Metafilter and Megnut on CBS Sunday Morning (7/9/06)

July 9, 2006 7:49 AM

CBS Sunday Morning/David Pogue give a glimpse of MeFi this morning in a piece on bloging; specifically this post, while interviewing Ms. Hourihan. (Unfortunately, he doesn't say "MetaFilter," it is really just a tiny screen shot of a small section of the page, but you can distinctly tell it is MeFi and that "one user marked as favorite.")
posted by pithy comment to MetaFilter-Related at 7:49 AM (36 comments total)

*tumbleweed*
posted by quonsar at 8:52 AM on July 9, 2006

Yeah, getting a screenshot on national television without any identification is like one of quonsar's witticisms. On the surface, it seems like it should be good, but is ultimately hollow and meaningless.
posted by crunchland at 8:56 AM on July 9, 2006

The bitch deleted all the non-food posts on her blog, and I can't find her post in the Internet Archive. She certainly hasn't gotten any less condescending over the years.
posted by blasdelf at 8:59 AM on July 9, 2006

Article/story has some glaring inaccuracies, such as stating that Meg sold Blogger to Google.

No need to hate on Meg though. Personally, I like her site more now that is has a focus. Good for her.
posted by terrapin at 9:15 AM on July 9, 2006

"The bitch" states rather clearly in the about section of her site where one can find her older, non-food-related posts. But it was probably easier to simply slag her, I guess
posted by terrapin at 9:21 AM on July 9, 2006

There was a screenshot of my weblog on The Money Programme once. It was almost as thriling as this.
posted by jack_mo at 9:31 AM on July 9, 2006

Well, it's deleted there too, along with a shitload of other posts (I was just looking in the Internet Archive, there's a lot that's completely missing).
posted by blasdelf at 9:33 AM on July 9, 2006

hacked popcorn probably isn't food
posted by matteo at 9:35 AM on July 9, 2006

The bitch deleted all the non-food posts on her blog

When a female does something you don't like, does she instantly become "the bitch?"
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:39 AM on July 9, 2006

Well, yeah.
posted by ColdChef at 9:40 AM on July 9, 2006

Is being called an "asshole" less derogative than its female counterpart, the "bitch"? Because if so, then I can understand why bitch is unnecessarily harsh. But otherwise, it's just a run-of-the-mill insult.

I don't use the word myself, but just because I tend to think that it is more degrading than "asshole". But it does present an interesting topic of discussion.
posted by SeizeTheDay at 9:52 AM on July 9, 2006

I've always felt that bitch more frequently had overtones of a female that wasn't acting the way you wanted her to, where asshole was just more about being a jerk in broadly defined terms. So a woman is a bitch if she turns you down, or hides her non-food blog posts [seriously, wtf?] but a guy is an asshole if he kicks his dog or tailgates someone. Or a woman's an asshole if she does the same things. I equate it with the adjective "bitchy" which clearly has a more transitive sense, that there needs to be a bitcher and a bitchee.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:05 AM on July 9, 2006

Here's a search for every post on her personal site that mentions metafilter. I'm sure it's there somewhere.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:06 AM on July 9, 2006

jessamyn writes "I've always felt that bitch more frequently had overtones of a female that wasn't acting the way you wanted her to ... I equate it with the adjective 'bitchy' which clearly has a more transitive sense, that there needs to be a bitcher and a bitchee."

What? I always thought it referred to the fact that a female dog with pups is probably going to be very protective. Isn't female dog the original use?

jessamyn writes "So a woman is a bitch if she turns you down, or hides her non-food blog posts [seriously, wtf?] but a guy is an asshole if he kicks his dog or tailgates someone."

Yeah, but he could also be a dick. Actually, if he kicks his dog he's ten kinds of asshole and a huge dick. If he's tailgating me he's probably just some asshole. If he runs away when you flip him off, he's also a pussy. I almost never use that last one, but calling some guy a dick isn't a problem.
posted by krinklyfig at 10:16 AM on July 9, 2006

But, back on topic -- did anyone notice how we're trendsetters, opinion leaders, upper-income and highly educated? Thanks Sunday Morning.
posted by geoff. at 10:34 AM on July 9, 2006

Haha, I had no idea the Money Programme was a real thing. I thought it was just a Python sketch.
posted by Gator at 10:34 AM on July 9, 2006

Actually that post isn't online because there was a gap between Blogger and MovableType when I posted my entries by hand. I've imported nearly all the old entries into MT now, but three months are still missing (March, April and May 2002). Here is the text of the entry (just as it's quoted in the MeFi post):

"This Index of Logical Fallacies looks like it should be required reading for anyone who wants to participate in online discussions. (Hello, Metafilterians? I'm looking in your direction...)"

Article/story has some glaring inaccuracies, such as stating that Meg sold Blogger to Google.

Yes, and it also implied we created Blogger in 2001. Sometimes I think they bend the truth because it's easier than saying, "Pyra Labs, the company that created Blogger, was sold to Google in..." Still it's irritating.
posted by megnut at 10:50 AM on July 9, 2006

Dammit, meg, when you make an appearance it fucks up the second-handedness.
posted by cortex at 10:55 AM on July 9, 2006

Ears must have been burning.
posted by puke & cry at 11:55 AM on July 9, 2006

Must have been the jalepenos.
posted by loquacious at 12:48 PM on July 9, 2006

Haha, I had no idea the Money Programme was a real thing. I thought it was just a Python sketch.

I had a friend in middle school who (truly) didn't believe in the Spanish Inquisition for that very reason.

So much for the benefits of Public Broadcasting, at least in America.
posted by oneirodynia at 2:19 PM on July 9, 2006

I'm pretty sure Meg greps the entire Internet for her name. That or one of her A-List buddies emailed her. In any case, yes, she is a bitch.
posted by keswick at 4:24 PM on July 9, 2006

I read most of that thread in the blue, thinking to myself 'wow, what the heck drew all these old-skool types out of the woodword?', and then I realized it was from 2002.

Time for my first coffee of the day, I think.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:47 PM on July 9, 2006

How's adding the year in the posted by line to comments in the archives coming Matt?
posted by Mitheral at 4:55 PM on July 9, 2006

Metafilter: No wonder all of us narcissistic a-list weblogers stopped frequenting this site years ago...
posted by Jimbob at 5:17 PM on July 9, 2006

have some more coffee, stavros, that post is from '05.
posted by keswick at 5:39 PM on July 9, 2006

It says May 2, 2002 at the top of the thread. I may be sleepy, but I ain't a-stoopid.

Also: woodwork. 'Woodword' is pretty cool, too, though.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:50 PM on July 9, 2006

Keswick's link is from 2005.
The "logical fallcies" link is from 2002.

*pours a cup of earl grey"
posted by Jimbob at 5:54 PM on July 9, 2006

oh.

*has some more coffee*
posted by keswick at 6:06 PM on July 9, 2006

It's a lot easier to just call everyone a douchebag.




You pack of douchebags.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:13 PM on July 9, 2006

What post are you looking for? Why does it bother you that it's missing?

Is being called an "asshole" less derogative than its female counterpart, the "bitch"? Because if so, then I can understand why bitch is unnecessarily harsh. But otherwise, it's just a run-of-the-mill insult.

I've noticed people calling women asshole's lately, it seems like it's more polite to call a woman an asshole then a bitch, or at least more feminist-correct. It still sounds very strange and conspicuous to me.
posted by delmoi at 10:50 PM on July 9, 2006

No one is going to question why there is an article about this new thing called "blogging" in 2006?
posted by shoepal at 11:08 PM on July 9, 2006

No one is going to question why there is an article about this new thing called "blogging" in 2006?

No, I stopped worrying about that when there were articles about this new thing called "blogging" back in 2001. If I remember correctly, "blogging" was a response to 9-11 or something.
posted by Jimbob at 12:09 AM on July 10, 2006

You aren't thinking about the demographic of that television show, Shoepal. Everyone who watches it are still living in 1956.
posted by crunchland at 4:58 AM on July 10, 2006

Fuck you, Sunday Morning is awesome, though I sorely miss Charles Kuralt. Then again, I *wish* were living in 1956, so thereyago.
posted by keswick at 12:55 PM on July 10, 2006

Not with that toilet mouth, buster brown.
posted by crunchland at 1:56 PM on July 10, 2006