The Frankish Reich

I think that's advertising revenue. The locals get local ad spots during network programming - even during the Super Bowl if I'm not mistaken - and they sell lots of ads during local news, etc. Mostly the wrong consumers at this point, but still very profitable. From an economic perspective, it's pure rent-seeking on the part of the Sinclairs of the world. I imagine the big 3.75 (ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX) have evaluated whether it makes sense to even keep the over-the-air thing going. They're all ready to jump ship with their Peacocks and Hulus gaining market penetration.

I'm sorry, I'm not like you, I don't file away every perceived slight in the recesses of my brain. Whatever. It was a fairness doctrine claim. Which was kind of my point.

Wow. Reuters reports 12 years ago on a study that showed a possible link. Then reports yesterday that later studies show no link. Outrageous! It's almost as if they reported that miasma caused measles in 1850, only to report that measles is an infectious disease in 1950. INCONSISTENT! BIASED!!

Well, it certainly is fertile terrain for the conspiracy theorists. False flag!!

All of this is antiquated. Yes, there are rules for over-the-air broadcasters requiring them to operate "in the public interest." Cable new, internet news, social media news, streamer news/entertainment? All of that is exempt. What percentage of people get their TV over-the-air with an HDTV antenna? The best info I can find is about 20%. And many of those may have over-the-air in addition to streamers or other sources of news/infotainment. In other words, this idea that over-the-air needs to be regulated is based on a pre-cable (much less pre-streamer) world. I've wondered why the ABCs and NBCs of the world don't just say "to hell with over-the-air, we're going 100% streaming." That's probably what we'll see if the regulators make life more and more difficult.

You're really not talking about the "Equal Time" rule, which is still there. It is why one of the networks ( forget which one) had to give Trump a 30 minute spot after they did a Kamala interview. It applies to political candidates. You are talking about the Fairness Doctrine, which went away in the 1980s. It was the one that required over-the-air broadcasters to give an opportunity to opposing viewpoints when they aired political programming advancing a certain viewpoint. The repeal of the Fairness Doctrine begat talk radio of the Rush Limbaugh type. Hey, maybe Republicans want to bring that back? They used to hate the Fairness Doctrine. It's hard to keep track anymore.

A very, very stupid and evil perp. Exactly who did he think was in a transport van?

See what I told @B-Man about spouting off BEFORE Trump delivers his official talking points? So much for the "what MAGA censorship, he went off the air for all of 4 shows" theory ...

On most teams, yes. But Nathan Peterman's record of inexcellence will stand for a long, long time. [And us oldsters will never forget Gary Marangi]

To save folks some search time, just go here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groypers

Someone tell @LeviF!

What, no more Be Best? Thankfully the alliteration and vagueness remain intact.

Guess you don't drink coffee ...

Never try to sneak one past the Bills Rainman

I really do like Rubio, and I hope Trump lets him do his job rather than interposing friend Steve Witkoff in everything important. Rubio's Charlie Kirk speech got attention - it was clear, impassioned, faith-based without being offensive to those who are not Christian. I wish he could've made that speech about 9 years ago ...

I see this as the Sean Payton move. Goodbye Russell Wilson old model, hello Bo Nix/Jaxson Dart model.

Russell Wilson has probably started his last game. And the record: 120-80-1 His top PFR comps are Cam Newton (wasn't expecting that!), Joe Montana, Ken Anderson, Stafford, Steve Young. I do think he is a HOFer just because he (and his team) was really that dominant at his peak.

Yeah, it's probably time to hang it up. The Giants going to Wilson as a bridge was really a stupid idea. I mean, I could see Zach Wilson or someone you think may still be a late bloomer/have some upside. The kind of offense the Giants will want to install with Dart isn't the kind of offense Russell Wilson can run. Just look at the disconnect with Sean Payton in Denver. Russell is kind of a borderline HOFer. He really was that good in Seattle, and even his last gasp half a season in Pittsburgh last year was fun while it lasted. There isn't much use for his skill set in today's NFL offenses, particularly when that skill set is in decline.

I'm sold on Herbert, but I'm still not sold on the Chargers in general. But I do think they are now our #1 threat in the AFC. They improved in all key areas, Harbaugh's culture (like it or not, we can all agree that the Chargers needed a change in culture) is taking, and even the loss of Najee Harris may not be so bad as it allows them to shift more carries to a really good rookie back from a declining back. Our ace in the hole: their division is way better than ours.

That's it. You were never going to get Trump going out there and saying "there is enough reason for concern that it would be prudent to minimize use of Tylenol unless otherwise instructed by your doctor." No. It was always gonna be "we have solved the puzzle of autism" or something very close to that.

Yes, and those pregnant "people" who are dealing with pain/discomfort probably ought to just get abortions, since of course a child that never exists is preferable to an autistic child. Think about systemic effects.

So you've hit on the problem here. I imagine the recommendation that came to Trump/RFK probably was something like this: a warning label. Advice to seek guidance from your doctor if you are pregnant before taking Tylenol. You'd want someone to at least ballpark the relative risks of, say, letting a 102 degree fever resolve on its own vs. taking Tylenol to bring it down right away. But Trump: tough it out, ladies! Don't take Tylenol. Just don't take it.

Not sure what they taught nurses in the 1980s, but surely you do realize that there is a confounding variable here? Maybe, just maybe, the pregnant women who took more Tylenol had more health conditions during pregnancy, including, of course, fevers? That's what newer, better studies tried to control for.

I do believe that Barron is on the spectrum, and that is why Trump is obsessed with autism. No man wants to blame his old sperm. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7396152/

I will miss the nightly reruns of Celebrity Family Feud. How will I know what 100 Americans would want to poop on if they could fly like a bird? (actual question)