What's weird?
No... I mean... that is weird, but it's not the weird thing I was thinking of... dang, that was really weird. How do you think of those things?
Ok, so the weird thing is that I just got a copy of Maxim in the mail. Like addressed to me personally. They got the apartment number slightly wrong, but still. Maybe I accidentally signed up for it by not checking a box somewhere online? Is there going to be a payment due card sometime soon.
I don't even like Maxim. The photos are like soft-core porn for those who are afraid to buy Playboy, and it's all wrapped up with a 'hipper-than-thou' tone that's just condescending and really annoying.
Let's look at it in more detail:
62/141 - advertisements (not counting halfpages or quarterpage ads)per page. Now I know that's standard or maybe even a bit low for a glossy magazine with lots of photographers and models and writers to pay, but still, at that rate, you need to be paying me to read it. I won't wear your trademark on my shirts, and I'm sure as heck not going to suffer through Calvin Klein emo-with-a-trust-fund overload to get to what content may lurk inside.
That being said, let's look at the 'content.'
Editor's letter:
First paragraph -17 lines, gist: Maxim editors leave the office during lunch to eat. Look at all the big words I use! It reads like the blog of an unemployed English grad student. Hmmm...
First 'Article:'
(starts on page 20)
5 paragraphs on Autumn Reeser. She was apparently on the O.C. and now she's doing the sequel to the Lost Boys? Are there supposed to be stars here? She's pretty hot and all, but not very bright or interesting. Sample quote, "Sleeping or coma scenes are always great."
Sex article:
How to tell she's into you. Here's a good cut from that. It's a woman talking about how she let a guy she was attracted to know she was interested. "I once told a group of people at a bar that I was turned on by anal sex." Wonder of all wonders, it worked. "When I got up to leave, he ran after me and started making out with me in the street." Ah, young love. Firstly, holy crap. Secondly, maybe that's one of those things that's sexier when it actually happens than in print, but I'm pretty sure if I were either of those people, I'd be running to the clinic after that. And finally, this is the cue that we need to know about? I've been hearing about eye dilation and different body language, and hair brushing, when apparently all I needed to do was wait until the woman I'm into announces her fondness for anal sex?
Yeah. I'm not going to read this anymore.
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Monday, August 04, 2008
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Time Cop-Out of the Year
Ok, Ok, I know I'm behind the news-cycle with this one, but as I'm sure everyone has seen by now, the Time Person of the Year is out, and it's 'You.'
Har har, clever clever.
I see what they mean - as a bulwark of the "old" media, a magazine is going to see the disturbance of the YouTubes and blogs and their aggressive watchdogging and raking of muck that is aimed not only at the standard targets of such things like politicians and movie folk and such, but at all media outlets as well. So, yeah, it would be silly to deny that there isn't a big shakeup going on. Bush's forged military records, Howard Dean's scream, panty-less coke-crazed attention whores - none of these would be what they are without the "new" media.
But I'm still not sold that impact is more important than, say Rumsfeld, Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong-il, or Hugo Chavez.
I'm not saying that their choice was unfounded. Hell, it's their magazine, they set the standards.
Feh, I guess it's a good thing I don't buy papers or magazines anymore. They're all online, don'tcha know?
Har har, clever clever.
I see what they mean - as a bulwark of the "old" media, a magazine is going to see the disturbance of the YouTubes and blogs and their aggressive watchdogging and raking of muck that is aimed not only at the standard targets of such things like politicians and movie folk and such, but at all media outlets as well. So, yeah, it would be silly to deny that there isn't a big shakeup going on. Bush's forged military records, Howard Dean's scream, panty-less coke-crazed attention whores - none of these would be what they are without the "new" media.
But I'm still not sold that impact is more important than, say Rumsfeld, Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong-il, or Hugo Chavez.
I'm not saying that their choice was unfounded. Hell, it's their magazine, they set the standards.
Feh, I guess it's a good thing I don't buy papers or magazines anymore. They're all online, don'tcha know?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
