Thursday, July 17, 2008
Why Do I Bother Reading Crap Like This:
Vanity Fair "Why Do People Love to Hate The New York Times?" (excerpts):
Yes, just like when young Panty Doughload was prancing about Prague as a sweet young Republican thang; penning poessies in sidewalk cafes and waiting for mommy to lure him home to the maternal Manhattan nest with a spiffy job offer. It seems almost quaint now... don't it?
Right. Its not like the Times hired one of John McCain's campaign foreign policy advisors (Bill Kristol) to squat in the lap of the Times op-ed page while dressed up as a squeaky keen quick study of our national political stage. When, in actuallity, Silly Billy is nothing more than a conservatart - a liar for hire - embedded at the NYTimes for the purpose of scrutinizing his own PNAC tatooed pecker, performing pole dances for neoconservative messenger boys, and massaging Johnny "BBQ" McCain's shriveled stag-party nutsack of a campaign. Oh no, surely, no one could be "pissed off" about that. It's obviously just some sort of envy and resentment problem stirred up by "copy ninnies" and "fact freaks"... and, as we all know, facts are stupid things. Just ask Judy Miller.
Renzo Piano!... OMG!, that is like sooo totally hip... to call it that, like... only... the totally coolest, who are so familiar with like the best of the best of the best, in the cruciform plan, and like are so pursued for comment by climber-friendly editorial associates who work for fruity magazines with florally enhanced perfume pleached pages... and such as!... will totally get it, OMG!, Like wait till everyone at Lily Pond Lane reads about this... OMG.
"Nah", of course not. We leave the understimulated cross-eyed skimming up to our Times editors. We wouldn't have it any other way. Just ask Judy Miller.
-::-::-::-::-::-
The louder he talked of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons. ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
*
“When I think of the pre–Iraq war liberal animosity toward The New York Times, it almost seems quaint,” Goldberg says. “It almost seems sweet. You meet these young, left-wing blogger types today who actively hate The New York Times and the mainstream media the way freshman College Republican types used to hate The New York Times.”
Yes, just like when young Panty Doughload was prancing about Prague as a sweet young Republican thang; penning poessies in sidewalk cafes and waiting for mommy to lure him home to the maternal Manhattan nest with a spiffy job offer. It seems almost quaint now... don't it?
Carr describes the online detractors as “an embedded base of copy ninnies and fact freaks, all of whom are armed not only with the ability to feed back to you in real time but also the means to fact-check you against your own work and the work of the universe. So, these people are armed, dangerous, and very pissed off. I’m not sure about what.”
Right. Its not like the Times hired one of John McCain's campaign foreign policy advisors (Bill Kristol) to squat in the lap of the Times op-ed page while dressed up as a squeaky keen quick study of our national political stage. When, in actuallity, Silly Billy is nothing more than a conservatart - a liar for hire - embedded at the NYTimes for the purpose of scrutinizing his own PNAC tatooed pecker, performing pole dances for neoconservative messenger boys, and massaging Johnny "BBQ" McCain's shriveled stag-party nutsack of a campaign. Oh no, surely, no one could be "pissed off" about that. It's obviously just some sort of envy and resentment problem stirred up by "copy ninnies" and "fact freaks"... and, as we all know, facts are stupid things. Just ask Judy Miller.
Perhaps it comes back to envy and resentment. As much as the Times’s influence is dwindling, many smart alecks on the Web would kill to have a tiny fraction of the paper’s prestige and power, and they may think (erroneously, one suspects) that they could wield it better than the current occupants of Renzo Piano’s climber-friendly Eighth Avenue tower.
Renzo Piano!... OMG!, that is like sooo totally hip... to call it that, like... only... the totally coolest, who are so familiar with like the best of the best of the best, in the cruciform plan, and like are so pursued for comment by climber-friendly editorial associates who work for fruity magazines with florally enhanced perfume pleached pages... and such as!... will totally get it, OMG!, Like wait till everyone at Lily Pond Lane reads about this... OMG.
Carr puts it this way, borrowing from Ralph Waldo Emerson: “The reflexive, baked-in desire to constantly take apart the Times is, I think, the hobgoblin of underemployed and understimulated minds.” Not that there’s anything wrong with that. “Would we have it any other way? Do we want people to read us with their eyes crossed and skim for the good parts?” he asks. “Nah.”
"Nah", of course not. We leave the understimulated cross-eyed skimming up to our Times editors. We wouldn't have it any other way. Just ask Judy Miller.
The louder he talked of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons. ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
*
