Unless Jon and Steve own the IP to their respective shows which I doubt how would they know anything at all about the effects except the occasional mention with the accountants and lawyers? Also there feelings about Youtube matter little take the Green Screen Challenge that was a legal way to use Youtube and I am sure they agree with that use but that is different then taking there key product and putting it in a place where they are getting 0 return.

There is no evidence at all that the clips on youtube increase ratings never mind that you can get clips of the show from Comedy Centrals website for free. The ratings for both show are staying steady but the average age is skyrocketing up which suggest that youtube is taking away viewers and who gets the ad revenue for these shows the owners? No, it would be a different big media company that spent 0 dollars on salary, physical cost, marketing and promotion. Supporting Youtube in this fight is a short term fix because the Viacoms of the world will have no incentive to spend the money on these shows and we will be stuck with more Carlos Mancina reruns and bad comedy movies.

The Harvard mom story is old news yet most of the details where not given in the "you go girl" write up. This woman already gets twice as long to complete the test because of her ADD and dyslexic then the other students. To repeat this point the other students have to take the test in 1 day she gets to take the test over 2 days because of "diseases" that can not be diagnosed except by behavior. She is not in a class room for a 9 hour day but for a 4 hour day and still wants an additional 2 hours. While as an undergrad at MIT the school paid someone to read her books to her. She had two years to take this test and waited to the last minute to take the test where she failed it despite her extra day advantage. (This is a test to basically weed out non English speaking doctors something like 95 percent of test takers pass.) Her fellowship program seems to have granted her special consideration to start at a later date then the norm.

She chose to go to demanding schools, she chose to enter a demanding field, she chose to wait to the last minute to take the test, she chose to get pregnant, and she chose to breast feed. This is not a woman fighting the good fight, she is a girl that is gaming the system. Feminism i thought was supposed to be about equal opportunity what this girl has been given every extra opportunity available and still wants more.

2. Nursing moms need to empty their breasts every 3-4 hours (on average) when babies are under 6 months. Going 9 hours means missing 2 or 3 nursing/pumping sessions.

She is not going anywhere close to 9 hours she is going 4 hours with a break already. And even if she was going the full 9 hours with a break like the rest of the students boo hoo.

All of these put the nursing mom at a real disadvantage to her non-nursing colleagues. She'll be terribly distracted (try taking a test when you have to pee or pass a kidney stone), and she could be distracting to her fellow test-takers. I'm sure she won't have much time to get a leg up n her competition while setting up, pumping, storing milk, cleaning pump parts and packing up.

The test was designed and time is a factor in this design to weed out bad med students from being doctors. She can’t be the first nursing medical student to take the test and they did not complain. But, that does not even make her argument wrong, her argument is wrong because she chose to nurse and get pregnant and take a test that demands it to be structured in a way where time is a component in order to judge the competency of the test taker. By her getting special treatment she is calling into question how valid her test is.

She could have taken the test before getting pregnant for the second time (I point this out to show she should have had an idea on what kind of hardships she would face), she could have postponed the test yet again. It was her choice to wait.