Tech update: According to Gawker Manhattan McDonalds are competing with Starbucks by offering one hour's free WiFi access in their restaurants if you buy a combo meal (!). Here's the locations:

1560 Broadway (Times Square)
220 W. 42nd St. (near Bryant Park)
280 Madison Ave. (near Bryant)
18 E. 42nd St. (near Bryant)
427 10th Ave. (near Javits)
47 W. 57th St. (near 59th St. entrance of Central Park)
1271 Avenue of the Americas (Rockefeller Center)
724 Broadway (two blocks from Washington Square Park)
1499 3rd Ave. (and 85th St., Upper East Side)
1651 Broadway (and 51st St.)

Also on the tech front, turns out AOL TW is working on its own version of TiVo, apparently called Mystro; the interesting thing about this, of course, is that it's a content provider - and one of the big advantages of TiVo is that it filters out content - namely ads. Hence AOL might be seen either as cutting its own throat or having to respond before someone else cuts it for them.

If the AOL version is planning some way to insert new commercials - say when you pause a live broadcast - that might be a bridge to far for consumers. We'll see.

ABC News has decided to suspend The Note for the duration of the upcoming conflict, citing allocation of resources.

So, Clare Short and a supposed host of other Labour cabinet ministers will quit if Britain goes to war without a new (and I deliberately don't say "second") resolution specifically authorising armed action.

Problem is, though, the eventual outcome of the resolution currently in front of the security council has nothing whatsoever to do with the rightness or wrongness of action against Iraq. It's about who can bribe the Angolans, Mexicans, Chileans and the other "undecideds" enough to weigh in on their side.

Clare Short, as International Development secretary, should know that more than most people. If it's that big an issue of conscience for her, she should quit now.

The next few days will inevitably be cheap and nasty, and a pathetic advertisement for the United Nations. Just what the Bush administration wants. If, as they want, they can go to war - they'll say the French and Russian vetoes are "impeding the will of the security council" - and, as a bonus, demonstrate the complete irrelevance of that institution, it'll be a good day at the office for them.

If any proof were needed that Fox News was a willing accomplice in the administration's mission to confuse Bin Laden and Saddam in the mind of the public, the "Fair and Balanced" channel now just has one. terrifying "War on Terror!" teaser graphic when intro-ing anything to do with Iraq or al-Qaeda.

I mentioned Bruce Springsteen and his views on the war a few days ago - the excellent fan site Backstreets has an item today about the Boss's concert in Atlantic City, where he talked about the line in the post-Sept 11 song "Empty Sky" which reads: "I want a kiss from your lips; I want an eye for an eye".

I remember when he played the song at Madison Square Garden, that line got a huge cheer (in fact, just as loud as the jeers later in the show when he played the song "41 Shots", critical of the NYPD).

Anyway - here's an extract from Backstreets:

He also had plenty to say tonight, particularly after "Empty Sky:" "One thing that bothers me, as a songwriter you always write to be understood." He discussed the "I want an eye for an eye" line, contending that "I wrote that as an expression of the character's confusion and grief, never as a call for blind revenge or bloodlust....we can't be too careful about these things these days....We're living in a time when there are real lives on the line...had to make sure that line was clearly understood."

Finally, farewell to Roger Needham, a man truly ahead of his time. I had the pleasure of meeting him a couple of times at Wolfson receptions and he came across as a delightful, brilliant, gentle man; who always left you wondering why more people in the world can't be this way.

Good McLaughlin Group today, probably because Michael Barone wasn't on it. Fascinating to hear Pat Buchanan and Eleanor Clift agreeing that Bush hasn't made the case for war. Also disturbingly enlightening to hear James Warren talk about Bush's moral certitude over the need for conflict, and the extent to which that has been inspired by his religious fervour.

Earlier, on CSpan, heard the brilliant Tom Friedman use the expression "up your nose with a rubber hose" during a speech at Johns Hopkins. I can't be certain, but I'm reasonably sure that's one of the signs of the end times.

Comment?

TomPaine.com ran an ad in the New York Times the other day calling for a debate on the whole issue of media 'bias', between Eric Alterman and Ann Coulter.

I guess the idea is that the discourse would take place at the National Press Club and be carried on CSpan. Great idea; but at the end of the day, after having the notion drummed into them by the GOP for lord knows how long, would anyone really end up being convinced that, hey, ok maybe individual journalists on individual news organisations might be "left-leaning" (as if that's a crime - they're still, as far as I know, citizens) but you just can't have that sort of debate outside the context of media ownership and regulatory issues.

And TomPaine's timing might be a little off. There seem to be bigger issues to concern ourselves with right now, like maybe the future of the United Nations and a new Monroe Doctrine? The media bias debate isn't going away anytime soon. It's always an entertaining diversion, and of course, important; but let's address some of the more pressing (no pun intended) questions first. Like how has this administration managed to get this far towards war with virtually no adverse coverage from news outlets that are supposed to reflect a healthy diversity of national opinion?

Talking of diversity of opinion, CBS 60 Minutes has hired Bob Dole and Bill Clinton to run a point-counterpoint segment in the show. Much as Dole has been able to re-invent himself from the grumpy old curmudgeon who cost the GOP two elections to genial, humorous, viagra-driven elder statesman, it seems he might be just as mis-matched against Clinton as he was in 1996.

Neal Gabler made an interesting point the other day, though, when he said that this segment would be a minute shorter than the last time 60 Minutes tried the format, as Don Hewett believes audience attention spans are shorter.

Comment?