Archives
Monday, July 27, 2009
Celebritiii!
Captain
Ed, new star of the Internet.
WHOSE
WATERLOO? Yesterday I wrote Captain Ed at Hotair with some well
intentioned advice. He didn't respond, although he'd been quick to
respond previously. So I emailed him again to tell him I was
disappointed. That got a very quick
response:I get about two thousand emails a day,
and at least as many comments. Itry to read all the email and as many
comments as i can, but i cant respond to all of them. If that
disappoints you, i apologize, but the suggestion that i Ginsu read
comments on your blog because i don't get enough feedback is laughable.
Not so fast. Captain Celebrity: You're way off base on this:
"the suggestion that i Ginsu read
comments on your blog because i don't get enough feedback is laughable."
No such charge was made. What are you smoking? If I even understand what you were saying. Which I actually don't. I'm trying to be your friend, with no strings attached. Sorry if I assumed from previous correspondence that you read your email. I won't make that miistake again. But don't put words in my mouth, either.
I sent you an email, one man to another, with a request that you read my commenters. (No idea where 'ginsu' comes from.) Here's what I said about my post and its commenters
http://www.instapunk.com/archives/IPLArchive.php3?&SELECTWK=YES&SD=20090717&TD=20090724&PNK=1
I'm going to tell you a truth you may not like, but please read to the end anyway. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but to give you feedback I don't think you're getting elsewhere. I have enormous respect for you, and I'm not asking for any link with this, only your temporarily undivided attention.
I had the temerity, a day after you linked to Instapunk, to post an entry criticizing you for your analysis of Limbaugh's "Waterloo" comment. (I was going to add an audio file of Jagger's 'Memo from Turner' including the line "Bite the hand that feeds," but that line's been changed in the iTunes file. Sorry.) I believe you should read the post, of course, but much more importantly the comments it received.
I don't have nearly as many readers as you, obviously, but I interact extensively with my (unscreened) commenters and over the years they have risen to the challenge. (They're the best in the rightosphere, MUCH better than your selectively chosen ones.) They actually write their comments, knowing that if they're an ass I'll skewer them and if they're articulate (even if they disagree), they'll wind up as an actual Instapunk post. (Did this long before your Green Room btw). I believe it would benefit you to read all the comments on my Waterloo post. I'll give you two excerpts, one from my post and one (partial) from among several eloquent comments.
Me:
"As for the reduction in softball questions, surely that's a relative improvement, maybe akin to the change from whiffleball to slow-pitch Sunday softball. Nobody asked him why the American people should trust a third consecutive House bill none of the members had time to read before passing it. Nobody had the nerve to ask him the obvious followup to his saccharine assertion that he's in a hurry because people are losing their health insurance every day of the current recession: "uh, Mr. President, the 'reforms' in this bill won't even start taking effect till 2013; how does immediate passage of a slapped together mountain of federal power grabs and mandates whose unintended consequences won't be felt for years alleviate present hardships in any way?" Nobody had the guts to pursue him on his prior astonishing admission that he hasn't even bothered to read all the variations of ObamaCare that he insists be pulled together into a permanent government infrastructure revolution in just eight days."
Eduardo:
"The problem with the squish conservatives is that they misrepresent the brand, do half of the stuff liberal Democrats want to do to show how they can "reach across the aisle", and they still get demonized by libs for everything they do anyway. The only time they are spoken of favorably is when they are being useful idiots. However, put them in a race against a Democrat and all of those good feelings disappear pretty quick...just like happened with McCain.The current state of things reminds me of the movie Braveheart, where the lowly peasants march out, fight & die for their nobles, who are only playing the game to fill their own wallets."
Was it last week that Hotair bragged about being praised by Media Matters because you trashed the Birthers? Fine. The Birthers deserve to be trashed. But don't take credit for lib praise, even ironically, because it makes people believe that 'media legitimacy' is what you're really after.
I know we're (Instapunk and others like us) small fry to you. But one of the reasons we're small fry is that I am an aging, reclusive writer-type writer (http://www.instapunk.com/archives/InstaPunkArchiveV2.php3?a=1833; read post AND comments) who has no desire to make guest appearances on Fox News, aspire to podcast celebrity, or have a booth at CPAC. I don't solicit advertising, I don't ask for money (except in jest), and I never run for Internet "This or That of the Year." I'm not indicting you for wanting all these things. But your podcasts and Michelle's burgeoning Fox media career make you suspect with a much larger body of conservatives than you realize. My readers are not monolithic -- they're not kneejerk fundamentalists or one-issue ideologues or ignorant namecallers." They're the NEW Silent Majority. They're smart. well educated, definitely out there in the realm of real life combat against the Obamatopian state and they're getting pissed off.
I just want you to know that we're here, and my read is that you're slowly losing them. There are probably a thousand Instapunks for every Hotair, so don't dismiss the comments you read based on their number. Several of my commenters are also bloggers ( see Maggie, a.k.a. InfidelsParadise.com). For example, I always figured you a cut (sorry, two cuts) above Ace of Spades, but Hotair is referencing Ace more and more often these days. Why? Because he's a "Conservative Blogger of the Year"? Is a new media elite being born that uses SiteMeter ratings the way Nielsen uses overnights and Hollywood uses box office? If you fall into that trap, you WILL fall behind the curve.
You could tell me I've poisoned my own readership because I've never shrunk from blasting Ace for his careless bad writing, Protein WIsdom for his pompous pseudo-intellectualizing, InstaPundit for loving "Serenity" without understanding one word of it, and Allah for his clicheed reliance on "beta male," "Dude," and easy Christian-bashing headlines, but I ask you to accord me some credibility as the true amateur on the scene in the pursuit of liberty.
I've been at this at least as long as you, I have never asked dollar one for doing it, and if you can spare a few hours to browse my archives, I think you'll find that when I say I'm offering un-self-interested advice, I'm telling the truth.
http://www.instapunk.com/archives/IPLArchive.php3:
No such charge was made. What are you smoking? If I even understand what you were saying. Which I actually don't. I'm trying to be your friend, with no strings attached. Sorry if I assumed from previous correspondence that you read your email. I won't make that miistake again. But don't put words in my mouth, either.
I sent you an email, one man to another, with a request that you read my commenters. (No idea where 'ginsu' comes from.) Here's what I said about my post and its commenters
http://www.instapunk.com/archives/IPLArchive.php3?&SELECTWK=YES&SD=20090717&TD=20090724&PNK=1
I'm going to tell you a truth you may not like, but please read to the end anyway. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but to give you feedback I don't think you're getting elsewhere. I have enormous respect for you, and I'm not asking for any link with this, only your temporarily undivided attention.
I had the temerity, a day after you linked to Instapunk, to post an entry criticizing you for your analysis of Limbaugh's "Waterloo" comment. (I was going to add an audio file of Jagger's 'Memo from Turner' including the line "Bite the hand that feeds," but that line's been changed in the iTunes file. Sorry.) I believe you should read the post, of course, but much more importantly the comments it received.
I don't have nearly as many readers as you, obviously, but I interact extensively with my (unscreened) commenters and over the years they have risen to the challenge. (They're the best in the rightosphere, MUCH better than your selectively chosen ones.) They actually write their comments, knowing that if they're an ass I'll skewer them and if they're articulate (even if they disagree), they'll wind up as an actual Instapunk post. (Did this long before your Green Room btw). I believe it would benefit you to read all the comments on my Waterloo post. I'll give you two excerpts, one from my post and one (partial) from among several eloquent comments.
Me:
"As for the reduction in softball questions, surely that's a relative improvement, maybe akin to the change from whiffleball to slow-pitch Sunday softball. Nobody asked him why the American people should trust a third consecutive House bill none of the members had time to read before passing it. Nobody had the nerve to ask him the obvious followup to his saccharine assertion that he's in a hurry because people are losing their health insurance every day of the current recession: "uh, Mr. President, the 'reforms' in this bill won't even start taking effect till 2013; how does immediate passage of a slapped together mountain of federal power grabs and mandates whose unintended consequences won't be felt for years alleviate present hardships in any way?" Nobody had the guts to pursue him on his prior astonishing admission that he hasn't even bothered to read all the variations of ObamaCare that he insists be pulled together into a permanent government infrastructure revolution in just eight days."
Eduardo:
"The problem with the squish conservatives is that they misrepresent the brand, do half of the stuff liberal Democrats want to do to show how they can "reach across the aisle", and they still get demonized by libs for everything they do anyway. The only time they are spoken of favorably is when they are being useful idiots. However, put them in a race against a Democrat and all of those good feelings disappear pretty quick...just like happened with McCain.The current state of things reminds me of the movie Braveheart, where the lowly peasants march out, fight & die for their nobles, who are only playing the game to fill their own wallets."
Was it last week that Hotair bragged about being praised by Media Matters because you trashed the Birthers? Fine. The Birthers deserve to be trashed. But don't take credit for lib praise, even ironically, because it makes people believe that 'media legitimacy' is what you're really after.
I know we're (Instapunk and others like us) small fry to you. But one of the reasons we're small fry is that I am an aging, reclusive writer-type writer (http://www.instapunk.com/archives/InstaPunkArchiveV2.php3?a=1833; read post AND comments) who has no desire to make guest appearances on Fox News, aspire to podcast celebrity, or have a booth at CPAC. I don't solicit advertising, I don't ask for money (except in jest), and I never run for Internet "This or That of the Year." I'm not indicting you for wanting all these things. But your podcasts and Michelle's burgeoning Fox media career make you suspect with a much larger body of conservatives than you realize. My readers are not monolithic -- they're not kneejerk fundamentalists or one-issue ideologues or ignorant namecallers." They're the NEW Silent Majority. They're smart. well educated, definitely out there in the realm of real life combat against the Obamatopian state and they're getting pissed off.
I just want you to know that we're here, and my read is that you're slowly losing them. There are probably a thousand Instapunks for every Hotair, so don't dismiss the comments you read based on their number. Several of my commenters are also bloggers ( see Maggie, a.k.a. InfidelsParadise.com). For example, I always figured you a cut (sorry, two cuts) above Ace of Spades, but Hotair is referencing Ace more and more often these days. Why? Because he's a "Conservative Blogger of the Year"? Is a new media elite being born that uses SiteMeter ratings the way Nielsen uses overnights and Hollywood uses box office? If you fall into that trap, you WILL fall behind the curve.
You could tell me I've poisoned my own readership because I've never shrunk from blasting Ace for his careless bad writing, Protein WIsdom for his pompous pseudo-intellectualizing, InstaPundit for loving "Serenity" without understanding one word of it, and Allah for his clicheed reliance on "beta male," "Dude," and easy Christian-bashing headlines, but I ask you to accord me some credibility as the true amateur on the scene in the pursuit of liberty.
I've been at this at least as long as you, I have never asked dollar one for doing it, and if you can spare a few hours to browse my archives, I think you'll find that when I say I'm offering un-self-interested advice, I'm telling the truth.
http://www.instapunk.com/archives/IPLArchive.php3:
And even though he ignored the first email, he was quick again to respond to my riposte:
Lol! Ginsu comes from the fact that i'm
incompetent at sending e-mail from my t-mobile Dash, esp when walking
thru airports. I seriously have no idea what that meant.
Your e-mail assumed i didn't respond because i'm full of myself. That's pretty presumptuous, and i didn't appreciate it. Your previous e-mail suggested that i should read your cimment section for enlightenment, when i don't have time to read all of ours. I read your e-mails, so if you have something to say, just say it.
Your e-mail assumed i didn't respond because i'm full of myself. That's pretty presumptuous, and i didn't appreciate it. Your previous e-mail suggested that i should read your cimment section for enlightenment, when i don't have time to read all of ours. I read your e-mails, so if you have something to say, just say it.
So I said:
Okay. You're losing your audience. You
make excuses for Obama where there are no excuses to make. I was trying
to show you the difference between unselected intelligent commenters
and the obedient ones your own selection process generates. I wasn't
the only one who got washed away in your last "open" signup. Some of my
commenters, who used to like you, also tried to sign up to no avail.
They don't like you so much any more.
I do. But you're making it hard. The "I'm way too busy to talk to average people" approach may seem cool to you now. Remember, you jumped on me because I actually expected you to respond, as you HAD done several times before. Now you're too important, with your 2000 emails a day?
Disappointed, yeah. Won't bother you again. I apologize for wasting your time with the idea that I could pose mere commenters as a buttress for my own concerns about where your career was heading. Way too democratic.
Wish you well still, but look out for that fall off the charts,
InstaPunk
I do. But you're making it hard. The "I'm way too busy to talk to average people" approach may seem cool to you now. Remember, you jumped on me because I actually expected you to respond, as you HAD done several times before. Now you're too important, with your 2000 emails a day?
Disappointed, yeah. Won't bother you again. I apologize for wasting your time with the idea that I could pose mere commenters as a buttress for my own concerns about where your career was heading. Way too democratic.
Wish you well still, but look out for that fall off the charts,
InstaPunk
Ah well. See the AARP entry below. They're not on our side. They're on their own side. Never forget it. I think I've been about as polite as I need to be. What do you think?
