I admit up front I’m a fan of Bond, James Bond. I’ve seen 24 of the 25 Bond movies over these past 58 years, most of them several times. I loved them all, sometimes more on third viewing than first.

So, who will be Eon Productions No. 7 007?

The producers must find a new leading man for their evergreen gold mine based on the character from Ian Fleming’s initial James Bond novel in 1953, “Casino Royale.” Or must it be a leading man? //

To some of us, a Yankee James Bond is an oxymoron. He’d become Jimmy Bond with cool dance moves. He’d hire someone else to do the chasing. He’d favor some obscure craft brew but would get in on the wrong side of an Aston Martin. //

Sean Connery was a raw, virile Scottish bodybuilder when Albert Broccoli picked him over David Niven, Ian Fleming’s favorite sophisticate. “I’m looking for Commander Bond,” said the initially unimpressed Broccoli, “not an overgrown stunt-man.”

Connery and Roger Moore each played the Bond role seven times. Craig did five times, Pierce Brosnan four, Timothy Dalton two, and David Niven and George Lazenby one each. Niven was in a Bond parody with Woody Allen, the first “Casino Royale.”

Lazenby, an Australian model and actor, generally gets a low Bond ranking, but interested me as a less slick secret agent, rather like I think I would be. And he wore a kilt. //

Sean Connery remains my favorite actor – in that and pretty much any role. Until Craig, my second favorite was Lazenby.

Now retired Craig, who brought a more nuanced secret agent to the MI6 role, has offered the opinion that a woman should not seek the James Bond role. Producers, he said, should instead create stronger parallel female characters.

Barbara Broccoli, the longtime producer, has issued her opinion. And, quite honestly, polls aside, it’s the only opinion that counts:

James Bond is a male character.

From the tech reporting sector, Google is taking blow after blow after blow. There are massive security vulnerabilities in what they offer you and I every day, and those privacy issues are going to start becoming enough of an issue to make the government look a little more closely at them.

So how do they keep the government from looking at them? They announce something that they know enough people in government will like and take credit for their “brave” stance and business policy. //

The latest tracking nightmare for Chrome users comes in two parts. First, Google has ignored security warnings and launched a new Chrome API to detect and report when you’re “idle,” i.e., not actively using your device. Apple warns “this is an obvious privacy concern,” and Mozilla that it’s “too tempting an opportunity for surveillance.” //

they are also banking on Congress and its ongoing fascination with trying to regulate Facebook that they can keep a low profile on all this privacy stuff and not have to worry about a Congressional investigation.

So that’s why they are choosing right now to go after so-called “climate deniers.” They are shifting the focus away from them at a time when it’s very easy to distract their users and Congress. But Google is going to find itself in increasing trouble before too long, and Congress had better start looking deeper into these security issues because Google is going to cause an insane amount of identity theft before too long.

Fox News celebrated 25 years on Thursday, as my colleague Brad Slager beautifully reported. While Slager talked about its inception, growth, and other media’s meltdown response to this milestone, I’ll focus on why Fox News’ formula has been different, why they missed an opportunity to discuss the scandals that have shaped them, as much as their unique entry into the world of news.