Can't edit tweets so let me try to clarify what I'm saying about NYT: a) NYT has a regular deal with Twitter for column placement in Trends.
-
-
As happens often, the masses choke on unctuous buffoon Brooks. Also normal. What's unusual is Twitter manually calling attention to this.
-
NYT's brand has always been invested in a middlebrow fake dignity, a grim pompousness. But they're paying for Brooks to be laughed at here.
-
This seems like it points at a strategic rupture: they're not trying to keep up appearances outside their bubble.
-
As long as it gets gawkers to sidle into the tent, who cares? And so NYT degenerates from grim banker to grimmer carnival geek.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
. Banned in Sweden. SubGenius, Zhuangist, white-hat troll. Defrocked mathematician. Brain problems.