Quantcast
Channel: Gawker
Viewing all 24829 articles
Browse latest View live

Former CNN journalist Miles O'Brien's arm was amputated two weeks ago after a routine injury turned

0
0

Former CNN journalist Miles O'Brien's arm was amputated two weeks ago after a routine injury turned into Acute Compartment Syndrome. "Life is all about playing the hand that is dealt you," O'Brien wrote on his blog. "Actually, I would love somebody to deal me another hand right about now – in more ways than one"


Florida Woman Calls 911 For Sex: "I Haven't Been Penetrated in Years"

0
0

An allegedly inebriated widow from a sleepy section of Florida's West Coast was arrested last Friday after calling 911 twice in search of a cop to do "extra duty" for her, then rubbing an officer who was dispatched to her house while telling him: "I am so horny."

Via NBC affiliate WBBH-TV:

Police say the initial 911 call happened just after 6 p.m., when Maria Montenez-Colon complained that she wanted her Corvette back.

When the officer arrived at the Almar Drive home, he said Montenez-Colon was very drunk.

The 58-year-old immediately told the officer he was sexy and asked if he was married, according to the incident report. Then she started over-sharing.

Montenez-Colon allegedly told the officer, "I haven't been penetrated in years," and "I am so horny."

The officer tried to steer the conversation back to the topic of the call, asking what he could do for her.

Montenez-Colon's response was "You can [expletive] me," according to the report.

The officer calmly explained that Montenez-Colon had legally ceded the Corvette to her stepson as she attempted to rub his chest. He left, but Montenez-Colon reportedly still burned for... justice.

Less than an hour later, Montenez-Colon called 911 again, complaining the officer who was at her home "pissed her off."

The original officer arrived, along with a second officer.

Montenez-Colon reportedly complained about the original visit to the second officer, saying, "He was a perfect gentleman, but when I asked him to [expletive] me, he turned me down so that made me angry."

When asked by the original officer if she remembered the conversation about misuse of 911, Montenez-Colon allegedly said, "I do, but how else am I going to get you to [expletive] me?"

Montenez-Colon was booked for misusing the emergency line. It's her fifth arrest since the beginning of 2013.

The Times tells the gripping and unreal tale of David Bar Katz, who found Philip Seymour Hoffman's b

0
0

The Times tells the gripping and unreal tale of David Bar Katz, who found Philip Seymour Hoffman's body, was quoted in the National Enquirer as the actor's lover and drug buddy, and will now start a playwrights' foundation with quick settlement money after the tabloid realized its source was an impostor.

Peter Singer Is Here to Talk About Right and Wrong

0
0

Peter Singer Is Here to Talk About Right and Wrong

Peter Singer is a professor of bioethics at Princeton University and one of the world's most prominent—and controversial—moral philosophers. He's written influential works on poverty, charity, and euthanasia, and is considered a founder of the modern animal rights movement. He's here to speak to you.

Singer is one the most famous ethicists alive today. He also draws the most ire, and inspires the most vociferous denunciations. Among his most influential (and argued-over) beliefs: that relatively wealthy people have a moral duty to donate relatively large amounts of money to people suffering in poverty; that "speciesism" causing mistreatment of animals is "as indefensible as the most blatant racism;" and that, in certain instances, euthanasia of profoundly disabled and suffering people is morally justifiable. (Please take the time to read Singer's own writings on these issues before leaping to attack or defend him.)

Below is an interview we conducted with Singer this month, covering many of his most famous beliefs. He is also the founder of The Life You Can Save, a group that determines which charities are most effective at helping the world's poorest people. He will be in the discussion section at the bottom of this post at 5 p.m. Eastern time to answer questions from readers. Go to it.

You're one of the world's most famous philosophers, at least among the general public. Do you feel like having a high public profile—spreading the message—is part of your ethics?

Peter Singer: Yes I do. It's because I work in ethics, and, more specifically, applied ethics, that I think it's important that if you have things to say that you think are right and you think could make the world a better place, it's important that many people read about them. Not only my colleagues in other universities or philosophy departments.

Is the desire to communicate with a wider audience lacking in the philosophy world, generally?

PS: Yes, I think it's still lacking to a significant extent. I think the situation is better now than it was 20 years ago... perhaps it's the internet that has provided [a platform] people like you who can write easily about philosophical issues for a wider audience. So I think the situation has improved. But there are structural reasons within the academic career setting that make it quite a disincentive— that you're not gonna get much credit for writing a piece in [the press], even if it's read by hundreds of thousands of people. You'll get more credit for writing a piece in a refereed journal that might be read by 500 people.

Let's talk about the issue of charity. One objection that often crops up is the tension between charity and economic development. Why the emphasis on charitable giving? Would those resources be better spent trying to build the economy in Third World nations?

PS: I don't see it as an either/ or. I think it's good for there to be investment in developing countries, and put businesses in there, and create employment, and so on. Generally speaking I think that that's a good thing. But, two things: One is a lot of the people that I'm addressing don't have that opportunity. They're ordinary people going about their jobs. They're not investors, or major capitalists, or CEOs of corporations. So if you said to them, "Let's promote economic development in Uganda or somewhere," they would say, "How do I do that?" Whereas if you say, "You can donate to the Against Malaria Foundation and you can provide bed nets," there's an easy path for them to do that.

The second thing is, I think that economic development leaves out a lot of people—and again, this is a general statement—but the evidence that I've looked at suggests that economic development does pull people out of poverty, and that's definitely an important thing, but quite often it leaves some of the poorest of the poor untouched. They don't have the skills, or sometimes they don't have the mobility, to get jobs that are created. I think we need to help them anyway. So essentially I think we need both. We need economic development, and charity.

Is there a finite pool of charitable contributions out there to be distributed? Or might some more showy forms of charity (like Batkid) be okay, because they end up pulling in more donations through their PR value?

PS: I would certainly hope that there's room for growing the amount people give to charity, and you would think that as people become more affluent, more of their income is available for non-necessity spending. You would think that the amount they give to charity ought to grow. If you look at figures for the United States, it doesn't look like it has been growing significantly, but I hope it would. The second thing is, it's a very large sum of money that we're talking about.. so if more of that were to go to highly effective charities, it would do a lot more good. So even if we can't actually grow it, which would be disappointing, we could certainly shift it towards the better charities.

What are the implications of your thoughts on charity for the arts? It seems that your position tends to cause outrage among fans of the arts who think that you're not counting the arts as a real charity.

PS: I'm not saying the arts are not a real charity, I'm just saying that in the world as it is, it's not a charity that I would give the highest priority to. I think it's great for people to promote and encourage the arts. But I do think you have to look at the world we live in. And if we could get out of the situation where we have a billion people living in extreme poverty, if we could meet basic needs... and provide some minimal education and health care and so on, then I think would be the time to say, "Yeah, let's help to promote the arts." But I just don't think that the differences you make by donating to a museum or an art gallery really compare to the differences you make by donating to the charities that fight global poverty.

Sometimes you're perceived as not having gratitude for charitable donations from the rich, i.e., saying someone like Bill Gates could donate more money. Is there a role for gratitude in your ethics?

PS: Sure. I think there's a place for—I'm not sure gratitude is quite the right word—I would say rather appreciation and recognition are what we should give to Bill Gates. And it's true that Bill Gates and Melinda Gates could give more, but I don't spend a lot of time saying that or criticizing them, because I think what they're doing is fantastic. I think they have made a huge difference to the world, they've saved millions of lives, they've set an example of what wealthy people can be doing. They're not saints or angels, but nor am I.

When it comes to an issue like climate change, which involves people balancing what are perceived to be the needs of the current generation against the needs of future generations, how do you tell people to make that calculation?

PS: I think that we have to take a long term view, even if it means some costs to the present generation. We cannot simply be oblivious to the damage we're doing, and the Russian Roulette we're playing with the future of the planet, which will have effects for centuries to come. When you talk about the costs to the present generation, I think it's important to distinguish between countries that are reasonably affluent, where virtually nobody is starving, and the sacrifices or cost for them, I think, would be relatively minor. Maybe take our standard of living back a couple of decades. But we were not living in poverty in the 1970s or 80s. We could cope with that quite well. On the other hand, other countries that still have people in extreme poverty I think are in a different situation... I think it's reasonable to say that we're the ones who should be taking the lead, and hopefully making it easier for the others to follow.

Should we treat the needs of future generations as equal to ours, or is there some discounting multiple we should put on them?

PS: I don't think we should discount them intrinsically, we should only discount for uncertainty. And there are some uncertainties... but you have to realize that if the damage is somehow irreparable, the consequences are huge, and they're huge for hundreds or thousands of years... and that's why even with a small discount for uncertainty, the shadow of the future ought to weigh very heavily on our present choices.

Inequality has finally been getting some traction in mainstream political discourse in America. Do you see inequality itself as a negative thing, or is it all dependent on its effects?

PS: It's all dependent on its effects for me. I don't see equality as an intrinsic good. I see inequality as something that has a wide range of different effects. The most obvious one for me is the law of diminishing marginal utility: the fact that if somebody is earning $100,000 and you give them an extra $1,000, you've made very little difference to their well being; if someone is struggling to live on $1,000 a year and you give them another $1,000, you've made a huge difference. So that's for me the basic problem with inequality. And obviously, that difference—the difference in the marginal utility of $1,000—is going to diminish as those extremes get closer...

There are also questions about political power that need to be discussed, and they tend to be stronger when we have fairly extreme inequality, which of course we do in the United States. The fact that you can have some billionaires putting huge amounts of money into politics, and therefore having a vastly greater influence than the average voter. If you really believe in democracy, that's difficult to reconcile with basic principles of democracy.

Should there be a maximum amount of wealth that anyone can have?

PS: I don't know that I want to say there's a maximum amount that anyone can have. I do think there are many things we could do, and used to do, to redistribute, that we don't. The move against death duties [inheritance taxes] seems to me a strange thing to have happened, because if you believe in equal opportunity, the idea that you tax someone's estate when they die seems a pretty sensible way of getting redistribution.

Is someone having an extreme amount of wealth a de facto indicator of a moral failing on their part?

PS: Well, if somebody has an extreme amount of wealth and is not using it for some good purpose, only for their own enjoyment or satisfaction, then clearly there's a moral failing in the world in which we live. But, as we were talking about the Gates before, they've done so much with a substantial part of their wealth... it would be sort of mean, failing to recognize what they've done, to say they were not good people because they still have a lot of wealth.

Let's touch on animal rights. What's your take on zoos?

PS: I think it was a mistake to get started on zoos. It was wrong to capture wild animals and confine them in captivity for people to go and gawk at them. And that's basically how zoos got started. But once you do that, and once you have animals that have been bred in captivity, you're really stuck with them in some sense. You can't return them to the wild. Many species, the skills they need to survive in the wild have to be learned... I think what we need to do is to turn the zoos around so the major purpose of them is not to provide people with an opportunity to look at animals, but to provide those animals with an opportunity to lead reasonably good lives. And then if, incidental to that, people can go and look at them while they're leading those lives, that's fine.

Let me ask you the perpetual question that arises in these animal rights conversations: "What are you gonna do with all the cows? Just let them roam free?"

PS: That question always comes up. But do these people really imagine that there are this many cows in the United States as a result of their natural reproduction? They're there because of the commercial incentives to produce them. If the market for the product disappears, then people will stop breeding them, and there won't be all these cows. We can still keep a few in some reservations.

I understand you're an atheist. Do you think religion is immoral? Is there a negative moral aspect to religious belief related to failure to seek out the truth?

PS: There are a lot of different kinds of religious belief. And very often in the discussion about the existence of god, there's [only one represented]... I suppose of the [fundamentalist, literalist] kind of religious belief, I would agree that I don't think there's evidence for such a god. I think there are actually good reasons like the Argument from Evil as to why there couldn't be an all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good creator of the universe.

So I think there is some kind of failing to take evidence and argument seriously when people have that kind of traditional view. But there are many people who describe themselves as religious, or even as specifically Christian or Jewish or Muslim, who would not take their beliefs in that literal sort of way, but who would describe their attitude as some sort of attitude to the world... they may find participation in certain rituals as adding meaning to their lives. And if that's the case, I don't think it's a failure of rationality. It may be something that, for some people, helps to make them better people.

Can you briefly explain your position on euthanasia? It seems to be the most controversial of your positions.

PS: First of all, I do not support involuntary euthanasia, which is killing someone against their will. What I support is, firstly, voluntary euthanasia, which is killing somebody on their request, as happens legally in the Netherlands [and elsewhere]... I also will support in some cases nonvoluntary euthanasia, which is carrying out euthanasia for somebody where there is no possibility of obtaining consent or refusal either way. So, for example, we might be talking about an infant born with severe disabilities. I defend nonvoluntary euthanasia in some of those cases, where the parents, after appropriate counseling and advice, decide that that's best for them and their family. Because we already withdraw life support from some of these babies. And I don't see a big difference between [turning off a respirator keeping a baby alive], which happens every day in intensive care units, and saying, "well, given the prognosis of this baby... we think that it's better that this baby should not live. Its prospects of a life of minimally acceptable quality are too poor"... if it's okay to turn off the respirator in these cases, it ought to be okay to give the baby a lethal injection.

Considering how much controversy that one position of yours generates, do you ever question the utility of holding it?

PS: I do sometimes think that, in hindsight, it might have been better if I never addressed that topic. But it's too late now. I'm not going to change my views, and I think it would shred my credibility as a philosopher if I were now to say, "Well, this doesn't seem to be going down well with the general public, so I'm going to change my views."

To what extent do you practice what you preach in your own life?

PS: I think to a significant extent, but not fully. As I said before when we were talking about the Gates, I don't consider myself to be a saint at all... I'm totally vegetarian and largely vegan, I'm not strict about being vegan... I'm now giving about a third of my income (to charity). I've been sort of gradually working up over the years. And, you know, I think that's substantial, but sure, I'm still living very comfortably, and I could still give more, so that's one of the things I suppose I struggle with still.

For people who still need a New Year's resolution for, is there any pithy thought you have for how to live a more ethical life in 2014?

PS: I would see this as the year of deciding to make your life an effective force for good in the world. Think about: How much good am I doing? How can I do more? I want to do more good in the world in 2014 than I did in 2013, and I will then want to go on and do more still in 2015. So push yourself to your personal best, if you like.

[Image via Wikipedia]

In case you missed it, Anderson Cooper's evisceration of Arizona State Senator and gubernatorial can

Open Call: Every Sketch Lena Dunham Will Do on SNL

0
0

Open Call: Every Sketch Lena Dunham Will Do on SNL

It was announced Tuesday that famous Dunham Lena Dunham will soon be portraying a character that is essentially herself on television once again, this time playing a version of Lena Dunham that is hosting Saturday Night Live on March 8. In honor of her hosting debut, let's crawl inside our dark, warm imaginariums and predict every single sketch in which Lena will participate.

Whoever's ideas ultimately prove the most accurate gets to host SNL (maybe, I don't know—it's on you to work it out with the SNL people).

Here are a few guesses to get the ball rolling:

  • Lena Dunham as a boy in BOYS
  • True GIRLS Detective (One of the girls from GIRLS is killed in a particularly creepy way and no one cares or tries to figure out who did it)
  • Lena Bieber
  • Lena Dunham portrays a short-haired historical figure (Julius Caesar)
  • Lena Dunham sells cupcakes she makes in her bathroom
  • Lena Dunham canNOT figure out how to open a package (becomes frustrated)
  • True GIRLS Detective [Alternate] (Detective Lena Dunham attempts to learn the truth behind a local woman's brutal murder, just ends up learning a lot about her own tastes and personality)
  • DAMES
  • LASSES
  • DEMOISELLES
  • GIRLS but in the future AKA ROBOT GIRLS
  • BATS
  • Lena Dunham plays a bean (Bean-a Dunham)
  • Lena Dunham plays a teen
  • Lena Dunham Drama Camp (camp for regular kids who are always starting drama)
  • Lena Dunham hosts a Photoshop tutorial at The Learning Annex
  • Lena Dunham sets a blog on fire
  • Lena Dunham child psychiatrist
  • Lena Dunham works in a store that sells liiiiiiiiittle things

OK, now you go. And remember: a crowded imaginarium is no excuse for an improper touch.

[Image via Getty]

Nybro Action Team! Girls Recap: Episode Eight

0
0

Nybro Action Team! Girls Recap: Episode Eight

The Nybro Action Team consists of Hjalmar Sveinbjőrnsson and Alex Bejerstrand, two under-employed friends and former Nybro residents now living in northern Sweden. Hjalmar is a student and a chef; Alex helps run his father's talent agency. They will be recapping Season 3 of HBO's Girls.

Lets get this party STARTED !!!

We are back with episode 8 of Girls and we are actually in a good mood, the episode has been watched, screenshots have been taken and Alex is hard at work at the drawings and we are both feeling cheerful because even the episode's first scene displayed what happened in the end of the last episode where the friend group was falling apart and we hope that is going to be enjoyable but we might wrong, Lena Dunham has already gotten a contract for the fourth season.

Some people here have been wondering about Lena Dunham need for near nudity dictatorship and we did stumble upon this article from Time entertainment from January:

Dunham's unabashed nudity on the show came up in a Q&A session afterward, as one reporter asked Dunham why she is constantly naked on the show. "Do you have a girlfriend?" Apatow shot back at the reporter. "Does she like you?" Dunham answered the question by saying that the nudity on the show is "a real human expression" and added, "If you're not into me, that's your problem."

I went and checked out who Apatow is and he looked to old to be going through "puberty" and I didn't find Dunham's answer fulfilling because on one hand she is fighting against the notion that every single girl should look like Barbie and on the other hand 80 percent of the show is just fat jokes.

After the intro scene and the Girls logo we join Hanna as she sits by a table at a bistro and all alone, the waiter comes up and asks if she is sure if she can't get her something else than a glass of water, but her reply is that she is waiting for Patti Lupone and when the waiter does not recognize the name she sings the line "don't wait for me Argentina" but did not help and she storms away in disapproval of Hanna taking one of the best seats in the house.

Hanna gets a call from Adam that is at the "call back" but has to stop as the "denim-clad" man next to him warns him the casting director disapproval of phones in the waiting room or the fact Adam says "everyone here looks like him with a noise job" and "I am not here to make friends."

We are outside Jessa's workplace where she looks incredible bored and when the delivery guy shows up he is obviously in a hurry to leave before that crazy girl stalks talking to him and he gets in trouble at work or becomes that involved in Jessa's life that he ends up having to fake his death.

Nybro Action Team! Girls Recap: Episode Eight

We cut again to Hannah at the bistro where she just got an text/email telling her that Patti has canceled the interview, obviously upset she just leaves and we are back at Adam's callback where he is told he has gotten the part, stoked with excitement and being Adam he goes into the bathroom, stuffs a bunch of toilette paper into his mouth and screams in half suffocated joy.

As he leaves the building obliviously excited of finally landing a part he meets denim-man standing in front of his BMW R series motorcycle from the '70-'80s, not entirely sure about the year but I love the older bikes and café racers, damn you Lena, making us care! … But the denim-man offers Adam a lift and he accepts and they ride away down the city streets.

We are at an unknown bar where Patti Lupone is on stage with her pianist getting ready for tonight's performances, she makes a remark to the pianist that he needs to hit the keys harder and that is why he is having trouble with his girlfriend. Hannah introduces herself as she walks in and Patti's response is that she canceled the interview, but Hannah knew and had called her publicist and found out she was here, she needs that article done today and hopes she can convince Lupone who asks how long it going to take, Hannah says it is going just be 5 to 35 minutes. She gets five minutes.

They sit down and she explains to Patti that this is just like a normal article BUT the exception is that they have to squeeze in the product they are selling, pills against osteoporosis. Turns out she does not even have it but they are just going to lie, so she has had it for 5 years, if you are wondering what osteoporosis is then it's when your bone loses mass and density, most often because of age and one of the most common symptoms is "old people hump back."

They try to find a good story for how she discovered she had "hump back" and they realize they have a lot in common, mainly just being lazy and easily "hysterical."

We are at some yogurt shop where Marnie meets up with her old friend Su Lin played by Greta Lee, the have a short talk when they are walking down the street and Marnie becomes jealous of her friend's achievements like soon she will open her own art gallery and still doing "porno" on the side.

Nybro Action Team! Girls Recap: Episode Eight

Marnie tries to land a job from her, but she just offers her to come and see the opening, scene ends with a really one-sided hug and we cut back to Hannah and Lupone.

They are not talking about the "hump back syndrome" but the fact that Adam is going to fuck everyone in the building, the fans and what ever moves, her relationship is doomed, that of course is massively helpful for her, we are back in the snack room in GQ where Hanna is sitting with Jessica Williams, they are talking about what happened today and how mind-fucked she is after Lupone has mind-fucked her with how Adam is going to change, the editor-in-chief comes in to give Hannah a new assignment and she is supposed to stay at some fancy hotel overnight and then leaves.

But that topic is off the table when someone from the accounting brings them their paychecks and Hannah is blown away over how much she is making a week now, more than her month's rent so she is going to head into town and "make it rain," of course we get a "montage" of Hannah walking down a street and buying a new dress.

We are back with Jessa in the store where she sits on top of the counter eating some chocolate and in comes Jasper her older friend from rehab, they have a short argument how well she is doing but he tells her how shitty her life is because "people like them" are not suppose to work in places like this!, is this how Lena projects the "counter culture"? Because those people are just junkies but I am glad to see Jasper is back, maybe if we are lucky he will cause Jessa to "not exist" any more.

We are at the hotel where Hannah, Elijah and Shosh are getting ready for Adam's surprise celebration tonight but ends up mostly with Elijah sobbing over that it's Adam that is the first one to fulfill his life long dream, Shosh comes in and says something Shosh-like and makes me miss her drinking last episode.

We are at Ray's apartment where Marnie shows up with a pizza but mostly with her "problems" and start laying them down thick, Ray has enough and tells her that he does not want this, he wants a real girlfriend not a girl that is ashamed of him, does not say that in so many words but we know.

Marnie tells him that he is not going to get to "dump" the girl he dreamed off in high school because she does NOT CARE and then leaves... with the pizza.

We are back at the hotel where Adam and Denim-man finally show up for the party, the girls and Elijah jump out of the side room shouting "SURPRISE", next scene and we are sitting in the living room and Denim-man is telling everyone one of his exciting "outdoor" adventure story´s about being in the "back country" only with a blanket and a bottle of water when he realized he was missing his mother's birthday but suddenly in storms Marnie with the box of cold pizza and hysterically and congratulates Adam for the Broadway success and then announces that she needs to go to the bathroom and is totally "A O K."

Hanna ends up going after her and Marnie ends up crying in her arms, a little later when the girls exit and join the group in the living room the denim-man is playing some bluegrass song and the rest of group sits there "puppy eyed" listening to him play.

After the song Marnie is trying to get in denim pants of Denim man but turns out he has a girlfriend that is at home making "paella" and he needs to head home, while this is happening you can see Elijah having a conversation with Adam, he looks like he is in pain and Elijah thinks he has found his way-out from "improvised dancing" when Jessa and Jasper enter the party with their crazy crazy attitude, Jasper saying he knows everyones name but of course gets them all wrong then they head into one of the bedrooms and Hannah notices that maybe they should not have taken her out of rehab, where in next scene you can see him and Shosh having a very high strong conversation about leaving school when Jessa comes in to announce that she knows where to get money.

Nybro Action Team! Girls Recap: Episode Eight

Of course we see them break into the children cloth store she works and steal some cash and cut to them in Jessa's bedroom sniffing white powder and him graping her tits but she pushes his hand lazy away to get a clear path to the mirror of lines.

Last scene we see Hannah and Adam in the bath tub having a conversation about their friends, he mentions how tired he was of Elijah talking about a lot of stupid shit while she mentions maybe that is how she sees his friend Denim-man, but they are talking about this in a very nice way, actually the most "real" I seen that couple from start, specially because Adam spots that she might be worried about his success being the person she is, but she says "no… no. no... god no..."

Well this episode was not that bad and felt short, even though my writing ended up in four pages and got cut down, don't worry because we are not going to miss what I edited out, mostly just "fan-fiction" about Jessa and Jasper, but on those notes lets end this now.

Nybro action team … OUT !

(Demin-man was played by Ebon Moss-Bachrach)


Illustrations by Alex Bejerstrand. Read previous installments of Nybro Action Team! here.

A History of Clickbait: The First 100 Years

0
0

A History of Clickbait: The First 100 Years

Clickbait is the lowest form of social media journalism, full of sensationalized headlines, grumpy cats, and awful personal confessions. Most pundits complaining about it say that it's a new invention for the short attention spans of the internet age. But that's not true. Clickbait's history goes back to the nineteenth century.

A History of Clickbait: The First 100 Years

In this political cartoon from 1888, called "The Evil Spirits of the Modern Day Press," we see many of the same "evils" that social media supposedly invented in the past decade. There is "paid puffery," which is equivalent to paid content. There are "bad pictures," which could be LOLcats; there are also "personal journalism," "scandal," "criminal news," "garbled news," and "boasting lies." Each of these, worded slightly differently, could be accusations about clickbait leveled at places like Huffington Post, Buzzfeed, Gawker and Upworthy.

At the time, critics of these media evils called it "yellow journalism." The term came from a popular cartoon character called the Yellow Kid, who appeared in a comic strip in the New York World called Hogan's Alley. In the nineteenth century, newspapers were fighting for circulation numbers, the same way social media sites compete for unique visitors or eyeballs today. One surefire way to boost circulation was to have a popular comic strip, and World owner Joseph Pulitzer was crushing his competition, William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal, by running the adventures of the Yellow Kid. (Eventually Hearst bought Hogan's Alley from the World, in a ridiculous bidding war that makes Facebook's acquisition of Whatsapp look sane.)

A History of Clickbait: The First 100 Years

Essentially, these papers were using LOLcats to get their circulation numbers up. The Yellow Kid was like grumpy cat, except human. He was a kid who lived in the slums, who would appear with wacky sayings on his nightshirt, usually written in broken English. Instead of LOLspeak, you had slum talk — but the upshot was the same. People were buying these papers to read stupid cartoons, not to get the news. One critic called it "Yellow Kid journalism," but the phrase that stuck was simply "yellow journalism."

Last year, XKCD's Randall Munroe made fun of clickbait headlines by writing up an imaginary timeline of major events in the twentieth century and giving them headlines like "Avoid Polio with This One Weird Trick" and "17 Things that Will Be Outlawed Now That Women Can Vote." The joke is supposed to be that nobody in the twentieth century would have written such ridiculous headlines. But the real joke is that, except for the contemporary idioms, Munroe's headlines would have been perfect for yellow journalists.

Here are a few actual headlines from 1913, in The World, a yellow journalism paper run by Joseph Pulitzer:

King Victor Shielded By His Queen From Assassin's Bullets

"Oldest Crook" To End Days in the Prison He Loves

Crowd Tries to Kill Would-Be Murderer

Coffyn Carries Passenger in Air Trip About the Bay

A History of Clickbait: The First 100 Years

Note that on the bottom there's a little box that says "Skirmish!" that details how much bigger this newspaper's circulation is than its rival papers, The World and The Herald. This is roughly equivalent to the way many social media outlets today proudly display the number of "likes" or "upvotes" or "uniques" next to each story.

A History of Clickbait: The First 100 Years

Yellow journalism came of age during the period when William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal was competing for circulation numbers with the Joseph Pulitzer's New York World. Things got so heated in their war for eyeballs that both papers would take any opportunity to turn the boring daily news into sensational, Earth-shattering events. That's one way that the sinking of the U.S. vessel Maine in a Cuban harbor went from an accidental explosion to a possible attack by Spain. Here are famous covers from the Journal and the World, suggesting that the Spanish attacked the Maine in the harbor during talks between the two countries on neutral Cuban ground.

A History of Clickbait: The First 100 Years

The U.S. State Department maintains to this day that "yellow journalism" helped instigate the Spanish-American War, which was fought mostly in Cuba and the Philippines. And people on the scene, who examined the ship after the explosion, said that it likely originated inside the vessel. It was probably an accident. But tensions between the U.S. and Spain were already running high, and it was easy for journalists to turn a hard-to-diagnose explosion into a possible act of war.

It's interesting to consider that over a century ago, Hearst and Pulitzer's papers were considered largely yellow journalism enterprises. And yet now Pulitzer's name adorns the Pulitzer Prize, one of the most respected honors any journalist can receive. To get the full force of this irony, imagine that in fifty years, the most important award in journalism is called the Buzzfeed Prize or the Gawker Award.

If you want to consider the historical facts, rather than read the yellow journalism stories that sensationalize clickbait, then you'll be forced to accept that clickbait is nothing new. Journalists and news sources — even respectable ones — have always used trumped up headlines and dumb pictures to lure people into looking at what they've written.

Sometimes this practice is harmless, or even beneficial. Maybe people will come for the LOLcats but stay to read a piece of excellent investigative journalism or cultural analysis. In other cases, sensationalized news headlines and gossip can have extremely negative repercussions, fanning the flames of war or bullying innocent people. But to claim that clickbait is some nasty new disease cooked up by techies of the internet age is as shortsighted and ill-informed as clickbait itself.


Netflix Jokes About Shipping DVDs by Drone, People Still Watching DVDs

0
0

Netflix's DVD division reminded the world it still exists by taking a shot at Amazon.com during its annual meeting, in a video spoof of the mega-retailer's infamous drone delivery publicity stunt.

The revolutionary Netflix "Drone2Home" service will deliver a movie to your living room (or bathroom) "within mere seconds of you adding it to your queue," because physical media is definitely not obsolete.

Meanwhile, in the real world, DVD subscriptions have dropped from 30 million in 2011—when Netflix split its DVD and streaming plans—to under 7 million at the end of 2013. Now the company is banking on original streaming programming, a business that Amazon is trying to muscle in on by building its own House of Cards.

If Amazon does take a bite out of Netflix, though, at least the DVD division can feel good that its fake drone service is exactly as real as Amazon's, and it cost a lot less to build.

[H/T: Tastefully Offensive]

Deadspin The Case For New York City As Greatest City In The World | Gizmodo No, Vaccines Don't Cause

Homeless Hater Greg Gopman Sued for Abusing Funds And Terrorizing CEO

0
0

Homeless Hater Greg Gopman Sued for Abusing Funds And Terrorizing CEO

Former AngelHack CEO Greg Gopman was just as toxic towards his own startup as he was towards homeless people. In a lawsuit filed this month in California State Superior Court, his cofounder Sabeen Ali claims that Gopman used money from AngelHack's bank accounts to pay for personal expenses including his $4,500/month apartment rent, credit card debt, as well as "elaborate vacations" in Thailand and Colombia.

It wasn't just for pleasure, though. Gopman also allegedly broke into Ali's company accounts, purported to fire all of AngelHack's employees, and prevented communication with clients. In short, the claims in the lawsuit sound like a flawless execution of a cofounder's worst nightmare.

According to the complaint (embedded below), Gopman and Ali began to discuss Ali taking over the role of CEO last November because Ali was doing most of the work. The agreement was signed right around the time Gopman decided to post a public Facebook rant against San Francisco's neediest residents.

That's when the alleged misuse of funds began:

Since signing the Agreement, defendant has failed to cooperate in good faith in order to undertake these required corporate actions. Instead, over plaintiff's repeated objections, defendant has unlawfully accessed the Corporation's bank accounts and distributed substantial company monies to himself to pay for personal expenses—notably, one distribution amounted to $70,000, which was used to pay off credit card debts. On information and belief, plaintiff alleges that that the defendants's company credit card debts included personal living expenses and elaborate vacations abroad in Thailand and Colombia. Plaintiff is informed and believes that not only has defendant paid his personal apartment rent out of company funds ($4,500 per month), but he has pocketed $2,500 a month in rent received from a roommate without reimbursing the Corporation.

Dicking over your roommate in the process, my that's some multitasking.

The lawsuit also claims that Gopman "took affirmative action to harm" AngelHack by removing Ali from the company bank accounts without authorization and trying to illegally access another AngelHack account with Silicon Valley Bank.

There's more mayhem where that came from. Ali accuses Gopman of:

(c) Changing all AngelHack corporate account information and passwords to critical systems and social media accounts all of which are of critical importance to AngelHack's ongoing operations: including AngelHack's GoDaddy account (host of angelhack.com), Gmail account, Twitter account, Facebook account, Mailchimp account, AngelHack blog, and Evenbrite account

(d) Emailing all AngelHack employees purporting to fire them and plaintiff; and

(e) Illegally accessing plaintiff's corporate email account, reading and forwarding numerous emails to himself for the purpose of misappropriating proprietary and confidential legal, financial and personal information.

Ali claims that Gopman also accessed the AngelHack email server and changed her credentials so that she couldn't get into her contacts or calendar and therefore couldn't communicate with customers, investors, and partners, and had trouble keeping appointments.

In November, Gopman sent out a cheery company-wide email announcing Ali's promotion, calling himself "a builder" to Ali's "Do'er":

Attention Attention Everyone,

Some big news! I would like to announce effective December 14, 2013, Sabeen Ali will be taking over as CEO of AngelHack and I will be stepping down as master and commander of our ship. I'm a builder and I feel like the majority of my work here is done. I have a couple big projects I want to begin and I feel like my main work getting this thing off the ground is done.

I'm sure all of you know Sabeen by now. She's been the Do'er behind the scenes making all the wheels turn for some time now . . .

He followed through on the title change. But the lawsuit says Gopman refused to recognize the part in the agreement that made Ali the majority shareholder, with a 51 percent in AngelHack and reducing his share to 49 percent.

Adding salt to the wound, Gopman's alleged spree of startup misdeeds came after the Facebook outburst that cost AngelHack clients, sponsorship partners, and more:

On December 11, 2013, an unfortunate event occurred that was very damaging to the Corporation. Defendant posted a hateful message on his Facebook page viciously demeaning the homeless residents of San Francisco. Defendant's post was widely disseminated and soundly criticized, bringing shame and disrepute on AngelHack and its employees and associates. As a result of defendant's public gaff, AngelHack and its employees experienced immediate international backlash, resulting in the loss of numerous clients and sponsorship partners and in AngelHack's employees, including plaintiff, receiving volumes of hate mail from around the globe.

Ali is suing Gopman for breach of contract, specific performance, declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and interference with prospective economic advantage. But even though the suit says Gopman has "acted with malice, fraud, and oppression," it's not clear that Ali or AngelHack will be able to recover much from him. Because she has not been issued the proper stock in the company:

...plaintiff has no adequate legal remedy. AngelHack is a privately held early-stage, event-based company with virtually no hard assets. AngelHack's true value at present is as a potential target for future outside investment or acquisition due to its uniquely successful hackathon model. There is no 'fair market value' of AngelHack as a going concern. Further, plaintiff is instrumental in running AngelHack as well as marketing its services to the industry. Without plaintiff, AngelHack will likely fail and any nascent opportunity will be scuttled. Damages, if awarded, cannot be properly ascertained since there is no fixed market value and damages will be inadequate to compensate plaintiff for the detriment suffered by her in the event that she is excluded from this opportunity which at this point in time remains speculative at best.

Despite running a company that puts on hackathons, Gopman confessed in a recent Medium post that he only just started teaching himself how to code. Hopefully he'll learn fast enough to be able to make next month's rent without dipping into the AngelHack accounts. Wouldn't want to end up one of those homeless "degenerates."

Sabeen Ali v. Gregory Gopman by Nitasha Tiku

Asiana Airlines was just fined $500,000 for failing to assist passengers and their families in the a

California Couple Finds $10 Million In Gold Coins In Their Backyard

0
0

California Couple Finds $10 Million In Gold Coins In Their Backyard

A rare coin dealer says that a Northern California couple basically tripped over $10 million dollars last year when they discovered a can of old coins while out walking their dog.

The couple were walking on their property in Sierra Nevada when they noticed a decaying canister sticking up from the ground. They eventually discovered eight cans in all, filled with more than a thousand gold coins, holding a face value of $27,980.

Coin dealer Don Kagin, who is representing the anonymous couple, extolled the "excellent mint condition," of coins, valuing the entire "Saddle Ridge Horde" collection at $10 million.

But it wouldn't be the first time a buried coin collection fetched millions.

According to "American Coin Treasures and Hoards," the bible of buried treasure finds, the biggest hoard of gold coins dug up before Saddle Ridge was a collection found by construction workers in Jackson, Tenn., in 1985. It had a face value of $4,500 and sold for $1 million.

[image via AP]

Huge Waves Knock More Than 500 Shipping Containers Into the Ocean

0
0

Huge Waves Knock More Than 500 Shipping Containers Into the Ocean

Millions of dollars worth of cigarettes have already washed up on shore after hundreds of Maersk shipping containers fell off a ship during a particularly rough storm earlier this month.

It's the largest recorded number of containers ever lost overboard in a single incident, according to CNN.

The Svendborg Maersk began losing its cargo near Northern France when 30-foot waves and winds of nearly 70 miles per hour began battering the ship in early February. By the time the boat docked in Spain last week, around 520 containers were unaccounted for.

Maersk says none of the containers held dangerous materials; by their count, 85% of the lost containers were empty and "others included such dry goods as frozen meat."

But even the losses of containers containing benign products have had lasting impacts:

These rogue containers can pose a danger to shipping and pollute the environment. In 2006, thousands of bags of Doritos chips washed up on the beaches of North Carolina's Outer Banks — much to the delight of local gulls — after the container carrying them split apart in the Atlantic. More famously, in 1992, a container broke apart off the coast of Alaska, and 29,000 plastic ducks and frogs escaped. They've been washing up as far away as Scotland and Japan ever since.

And it hasn't taken long for some of the lost items to reach shore — more than $5 million worth of cigarettes, including Marlboro Reds and Marlboro menthols, washed up onto English beaches in the last few weeks. The container they came from held an estimated 14 tons of cigarettes.

Maritime authorities are on the lookout for floating containers — apparently the insulation in refrigerated shipping containers allow them to float for a few months — but most have already sunk to the bottom of the ocean. At least 13 have been recovered so far

Joe Biden: I May Be a White Boy But I Can Jump


Confused Japanese Tourists Trigger High-Speed Police Chase

0
0

Confused Japanese Tourists Trigger High-Speed Police Chase

A Utah police chase ended with a Japanese family at gunpoint after they accidentally led highway police into a high-speed chase on an interstate near the Arizona border.

Police first noticed the family's car around 1 am, when they spotted it swerving between interstate lanes at less than 40 miles per hour. Officers thought they were observing a DUI in progress and tried to pull the car over.

Instead, the car sped up, eventually leading three patrol cars while other officers laid spikes on the highway ahead. Seven miles after the chase began, the car's tires were punctured.

According to officers, the occupants of the car — a woman, her husband, and their seven-year-old son — were terrified.

The woman said she had no idea what she was supposed to do when the patrolman put on his lights and siren, so she sped up to get out of the way. She kept apologizing for crashing the car, not realizing they ran over tire spikes, Horne said.

Patrolmen took the family to a motel and wished them safe travels.

The family will not face any charges.

[image via Shutterstock]

Police Officers Indicted After Secret Dashboard Camera Video Surfaces

0
0

Police Officers Indicted After Secret Dashboard Camera Video Surfaces

New Jersey prosecutors abruptly dropped charges against a 30-year-old man facing years in prison after a previously undisclosed dash cam video surfaced depicting the responding police officers breaking several laws.

Marcus Jeter was arrested in 2012 after police responded to a domestic violence call at the home he shared with his girlfriend. No charges were filed and he spoke with police before departing the scene. He was pulled over shortly thereafter.

Police video from the traffic stop show two officers approach the car with a handgun and a shotgun. Jeter was eventually charged with eluding police, resisting arrest and assault. Prosecutors offered him a five-year plea deal.

But they dropped the charges when they saw a second video from another police vehicle that struck Jeter's car. The camera on that vehicle shows the officers break the window of Jeter's car, punch him in the head, and drag him out — all while he had his hands in the air.

One officer punches Jeter repeatedly while yelling, "Stop resisting. Why are you trying to take my fucking gun?"

The two officers were indicted on conspiracy and official misconduct. The officer who struck Jeter was also charged with aggravated assault.

[image via ABC]

Here's Kanye West Rationally Explaining His Creative Frustration

0
0

On Tuesday's Late Night with Seth Meyers, Kanye West truly cracked the Matrix. Without raising his voice or spiraling into narrative curlicues or providing any of the intensity necessary to render this 2+ minute verbal essay on his creative prowess a "rant," West lucidly explained what he's been saying for a while now: He feels stifled by powers that be who expect him to work in a certain way because of his established profile. He feels limited in his permitted expression, particularly when it comes to fashion.

The whole appearance, really, seemed like damage control for his erratic, albeit highly entertaining string of interviews last year. "2013, all the controversy, blah blah blah blah...I'm in the process of breaking down walls that people will understand 10 years from now, 20 years from now," he said.

Of course there was grandiosity. It wouldn't be Kanye if there weren't. He also compared himself to Michelangelo. Again.

Meyers engineered Kanye's second segment around his sense of humor. He showed a clip of an SNL sketch idea written with Meyers that parodied Kanye's awards show etiquette. In it, he interrupts an 8-year-old's victory speech at a pumpkin competition. This dates back almost two years before his infamous interruption of Taylor Swift at the 2009 VMAs. How prescient and/or inspiring.

Kanye also thanked Meyers for granting him the platform of his talk show. So humble this one, when he isn't talking about himself!

On his sense of humor, West said, "You laugh to keep from crying. Life is like...life is life. There are ups and downs, and they will give an 8-year-old the Best Pumpkin at any given time and you just have to be prepared for these type of things." Words to live by.

He closed the show with a medley of his hits "Jesus Walks, "Touch the Sky," "Stronger," "Heartless," "All of the Lights," "Mercy," and "Black Skinhead." Like the rest of this appearance it seemed tailored to be as user-friendly and crowd-pleasing as possible.

It did not fail. The guy cleans up well, of course. He's a consummate performer. Interviews are among the art forms in which he dabbles, and it's great to see him pull off something this conceptual.

Republican "Bullies" Want Jan Brewer to Veto Arizona's Anti-Gay Bill

0
0

Republican "Bullies" Want Jan Brewer to Veto Arizona's Anti-Gay Bill

With pressure mounting from major corporations, Republicans have suddenly become very critical of SB 1062, the Arizona bill passed last week that would allow businesses with "strongly held religious beliefs" to discriminate against LGBT customers. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has until February 28 to veto the bill before it becomes law.

On Tuesday, Rush Limbaugh complained that Brewer was being "bullied" to veto the bill "in order to advance the agenda."

If so, those "bullies" looking to "advance the gay agenda" now include prominent Republicans from across the country, including Arizona Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake:

Mitt Romney

Newt Gingrich

And three Republican state senators in Arizona who now say they regret voting for the bill.

"I think laws are (already) on the books that we need, and have now seen the ramifications of my vote," State Sen. Bob Worsley told The Associated Press earlier this week. "I feel very bad, and it was a mistake."

Why the sudden change of heart? Money. More specifically, criticism from major corporations, including Apple, American Airlines, and the NFL, which could pull the 2015 Super Bowl from the state if the bill isn't vetoed.

"This is going to hurt the state of Arizona's economy and, frankly, our image, so I hope the governor of Arizona will veto this and we move on," McCain told CNN.

The pressure seems to be working. According to NBC News, Brewer is "likely" to veto the bill before Friday's deadline.

[Image via AP]

The Week in Tabloids: Kendall Jenner Steals Kim Kardashian Vogue Cover

0
0

The Week in Tabloids: Kendall Jenner Steals Kim Kardashian Vogue Cover

Welcome back to Midweek Madness, in which Callie Beusman makes a pilgrimage to the local newsstand and buys the latest issues of Ok!, In Touch, Life & Style, Us and Star. Together we "read" the "news" so you don't "have" to. This week: Nicole Richie is "scary skinny;" everyone hates The Bachelor; and new fashion it girl Kendall Jenner is getting the Vogue cover Kim Kardashian wanted. Whoops!


The Week in Tabloids: Kendall Jenner Steals Kim Kardashian Vogue Cover

Ok!

WEDDING & TWO BABIES!

Stop us if you've heard this one before: Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt are going to get married and have two more kids. With a twist, though: Angie and Brad are planning on getting pregnant with one child and adopting the second from Ethiopia. Sure! This article also goes into great depths describing the most batshit fabricated wedding of all time: the ceremony will be officiated by George Clooney, who will get his marriage license online. It will take place in France during Cannes (because none of their friends will be invited to the Film Festival??); Brad and Angie "have set aside a couple of a million dollars for catering, decorating, flowers, and staff," as one does; there will be a private party in a fake bunker that Brad and his sons built in honor of World War Z; people dressed up as characters from Monsters, Inc. will be flown in from Disneyland Paris. OK, SURE. Moving on: Miley Cyrus is now a huge commitment-phobe; she's been through 7 men in 4 months — but apparently this will all take place in the FUTURE, from Sept. 2014 to Dec. 2014 (Fig 1). A source close to Miley adds that her "tough, sexually-liberated-girl persona" is just a "defense mechanism," thus the 7 Future Lovers. Moving on: Selena Gomez, who did not go to rehab for substance abuse, is "still partying" — according to an Instagram she posted of herself sipping on a girly cocktail with a friend. Also, she wants implants, says a source. Oooook. In other news, Kendall Jenner is totally going to steal Kim's Vogue cover. As a reminder, Kim's promised Vogue cover does not yet exist, and may never exist. But Kendall is now beloved by the fashion industry, having walked in both New York and London Fashion Weeks; she also sat next to Anna Wintour in the front row at Topshop. Kim will absolutely lose her shit if this continues, affirms the mag. Elsewhere in the magazine, the Royals are running out of money; most of their vast wealth is locked up in property, which they can't sell. As a result, they're downsizing: Kate Middleton plans on "halving the $54,000 she spent last year on clothes." The very picture of frugality.

Grade: F (crawling for three days over scorching desert sands)


The Week in Tabloids: Kendall Jenner Steals Kim Kardashian Vogue Cover

Life & Style

PROPOSAL GONE WRONG

Sigh, another Bachelor story: this one says that Juan Pablo lost his "two favorite girls," both of whom chose to leave the show, and had a sad, lackluster proposal that made everyone cry as a result. But also he's a womanizer and has been seen with three women since the show ended, so it looks like he bounced back ok. Moving on: in a beautiful case of burying the lede, Ashton Kutcher is demanding that Mila Kunis sign a pre-nup in order to protect his $170 million (oh, also, he proposed to her). Mila Kunis, whose personal brand is "chill," probably doesn't really care. In other news, Selena Gomez and Niall from One Direction made out a lot in London and thus Selena has initiated a revenge sequence against Justin Bieber. Apparently Selena's friends are encouraging her to continue seeing Niall, who is doofy and kind and sometimes pretends to play the guitar. Next: Kendall Jenner wore no bra beneath a sheer shirt on the Marc Jacobs runway, causing Life & Style to ponder: "WHAT HAPPENED TO KENDALL?" Apparently, Kris Jenner has been pushing her to dress "sexier" in order to "keep the family in the limelight"; as we all know, nothing in the world is sexier than brown trousers that a turn-of-the-century pauper would wear on his paper route (Fig 2).

Grade: F (walking for three hours barefoot over frozen arctic ice)


The Week in Tabloids: Kendall Jenner Steals Kim Kardashian Vogue Cover

Star

TRAPPED!

Full disclosure: We could not bring ourselves to read this cover story. But "crying in public" and "too broke to leave Dean" sound super sad, and we hope Donna Martin graduates. Moving on: Nicole Richie is "scary skinny" and "won't stop cleansing," says a report based on a paparazzi photo of her leaving a store carrying a plastic bag. A zoomed-in image of said bag reveals that there is DUN DUN DUN "UltraCleanse Plus" shake mix inside (Fig. 3). According to an alarmist source, Nicole's husband Joel "is scared to death that her organs will begin to shut down." She seems to be ambulatory though? Also too thin, on a different page of the mag, is Emma Roberts. A scintillating eyewitness account straight from Nobu: "All she ate was one piece of sushi and didn't even touch the rice!" Someone call the cops. Next, "bad girl" Cara Delevingne is making friends with Taylor Swift, but TSwizzle's "inner circle" is worried because Cara is a "terrible influence." Protect America's Sweatheart at all costs. Jennifer Aniston and Justin Theroux are "worlds apart" which does not mean she is basking in the sun on Tatooine while he's shivering in an ice cave on Hoth, but apparently they haven't seen each other in 50 days. The editors are drafting "sad and alone" headlines right now. More relationship news: Your boyfriend Ryan Gosling keeps trying to break up with Eva Mendes, "but she manipulates him into staying," a source swears. Keep fighting the good fight, girl. There's a two-page article about how Khloe Kardashian has serious feelings for The Game; here is an actual sentence: "While The Game, 34, is a former gang member and drug dealer whose rap sheet includes arrests for disorderly conduct and threatening someone with a gun, Khloe is drawn to the hip-hop artist's sensitive side." But it's going nowhere, an insider says: He doesn't feel the same way about her. This, of course, means Khloe is "falling apart," and the proof is a weirdly-angled Instagram selfie which allegedly illustrates how "she's been going overboard with fillers and Botox." Finally, a two-page piece called "Miley's X-Rated Extravaganza" consists of tongue-extended crotch-grabbing images from the Bangerz tour and the possibly erroneous statement: "As she twerks and teases onstage, Miley Cyrus' Bangerz tour is proving too hot for tweens — and it's inspiring a parent-led revolt." The revolution will be driving carpool!

Grade: D- (three hours bareback on a horse galloping in the rain)


The Week in Tabloids: Kendall Jenner Steals Kim Kardashian Vogue Cover

In Touch

OUR MEDICAL MIRACLE

Ok, we have never seen Teen Mom, but this is really touching: Leah from Teen Mom has a 4-year-old daughter, Aliannah, with a rare form of muscular dystrophy; despite being told that Aliannah would have to spend much of her life in a wheelchair, Leah revealed the magazine that her daughter is capable of running. Also, her family and fans are very supportive of Ali: "Until the day she doesn't walk, I'll never think that she won't," says her dad. I'm tearing up a lil bit. In other news, Snooki is maybe pregnant, although she hasn't announced anything officially. The one bit of evidence is that she's postponed her wedding, which is Great Gatsby-themed. I think that's the most notable part of this story, because one time Snooki told the New York Times that she'd only read two books in her life (Twilight and Dear John). Moving on: Christina Aguilera is definitely pregnant (she announced it earlier this week). InTouch takes this opportunity to remind us of the specter of baby weight and Christina's recent "impressive 49-pound weight loss following years of flaunting a fuller figure." BLERGH. Next: Bachelor Juan Pablo is the worst Bachelor ever, says everyone. According to an eyewitness at the show's Women Tell All special, which airs March 3, all the women unified against him in an impressive display of sisterhood. One contestant, Kelly (the one whose profession was literally listed as "Dog Lover"), has a gay dad and started to tear up when she brought up Juan Pablo's homophobic comments. Which bodes well for ratings, probably, because berating homophobes makes for great television.

Grade: D (walking for three miles with Juan Pablo talking to you)


The Week in Tabloids: Kendall Jenner Steals Kim Kardashian Vogue Cover

Us

AMAZING OLYMPICS STORIES

Hey, remember the Olympics? Shit happened. Some of it was cool. Now Meryl Davis and Charlie White are going to be on Dancing With the Stars. Cool. Also inside: Paula Patton has wanted to ditch Robin Thicke since last August, but with the Miley stuff and the mirror butt-grab situation, he "begged Paula to stay with him until the controversy had died down," says a source. Brooke Burke, the lady who used to stand next to the guy who hosts Dancing With the Stars, found out she'd been fired from the show just a few hours before it was announced. Erin Andrews is the new lady, and ABC hopes she will bring a "young male following." Snicker. The obligatory Juan Pablo article in this issue has details from the Tell All taping. Apparently Lucy goes off on the Bachelor star, and Kelly, whose dad is gay, brings up the homophobic quotes and cries. Meanwhile, former Bachelor Jef With One F Holm says of Juan Pablo: "He is, by far, the sleaziest Bachelor." Burn. The next Bachelorette will either be Andi or Renee, in case you were wondering. Last, but certainly not least, a two-page spread about "Lupita's Makeup Magic" will have you thinking you can pull off fuchsia gloss and green eyeshadow. Good luck! (Fig. 4)

Grade: D (skating for 3 minutes)


Addendum

The Week in Tabloids: Kendall Jenner Steals Kim Kardashian Vogue Cover

Fig. 1, from Ok!

The Week in Tabloids: Kendall Jenner Steals Kim Kardashian Vogue Cover

Fig. 2, from Life & Style

The Week in Tabloids: Kendall Jenner Steals Kim Kardashian Vogue Cover

Fig. 3, from Star

The Week in Tabloids: Kendall Jenner Steals Kim Kardashian Vogue Cover

Fig. 4, from Us

Viewing all 24829 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images