Bostonist has been unkind to the Herald in the past, but we have to say that it's never bad to live in a two-newspaper town, especially if what you want from your news is not just information, but amusement. Take today's papers: Both the Globe and the Herald had fine coverage of the day's biggest local story, the scaffolding collapse on Boylston Street. And both rags reliably ran wire stories on the major national stories (although the Globe ignored, and the Herald prominently featured, an AP story on one of the Herald's favorite topics: Sex for sale on craigslist; the AP's wrinkle? Sex in lieu of rent). But only the Herald had two stories (one of their own and one by the AP) about the fact that early tomorrow morning, it will be 1:02:03 on 4/5/06 (1,2,3,4,5,6, get it? It's exciting, we suppose, unless you live in the whole rest of the world, where it's 1,2,3,5,4,6, but whatever).
Also, props to the Herald for yesterday's edition, which contained two stories in compliance with that paper's editorial policy of reporting on every non-violent misdemeanor that involves poop.



It's so good, they give it away, and I'll still don't touch it. Newsprint is sooooo analog.
> unless you live in the whole rest of the world, where it's 1,2,3,5,4,6, but whatever
Or worse what otherwise likeable Harvey Leonard said during tonight's weather on Channel 5 that the event "won't ever happen again." Sure it will: in 2106, 2206, etc.