Archive for March 13th, 2008

Whatever, MSN and Newsweek. We’re Know What You’re Selling.

March 13, 2008

So, MSN has this “front page” story (it appeared on their portal page thingy) under the headline “Is user-generated ‘Net content at an end?” Hmm, usually, if there’s a trend appearing in Newsweek (let alone the friggin’ MSN), it’s probably already about a month old already. But I hadn’t heard about how user generated content (UGC) was dying. Maybe they were on to something?

Yeah, they were. That something was them trying to legitimize themselves as “journalists” and “experts” while pissing on Joe and Jane Blogger. Oh, heaven forbid someone advertise next to some loud mouth with a laptop and a fucking interweb connection! They’re aren’t seasoned, expert journalists like the fucking hacks hardworking writers on the Newsweek staff! Why in the hell would anyone in their right mind want to advertise next to that garbage? Surely, this spells then end of the average person posting their opinion and thank God for that!!!

Here’s the deal, MSN and Newsweek and the rest of you hack journalist news outlets out there. The thing about it is that public opinion will always be interesting to somebody. You people all went to some sort of “journalism school”, which I have heard that it’s basically someplace where they tell you how to sell your opinion tell your point of view. It’s like ad school, but a whole helluva’ lot less honest because at least advertisers hold no illusions about being objective. God bless the advertisers and marketers. And God bless the little loud mouths willing to put their unwashed hands to the keyboard to reach the electronic masses. Most people are getting smart enough to also realize that what they’re reading is opinion. I know it’s hard for you people, Newsweek and MSN, to understand we’re not a nation of complete fucking imbecils, though, we do keep reading and paying good money for your opinions news. So maybe you are on to something.

Furthermore, assholes, UGC is more than blogs and fucked up Wikipedia definitions. It’s someone buying a television or CD and leaving a recommendation about it on Amazon or even, I know this makes you people cringe in your red underwear, but the Wal-Mart! We have been, and always will be, creatures of free-thought and opinions. We will continue to share these opinions even after you poo-poo us and tell us that as rank amateurs we have no business sharing our thoughts, ideas and opinions in our blogs. We will keep these “ignorant”opinions flowing in forums and in the comments of other blogs. And the more compelling, interesting and well-written the ideas are expressed, the more of a chance they have to filter into the 1’s and 0’s of the interweb.

As this interweb thingy grows, we recognize and crave sources of honest, objective information. If not, About.com would have died a long time ago. And so would have Wikipedia, despite all their faults. By citing Knol, you are showing your complete ignorance of life and death on the interweb. Wait and see – if it doesn’t die the slow death of dis-interest and irrelevance, the spammers and marketers will take advantage of it and make it as reliable as the Wikipedia. However, just because we desire accuracy in our information by no means indicates we’re willing to trade-in our opinions and swallow yours.

We will not apologize or shame ourselves into thinking that we shouldn’t dare to voice our opinion because you people, with your ad space to sell and need to stay relevant, dare to shit on the “amateurs”. You people, Newsweek and MSN, should be ashamed of putting out that sort of propaganda. And you should be even more ashamed for thinking we wouldn’t see right through it.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.