I'll take "Bad Journalism" for $2000, Alex

[yendi]

Remember last week, when I linked to the fucking hysterical faux letter Ken Jennings wrote to Jeopardy! in his blog? The one that was so over the top that only an idiot could possibly think he was sincere?

Well, New York Post writer Michael Starr is that idiot.

Comments

[tattermuffin.livejournal.com]

Should we all spam him with offers to sell him spoof-detection software and the like?

It's too bad that snopes hasn't got wind of it, sending him 40,000 emails with the link to a "it's a joke, people, get a clue!" would be fun too.

[yendi]

Oh, I'm sure it'll hit Snopes soon enough (especially once the Post and their Starr reporter deny ever being fooled).

[yndy.livejournal.com]

Safe Bet:
We won't be seeing Michael Starr on Jeopardy! any time in the near future either...
heh.

[mistercrabby.livejournal.com]

The answer is, "This New York Post reporter lost his sense of humor in a tragic accident."

[yendi]

Heh. You give him the benefit of the doubt. I'm not sure he ever had one.

[dindin.livejournal.com]

Did you see Rep. Wexler (?) on the Colbert Report saying (prompted) that he liked cocaine because it was fun. Apparently people are getting in a snit over that, too.

[yendi]

Sheesh. Let's hear it for the rise of the stupid.

[sempereadem.livejournal.com]

Do people have no grasp of humor, or satire, or farce anymore? I mean, everyone is so deadly earnest about everything, they seem to forget how to differentiate these days.

[yendi]

I think it's because we, societally, don't reward subtlety, so there are folks who simply have managed to get by for years without ever being exposed to it (or being aware of that exposure). It simply never occured to Starr to question what he read as being satire, because he'd never encountered it while going through journalism school or as a reporter.

[kizlj.livejournal.com]

I rarely attribute to journalistic malice what can more readily be chalked up to laziness or stupidity, but in this case, I suspect it was intentional. we journos get a *lot* of pressure these days to generate traffic and hits. (I consider myself about the least interested journalist on earth in sensationalism and keeping the business side happy, but I'll confess I've started writing my headlines with more of an eye on 'tantalize reader to click' than 'convey all information.' I still write my stories straight, though.) inflammatory headlines do that.

the Post reporter probably did understand the piece was humour, but also realised he could pull bits out of context and make a buzzy story out of them. and gave into the temptation.

[muse0fire.livejournal.com]

They've also forgotten the whole premise of "context".

And no, they have grasp of satire because satire involves thought, and we've become far too lazy a society to have to THINK about what someone has said (and the spirit in which it was said.)

[robyn-ma.livejournal.com]

Did you expect anything better from the New York Post?

[yendi]

Sudoku. And do they still print Luann?

[mactavish.livejournal.com]

Michael needs to read this:
http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2006/07/14/onion_blogger/index_np.html

[yendi]

Heh. Yeah, I read about that back when Patrick Nielsen Hayden posted it in his blog. I can't wait to see if Starr tries a similar defense.

[litch.livejournal.com]

CNN picked it up
http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/TV/07/25/people.kenjennings.ap/index.html

[elionwyr.livejournal.com]

"We regret the insinuation that Mr. Alex Trebek is a robot, and has been since 2004. Mr. Trebek's robotic frame does still contain some organic parts, many harvested from patriotic Canadian schoolchildren, so this technically makes him a 'cyborg,' not a 'robot.' "

HA!