i don't think we know nearly enough about this kid to say he is "douchey" either. all i've gathered from that article is that he smiles a lot in photos.
― Treeship, Thursday, 9 October 2014 20:14 (eleven years ago)
The info's all from his Facebook page; if anyone's going to go "His privacy!" about this I'm going to ask about this wonderful world you live in which is not here.― Ned Raggett, Thursday, October 9, 2014 1:11 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― Ned Raggett, Thursday, October 9, 2014 1:11 PM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
cool post
― example (crüt), Thursday, 9 October 2014 20:15 (eleven years ago)
Have any good stories about young J.B.? Hop in below or shoot us an email.
this addendum is the worst part
― Treeship, Thursday, 9 October 2014 20:21 (eleven years ago)
like, they are actively soliciting material to use to smear this person, a private citizen, on a nationally popular website. how is this the same thing as facebook existing?
― Treeship, Thursday, 9 October 2014 20:24 (eleven years ago)
i think margaret sullivan made a legitimate point, but that's a long way from singling out someone who's not a public figure and writing an entire article (well, 'article') ridiculing him.
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 9 October 2014 20:26 (eleven years ago)
Also a lot of the stuff is just about his personal/social life, it's not like they're pointing out some Super PAC he runs or something.
― my jaw left (Hurting 2), Thursday, 9 October 2014 20:29 (eleven years ago)
yeah, disclosing his relationship with the israeli army is totally different and unrelated from raiding his facebook profile for pictures and "likes" that encourage readers to make assumptions about what he is like as a person.
― Treeship, Thursday, 9 October 2014 20:35 (eleven years ago)
It fits with Gawker/Jezebel's bad habit of trying to show that someone is a Bad Person instead of focussing on one egregious incident. It leaves a bad taste. If you think/know someone's done something wrong then stick to that - don't do an armchair audit of their whole life.
― Re-Make/Re-Model, Thursday, 9 October 2014 20:40 (eleven years ago)
the gawker/jezebel tone is so toxic. it's weird to read an article i basically agree with (not this one) and still come away feeling gross.
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 9 October 2014 20:43 (eleven years ago)
it's the plague of my generation
― Treeship, Thursday, 9 October 2014 20:52 (eleven years ago)
haha
― polyphonic, Thursday, 9 October 2014 20:53 (eleven years ago)
ok ned, i'll lift whatever info i can about you from the internet and write a high-profile piece for a major website mocking you. that's exactly the same thing as you having a facebook profile, right?
― I dunno. (amateurist), Thursday, 9 October 2014 23:13 (eleven years ago)
to be clear i will not actually do this to ned. i was just making a point.
― I dunno. (amateurist), Thursday, 9 October 2014 23:14 (eleven years ago)
The info's all from his Facebook page; if anyone's going to go "His privacy!" about this I'm going to ask about this wonderful world you live in which is not here.
― Ned Raggett, Thursday, October 9, 2014 7:11 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
Heart u Ned but come on, a private person putting stuff on Facebook doesn't make it ok for a big website or medium to use everything they can find to negatively profile someone just because his father is a douche. It's the stringing together of seemingly unrelated things to make up a profile fitting your idea of someone (or someone's father) that is the scariest thing about this.
― definite classic, predicting a solid 8/10 from the p-fork boys (Le Bateau Ivre), Thursday, 9 October 2014 23:26 (eleven years ago)
David Brooks' son being in the Israeli army seems relevant at least to the extent that he does at times write about Israel. The rest of it is just kind of catty and pointless.
― my jaw left (Hurting 2), Friday, 10 October 2014 00:31 (eleven years ago)
FWIW, I've taken the responses on board and have been thinking off and on about it for the past half hour. The larger points about expectations of privacy/guilt-by-association are well taken. (Though frankly any guy from a fraternity who likes Tucker Max makes me a little skeeved separate from anything else; still, I'm not about to grill every last person who unironically likes the Chive or whatever.) And I'll admit the funniest part to me besides the headline, per Alfred's post, was Podhoretz fully embracing his bitter bastard persona at last; then again I did post the direct link so I can't not own that. Likely wouldn't post it now.
Still, though -- building off Milton Parker said, is it just the world that Gawker made or also something else? I keep thinking about news stories from all over the place essentially now regularly talking about photos on social media, posts, etc. when it comes to someone that figures in it, for whatever reason. I guess I'm more jaded than I realize but I honestly wasn't *surprised* that this could happen, and that may be my own burden to bear.
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 10 October 2014 00:53 (eleven years ago)
I guess I'm just kind of disappointed to see articles that amount to "Hey look at this fuggin guy," let alone about non-public figures.
― my jaw left (Hurting 2), Friday, 10 October 2014 01:18 (eleven years ago)
But that said, look at this fuggin guy:http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/files/2013/01/Podhoretz_Swim.jpg
― my jaw left (Hurting 2), Friday, 10 October 2014 01:19 (eleven years ago)
First line in today's column: "George Eliot was an emotionally needy young woman."
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 14 November 2014 16:42 (eleven years ago)
followed by an account of their prom date
― things lose meaning over time (Dr Morbius), Friday, 14 November 2014 16:47 (eleven years ago)
Yet what do we mean when we use the word meaning?
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 8 January 2015 19:57 (eleven years ago)
oh boy he's going with Clinton-style epistemology
― touch of a love-starved cobra (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 8 January 2015 20:35 (eleven years ago)
is he dead yet?
― brosario nawson (m bison), Friday, 9 January 2015 00:28 (eleven years ago)
well, he's braindead
― Οὖτις, Friday, 9 January 2015 00:30 (eleven years ago)
colleges should invite terrible speakers more often because hebdo
― Guayaquil (eephus!), Friday, 9 January 2015 05:08 (eleven years ago)
Op-Ed Columnist I Am Not Charlie Hebdo By DAVID BROOKS
Not sure I want to read this
― curmudgeon, Friday, 9 January 2015 15:19 (eleven years ago)
absolutely sure I don't
― thinking of a master plan (m coleman), Friday, 9 January 2015 16:26 (eleven years ago)
I Am Not David Brooks
― Οὖτις, Friday, 9 January 2015 16:59 (eleven years ago)
If you read my comment above yours, you've already read it
― Guayaquil (eephus!), Friday, 9 January 2015 18:14 (eleven years ago)
picturing this column accompanied by a picture of Brooks in a t-shirt that reads "I AM DAVID BROOKS"
― Οὖτις, Friday, 9 January 2015 18:22 (eleven years ago)
lol u guys it's so bad though
― man alive, Friday, 9 January 2015 18:25 (eleven years ago)
To be fair, he's not saying that people who speak out against racial or religious insults are exactly the same as people who walk into an office and murder people. Just, you know, there's a continuum. To be safe, we should stop calling people racists.
― something of an astrological coup (tipsy mothra), Friday, 9 January 2015 18:31 (eleven years ago)
Yet what do we mean when we use the word meaning?― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, January 8, 2015 1:57 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, January 8, 2015 1:57 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
in homage to the events in paris, david brooks will be channeling jacques derrida in this week's column
― I dunno. (amateurist), Friday, 9 January 2015 19:33 (eleven years ago)
Let me put it this way: If we look at the people in history who achieved great things — like Nelson Mandela or Albert Schweitzer or Abraham Lincoln — it wasn’t because they wanted to bathe luxuriously in their own sense of meaningfulness. They had objective and eternally true standards of justice and injustice. They were indignant when those eternal standards were violated. They subscribed to moral systems — whether secular or religious — that recommended specific ways of being, and had specific structures of what is right and wrong, and had specific disciplines about how you might get better over time.
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 9 January 2015 19:46 (eleven years ago)
Even remotely, distantly comparing people protesting a campus speaker to people actually shooting up a newspaper is just so insidious it's unbelievable.
― man alive, Friday, 9 January 2015 19:52 (eleven years ago)
http://images.politico.com/global/2012/10/121030_david_brooks_605_ap.jpg
Let me put it this way.
― guess that bundt gettin eaten (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 9 January 2015 19:56 (eleven years ago)
Let me tell you, in an eleven-word sentence, about "the people who achieved great things."
― man alive, Friday, 9 January 2015 21:01 (eleven years ago)
Ridicule becomes less fun as you become more aware of your own frequent ridiculousness.
― jmm, Friday, 9 January 2015 21:10 (eleven years ago)
that must be an excruciatingly long and slow process for him
― man alive, Friday, 9 January 2015 21:24 (eleven years ago)
wicked subtweet
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/03/11/when-values-disappear/?_r=1
― mookieproof, Thursday, 12 March 2015 14:47 (eleven years ago)
That posting is a nice rebuttal to Kristoff's misinterpretation of WJW as well as to Brook's absurd let's punish non-college going Dads for their lack of morals and values thing in a recnet column of his(based on Brooks misinterpretation of Putnam's new Our Kids book)
― curmudgeon, Thursday, 12 March 2015 16:30 (eleven years ago)
every time i open this thread
http://stack-dog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/0571AE26-7118-4B22-9810-B37B1C100BAE_zpszc2oknoh.png
― flappy bird (spazzmatazz), Thursday, 12 March 2015 19:13 (eleven years ago)
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/for-david-brooks-the-rich-are-people-the-poor-are-numbers-20150311#ixzz3UG7EQzeE
Matt Taibi v. Brooks
― curmudgeon, Friday, 13 March 2015 16:53 (eleven years ago)
Brooks is EXCITED about Marco Rubio! He has *ideas*!
On his first day in office, he handed each legislator a book with the cover “100 Innovative Ideas for Florida’s Future.” The pages were blank. He was inviting his members to fill them in — a nice collaborative touch.
well, I guess that's one way to look at it...
― Οὖτις, Tuesday, 21 April 2015 23:04 (eleven years ago)
my dad has a blank book titled everything i know about sailing; where's his bobodorsement
― difficult listening hour, Tuesday, 21 April 2015 23:05 (eleven years ago)
http://i.imgur.com/sQGxpot.jpg
― Flow-through nonresident pass-through entity (los blue jeans), Sunday, 26 April 2015 01:15 (eleven years ago)
Easy target but couldn't resist.
― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Sunday, 26 April 2015 03:06 (eleven years ago)
"Despite all these efforts, there are too many young men leading lives like the one Gray led. He was apparently a kind-hearted, respectful, popular man, but he was not on the path to upward mobility. He won a settlement for lead paint poisoning. According to The Washington Post, his mother was a heroin addict who, in a deposition, said she couldn’t read. In one court filing, it was reported that Gray was four grade levels behind in reading. He was arrested more than a dozen times."
― Treeship, Friday, 1 May 2015 14:24 (eleven years ago)
this is a more fucked up way to frame the situation than just saying something outright racist.
― Treeship, Friday, 1 May 2015 14:25 (eleven years ago)
dude was beaten to death for no reason and brooks feels the need to scrutinize his academic record
― Treeship, Friday, 1 May 2015 14:26 (eleven years ago)