Ah, remember the good old days? Back when Stephen Glass was busy plagiarizing for The New Republic? Back during the late 1990s, when the magazine actually had some readers? [Seriously, The New Republic today only has a weekly circulation of about 40,000 people, about what Daily Kos, which it hates so much, gets in an hour.] Back when there was no blogosphere to compete with award-winning reviewers and critics like Lee Siegel?Well, apparently, The New Republic and Mr. Siegel are deeply nostalgiac for those pre-internet days of glory. How else to explain the utterly bizarre, over-the-top, near-hysterical condemnation of the blogosphere by Siegel? Check this out (bolding added for emphasis):
It's a bizarre phenomenon, the blogosphere. It radiates democracy's dream of full participation but practices democracy's nightmare of populist crudity, character-assassination, and emotional stupefaction. It's hard fascism with a Microsoft face. It puts some people, like me, in the equally bizarre position of wanting desperately for Joe Lieberman to lose the Democratic primary to Ned Lamont so that true liberal values might, maybe, possibly prevail, yet at the same time wanting Lamont, the hero of the blogosphere, to lose so that the fascistic forces ranged against Lieberman might be defeated.
Oh. My. God. Somebody, get this guy a bottle of Valium, stat! The blogosphere as "hard fascism?" You mean, as opposed to "soft fascism?" You mean, like Hitler's Germany vs. Mussolini's Italy or something? And what's this about anyone who opposes the Great Joe Lieberman being "fascistic?" As I said earlier: Oh. My. God. Time for the men in white coats over at The New Republic. Also, is this like THE BIGGEST violation of Godwin's law ever or what? Ha.
This article is truly the gift that keeps on giving. I'm not kidding; there are so many (unintentionally) hilarious sentences in Siegel's New Republic screed that it's hard to know where to begin. How about, "The blogosphere's lack of concentration is even more dangerous than all its rage." Hahahahahahaha. Or, "...when bloggers do get the MSM to turn its head their way, the training wheels come off and they usually fall flat on their faces." Hehehehehehehehehe. :)
Boyohboyohboyohboyohboyohboy, that was a good belly laugh. Seriously, thanks Mr. Siegel! I haven't laughed so hard since I last picked up a copy of The New Republic off a magazine rack about 15 years ago. Sorry, cometothinkofit, I don't believe I actually picked UP that copy of the New Republic. And, come to think of it, I didn't laugh either. Oh no, nothing funny about The New Republic. That's Deadly Serious Journalism right there, the (reportedly) self-described "in-flight magazine of Air Force One." Bwahahahahah. Whoops. No Laughing Allowed. Not at The New Republic, Dying Magazine du Jour.
So, in all seriousness, and in conclusion: bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. I'd better stop now, before I bust a gut!
Why any real journalist would be scared of blogs I dunno. I mean really, most people still get their news from hard copy.
"Newsrooms shrunk by layoffs and battered by bloggers, are seeing their traditional audiences shrink. Daily newspapers lost 1.2 million readers in the six months that ended in March, down to 45.5 million. Online newspaper readership grew to 56 million."
We threaten him because we are eroding the monopoly of the pseudo intellectual elites who think it's their right to control public opinion from their ivory tower.
This sounds like "pull up the draw bridge and surround the moat, the barbarians are at the gates."
And so we are. Be very scared, Lee Siegel. The revolution will not be televised and small, stuffy magazines can no longer dictate to the masses what they should believe.