The NBA’s best Tweeter weighs in on a controversial topic in social media:
@FredAstaireME who cares!! I’m a boss!! Where ever I stand!
— Tony Allen (@aa000G9) January 26, 2012
Related: Tony Allen on how to handle haters
I had to take off my ring after I ate this sandwich.* Not because I wanted to track down Mr. Danver and marry him instead, but because the ring was too tight for my salt-swollen fingers.
That’s the ultimate compliment for a fast-food restaurant.
Until a couple years ago, like many people in Memphis, I only knew Danver’s as the place that gives out free roast beef sandwiches when the Tigers score 65 or more points.** The “legendary” roast beef is the centerpiece of the menu but the locally-owned chain has been serving up cheap breakfast, lunch and dinner under their signature Tiffany lamps for 40 years now.
The food is pretty good for the price. And the “Grandpa’s rec room” atmosphere attracts some quirky subjects for people-watching. As Memphis’ charms go, this place is underrated.
I once went to the Union Ave. location with some coworkers for lunch and was surprised to learn that it’s quite the happening spot. The place was packed and we had to wait in line a good 15 minutes or so before it was our turn to order. So of course I ordered a steak, because I was so tickled that it was even an option.
Even though my companions’ (work husbands?) food was already digesting by the time the steak arrived, it wasn’t bad. It was better than CK’s, where only a masochist would dare order steak and eggs. If I had a hankering for steak and only a ten-dollar bill, I’d go to a meat market. But if I wanted a baked potato and a drink too, I’d go to Danver’s.
Fellow Memphians, if you only learn one thing from reading this blog I hope it’s that you don’t have to choose between eating fast food and eating local. If you’ve never been, check out one of Danver’s five locations. Try to order a “hot ham” without giggling, and enjoy. You can thank me later. Read more »
These people are not "work spouses"
I learned a new term today, from female-focused career blog The Grindstone: work spouse. “Does having a ‘work husband’ threaten your marriage?” the article asks.
Maybe, maybe not… but the term ‘work husband’ sure threatens the meaning of the word “marriage.” It threatens the prospects for real male-female equality in the workplace. It’s an inappropriate way to define a professional relationship.
The post refutes a comment on a prior entry — “How to divorce your work husband” — that bizarrely opens with
Oh the “Work Husband.” It’s a dubious title that I’ve never been quite comfortable with.
If you’re not comfortable with the term “work husband,” here’s an idea. Don’t use it. It’s an unnecessary and frankly creepy classification for an office friendship. I thought surely it was another phenomenon concocted by Cosmo or some other faux-feminist advice-peddling rag for “sassy” types but Wikipedia traces its origins back to the 1930s with Faith Baldwin’s novel The Office Wife. Back then, such a term made a hell of a lot more sense. But in 2012?
What do you call someone who
…backs you up in meetings. He emails you non-essential information — frequently. When he goes the vending machine, he buys for you, too, and at work events, he knows whether you want red or white. He knows your spouse, if you have one, and kids, if you have them. You know his. You have each other’s cell numbers, just in case… ?
The Huffington Post calls that a work spouse.
I call it a FRIEND. Why attach a sexually-connoted word to a relationship that is completely platonic? Is it still so novel for a man and a woman to have a supportive and constructive working relationship, that people actually feel comfortable likening it to a sacrament?
I think it would be funnier than Whitney.
TV pitch: Unable to find jobs in her field, laid-off journalist becomes a trucker. Hilarity ensues. (Not there yet but it’d be a funny show)
— Jen Simmons (@jensized) January 18, 2012
Romenesko posted Friday a photo of Halifax Media Group’s new wardrobe policy, which in addition to obvious no-nos like “transparent clothing,” forbids jeans, T-shirts and hats in the newsroom. The following day, he posted an email from a reader whose paper banned employees from wearing jeans and listening to music at their desks.
Rules like these are so much of what’s wrong with the newspaper industry. They’re insulting and repressive, and they repel the young journalists organizations need to be trying to lure.
These are adults. Most, if not all, are college-educated and have the common sense to know how to look and act professional at their jobs. They don’t need to be told what to wear. Choosing to do so — even if as a safeguard — shows little confidence in them. It also demonstrates how disconnected the people who make the decisions (and the money) often are from the people who make the product. Would you send a photographer in slacks to cover a flood? Not if you want a good shot.
The least corporate media can do is create a comfortable atmosphere for their staffs. Deadlines and competition make newsrooms stressful enough. Then layoffs, reorganizations, automation and various other cost-cutters make bigger workloads for shrinking staffs.
Readers can’t tell a page designer wore jeans or a reporter conducted a phone interview at home in pajamas because their source waited until 10:30 p.m. to call back. I’ve done both, with no detriment to my work. They can’t tell a copy editor was listening to her “Hits of the 90s” Pandora station so she could tune out a reporter’s phone conversations one cube over. So instead of over-regulating the newsroom, how about rewarding the people who are busting their tails with the freedom to do what they need to be productive?
Good news for lovers of vintage rock soundtracks, Bill Murray and Futura! A Wes Anderson trailer has arrived on the internet.
The Darjeeling Limited, which remains my least favorite of Wes Anderson’s films, was released in October 2007. Fantastic Mr. Fox, which was an animated adaptation of a Roald Dahl story, came out around Thanksgiving, 2009.
So Moonrise Kingdom will be Anderson’s first feature-length live-action film in five years. Hard to believe it’s been that long.
Bookcat 3
By Jen | January 10, 2012
Buddy finds Hitchens’ life fascinating, particularly his mother’s tragic fate.
