It's inevitable, when you skate, that at some point you will fall and hit yourself, your body on the pavement.

I am grateful for my father who taught me to fall.  

I've been stalled in skating... a few days ago on Twitter I said, "Why not rennovate the house during a press tour?" and that's really been quite the issue. Inches thick dust, a confrontation with possessions that usually reside, possibly retired, in closets, all in the open and questioning their own extistential existance. 

Yesterday was long, in good and bad ways.  I took my son to judo, and as he was done, I slipped into the adult class, to my shock making it simply through the warm ups and into the grips and holds.  My son studies judo, my father teaches it.  I myself am a brown belt, but I have not practiced regularily in years.  Sill muscle memory and sheer animal intelligence prevail.  

That night, as I was driving back, my sitter texted me.  Like a drug dealer knowing when her client needs another hit.  "Hey, need any help tonight?"

And just like that, it was on.  It didn't matter that I'd worked ten hours, that I'd just done a two hour workout and was drenched with sweat, that that was my second work out for the day, I was ready to go.  I managed to get home, hastily eat an apple, and dig out my skates.  I did not have my indoor wheels on my Lolly skates, so I pulled out my Hello Kitty Skates, a limited edition skate by Moxi that I'd found by sheer chance on ebay.

I met with my skate buddy and we drove off towards northern lights, swapping stories of our days (we could not be more different professionally) and swearing at the traffic.  The whole communte north is a festering of frustration, raw nerve ends that irritate.  We made it with just an hour to skate, but better than nothing and as I glided out on the floor I promptly stuck one skate pretty  much inside the other and flew forward.  My skate partner is quite a bit bigger than me and well seasoned in derby so I didn't actually manage to knock us both down, he served as a sort of solid human wall.  But I found that I was still warm and alive from judo and quite unafraid of falling.

Even though the skates were stiff, and new, and the wheels aren't my favourite type, by a few laps I felt an ease skating that I haven't ever felt.  Dance moves I'd stumbled over weeks before were fluid.  I wasn't avoiding the floor, or the inevitable crash, I was prepared for it.  The saying in judo is, "Maximium efficiency for mutual benefit," and that applies to how you fall as well.  It was the best hour of my day, my week, it was unsurpassed, actually, and it was, quite simply, what I needed.  

Freedom comes in many forms and many tenors.  For me it's less about the pressures from the outside than the darkness on the inside, of self regard, of a a relentless drive for professional success that can be quite pensive and difficult to carry at times.  I find freedom in a shifting perspectives.  There's not a part of my life I don't carry with me and know the shape of, and regard as part of the mosaic.  Skating is no different.

And it's a simple answer to the next morning's process, when writing comes as it does so often lately, with little difficulty.  The organizational social geometric structures I compose for work, my own pages of words for pleasure and my own projects. I am certainly tired, and a bit sore, but there's nothing in me that scares away from that kind of difficult.

It's fairly easy to carry the falling metaphor to a conclusion and so I'll allow you to walk it there, as docile as it is.  It doesn't make it any less true.  I feel often I can do the most difficult things because I have the knowledge of how to fail, break, fall down hard, repair, solve and rebuild.  I think of this too, in the shockwaves that follow Manchester.  I think of it because yes, it is all connected.  All of it, everything.


From the ground upwards,

QRC


MORE
5/26 '17 1 Comment
"Are you injured?"

"Only my dignity."
 

What was your last name before you were married?

Lynch. No, Gray. No. I don't remember. 

So... when you were a child, in school, what last name did you use? 

I'm not sure. 

I need this application for this document expedited it's an emergency I'm going to Jamaica on the 12th

(really? Because you need a liver transplant and the only place you can get it is at the world-renowned Montego Bay Hospital, under the care of Dr. Hurricane McRum? That IS an emergency!) 

we can have it for you in five business days, on June 5th.

no that's not soon enough I'm going to Jamaica on the 12th it was a super cheap package I just had to have it

the 5th is before the 12th

they told me you had same-day service here

we have same-day service in Scranton

why does Scranton have same day service and you don't? 

The population of Scranton is 75,281. The population of Philadelphia is 1.56 million. We get 200 applications a day.

but I can get same day service in Scranton 

ok, here's your application. 

*tsh* I can't go to Scranton

I guess  you're not going to Jamaica either.

MORE
5/26 '17 6 Comments
I fucking love you.
ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED!!!
I also have to add:
Tiny little African American lady, dressed all in bright red, needed help with her application today. I helped her while a crazy lady screamed and hollered expletives on her cell phone. Tons of F Bombs. When we finished, I reached my hand under the glass to her, and said something like "it's a noisy day." she squeezed mine, and said "bless you."
I love these extra bonus stories here in the comments. :)

Y'know, if that one tiny African American lady was an asshole, your job would almost be easier in a way... if everyone sucks, you can just write off everything as "This whole thing sucks," and be done. But then you get these genuine, beautiful, human-connecty moments that show you a glimmer of magic and wonder in a sea of shitpoop, which means you can't just keep yourself completely sealed off 100% of the time. Damn those nice, good people!

This is bleakly hilarious, and hilariously bleak. And your vignette above about the tiny woman is perfect - your kindness and empathy and her appreciation elicited actual "awwwws!" from me n' my beautiful girl.

But I swear to Frigg, if this earworm of "Montego Bay" doesn't die a painful but decisive death in the next hour...

(Completely unrelated: click here! You won't believe what happens next! One weird trick! #12 is golden! Do you like me Y/N? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXjVd0TeOX0 )
Oh Lorde. When those backup singers pop up out of the reeds at 0:50...
 

Quite a few places on my body continue to ache from the 7 minute workout challenge thing. We've been doing it for three weeks now, I think? Since the end of the burpees.

So it's 7 minute workout. You do 12 different exercises, specific ones in a designated order, each for 30 seconds, with a 10 second rest. You're supposed to go all-out -- produce maximum effort -- during the 30 seconds. It just requires a floor and a sturdy chair/bench/table/box.

  • Jumping jacks
  • Wall sit
  • Push ups
  • Ab crunch
  • Box step-up
  • Squats
  • Triceps dip
  • Plank
  • High knees running in place
  • Lunges
  • Push-up with rotation
  • Side plank

My problem at this point is breathing during the planks since there are four aerobic exercises before, and two minutes of max aerobic effort leaves me bloody breathless. Since the plank tightens up the abdominals, I can't take full deep breaths.

Anyway, it seems to be a good fit for my attitude, though it would probably be smart to add another 7-10 minute activity during the day. Maybe 50 burpees! Maybe not (gag).

If you're interested, there are a lot of apps that will coach you. A free one for the iPhone is the "7M Workout" which is by consumer products company J&J as a branding effort (It doesn't seem to actually solicit anything, though it might be scraping some personal info. I haven't given it any permissions). I'm sure there are ones for Android too.

Once you know the exercise forms, an app is overkill: all you really need is a 7 minute audio track with timer beeps and prompts.

MORE
5/25 '17 2 Comments
Burpees are hell on earth. The other exercises seem reasonable... but burpees can go F themselves.

Flabbily,
Jill
This seems like just the sort of thing that I should be (but am not) doing.
 

Deep in a comment thread from one of my prior posts I mentioned that the New York Times curates an almost-daily list of well-considered articles from both the center, right and the left. Reading these articles lets you see how the other side(s) may be thinking, without having to wade through all the crap that's online. Folks seemed interested in it, so I figured I'd point y'all to it. 

It may be hidden behind a paywall, but I reckon if you click this link from an incognito browser you should be OK. I pay for the Times and don't feel too guilty for sharing this.  

Here ya go!

Writers From the Right and Left React to Trump’s Riyadh Speech, and More https://nyti.ms/2qPF6IY


MORE
5/23 '17 1 Comment
Thanks for this.
 

Introversion and Extroversion might be looked at through the lens of a need to perform. If we have to be "on stage" -- acting in certain ways in order to conform to expectations or needs -- that is probably a social energy sink. Conversely if there are people around whom we do not need to perform in any particular way, that is, be at rest or just "being ourselves", that time would probably be energy recharging.

One can be on-stage and still be alone or with just one or two people reading a book or being quiet. If being alone and quiet isn't your natural state you have to perform it at some level of consciousness.

I know this isn't particularly original. However, I came at this thought by the angle of thinking about how there are people with whom I need to perform "Sean": people I need to pay attention to; and people with whom I don't: I don't have to be conscious of their presense -- with whom I can be comfortable just being present in my own skin.

But then it gets all muddled up with habit and performative ruts and "who the hell am I, and who the hell do I want to be?" and my belief that the sense of self isn't much more than the story we keep retelling to ourself (consciously and subconsciously) about how we react to the things around us.

Deep thoughts for a Tuesday. I really should reserve a car and go buy hardboard panels.

MORE
5/23 '17 2 Comments
This has given me stuff to think about.

I only learned the real (better?) meanings of "introverted" and "extroverted" in the last 6-7 years or so. I always considered myself extroverted because I did a lot of theater / band / choir / speaking from middle school through adulthood. But I never considered how, ever since I was a teeeeeny kid, my parents would find me sitting in my room "staring at the wall," which I still do, which was my way of processing/clearing the mental queue and recharging the ol' batt'ries. Hello, introvert. Who knew?

So, thanks for giving me some good stuff to ponder.

(Also, an aside: LOVING your paintings on IG, by the way.)
Thanks you!
 

So a long time ago I was talking to a friend about doing the art for a webcomic that a he wanted to develop. When we first started out, I did some concept work while he worked on world building. All of this makes sense to a certain degree.

The problem was that this went on for a very long time. Many months, in fact, passed without our having written / illustrated a single comic panel.

We discussed it, and he wanted to keep going as we were. I wanted to get cracking on a product that people could enjoy.

We agreed to a compromise: I said "Why don't we try a 'minimum viable product'? Write up a five page comic, I'll illustrate it, and we'll put it online. That way we can see if anyone other than us gives a shit."

When it took many months more for those five pages worth of text to come my way, I bowed out.

Now that I'm working on my little project, I'm writing a lot in a lexicon of sorts. Worldbuilding. Not nearly on the level that he did, but I find myself wondering if I'm distracting myself a bit too much with unnecessary things. I find myself doing searches on late 70's and early 80's fashion. Digging up news clippings from 1979 Detroit. At best, these would be 'stage dressing'. None of it will be strictly speaking necessary for the book.

So I guess my question is this: Do you have some rule that you keep yourselves to in order to keep from spending too much time on extraneous elements of your storytelling? To keep yourselves from doing too much homework and not enough actual writing?

ETA:

MORE
5/23 '17 7 Comments
I love this image. Really really.
Thanks!

I'm working on a friend / fellow squatter / love interest for Patch in the book. She's the one who is smart enough to keep their little band of homeless kids from getting scooped up. She's not exactly a leader per se, but she's alpha enough to draw Patch's eye.

Ouch. Sorry. Didn't mean for that awful pun to sneak out.
nope. I go deep on worldbuilding. I just try not to let that stop me from releasing things if someone is depending on me. Really cool stuff can always be backformed.
Interesting. I hope this post doesn't come across as my not understanding the value of worldbuilding (I absolutely do) I just fear allowing it to become the limiting factor in moving forward.

Has that ever been an issue for you? Feeling like it slowed you down? (Even if you felt it remained necessary.)
It's the part I like best, so not really- it may be why I'm not good at doing stuff on my own, but the other time I'm doing it is for a LARP, which has built in hard deadlines. Which help.
Yeah. That might be the best takeaway for me - to set hard deadlines for myself.

(Thanks for the info!)
Yeah. That might be the best takeaway for me - to set hard deadlines for myself.

(Thanks for the info!)
 

First, a text from my (second) ex-husband at 7:30AM "Happy Mother's Day!" 

Then our kid wakes up and first thing out of her mouth is "Happy Mother's Day!" And she gave me 2 awesome touching mother's day cards. And a handprint keepsake.

At noon, my current flirtation texts "Happy mother's day to you"

At 3PM, my cousin texts "Happy mother's day!"

At 4PM, my neighbor stops by with strawberries and a "Happy Mother's Day!" wish

At 5PM, a friend from DC texts "Happy Mother's Day"

At 6PM, my brother calls and leaves a "Happy Mothers Day!" message

At 8:30PM my boyfriend from 2007-2010 texts "Happy mothers day :-)"

I love my wonderful life and the wonderful people in it. I feel wrapped in good wishes and oh so blessed. 

PS: and the next day, I got flowers :-)

MORE
5/19 '17 1 Comment
Happy Mo- oops I'm late
 

Here are the seedings Madeline gave me. 

I transplanted 3 into larger pots, broke open the compost bin, and mixed that nasty stanky liquid in, gave them a soak. Vince had offered me cocktail hour before I went outside to re-pot them, and for some reason, Maslow's Need Hierarchy made me say, "in a minute, I have to play in the dirt first." 

Clearly, I need more pots. And dirt. And plants.

Today I communicated with a deaf person and a person from Mali (who spoke French; not at the same time) via a translation line. I'm living in the FUTURE.

MORE
5/18 '17 4 Comments
Hello, little plants!

What's a translation line? Is it like what the people use at the UN? Is there an actual translator person on the phone, or is it a comput0r?
I thought it would be a computer. It's a 3-way call with a live translator.

In the case of the deaf person, I called his phone number, It rerouted to someplace, I heard a recording that said, "please wait," and then it connected to a guy who sounded like Standard 20-Something White Mid-Atlantic American Male. He talked like it was a normal conversation, and typed what I said, almost as quickly I spoke.

Interestingly enough, the guy to whom I was actually talking was kind of a prick, and the poor translator was caught in the middle.

The French call was different. I called a translation service and plugged in codes for my office and French. The call was routed to a native speaker of English, French, and Haitian French. She called the woman on her cell phone to make a three way call.

So I had to keep trying to get the woman to make eye contact with me, to remember it's me she's talking to, not the translator on the phone.
We soooooo live in the future!

Thank you for explaining this to me.
You dirty girl!
 

It's so much of it, isn't it? The press of the day and hours against what comes next, neither wishing to dismiss it but also, not quite claiming it the way it ought, because the savoured hour waits.

And what a day it is.  The air is cool, rushing, the light changes from gold to white to blue on a whim.  All of outside feels like the ocean.  I stepped out this morning, on to the front step, the damp from the rains the night before soaking into my socks, and I spread my arms to it.  Soon, too soon, the hot summers will come, heavy breathed and and in some element, relentlesss.  But these flickering seasons, fall and spring, which seem to be growing briefer and briefer here in my small corner of the world as the the big blue marble warms, are precious to me.  Fall always makes me restless, makes me long to run long distances, to move, to migrate. Spring drives me out, into the fresh, into the air, filled with ideas and moments.  I throw open the doors to the cool moodiness of it just as I put on a sweater to guard against the intermittent chill.

Tonight, I want to lose myself in music and motion.  I don't want to drag my expectations and run into those curdled, half formed feelings of frustration.  What is that anyway?  It's not an expectation anyone has crowned me with, it's the thing I do for me.  And yet inside me is that part that will always drive harder, want the extremes, want to do well, do well, and it's never enough.  It's why I think I will never be a winter or summer person, but always a fall and spring, enamoured of the changes, fascinated by the most ardent, difficult parts of process.

*********************************************************************

I haven't had the sensation of falling in love in a long time.  Too long. But this return to something I care about has all the hallmarks.  I am at the sixteen week mark and I find the milkman is coming up the stairs, waking me.  I find the coffee cooling in the cup, I find that progress is more difficult now that base skills have been regained.  I will have to work harder, attend to the growth part of things.  I'm old enough but not so old I don't remember the pain of growing quickly as a teenager, the way the bones stretched and the muscles screamed to catch up.  There's a bit of that now. But pretty masochist that I am, certain kinds of pain are not a deterrent.  I hate being conqueored but I long for a leadership that is stronger than mine.

So I fight against what I don't know, what I can't master.  I don't feel fear or self consciousness, as the fight is so genuinely with myself and always has been.

*********************************************************************

For all of this, you'd think I was good at this already.  Had some mastery.  I am not, like many things I'm forgettable as a sound once it's ended.  I don't stand out in any way in my skating, nor do I expect to.  However, there are private things I wear and do just for me and this is in many  ways, part of that small garden of things I keep that give me joy, regardless of skill.

I'm evangelical about this feeling.  I want you all to have it too.  I want to urge you to find the way life feels like this but it's a tidal wave, it's always too much - I am so frequently too much- that I come here and leave it on the page.

*********************************************************************

My life is rioting around me as I write this.  It is time to go, time to slip into that liquid sunlight, time to tend to the children, time to attend to the very big project.

But each night, the door opens and I go through a forest of gold, of silver, of diamonds. I dance all night and I am sleepy in the morning and it may be that my slippers through but I have no desire to wake or be saved.  

Don't save me from the dreams that give me the fire to do my other work so well.  I would never have wanted the Beast to change into a man.  I'm the mother who hunts the wolf that ate her mother and scared her child. 

I'm the woodcutter who heard the call and answered, with his axe.

I need these things to feel alive.

I suspect you do, as well.

yours, verbatim,

Queen

MORE
5/16 '17 1 Comment
[Reconsitutes ABBA for the sole purpose of turning this post into a single]
 

Honest, sincere question:

What does a news article or report need so you'll consider it "not fake"?   I imagine some folks may just dismiss any news they disagree with as "fake news."  But I'm trying to assess what criteria need to be satisfied in order for someone to accept that what is being presented, whether they agree with the article's viewpoint or not, as "reported accurately."

I acknowledge that humans are gloriously imperfect, and that it is physically impossible to report something without imparting some molecule of bias/slant.  But anyway.

If you are left-leaning, are you capable of reading an article from Breitbart or PrisonPlanet and evaluate it with the mindset that it could potentially be accurate? If the Washington Post cites a source "who only spoke on the condition of anonymity," would you be more apt to believe it's "real" and not "fake?" What if Breitbart cited an anonymous source? Would you instantly think, "This is bullshit" and roll your eyes? What if they interviewed Comey directly?

If you are fervent Trump supporter, is it even possible for you to read something on The Huffington Post or even the Washington Post and believe it's within the realm of possibility that it may be accurate? What if they cite an anonymous source? What if they cite a primary source? What if they interviewed Comey himself, for example? 

What criteria need to be met for you to feel satisfied that the reporter is reporting accurate information?  Do you need unedited video from Trump himself? If he were incriminating himself, would you dismiss it as doctored video? 

I'm struggling with this.


(x-posted to DW.)

MORE
5/16 '17 44 Comments
Conditions of anonymity have to be respected. If the news the anonymous source reports is specific enough, the source might not matter.

"A Mar-A-Lago source speaking on condition of anonymity said that after Mr. Trump was served roasted beet salad by an elderly waitress, he said, "No servers over the age of 30 willever be hired in America again, that's it, final, only 25 year old waitresses with big sparkly tits."
Yep, I definitely respect those anonymous sources. But I see myself nodding in perfect, blind, this-is-totally-factual agreement whenever it's printed in the NYTimes, slightly less but still in the high 90th percentile when it's cited by WaPo... but if Breitbart quoted an anonymous source I'd laugh and roll my eyes. Which is... I guess... dumb?

I used to get this thing from the NYTimes that said "Here are some well-written, well-researched articles from the right that you might wanna read to get out of your lefty echo chamber." I found it immeasurably helpful... until it stopped automatically arriving to my inbox. (Must investigate.)
Please let us know if you rediscover this. I would like to check it out.
Seconded. I am too much in the echo box or just taking a break altogether. This is no-goodnik.
Here's today's NYT round-up of good writing from both sides:

Writing From Right and Left: Reactions on a Special Counsel, and More https://nyti.ms/2qvqL4o
I would also like to know how to get my tits to sparkle. Are the tits themselves sparkly, or are they just wearing a disco-ball bra?

WE DISCUSS THE IMPORTANT SHIT HERE.
Fortunately for you, I have a bag of breast sparkles RIGHT HERE. Just fly on out.

Happy to be of service.
Sometimes sparkle is in the eye of the beholder.
These are excellent questions. To be honest, I take everything with a huge-ass grain of salt these days, no matter the source. This comes from (my perception of) what happened during the primaries, with Bernie being systematically left out of many of the sources I used to trust. When I say this, I am often met with backlash but... it is what it is. Everything you raise in this post deserves a lot more good, hard thinkng.
Yeah, it's definitely easy for me to point the fingers at the "dumbasses on the alt-right." But they're doing the same thing to lefties, and we all think we're right, and we all cannot comprehend how the other side can feel the way they do.

*shrug*
The much-bashed MSM has a lot of motivation to get the story right.

For one - their subscribers and advertisers demand it.

If the NYTimes made up stories and got busted - and they will - they kill their own integrity. It's devastating - subscribers to the Times, the Washington Post, watchers of the evening news and CNN, etc. are expecting the stories they read/see to be accurate. The more stories they botch, the more subscribers and advertisers they lose. To most media outlets that actually make money, journalistic integrity isn't just a plaque on a wall - it's the core of their survival.

In other words: they have accountability.

Super-partisan outlets, from Fox News to PoliticusUsa, care less about accuracy and more about making their readers happy. Their audience wants to be told they are right, and so the stories will be skewed in that direction. Accuracy isn't as importance as obsiquiousness. (That's why I don't consider Fox News a news outlet.) Still, they have advertisers too, and if they're humiliated repeatedly with bad stories, even people who pay their bills will rebel.

Sure, the Times, Washington Post, etc. are going to make sure Trump takes a punch or two in their stories. It's only fair - he started it. But there's a reason the Times has started the much-derided practice of "positive stories about Trump every Sunday" - they need to show to the dunderheads that "liberal bias" doesn't define them. It's easy to find cases where the NYT uncovered stories that hurt the "left" - they broke the story about Hillary's ill-fated email server, after all.

Now, none of this is to suggest that the MSM doesn't get it wrong sometimes. It happens. Reporters manufacture stories (sup, Stephen Glass) or get fooled by bad intel (the final season of The Wire was based on the true story of cops "inventing" a serial killer in order to direct funding to the department; this really happened). Sometimes the reporters misunderstand the information in front of them. Or sometimes, they're simply lied to - this happened to the Wilmington News Journal, who retracted an entire dynamic story based on the subject's delusional lies. (I know the subject. She lied.)

But reputable media sources point out their errors and clean up the story, and make it clear they were wrong. "Alt" media doesn't bother - they justify their error by saying "well, it COULD have been true."

I think it's our responsibility to take stories at face value. The recent story about Trump spilling a crucial piece of intel to the Russians was carefully parsed by the Times; they framed it as "our sources say this." But it's clear they have FAITH in their sources, and that's the crux of Jill's question: should she have faith in their sources, too?

To decide, look at the track record. Look at their win/loss record. That's your best bet. It won't be 1.000, but the MSM is still doing a bang-up job.

By now, the Times story been corroborated - by Trump himself - and several sources claim Israel is the country that has been providing us with great intel. Israel is reportedly quite furious about Trump's leak.

Is that true? We'll see. If so, it's a feather in the MSM's cap - and another reason to trust them.

Here's the thing, though. The Trump campaign really did change the rules. Before him, truth mattered. But he proved you can absolutely lie, contradict yourself, and lie again and it doesn't matter WITH A CERTAIN CROWD. (What motivates that crowd? Everything from extreme right politics to a need to feel like their memes actually make a difference.) Truth doesn't matter - an effective lie is as desirable as just telling the truth. But THEY HAVE NO ACCOUNTABILITY. If they're wrong, they ignore it and move on.

BUT. These people in Washington? The ones with jobs who have to deal with the NYTimes reports? When reporters ask them to comment on a story they know is damaging, they're in a tough spot. If they deny it and it turns out to be true, their credibility gets damaged - at best. Look at McMaster - his first statement was a bit of Nathan Thurm wordplay, but then he was more blunt in his denials. There's a consequence to that. McMaster is now widely considered a liar. That's not a great look for a Trump staffer at this moment.

And that's the final step on the circle of journalistic life. Real people are asked to confirm the news. In the real world - er, rather, DC - people take a huge political risk denying what they know to be true. Especially when there are so many staffers who WANT to leak Trump's Follies to the press. (Along these lines - WaPo and NYT have both said they've dealt with lots of deliberate fake "intel" from people who want to discredit them. It's a tricky business. Everyone thinks they're the Joker.)

Oh - and sources have been anonymous since the inception of American journalism. They HAVE to be. Their bosses don't want people talking to the press. But they do it, because they need the press to get the word out there and stop the madness. People who cry "reveal your sources or GTFO!" can be defined in one word:

Un-American.

So Buzzfeed is that site that makes you answer questions about tacos to tell you what narwhal you are. But they are actually great for long-term stories - Ben Smith is widely respected for his political journalism. And yes, they lead the way in clickbaity headlines, but I think that's just the way of the present - it's a fight to the death for clicks out there. So get used to it. But Buzzfeed is no joke when it comes to reporting that makes a difference - look how they raised the hood on the alt-right dogwhistling of Million Dollar Extreme Presents: World Peace, causing Adult Swim to cancel them. The author got heavily attacked and threatened by the sniveling fans of the show (and ultimately, geez, who cares), but it was excellent, informative, sourced journalism.

There are many "journalists" who don't answer to anybody. They have no accountability. That doesn't make them always wrong - sometimes they have sources too (Mike Cernovich has "his people" inside the WH, after all). But it literally doesn't matter when he's wrong. He loses nothing. Not like the MSM.

This was a long and serious post. Sorry about that. Let me make it up to you: An old woman goes to the doctor. "Doc, I have a problem with gas. I fart 10 times a day. Fortunately they're silent and don't stink - in fact, I've farted twice and you have no idea." The Doc says "I see. Take these pills and see me next week." Next week: "Doc, my farts are still silent, but now they stink! What the hell?" Doc says "Great! Now that we've cleared up your sinuses, let's work on your hearing."
You're like smart and stuff.
I think all investigative journalism should end in a joke as a reward for getting that far.

A follow up question : You say the MSM has accountability. But to whom? By whom? Who stands up to the Times and says "You got this wrong" (or "LOL cuck libtard fake news!")? Who watches the watchmen?
Two little old ladies run into each other at the supermarket.
One says to the other, "Barbara, you've got a suppository in your ear!"
Barbara says, "What?" After several rounds of negotiations, Barbara says, "Great, now I know where my hearing aid is."
I could give you an answer to this, but why reinvent the wheel? UW offers an entire university course on the subject now.

The syllabus, all of the lectures and homework, and a bunch of additional resources are all available for free online.

http://callingbullshit.org/index.html

I also found this fascinating and highly helpful:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0074VTHH0
Oooh! Thank you!
I love my smart friends. Daaaang.
Well, looky here! Thank you!
(Love the URL, BTW.)
There's also the idea of emotional appeal. For example, WaPo and NYTimes don't care about feelings, just facts. If the facts evoke an emotional reaction, great. Click bait news sites tend to hyperbolize with emotionally charged language.
Ya know? I used to think that, too.

If we're talking about The Times, I agree with your assessment of facts over feelings. But WaPo's headlines are increasingly BuzzFeedy / clickbaity and I'm starting to seek out the more even-handed companion article on the NYTimes after I read the waaaaaaay biased article on WaPo. (And don't get me wrong, I am WaPo's target audience. I agree with their leftiness. I love them. But maaaaan, those headlines are getting soooo annoying (or at least how they're summarized in my 3x-day emails I get from them).

Here are some examples from today (because it's the first one I grabbed):

--Trump doesn’t embody what’s wrong with Washington. Pence does. The president is crazy. What’s everyone else’s excuse?

-- The experts were right: Trump isn’t fit to be president

-- ‘I was in total shock’: Ohio police officer accidentally overdoses after traffic stop

-- Bill Gates told new grads to read this book. Now it’s surging on Amazon.

-- Paul Ryan might regret having said this about Hillary Clinton

I mean, I'm surprised those headlines don't say "Hosted by Outbrain" or "Zergnet" after them. I get that newspapers need to sell subscriptions and ads... so I bought subscrptions to WaPo and NYT right after the election. The NYT just feels fairer to my eyeballs.
Yeah, sometimes I have to search out the same story on multiple news sites and let my brain sift it a bit. I like getting American news from British sites (BBC, The Independent, The Guardian) because the distance means they talk in broader terms. It's calmer.

Avoid The Daily Mail.
Daily Mail = NO NO NO.

I do occasionally dabble in The Guardian, but seem to recall maxxing out on free articles and forgetting the incognito window trick. Thanks for the reminder!
Okay, before I go clicking around in the darker corners of the intarwebs, what's with Daily Mail?
It's basically the UK's version of the New York Post, mixed with a little National Enquirer.

By way of example, they're the ones who doxxed the grad student in one of my labs who was auctioning off her virginity online a few years ago. One of their reporters showed up at her lab to harass her ("don't you want to tell your side of the story?") and I had to run him off.
BUT, and this is probably bad, they ran the story about Sean Spicer's college nickname, verifiably.

Broken clock, etc.
Yes. They're not particularly fake news. More just sleazy shitty news.
Got it. No Daily Mail.

(Thanks.)
Daily Mail is great for shitty gossip, not so much for news. Sometimes I read it as a guilty pleasure!
Have you seen that things going around from Oatmeal about beliefs &changing your mind? ... Thing thingy (I googled it for ya) http://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe


Yeah. I love that.

I love the Oatmeal in general, but that hits extra hard these days.
Oooh! I hadn't seen this! Thank you! I typically like how the Oatmeal boils stuff down.

((Clicks through))

OMG OMG LOVE THIS LOVE THIS SO MUCH THANK YOU!
I instinctively eye roll for pretty much everything from the Right. I don't _want_ to. For a while, I looked for a source that I could 'trust' and get some balance. I wasn't able to find one. I'm uncertain how much of that is a failure on my own part to not respond with a knee jerk reaction as soon as I started reading.

For a little while, I got really high on my horse about it though. This seemed like 'proof' of the wrongness of the Right. "They can't even write a simple article anywhere that just states facts. It's all emotional bullshit."

But in the end, I'm not that naive. "We're" doing it too.

Even valued papers like WaPo and NYTimes. Because here's the thing: their job isn't to be unbiased. It's to sell newspapers. In a world where that's getting harder and harder to do, even they are succumbing to the 'cheap shots' that are click bate-y headlines and emotional wording. Leading their audience to an emotional response. Because people who get worked up about something link to their articles.

One of the podcasts I listen to This Week in Google ( https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-google ) or TWiG has a regular contributor by the name of Jeff Jarvis. He's long been a journalist and is doing work on a number of things involved with the theme of "How do we 'fix' journalism and hold news sources accountable in the digital age?" He's a bit curmudgeonly (in a way that I think you would adore) and while I don't always agree with him, I give him extreme props for being well thought out and forward thinking.

Bottom line is that I don't have a good answer, unfortunately. My own 'solution' is completely unacceptable. Burying your head in the sand does nothing. It helps nothing. It improves nothing.

So I commend you for trying to figure out a set of criteria for more valid sources. It's a great goal. I'm going to do some more thinkin' on the subject and if I come up with anything, I'll let you know.
This seems of value, so I tossed them a few bucks. I hope it launches:
https://www.wikitribune.com
Podcasts: Left, Right and Center (discussion of current events/politics between three people with said POV, some change week to week).
Democracy Decoded: ex-lobbyist tells you how Washington really works, helps explain current events, more fact-based than opinion-based.
But you will love Science Vs. it analyzes political issues that are science-based, like fracking and climate change and the podcasters are from Australia.
These sound perfect-- thank you! Podcasts aren't a regular part of my media consumption, but it looks like maybe it should be.
Podcasts are good for boring car rides and plane rides (for plane, download your episodes before you take off).
These sound great - thanks!
I look for specificity and source citations.

Bad example: "A source close to the White House said that a sealed envelope containing personal information was delivered to the Russian consulate."

Good example: "Wendy Higgerton, White House chief of flatware, said that she sent a thank you note to Sascha Bierlislubovitz of the Russian Consulate, for their gift of seven oyster forks."
I love you SO MUCH.
I live to serve. :)
Yeah. That was a pretty great set of examples. (Why does that sound dirty?)

Also, I will just say that I think it pretty solidly covers what I look for, though I too am struggling. A lot.

In fact, my greatest fault right now is that I'm playing Ostrich and burying my head and 'hiding' because I can't really read ANY article without immediately punching holes in it and coming away thinking "that was completely biased bullshit" - even from the side I agree with.
My podcast habit is hurting. I used to listen to about 3-4 hours a day of podcasts- smart, dumb, weird, and Whatever Happened To Pizza At McDonald's?, but right now I haven't been able to feed that habit enough.