The BBC has canceled phone-in contests after confessing some of their previous contests had phony winners. During the contests, apparently technical problems arose which prevented callers from getting through. Instead of postponing the contest, employees of the BBC faked a winner. The Telegraph lists some specific shows.

Updating a earlier story on the BBC, the production company responsible for depicting the Queen as storming out of a photo shoot, when she did nothing of the kind, has apologized for embarrassing the BBC and essentially lying about the Queen.

It appears light is exposing lies and deception at the BBC.

Dr. Judith Hardanger-Hansen writes again, in another column by me over at the American Spectator Online today.

MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski won’t lead the news with a story on Paris Hilton getting out of jail. This is remarkable. Her bosses had better treat her well.

In Reuters article on a possible cure for a common form of blindness, the reporter writes, “Embryonic stem cells are the ultimate master cells of the body, giving rise to all of the tissues and organs. Their use is controversial because many people oppose embryo destruction, although Britain has encouraged such research.”

I guess this is par of the course in our culture of death, but explanations like this still surprise me. Sure, some people oppose using unborn children as medicine, but more than that, as I understand it, embryonic stem cells have not accomplished anything in the lab. They are praised and hoped for, but the real results have come from adult stem cells about which there is no controversy.

James Taranto points out a report, not widely touted by the establishment press, of grisly torture by our enemies in Iraq. If you follow the links, you’ll see descriptions of evil deeds like those portrayed for entertainment in the movie Hostel and reports of men freed by our troops. Yet on this Memorial Day weekend, we get no above-the-fold coverage on this, no evidence for the reason Mr. Bush called them evil.

Patrick Henry’s words about another American conflict seem to fit, and on this weekend, I recommend them in honor of those who have given their lives in defense of our freedom and their own families.

For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. . . .

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those, who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it. . . .

If we wish to be free—if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending—if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon, until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained—we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!

Stop reading newspapers that ask dumb questions, such as “Is the presidential race too long?”

What if we asked, “Should political debates be actual debates?” Maybe that’s kids stuff to the campaign experts of the world.

January asks why book coverage decreases while book publishing increases. “Newspaper owners don’t see book reviews as revenue producers,” he writes, and then he complains about certain bloggers.

Did Lars review of The Last Detective leave you cold? Did you start questioning his loyalties? Could he have been paid off by Crais or Crais’ evil publisher (doesn’t matter who it is b/c all of them are e.v.i.l. money-grubbing capitalists)? If so, perhaps you agree with Lynne Scanlon, who says, The First Thing We Do, Let’s Kill All the Book Reviewers. She raises several good angst-ridden points, but I plan to continue taking my life in my hands by reviewing the books I read. I’m sure Lars will too. We’re building trust here at Brandywine Books–trust you can bank on.

Which leads me to wonder if we should set up one of those Amazon Associate accounts or a recommendations page. Tip jar, maybe. Advertising. Hmmm.

More on the death of the creature popularly called “newspaper.”