ShareThis Page
The Thursday wrap |

The Thursday wrap

| Thursday, December 7, 2006 12:00 a.m

The Times in play? The Old Gray Lady — The New York Times — may be “in play,” as in ripe for taking away from the Sulzberger family. As the New York Post tells it: “Billionaire insurance titan Maurice ‘Hank’ Greenberg has begun buying huge blocks of New York Times stock to break the Sulzberger family’s stranglehold on the media empire.” Mr. Greenberg is said to believe The Times’ stock is undervalued. Given the scandals that have plagued The Times, is it any wonder?

The queen’s English: Agence France Presse is reporting that a University of Munich researcher has concluded Britain’s Queen Elizabeth’s once Upper Received dialect had evolved into a “less plummy” Standard Received. A professor studied the queen’s annual Christmas broadcasts dating to 1952. The study was reported in the Journal of Phonetics. All’s well and good, we guess. But a French wire service reporting on a German university study of the queen’s devolving English strikes us as just a bit snarly.

Embracing the truth: In a spate of incredibly good judgment, the National Science Teachers Association has rejected an offer of 50,000 free copies of Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth.” And with good reason: The film is pure propaganda.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.