I'm old-fashioned – I like the morning paper. I page through it, front to back, reading more in the first section, next to nothing in the sports section. I read most of the weekly science section, and most of the op-ed page. The paper surprises me with things I wasn't looking for, and I put a high value on those serendipitous finds. Could neutrinos actually travel faster than light? What would that mean to our understanding of the universe? (The bartender says, "we don't serve faster-than-light particles in here." A neutrino walks into a bar.) Could that candidate honestly believe that evolution is a false theory or that global warming is not the result of human actions? What does that say about his or her intelligence, judgment and ability to lead? (Too sad for jokes.) That new cell phone is pretty remarkable. Is the company that makes it a good investment? The only part of the paper that leaves me cold is the sports section – I just don't care whether the sports team from my area beat the sports team from your area. If they did, I hope the people watching the game enjoyed the show, but I also hope they don't feel in some way better than the spectators from the other team's area. (How does the world-series-winning pitcher change a light bulb? He holds it up and the world revolves around him.) Finally, I have to ask how the news world is changing with the influence of television and the Internet. TV news has shortened news stories to five or six sentences – count them in the next news cast you watch. The choice of images has an enormous impact on the message of the story, and the tone of the reporter puts a subtle spin on every word. On the Internet, we only look at the stories we click on – we have to take action to read more than a headline. I think on average the population takes in less news today than twenty years ago, and we are strongly influenced by non-verbal elements than we realize. I'm sticking with the newspaper.