Kromm

I think that disparity in expectations is a fair point, but applying it retroactively isn't necessarily so. Her parents would be much more rightfully criticized, even though she'd technically been an adult for a year. It's an excuse that's now (rightfully) disappeared. It might irk kids of the current generation, but their access to greater information invokes greater responsibilities. It probably especially hurts, because Boomers now, to the point of it becoming a stereotype, often seem to revel in disinformation and shallow understanding of things. I'd argue the older people have lost their excuses too, but mainly for the things they say and do NOW. The past isn't gone and dead, though. I just think the burden of proof for indicting people morally is a little higher when applied retroactively . Not absent. Just higher. That's why how she responds now is important. To help us figure out if it's the moderate crime of ignorance, or the greater crime of participating in something she knew was wrong.

His naval career was even worse, if you do some digging.

I don't disagree, but the better question is if that was an equally fair expectation in 1999. A time that arguably pretended to be socially enlightened, but often wasn't. The notion of gay marriage seemed impossible. The disparity in reprentation in media was only discussed in sociology journals and fringe publications. The notion of dismantling racist statues was barely a blip. Bill Cosby and Woody Allen were still heroes. It was a long time ago. I agree with you that the tools existed, even in those days, to find things out. But did the motive to do so exist? And I don't mean in any ultimate moral sense, I mean in a practical everyday sense that makes us think anyone else was doing it. It may suck that's the case if not, but this takes a realistic look at where people's minds and values were at in that time. Wishing it were better then means making sure it IS better now. That's not true for all racist acts, but when we are looking at (possible) total blind ignorance, I think it does. That's why we need to hear from her to see if that's actually the case (and see if we believe her).

I agree waiting too long is a danger to her image, but as I said previously, she's got a really complex tightrope to walk here between a genuine sounding apology, while not sounding either too defensive or too blasé. I'm not surprised it's taking this long. Heck, since I believe she publicly professes liberal political views, she might even be worried about how right wing media outlets are already using her/this situation to loft cancel culture accusations into the ether (because yes, if we're being honest, a lot of barbs are being thrown at her from the left). A careless response might seem to ally her with those right wing outlets.

Sure, it shouldn't be her abasing herself unduly for something that's presumably not really her fault, but she's got to be VERY careful about what she says. She's got to thread a tricky needle of sounding genuinely regretful, without either going over the top, or conversely sounding uncaring. It's got to acknowledge it's ugly, deny she knew it was, but somehow not sound like just an excuse.

The consensus I've seen is that it's not likely to do anything measurable to your cognition, but unlike a lot of snake oil, it's harmless. It's vitamins. I won't say she gets a full pass on it, but as questionable endorsements go, it's on the minor side. If she does the job here well, I won't care about her hawking vitamins. Unlike Dr. Oz, who was pushing weight loss pills, which are actually dangerous.

My point is that there was a period, I don't know for how long, where if you tried the Mega Wall, you couldn't go back to the other one (and so risked your finish). Mostly only people so fast they'd get through even without a buzzer did it during that period. Heck, it may have only been one season. I just remember it sharply, because it was so lame.

I know it probably happened a while ago and it blew by me, but when did they change the rule that once you picked the Mega Wall that you had to stay with it? It was clear last night they no longer had to stick with it.

You know that show where walls with weird shaped cutouts move and people have to get through them? That dumb show was solid gold genius compared to this.

I actually just verified, it's all available for free on Tubi as well. The main difference is that the season numbering seems to be different. Peacock presents all of the later TV movies as Season 10, and Tubi has them divided up to create a total of 16 seasons. Peacock also has "Prescription: Murder" totally separate from the series (if you search "Columbo" it comes up as a 2nd result). You may not have seen it if you just clicked on the series icon. Tubi has "Prescription: Murder" as Episode 1 in their sequence. Tubi also has the second pilot, "Ransom For A Dead Man", as Episode 2. Peacock doesn't have "Ransom For A Dead Man" at all, either as a separate entry, or as part of the series. Edit - Correction. Peacock DOES have "Ransom For A Dead Man" but it does not come up if you search using "Columbo". It ONLY comes up if you explicitly search "Ransom For A Dead Man". Peacock has a "29 days left" note on the series, implying it's disappearing off Peacock at the end of June.

She should, but I think she's going to face a lot of hysteria and accusations that don't take into account that as deeply racist as the origins of this thing are, that by 1999 those origins had been glossed over and generally forgotten about for so long that most of the participants apparently had no idea about them. At worst, in most cases, it was reduced to rich people (yes, always white) showing off their influence by buying their kid the equivalent of a beauty pageant win. Again, she does need to say something, but for her sake I hope she's very careful with whatever statement she makes, because I'm sure she's in a very precarious position based mostly on something that I bet was her father's doing. Then again, Missouri has a ton of barely under the surface racism. And always has. So I could be wrong.

Seems to be based on a similar UK show. Honestly, a few minutes in to Episode 1, I'm bored to tears. I hope they didn't pay too much money to license this idea.

Matt Murdoch makes a certain amount of sense, since he's a lawyer. It wouldn't even have to include Daredevil.

Did you enjoy Murder By The Book, directed by a little known director named Steven Spielberg (written by the equally obscure Steven Bochco)?

Seems like a really tough course this time. The 4th and 5th obstacles decimated people. Even the 2nd obstacle was tougher than usual for that position. Edit - Heck, even the balance obstacle, the 3rd, is brutal, because aside from how tough those always are, you can waste a ton of time just deciding between the two choices they gave. Edit 2 - Speaking of choices, I still hate the stupid Mega Wall thing.