In an effort to compensate for my blog and celeb gossip reading and expand my newsource beyond CNN.com, I've added the New York Times to my internet bookmarks. The first few days of this adventure have shown me that there really is a big difference in what gets reported. It has also shown me that no matter what newsource I'm reading, I mainly just skim the headlines and only click on something if a) it's outrageous/scandalous, b) it's related to entertainment, or c) it's just off the wall.
Today I have stumbled across something on the Times website that I do not see on CNN and which has confirmed that the expansion was a good move - The headline reads: Judge Embeds Puzzle in Da Vinci Code Ruling. Awesome. I click on it, and sure enough, if you read it too, you will see that in ruling against some book's copyright challenge, a British judge inserted a secret code in his ruling. His reason, "just for a bit of fun."
This would never happen in America because the judges are crotchety and stuffy and frankly, just not that mischievious. Perhaps if Scalia would start doing this with his opinions I might just respect him a bit more.
Update, 1pm, Friday, April 28: Code solved. (spoiler alert? if you can get your hands on the ruling and are going to try to solve it, don't read. But the lawyers who solved it only did so with numerous hints from the judge, so um, good luck)
No comments:
Post a Comment