Thursday, February 17, 2011

the men at wapo are beliebers

While it may be just fine for Taco Bell to use only 36 percent beef in their delicious wares, or for American pop artists to survive on just 36 percent music (although don't expect to win a Grammy. WHOISARCADEFIRE?!), I'm still having trouble wrapping my mind around the Washington Post's 36 percent news policy.

OK, that may be a little harsh. As an avid reader of the Post, I have actually come to depend on it for very important international news, like this:

Yeah, I was being #sarcastic. But for the record, at least that link goes to Ezra Klein's blog, which is better than, say, a legitimate article that would have a danger of showing up in the print edition. But still... The fact that Mr. Klein, one of the most recognizable names at the Post saw it fit to even mention this Bieber nonsense can only mean one thing -- THE POST'S BEEN INFECTED WITH THE BIEBER FEVER!

And perhaps, if Mr. Klein lived in Canada, he'd have been able to cure his case without having to be up to his Bieber-bowl cut in debt. But instead, it seems he did nothing... AND THE FEVER SPREAD! OH MY GOD, POST EDITORIAL WRITER JONATHAN CAPEHART HAS IT TOO! He writes:

"Just the sight of Justin Bieber elicits an eye roll from me. I mean, what's up with that hair? And he has a 3-D movie about his life? He's only 16! But it's his political comments in the latest Rolling Stone that have my eyes rolling so hard I can hear my mother saying, "Keep it up. Your eyes are going to stay that way."


Or maybe not. Perhaps, instead, it's just the beginning -- the beginning of the Post's inevitable transformation into The Onion. (Side note: That would be AWESOME!)

See, besides the original Rolling Stone article where Justin Bieber, political wonk, first appeared (I imagine the reporter asked these questions in the first place in an attempt to relive "the kid who doesn't even know what German is" moment), the only other outlets latching on to Bieber's bungles (now there's an SEO term!), are gossip sites such as the always funny Dlisted, which appropriately sandwiched it between O.J. Did Not Get the Beat Down in Prison and Halle Berry and Gabriel Aubry Have Put Down Their Shanks.

The Washington Post, though? Come on, you're supposed to be a news generator, not a non-news re-reporter!

The New York Times didn't comment. The Boston Globe remained hush. I couldn't even find a reference to it in the freaking L.A. Times. Now, I don't mean to call up NAMBLA and have them send the male editorialists at the Post applications to join their organization, but I find it a bit odd that not just one but two adults at what was once a news institution have found the rather baseless and innocuous political quips of what seems like a rather dimwitted teenage boy not only important enough to mention in passing, but in the case of Capehart, important enough to actually analyze. ("Surely all that Oh, Canada flag waving and talk of Americans being 'evil' will enrage the conservative parents of Bieber's screaming teen girl (and more than a few gay teen boys) base...")

But take heart, future members of the National American Man/Bieber Love Assocation, at least you have each other and, hopefully, a sense of humor.*

*That is to say, don't sue me! I don't really think you have a thing for young boys! (Hey, after the Snyder situation, you can never be too careful...)


Anonymous said...

National American Man/Bieber Love Assocation <----brilliant

-anon bri

Anonymous said...

I really hate that kid. I'm not saying that he isn't talented nor that he wouldn't be marketable to a certain young market, but I find him stupid and underwhelming in all aspects. The worst part is that he doesn't realize it. So, why is anything he does newsworthy?