So what magazine would be so desperate for any sort of good news that they'd blitz out a press statement bragging about their lead editor being ranked at the top of his class by a two day old website? Newsweek!

Yesterday we received an email from one of Newsweek's flacks with a subject line that read, "Newsweek's Meacham, most powerful Magazine Editor." Copied into the body of the email was the post by Mediaite's Colby Hall announcing Meacham as the most powerful magazine editor.

Yeah.

After receiving this yesterday afternoon I walked around scratching my head a bit, alternately saddened and angered by the email, but mostly angered. I was angered that a magazine I've enjoyed for a number of years had stooped to such a ridiculous level to try and bring attention to itself. I was angered over the fact that there are people out there who actually give a damn about their ranking on some retarded "Power Grid." So I walked around a bit and thought all of this over and decided that I was going to post something about it on Gawker tonight, only to come home and discover that New York's Will Leitch had beaten me to the punch and written something on the subject at Deadspin that pretty much perfectly captured exactly what I was thinking. Calling Mediaite a "handy reminder of just why everyone hates the media," Leitch wrote:

From my experience, 27 percent of the people who work in media (and I'm using the Mediaite definition of media, which is pretty much "anyone who gets paid for typing, talking or figuring out how to fire people who type or talk") are journalists in the truest sense, out to enlighten the public for common good, altruistic believers in the fourth estate and its power to invoke change. The other 73 percent are pretending to be that 27 percent and really just trying to promote their own personal brand. In the past, this has always been an inside joke, something for media folk to snicker about in private. Mediaite breaks with the pretense and just states what everyone already knew: This is really what it's all about. It's not about informing the public. It's not about being good at your job. It's about being known, and being recognized. Mediaite doesn't damn this, not at all, not nearly as much as they should: They just point it out ... and then they prove it. They're excellent at that.

By far, the most entertaining and popular section of Mediaite is their Power Grid, which ranks reporters, columnists, editors, anchors, executives and talk show hosts by their "buzz" ranking, or some such meaningless word tossed out in a dead conference room somewhere.

But wait, you ask: Isn't the media dying? Yes! It totally is! This is the last gasp. It would make more sense to have a Plumberite, or a Morticianite, or a Forecloserite, you know, professions that are actually growing and have a concrete future. (They make more money than most media people too, and are generally more attractive.) But plumbers and morticians aren't self-indulgent assholes! They don't assume that just because they care about what they're doing, everyone else does. They'd never start a site like that. That's our job.

Yes. Absolutely perfect. The only thing I'd add to this is that the obsession of some over Mediaite's "Power Grid" pretty much confirms something I've long suspected—That of all the narcissism-laden social circles existing in New York City, and I've dipped my toe in most of them, there is none more densely populated with self-important a-holes than the New York media circle. Period. It's actually not even a close race, as the New York media social circle far outdistances all others in terms of pure, unadulterated love of self.

Finally, I feel compelled to add, lest someone accuse me of feeling bitter over my Mediaite ranking or something, that I have no idea if I appear anywhere on any Mediaite "Power Grid" list, though I'm sure someone would have pointed it out to me by now if I did. With that said, is it possible for me to just opt out of any future rankings? I know and like some of the people working at Mediaite, but I don't want any part of this. The whole thing just gives me indigestion when I think about it.

The Real Reason You Should Hate the Media [Deadspin]
pic via

The Times of London asked experts about the Twitter phenomenon, and concluded that people use the Internet message-broadcasting service to send 140-character "tweets" relating their most mundane activities because of an underdeveloped sense of the self:

The clinical psychologist Oliver James has his reservations. "Twittering stems from a lack of identity. It's a constant update of who you are, what you are, where you are. Nobody would Twitter if they had a strong sense of identity."

"We are the most narcissistic age ever," agrees Dr David Lewis, a cognitive neuropsychologist and director of research based at the University of Sussex. "Using Twitter suggests a level of insecurity whereby, unless people recognise you, you cease to exist. It may stave off insecurity in the short term, but it won't cure it."

For Alain de Botton, author of Status Anxiety and the forthcoming The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work, Twitter represents "a way of making sure you are permanently connected to somebody and somebody is permanently connected to you, proving that you are alive. It's like when a parent goes into a child's room to check the child is still breathing. It is a giant baby monitor."

Politico checked in on the service's use in the nation's capital, and found that the vainglorious pundits and lawmakers who crave attention in print and on TV have also flocked to Twitter. The media at large, a class of people who define themselves by the size of their audience, have turned themselves into the Twitterati, building up lists of "followers" as a reassurance that they have an importance that will outlast their dying employers.

But the narcissism of today's overcommunicators transcends one little startup, and goes far beyond the makers of media. The Washington Post profiled Julie Zingeser, a 15-year-old girl who sent and received 6,473 texts in a single month. Her mother worries about Julie's ability to focus. Sherry Turkle, an MIT professor, worries about deeper issues:

Sherry Turkle, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, wonders whether texting and similar technologies might affect the ability to be alone and whether feelings are no longer feelings unless they are shared. "It's so seductive," she said. "It meets some very deep need to always be connected, but then it turns out that always being trivially connected has a lot of problems that come with it."

Always being trivially connected sounds like Twitter's business model. The company is now worth $230 million, according to its investors. Some narcissistic executive with more wallet than brains will likely pay more than that to take it off their hands. And some day, perhaps Williams, the Twitter CEO, will no longer have to explain what he does for a living. Twittering will seem as natural as drawing breath. By then, we may have even forgotten that there was more to life than constantly proving we're alive.

(Photo by moriza)

Crazy for Rudy [VF]