Sometimes I wonder if newspapers deliberately publish poorly written, irrational, inflammatory columns for the explicit purpose of pissing readers off. They probably figure that when people get annoyed, it generates discussion, so it gets the numbers up, and numbers are the bottom line. I realize that by writing about things that I see in newspapers that piss me off, I am actually feeding into their brilliant little plot, but some days I just get so annoyed that I can’t help myself.
For example, this charming fat-phobic column in the New York Times likens gaining weight to global warming. Well, it’s a bit more complex than that; the author is trying to illustrate the problems with Bush’s policies on climate change by creating a hypothetical situation with a fat person trying to lose weight (because all fat people try to lose weight, you know, since we are disgusting). In addition to being somewhat confusing and basically totally pointless, it was nice to be reminded first thing in the morning that pretty much every day, I will read something in the news which bashes fat people, and that is apparently totally ok with society at large. She should have just written a sharply worded critique of shitty government policies. It would have made a far more effective point.
And then in the Times of London, there’s a column which I think is supposed to be tongue in cheek called “Everything I know about women” which compares adult women to two year old toddlers. Did you know that you can buy us off with shiny things like “cars and jewelry”? And you should always apologize to women, even if you don’t know why, because “What seems to you or me like a minor infraction is, to her, on a par with genocide.” Oh, and there’s no need to sound sincere. And there’s no point in arguing with women, because we are irrational. Also, ignoring us works like a charm, apparently.
If you want a followup, here’s some dating advice from the imbeciles at AskMen, because “women are a bit like Labradors: if you say the right things in an appropriate tone of voice, they’ll do what you want.” For example, you should pretend to be interested in your partner’s life, so ask questions, but make sure to ask the right questions, because you don’t actually want her to talk. Also, you should make sure to shower her with vapid comments about her personal appearance, because this will make her want to have sex with you. Furthermore, pretending to be interested in commitment is pretty much a guaranteed way to bag that Labrador, my friends.
And don’t even get me started on the Advocate. That paper is one big train wreck which should be quietly taken out back and shot before it bites someone. Or drops dead in the street and makes a big mess. I don’t expect stellar journalism from a local paper, but articles which abide by basic spelling and grammar rules would be nice, along with pieces that actually parse. Some of the “journalists” are so lazy that they just make lists of things, rather than actually researching and writing an article. It’s truly awe-inspiring.
(If you’re wondering why there’s been no installment in the story of Henry Makepeace, which you probably aren’t, since none of you seem that into it, he’s getting a week off, because I don’t have the energy for fiction this weekend. Or much of anything else, honestly.)
Wrath on Sundays
Sometimes I wonder if newspapers deliberately publish poorly written, irrational, inflammatory columns for the explicit purpose of pissing readers off. They probably figure that when people get annoyed, it generates discussion, so it gets the numbers up, and numbers are the bottom line. I realize that by writing about things that I see in newspapers that piss me off, I am actually feeding into their brilliant little plot, but some days I just get so annoyed that I can’t help myself.
For example, this charming fat-phobic column in the New York Times likens gaining weight to global warming. Well, it’s a bit more complex than that; the author is trying to illustrate the problems with Bush’s policies on climate change by creating a hypothetical situation with a fat person trying to lose weight (because all fat people try to lose weight, you know, since we are disgusting). In addition to being somewhat confusing and basically totally pointless, it was nice to be reminded first thing in the morning that pretty much every day, I will read something in the news which bashes fat people, and that is apparently totally ok with society at large. She should have just written a sharply worded critique of shitty government policies. It would have made a far more effective point.
And then in the Times of London, there’s a column which I think is supposed to be tongue in cheek called “Everything I know about women” which compares adult women to two year old toddlers. Did you know that you can buy us off with shiny things like “cars and jewelry”? And you should always apologize to women, even if you don’t know why, because “What seems to you or me like a minor infraction is, to her, on a par with genocide.” Oh, and there’s no need to sound sincere. And there’s no point in arguing with women, because we are irrational. Also, ignoring us works like a charm, apparently.
If you want a followup, here’s some dating advice from the imbeciles at AskMen, because “women are a bit like Labradors: if you say the right things in an appropriate tone of voice, they’ll do what you want.” For example, you should pretend to be interested in your partner’s life, so ask questions, but make sure to ask the right questions, because you don’t actually want her to talk. Also, you should make sure to shower her with vapid comments about her personal appearance, because this will make her want to have sex with you. Furthermore, pretending to be interested in commitment is pretty much a guaranteed way to bag that Labrador, my friends.
And don’t even get me started on the Advocate. That paper is one big train wreck which should be quietly taken out back and shot before it bites someone. Or drops dead in the street and makes a big mess. I don’t expect stellar journalism from a local paper, but articles which abide by basic spelling and grammar rules would be nice, along with pieces that actually parse. Some of the “journalists” are so lazy that they just make lists of things, rather than actually researching and writing an article. It’s truly awe-inspiring.
(If you’re wondering why there’s been no installment in the story of Henry Makepeace, which you probably aren’t, since none of you seem that into it, he’s getting a week off, because I don’t have the energy for fiction this weekend. Or much of anything else, honestly.)