Wow. That is going to make me laugh every time I think about it. What a great role model she is. Hopefully all those 14 year olds begging for Luis Vuitton bags from their parents will begin to realize how not cool it is to be like her.
Of course, she will probably make a fortune selling some book about her experience in jail….
First of all, you do realize the CNN Breaking News alerts post automatically, right? So if your apparently sarcastic tone is an attempt to charge me with hypocrisy, you’re off-base.
Secondly, I never said anything about “websites that report on the misfortunes of others,” I criticized websites that take pleasure in the misfortunes of others. There’s a HUGE difference. And this breaking-news alert is the former, not the latter, which means it’s entirely unobjectionable under the criteria set by my earlier post.
Thirdly, I consider spending 15 days in jail to be distinctly different from the sort of “misfortune” that’s truly life-changing, like losing a job and having your career prospects severely damaged (or, far worse obviously, losing your freedom, or your life). It’s the life-changing misfortunes where I really tend to feel bad for the person, even where the misfortune is in some way “deserved” or “just.” But minor, transitory misfortunes are far less worthy of sympathy. Something that’s going to be over in 15 days should be a blip on the radar screen of a well-adjusted person’s life. (Whether Paris Hilton is a “well-adjusted person” is a separate, debatable issue.)
And finally, notwithstanding the above, I don’t feel any particular joy in Paris’s misfortune. I might find it funny, but that’s different from being happy that it occurred. I’m neither happy nor unhappy about it. I find it fairly inconsequential.
My understanding was that “misfortune” is a synonym for “bad luck”. Paris Hilton is going to jail because she made a conscious decision to violate her probation. That’s consequence, not misfortune.
I fail to see the distinction here between “finding it funny” and “taking pleasure” in it. I also don’t see the distinction between your allowing an automatic post about someone’s DUI experience and Ciolli allowing others to make similar posts.
I’m not accusing you of being an outright hypocrite. I’m also not defending Ciolli for allowing threats, racism, and untrue statements about anyone. I suppose I’m just pointing out that there’s a fine line between what you call “creating a site known for character assassination” and “news” when what comprises the character assassination is factual and disseminated to an audience that wants to know. Your and CNN’s nationwide audience wants to know about Paris Hilton going to jail. Cioll’s narrower audience wants to know the same kind of dirt about law students at top ranked law schools.
“Your and CNN’s nationwide audience wants to know about Paris Hilton going to jail. Cioll’s narrower audience wants to know the same kind of dirt about law students at top ranked law schools.”
Come on everybody, you know the words — sing along!
Anon @ 9:09, do you see the distinction between 1) posts on a message board that actively take pleasure, mock, and otherwise make fun of the sex lives, career fortunes, and other personal, private details about individual law students who are not public figures, and 2) a breaking-news post from CNN that simply announces (without commenting on) the fact that a major celebrity has been sentenced to jail?
If not, then apparently you are incapable of recognizing head-smackingly obvious distinctions.
Sorry, but no, it’s NOT a “fine line.” Not in this case. Not at all. There may be other cases where I’ve blogged something that you could make this argument about, and have it be coherent and plausible. In fact, I’m sure there probably are. But this is not one of those cases. Not even close.
P.S. But I appreciate you “not accusing [me] of being an outright hypocrite.” That’s very magnanimous of you. For my part, I’m not accusing you of being an outright moron.
P.P.S. Isn’t the notion that “what comprises the character assassination is factual” rather hotly in dispute in the AutoAdmit case? Or do you have some inside information that indicates those female law students really do have sexually transmitted diseases (etc. etc.)?
If all AutoAdmit did was “report” on “news” of publicly available, verifiable, non-private facts — like someone being sentenced in a court of law, for example — I wouldn’t have any problem with it, or at least, I’d have a lot less of a problem with it than I do now.
And on the other hand, if my site went on an endless crusade with numerous posts, one after another after another, devoted to bashing Paris Hilton and calling her a drunken, idiotic slutbag whoreface — nevermind that those things might be true — I’m pretty sure the overzealous, repetitive, mean-spirited attacks would turn off a sizeable portion of my readership… myself included. I would have a problem with my own site if I did that, just as I have a problem with AutoAdmit when they do it (to private figures, no less), even in those cases where the factual assertions in question are true.
But it’s not “character assassination” to simply report the facts of what happened, once. It’s not even in the same ballpark. That’s just retardedly wrong. Seriously, concede the point and try again when your argument actually makes sense. Like I said, I’m sure there are posts in my archives that you could use to make your point, but this is just emphatically not one of them.
I fail to see the distinction here between “finding it funny†and “taking pleasure†in it.
Perhaps there isn’t, but Brendan used the later term when he described behavior where people took action directly because of it. In this case, he simply finds something funny that also happened to auto-post. The fact that he found it funny and the fact that it got posted are unrelated, where as the “fine” folks at Xolo…oh forget it i don’t even want to look up the spelling, that other website, in his view actively post what they do in because they take pleasure in doing so.
Well, this is more newsworthy than David Hasselhoff being drunk. The amount of time the news media spent showing the same clip over and over of a guy who was in his own house and who wasn’t breaking the law or hurting anyone else is truly sad. The only thing more pathetic than Hasselhoff (or, let’s be real, his wife or whoever else sent the video to the media) is the media itself.
I find Paris’ defense–I didn’t know I was breaking the law because I just do what people tell me to–sickening and frankly frightening. Even more bizarre was her mother’s reaction which seemed to be “how dare they prosecute my daughter for breaking the law?” It would be different if they went after Hilton for a single violation of her suspended liscense, though they would be within their rights to prosecute that, but she was issued like three or four tickets for driving on a suspended liscense. It’s ridiculous.
This is an archived post. Comments are closed.
To leave a comment on a newer post, please visit the homepage.
May 4th, 2007 at 8:02:38 pm
That’s hot.
May 4th, 2007 at 8:14:50 pm
Good.
May 4th, 2007 at 8:24:47 pm
The fact that CNN is devoting time and resources to reporting on a waste of space like Paris Hilton is outrageous.
May 4th, 2007 at 8:39:18 pm
THAT’s breaking news???
May 4th, 2007 at 8:44:09 pm
just to clarify, my last comment was aimed at CNN, and not brandan…
May 4th, 2007 at 9:09:32 pm
So Brendan, remind me again what your thoughts are of websites that report on the misfortunes of others?
May 4th, 2007 at 9:11:24 pm
Wow. That is going to make me laugh every time I think about it. What a great role model she is. Hopefully all those 14 year olds begging for Luis Vuitton bags from their parents will begin to realize how not cool it is to be like her.
Of course, she will probably make a fortune selling some book about her experience in jail….
May 4th, 2007 at 10:30:38 pm
Anon @ 9:09:
First of all, you do realize the CNN Breaking News alerts post automatically, right? So if your apparently sarcastic tone is an attempt to charge me with hypocrisy, you’re off-base.
Secondly, I never said anything about “websites that report on the misfortunes of others,” I criticized websites that take pleasure in the misfortunes of others. There’s a HUGE difference. And this breaking-news alert is the former, not the latter, which means it’s entirely unobjectionable under the criteria set by my earlier post.
Thirdly, I consider spending 15 days in jail to be distinctly different from the sort of “misfortune” that’s truly life-changing, like losing a job and having your career prospects severely damaged (or, far worse obviously, losing your freedom, or your life). It’s the life-changing misfortunes where I really tend to feel bad for the person, even where the misfortune is in some way “deserved” or “just.” But minor, transitory misfortunes are far less worthy of sympathy. Something that’s going to be over in 15 days should be a blip on the radar screen of a well-adjusted person’s life. (Whether Paris Hilton is a “well-adjusted person” is a separate, debatable issue.)
And finally, notwithstanding the above, I don’t feel any particular joy in Paris’s misfortune. I might find it funny, but that’s different from being happy that it occurred. I’m neither happy nor unhappy about it. I find it fairly inconsequential.
May 4th, 2007 at 10:51:41 pm
My understanding was that “misfortune” is a synonym for “bad luck”. Paris Hilton is going to jail because she made a conscious decision to violate her probation. That’s consequence, not misfortune.
May 4th, 2007 at 11:20:49 pm
I fail to see the distinction here between “finding it funny” and “taking pleasure” in it. I also don’t see the distinction between your allowing an automatic post about someone’s DUI experience and Ciolli allowing others to make similar posts.
I’m not accusing you of being an outright hypocrite. I’m also not defending Ciolli for allowing threats, racism, and untrue statements about anyone. I suppose I’m just pointing out that there’s a fine line between what you call “creating a site known for character assassination” and “news” when what comprises the character assassination is factual and disseminated to an audience that wants to know. Your and CNN’s nationwide audience wants to know about Paris Hilton going to jail. Cioll’s narrower audience wants to know the same kind of dirt about law students at top ranked law schools.
May 4th, 2007 at 11:34:17 pm
“Your and CNN’s nationwide audience wants to know about Paris Hilton going to jail. Cioll’s narrower audience wants to know the same kind of dirt about law students at top ranked law schools.”
Come on everybody, you know the words — sing along!
One of these things is not like the other,
One of these things just doesn’t belong,
Can you tell which thing is not like the other
By the time I finish my song?
(HINT: “public figure”)
May 4th, 2007 at 11:34:46 pm
Anon @ 9:09, do you see the distinction between 1) posts on a message board that actively take pleasure, mock, and otherwise make fun of the sex lives, career fortunes, and other personal, private details about individual law students who are not public figures, and 2) a breaking-news post from CNN that simply announces (without commenting on) the fact that a major celebrity has been sentenced to jail?
If not, then apparently you are incapable of recognizing head-smackingly obvious distinctions.
Sorry, but no, it’s NOT a “fine line.” Not in this case. Not at all. There may be other cases where I’ve blogged something that you could make this argument about, and have it be coherent and plausible. In fact, I’m sure there probably are. But this is not one of those cases. Not even close.
May 4th, 2007 at 11:36:31 pm
P.S. But I appreciate you “not accusing [me] of being an outright hypocrite.” That’s very magnanimous of you. For my part, I’m not accusing you of being an outright moron.
May 4th, 2007 at 11:41:13 pm
P.P.S. Isn’t the notion that “what comprises the character assassination is factual” rather hotly in dispute in the AutoAdmit case? Or do you have some inside information that indicates those female law students really do have sexually transmitted diseases (etc. etc.)?
If all AutoAdmit did was “report” on “news” of publicly available, verifiable, non-private facts — like someone being sentenced in a court of law, for example — I wouldn’t have any problem with it, or at least, I’d have a lot less of a problem with it than I do now.
And on the other hand, if my site went on an endless crusade with numerous posts, one after another after another, devoted to bashing Paris Hilton and calling her a drunken, idiotic slutbag whoreface — nevermind that those things might be true — I’m pretty sure the overzealous, repetitive, mean-spirited attacks would turn off a sizeable portion of my readership… myself included. I would have a problem with my own site if I did that, just as I have a problem with AutoAdmit when they do it (to private figures, no less), even in those cases where the factual assertions in question are true.
But it’s not “character assassination” to simply report the facts of what happened, once. It’s not even in the same ballpark. That’s just retardedly wrong. Seriously, concede the point and try again when your argument actually makes sense. Like I said, I’m sure there are posts in my archives that you could use to make your point, but this is just emphatically not one of them.
May 4th, 2007 at 11:49:23 pm
All this does is raise her celebrity … so I’m not sure this is a good thing. That said, I’d love to see a reality show about her time in prison.
May 5th, 2007 at 12:48:12 am
I fail to see the distinction here between “finding it funny†and “taking pleasure†in it.
Perhaps there isn’t, but Brendan used the later term when he described behavior where people took action directly because of it. In this case, he simply finds something funny that also happened to auto-post. The fact that he found it funny and the fact that it got posted are unrelated, where as the “fine” folks at Xolo…oh forget it i don’t even want to look up the spelling, that other website, in his view actively post what they do in because they take pleasure in doing so.
May 5th, 2007 at 12:51:52 am
Brendan, the more ubiquitous your blog becomes, the more idiots it attracts. Oh the price of fame!
May 5th, 2007 at 8:28:34 am
Well, this is more newsworthy than David Hasselhoff being drunk. The amount of time the news media spent showing the same clip over and over of a guy who was in his own house and who wasn’t breaking the law or hurting anyone else is truly sad. The only thing more pathetic than Hasselhoff (or, let’s be real, his wife or whoever else sent the video to the media) is the media itself.
May 5th, 2007 at 11:44:49 am
Heh, whoreface. Heh
May 5th, 2007 at 11:07:16 pm
I find Paris’ defense–I didn’t know I was breaking the law because I just do what people tell me to–sickening and frankly frightening. Even more bizarre was her mother’s reaction which seemed to be “how dare they prosecute my daughter for breaking the law?” It would be different if they went after Hilton for a single violation of her suspended liscense, though they would be within their rights to prosecute that, but she was issued like three or four tickets for driving on a suspended liscense. It’s ridiculous.