Here we go again!
Although there is room on the official website, I think I'm going to do my writing here in my blog...
I'm also going to TRY and commit to adding a picture a day into my photoblog, since it's been sadly neglected (even worse than this one) and needs some attention.
So prepare yourselves for 30 days of utterly pointless (but hopefully entertaining) blog posts by yours truly. In addition, we can explore pressing questions like this:
What does it mean when people write in a news article that "calls to ____ were not immediately returned"?
This statement drives me crazy and is always appearing in news items on msnbc.com. That kind of wording doesn't make sense. Did ____ call back or not? Why can't they just say "they wouldn't provide a statement", or "they didn't want to talk to us"? And if they DID call back, then just write "they wouldn't tell us anything". Since when did somebody not immediately returning a phone call become news?
From msnbc.com today:
LOS ANGELES - Hollywood writers and producers broke off contract talks Wednesday night without a new deal, allowing the Writers Guild of America’s current pact to expire at midnight.
It wasn’t immediately known whether the writers will walk off the job. A call to a union spokesman was not immediately returned.And now I'm dying to know - did they have a conversation? Did they call back? Did the union spokesman refuse to give information or did they let loose with some juicy details that msnbc is going to wait until tomorrow to release?
Imagine a conversation like that in everyday life:
"Hey Mel, how's it going?"
"Oh good! How are you?"
"Not bad. Say, have you heard from Ledawit lately? How's she doing?"
"Well, calls to Ledawit were not immediately returned".
See what I mean? How do you respond to that?!