« Understanding Editorial Writing | Main | Remedy du Jour -- October 13, 2012 »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Anywhere But Here Is Better

Dave - you and Mendelson are like the little boy who point blank refused to believe the emperor was wearing new clothes, because he believed the evidence of his eyes.

The only difference is that it doesn't matter who calls their bluff, the corporations and the stock traders and the hedge funds and the media owners and the advertising agencies cannot and will not admit the naked truth - and the deluded mass audience will continue to be conned and relieved of their dollars. Consumerism is pure bullshit and always has been, and this current generation's attempted manipulation via (anti-) social media is merely the latest in a long line of hoodwinking.

It's not as if there aren't victims. The massive theft from small investors tricked by all the hype about social media performance into over-paying for Facebook shares is scandalous - and mostly because it hasn't been considered a big enough scandal to put Zuckerplonker and others in jail.

Oliver refuses to fucking "like" it.

Anywhere But Here Is Better

PS - I still belly-laugh over your monkeys-grooming description. :-)

Mike Roberts

One of the things that amazed me in the interview is that the syllable "shit" was beeped out every time and even the letters "SHIT" on the cover of the book was defocused, though it could still be read! I shake my head.


I'll share my personal take on social media. I use twitter religiously. I use it every day, tweeting many things. And I know there really isn't any good reason to do it, but I do it anyway. It's hard to explain why I do it, I mean, it is just there, you know? Anyway, have a nice night. Peace.


Sorry Dave, but it is patently obvious that anyone who lumps Farcebook and Twitter into the same category hasn't got a clue about either.

So you want me to stop tweeting links to your blog posts? Tough. I'll continue.


What is funny is that somehow Dali (Salvador), saw that in 1964 (sorry in French, not sure how it goes through translate) :
« L’éblouissement scatologique du sacré qui doit être la virgule pointilliste culminante de tout fête qui se respecte sera, de même que dans le passé, exprimé par le rite sacrificiel de l’archétype. De même qu’au temps de Léonard on procédait à l’éventrement du dragon des blessures duquel émergeaint des fleurs de lys, aujourd’hui on devra procéder à l’éventrement des machines cybernétiques les plus perfectionnées, les plus complexes, les plus coûteuses, les plus ruineuses pour la communauté. Elles seront sacrifiées pour le seul bon plaisir et divertissement des princes, recocufiant ainsi la mission sociale de ces formidables machines qui par leur pouvoir d’information instantanées et prodigieuses n’auront servi qu’à procurer un orgasme mondain et passager et à peine intellectuel à tous ceux venus se brûler à la flamme glaciale des feux de diamants cocufieurs de la fête supracybernétique. »


Phil: While they are not the same, they both are largely lacking in any value (beyond perceived) for the average person. Both largely rely on feeding feelings of self importance (ego) by imparting some since of importance to one's tweets, updates, etc. In reality, unless you are already some big name, nobody really cares and "social media" will do nothing to benefit you. It's okay for communication with your family and buddies, but so is just about any other form of communication. And most require actual interaction, rather than passive information dump.

Ben: A million years of evolution. Kind of like how scratching an itch feels good, even if it isn't very productive. Nothing to be ashamed of, but not the basis for an economic system, either.

The comments to this entry are closed.