We are deeply wounded.

Make that a billion gazillion hillion — words written about the newspaper story line, that is. The WashPost tells us, as if we didn’t know by now, that there’s no feud like a newspaper feud, especially when it happens on the internet:

If all we had was print, we never would have had the poly-linked blogfest tempest over the final season of HBO’s “The Wire,” on sites like Slate.com, Poynter.org and something called Fimoculous.com, along with New York magazine’s Vulture blog.

What? And no mention of The New Package? I’m offended. What do we have to do to get on the radar with Fimoculous.com?

Personal peeve: Could we start restricting use of the word deeply, except as a straight adjective? She plunged the dagger deeply into her editor’s gut: OK. “I deeply resent Simon’s dishonest efforts to revise history,” Marimow says: not OK.

(Actually the first one’s not OK, either. “Deep” is a better word there. But I’m getting tired of “deeply” used as an all-purpose intensifier, as it’s so overused as to be meaningless, especially in journalism. People are never just religious when they can be deeply religious, sorry when they can be deeply sorry, or, apparently, merely offended when they can be deeply offended. As Jay Spry reminds us, God is in the details, at the Baltimore Sun and elsewhere.)



  1. Well, the wags at New York magazine reported this out with a dictionary editor and found that since about World War II it’s been okay to evacuate a person without emptying him.

    This, in a nutshell, says all you need to say about the “what’s wrong with the modern newsroom” thesis of Season 5 .

    Forest for the trees, people. Forest for the motherfucking trees.

  2. Ahem: You can also see where I’ve been wasting my time, as well. Here’s the NY mag Vulture blog piece, and if you scroll down to the comments you might see a familiar name. P.S. Not David Simon’s.

  3. I was just coming here to post this crapfest! The very first half of the very first sentence had me headdesking:

    The Internet may be killing newspapers


    Then, this:

    “The show does not resemble the newsroom that I know,” says Tim Franklin, current editor of the Sun. “Reporters and editors have never worked harder than they do now and never have worked under more ethical guidelines than they do now. . . . To suggest there isn’t great work going on or that we have abandoned urban coverage is ridiculous.”

    Which, way to argue with a strawman nobody’s fucking stuffed. Jesus tits, nobody’s saying there isn’t great work being done. What’s being said is that management is screwing the pooch so aggressively the pooch is thinking of filing charges, but of course Franklin turns it back around to say “oh, he’s insulting the reporters,” like right-wing pundits accuse anti-war Democrats of smearing the trooops. What a dick.


  4. And not for nothing, but “ethical guidelines” don’t do jack shit if you’re constantly being shortchanged, screwed around with, punished for ambition and rewarded for laziness, and generally told that whatever you’re doing, it’s wrong. No ethical guidelines in the world will address the corporate greed and institutional stupidity that are, Internet entirely fucking aside, really killing newspapers.

    Let’s write a code of ethics! Then we’ll NEVER have to address the problem. Maybe later we can have a meeting, and get bagels.

    I am going to eat my own head.


  5. So many of these articles walk the same schizophrenic edge: “Simon is of course writing fiction, none of what he says about us/me/them is really true AND fuck Simon for telling those damn lies about us/me/them.”

    And we know all about that angry bullshit, don’t we? Like how liberal/progressive bloggers are so angry and shrill about pre-emptive wars being fought in their name, elections stolen under their noses, and their country’s Constitution being used as a doormat and anyway, even though some of what they say might be true, they just need to grow up and learn that their anger is hurting their cause. Angry like that?

    Nobody remembers Upton Sinclair for how gracefully he could turn a phrase or how believable his characters were. Partly because he couldn’t and they weren’t, but mostly because they remember how right he was about everything that was broken. DS will be remembered both for his craft and artistry AND for being right about what was broken, bleeding, and ignored wholesale.

    I’m offended. What do we have to do to get on the radar with Fimoculous.com?

    It sounds like 1) we’d have to piss DS off. Volunteers?
    2) devote a lot more time and energy to pursuit and degustation of the metacommentary.

    Don’t know about 1) but as soon as I find more time and energy to write more posts, screen comments for spoilers, and read all the trashtalk email we send back and forth to each other behind the scenes, then I pledge to become even more deeply committed to tracking down and digesting every bit of the extraneous “poly-linked blogfest tempest” out there.

    Unless, of course, another more interesting poly-linked blogfest comes along first… (leans back in chair, rubs chin) hmmm, remember last year after Edwards dumped Amanda and Melissa? Now THAT was a poly-linked blogfest …. or how about when Atrios cleaned his blogroll?….. oh, no, wait, wait, Althouse vs. Thers!

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Comments RSS