The latest issue of Time only

further evinces the pub's secret

agenda to exaggerate the dangers

of the net. In a move shrewdly

calculated to outrage anyone

even vaguely associated with new

media, Time gave Netscape's

one-man Bartles & James, Marc

Andreessen, some regal real

estate on this week's cover.

While we applaud the use of

Jargon Watch-term reject

"instantaires" (which doesn't

refer to the gastronomic results

of eating bean burritos), the

piece is sure to spur new

reactionary legislative trends.

News is as much of a commodity on

the net as it has been in print,

but home delivery jumped to a

new level this week as

PointCast announced a

partnership with Netscape. The

PointCast screen saver turned

"personalized news network" is

free, supported by advertisers

who want their messages

downloaded along with the news.

Though some might dispute the

sagacity of advertising to

people too cheap to cough up a

few bucks for essentially the

same service, delivered ad-free,

from Farcast, it seems to us

that ads make at least as much

sense as flying toasters.

The standard comparison is to a

horserace (or, if you're looking

to be quoted by name, to some

bloodier event), but political

coverage is less like a day at

the races than a fashion show.

So no wonder Hillary's Hair

rises head and shoulders above

the slew of politically-themed

sites popping up on the net

faster than Republican

candidates are dropping out.

Offering a well-documented side

show of the First Lady's

numerous coifs, the site also

invites viewers to vote on their

favorite style. That your vote

won't actually effect the daily

(hair)-doings at the White House

only makes the metaphor more

apt.

Purloined from the Suck

Contributor's Guidelines:

...Ideally, one's subject should

think we're laughing with them

when, in fact, we're laughing at

them. As merchants in the art of

"bad vibes," one should expect

uneasy situations to arise in

the case of unforeseen

encounters with one's victims.

While one can never outrun the

dire repercussions of loose

invective, Suck has commissioned

an independent study into the

most tenable "acceptable

excuses" for use during

unfortunate "f2f" interactions.

a. "You thought that was bad? Good

thing you never saw the first

draft!"

b. "Don't complain! There's a

three-month waiting list to get

panned by Suck!"

c. "You must not have understood -

that was a parody of your

critics. We love you, chief!"

If these fail, a common, yet

potent, ruse is to excuse

yourself to tie your shoe and,

while crouching, grasp for a

handful of topsoil, suitable for

blinding one's foe. If

physically cornered...

<illegible past this point>