Happyfeet outlines the issue over at the pub — taking his cue from Christopher Taylor.
And those who haven’t yet commented on this — well, I question their patriotism.
Search
Archive Calendar
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |
Archives
Categories
- A Government That Can Force You to Buy Health Insurance Can Make You Do Anything (3)
- a protein wisdom philosophy primer (3)
- academics (25)
- armadillo (8)
- Friday Fiction 100 Word Challenge (51)
- from the protein wisdom conceptual series (136)
- identity politics (33)
- If Republicans Win the Senate in 2014 (1)
- in which celebraties comment on current events (67)
- language / intentionalism (88)
- legal (6)
- My brief conversations with inanimate objects (130)
- NSA / FISA (46)
- One Term to Serve, the 2012 Revival (6)
- Overheard in a Fallujah bunker (27)
- Poems from 196x, Revised by the Ghost of Richard Brauti (27)
- protein wisdom's DNC coverage (30)
- protein wisdom's RNC coverage (29)
- protein wisdom: the movie Lists (20)
- Provocateurism (16)
- real-time empirical observations (51)
- red pills found behind the sofa cushions (42)
- Scenes from my driveway (61)
- Talking back to 80s music (41)
- The Martha Stewart Chronicles (58)
- The protein wisdom interviews (10)
- The protein wisdom original poems (142)
- Uncategorized (20,046)
- Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance, abridged (34)
Recent Comments
- In The Mailbox: 02.28.23 (Afternoon Edition) : The Other McCain on Hey, longtime pw readers…
- In The Mailbox: 12.23.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll truly IS a sad, embittered psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- In The Mailbox: 07.18.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
I say a firm maybe so.
This is going to be a surprise to everyone but I say no. We ought not reward the attention seeker in life or in blogs with what they desire.
Even if what they desire in the short term weakens them in the long term — and, in so doing, corrects a corrupt system?
Listen: I just had former troll timmy take a dig at me related to this very topic. He noted that at one point Glenn Greenwald and I used to debate rather regularly, but that Greenwald has become a SUPERSTAR who won’t even return my calls these days.
He has NYT best-sellers, and his posts blah blah blah.
Whereas I am unimportant. A blogging nobody. A zilch. Timmy based his entire criticism on popularity — not stopping to recall the number of times that I’ve posted critiques of consensus-based truth and naked emperors, which should have told him that such criticisms don’t much faze me when the person I’m being compared to is someone so consistently disingenuous as Greenwald.
Greenwald’s traffic is high, but in my estimation, he courts only those who, when the party is over and the morning sun shines, are going to feel all dirty and used when they wake up naked beside him.
As for mainstream journalists trolling for blog traffic by writing patently inflammatory columns, let them. And link to those columns, so that hopefully new readers will stumble upon your critiques while Googling — the end result being that such columnists will be revealed for the opportunistic and unprincipled frauds that they are.
Let them enjoy the short term fillip of pleasure that comes with a huge burst of traffic. In the morning, they’re still whores — and in the long term, their pleasure zones will become stretched and flappy, and dry as a Letterman riposte.
I have to agree with you, JeffG, and come down on the side of linking, even if it does “drive traffic” to the troll’s writings.
Yes, before partisanship the MSM is driven by numbers. It’s the old “even negative attention is welcome because it’s still attention” game.
However, at some point, the flaming troll will be more remembered for their flames (if especially there is a record to flog them with at a later date) then their traffic.
I am a firm believer in exposing these types in as public a manner as possible.
My attitude about this is a little different. I feel that there’s not a lot of use demonstrating that a person is a moron, because it’s so common an affliction and because there are those who will revere his moronicity just because it’s agreeable to theirs. On the other hand, if you are in a position to demonstrate that someone is a medacious douchebag, I think it’s important to do so. Further, if someone attacks you through lies or misprision, then it’s important to respond.
Did Beauchamp’s “articles” receive more attention because of the blogswarm questioning him? Yeah. Was it important that he was revealed as a fabulist? You betcha. Those who felt that dealing with him as was done was an index of ideologically motivated bad faith also exposed themselves as morons, which is useful. And those who purport to speak for my views I endorse who lie, waffle or attempt to finesse the truth are the ones I need most violently to confront.
There’s a couple of side benefits to linking the article. One is that many people (me included) tend to assume that something’s been taken out of context (even if the whole article is quoted, there are things that people write that when taken singularly can be very offensive but if you have a chance to examine other writings you find they’re being tongue-in-cheek).
The second benefit is the mental click that happens when someone reads an idiotic article on a website complete with a banner and graphic and URL. No link = some idiot that was torched before, maybe I’ve seen him get torched before or maybe not, and was this the same guy/news source that didn’t fact check before? Link = graphic and banner and URL recognition that yes, I’ve read this idiot’s postings before and he’s still a cretin. And yes, this online news source consistently screws up their fact checking.
I think the linking is less the issue than that the phenomenon is understood by all involved. Kind of like the “moby” deal. MSM outlets who establish a record of blog trolling, or particular employees of same, should be wearing an “I are a blog troll” t-shirt when they go home on the short bus in the afternoon.
Are you going to print some of those up for the next blogger get-together, happyfeet? I think a special invitation should be extended to some particular trolls just to award them their shirts.
Definitely, and if they behave, scratch n sniff stickers too. Redolent of bananas.
Speaking of blogger get-together, how many of you think you might be able to gather in June of next year here in Vermont?
There’s a Junish time of the year where I have to be in NY anyway. And I’ve never been to Vermont. A friend of mine went to fat camp there. She brought me some syrup.
Wish I could add this to my comment.
On the post in the pub this morning, I sent a trackback to neo-neocon’s site and to where she cross-posted it at Jules Crittendon’s site. She’s removed both of them, which suggests I guess that this strikes a nerve. Does an accusation of blog trolling have transitive properties? Dunno, but no scratch n sniff sticker for her.
Hmmmmmm. Well, she’s Jeff’s alter-ego a lot when he gets air time. I’m inclined, from what I’ve heard, to give her every doubt benefit.
Me too. She mostly uses her powers for good, and meta-blogging understandably strikes some as tedious.
But she still doesn’t get a sticker.
Dan – June is approximately 3 months after my twins are scheduled to send my life into complete and utter chaos. I am sure I would love to get away, and I am more sure that my better half would serve me my nuts for dinner with a nice red wine reduction.
I hope there’s no nearby fava outlet.
Flava beans and fairy oysters?
Relax JD! I’m not saying you’re a fairy NOW! You know, AFTER dinner…
Back OT, I like your style Jeff, and agree with JD- re. comment #5
I believe it’s important in a civilized society for truth to confront lies every time they are told.
Come on!
Fairy oysters~prairie oysters…
It’s FUNNY!
lee – I laughed, inside, in a nervous kind of way.
Dan – I am going to wait for one of those insane mood swings, or rather more insane than normal, and just when she can no longer stand the sight of me, I will tell her I am heading to Vermont.
Dan – I am actually trying to talk her into letting me host an event, a get-together of sorts, at our home. So far, no luck, but I am going to keep on her like stink on a hobo until she gives in.
Why in the world would any of us want to go to Vermont? Youse guys should travel to Colorado. Heck, if a certain person gets wind that enough of you will be in the same place just a long day’s drive from her place, she might show up – in which case it will be time for Flight 514 treatment and a trip straight to the pokey for violation of a certain court order.
On second thought, baiting the crazy’s not such a good idea. But I do think youse guys should travel to Colorado instead. After all, if we’re good enough for the DNC, we should be good enough for PW commenters/bloggers.
And hey Jeff, speaking of the DNC, since it’s going to be in Colorado next year, are you going to try to live blog it in person this time? We’ve decided we’re going to leave the area, maybe even leave the state.
Why would one blog troll, is that like speaking Elvish?
Cross-posted at the Pub:
Well, you don’t have to provide the actual hyperlink, because then they know through their referral logs that you sent them there.
Instead, you could reverse the URL thus:
keewsweneits17111402dimoc.nsm.cbnsm.www\:ptth
which would provide the correct link to anyone who wants to spend the time typing it into their address field, but their hit wouldn’t register your blog as the referring site.
Also, it would limit the traffic, because only the most interested would take the time to reverse the URL.
Ethical and underhanded at the same time. How can you resist?
Sunshine is the best disinfectant for the type of material referenced here. Let as many people as possible see exactly what they are saying, in their own words.
HOW DARE YOU QUESTION MY… oh, crap.
That sounds like a huge pain in the ass, dicentra. I’m wondering if TinyURL provides referrer info, if that’s all that’s trying to be avoided. I think the purpose is more to not provide any traffic to the goons, not to disguise where they’re coming from.
If people call out blog trolling for what it is, that could take some of the shine off it for these guys, but probably more importantly, we’ve already seen way too many times how the media can launch a meme just by pointing to the fact that “it’s been reported that” or that the “blogosphere is buzzing about…”
It’s a good thing in itself if more people embrace a vocabulary that lends itself to dissecting the dynamics of the interplay between the media and the blogosphere.
… in realtime.
The Belmont Club links to a perfect example of blog trolling. You can get the direct link there, or be satisfied with Wretchard’s description. I think this one is definitely too dumb to link to, but Wretchard says, “Follow the link and read the whole thing.” I’ll pass.
Hm my comment from last night didn’t get through. What I’m talking about in the article is responding to trolling: blessing the deliberate attempt for attention by posting outrageous and provocative things simply for that attention. Several bloggers and now newspaper columnists rely on that for their livelihood – they are people who would otherwise be ignored in obscurity were it not for the free publicity and links thrown them by eager bloggers swallowing the bait whole.