Changes to City Guide

We've just launched the first in a series of updates to City Guide, our interactive entertainment guide, that are designed to improve the site's look and feel and overall usability.

Some changes to note:

• A new City Guide main page with quick browse links, popular profiles, and suggested searches

• Search functionality that is easier to use

• "Browse" pages for nine top categories including Restaurants, Movies and Events that organize the listings and showcase original content

• Enhanced search results pages

• Improved functionality for movie searches

These enhancements will help you navigate City Guide so you can quickly find the best restaurant, movie and entertainment listings in the metro area. Keep an eye out for more changes in the coming months.

Nancy Kerr, Features Editor

By Nancy Kerr |  July 28, 2006; 6:21 PM ET  | Category:  Content
Previous: OFF/beat Launches | Next: Post Launches Updated Wireless Homepage

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Re: Scowcroft on comprehensive Mid-East settlement.

Mr. Scowcroft's so called plan for a comprehensive Mid-East settlement is a naive fantasy. It is simply a prescription for national suicide for Israel. A return to the pre-1967 borders will be the penultimate state for the final attempt to destroy Israel. Arab guarantees are simply meaningless when it comes to Israel. Land for peace is land for suicide. It really doesn't matter anyway, as his plan, which is really a trap, will never be implemented.


Michael S. Greenberg, Ph.D.

Posted by: Michael S. Greenberg, Ph.D. | August 2, 2006 09:45 AM

Now Bush is giving the military courts over to a quasi civilian/military court? These prison camps are against International Law and their own laws. How is it that it has not come under the jurisdiction of "The Hague"? There are many such "camps" the U.S. is not alone in that, let's see a study on how many and the conditions and who is involved around the world.

Posted by: Terri Robson | August 2, 2006 05:57 PM

AN OPEN LETTER TO ANYONE IN THE PEACE OFFICER FIELD!!

I FEEL VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THIS ISSUE BECAUSE I KNOW OF A PEACE OFFICER LISTED ON ONE OF THOSE MEMORIAL PAGES TO THOSE BRAVE FALLEN OFFICERS!!!

TO:
Hon. Stephen Harper
Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
K1A 0A2

Twenty-seven Canadian peace officers were praised today by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, for their long and exemplary service to Canada.

TO:
Congressman David Dreier
233 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC, U.S.A. 20515

That is why I introduced H.R. 3900, the Justice for Peace Officers Act, with the strong support of Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, to make it a federal crime to murder a peace officer -- whether federal, state or local -- and flee the country, providing concurrent jurisdiction for the federal government to prosecute the suspect.


Dear Sirs

I see you are doing legislation on behalf of federal peace officers or commemorating their service.

As such, can you believe that Malaspina University College in Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada says a letter received with a closing salutation of "former federal peace officer" is threatening??

That is what Dr. Patrick Ross, Vice-President of Student Services, said in a recent meeting??

This Dr. Patrick was referring to a letter received from a person who was a federal peace officer and since retirement he has closed his letters with "former federal peace officer" after his signature and name??

I know I had trouble trying to get a simple class outline out of one of their History Professors, Professor Cheryl Warsh, who refused to send me a course outline for an interested student from America??

What was so secretive about a course outline??

In closing, have you ever heard anything so disgusting as a simple closing salutation of "former federal peace officer" being threatening as indicated by Dr. Patrick Ross from Malaspina University College !!

Tell that to all those federal peace officers listed on the numerous memorial pages to those fallen officers!!

I think people should tell this Dr. Patrick Ross exactly what they think of his statement!!


Sincerely,

Brenda Anne Bates


HOPEFULLY SOMEONE WILL TELL DR. PARTICK ROSS WHAT THEY THINK OF HIS COMMENT THAT A CLOSING SALUTATION OF "FORMER FEDERAL PEACE OFFICER" IS THREATENING ON A LETTER!!

HOPEFULLY, YOU WILL AGREE WITH ME THAT ROSS IS AN IDIOT TO MAKE SUCH A STATEMENT!!!

PATRICK ROSS SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF HIMSELF!!!

Posted by: Brenda | August 4, 2006 09:53 PM

Will someone please ask W about the rapture?

http://www.crooksandliars.com/posts/2006/08/05/who-exactly-is-offering-the-white-house-advice/

Posted by: Huh? | August 5, 2006 06:23 PM

In regards to Hugo Chavez's tirade against the U.S. I agree with him on at least 3/4 of what he says, and so do a vast majority of the people around the world.The American citizens can thank this present administration for this and in particular Donald Rumsfeld;Paul Wolfowitz;Dick Cheney who for decades have tried to get various Presidents and Congress to militarily impose their brand of democracy.Peace and democracy come from within countries not foreign entities forcing it onto them,which in this new century will only bring anger and dissent.

Posted by: Terri Robson | August 7, 2006 11:41 AM

Considering Liebermans connections to Abramoff, I would suggest that is why the American voters should drop him.For the U.S. to damn EVERY COUNTRY that has corrupt governments I find allowing criminals to run for office and/or remain in office hypcritical to the extreme.If all persons with a criminal record were refused entry into political parties well, lets just say Jeb Bush would not be in charge of what could be arguably said is the most corrupt state in the union.

Posted by: Terri Robson | August 8, 2006 12:27 PM

Face it, this blog is basically dead. You offended and lost touch with too many of your readers, they gave up on you. They won't listen to your PR-line blog anymore.

Posted by: Flap | August 9, 2006 10:17 AM

Flap, plenty of people who used to come here and comment would come back if they thought The Post cared what they had to say. That's the reason I don't even bother reading this blog much anymore. I can't remember when I looked at it last before today, but it would be measured in months, not weeks or days.

A major irritant with me and The Post these days is that they don't allow commenting on Ms. Howell's columns like they do with stories filed by their reporters and correspondents. After all this time, I suppose Ms. Howell is still afraid of getting a good old fashioned tongue-lashing. Oh well,... at least now she finally seems to be into answering some of the readers questions instead of trying to play Brenda Starr/Nancy Drew with politics.

Posted by: Philip | August 9, 2006 11:17 AM

"Iranians among Hizbollah combat dead: TV"

And I suppose they also found Saddam's WMD hidden in their pockets. You ever get the feeling you've already seen this movie?

Posted by: shingles | August 10, 2006 12:59 AM

In regards to whistle blower protection, I fail to see why there needs to be a special bill.The "FIRST AMENDMENT" should be the only right these socially conscious people need and they should be commended for their effort in keeping governments,corporations and any other entity that is trying to circumvent the honesty of these front line people.

Posted by: Terri Robson | August 10, 2006 11:29 AM

While the media is concerned about corruption, especially with the GOP, they totally neglect to cover state-wide corruption in New Mexico. Is it because the corrupters are mainly, if not the only corrupters? The New Mexico attorney-general is running for the U.S. House. She has botched a FBI investigation of one of several corrupters. The Governor, Bill Richardson, has set up an ethics commission to cover up his own party's corruption. I'm a registered Democrat, yet I really am upset how the media wants to paint the GOP as the only corrupters. Send someone out to get this story. For example a state Representative, Richard Vigil has been able to get over $100,000 for his wife's foibles in the West Las Vegas school district. Richard Vigil's brother is on trial for a number of charges. He was one of two state treasuers charged with multiple corruption charges. One has pleaded guilty. New Mexico rivals the Big Easy on corruption.

Posted by: Dr. R.D.B.(Ben)Laime | August 21, 2006 09:35 AM

From http://mediamatters.org/items/200608260001?src=newsbox-atrios.blogspot.com#2

Two journalists explain their profession

Washington Post reporter Jonathan Weisman participated in an August 25 online discussion on the newspaper's website:

West Coast: Dick Cheney said he was stuck with the grave decision of whether to shoot down the flight that crashed in Pennsylvania or not. The recently released NORAD tapes confirm that the government first knew of the flight one minute before it went down. Is Cheney lying, again, or was he thinking very fast that day, with his drama unfolding within 60 seconds? I've yet to read anywhere that Cheney has been queried about his story. THANKS.

Jonathan Weisman: If I can get him on the phone, I will query him. Cheney's statements present a quandary for us reporters. Sometimes we write them up and are accused of being White House stenographers and stooges for repeating them. Then if we don't write them up, we are accused of being complicit for covering them up. So, all you folks on the left, what'll it be? Complicity or stenography?

We can't speak for all the "folks on the left," but we suspect most of them would choose "Option C: Journalism."

Indeed, several participants in the online discussion made exactly that point. As one put it: "[R]esearch and intelligent questions based on said research that makes up 'Reporting'. Retyping statements without research is 'Stenography'. Avoiding asking tough questions because it makes your original stenography look really, really bad is 'Complicity'." Weisman, showing nothing but contempt for his readers -- and, though it seems he didn't realize it, for his profession -- responded with a series of churlish comments like "Please apply for my job" and "Sometimes, you folks really drive us nuts."

We can assure Mr. Weisman that the feeling is mutual.

Read the entire transcript of Weisman's chat here for a perfect illustration of many of the problems with journalism today.

Then head over to Philadelphia Inquirer reporter Dick Polman's blog. In June, Polman -- described by ABC News as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation" -- posted an explanation of what's wrong with the kind of journalism Weisman seems to defend:

I don't feel that we should be content with passing along misinformation in "straight" stories. The reader deserves a full context, and that means politicians should be fact-checked -- a job that's relatively quick and easy to do, in the Google era. Providing accurate factual context is not "commentary." It's what "straight" reporting should be about.

It always helps to remember the lesson of Senator Joe McCarthy. The 1950s demagogue, whose inaccurate red-baiting wrecked careers and drove people to suicide, was enabled at every step of the way by journalists who believed their job was to only report "what was said." McCarthy was a senator, therefore, if he said something (true or not), it was deemed news. When he made wild charges about 60 or 80 or 100 communists in the State Department, it was reported as news. The "fact" that he was making such charges was considered sufficient; as the New York Times wrote back then, after reviewing their own McCarthy coverage, "It is difficult, if not impossible, to ignore charges by Senator McCarthy just because they are usually proved false. The remedy lies with the reader."

Washington reporter Richard Rovere, in a book he wrote two years after the senator's death, complained about "the system that required (reporters) to publish 'news' they knew to be fraudulent but prohibited them from reporting their knowledge of its fradulence. [sic]"

In today's world, given the credibility problems that have plagued administrations of both parties, that "system" is not an [sic] adequate. Nor was it then.

Posted by: | August 26, 2006 01:21 PM

Rock on.

Posted by: Internet Punk | August 30, 2006 10:47 AM

Re: FEMA's willingness to pay for restructuring and cleanup. When Bush put all of these groups under NSA it underminded anything FEMA could do.I do not beleive the money will ever be forthcoming, and the citizens must put the blame for this dabacle square on President Bush not FEMA.

Posted by: Terri Robson | August 30, 2006 11:55 AM

technology and capitalism do not mix well together... ...the cause of all normal annoyances... we need to end this disaster

Posted by: junkgamer | September 1, 2006 01:32 PM

The surreal quality of this experiment in blogginess has not really diminished at all since my last visit.

I love that about this site.

Posted by: AJ (MLWAM) | September 11, 2006 03:57 PM

Seriously guys...

take a look at Glenn Greenwald's takedon of the "serious foreign policy experts" Kristol and Lowry.

http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/

If only the Post had an institutional memory.

Posted by: AJ (MLWAM) | September 12, 2006 09:56 AM

I sincerely hope that dirty politics do not play a part on Ellisons side,using his religion against him is tantamount to bigotry.The Christian right have their own agenda do you debase them???????Whomever a person believes in is between them and their respective powers that be and DO NOT BELONG IN POLITICS.The more religion can be kept separate from politics the faster this world will be at peace.

Posted by: Terri Robson | September 12, 2006 01:58 PM

Boltons comments about the U.N. and it's non transparency and corruptness seems to have been taken from his own political travesty's.The U.S. also owes the U.N. a whopping amount of monies,this is a country that has started almost every war and or conflict since the end of the second world war ans so it should pay more.It is only because there are certain countries that have vetoes that the U.S. wants it re-vamped to suit it's own economically driven foreign policies.

Posted by: Terri Robson | September 12, 2006 02:09 PM

Thank you for publishing important information. I often wish to send letters of condolence to many of the victims mentioned in the stories. It would be helpful it the article would indicate a letter where letters of condolence could be sent. Perhaps someone could be in charge of receiving these letters and passing them on to the right person, if the would-be receiver wished to keep their address private. Thanks again for informing the public of those who may be in need of sympathy or help.

Posted by: Wendy McHood | September 12, 2006 06:48 PM

HFS! This blog is still running? And the Post continues to ignore it?

I was emailing one of their political writers a couple months back, she was unaware of the "protest comments section" but thinks that the regular Posties we heckle are really nice. Unfortunately, we are far past the point of being "really nice" about politics.

Please let this election be "A Return to Hope"

Posted by: lieinveigleobfuscate | September 14, 2006 04:22 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2007 The Washington Post Company