Sent in by the friend of an ultimately unsuccessful Google applicant, the test was supposed to be completed by the applicant within three days. It asks for a response to an imaginary request from an imaginary Google manager, for an analysis of whether the company — "Poogle," not Google, mind you — can hire 750 engineers in six months to launch a new product within 12 months (click to enlarge):

This is a terrible question. The only issue is whether it is an intentional one, designed to test the applicant.

It's terrible because doubling the number of engineers on the sort of product Google makes — software — emphatically does not make it ship faster, certainly not within the first six months of their work, and certainly not at the scale of 750 engineers.

This has been widely understood among software managers since the publication of Frederick Brooks' Mythical Man Month in 1975. As blogger and former Microsoftie Joel Spolsky summarized the thesis 25 years later:

When you add more programmers to a late project, it gets even later. That's because when you have n programmers on a team, the number of communication paths is n(n-1)/2, which grows at O(n2).

From Mythical Man Month:

Men and months are interchangeable commodities only when a task can be partitioned among many workers with no communication among them. This is true for... picking cotton; it is not even approximately true of systems programming.

When a task cannot be partitioned because of sequential constraints, the application of more effort has no effect on the schedule. The bearing of a child takes nine months, no matter how many woman are assigned...

Since software construction is inherently a systems effort — and exercise in complex interrelationships — communication effort is great, and it quickly dominates the decrease in individual task time brought about by partitioning. Adding more men then lengthens, not shortens, the schedule.

Even when a software team can benefit from some organic growth (as opposed to Poogle's doubling), it's going to take on the order of six months just to get the new people up to speed on the existing code base and trained in corporate peculiarities, which at Google are significant due to the scale at which it operates (Ken Thompson, legendary co-creator of the Unix operating system and inventor of Google's new Go programming language, still isn't allowed to check in code there, having failed to jump through the requisite hoops, he recently said in the book Coders at Work ).

So "Poogle" shouldn't be asking whether it needs to hire more recruiters to add 750 new programmers to "Product X" in six months; it should be asking whether the feature list for Product X should be trimmed, the deadline lengthened or a subset of it easily split off into Product Y.

But maybe Google is asking candidates to come up with that answer on their own. Whoops.

Supporting documents supplied as tabs to the test:

This one goes on; we've cut it off:

(Top pic: Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin. Getty.)

Of course, that rule only applies to the 30 members of Goldman's management committee, composed of managers from all its business units. The rest of its 31,670 or so Goldmanites will be eligible for cash bonuses as well as stock. As for Goldmans' top 30 executives, their bonuses will be entirely in the form of restricted Goldman stock this year, which they won't be able to cash out for five years and can be rescinded if their business units fail down the road, the New York Times' Dealbook reports. And what's more, the company will begin putting its compensation practices up for a shareholder vote, meaning that if you're rich enough to buy some Goldman stock, someday soon you'll be able to go to a shareholder meeting and personally watch them vote to pay themselves billions of taxpayer dollars.

This year, at least, we will be spared the spectacle of bales of vacuum-packed cash being dumped via forklift on dozens of circular driveways in Connecticut. This effort to ward off populist outrage comes on top of Goldman's banning of Christmas parties, ramping up its charitable giving, rescuing homeless kittens, and arming itself in case all that fails. (Or not. Who knows? We're trying to lay hands on a list of all New York City handgun permit recipients to sort that one out.)

This would be a good time to remind you that we'd still like you to tell us how they're going to spend their bonuses, seeing as much of it is from your direct and indirect taxpayer subsidies. Here is how one tipster recently described his Goldman-executive pal's anticipation of this year's bonus:

For example he wants to buy a Mercedes Benz E550 Class 2010 in cash. Also in the last couple years with the exception of 2008, he has bought many things, from cars, boats, paintings, to stocks from Fortune 100 companies. This year he is very happy and supposedly he is going to have gifts to all.

We'd be happy, too. A fully loaded 2010 Mercedes Benz E550 retails for around $79,600, though we bet that a Goldman exec would be able to cut a great deal for himself. They tend to be good at that sort of thing. One of our Jalopnik colleagues points out that "if the guy was really a baller he'd be springing for the E63 AMG instead of the mid-level version. What does that say about Goldman Sachs compensation, eh?" We guess that's what Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein meant when he ordered everyone to "avoid making big-ticket, high-profile purchases" this year.

If you know of any similarly discreet purchases in the offing, do let us know, or post the information to #goldmanproject. We're especially interested in the Christmas and New Year's celebrations that Goldman Sachs employees aren't allowed to have: Send any invites, details, photos, and party reports our way (we'll redact the specifics, of course). We're paying for them, so we'd kind of like to know if they're any fun.

Since Totally Pauly first terrorized audiences back in the 80's, looming over his entire career was the specter that this young man's style of stoner-goofy might have consequences far beyond just his own act. Pauly Shore came to prominence not just as a novelty act in his own right, but as the Prince Hal of comedy; son and heir to Mitzi Shore, owner of the the Sunset Strip's famed Comedy Store which has launched the career of decades of giants.

History however, will note the intervention of a benevolent god which saved the universe from this fate, in bestowing upon Mr. and Mrs. Shore a second son, Peter, who, as the suit reveals, has stood as a bulwark between Pauly and world comedy domination. The suit provides a fascinating glimpse into the strife and discord roiling the first family of hack comedy.

The Hollywood Reporter has details of the suit, filed by Pauly against his brother Peter, "alleging Pauly was improperly removed from the family company's board of directors and suggesting possible elder abuse of their ill mother, Mitzi Shore."

According to the report, Pauly, Peter and Mitzi jointly control the Comedy Store, with Peter serving as CEO. The suit however, alleges that Peter too advantage of Mitzi's ongoing ill-health (she suffers from Parkinson's) to win her vote to remove Pauly from the Store's Board of Directors, and subsequently denying to even fill Pauly in about the company's business. Pauly's suit seeks to overturn his removal from the board, thus restoring him to his rightful role at the forefront of hack comedy.

Future generations will never know the comedy magic they might have known had The Weasel been an only child and been able to remake the trade's most hallowed venue in his image. But to Peter Shore, lovers of comedy everywhere should send their eternal gratitude.

This story was originally published by CityFile.

In the world of celebrities, socialites, and reality stars, relationships are more often "blink-and-you'll-miss-it" than "long-term." That's to be expected, of course. Think of all the temptations when countless other beautiful people are around! To size up the potential of a handful of newer and more high-profile couples on the New York City scene, we turned to Patti Wood, the "Babe Ruth of body language experts" who has evaluated unspoken signals for hundreds of media outlets over the years. Join us below as Wood breaks down which twosomes are destined for eternal bliss-and which are bound for a break-up.

Ivanka Trump & Jared Kushner

Background: Real estate heiress, jewelry designer and Celebrity Apprentice co-host Ivanka started dating real estate scion and New York Observer publisher Jared Kushner more than two years ago. They were married on October 25th.

The verdict: "Her whole body is facing toward Jared, which means she's all about him. Most women do not pose this way. She doesn't care that people are taking photos; she is clearly proud to be next to him. Her left hand is up, showing she wants to touch him in a loving way, and her shoulders are up in a half-hug, suggesting she just wants to be closer to him. Her broad, relaxed smile also says that she's at ease with him. As for Jared, his pelvis is angled slightly toward her, and he has his arm around her in a protective manner, but not a controlling one. All of their body language signals show that they have a good sexual relationship and care for each other very deeply. It looks as if they'll have a long future together."

Tinsley Mortimer & Prince Casimir Sayn Wittgenstein Sayn

Background: It's unclear when the Tinz and "Cassi" first got together, but they were pictured together back in July when they attended the Cartier International Polo match. (Things went south with her ex-husband Topper when they separated in January of last year.) While Tinsley has been seen out with former American Idol contestant Constantine Maroulis recently, Cassi appears to still be in the picture for the time being.

The verdict: "The first thing I noticed about this photo is that this guy has a strong ego, which is indicated by his foot jutted out in front of him as if he's trying to emphasize he's his own man. She's awkwardly positioned, showing that she's off-balance in the relationship. She's got her legs pulled and shoulders pulled back but her pelvis is forward, like she can't make up her mind if she wants to be with him or not. Her outside arm is down, not reaching toward him, which is odd for a truly solid couple. There's tension in her face, meaning she's uncomfortable, and all of her body cues suggest she doesn't feel balanced, safe or secure with him. It doesn't bode well... at all."

Topper Mortimer & Valerie Boster

Background: Topper Mortimer, Tinsley's estranged husband, reportedly first got together with Vogue editor Valerie Boster during fashion week in September. She recently threw him a birthday party at one of his favorite hangouts on the Upper East Side, preppy palace Dorrian's.

The verdict: "Here, he's doing something called 'overlapping,' where he's positioning his body around and behind her, and his chest is leaned in toward her. This means he is comfortable and at ease with her, but he's not enveloping her so tightly that he feels he needs to control her. Valerie's a little more conflicted: She's planted in her own seat but she is only leaning her upper body toward him, as if she is hesitant to give up too much and wants to remain independent. Her crossed arms indicate she wants to protect their relationship from the public eye. I'd like to see them a little more affectionate with one another, and while this doesn't appear to be a sexually-charged relationship, it doesn't necessarily mean it won't last."

Kate Hudson & Alex Rodriguez

Background: The actress and the New York Yankees third baseman first got together back in May, after she allegedly ended her relationship with Owen Wilson and A-Rod and Madonna split up.

The verdict: "This couple screams 'passion.' She's pressing into him with her pelvis, which says she really digs him sexually. She's even got her hand on his rear end, and her whole body is arched into him. Likewise, Alex has his pelvis and stomach forward, but he's holding back a bit, which you can see through his restraint with his elbows. He's definitely the alpha in this relationship and seems preoccupied by people watching them. Overall, it's clear she'd do whatever he wants. If the sex continues to be good, she's going to do her best to make it work. I'd like to see a little more tenderness in the relationship, though."

Bethenny Frankel & Jason Hoppy

Background: The Real Housewives of New York City star Bethenny Frankel and Jason Hoppy got engaged on October 8th after dating for 11 months. She announced she was two months pregnant in mid-October.

The verdict: "The fact that she's sitting on his lap suggests two things: 1) she depends on him, and 2) they have a good sexual relationship. Her arm is very relaxed around him-she's not clinging on for dear life-and she has a relaxed smile, indicating she trusts him absolutely. The intimate gesture of their heads touching means they are balanced and like-minded. His arms are relaxed around her in a protective, loving way, and his joyous, open smile shows he could not be more enamored with her. This is a very solid couple."

Olivia Palermo & Johannes Huebl

Background: The socialite and star of The City started dating German  model Johannes Huebl in the spring of 2008.

The verdict: "What I like here is that her feet and body are angled toward him, and his body is shifted subtly toward her. Body and foot positioning says a lot about a couple's connectedness-and in this case, they have a strong connection and bond. Their hands are intertwined, indicating they feel at ease with one another and are protective of each other. Their relationship is one where each goes for comfort and strength. Given this pose, it's likely that they have a soulful, private relationship, but also a bond that is sweet and dependable. It looks to me as if they have a future."

Emmy Rossum & Adam Duritz

Background: Actress Emmy Rossum went public with Counting Crows singer Adam Duritz in late September, immediately after her super-secret music executive husband, Justin Siegel, filed for divorce. It remains a mystery how Duritz, who's dated Courteney Cox and Jennifer Aniston in the past, manages to reel in ladies who are infinitely better looking than he is.

The verdict: "He's definitely claiming her as his 'woman' in this photo in a controlling way. He's gripping her arm so she can't move, and it's actually sort of disturbing. His gestures say, 'She's mine; isn't she gorgeous?' Emmy, on the other hand, may have the side of one hip toward Adam, but the rest of her body is pulled away, meaning that she's definitely not entirely at happy with him. It's also interesting how she's holding her purse. When couples are really into each other, the woman automatically moves her purse to the hand furthest from her companion. Here, her purse is a physical barrier, which also translates to an emotional barrier. There's also tightness around her mouth, which suggests some conflict with these two. I wouldn't expect them to last long at all."

More info on Patti Wood can be found on her website, pattiwood.net.

Big editorial shake up at Ad Age: Top editor Jonah Bloom is leaving to become CEO and editor in chief of Breaking Media, the blog network that publishes Above The Law, DealBreaker, and others. Ad Age senior editor Matt Creamer is going with him, to become a top editor at Breaking Media. Ad Age's new executive editor is Abby Klaassen, who was digital editor.


Mediaititititie had a party. A fancy party! At The Plaza! Look at all these pictures of the party. There are many famous people there. The less famous people there are attractive! It sure ain't our party. But as we always tell ourselves, "Unattractive people make up for it by being smarter, that's what my mom said."


Nieman Journalism Lab writes an entire article about what journalists will be "fighting about in 2010" and leaves off the most obvious thing: scraps of bread.


Amazon has dropped the price of Sarah Palin's book to a mere $7.99. The liberal media is trying to spin this as another battle in the "Book Price Wars," but plainly Sarah Palin wants to be able to tell her readers that her book is now only half the cost of Lowrey's Bacon Curls Microwave Pork Rinds. (Their favorite food because they're so dumb). (Not classist).

Finally the kids in New Directions got a chance to compete at sectionals and it was not the rainbow covered unicorn pasture they had imagined. There were major shakeups in the group, and all of the messy secrets and relationships had their final reckoning and then...showtime! Artie loading onto the handicapped bus was just about the saddest 3 foot sojourn you ever did see, and not the triumphant razzle dazzle they imagined when everyone banded together to raise money for a bus. Wait, didn't they use that money to build a handicap ramp in the auditorium? Did Puck sell more drugs or something? Or did he win a bunch of money at fight club?

Their first big outing wasn't a total bust. Just look at all the great songs they got to sing.

"And I'm Telling You...": I'm sorry to all you Dreamgirls fans out there, but I am not a huge fan of this song, so maybe I was biased against Mercedes interpretation, but I wasn't that into it. However, all the kids were, so it was decided that Mercedes would sing it as the group's ballad at the competition.

Now that Will was ousted as leader during last week's Matressgate, they had to come up with a whole new set list. Of course Rachael took the lead—as she did more than once last night—and offered one of the many selections from her repertoire as the ballad. Emma, the acting Glee "coach," tells Rachel to give Mama Mercedes a chance, and she lights into this tune, much to the satisfaction of her classmates. Rachael looked like she was faking a positive reaction at the performance to hide her pain, but in the end she did the selfless thing and takes herself out of the running and lets the big belter have her moment. Mercedes was not going anywhere, and neither was Rachael. She did more for the team by stepping down than by stepping up. Finally Rachael is a big girl, and we never liked her more.

Everyone in the group loves Mercedes because she is fierce and confident and dishes all the dirt (is she going to tell everyone that Brittany and Santana are getting it on?). We thought she was being a lady by keeping Puck's secret, but it seems that her big mouth is as good for gossiping as it is for singing. Now everyone in Glee knows Puck's the father except Rachael, who figures it out with her "sixth sense." Sorry, Rachael, but as a female drama nerd, your sixth sense is called gaydar, not ESP.

Based on a hunch—and her very wiley Tay-Sachs ruse to suss out whether or not papa was a Jew—Rachel tells Finn that Puck is the father. A big fight ensues and Quinn lets out a whole bunch of tears, which wash away all her lies.

All of the sudden, everyone's telling everyone they're not going. Rachel fights for Finn, Finn fights for Quinn, Puck fights for Quinn, Finn fights Puck, and Quinn, well, she just wants to be alone. We're even more Team Quinn! after she handled her mess with class. She owns up to the mistakes she made, lets Finn walk away without lying to him, she pushes Puck away, and says she needs time and space to figure out what she's going to do. It's finally time for her to grow up and stand on her own. She also forgives Rachael for having the strength to do what she couldn't. And Rachael was honest about her motivations too. Since when are these kids so mature? It all seemed a little pat to tie up the whole "who's the babydaddy?" storyline, but it was satisfying and left enough up in the air that when the show comes back we'll still have some interesting dynamics.

Ken was also standing up for himself and trying to force Emma to love him when she announced she was pushing off their wedding for a few hours to get it "out of broad daylight" and so that she could take the kids to sectionals. He was none too thrilled, but let it happen anyway, for now.

"Don't Rain on My Parade": I know I'm asking for a gay riot after shitting on "And I'm Telling You...," but I'm not a huge fan of this Funny Girl classic either. The lyrics are awkward, the structure is strange, and I don't get why the sun is a ball of butter. Wouldn't it be really melty? Also, it seemed so obvious to have the weird Jewish girl with the big nose take on Barbra's big number. Then again, when the club is left to come up with a song on the fly, what else would Rachael fall back on? Like she said, she's had this prepared since she was four. And man, does she kill it. I'm getting a little teary just thinking about it now.

But it is strange (against the rules?) to have one girl do a whole number on her own without anyone else in the group uttering a note. That's not a show choir, that's the Rachael Barry Show. We loved it, but it wasn't what this competition is all about. And is it really a ballad? I'm not sure what else I would call it, but a gut-wrenching rouser like this doesn't scream ballad to me. Still, when she throws her arms out and introduces the "band" and our merry mass of misfits walk (and wheel) down the aisle...ugh, here come the tears again.

There was a giant storm cloud looming over the whole proceeding. Not only was Mr. Schue banned from competition, but Finn also quit the group in the wake of Quinn's big reveal. The only replacement they could find was naughty nerd Jacob (his trying to cop a feel while "comforting" Rachael on the bus was an awesome detail). Then, of course, when they arrive, they find out that the Jane Addams girls and the Haverbrook deaf kids have stolen all their numbers thanks to Sue Motherfucking Sylvester.

Surprisingly, it was Rachael who came through for the team, and for a change, it wasn't because she was trying to make herself look like a queen. She even tried to get Mercedes to sing a ballad like they agreed, but the group insisted that she take the solo. Wow, she actually tried to step to the side when center stage was offered. You grow, girl!

Will wasn't going to let dastardly delight Sue Motherfucking Sylvester ruin all the hard work he put in. SMFS was a bit less of a delight when she ran into Will in the hall at school. Not only did she list the things Will is not good at—being married, running a high school Glee club, and finding a haircut that doesn't make him look like a lesbian—but she uses every cruel tactic in the book to incite him. For a change, when she gave a little "victory" fist pump when walking away, we cringed instead of laughed.

To spite Sue and save his club, Will goes to Finn—who thanks to a blah blah blah plot device was in the school. Will sends his little alter ego to save the day with a pep talk and a new song. Ain't nothing going to get them down, and they find a way to march in their parade with umbrellas, even if some members are still a little pissed at each other.

"You Can't Always Get What You Want": Other than the silly organ version at the beginning of The Big Chill, this is the best cover of The Rolling Stones song I've ever heard, and New Directions found a way to turn it from a gospel-inflected dirge into a victory march. No wonder the crowd was up on their feet (and it seemed like a large crowd of white people considering there were only three choirs performing, one of the teams was all African-American, and none of the New Directions parents made the trip from Lima. Just who are these crazy white people going to random show choir sectional tournaments?).

This was a fitting song for Finn, seeing that he didn't get anything he wanted. His baby and Quinn were both taken away from him, even though the baby wasn't his in the first place. He doesn't even want to be the star quarterback or the Glee club hero anymore. He wants to be a normal kid, but Will thrusts the responsibility for saving the team onto him. Admirably, he steps up. Wow, his and Rachael's kids are going to be real leaders—and gay.

Thanks to Candace Dystra, fifth runner up of Miss Ohio 2006; Rod Remington, co-anchor of WOHN-TV and Sue Motherfucking Sylvester's ex-boyfriend; and Donna Landries, Ohio vice comptroller, New Directions does get what they want, the secional trophy. That means the girls from Jane Addams didn't get what they wanted, and they were big old cheaters. That has really got to sing. Eve really fucked up. Even though she tried to come clean before the final verdict was handed down, she didn't try hard enough, and McKinley High's squad was deemed the one that didn't suck the worst.

That means SMFS didn't get what she wanted either. Not only is the Glee club still around, but she got outed for being a big old cheater and deposed from the Cheerios. The way she told Principal Figgins "I beg your pardon" in about seven different inflections with different shades of meaning was amazing. That should seal up Jane Lynch's Emmy nomination right there. So, Sue will be down at her condo in Boca (of course) getting tan and she is going to come back to give Will a ride on the Sue Sylvester Express—destination: horror.

It was poor, stupid Terri who really didn't get what she wanted. When she sees Will in their house, it was a little bit sad and a lot bit awkward. She says, "I wanted so many things I know we'll never have, but it was OK because I had you." Way to turn the knife, Terri. And, sorry, we don't believe you. We believe you'd rather have a breakfast nook full of scented candles and Restoration Hardware dressers full of lilac sachets with some other dude than be all poor and married to Will. Now that they're over, are they over over or is it going to be Terri-lurking-in-the-shadows over. We kind of hope it's the later, because we need someone to hate hate, not love hate like we love hate Sue Motherfucking Sylvester.

When Will leaves he goes straight to Emma's wedding to find the ice sculpture melting and the Cheetos going stale in their bowls at the VFW Hall in Lima, Ohio, which is officially more depressing than a burnt-down Chuck E. Cheese taken over by wild dogs in Detroit. When he arrived (with a very nicely wrapped gift) he thought that he wouldn't be getting Emma, but it looks like Ken finally wised up and walked out. Though it wasn't all good news, Emma was leaving school because she couldn't face having to see both Ken and Will in the same building everyday. She doesn't want to be the rebound girl either, so when Will says that he and Terri are done, she does the smart thing and goes home alone.

But the next day, Will realizes he can't live without her, and they make out in the high school hallway like a couple of band geeks. But what happens next? Will they stay together? Will they leave school? Will Terri boil her bunny now that she is getting with her man? Damn you for leaving us, Glee! We can't get what we want, which is another episode next Wednesday.

"My Life Would Suck without You": I didn't realize how much I liked this Kelly Clarkson song until I heard it here. If it weren't for the very expected Emma/Will hookup during the number, it would have been another three-Kleenex kind of celebration, but alas. What was spectacular about the routine is that it incorporated moves from plenty of the other numbers—the "Single Ladies" ring finger, the coy "Say a Little Prayer" curtesy, the cowboy moves from "I Didn't Even Know His Last Name", and plenty of others that we had seen so far in the season. Not only was it a tribute to all the steps Will had taught the kids, but to the show itself. Seriously, Glee, our lives would suck without you.

Then we found out that Idina Menzel is about to sign as the coach of vocal adrenaline and Will's rival (and possible love interest?)! Who is Idina Menzel? Kill yourself! No, don't. Wait until April, because this is going to be more spectacular than a Sue's Corner marathon.

With a heavy heart and a quivering hand write I this tale of woe. Season VI has fallen before us. Its crowning moment and incandescent guillotining cruelly coincided. Now there's nothing left but remnants and leftovers, day old hardened regret to skim from the surface and reserve for stock. Three chefs and four dishes, four judges and two brothers. Knives were drawn there, between the vines, yonder. For this the final finale, at the very moment when it was most important all variables remained constant as to distill the plasma of the the remaining three competitors, as to avoid tainting the original source, that which would be judged, with the backwash of masses of questionable molarity, by definition a flawed and uneven bunch, Bravo rounded up the once dismissed chefs of episodes past and, through the cruel illogic of knife block paired them in malevolent covalent bonds with the remaining three. So from behind the vine they came, feet first, like benighted children of the corn, The brothers Voltaggio fared not too poorly. Bryan received Ashley and Jennifer, who should have taken from him the knife with her name therein transcribed and stabbed repeatedly Mike Voltaggio about the head and heart and stood in his spot—Michael meanwhile bodily picked up like so much karmic dry cleaning and dragged by Hell's hounds southbound—grinned maniacally, her red face covered in red blood justly spilled. Mike Voltaggio received Fat Cry Baby Boy Eli and Fat Cry Baby Girl Jess. Friar Kevin received Ash, a benediction, and Preeti, the Top Chef equivalent of the Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Technique, tuberculosis or of a profound disagreement between husband and wife about circumcision. Blows all latent, patiently waiting, felt only later in action and application but when felt fatal.

The chefs' courses numbered three and their choices somewhat circumscribed: For the first course chefs would be forced to use all the ingredients from their identical mystery boxes. For the second course, chefs could do whatever they please. The third course must be dessert. Into the kitchen to see the box. Not much doing: a rockfish, a crab, some anise hysopp, a man, a plan, a canal, Panama. Mighty were the prep lists; scant was the time. Fat Cry Baby Eli creamed his pants with servile Oui, Chefs, delighting like the old ghost of Foucault on the Tenderloin, in the erotic charge of the self-abnegation. Jennifer expertly cleaned Bryan's rock fish. Preeti, stuck in sweet molasses, pondered the carrot, considered the lobster, sought satori in the hysopp and left Kevin in the weeds, his tender angel belly to be feasted upon by vultures.

That night, toothsome Kevin stewed in a funk and the brothers Voltaggio planned their range management. There was a knock at the door. Would it be Tom adding a twist. "Good evening, Chefs. Here's the thing: In addition to winning the title of Top Chef, there's another prize. We'll be inserting a glass rod into the urethras of the erect penises of the losing two chefs. Then we'll be screening for the new Robert DeNiro comedy Everything's Fine. A note to the chef who loses his erection first: We'll take a small hammer and break that glass rod inside his penis. To avoid a similar fate, the other chef must maintain an erection for life." Or would it be Padma, not wearing much of anything at all. "Good evening, chefs. The producers forwarded me your Google searches. "9 mo pregnant"+"indian"+"hirsute" Bryan, I am shocked!" The chefs look around uncomfortably. Kevin starts giggling and buries his head in his hands. Bryan looks helpless, wide-eyed and scared. A mischievous smile creeps across Padma's face. "Well," she says, "you sought it and here you have it," stepping from the hallway into an erotic coupling no words could capture save, perhaps, in a magic combination "iridescent" "filthy" "weird" and "creepy". No! It would be neither of those things. Instead, there are two nice looking old ladies at the door. Shit's either about to get real fucked up ["grandmother"+"senior'+"swingers"] or real warm. Thankfully it was the latter. ["mothers"+"reunion"+"crying"]. Mama Gillespie hugs Baby Kevin Gillespie. Mama Voltaggio hugs both the boys.

The stakes are raised. Moms are now involved. It's like when you're a kid in Junior High School, say Abington Junior High School, and you see a kid who makes fun of you at the Willow Grove Mall and you're with your Mom coming out the World of Science and he sees you (he's coming out of Challenges, the arcade) and your eyes meet and you just hope that the bully respects the rules of adolescent warfare and doesn't humiliate you in front of your parents because what could be more devastating to a child than to be a loser in the eyes of his parents? But his eyes are dead to you, glazed over by one too many rounds of Street Fighter, and you exhale as you walk away and walk towards the Wall because Ugly Kid Joe has a new single you want to get on cassette. And then the word "Loser!" hits you like shrapnel, peppering your skull. Your palms sweat and the cookie scent piped out of Mrs. Fields is now mixed with the acrid tingle of fear. But you don't dare turn around because for all your mother knows, that "loser" wasn't meant for you but some other loser, hopefully a Momless one. You are still simply the Secretary of the Key Club, well loved and eager to please. Or at least you hope you are.

To lard the good cheer of unexpected mom presence, that fortifying maternal element, the judges demand the contestants create a fourth dish: A Mom Dish. Sigh. Let's cut the crap and skip ahead.

The producers have now roped in a Voltaggio Mom as an anabolic boost to a fading season and a fraternal rivalry assiduously cultivated at great cost. This brings the body count that has fallen victim to this belabored narrative to two: Jennifer Carroll and now this Lady. Not cool: Moms are civilians.
As for their food, the best I can remember: Kevin's red balls in yellow custard was the best Mom dish. Toby Young liked Bryan's sardines but that's because he's an asshole. No one really liked Mike's broccoli. For the second course, Kevin's dish was, again, the clear favorite except he botched his mushroom. Bryan's was bland and Michael won by default. Third dish, Bryan's venison was hands down the favorite and for dessert, his again was the only offering both well executed and well thought out. Kevin's was lacking a central focus and Michael's flavors, though bold and strong, were offset by an over and improperly cooked cake. The breakdown of judges' opinions is illustrated in this amateur grid below.

As the diagram makes heartbreakingly clear, Bryan should have been the winner. Kevin pulled a Casey, unfortunately, and though he could blame Preeti he doesn't and, furthermore, shouldn't have. The fault was his own. He had, by his own admission, a bad day on the worst day to have one.

Instead the winner is Michael, the Roman-looking one. Certainly a good chef, Michael Voltaggio, but not worthy of the by now dubious honorific of Top Chef and certainly not by the logic to which the show itself supposedly clings. I'm not quite sure now, sorting through my gripes, which ones are valid and which ones aren't. I suppose, for example, that it doesn't matter that Mike is a dickhead for this is, after all, a cooking show. He isn't, in the reality tv show cliche, "there to make friends." On the other hand, character is the currency and the bungee that bind us week after week to the show's and Padma's heaving bosom even though, increasingly, other things happening at Wednesday night at 10 pm seem more appealing [cf. toe clipping, looking for an accountant, reading up on circumcision.] Furthermore, character, as much as salt and pepper, is what gives food flavor. In dinner too, character is the narrative. But good artists are often crummy people. Alexander Pope was a bitter little man. Picasso was no great shakes himself. Celine was a fucking Nazi for Christ's sake. I love Roald Dahl but he wouldn't love me because I'm a Jew but do I still read The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar? I do.

I suppose, therefore I can dismiss that gripe. Though if I see Andy Cohen, I'll tweak his nads (in a not nice way) for cross contamination of two currencies in a single market. But that Michael won in a way that was so clearly at odds with both reality and the completely isolated but nonetheless self-contained terrarium of reality television is a gripe that has the added, if coincidental, value of being true. Is it only the $125,000 prize awarded to the wrong Voltaggio that so irks me? No, it is not. The crushing moment isn't when Michael wins but from when his mother from the shadows comes to embrace her son, the winner, while Bryan, back to the camera, with his neck stiff—for heavy is the crown and heavier is not having one-watches stoically at a distance. Though it is Michael Mama Voltaggio embraces, it's to Bryan her eyes turn and there they stay. And as Mother and Sons leave the studio, the thunderous fact that one's a loser, no matter how unjust the outcome or the panel deciding it, surely crashes heavy on Bryan's soul, sweeping him and us out to sea.

This is Joshua David Stein. Thank you for reading. I'll see you next year and thank you to Yoni Lotan, again, for your wonderful work.

UPDATE: Times spokeswoman Diane McNulty responds: "Carlotta is on a long planned two month break so this is not going off the reservation. She left on December 8, and is due back in Kabul at the beginning of February. Carlotta had expressed a desire to do more reporting—she'd lost so much time to the kidnappings and security logistics."

According to a memo from Times foreign editor Susan Chira, Gall will stay on at the bureau as a "senior Afghanistan correspondent" focusing on "the intersection of Pakistan with the Afghan conflict." Former Baghdad bureau chief Alissa Rubin will take over running the bureau, which is usually staffed by a small rotating handful of Times reporters and a larger number of local Afghan reporters.

Chira's memo portrays the move as an attempt to take the day-to-day management of the bureau off Gall's plate so she can write more stories. But we're told Gall was furious at the decision—so much so that she's "gone off the reservation" on an unplanned vacation and has been out of contact with her colleagues at the Times for a week-and-a-half. Not that there's anything wrong with that—as far as we're concerned, Gall has earned the right to blow off steam any way she pleases by breaking the story of a taxi driver named Dilawar who was murdered by U.S. forces at Bagram Airbase in 2002. That story was later expanded into a lengthy dispatch by Gall's colleague Tim Golden that got much more attention than her original report and became the basis for the documentary Taxi to the Dark Side.

Still, as is often the case with foreign correspondents, Gall has a reputation as a difficult person to work with, and the Times' decision to pull her out of the bureau chief role at the very moment that Kabul becomes the paper's most crucial foreign outpost doesn't look like a vote of confidence in her leadership abilities. We hope she returns to the bureau soon and gets to work. Chira's full memo is below; An e-mail to Gall seeking comment wasn't immediately returned.

It is widely acknowledged, even among our competitors, that there is no reporter who knows more about Afghanistan than Carlotta Gall. For eight years, even while the world's attention shifted to Iraq, Carlotta continued to live in Kabul, where her brave and prescient reporting kept breaking new ground - and was an essential contributor to our Pulitzer Prize for coverage of Afghanistan and Pakistan in 2008. Now that all eyes are focused on Afghanistan again, and American troops and journalists are surging back, Carlotta's knowledge is more valuable than ever. That's why we've agreed that she will return to reporting full time, after years when she has also assumed the increasingly time-consuming duties of bureau chief presiding over a rapidly-expanding bureau. To those duties, especially in the past year, Carlotta has given heart and soul. We have a bureau that continues to produce scoops and works in close collaboration with Washington. And Carlotta has helped ensure that our dedicated and talented Afghan staff has received continual training in journalism, video and writing for the Web. But the price has been been fewer bylines by Carlotta Gall. So now she will become Senior Afghan Correspondent, and her brief will include the intersection of Pakistan with the Afghan conflict.

We are very lucky that Alissa Rubin has agreed to shoulder the daunting task of bureau chief. She brings to this task exceptional journalistic skills, as her acute and wide-ranging reports from Iraq demonstrated. Alissa also has considerable experience in the security and logistical challenges posed by a wartime bureau, acquired in Iraq as bureau chief for us and for the Los Angeles Times.

As Baghdad Bureau Chief, she was able to juggle the considerable journalistic task of thinking strategically about a rapidly-changing conflict with the harrowing demands of keeping Western and local staff safe in what was certainly the most dangerous war zone our journalists had ever operated in. Afghanistan is beginning to challenge Iraq's record on that score, and Alissa's dual experience will be a sure guide.

Her time in Iraq showed her to have a sure sense of the big themes of a big story, She is no stranger to Afghanistan,where she reported with great rigor and compassion about the war and the toll it took on Afghans and their society, beginning in 2001 for the Los Angeles Times.

Alissa and Carlotta are members of a very strong team in Afghanistan and Pakistan that includes some of our finest and most seasoned war correspondents. We will be well positioned to continue our searching coverage of this conflict in a crucial year.

Intensive steroid use appears to cause serious kidney damage, it looks like, if you believe "doctors" and "case studies" and "the New York Times" rather than the T-Nation message boards.

Either way, steroids do give you beautiful breasts.

[Pic via]

That's because the social network has codified this new state of affairs right there into its written "Privacy Policy." A comparison of the new and old policies reveals this addition:

Certain categories of information such as your name, profile photo, list of friends and pages you are a fan of, gender, geographic region, and networks you belong to are considered publicly available to everyone, including Facebook-enhanced applications, and therefore do not have privacy settings. You can, however, limit the ability of others to find this information through search using your search privacy settings.

Facebook users have just begun to realize this is happening. Reuters' aggressive financial columnist Felix Salmon took note of this exciting new "privacy" feature when his critics on an investor website published a list of his Facebook friends, presumably for hate-mailing. Former Gawker editor Doree Shafrir blogged this morning about how her once-hidden friends, network and fan-page subscriptions have suddenly been published.

I've now set my privacy settings so that only friends can search me [and find out you're a fan of Howard Kurtz! Oy! -Ed.]…which seems sort of counterproductive to the whole enterprise, doesn't it?

Indeed it does, and it's scant protection: Shafrir's friends are still listed to strangers on her profile page, if you can find it. There's a way to turn this off, too, according to Salmon (see update to his column), but anyone who shares a friend with you will still be able to see all your friends (I'm looking at Salmon's now, and we're not friends).

Really, as gossip bloggers, we at Gawker should be happy about all this; it certainly makes it easier to hunt down people willing to confirm gossip about their acquaintances. And it's satisfying to have our conspiracy theories confirmed — and quoted by civil libertarians at the Electronic Frontier Foundation who, along with the ACLU, have raised serious objections these "privacy" changes.

But there's something maddening about watching Facebook bumble its way into another privacy debacle, one approaching in its disastrousness the launch of the Beacon advertising/stalking system a few years back. If only Facebook's investors agreed. But then they're not exactly a pack of civil liberties advocates, now are they?

(Top pic: Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, by Simon Doggett)

If American conservatives want to know what a real War on Christmas might look like, they should probably visit the Holy Land. Something called the "Lobby for Jewish Values" is actually, for real, campaigning against restaurants that display Christmas trees and wreaths. And it is just not just the nuts! Every year, the Jerusalem Rabbinate threatens to revoke the kosher certification of restaurants that display "Christian symbols."

And they have kick-ass fliers:

According to the lobby's Chairman, Ofer Cohen, they have received backing by the rabbis, "and we are even considering publishing the names of the businesses that put up Christian symbols ahead of the Christian holiday and call for a boycott against them."

Fliers and ads distributed among the public read, "The people of Israel have given their soul over the years in order to maintain the values of the Torah of Israel and the Jewish identity.

"You should also continue to follow this path of the Jewish people's tradition and not give in to the clownish atmosphere of the end of the civil year. And certainly not help those businesses that sell or put up the foolish symbols of Christianity."

The "clownish atmosphere" of Christmas? That is too far. It is time for the United States to invade Israel and topple their tyrannical government, in order to protect the rights of their Christian minority.

The New York Times needed to cut its staff. Its newsroom staff is too big for the paper to survive for the long term. And with a newsroom that large, there is inevitably dead weight. Still, every person that leaves is something lost for the paper.

Metro Section: It was bloated, with 50 reporters but no standalone section in the paper. Buyout takers from the section were Ralph Blumenthal, Nicole Collins, Paul Nielsen, Tina Kelley and Jenny 8. Lee, who was the biggest individual brand name to take the (meager) money and run. With such a relatively modest news hole, it's doubtful that the departures will be very visible in the print product; the question is whether the NYT can keep its City Room blog (which Lee had a hand in) as excellent as it's been. It could soon become more important than the print Metro section, in terms of influence. Other, smaller blogs by Metro staffers could well get cut in the NYT blog purge, so they're not as much of a worry.(The same goes for every other section, of course).

Business: It was also big, with 85 staffers, but more justifiably so. But they lost some serious quality reporters. Buyout takers include Louis Uchitelle, Alex Berenson, Jonathan Glater, Leslie Wayne, Edmund Andrews, and Geraldine Fabrikant. Andrews and Fabrikant would probably be considered the two biggest names leaving.

Sports: They lost Jack Curry, a big name, and Giants reporter Joe Lapointe. The sports section is expected to get hit hard in the round of layoffs, mostly because the connection between the NYT and the very concept of "sports" has always been tenuous. Although it's a very good section! It will survive.

DC: Stephen Labaton, Neil Lewis, David Johnston, and David Stout are all leaving. Also, the Business desk in DC has been rather decimated, we hear. The paper will have to staff back up. Between pressure from the WSJ on a national scale, and the increased DC focus of the weakened Washington Post, and Politico, the Times can't afford to lose any ground in its DC coverage.

More broadly, these buyouts signal the end of the classic New York Times culture. The paper used to be a job for life, with tenure as strong as the most bureaucratic college and a bureaucracy as entrenched as The Pentagon's. Those days, by necessity, are ending for good. Slowly, NYT employees are being forced to show and prove to justify their own paychecks. Just like employees of normal media outlets!

A year from now, many more newsroom employees will be gone. And things will be tighter at the NYT. For better or worse, they're going to lose some flab. And a fair amount of mystique.

[Special shout out to the many departing members of the NYT copy desk. Copy editors will soon be a luxury remembered wistfully.]

No one really remembers Nobel Prize acceptance speeches. Not even King's, which Obama quoted a couple times. And this one probably won't go down in history, but it was terribly smart and occasionally lovely, and we're inclined to agree with James Fallows that it "will probably seem better, on re-reading and with the passage of time...." Reading the transcript is probably more edifying than watching it.

So. The humble bit sounded genuine. The defensive bit was funny.

But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 42 other countries — including Norway — in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.

"Including Norway" is not quite as bizarrely memorable a piece of odd Presidential justification as "you forgot Poland," but we will make an effort to quote it mockingly in our foreign policy coverage from now on. Even NORWAY, people!

Here is the president laying out the incredibly unrealistic conditions of a "just war":

The concept of a "just war" emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when it meets certain preconditions: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the forced used is proportional, and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence.

Yeah those are all kinda impossible to meet to everyone's satisfaction.

Because George W. Bush so brazenly co-opted the utopian rhetoric of liberal internationalists, no current politician can speak of the courage and heroism of those who protest oppressive regimes without unintentionally evoking that jackass in all his smirky vainglory. Though Bush only ever talked about the nations he was actively interested in messing around with for strategic reasons. Obama brought up Burma and Somalia and Zimbabwe. (And, look at that, climate change.)

The crazier right-wing critics are basically grasping at straws in their attempts to find fault (it was a "lecture," he didn't count the GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR as one of the wars he is waging, actual psychopath John Bolton is mad that he said he "prohibited torture") but that is to be expected.

Not-great video of the speech is on Youtube if you'd like to watch it.

[Pic: Getty]

This is BK's new promotion in the UK: Some girl who gets in the shower in a bikini every morning and sings a song, live on webcam. Sez Ad Age:

A Burger King spokesman explained the blatantly male bias of the campaign. He said, "Our research showed that breakfast is a male-centric audience for Burger King; it doesn't resonate as well with women — we are targeting the people who are buying breakfast."

Burger King is clearly sexist unless they extend the same courtesy to Ladies Who Lunch, with a Penis Cam.

[We asked the Subservient Chicken for a comment and he just shrugged. You never used sex to advance your career, Subservient Chicken! You can be proud of that.]

UPDATE: Editor & Publisher, the venerable trade magazine covering the newspaper business also owned by Nielsen, is being shuttered as part of the deal, according to a memo from Nielsen Business Media president Greg Farrar posted by Jim Romenesko (and pasted below). Which means that one of the premiere chroniclers of the long, slow, death of the newspaper business is now dead. E&P dates back to 1884 or 1901, depending on how you look at it, and has employed some extremely smart, and talented media reporters. Kirkus Reviews is also being shut down, leaving the business of anodyne early book reviews to Publishers Weekly. Very sad.

Message from Greg Farrar

Dear Colleagues,

Today, we announced that Nielsen Business Media has reached an agreement with e5 Global Media Holdings, LLC, a new company formed jointly by Pluribus Capital Management and Guggenheim Partners, for the sale of eight brands in the Media and Entertainment Group, including Adweek, Brandweek, Mediaweek, The Clio Awards, Backstage, Billboard, Film Journal International and The Hollywood Reporter. e5 Global Media Holdings has also agreed to acquire our Film Expo business, which includes the ShoWest, ShowEast, Cinema Expo International and CineAsia trade shows.

In addition, we've made the decision to cease operations for Editor & Publisher and Kirkus Reviews.

This move will allow us to strengthen investment in our core businesses – those parts of our portfolio that have the greatest potential for growth – and ensure our long-term success. We remain committed to building our trade show group and affiliated brands. These assets continue to be a key part of The Nielsen Company's overall portfolio and we strongly believe they are positioned to grow as the economy recovers. In addition, we'll continue to assess the strategic fit of our remaining portfolio of publications.

As a result of these decisions, many of our friends and colleagues within these businesses will be leaving the company or will begin to transition to the new ownership immediately. These venerable brands have long been an important part of our Business Media family, and we are pleased that e5 will continue to capitalize on the brands' potential. The transition is expected to be complete by the end of the year.

Pluribus Capital was founded in 2009 by James Finkelstein, George Green and Matthew Doull to focus on acquiring and managing industry leading media properties with high growth potential, particularly those with strong brand recognition across multiple platforms including digital, print and events. Guggenheim Partners is a privately held, diversified financial services firm. Both Pluribus and Guggenheim have strong track records of successfully managing investments in a variety of companies.

I want to take this opportunity to offer heartfelt thanks to our colleagues who will be leaving the company for their dedication and commitment to Nielsen over the years. Please join me in wishing them well in their future endeavors.

Regards,

Greg Farrar
President
Nielsen Business Media

1. "This Reality TV Star is telling all her friends that she has slept with a certain famous Twilight star. She was drunk at a club this week and when our source questioned her about it, she said ‘it' was really 'small' but the actor can ‘really work with what God gave him.' Not Lindsay Lohan." [BuzzFoto]

2. "Which story involving a B list television and movie actor and his singer wife should be corrected by a national tabloid but isn't because they have paid so much money to the person who gave them the original story. Now you may be asking why the B list actor doesn't sue. Well it turns out that although this time he is not guilty that hasn't always been the case and he doesn't want those stories to come to light." [CDaN]

3. "This actress is a chameleon on the screen but seems to be quite down-to-earth in real life. That's why it was surprising for us to learn that she is considered a real nut case by a former employee. One day she ordered the staffer to throw out everything in her refrigerator and kitchen cabinets that contained any alcohol or caffeine or sugar or flour. Within 24 hours, she was pitching a fit because there was no food in the house. She ordered the staffer to go to the store and purchase about two dozen items. The shopping list included Grey Goose Vodka, Oreos, and Mountain Dew. All of the items were consumed over the course of the next three days." [Blind Gossip]

The New York Post sinks its dripping, sexxxy fangs into the story today, and digs this dirt: The janitor snitched on the nekkid pair (rather than, presumably, doing the "Hellooooo, ladies" porn movie thing) because he thought they were hormonal students, raging sapphically out of control! And one teacher, Cindy Mauro, looks like that type, the paper STRONGLY IMPLIES:

Mauro, who lives in Bay Ridge with two other women, recently went punk, dying her hair pink, getting several new tattoos, and wearing tight, low-cut clothing, neighbors said.

Mmm hmm. Furthermore, students say Mauro didn't like kids making anti-gay remarks in her class. We all know what that means, heh. And as for her counterpart, the innocent Alini Brito? Everyone's shocked:

"I still can't believe it," Melissa, 17, added. "If a boy came on to her, she would get nasty."

We read you loud and clear. The scenario's beginning to take shape: One radical punk rock lesbian infiltrates a high school in order to seduce innocent female colleagues. We see it all the time.

The two teachers deny the entire thing. Needless to say, do not read a New York Post sex scandal story for anything other than entertainment value.
[Pic via]

On the anniversary of the day the fraud as revealed, the Journal says Mark has talked to some Wall Street types about a position on a trading desk or in trading technology. He asked one person to keep him in mind if there were any openings. Unfortunately, it's not that simple.

He's untouchable in any firm that deals with the public," says someone who talked to Mr. Madoff. He was near tears while describing his feelings about his father, the person added, asking why anyone would bring his son to work at a crooked investment firm. Another person approached by the 45-year-old Mr. Madoff was told by his lawyer not to respond.

Andrew Madoff, meanwhile, is considering starting a disaster recovery firm. Disaster being his area of expertees, one supposes. Even former employees who haven't got the last name Madoff are struggling.

I'll never get a job in finance, and I'm one of the lucky ones," says Eleanor Squillari, Bernard Madoff's assistant for many years. She went to beauty school this summer and plans to look for work at a hair salon while selling her handmade jewelry.

Do not be surprised to see a couple of Madoff-looking guys sweeping up hair there.

The other big story is the arrest of five American men linked to militants in Pakistan. It's the third or fourth similar tale this year, so expect to see some serious features on the topic in the near future. The tabloids keep pulling nuggets from the rich Tiger Woods seam — today one of his mistresses (number eight? maybe number nine?) spills even more beans and there are some juicy new text messages flying around.

If that is not enough diversion for you:

• The New York Times reports on the misery of old people in rural areas. It's a hoot. Perhaps put on Barber's Adagio for Strings before reading.
• The Washington Post finds out those crackpot right-wing teabaggers' plans for the 2010 elections. Expect a lot of borderline mentally-ill people to appear in your neighborhood to campaign soon.
• And the Wall Street Journal finds that Apple is about to take over the world by launching a web version of iTunes.

Disclosure: I freelance write and report for newspapers that are included in this roundup. Where there is a direct conflict of interest I will make it clear.

The New York Times: points out that getting old in the middle of nowhere is hard. Cheery stuff. If said old people fall and break their hips though, Democrats in the senate are hopeful healthcare reform will pass in decent shape. Pakistan has detained five Americans tied to militants (figuratively) and in Britain they're levying a one-time 50 per cent tax on banker bonuses — which should be known as the 'try and save Gordon Brown tax'. The Large Hadron Collider at CERN in Switzerland is firing on all cylinders, or whatever it does, and China's neighbors are jealous of its success.

The Washington Post: finds more mortgage shenanigans, and a surge in the ranks of extreme Republicans. It's like being in the early 2000s again. Except that Democrats in the Senate are pleased with the deal that's emerging on healthcare reform. The paper also reports the five men arrested in Pakistan and highlights the plight of people with tattoos who have to cover them up at work.

The LA Times: has the healthcare story too but doesn't feel the Pakistan arrests worthy of the front page. There's a piece on rising costs at the University of California, a look at the battle for Swedish novelist Stieg Larsson's fortune and the news that a new telescope will see in infrared light. The founder of Broadcom is cleared of lying to investigators and yet another Iran internet story.

The Wall Street Journal: reports the backlash on banker pay, and its flipside — the Americans who default on their mortgages and then rent luxury homes at knockdown rates. Apple is planning a web version of iTunes and a look at the power immigration officials have to decide who is culturally relevant.

The New York Post: Tiger Woods really must wish he'd slept with classier women.

The Daily News: he must also wish he'd just called members of his harem instead of texting the whole time.
The Minneapolis Star-Tribune: a year after Bernie Madoff's fraud was revealed, a fairly large Ponzi schemer is not even the top story in Minneapolis today.

Aftenposten (Norway): this is probably what Obama read before accepting the Nobel Peace Prize today.

James Madison High School in Midwood boasts graduates like Senator Chuck Schumer and baseballer Frank Torre. But, thanks to two of the News' resident Brits, Christina Boyle and Joe Jackson (and someone called Brendan Brosh) it will now be remembered for sexiness.

Yesterday it was revealed that two language teachers had allegedly been found "undressed" together in a classroom. Today we find that another teacher, also somewhat hot, has been accused of inappropriate behavior with (male) students. Allison Musacchio, 31, who seems to take her title 'social studies instructor' somewhat literally, is under investigation after over 200 sexy texts and sexy calls between her and a student were found on her sexy phone. She'd been investigated for similar antics before. She denied it to a neighbor though:

She said, 'Absolutely not,'" the neighbor said. "She said, 'Are you crazy? With my Greek background, I would never do something like that. I have morals and respect.

Do Greeks have a particular moral code about sex with students? Anyway; expect to find a full-blown orgy in progress by the time tomorrow's paper comes out.

• Q: How insane is alleged used vibrator criminal Casey Johnson? A: She and Tila Tequila just got "engaged." Tila—who once dated Casey ex Courtenay Semel—showed off "a 17-carat diamond ring from my baby. My baby is a billionaire! She's the heiress of Johnson and Johnson," then the pair made out for the cameras and Tila showed her boobs. Sometimes I look at pictures of these women, and they're like little girls playing dress up and making up fairy tales, and it's cute. Other times I remember that Casey has a daughter, and I feel like an accessory to a horrible crime. [P6]
• 
  
• Is Amy Winehouse back with Blake Incarcerated? They might have had a 36-hour love-in in Sheffield. But Amy's dad Mitch says it isn't true. (Which is actually evidence it might have. He's always wrong.) [ShowBizSpy] [ShowBizSpy]
• 
  
• Billy Joel and Christie Brinkley are pissed at Page Six for saying daughter Alexa Ray's alleged suicide attempt was the result of a mother-daughter tiff. Alexa's hospitalization came "while suffering a devastating heartbreak." That's right, blame it on the boyfriend. [AP]
• 
  
• Nicky Hilton's stolen computer does not—she repeats does not—have a sex tape on it. That's Paris' thing, not hers. [TMZ]
• 
  
• "I can be up and down like a yo-yo," said unstable singing homebody Susan Boyle. "I can be depressed." In an interview the Sun she describes the "psychological bullying" of her youth. To demonstrate that show biz is no different than middle school, the Sun pairs this article about SuBo's mental health struggles with an unflattering crazy lady picture. [fig.1] [Sun]
• 
  
• A mysterious bouquet of roses appeared at the Woods home last night, and they were for Tiger. [fig.2] No word on who sent them, but you'd think there'd be zillions of bouquets arriving right about now, from aspirational quasi-hookers for Tiger, and aspirational modelizers for Elin. Apparently this was the only one. [TMZ]
• 
  
• Liza Minnelli has settled a $100M lawsuit for sexually assaulting her bodyguard, proving once and for all that Whitney Houston's movie was false. The guard accused Liza of "drunkenly battered him and forced him to bed her," according to NYDN, which fails to explain how on earth Liza kept this from the press for so long. Apparently Soumayah earned $238K to protect Minnelli, and endured physical and sexual abuse to keep his job. [NYDN]
• 
  
• Jake Gyllenhaal is going to propose to Reese Witherspoon over the holidays. This sounds about right, because there was that break-up rumor a couple weeks ago, and if I have learned anything from rom coms and the Longoria-Parker romance, it's that there is always a period of disarray and heartache right before the handsome man drops to one knee and tells the lady he just can't live without her. [PopEater]
• 
  
• Lindsay Lohan's philanthropic trip to India has "over 40 children saved so far... within one day's work." The girl is a child-saving savant. [P6]
• 
  
• When LiLo gets back from India, she'll have Gucci model Adam Senn waiting for her, says the Daily News. Senn is also a restaurateur, character on The City, and possessor of savvy gossip-leaking skills, because concocting this rumor while Linds is in India means she's probably too busy to deny it. [NYDN]
• 
  
• Tom Brady ex Bridget Moynahan wishes Tom and Gisele's new baby boy "the best." She also wishes everyone would forget she dated him, because she is sick to death of having her headshots next to Gisele's in gossip columns. [fig.3] [NYDN]
• 
  

Figure 1.













Figure 2.













Figure 3.

An 'insider' told Popeater that:

Nowhere near enough people paid the $19.95 [online fee] to cover the reported $150,000 the fading brand paid the Alaskan hunk to go rogue.

That figure is a lot higher than anything we've reported. Our best guess is Playgirl paid Levi around $25,000 plus a cut of the revenues. So this could, of course, be part of Richard Johnson's vendetta against Johnston for snubbing him at the Fleshbot awards. A spokesperson for Playgirl told P6 that:

Between the hours of 1 a.m. and 3 a.m. the morning the shoot went live on Playgirl.com, we had already surpassed all daily sign-up records. For the amount we paid, not $150,000, we were astounded at how well it has gone for us. In terms of sheer publicity, it has been worth millions.

In terms of sheer publicity? That may be an accounting term for 'who's going to pay almost $20 to see those pictures'?

The President, who just signed the guestbook at the Nobel Institute (pictured above) has truncated the usual three days of stuff to just 24 hours, of which he'll presumably spend some time sleeping. Today he will attend a banquet, give a lecture, watch a torchlit procession then bail with excuses about not being able to get breakfast because of 'work' and vague promises to call sometime.

Norwegians think refusing to lunch with their king is rude — or at least 44 per cent of them do, according to a survey. But then they're socialists. Royalists. Socialists. Well some evil, lazy, un-American combination of the two anyway.

So, if that special someone says, "This year, what I'd really like is stuff that focuses exclusively on my race," here's NYT's guide to "gifts created for and by people of color this holiday season," including a "Wise Latina" tee-shirt and The Mocha Manual to Military Life: A Savvy Guide for Wives, Girlfriends and Female Service Members.

NYTPicker says the guide is racist. Mediate pussyfoots with "bordering on offensive." What "border" didn't this cross? It's a celebration of the racist assumption that "people of color" are defined by their colors—but white people get to self-define with their interests, hobbies, and desire for "Home and Decorating Gifts for $25 and Under."

Also, these gifts are mostly backhanded insults, and not just to one's race. For instance:

Pretext: This book will improve your makeup skills.
Subtext: Your makeup skills need improving. Your foundation never matches your skin tone, your complexion is blotchy, and you are not nearly pretty enough to go without. Cover it up, already.
Racist Subtext: Your Asian eyes are freaking me out. Can't you use some kind of shadow trick to make it look like you have eyelids?

Pretext: This product will help you deal with "problem hair."
Subtext: Your hair is a "problem."
Racist Subtext: Black hair is a "problem," and black women's grooming habits are of public interest, which is why I consider it my business to help you rein in that mane.

Pretext: This book will help you discuss the "nuanced complexities of African-American relationships."
Subtext: Your relationship is terrible, and you are so dense, I think you need a book to explain how to fix it.
Racist Subtext: Someone once told me black people come from broken homes and beat their wives. You are black, therefore yours is probably a broken home, and your husband is probably beating you. Here, let me save you with this book, is was written by a black celebrity.

Mediaite questions how the "Of Color" guide "made it past the editing process." My question is, what kind of "editing process" do gift guides go through anyway? Especially ones destined to live only on the web? If the age of Lucky magazine has taught us anything, it's that shopping guides are as much about stroking editors' relationships with subjects/designers/publicists as they are about content. The New York Times is supposed to be better than that, but if it turns out they dropped their editorial standards a bit for their massive array of web-only holiday shopping guides (complete with click-through internet sales) I doubt anyone would be shocked.

[NYT] [NYTPicker] [Mediaite]

The Hollywood Reporter reports that Palestinian shopkeeper Ayman Abu Aita filed a $110 million libel lawsuit against both SBC and David Letterman's production company because Cohen gave an interview on "Late Night" where he called Abu Aita a "terrorist". He and Letterman were talking about a scene in "Bruno" where Bruno interviews a "terrorist" at his home. However, Abu Aita claims he is a "peace-loving person who abhors violence," and that his reputation was ruined after the movie came out. On the other hand, the Alabama preacher who tried to convert Bruno to straight-dom is attempting to ride his new-found fame all the way to the mayor's office of his small town. [THR]

•With her cable network, Oprah is looking to do for documentaries what her book club did for William Faulkner novels: She's launching a documentary film club. The films will initially have "inspirational themes," so when your mother starts gushing about some documentary about underprivileged youth in 2011, blame Oprah. [THR]

•Chris Weitz, director of "New Moon," has come to the defense of the Illinois girl who's facing up to three years in prison for videotaping part of his film. According to The Wrap, Weitz wrote "Needless to say, the case seems to me terribly unfair and I would like to do what I can to address this." He then turned into a werewolf, broke into the girl's cell and took her to a castle where they made out. [The Wrap]

•Can you guess the premise behind the new speed-dating reality show on ABC called "Conveyor Belt of Love?" 30 men rotate on a conveyor belt in front of five women and are given a minute to talk to them before being whisked away forever. This would be about a thousand times more interesting if there was a fire at the end of the conveyor belt. [Variety]

•Johnny Depp does not watch his own movies. The Wrap reports that Johnny Depp recommended his new film "Public Enemies" to an audience in Tokyo by saying "I haven't seen the film yet, but I hear great things about it." Douche-y, or kind of awesome? [The Wrap]

•Cameron Diaz first won our hearts in the raunch-fest that is "There's Something About Mary." Now she's returning to her gross roots with "Bad Teacher," which is about a "foulmouthed, gold-digging middle teacher." [Variety]

•'Glee' fans: Idina Menzel, the Tony award-winning "Wicked" star, is in negotiations to appear in the final nine episodes of the season as the coach of McKinley High's arch-rivals. [THR]

The country music star is all butterflies and Jesus love onstage, but this scintillating Facebook quiz of a listicle is a cry for help from a cold, lonely prison. I am preserving Esquire's boldface formatting, because I find it compelling to read these sentences loud at first then very soft, in your head. (Does everyone do that when they read boldface text?)

• As you step off that stage, you're pretty much alone.
• My cell phone is my best friend. It's my lifeline to the outside world.
• It's hard to find people who don't want something from you.
• People think, Oh, you travel around, you get to see the country. I've seen basements, I've seen concrete, I've seen pillars.
• Nobody's going to tell me that my dog doesn't love me.

Who on earth would tell someone that? Is somebody hurting you, Carrie? You're in a safe place, now, you don't have to go back.

• I can't watch animal movies. I watched Beverly Hills Chihuahua and sobbed, because of all the dogfighting stuff they had in there. This little Chihuahua gets stuck in a Mexican dogfighting ring, and it's supposed to be funny, but oh no, it's not.

Barbara Walters named Michelle Obama this year's most fascinating wife of Barack Obama, who they obviously were not able to book on the show—er, person. Yawn. What really tickled us was Walters' prurient fascination with the scandalous sexual practices of two of her young honorees.

Here is Barbara Walters talking to Lady Gaga about her sapphic reputation on tonight's show:

Barbara is so concerned!

Gaga's mysterious and exotic sexuality only landed her at the 10th most fascinating person of 2009.

But Adam Lambert's full-on gayness pushed him all the way to number 5. Here is Barbara's adorable introduction to her interview with Adam Lambert:

And here is part of her interview, where she wonders if Lambert's gayness marks "the end of the world":

We can only hope that Walters is channeling the old ladies who must make up the bulk of the "Most Fascinating Person of the Year's" audience: Such a nice young boy... but did you know he is gay!? Fascinating.

Next year it's just going to be "The Most Fascinating Queers of 2010".

Flirting is a complex thing. People write books about it. But text messaging is just not a good way to communicate anything more complicated than "10pm @ the Cheese Whiz factory; bring yr goggles." (Plus, texting your illicit lover is a sure-fire way to get caught—the Times calls it the "digital lipstick on the collar".)

The New York Post today released a transcript of eight text message sessions between Tiger Woods and one of his alleged mistresses, cocktail waitress Jamie Grubbs. Taken as a single, uh, text, they show how three key components of flirting are ruined by text messaging.

Jokes

Jaimee: if we hang out on a Sundway we can watch desperate houswives again haha
Tiger: oh god
Jaimee: take a break from watching boring old golf
Jaimee: I mean the amazing sport of golf ;)
Jaimee: [more than an hour later] babe I was kidding
Tiger: I know sexy

The worst part about this exchange is imagining Grubbs sitting around for an hour, fretting that she upset Tiger by making fun of golf. Text message flirting sets up this tit-for-tat arrangement that breeds passive-aggression: You never want to be the last person to send a text, and if you're met with silence you can't help but wonder if it was something you said. If a joke bombs on the phone, at least you don't have to wait an hour to find out.

Revealing Personal Conversations

Tiger: [later, in response to Jaimee's mention of a date who was "full of himself"] you kinda like that for some reason which is weird why you decided on me.
Tiger: having an asian mother and a military father you cannot and will not ever be full of yourself
Jaimee: I have fun with u, you always make me smile and I am not afraid to be myself or say anything to u ... the day I met u I thought u were going to kick me out a few times but for someone reason you didn't and u have told me numerous times I talk to much but slowly as I get to know u iI think your absolutely amazing
Tiger: you are wrong I'm bone thugs in harmon

We're going to give Grubbs the benefit of the doubt here (which, granted, is a very large benefit in her case) and say that if she was face-to-face with Tiger she would have recognized the opportunity to take this conversation out of the insipid "no you're amazing" back-and-forth that comprise most of the messages. That "you cannot and will not ever be full of yourself" line offers probably more insight into Tiger's character than a million porn stars talking about the size of his dick ever could. Opportunity missed, Grubbs!

Romantic bullshit

Tiger: do you have a boy friend
Jaimee: I don't even have someone I am dating ... no ... u can be my boyfriend ;)
Tiger: then I am
Jaimee: I wish
Tiger: quiet and secretively we will always be together
Tiger: when was the last time you got laid

OK, this one is ridiculous. Now we're thinking that some sort of damage to the language part of the brain may have as much to do with how stupid Grubbs and Woods sound as did their mode of communication. Maybe people who sound stupid in text messages are just kind of stupid? Maybe we just argued our own blog post out of existence?

But still: If they had said this horseshit over the phone we wouldn't have to read a word-for-word transcript of it later. (Ditto for Facebook messages, Salman Rushdie.)

Don't text and flirt!

That's because we have some genuine suspense to look forward to tonight—a recent development on this show: All season it's been obvious who the Final Four would be, and even Jen's ouster last week wasn't a huge shock given her late-season slump. In fact, you wanna know just how dominant the frontrunners were this season? The Final Four won all 13 elimination challenges, and tonight's Final Three won 12 out of 13 of them. So tonight, any of these three could take the prize—Good Volt, Bad Volt or Friar Beard. I even made up new nicknames for them, just for the occasion—that's how excited I am!

So why not join us in live-blogging all the suspenseful excitement? The show starts at 10 Eastern and the commenter-created live blog happens directly below this post. Last week's edition was, as ever, a blast (see a selection of my favorite comments by clicking here). Among the highlights:

• During the pre-live-blog-banter phase, commenter rodmanstreet reported that a friend once lost her car keys in her fridge's veggie drawer. Then Lizawithazee said she once tried to start a car with a zucchini (but I think she made that up).
• When Kevin mentioned that there's a Facebook page devoted to his beard, commenters GonzoMaz and Mat Cherrette immediately headed over to FB to become fans of it.
• Michael Chiarello sampled Michael V.'s pistou, and then complained that it didn't "finish" in his mouth. I guess some people like it when a man's pistou does that.
• Tom praised Jen's duck for being "ducky." Like Sesame Street's Ernie, he's apparently a ducky fan. Unfortunately, that didn't save Jen from getting her goose cooked.

As for tonight, the preview clips I watched didn't contain much that was revealing or interesting, except this: Michael Volt will remark that his brother has gotten screwed over in the prize category. I did a little research on that, and boy was he ever right. Here's a rundown the number of challenge wins (quickfire + elimination) for each of the Final Four, along with the most valuable prizes they got out of those victories:

• Kevin (8 wins) $30,000, $15,000 and a set of Calphalon cookware.
• Micheal (5 wins): $15,000, $10,000 and a Toyota Prius.
• Jennifer (4 wins): $15,000 and a $10,000 Macy's gift card.
• Bryan (4 wins): Diddly squat.

You know what sound effect Bravo should've played every time Bryan won? Just click here and push the big blue button to find out.

OK, time to push the "on" button on our remotes, because the live blog hour approaches. I won't post any maudlin "goodbye till next season" message here, because we can meet again soon to live-blog the Top Chef Reunion Episode that Bravo will air next Wednesday (Note: It will start at 9 Eastern, not 10!). So I'll see you all there next week—and I'll see you down in the comments section shortly!

[Ed. Note: Please NO SPOILERS until the show is over. We posted something earlier today that might give some clues as to who won, but not everyone read it. So, please DON'T TALK ABOUT IT until after the show.]

NPR's Daniel Schorr, who once worked with Edward R. Murrow, gave a heartfelt goodbye to his typewriter. On Twitter! Wow.

People were also talking about striking out in new directions at the New York Times, on buyout day.

Writer and ex Valleywagger Melissa Gira Grant has no fucking time. Or, rather, no "non fucking" time. It's fucking overwhelming!

Blogger and entrepreneur Tom Bridge isn't asking for a perfectly ordered society. Just the basics.

The Wall Street Journal's Colleen Debaise really appreciates your interview for her video "Creating Buzz," owner of Bill's Bar & Burger. Here, have some "check [it] out" buzz!

Did you witness the media elite tweet something indiscreet? Please email us your favorite tweets - or send us more Twitter usernames.