News often attempts to engender stories before they actually happen. So for example, today Obama vetoed the Keystone XL Pipeline. In the past few days every paper, nightly news, and blog predicted he would do this. On the sliding scale of egregiousness, this isn't really bad, but I'd prefer for them to report actual events instead of predictions. What makes these reproachable is oftentimes they create their own story, which is often an incorrect abstract exaggerated to generate interest. Back in 2009, for instance, the Senate-House Republican dinner invited Sarah Palin as the keynote speaker. She wasn't certain if she could make it, so coordinators turned to Newt Gingrich. By the time she figured out she was available, he had already accepted. If you looked at the news, it seemed like blood was in the streets between the two camps, and the speech would be the culmination of the tension between the establishment (Gingrich) and the new Tea Party (Palin). If you actually watched it, Gingrich expressed regret that Palin couldn't make the speech herself and thanked her and her family for attending. That's it.

Like any business, news needs to make money. It's nothing recent — many historians attribute the entire Spanish-American War to excited newspapers and yellow journalism — but I'm still hoping we've moved on from "making shit up" to acquire customers. There is exciting shit happening in the world right now: ISIS. Boko Harma. The Ukraine. Racial tensions. Greece and the Eurozone. You don't really need to create anything. It's already there.

Update on UPS-Innovations: Did not receive my packages, but I did receive two identical Loot Crates. ?????