Media

Churning and Churning in the Media Gyre

|

When I was 20 or so I got an internship that involved, among other things, churning out press releases for a hospital. I was young enough to be surprised the day I discovered my handiwork, barely altered, run as a news story in the local paper. I felt like I'd unwittingly joined the Illuminati.

Traditionally there hasn't been an easy way to tell how much reporting is really PR, but the folks behind churnalism.com want to change that. The Guardian reports:

As you can see, I've retyped Pfizer's press release with a MUCH more colorful lede.

The website, churnalism.com, created by charity the Media Standards Trust, allows readers to paste press releases into a "churn engine". It then compares the text with a constantly updated database of more than 3m articles. The results, which give articles a "churn rating", show the percentage of any given article that has been reproduced from publicity material….

[Trust Director Martin] Moore said he accepted journalists often have a valid reason for using press releases, and will often need to copy and paste significant chunks, such as official statements and quotes. But he said that on many occasions reporters appear to be lifting press release text verbatim and adding little or no additional material.

In a typical example, the Express, Mirror and Sun all lifted of chunks of text from a press release last month on behalf of the Benenden Healthcare Society, which quoted a poll showing "British women spend more money on their looks than their health". The Daily Mail copied 98% of the text directly from the press release.

At this point the site focuses on the British press. I hope it won't be long before it either expands its radius to the U.S. or inspires an American copycat.

Advertisement

NEXT: Skating By

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I don’t know about the U.K. But here stateside this kind of thing is largely the province of community newspapers and rookie reporters who haven’t yet learned to be cynical about flaks and their BS.

    1. Not sure whether the SF Chron qualifies as a community newspaper, but the lower right corner of its front page commonly carries articles directly credited to ‘citizens united against scary companies’ or some such. IOWs, they don’t even bother to cut and paste over a writers name.
      I wonder if they charge for the space.

      1. I’m not sure what you’re describing, exactly, but if a paper like the Chronicle were letting interest groups contribute front-page editorial content, it would have been a major uproar in the journalism world.

        And no, it’s not what I (or anyone else) means by “community paper.”

        1. TomD|2.27.11 @ 12:22PM|#
          “I’m not sure what you’re describing, exactly, but if a paper like the Chronicle were letting interest groups contribute front-page editorial content, it would have been a major uproar in the journalism world.”

          Tom,
          Dunno where you are, but the next time I see it, I’ll tell you so you can buy print edition and see for yourself.
          What I’m saying is that a portion of the Chron front page, not labeled as advertising, has carried an ‘article’ directly credited to some interest group on at least 4 occasions when I noticed the bias was stronger than normal and checked the credit.
          I too thought I’d hear a scream about it, but (crickets).

          1. It was a huge deal in the media industry four or five years ago when major newspapers even began selling front-page ad space. I just really have trouble believing that the Chronicle would have taken the further step of externally produced editorial content without it prompting a deafening outcry from editors, writers, readers and media watchers.

            You seem to think it’s something that could just kind of “start happening” without anybody really caring or piping up about it.

            1. You seem to think it’s something that could just kind of “start happening” without anybody really caring or piping up about it.

              I take this back… You did say you thought you’d hear a scream about it.

            2. “I just really have trouble believing that the Chronicle would have taken the further step of externally produced editorial content without it prompting a deafening outcry from editors, writers, readers and media watchers.”

              I can only imagine that the Chron is held in such low esteem that no one cared.
              Again, are you someplace where you can get the print edition?

              1. Yeah, I was in San Francisco and I never saw this, not even once.

                Now, that was probably because I never read the Chronicle, but hey. (Seriously, why pay when the Examiner’s free and contains the same content lifted straight from the AP, just with mainstream conservative instead of mainstream liberal opinion columns?)

            3. It was a huge deal in the media industry four or five years ago when major newspapers even began selling front-page ad space.

              Only for the historically ignorant who had never seen a 19th century newspaper.

          2. churn is to chum,
            as The New York Times is to…?

          3. How much of the proletariat in the 1850’s heard classical music? Hardly any of them. Large orchestras have always been for the rich and a minuscule number of people extremely interested in such music. It really wasn’t until the age of recorded music that the lower classes got much exposure to orchestral music.

            I don’t know how this is in other markets but in Chicago much of the “weekend morning local TV news” is a few headlines and weather surrounded by paid appearances. Usually some veterinarian or upscale caterer paying for a 5-minute interview with the anchorperson. Most of those “Good Morning Syracuse” type of shows are the same thing, but they don’t get passed off as news.

        2. Why is it so horrible for newspapers to do it, but OK for TV (in that I haven’t heard any screaming over it)?

          The local broadcasters I get are from Albany, NY which, being a state capital, has lots of lobbyist and pressure-group scum trying to inflence government to do things that benefit them. It’s not uncommon for pressure groups (particularly NYPIRG) to hold press conferences and for the local TV news to report uncritically on the exhortation of the pressure group. Typically, this means reporting the conclusion of the group’s latest study as fact, at least in the lede.

          I’ve heard the same thing on a lot of international broadcasters. The BBC and others will report very uncriticaly when groups like Greenpeace or Friends of the Earth or Human Rights Watch issue a report.

          1. Well, as far as local TV news goes, everyone already knows it is worthless crap except for the weather report. People still like to think that newspapers are somehow more serious and legitimate.
            In Europe, the whole mainstream seems to be very susceptible to whatever environmental or “social justice” alarmism is trendy.

    2. reporters who haven’t yet learned to be cynical

      They aren’t supposed to be cynical. They’re expected to be objective. There’s a difference between cynicism and healthy skepticism.

      1. Not “supposed to,” by whose reckoning?

        The point is that when you spend your days dealing with an entire class of people (publicists, marketers, political operatives) who are charged with trying to pull the wool over your eyes, you learn to become cynical about them.

        Skeptical, too.

        Why wouldn’t you be?

        1. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

          Tom pretends that reporters have ethics. Hilarious. Did you learn that in J-School?

          1. Did you learn that in J-School?

            Junior high?

          2. It appears TomD is to newpaper “reporters” as dunphy is to cops.

            Or something…

            1. The cynical retorts above notwithstanding, legitimate journalists–as opposed to opinion writers–should present the facts of any given story to the best of their ability, without interjecting their own biases and life’s disappointments.

              1. Except that’s impossible, because they are human beings (barely) with their own biases and life’s disappointments. So instead of trying and failing and pretending that reporters can be robots, why not just be upfront about biases so you at least know where they’re coming from?

                The “objective journalist” canard has been a load of shit since the day it was invented and needs to go away.

                1. “that’s impossible, because they are human beings”

                  Humans cannot discern reality? There’s no such thing as objective truth? Then how can you defend the merits of your own argument? By asserting that humans cannot objectively process and interpret reality, you have undermined your own argument and cut yourself off at the knees.

                  1. By asserting that humans cannot objectively process and interpret reality

                    No I didn’t. Learn to read, DanT.

                    1. Fact = / = Truth

                      I believe this is were the discrepancy lies.

              2. They should also try and leap tall buildings in a single bound. Their success rate for both I think would be similar.

            2. Don’t we already have one of those? Excluding Reason staff, I mean.

      2. “Healthy skepticism” =ing “only critical of the other Team”, of course…

  2. Writing new stuff is hard!

    1. So’s my…..ahhh forget it, too easy.

      1. Reporter Barbie|2.27.11 @ 12:21PM|#

        Writing new stuff is hard!

        Stop stealing my shit

  3. Some very tricky issues before SCOTUS this week:

    But the eight Supreme Court justices who will hear Ashcroft v. al-Kidd still confront some tough questions. Their answers could shrink or expand federal powers to detain people in sensitive cases.

    In particular, the court could clarify whether prosecutors can use their material witness powers to incarcerate suspects for whom they otherwise lack strong evidence of wrongdoing. It’s a Fourth Amendment test in a post-Sept. 11 world, complicating efforts to predict what the court might do.

    “It’s quite hard to know,” said Kerr, a former Supreme Court clerk. “The justices don’t have a long track record on this particular issue.”

    Hmm, tough issue. Can the government hold someone without trial or even filing charges indefinitely, in the civilian justice system? Wow, that’s a toughie.

    Guess which side Obama is on:

    In seeking to overturn the 9th Circuit, the Obama administration’s lawyers characterized the material witness law as a crucial law enforcement tool. [Solicitor General] Katyal noted that Oklahoma City bomber Terry Nichols was initially held as a material witness, before investigators found enough evidence tying him directly to the 1995 bombing of the city’s federal building.

    “The fear of personal liability may dissuade prosecutors from obtaining such a warrant when they harbor any suspicion that the subject might be involved in criminal wrongdoing but do not yet have probable cause to bring criminal charges,” Katyal argued.

    1. “The fear of personal liability may dissuade prosecutors from obtaining such a warrant when they harbor any suspicion that the subject might be involved in criminal wrongdoing but do not yet have probable cause to bring criminal charges,” Katyal argued.

      Gosh! The last thing want to do is make our prosecutors fearful of violating someone’s rights when they have any suspicions.

      Fucking asshat.

      1. The hilarious thing is that Katyal represented the detainees in Hamdan vs. Rumsfield.

        I’m sure he has some reason more complicated than “the right people are paying me in charge now” for his position.

        1. I’m sure Kaytal’s arguments are as impressive as Bob Barr’s argument for representing Baby Doc.

          1. Yo, fuck Bob Barr!

            Sorry, knee-jerk reaction.

          2. Bob Barr isn’t representing Baby Doc in any sort of criminal proceeding. He’s acting as an international liaison to try to get his assets unfrozen. Very different things.

            1. “His” assets? Baby Doc’s? All the money he got from trading fairly in the free market?

              1. I guess the reason.tv mug and reusable shopping bag/portable toilet they sent me isn’t mine either, since I didn’t trade for it on the market.

                1. Baby Doc sent you a reason.tv mug and tote bag?

                  1. I wanted to know if it was a used portable toilet 😉

                2. First of all, if you acted voluntarily, and they did, too, you’re going to have to explain how that was not a market transaction.

                  I mean, did you steal it from the poverty stricken magazine that you ruled, while murdering hundreds or thousands of employees?

    2. “Katyal noted that Oklahoma City bomber Terry Nichols was initially held as a material witness, before investigators found enough evidence tying him directly to the 1995 bombing of the city’s federal building.”

      The other side needs to find some cases where they used material witness warrants to hold someone who turned out to be completely innocent.

      1. Actually, al-Kidd was never charged with a crime and never gave any evidence against a terrorism suspect, so this is such a case.

  4. Speaking of PR, here’s an excerpt from the Nature Conservancy’s writeup at Wikipedia:

    The Nature Conservancy is a US charitable environmental organization that works to preserve the plants, animals, and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive.

    […]

    The Nature Conservancy rates as one of the most trusted national organizations in Harris Interactive polls every year since 2005…The Conservancy received a four-star rating from Charity Navigator in 2008 (three-star in 2010) and was named by that organization in 2005 on their list of “10 of the Best Charities Everyone’s Heard Of”. The American Institute of Philanthropy gives the Conservancy an A? rating and includes it on its list of “Top-Rated Charities”.

    1. Surely this will persuade people that Wikipedia sometimes fails to conform to a neutral point of view.

    2. I don’t see anything wrong with that. Seems reasonably straightforward and factual.

  5. The fear of personal liability may dissuade prosecutors

    See also: the fear of asteroid strikes.

  6. Back OT, while the wholesale “regurgitate and print” is problematic for newspapers “writing” about companies, it’s a lot scarier when they “write” about government using cheat sheets.

    The government does a lot that’s essentially unquestioned because alleged journalists are either too lazy to do their own research and write their own articles, or because they refuse to print what they know, too scared of losing access to the government flacks they’re supposed to be covering.

    1. When I was a reporter back at the dawn of time I hated anything and anyone associated with school districts and their governing boards. From PR flacks to the little tyrants in charge of the boards, they were often abusive, intimidating, and threatening. Then they wondered why they never got any good press from us.

      1. they were often abusive, intimidating, and threatening…they wondered why they never got any good press from us

        If they were nice to you, you would have given them “good press”? Sounds to me like you’re part of the problem.

    2. OT? Off topic or on topic?

      1. I thought it was on-topic. I’ve been known to be wrong, though.

        ed: it’s sad when the PR people can’t even play nice.

        1. I just meant that both on and off begin with “o.”

  7. On topic: does this mean the Associated Press will have to cite the White House press secretary on half of their stories?

    1. You know, you wouln’t have to designate a comment as being “on topic” if you would just use the reply button for the alternate-topic comments.

      1. that’s his thing- not using threaded comments. of all the commentariat, he holds to the principle of: Yo, fuck threaded comments
        for that, I salute him.

        1. Im with you. If we all did it, this would be a better place.

  8. I had a similar experience writing industry research-reports, where executive summaries & other sections were usually made semi-public (at least sent to clients and some trade rags). Every now and then I’d come across a trade journal publication article and be reading something going, “gee, this guy sounds really clever… wait a minute?”… then realizing it was my own stuff hacked up and reprinted. (most of the time they may have cited my company as a ‘source’, but in many cases the article itself *was* the source-material, sans much else added)

    I think the worst (or most blatant one) in a more proper ‘journalistic’ context was a big piece on coffee I’d done that was jacked by a west coast paper… it was pretty much word for word chopped from a 5 page executive summary, no citations at all. I did speak to the writer of the piece at the time, but in the end didn’t really make much of it except to ask that they at least give us some future PR opps in exchange for jacking our material.

    the churnalism.com thing sounds interesting. I know they’ve had some similar type thing for college professors, where they put their student papers in a shared private DB, and they will be searched for commonality with 1000s of other submissions by others… looking for shared-essay-copying, basically. I think it also did web searches concurrently, looking for sections possibly jacked from Wikipedia or other sources.

    1. I know they’ve had some similar type thing for college professors, where they put their student papers in a shared private DB, and they will be searched for commonality with 1000s of other submissions by others…

      turnitin.com – plagiarism detector.

      1. Unfortunately it doesn’t work for math.

        1. I note how professors just love to repeat the story of Archimedes taking a bath and discovering the principle of displacement, but they NEVER, NEVER mention that Pythagoras sacrificed goats and prayed to Hera to receive the revelation of his theorem. Talk about confirmation bias towards one’s world view.

          1. Pythagoras was scum. I wish I could travel back in time and kick his smelly Samian ass.

            1. Whoa, calm down there, Commodore Decker. What did Pythagoras ever do to you?

              1. Tulpa’s wife, b^2, cheated on him with a^2, and now he has to take care of a c^2 that isn’t even his.

                1. Well, that and the fact that Tulpa is an anti-Samite.

                2. Never even been married, let alone had any square hypotenuse offspring.

              2. You know, the planet-killer was NOT a vagina reference.

            2. IF anyone needs a time travel beat down it’s Leibniz and Newton.

              Fuckin’ calculus, how does it work?

              I prefer proposition 47, it sounds more political.

              1. Is that a Ferengi thing?

                1. You still haven’t explained why you hate Pythagoras.

                  You know who I hate? That fractal guy, Mandelbrot. He was such a dick; I never thought that he would die.

                  I didn’t get a chance to beat his ass before he died though, a thing that I find most regrettable.

                  1. Why are we talking about kicking mathematician ass, anyway? There’s no evidence Pythagoras ever did any mathematical work of his own; the theorem that bears his name was known to the Babylonians and Indians long before he was born, and the first written association of him with the theorem comes five centuries after his death. Plus, I’m not a fan of secret societies.

                  2. Sorry, threats of bodily harm against milennia-dead philosophers are generally not my style. I’m just really bummed now that the Fuddruckers at Waterfront is gone and lashing out at every vegetarian I can think of.

                    1. Try the burger at Smokin’ Joes in the southside.

                      They have like 1000 beers to chose from there.

                      Or, if that’s not your style then you could dig up the corpse of Mandelbrot and set it afire. That always makes me feel better.

                    2. How many times can one burn a corpse?

                  3. You know who I hate? That fractal guy, Mandelbrot. He was such a dick

                    Actually, he was my neighbor. He was a nice guy.

                    I painted his house. If I’d known more about fractals i would have just thrown it randomly around and expected it to eventually form some kind of hot, hippy looking pattern.

  9. they put their student papers in a shared private DB, and they will be searched for commonality with 1000s of other submissions by others…

    Wait, what? Surely you can’t mean…

  10. People still read news print?

  11. “I am disappoint,” says Senator Nelson.

    I am disappointed and ? quite frankly ? think it pitiful that Scott would turn down $2.4 billion in allocated funding for high-speed rail in the nation’s fourth-largest state. Such a decision will cost Florida 24,000 new jobs and will obstruct economic growth along the I-4 corridor, and eventually all the way from Orlando to Miami.

    For the past week, Scott has cited so-called economic realities that led him to first turn down the money. He claimed Florida taxpayers would be on the hook for possible cost overruns. He claimed that ridership and revenue projections were overly optimistic. He claimed the state would have to repay the federal government all of the $2.4 billion, if the project faltered.

    “Turn down free money? what the fuck is wrong with you? What could possibly go wrong? Have some faith, Baby!”

    1. so-called economic realities

      If only every problem could be dispelled by sticking a “so-called” in front of it.

    2. Still can’t get over that college kid on the 61C inveighing against “so-called individual rights” to his girlfriend. He sure looked foolish when I asked him whether his problem was that they were not “individual” or not “rights”. Or maybe I just looked like a prick.

      1. Well, as a “so-called prick”, I resemble that remark.

      2. “so-called individual rights”? Really?

        Yeah, I don’t even doubt it. What the fuck is wrong with people any more? “So-called” rights….fuck me…

      3. Being a prick has its advantages.

        Fuckin’ natural law, how does it work?

      4. Mouthing off to some punk who says something like “so-called individual rights” isn’t going to make anyone here (except the trolls, perhaps) think you looked like a prick.

        1. No more than we already do. Maybe even a little less!

        2. Being a prick, you’re doing it wrong.

          1. I’ll try harder in the future, you slatternous bilgeswimmer.

    3. “I am disappointed and ? quite frankly ? think it pitiful that Scott would turn down $2.4 billion as payment for helping a Nigerian prince in the nation’s fourth-largest state.”

    4. I think I may have voted for Nelson back in 2000.

      I am ashame.

  12. if you would just use the reply button

    BAH!

    1. I never use the reply button.

      1. Me neither.

        1. Non-conformists!!!

          1. Everyone does their own thing, I do what everybody else does, therefore I am a non-conformist.

  13. Speaking of disappointments, Krugabe can’t understand why the party which won the last election gets to pursue its stated goals.

    The story of the privatization-obsessed Coalition Provisional Authority was the centerpiece of Naomi Klein’s best-selling book “The Shock Doctrine,” which argued that it was part of a broader pattern. From Chile in the 1970s onward, she suggested, right-wing ideologues have exploited crises to push through an agenda that has nothing to do with resolving those crises, and everything to do with imposing their vision of a harsher, more unequal, less democratic society.

    Which brings us to Wisconsin 2011, where the shock doctrine is on full display.

    and

    The good news from Wisconsin is that the upsurge of public outrage ? aided by the maneuvering of Democrats in the State Senate, who absented themselves to deny Republicans a quorum ? has slowed the bum’s rush.

    Obstructionism is bad, except when it’s good!

    1. right-wing ideologues have exploited crises to push through an agenda that has nothing to do with resolving those crises, and everything to do with imposing their vision of a harsher, more unequal, less democratic society.

      I had no idea Obama and Pelosi were right-wing idea-logs.

      1. so-called right-wing

  14. Bob Barr isn’t representing Baby Doc in any sort of criminal proceeding. He’s acting as an international liaison to try to get his assets unfrozen.

    “Your Honor, my client stole that money fair and square!”

    1. Aw, geez, didn’t anyone tell Bob Barr that you never respond to emails from deposed dictators trying to get their assets out of the country?

      1. He’s just trying to get his own money back from Baby Doc.

  15. The important thing is that the steak I just made was DAMNED GOOD. I made a sammich, but it’s so good, Ima just eat the rest as plain ole steak. Cause it’s that good.

    And World Superbike is coming on – first bike racing of the season! Back to civilization!

    That is all.

    1. Fucking ants get all the glory. Yeah, if I had an exoskeleton I could lift six times my body weight too. What’s so special about that?

      1. You’ve got a point, but you have to admit that armadillo penes are more impressive.

        1. You just HAD to break up the text and kill the full effect of that joke, didn’t you antphile?

          1. You’re supposed to reply to yourself in order to keep that from happening, you lexicographic order hog.

            1. That coming from a guy who spends an enormous amount of time fighting over the territorial pissing grounds of a few paragraphs on Wikipedia? Don’t deny it, we know you do.

              1. A few paragraphs on Wikipedia that are seen by millions of people around the world, and quoted in countless grade school research papers. Well worth fighting over in times of crisis.

                At least I’m not prepending A’s to my name hoping to get attention from people who vow to read the encyclopedia cover to cover but give up after 10 pages.

                1. I’ll remember that next time I’m with an aardvark prostitute and we are 69ing coke off of each others’ asses, and it occurs to me to wonder if this really as good as it gets. ‘Could be in the trenches in the middle of a Wikipedia power struggle that I somehow got roped in to fighting for free, so yep.’

                  1. BTW, the Superbike race was kind of meh. MotoGP, get here and give us a good race!!!

        2. Meh. My penis has an exoskeleton.

    2. Oops, wrong thread!

      1. That. Was. Fucking. AWESOME!

  16. I felt like I’d unwittingly joined the Illuminati.

    Rumsfield refuses to deny that he is a part of the Saurion Conspiracy!

    http://www.wwtdd.com/2011/02/l…..s-a-lizard

    The so called real journalist in the MSM refuse to touch the issue. It took a man with real guts, Louis C K, a comedian for Chrissakes, to do their job for them.

    1. Bob Wilson speculated that you don’t find out who the Illuminati are until you learn that you are one, and maybe his specul’n was right.

  17. Is it Zoology Sunday already?

    1. In 1910 and 1911, Clarence Birdseye captured several hundred small mammals and isolated several thousand ticks for research into the cause of Rocky Mountain spotted fever. His next field assignment, off and on from 1912 to 1915, was in Labrador, Canada, where he became further interested in food preservation by freezing, especially fast freezing. He was taught by the Inuit how to ice fish under very thick ice. In -40?C weather, he discovered that the fish he caught froze almost instantly, and when thawed, tasted fresh. He recognized immediately that the frozen seafood sold in New York was of lower quality than the frozen fish of Labrador, and saw that applying this knowledge would be lucrative. His journals from this period, which record these observations, are held in the Archives and Special Collections at Amherst College.

      Conventional freezing methods of the time were commonly done at higher temperatures, and thus the freezing occurred much more slowly, giving ice crystals more time to grow. It is now known that fast freezing produces smaller ice crystals, which cause less damage to the tissue structure. When ‘slow’ frozen foods thaw, cellular fluids leak from the ice crystal-damaged tissue, giving the resulting food a mushy or dry consistency upon preparation.

      In 1922 Birdseye conducted fish-freezing experiments at the Clothel Refrigerating Company, then established his own company, Birdseye Seafoods Inc., to freeze fish fillets via chilled air at -45?F (-43?C). In 1924 his company went bankrupt due to lack of consumer interest in the product. That same year he developed an entirely new process for commercially viable quick-freezing: pack fish in cartons, then freeze the contents between two refrigerated surfaces under pressure. Birdseye created a new company, General Seafood Corporation, to promote this method.

      1. what no baseball with a misogynist thread?

        1. Everyday is misogyny day

          1. Well, that’s to be expected when you’re one of the few representatives of womankind

  18. Now this is some unbiased reporting: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02…..polis.html

    NY Times, only the news that’s fit to print.

    1. And here I thought that George Wallace was the littlest populist.

      Did that little ‘tard actually say “Can i haz cheezeburger?”

    2. So, this kid is holding a “Don’t Tread on Me” sign. “Don’t Tread on Me” is also seen on the Gadsden flag. The Gadsden flag is used often by Libertarian and Tea Party groups. Ergo, the Koch brothers are paying this kid to hold up this sign and undermine the union.

      How’d I do? Can I get a column in the NY Times now?

    3. Awww, how cute! The kid’s barely off his Mommy’s teat, and they’re already prepping him for the government’s.

  19. +1 for the Yeats paraphrase in the title!

    1. What about me?

      “`Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
      Did gyre and gimble in the wabe”

      1. Yeats has you beat:

        From The Second Coming:

        Turning and turning in the widening gyre
        The falcon cannot hear the falconer…

    2. -2 What an overrated rhyme. Slant this, Yeats!

      1. You’re just feeling slighted because Yeats envisioned the rough beast as a sphinx rather than an aardvark. Well, get over it!

        1. Nah, he’s still mad for Tulpa pissing all over his semi-clever threadjack hack on me a ways back.

          GET OVER IT, ANT EATER!

  20. City managers don’t issue press releases because the city desk of the nearest “so called” respectable paper is their stenographer.

  21. City managers don’t issue press releases because the city desk of the nearest “so called” respectable paper is their stenographer.

  22. Holy crap the Acadamy Awards is boring as hell

    1. you seem surprised by this

      1. I expected Franco to be cool-he’s an idiot

        1. bring back Kirk Douglas

          1. naked-I want something to look at

    2. “Holy crap the Acadamy Awards is boring as hell”

      Tell it to someone who cares.

      1. Sevo: Holy crap the Acadamy Awards is boring as hell

        You replied didn’t you!

    3. I recommend chasing it with 1987’s nine time Academy Award winner and Best Picture The Last Emperor.

      If you can make it all the way through without falling asleep, you’ll have done something no Academy voter has managed to accomplish.

      1. I’d rather watch Empire of the Sun

          1. I saw it. The only movies I love to watch endlessly is any version of Pride and Prejudice-and some people question that I’m female

            1. I question our sanity.

  23. http://www.iphone-5-release.net | We Are The Top Source of Up To Date News, Information, and Rumors About the iPhone 5, iPhone 6. Our Team Updates You Hourly So You Are Always Informed.(http://iphone-5-release.net/) iphone 5

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.