Showing posts with label TRUE/SLANT. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TRUE/SLANT. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

In which my journalistic integrity is questioned

"Which is where we differ. Few print writers want to assign, edit or read the stuff [Susannah Breslin] covered. I didn’t find either of those qualities in her work. You did. But it was certainly sexy and flashy and got lots of angry comments, so it’s a great fit for the web. Does its popularity in that medium — where the loudest and most shocking win — make her, de facto, a great journalist? Not in my book." -- Caitlin Kelly

***


The first time I was on TV, I was a guest on "Politically Incorrect." Basically, it was a set up. At the time, I was the co-editor of an online magazine that had the word "postfeminist" in the title.

Sitting directly across from me on the stage was Erica Jong, whose Fear of Flying had long ago turned her into something of a feminist icon.

I knew what the deal was. This was a show. The intention was a cat fight. And a cat fight is what they got.

For the next 22 minutes, I insulted Jong, suggesting her feminist ideologies were woefully outdated, sad, and boring. Jong insulted me, positing me as an uppity idiot who was too naive to know anything of the world, a fool who had no appreciation for what her generation had supposedly done for me.

After the show, us four guests -- Dylan McDermott and Rita Rudner had spent the majority of the show gawking as Jong and I had gone at it -- walked off the set.

Backstage, I turned to Jong, who sneered at me with cool disdain. I smiled politely. She understood this was a show, right? Jong looked the other way, enraged.

It was no show to her. This was her life. And it was all too clear to her that she had been replaced.

***


Yesterday, Mark Dery wrote a wonderful post over on True/Slant: "Goodbye to All This: On Leaving True/Slant." In fact, I was going to write about that post on my blog today.

If you've not been following the True/Slant story as of late, the site was bought by Forbes Media a few months ago, and as of August 1st is no longer publishing.

Some of the True/Slant writers will be heading over to Forbes.com. Some will not.

Dery's farewell post was, as his stuff always is, complicated, brilliant, and too smart. Too smart for the internet, too smart for me, too smart for you. That's how Dery is.

I've written about his work here before. I enjoy it most not for his insights, his ability to be intoxicatingly complex and hilariously insightful at the same time, nor the way his prose dazzles on the screen like Nurevey danced on the stage, but because I always feel embarrassed when I read him. He's my own personal homo sacer, whom I can neither kill nor usurp.

This is why I like him: because he is better than I am.

***


What is Dery's post about? Well, it's about the current state of journalism. Although, it's as much about the current state of journalism as Penelope Trunk's blog is about career advice.

(Which is to say, Not much, and, Thank god.)

In a nutshell, the post is a pyre upon which he tosses journalism (dead), books (antiquated), magazines (over), and, of course, himself, for no man who kills something does not love it, too, love it enough to bother to kill it, for every man who kills knows when he does so that he kills not the Other, but himself in effigy.
"I was a desultory True/Slant-er, posting infrequently and at inordinate length, on topics that were sometimes topical but often not. I’m not immune to newsiness, but refuse to be stampeded trendward, along with the rest of the goggle-eyed media herd."
Dery's post in two words: fuck you. Or, more properly put: fuck you, because I love you.

To wit: Fuck your internet. Fuck your SEO. Fuck your page views. Fuck your what you're supposed to do. Fuck your flaccidity. Fuck your boredom. Fuck your ease. Fuck your dysentery of the mind. Fuck your unthinking idleness. Fuck your pablum posts. Fuck your verticals. Fuck your listicles. Fuck your PowerPoint presentations. Fuck your shit.

After I read it, I thought, oh, I know what I'll say about it on my blog. I'll say, Isn't it funny the best post on True/Slant was published after the site stopped publishing?

(Surely, the greatest post ever written on the internet will be the one written after the internet is gone.)

Then I read the comments.

***


Before my father left my mother, he would get home from work, and I would try and get him to wrestle me on the living room floor. I have no idea why. Invariably, these sessions would end up with me crying. I don't remember why that is the case. Years later, it occurred to me that I was entirely very likely attempting to get my father -- who had been raised by an Irish Catholic alcoholic father in the bowels of Brooklyn, and so, therefore, was not exactly what one would call physically demonstrative -- to touch me. That he was a writer, and that I became a writer who spent most of her so-called writing career wrestling with the act of writing, was to become all too obvious for far too many years.

***


When I began posting on my True/Slant blog, Off the Record, earlier this year, my posts would not infrequently, shortly after publication, show that a comment had been added by another True/Slant blogger, Caitlin Kelly.

I don't know Kelly. Her comments were sometimes if not oftentimes in disagreement with something that I had written. Occasionally, I read Kelly's blog.

So, I suppose I was not entirely surprised to see that Kelly had posted a series of comments to Dery's post that referenced me. In his post, he had mentioned me in flattering, surely undeserved ways as someone who wrote things that weren't, well, shit.

Among various other points, Kelly seemed to take issue with this idea. She argued that, no, my writing was shit, the worst kind of shit, really, because it wasn't even authentic shit, but manufactured shit, shit prose pumped out in hot pursuit of page views. It wasn't even good shit. It was shitty shit.

Not only, she seemed to be suggesting, was I shitty a blogger, but I was a shitty writer, and not even a shitty journalist, but not a journalist at all, as Dery had had the gall to posit. I was a shitty not-journalist.

"'Content' is just a pile 'o [sic] words produced in some order," she scolded him. "It does not demand thoughtful or insightful ideas. And, while you laud Breslin, much of her work focused on incendiary topics like porn — which attracted, as we all know it would, many prurient eyeballs."

***


In April of 2009, I spent a week in Los Angeles working on a story about the adult movie industry and the recession. I wrote it for a publication that I was writing for at the time.

I came home and wrote a 10,000-word essay about what I had done, and what I had seen, and what I thought about all those things. I submitted the story to the editor. The editor wanted to change it in ways that I believed would work counter to the truth of the essay. I withdrew the piece from the publication. I published it myself.

1. This is what is called "operating at a loss."

2. This is what could be called journalism.

3. This could be dismissed.

4. This (the story) could be misconstrued as a bid for page views (of which there have been over 1 million, but, hey, who's counting?).

5. This is the stuff of which vitamin soup is made.

6. This is what I'm trying to say:

7. Fuck you.

***


The other day, somebody wrote me an email. A woman. Someone I know only lately, and only a little bit. But I have the impression that she is very tough. Not tough. But solid. Solid like an Oak. Like an Oak in a hurricane.

This is what her email said:
Yeah, you are in there.

You do.

As you say and I concur, Folks just watch, they stare, they don't get moving.

Yeah, you engage. Keep doing that. It's good. And don't ever stop doing that.
***


A long time ago, I was on the set of a really crazy movie where a lot of really crazy things happened.

Driving home in the darkness, I was in a very strange state of mind. Years later, I would understand that there was a word for this state of mind, and the word was "dissociation." But that was later. Too late, really. But that's another story for another time.

I was driving out of the Valley, over the Cahuenga Pass, going back to the shitty little one-bedroom apartment I had on a boulevard named for the Happy People.

Well, at least I had balls. (That's what I told myself.)

At least I had something to say.

At least I wasn't a crashing bore.

At least I didn't waste my time on submitting pitches to the Times, on whining about my page views or lack thereof, on writing throw away comments tacked onto blog posts that I could never hope to write because I lacked the insight, the talent, and, perhaps most importantly, the balls to write them myself -- and, worst of all, I knew it.

Thursday, July 29, 2010

True/Slant signs off


In case you haven't heard, True/Slant, where I've been blogging at Off the Record since more or less the beginning of the year, is no more. The site was acquired by Forbes Media a few months ago, and the site will cease operations as of the end of this month.

As for whether or not I will be blogging for Forbes Media in the future, I am not at liberty to say at this time. Infer from that what you will.

The best part about writing for True/Slant? Having an editor who didn't think it was his job to tell you what to do.

Thanks, Coates.

[Off the Record]

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

I get email

Your brutal in a nice way. I feel like a shaken baby. And I've been paying attention. Your scary dead on. You reminded me I wanted to re-read "Dispatches" by Michael Herr.

I bet you could write a hell of a war story. Soldiers. Now that I'm musing about it, I guess we we're a kind'a porn star. I'll have to think about that.

Anyhow, good read. Thank you. I'll be clicking around for more.

Friday, June 25, 2010

Al Gore is a crazed sex poodle


At True/Slant, I wrote about the sexual assault allegations against Al Gore.
If you can bear to get through the entire 73-page PDF (do not recommend), you will find a sordid tale in which the accuser explains she is a licensed masseuse approximately 95 times, states she was summoned by staff at the hotel to visit a "VIP" guest for a massage at 10:30 PM on October 24, 2006 (aren’t most massages after, say, 8 PM inherently erotic in nature?), coughs, like, 700 times (suspicious!), is greeted by the ex-VP with the line, "Call me Al" (literary allusion?), who hugs her weirdly, turns down the lights, and asks her to massage his inner-thighs (as a woman, I can assure you that this means one thing and one thing only). Call Me Al gets shouty and demanding and moans in a way that indicates he wants his abdominal area massaged. Actual line from the masseuse: "I got a tiny bit mad under my terror." WHAT? Were you wearing a tiny hat, too? Then Gore puts her hand on Lil’ Gore in a demanding fashion and shouts: "THERE." I guess that is one way to get a hand job. Or not. "I felt like I was dancing on the edge of a razor," she confesses in what one can only imagine was a breathless way of speaking to the police. Gore gets angry and she describes him as "Teflon coated." Next, Gore starts asking her to release his second chakra. She fantasizes about doing a "little Spock hold" on him. Eventually, Mr. VP No More gets up, wraps her in an "inescapable embrace," gives her a "'come hither' look," and grabs her boobs and butt. That’s when she tells him, in no uncertain terms, "You’re being a crazed sex poodle," which is totally the most awesome line in the whole thing, and, frankly, I could see Gore being a total crazed sex poodle, but that’s another story for another time. She distracts him by pointing at some chocolates, and he busts out the Grand Marnier. He kisses her and smooshes his erection into her. She refers to him as "Mr. Smiley Global Warming." He humps her, she calls him a "lummox," and there are political references. When she gets home, she finds "stains" on the back of her black slacks, which she didn’t launder on account of her "intuition," which is pretty much why I never do my laundry either. It goes on and on, but suffice to say: fin.
[True/Slant]

Wednesday, June 9, 2010

Shut up to all that



Mark Dery is one of the smartest if not the only smart person writing on the internet, and every time I read something of his, I'm reminded of how stupid I am, which rather than depressing me, makes me want to do better.

His latest missive on True/Slant is "Have We No Sense of Decency, Sir, at Long Last?: On Adult Diapers, Erectile Dysfunction, and Other Joys of Oversharing," which could alternately be titled, "Shut Up Already, Jeff Jarvis, About the Garden Hose Coming out of Your Dick."

It's not to be missed.
Isn’t that the motivation for much of what we call oversharing, online? Ours is the age of nanocelebrity: broadcasts created by us and, too often, for us and us alone. How many YouTube videos and blog posts and Flickr sets languish, their discussion threads registering a melancholy zero comments, their feature attractions playing to a spellbound audience of one? We’re all Norma Desmond, ready for our close-up. In the age of reality TV and Paris Hilton, American Idol and YouTube (which has the power, if your video goes viral, to turn you into a global celebrity, even if you’re just some guitar geek shredding Pachelbel’s Canon), we see fame as our Warholian birthright. In his book, Fame Junkies: The Hidden Truths Behind America’s Favorite Addiction, Jake Halpern notes that 30% of American teenagers believe they’re destined to be famous. The middle-school students he surveyed seemed to see becoming famous as a goal unto itself, rather than a by-product of doing something that merited renown.
[True/Slant]

Monday, May 24, 2010

The great obscenity debate



Last week, I wrote a post on True/Slant about Max Hardcore.
Even those with only a passing interest in porn may have at least a vague knowledge of who Max Hardcore is. Directorially-speaking, he came of age in late-’90s Porn Valley, when competition was harsh, obscenity prosecutions were seldom, and extreme porn was the hot new thing. Even back then, Hardcore was at the vanguard. Surely, he had his peers in extreme porn — Greg Dark, Jim Powers, and Rob Black among them — but Max? Well, his brand of porn was something else altogether.
The next day, I received an email from Karen Stagliano, whose husband is about to go to trial on various obscenity related charges, and who was gracious enough to allow me to post her letter.
When people say that Max deserves to be in jail under pretenses of an obscenity law, it creates a slippery slope of allowing people to put anyone in jail just because they made something that they simply don’t like. Not everyone has to like pornography. Violent crimes should be prosecuted under every letter of the law, but if a porn movie is indeed made consensually, then even if there are people in this country who disagree with it, shouldn’t we simply be able to tell those people to simply not watch it?
Yesterday, I received an email through AnonymousSpeech.com, the subject header of which read: "so you don't like max hardcore?"
What kind of a fucking hypocrite, chastises the guy in your max hardcore story who you wrote an email to, for not watching a max hardcore video... and then goes on to say oh fuck it, you don't need to interview Max in prison?

I love Max Hardcore's art. You're a stupid cunt who needs to be skull fucked. How much money would it take to have you skull fucked on camera?

You're also a liar. Not everyone suffers in a Max Hardcore move, just the piece of shit whore.

Who the fuck are you to sit in judgment anyway cunt?

You're the 'sad' one, you aren't willing to give others the freedom to explore their sexuality. You are nothing but a secular fucking moralizing cunt.

No one elected you to call Max Hardcore names and denigrate his art. You're a stupid cunt.

I suppose vanilla feminazi porn is what you're into is it? you stupid bitch.

I am going to jack my cock to some of the nastiest max hardcore I can find on pirate streaming flash porn sites and pretend it is you getting skull fucked now.

Then I'm going to forget your forgettable and shitty article on Max Hardcore.

boo.

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Max Hardcore gets his comeuppance



On True/Slant, I've posted a long essay about Max Hardcore, obscenity, and a new movie that depicts the tables being turned on this notorious, imprisoned pornographer.
I had seen Max’s movies. I found them terrifically depressing. To be clear, I have seen many, many (far too many, really, come to think of it) movies that fall into the explicit, depraved, and explicitly depraved category. I’ve seen cophrophagy porn, senior citizen porn, a porn in which Ron Jeremy appeared as a baby in an adult diaper and a bonnet, midget porn, world-record setting gangbang porn (I was present for one of those, and it’s hard to say which was worse), so-called “ready to drop” pregnancy porn, and a movie in which a series of young women had sex with men and then promptly threw up onto a black tarp spread over a sagging bed after taking what I assumed to be Ipecac. Suffice to say, it takes a lot to shock this reporter when it comes to porn movies. Max’s movies aren’t shocking — not most significantly. They are sad. Everyone suffers. No one is happy. If joy is located at one end of the spectrum, this is where its opposite resides. This is the monstrous mating of unfulfilled longing and untenable hate. Their progeny: an abomination.
["Imprisoned Pornographer Max Hardcore Gets a Beat Down"]

Thursday, May 13, 2010

The price of journalism



A few weeks ago, I was interviewed by Andrew Rice for a New York Times Magazine story that's now online: "Putting a Price on Words." The story focuses on what Rice calls "online journalism entrepreneurs." I was interviewed in conjunction with True/Slant, where I write the Off the Record blog. I'm not mentioned in the piece, but it's a must-read for anyone working in journalism today.
"You can’t call it a dot-com boom — there is not much capital, there are no parties with catered sushi and no one is expecting to get rich. But this generation of start-ups does share at least one trait with its 1990s predecessors: a conviction that they’re the vanguard of an unfolding revolution. One morning, as a March gale howled down Broadway, I visited the editors of the Web site True/Slant. Their loftlike office, in a vintage SoHo building, was bare, white and slightly chilly, as if designed to reflect the present ethic of austerity. With just five employees, True/Slant has built a significant audience since it started last year: about a million readers visit the site at least once a month, a number similar to the online following of The Village Voice or The Charlotte Observer. The site owes its modest but growing success to the work of more than 300 part-time contributors. It’s not so much a unified publication as a loosely connected commune of bloggers, who generate a continual stream of content with minimal editorial intervention. The company calls what it is doing 'entrepreneurial journalism' and says it’s the future of the profession."
["Putting a Price on Words"]

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

Can I take your order?



Over on True/Slant, I wrote about when I used to be a waitress.
"I was a waitress for two years. I’ve worked a variety of jobs over the years, from pasta-maker to college teacher, but waitressing was far and away the hardest job I ever had. The hours are grueling, the physical labor is brutal, and suffice to say you learn something of human nature when required to wait on people: People will treat you like crap because they can."
["Don't Go in the Kitchen and Other Tips from a Former Waitress"]

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Virginia rejected license plates exposed!


I called up the DMV. I wrote down a bunch of obscene acronyms. On the internet, they call this "original reporting."
"Surely, Virginia has a unique relationship to politics. Among the more provocative politically-themed plates rejected in ‘09: 'EFOBAMA,' 'OBMASX,' and 'FPALIN.' It was unclear if others were political or sexual: 'TBAG4U,' 'TBAGGER,' 'TBAGGNU.' In 2003, 'Choose Life' plates generated public debate. 2009 saw a lone 'ABORT.' Then, there was 'DEMOCRP.' But, without a doubt, the most enigmatic possible political plate message was 'H8KSM.' A reference to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed or an all-girl teen rock band? We may never know."
[True/Slant]

Thursday, April 22, 2010

Obama and the case of obscenity

"If you get the impression from [US Attorney General Eric] Holder that the current administration has little interest in pursuing obscenity prosecutions, you’d probably be right. Whether you believe the reason is 'First Amendment considerations,' a limited budget, perceived lack of public interest, or all of the above, you’d probably be right about that, too."
[True/Slant]

Monday, April 19, 2010

A love song for Jeffrey Dahmer


Over on True/Slant, I interviewed singer-songwriter Dudley Saunders about his serial killer love track, "Love Song for Jeffrey Dahmer."
"The second thought is that, when I hit New York, I felt like a ghost to myself, like I could look in the mirror and not see anybody there. I had no idea who I was, and I knew I was forbidden to find out. But somehow I got this sense that the things that made me scared or uncomfortable or upset were like little signposts to who I really was, and if I could only go straight into those things, I might find out what was hiding in there."
[True/Slant]

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

TRIGGER WARNING: DO NOT READ THIS POST!!!



I wrote a post on True/Slant about feminist blogger abuse of TRIGGER WARNINGS which are supposed to signal you that SOMETHING TERRIBLE IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN because blog posts are SCARY and if you do not understand this you are a CERTIFIABLE ASSHOLE.
"After some in-depth research (like, half an hour, maybe?), I was able to conclude that, for whatever reason, the feminists are all over their TRIGGER WARNINGS, applying them like a Southern cook applies Pam cooking spray to an overused nonstick frying pan. It’s almost impressive, really. I guess the idea is that blog posts are TOTALLY SCARY, and if you are EASILY UPSET, if you see a TRIGGER WARNING coming, you can look away REALLY FAST, or click elsewhere, so you won’t, you know, FREAK THE FUCK OUT."
Since, I've been proclaimed a certifiable asshole, willfully ignorant, an invalidator, a non-friendly in the "cold, uncaring place" that is cyberspace, cruel, mocking, Glenn Beck-esque, an "Internet tough guy," "Teabaggerian," basely ignorant and lacking in empathy, simple, "a fucking tool," "an unsophisticated thinker," worse than moronic, "dangerous," a crappy journalist, a poor googler, lacking in analytical skills, someone who can use my "melon as a hat rack," a troll, "disgusting," a "supercilious asshole," "warped," incapable of empathy, intellectually dishonest, a "Sister F***er," "purposely obtuse and beyond help," and "the kind of person who’d take [my] Vietnam-veteran granddad to see The Deer Hunter without warning him that it’s not actually about hunting deer."

Those were only the comments from my True/Slant blog. I didn't bother reading the comments here, here, and here. Oh, and this guy compares me to a "a festering boil on [his] neck." And I'm not even getting into the hate mail.

On the other hand, writer and best friend Lydia showed up and weighed in, as well:
"Or what if we could just be honest, and admit that when the topic of the blog is feminism, the TRIGGER WARNING on every other post is like a flashing neon sign, attracting *more* attention to a particularly explicit post, even as it purports to deflect the attention of those to whom it might actually be relevant."
Additionally, remember when the guys at Manhood101.com called me a "dumb cunt," etc.? Well, apparently, they've had a change of heart, as they showed up, too.

I wish someone had put a TRIGGER WARNING in front of the comments; then, I wouldn't have read them at all. Unfortunately, it seems the fact that I put a TRIGGER WARNING in the title of my post, "Trigger Warning: This Blog Post May Freak You the F*** Out," didn't dissuade TRIGGER WARNING advocates from reading it. Funny how those TRIGGER WARNINGS work, isn't it?

Monday, April 12, 2010

Let's all get politically incorrect



Last week I mentioned I was interviewed on KPCC radio.

I wrote about my experience on that show, "Politically Incorrect," and obtusely posited 21st century journalism as its own unique brand of prostitution on True/Slant here.

If you want to listen to me sound like a 14-year-old, get indignant, and talk about teachable moments, the show is online here.

Wednesday, April 7, 2010

Snuff is the HIV of the blogosphere

Over at True/Slant, I wrote about the WikiLeaks.org Apache helicopter video: "An Appetite for Snuff." To be perfectly honest, I tune out a lot on the political front. Basically, it seems like political debate these days is just one pundit hollering at another, and I fail to understand the point.

That said, the general reaction to this video really churned me into a frenzy. Liberals screaming about how it was a MASSACRE of innocents (armed with RPGs and AK-47s, but, hey, who needs facts when you're blogging?), conservatives defending it by any means necessary, and nobody really stopping to think about what it all means that we are in total debating nothing, a lot of hot air signifying puffery, misdirecting our collective attention so we can avoid the fact that it's all a protracted excuse to ogle what amounts to a snuff video.
"So, it seems, 'Roller Ball Murder' has finally come to pass. In the 21st century, death is entertainment, and the only thing that can whet our appetite is watching people die. After all, where else could we go after we all watched '2 Girls 1 Cup'? Porn is so passe, and snuff is the new, new thing. In the olden days, you had to leave the house to rent 'Faces of Death.' These days, snuff is piped into your home 24/7, and if you feel any quiver of self-revulsion at your desire to watch other people dying, you can upload the video to your blog and weigh in with your own admittedly under-informed two-cents on it. That way, you can pretend you’re engaged in, you know, a conversation. It’s not like what you’re in the business of is trading in snuff, right? No. Not you."
Posts like these that I've written in the past tend to be unpopular. Nobody, it seems, wants to look in the mirror. They'd rather watch that video one more time.

[True/Slant]

Friday, April 2, 2010

White people problems



Over at True/Slant, I blogged about two white girls who are taking heat because they decided to go live with a family from Mexico in MacArthur Park, which is in Los Angeles.

Basically, the complaint is that white people are chock full o' inherent privilege, only people of certain races or classes can write about other people in those races or classes, and if you don't follow these rules, you are not in the club.

This thinking is asinine, stupid, and also boring. Who is anyone to define journalism? Who dictates what is politically correct and what is not? At least the two broads at hand got off their asses and did something other than claim revomited content as reporting and bitch and whine because they got called gossip bloggers for spreading rumors or whatever it is they do over there.

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

I'm a big name



My friend Dana Harris at Variety sent me this link late last week, "True/Slant Builds Platform for Journalists, Brands" from Advertising Age, in which I am referred to thusly: "The network has 301 curated contributors today including big names like Rolling Stone political writer Matt Taibbi and photographer/blogger Susannah Breslin." Amusing.

In any case, I've been getting a surprising-to-me amount of joy from blogging at Off the Record. True/Slant is like The Huffington Post if Arianna were assassinated, there were way less bloggers, not everyone was retarded, and you actually got paid.

Recently, I've written on whether or not Perez Hilton violated a federal obscenity law, why Warner Bros. wants you to torture a woman to death, and the Tiger Woods love doll. Follow me there, too, won't you?

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

I'm off the record ... again

I started blogging -- and by "started," I mean I wrote one post -- over on True/Slant in early January, but the following Monday, I found I had kidney stones, and spent the next six weeks in pain. In any case, now recuperated, I am back at it again. Join me there, won't you?

So far, I've written about "The Hurt Locker," Susannah-brand journalism, and the monkeys at the Playboy mansion.

I'm rather enjoying it. I'm trying to get down some stories and/or ideas that I haven't told thus far, demanding of myself a modicum of greater seriousness, and, who knows, in the coming weeks, I may even offer up something approximating investigative journalism, or its limp-wristed cousin Maury who whines during dinner and then passes out in the foyer. He's so embarrassing.

Thursday, January 7, 2010

I'm Off the Record



Going into 2010, I don't have much in the way of concrete New Year's resolutions, other than, you know, "be less fat," "get off your ass," and "stop being such a nutcase," except that I do want to, ah, spread my wings, and venture into some new territories, and try some untried things.

I know this is shocking, but sitting around blogging about random crap does not get one taken very seriously. And serious! That is what I am now! Very, very serious! I cut like a knife. Or, you know, whatever. Actually, I drink a lot of tea, eat a lot of eggs, and don't go to yoga nearly enough.

In the spirit of taking myself more gravely, as it were, I've started a blog over at True/Slant: "Off the Record." I decided to call it that because a) I couldn't think of anything else, b) it sounded super-sexy, and c) I am totally into cheesy journalisms.

All joking aside, or at least taking a rest on the Lazy Susan in the middle of the table, I will, I hope, be doing some more serious reportage there. I'm really looking forward to it. If all goes well, when I spread my tiny new wings, I will not fall to my death and splat and break my neck on the pavement far, far below, but fly like, um, a bird, or whatever.

Anyway, follow me there. There's comments and everything! Thanks to the charming Coates Bateman for having me.