aside from the first graf, was this written by bill conlin? is there a real preview in there or just a collection of cliff notes gleaned from joel sherman columns?
the sex part isn't a big deal, alex, but a criminal indictment is. he might be able to slog his way throught that, but at what cost to his political reputation and his ability to run the state? being a governor is hard enough; doing it while being named as criminal defendent is infintely worse. he should resign and rehab himself in the private sector. that's not just for our sake, but for his own.
from the tone of most of these comments, i reckon i'm one of the very few who has enjoyed denton's re-ascension at gawker. while i've recoiled from most of the rest of the posts as they, almost on a daily basis, get more and more tedious and less revealing, his always entertain and inform me. they're tougher and more chewy than richard's or alex's, but they offer me what gawker used to offer two or three years ago: a glimpse into a world that i otherwise have no access to. those of you in that world, in that industry, may not appreciate having it revealed because it has already revealed itself to you. but for me, denton wryly displays these characters for what they are. is he the arch-iconoclast? are we being given never-before-known insights into human foibles and proclivities. no, but he is a fine chronicler of this business and social scene, managing to be wholly of it but not subsumed by it. he's not perez hilton with airs; he's michael musto with a stiff upper lip. rage on, nick. i'll do my best to support the pagviews.
zeke must be wishing he could be martin lawrence so there could be a new vein of jokes to mine.
unless i'm mistaken, that is the very miller lite justin timberlake was shotgunning at lambeau. the conspiracy widens...
and has anyone else noticed that for all the talk of the denton doctrine of page views, most of the ads continue to be for gawker artists? maybe this page views thing isn't working so well...
@jezebelmoe: i haven't read through the next two pages of comments, so my apologies if i'm repeating what someone else has noted, but moe's reaction makes it sound as if she needs everyone else to be as excited and idealistic about obama as she is. otherwise it's as if she's threatened by the possibility that maybe, just maybe obama isn't the messiah candidate. at bottom, she sounds very immature about politics. candidates win and candidates lose. maybe, moe, other people have different concerns and different values than you do. i don't support obama or hillary. but i can't hate or denigrate those who do because y'all just see the world differently. and that's great.
in the meantime, how about we all agree to stay involved and alert no mater who wins or loses so that we can exert influence on the politicians beyond the primaries and election days? deal?
i once worked with a guy named richard head. 100% true.
where in this does it say that making money touring is a myth? what i'm hearing is that the market doesn't value some bands as highly as the bands would like them to. that doesn't mean they can't make money, but it does mean they won't be gazillionaires and live in the predetermined opulence they expected. look, if fugazi can make a living on touring, then the model is proven. they're not wealthy, and don't want to be, but they make their money and get to live and survive as musicians without working at starbucks. sorry, marron 5, but that might be as much as you can ask for and maybe all you can expect.
@AnnaBanana: i live in the neighborhood and i thought the same thing. that it was some kind of freshman or sophmore year lib arts or sociology student trying to strike out against the man.
that said, i think a lot of the ambiguity discussed here can be sorted out somewhat easily if we all can agree on certain essentials:
1) the plain fact that several people have brought up that rape is a violent crime. though the sexual organs are involved, it is not a "sexual" act. it is violence and submission via the sexual organs. it is particularly visceral and psychologically imperious because it employs the sexual organs, the part of the body that owns the primal drive to survive and reproduce. when a man rapes a woman or another man (and let's be honest, it happens all the time in prison or otherwise), he wants to overcome some perceived or intuited shortcoming by attempting to own the sexuality of the victim. it is a crime of violence, of battery, of assault, of dominance, and theft.
2) rape pre-exists advertising and media, and therefore cannot be assigned to those things causally. rape does not follow from titillation, but rather from what i mentioned above: a need to dominate and take. it's covetous, not simply from being stimulated.
if we can aver that these two things are true, then we can keep the AA ads in their proper place. the cynical use of sexuality and provocation to move merchandise. no more and no less.
tomorrow, will's going to post an item about julia allison and jakob lodowick (or whatever his name is) taking up bowling as part of a new reality show called "the splits"
@Choire: cool. i apologise if that came off as a conspiracy theory. i was simply curious. thanks, choire. i do appreciate the answers and that you were thorough in replying. and if you ever do get down to who's shopping the story, i will eagerly read the follow-up...love a good story...
@VenusCloacina: i'm not trying to hold her out as some of paragon of social graces, but obviously someone at gawker hq thought it was worth investing the time to do all this research or that having gotten this research from someone else that it was worth running it even though this didn't get a mention in today's gossip roundup despite being the top item for page six's online coverage. just a strange turn of events is all i'm sayin.
is anyone else curious about the fact that page six ran a hit piece on burkle after he strong-armed them into dropping stern last year? and that gawker is doing a hit piece on the woman going after burkle? am i alone in thinking something is amiss here?
can we please, please retire the tired trope that wealthy people are somehow immune to suffering just because they have money? yes, they can recover in ways poor people can't, but they're still human beings with lives, families and homes just like the rest of us po' folk. honestly, moe, get over it. just because someone has money doesn't retire them from the human species. you don't need to feel complete empathy, but have a heart and be human. rich or poor, republican or democrat, tragedy is tragedy.
navel gazing. ugh. i feel for you, jess. it seems like all you want to do is love music and share your love for it. you unfortunately live in a world where many people anchor their self-identification to their position in the race to know some thing before anyone else. "i've seen it all. i was here first." personally, i miss out on LOTS of music. lots of everything really, because i just don't care enough to compete in that race. but since you're writing about it are at once compelled to be a competitor and judge of the competition, i have a suggestion that i hope might help. write more pieces like this that tell people what really sucks out there. you sort of allude to the idea in noting that you've written about the stuff you love. so go ahead and tell us more about bands like black kids and why they aren't worth our attention, at least not yet. i find a negative review to have a much stronger effect on me than positive one.
and you might want to just focus on the music and stop worrying about the wannabes of the world. in the end, the music is what counts.
"you can throw out the first 12 seasons! it all comes down to one!"
-gsteinstack52284
every sixth round pick that starts his career as a back-up now dreams of impregnating and dumping supermodels. this truly is the land of opportunity.
@In Other News...: John Fitzgerald Page can bring Windex back from the dead.
John Fitzgerald Page can smell Britney's ladyflower through pictures.
