You could, however, say it was about heartbreak and failed relationships. If you wanted to.

It’s this blog post from Robert “Emergency” Krulwich, wherein he explores the wonder of love between one bee, one flower, and the BBC Radiophonic workshop.

"Bee orchid" by Nigel Jones on Flickr

Okay, to be fair, the BBC radiophonic workshop only comes in because the video Krulwich included sounds like it was scored by said workshop.

Be prepared for thrills, chills, and exhiliration – this is “A ‘Will You Be My Valentine?’ From Hell.”

It’s gotten to the point that the rumors themselves have become an more important news story than what they might be about or whether they’re true.

If the rumors are the news, how do you report them while making sure that Paterson’s “alleged misconduct” doesn’t get shortened to “misconduct?” Well, we just use the word “alleged.”

The difference between "alleged misconduct" and "misconduct" is that we KNOW Fleetwood Mac all slept with one another in a bed made of pure cocaine.

But this story is more complicated than that. Gov. Paterson hasn’t been accused of anything. His ‘alleged misconduct’ hasn’t been alleged yet – the rumors are merely that the New York Times is going to publish a story laying those rumors bare.

What that means is this: David Paterson, governor of the state of New York, is under fire for rumored alleged misconduct.

WTF, news media, WTF?

At least “All Things Considered” has the decency and wherewithal to report the story as it is and investigate how it got that way. It even includes this truly classic public radio line: “This truly is the scandal that dare not say its name — because nobody really knows what the heck it is.”

It’s a perfect walk on the balance beam between reporting rumors and sussing out why we love rumors.

The lesson I’ve learned from NPR’s story? More questions.

• Can we please wait for something to become a story before making these premature ejaculations of reportage into a completely new story?
• Or has the New York Times succumbed to the same pathetic tactic of terrible Hollywood blockbusters and cult TV shows?
• Are they building undeserved hype in the name of selling papers?
• Are they trying to sex up their political coverage?

I know times are rough for newspapers, but I’m not so sure that hiking up the Gray Lady’s skirt is the way to fix it.

Add to that his crazy accent and crazy aptitude for the English language, and you’ve got a recipe for making me your biggest fan.

I took some notes after hearing his latest column, but I used the Dragon Dictation iPhone app. In a noisy car, that’s a recipe for some bizarre text. Allow me to share:

Under could just use call him on all things considered last night focus on zombies and vampires versus avatar or robot or computer-generated creatures at this wonderful dichotomy between things that are real nasty and some romantic getaway

What that translates to, roughly, is this:

Andrei Codrescu’s column, on last night’s “All Things Considered,” focused on zombies and vampires versus the Na’vi of “Avatar” (or robots or computer-generated creatures), and created this wonderful dichotomy between things that are rooted in humanity, with all the messiness, nastiness, and sexiness that that entails. It’s quite romantic, in its way.

I don’t question that impulsive reaction to the story, either. Codrescu even notes that “the zombie advantage is that they have human roots in the rising dead of all religions. If they succeed in crossbreeding with vampires, who also have undead human roots, they will be practically unbeatable.”

But really, I think the most telling moment from the transcription is this: “Avatars badger frogs, bearded cats and (unintelligible) are technically and generationally better motivated.”

I love Andrei Codrescu, but his accent is so thick as to be beligerently unintelligible. It can get frustrating. It’s so delightful, though, when you can make out the crazy things he says, and realize the ease with which he makes them seem rational.

Convenient, then, that I ended up married to one of the more ambitious, self-motivated women, nay, people I’ve ever met. Kerry certainly gets more press than I do, that’s for sure, but she also makes quite a bit more money.

Kerry made the cover of the local alt-weekly this week!

I’m totally fine with that, but there is that masculine bit of pride that creeps up any time I come up a little short at the end of a pay period.

In short, I can corroborate the information presented in “Modern Marriages: The Rise Of The Sugar Mama,” a story from Tuesday’s “Morning Edition.”

Whereas if the finances were the other way ’round, Kerry would probably never hesitate to let me lend her a little, I simply can’t bring myself to ask. Kerry usually has to offer. She’s kind enough to insist – even though I insist on keeping a tab, which I pay back immediately on pay day.

Our marriage hasn’t been a way for either of us to get ahead. We went into this intending to ignore traditional gender roles, and function as equal partners. In most areas of our lives, we’re successful in this. We share chores (some days better than others), and split the bills, but we are anything but financial equals.

I know exactly what Derek Monnig means when, talking about how his wife makes almost twice what he makes, he says “Well, she gets called Sugar Mama quite often.”

I don’t think I’ve ever said that out loud, but you get the idea.

I bring in what I can, Kerry brings in what she can, and that’s good enough for us. It’s just that Kerry brings more in. And again, there’s that masculine pride.

On top of that, my family never talked much about money when I was a kid, other than the occasional “be better about money than I am” talk from my dad, which never included information about in which manner he was bad about it, nor how to avoid it.

So I tend to avoid conversations about money.

That, along with the fact that I’d be worried that I wouldn’t be able to support us if I needed to, makes me feel guilty for making less. I know that’s silly.

I’m extremely proud to be associated with Kerry in any capacity, and I’m stoked that her boundless ambition – and drive to simply not suck – is being rewarded.

I’m just not sure how to handle my end of this new economic order.

This guy:

Is John Oliver. He’s the guy whose name we were looking for.

And he’s going to win the States back for Mother England. Which would be good for England, because, as Madeline Brand unwittingly implies, they probably don’t have TVs or anything over there.

From Memphis, Tenn., this is Senior Male Correspondent Matthew Crawford Trisler.

1. Get Bob a better microphone. For the last few weeks, it’s sounded like Bob has been coming to us live, under water and in space.

2. Continue to call BS on the people who are supposed to be calling BS. I’m a big fan of this week’s story about the biggest media mistakes from 2009. You guys are making it clear that the watchmen need to do just a little bit better job policing themselves.

3. Hire the rogue. Seriously – If you’re going to continue to watch the watchmen, you guys should hire 19 year old guerilla fact checker Daniel Lipman.

4. Keep teaching us valuable life lessons (like how to ambush the unsuspecting). Make sure we know all of the little things we need to know before trying your life lessons – like tag teaming an ambush so that bathroom breaks are possible.

5. Let Brooke say “snuggie” more. It’s super cute when she says it. You can totally hear her grinning.

Happy New Year, everybody. May you get everything you ask for in 2010 (including that Washmatic you’ve always wanted).

This recap was written by Kerry and edited by Matthew, who tried to make a snuggie for our hyper, 75-pound dog last night. It was as hilarious as you’d think it would be.

Renee Montagne had a fantastic interview with Carl this morning. I woke up in the middle of it and was a little confused that a) Carl wasn’t using his news voice and b) it wasn’t exactly 8 a.m.

There was apparently a Carl Kassel Show in the late 1950s. He was a DJ. There was theme music. I feel bad, but I’m laughing at a Real American Journalism Hero.

During the interview, Carl confirms that NPR holiday parties are almost exactly like we think they are, with one exception. Carl isn’t walking around in a smoking jacket. He’s walking around with a saw, ready to preform some “illusions” (his word, not mine) on his co-workers.

Carl will still be on “Wait, Wait Don’t Tell Me”, but you’ll be setting your clock to someone else’s voice ever morning.

Again, have a great semi-retirement, Carl. You’re a Real American Journalism Hero. I think that title comes with a cape and a gold-dipped AP Stylebook.

This picture from the NPR homepage:

And for one particular reason given why he’s wearing said shirt: “Back of shirt says, in masking tape, ‘DID NOT PUT ME ON THE LIST OF 50 MOST IMPORTANT RECORDINGS OF THE DECADE. SEND PROTESTS TO BOB BOILEN.’”

If you – and you know who you are – would like to bring sexy and informative back, there is a wide range of NPR shirts available at the NPR shop online. Timberlake’s shirt, unfortunately, is not available. Which is a damn shame, as I would totally wear that. All the time.

And, it’s no t-shirt, but if you’re looking to buy Kerry and I a Christmas present, this radio would not be frowned upon.

Update: The NPR shirt worn by Justin Timberlake is back by popular demand. Enjoy. (Thanks, Andy Carvin.)

Brooke Gladstone’s “The Civil (Book) War” from Radio Sweethearts on Vimeo.

I just downloaded the audio, and threw some photos from Google into iMovie for the “Ken Burns Effect.” There you go. Thank me later.

This week’s On the Media recap was more facilitated than written by Matthew without the express consent or prior knowledge of Kerry.

Sort of like how I just did, back there.

Anyway, I don’t know what’s up with Bob being away from his regular microphone – and I know that coupling a decent microphone with Skype can result in some pretty nice sound quality, but it sounds like Bob Skyped in over dial-up using his computer’s built-in microphone – after first recording his part of the show on an Edison cylinder.

(It wasn’t that bad. Over speakers in the kitchen, I didn’t notice the decrease in quality that Bob bemoans – and though I did notice when listening on headphones, I think it’s because I’ve begun listening for that kind of thing. (I’ve edited so much audio in the last few months, that I’ve begun to be able to read waveforms like you’re reading these words here.)

(Also, Bob, Brooke, Katya – you don’t know bad audio quality until you’ve had to edit something recorded via BlogTalk Radio.)

Bob felt that his audio quality was apparently bad enough that Bob needed Brooke to read the intro to his first story for him, as though she were reading him a bedtime story to help him sleep after a long playdate with a friend from preschool.

But what’s really bad is the blatant plagarism that “On the Media” unintentionally reveals at the end of the episode. There’s apparently a play about the closing of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, in which – well, we’ll just let Brooke explain it:

BROOKE GLADSTONE: One of my favorite scenes is this reporter calling a politician and they are narrating their subtext.

[CLIP]:

ACTOR AS FEMALE REPORTER: Indirect question.

ACTOR AS COUNCILMAN: Insincere confusion about the point of the question.

ACTOR AS FEMALE REPORTER: Restatement of question.

ACTOR AS COUNCILMAN: Off-topic comment.

ACTOR AS FEMALE REPORTER: Same question.

ACTOR AS COUNCILMAN: Deep rumination and troubled contemplation.

ACTOR AS FEMALE REPORTER: Same question.

ACTOR COUNCILMAN: Mmm, complicated reasons why the question itself can’t be addressed as posed.

Now, this is no ‘indirect question’ I’m about to ask. It’s really closer to a direct accusation. In fact, it’s not a question at all. It’s a statement, because it’s a fact, and there’s nothing I can do to blunt that. I can only delay it, and I’ve done too much of that already.

This section of the play is lifted more or less directly from the 10th act of the “This American Life’s” episode, “20 Acts in 60 Minutes.” It’s about 25 minutes in, you can find the episode here. And try and tell me that it’s not dubious.

This week’s highlights reel was written by Matthew, much later than it should have been, and, if it had it been edited by Kerry, would have included the disclaimer that it’s probably no more plagarism than it would be if someone else started a public radio fanblog.