a lazy friday
today, i will be blogging my day, constantly and without remorse. this means, i will be reading as much of nytimes.com, slate, washington post, detroit free press, and any other random media i can handle. until maybe i decide to do work.
to start off, commentary on john tierney, a science writer for the new york times, and his blog. Tierney is smart, and the blog is informative/well-written/interesting enough. But it tries to ride the line between edgy (look, i write about pot! polygamy! spring break!) and straight-laced new york times establishmentism (not a real word, i think). the headlines are cutesy, but the posts can be bland. it's a censored william saletan (from slate) and where's the fun in that?
and then you get comments like this, which exemplify the problem. on a post about greenland glaciers, one reader has something apparently important to say:
"How bracing and encouraging that John Tierney believes that global warming is “the kind of collective-action problem that isn’t easily solved by market forces.” This seems to be a libertarian’s conversion of epochal portent - rather like Archibishop Wilberforce declaring his insulting words to Thomas Henry Huxley of 1860 “inoperative,” and then admitting to “Darwin’s Bulldog” that the good Reverend Wilberforce himself had primate ancestors on both his grandmother’s and grandfather’s side."
translation? anyone? readers like this are half the problem. sigh.
to start off, commentary on john tierney, a science writer for the new york times, and his blog. Tierney is smart, and the blog is informative/well-written/interesting enough. But it tries to ride the line between edgy (look, i write about pot! polygamy! spring break!) and straight-laced new york times establishmentism (not a real word, i think). the headlines are cutesy, but the posts can be bland. it's a censored william saletan (from slate) and where's the fun in that?
and then you get comments like this, which exemplify the problem. on a post about greenland glaciers, one reader has something apparently important to say:
"How bracing and encouraging that John Tierney believes that global warming is “the kind of collective-action problem that isn’t easily solved by market forces.” This seems to be a libertarian’s conversion of epochal portent - rather like Archibishop Wilberforce declaring his insulting words to Thomas Henry Huxley of 1860 “inoperative,” and then admitting to “Darwin’s Bulldog” that the good Reverend Wilberforce himself had primate ancestors on both his grandmother’s and grandfather’s side."
translation? anyone? readers like this are half the problem. sigh.
posted by alison at 11:30
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home