Do you eat, sleep and breathe news? My bet is, if you are a hard core journalist you do. You have probably had newsprint stuck to your favorite notebook after you spilled coffee on it and it created a crusted beige blob forever imprinting the news of that day onto the cardboard backing. Maybe you have even fallen asleep on a newspaper like I have and awoken to find faint sans serif type tattooed on your cheek. Here is a classier and more fun way to sport the news: on your nails.

My initial warning to you is that I have not yet tried this so I cannot report results yet but I am planning on reserving some time for a manicure tonight so I will report back with my successes and failures. I will also add that I would have told the world about this apparent trend eons ago had I known about it but my trend-savvy friend Mandy  mentioned it to me last night.

Now that I have kept you all patiently waiting, here are the instructions:

-What you will need: ten finger-nail size strips of newspaper (the words do not matter as the newsprint will appear backwards but of course content always matters so take out your New Haven Register), rubbing alcohol or vodka (for those over 21 years of age) will do just fine and a bowl that your hand will fit in.

1) Go through the whole shabang of cutting, filing and nail-polish removing your nails. 

2) Let that dry. (In fact, I am just going to asterisk this and whenever you see **, then let your nails fully dry. This is (from what I have heard) very important.

3) Paint your nails with a light color (this is important as newsprint is black)

**

4) Paint your nails once again with the same color, creating a second coat.

**

5) Dip one nail at a time in the alcohol and press your newspaper strip against your nail. I have heard it also works to dip the strip of newspaper in alcohol as well. The words should show up as planned.

**

6) Once your nails are sufficiently set and dry, coat your newsprint nails with a clear coat of polish and preform any touch-ups you may need.

The final step is to flaunt your new nails like the savvy and fashionable journo or English fiend that you are.

I have brushed aside all of the other trends I have spotted in favor of this new one, which has sparked my curiosity and interest in a way that maybe it shouldn't be doing - you tell me.

I was invited to sign up for Google + yesterday, which for those of you who haven't heard of it, is a combination Facebook-Twitter-LinkedIn social networking site. Right now, it is in the trial stages so it is by invitation only and I have only really stumbled upon fellow journos on the site who are trying to figure out exactly where it fits into their lives. I am doing the same thing.

It is very user-friendly and dynamic and possesses many of the traits that Twitter and Facebook have. You can share posts, comment on other peoples' posts, recommend links and add photos and videos. You don't "friend" or "follow" people but you have "circles." The concept is essentially the same. However, these circles are divided into categories so if I only want to see what my coworkers are saying or my friends or other journalists, I could hone in on them without the other constant stream of posts. It acts as a filter. 

You also don't seem to be able to post to Facebook or Twitter from Google + yet, and that may be because the sites are so similar, the previous social networking venues are a tad frightened.

Click here for a Google + demo

To me, it looks like an incredibly useful tool IF it catches on with the average Joe. If it is all corporations, businesspeople, journalists and news organizations, it settle into a lesser-used spot next to LinkedIn.

The one amazing feature that this has that will be incredibly useful to journalists (as well as everybody else) is the ability to share links, videos, information, etc. with people who aren't on it. Simply, it could be used to shoot your friend an e-mail about the latest viral video on YouTube. For journalists, it can be used to crowdsource and reach out to anyone with an e-mail address, which, let's not lie, is most people these days. 

So get an invite, give it a spin and tell me how you think it fits into your life personally or professionally.

We interrupt your regularly scheduled programming to bring you this brief, yet educational blogpost. 

As America knows, President Barack Obama announced that Osama Bin Laden was killed. Some heard about it on Twitter, others on Facebook and some via their morning newspaper. 

Newspapers are powerful tools. They are the first draft of history, they hold those in charge accountable for their actions and they have the potential to shape the way you think, feel and act. As a journalist, it was very interesting to see how different newspapers covered the death of Bin Laden. 

Headlines ranged from simply  "Dead" to "Rot In Hell!"

This piqued my curiosity because journalists are taught to be completely unbiased when it comes to news reporting. Some don't even register to vote with one political party or another to keep themselves unbiased to the world. So the question is, with something like this, what is appropriate coverage?

You won't find many Americans who are mourning Bin Laden's death, so there aren't really two sides to the story. But as a reporter or an editor, what would your story read like? What would the headline be?

I don't have an answer to this. Personally, I feel that it is crucial to be unbiased while reporting the news, but when it comes to something like Bin Laden's death, I'm not sure if I could write a straightforward "Bin Laden is Dead" story. No matter how neutrally reporters write, everyone has opinions and in instances like this, it would be hard to prevent them from leaking out.

Here are some newspaper headlines from Monday: what do you think?