Odds and Ends

There's a great interview with Stephen Colbert over at The Onion AV Club.

My cable television went out yesterday.  It did this once before.  The previous time, it turned out that someone stole the cable wire off the roof of my building.  The same symptoms are happening this time (no television reception, cable box doesn't know what time it is, cable company can't figure out the problem over the phone when I call and so I needed to set up an appointment), so I'm guessing the cable bandit may have struck again.  Set up an appointment for Tuesday.  It'll be a TV-less weekend.

I've been meaning to write for the past week or so about the magazine Legal Affairs.  It recently announced that it hasn't been able to attract enough financing and isn't going to be printing any more issues (it'll continue to publish online).  I think that's a shame.  I think they filled a niche for thought-provoking legal writing that wasn't motivated by a political agenda, and they did it quite well.  I'm normally ashamed of how little law-related news and opinion really captures me -- I'll get interested in something occasionally, like the Harriet Miers nomination, but even then, it's usually from the political angle more than the legal one.  Nevertheless, there was usually something in each issue of Legal Affairs that captured my interest, whether a book review or their recent piece about who owns fantasy baseball statistics.  The magazine's tag line is about the "intersection of law and life," and I think that captures it well.  There are a lot of ways that the law influences our lives.  And most law-related writing doesn't take you there, and ends up being relatively uncompelling, at least to someone who's not engaged in the law on a day-to-day basis.  And the articles in Legal Affairs are invariably well-written.  So I think it's a shame they haven't found the funding to continue publishing in print, and I hope an investor steps up to the plate.  They're certainly adding more value to the world than, oh, I don't know, British Birds, a monthly journal for birdwatchers who enjoy deep-fried cod and white potatoes.  You can't imagine how much I'm hoping that there's someone out there who reads my weblog and also reads British Birds.  Please send me an e-mail if you're out there.

Comments

[PG]

At least it's actually about avian life and not a ladmag. Unless there's a subtext to "enjoy deep-fried cod and white potatoes" that I'm missing.

[Chris Csefalvay]

I have seen one. I don't read it, but I have to say it does calm your nerves. Interestingly enough, I saw it in the lobby of a dentists'.

But the problem is not with British Birds. It's with us.

If, say, the legal community who enjoyed Legal Affairs (wow, that includes me, too!) would have mounted organised actions - and, of course, if the Legal Affairs folks would have informed us that that may be necessary - they could have survived. Why didn't they, say, ask their readers for a couple of pounds (or dollars, whichever side of the Pond you are at). Or ask one of the big law firms to support them.

[Sanya]

And you know, it's silly how most legal writing doesn't talk much about the intersection with law and life. It's completely ridiculous because the law is completely involved in our lives. It restricts our freedoms in many different areas, even if the end result may be good, and it's weird how people don't discuss things like, for example, how much law is too much law. The Anti-Terrorism Act in Canada is probably too much law, in my opinion. But there are no publications out there that discuss things on a strictly legal/life basis.