Discussion
  • Read More
    dothedewJ.K. Trotter
    4/29/16 1:08pm

    If the bullshit slung by a jargon-laden parody twitter account is easily confused for your own academic work by people who know you well and work with you, then perhaps it is time for a re-examination of your bullshitty jargon-laden “writing”.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Hip Brooklyn Stereotypedothedew
      4/29/16 1:11pm

      This is apropos of relatively nothing, and I really like and respect Judy Butler, but her famous ridiculously long sentence from the 1997 article “Further Reflections on the Conversations of Our Time” comes to mind:

      The move from a structuralist account in which capital is understood to structure social relations in relatively homologous ways to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition, convergence, and rearticulation brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure, and marked a shift from a form of Althusserian theory that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects to one in which the insights into the contingent possibility of structure inaugurate a renewed conception of hegemony as bound up with the contingent sites and strategies of the rearticulation of power.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      dothedewHip Brooklyn Stereotype
      4/29/16 1:13pm

      I mean, obviously, but why did she have to dumb it down for her audience?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Rom RombertsJ.K. Trotter
    4/29/16 1:17pm

    I am the real Jeff Jarvis and I have no butt so instead of making a poop out of my butt I make a poop out of the tiny anuses at the tips of my fingers and, when I do, I’ll chase children who have entered my woods while shouting “I’m gonna grip you with ten anuses, you trespassing scoundrels!” Technology is important and we should have more media.

    UPDATE: I have been sued and will soon live with the criminals in the felon’s box.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      MissNormaDesmondRom Romberts
      4/29/16 1:20pm

      ♡

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Psychopomps: Taking Gawker to the Great Blog in the SkyRom Romberts
      4/29/16 1:51pm

      Are you MauryCompson

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    tornadoslackssJ.K. Trotter
    4/29/16 1:12pm

    I don’t know. Names are tricky. I called the low cost vet clinic to set up a spay for a foster dog and they asked me if I was "slackss, tornado," who brings "Max" the dog there. I immediately disassociated myself from the other, less worthy"slacks" as I would never be so dull as to name a dog "Max." As if.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      ad infinitumtornadoslackss
      4/29/16 1:25pm

      I had to get a prescription for my dog a few months ago, and I had to give him a middle name, because there was already someone in the system with his name, my last name and my birthday. It was very odd.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      tornadoslackssad infinitum
      4/29/16 1:29pm

      Whoa, that's way weird. I'd go with Marie for a girl, Wayne for a boy.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Maude'sFistJ.K. Trotter
    4/29/16 1:24pm

    ......Must disagree. “Lazy” is the adjective you are looking for. If satire depends on explicitly invoking its target, it is not well done. A well-done satire would not need to mention its target by name, as the parody should reflect the ideas so closely that the informed reader will recognize the intended subject by association. Dressing up an excuse for laziness or poor writing or ill-conceived execution in “first amendment rights” is a defense of “writers” who should be trying harder........and clearly need to......

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Sean RMaude'sFist
      4/29/16 1:35pm

      You are truly a person of limited imagination and judgement.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Maude'sFistSean R
      4/29/16 2:23pm

      ....not to be too swift, but I have a modest proposal.....

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    J.K. TrotterJ.K. Trotter
    4/29/16 1:32pm

    Correction: This post originally referred to Jeff Jarvis as the co-author of Regret the Error: How Media Mistakes Pollute the Press and Imperil Free Speech. In fact he only wrote the book’s foreword. We regret the error. ;-)

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Manhattan123J.K. Trotter
      4/30/16 12:22am

      Jeff Jarvis libel!!!!1!

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      dvdoffJ.K. Trotter
      4/30/16 1:14am

      No you don’t.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Sid and FinancyJ.K. Trotter
    4/29/16 1:27pm

    In my experience, it’s always the nicest people who say things like, “I emailed other Hearst executives I happen know. I’m lucky enough to have the connections to make that possible; pity the poor shmuck who doesn’t have such media emails.”

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      festivusaziliSid and Financy
      4/29/16 2:15pm

      “Just be glad ol’ Willie Randolph isn’t still alive, or I could have had you killed.”

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      BlastProcessingSid and Financy
      4/29/16 2:21pm

      I like how it tries to come across as populist and instead paints him (accurately) as the worst kind of privileged piece of shit.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    ArdenJ.K. Trotter
    4/29/16 1:20pm

    Why is it that the Free Speech Warriors who demand everything they say/like be shouted from the rooftops, and that if you don’t like it you should grow thicker skin, *always* end up unable to handle the opinion of others while having the thinnest skin of them all?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Orlandu7Arden
      4/29/16 1:27pm

      Because said people generally want the “freedom” to insult various groups of people without being told in return that they’re being offensive. Needless to say, people who strongly desire to regularly insult various groups of people are not very high on measures like self-esteem or confidence in one’s life choices.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      AnarchyOfTasteArden
      5/01/16 11:50am

      I don’t think it is actually the case that free speecch warriors do this more than anyone else? Who else are you even thinking of?

      Everyone is too thinned skin, IMO. This is especially true of those who denounce a more liberal interpretation of free speech.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Quasar FunkJ.K. Trotter
    4/29/16 1:10pm

    There are no absolutes, except for the absolute fact that any person who calls him or herself a “futurist” is a giant bag of douche.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      IskaralPustQuasar Funk
      4/29/16 1:13pm

      I disagree. People like myself, who took a Hot Tub Time Machine from the desolate wasteland of the year 2250, are really starting to reclaim that term.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Sid and FinancyQuasar Funk
      4/29/16 1:17pm

      My friend was interviewed in a major newspaper — man-on-the-street story about reactions to the death of a famous musician, as I recall — and they referred to him (per his stated preference) as “John Smith, Futurist.”

      I have been responding to the question, “What do you do?” with, “I’m a DJ and Futurist” ever since.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    ╰(　´◔　ω　◔ `)╯< Woke and BokeJ.K. Trotter
    4/29/16 1:20pm

    Making the target of your satire butthurt is the highest praise any troll could ever accomplish. Huzzah for Prof. Jeff Jarvis.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Ned FreyJ.K. Trotter
      4/29/16 2:20pm

      I’m not defending Jeff Jarvis’s overreaction here, but the original dustup was exacerbated by a few of Esquire’s poor choices in the way they presented the original piece.

      The byline originally simply read “Prof. Jeff Jarvis” — not “@ProfJeffJarvis,” which is how Gawker presented it when it later republished the piece. Also, the bio that clarified that the author was not the real Jeff Jarvis appeared all the way at the end of the piece, where very few people who casually came across the posting were likely to see it.

      Had Esquire originally presented the piece the way Gawker did — i.e., with this byline at the top: “@ProfJeffJarvis, a parody account” — the whole thing probably wouldn’t have been as big a problem. Or, at the very least, if Jarvis had still complained, he wouldn’t have had as good a case as he originally did that the satire was confusing and deceptive. (Esquire clumsily tried to alter the post later to make the parody clearer — by changing the byline to “Prof. Jeff Jarvis, a well-known satirist” — but by then it was apparently too late, and they ended up throwing in the towel and deleting the whole thing.)

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        Ned FreyNed Frey
        4/29/16 2:34pm

        I do think the real Jarvis’s drama-filled tweets are kind of funny, though.

        I like how he talks about going into atrial fibrulation, like a Southern belle declaring she’s having “the vapors.” (As someone who has this condition, I can tell you that occasional bouts of afib are really not that big a deal.)

        Reply
        <
      • Read More
        MemeWeaverNed Frey
        4/29/16 2:45pm

        That killed me, too. Maybe tweet a photo of your fainting couch, good sir?

        Reply
        <