the contemporaneous stream of CBS News' coverage
RT @dangillmor: Please, please do yourself a favor and take a look at "Apollo 11 in Real Time" -- a web mashup of original-source audio, vi…
A reminder that weather doesn't equal climate...
Can these people actually be this moronic?
RT @Malinowski: When you watch this excruciating meeting between the president and survivors of genocide and religious persecution, remembe…
RT @Index_Magazine: It’s lonely and dangerous running an independent news website in Malta, but some lawyers are still willing to stand up…
RT @kscheib: @dangillmor Did you see this? You can land your own lunar lander wherever you want with this AR Version my colleagues @zeitonl…
"Apollo 11 in Real Time" -- here's my current screen.
Please, please do yourself a favor and take a look at "Apollo 11 in Real Time" -- a web mashup of original-source audio, video, and much more from the astronauts and Mission Control. It is beyond brilliant.
Phoenix police union is an exemplar of its species, and that's not a compliment. Latest:
A reminder that tech industry evil has always existed in the form of mobile phone operators and Internet access providers. They should be punished for this stuff but they have cozy arrangements with government.
Cruelty-as-policy in a school district. Disgusting people running this operation.
RT @dangillmor: Rhetorical question: why are medical billing errors never in favor of the patient?
© 2009 creamsocial