It's basically the same as your Raser laws, just a different name and different penalties. But the concept is the same in terms of harsher penalties for being 50km/h over the limit.

The nomenclature of "stunt driving" (performing dangerous, irregular maneouvres for the fun of it) or "street racing" (racing dangerously on public streets with regular traffic present and ignoring limits, signs, and signals) laws is because these were the motivations given for enacting these limits in the first place. That rhetoric caught on and became how people refer to these limits in everyday conversation regardless of whether the limits actually do anything to combat these activities.

Don't you know? Grooming is only bad if it is done in secret. Doing it in full view of society? Play on. /s

A more accurate headline would be "Republicans defend the right to marry children." The use of the passive voice makes it sound like the issue here is the bill rather than the obvious bad actors who want to preserve their ability to harm children.

It still veers far from "facts" by stretching to paint the accused in a sympathetic light. If you want to talk about what is ethical journalism and not making a presupposition of guilt then the headline shouldn't be making excuses for people accused of corrupt behaviour before all the facts are on the table.

It's still a terrible headline running reputation defense for the accused that does not match what is contained in the article. If they were being "ethical journalists" and sticking to the facts the headline would read along the lines of "lawmakers accused of using influence to obtain rare products before the public can access." That's a fact-based recap of what is happening, unlike what was written which reads as "maybe this was wrong but can you blame them when they are really big fans?"

Fuck, this is a terrible headline. Why is the focus on painting corrupt officials as passionate liquor afficianados rather than, you know, that they're corrupt?

I do follow award winners and finalists but generally make sure to research the history of the award and what the panel is typically looking for when choosing winners. No point in an award if the award criteria doesn't match my interests.