Its not that wack. The only people writing anything on the walls are people tagging "X3V" in that neighborhood. Gangmembers tagging 13 (for La Eme) and V for Vatos. If people were putting up burners and not just marking territory I think things would be different.
@Hamilton Nolan: I'm sure he could afford to put up a big wall in the middle of nowhere. L.A.'s got public and private enterprises that hire teenagers and other less desireables to paint walls regardless of weather or not they're legal. A lot of Mexican businesses paint murals on the side of their buildings ... they use acrylics (basically anything but spraypaint) cause well-meaning workers cover it up. Hell, they even go in and cover up the Venice walls, Belmont is now condos, and more and more pieces are going up on overpasses and in the L.A. river.
Well, given that Wired wouldn't exist without an army of PR people promoting gadgets, personalities, tech companies, and tech memes on behalf of their clients - Chris Anderson is probably right to feel like maybe his magazine is a middleman that's going to be "disinterMEDIAted".
heh, see what I did there? Wow, me, Jarvis, and Anderson - visionaries for the new age.
@snugbug: No beef, just envisioning the whole "Dieter From Sprockets" attitude.
"Vat is zis news zat you speak of? Ve speak za new language, von vich destroys und constructs a new media..."
"I'm sorry; I don't use words like 'polite discourse between mature adults' or 'informative and mutually beneficial interview.' There are no words. I don't use words like 'hair,' instead I use words like 'colorful technology futurehat' and begin sentences with 'I'm sorry,' when I'm clearly not. There are no words to describe what a codescending extra-large bag of ego I am. Except those words, and many others, of course. But we no longer use them here in my futurehat. I'm sorry; I am going to be a very annoying person."
This exchange reminded me of college seminars that should've ended in knife fights.
I've said it before: if "media" becomes something people do in their free time rather than as part of a job, then the people with the most free time--the idle rich--win everything. HuffPo will show us the way!
By the way, his "news always comes to ME, summarized and customized for MY needs by others" argument is typical Twitter crackhead talk. What a feudalistic overlord--he wants the entire media and all his friends to attend to his needs, for free.
Now I'm curious, journo-types reading along: if someone schedules an interview with you, and when the time comes the simply don't want to do it, would you rather they:
1-say to you, "hey, I'm just not into this today, let's reschedule/cancel, sorry for your time wasted"
or
2-act batshit crazy, talk to their armpit, ask you questions about your first homosexual encounter, or claim to be inventing a new terminology for media, that they will only speak in that new terminology, and they will not tell you any of the new terms, thereby effective ending the interview, and still wasting your time?
@PhyrePhox: I prefer #2. (Though, I've really had neither happen. If #1 happens, usually the publicist makes up a good reason.) Most often, if they're not into it, you just get a lot of one or two word answers (only had this happen a couple of times). I'd prefer #1 or #2 over one word answers.
@PhyrePhox: #2 fer shure. An over-aggressive/batshit crazy/arrogant bitch of a source is a journalist's DREAM! He's feeding you liquid gold with a spoon. And guess who's gonna look like the Ass of the Century in print? I mean, "in zeroes and ones."
@PhyrePhox: Neither. I expect them to man-up and do the fucking interview. They don't have to be inspired, just informative, and if they can't be either why are they agreeing to be interviewed in the first place? What a douche.
If Anderson really wants to talk beyond the current vernacular, I know there are folks at Harvard working on a new lexicon for this shit (formerly known as journalism). The reality here is that he is being both pompous AND lazy.
Chris Andersen is most certainly trying to place himself in the role of media business futurist visionary in the wake of his book about the "free economy". So to do this, he's following the tried-and-true pattern of real imbeciles: you re-define existing words and ideas according to your own tropes, and try to "brand" yourself in the intellectual world. Challenging language, or remaking the definition of words is the hallmark of a really genius thinker, like Heidegger or Hopkins - but oddly enough it's also the mark of a real idiot, someone who's using it as a smokescreen to hide the poverty of his thinking.
The problem, as Malcom Gladwell pointed out in his New Yorker takedown of Andersen's "free economy", is when underneath all the clumsy prose is just a bullshit idea (ironically, gladwell is pretty much the example of a person who did what Andersen is trying to do, but did it well and successfully because he wasn't entirely full of shit).
The more Andersen gives interviews like this, the worse and worse his reputation is going to get among real thinkers, and the better it's going to get among idiots. Although given Thomas Friedman's success, I guess you can conclude that America loves a professional idiot.
@Pope John Peeps II: I don't think America loves a professional idiot as much as I think America believes no one can be *that much* of an idiot so they themselves must be missing something that everyone else seems to see. Ah, but there's a problem with that kind of believing, and the cure for that is fashion week.
08/12/09
08/12/09
08/12/09
07/30/09
07/29/09
Isn't that like Bozo the Clown criticizing Ronald McDonald?
07/29/09
heh, see what I did there? Wow, me, Jarvis, and Anderson - visionaries for the new age.
07/29/09
07/29/09
@Ken Green: But what's your beef with the Germs, son?
07/30/09
"Vat is zis news zat you speak of? Ve speak za new language, von vich destroys und constructs a new media..."
All existentially and shit...
07/29/09
07/29/09
07/29/09
I've said it before: if "media" becomes something people do in their free time rather than as part of a job, then the people with the most free time--the idle rich--win everything. HuffPo will show us the way!
07/29/09
Not to worry, it's Free.
07/29/09
07/29/09
07/29/09
My fave bold, awesome FUCKING LIE contained therein:
"We've tried paying some of our bloggers and they thought it was insulting."
@Gawker: Please duly note I will NEVER be insulted if you try to pay me.
The Germ interviewer also asks him how come Free isn't free? HAHAHA.
07/29/09
1-say to you, "hey, I'm just not into this today, let's reschedule/cancel, sorry for your time wasted"
or
2-act batshit crazy, talk to their armpit, ask you questions about your first homosexual encounter, or claim to be inventing a new terminology for media, that they will only speak in that new terminology, and they will not tell you any of the new terms, thereby effective ending the interview, and still wasting your time?
07/29/09
07/29/09
07/29/09
If Anderson really wants to talk beyond the current vernacular, I know there are folks at Harvard working on a new lexicon for this shit (formerly known as journalism). The reality here is that he is being both pompous AND lazy.
07/29/09
07/29/09
The problem, as Malcom Gladwell pointed out in his New Yorker takedown of Andersen's "free economy", is when underneath all the clumsy prose is just a bullshit idea (ironically, gladwell is pretty much the example of a person who did what Andersen is trying to do, but did it well and successfully because he wasn't entirely full of shit).
The more Andersen gives interviews like this, the worse and worse his reputation is going to get among real thinkers, and the better it's going to get among idiots. Although given Thomas Friedman's success, I guess you can conclude that America loves a professional idiot.
07/29/09