This isn't worthy of a post, but it's bugging me.
Paul Harvey is a guy who is paid a krillion dollars to do a 10 minute syndicated show where he reads stories off the AP Wire. It used to be really interesting when the only way to get news was from the newspaper thrown on your lawn (twice a day - a morning and evening edition) since he'd report on some pretty obscure stuff. These days, the Internets has made him pretty much irrelevant.
Anyway, he comes on WBAP on Tuesday and tells the craziest story about actor Jack Black tying up his next door neighbor. I don't remember all the details, but it was insane. So I immediately go to the gossip sites thinking this will be huge news but there's nothing there. So I blow it off.
Today, Ron Chapman is filling in for Paul Harvey and at the end of the segment he issues a retraction on the Jack Black story. "The information came from a source we now deem unreliable and have removed him from our Rolodex." Sheesh.
But you know what's odd? (And this is really what's a little amazing.) If you use The Google and search "Paul Harvey" and "Jack Black" together you get nothing. Nada. You can even search under "news" or "blogs" and not a single mention of the whole mess.
So what have I learned? Anyone who listens to Paul Harvey doesn't use the Internet but does use a Rolodex.
The End.
.jpg)
11.20.2008
The Rest Of The Story
This isn't worthy of a post, but it's bugging me.
Paul Harvey is a guy who is paid a krillion dollars to do a 10 minute syndicated show where he reads stories off the AP Wire. It used to be really interesting when the only way to get news was from the newspaper thrown on your lawn (twice a day - a morning and evening edition) since he'd report on some pretty obscure stuff. These days, the Internets has made him pretty much irrelevant.
Anyway, he comes on WBAP on Tuesday and tells the craziest story about actor Jack Black tying up his next door neighbor. I don't remember all the details, but it was insane. So I immediately go to the gossip sites thinking this will be huge news but there's nothing there. So I blow it off.
Today, Ron Chapman is filling in for Paul Harvey and at the end of the segment he issues a retraction on the Jack Black story. "The information came from a source we now deem unreliable and have removed him from our Rolodex." Sheesh.
But you know what's odd? (And this is really what's a little amazing.) If you use The Google and search "Paul Harvey" and "Jack Black" together you get nothing. Nada. You can even search under "news" or "blogs" and not a single mention of the whole mess.
So what have I learned? Anyone who listens to Paul Harvey doesn't use the Internet but does use a Rolodex.
The End.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Does anyone really gives a rat's ass about Black or Harvey?
The End? no sir, THE END is not till 12-12-2012.
Or sooner if T. Bishop has anythng to do with it.
As with Mr. Harvey and print media in general, (I'm talkin' to you Bridgeport Index, Jacksboro Gazette, etc., yada yada,) I think the internet is largely responsible for Obama winning....out with the old (Paul Harvey, bless his soul) and in with the new (bless Obama's soul as well).
I remember many a good evening heading home with dad in his company car after we had been checkin wells for one of his pumpers that was on vacation. Headin across Shackelford or Jack co. and listening to Paul Harvey by the light of the dial radio in an old Crown Vic.
Good... umm... no, GREAT times.
Paul Harvey was and is old school with down home values.
Is there any wonder that sleazy attorneys would not be a fan of Pal Harvey?
That pic reminds me of Muck Huncho Conservative AHole Picto. Limpy Gayos may like it a Lotto.
Post a Comment