Online banking is nothing new, at least not for the tech savvy-ish. But, there are always times when a face-to-face in the bank is preferable when you need to get something accomplished. With Bank of America's new free checking gimmick, however, the bank doesn't want you inside their branches or at their drive-up windows. You can use the ATM, you can use the website, you can probably call, but leave the tellers alone.

According to the bank's website, "If you choose to receive paper statements or use a teller for deposits or withdrawals, you will be charged an $8.95 monthly maintenance fee."

Meanwhile, the bank is dropping other free checking accounts — like those for college students — unless those account holders meet certain requirements.

Let's be real: when banks make these types of decisions or introduce these types of products, they're not trying to do you a favor. Bank of America isn't your buddy and they're not looking out for your best interests. It's about making money, and charging fees is one way to do that. Of course, the big dogs making these decisions aren't buddies with the tellers in this scenario either. There's no word yet on how many tellers will be laid off because their jobs are now automated ... you have to know that news is coming.

Something that got me in today's report from The Charlotte Observer is a comment from an economic researcher, Brian Moeb, that the bank's plan is to "trim lower-income customers." He reportedly thinks charging customers fees for interacting with the bank's staff is "a great idea."

Wow. Well, OK. All you lower-income customers out there, you're on notice.

Of course, since Bank of America isn't always known for their outstanding customer service, maybe being pushed out of the bank for being too low-income is a good thing. I stopped banking at BofA a decade ago and can report I'm happier not being one of their customers.

Today, when I go to my bank, I'm greeted by name, asked how I'm doing in a way that makes me think the teller actually cares and, slowly but surely, the teller and I are getting to know each other through our two minute meetings every week. When we return from vacation, she asks how we liked it. When we bought a new car, she marveled at it with us. From my side, I'm fascinated by my teller's endless collection of costume jewelry. That woman likes her bling. She also has a very cute granddaughter who occasionally comes to work with her. Because of her, going by the bank now feels less like a chore and has actually become enjoyable. But, she's not the only teller within my bank who's like that. When I go to a branch, clear across town, on behalf of my mother-in-law or to access our safe deposit box, they, too, greet us by name, ask how we're doing and seem genuinely interested when we answer.

Sure, my husband and I do 98 percent of our banking online, but, still, I like it when the company that holds onto all of our money actually gives a shit about us as individuals rather than as a cluster of accounts. Call me crazy.

So, out of curiosity, I went to YouTube to see if I could find some videos detailing what other people think of Bank of America's customer service. Here are three, and all are dissatisfied:

One can only hope.

Reporting from Washington and Los Angeles — In a sharp rebuke of the Bush-era crackdown on foul language on broadcast television and radio, a federal appeals court on Tuesday struck down the government's near-zero-tolerance indecency policy as a violation of the 1st Amendment protection of free speech.

The ruling is a major victory for the broadcast TV networks, which jointly sued the Federal Communications Commission in 2006.

The case was triggered by unscripted expletives uttered by Bono, Cher and Nicole Richie on awards shows earlier in the decade, and the court's decision calls into question the FCC's regulation of foul language and other indecent content on the public airwaves.

Read the rest of this L.A. Times article, by Jim Puzzanghera and Meg James, here.

In case you missed it, Google the Internets for "Janet Jackson nipple." Frankly, I don't see what the fuss is all about. First of all, everyone has nipples. Second, you have to spend some time slowing this video down and repeatedly watching it to actually see any nipple action. (Something I have no interest in doing so, sadly, I still have yet to see even one of JJ's nipples.) I hear it was decorated and pierced. Good for her. Everyone needs a hobby.

Woo hoo! College textbooks are damn expensive. I know, I used to buy and sell them ... both as a student and as a manager of two college textbook stores, one in Montgomery, Ala., and another in Atlanta, Ga. But, that was more than a decade ago. Even then, however, the industry was trying to figure out how to rent textbooks and still turn a profit.

There are some books that, as you college students already know, you're guaranteed to get about half of your money back on during book buy back season at the end of the semester. These are your English and History 101 types of books. There's a huge demand for them since everyone has to take those classes.

You get into graduate level classes, however, and there isn't much demand for the books. For a class of 25, the campus bookstore will probably carry 12, the off-campus bookstore will likely carry 10 and both will figure the other three will be picked up either from other students or online. And, they're probably right.

It used to be, when I ran off-campus book stores, our main competition was with the campus store. We would fight with them to get accurate book information for each class. We would snoop through their stores for pricing information, and they would do the same to us. (Everyone wants to be known as the low-cost leader.) And, during buy backs, we would do our best to offer $1 or $2 more than the other guys.

Book buy backs are essential in the college textbook industry because that's where the money's at. The stores get the books from students less expensively than they get them from wholesalers and publishers. Plus, there are no shipping charges. But where there's profit, there is usually also risk.

The risk in buying books back from students is several fold: the book may be usurped by a new edition (everyone, besides the author and publisher, hates it when that happens), the professor or department may change their mind about which book to use at the very last second and there's always the possibility the store will over-buy the books and then not be able to unload them all to next semester's students.

But, more often than not, it's more profitable to buy books back from the students. So, in my mind, renting the books makes sense. Or, at least it's an experiment worth trying (finally). For one thing, it means the stores will hand out less cash at the end of the semester. Instead, they'll simply hold their hand out, take their book back and re-stock it.

Here's an example:

If you buy a $100 book, take good care of it and turn it in at the end of the semester for $50, then why not just pay $50 to begin with?

It sounds easy, but it's going to be a challenge for the school's store to manage. And, I have a lot of questions. Like, which books are for rent? What happens if the book gets lost or damaged — would you then owe the store the full amount? What about old editions or out of print books, do they qualify for this program?

It will be interesting to see how this program pans out, and it will also be interesting to see how the off-campus bookstore, Grays, responds.

The sad news for students, however, is any savings they realize on their textbooks probably still won't make up for the extra $708 they'll owe for tuition this year. Wa.wa.wa.

This lady's got a few more ideas about how to save money on your college textbooks: