Friday comment contest
No jokes about the commenting system on the new Web site, please. We're working on it. For now, we'll go back to the old blog for our weekly winner.
Difficult to avoid the Erin Andrews saga, since that produced the majority of comments, so let's give it to Jeff for this reaction to my guilt-ridden handwringing and promises to try to be less naughty in the future when it comes to posting pictures of young women.
Come now, Neil. No reason to run 180 degrees in the other direction. Your audience is primarily male. We like to look at pretty ladies. We like beer and sports and chicken wings. That's not going to change. Nor should the things you, and other tasteful journalists, use to whet our various appetites. With the caveat being that it not cross a moral, ethical, or legal line. Most people know, instinctively, where that line is. You know that showing pictures of cheerleaders dressed like cheerleaders is okay. That showing swimsuit models in swimsuits is just fine. Most of you, and most of us with half a brain, understand the difference between those things and this disgusting one that the vidoegraphing creepy sicko pulled.
You may recall what Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart once said in a 1964 case seeking to define the word 'pornography.' "I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so," wrote Stewart. "But I know it when I see it."