Case in point? The link to the article is here:
Gargoyles Out To Snatch Christmas
(more after the jump)
It took me half of the article to realize what the hell Allan Fransisco was talking about. The column is supposed to be about IT. There is the world Gargoyle on the title. And under normal circumstances not involving mild retardation, there has to be some connection.
Two paragraphs later, my good friend "correlation" still cannot be found. Neither are there any attributable context clues that would point out that I was, in fact, reading the writer's mental fart about the Maguindanao Massacre, and not about a videogame involving Gargoyles (which would've been awesome)
Speaking of which, GARGOYLES. Let's talk about that for a minute here. Think of a bad word to describe the Ampatuans. Try to think of as many as you can, and see how long the list goes before the word "Gargoyle" enters your mind. A stone, gothic looking waterspout carved in the image of a winged beast. An ELEGANT STONE RAIN DRAIN. It never entered my brain. It probably never will.
Jesus. No. Writing style is absolutely purple. I had to remind myself twice while reading the article that I'm not reading Twilight fanfiction. I can also understand that this is supposed to be an opinion-type of column, but the lack of facts almost makes me think the guy basically sat down, thought of one or two things he and his friends talked over lunch that day, and just wrote them the fuck down like nobody would ever read it. Because that's what I think this is. Glorified scribble.
If winners get to write history, I would assume columns like this are what losers would write. Is this what journalism has come to? Some guy sitting down for 15 minutes without researching anything and then publishing substandard horse shit for people to read? Quoting Michael Crichton, "In the information society, nobody thinks. We expect to banish paper, but we actually banish thought"
What the fuck happened? It almost feels like there was some point in time not too long ago, editors of online newspapers woke up one morning, realized that unlike their traditional counterparts, their money won't come from people who will appreciate their journalistic prowess, integrity, and writing skills.
No, on the internet, it's all about how many people accidentally stumble on your website and consciously/unconsciously click on your ads. Imagine being an opera singer whose income depends on how many packs of peanuts gets sold during her performance. You don't have to sing well, just have lots of shows to get more peanuts.
In a knee jerk reaction, the editors went "Fuck it. Fuck integrity. Let's make money!" and just went on letting writers do whatever the fuck they want for articles like the dumb sonnvabitch gargoyle article that fucking pointless and a waste of my time.
*pant pant*
Going back.
I remember before, I was being recruited by a friend to write online articles for him for 300 pesos per piece. He says it's a good way to make money and exercise my literary muscles. He knew it in his heart as well as I did that it's not really about what I write about, but how much visibility my article will give his clients on search engines. I could write as horribly as I could for all he cared but it wouldn't really matter. I turned down the offer and politely asked him to go fuck himself. (we're not friends anymore, if you still haven't figured that one out).
There are still days I refuse to believe this model is now what our once revered publications are now adopting. And clearly, there is something fundamentally wrong in having the voice of civilized society turn into money-making drabble.
Fuck gargoyles. More than anything else, I believe this warehouse-style of writing is killing our free press faster than any Ampatuan can.
2 comments:
I couldn't find the connection either. What was the whole point of the article? The iphones? the ampatuans? or was it about the gargoyles? <.<
I read the article and I lol'd. It looked as though someone fumbled with the cut-and-paste and publish routine (no, someone fumbled, period.)
As with the writing, the level on incoherence is high and the substance is low. It sounds like it was made by a high school student who needed to add padding to his otherwise bland essay.
Post a Comment