I would have never started reading Maureen Tkacik's Gladwell for Dummies in The Nation if I had known that it was over 8K words, so, you know, be warned. And yet it has an "irritating, unrelenting readability" that kept bringing me back to it over several hours. While Anti-Gladwellian screed might be too strong of a descriptor, I'd be comfortable throwing around phrases like petty and jealously thorough. Profiles like this don't get written without there being some sort of personal vendetta involved. And yet, while it's a devastating look at Gladwell's work, it also functions as a takedown of those who enjoy his books. The title of the article should not have been "Gladwell for Dummies" (that would have been better lampooned as "Pseudoscience for Airplanes"), but "Gladwell is for Dummies". Maureen, you make me feel dumb for having read Gladwell's articles, what SHOULD I read?

That success is in the eye of the unsuccessful would seem to be the great unspoken dilemma dogging critics asked to consider the work of the rich and famous author and inspirational speaker Malcolm Gladwell. No matter how well intentioned or intellectually honest their attempts to assess his ideas, the subtext of Gladwell's perceived success, and its implications for their own aspirations in the competitive thought-generation business, obscures their judgment and sinks their morale. Nearly a decade has passed since the New York Times dryly summarized Gladwell's first book, The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference (2000), as "a study of social epidemics, otherwise known as fads," and yet, each Sunday, it still taunts perusers of the paperback nonfiction rankings, where it currently sits in sixth place. Gladwell may be merely "a slickster trickster" who "markets marketing" (as James Wolcott put it), or a "clever idea packager" who "cannot conceal the fatuousness of his core conclusions" (science writer John Horgan); he might even be an "idiot" (Leon Wieseltier). But one thing is clear: Gladwell is no fad. He is a brand, a guru, a fixture at New York publishing parties and in the spiels of literary agents hoping to steer writers toward concepts that will strike publishers as "Gladwellian."

Via Fimoculous

Photo by Flickr user danielweir.esq
It's important to note when discussing the problems at newspapers that spending on advertising is down almost EVERYWHERE, not just in newspapers. Industries that are dependent on ad dollars, of which Big Newspaper is just one, are all hurting. Yes, circulation is down, but there aren't less people reading the news necessarily, there are just less people subscribing to newspapers. If newspapers were able to charge higher fees for online advertising, they'd be in much better shape, obviously.

On that note, I noticed I had about a zillion tabs open related to the newspaper industry and I thought I'd collect them all here.

Via Daring Fireball, The Awl, demanding context from how bi-annual newspaper circulation numbers are typically reported, put together a chart showing newspaper circulation over the last 2 decades. It's pretty if you like looking at line graphs with dramatically plummeting line graphs. The LA Times' fall is breathtaking in its suddenness, and circulation is down 10% across the board.

In supporting Steve Coll's idea that newspapers should be nonprofits and in attempting to determine the value of local newspapers, Clay Shirky decides to do a "news biopsy" on his hometown newspaper, the Columbia Daily Tribune. From his biopsy, he finds that only 1/6 of the newspaper is "created news" or content created by the newspaper's 6 reporters and those 6 reporters work for a newspaper with 59 employees.

The city desk editors and the copy chief make the work...more valuable than it would otherwise be. But you can pick any multiplier you like for necessary editorial and support staff and that number, times six reporters, won’t be a big number. In particular, it won’t be 59, or anywhere near it.

His conclusion? "There are dozen or so reporters and editors in Columbia, Missouri, whose daily and public work is critical to the orderly functioning of that town, and those people are trapped inside a burning business model."

Also commenting on the "the power and necessity of local reporting" Esquire.com uses the recent Samoan earthquake/tsunami as an example of the big guys besting the little guys.

Newsosaur looked into pay walls and found that paywalls might never come because publishers are realizing they can't afford to lose the traffic a paywall would cost. Which is good news, because some columnists are quitting over paywalls. At the end of the Newsosaur's piece, there is bleating from Stephen Brill that, “You are misinformed about folks being less inclined” to add paywalls. Stephen Brill, by the way, founded Journalism Online, a company dedicated to helping publishers charge consumers for content, so, you know, he might be biased. (Journalism Online has a funny section of their site called Why Readers Will Pay For Online News, which features several different newspapers talking about why people SHOULD pay for news, but not why they WILL. That's a distinction worth making.)

Finally, via Kottke, Daniel Gross has a piece in Slate that says despite the falling circulations numbers, it's not as bad as you think. Several publishers were able to raise subscription revenue by raising subscription costs enough to make up for canceled subscriptions. "This is the new emerging model—cutting costs, raising prices."

I debated whether to include this last one because I kind of hate Megan McArdle's writing. I figured since I had already read her post and linked it, I'd leave it there for you to decide if you want to read it or not. Here's Megan McArdle doing what she does best, spewing confusing nonsense. She doesn't add anything to the conversation, but wants you to know she's very concerned about the future of journalism.

...It would have a book deal by now. That's just how publishing works these days, right?

Two links from two weeks ago that you may or may not have seen, but I had saved to share and not gotten around to it yet.

The Yes Men sent out a hoax press release from the US Chamber of Commerce saying they had changed their position on climate change. Obviously the media was interested in this so the Yes Men rented a room at the DC Press Club and gave a fake press conference. Then it gets really awesome when a representative of the Chamber shows up and shuts down the presser. And now, they're getting sued for it



Via TPM.

If you saw the profits made by the big banks last quarter and wondered how they were doing it, Philip Greenspun has an answer:

Because of the Collapse of 2008 financial reforms, the big investment banks are able to borrow money from the U.S. government at 0 percent interest. Then they can turn around and buy short-term bonds that pay 2 or 3 percent annual interest. Now they’re making 2 percent on whatever they borrowed. They can use leverage to increase this number, by pledging some of the bonds that they’ve already bought as collateral on additional bonds.

It's all so awesome, isn't it?

This is interesting. On Reddit the other day, someone mentioned they wanted to watch Battlestar Galactica in reverse, and the next comment kind of blew everyone's mind.

HUGE SPOILERS BELOW

Photo by Flickr user D'Arcy Norman

If you watch Battlestar Galactica backwards, it's a story about a ship called "Galactica" coming out of retirement to lead humanity to a new home, where it is retired. The people have to abandon their home planet to spend some time farming mud on "New Caprica," then they find a beautiful new place to live. Roslin becomes president, then she's a schoolteacher for a while, then she's president again. She has cancer, it goes away, then comes back. Then she doesn't have to worry about it anymore.

The president has an assistant who gets killed by a cylon-hater. She gets a new assistant who gets killed by a cylon-hater.

SURPRISE!, Tigh's wife comes back! Then he kills her. Then SURPRISE!, she comes back!

Adama is very sad because the woman he loved died... but he falls in love again. Then he's very sad, because the woman he loved died.

Baltar works on a farm, but then he becomes a famous scientist before working on a farm again.

Lee and Starbuck try to have an affair, but it's really awkward, because Starbuck's already in a serious relationship. She gets married. Then Starbuck and Lee try to have an affair, but it's really awkward, because she's already in a serious relationship.

In the first episode you'll wonder when they're going to explain ChipSix. In the last episode you'll still be wondering that.

Also, if you watch the series forwards, the same stuff happens.

Now granted, 'All this happened before and will happen again', but it's hard to tell if the commenter was trashing the show's redundancy, which is how I read it. On the other side, Adam thought this added to the show's depth. Is the fact that the same things keep happening again and again a bug or a feature? I enjoyed the hell out of the series, don't get me wrong, but I'll never be able to think of Battlestar Galactica again without taking the comment above as criticism, not praise.

Via Adam P

20 years ago, East German officials made the decision that East German citizens would be allowed to visit West Germany and West Berlin. East Berliners streamed to the Berlin Wall and West Berliners greeted them warmly on the other side.

10 years ago, I was in Berlin on the anniversary, and saw The Scorpions play 'Winds of Change' at the Brandenburg Gate accompanied by Mstislav Rostropovich and 165 other cellists. It was the most metal moment of my life. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find any video or photos of the event.

This year, they celebrated with U2, for whom, ironically, a wall was PUT UP.

Here's Season 3 of Everything Don Draper Said (and Season 1 and Season 2 (PLUS Everything Tracy Jordan Said Seasons 1, 2, and 3)). There were a few episodes this season where Don's story wasn't necessarily the focal point, or he didn't have too many knockout scenes, and yet, as you scroll through, you'll still find some magic. He had about 500 more words than last season, but much less than the 10K words in Season 1. As always, what follows is a transcription of everything Don Draper said this season on Mad Men. There's no context, but if you're a fan of the show, you'll lose your morning looking at this. Enjoy!

Episode 1
"Come on, drink this."
"You're so sure it's a girl?"
"I could have done that."
"At least you don't look tired."
"Close your eyes."
"You're on a warm sandy beach."
"You're on a warm sandy beach. You can smell the faint scent of coconut oil. And as you slide your hands though that cold patch of sand underneath the shadow of your deck chair."
"Bert's on it's way. Where's Roger?"
"Well, it's a sales call, isn't there more I can do here?"
"Really? I have one."
"Come on in, Bert."
"This isn't easy."
"Is that the last of it? Because I don't like how much I'm getting used to these."
"Can you believe this? What is the world coming to?"
"That's not a bottle, it's his date."
"'I'm sorry honey, but I'm taken. I just pawned my typewriter so we can be together all weekend.'"
"Excuse me?"
"Uh, Bill. Call me Bill. And, uh, this is my associate, Mr. Fleischman."
"Well, we have to check in and we have an early meeting."
"The Belvedere."
"Hoffstadt. My brother in law. He borrowed a suitcase to go to Puerto Rico, but he never tires of putting his name on other people's things."
"Really?"
"Uh, no, it's OK. I don't usually tell people I'm an accountant."
"Of course you do know there are other kinds of accountants."
"Tell them what we do."
"Well, I'll have to swear you all to secrecy."
"You're right."
"You ever heard of James Hoffa."
"There is a lot of money missing."
"No, we're accountants."
"I don't know, I keep going to a lot of places and keep ending up somewhere I've already been."
"Sam."
"Well, this is me."
"I don't know."
"I've been married a long time. You get plenty of chances. It's my birthday."
"It really is."
"That's not gonna help."
"Stand up."
"Go on."
"Not yet."
"Come on, let's go. Come on, forget your shoes. Let's go. Come on!"
"Come on."
"I'm just here to show you the continuity of our service. With our without Bert Peterson, you are on our mind."
"Morris, you remember Salvatore Romano."
"Sal, this is Howard."
"Well, is it about our work? I mean, we don't want to take credit for everything, but 2 of every 3 raincoats sold last year had London Fog stitched on the inside pocket."
"London Fog is a 40 year old brand that sounds like it's existed forever. You've established with our help that it means one thing. Rain coats. New products aside, there will be fat years and there will be lean years, but it is going to rain."
"What time is it?"
"We should be back in the office by 3."
"I'm gonna ask you something and I want you to be completely honest with me. London Fog. It's a subway car, and there's a commuter looking up. There's a girl with her back to us. She's wearing one of those short tan ones, but it's open. Her legs are bare. We know what he's seeing. Limit your exposure."
"Good."
"Help yourself. So, Cosgrove vs Campbell. Is Cooper playing God or Darwin?"
"Lane read about it in some management book?"
"Come in."
"What?"
"Our stories are straight."
"Find how much it is to repair and it will come out of your allowance."
"Then don't break things."
"Come here."
"I will always come home. You'll always be my girl."
"I don't sleep well when I'm not here."
"Yes."
"Well, it was the middle of the night and it was raining very hard and I had just come home from work."
Read the rest of this entry »

Well now. I can't imagine many people were disappointed with how this one went. While last week was about disaster, this week was about break ups, new beginnings, and trying to change what appears unchangeable. The satisfaction Don feels at starting off anew juxtaposed with the end of his marriage.

-Of course Don finds out about McCann buying PPL from Hilton. And while the new agency would seem like an opportunity to get more of Hilton's business, that doesn't appear in the cards. We'll see next year.

-Speaking of next year, what's your guess on how long down the road the season starts? I bet Sterling Cooper Draper Price will have moved into an office and is more of a viable business. That would mean that we see nothing for the Draper divorce, though.

-Speaking of the Draper divorce, what will Betty's role be next year? I've voiced displeasure with her character before, but I can't imagine her being completely jettisoned the way Sal was.

-Speaking of Sal, interesting that they threw a bone to all the people who miss him with the momentary trouble of the art department being locked. How many of you thought that'd be his ticket back until Don kicked that door down? Or maybe he really is done on the show. One way to come back could be working for McCann, now that they don't have Lucky Strike. Kenny and his Haircut and Kinsey will also need to pop up from time to time.

-With Pete and Peggy ostensibly re-energized is that it for Duck? I'm still curious what Peggy sees in him, but her track record with guys is pretty awful, so I suppose she just has bad taste.
Read the rest of this entry »

This was a great collection of short stories. Although the stories all had different plots, there were strong themes tying them all together. I liked the first story and those towards the end.

Both of these moves were awful, and I'm offended Marvel hasn't put any effort into their best character. Also, I don't think having these movies made means they can't; there could always be a Hulk-style do over. War Zone was better, and I have no idea what John Travolta or Dominic West were doing near either of these projects.