Atlantic Monthly Contributors's Blog, page 1099

Consider the BlackBerry Z10, a Smart Fish in an Ocean of Smartphones

So maybe you're shopping for a new cellphone this weekend. You could wait for that heady new Facebook phone, but that would make you one of them. Or you could hold out for that cheap iPhone, which Apple swears is coming. And then there's the latest savior from BlackBerry, which, hey, when I tried it out over the last two weeks — and out at the bar on the weekend — at least nobody made fun of it.

Indeed, the BlackBerry Z10 has succeeded for the struggling Canadian company in at least one sense: It's no longer embarrassing to whip out a BlackBerry in public, a low bar for an information and communication machine. Although one BetaBeat blogger had the exact opposite experience, every time I took out the Z10 people responded with awe and wonder. It has the "BlackBerry" name right there on the front. And yet, people wanted to touch it — it was almost as if they'd hoped the once popular BBM machine had cleaned itself up a bit. Nostalgia is powerful these days, but is it powerful enough?

Just looking at the thing, one does get the impression of an evolution. Before turning on the BlackBerry Z10, you want to like it. While switched off, the buttonless screen looks like a chic yet wise black hole full of information. Its plastic "BlackBerry" crested back adds durability, not chintz, making it the type of phone I can throw in my purse without investing in another $30 case. And while it has a much bigger screen than the 3.5-inch iPhones 4 and 4S, its slim body makes an otherwise giant 4.2-inch screen manageable. It's after turning the thing on when those impressed BlackBerry onlookers started to lose interest — not because of anything too offensive, just for a lack of interest to learn.

As other reviewers have noted in the two weeks since the Z10's release (are you sick of that commercial yet?), the BlackBerry 10 operating system has a "steep learning curve." That's an accurate statement for phone savvy tech bloggers and an understatement for most phone users. Indeed, there is a lot of learning involved, mainly because the Z10 has no home screen button. Users have to swipe to get around: swipe up to get to some places, swipe left to get to others, swipe right to get elsewhere. Once in a program, you might find yourself swiping furiously just to get out of it. (When in doubt, swipe up!) It is possible to get used to the swiping, but unforunately for BlackBerry when someone comes in to a phone store and tries out the phones, familiarity matters.

Windows 8 has had this problem (especially when it comes to its Surface tablet), with sales lagging because people don't like the totally new look, something CEO Steve Ballmer says consumers will get over once they get used to the product. BlackBerry has already had a similar adoption issue, per its first (otherwise good) earnings report: It hasn't sold enough phones to loyal users yet. That report, however, did not include U.S. sales, since the phone only went on sale in U.S. markets two Fridays ago. But there was a notable lack of lines, which drove down BlackBerry's shares on its debut day, according to multiple media reports. Despite what that says about future sales, even with a big launch event, all that March Madness marketing, and generally favorable reviews from the tech press, people didn't show in droves.

I suspect it has something to do with this familiarity problem. But this is more than just a nostalgia issue. People can get over the newness of something. Remember the original iPhone reviews? People didn't understand a phone without a keyboard. The problem with the new BlackBerry, however, is that it doesn't give to many people a legitimate reason to switch back to their old BBM-ing, clickety-clack ways. The loyalists who like the BlackBerry of yonder will find it too different. And the current iPhone and Samsung customers won't have a reason to align with a new brand and its new OS. (The BlackBerry Q10, with the same new operating system and that familiar tactile keyboard, arrives later this month.)

Think about it: BBM is only as good as the number of people that use it. For people who live in cities, BlackBerry Maps doesn't have subway directions. The whole app itself is a big mess. It only maps directions from a current location to another place. So, if you want to figure out distances or routes from somewhere you're not, it's impossible. By the way, for Google loyalists, the app store, BlackBerry World, doesn't feature a Google Maps app. Speaking of the World store, it doesn't offer Instagram, which is kind of bizarre because it prominently features its the trademark app of its owners at Facebook (which would now tell you too much Facebook up front is not enough). Maybe that's not your social network of choice, but it's indicative of a larger issue: BlackBerry isn't at the forefront of apps, a thing that kind matters for a gadget aspiring to be on the vanguard.

None of which is to say the Z10 doesn't offer some (very user-specific) reasons to switch from your iPhone or Android device this weekend. The new BlackBerry's keyboard is smart and responsive. And BlackBerry users care about these things, because of the tactile keyboard. Once you realize that you can basically type a sentence of garbled up typos and the phone knows what you mean, translating it into real words, you won't miss the old clicky keys.

The hub, which shows emails, phone calls, text messages, and all modes of communication in one easy to read screen (pictured at right), provides the perfect snapshot of phone happenings. iPhone and Android software feature similar notifications centers, but BlackBerry collects them all in one place without making you launch a bunch of applications to read a text message or answer an email. Click on "Gmail," and the email screen just slides right over. Instead of clicking the (non-existent home button), just thumb right to get back the hub. It's all very smooth.

While nice, those two things alone probably won't get hoards of people to tackle a device with so much learning involved. But there is one group I can see loving this phone: business people currently using two different phones. BlackBerry's whole work-personal balance thing makes this an enticing device for consolidating gadgets. BlackBerry Enterprise Service, which involves setup with your company business, keeps work email completely separate, technically, but aligned physically. So, say you want to leave your company; you can just disengage that account, which your company has complete control over and keep the phone. Unless you're like the Path CEO and get some sick bragging-rights pleasure out of toting two gadgets with the same purpose, the promise of ditching the ole "work-only" BlackBerry makes the purchase of a Z10 more than worthwhile.

And for those of you who take the plunge, take heart: The stigma of owning a BlackBerry has evaporated. The judgmental masses will look at you and your phone like a celebrity and her entourage on the verge of a comeback, like Britney Spears circa Blackout. Nobody's quite ready to call it a comeback. But it's something. Something very promising.

       

'Vikings' Will Pillage Again

Today in show business: History has renewed its first-ever scripted series, Jessica Chastain is headed to a haunted house, and the new Godzilla movie has a weird cast.

History, formerly The History Channel, has renewed its first scripted series Vikings for a second season. So, Minnesota is pretty excited I guess. The show actually does pretty well, averaging about five million viewers a week, so I guess a lot of people are into vikings? So where were you guys when The 13th Warrior came out, huh?? Antonio Banderas needed you! And you let him down. And now John McTiernan is going to jail! But now that it's on History and you don't have to leave your precious houses to watch it, so now you all loooove vikings. Fair weather viking friends you are. For shame. [Entertainment Weekly]

Jessica Chastain, Emma Stone, Benedict Cumberbatch, and Charlie Hunnam are all going to be in a ghost movie directed by Guillermo del Toro. The movie is called Crimson Peak and it is about... "a woman who discovers that her husband might not be who he appears to be." That's all we know! But given that it's Guillermo del Toro there are probably going to be some crazy special effects. Oh, and it probably won't get made. That's another common trait in Guillermo del Toro movies. Lots of them just never get made. Pacific Rim happened, though, so maybe he's on a roll. I hope for that weird cast's sake that that's true. [The Hollywood Reporter]

Speaking of weird casts, Sally Hawkins of all people has just joined the cast of the new Godzilla movie. Yeah. Her. Isn't that weird? Weirder still that the rest of the cast is Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Elizabeth Olsen, Ken Watanabe, David Strathairn, Brian Cranston, and Juliette Binoche. Yup. For the Godzilla movie. Speaking of, when are Helen Mirren and John Hawkes going to announce their new Rodan movie? Really looking forward to that one. Anyway, really curious to see this Godzilla thing now! So, good marketing tactic, marketers. A weird cast. Who knew? [Deadline]

Yet another star-studded production is headed toward the White Way. Rachel Weisz, her husband Daniel Craig, and Rafe Spall are set to appear together in a Broadway production of Harold Pinter's Betrayal, which will open at the Barrymore in October. Weisz has long been the white whale of many a Broadway producer — she was supposed to be in a production of Miss Julie a few years back, but that fell through and Sienna Miller eventually did the role — and now she's finally been harpooned. That's exciting. She's maybe the most likable "serious" actress of her generation? I think she is really quite likable. Anyway, it is a little awkward that a husband and a wife are doing a play all about infidelity with just one other actor, but whatever. They're professionals. They can handle it. So, good luck never getting tickets to this thing! [Playbill]

Here are the 2013 Golden Trailer nominees, which awards the best movie trailers. I don't really feel like I agree with the picks, but then again I also can't think of who I'd nominate instead. I didn't love the movie, but I kinda liked the trailer for The Impossible? Oh, and The Master had cool trailers. I dunno. I guess I just don't remember there being anything remarkable about the trailer for 42. That's all. [Deadline]

Speaking of trailers, here's a little teaser for the next season of Dexter. We don't see anything, but oh well. It comes back in June. Yay! Things get messy apparently!

       

Who's Afraid of Michael Arrington?

The reason the press has stayed mostly silent in the wake of sexual assault allegations connected to Silicon Valley big-wig Michael is not because, as several have suggested, the tech world is scared of the TechCrunch founder. In its latest post on the matter, Gawker's Adrian Chen has several named sources, including the former HR director of a company Arrington once worked with, describing incidents in which Arrington allegedly physically threatened women. The sexual assault allegations are much more vague and thinly sourced: Jenn Allen, Arrington's ex-girlfriend, who had posted on Facebook that Arrington had cheated on her and accused him of  "physical abuse." Allen left a comment on a Gawker story reprinting her Facebook post claiming that an unnamed woman told her she was raped by Arrington. It's pretty murky stuff, which is the most obvious reason why the rest of the tech blogging world didn't light up with follow-ups. (The story was picked up by a few blogs but certainly didn't dominate the conversation.)

Chen deserves credit for sticking with the story and adding facts to the public record, but in the process (maybe to raise the dramatic stakes?) he's pushed a false narrative that Arrington's sway over the tech world is so complete that people are afraid to discuss the allegations. "The Silicon Valley tech press has been largely silent," Chen wrote, implying his own bravery. On Twitter he has been more explicit: "The race is on to be the last tech blog to pick up the Arrington story." He's been supported by other Gawker Media employees: "People are too afraid to even mention Arrington by name," suggested Gizmodo's Sam Biddle. Gawker's Max Read echoed that sentiment calling it  "unbelievably embarrassing for most of the tech press that this isnt getting publicly talked about."

But let's take a moment to consider this fear-of-Michael-Arrington premise: it would have been a much more reasonable and plausible explanation back when Arrington, as gatekeeper to the startup publicity machine TechCrunch, had real power in Silicon Valley. In 2007 Wired ran a whole article about how much that meant in the startup ecosystem. For example: "A positive 400-word write-up on TechCrunch usually means a sudden bump in traffic and a major uptick in credibility among potential investors," wrote Fred Vogelstein in his five page success story. To the degree that that exposure had real business value, Arrington's ability to cut people off was a real threat.

But that was 2007. In April 2013, Arrington no longer occupies his perch at TechCrunch. He only kind of sort of works as a columnist for TechCrunch now, which he left in a huff after its owner AOL felt uncomfortable with his cozy relationship with the start-ups he personally funds. In the wake of his noisy exit as the editor, numerous other outlets have sprung up to write about angel rounds, soft launches, and acquisitions of tech startups. TechCrunch has lost a lot of its Silicon Valley, with the tech blog scene proliferating since. It's no longer TechCrunch versus Engadget anymore. Not only is Arrington, who runs the blog "Uncrunched" when he's not investing in companies directly, no longer that all-powerful Michael Arrington, no single person has the power Michael Arrington once did. Sure, he has important friends. And lots of people may have lingering fear of his past threats. But, the tech reporting world has changed since those days, probably for the better, and if there is adequate sourcing to these allegations of abusive behavior, journalists will pursue the story. If anything, the fact that so many people are talking about these rumors (which Chen writes "circulated almost from the time he started his career in the tech industry") is testament to his diminished influence over the tech press.

       

The Kitten Bowl Has Absolutely Nothing on the Puppy Bowl

We're sure some people were excited by the news Friday that the Hallmark Channel will be launching a kitten-themed competitor to Animal Planet's immensely popular (but apparently speciesist) Puppy Bowl come halftime next February. We are not those people. We are going to come out and say it right here: Kitten Bowl will in no way as be as endearing as the Puppy Bowl. Never could've been.

Some background: Kitten Bowl, according to a Hallmark press release, will be annual. It will be presented in conjunction with the American Humane Association. It will stream at home. Hallmark's "top tier Original Movie talent" will seve as judges, referees, and trainers. (So Kellie Martin will definitely participate, right?) It will stream live. Home viewers will vote for the Most Valuable Kitten. And all the kitties will compete in some sort of feats of agility thing. "In a typical feline agility contest, acat would complete between six and fourteen obstacles, with winning cats completing thecourse in ten seconds or less," the release explains. "In 'Kitten Bowl,' however, the competitors are kittens and anyform of cuteness is the key to the game." 

We understand Hallmark's end game here. One, they obviously want to capitalize on Puppy Bowl success. Two, cats are cool. (Check out the inset meme that Hallmark just made to go along with its hip new press release.) Three, the network probably thought the Puppy Bowl was being a bit discriminatory by relegating the kittens to the halftime show. While we admit that we, too, are somewhat speciesist, we hold firm to our belief that Kitten Bowl will not work. 

Kittens are difficult. We've learned recently from the cat actors on Broadway in Breakfast at Tiffany's that cats are hard to work with. They are notoriously diva-ish. (We are purposefully ignoring the counter argument involving Helen Mirren's troublesome corgi.) In Maura Judkis's Washington Post story about the filming of the Puppy Bowl, she describes what happens when you put kittens on camera: 

The kittehs are placed on the set, which is outfitted with a circus-like jungle gym of scratching posts, hidey-holes, blowing tinsel, wagging toys, gyrating toys, rotating toys and a blast of catnip. Despite the performance-enhancing drugs, the cats are subdued.

“Cat fishing ain’t going so hot today, guys,” said one of the 13 volunteers tasked with entertaining the cats with fishing-rod toys. No one’s biting, it seems.

That's not to say the kittens aren't cute, but whereas you can make a dog do tricks and have it go viral, cat videos are mostly successes because cats do silly things. You can give a puppy some toys and it will go nuts. A kitten could just say: screw you. That's just how cats are. They are jerks sometimes! Just look at the number of kittens that are sitting it out in the Puppy Bowl halftime show. They're kittens. They couldn't care less. 

So there. We condone Kitten Bowl's existence. We admit that, at times, kittens are cute. Still, we remain loyal Puppy Bowl supporters.

Update: We got an adorable, pun-filled statement from the Puppy Bowl people over at Animal Planet: 

You’ve GOT to be kitten me! With the record-breaking success of Animal Planet's Puppy Bowl, our famous Kitty Half-Time Show and the huge viewership for our new live Kitten Cam, we're not surprised by a “copy cat”. After all, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. We’re just happy that pet adoption is being promoted and more animals are finding their fur-ever homes.

       

The Problem with Torrington Is the Problem with Rape, Not Twitter

Everyone can agree that it's sickening: Students at Torrington High School in Connecticut have reacted to the alleged rape by two of its football players of two 13-year-old Torrington Middle School students by taking to Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram with words like "snitch" and "whores," with photos showing support for the Red Raiders' star receiver and defensive back at what was supposed to be a dodgeball tournament seeking reconciliation.

But it's the reaction to the reaction that remains confounding: Parents and educators in the town of 36,000 in northwest Connecticut continue to struggle, as they have since Edgar Gonzalez and Joan Toribio were arrested in February, with how to confront its rape culture as attention grows, with how to stop a bunch of kids on social media from blaming the victims. Now comes a long story in today's New York Times, searching for answers — all of which appear to center on "generational divide" between adults who "don't believe in Twitter" and children turned rape apologists "just to get a reaction."

But does blaming the problem with rape culture on the new problems of the Internet ignore the cruel way rape victims have been treated in the past? Torrington, it seems, is about to find out.

Educators in Denial

A total of four boys at Torrington High — two 17-year-olds, and the 18-year-old Gonzalez and Joan Toribio — are facing felony charges for second-degree sexual assault involving 13-year-old girls, girls not old enough to legally give consent in Connecticut. Gonzalez did not appear at a pre-trial hearing Friday, reports The Register Citizen, but will return to court from jail next month, when his attorney could seek to lower his bond. And according to a warrant obtained by The Republican American of Waterbury, Connecticut one of the boys had multiple encounters with the underage girl.

Meanwhile, at Torrington High, it turns out the controversial Instagram photo (at right) where players flashed Gonzalez's football jersey number — 21 — was taken at a charity event that the school principal thought would "appeal to her students' better natures. This is just one many new nuggets of context that the Times's Vivan Yee attempts to bring to the "helpless" efforts in light of the #FreeEdgar meme, a "defiant Twitter hashtag that has come to stand for everything the teenagers believe is wrong with the arrests — and everything outsiders believe is wrong with the town."

And, yes, the teenagers remain defiant. Even after the Register Citizen collected a series of tweets it said were from Torrington High's students — including "statutory rape is a victimless crime" and "You destroyed two people's life" (sic) — the Times's Yee digs up another epithet to add to the list from Torrington's vicious Twitter trail:

Young girls acting like whores there’s no punishment for that ... young men acting like boys is a sentence.

Yee also spoke to one unnamed sophomore outside Torrington High, who told her that "[t]he chick, she should get in trouble, too.... It's probably a regular thing she does. It wouldn't surprise me."

So where are the adults? Torrington High's principal, Joanne Creedon, has asked students to quit the social media smearing, and it appears the school is re-thinking its bullying policy, reports NBC Connecticut's Tosin Fakile. But those moves have largely been ineffective, particularly because of a lack of understanding of social media, its prevalence and its power, from the top-down. 

The Times reports that local school-board chair Kenneth Traub, in response to a community "aghast at the posts" and frustrated that students didn't understand the definition of rape in Connecticut, moved to "convene a community forum on sexual assault, with members of the Police Department and sexual assault counselors." But Traub, in an interview with the Times, doesn't seem to understand the very "ghastly" posts that are so confounding the grown-ups in Torrington:

"I put no weight in any comments made online," he said. "I don't believe in Twitter. I don't believe in Facebook. I don't think that 13-year-olds should spend as much time online as they do."

But they do. And they are. And they are spending their time saying some sickening things. Here's another Torrington adult — the head of the local sexual assault victims crisis center, no less — interviewed by the Times for her take on a "generational divide" she doesn't seem to understand:

"It's not completely uncharted territory, but it's new," Ms. Spiegel said. "A while back it was Myspace, and then it was Facebook, and then it was sexting, and now it's Twitter."

In an interview with the Times's Al Baker last month, school superintendent assistant Debrah Pollutro threw up her arms when it came to solutions for dealing with the online bullying of possible rape victims:

"Parents are asking us, 'What are we going to do about online bullying?' " Ms. Pollutro said. "And I tell them, 'There's nothing we can do; there’s no police, no protection whatsoever governing the World Wide Web.'"

Clearly, the responsible parties in Torrington need some Twitter and Facebook training. But the larger implications aren't that their kids are spending too much time "posting" things. Their kids, in increasing numbers, seem to have an inclination to blame the victims — and that's a culture that's been around a lot longer than Twitter. That's a culture that only gets exacerbated by retweets heard 'round the world. And while adult ignorance as an excuse not to police it is one thing, it's worth looking at the roots of victim shaming in high schools of American past.

A History of Shaming

(Photo by Dan Hulshizer/AP)

It is the tweet that still echoes in Torrington, nearly two months after the sexual episodes, which on Friday were confirmed as multiple incidents. And the contents may be illicit — "sticking up for a girl who wanted the D and then snitched? have a seat, pleaseeee" — but the sentiment is hardly new. Students coming to the defense of star athletes and quickly (and publicly) castigating the victim, well, they weren't all born in Connecticut. They didn't all come from Steubenville, Ohio. Or Duke University.

One of the more instructive intersections of sports, school, and rape remains the 1989 episode of the Glen Ridge High School football team in New Jersey. And even though it didn't start with them either, there was no Facebook back then, as there was even during the Duke lacrosse case. Four members of the Glen Ridge team (pictured above) were accused of raping a 17-year-old girl with a broomstick and bat. Kevin Scherzer, his twin brother Kyle, and Christopher Archer were found guilty of aggravated assault, and Bryant Grober was convicted on a third-degree conspiracy charge. But from the start, the victim was described as "mildly retarded"; she reportedly had an IQ of 64. If you look back at that case, you'll find quotes from locals calling the girl "flirtatious and open," and you'll find a defense of the boys: "I know them well enough to know they wouldn't make someone do something against their will." And in Bernard Lefkowitz's book about the Glen Ridge case, Our Guys, one of the Glen Ridge residents interviewed said something eerily familiar these days: "It's such a tragedy.... They're such nice boys and this will scar them forever." 

That quote reads nearly the same as what CNN's Poppy Harlow said about the Steubenville athletes after they were convicted last month on juvenile rape charges, saying that the convicted rapists "had promising futures, star football players, very good students, literally watched as they believed their lives fell apart." And "a girl who wanted the D" in Torrington, well, that isn't unlike the defense lawyers in Steubenville saying that the 16-year-old victim in that case wanted to leave with the quarterback. And saying the Glen Ridge victim was "flirtatious and open" is a much more polite version of Torrington students tweeting that "statutory rape is victim-less crime." It is a cycle of shame, with or without social media, with or without cable-news trucks — rape culture, it seems can only be blamed on the people who create it, even if the technological enablers (and the stupid parents) make it worse. As a grand jury prepares to convene in Steubenville, and the school system in Torrington considers discipline ahead of a May trial, perhaps the confounded principle people on the ground will stop looking for answers in the margins of a "generational divide" — and start finding solutions from inside their hearts.

       

Rutgers Fires Athletic Director, and the School President Might Be Next

Tara Sullivan of New Jersey's The Record is reporting that Rutgers Athletic Director Tim Pernetti has been fired, adding to the list of those brought down by the scandal over their out-of-control basketball coach—a list that might soon include the president of the university. Head coach Mike Rice was fired earlier this week, after video surfaced of him physically and verbally abusing his players, including shoving several of them and throwing basketballs at their heads. Rice's assistant coach, Jimmy Martelli, resigned on Thursday after it revealed he was guilty of similar behavior. According to the report, Pernetti may be allowed to resign, depending on how the school plans to handle his contract, which still has a year remaining.

However, that didn't silence the anger directed not only at Rice, but at school administrators who seemed willing to do very little about it. Pernetti was not only aware of the now infamous videos, but he had personally seen them and (allegedly) chose not to share them with anyone else; not even the school's president. Pernetti chose to suspend Rice for three games back in December and fined him $50,000, and hoped that would be the end of it. Obviously, it would not be.

Now the school has responded to calls that Pernetti be dismissed as well. A graduate of Rutgers, Pernetti had orchestrated the school's recent move to the Big Ten, which is expected to be a major financial windfall for the athletic department and the school. Now he won't be around to enjoy the fruits of that labor.

The university president, Robert L. Barchi, who had already "alienated faculty, state legislators and the student body" in his first half-year on the job, is now facing added pressure from inside and out of the state school: "Maybe if the president was more tuned in, he would think that we have 58,000 students, 18 to 22 years old, and what exactly is happening? He is throwing balls at students' heads? And he’s calling them what? He was not interested in that," a Rutgers economics professor tells The New York Times.

       

How Facebook Brought the Cellphone Back Down to Earth

With the big Thursday reveal of Facebook Home, the haute-tech blogger set seems to have come to terms with the reality that smartphones are now a commodity of the masses, sometimes not made for their very particular tastes. Indeed, the new sub-$100 HTC First device that will be first to run the new Facebook-first version of Android's cellphone software — well, it just isn't for the insider crowd, what with their fancy hardware and latest-and-greatest software platforms. However, aware that over 1 billion people on Earth now own a smartphone, even technology taste makers are trying really hard to conceptualize the future: You — yes, even you, and you and you — might actually want to buy this "Facebook Phone" thing.

Despite their own privacy concerns (there will be ads, and there will be data mining) and their insistence that users want more and more apps (beyond, you know, "Chat Heads"), the conventional wisdom among Silicon Valley's functional equivalent of Morning Joe is that the plebeians — you know, people with normal brain power, thin wallets, and general technological savvy of our times — will want what Facebook has to offer. Which is to say: The social network's takeover of the everyman phone is for you... not for them.

Despite calling it a "laughable" proposition for the "tech set," Mat Honan at Wired says "millions of Americans" will want the Facebook phone:

Will businesses take to it? Almost certainly not. No business, other than maybe Buzzfeed, wants its employees spending more time on Facebook. Will it be a hit with early adopters and the tech set? That’s laughable. No. Will millions of Americans just want a handset that can run Facebook? That seems like a bet I’d take.

Just who are these "millions" of real people, you ask? Poor people, with poor taste, Honan suggests: "I suspect there is a strong correlation between people who want a 'free' smartphone with people who really dig Facebook," he writes. You people who value bargains over privacy and utility and style are already buying up all those mid-level Android phones because you people have no idea what's what, as SplatF's Dan Frommer explains. So "the types of people who, every couple of years, go into the Verizon or AT&T shop and walk out with whatever newish thing the store rep says they should buy" will be drawn to the HTC First and its ilk. Or, in a similar vein, Frommer says, those "who have bought Android phones — and some iPhones, probably — who don't really care that they're Android phones, or even smartphones" also fall in the Facebook sucker category.

Within these others, the "tech set" also suggests another, sicker subset: "Facebook addicts." Slate's Farhad Manjoo, who comes right out and says "I don't think Facebook Home is for me," guesses that people with an unhealthy attachment to the social network will love the new Facebook-fronted Android platform. That's like saying a nicotine addict would definitely like a pack of cigarettes. ReadWrite's Mark Hachman agrees with that proposition, by the way: "If you're obsessed with Facebook, Home is for you. But if you'd like to use your Android phone for something else — like checking email, for example — you'll probably find Home more trouble than it's worth," he writes. It's unclear how we diagnose the addicts. But if they truly have a health issue, perhaps we shouldn't prescribe a phone with the drug of choice right on its home screen.

In reality, none of the reality check from the "tech set" is very helpful to an actual person deciding if he or she want to buy a new Facebook phone. (Beyond the HTC First, the Home software will be available for select Android phones, both top-tier and mid-level, beginning April 12.) More likely, the tech bloggers want to cover their hides on this one. They don't like it, nor do they understand it, and they certainly won't buy it. But instead of coming right out and saying you shouldn't buy this thing, they're preparing for the moment if and when the Facebook phone sells millions of units in the U.S. (Another theory, by the way, is that Facebook made this phone for its overseas markets.) In that case, they can look back and say: We knew this would happen to you people. 

If you really want to know if the "Facebook Phone" is for you, you might consider the following questions posed by The Atlantic's Alexis Madrigal:

Will it be worth opening up every part of your phone interaction to Facebook in order to access that experience? Do you want your definition of a computer to center on Facebook Friends and the limited set of actions you can take with them? I can't answer that for you, but I can say that it is a tradeoff, and the more you think about it, the better.

Maybe you don't care about any of those things. And in that case, the HTC First is pretty, pretty cheap, and Facebook sure has built in some nice features.

       

How to Cope with Today's 'Gut Punch' of a Jobs Report

Today's non-farm payroll report for March was U-G-L-Y. Former Obama advisor Austan Goolsbee called it a "punch to the gut." Experts were already predicting bad things, but this was way worse than anyone expected. So is everything going to be okay, or is Cyprus starting to look like the better place for a retirement home?

GIGANTIC MISS: JUST 88K NEW JOBS businessinsider.com/the-march-jobs…

— Joseph Weisenthal (@TheStalwart) April 5, 2013

Based on what we're seeing from economics watchers across the spectrum, there are basically four standard reactions to choose from. Whatever cause you think is most responsible for the disaster not only says a lot about your worldview, but also helpfully provides a course for action. 

Thanks for sequester, DC! RT @businessinsider:JUST 88K NEW JOBS, UNEMPLOYMENT RATE FALLS TO 7.6%, DOW OFF 137 read.bi/XtmiMu

— Henry Blodget (@hblodget) April 5, 2013

1) Blame the sequester. The first and most obvious response is to assume that when every government agency slashes their budgets, the economy tanks. Some would argue that it's way too soon for those effects to be seen in the labor market, but people did see it coming a mile away and may have already been factoring it to their plans. You better hope that new Obama budget proposal actually goes somewhere. (Of course, if it's not the sequester and that's still coming after us, then we're in big trouble.)

Smoking gun behind the weak report is in the hand of the payroll tax hike, not sequestration.

— Annie Lowrey (@AnnieLowrey) April 5, 2013

2) Blame the payroll tax. For two years, Americans had been enjoying a 2 percent break in payroll taxes—the money that comes right out of your paycheck and straight to the Treasury. On January 1 of this year, the holiday expired and now the ripple effect has come home to roost. Honestly, this is the most likely culprit. There's no denying that the effect of the tax change was direct and immediately. People simply don't have as much disposable income to spend, dropping demand across the whole economy and forcing businesses to slow down their growth. Everyone knew this would happen, but they let the tax expire anyway. The "silver lining" attitude for this angle is that the payroll tax simply went back to where was pre-recession and businesses just need a little more time to adjust.

3) Blame the weather. March weather really sucked this year, right? No one wants to go to work in cold and snow. Pray for sunshine.

4) It's not that bad. After hearing the number CNBC economist Steve Liesman said, "I'm not sure if I'm sitting on the edge of the windowsill I would jump." Not exactly a ringing endorsement, but definitely a reminder to not panic.

Unemployment rate more important than number of new jobs. I'll keep saying it. #teamdemographics

— Conor Sen (@conorsen) April 5, 2013

The good news is that unemployment rate actually went down to 7.6 percent, lower than it's been at any point since Obama took office. Critics will counter that the reason it went down is because the size of the work force (the number of people who are actively looking for jobs) shrank to its lowest level in a generation. That usually means things are so bad that people are giving up on even trying to find work. The counter-counter argument to that is "demographics." Labor force participation is going down and will continue to go down every month for the foreseeable future because baby boomers are retiring. We just don't have as many workers as we used and and that's the way its going to be.

Some other check marks in the report's favor: Every jobs report for the several months has been revised upward in the following month's report, so the number might not be as bad as we think. Summer's coming, which might help get things moving again. There's no election this fall, which means we might actually get a budget this year. (Although that also means no campaign jobs to fill.) Oh, and these numbers aren't that accurate anyway.

Overall, the report still looks like a disaster and a flashing neon sign that says another recession is right around the corner. But it's only one month's data and it's too soon to tell if March is just a blip in a volatile economy or the only warning we're going to get before certain doom. See you next month.

       

The Long-Lost Books You Loved as a Kid Are Coming Back

There's some very exciting news for Y.A. readers and nostalgists today. Lizzie Skurnick, journalist and author of Shelf Discovery: The Teen Classics We Never Stopped Reading (a great walk down book-memory lane) has a new imprint at Ig Publishing. According to Ig publisher Robert Lasner, writes Claire Kirch in Publishers Weekly, Lizzie Skurnick Books will “bring back the very best in young adult literature, from the classics of the 1930s and 1940s, to the thrillers and social novels of the 1970s and 1980s.” Oh yes. Those long-forgotten reads (or the books you may never have gotten to read) will be back, 12 to 14 titles a year. The first release will be Lois Duncan's Debutante Hill (that's I Know What You Did Last Summer/Down a Dark Hall/Killing Mr. Griffin Lois Duncan. Chills!). 

Duncan writes on her website, "the very first book I ever wrote--DEBUTANTE HILL--will be having its 55th birthday later this year! To celebrate that birthday, it's going to be republished in September." It's been out of print for three decades after its publication by Dodd, Mead in 1958, writes Kirch.

Following that, there will be original releases as well, including in fall of 2014 Isabel's War, the first book in a trilogy by Lila Perl, author of 1972's Me and Fat Glenda (1979 cover from Clarion Books at left). Glenda, too, will be reissued and given a new look like that above, as will a range of titles you may remember, like 1982's To All My Fans, With Love, From Sylvie by Ellen Conford and 1979's Happy Endings Are All Alike by Sandra Scoppettone.

Skurnick notes that a lot of the books once loved by teen girls have fallen out of print (in contrast to those for teen boys) and hopes that "women who, like herself, came of age in the '70s and '80s, will form the core readership" of this new imprint, though of course it's hoped that newer Y.A. readers will pick them up and fall in love for the first time, too. It's a nostalgia-based publishing move, which, from this writer's perspective, certainly doesn't seem like a bad thing. If fact, far the opposite. Let's start dreaming up our ideal nostalgia reissue lists now. 

       

The Many Memorable Remembrances of Roger Ebert

Movie fans, journalists, Chicagoans, and, truly, all Americans lost a hero Thursday when they learned that Roger Ebert had died following his lengthy battle with cancer. As the evening continued and we woke up to a world without that famous thumb, tributes from colleagues, rivals, and admirers have emerged, many with delightful and poignant stories about the newspaperman who loved movies. We've collected some of the words—and images—from those remembrances. 

Scott Stanis, The Chicago Tribune

Stanis's beautiful image of two friends and adversaries meeting in heaven needs no introduction: 

An addendum, according to Douglas Martin's obituary in the New York Times: Ebert was once asked "what movie he thought was shown over and over again in heaven, and what snack would be free of charge and calories there." He answered: "'Citizen Kane' and vanilla Häagen-Dazs ice cream."

Chaz Ebert

Ebert's wife gave a statement on her beloved husband:

He fought a courageous fight. I’ve lost the love of my life, and the world has lost a visionary and a creative and generous spirit who touched so many people all over the world. We had a lovely, lovely life together, more beautiful and epic than a movie. It had its highs and the lows, but was always experienced with good humor, grace and a deep abiding love for each other. 

This morning she posted the following on Facebook: 

Richard Roeper, The Chicago Sun-Times

There are a lot of wonderful memories in this piece by Ebert's other cohost and Sun-Times colleague, Richard Roeper. But it's Ebert as the man, not the icon, that resonates: 

He was corny. For years, Roger and Chaz would host massive Fourth of July parties at his home in Michigan, and Roger would always wear his wonderfully tacky American flag shirt while presiding over the karaoke contest and the barbecue and the dancing on the temporary floor installed in the backyard. You never saw him happier than when he was surrounded by family and friends.

Roger Simon, The Chicago Sun-Times

Simon paints a portrait of Ebert as a fun-loving, once hard-drinking man who believed not just in film, but in the newspaper business: 

Even though I didn’t really know him, Ebert began clipping out my columns from the paper and putting them on the desk of the editor at the Chicago Sun-Times, Jim Hoge. When I was a senior, I got a call from Hoge asking me to come to Chicago, where he offered me a job. I politely turned him down, saying I wanted to work for magazines.

That night, when I was back in Champaign-Urbana, I got this roaring call from Ebert, telling me that nobody in his right mind would turn down the offer of a job from a newspaper! Newspapers were where the most important writing in America was done!

Mark Caro, The Chicago Tribune

In making the case for Ebert as the "quintessential Chicagoan" Caro explains what it was like to go to see Austin Powers with him:

Ebert also was a collegial presence in the downtown Chicago screening room where movies were previewed for critics, though you knew not to take his back-corner seat by the door, or either of the two in front of it. He'd banter before, after and on rare occasions during movies. In 1997's “Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery,” after Mike Myers' spoofy spy declared, “It's my happening, baby, and it freaks me out!” Ebert erupted in the screening room, “I wrote that!” Myers had lifted the line from Ebert's “Beyond the Valley of the Dolls” (1970) script for director Russ Meyer.

Dana Stevens, Slate

Stevens suspects she wrote to Ebert when she was between 11 and 13 to ask how to become a film critic. Ebert not only wrote back, but did so in detail, with advice and suggestions for which colleges she might attend. Stevens shared the letter upon his death. 

Chris Jones, Esquire

Jones, who profiled Ebert in 2010,  hared Post-it notes Ebert had written to him.

The Onion

Even the home of satire's "obituary" for Ebert—"Roger Ebert Hails Human Existence As 'A Triumph'"—was understated and moving:  

 “At times brutally sad, yet surprisingly funny, and always completely honest, I wholeheartedly recommend existence. If you haven’t experienced it yet, then what are you waiting for? It is not to be missed.” Ebert later said that while human existence’s running time was “a little on the long side,” it could have gone on much, much longer and he would have been perfectly happy.

The News-Gazette, Champaign-Urbana

Ebert's hometown paper dedicated most of their front page to him (via @HuffPostMedia): 

In an article for the paper Melissa Merli interviews members of the community, including administrators at Ebert's alma mater.