[mccookgazette.com] Fair ~ 73°F  
High: 71°F ~ Low: 30°F
Friday, Nov. 28, 2014

Media Fail

Posted Wednesday, June 8, 2011, at 12:55 PM

I have often stated whether on my blog or in comments that I fully believe that the media, for the large part, has been failing us for a long time. I do not, however, believe it to be failing us because of supposed political bias. For me, the media is fairly balanced in it's reporting on straight news. When it comes to politics that is often a different story.

Where the media has largely failed us is that the supposed "news" outlets no longer do research before reporting on stories. This often leads to mistakes and from time to time reporting a story that is not in actuality real.

The latest example comes from the town I am living in, Russellville, Arkansas. About two weeks ago a story broke about Russellville's Middle School yearbook having a poll in ranking the five worst people in history. On that list were Adolph Hitler and Osama bin Laden, which just about everyone can agree on. Charles Manson is also on that list (personally I can think of quite a few people that could and should be ahead of him on the list). Where the controversy came was the inclusion of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney at numbers 4 and 5 respectively.

Politics aside it was a ridiculous list to have in the yearbook to begin with, but where the media failed was in simple geography and the name of the school.

On numerous websites it was reported that Russellville Middle School was in Little Rock, Arkansas. It is not and very simple research would have fixed this problem. Unfortunately some "news" organizations simply copy and paste their stories and that is how the mistake is made. I do not know which site was the first to make this error, but the mistake probably occurred because the original story was originally posted on fox16.com's website, which is a channel in Little Rock and the assumption was made that since a Little Rock station was reporting on the story that the school was actually in Little Rock. Again, it is a simple error but one that could have been avoided. Instead absolutely no research was done on the story so websites begin reporting that the school was indeed in Little Rock. Yahoo.com was the first website I noticed the mistake on.

The other mistake that has been made is that some "news" sites have been reporting the school as Russellville High School. It is not, again simple research would have fixed this problem but the sites chose not to do any research and went with it.

This is a microcosm of the larger problem in with "news" organizations. Instead of doing the research needed into a potential story in order to make sure that that story is accurate too many organizations just want to break the story out there so they go with it as it is.

One example on the national side that comes to mind is the Tiger Woods accident. When it first broke it was reported that he was involved in a two car accident and was in very serious condition at the hospital. All of this was being reported AFTER he had already been released from the hospital with scrapes and bruises (reportedly at the hands of his wife not the accident though this has never been confirmed either).


Comments
Showing comments in chronological order
[Show most recent comments first]

Michael,

I agree in some ways, this is also reminiscent of Weiner sexting reporting, odd you didn't mention that.

What is particularly troubling for me about your post is that your problem is with the media getting the name of the school and the town wrong. You apparently have no problem with Bush and Cheney making the list of 5 worst people, although from your post it seems that maybe you're just upset that they didn't come in before Manson.

Still awaiting an apology

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Wed, Jun 8, 2011, at 6:38 PM

Whether or not this is indicative of Arkansas education system, that's a debate for another day. What is important is Weiner-gate. The MSM has completely missed the boat. What would Weiner have done to keep this off the news? Looking at the level of deceit he was willing to commit, I would say a lot. How much would he have traded, sold, or even stolen to keep this from going public? With the help of the MSM, he almost succeeded. Thankfully, the truth won.

-- Posted by Chunky Peanut Butter on Wed, Jun 8, 2011, at 8:54 PM

SW,

I, for one, am not suprised that mike has problems with the minutia of the article rather than the substance, (other than there are worse people than broken down crazy Charlie Manson). Russellville is one of mike's sacred cows. If something that can possibly be construed as negative is said about any of mike's sacred cows he goes on the offensive. But, that being said It sure is fun to watch him go on. I thought for a second that mike would be happy about the story, but then I realized that he might be upset that Russellville school systems are not far enough left for him to choose to work at. After all, cmon, Hitler AHEAD of Bush and Cheney? Probably a vast right wing conspiracy.

-- Posted by Sir Didymus on Wed, Jun 8, 2011, at 10:45 PM

The mixing up of the address of a school can be disconcerting...

Let's all focus on this travesty of irresponsible reporting. In the meanwhile Obama golfs while America burns...

-- Posted by Mickel on Thu, Jun 9, 2011, at 5:42 PM

I didnt read in mikes article where he states how he feels about the substance of the article, perhaps because thats not what his blog post was about. It soulds to me like a few people on here need to get their own blogs, then they can write what they want.

Weiner should resign, so should all of the other people who consort with hookers, steal, and lie. I can site several examples if this is something that really interests cpb.

"america burns", well, thats just funny

-- Posted by president obama on Thu, Jun 9, 2011, at 5:54 PM

(lap)dawg,

While I agree that Michael refuses to address the substance of the article, (I'm shocked! :P) I would actually be shocked if Michael were to address a blog that discussed a failure in the educational system.

Still awaiting an apology

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Thu, Jun 9, 2011, at 6:28 PM

Welcome back! I agree with you about the media largely failing us, I would go a step further and say its failed us miserably. On the other hand, I was wondering if maybe the history teachers were failing the students at this middle school by not teaching how evil

Joseph Stalin, Ivon IV of Russia, Genghis Khan, Attila the Hun, Kublai Khan, Idi Amin, Benito Mussolni were, just to name a few.

-- Posted by Keda46 on Thu, Jun 9, 2011, at 7:13 PM

Mike has not refused to adress it, ITS NOT WHAT THE BLOG IS ABOUT.

Once again, it sounds like you need your own blog, then you can adress whatever you want.

I was dissapointed he didnt touch on vinal siding versus concrete siding, but then I realized, THAT IS NOT WHAT THE BLOG IS ABOUT.

-- Posted by president obama on Thu, Jun 9, 2011, at 9:51 PM

I would have thought that when I stated, in the blog, thats can think of me worse than Manson it would be obvious that I would think the same of the two men below Manson. However, I guess obvious is not in your forte.

Considering that my blog wass about the failure of the media to do simple research and not a poll that was in the blog because I was using it as an example it is really counter-productive to talk about the poll.

As for Weiner, what he did was hardly news and hardly new. To this point nothing he did was illegal, and it certainly doesn't rank up there with propositioning men in an airport mens bathroom or sending sexual emails to underage boys.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Thu, Jun 9, 2011, at 10:35 PM

bigdawg,

I'm sure you can google political scandals involving sex and come up with a lot of incidents. Mostly, I'm sure, tilted towards Republicans and Conservatives. But I'll spare you the effort since the theme of this blog is the sloppy media. And the fact that I don't care.

I have to wonder, how character and personal integrity did the journos have to sacrifice to support Weiner? How do they explain this to their children. Do they teach their sons this is not acceptable behavior, it is demeaning to yourself and the women you send the photos of yourself? Or is it just a personal choice? How about their daughters? Do they teach them that these are the signs of a creep? Or is this just and adult choice? Or do they take the path of the hypocrite, do as I say, not as I do?

It is this, that is the true corruption of our media.

-- Posted by Chunky Peanut Butter on Thu, Jun 9, 2011, at 11:03 PM

Mike,

Ill bite, Ill go back to your apparent blog topic. Which news sources reported that the the yearbook thing was from Little Rock? All of the places I saw it reported was it was in Russellville. I guess I don't get my news from Yahoo.com. I still am amused that you are outraged enough about an error that, to be honest wasn't that far spread but you are downplaying the rest of the story. Priceless. As to the rest of it.... are you using the bad behavior of some to justify the bad behavior of others?!? REPUGNANT! Please mike, stop loathing yourself!

CPB,

Realize that mike, an quite a few other people are not concerned with ethics unless there is some hypocrisy exposed. Otherwise, lying and trying to distract by claiming a crime is committed against them is perfectly accepable. After all, it is only bad if you claim to have morals in the first place.

-- Posted by Sir Didymus on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 1:38 AM

P.S.

It seems that Yahoo.com has changed their story just to make mike look bad.

-- Posted by Sir Didymus on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 1:45 AM

News organizations are not like governmental organizations - they do not exist on the backs of taxpayers. How many of those failed media outlets have you supported lately by actually purchasing your news rather than reading what's free on the internet? You get what you pay for.

-- Posted by Linda1547 on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 6:52 AM

Well sir, thanks for letting us know what mike should get mad and offended at. I guess you are the decider on such topics. No, we are not using the bad behavior of others to justify anything.

-- Posted by president obama on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 7:47 AM

guess I'll have to add my two cents worth. I will defend and chide Michael at the same time. The premise of the post was that the MSM has failed/is failing us, and quite miserably. I completely agree. Michael, in my opinion, should have left it at that. No, he had to include the poll, which is not germane to the subject, because it included Cheney and Bush and that fits in with his liberal ideology.

-- Posted by doodle bug on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 9:34 AM

Doodle the poll is central to the story and it is used as an example and for context. The inly people making a point of the poll are not on the left or middle of the spectrum.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 4:50 PM

Didymus, it's called story corrections. I'm sure you have heard of this. In case you haven't here is a quick run-down just for you:

A news organization runs a story but with an error or errors in it. Those mistakes are found and CORRECTED.

Understand? Good.

Of course I'm sure it was just an error and a case of "jumping to conclusions" in a sad attempt at making fun of me. You would never do that.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 5:00 PM

Didymus I hope you are paying attention because I am about to make a CORRECTION. This is how it works.

In a earlier post I stated: "I would have thought that when I stated, in the blog, thats can think of me worse than Manson it would be obvious that I would think the same of the two men below Manson."

Obviously there is an error there. The statement should have read. I would have thought that when I stated, in the blog, that I can think of men worse than Manson...

Which brings me back to SW, I see you still have not responded to the fact that I do have an issue with the list though I don't actually say it as you want me to say it. It should be obvious that if I can think of men worse than Manson for the list, and he is third, it should be quite obvious that I can think of worse men than numbers 4 and 5. What do you say to that?

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 5:06 PM

Michael,

What then is your issue with the list? The only thing you said was: "Charles Manson is also on that list (personally I can think of quite a few people that could and should be ahead of him on the list). Where the controversy came was the inclusion of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney at numbers 4 and 5 respectively.

Politics aside it was a ridiculous list to have in the yearbook to begin with"

So you claimed that for reasons other than politics, that it is a ridiculous list, but you never said why or what your issue is. The only complaint you stated about the content of the list is that you think there are people who should be on it ahead of Charles Manson. Is anything I have said here incorrect?

To answer your question, I say the only person you stated you took exception to inclusion was Charles Manson, you didn't say you took exception to the inclusion of Bush or Cheney, what is a reasonable person supposed to believe, particularly when you have a history of expressing a negative opinion of Bush and Cheney. So where on your list of worst people in history should Manson go? What about Bush and Cheney, where do they rate in relation to Manson in your opinion?

Since I have politely answered your question maybe you will now reciprocate. Do you have any evidence that numerous websites posted the wrong information? As per your condescending explanation to Sir Didymus you are exactly right and have shown what an article does when they correct information. There should be numerous websites that you can show where they have "CORRECTED" the information. After all when a news source has to issue a correction they make a clear notation just like you did when you cleared up your thoroughly confusing prior post.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 6:44 PM

I disagree Michael. You appear to be commenting on how the MSM was in error in reporting on which school had taken the poll. I fail to see how the poll had any bearing on which school conducted it. One other point of contention: when were you appointed the arbiter of which moral failing is/was worse than others?

-- Posted by doodle bug on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 6:44 PM

Michael,

You said: "Doodle the poll is central to the story and it is used as an example and for context. The inly people making a point of the poll are not on the left or middle of the spectrum."

I beg to differ, I made an issue of the poll and would count myself strongly in the middle of most issues. Although to be fair, from your fringe liberal view, you probably see me as to the right of Rush Limbaugh.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 6:48 PM

you want mike to explain why the list is stupid? cant you see it for yourself? are you that dence as to not be able to see with your own eyes how dumb it is? The poll is not what the blog is about. get over the poll.

There is what reasonable people believe, then there is what you believe. Im a reasonable person and I realized right away that this blog is not about the poll.

I guess the next time this happens mike should simply write. "the media said a school was in the wrong city". end of blog.

-- Posted by president obama on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 10:22 PM

Mike,

Way to sidestep my point. Which were the news outlets that got the town wrong? I saw this story early last week and I laughed because I knew you were in russellville. I even talked about it to someone else who reads the blogs. So...where did you see it other than Yahoo.com? I would also like to say that most reputable news outlets would put a notice of a correction. Even if it is a little bitty notice.... So, yes. I am hinting that you are making a mountain out of a molehill. If I am wrong, put me in my place and show some proof. I looked at Yahoo.com which was apparently only the first of many places you saw the error and they had either corrected it or gotten rid of their article. I find it amusing that someone that is so prone to errors cannot forgive it in someone else. It truly "humors" me. Ill try and find a place that talks about a correction on the location of russellville middle school. I don't have too much faith though.

-- Posted by Sir Didymus on Fri, Jun 10, 2011, at 10:39 PM

good one sir. now im a homophobe, nice work throwing that one out there. I dont choose to single out one group to hate, I hate everyone the same. I just love the shout out, 'gotcha" type blogging that goes on here.

-- Posted by president obama on Sat, Jun 11, 2011, at 5:45 AM

Class, class, CLASSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS, as the teacher on the Cheech & Chong album said. Your getting a little out of hand, calm down, take a deep breath and be nice to each other. Ok! I was kidding, now get back to your disrepect and scornfull abuse of each other.

-- Posted by Keda46 on Sat, Jun 11, 2011, at 8:41 AM

a couple of points: dawg, your post of 6-10 at 10:22 pm. I absolutely, whole-heartedly agree with your first paragraph. I still fail to see what relevance the poll had to do with Michaels initial complaint, that MSM if failing miserably. Then in a reply to me, Michael stated that the poll is CENTRAL to the story. I dont think anyone should expect to have it both ways. IF the poll, or question had been about the number of seats in the school cafeteria, would it still have been central to the story?

I will have to agree with a point made by SW. What is a poll like that doing in a MIDDLE school yearbook?

-- Posted by doodle bug on Sat, Jun 11, 2011, at 10:21 AM

(lap)dawg,

I thought I was clear in what I asked of Michael, to share what issues he had with the poll, especially since he clearly said he doesn't have any issues with it that are political. Personally, I don't think the poll is dumb or stupid as you say, I find it a telling window into an educational system that may or may not be attributable to a greater whole. So I must be so dense, oh excuse me "dence" that I can't see why it is stupid in your and Michael's opinion. That's why I asked for an explanation.

You see, I don't like trying to guess what other people think, nor do I feel that I KNOW what others think as Michael often says he does. I prefer to ask people to explain their own thoughts. I know: radical concept.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Sat, Jun 11, 2011, at 12:10 PM

apologies to Michael. Re-read (again) your original post and you quite clearly state that you also think it was ridiculous to have the list in a middle school yearbook.

But I will stand by my comment that the list, in my opinion, was/is not central to the intent of the original post.

-- Posted by doodle bug on Sat, Jun 11, 2011, at 12:55 PM

SWNebr Transplant,

Yes, you are dence as Led.

-- Posted by Sir Didymus on Sat, Jun 11, 2011, at 3:58 PM

bigdawg,

I would quote what you have said in the past about the GLBT community to support my claims, but evidentally you have some influence with the webmaster and your posts have been deleted, but unfortunately you are still here. Mike's however are here for everyone to see...well at least as long as he leaves this blog up or changes the name of his blog again. To make it crystal clear how I feel, you are a bigoted cretin.

-- Posted by Sir Didymus on Sat, Jun 11, 2011, at 4:20 PM

calling people homophobes, wow. You are running out of material. yep still here, sorry. Dont worrry, Im sure there will be some silly little thing I write that you associate with being a racist, homophobe, anti-semite, etc... and you can go running to the webmaster again and cry to him.

its a good thing I dont really care how you feel.

-- Posted by president obama on Sat, Jun 11, 2011, at 8:05 PM

(lap)dawg,

You did direct a transgender slur towards me on at least two occasions that I can recall, even after I posted links explaining why it was offensive. Do you not remember doing so? Although for some reason they are no longer on the boards, how did you remove them? Using homophobic slurs does tend to indicate that one has homophobic tendencies.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Sun, Jun 12, 2011, at 10:06 AM

in fact, sir offended everyone who dosent read or write so goodley by comparing them to me. He should be banned

-- Posted by president obama on Sun, Jun 12, 2011, at 8:55 PM

the reason you cant find the "slur" is because some very thinned skinned person complained. blame Sir for the posts being deleted.

-- Posted by president obama on Sun, Jun 12, 2011, at 9:47 PM

I'm sorry SW but I'm just not going to spell everything out for you just because you don't get it or write what you think I should write because then it would be your blog not mine.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 9:48 AM

Michael,

Thank you for your apology, if you refuse to spell out what you mean, I would appreciate if in the future you would just say so rather than saying you've explained things fully.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 11:18 AM

(lap)dawg,

Since you put slur in quotation marks, does this mean you don't consider what you've said to be a slur in fact?

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 11:19 AM

In a word SW no. As I said, and apparently (as usual) you either ignored or purposely didn't read, I'm not going to spell everything out just so you can understand. If you are having issues with simple comprehension then that is a you problem.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 11:51 AM

Doodle I respectfully disagree. The original story with the yearbook is very central to the story because it's background to the overall story.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 11:56 AM

I did not know anything about a "slur" until I got a message from the web master telling me not to call you by your nickname I made up for you. Im still not sure what the hub bub is.

Was I slurring you by not calling you by your offical screen name? If thats the case they the web master needs to get in touch with you about the use of lapdog.

-- Posted by president obama on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 12:23 PM

sorry Michael, I thought you were complaining about the MSM not getting their facts straight pertaining to which school was involved. I still fail to see how the poll has any bearing on which school was involved. In my opinion, the story was about the misleading information, not the poll. I am not attempting to be deliberately obtuse.

-- Posted by doodle bug on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 1:30 PM

O bother. Here we go again. Can we not converse in a constructive manner on anything? Bottom line: media outlets should do more homework before reporting stories. However, because of shortages of staff media outlets rely on national media agencies so if the initial report is incorrect it is often reported incorrectly many times over. The subsequent correction is often overlooked. Is a high school poll worthy of such attention?

-- Posted by BuffRoam on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 3:07 PM

Then why ask the same question continuously doodle? The poll was part of the original story and I included it because of that. I'm sorry that you don't understand why it was included I have tried to explain it the best that I can.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 3:36 PM

Michael,

What are you saying no to in your last message to me? Do you mean that no you will not produce any evidence that supports your claims? If this is the case, how are you any different than the people you complain of?

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 3:37 PM

(lap)dawg,

I'm saddened that you feel using homophobic slurs is appropriate and that only "thin-skinned" people might object. However, interesting thought, if that is your claim, how do you know it was Sir Didymus, not Michael that brought it to the attention of the webmaster? After all, Michael is about the thinnest skinned person I've seen on these boards.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 3:40 PM

Doodle,

I follow your line of thought, and honestly I was mostly riding the poll to bother Michael, I do however now find it telling that he is all over the poll being so important to the article, yet he refuses to address the poll when I asked him about it. Sort of hypocritical I think. But that is common with Michael's arguments, he likes to pick and choose what he talks about and ignores anything he can't spin enough to satisfy himself.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 3:43 PM

Michael, I dont recall continually asking questions. I stated that I believed the poll to be irrelevant and I still feel that way. We'll just have to leave it at a difference of opionion. I re-read ALL my responses in this thread and found only ONE with a question pertaining to the poll. Michael, they were STATEMENTS of my belief, NOT questions!

-- Posted by doodle bug on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 4:05 PM

Here we go again SW. I answered your question but as usual you don't accept my answer so you claim that I never answered it. I wish you weren't so transparent but you really are. You continually demand from people and when they do take the time to answer you don't accept what they have said and claim they haven't done what you demanded of them.

I also see that despite a claim from you that you never label and you deplore people who do you continue to label people at every possible turn.

I do however find it telling that I quite clearly stated that it stands to reason that if I can think of quite a few people that are worse than Charles Manson (who is third on the list) I can think of quite a few people that are worse than the two people that appear on the people below Manson. There, I have now stated it twice just for you.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 4:47 PM

I stand corrected doodle. Opinions not questions. My point was that you have the belief that the poll was irrelevant to the story and I feel that it was central to the story. As you said we will just have to leave it as a difference of opinions and agree to disagree.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 4:49 PM

Michael,

"I do however find it telling that I quite clearly stated that it stands to reason that if I can think of quite a few people that are worse than Charles Manson (who is third on the list) I can think of quite a few people that are worse than the two people that appear on the people below Manson. There, I have now stated it twice just for you."

Actually you stated a hypothetical that may or may not apply to your beliefs twice. You didn't say that you don't believe Bush and Cheney should be on the list, or where they should be which were my questions. You say "it stands to reason". Just because it may be a reasonable thought to some people doesn't mean it is in fact the truth. I think it is also reasonable given your history of expressed opinion of Bush and Cheney that it is not implausible that you would believe they belong on the list. After all you clearly stated that your problem with the list WAS NOT political, and since they are there for political reasons, that wasn't your concern.

But regardless, if you don't want to answer questions in the future just say that you refuse to support your claims and I will just leave it at that.

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 6:45 PM

Talk about an epic media fail, the Sarah Palin e-mails scandal that wasn't.

-- Posted by Chunky Peanut Butter on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 7:09 PM

I'm guessing that mike can't put me in my place and show some places that had the information wrong or even made corrections. I notice that he just stops talking to me when he can't attempt to prove that he is right. Cause I spent some time doing a few searches with different parameters and couldn't find anything. Oh well. Guess I will have to bask in the warmth of being right.

-- Posted by Sir Didymus on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 10:31 PM

There you go again SW. Once again assigning your own facts in a vain attempt to prove yourself that you are right and I am wrong. It is clear that no matter what I say you will make your own decisions on what I have said as opposed to what I have actually said. I have said my peace and you have rejected it because I didn't say what you wanted me to say.

-- Posted by MichaelHendricks on Mon, Jun 13, 2011, at 11:59 PM

Michael,

All I want is for you to be clear about what you believe and support your claims of "facts" I don't think these are unreasonable expectations. Do you?

-- Posted by SWNebr Transplant on Tue, Jun 14, 2011, at 2:19 PM


Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.


And Now for Something Completely Different
Michael Hendricks
Recent posts
Archives
Blog RSS feed [Feed icon]
Comments RSS feed [Feed icon]
Login
Hot topics
The More Things Change The More They Stay The Same
(6 ~ 8:37 PM, Sep 5)

Goodnight Sweet Prince
(3 ~ 11:45 AM, Aug 15)

Elections Matter
(14 ~ 2:15 AM, Aug 9)

Hodgepodgeiness
(262 ~ 6:55 AM, Jan 8)

It Begins ... Again
(24 ~ 11:41 PM, Oct 27)