Really. Front page.
“All the news that’s fit to print”…really?
July 8, 2009 by wordadvocate
Posted in Media, Wordadvocate | Tagged FAIL, New York Times | 2 Comments
2 Responses
Leave a Reply
Posts by Author
-
Recent Posts
- Christmas Money – fiat vs. real value
- Raising Zombies From the Dead or Twice Killed Pork
- A warm welcome to our readers and their friends
- 95% surveyed admitted to it (and the other 5% were lying), and, So sleazy the cavemen did it, and, Today’s Tom saw you
- Why We Liked Ike
- Holiday Madness Advice Madness
- African ingenuity blogwatch: Coconut handbags, open source science archives, and more
- Health Care Costs: Insurance vs Providers
- something keeps bugging me
- Knowing History: Afghanistan
- Press-Pool Britannia
- With a Link-All Help From Our ‘Little Friends’
- Free Market Increasing Health Care Costs
- Health care production & delivery vs. food production & delivery
- All Your Base Are Belong to ____
Categories
Featured Works
Other Author Blogs
A Musing?
Adventures in Desperation
AFMarCom
Americans For Truth In News
ChrisV82's Hairy Blogsack
DADvocate
Disquiet Reservations
Fundamentals
jesharris: Power in the Blog
Noli Irritare Leones
Political Byline
Political Friends
Pour Me Another Suburban
Random Musings of a Deranged Mind
The Small "r"
Wired Sisters
Why Is American Health Care So Expensive?
Subscribe by Email
Archives
Gray Lady, hold still for your money shot.
I thought at first that the article was simply teased in capsule on the paper’s voluminous home page rather than run the prime real estateof the actual dead-tree front page, then found this beneath the online article:
“A version of this article appeared in print on July 8, 2009, on page A1 of the New York edition.”
Like, Zoinks, Scoob! The NYT web site just ran a multimedia feature showing a 360-degree image of the paper’s situation room, in which each afternoon are made the Olympian decisions regarding which stories get the front-page treatment. As the reader spins dizzy like a record amid the board table and array of green parliamentary chairs, s/he is encouraged to imagine a like venue for effecting the grave priorities of the industry profiled in the article: the paper has discovered that in the “adult” film world, sex scenes aren’t so much essential to the “plot” – they are the plot.
“On the Internet, the average attention span is three to five minutes,” said Steven Hirsch, co-chairman of Vivid Entertainment. “We have to cater to that.”
I find those numbers disappointing; it usually takes me at least five to seven minutes…just to get a handle on the story line.
“The falling cost of hand-held video cameras gave birth to a generation of pornographers with little interest in drama beyond a clichéd plot involving a pizza delivery boy…”
Ah, so it was the cameras that were hand-held…as opposed to, as I might have thought, the entwined hands of the lovers watching at home. I suspect the pizza-delivery angle in the “plots” was adopted to “tear down this wall” of proscenium separation between audience and stage, given the frequency with which such deliveries accompanied home viewing, my sources tell me.
“Plot-centrism was in full bloom in 2005 with the release of ‘Pirates,’ about a ragtag group of sailors who go after a band of evil pirates.
“That movie, with a budget of more than $1 million, had special effects (pirates materializing from the mist), and, yes, lots of sex.”
Alternate title for “Pirates”: rhymes with “Buccaneers”. Critics found the movie, again so I hear, harrrrrd to watch, what with the utter predictability of one “yo ho ho” after another.
“Two years later, the movie’s studio, Digital Playground, spent $8 million on a sequel — a remarkable sum in an industry where the average movie costs $25,000, according to the director of the two movies, Ali Joone.”
I wonder if the director was also behind that classic of world-lit porn, the 1001 Nights adaptation Ali Joone and the Forty Double Ds.
“The feature is not as big a part of the industry today,” [Wicked Pictures president Steve] Orenstein said. But he says he still plans two to three bigger-budget releases each year, including the recently shot ‘2040,’ which is about the pornography business of the future. Mr. Orenstein described the movie as ‘an almost Romeo-and-Juliet story between an aging porn star and a cyborg.’”
Rejected titles: Death in Penice. O Porn Star of the Future, can you hardcore “a” Apple Mac?
“In lieu of plot, there are themes. Among the new releases from New Sensations, a studio that makes 24 movies a month, is ‘Girls ’n Glasses,’ made up of scenes of women having sex while wearing glasses.”
Looks like the proverbial question of “making passes” at lasses bespectacled was long since settled.
“I used to have dialogue,” said Ms. Samson, whose given name is Natalie Oliveros, and who is one of the industry’s biggest stars.
“Getting it on in one hardcore scene after another just isn’t as much fun,” she added.
The reader is encouraged at this point to make self-devised jokes, in line with the hard-y do-it-yourself spirit of the porn audience.
Out of niche-blogging duty I read the article so that you, Gentle Reader, would not have to, and, as with a TV documentary viewed in England c. 1986 on the country’s tabloid-topless “Page Three Girls”, found it so lacking in redeeming social value I was forced to change the channel, metaphorically speaking in this case, the minute it was over…
Porn is a multi-billion dollar enterprise. It has been postulated that we would never have had the web without it. Ignoring it wont make it go away. They should keep the naked pictures out of the papers.
Steve