― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:28 (eighteen years ago) link
― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:32 (eighteen years ago) link
― erklie (erklie), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:32 (eighteen years ago) link
xpost - "mistake"
― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:33 (eighteen years ago) link
― erklie (erklie), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:50 (eighteen years ago) link
― D.J. Short (D.J.), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:54 (eighteen years ago) link
also, i just read that piece today and was thinkinga posting here about it, or on ile rather. it does have the "too-good-to-be-true" shattered glass vibe, but less in a set-piece sort of way and more in a "naah he's blowing everything waaay out of proportion" sorta way.
perhaps nick was making a statement about the new management (i.e. "burning down my masters house"?)
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:57 (eighteen years ago) link
― chaki (chaki), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:00 (eighteen years ago) link
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:02 (eighteen years ago) link
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:03 (eighteen years ago) link
― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:06 (eighteen years ago) link
And who the hell says Neil Strauss made stuff up?
― beener, Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:08 (eighteen years ago) link
― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:13 (eighteen years ago) link
― erklie (erklie), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:15 (eighteen years ago) link
― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:15 (eighteen years ago) link
― noizem duke (noize duke), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:17 (eighteen years ago) link
― harold, Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:27 (eighteen years ago) link
many posters here may have more insight re: this, but if so, then why bother writing the apology? why not just say "fuck y'all new times douches" and take off?
― veronica moser (veronica moser), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:34 (eighteen years ago) link
Did he go to Harvard for journalism? I thought he studied Latin or some shit.
I know that when I studied journalism at a football school in Florida, they made me take classes on journalism ethics and journalism law before they handed me a degree.
One factual error = C Two factual errors = F
― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:54 (eighteen years ago) link
― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:55 (eighteen years ago) link
― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:56 (eighteen years ago) link
― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:58 (eighteen years ago) link
I always thought they were saying "end...scene", no?
― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:35 (eighteen years ago) link
― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:38 (eighteen years ago) link
― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:43 (eighteen years ago) link
No pages were found containing "cache:pERKO8MDWugJ:www.villagevoice.com/nyclife/0609,sylvester,72342,15.html PUA".
― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:44 (eighteen years ago) link
not usually. "scene" means the take of the scene is completed.
― Autonomous University of Zacatecas (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:52 (eighteen years ago) link
― Autonomous University of Zacatecas (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:53 (eighteen years ago) link
NOOOO!!! Can I use this chair?..
― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:59 (eighteen years ago) link
OK, I know, it smacks of Vice
― Paul (scifisoul), Thursday, 2 March 2006 06:06 (eighteen years ago) link
please tell me it's not real.
― jhoshea (scoopsnoodle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 06:12 (eighteen years ago) link
― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 06:12 (eighteen years ago) link
― Roque Strew (RoqueStrew), Thursday, 2 March 2006 06:36 (eighteen years ago) link
Actually it was the new management making a statement about the new management... which makes this even more tragic/funny.
― Da Na Not! (donut), Thursday, 2 March 2006 06:44 (eighteen years ago) link
― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:09 (eighteen years ago) link
Is the cached version gone? I got through half of it and then lost interest; went back to finish it and now I'm not seeing anything.
― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:16 (eighteen years ago) link
― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:18 (eighteen years ago) link
― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:19 (eighteen years ago) link
― vahid (vahid), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:24 (eighteen years ago) link
― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:28 (eighteen years ago) link
Same here, and maybe that's why I'm so non-plussed. MattCPerp, are you defending the piece as a piece of performance-writing that the editors just didn't pick up on? It seems kinda cavalier and silly for the writer not to tip at least someone off about that, maybe run it past someone, etc., before it hits the galley.
Just strikes me as a pretty lame/false defense.
― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:28 (eighteen years ago) link
If this piece was clearly meant as satire, was presented to his editor as such, and his editor was ok with that before it ran, then maybe he is a "fall guy." But if it was assigned/assumed as a piece of reportage journalism, then he clearly violated journalistic ethics. I tend to think it's the latter. I don't think his editor told him to write (or approved of his writing) a satire cover story, then pulled it for fabrication reasons. I think Sylvester was well aware he was supposed to be writing this piece with a reporters' hat on and either got lazy or simply couldn't break out of his usual "creative" writing approach.
― ghimper, Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:31 (eighteen years ago) link
― James (D.J.), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:34 (eighteen years ago) link
Given the pieces that Nick has written for the Voice in the (very recent) past, I just don't buy for a moment that the editor who okayed this Strauss piece was not aware of Nick's style.
― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:36 (eighteen years ago) link
― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:37 (eighteen years ago) link
― Reggie, Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:37 (eighteen years ago) link
This is also a very likely scenario, but I still think that the editors should have had qualms about the presentation of Nick as a proper journalist to begin with.
― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:38 (eighteen years ago) link
― Reggie, Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:39 (eighteen years ago) link
― Susan Douglas (Susan Douglas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:41 (eighteen years ago) link
― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:41 (eighteen years ago) link