Wednesday, July 28, 2010

It seems Vanity Fair Magazine has issues with the internet

I was furious at the patronizing, misogynistic tone in this article about successful female social media users. "Tweethearts," and other twee language being used to diminish women and objectify them does not make me giggle. However, @geekgirldiva covered it way better than I did, here
 This morning, I was treated to this, before I had my first cup of coffee. Really? We're serious about this hating the internet and its culture, are we, Vanity Fair? Then why do you have a website, or a twitter page, (@vanityfairmag)? Of course, you'll notice that there is no comment field. I've been scratching my head at that and realized that it boils down to this: They can't stand the heat. 
*Ahem* Then perhaps, Vanity Fair, you ought not to be mucking around in the internet's kitchen. 
I'd also like to point out, that both in the VF article, and in his home blog, Tom Shone shows a desperate need for a proofreader. "...Comes dangerous close to having a critical opinion," tsk, surely you meant, "...Comes dangerously close?" 
 When someone who has decided that it is unfathomable for the savvy and often snarky populace of the internet to parse the humor in Cinematical's thoughts on The Town trailer, particularly the studio glossing over Ben Affleck as, "The acclaimed director of Gone, Baby, Gone," vs. "Directed by Ben Affleck," then I have to consider that it's the internet they don't like. 
Vanity Fair, your writers either don't like, don't understand, or don't feel welcome on the internet and choose to snark and condescend, rather than learn from us. It's all done in a breezy, tra-la-la-the-children-on-the-internet-are-so-droll-in-their-stupidity-aren't-they tone. 
You don't even give us a forum in which to defend ourselves, for heaven's sake. Are you that afraid of what we'll say to you? I have long admired the photography and interviews in your pages, but I am not an idiot, and I do not appreciate having a culture that both embraces and mocks itself, that tries for a little tongue-in-cheek flair in a world that most of us can't even make a decent living in, treated as if we're all a bunch of cute little girls showing our tits and fanboys drooling in front of a screen. 
 Nothing in Shone's review-of-a-review means anything, (what, he couldn't come up with his own opinion of Scott Pilgrim vs. The World?)  It's simply trashing a writer from a competing outlet, who actually seems to, oh... understand the audience he's writing for, and dressing it up in an elitist tone. 
Give me a break. If that's the best you can come up with, then maybe I don't blame you for being scared of having a comment form. The internet would eat your writers alive. 
Just don't pretend that your writers are special. Not anymore. You're just like the rest of us, making it up as you go along. The difference is, you pay your writers to be unoriginal and they're not beholden to their readers. Most of the rest of us aren't paid, (or, not much,) and we are ALWAYS beholden to our audience. 
When you're ready to join the rest of the internet, you can comment on my blog. Mkay?