2:52 PM Manny: Reports today that parent NYT is telling the Boston Globe to break their unions.
me:
So the Boston Globe is supposed to break it's unions or else?
2:53 PM Manny: really, it's supposed to mass fire everybody
they don't care what unions are left after
me: Well that should improve the quality of journalism
Manny: it always does
2:54 PM as long as the bosses can keep acting self-righteous about how newspapers are the bulwark of freedom and democracy, they don't care if its true.
There's some kind of rule that everyone who criticizes modern journalism has to say ``I love the NY times.''
2:55 PM me: People are very loyal to their childhood memories
I'm constantly getting people mad at me because I casually insult the NYT
Manny: we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. "Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lieutenant Weinberg? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives! You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall! You need me on that wall! We use words like Honor, Code, Loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline! I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it! I would rather you just said "Thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to!"
Yes, I have found that lots of people knee-jerk defend the times
especially reporters, who should know better
2:56 PM they've ingrained an inferiority complex toward it as well
2:57 PM me: It's part of the problem, I think
2:58 PM Manny: You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall! You need me on that wall!
me: Is that a quote I should know, btw?
Manny: A Few Good Men
me: now I remember
Manny: sarcastic
me: I got it
2:59 PM But who's on the wall now? Who are the defenders?
Talk about how everything online is wonderful, everything paper is crap and then use the online to pimp your upcoming (paper) book. Bonus points for talking about how much you love the New York Times at least twice per blog post. It'll help your credibility. You love the Times, but ...
3:01 PM unrelated, but funny
3:02 PM me: That's not unrelated
Manny: well, the guy's basically defending the ongoing existence of the print product
which we're saying is, to a large extent, crap
But i believe it's always been crap
3:03 PM it is, thus, once- and-future crap
me: I agree. This isn't a problem that has to do with whether you write electronically or not: "Basically, imagine a group of people watching a building burn down and bickering amongst themselves about whether it's a conflagration or an inferno. It's like that, but with consulting fees."
3:07 PM Manny: the thing is, newspapers are aimed at 4th graders
there's no two ways about it
they are
fact
3:09 PM me: I just lost the last thing you posted
Manny: Reporters for the Times can act as pompous as they want, but they write as if for 4th graders.
fact
the paper is middlebrow
at best
3:10 PM If you're smart, it should be beneath you
Lots of very smart, very powerful people won't touch it
3:11 PM I stopped during the Iraq war run-up, and somehow, I remain reasonably well informed
3:13 PM me: I also stopped during the Iraq war run up, they were too grossly negligent to be relied on for anything ever again. (Although both of us obviously still browse enough to get pissed off by the idiots spouting nonsense).
3:14 PM Manny: My buddy tomas calls reading the Times ``a self-inflicted wound.''
People link to it
me: true
that's like the wound I inflict on myself when I feel compelled to watch meet the press
3:15 PM Manny: an engraved invitation to apoplext
apoplexy
whatevs
3:17 PM me: lol
| 7 minutes |
3:25 PM Manny: It is hard to get people to take seriously the idea that you don't read that paper
It's like, people who went to fancy schools assume people who don't read it are stupid
or land-grant alum
unless they've read a lot of noam chomsky
3:28 PM Chomsky, on the NYT and Iraq: A few days ago, the New York Times—the military and Iraq expert of the New York Times, Michael Gordon, wrote a comprehensive review, first-page comprehensive review, of the options for Iraq that are being faced by the candidates. And he went through them in detail, described the pluses and minuses and so on, interviewing political leaders, the candidates, experts, etc. There was one voice missing: Iraqis. Their preference is not rejected; rather, it’s not mentioned. And it seems that there was no notice of that fact, which makes sense, because it’s typical. It makes sense on the tacit assumption that underlies almost all discourse on international affairs. The tacit assumption, without which none of it makes any sense, is that we own the world. So, what does it matter what others think? They’re “unpeople,” nice term invented by British diplomatic historian [Mark] Curtis, based on a series of outstanding volumes on Britain’s crimes of empire—outstanding work, therefore deeply hidden. So there are the “unpeople” out there, and then there are the owners—that’s us—and we don’t have to listen to the “unpeople.”
3:32 PM me: Nope. We certainly don't
That's why KIPP is such a popular schools program
3:33 PM Manny: those paternalistic fucks can bite my gnards
me: It's a: you, un-people, we own you and can make you little automatons to help us protect our oppressive system
3:35 PM Manny: remember when the Times told us all the it was crazy to think that 100,000 iraqis had died?
Ha ha!
Crazy!
3:36 PM me: Well they didn't, only the little video game people died dude
3:37 PM Manny: Brown people. I once heard that cockknocker Ethan Bronner from the Jerusalem bureau tell on the media, in a condescending tone of voice, that Israelis didn't oppose the gaza incursion of last winter because their media didn't provide them with a true picture of the civilian deaths
with a straight face, he said this
Yeah, those stupid israelis, not being informed about the 1,000 dead people
3:38 PM not like the readers of the Times
daily confronted with the human cost of their reporters' fun and career-advancing excursions to the U.S.'s only active Baghdad bureau
3:39 PM me: ha
3:40 PM do you read Uncle Norman's postings? He talks about how asinine the "uniformed" Israeli concept is: http://tennisplayerintelaviv.blogspot.com/2009/03/israels-turn-inward-in-its-2009.html
Manny: i seen it
It was just so hilariously stupid
3:41 PM Yeah, every day I pick up the times and am confronted with the thousands and thousands of dead iraqis. Oh wait.
3:42 PM me: we just saw the first one of our own dead in like 20 years
No comments:
Post a Comment