Oh. Well, that changes things, then. We already knew about the weapons and financial support. It struck me as a little odd, especially after Biden came out and publicly supported Mubarak remaining in power.
Politics is messy business. Good on you for looking into this for idiots like me that read a sensationalist title and jump to conclusions.
“It seems to me, based on statements so far, that the US is focusing more on the post-Mubarak situation than on trying to save him. It is trying to engineer (and manipulate) a smooth transfer of power.”—Brian Whitaker (via soupsoup)
I’m hearing rumors that the Egyptian military has “joined” protesters? I should probably just Google it but I can’t find anything backing this up outside of reports that a handful of police+military dumped their guns in the Nile. Anybody?? This is some riveting stuff.
can’t decide if i want to keep using my “serious business” tag (http://bigopinion.tumblr.com/tagged/serious_business) as a default for my personal-professional blog or if i should defer to my posterous account (http://bigopinion.posterous.com) and reboot it with some new content. serious stuff would get posted there and would be bounced back to tumblr, joekposts and frivolous bullshit would solely reside on tumblr.
i guess i wonder because posterous is really easier to manage for longer articles and the layout looks infinitely better over there and my biggest worry (and anyone else’s that considers tumblr to be their primary self-publishing outlet) is that tumblr is becoming more and more of a non-character-limited twitter and as such is taken much less seriously
i think i know the answer to this question already but i guess if anyone has a thing to add to this then feel free
I recently sent a message to Ben Patton/Paddon/whateverI’mnotajournalist at gamejournos.tumblr.com, more commonly known as “Game Journalists Are Incompetent Fuckwits”, or GJAIF for short. Obviously.
Edit: QUEUE FAILED! What else is new?
For the uninitiated, ‘Game Journos’ is a watchdog of sorts that patrols the streets of Gaming Journalism (if it can be called that), bringing attention to the nasty little miscreants who divert our attention daily with the mindless ramblings of amphetamine-addicted pre-pubescent excogitators of filth, whose writings bear eerie similarities to the actions of these things.
Journalism itself has it foundations in enlightenment-era Europe, a concept known only to Gaming Jernoz (not ‘Game Journos’) through AssCreeBro, and was a culmination of the public’s rejection of Church-and-State-dominated elite control of information. The goal was to cross the lines of class in who had the right to access information, and today a strong, free press is considered a hallmark of entering First World Country status, as it provides the public with a powerful tool to voice their concerns and understand the world about them. Gaming Journalists do not understand this. At all.
My letter to Ben was shortly thus:
May I make a suggestion to draw even more distinction between your ‘then’ and ‘now’? I would suggest demonstrating the contrast between game reviews and other product/media reviews. (Videogames are unique in that they’re evaluated as much on the basis that they’re products as they are ‘art’; the closest similarity to this, I find, would be automobiles.) By fishing out the relative equivalents of, say, the film industry—Roger Ebert—and those within the automobile industry—AJAC (Automotive Journalist’s Association of Canada), you can demonstrate clearly where the exact problems and shortcomings are. This shouldn’t be very hard, as problems and shortcomings are pretty much what gaming jernalizm is entirely composed-of. This is due to more than just the demographics of appeal—auto mags have roughly the same target-audience—but is steeped in the sown seeds of a much larger problem. “Gaming journalism” is basically, right now, the Wild West. Lawless settlers, all moving in from god-knows-where, who are free to do whatever they want because it’s so goddamn sparse and unpopulated by those who uphold the moral-standard, are free to roam and do whatever the hell they want. What they need is law. Order. Codes. A Sheriff to shoot them in the fucking face when they get plastered, fuck their sister, and ride a pig covered in shit straight into the saloon. That saloon is the Internet, and there’s no Sheriff. If I gave enough of a shit about the Saloon (who’d invest in a place like that?), I’d police it myself, and I’d do it like I was the goddamn T-800 captured from Cyberdine and sent back in time To Protect Sar—err, the Saloon’s Integrity before it got covered in molested-pig shit. Hopefully you understood all this. You should, as I wrote it in Game Jernalizm format, so feel free to point out everything that’s incorrect about it. But we ALL need a higher standard, here. A PRINT standard. Whip out The Atlantic, or the NYT, or the Globe & Mail if you have to. Start showing them their shortcomings to established mediums.
If you can’t do that, then there’s no point.
There is always disillusionment when one enters the world of ‘journalism’.
It’s about truth, and the doe-eyed folks who come into it are often shocked by it—except, of course for, you guessed it—game journalists. They thrive of off it, for some reason, and I suspect it’s because they’re all base, soulless creatures like Sasquatch, Godzilla, King Long, Lochness [sic] [monster], Goblin, Ghoul, or a zombie with no conscience, to paraphrase Jay-Z. (You know what their achilles-heel is? Love- they don’t get enough of it! jk, of course. They deserve no love.)
Similarly, consistency and insight should be of concern as well, since those are especially lacking—although, to game journalists’ credit, they have consistently shown a lack of insight. The organisation should have a declaration available, as well, that details which Style Guide they refer to (eg. Canadian Press Style Guide, AP Style Guide—both are retard-proof, in fact, and only run you about $30).
The real problem, I think, facing gaming journalism today is this: gaming journalism. By that, I mean, the problem isn’t the product it covers or the demographic it ‘appeals’ to; there just doesn’t seem to be any self-improvement. Indeed, the amount of effort required to get such a lumpen mass of shit rolling would be enormous, since an object at rest prefers to stay at rest, and no-one, understandably, seems to want to touch that mass and overcome its enormous static inertia to get it rolling.
No self-respecting journalist would enter this circus-tent and emblazon the moniker “games journalist” on their card, given the current environment. If only the shit would just dry up and crumble, we might be able to sweep it away. But it doesn’t. It keeps getting pissed and spat on, keeping it moist, heavy, and held together.
So the shit has to improve itself. There’s simply no way to attract new investors (journalists, ‘talent’) to a company that is just filled with toxic assets (game journalists), unless the toxic assets themselves suddenly get very attractive, which just ain’t gonna happen on its’ own.
And that’s why I’m calling for a total, outright rejection of Wild West Game Journalism by all parties of influence who have even a modicum of common-sense and civic duty. It is your duty to denounce crap game journalism.
Outlets & Employers:
Provide them with the tools necessary to succeed—an education, and money, to start—and the support and commitment to quality reporting at all levels, and there can be real change. It will be good for your business, too, idiots.
But until then, game journalists will just be a bunch of 38-year-old drunk, prepubescent, incestuous Gremlins on meth that ride hogs covered in shit all throughout our respectable taverns.
today's the first time i've eaten on campus before and not felt horrible afterwards
usually i go to the campus subway and get a chicken sandwich or a blt or something, it ends up being stupid expensive because our subway isn’t supplied by the company proper or something.
so i went to the cafeteria not even five minutes away from my office for my lunch break instead, figuring i’d get something gross like an hours-old burger and gross fries or something. half of a chicken club wrap, some pita chips, a nice salad and a piece of some kinda cinnamon raisin upside-down cake later, i think i made a better choice than subway.
The ubiquitous “like” is currency for brands, and Facebook is giving them a new way to collect: an ad unit that shows up on the right-hand side of the screen it calls “sponsored stories.”
The settings that exist for users to control whose feeds they see and who sees their feed also apply to the sponsored stories. Users, however, will not be able to opt out of having their action turned into an ad and having that broadcast to their connections on Facebook.
An Ohio mother of two was sentenced to 10 days in jail and placed on three years probation after sending her kids to a school district in which they did not live. Kelly Williams-Bolar was sentenced by Judge…
Wow, is it a crime to be a Christian governor!? Apparently! Apparently Christians and especially Christian politicians have a role in this “diverse” nation: keeping their mouths shut. Sadly, most actually do that when they should be speaking out just as loud as everyone else. Besides, they have the constitutional right to speak out. Even politicians.
You snarky, ignorant fuck, you know as well as I do that if a Muslim politician had said about Islam what this Alabama assclown had said about Christianity, you’d be calling it a terrorist invasion and he’d probably be removed from office. You claim to be a Constitutionalist, fucking learn the Constitution. You claim to want to adhere to the founders’ vision for this country, you fucking learn what their vision is you insufferable piece of fecal matter.
Locke, writing his Letters Concerning Toleration (1689–92) in the aftermath of the European wars of religion, formulated a classic reasoning for religious tolerance. Three arguments are central: (1) Earthly judges, the state in particular, and human beings generally, cannot dependably evaluate the truth-claims of competing religious standpoints; (2) Even if they could, enforcing a single “true religion” would not have the desired effect, because belief cannot be compelled by violence; (3) Coercing religious uniformity would lead to more social disorder than allowing diversity.
I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.
[I]t may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the line of separation between the rights of religion and the Civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions and doubts on unessential points. The tendency to unsurpastion on one side or the other, or to a corrupting coalition or alliance between them, will be best guarded agst. by an entire abstinence of the Gov’t from interfence in any way whatsoever, beyond the necessity of preserving public order, and protecting each sect agst. trespasses on its legal rights by others.
…and, for good measure, a non-founding father who you claim to support:
We establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief. Nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate. All are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a faith or not, and those who believe are free and should be free, to speak of and act on their belief. At the same time as our constitution prohibits state religion, establishment of it protects the free exercise of all religions. And walking this fine line requires government to be strictly neutral.
So quit your bellyaching and get on board or get your Christo-fascism the fuck out of my free country.
reblogging for commentary.
love this. though it could have a better tone, it’s a good view supported by solid facts. would reblog again; a++++++
Don’t just follow this blog for Kaine. I know that a lot of people love her because she is unique and interesting. Let me tell you something…the entire game is interesting. It’s really a hidden treasure. I would love if you guys could go out and buy the actual game. Some of you are selfish and don’t wanna get it because it doesn’t have “young, hot Nier”. I can tell you that I’ve played both NieR and the Japanese NieR Replicant, and I liked NieR a hell of a lot better because the relationships with the characters fit better with daddy Nier. He really grows on you while you’re playing the game. Every character, sound, song, story, encounter in this game will engrave itself into your mind. Cavia has created a mature, fantastic, brilliant, breathtaking game that unfortunately got pushed under the radar. Please, PLEASE go out and buy this game. I beg of you. I want you all to experience what I did. I want you all to feel the emotions this game produces. I want you all to love NieR.
Giving this game its due attention. Anyone with a PS3 or a 360 that’s looking for a solid game with a good story owes it to themselves to try Nier.
I read your post. Really liked it. I worked as a sub-editor for 5 years, some, but not all are real anal about the whole subject...
The only thing that worries me is children (I'm in the UK) will be taught sloppily. And one cannot bend or break the rules effectively until one has mastered them.
We could just descend back into 16th century style writing: spell words how they sound and write vernacular, but then I guess your little essay makes Swift and the good Dr Johnson turn in their graves.
I totally agree — effective and proper teaching is necessary, and I’m certainly not arguing for doing away with it. Grammar isn’t any sort of “evil” by traditional black-and-white measure, but I guess for the sake of my argument it could be best described as a necessary evil.
I don’t mean to sound so dismissive of grammar mistakes as to lessen the overall importance of precisely-taught grammar overall. On the contrary, as a US citizen having worked and learned in the typical system, grammar needs to be given more priority than it receives now.
I guess my point there was that there’s a rather large group that prides themselves in their own mastery of grammar as though it’s an art a rare few are meant to succeed in. In a perfect world, correct grammar would be mandatory not for the sake of further justifying this kind of us-versus-them brand of superiority, but rather to guarantee every person the fair and equal opportunity to exchange ideas and information with the same linguistic grace and precision as the next — including the effective bending or breaking of said rules, given the proper purpose and context.
sadly that’s more or less a pipe dream, but i guess in lieu of such a gramatically-pristine utopia, those with exceptional grammar skills can endeavor to take everyone seriously regardless of their grammatical abilities, instead of berate and harass offenders into feeling stupid. correcting grammar doesn’t necessarily have to be done with corporal punishment, and i guess i’m lumping verbal harassment (edit: and superiority complexes!) in with that.
i suppose it’s worth mentioning that the “Grammar Nazi” type I’m thinking of largely appears in text-based situations. spoken word is an entirely different animal, but when working with internet-based communications or writing and editing situations, where all you’re given of a person’s grammatical competence is what they can write, there’s a sort of detachment from the person as an actual individual — as though harsh, spiteful criticism is justified because the text by itself is somehow detached from the person that produced it.
i was recently subjected to a pretty embarassing example of grammar nazi-ism thanks to the wonders of facebook, to the point that i ended up blocking a dearly beloved friend from appearing in my feed.
i don’t get the hate people have against others based on their poor use of grammar. if you want my opinion, self-proclaimed “grammar nazis” are self-important little shits that deserve a swift kick off of their high horse. and granted they are usually young and/or socially awkward and i feel juvenile even addressing this, someone ought to say something smart about it in the interests of equality.
i guess because having studied grammar as a vehicle of thought and as a subject of education; after studying its use in slang, colloquialism, and vernacular, even if someone uses slightly (or in some cases heavily) incorrect grammar, the transmission of the idea put forth in words is still more or less decipherable. intelligent ideas can hide behind unorthodox, “incorrect” grammar. one’s grasp of higher-level thought processes is not and should never be associated with their thorough understanding of a language’s complexities and subtle mechanisms or lack thereof. we as readers, interpreters, and communicators, when presented with a rather difficult grammatical situation, still understand the underlying message behind it. the communication facilities of our brains can put two and two together to make the central idea more easily interpreted in conscious thought, even if our superego wrinkles its nose at the slight imperfections in its delivery. “grammar nazi” types revel in deferring to the superego and use their ability to scope out and identify others’ grammatical mistakes as a prop to make themselves feel superior; often ignorant or blind of their own mistakes, slip-ups and embarrassing tendencies in favor of constantly patting themselves on the back at the expense of others.
when “The Grammar Nazi” refers to the context of an offender’s remarks before berating them on their grammar, they’re doing a few things wrong:
1) they’re confirming that they actually understand the offender in question while at the same time harassing them for being unintelligible
2) they’re flaunting their familiarity with grammatical rules, structures, and standards that more than likely do not extend beyond what they learned in second grade as if they are special flowers and their second-grade language comprehension skills are superior to others’. (second grade is interchangeable with high school here i suppose)
3) they’re being a hateful, terrible, trivial person by stooping so low as to take issue with someone’s use of what is probably common vernacular as a reason to hate the person, as if their High English is superior to common, plebeian english. self-importance, classism, and intolerance all rolled into one. not to mention, of course, openly wearing the Nazi namesake like a badge of honor.
now i know that because i roll with the reading and writing crowd i might get some frowny faces cause of this, and there may still be some people that pride themselves in being The Grammar Nazi. but really, literary types: let’s put that behind us. it’s 2011. surely you have some better way to describe yourself. “my grammar and communication skills are so superior to others’ that i constantly hate people i’ve never hardly met before because of theirs” is not attractive, nor is it funny anymore. if you can’t find a better reason to dislike someone, maybe you shouldn’t dislike them?
also not to brag but i could probably run circles around any “Grammar Nazi” any day of the week but i choose not to because i have better things to do with my life than hate, and anyone who can’t say that for themselves is a sad, disappointing person
Let’s not lower our standards to the point where we think Keith Olbermann is the great liberal hope to counter what amounts to the lowest common denominator of political discourse.
We don’t need Beck, Hannity, Olbermann, or Maddow. We need something completely different from all of these partisan hacks. Our standards are laughably low.
We need someone who simply looks at the issues and presents a case for how we can solve them. Every second in my day wasted listening to these talking heads argue with each other is a second lost trying to improve our collective quality of life.
The end of the current disaster of cable news noise chamber discourse cannot come quick enough.
Frances Fox Piven is a distinguished professor of political science and sociology at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York.
At 78, she has taught several generations of students about how and why poor people don’t get a fair shake in the United States and how to increase their organizational power and encourage voter registration.
[Beck] accused her of being “an enemy of the Constitution” and an advocate of “violent revolution” and has listed her as one of the nine most dangerous people in the world.
Since he started to air these attacks, Piven has begun receiving death threats.
As a student I totally agree with this — the width and scope of what goes into a novel is a mystery to me, as I’ve been taught almost exclusively about exposition based on short stories (and now 10-minute plays). But where does literary study fit into all this? Does studying lengthy classics not play into novel-writing education? Does the problem of not knowing how to construct a novel also lie with general literary studies, and the choice to read excerpts from older works in lieu of the actual, complete work? Do we gleam the same insight into The Divine Comedy by only studying The Inferno?
I recently told a professor I didn’t like a play we read — Angels in America — because we only read Part 1. I liked what we had read, but I didn’t like that we only studied part 1 because I felt shortchanged: it felt incomplete and irresponsible to draw assumptions about the work after only reading half of it (or as many familiar with the play know, part 1 is just a small portion compared to part 2’s seven hour length). After thinking about it, though, isn’t that how most literary studies classes operate?
I don’t know why it took so long for manufacturers to create something like this, but Fastmac has finally found a way to free up your power outlets while still charging any of your devices that connect via USB (tablet, phone, blackberry, flipcam, etc.). Genius. -Matt
You may be right; you may have a point — maybe Republicans are lying about healthcare reform. But if your point is to say that they’re lying, why do you have to go Nazi on them? You know, there’s already a perfectly good word for liars: liars. Lying doesn’t make you a Nazi. Lying isn’t even what made the Nazis Nazis. People at Auschwitz weren’t upset ‘cause they were lied to. ‘You said there’d be a pool!’
You know, I shouldn’t have to explain this, but sharing one attribute with Nazis doesn’t make you one. The Nazis marched with great precision — that doesn’t mean [this marching band] are Nazis! The Nazis were notorious for brown shirts. That doesn’t make [this UPS employee] a Nazi!
…We have been having a conversation about civility and honest discourse because a madman went on a shooting rampage. But the measure of our discourse is not the effect that it has on a madman; the measure is what effect is should have on a rational person. So let’s take you at your word: if you literally believe the Republicans are using tactics that, unchecked, could lead to the Holocaust, where does it leave a rational person?
So call out the lies. Say they’re being douchebags and assholes, or assbags and doucheholes, ‘cause the rational mind understands that, for the most part, those titles are situational and often temporary. ‘Cause when it comes to civility and honest discourse, I have no problem with coarseness: what I have a problem with is people using hyperbole to induce an irrational fear of a particular group with the goal of ultimately reducing their numbers. Hey, you know who else did that?
Ever the classy, reputable source of news that they are, Gawker’s gangly pop culture arm Valleywag tossed this out. I don’t want to sound like a gay basher but Valleywag is of course a gossip engine, so they have all these little details.
After Cook was profiled as a “lifelong bachelor” and “intensely private” elsewhere, we wondered if he might be gay. We’ve since heard from two well-placed sources that this is indeed the case, and it sounds like Cook’s sexual orientation has been the topic of at least some discussion within the company.
So, he’s not openly gay, and there isn’t any kind of concrete proof outside of “what we heard from our people,” but I guess hearsay is good enough to justify pronouncing “THIS GUY’S A HOMO!!” to the world directly in the title.
Your daily reminder that Gawker is actually a massive crock of worn-out shit preying on the lowest common denominator with shock titles and purposefully edgy content to capitalize on ad revenues.