Now, the NYT is back again -- this time with a new and controversial Sunday magazine cover story, Blog-Post Confidential, written by Emily Gould, a former editor at the high-profile Gawker media gossip blog. Gould's piece is long, and not very good: I read the top twice in a fruitless search for a nut graph. It needed a lot more editing and probably three rewrites. Basically, Gould chronicles the pitfalls of leading a too-public life on the Web.The NYT published the story online in advance of tomorrow's print debut -- kicking off a storm of criticism directed at the paper and at Gould. It's drawn nearly 1,000 often-negative comments -- including No. 1, from a reader who goes by the name Ego Nemo: "At first, I thought I was reading the sophomore page of the student newspaper at Harding High in Yokelville, Ohio. Then I realized that it was the New York Times. Just awful."
Guess what? As more critics pile in on Gould and the NYT, I wouldn't be surprised if the paper got even more hits than if the story had been well-received or just plain so-so. The only thing worse than negative blog chatter is no chatter at all, right?
I think I've got the world's most gosh-darn interesting life. But maybe I'm just delusional. So, I play it safe: I don't write much about my personal life on this blog.
ReplyDeleteMostly, though, it's because I figure you come to this blog to read about Gannett, and not about that time a mink coat clad Washington Post columnist caught me in the kitchen with my pants down -- literally -- at a raucous cocktail party in Chevy Chase, Md. Right?
[Fingers in ears, mind's eyes shut tight] Too much information, na,na,na,na,na,na ... even if it is a joke, too much information na, na,na,na,na,na,na ...
ReplyDeleteThat gives new meaning to the phrase "nut graf," Jim.
ReplyDeleteStill I don't think a nut graf would have helped the Times story.
Gould's trite unbosomings are not the scariest thing about the NY Times today.
ReplyDeleteNor is the Times' decision to print her "work."
Nor is the Times' choice to make this endless diary blathering the magazine's cover story.
You want fucking terrifying?
Go to the NYT Books page and scroll down to "The Big Squeeze" by Times labor guy Steve Greenhouse.
The review is typical academic jerking off -- don't bother.
Just click the "First Chapter" link and read. Keep going.
If you find yourself wanting to stop because it's pissing you off oo much, don't. Keep going
It'll make your jaw drop, your temper boil and your fear flare like nothing else.
And it should.
THIS is what should be drawing 1,116 comments. This book. This topic.
In fact, it probably would -- if the Times would kindly stop playing Judge Turpin to Gould's Johanna, wipe itself off and make it possible for us to talk about what is fast becoming the biggest threat of our time.
Anyone know how to make that happen?