According to the J! Archive it was a Double Jeopardy question worth $1200, and the category was "Set in France."
It still bugs me that Worf revealed that Section 31 stopped being the Federation’s secret wetworks division and became an open part of Starfleet Intelligence. That means that the “good guys” have no problem working with a division that specializes in murder and genocide. How can Starfleet and the Federation still claim to be ethical and moral?
Oh, I've never considered Sisko a hero because of that episode. I think he's a piece of shit, actually.
It can still work if the one-two punch of the Dominion War followed by the Mars incident led the Federation down a darker, more militaristic path that included openly acknowledging Section 31 and allowing it to grow in both size and influence, and then maybe the aftermath of PIC season 3 helps break that malaise and leads to a more hopeful 25th century.
Section 31's strength as an unknown was that they were able to do things in service of the Federation that could not be done by Starfleet because they were too icky for nice people to do.
So what exactly is the point of Section 31 if they are a visible arm of Starfleet Intelligence?
So what exactly is the point of Section 31 if they are a visible arm of Starfleet Intelligence?
Looks like it wasn't all wine & roses on the PICARD S3 set:
screenrant.com
Filming Star Trek: Picard Season 3’s Reunion Was “Quite Depressing” For One TNG Icon
Blame mobile phones.
screenrant.com
I've always said that I'd love to hear the tea spilled on what it was like shooting this show. Glad that Sirtis is kinda confirming my suspicions here that things weren't as nice and cozy as everyone pretended. 
Harry Treadaway Joins Amazon MGM’s ‘Bishop’ As Series Regular
'Bishop,' the new thriller series from Amazon MGM, has added Harry Treadaway to its cast, the studio announced on Thursday.
deadline.com
It's sad to say that Picard also had a hand in this when Rios' smoking was portrayed as "macho" and "cool": https://theankler.com/p/cigarettes-get-a-sequel-hollywoods
Rios is a rebel.
The show was rated TV-MA. It's not as if it's being marketed to kids.
And immediately recognisable voices too
I'm assuming you didn't read the article which mentioned the worrying trend of glamorizing cigarettes among people, even movie stars, all of whom were adults and no mention of marketing towards kids (in fact one line of the article even points out these people then claim "Don't tell the kids" as if that absolves everything). Last I checked adults have lungs that are just as susceptible to smoking as kids' lungs.
Meh. People will do unhealthy things to themselves. They always have and always will. I see nothing wrong with some characters having that "edge" to them. We're imperfect beings.
Yep. If you watch Scarface as a teenager and take up a crippling cocaine habit, that's on you and your parents or guardians. YOU and THEY failed, not Brian DePalma. Hollywood isn't your 24/7 babysitter.
I smoked socially for about six months in my early 20s. (To be fair, I bought one pack and barely touched it and typically bummed a cigarette from a coworker after work at a bar.) I regret it very much, particularly having to tell my kids, “You shouldn’t smoke,” with their response being “But you did, daddy.” That is a harder hill to climb than saying, “I never smoked and you shouldn’t either. Ignore what that famous person is doing.”
The world is now based almost entirely on image. We have "influencers" like, say Francesca Tighinean, touting "expertise" in psychology with only a bachelor's degree. Actual credentials and morals have lost their value. People who don't drink, smoke, or do drugs and have good degrees and good jobs but don't have the looks or image are labeled as uncool in, say, the dating world and lose out to people who do smoke and drink because they have looks or image.
In light of all this, considering that tv/film is a leading proponent of image, the glamorization of smoking in said shows is entirely concerning, period.
In light of all this, considering that tv/film is a leading proponent of image, the glamorization of smoking in said shows is entirely concerning, period.
Education and prevention starts at home.
Source: I’m a parent.
Image has always meant something. But nothing is more important than a role model. Being a good role model or providing your kids a good role model is far better than allowing your kids to have free rein of the world. Watching things together and having discussions with your kids is a far more impactful thing. I’m not blind to suggest that celebrity doesn’t have power but not recognizing the power of good parenting, setting limits and being consistent is diminishing good parenting.
It’s hard, particularly in this day with media everywhere and shortened attention spans, but it is important.
Similar threads
- Poll
