I can't stand corniness of this magnitude
I can't stand corniness of this magnitude
Good lord, calm down. That post was perfectly fine.
I just fucking hate try-hards, man.
that's only cuz you don't try at all. it shows.
Try-hards make you suicidal? SOMEONE needs their 4-year sabbatical.
The most embarrassing thing about this post is that when we post our "look-at-how-clever-we-are" insidery bullshit it tanks. When Buzzfeed posts it it does 3 million PVs.
It's because we're mostly annoying in a prickish, alienating way, whereas BuzzFeed is annoying in a lowest common denominator, college a capella group way.
Why are we in this business?
But we don’t necessarily format our insidery bullshit in a way that’s easily consumable and shareable.
You don’t even need to be (completely) aware that the people emailing each other in that post work at BuzzFeed. It’s generically humorous and sometimes absurd.
And I don’t think they were framing it as “look-at-how-clever-we-are”; they were framing it as an uncommonly vibrant slice of an otherwise (relatively) normal office environment. I mean, did you read Jonah Peretti’s contribution to that? Good lord.
Yeah, you're right. I wonder if we even have anything we could repackage the right way.
Also I think a sizable number of people’s eyes glaze over at phrases like “well actually impoverished enraged detroiters will be a suitable revolutionary vanguard”—which of course is exactly what made the post so enjoyable to others.
I think it's a CBS vs. HBO analogy. "Who watches CBS shows?" we laugh as we tune into True Detective. And yet everyone else in the country watches those other shows and everyone else in the country finds LOL email posts funny. We're the small-market weirdos here.
Please change the internal Gawker email system to look like a string of tweets
I'm not sure how apt that is. Reading through this thread as an example, the Gawker internal humor is lovingly cruel. One might even compare it to a Chuck Lorre production.
We've never seen a Chuck Lorre production so we really can't compare.
None of the characters on his shows would watch his shows either. This whole situation is like the opposite of an Ouroboros.
I'll just go back to a simple point then: Everyone reads Buzzfeed. Many people do not read Gawker.
Man, it must be tough being part of the intellectual elite! If only you could mindlessly enjoy TV and junkfood and xenophobic humor like regular Americans.
But alas, someone has to carry the burden of knowledge and accept the responsibilies it entails. So once more into the fray you go, valiantly!
I was comparing how people respond to us / classify us. Personally, all I do is watch—and adore—popular TV and books. And I'm eating chips right now. I promise I'm pretty far away from intellectual or elite.
Fair enough. Who would you consider Gawker's intellectual elite? If we're talking strictly Gawker core, I'd say Nolan despite his blue-collar affectations.
If we include the rest of the Gawker sites, I'd say Annalee Newitz has you all beat. Even though she's old enough to be your mother (I kid), she seems to be closer to the cutting edge in both the natural and social sciences discourse than any Gawker writer. Have you ever thought about maybe giving her a sort of guest spot on Gawker itself? It would also add a queer female perspective, which is lacking as of now.
I really idolize Annalee and she's incredible and we try to splice over a lot of her stuff because we love to have it on the page. But asking her to write for Gawker would add to her already INSANE schedule, although I'm happy to ask!
As for who is our intellectual elite on Gawker itself, if I'm being honest, everyone here is blow-my-mind incredibly fucking smart. And everyone here is insanely normal and unpretentious. So if I had to choose, I'd vote for Max as most intellectual (because he's my boss) and Taylor as most elite (because he's never eaten shrimp).
That would be awesome if it were to work out! Maybe a piece on social engineering through modern media/technology (back in the day when she still had her Wired column she used to write some dope pieces on that topic).
Or maybe something relating to queer culture - the magazine she and Charlie Jane Anders used to run had some great pieces, would love to see some of those ideas reaching a wider audience. I mean, Rich does a good job of covering queer issues, but he's more focused on examining the culture as it is right now and less given to wildly forward-thinking pieces.
I have never read Buzzfeed.
You're a very, very rare dead kitten.
I love how angry Matt Yglesias makes people. Just the thought of him.
I don't want you to die.
I wish you would step back from that ledge, my friend.