priorities

my new work schedule has some built in sitting-around time in the morning... and free breakfast. so it seemed logical to form a little routine, where i finish my coffee, eat my turkey sausage, and peruse the headlines on the internet. it's been a few years since i read the paper regularly (thank you NPR for keeping me the loop all this time) and i'm having trouble adjusting to the internet format. it just seems aesthetically wrong. i'm also unwilling to register (even though it's free) to actually read the articles, so i jump from the new york times, the chicago trib, to cnn.com skimming headlines and looking at pictures.

lest i manage to absorb some real news, i made an amusing, though not very surprising discover today. we could all go on and on about the vapid articles in the paper and on TV, and about how none of us are interested in real current events. i often use that as justification for my non-news-watching and non-paper-reading. but i learned this morning that most of us gravitate away from real news, even when it's offered to us in easily accessible, point-and-click format.

here are the "top stories" as listed by CNN:

- Iran pledges $50 million to Palestinians
- Pentagon fights back over Rumsfeld
- Nepal protesters fired on, 1 dead
- Group: Iran may be expanding nuke plants
- Hussein trial resumes, adjourns again

and here are the "most popular":

- Two sex offenders slain; suspect kills self
- Jolie reportedly to have baby in Namibia
- Suspect blogged about cannibalism
- Crash tests: Toyota Prius, small cars and minivans
- An inside look at Opus Dei

i guess it's not so surprising that the average american is more interested in angelina jolie than they are in donald rumsfeld, but what is surprising is that "Rangers catch bear after deadly attack" didn't feature more prominently on either list.