now if the author were writing things that were sociopolitically motivated, and the ideologies the pseudonym advanced were questionable when stacked against the real identity of the writer (for instance, a book that seeks to cast rapists in a sympathetic light, written by a man under a female pseudonym), then you…

I would characterize it more as “because people want to know.”

The very general proposition of journalism is this: The public has a right to know true things that are important to the public.

No.

I hate the Cardinals, but its difficult to get worked up about this.

If a rape was committed

(b) Exceptions.

The only offer such a transparent bluff would receive would be one to kiss Rose’s ass. The odds of successfully securing--much less enforcing--such a subpoena are longer than the odds Rose plays all 82 for the Knicks this year.

Conceivably all other crimes? In the criminal context, sexual history is a more narrowly circumscribed type of character evidence than other character traits. Compare FRE 404(a)(2) with FRE 412. Of course, this is a civil case, but even there the burden of proving probative value outweighs unfair prejudice is flipped…

“Who?”

One of the weirdest things about this is that the League doesn’t just leave it to individual teams to handle. If the Steelers think that silly shoes muddles their brand of #DoingItTheRightWay, that’s the Steelers’ problem.* Conversely, if it actually promotes the brand, they should want to let Brown be as goofy as he…

Coaches and management are annoyed enough at having guys miss training camp and risk injury. No way they play ball with risking injuries in the middle of a playoff race for a glorified exhibition tournament.

Do you mean to imply that the 2011 team won by being loaded with skill, rather than #grittership? Because Cam Neely would have words.

Turns out that a top-5 center a good right wing don’t mean much when the other 3 lines are devoid of talent because you keep trading it away over invented locker room issues.

One party lectures poor rural whites about how they’re a bunch of ignorant, irredeemable racists. The other doesn’t.

I mean, your dad is correct.

Or, more likely, the candidate will just tell the moderator his/her facts must be wrong, and media outlets will have to sort it out the next day--which they can do regardless of whether the moderator interjects. There is basically no value-add to moderator fact-checking, and a lot of opportunity for mucking things up…

So we’re all just going to ignore that Taranto is criticizing fact checking as a genre (i.e., Politifact et al.), not as a practice?

Stubbornly ignoring the context in order to paint Taranto as a crazy person rather than someone with a (legitimate) criticism of the current “fact checking” genre of journalism practiced by Politifact et al?

Then again, if there’s anyone who can make me sympathize with Greg Schiano, it’s a fucking cyclist.