As the New York Times, which I read obsessively and love more than my own family, tries its darndest to recapture its waning readership, it has filled more and more of its pages (both online and off) with youth-friendly features like blogs and articles about fancy underwear. And boy does it work. Thursday is now my favorite day of the week. In second place is Sunday, where I can generally count on a healthy dose of Michael Pollan waxing masturbatory on local produce while tsk-tsking our love of corn syrup. God, it’s hot.
However, I like my fluff pieces to feature the same writing standards as the real articles. I have no objection to illogical structure or straight-up bullshit. It’s really just the Times’ appropriation of slang in its perverse dissection of youth culture that makes me want to die a little every time I happen across it. It’s as though every time there’s an article about hipsters, it’s as though the newspaper is saying that the group is not just a subjective social distinction among well-off young people, but it’s an actual cultural group. Like, with legal rights or something. That’s not okay.
Additionally, I take issue in these articles with the use of language commonly found on a 12-year-old’s Livejournal. Snarky, for instance. Or any time “u” replaces “you.” Same goes for “2″ with “too” or “to.” Even if you’re just trying to make a point about how we crazy kids love our text messaging.
And while I’m at it, I’m going to also declare a moratorium on anymore discussions on how the world is deeply affected by social networking and Blackberries. Let’s stick with dead Russians and pissy Republicans.
New readers can’t be more important than dignity, right?
[...] 11th, 2007 Several weeks ago, I unfairly admonished the New York Times for its use of “ginormous” – as in something that is really big – in [...]