Faced with a burgeoning digital landscape, traditional commercial-television networks had already established a “rear-guard” mentality wetted to the status quo by the time the Aereo case hit the U.S. Supreme Court in 2014. At the time, rather than paying a cable fee, that company picked up television signals on the public airwaves and sent customers the signals over the internet (charging for use of the receptors).
Before the advent of cable television, “television” was free; and yet well into the cable era the default assumption was that television should be paid for, which implies that the public airwaves had somehow been privatized. “You can’t take our signal. You just can’t,” said Les Moonvies, CEO of CBS, as if he were some rejected child-actor. Imagine if a network CEO had made a similar exclamation in the 1960s. “They’re my airwaves, Mine!”
Does a film narrative that lasts over two hours really need to jump to a whole new level every twenty minutes lest the audience otherwise drift away in unsatisfied boredom? The embellishments can easily detract from the credibility of the film’s main subject-matter—in this case, what it would be like for a human being’s life-span to be extended past the duration of the corporeal body (including the brain) by means of consciousness in neuro-artificial intelligence.
According to a survey, which was led by a sociologist at Catholic University and published in The National Catholic Reporter, 40 percent of 1,442 American Catholic adults said “you can be a good Catholic without believing that in Mass, the bread and wine really become the body and blood of Christ—a core doctrine of Catholicism.” A reporter opines that this “could reflect the decline in Mass attendance. The survey finds it’s fallen from 44% attending at least once a week in 1987 to 31% in 2011, while those who attend less than monthly rose from 26% to 47%. When asked why they don’t go to Mass more often, 40% say they are simply not very religious.”  This is a rather broad term; what does it mean to say that someone is religious? Looking back at the history of religion, a neutral party might half-joke that the adjective refers to the proclivity to spar over puerile theological distinctions as if Creation itself hung in the balance. In this essay, I illustrate how such a distinction bearing on the Eucharist (i.e., Holy Communion) can be diffused of its alleged historical significance as warranting Christian division under the taskmaster of (cognitive) uniformity as a placeholder for unity.
I had to wear a “space suit” of sorts to watch the lunar eclipse in mid-April.
Does it really make a difference whether you go outside to watch a lunar eclipse?
Was Jesus married? Did he designate his wife as one of his disciples? Did he include Mary, his mother, as a disciple too? Even if only centuries after Jesus the Egyptian (Coptic) Church held that the answers could be “yes,” news of this historical perspective could reshape how people view today’s Christianity.
Not only is the world as a whole not reducing carbon emissions; 2012 was a record year! How could this be? The answer may lie with Darwin’s theory of natural selection.