Stop Promoting What You Hate – yeah you!
January 14th, 2009
I had to take a break from work to bitch about this. Yet another topic of controversy that is around after the Costa Rican earthquake a while back is that a local newspaper published some horrific pictures about [let your imagination fly].
See what I wrote in the paragraph above? There are some things some you should take note, especially all the bloggers and twitters that have been bitching about this for days (BTW, about time to let it go):
- You cannot tell what the source is
- You cannot tell what the picture is
If you read this, then by mere statistics you are a lazy son of a bitch who would have just let it go and would go on with your business. But if I wrote what the actual article was about, the source, and the picture; guess what I am doing? I would be promoting that which I abominate – get it? And wouldn’t that be fucking ironic? Helping that which I am bitching about?
Also, for the love of whatever the fuck you deem sacred, DO NOT LINK TO THE FUCKING SOURCE!!! See, in the “Internets”, Google has a super secret sweet formula that it uses to find the most relevant results based on the web page’s page rank. Even tough this formula is as secret, it is a well known fact that Google uses the number of incoming links to find out your page’s relevancy with what is being searched for. Did you catch that? No? Hold on, let me put it clearer:
INCOMING FUCKING LINKS
So all of you posting the URL on your blogs, on your Twitter accounts, and so on are actually HELPING that which you bitch about. So when someone googles:
Costa Rica Earthquake Victims
You are actually helping the despicable newspaper to rank in the first results; where MORE people will find the image you wanted no one to see. This means that they generate more traffic, hence generate more revenue and can guarantee to keep writing all these stories that you fucking hate. Again, isn’t that fucking ironic?
So, if you don’t like something, be discrete, don’t fall prey to what these types of media want: FREE PUBLICITY. I know what they did was not right, but hey – who are we to judge?
I am not saying that you should not bitch – you should, that is what freedom of speech is all about. I am just saying that you should just be smarter about bitching – understand the consequences.
There, I can go back to work.
BTW: The Google Search above is used as an example, I don’t know if they rank high on that query and quite frankly I could not care less.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:14 am
Touché. Thank you. I also want to jump in and highlight that everyone is bitching about the said pic, but no such fuss about the close-ups to tears and faces on TV. So, GIVE ME A BREAK.
If the audience would really make themselves hear we would not have the abominable TV newscasts we have in the country and the newspaper being discussed wouldn’t be sold massively. Besides, the sames criticizing are the ones linking to many “funny”articles written there every now and then. So?
January 14th, 2009 at 11:59 am
So if I am understanding your “rant” correctly, you are upset w/not only the peep who post sensationalized stories & the pic’s, but also those that add to it by clicking the link & increasing it popularity? is that correct? I am more annoyed & sometime disgusted by the jackels that call themselves “The News”. The “If it bleeds, it leads” programing mentality. A song says it pretty good, “..the bubbleheaded bleach-blond comes on @ 5. She can tell you about the plane crash w/a gleam in her eye…” It is all BS anyways, good for you speaking out. Also, you shouldn’t swear so much. I understand that language filled w/colorful adjectives can add to a stories flavor, but if you use it all the time, it looses it punch……..kinda like a store that has “SALE” sign in the window everyday. Love you stuff, keep it up.
January 14th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
@Alejandra: Thanks for the post. You hit the nail right on the head. The picture raises all this fuss, but other things which we deem as repulsive go unnoticed.
For instance, just got back from lunch, and one of the main stories in Teletica was a 5 minute segment of the interview of a woman who was trapped and escaped. She could barely speak without crying but they ran the whole segment. That is just as sick as what the newspaper did.
We are all part of a media circus that profits from this. This is primarily the reason why I stopped watching CR TV altogether, it blows.
January 14th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
@Piazzano: Thanks for your post. You are right, I should not overuse the ‘f’ word that much. I usually try to tone it down but in that post I was really pissed off when I wrote it and it just poured.
Like I told Alejandra above, we are living in a media circus (Natural Born Killers by Oliver Stone does an amazing job reflecting this). The sad part is that “the news” hide their appetite for “disinformation” in the form of ‘charitable actions’. I cannot deny some of them go good deeds trying to organize people to donate for this noble cause; nonetheless, why on Earth must they televise people who are devastated crying and asking them how do they feel? I really cannot think of what THAT story brings to the table, I really don’t.
While there has been some good coverage form the TV media with this, there has been some reporting that repulses as much as the pic on the newspaper – yet everyone is fine with it.
January 14th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
grumpytico – you are very passionate about your “rants” especially this one. I agree about the media (all forms) hiding or cloaking their true intentions by appearing comforting & concerned. There is no reason why we should see another person grief & anquish being broadcast in true HD – BS. Long are the days where respected journalism might capture a single black/white photos (Time/Life) showing more emotion and compassion + truley inspiring people to think beyond thier own selfish needs & care about another. Unfortunately, as you pointed out, we are more the cause then the cure. If everyone stopped by the “Star” “People” Inquirer” and bought “Popular Mechanics” (sorry, couldn’t think of anything else) they would disappear, but we don’t so they do.