XOXO -- "Gossip Girl" at PaleyFest '08

The return of new episodes of "Gossip Girl" is on April 21.

For some (mainly me), that still seems like ages. To others, not yet in the know of how fabulous "Gossip Girl" is, you still have time to catch up. And please do, the show is lagging in the ratings despite its powerful following amongst the teen-set.

I was in attendance at this weekend's PaleyFest, where the cast and crew came out from New York City to chat and text about the show. Painfully shy were the three leading boys: Penn Badgley ("Dan Humphrey"), Chace Crawford ("Nate Archibald"), and across-the-pond-native Ed Westwick ("Chuck Bass"). Although, when Westwick mumbled in his quiet British accent, the auditorium definitely did one of those lovey-dovey sighs. 

Crawford did preview this about the brooding Nate Archibald: "He's conflicted. He will have opportunities to come out of his shell." Could it be with Jenny? Even though it's in the book, it doesn't look good, seeing as how Nate will be "hanging out" with Vanessa Abrams when the show returns.

As for the sweet Taylor Momsen, who plays Jenny Humphrey, the actress seemed quite genuine (as oppose to overrated Hayden Panettiere) in her portrayal of the social-climbing Brooklyn-ite. She said, "It's a really fun character to play ... She's getting an edge. She's learning her power. She wants to be in." A moment later, she nervously added, "I guess."

And the writer's strike may have been a good thing for "Gossip Girl." Since only five episodes of "Gossip Girl" will be produced in the limited time. Writer Stephanie Savage said when the show returns it will be "pure adrenaline ... No D stories. Only A's."

Here are some tidbits that couldn't make the article currently making the rounds:

--Badgley, after appearing in three other failed WB series did not want to participate in another series. That obviously didn't happen.

--The CW gave the cast $6,000 to relocate to New York City.

--"O.C." creator Josh Schwartz discovered Vanessa Abrams when the actress who portrays her, Jessica Szohr, went to his house for a BBQ. Writer Stephanie Savage agreed, but double checked on IMDB to make sure Szohr was in fact a real actress.

--As for the twins, a.k.a. Isabel and Kati (portrayed with such realism panache by Nan Zhang), the audience won't be seeing doubles anymore. Zhang enrolled at Brown University while the show was down for the writer's strike. Isabel will be flying solo.

--In the adorable "Aww" moment of the night, when asked if Westwick enjoyed Leighton Meester's character Blair's rendezvous with Chuck, he had this to say: "Two thumbs up ... I mean, look at her."

You know you love me.

Ending a blog entry with that seems to be getting really cliché, huh?

Cupid does the Cupid Shuffle

Teari Schnakenberg submitted this video of cupid dancing after speed dating in the Titan Student Union Underground pub area on Feb. 13.

Campus Life

This is the beauty of studying at a public institution:

Cal State Fullerton is an open campus and anyone can virtually come in and look around. Sometimes visitors come in quietly. Other times, visitors make their presence known.

CSUF Student Stephanie Drutman sent us some photos of "Bro. Jed", a man who was preaching in front of McCarthy Hall.

Said Stephanie: "Bro. Jed was "Preaching in all the wrong ways," in front of McCarthy Hall for hours causing commotion among everyone who walked by."

See anything interesting on campus? Send us your photos and contact information and your stuff might show up on the Daily Titan blog!

SEE RELATED: Protest in the Quad

GIANTS WIN 17-14!

It was a great win for the New York Football Giants, considering the challenges this team has gone through. They had to suffer from some moaning and groaning from former running back Tiki Barber, who sniped at Eli Manning's leadership ability. They lost all-word mouth Jeremy Shockey and let a lead slip against the New England Patriots in the last game of the season.



They had to go to Green Bay and beat Brett Favre, they had to beat Tony Romo and the Dallas Cowboys. Finally, they had to slay the dragon that was Tom Brady and the New England Patriots.

I think the sentiment from many in the media, was how angry the Patriots were and how many they were going to score, maybe 40, 50 points on the 'lowly' Giants, because all the Spygate issues that had come up [allegedly a Patriots video guy had been filming walkthroughs of the opposing team, dating back to their first Super Bowl win in this decade, against the St. Louis Rams] and because of Giants wide receiver Plaxico Burress. He had made a bold prediction, the Giants would somehow pull it out.

The Patriots were so impressive all year long, but something had to give, didn't it? I don't think you can take away from their accomplishments. In the end, no one really wanted to give the Giants a chance, but against all odds, it seemed like they truly shocked the world on Superbowl Sunday.

Self-censorship

The worst repercussions I can expect for writing something is to be sued for libel. Not so in Afghanistan.

See here.

The 23-year-old Sayed Parwiz Kambakhsh allegedly added three paragraphs to a story which criticizes "the ignorance of the Prophet Muhammad on women’s rights," according to the NY Times, and distributed the story around school. He can appeal his death sentence, but even without the Taliban, Afghanistan clearly isn't a place for free speech.

So what about the United States? Could I say something like that here?

A Danish paper in 2005 ignited controversy across the Muslim world when they ran cartoons of the prophet Muhammad. The Wikipedia entry on the subject depicts the original cartoons. It's hard to believe mere cartoons resulted in embassies being set on fire, but that is the sensitivity of this issue.

I've seen various student and professional newspapers publish controversial items just to draw attention to themselves. I would never publish something just for the sake of creating controversy, but, conversely, would I shy away from publishing something for fear of the consequences?

I'd like to say no but I can't honestly say that is really the case. The religious fanaticism and consequences of publishing a negative depiction of Muhammad, even in America, can be great. Being a "fearless journalist" becomes a much more complex issue when dealing with the prospect of fanaticism. Would we be the ones putting our heads on the chopping block if we called Muhammad ignorant, or would fanatics lash out at others? Would we be responsible if that happened? What about all the moderate and liberal Muslims who would also be offended by such a reference?

Is defaming Muhammad the equivalent of screaming "Fire!" in a crowded theater?

You've found us!

The Daily Titan isn't a real big fan of definition leads, but I can't help this one:
When one types "define:blog" into the Google search engine, you get a few results:
- Short for "Web log," a specialized site that allows an individual or group of individuals to share a running log of events and personal insights with online audiences. Blogs with political or current-events themes have grown in popularity and become "soap boxes" for instant mass-audience commentary.
www.pvt.com/oth/glossary.htm
- Web LOG is a journal kept on the Internet. This journal is often updated daily and contains all information that the person maintaining the BLOG (the blogger) wishes to share with the world. www.avatar.co.nz/resources/web-site-design-web-marketing-definitions-b.html
- Like an online dairy. This can be about and be used for anything at all, it can be used for news, reviews, products etc for a business, organisation etc. This is great as it helps the user stay in touch with the website with new and up to date information.
germworks.net/blog/2007/02/11/web-jargon-explained/
Welcome to the Daily Titan's Version of "The Blog." Here, you'll get the story behind the story and other fun stuff.
Hope you come back soon!