nick sylvester = maker upper

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

http://www.gawker.com/news/village-voice/the-voice-is-even-more-fucked-up-than-usual-157816.php

damn

whadda way to end a beautiful career.

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 22:54 (nineteen years ago)

shit, he was our man on the inside

― senseiDancer (sexyDancer), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 22:59 (nineteen years ago)

The ‘Voice’ Is Even More Fucked Up Than Usual

Best title ever.

― Mr Harman, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 22:59 (nineteen years ago)

See, I was avoiding posting this because it seemed kind of mean and ghoulish, but prove me wrong, ILM...

― Eppy (Eppy), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:00 (nineteen years ago)

note: this is only at rumour stage.

So sorry, if this isn't true.

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:01 (nineteen years ago)

oh dear me.

― deej.. (deej..), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:02 (nineteen years ago)

I'll be more interested when the "alleged" quota goes down, it reads more like popbitch atm to me.

― fandango (fandango), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:02 (nineteen years ago)

I'm interested enough as it is.

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:03 (nineteen years ago)

http://junta.toson.net/lmao.jpg

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:03 (nineteen years ago)

http://pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/f/faint/blank-wave-arcade.shtml

― Steve Shasta (Steve Shasta), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:05 (nineteen years ago)

Why would anyone get in much trouble over a fluffy lifestyle piece like this? (honest question - I'm no journalist)

― darin (darin), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:05 (nineteen years ago)

Google one Jayson Blair.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:06 (nineteen years ago)

Damn I have seen too many times on ILM people raining voodoo curses on Nick Sylvester's* career around here to not have some pre-evidence sympathy for yet another slander. Also not implying anyone posting this is doing this... just noting.

*Yeah, I hate his music writing style, when he turns it on full-pitchforkian-tilt (just not my taste I guess), but other that that no ill will to him personally.

― fandango (fandango), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:07 (nineteen years ago)

since nick posts here, why don't you people relax

― cutty (mcutt), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:07 (nineteen years ago)

What a high-stakes story, too.

xpost

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:08 (nineteen years ago)

someone could get sued for this if it's wrong surely?

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:09 (nineteen years ago)

i like how he does the riff raff blog, especially the interviews. which are made up as well, right?

― rizzx (Rizz), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:10 (nineteen years ago)

yes

― cutty (mcutt), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:10 (nineteen years ago)

no, believe me, the music world is actually that ridiculous

― senseiDancer (sexyDancer), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:11 (nineteen years ago)

Well, I'm sure there are repercussions regardless of the context, but it's not like he's covering Iraq or whatever.

x-post to Ned

― darin (darin), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:11 (nineteen years ago)

this thread will not be pleasant.

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:17 (nineteen years ago)

i hope nick doesn't mind my doing this.

here's the story:

http://search.villagevoice.com/search?q=cache:pERKO8MDWugJ:www.villagevoice.com/nyclife/0609,sylvester,72342,15.html+PUA&access=p&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&client=village_voice&site=VillageVoice&oe=UTF-8&proxystylesheet=village_voice

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:17 (nineteen years ago)

this thread really needs to go, actually.

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:19 (nineteen years ago)

why?

we're debating an issue. Which is what message boards are for surely?

free speech and all.

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:21 (nineteen years ago)

It's not like this thread is even malicious.

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:21 (nineteen years ago)

this thread will not be pleasant.

-- M@tt He1geson

OTM.

And even if it is made up, it's hardly inconceivable, it would barely matter if it was frankly. I'd expect as much (or certainly massive scoops of IRL exaggeration) from this kind of feature!

― worst iPod case scenario (fandango), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:23 (nineteen years ago)

debating an issue? does anyone here know ANY FACTS besides what gawker has to say? no!

― cutty (mcutt), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:23 (nineteen years ago)

you don't think this thread is gonna turn malicious?

there's already gonna be enough on the internet that we don't need his colleagues/peers/whatever turning ILM into a fucking knitting circle about it.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:24 (nineteen years ago)

xpost: the cover story was taken off the site, for one.

― senseiDancer (sexyDancer), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:25 (nineteen years ago)

If dude needs anything right now, it's probably to be left alone.

Whatever you think of his writing (or alleged ethics), he's still a part of our little online community, and I think we should give him a little respect.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:25 (nineteen years ago)

lmao @ worst writer ever

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:25 (nineteen years ago)

debating an issue? does anyone here know ANY FACTS besides what gawker has to say? no!

-- cutty (holle...), March 1st, 2006.

It's still an issue though.

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:26 (nineteen years ago)

why couldnt he just make up a story about hilarious black coke dealers like usual

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:26 (nineteen years ago)

lol @ dead ppl

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:27 (nineteen years ago)

debating an issue? does anyone here know ANY FACTS besides what gawker has to say? no!
-- cutty (holle...), March 1st, 2006.
It's still an issue though.

-- Hairy Asshurt (lindseyloha...)

haha "debating an issue" is the new "gossiping about total speculation"

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:27 (nineteen years ago)

So if Kanye West posted here we couldn't call his ass out over somethign stupid he did?

bullshit.

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:27 (nineteen years ago)

TS: snakes vs. spiders

― senseiDancer (sexyDancer), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:27 (nineteen years ago)

fainted?

― gear (gear), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:28 (nineteen years ago)

lol nick sylvester in a bucket hat lmao

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:28 (nineteen years ago)

DO YOU THINK YOULL BE FIRED FROM THE VOICE FOR MAKING UP A STORY?

...

YEAH MAKING UP A STORY IS PROBABLY NOT COOL WITH THEM

...

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:29 (nineteen years ago)

xpost, Hairy, point being that we don't know what happened, really.

― mike powell (mike powell), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:29 (nineteen years ago)

wait...kanye doesn't post here?

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:29 (nineteen years ago)

We don't know what happened. But there's this article to talk about. I thought it was intriguing, possibily slanderous, and worth talking about as this is a site full of journalists.

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:30 (nineteen years ago)

ILM IS INTERESTED IN DEFENDING YOU

YES

IS THAT BECAUSE YOURE A SMARMY RACIST?

.....

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:31 (nineteen years ago)

if this doesn't blow over tomorrow it'll be back on ILM in a second, if anywhere. I'm with jess on this, this thread (but not the thread to potentially come) basically isn't going to do any good at all. Deletion might be a bit much unless it gets really sour, but it is basically useless for any purposes after the first post until Gawker graciously updates with any of those fact things.

― fandango (fandango), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:32 (nineteen years ago)

who wants to bet the comma abuser is nick sylvester?

― naturemorte, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:33 (nineteen years ago)

I think far too many threads have been deleted recently.

It's like reading through the eyes of some overzealous mod.

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:34 (nineteen years ago)

alternately

― Eppy (Eppy), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:35 (nineteen years ago)

who wants to bet the comma abuser is nick sylvester?

nope.

― cutty (mcutt), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:35 (nineteen years ago)

i readily admit to schnadenfreude at this

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:36 (nineteen years ago)

So if Kanye West posted here we couldn't call his ass out over somethign stupid he did?

Despite the tunnel vision of the blogosphere, I wouldn't exactly call Nick Sylvester a public figure.

Plus, I think having a scarlet letter on his resume would be "call[ing] his ass out" enough. Let the guy be.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:36 (nineteen years ago)

Who is getting satisfaction here Eppy?

xpost

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:36 (nineteen years ago)

xposts - yeah I don't think this should be deleted either as is, but I still think it's a little but a placeholder until the "facts" arrive.

― fandango (fandango), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:36 (nineteen years ago)

even tho hes boring i wouldnt wish the same on breihan

― ,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:37 (nineteen years ago)

Why the need for deletion? Surely ILM mods such as Nick's PFM co-writer Jess, and Village Voice co-scribe Sterling, will want the thread to stay up for when we can all watch Sylvester's triumphant vindication from these cruel and vicious and boundless rumours, surely?

Also: lol2005.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:37 (nineteen years ago)

this backlash is fucking nuts!!! we cant talk shit about nick sylvester making dumb shit up?? 'call it hyper-game'

― ,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:38 (nineteen years ago)

So now we're on to backlash backlash? See, this is why I miss blogs. Can't you kids go talk about this on your friends-only LJs?

― Eppy (Eppy), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:39 (nineteen years ago)

how does it feel to be perpetua's perpetua

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:43 (nineteen years ago)

Like I said.

― Eppy (Eppy), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:44 (nineteen years ago)

haha dom someday maybe you'll actually rate this sort of thread like you so desperately want to.

p.s. the archives bear out that there's no love lost between me and nick. repeatedly.

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:44 (nineteen years ago)

I predict a wry Ott.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:45 (nineteen years ago)

"Please insert an “allegedly” into every sentence of that second, speculative graf. We’ll let you know more as we do."

fucking tenterhooks I tell thee :-P

― fandango (fandango), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:45 (nineteen years ago)

theres a wry ott goin on

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:46 (nineteen years ago)

Jess, this is neither the time nor the place for trolling, this is an unprovoked attack on a highly respected internet music journalist from cowards who hide behind blogs, a la terrorists. I'm lighting a candle for truth right now: I hope you are too.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:47 (nineteen years ago)

i enjoyed your earlier work, esteban

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:48 (nineteen years ago)

whoops

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:48 (nineteen years ago)

Until suspicions are confirmed (or refuted), we should shut the fuck up, and wish him the best.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:48 (nineteen years ago)

why the fuck should we wish him the best

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:50 (nineteen years ago)

its most courtesy than he'd extend to any rapper he interviews

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:50 (nineteen years ago)

[ethan interloper]

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:53 (nineteen years ago)

fuck off gay stalker

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:54 (nineteen years ago)

can we at least delete this comma dude's posts.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Thursday, 2 March 2006 00:05 (nineteen years ago)

Or start talking about Cat Power too or something.

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 00:06 (nineteen years ago)

This might be controversial, but I find Cat Power to be a very attractive woman.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Thursday, 2 March 2006 00:08 (nineteen years ago)

ethics, by mr. tom smith

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 2 March 2006 00:13 (nineteen years ago)

This omission - in and of itself not a David Irving-level falsehood - was crucial for the advancement of Syl's syllogism, his poisoned well, his inherently flawed argument.

Nick, you're a sniveling little cunt.

Granted, your piece didn't inflict harm on anyone (least of all TLASILA - we received free press, etc.), and your assertions, while arguably snarky and insipid, were scarcely libelous.

I'm pissed because you appealed to our better nature, then fucked us for an idiotic punchline. You can't get much lower.

― ,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 00:19 (nineteen years ago)

I'm annoyed, as someone familiar with cocky/funny and Neil Strauss, that New Yorkers are ruining it before I even get there.

― WillS, Thursday, 2 March 2006 00:29 (nineteen years ago)

i knew something was wrong when i read a voice article i enjoyed

― noizem duke (noize duke), Thursday, 2 March 2006 00:55 (nineteen years ago)

I read this on the subway last night, and kinda figured that it was just Nick being Nick, which is fine by me, but clearly is not something that translates to actual journalism.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:06 (nineteen years ago)

Next you'll tell me there is no such phenomenon as ripsterism?!!

http://www.villagevoice.com/nyclife/0602,sylvester,71589,15.html

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:07 (nineteen years ago)

i enjoyed half this article on the subway this morning, then promptly threw it away when I got to work. Later in the day I went to the site to find the rest and couldn't find it there..

if Sylvester goes down, then the illustrator should too:

http://images.villagevoice.com/issues/0609/sylvester2.jpg

http://www.marcoschin.com/img/lavalife/2002_dogwalk.jpg

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:13 (nineteen years ago)

there's no such thing as the South Bitch Diet?

― imbidimts, Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:14 (nineteen years ago)

those illustrations are great! esp. since they're on the subway! i mean, what better place to see idealized cartoon twenty-somethings cavorting in love on a billboard just above, say, a man who smells of his own urine? i love new york!!!!!

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:15 (nineteen years ago)

midi, both those pieces are illustrated by the same guy.

― mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:18 (nineteen years ago)

two-timer

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:19 (nineteen years ago)

xpost i think he knows that, hence "illustrator" singular.

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:20 (nineteen years ago)

Just to clarify, I linked that "ripster" thing (which I hated as much as I like Nick's 'Fork writing, but that's irrelevant) to illustrate that Sylvester obviously is/was the Voice's go-to po-mo satirist; the only ludicrous part of the whole saga is that someone decided his was cover story material - thus subjecting it to a completely unwarranted level of expectations and scrutiny. I mean, FFS, did anybody expect Nick to double-source his facts and log his Factiva searches when his stuff ran in the Choices' "Essay" section?

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:20 (nineteen years ago)

Now watch the dude become the anti-Adam Penenberg, a poster boy for why bloggerization of the press is an awful, standard-lowering thing. Sad.

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:22 (nineteen years ago)

interesting how nick sylvester gets fired for making up stuff but people like kenny goldsmith ["kenny g" to the wfmu-familiar] have entire magazines devoted to his con artist antics.

― maria tessa sciarrino (theoreticalgirl), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:23 (nineteen years ago)

that doesn't explain the viral marketing piece's complete misattributions, tho. those industry-specific columns usually carry the veneer of, y'know, actual research (at least when douglas wolk writes 'em they seem credible).

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:23 (nineteen years ago)

that last post was to joseph cotten but it could stand in as a response to maria, too.

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:25 (nineteen years ago)

Maybe we'll get a "Saturday Night Fever" out of this.

― deej.. (deej..), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:25 (nineteen years ago)

I didn't read the viral marketing piece... The ripster essay was a transparent joke (fake diary entries, etc) and scanned as a parody of a New York mag-style trend piece.
x-post

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:27 (nineteen years ago)

Well, Douglas Wolk is a journalist, whereas Nick Sylvester is a humorist who ended up working at a newspaper.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:27 (nineteen years ago)

so I guess the only silver lining here would be some updates on his dormant Riff Central?

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:28 (nineteen years ago)

"I didn't read the viral marketing piece"

i'm not sure anyone did

― noizem duke (noize duke), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:30 (nineteen years ago)

I heard he was suffering Post Tramatic Stress Disorder from an iPod War.

― A. Poster, Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:31 (nineteen years ago)

WINNER!

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:32 (nineteen years ago)

you are given an assignment for the cover of a major newspaper that involves reporting = you learn to be a reporter real quick or you turn it down

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:33 (nineteen years ago)

No argument there!

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:34 (nineteen years ago)

HARMONY

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:35 (nineteen years ago)

Side by side on my piano

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:35 (nineteen years ago)

At least he didn't lie about pizza.

― My Psychic Friends Are Strangely Silent (Ex Leon), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:39 (nineteen years ago)

I think we're all missing the most pertinent question this story throws up: will this The Game book actually help me get laid more often?

― jimnaseum (jimnaseum), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:40 (nineteen years ago)

no but it might get you booted in the cack

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:41 (nineteen years ago)

What are you, Cliff Clavin?

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:47 (nineteen years ago)

cack

\Cack\, v. i. [OE. cakken, fr. L. cacare; akin to Gr. ??????, and to OIr. cacc dung; cf. AS. cac.] To ease the body by stool; to go to stool. --Pope.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:49 (nineteen years ago)

the context was perhaps a bit off

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:50 (nineteen years ago)

that TLASILA email exchange is ridiculous

― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:50 (nineteen years ago)

"perhaps the village voice will be cacked by this experience"

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 01:50 (nineteen years ago)

http://villagevoice.com/news/0610,news,72372,2.html

― deej.. (deej..), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:02 (nineteen years ago)

oooh.

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:03 (nineteen years ago)

Awwwkwaaaaaard

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:03 (nineteen years ago)

Here we go.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:04 (nineteen years ago)

― ohboy (joseph cotten), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:06 (nineteen years ago)

Does this mean we don't have to wish him the best anymore?

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:09 (nineteen years ago)

the word "reported" makes that statement of apology particularly painful.

― Autonomous University of Zacatecas (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:11 (nineteen years ago)

aaaaand....scene

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:12 (nineteen years ago)

This thread has been abandoned by everyone except vultures.

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:12 (nineteen years ago)

The City's New Gay Saturday Bash

― senseiDancer (sexyDancer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:14 (nineteen years ago)

i don't rilly get how a writer for, despite its aimlessness and paralysis, still the premiere alt newspaper in the nation could think he could get away with this in the age of Jayson Blair and james Frey. Don't know the guy, find the few things i have written smug, don't bear him ill will…but I don't get it. Hamron called it correct.

― veronica moser (veronica moser), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:15 (nineteen years ago)

So you're calling yourself a vulture?

― jimnaseum (jimnaseum), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:16 (nineteen years ago)

that was supposed to be "…things I have read smug…"

― veronica moser (veronica moser), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:16 (nineteen years ago)

commence lmaoing

― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:18 (nineteen years ago)

wry ott going on = gold. Just sayin'

― BlastsOfStatic (BlastsofStatic), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:21 (nineteen years ago)

why do i have the sinking suspicion that many of the people here sending out their support to him are actually enjoying every moment of this?

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:21 (nineteen years ago)

I don't know why the response seems okay to me when I was sad about the Brent DiCrescenzo debacle and wanted him to write again.

― WillS, Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:35 (nineteen years ago)

i'm going to stay out of this, but it's worth pointing out that the voice got rid of all of their fact-checkers about a month ago. that doesn't excuse what happened (if it's true), but the voice should certainly look into hiring some fact-checkers, pronto.

― geeta (geeta), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:39 (nineteen years ago)

This thread makes me sick.

― save the robot (save the robot), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:41 (nineteen years ago)

why?

― Sym Sym (sym), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:52 (nineteen years ago)

Sicker than making shit up and publishing it?

I'm willing to overlook the douchebaggery on this thread when the offense is so serious. That's not to say that we should all be rubbing it in though.

xpost

― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 2 March 2006 02:53 (nineteen years ago)

This thread could be filled with much more douchebaggery.

But my heart goes out to poor, poor Sylverster. All he did was fabricate quotes - when did that become such a crime?

― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:25 (nineteen years ago)

Wry Cooter.

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:28 (nineteen years ago)

wroffle

― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:32 (nineteen years ago)

Guy made a mistake, owned up to it. Move on.

― erklie (erklie), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:32 (nineteen years ago)

I'm actually happy that Lookner is actually a real person - it sounds so made up.

xpost - "mistake"

― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:33 (nineteen years ago)

yes, a decision can be a mistake.

― erklie (erklie), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:50 (nineteen years ago)

Too bad. I guess he was in over his head? I dont know. I thought the story was pretty boring personally, I just didn't care about the topic enough to read the whole thing, but it sucks that this happened. Hopefully he'll learn from this.

― D.J. Short (D.J.), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:54 (nineteen years ago)

geeta otm.

also, i just read that piece today and was thinkinga posting here about it, or on ile rather. it does have the "too-good-to-be-true" shattered glass vibe, but less in a set-piece sort of way and more in a "naah he's blowing everything waaay out of proportion" sorta way.

perhaps nick was making a statement about the new management (i.e. "burning down my masters house"?)

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 03:57 (nineteen years ago)

this is what you get for talking shit about WEEZER, dicknose!

― chaki (chaki), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:00 (nineteen years ago)

on the other hand that cocks and dolls blog response doesn't really say anything incriminating...

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:02 (nineteen years ago)

monkeyfishing

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:03 (nineteen years ago)

i'm trying to think of any lifestyle/fluffpiece feature writers where this sort of thing didn't end up really really helping their careers - it certain helped neil strauss for example (i'd almost suspect nothing that's happened with how this has played out has been an accident). do ruth shalit or stephen glass count as fluffpiece writers? (glass probably does right, but he occasionally veered into the political forum so that probably counts as journalism where there's 'ethics' and 'standards'). suspension = his editors weren't in on the joke, that's where he fucked up.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:06 (nineteen years ago)

The guy should never be allowed to work anywhere near journalism again. Anyone who doesn't understand why doesn't understand journalism.

And who the hell says Neil Strauss made stuff up?

― beener, Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:08 (nineteen years ago)

um well neil strauss among others

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:13 (nineteen years ago)

truthiness.

― erklie (erklie), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:15 (nineteen years ago)

maybe he was making that up, about making stuff up

― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:15 (nineteen years ago)

yeah maybe it was strauss, like "come with me kid. . .to the dark side"

― noizem duke (noize duke), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:17 (nineteen years ago)

Just another example of the lines being blurred between journalism and "creative nonfiction"; you'd think a Harvard-educated journalist would be aware of the distinction and that he was writing for a newspaper, not some personal blog. But perhaps his hubris overshadowed his journalistic integrity. I don't feel sorry for him because what he did, even if it seems superfluous, is entirely inexcusable, but he is a good writer and will rebound somewhere.

― harold, Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:27 (nineteen years ago)

"perhaps nick was making a statement about the new management (i.e. "burning down my masters house"?)"

many posters here may have more insight re: this, but if so, then why bother writing the apology? why not just say "fuck y'all new times douches" and take off?

― veronica moser (veronica moser), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:34 (nineteen years ago)

xpost

Did he go to Harvard for journalism? I thought he studied Latin or some shit.

I know that when I studied journalism at a football school in Florida, they made me take classes on journalism ethics and journalism law before they handed me a degree.

One factual error = C
Two factual errors = F

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:54 (nineteen years ago)

Not rubbing anything in. Just saying I'd be scared shitless to try something like that.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:55 (nineteen years ago)

no lookner, no credibility

― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:56 (nineteen years ago)

ha!

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 04:58 (nineteen years ago)

aaaaand....scene

I always thought they were saying "end...scene", no?

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:35 (nineteen years ago)

blount, you do realize that the more you neg nick, the more it turns him on, right?

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:38 (nineteen years ago)

how much is that wallaby in the window?

― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:43 (nineteen years ago)

hmmm

No pages were found containing "cache:pERKO8MDWugJ:www.villagevoice.com/nyclife/0609,sylvester,72342,15.html PUA".

― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:44 (nineteen years ago)

aaaaand....scene

I always thought they were saying "end...scene", no?

not usually. "scene" means the take of the scene is completed.

― Autonomous University of Zacatecas (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:52 (nineteen years ago)

(i've heard it used in theater too, but mostly film/tv.)

― Autonomous University of Zacatecas (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:53 (nineteen years ago)

http://sportsmed.starwave.com/media/pg2/2002/0313/photo/crossrichter_sp.jpg

NOOOO!!! Can I use this chair?..

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 05:59 (nineteen years ago)

has everyone grandstanding here actually read the article? I enjoyed it - and the fact that a story on running covert vs overt game was itself running game on everyone is kinda clever - but it was just a pickup artist lifestyle piece: never took it for serious. I'll bet a lot more people read The Voice this week... (even without knowing about 'the scandal')

OK, I know, it smacks of Vice

― Paul (scifisoul), Thursday, 2 March 2006 06:06 (nineteen years ago)

does this mean there's no such book?

please tell me it's not real.

― jhoshea (scoopsnoodle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 06:12 (nineteen years ago)

The Village Vice

― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 06:12 (nineteen years ago)

hit on it in the end . . . then back . . . God is love . . . tender mercies . . . LOCK THREAD

― Roque Strew (RoqueStrew), Thursday, 2 March 2006 06:36 (nineteen years ago)

perhaps nick was making a statement about the new management (i.e. "burning down my masters house"?)

Actually it was the new management making a statement about the new management... which makes this even more tragic/funny.

― Da Na Not! (donut), Thursday, 2 March 2006 06:44 (nineteen years ago)

Have any of you actually read the Strauss book? I read a large chunk of it in Barnes & Noble a couple months ago, and one thing that was immediately clear to me while reading Nick's article was that he was writing it in the same style as the book, ie things vaguely rooted in reality, but highly stylized/fabricated in a way that is fairly obvious to anyone who is remotely skeptical/not gullible. As an idea, this isn't so bad, but someone at the Voice really should have noticed that this would not fly as proper journalism before they okayed the story for print. I don't really see Nick as the problem here - the people at the Voice are fully aware of his style and humor. He's definitely taking the fall for their poor editorial decision and apparent lack of fact-checkers.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:09 (nineteen years ago)

... then why not mention something about that in the apology letter? It's not that tough to say "It was a misunderstanding - what I was trying to do was ..." and "sorry for the confusion."

Is the cached version gone? I got through half of it and then lost interest; went back to finish it and now I'm not seeing anything.

― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:16 (nineteen years ago)

Well, it's understandable that Nick would not be defensive in the apology letter that he was forced to write! That's really not the best place for that sort of thing since what he was doing there was face-saving for himself and the publication, plain and simple.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:18 (nineteen years ago)

i've been on several sides of the editor-reporter relationship but i don't see how presenting things as if you'd seen them when you hadn't even been there is a fault of the editors. editors aren't there to watch every single thing a reporter does, and they have to be able to trust that the reporter's doing a decent job -- maybe they'll need a little spellchecking, maybe they'll get a date off by a month or a year, but still, you have to be able to trust that they're doing the work. when editors find out they can't trust that, they get pissed off.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:19 (nineteen years ago)

there was a big cover article on strauss a few weeks ago in san jose's local weekly. scooped! maybe someone should check for plagiarism?

― vahid (vahid), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:24 (nineteen years ago)

I agree with what you're saying, Gypsy Mothra, but my point is basically that hiring Nick to do a piece that would be understood as journalism (and not as some warped postmodern variation) and making it the cover story of the publication is kind of a flawed decision on the part of the editor since there's no question that they weren't already familiar with the sort of thing Nick has done for the paper in the past.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:28 (nineteen years ago)

"i've been on several sides of the editor-reporter relationship but i don't see how presenting things as if you'd seen them when you hadn't even been there is a fault of the editors."

Same here, and maybe that's why I'm so non-plussed. MattCPerp, are you defending the piece as a piece of performance-writing that the editors just didn't pick up on? It seems kinda cavalier and silly for the writer not to tip at least someone off about that, maybe run it past someone, etc., before it hits the galley.

Just strikes me as a pretty lame/false defense.

― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:28 (nineteen years ago)

I don't really see Nick as the problem here - the people at the Voice are fully aware of his style and humor. He's definitely taking the fall for their poor editorial decision and apparent lack of fact-checkers.

If this piece was clearly meant as satire, was presented to his editor as such, and his editor was ok with that before it ran, then maybe he is a "fall guy." But if it was assigned/assumed as a piece of reportage journalism, then he clearly violated journalistic ethics. I tend to think it's the latter. I don't think his editor told him to write (or approved of his writing) a satire cover story, then pulled it for fabrication reasons. I think Sylvester was well aware he was supposed to be writing this piece with a reporters' hat on and either got lazy or simply couldn't break out of his usual "creative" writing approach.

― ghimper, Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:31 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/02.08.06/nlp-0606.html

― James (D.J.), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:34 (nineteen years ago)

My defense of the piece is basically that Nick Sylvester is a comedian/satirist/critic working in a faux-journalistic voice, and the Voice editors made the mistake of putting his writing in the context of straight journalism, and they kinda got what was coming to them for making that mistake. It'd be like if you started airing Daily Show reports in the middle of a national news broadcast without explicitly pointing out to the viewers that what they are seeing isn't really journalism, even if it looks and sounds a little like journalism.

Given the pieces that Nick has written for the Voice in the (very recent) past, I just don't buy for a moment that the editor who okayed this Strauss piece was not aware of Nick's style.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:36 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, why would VV sabotage a writer whom they felt could be a great writer for them in the future ... UNLESS THERE'S SOMETHING WE DON'T KNOW.

― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:37 (nineteen years ago)

Harvard grad in learned behavior shockah

― Reggie, Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:37 (nineteen years ago)

I think Sylvester was well aware he was supposed to be writing this piece with a reporters' hat on and either got lazy or simply couldn't break out of his usual "creative" writing approach.

This is also a very likely scenario, but I still think that the editors should have had qualms about the presentation of Nick as a proper journalist to begin with.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:38 (nineteen years ago)

He lied and got caught. Stop defending him.

― Reggie, Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:39 (nineteen years ago)

and start enjoying the trainwreck, people!

― Susan Douglas (Susan Douglas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:41 (nineteen years ago)

I don't think a magazine that was recently bought out by a huge corporation would use its most valuable pages on a piece of situationist satire about a dating book.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:41 (nineteen years ago)

"I don't think a magazine that was recently bought out by a huge corporation would use its most valuable pages on a piece of situationist satire about a dating book."

OTM.

And if it is satire, it's weak satire.

― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:45 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, but it's what they did, Chris!

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:51 (nineteen years ago)

To put it another way: if he admits to quote-fluffing, he's still a fine writer, just not a trustworthy journalist; if he defends the piece as performance/satire, journalistic ethics remain intact, but damn he needs to stay in his soft, comfy world of music-crit and leave the tough stuff to more able, professional writers.

― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:52 (nineteen years ago)

I still think that the editors should have had qualms about the presentation of Nick as a proper journalist to begin with.

Every good writer deserves an opportunity to grow and write in different styles. A popular pomo stylist like Nick deserves a chance to do straight journalism. Maybe it's a risk to give him a cover story, but then again, I'm sure there are thousands of examples of first-time journalists pitching a solid story concept and getting a cover based on the results of that work.

Nick received an awesome opportunity, and it sounds like he blew it. VV blew it as well by not giving him the support, not fully checking the facts, etc. Especially since the story wasn't time specific, and could have easily been the cover story the following week if they needed the time to get it right.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Thursday, 2 March 2006 07:57 (nineteen years ago)

VV blew it as well by not giving him the support, not fully checking the facts, etc.

"Guys, help me out and make sure I don't lie this time. Thanks."

― Reggie, Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:01 (nineteen years ago)

"VV blew it as well by not giving him the support, not fully checking the facts, etc."

THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO FACT-CHECK HIM FABRICATING QUOTES!!!! As someone that started out as a fact-checker (and had the unpleasant task of finding fabbed quotes), the fact-checker's job should be to, as someone mentioned above, check dates, times, amounts, etc., etc. Yeah, they should've caught these quotes if they'd been doing their job, but that shouldn't be an issue. The only people the fact-checkers let down were the editors and readers; Sylvester is the last person they should feel sorry for.

― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:03 (nineteen years ago)

(where's my fucking ILM copy-editor to change my 'that' to 'who' and to catch my dangling modifiers? My grammar's a mess this time of night.)

― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:05 (nineteen years ago)

It sounds like Nick fucked up, which makes me sad, because I really love his stuff.

Nick, if you're reading - I really love your stuff. Good luck and things. Also: don't do this again.

― sean gramophone (Sean M), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:07 (nineteen years ago)

"Guys, help me out and make sure I don't lie this time. Thanks."

I don't mean for his sake, I mean for their own sake.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:07 (nineteen years ago)

This may be endemic of a bigger issue: It used to be that most critics came from a journalism background and knew the basic ethics and procedures, whereas nowadays things often happen backwards -- amateur blogger becomes professional critic becomes professional journalist, and doesn't really know what he or she is doing or what constitues crossing ethical lines.

― jaye, Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:10 (nineteen years ago)

The average middle schooler knows that saying that something happened when you know it didn't is "crossing ethical lines"

― Reggie, Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:15 (nineteen years ago)

Not if he has a warped view of what real journalism really is.

― jaye, Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:19 (nineteen years ago)

So seriously though, will that wallaby shit work for me?

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:20 (nineteen years ago)

OMG! YOU MEAN HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SIT DOWN WITH SOME FRIENDS AND DISCUSS THE GAME?! HOLY SHIT!!!

Cut the guy some slack. Like this affects anyone.

― darin (darin), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:23 (nineteen years ago)

OMG! YOU MEAN HE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SIT DOWN WITH SOME FRIENDS AND DISCUSS THE GAME?! HOLY SHIT!!!

Cut the guy some slack. Like this affects anyone.

way to discredit the entire notion of "journalism." thanks.

― hjkh, Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:27 (nineteen years ago)

so if nobody gets hurt, "journalists" should just make shit up. Love your thinking, mate!

― timmy tannin (pompous), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:27 (nineteen years ago)

Jesus fucking christ. Not every printed word in the English language is "journalism".

― darin (darin), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:28 (nineteen years ago)

Jesus fucking christ. Not every printed word in the English language is "journalism".

yes, certainly not a cover article posited as such in a major metropolitan newspaper.

― dfdf, Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:31 (nineteen years ago)

pissing off that lookner dude is not quite like failing to assess or challenge the case for invading a country, true.

but it's a public profession. so our fuck-ups are public too.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:33 (nineteen years ago)

Editor's note: he's been suspended

http://villagevoice.com/news/0610,news,72372,2.html

― StanM (StanM), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:35 (nineteen years ago)

OK so what happens now? He got suspended, there's no way the Voice can let him come back, right? What about Pitchfork? Do you think this guy screwed himself out of a career because of this? Obviously it doesn't rise to Jayson Blair levels of importance, but is this guy ruined now?

― frank e., Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:37 (nineteen years ago)

All I'm saying is that whenever shit like this happens, it just always happens to be the peers of the "guy in question" who always freak the fuck out. Like any normal person gives a rat's ass about some fluff designed to placate them on the way to work. I applaud your consistency, but get some perspective.

― darin (darin), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:38 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.mixotheque.com/blog/sylvester.JPG

― naturemorte, Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:42 (nineteen years ago)

Jousnalist ("writer" / "satirist", "critic", whatever) in "making shit up" shocker. Nick looked very fetching the other week when he was on BBC 6'o'clock news in some hipster hat talking about the Super Bowl show.

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:42 (nineteen years ago)

-- darin (darin...), March 2nd, 2006.

Most people (even "normal" ones) don't like being bullshitted, regardless of the relative level of importance.

― gdfgdfg, Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:48 (nineteen years ago)

Oh I dunno. Why would April Fools Day or Jeremy Beadle exist otherwise.

― Sick Mouthy (Nick Southall), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:50 (nineteen years ago)

peers freak the fuck out because this is a profession with its own professional codes, which are mostly there for a reason. there's a lot of diagreement about a lot of things within the profession, but making things up is a universally recognized red-letter offense.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 2 March 2006 08:53 (nineteen years ago)

Fair enough. I need to go to bed.

But I still think you guys underestimate the audience sometimes...

― darin (darin), Thursday, 2 March 2006 09:12 (nineteen years ago)

I mean we can tell the difference between "information" and "entertainment".

― darin (darin), Thursday, 2 March 2006 09:26 (nineteen years ago)

always?

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 March 2006 09:32 (nineteen years ago)

um, no, on the whole we can't. fox news, celebrity culture, star weekly, etc. i mean the readers of the village voice hopefully can. but you seem to be sidestepping the main issue of journalistic integrity. sylvester was quoting real individuals whom he never talked to. if you can tell the difference between entertainment and information then you can understand why that's a problem apart from the readers.

― naturemorte, Thursday, 2 March 2006 09:34 (nineteen years ago)

xposted from elsewhere. I am not speaking for Nick - I've only met him three or four times, and we barely crossed paths at Pitchfork - but this is infuriating. And one of the many reasons I refuse to get my financial well-being tied up in writing.

This is exactly the scenario that played out when Steve Martin (Nasty Little Man) went after Brent DiCrescenzo's Beastie Boys review at Pitchfork: an established (and aging) industry peer sees a young cub juggling knives - which we all do to get people to look at us - but instead of smiling knowingly at the bravado - "Hey, I'm on this kid's radar, cute" - Lookner grabs one by the handle and jabs it into his forehead Munich-style.

Lookner is a fellow Harvard alum, and a tiring L.A. comedy writer from the dire MAD TV/mid-90s SNL eras. He was a big part of The Man Show. You will find him falling off the edge of a bar with Jay Mohr on most Wednesday nights. Check out Mohr's Gasping for Airtime insight into this meathead frat-boy clique's pathetic insubstantiality.

Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke.

Chris Ott
Editor in Chief
SPIN Magazine

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Thursday, 2 March 2006 13:05 (nineteen years ago)

lol

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 13:11 (nineteen years ago)

maybe stay on ur own instead of 'fratboy' cheap shots & playing captain save-a-hack?

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 13:17 (nineteen years ago)

classic that nick only got suspended. very impressive, Voice!

― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 2 March 2006 13:58 (nineteen years ago)

Oh my god I don't believe we just brought up Brent's piece as a comparison to this.

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:13 (nineteen years ago)

personally, I defend the right of anyone to get pissed off if they have quotes attributed to them that they did not say, no matter how lame the person is, unless it's clearly a joke, which this wasn't. But I do think it's silly to think this will hurt his career, I mean, maybe if he wanted to write for The New York Times or something, but like Pitchfork could care? Or any number of outlets. The New Yorker Shouts and Murmors section would be a perfect home for him. If they can have Sasha Frere Jones talking about Mariah Carey, they can have Nick's trash talking. Better then jokes about old books I ain't ever read.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:19 (nineteen years ago)

There are plenty of great writers able to scoot from satire to straight reporting. I mean, in a sense Christgau does it, Dan Savage does it, Neil Pollack has done it, Tom Wolfe has done it, and so on. I say, ethics aside, if you're going to make something up, make something up about made-up people. Don't make something up about real, living, breathing people unless you know they're cool with it.

Ethics not aside, if you're going to make something up, just write a book or something. It's called "fiction," and a lot of people like it.

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:22 (nineteen years ago)

Nice, Ott.

I feel bad for Sylvester, hopefully this mess will blow over.

Also could Eppy stop posting to this thread. Or be castrated. Or at least stop talking about "we" as though he is more than one lonely person.

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:23 (nineteen years ago)

I think you are mis-guessing what I was going to say about it, but OK.

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:25 (nineteen years ago)

I'm glad you're willing to defend that right Dan, given that most people don't like lies being told about them, let alone having lies published for millions of people to read.

This isn't a instance of journalistic ethics that Nick Sylvester didn't learn at j-school or the tutelage of an editor. It's pretty basic morals. If you need to be told that lying is wrong, you've got problems that need more than a suspension. Which is why any editor who hires Nick from here on out will have a credibility problem to contend with. I'm sure Nick's a nice guy, but he just took a long piss into the wind without a clean towel in view.

FWIW, Ruth Shalit hasn't had a byline in years.

― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:31 (nineteen years ago)

any edtior who hires a guy known for treating rappers like anonymous shit to their faces while fawning over weirdo rock bands had a credibility problem to begin with

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:34 (nineteen years ago)

I think you are mis-guessing what I was going to say about it, but OK.

-- Eppy (epp...), March 2nd, 2006.

I don't feel I should devote my time here on this thread to guessing what you are gonna say.

Say it or get off the can.

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:38 (nineteen years ago)

don weiner otm -- words i've never said before.

wtf at all this 'fact-checker' shit? just do it right the first time, you lazy so-and-sos.

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:41 (nineteen years ago)

i blame the readers for believing him

― ,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:43 (nineteen years ago)

the other night i was at a bar in paris talking to some swedish girls that were too tall and good-looking for me. we started talking about shows in paris and music news etc and, like most conversations about music with people my age, avoided mentioning pitchfork for as long as possible. when it finally happened (talking about new knife album), one of them said, "oh. yah. like, mah friend was in nyoo york and mett neek sylvestre."

NICK LIE ALL YOU WANT YOU ARE INTERNATIONAL GONZO MUSIC SEX SYMBOL!!

― poortheatre (poortheatre), Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:51 (nineteen years ago)

I'm curious about ,,,,,'s comments about Nick treating rappers like "anonymous shit", as some rock-band friends of mine had a similar experience. sylvester's very short article on them was riddled with small mistakes. nothing earth-shattering, but about one inaccuracy per line. he got song titles wrong, an album title wrong, the band's label wrong, identified the drummer as the singer, misattributed quotes from people in the band, and quoted lyrics inaccurately. again, nothing of terrible importance but it was kind of laughable.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:57 (nineteen years ago)

wtf at all this 'fact-checker' shit? just do it right the first time, you lazy so-and-sos.

newspapers should have fact-checkers. ostensibly, newspapers report news, and for a paper (even an alt-weekly) to lay off its fact-checkers is very irresponsible. i totally agree that ~~journalists~~ people who write for newspapers have an unspoken oath to get their facts straight, but the factchecking department should always be on guard to cover the newspaper's ass.

― jbr, Thursday, 2 March 2006 14:58 (nineteen years ago)

"caring" isn't the vicefork WAY

― jbr, Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:00 (nineteen years ago)

it's not a newspaper, it's the village voice. there isn't much objection along NYT lines, because the story is trivial, but he obviously fucked up -- and the question is WHY BOTHER MAKING IT UP? i can't imagine fact-checkers would get into this kind of territory anyway -- maybe on the new yorker, but generally?

xpost

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:01 (nineteen years ago)

it's not a newspaper, it's the village voice.

it is a newspaper, in that it often publshes news features.

― Autonomous University of Zacatecas (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:03 (nineteen years ago)

yeah why would anybody care about blatant lying in the voice-

In its March 30 issue, The Village Voice broke a shocking story connecting the growth of US-aided Muslim militance in Afghanistan with the February bombing of the World Trade Center.

(...)

In March of this year, the Village Voice broke exclusive new details of a special IBM wartime subsidiary set up in Poland by IBM's New York headquarters shortly after Hitler's 1939 invasion.

(...)

First, there was the story the Village Voice broke about the Mayor's aides allegedly offering a $144,000/year job to former City Councilman Thomas Ognibene in order not to run against Mayor Bloomberg in the GOP primary.

- its not a serious paper or anything

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:08 (nineteen years ago)

he should have added a disclaimer like he did on his fake Voice blog:

"Disclaimer: With the exception of the MP3 and verifiable band bio, this entire entry is probably made up."

― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:09 (nineteen years ago)

fritz i dont doubt he treats rock bands like anonymous shit too but he also seems to engage with their music more readily when it comes to actually posting seriously - maybe i just notice the rap shit more cuz its this smarmy harvard grad acting like a dick to ppl from my city

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:11 (nineteen years ago)

ott joins the jackass parade.

instead of smiling knowingly at the bravado - "Hey, I'm on this kid's radar, cute"

how would you feel if a big newspaper printed a story saying you were in new york when you weren't? how would your wife + family feel?

― vahid (vahid), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:24 (nineteen years ago)

"how would your wife + family feel?"

it wouldn't work. they would hear me snoring on the couch.

― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:27 (nineteen years ago)

Then your boys could come up and dance and sing and jump on your tummy.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:27 (nineteen years ago)

Happy Birthday, Ned!

― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:32 (nineteen years ago)

:-D

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:34 (nineteen years ago)

Jimmy is 8 years old and a third-generation heroin addict, a precocious little boy with sandy hair, velvety brown eyes and needle marks freckling the baby-smooth skin of his thin brown arms.
He nestles in a large, beige reclining chair in the living room of his comfortably furnished home in Southeast Washington. There is an almost cherubic expression on his small, round face as he talks about life -- clothes, money, the Baltimore Orioles and heroin. He has been an addict since the age of 5. His hands are clasped behind his head, fancy running shoes adorn his feet, and a striped Izod T-shirt hangs over his thin frame. "Bad, ain't it," he boasts to a reporter visiting recently. "I got me six of these."

― ,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:37 (nineteen years ago)

I was waiting for someone to get all Janet Cooke on this thread.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:39 (nineteen years ago)

yeah but that made-up story cast important light on an real life community epidemic instead of being some smug po-mo loser dicking around nyc scenester bullshit & using newspapers as his own narcissistic playground

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:44 (nineteen years ago)

also janet cooke didnt think black ppl using & selling drugs was hilarious or cute

― ,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:45 (nineteen years ago)

RIFF: JIMMY YOU USE HEROIN ALOT HUH

JIMMY: YES I AM ADDICTED TO IT

RIFF: WOULD YOU SAY YOU ARE "CUCKOO" FOR IT

JIMMY: ...

― ,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:46 (nineteen years ago)

haha ts: nick sylvester makes up/changes details in fluffpiece about picking up chix vs. nancy grace makes up/changes details in (career making) story about murder of her fiance.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:47 (nineteen years ago)

Holy schadenfreude, Batman.

You know you've hit bottom when Tom Smith is lecturing you about ethics.

― Edward III (edward iii), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:48 (nineteen years ago)

for me the fact that its a fluff piece makes it worse, not better

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:49 (nineteen years ago)

whoa, i wonder if tom smith knows nancy grace!

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:53 (nineteen years ago)

Smith once wrote a piece about scoring with one of the chicks from Frightwig. So he & Slyvester are kindred spirits, in a sense.

― Edward III (edward iii), Thursday, 2 March 2006 15:57 (nineteen years ago)

2) fluffpiece/lifestyle feature 'journalist' fate (neil strauss, tom junod, richard meltzer) - positive: nothing negative happens to yr career. negative: this means you're still a fluffpiece/lifestyle feature 'journalist'. positive: except now you're better paid. negative: you become an even bigger asshole.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:02 (nineteen years ago)

i wonder if sylvester has even been to a kill whitey party like he says?!

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:02 (nineteen years ago)

ok that was probably true

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:02 (nineteen years ago)

and sylvester should take comfort in that there's two things that can happen to him now -
1) 'serious' journalist fate (janet cooke, ruth shalit, stephen glass) - no longer work in journalism, get better paying, more prestigious job instead (ok, i guess it could be argued cooke made a lateral move after the post)(note: ignore possibility of consequences if your name is mike barnicle, rick bragg, joe klein).
2) fluffpiece/lifestyle feature 'journalist' fate (neil strauss, tom junod, richard meltzer) - positive: nothing negative happens to yr career. negative: this means you're still a fluffpiece/lifestyle feature 'journalist'. positive: except now you're better paid. negative: you become an even bigger asshole.

Janet Cooke worked at a department store for like 20 years or something!

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:05 (nineteen years ago)

Nothing much here except:

Also: Yes, yes, we know about that essentially useless Editor’s Note. More on that TK later.

Hmmm.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:07 (nineteen years ago)

They asked for and paid for a Nick Sylvester piece, and they got one. Unless the editor specifically said "hey, this is going on the front page under the general news and editorial section" it's possible (probable?) Nick didn't know what he was supposed to turn in. With things the way they are (I'm still amazed the Riff Raff column exists, and I like a reasonable portion of Nick's stuff) it's not surprising that he could make the front page with a parody article.

Is there anything Nick's written for the voice that hasn't had some sort of parody disclaimer or was at least written in the guise of being a gossipy music article?

― mike h. (mike h.), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:07 (nineteen years ago)

I love Situationism as much as the next guy (if the next Guy is Debord; get it? get it?) but, for instance, the same Voice issue has a Sylvester story entitled "E-thics" (oof). It's about viral marketing schemes. I would like to be able to take the facts that Nick cites (e.g., that the "Mothers Against Noise" joke was bankrolled by Universal) seriously. Sadly, I can't.

― Never Work (joseph cotten), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:08 (nineteen years ago)

I love Situationism as much as the next guy (if the next Guy is Debord; get it? get it?)

I am going to steal the fuck out of that.

Isn't it pronounced "Gee" though?

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:10 (nineteen years ago)

Trife, you shoukd get a VV blog where you write like you write on ILX

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:10 (nineteen years ago)

like i said whiney - lateral move!

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:10 (nineteen years ago)

hey JB are you asserting that Sylvester has the writing chops of any of those other writers? because that's kind of a mitigating factor when it comes to taking comfort.

― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:11 (nineteen years ago)

what the fuck has this got to do with situationism?

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:12 (nineteen years ago)

er, don, neil strauss's chops?

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:13 (nineteen years ago)

captain save-a-hack logic

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:14 (nineteen years ago)

writing chops - meltzer>junod>sylvester>strauss (note: strauss best seller in the bunch)(ie. nick you might want to think about pitching a teagan presley bio right now while the iron's hot).

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:16 (nineteen years ago)

meltzer never made anything up! especially when he did!

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:19 (nineteen years ago)

maybe a book on "trap-hop" modelled after
http://tommcmahon.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/leniafrica2.jpg

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:19 (nineteen years ago)

haha i thought that graphic was gonna be the david foster wallace hip-hop book at first

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:25 (nineteen years ago)

http://img314.imageshack.us/img314/1322/traptop0pc.jpg

― LYRICAL MR PERFECT, Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:26 (nineteen years ago)

haha that book is pretty good tho

xpos YES

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:27 (nineteen years ago)

blount, your gap between junod and sylvester is approximately 1.43298 zillion miles.

― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:30 (nineteen years ago)

he should avoid a hip-hop book, those things never sell. teagan presley bio all the way, and then a funny how to book about scoring milfs, then maybe a collection of 'essays' on various pop trivia including a first published in esquire feature on mischa barton that may stretch the truth slightly, then, if the time is right, a guest shot on around the horn.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:32 (nineteen years ago)

i predict a long career of being the guy making funny hand gestures in the background of cobrasnake photos

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:33 (nineteen years ago)

who are you, his agent?

i'm sure that's been the gameplan since his freshman year.

xpost

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:34 (nineteen years ago)

is it time for the "WHAT'S ON NICK SYLVESTER'S IPOD?" thread yet?

― sean gramophone (Sean M), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:35 (nineteen years ago)

lol @ gear

maybe a reader-submitted mcsweeneys list too?

― ,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:35 (nineteen years ago)

Is there anything Nick's written for the voice that hasn't had some sort of parody disclaimer or was at least written in the guise of being a gossipy music article?

um, this story?

i know all the facts aren't out, so it's hard to judge this situation completely. but i'm kinda weirded out by people making the "c'mon-they-should've-known" defense. even if you think the editors should've known -- which is a stretch, and you'd need to know what kind of talk went on between reporter and editors -- there's no way the reader can know. and yeah, it's fluff. guess what? writing good fluff is hard. having the right quotes, the right anecdotes, it takes work like anything else. making shit up is making shit up.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:40 (nineteen years ago)

F U N N I E S T W A Y S T O S E L L C R A C K

By Nick Sylvester

Use slang I can't understand.

Be from the south, or at least, Virginia.

Have avant garde minimalist production.

Wear Bathing Ape sometimes, if not a bucket hat.

Be poor and Black.

― ,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:41 (nineteen years ago)

xpost: (and i can't believe people are getting into whether the guy who apparently wasn't there and never talked to the writer is a fratboy or not. that's the lamest excuse i've ever heard. there's no "unless it's a fratboy" exemption in the ethics rules.)

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:42 (nineteen years ago)

xpost

Capital "B," cuz.

― Jimmy Mod: The Prettiest Flower In The Pond (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:42 (nineteen years ago)

is might magazine responsible for this klosterman/strauss/sylvester type of fluffpiece writer? i never read it but it seems like eggers pre-new sincerity definitely would've been this type of asshole.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:42 (nineteen years ago)

capital b what?? i doubt nick would put caps on 'black' (unless he was poppin a cap on a black lol slang) but i do

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:44 (nineteen years ago)

is it time for the "WHAT'S ON NICK SYLVESTER'S IPOD?" thread yet?

-- sean gramophone (sea...), March 2nd, 2006 11:35 AM.

Yes.

― Edward III (edward iii), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:45 (nineteen years ago)

i'm still wondering how making up the quotes somehow, in some people's mind, automatically makes the piece a "parody."

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:50 (nineteen years ago)

it means indie nerd rock critics w/ ties to pfork & the voice are choosing bullshit hipster crew love over journalism

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:53 (nineteen years ago)

like all those republicans who 'stand behind' tom delay

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:54 (nineteen years ago)

ethan yr verging on dom territory here

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:54 (nineteen years ago)

amirite?

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:54 (nineteen years ago)

Oh OUCH

― Dan (That's Mean, Jess) Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:55 (nineteen years ago)

haha

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:56 (nineteen years ago)

sorry, sorry

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:56 (nineteen years ago)

'this thread needs to go, actually'

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:56 (nineteen years ago)

that was actually a fabricated quote on my part from myself

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:56 (nineteen years ago)

"verging"

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:56 (nineteen years ago)

any similarities between crack rappers and actual people, living or dead, are coincidental

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:58 (nineteen years ago)

I shall be keeping all your names for the roman a clef about ILX I am writing with Edmund Morris, who shall interact with all of us when we were six.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:58 (nineteen years ago)

Though perhaps 'interact' is too neutral a term.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 16:58 (nineteen years ago)

seriously trife if anything get on him for biting aidin vaziri's style, failing to kiss musicians' asses is hardly a crime even if *gasp* they're rappers. not everyone can be byron allen dude.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:01 (nineteen years ago)

"Calliope niggas made the St. Thomas look like church..."

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:01 (nineteen years ago)

Wondering when this would get back around to Nik Cohn.

― deej.. (deej..), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:04 (nineteen years ago)

noblesse oblige is better than nothing i guess

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:04 (nineteen years ago)

failing to kiss musician's asses /= dehumanizing solipsistic bullshit, half of which is made up

― ,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:07 (nineteen years ago)

he didnt even bother to learn the name of which rapper from franchize he was talking to

― ,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:08 (nineteen years ago)

Every time ILX invokes the postmodernism excuse for Nick Sylvester, a masked guman kicks Jill Carroll in the face.

― Never Work (joseph cotten), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:09 (nineteen years ago)

yeah jess nobless oblige, im using my immense personal wealth to give handouts to rappers & label owners w/ 100k albums sold & 2 hummers in the garage

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:09 (nineteen years ago)

& if you think i 'kiss ass' w/ every interview subject you dont know shit - astoundly you tend to get better stories from treating mmusicians like people instead of being a dick, ignoring what they say & then making shit up

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:12 (nineteen years ago)

whatever byron

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:14 (nineteen years ago)

you're right though - boring, fawning celebrity puffpieces = the best journalism you'll ever read, esp with musicians who god knows definitely deserve respect and have interesting things to say.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:16 (nineteen years ago)

is the article still online anywhere, the links above seem busted

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:16 (nineteen years ago)

ethan there's a gulf of difference between making shit up and being needlessly deferential as i am sure you know.

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:17 (nineteen years ago)

what about being needlessly dickish and getting everything wrong?

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:19 (nineteen years ago)

http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:pERKO8MDWugJ:www.villagevoice.com/nyclife/0609,sylvester,72342,15.html+sylvester+voice+strauss&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

Agree that pulling it down was an error in judgment. It's not the crime, it's the coverup, etc...

― Edward III (edward iii), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:20 (nineteen years ago)

where the fuck did i praise 'boring, fawning celebrity puffpieces'?

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:20 (nineteen years ago)

"captain save-a-hack" haaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:21 (nineteen years ago)

I didn't realize Blount and Jess had so much respect for Riff Raff interviews.

― Zwan (miccio), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:21 (nineteen years ago)

haha i won't start naming who i think nick is a better writer than when he tries

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:22 (nineteen years ago)

i highly doubt any egos will be bruised

― Zwan (miccio), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:26 (nineteen years ago)

"when he tries"

― Zwan (miccio), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:26 (nineteen years ago)

failing to kiss musicians' asses is hardly a crime

we're drafting legislation though

― Thomas Tallis (Tommy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:29 (nineteen years ago)

i respected his interviews more than the 'plz plz get me out of the rockcrit ghetto' lifestyle zeitgeist 'i saw a hipster in a gym' sub-gladwell crap. they made better reading than the groupie/publicist sycophancy trife is upholding as a model. suzy slobjobs writ large as hardly something to aspire to.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:30 (nineteen years ago)

its one thing to 'break the rules' to be disrespectful to kanye or paul mccartney or some other asshole the press takes seriously, but we're talking about a new york hipster ivy league asshole shitting on a member of dem franchize boyz, dehumanized to the point of not even naming him. yeah bout time somebody took franchize down a notch!! thank god someone was brave enough to put the 'celebrity fluff pieces' on dem franchize boyz to an end!! hey maybe dude actually had something to say, or maybe another rapper might have something interesting to say, but we'll never know cuz nick gives every interview subject the same disrespect, infantilization & self-serving horseshit

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:31 (nineteen years ago)

i don't think i've ever read a rekkerd review by the dude. i only know him from the fake voice blog. i will have to investigate.

― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:32 (nineteen years ago)

blount where am i upholding 'groupie synchophancy'?? ive personally told interview subjects i think they should do more than glorified drug raps, more than sylvester's ever asked

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:33 (nineteen years ago)

whatever suzy

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:34 (nineteen years ago)

perpePUA

― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:35 (nineteen years ago)

to be fair boring groupie puffpieces probably are a good career move if you want to stay just a music 'writer' and you're more concerned with making yr subjects happy than yr readers. you can make a living at it definitely.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:36 (nineteen years ago)

would you rather see dick cheney have an exclusive sitdown interview w/ seymour hersh or ted rall? is the worth of journalism measured in who can say 'fuck off' the loudest??

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:37 (nineteen years ago)

next, people are gonna be telling me that catucci doesn't actually watch all that porn! (i kid, nick, if yoo r a lurker, i know yoo watch tonz of porn and i love you)

― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:37 (nineteen years ago)

ted maul?

― cutty (mcutt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:38 (nineteen years ago)

would you rather see dick cheney have a sitdown with seymour hersh or fred barnes? is the worth of journalism measured in who can slurpslurp the loudest?

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:43 (nineteen years ago)

i cant believe im being accused of being a careerist compared to NICK SYLVESTER! do inane questions & smarmy self-obsession count as hard-hitting journalism now?? believe it or not sometimes ppl actually say interesting things when you treat them respectfully instead of mocking them outright

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:47 (nineteen years ago)

and, as many other ppl have noted, making up quotes

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:47 (nineteen years ago)

I'm with ethan, I've never understood the mindset that sez "the only good interviewer is a TOUGH interviewer" (at least where music writing's concerned) - though mark s has interesting things to say on this subject w/r/t john lydon & possibly others

anyhow ethan isn't advocating sycophancy & doesn't practice it, he rather seems to take a highly controversial "make your interview subjects comfortable" stance & that hardly amounts to blowing yr subjects

― Thomas Tallis (Tommy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:48 (nineteen years ago)

really the only groupie/publicists i see in this thread are the sylvester fan club pretending its just all a big misunderstanding/genius move on the part of the new messiah

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:48 (nineteen years ago)

blount claims everyone is a careerist for chrissakes. i guess miccio was a careerist in the end but it turned out to be propane and propane accessories.

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:49 (nineteen years ago)

and most of my interviews in the past year & a half are for local mags like crunk, get'em, etc w/ no online content or distribution outside the south, i recognize my early pieces come off kinda charlie & the choc factory-ish but i think ive gotten alot better w/ this shit - oddly enough for a cynical opportunist i havent been posting them online or pitching them to village voice tho!

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:50 (nineteen years ago)

ethan, where can i read your stuff?

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:51 (nineteen years ago)

you should do a blog for get'em

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:52 (nineteen years ago)

you can interview fall out boy and hawthorne heights and make up quotes

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:52 (nineteen years ago)

lol @ reverse racism

im going to lunch now

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:53 (nineteen years ago)

PDRANK: KANYE CALLED YOU "THE WHITE CRUNK." DO YOU LIKE WHITE CHOCOLATE?

ALEX KAPRANOS: YES, WE LIKE WHITE CHOCOLATE.

PDRANK: HAVE YOU EVER OWNED A SLAVE?

ALEX KAPRANOS: ...

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:53 (nineteen years ago)

i have a Black Crunky chocolate bar from Japan.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:55 (nineteen years ago)

http://blogimg.goo.ne.jp/user_image/43/f6/7bea8f2c497ec8bbc30216620d38c155.jpg

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:56 (nineteen years ago)

PDRANK: DO YOU LIKE "BLACK CRUNKY" CHOCOLATE BAR FROM JAPAN?

FRITZ WOLLNER: YES I LIKE BLACK CRUNKY CHOCOLATE BAR FROM JAPAN.

PDRANK: DO YOU ALSO ENJOY ANAL SEX?

FRITZ WOLLNER: ...

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:57 (nineteen years ago)

haha i am beginning to understand what the appeal of this was for nick

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:57 (nineteen years ago)

for the record, i never said "...". Jess is suspended.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 17:58 (nineteen years ago)

i think blount's just suffering from guilt by association

― ant@work, Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:03 (nineteen years ago)

otm.

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:05 (nineteen years ago)

Artists will be more likely to share exceptional/suprising/interesting things with you if you make them comfortable.

When an artist tells you, "I didn't think I'd ever talk about that," it's a lot more rewarding than being on the offensive end of some some gonzo gotcha

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:12 (nineteen years ago)

yeah nick's much loved "...." response offers nothing journalistically

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:15 (nineteen years ago)

aidin vaziri pulls off both, which is pretty impressive, which is why you shouldn't compare him to nick

― ant@work, Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:15 (nineteen years ago)

hack: 'i luv writing fawning puffpieces about you'

subject: 'i luv it when you write fawning puffpieces about me'

hack: 'are you comfortable?'

subject: 'a little lower'

hack: 'how's that?'

subject: 'yeah that's it, that's the spot'

hack: 'when's yr new record drop?'

WHAT GREAT 'JOURNALISM'

to be fair it is better than 'i saw hipster in a gym'.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:15 (nineteen years ago)

o vaziri's MUCH better in every way than nick, just that that seemed very much the style he was biting. definitely preferable to the ethan/suzy school of questioning by which definition stewardesses and waiters count as hardhitting journalists.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:18 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2003/20031015/w2.jpg

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:18 (nineteen years ago)

i have no idea why you're pulling this bullshit with ethan, blount

― ant@work, Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:20 (nineteen years ago)

after all this time on ilm?

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:21 (nineteen years ago)

This reminds me of the time my sea monkeys started eating each other.

― My Psychic Friends Are Strangely Silent (Ex Leon), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:22 (nineteen years ago)

"Your new album sucks! I've never been so bored in my life!"
"Umm...sorry..."
"Yeah what the fuck were you thinking?"
"I don't...who the fuck are you?"
"I'm a rock journalist, motherfucker! Who are YOU?"

WHAT GREAT 'JOURNALISM'

― Thomas Tallis (Tommy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:22 (nineteen years ago)

anyhow i'm late for lab - if any of yall see a hipster in a gym or an 'artist' with something interesting to say lemme know.

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:22 (nineteen years ago)

ilm: really just brine shrimp

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:22 (nineteen years ago)

Nicole wins, as usual.

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:23 (nineteen years ago)

HEY PEOPLE LET'S SEE HOW LONG WE CAN KEEP NICK SYLVESTER'S NAME AT THE TOP OF THE NEW ANSWERS PAGE

― cutty (mcutt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:23 (nineteen years ago)

jesus, it seems to me that ethan isn't advocating much more than knowing the names of the people you're speaking to and treating them with some basic courtesy... how this is sycophantic or a "school of journalism" is beyond me.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:24 (nineteen years ago)

i am not attacking ethan's sense of journalistic ethics, just ethan

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:24 (nineteen years ago)

it's what we do

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:25 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.lessonsforsuccess.com/images/book2.gif

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:25 (nineteen years ago)

actually one reason why this grates me so much & why, like i said above, i think itd be more ok with somebody like kanye who we already know way too much about the opinions (and self-opinions) of -- rappers like t-pain & dude from franchize who nick doesnt care the name of, your average vvoice reader doesnt even know who they are, and bullying them with stupid questions isnt some long-awaited beatdown, in that context its closer to a reporter being abusive to random bystanders during a man-on-the-street bit. rappers have got interesting shit to say if you let them, instead of going for as many worthless "..." responses as possible!! try reading ozone mag, murder dog, or even vibe (for the great stuff after the opening letters, where you learn interesting shit about rap & r&b stars thru actual professional interviewing - even if its "fluff" like bonecrusher's fried fish essentials or remy ma's favorite movies or whatever - instead of just hearing all the unfunny, self-absorbed inanities of the interviewer), they have 2 & 3 page interviews with no-name rappers where you actually get to hear their voice & gain insight into the musician youre presumably reading music writing for. picking on 1 hit wonders w/ pointless questions is talentless hack bullshit, not the subversive idol-shattering that jess & blount seem to think it is

xpost much luv jess

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:26 (nineteen years ago)

i don't really know how i've been drafted into the nick sylvester legal defense fund, especially as someone who spends waaaaay too many hours in a week transcribing interview tapes for accuracy

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:28 (nineteen years ago)

Would someone bring me up to date on one fact that doesn't seem to translate upthread?

I want to know whether the VV commissioned a piece from NS (his choice of topic), or this particular type of story.

Thanks.

― Giles Manius (jsoulja), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:29 (nineteen years ago)

what?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:30 (nineteen years ago)

the actual commission was for a piece on his choice of topic, with the criteria that it be A) fluffy and B) untrue.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:31 (nineteen years ago)

i understand the urge though. at some point you just get sick of hearing yourself go "ummm" and "uh" 900 times in 45 minutes.

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:32 (nineteen years ago)

Dom has turned into that creature from The Hidden and is now going from ilxor to ilxor, inhabiting their bodies and posting under their names

― lil' flipper (eman), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:32 (nineteen years ago)

xpost
there is nothing more painful than listening to yourself do a bad interview

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:33 (nineteen years ago)

haha yeah it took me a long time to realize i could compress statements where dude goes 'well....... actually.... uh.. we were.... ummmmm.... just tryna..... ya know.... put..... some music... uh... out for the streets.... ya know...'

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:33 (nineteen years ago)

yeah, that is the worst. (xp)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:33 (nineteen years ago)

xpost w/ fritz haha yeah especially when you hear yourself harping on & on & on about some silly pet question the rapper dont even care about answering

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:34 (nineteen years ago)

i don't really know how i've been drafted into the nick sylvester legal defense fund, especially as someone who spends waaaaay too many hours in a week transcribing interview tapes for accuracy

i assumed it might be guilt by association with you too, jess. though thankfully you aren't insane.

― ant@work, Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:34 (nineteen years ago)

"The guy should never be allowed to work anywhere near journalism again. Anyone who doesn't understand why doesn't understand journalism."

― mox twelve (Mox twleve), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:34 (nineteen years ago)

Nick Sylvester: HOT or NOT?!

― Confounded (Confounded), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:35 (nineteen years ago)

tho on the bright side ill never have to listen to tapes of myself harrassing some so so def b-lister about deerhoof & top hats or whatever

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:35 (nineteen years ago)

guilt by association of having to adhere to some semblance of journalistic ethics and a fact-checking department that sits right next to me all day?

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:36 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.scifimoviepage.com/images/hidden.jpg

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:37 (nineteen years ago)

who actually snapped their fingers at me and shook their head "no" when i described 92q as a clear channel station on the phone today haha

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:37 (nineteen years ago)

it's radio one, for the record

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:37 (nineteen years ago)

x post to jess

a big stack of Juggs magazine isn't a fact-checking dept.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:38 (nineteen years ago)

"can i borrow your copy of swank, strongo?"

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:38 (nineteen years ago)

a fact-checking department that sits right next to me all day?

unfortunately for everybody I think this qualifies as "living the dream"

― Thomas Tallis (Tommy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:41 (nineteen years ago)

especially when its really a stack of Juggs magazine

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:42 (nineteen years ago)

just try to shut the guy up on the subject of dangling participles

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:42 (nineteen years ago)

just kidding cris i luv u boo

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:42 (nineteen years ago)

guilt by association of having to adhere to some semblance of journalistic ethics and a fact-checking department that sits right next to me all day?

i was referring to when you took offense with ethan pointing out the obv. re: nick.

― ant@work.com, Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:44 (nineteen years ago)

Can we start a betting pool and predict when Nick will post next to ILM? Will it be on this thread?

― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:44 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.jefframirez.com/ilx/drudge..jpg

― account settings (account), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:47 (nineteen years ago)

if Nick posts on this thread it will balloon to 4000 posts and be auto-bookmarked at the top of New Answers.

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:51 (nineteen years ago)

Also at least 5 people posting here will spontaneously cum.

― Dan (You Know It's True) Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:52 (nineteen years ago)

Will keep a lookout for him tonight on CNN.

― Edward III (edward iii), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:53 (nineteen years ago)

which ones tho

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:53 (nineteen years ago)

if Pitchfork reports this in their daily news section, space/time will rupture and Chicago will swallow itself.

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:58 (nineteen years ago)

It'll be easy to find out after the fact -- the people who mysteriously drop out of the thread for the five minutes following Nick's post are the ones cleaning the splooge off their keyboards.

xpost

― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 2 March 2006 18:58 (nineteen years ago)

Breaking news: Liars change name to Maker Uppers

― Edward III (edward iii), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:01 (nineteen years ago)

the title of this thread deserves an award

― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:06 (nineteen years ago)

I want to know whether the VV commissioned a piece from NS (his choice of topic), or this particular type of story.

i don't think they commission pieces from him, as he's on staff. that said, the blogger who is quoted heavily in the piece is claiming that she pitched them this very piece back in january.

― maura (maura), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:12 (nineteen years ago)

ah shit, that first line was supposed to be italed.

― maura (maura), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:13 (nineteen years ago)

Gothamist: "The entire piece read like a press release for the book-- when we read it, we wondered how much money Nick Sylvester was taking to sneak it into the magazine."

― StanM (StanM), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:14 (nineteen years ago)

I just looked up the Dem Franchize Boyz interview to see what Ethan was getting the vapors over. I thought it was pretty funny. Does that make me racist?

― Mickey (modestmickey), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:18 (nineteen years ago)

lady if you have to ask

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:20 (nineteen years ago)

By DAVID B. CARUSO=
Associated Press Writer=

NEW YORK The Village Voice suspended one of its editors
after he admitted fabricating material for this week's cover story,
a look at ``The Secret Society of Pickup Artists.''
The weekly alternative newspaper published an editor's note on
its Web site Wednesday night announcing the suspension of senior
associate editor Nick Sylvester.
In an article about the effect that Neil Strauss's book, ``The
Game,'' has had on the singles scene, Sylvester closed with a
description of a night in which he and three television writers
from Los Angeles tested strategies for picking up women at a
Manhattan bar.
``That scene,'' the Voice wrote, ``never happened.''
It attached a note from Sylvester, in which he said the account
was ``a composite of specific anecdotes'' shared by two of the
alleged participants. One of the people supposedly present, the
comedy writer Steve Lookner, wasn't involved at all, Sylvester
acknowledged.
``I deeply regret this misinformation, and I apologize to
Lookner for his distress, which I certainly never intended,''
Sylvester wrote.
Voice Managing Editor Doug Simmons said the paper was still
reviewing the accuracy of the rest of the story and planned to
publish a second statement in its next edition.
Simmons declined to comment further on the matter. He said
Sylvester, who also writes for the online music magazine Pitchfork,
joined the Voice staff in 2005.
Attempts to reach Sylvester were not immediately successful. He
did not return an e-mail message sent to him at Pitchfork Media.
Sylvester predominantly wrote music reviews for the Voice. His
few full-length feature articles included several interviews with
characters who told somewhat fantastical stories.
In an August story about cheating on college campuses, Sylvester
described interviewing a student who spent $500,000 to have a
multiplication table tattooed over his entire body; a Harvard
Medical School graduate who cheated with Morse code; a Boston
College junior named Simeon Criz who cheated using a specially
designed deck of playing cards; and a Manhattan doctor named Noam
Feldstein who delivers ``a hundred newborn babies each day.''
Boston College said it had no record of a student named Simeon
Criz. The board that licenses doctors in New York said it had no
record of a physician named Noam Feldstein.
Founded in 1955, the Voice covers arts, entertainment and news
with an irreverent bent that often stretches the conventions that
govern most big-city newspapers. Its staffers have won three
Pulitzer prizes.

― Howard Kurtz, Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:27 (nineteen years ago)

We blew it, Caitlin.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:31 (nineteen years ago)

Simeon Criz and Noam Feldstein to thread.

― fritz (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:35 (nineteen years ago)

ahahahahha:

http://www.villagevoice.com/arts/0531,education7,66455,12.html

Education Supplement Fall 2005
Crib Sheet Confidential
Class clowning: Inside the shadowy world of 'retro-cheating'
by Nick Sylvester
August 2nd, 2005 1:06 PM

Ever since Back to School, the shocking 1986 film in which college's oldest living freshman, Rodney Dangerfield, pays Kurt Vonnegut to write his term paper on, conveniently, Kurt Vonnegut, students at American universities have been cheating on tests, homework, papers—literally anything they can. Over time a fast-paced game of cat and mouse has developed between career-driven students who will do anything to get ahead and the university professors who go to great lengths to defeat cheaters and uphold academic honesty.

The cats are winning. By the end of the 2003–04 academic calendar, nearly all popular methods of hi-tech cheating, including pocket Game Genie Scantron decoders and the Bluetooth wireless true-false bra, had been stamped out. Plagiarism virtually ceased when Internet search technology allowed professors to scour for tracts too similar.

Campus buzz across the country reveals that while universities spend their resources combating hi-tech cheating, students are taking lessons from the ghosts of Cheating Past, embracing low-tech cheating in unprecedented numbers and reminding their stodgy professors what it really means to "walk like an Egyptian": Cheat.

The ancient Egyptians were arguably the world's first and best cheaters—and today's slackers are raiding their tombs for tricks. Just as pharaohs would tattoo secret messages onto the scalps of messengers—the text then concealed by their grown-out hair—students across the country are turning to the tat as the next big cheat.

Scientific equations seem to be the most popular at the moment, students opting for tattoos with the most long-term value and breadth of application. Tattoo parlors consulted for this piece all cite inside-arm tattoos of the quadratic equation as the street favorite, with full-stomach tattoos of the Periodic Table of Elements as the second, though infinitely more painful, most popular option.

"Science is sexy," says Colin Klein, a college student, "but it's also very useful." Klein's tattoo, a multiplication table that covers his entire body, took 10 years and over $500,000 to complete—you do the math.

But not all tattoo cheaters are in it for the long run. "Down my left arm I got a list of 30 adjectives," explains Simon Moerder, a student at a well-known American university who's using tattoos to take the GRE at the end of the summer. "Down my right arm I got another list of adjectives—except they're antonyms. So when the test people look at my arms, they see art. But when I look at my arms, I see answers."

Tattoos are expensive, however, so the dusty return of Morse code to Cheat University comes as no surprise. The fast-paced language of beeps and held tones allows for cheap, relatively undetectable in-classroom "team-cheating," as popularized by the notorious State College High School "Clickz N Cutz" homework gang in 1987. Morse code also allows for transatlantic cheating, an option heretofore forgotten by most cheaters on test day.

"I don't know how I would have gotten through med school if it weren't for Morse code," says Dr. Conrad Boccuti, a recent Harvard Med grad whose real name has been changed so his patients don't sue him. Medical students are often under intense pressure; Morse code cheating is nearly essential, even after a degree is conferred. "Click click click, clap clap, long-clap—you see, I just told that man over there he has herpes."

A lot of cheaters complain that their art has lost its sense of mystique; Boston College junior Simeon Criz aims to reclaim exactly that. "Everybody hates magicians because they cheat," he notes, "but everybody loves cheaters who do magic tricks." Criz recently designed a deck of playing cards that, instead of diamonds, spades, clubs, and hearts as suits, has A, B, C, D—all possible answer choices for a test.

"When the teacher comes up to me during a test and says, 'Hey, you're playing cards when you should be taking the test," I tell him to pick a card. Then he picks a card. A quarter of the time that card's got the right answer on it."

But how long will the new tricks last? University officials remain confident they can thwart the latest wave of cheating, already coined retro-cheating, without attacking students' personal liberties. "If I see a tattoo made of letters, or that kid with the cards, or an Egyptian, I'll probably do something," assures an unnamed college provost. "I'll probably kill somebody."

And lastly, what ever happened to the good old-fashioned crib sheet? Does anyone still use them?

"Never leave home without one," admits Dr. Noam Feldstein, an OB-GYN at a Manhattan hospital who delivers close to a hundred newborn babies each day. "That's why they call them crib sheets," he explains. "Right, like I'm going to deliver your baby without a little cheating."

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:37 (nineteen years ago)

Oh my.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:38 (nineteen years ago)

is it unethical to "investigate" a clearly satirical fake piece? or just stupid?

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:38 (nineteen years ago)

"If I see a tattoo made of letters, or that kid with the cards, or an Egyptian, I'll probably do something," assures an unnamed college provost. "I'll probably kill somebody."

god nick pulled one over on us there!!!

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:39 (nineteen years ago)

vv ain't worth reading these days, is it

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:41 (nineteen years ago)

it still has apartment ads!!!

― maura (maura), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:41 (nineteen years ago)

TWAIN 3000, yo

― senseiDancer (sexyDancer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:41 (nineteen years ago)

The AP story is unfair (or maybe just dense) to imply that the cheat-sheet story was anything other than transparently made-up. but if the voice was cool with that one, maybe that's why nick thought it would be OK to do something similar in the latest story.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:42 (nineteen years ago)

serious, David Caruso at the AP, how can you go from King of New York to dissing an article that mentions blue-tooth wireless true false bras. That's like, sub Jade.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:43 (nineteen years ago)

that's a really funny article

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:45 (nineteen years ago)

a Boston College junior named Simeon Criz who cheated using a specially designed deck of playing cards;

the method:

Criz recently designed a deck of playing cards that, instead of diamonds, spades, clubs, and hearts as suits, has A, B, C, D—all possible answer choices for a test.

AP in non-possession of basic math skills shocker?

― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:45 (nineteen years ago)

trife, where was that dem franchise boyz thing? i couldn't find it....

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:49 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.thephoenix.com/OnTheDownload/PermaLink.aspx?guid=29600206-8f44-44f5-b2ae-f016ce0d6f2c

Lie defector: Voice blogger accused of telling the truth

(This story was removed from online editions of the Boston Phoenix.)

Lie defector: Voice blogger accused of telling the truth

By Carly Carioli and Matt Ashare

The Village Voice yesterday suspended serial fabriactor Nick "Riff Raff" Sylvester, after it was revealed that elements of a cover story he wrote this week were actually true.

Allegations of truth in Sylvester's writing sent shockwaves through the blogosphere, where Sylvester, a former Harvard Lampoon staffer and Pitchforkmedia.com editor, was widely loved and loathed for his humorous "fictional" interviews with semi-famous musicians on his blog, "Riff Central." On the basis of these so-called "fake" interviews — and perhaps on the basis of an article or two in the pages of the Boston Phoenix — Sylvester was hired last year as the Voice’s chief music blogger, reprising his schtick under the heading "Riff Raff."

"I wish to apologize to the Voice's readers," Sylvester wrote in a tersely-worded statement published Wednesday on the newspaper's web site. "I invented only about one-third of this week's cover story — which was about how girls won't date some dudes I know because they've already heard all the pickup lines we stole from Neil Strauss's book The Game, which we all bought because we thought it was actually about G-Unit. The other two-thirds of the story were the product of factual reporting. I deeply regret this information."

In what might have been the day's most shocking revelation, Sylvester also admitted that all his past "fake" interviews had in fact been real. It turns out that the Hair Police song "Not Raft But Cage" really is the sound of "two gorillas . . . shitting into their own microphone." The Ying Yang twins really did almost change the words to "Wait (The Whisper Song)" from "Ay bitch, wait’ll you see my dick" to "Hey, where’d my dick go?" And both of Ariel Pink’s parents write for Desperate Housewives.

Several Voice colleagues who wished to remain anonymous hinted that there have been newsroom complaints in recent months that Sylvester was "coasting" — going to actual concerts, conducting verifiable interviews, and writing diligent criticism instead of making funny shit up like he was supposed to.

Indeed, it appears that Sylvester's slide down the slippery slope toward the truth in print began even before he arrived at the Voice. It was assumed by Phoenix editors that the "cult folk singer Vashti Bunyan" was a figment of Sylvester’s fertile satiric imagination. But this week the Phoenix's research department turned up disturbing evidence that not only is Bunyan a real person, but she actually came out of retirement to record with Animal Collective.

Sylvester's editors at the Voice were dumbfounded. "We thought we had a really talented liar on our hands," said Voice music editor Chuck Eddy, "but it turns out the kid just lucked out and had a funny chat with the Game."

"We used to say to ourselves, 'You just can't make stuff like this up,' " said Pazz and Jop grand poobah Robert Christgau. "Turns out we were right."

DOWNLOAD: AC/DC's "Riff Raff" at Buddyhead.

― lovelylurrrker, Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:53 (nineteen years ago)

Fall from grace or New Times turmoil fallout? You be the judge!

http://thephoenix.com/article_ektid4211.aspx

― Edward III (edward iii), Thursday, 2 March 2006 19:54 (nineteen years ago)

trife, where was that dem franchise boyz thing? i couldn't find it....
-- M@tt He1geson (matt@blah) March 2nd, 2006 2:49 PM.

http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/riffraff/archives/2006/02/dem_franchize_b.php
the topper is the comments from folks like "I hate rap" egging him on.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:01 (nineteen years ago)

One of the things you say in the song, gangsters don't dance--is that true you think?

Well, some gangstas don't. They just lean wit it, rock wit it. They might just set in one place, moving back and forth or moving side to side--or leaning and rocking.

It just seems like gangsters would want to dance. Like, you're a gangster--dance.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:04 (nineteen years ago)

reassert that hierarchy, yo

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:06 (nineteen years ago)

he should have asked something along these lines:

I hate that we live in the shadow of "Lean Back." It's OK to dance guys: it's supposed to indicate how well you fuck. Why are you afraid of showing that?

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:07 (nineteen years ago)

Dance gangster monkey!

― Edward III (edward iii), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:08 (nineteen years ago)

Thanks for going there, Ed.

― Dan (Think Before You Post, People) Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:12 (nineteen years ago)

I'm suddenly reminded of a 1994 Snoop interview in Select that went something like this:

Select: What about the whole murder/gang/violence allegations surrounding you?

Snoop: That don't matter. Like if I pulled a gun on you right now, you'd be scared, right?

Select: Possibly.

Snoop: But if I dropped a rhyme right now, you'd love me?

Select: Perhaps.

Snoop: Do you wanna hear me bust a rhyme right now?

Select: No.

― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:13 (nineteen years ago)

xpost
margaritas all around.

― Sterling (Yeah, Like You Always Do) Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:14 (nineteen years ago)

I can always be counted on to pierce the veil of sensible behavior.

But really, that's the subtext that upsetting people.

― Edward III (edward iii), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:14 (nineteen years ago)

you think?

― Sterling (No Shit!) Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:14 (nineteen years ago)

Sterling, shouldn't you be somewhere adding threads to your delete fantasy wishlist?

― Edward III (edward iii), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:18 (nineteen years ago)

thx for the link alex.

now i get it.

that interview was bad.

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:36 (nineteen years ago)

that dem franchise boys link doesn't work for me, can someone cut & paste it?

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:40 (nineteen years ago)

do Harvard Lampoon folks typically end up in prominent press/writing gigs that don't involve comedy? it never really seemed to me like he was interested in writing much that wasn't satire or somehow tongue-in-cheek, although I never really thought he was that funny either (ok, we get it, Tony Yayo wears a bucket hat, etc). I'm less confused about the Voice holding him to serious journalistic standards than I am that the fake Riff Central interviews apparently convinced somebody that he should be able to interview people for real and be all kooky and "Kaufman-esque" about it. I don't know him and have a few mutual friends so I try not to pass judgement but in that context dude comes off like a dick for real.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:40 (nineteen years ago)

To go along with the music, Dem Franchize Boyz have invented a dance, the "Lean Wit It, Rock Wit It" (video here), which also happens to be a song on their new album, On Top of Our Game. I got one of the Boyz on the phone yesterday to talk about the dance's popularity, and the future of snap.
I want to talk about the dance.
What's going on.
Just the dance.
What about it.
It's the best dance I've ever seen.
We're trendsetters.
Did this come to you in a dream?
No it came from the "White Tee" song. That's what we used to do around the neighborhood. I like to think I added a twist to it, came over the song and everything, and the rest is history. It is what it is.
That's awesome. But why lean wit it first and then rock wit it? Why not rock wit it first?
Because in the dance you lean first, then you rock wit it.
So you're saying it would look pretty funny if you rock first.
Yeah it would look funny if you rock first.
Who's the best at this dance?
Parlae outta the Franchize.
How about among your friends, who's the best?
Oh yeah! Friends, fans, celebrities, athletes, everybody's doing it their own sexy little way. Ain't no exact way to do it. You do it how you want.
Right, like if you want to rock wit it first.
Add your little flavor to it.
Jermaine Dupri is probably pretty bad at this dance.
Oh yeah! He got his own little flavor. That's what I'm trying to tell you. Parlae do it the best.
Do you think the Lean Wit It Rock Wit It is better than the Macarena?
I mean, yeah. You really got to get sweaty, but if you want to get sweaty, you can.
One of the things you say in the song, gangsters don't dance--is that true you think?
Well, some gangstas don't. They just lean wit it, rock wit it. They might just set in one place, moving back and forth or moving side to side--or leaning and rocking.
It just seems like gangsters would want to dance. Like, you're a gangster--dance. Do you have any dances in the works for gangsters?
It just came about. In "White Tee", we were leaning and rocking. Folks started catching on. So Parlae figured out: Name the dance and perfect it, and expose it to the world.
People are calling your dance the Electric Slide of the South.
It's something like that.
Other people are calling it Atlanta's hokey-pokey.
Atlanta's hokey-pokey.
Yeah.
I ain't gonna agree with no hokey-pokey.
Snap music is big now; what's the next snap?
What's the next snap?
Do you think people will start slapping each other on the butt?
Excuse me?
What's the next snap?

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

― darin (darin), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:44 (nineteen years ago)

Two things that bother me.

1) Nick is now the effigy of the Village Voice for everyone who wants to take a shot at them. This has been picked up for national dailies via the AP.

2) In more Shattered Glass parallels, everyone wants to play the cool snoop role and dig up the huge conspiracy a la Caruso's AP story, which ends with:

In an August story about cheating on college campuses, Sylvester described interviewing a student who spent $500,000 to have a multiplication table tattooed over his entire body; a Harvard Medical School graduate who cheated with Morse code; a Boston College junior named Simeon Criz who cheated using a specially designed deck of playing cards; and a Manhattan doctor named Noam Feldstein who delivers "a hundred newborn babies each day."

Boston College said it had no record of a student named Simeon Criz. The board that licenses doctors in New York said it had no record of a physician named Noam Feldstein.

They're playing themselves in the movie of this in their minds.

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:49 (nineteen years ago)

xpost holy shit that interview is appalling

― geoff (gcannon), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:54 (nineteen years ago)

I don't get the "satire," even in the obviously false story about student cheaters. It reads like an attempt to replicate the exact tone and modulations of a certain kind of breathless, know-it-all New York Magazine or NY Observer article. And I agree with some here that it is very very well done. But to what end? Isn't satire supposed to reveal something?

xpost: But who WOULDN'T want to be Peter Sarsgaard in that movie?? Even if he does look exactly like Chloe Sevigny.

One your 1), Chris, yes, that's what happens when you create situations out of whole cloth and run them as fact. Your publication's reputation takes a big fucking hit. This is about much more than NS now.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:54 (nineteen years ago)

yeah I dont give a shit about journalistic integrity but I'm really glad to hear some bitching about that interview. Somebody needs the living shit slapped out of em for sure.

― reacher, Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:54 (nineteen years ago)

It's aggrandizement at worst. People are using it as an excuse to run their mouths and flex their self-righteous muscles.

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:57 (nineteen years ago)

Isn't satire supposed to reveal something?

Well Nick's brand reveals that you can get all the way to senior associate editor being pretty much full of shit at all times.

― Candicissima (candicissima), Thursday, 2 March 2006 20:58 (nineteen years ago)

GIS return for "Nick Sylvester":
http://www.danlindblom.com/wp-images/warning.jpg

― senseiDancer (sexyDancer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:00 (nineteen years ago)

chris, do you think that people outside of the 'riff central'/'riff raff'/pitchfork fan demographic knew that those old stories weren't just another breathless trend story, but a parody of said breathless genre?

i mean, i wonder how journalists who did actual research for their stories feel about having their bylines held in the same esteem as the "obviously" fake stories. no matter how outre or unbelievable they seemed, those faux-satirical pieces have now cast a shadow on their reputations as well.

that said, my stomach did turn a bit when the e & p story showed up on drudge.

― maura (maura), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:01 (nineteen years ago)

haha ilx regulars getting into circle jerky willful misreading flamewars is some compulsively ugly reading, but wow being tsk-tsked about "running their mouths" just made it all all right.

― geoff (gcannon), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:03 (nineteen years ago)

If you can't tell this is satire, you probably shouldn't be, like, reading.

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:04 (nineteen years ago)

we always kiss and go out for gelato at the end

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:04 (nineteen years ago)

thanks eppy! way to miss my point. kisses to you too!

― maura (maura), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:05 (nineteen years ago)

That's why I shouldn't post to this thread. That and the castration threats.

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:07 (nineteen years ago)

How do "real" musicians feel about "noise" musicians being reviewed side-by-side in the same magazine?

― senseiDancer (sexyDancer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:08 (nineteen years ago)

OK so how about "If people outside of the 'riff central'/'riff raff'/pitchfork fan demographic can't tell this is satire, people outside of the 'riff central'/'riff raff'/pitchfork fan demographic probably shouldn't be, like, reading."

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:09 (nineteen years ago)

-- Thomas Tallis

was this on a thread here, or what? i'd love to read it. i've got an interview coming up (first non-review work! pat on the back) with a guy who i may disagree with on a lot of issues surrounding his work. i'm sure all the hardened pros can give a cub a tip or two (to make a thread worth a good goddam for once)

― geoff (gcannon), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:11 (nineteen years ago)

chris ott, do you realize how naive you sound? it's a sizeable news story when village voice pulls a cover story and suspends the reporter. especially when the voice has been going through some pretty public problems. journalists are gonna be writing about it. people are gonna be "running their mouths" about it. i'd suggest you get used to the fact that there's going to be a fair bit of damage done by this one.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:12 (nineteen years ago)

xxpost

Musicians, usually supplying entertainment instead of information, aren't held to a code of ethics and standards.

If they were then we would never have David Allen Coe.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:12 (nineteen years ago)

Way to limit the audience of the Voice there, Eppy.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:12 (nineteen years ago)

I know, I'm going to get a letter of reprimand from circ.

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:15 (nineteen years ago)

Sylvester always had infinite boners for the likes of 3xc3pt3r and Gang Gang Dance, but I guess To Live and Shave in LA didn't make the cut

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:15 (nineteen years ago)

"I had no idea..."
http://www.djoflaeyjan.com/gamalt/owelles.jpg

― senseiDancer (sexyDancer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:16 (nineteen years ago)

roffle

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:17 (nineteen years ago)

Because one trainwreck deserves another:

MARISSA MARCHANT SIGHTED ON PROGRESSIVEHOUSE.COM!!!

― Confounded (Confounded), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:19 (nineteen years ago)

i've got an interview coming up with a guy who i may disagree with on a lot of issues surrounding his work. i'm sure all the hardened pros can give a cub a tip or two (to make a thread worth a good goddam for once)

Good: "You know, some people might consider a song like that a little mysoginistic"

Bad: "Quite frankly, I think you're a fucking woman-hater and an total douchenozzle, Mr. Mayer!"

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:20 (nineteen years ago)

not exactly that clear-cut a situation but yeah thx

― geoff (gcannon), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:23 (nineteen years ago)

This just in from AP:

"Jonathan Swift proposes using Irish babies as foodstuffs."

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:32 (nineteen years ago)

I hear there are some openings at Spin...

― Edward III (edward iii), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:34 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2006/03/02/publiceye/entry1364410.shtml

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:39 (nineteen years ago)

The non-Gawker takes on this so far have been hilarious:

"More to the point: How does anyone, in this day and age, think they can get away with it? As CBS News learned during Memogate, the Internet has connected us to the point where critics can seize on a misstep nearly instantaneously. That's not to say we live in an era free of journalistic sin – far from it. But technological innovation has made it pretty damn hard to get away with an outright fabrication, which is a pretty good reason not to do it, if ethics ain't enough to sway you."

The technological innovation of the voice fact-checking after the article has already come out? Yeah, damn those internets.

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:42 (nineteen years ago)

i find this whole brouhaha to be ridiculous and likely the product of a new eic who is unfamiliar with nick's writing. a quick look at nick's entire career as a writer (love 'em or hate 'em) reveals that this is always how he has approached his topics: with a flippancy that obviously annoys more than a few and a general disrespect for his subject matter. this is his writing style, and i for one enjoy it.

certainly the stakes were raised with this being a cover story (tho we do not know if it was assigned as such), but this is pretty much a standard nick sylvester piece. it has a very narrative structure, it's full of asides and the quotes are very rich. of course this was cooked -- that's his style!

it is certainly within a publication's rights to refuse that sort of writing -- witness wolfe and the like thriving at new york and esquire in the '60s while the new yorker thumbed its nose at them for shoddy journalism. it's a style of writing with a long history: swift, dickens, london, thompson and countless more. in fact, up until the '20s, that *was* journalism. the point was the moral, not the facts.

of course this changed and this has largely been for the good (i say largely because politically this leads to lots of he said she said pieces where the existence of cold hard facts is ignored -- it's a twist on journalism 101 that benefits the deceiver). but there are still writers who work around this, most notably -- and ironically -- strauss. i could see glass as a possible parallel here except that i can't imagine nick ever really honestly claiming his pieces as fact. he writes classic ledes and all of that with a wink and a nudge to make sure we're in on the joke.

and so in this instance i think the issue came from: a) someone complaining (as was absolutely their right to do) and b) a new editor who was unfamiliar with how nick writes. i agree that there are journalistic standards -- i strongly advocate them -- but nick is not a journalist! he's a features writer, plain and simple. and so from that miscommunication (or at least that's what i see it to be) between the editor seeing nick as a journo and nick seeing himself as nick, we've reached this hubbub that i'm finding really hard to take.

somehow, even tho we're a society so immune and oblivious to fact, we are now demanding total transparency in the strangest places. sure, politicians and companies can lie, but not movie stars or writers that we never read. there's this false standard that has arisen from i dunno the fuck where, and through a confluence of bad decisions and timing (nick is not absolved of guilt here, tho i do not really blame him for being the writer that he is) nick has gotten caught up in this. needless to say, i'm pulling for him.

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:47 (nineteen years ago)

"Someone hired Evel Knieval as a busdriver, and he drove that busload of kids of the Grand Canyon! It's the fault of the guys that hired him! Don't they know he jumps canyons? It's what he does!"

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:53 (nineteen years ago)

"off the"

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:54 (nineteen years ago)

Wonder what this guy's parents think of him. Did he have to warn them that his first Voice cover story was getting pulled b/c he fabricated quotes? Did they ask him if "this is how he's spending their Harvard tuition money?"

― Bob D., Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:54 (nineteen years ago)

Jams, I have to be blunt -- this completely undercuts what I think is a good and spirited defense, because it puts the onus on us that somehow we are all individually at fault for this failing which you envision as endemic. I find that insulting, if not patronizing, and I hope I don't have to spell out why.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:54 (nineteen years ago)

i've got an interview coming up (first non-review work! pat on the back) with a guy who i may disagree with on a lot of issues surrounding his work. i'm sure all the hardened pros can give a cub a tip or two (to make a thread worth a good goddam for once)

well, those issues are a part of the story, so you shouldn't shy from them. and you would be doing your subject a disservice if you discussed these reservations in the piece without confronting them with them and getting their side of the story. but there are ways of doing this, as Whiney intinmated, without making you look like an arrogant, uninformed douche.

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:56 (nineteen years ago)

Also, I think you dismiss a core point too swiftly:

a) someone complaining (as was absolutely their right to do)

If you agree it is their right, are you also defending Nick's practice in this particular instance? I don't find it an impossible balance to maintain, but it strikes me as a questionable one.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 21:58 (nineteen years ago)

sorry to be blunt but surely that's part of the normal job of editing ?

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:01 (nineteen years ago)

i see a lot of jams' points, but it wasn't some kind of free-wheeling gonzo journalism that got him in trouble. the fiction that he's admitted to is this:
I did not meet Steve Lookner in New York at Bar 151. The trip and my encounter with him, DC, and Vali did not happen as I reported, or at all. The scene was a composite of specific anecdotes shared to me primarily by the two other parties, DC and Vali; Lookner did not share or take part in these anecdotes either

this isn't particularly interesting to the reader or integral to the narrative or artistically brilliantly rendered. it's not like some editor was unable to grasp the "style" that made it ok for him to write this. it's not like we're arguing about the bats rising out of the desert in "fear and loathing in las vegas", we're arguing about somebody writing "this guy told me x in y" and the guy saying "i was never in y and i didn't say x".

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:02 (nineteen years ago)

yeah ned that's not sposed to be a major point or even a blame shift but more of an aside, just something outside of nick that's been on my mind of late. and it's not "people" so much as "the media." but anyway.

and no i am not defending nick's practice of attributing false quotes and actions to real people. to fictional people -- or composites -- i'm all for it.

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:02 (nineteen years ago)

Nigga stole my bike.

― Jayson Blair, Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:03 (nineteen years ago)

the problem is that unlike the cheating piece, there's nothing patently unbelievable or fantastic about his Game article. i *am* familiar with his style and i didn't think he was deliberately exaggerating, or pulling a Tom Wolfe imagining-the-inside-of-my-subject's-head thing. if that's what he was trying to do, it was a pretty weak attempt.

― yuengling participle (rotten03), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:03 (nineteen years ago)

"and so in this instance i think the issue came from: a) someone complaining (as was absolutely their right to do) and b) a new editor who was unfamiliar with how nick writes. i agree that there are journalistic standards -- i strongly advocate them -- but nick is not a journalist! he's a features writer, plain and simple. and so from that miscommunication (or at least that's what i see it to be) between the editor seeing nick as a journo and nick seeing himself as nick, we've reached this hubbub that i'm finding really hard to take."

Rationalize it all you want, but feature writers still have an obligation to tell the truth. Their styles may be more creative than the sweaty stuffed shirts documenting city council meetings, but they are held to the same ethical standards.

The Village Voice shouldn't be required to bend to suit Nick Sylvester.

― Terrible Cold (Terrible Cold), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:04 (nineteen years ago)

i swore i would stay out of this, but i will say this--as far as i know, there was no "new editor" involved with this story. the acting EIC is doug, who has been at the voice for an extremely long time.

― geeta (geeta), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:04 (nineteen years ago)

I think his admissions can still be read as "judicially sound" ways of admitting his ..creative writing, without stirring further controversy at this point.

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:04 (nineteen years ago)

ah thanks for that geeta. i thought that nt brought in someone new. i hearby retract that!

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:05 (nineteen years ago)

I would wager he was trying to mock an old semi-friend who didn't find his jab so funny.

― senseiDancer (sexyDancer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:06 (nineteen years ago)

It's good writing, again

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:07 (nineteen years ago)

"hearby"

― Confounded (Confounded), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:11 (nineteen years ago)

Nick Sylvester
Feature Writer/ Satirist Extraordinaire
"Purveyor of Fine Fanstastical Scenarios in the Dickensian/Swiftian Mode"
50p. per worde

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:13 (nineteen years ago)

sorry yance, you're wrong. i'm pulling for nick too but the wysiwyg defense does not -- and should not -- fly. the habit of fabricating quotes and falsely insinuating yourself into events does not comprise a "style" any more than cheating comprises a strategy. its a violation of privilege, plain and simple, end of story.

i think nick is a great critic and i feel for what he's going through as an acquaintance but i really resent the oversympathetic liberal mindset that forgives bad journalism by nibbling away at the circumstantial and anecdotal evidence. sure, maybe this isn't the kind of writing he's done before, and yes, perhaps he was rushed into the situation but, know what? he's also a fucking bright kid who shouldn't need three years under bob woodward to know that rule one of feature writing is "don't make shit up". someone upthread said that if he wasn't ready for this kind of gig he shouldn't have taken it on, and that really couldn't be more true. being responsible for yourself = the ultimate careerism.

i don't buy for a second that this was anybody's responsibility but nick's, and although i hope there's more to the story, if it's as simple as how it's being presented by the press so far, i'm really disappointed.
that said, i'm pulling for him and i'm hoping he comes out of this for the better.

xposts

― mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:13 (nineteen years ago)

the wysiwyg defense?

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:14 (nineteen years ago)

M. Biondi

di Milano ?

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:14 (nineteen years ago)

fritz: what you see is what you get

― mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:17 (nineteen years ago)

ysi?

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:17 (nineteen years ago)

di New Jersey, but I'm part Italian, and I believe some of that is from the north

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:17 (nineteen years ago)

http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/B000042OR0.03.MZZZZZZZ.jpg

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:18 (nineteen years ago)

Nick, just interview yourself and post it on MySpace. Go Hollywood, bypass all this BS.

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:18 (nineteen years ago)

KING OF TEH NEW YORK
The Nick Sylvester Story

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:20 (nineteen years ago)

somebody, anybody, pls explain how this article was parody, again. it seemed pretty straight to me.

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:20 (nineteen years ago)

I think the key is that in a piece like this you don't always have to tell the literal truth the whole time, but you shouldn't have people wondering whether you're telling the truth. That's why, though I don't much like the cheating story, it's defensible, but I don't think the Game story is. Like Fritz said, it's not the bats rising out of the desert. That encounter easily could have happened; it just didn't.

Which is a wordy, drawn-out way of saying: hstencil OTM. If it's a parody, what of?

― Rick Massimo (Rick Massimo), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:21 (nineteen years ago)

(OK M. Biondi, there's an über-classic French movie quote about one "Marcello Biondi, di Milano". never mind)

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:23 (nineteen years ago)

It was parody because the conversation never actually took place. He made it up. Get it?

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:23 (nineteen years ago)

Screw that, he attempted to malign the pick up and seduction community by portraying the PUAs as sleazy malcontents.

As Dolly, the blogger quoted by Nick in the article who had met real life PUAs while dating in NYC, says in HER letter to the article (I'm paraphrasing) it was an unfair portrayal of the men and that she actually enjoys her time with them and that teaching men how to be successful with women WORKS (because it also worked on her even though she KNEW about PUAs and how it's done).

NOT to mention that there is total speculation about whether or not any of the other women involved even saw what he supposedly reported or even how the students behaved. If one part is false, who knows if he embellished and/or falsified the rest.

Nick goes down!

[self-promotional bullshit redacted]

― Asian Playboy, Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:24 (nineteen years ago)

Hey man, I hear you have a blog...

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:25 (nineteen years ago)

It's a parody of the kind of snarky, irritating yet decadently thrilling writing that fills the pages of New York Magazine, the NY Observer, and, increasingly, the front pages of the New Yorker. And it's done to a T. What elevates this to satire -- the moral that Yance refers to, the moral that makes it all okay -- is what I guess I'm missing. In both pieces.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:26 (nineteen years ago)

It was parody because the conversation never actually took place. He made it up. Get it?

uh, no:

http://m-w.org/dictionary/parody

i didn't catch that at all. didn't seem "edgy" enough for that (as in, the faux-edginess [whatever the fuck that means] that, say, new york traffics in), nor nearly as sanctimonious (deservedly or not) as most voice covers. it just read as kinda, well, there for me, if that makes sense. like "there's some dudes that do this but some girls know what it is, blah blah" and not much else.

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:30 (nineteen years ago)

i mean, ok, "blogs to riches" (the most recent new york cover i've read), THAT reads as parody, sure.

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:31 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, I have to say that while Jams is doing his best, saying this:

of course this was cooked -- that's his style!

...means nothing if someone totally unfamiliar with him or his style reads the piece.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:31 (nineteen years ago)

It was parody because the conversation never actually took place. He made it up. Get it?

Nope. I don't get it.

A parody is "a satirical or humorous imitation of a serious piece of literature or writing." The great parodies I've read expressed points that couldn't be made through straight writing, only by outlandishly exaggerated imitation.

If I tell you your shoe's untied, and it isn't, it isn't parody.

(xpost) Tracer Hand OTM.

― Rick Massimo (Rick Massimo), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:32 (nineteen years ago)

Well, that's all I was waiting for.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:35 (nineteen years ago)

Don't go dismissing The Village voice's responsibility in this fiasco.

They're the ones who asked a music feature writer to do a social piece. They're the ones who read what amounts to coverage of guy techniques for pulling pussy and decided to run this as a cover story.

Should this outcome really be so shocking to them?

The Village Voice turned into a sad joke years ago, kind of like NYC on the whole, actually.

Nick's story is a metaphor for the turns the city took in the 90s: Self-important white pedigree man bluffs way through reality. Disempowered liberal outlets unable to stop him, so they instead sign on. Whole thing blows up in their faces.

― Giles Manius (jsoulja), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:35 (nineteen years ago)

Obviously sarcasm doesn't register here. My point was that Nick's fabrications had nothing to do with any concept of satire.

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:39 (nineteen years ago)

The Voice asked a feature writer to write a feature. Really, if you're competent, what's the problem?
x-post

― Binjominia (Brilhante), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:41 (nineteen years ago)

Good: "You know, some people might consider a song like that a little mysoginistic"

i love the old "some people" line, because it gets you the interviewer off the hook of being directly confrontational. and it's not really disingenuous, because you as an interviewer don't necessarily share the views you're presenting, you're just acknowledging they exist and getting a response.

but nick is not a journalist! he's a features writer, plain and simple.

this is an odd statement. i know a lot of good features writers who would take exception to it.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:41 (nineteen years ago)

You're so earnest, Giles. I turns me on.
x-post

― thin ethnically ambiguous girl (joseph cotten), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:42 (nineteen years ago)

i guess, at least in the features i've written, i assumed that it was, um, journalism i guess, or that it was my job to deliver the facts as i knew them to be, not some creative writing exercise or anything.

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:43 (nineteen years ago)

but nick is not a journalist! he's a features writer, plain and simple.

Fuck does THAT mean?!!

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:43 (nineteen years ago)

Exactly.

― Binjominia (Brilhante), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:43 (nineteen years ago)

kind of like NYC on the whole, actually.

this brings back memories, Giles.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:44 (nineteen years ago)

anyway, can't we discuss the important issue at hand? In the last Best of NY issue, Nick said my party cost 10 bucks when it was free! That must be why nobody came!

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:45 (nineteen years ago)

They're the ones who asked a music feature writer to do a social piece.

fuck that, music writers aren't retards who live in self-contained bubbles that prevent them from reading and understanding 'regular' feature-type pieces. in fact, lots of them actually write exactly those types of stories except about, you know, musicians.

this isn't about someone being too out of their depth to know the rules of engagement. and devils advocate, even if it were, writers aren't slaves -- they're fully within their rights to reject or defer any assignments they're not comfortable with.

― mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:45 (nineteen years ago)

the habit of fabricating quotes and falsely insinuating yourself into events does not comprise a "style" any more than cheating comprises a strategy. its a violation of privilege, plain and simple, end of story.

OTM, and that's all I have to say.

― Je4nne Æ’urÂ¥ (Je4nne Fury), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:51 (nineteen years ago)

xpost- writers often don't have the means to reject any assignments.

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:54 (nineteen years ago)

And if they don't have the means to reject any assignments, how does making shit up guarantee that one day they will?

― Terrible Cold (Terrible Cold), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:56 (nineteen years ago)

It doesn't

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:57 (nineteen years ago)

kind of like NYC on the whole, actually.
this brings back memories, Giles.

-- Dan Selzer (danselze...), March 2nd, 2006.

I don't post enough to catch this reference, Dan. Are you refering to Madonna?

― Giles Manius (jsoulja), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:57 (nineteen years ago)

but he's a paid staff member, not a freelancer. i think you're confusing apples and kumquats there.

― maura (maura), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:58 (nineteen years ago)

if not being able to reject assignments is a problem, don't accept a position as a senior associate editor for fucks sakes!

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Thursday, 2 March 2006 22:59 (nineteen years ago)

Right, that title - I got another impression from reading this thread.

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:00 (nineteen years ago)

Screw that, he attempted to malign the pick up and seduction community by portraying the PUAs as sleazy malcontents.

"the pick up and seduction community"

(sorry, not really relevant to the general thrust of the thread, just thought it was funny)

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:02 (nineteen years ago)

actually thought you were a different giles who used to post to electrodiscopunks yahoo group.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:05 (nineteen years ago)

Gawker update of sorts

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:08 (nineteen years ago)

“I’m still here, and in good standing,” Doug Simmons, the beleaguered acting editor-in-chief of the Village Voice, told Gawker by phone just a few minutes ago. Then he laughed. “Well, maybe not in such good standing.”
Simmons was returning a voicemail we left for him about 24 hours ago — he’s had some things on his mind, we imagine — to apologize for his delay and clarify that he has not in fact quit the storied alt-weekly, which yesterday retracted its cover story after learning parts of it were fabricated. Mediabistro reported this morning that “interim editor Doug Simmons has left the paper (according to a PR rep)” in wake of the revelations about the cover story, by star young writer Nick Sylvester. Sylvester’s piece examined how men in New York are employing the pick-up strategies described in Neil Strauss’s The Game, and how women are developing countermeasures.
The Voice posted a note from Sylvester on its site last night acknowledging that the final scene of his piece was fraudulent, and the paper said that the 2004 Harvard grad, a Lampoon vet, had been suspended while the piece is reviewed.

“I just adore that kid,” Simmons told Gawker, reporting that his review, currently in progress, is not turning up problems beyond the fraudulent conclusion. “The thought of firing him is a painful one for me. I hope this review can bring an understanding to the paper — and to Nick — about the boundaries of journalism.”

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:09 (nineteen years ago)

Frankly, that last line is cheeseorama.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:10 (nineteen years ago)

I didn't know the Voice was run by Willem Dafoe in full villain mode.

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:11 (nineteen years ago)

last line -> suspicio-meter goes off the scale

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:11 (nineteen years ago)

"Kid's a loose cannon. Maybe we can break this mustang in...maybe we can't. Dog's no good when it's gone mad. Sometimes you gotta put 'er down. Hopefully, that won't be the case. "

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:14 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.prowrestlingrings.com/images/ringpics/lowshowbig.jpg
The boundaries of journalism

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:19 (nineteen years ago)

1) i know i'm not the first to say this, but:

but nick is not a journalist! he's a features writer, plain and simple

manages to be the most idiotic comment on a thread jam-packed with idiocy. "feature" != "fiction".

2) i know little about the village voice, and even less about nick sylvester. but no matter who he is and what kind of stuff he's written in the past, if he was commissioned to write a piece containing real-life interviews with real-life people and he made it up, he deserves to be sacked.

it's like the writer of my former acquaintance who once made up a meat loaf review for the scotsman because she couldn't be arsed going to the gig. (she got caught 'cos - whoops! - the gig was cancelled.) sure, it's not crime of the century. but most publications have standards, and those standards involve, y'know, not fucking making everything up because you're lazy/a twat/both.

3) if you are commissioned to write a piece based on case studies you've completely made up - which i don't think ever happens, but hey, let's give the guy the benefit of the doubt - then you should probably try to avoid using real people's names.

4) there is no 4.

― grimly fiendish (grimlord), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:19 (nineteen years ago)

the boundaries of journalism

jesus christ. it's not difficult. YOU DON'T MAKE SHIT UP.

unless you're the daily sport, natch.

― grimly fiendish (grimlord), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:22 (nineteen years ago)

Well said. (I have to say that Jams's long post up there, which I initially liked, looks increasingly indefensible on a rereading.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:23 (nineteen years ago)

if he was commissioned to write a piece containing real-life interviews with real-life people and he made it up, he deserves to be sacked
One word : tabloids. But yeah

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:23 (nineteen years ago)

"fuck that, music writers aren't retards who live in self-contained bubbles"

um...

― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:25 (nineteen years ago)

One word : tabloids.

oh, i know. i'm not saying this hasn't happened before. i'm not, sadly, even saying that it doesn't happen more than we think. but that doesn't stop it being a sackable offence.

x-post: roffle etc

― grimly fiendish (grimlord), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:26 (nineteen years ago)

i was waiting for that, scott. but you know what i mean.

― mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:26 (nineteen years ago)

In real life journalists do make shit up, only they don't do it "for good", however misguidedly, is what's so unsettling here maybe ?

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:26 (nineteen years ago)

my former acquaintance who once made up a meat loaf review for the scotsman because she couldn't be arsed going to the gig. (she got caught 'cos - whoops! - the gig was cancelled.)

This reminds me of the time when the Herald -- or somebody? -- ran a New Year's Day story about fireworks exploding from the seven hills of Edinburgh as the Proclaimers rang in Hogmanay. Except none of it had happened because weather had forced them to cancel it all.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:26 (nineteen years ago)

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:29 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah but why stop at gutting the writer for fabricating a dumb feature?

Why not gut the paper for publishing a dumb feature?

― Giles Manius (jsoulja), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:29 (nineteen years ago)

after browsing the article in question (it's way long and boring. lots of stuff like this is though. not knocking the dude for that.) whoever first mentioned swift and twain on this thread needs to be suspended from ilm for a week.

― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:31 (nineteen years ago)

The People Vs. Larry Flynt.

... what does it matter if what is printed is obviously satire or just commentary. it is obviously not a serious, academic article. lifestyle piece.

who cares if a writer lied in a piece that nobody was taking seriously anyway? i just have different standards for lifestyle pieces and actualy journalism.

― Cameron Octigan (Cameron Octigan), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:31 (nineteen years ago)

the episode that csi:miami did on that date-scamming book was way better by the way.

― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:32 (nineteen years ago)

In real life journalists do make shit up

and get fired for it

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:33 (nineteen years ago)

The troubling impression that "in real life, journalists … make shit up" is exactly why the Village Voice suspended Sylvester.
x-post

― Binjominia (Brilhante), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:34 (nineteen years ago)

i just have different standards for lifestyle pieces and actualy journalism.

So if a piece reports on a cultural trend (let's say, early retirement, or teen abstinence, or, hell, hipsters in gyms), you don't care whether the trend actually exists?

― thin ethnically ambiguous girl (joseph cotten), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:34 (nineteen years ago)

if the dude had just used fake names for everyone in the piece we wouldn't be here right now.

― scott seward (scott seward), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:34 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, I get the Village Voice and Hustler confused all the time.

― Terrible Cold (Terrible Cold), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:34 (nineteen years ago)

This reminds me of the time when the Herald -- or somebody? -- ran a New Year's Day story about fireworks exploding from the seven hills of Edinburgh as the Proclaimers rang in Hogmanay.

oh come on. if you're publishing a paper on new year's day, your first-edition deadline is probably even earlier than usual - 9pm on new year's eve? 10pm at the latest. so what do you do? you've got a planned event that was 99% certain to take place, so you ... extemporise. and then you very swiftly change it for second and third editions (if indeed you're lucky enough to get 'em on NYE).

hstencil, whether knowingly or not, makes the same point more simply. daily papers have edition deadlines. sometimes you have to make a call and run with it. this is not the same as fabricating quotes.

Why not gut the paper for publishing a dumb feature?

if you mean "what a dreadful idea for a feature", i agree. if that's what passes for a cover story at the VV, it needs to have a good ol' look at itself.

if you mean "they should have known it was all made up" - as some people have suggested - then, er, how? you really think the fact-checkers should ring up every person ever quoted in a newspaper to be sure they've not been misquoted? holy fuck.

you know that in the UK we don't have fact-checkers, right? that we poor beleaguered subs have to do that too? sure, i'm going to check the facts where possible, but come on: the onus is on the writer not to make up quotes.

― grimly fiendish (grimlord), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:36 (nineteen years ago)

hstencil, whether knowingly or not, makes the same point more simply. daily papers have edition deadlines. sometimes you have to make a call and run with it. this is not the same as fabricating quotes.

nice caveat. i don't remember how it all went down but i'm not sure if the post screw-up was attributable to deadline, tho that could be right. of course, the voice ain't a daily...

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:39 (nineteen years ago)

In real life journalists do make shit up, only they don't do it "for good", however misguidedly, is what's so unsettling here maybe ?

??? what does this mean?

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:41 (nineteen years ago)

― senseiDancer (sexyDancer), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:42 (nineteen years ago)

It just came to mind, gypsy; I'm not saying it's the same thing at all.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:43 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah I suppose it means nothing since Sylvester didn't do any good beyond making people smirk.

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:44 (nineteen years ago)

hey remember nicks defense of the racist kill whitey parties?? they were MISREPRESENTED BY THE MEDIA! their quotes were taken OUT OF CONTEXT!!!

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:46 (nineteen years ago)

nah tracer i was just trying to clarify blunt's statement/question there, which i don't understand.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:47 (nineteen years ago)

actually his dicksucking interview with the kill whitey dude was probably his only serious one ever

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:47 (nineteen years ago)

My question is, what's a "Senior Associate Editor"???

I thought one was either an assistant editor, associate editor, or a senior editor.

― fdf, Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:48 (nineteen years ago)

but i'm not sure if the post screw-up was attributable to deadline

b-b-b-but the only alternative would be if it were down to, i dunno, sheer fucking insanity or something.

mind, as we know, sheer fucking insanity and journalism often go hand in hand :)

― grimly fiendish (grimlord), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:48 (nineteen years ago)

i just adore that kid!

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:49 (nineteen years ago)

jeepers!

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:49 (nineteen years ago)

what a tyke!

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:49 (nineteen years ago)

*cue Little Rascals theme*

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:49 (nineteen years ago)

remember when he played those strange rap fellows daily show-style? what a scamp!

― gear (gear), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:50 (nineteen years ago)

"So if a piece reports on a cultural trend (let's say, early retirement, or teen abstinence, or, hell, hipsters in gyms), you don't care whether the trend actually exists?"

Honestly, no. It's a lifestyle piece, and I'm far more interested in seeing what the writer does with the piece than I am the fact value.

Early retirement seems like a regular ol' journalism piece to me.

Teen abstinence and hipsters in gyms? Don't need lifestyle writers to tell me that.

Lifestyle writers are there to entertain. They are funny or interesting, and that's all I expect.

― Cameron Octigan (Cameron Octigan), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:51 (nineteen years ago)

jayson blair was very cute and cuddly as well...

― gringoh, Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:52 (nineteen years ago)

yr standards are way too low dude

xpost

― Renard (Renard), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:52 (nineteen years ago)

In real life journalists do make shit up

And get fired, seconded. Or sometimes they resign first. How many other people have managed to write features, cover stories and straight reporting pieces without fabricating? What do you think their opinion is when they hear someone among them has just done it?

― George 'the Animal' Steele, Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:52 (nineteen years ago)

And if his book is to believed, Jayson Blair was also catnip to the ladies, who were always hugging him and consoling him and calling him "sweetie."

― Terrible Cold (Terrible Cold), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:54 (nineteen years ago)

My question is, what's a "Senior Associate Editor"???

it's the kind of thing that happens to you when you demand a pay rise and they don't give you one. "let's see ... you're overpaid enough as it is ... how about 'deputy chief senior executive assistant managing associate editor'?"

"great. i'll be at lunch if you need me."

"we won't."

― grimly fiendish (grimlord), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:56 (nineteen years ago)

The saddest part of this whole thing is that the Village Voice is now the type of publication that runs cover stories on pussy hounders pulled straight out of a Wes Anderson script.

That's your liberal media outlet for you.

No wonder we have a bunch of right-wing idiots running our country....

― Giles Manius (jsoulja), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:56 (nineteen years ago)

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c286/shallowrewards/suspicio.gif

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:57 (nineteen years ago)

Haha

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 2 March 2006 23:58 (nineteen years ago)

Although this would be nothing if the issue were just a fabbed quote

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Friday, 3 March 2006 00:01 (nineteen years ago)

Again a terrible counter example but I think the entire tabloid industry lives off generally benign made-up shit and disposes of a sizeable budget to pay for (willfully or not) published fabrications.

hey :-O

― blunt (blunt), Friday, 3 March 2006 00:01 (nineteen years ago)

Ott brings the content!

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Friday, 3 March 2006 00:01 (nineteen years ago)

um one idea (not mine either): the "cover story" may have nothing to do, anymore, with what the biggest article is, or what's been put in the well, or what's most important that week, but just what might get people to pick it up on one glance.

― geoff (gcannon), Friday, 3 March 2006 00:04 (nineteen years ago)

true

blunt, the diff w/tabloids is that the reporters can always find someone to actually say the quotes they're using, so their asses are covered, even if that person is their girlfriend who met posh spice once and is identified as "am acquaintance of victoria beckham" ... ass-covering. so so important.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Friday, 3 March 2006 00:08 (nineteen years ago)

Distressed by the sorry state the Village Voice finds itself in, ILM goes all 50 posts/hour over it in March 2006.

Let's see, I've been misquoted as many times as I've been interviewed, once a journalist called to ask if he could put a certain phrase he had thought about to my credit. Since then I've become a journalist myself.

― blunt (blunt), Friday, 3 March 2006 00:10 (nineteen years ago)

No I'm really talking about printing complete bullshit and having the means to pay for the consequences.

On a sideline I'd be willing to talk about the "truth" found in right-wing politico editorials. But we're having fun ?

― blunt (blunt), Friday, 3 March 2006 00:12 (nineteen years ago)

I really can't believe anyone is defending this. I don't agree with you at all Yancey...in fact I was pretty surprised at your take on the matter. There's no difference between being a "writer" and a "journalist" when it comes to the law, which is why publishing (possibly damaging) lies is something that any publication must avoid. Anyone who is seeing this as an issue of style is willfully ignoring the morals at play.

"just adoring the kid" is the same line of crap that was swallowed during the Ruth Shalit melodrama. And then she turned right around and burned Salon with more of her "errors."

I'm really curious to hear the opinions of editors on this thread--matos et al--would you run a Nick Sylvester piece or would you blacklist him? Is his "style" or voice or writing chops so unique that you can't live without him?

― don weiner (don weiner), Friday, 3 March 2006 00:12 (nineteen years ago)

it's a big day for music shitstorms

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/03/02/D8G3NUIG0.html

― ftgsdag, Friday, 3 March 2006 00:16 (nineteen years ago)

blacklist

How about just "fire". There's no reason the guy needs to be blacklisted. He made a huge error, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't ever be able to work again.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Friday, 3 March 2006 00:22 (nineteen years ago)

obviously he should be fired.

I'm not saying he shouldn't work again. I'm saying who is willing to hire him or assign him, what are the parameters, what is going through your head, and why is he worth it? If you're Nick, what is your groveling strategy? I'm saying, with the Ruth Shalits of the world paving the way (her serial "inaccuracies" that continued after her flameout with the New Republic and the Washington Post), who wants to hire Nick and why? With all the things to worry about as an editor, I'm curious who wants to take on the baggage, and the rationale behind it. Maybe it's a lot more simple than I'm making it.

― don weiner (don weiner), Friday, 3 March 2006 00:37 (nineteen years ago)

Nick isn't like those other writers though. He's a failure as a satirist/parodist, but as far as I can tell he never tried to pull a fast one on his editors. Everyone knew his bag was creative semi-fiction. He deserves to be suspended and maybe he deserves to be fired, but this is just not nearly the same thing as Blair/Shalit/Glass/etc.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Friday, 3 March 2006 00:45 (nineteen years ago)

I CAN'T BELIEVE I FORGOT NICK'S BAG.

― Doug Simmons, Friday, 3 March 2006 00:50 (nineteen years ago)

i think one disconnect on these kinds of things is that some percentage of the general public just assumes that reporters make things up all the time. so they don't get why fabrications in a harmless fluff piece matter.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Friday, 3 March 2006 00:51 (nineteen years ago)

"it's a composite, like new york magazine does"

― j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:07 (nineteen years ago)

i remembered another guy who made stuff up and it ruined his career (NOT) - mitch albom!

― j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:08 (nineteen years ago)

this might be the only place where anyone would give a shit about nick sylvester and his bad journalism

― this, Friday, 3 March 2006 01:08 (nineteen years ago)

and two others but frankly they're so far out of sylvester's class (way beyond meltzer) it'd be embarrasing to mention them

― j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:08 (nineteen years ago)

fuckit - aj liebling and joseph mitchell

― j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:09 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif http://www.jefframirez.com/ilx/drudge..jpg http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif
http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif

― account settings (account), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:09 (nineteen years ago)

Do I think the guy's career should be over? No. Do I think the Voice should fire him? Maybe; that's their ball of wax. If they simply kicked him back to doing straight music crit and his Riff Raff thing, would I be outraged? Not really. As much as this guy is being slagged, he's still a kid. Frankly, maybe that's part of the problem -- Senior Associate Editor at the Voice, and he's a year or two out of college? Now I don't know what that title signifies exactly, but it sure doesn't sound like Nick's experience was suited to the position -- especially if he couldn't handle writing a full feature, as has been implied.

Frankly, I feel a little sorry for him. With the exception of Rob Christgau's Pazz and Jop write up this year (which was pretty great), Nick Sylvester's stuff was pretty much the highlight of their music coverage, at least in my opinion. I think that he needs to be punished, certainly, but I am I going to wish that the guy gets wiped out permanently by this? Nah.

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:09 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gifwhadda way to end a beautiful careerhttp://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif

― account settings (account), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:10 (nineteen years ago)

yeah letting a blogger write for you is one thing - to each his own, it takes all kinds, whatever - but to make one an editor = ARE YOU FUCKING CRAZY?

― j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:13 (nineteen years ago)

you reap what you sow

― j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:13 (nineteen years ago)

Nick off Pitchfork staff page.

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:18 (nineteen years ago)

The blogger thing doesn't throw me so much -- most of the stuff he wrote was pretty much blog sized anyway. Plus (love it or hate it or be ambivalent towards it) he did write fulll length criticism for P-fork which was far more in-depth than anything usually available on the Voice. I mean, unless you think Christgau writing a non-commital sentence about an album that dropped four months ago is fascinating. Seriously, I need to get on the tenure track. A MINUS.

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:21 (nineteen years ago)

yeah letting a blogger write for you is one thing ... but to make one an editor = ARE YOU FUCKING CRAZY?

What's wrong with bloggers? I mean, there are plenty of bloggers who would make (or already do make) perfectly good editors.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:22 (nineteen years ago)

Very interesting.

It even made me break my silence here.

― Brett Hickman (Bhickman), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:27 (nineteen years ago)

Nick off Pitchfork staff page.

get one cntl-f search function, funny guy. he's still under contributing writers. or are you saying he was pulled off managing editors list?

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/staff/

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:30 (nineteen years ago)

wait blount yr putting nick in albom class? seriously, dude's had enuf!

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:32 (nineteen years ago)

BTW, does this mean that Deerhoof isn't the best band in the world, or will they get to keep the title?

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:32 (nineteen years ago)

yes, he was pulled off the editors list cuz I saw him there this morning. OH SNAP!
xpost

― timmy tannin (pompous), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:33 (nineteen years ago)

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:MBd60QIPOpkJ:www.pitchforkmedia.com/staff/+%22ryan+schreiber%22&hl=en&gl=uk&ct=clnk&cd=3&client=firefox-a
www.pitchforkmedia.com/staff/

Spot the difference!

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:37 (nineteen years ago)

now he's off the writers list! Soon he'll be deleted from all our memory files.

― timmy tannin (pompous), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:38 (nineteen years ago)

Who'll be deleted from our memory files?

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:43 (nineteen years ago)

Who's Nick Sylvester? OH FUCK DOM BEAT ME

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:44 (nineteen years ago)

herodotus >>>>>>>>>>>> liebling, mitchell>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>meltzer>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>junod>>>>>>>>sylvester>>>>>albom>strauss

― j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:47 (nineteen years ago)

No one is worse than albom, blount.

― My Psychic Friends Are Strangely Silent (Ex Leon), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:49 (nineteen years ago)

seriously!

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:50 (nineteen years ago)

dude was an original sports reporter - that's gotta count for something!

― j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:52 (nineteen years ago)

Tuesdays With Morrissey?

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:52 (nineteen years ago)

albom>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>skip bayless

― j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:53 (nineteen years ago)

spot-on

― gear (gear), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:56 (nineteen years ago)

still not enough gap between Junod and Sylvester, Blount. Seriously dude.

― don weiner (don weiner), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:57 (nineteen years ago)

skip bayless--"super bowl is boring with no stars like tom brady and seattle and detroit are second-class cities. also: winter olympics is for fagz"

― gear (gear), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:57 (nineteen years ago)

"No one is worse than albom, blount."

Hello, Bob Greene! (who, like albom, started out with a shred of human decency)

― scott seward (scott seward), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:57 (nineteen years ago)

ohh bob greene....that was a hard fall

― gear (gear), Friday, 3 March 2006 01:58 (nineteen years ago)

it is kinda sad that the good espn dudes (ralph wiley, hunter thompson) die (halberstam watch your back!) and skip bayless and woody paige and colin cowherd are still drawing breath.

― j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:01 (nineteen years ago)

albom>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>skip bayless

-- j bloun

A turd would be better than Bayless.

― van igloo (van smack), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:02 (nineteen years ago)

bob greene writes for the jewish world review now (i think). which is probably a fine periodical...

― scott seward (scott seward), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:02 (nineteen years ago)

i'm searching for albom's interior monologue as ben wallace so that we can hunt for the real killer here but i'm coming up with nothing.

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:02 (nineteen years ago)

"senior associate editor" = "co-executive producer"

I'm still confused what makes this guy (whom I don't know) a satirist. The target in his cases seem to be the form - giddy/stupid pop-culture features - first and foremost, not the subject. That's the difference between, say, "Weird" Al's "Fat" or "Eat It" and Randy Newman's "Rednecks." It's also what keeps things like the Onion and the Daily Show so sharp - imitation of the form (newspaper/newscast) is just the platform for satire, not the whole of the joke.

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:04 (nineteen years ago)

Wiley was like a soccer dad who desperately wanted to be cool. Obviously I didn't wish any harm to come to him, but I don't miss his writing.

Bayless' work is the ... er, gold standard for shitty opinion pieces.

― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:04 (nineteen years ago)

the jewish world review's line-up, with a few exceptions, is like a who's who of idiocy:

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
MUGGER
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

― scott seward (scott seward), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:06 (nineteen years ago)

Russ Smith--"Bush is our greatest orator since MLK"

― gear (gear), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:07 (nineteen years ago)

not to derail but liebling >>>>>>>> herodotus

― adam (adam), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:09 (nineteen years ago)

OMG, forget Nick, comedy gold!:

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/coulter1.asp

― scott seward (scott seward), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:12 (nineteen years ago)

Wasn't it Bayless who wrote the piece about how the Knicks' acquisition of Steve Francis was a brilliant move, because know Larry Brown has the perfect lineup of underachievers upon which to work his magic?

OMGLOL. I mean, if you're that wrong about something, do you still qualify as an expert? Can he be decertified? That's like being a lifeguard and letting a child stricken with polio go off the high dive.

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:12 (nineteen years ago)

ahh, Michelle Malkin!

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:12 (nineteen years ago)

"Movies with the same groundbreaking theme to come:

* "Westward Homo!"

* "The Magnificent, Fabulous Seven"

* "Gunfight at the K-Y Corral"

* "How West Hollywood Was Won"

OK, back to predictions. The best director award will go to ... Ang Lee, director of "Brokeback Mountain." (For analysis, see above.) Also, this is gays directed by an Asian, which should satisfy the gaysians. Hands down: Ang Lee."

― scott seward (scott seward), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:13 (nineteen years ago)

That Coulter piece is a classic. Oh, Ann you're so 2003.

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:14 (nineteen years ago)

I'm the advisor for a college newspaper and I have to constantly remind the students not to make shit up. Fabricating quotes is a sign of laziness. You make up quotes in fiction, not in journalism. Whoever makes up quotes knowing the rules posted by the publication for which he's writing deserves his fate.

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Friday, 3 March 2006 02:53 (nineteen years ago)

his fate is probably to get canned by the Voice, go off to write a pretty entertaining mea culpa memoir which is 33% "it's not my fault, the bad editors made me do it", 33% "it's not my fault if squares just don't get it it, swiftian satire is my bag", and 33% "it's not my fault, i was high as a kite" and to go on to write screenplays for various SNL alumni, starting with the feature-length adaptation of the narnia rap. if not that, there's always Vice.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 03:08 (nineteen years ago)

http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/images/2003/locke.jpg http://www.janome.com/images/accessory-BOBBIN-THREAD.jpg

― Roque Strew (RoqueStrew), Friday, 3 March 2006 03:28 (nineteen years ago)

Whoever put that Coulter link into this thread is the one who should be fired. Kudos to JWR for their equal opportunity hiring of a NAZI for their publication.

― Mitya (mitya), Friday, 3 March 2006 03:32 (nineteen years ago)

I just report the news, Mitya, don't shoot the messenger.

― scott seward (scott seward), Friday, 3 March 2006 03:35 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif Nick off Pitchfork staff page. http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif

― lil' flipper (eman), Friday, 3 March 2006 03:53 (nineteen years ago)

Nat Hentoff

Scott!!!!!!!!

― deej.. (deej..), Friday, 3 March 2006 04:37 (nineteen years ago)

33% "it's not my fault, i was high as a kite"

I would personally pay Nick to write a book-length "it was because I was smoking half an ounce of purple-haired Carmel buds per day" sorta deal

― Thomas Tallis (Tommy), Friday, 3 March 2006 04:38 (nineteen years ago)

[removed by request]

― Naive Teen Idol (Naive Teen Idol), Friday, 3 March 2006 05:01 (nineteen years ago)

"Nat Hentoff

Scott!!!!!!!!"

i said there were some exceptions. and some of the people on that list i am not familiar with. they may not be idiots.

― scott seward (scott seward), Friday, 3 March 2006 05:13 (nineteen years ago)

hentoff is only totally off the money like 2/3 of the time.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 3 March 2006 05:25 (nineteen years ago)

Have you read his jazz writing?

― deej.. (deej..), Friday, 3 March 2006 05:27 (nineteen years ago)

i pray to god i'm on the money as often as he is in when i'm 81

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 05:29 (nineteen years ago)

I think he's one of the best jazz writers I've read, along with Ralph Ellison. But I generally haven't read much of his recent political stuff the odd essay aside.

― deej.. (deej..), Friday, 3 March 2006 05:31 (nineteen years ago)

i just mean his political stuff, and only then sometimes. but on those times he can be totally maddening.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 3 March 2006 05:47 (nineteen years ago)

Hentoff was waaaaay off when it came to the Terri Schiavo fiasco. I don't know shit about jazz so I'll assume he's more than competant in that arena.

― Brian O'Neill (NYCNative), Friday, 3 March 2006 06:18 (nineteen years ago)

I couldnt bring myself to read this whole thread because of how dumb it is on so very many levels, but I cannot figure out why Coulter is writing for a Jewish publication. What the fuck is going on?

― fkj, Friday, 3 March 2006 06:21 (nineteen years ago)

Lotta Jews are neo-cons.

― fgfdg, Friday, 3 March 2006 06:25 (nineteen years ago)

now pitchfork stopped working

― lf (lfam), Friday, 3 March 2006 07:26 (nineteen years ago)

lotta neocons are jews, that is. most jews are liberal.

― staxwell, Friday, 3 March 2006 07:26 (nineteen years ago)

hentoff is prolife which is where his schiavo take came from i'm guessing. he's otm well enough to justify those incredibly frustrating or blockheaded times he's so wrong (most disgusting for me was when he was selling that 'clinton's a rapist' line the right was spreading after the impeachment fell thru) and sadly probably more relevant now than ever.

― j blount (papa la bas), Friday, 3 March 2006 09:20 (nineteen years ago)

"Asked to resign" from Pitchfork? What the fuck kinda cop out is that? Doesn't Ryan have a desk he can bang his fist on?

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Friday, 3 March 2006 09:23 (nineteen years ago)

wow, he really isn't on the fork staff page anymore. what the hell is going on? if nick gets the pitchslip for this..

― poortheatre (poortheatre), Friday, 3 March 2006 10:28 (nineteen years ago)

i think it's more likely that nick had a breakdown and quit Pitchfork than Ryan S fired him because he put fabrications in a VV cover story.

― sean gramophone (Sean M), Friday, 3 March 2006 10:30 (nineteen years ago)

still...
http://mindprod.com/images/martyr.jpg

― poortheatre (poortheatre), Friday, 3 March 2006 10:30 (nineteen years ago)

check out Pablo "Yoruba" Guzman's obituary for Ray Baretto in this week's Voice. That's rare appearance of the kind of writing that made this paper's reputation back in the day: passionate, well-informed, personal and political. oh and accurate.

sylvester's thing was just a glom on strauss anyway, an attempt to ride his book's publicity that backfired, or maybe worked too well.

― m coleman (lovebug starski), Friday, 3 March 2006 11:38 (nineteen years ago)

Well, what does it say about a publication, any publication, that stands by a dude who admits to making shit up? It's called credibility, and it matters, even at Pitchfork.

Maybe the guy can get a job making up quotes for movie posters.

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Friday, 3 March 2006 12:39 (nineteen years ago)

Fabricating quotes is a sign of laziness.

Not only is it a form of laziness, it's also the clearest possible sign that you are in no way, shape or form cut out to be a journalist. Period. If you're making up quotes, or are even tempted to make up quotes, just do yourself and everyone else a favor, and quit.

― poynter.org, Friday, 3 March 2006 12:42 (nineteen years ago)

i'm not entirely sure why pitchfork would fire him for this.

― Hairy Asshurt (Toaster), Friday, 3 March 2006 13:48 (nineteen years ago)

cuz they're a bunch of fucking pussies like the rest of you

― common sense (sexyDancer), Friday, 3 March 2006 13:59 (nineteen years ago)

yeah, he fucked up and i think it was a pretty huge lapse in judgement and the voice really ought to quit the whole condescending "i love this kid" shit and can his ass, but i would think someone could still write record reviews for pitchfork even after making shit up in the voice. i can see them taking him off interviews and features for awhile, but has he done anything to suggest he's incapable of saying whether or not he likes a record? it's like saying someone can't be make up the word jumbles anymore. anyway, who knows, maybe he quit.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 14:02 (nineteen years ago)

it's like saying someone can't be trusted to make up the word jumbles anymore

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 14:03 (nineteen years ago)

has he done anything to suggest he's incapable of saying whether or not he likes a record?

Cue 500 posts of whining about how that's not what record reviews are about.

― strap in, Friday, 3 March 2006 14:07 (nineteen years ago)

oh for fucks sake, what else are record reviews about? i mean yeah, you can say who played bass and what font they used but ultimately it's "yeah, i like this" or "no, i didn't like this" or even "hey look at me, i'm not saying whether i like this or not"

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 14:14 (nineteen years ago)

anyway, that brent guy is still on the list of contributing writers for pitchfork and he made a pile of shit up, so i guess sylvester quit unless pitchfork are huge hypocrites.

dude, you can still write record reviews.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 14:17 (nineteen years ago)

this shit is like the music scribe community version of watergate, look at all of you ejaculating at this shit. move on.

― NastyNasir, Friday, 3 March 2006 14:41 (nineteen years ago)

Bob Woodward ejaculated?

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 14:47 (nineteen years ago)

They mentioned this story on Morning Edition on NPR this morning.

― o. nate (onate), Friday, 3 March 2006 14:50 (nineteen years ago)

I like the idea that the previous piece on college cheating was thought of as a serious article by the editors and part of the readership. It'd be kind of great to uncover a trail of completely ridiculous claims and quotes that someone was believing until there were some false quotes at the end of an otherwise believable article. In any case, someone messed up.

Also, so we never forget:
http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/d/daft-punk/daft-club.shtml

― mike h. (mike h.), Friday, 3 March 2006 14:51 (nineteen years ago)

watergate xpost

xpost: shawn d please, i spent 500 words on this out of the 5000 i wrote this week, this isn't gonna be anybody's watergate, not even yours (the d's for deepthroat, right; suck a dick)

-- Nick Sylvester (nick...) (webmail), September 10th, 2005 3:43 AM. (link)

i guess shawn d's laughing now
This sounds like the worst thing

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 14:53 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah but why stop at gutting the writer for fabricating a dumb feature?
Why not gut the paper for publishing a dumb feature?

-- Giles Manius (gilesmaniu...), March 2nd, 2006.

yr damned right....this piece is about as idiotic as the "mandate" thing that the Times ran sometime last year (looked for it couldnt find it)...and satire or not (like hstence, don't see it sorry) its pretty useless writing about something that needn't be discussed.

pitty the voice have to go to the mat on this, but maybe they deserve it.

― bb (bbrz), Friday, 3 March 2006 14:55 (nineteen years ago)

people still read village voice, yikes.

― NastyNaseer, Friday, 3 March 2006 15:03 (nineteen years ago)

Will writing ever recover from this, can the public ever regain their faith in you guys? Or have we lost that innocent bond we once had, i feel betrayed.

― NAstyNaseer, Friday, 3 March 2006 15:09 (nineteen years ago)

tremendoid, please don't quote things that weren't actually said ok thx.

-- Nick Sylvester (nick...), September 10th, 2005.

ouch.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 15:12 (nineteen years ago)

Hahahahaaha! (And having met tremendoid the other night I can confirm he's a very good guy, so frankly this is all the more rich.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 March 2006 15:19 (nineteen years ago)

(I idly note Riff Raff hasn't been updated since the postpunk panel report.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 March 2006 15:20 (nineteen years ago)

This thread has been locked by a user.

This isn't about music, guys. Take it to ILE.

(oooooooh, I nearly felt the power there! I'm starting to understand the appeal...)

― StanM (StanM), Friday, 3 March 2006 15:20 (nineteen years ago)

Test?

Damn.

OK, carry on then.

― StanM (StanM), Friday, 3 March 2006 15:21 (nineteen years ago)

Gawker's latest. They're calling it 'Sylvestergate' now.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 March 2006 15:26 (nineteen years ago)

people still read village voice, yikes

per maura upthread, they still got apartment listings.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 15:27 (nineteen years ago)

so re: Sylvestergate, is Deep Throat really Dolly D or Tha Pumpsta?

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 15:35 (nineteen years ago)

"Sylvestergate" wtf. Is that gawker site actually being serious?

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 3 March 2006 15:44 (nineteen years ago)

Is a site called "Gawker" being serious?

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Friday, 3 March 2006 15:46 (nineteen years ago)

Fair point, I suppose.

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Friday, 3 March 2006 15:50 (nineteen years ago)

good god this cocksanddolls person is just as bad as nick. the whole pitch was about something relatively different (not to mention that nick pitched it to simmons apparently, and not v.v.)

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:01 (nineteen years ago)

that e-mail the girl sent to Simmons could quite possible be the worst pitch I have ever read.

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:02 (nineteen years ago)

it's far easier to pitch someone if you wait patiently outside their apartment in the cold at 6am.

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:03 (nineteen years ago)

I like how on her blog she's like "The Village Voice stole my pitch and they didn't even do it the way I said it!" Uh, then it's NOT YOUR PITCH, dude!

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:06 (nineteen years ago)

Sylvester wrote the exaxt opposite of what she wanted to do. If she can't fathom that, she should stick to her hooking-up in NYC blog.

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:08 (nineteen years ago)

I HAVE NO WRITING CLIPS BUT HAVE BLOG ABOUT FUCKING PLEASE LET ME WRITE COVER STORY PLEASE THANKS

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:12 (nineteen years ago)

I THINK THE REAL ISSUE IS THESE WOMENS FIGURING OUT WE ARE TRYING TO PICK THEM UP, THE FLOODGATES MUST BE STOPPED, THEY CANNOT KNOW WE WANT TO FUCK THEM

― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:12 (nineteen years ago)

CODE RED

― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:12 (nineteen years ago)

cutty where is your book? what is your method of attack?

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:13 (nineteen years ago)

other than just like "go to union pool?"

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:13 (nineteen years ago)

Or "pine mounfully for girls on myspace"?

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:14 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.jefframirez.com/ilx/drudge..jpg MEN WANT TO FUCK WOMEN NEWS AT 11 http://www.jefframirez.com/ilx/drudge..jpg

― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:14 (nineteen years ago)

oh c'mon eppy - not everyone's you.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:15 (nineteen years ago)

Nah dude, I'm all about Friendster.

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:15 (nineteen years ago)

no wonder.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:16 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif WOMEN ARE BEING LIED TO WE MUST INTERVENE VILLAGE VOICE http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif

― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:16 (nineteen years ago)

OK, I lied, I'm all about Ohio Connection.

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:16 (nineteen years ago)

cutty where is your book? what is your method of attack?

I JUST BE MYSELF I MAKE MY OWN LIES UP, I DON'T TAKE THEM FROM A BOOK

― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:18 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif WOMEN ARE AGREEING TO HAVE CASUAL SEX THEY MUST BE STOPPED http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif

― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:19 (nineteen years ago)

"NO, THAT'S MY ROOMMATE'S BONG. I DON'T DO THAT STUFF."

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:19 (nineteen years ago)

"HEY, DO YOU LIKE YO LA TENGO BECAUSE I HAVE SOME VINYL"

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:20 (nineteen years ago)

"that's my roommate's vaporizer," more like.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:20 (nineteen years ago)

i actually watched a dude try THE GAME on a friend of mine last week. he told her a mark on her face looked like skin cancer, and then he tried to kiss her. swear to god. (dude struck out hard)

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:20 (nineteen years ago)

IF WOMEN WOULD FUCKING HIT ON GUYS, AND NOT WAIT FOR GUYS TO HIT ON THEM

THEN THERE WOULD BE NO "THE GAME"

AND THEN NICK SYLVESTER WOULD NOT BE SAD RIGHT NOW

AND YOU ASSHOLES WOULD HAVE NOTHING TO TALK ABOUT

I KNOW WHO IS TO BLAME

http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif THE WOMEN http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif

― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:21 (nineteen years ago)

I admit that alarm light makes me laugh every time I see it.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:22 (nineteen years ago)

ok now the sirens looks like breasts

― Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:22 (nineteen years ago)

roffle

― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:22 (nineteen years ago)

ok, can we lock this now?

― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:22 (nineteen years ago)

Dolly D's story sounds approx. 1,000,000,000,000,000 times better, i.e. some women are wise to the tricks but fall for it anyway! Rather than: some women are wise to the tricks and uh. Yeah.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:23 (nineteen years ago)

my first date with my girlfriend was at Union Pool. I totally neg'd her out. 2 years later, still with the negging.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:23 (nineteen years ago)

ALWAYS WITH THE NEGGING

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:24 (nineteen years ago)

I wish The Game had written the book instead of N.S., it would make this whole debacle more entertaining than it presently is. (Note: I’ve always liked Nick’s writing and hope (a) he isn’t blacklisted and (b) has learned an important life lesson from this.)

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:25 (nineteen years ago)

cocaine, anyone?

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:25 (nineteen years ago)

WHERE THE FUCK IS TERRIFICA WHEN WE NEED HER?????!?!?!

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:27 (nineteen years ago)

"People are happiest when they're alone and living their solitary lives."

― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:28 (nineteen years ago)

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:28 (nineteen years ago)

"Well, are you comfortable with trying a little COCAINE?"

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:29 (nineteen years ago)

i have some game lines i could use on terrifica

― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:31 (nineteen years ago)

R U FANTASTICO???!??!?

As is often the case with comic book superheroes, Terrifica has an arch-nemesis: Fantastico. Fantastico is a man who has encountered Terrifica on multiple occasions, who dresses in velvet and says that he likes to indulge in pleasurable things and to bring out the pleasure in people. In his encounters with Terrifica, she has never addressed him directly, but rather warns his alleged prey not to be manipulated. It is unclear who Fantastico is through the day, when not pretending to be a supervillain.

Despite Terrifica never addressing Fantastico directly, her alter ego Sarah has. In fact, Sarah claims to have been seduced by him years ago. Sarah has confronted him since but Fantastico claims to have no recollection of their initial encounter.

Fantastico has said that Terrifica is just a miserable, lonely, loveless, cold woman who does not want anyone else to be happy. He is confident that if given a chance, he could change her attitude. Fantastico has said that Terrifica has only been an occasional annoyance to him and that "I have no problem doing what I do."

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:32 (nineteen years ago)

"I do this because women are weak."

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:34 (nineteen years ago)

shh, hstencil

― cutty (mcutt), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:35 (nineteen years ago)

BRYAN ROBINSON = MAKER UPPER

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:36 (nineteen years ago)

I live like two blocks away from Bar 4. You think I'd notice two dueling sexual superheros battling for genital supremacy.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:38 (nineteen years ago)

I appreciate the interest, but since the ABC article came out (but not because of it), I've decided to hang up my cape. No regrets, no hard feelings. I just can't continue because people at work are close to unmasking me and I could deal with that except that I couldn't bear for one co-worker in particular to laugh at me. Thanks for caring. I still love Metropolis and will fight predators.

Posted by: Terrifica | November 18, 2002 06:37 PM

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:40 (nineteen years ago)

From Technorati.com....

Top Searches
“American Idol”
Origami
“Nick Sylvester”

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:42 (nineteen years ago)

he was #1 last night

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:44 (nineteen years ago)

And now, clearly less popular than origami.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:45 (nineteen years ago)

Dude, you didn't hear about the big origami scandal?

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:46 (nineteen years ago)

As reported on paperer.com

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:47 (nineteen years ago)

i downloaded some Philipino anal porn off Technorati but I don't know how to unzip a .RAR

http://www.technorati.com/search/tammy%20nyp

HOW DO I SHOT .RAR?

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:48 (nineteen years ago)

One rumor inside the Voice, we hear, is that the decision not to fire Sylvester came from Village Voice Media HQ — the Arizonans formerly known as New Times Media — who agree that Sylvester can be forgiven because he is young and was “fatigued.”

Think I can ask my boss to forgive me for fucking up million dollar buys by being young and fatigued? Ah who cares, I quit anyways.

― Candicissima (candicissima), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:51 (nineteen years ago)

it seems like people here are still speculating whether Sylvester quit Pitchfork or was asked to quit, this says the latter:
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/ny-bc-ny--villagevoice-fabr0302mar02,0,7432230.story

personally, I'm kind of surprised, considering that the Voice has only suspended him so far. I mean, what if they decided not to fire him? would Pitchfork want him back? besides, PF had a pretty lax attitude toward fact-checking themselves until what? 9 months ago?

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:56 (nineteen years ago)

I can't agree with that assessment of their fact checking. I.e. this review http://pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/comp/soul-jazz/tropicalia.shtml. Shot through with errors.

― jimnaseum (jimnaseum), Friday, 3 March 2006 16:58 (nineteen years ago)

and only about a month old.

― jimnaseum (jimnaseum), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:00 (nineteen years ago)

The new Gawker update to which Candicissima refers.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:01 (nineteen years ago)

not saying they still don't make errors! just that they didn't even seem to know what fact-checking was a few years ago, compared to now. (xp)

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:01 (nineteen years ago)

remember when I wrote but like Pitchfork could care? upthread? Guess I was wrong.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:01 (nineteen years ago)

xpost, I was sort of agreeing with you, I was meaning that PF is being hypocritical with this move: why the hell take Sylvester off the staff for making stuff up while keeping someone who has researched his review on google?

― jimnaseum (jimnaseum), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:05 (nineteen years ago)

is it some sort of "no really, pitchfork is a real magazine with high ethical standards" kind of move? Just interesting if the Voice doesn't fire him and Pitchfork does. Was he fabricating his own opinions in record reviews? Did he really hate those bands he liked and vice-versa?

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:08 (nineteen years ago)

so far, this is the best quote this thread has produced:

This reminds me of the time my sea monkeys started eating each other.

-- My Psychic Friends Are Strangely Silent (nicole.kessle...) (webmail), March 2nd, 2006 1:22 PM. (Ex Leon) (later) (link)

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:09 (nineteen years ago)

Oh, no question of that, Midi!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:10 (nineteen years ago)

that is a Pitchfork 9.8 rated zing

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:11 (nineteen years ago)

if nick sylvester was fired, how the fuck do they justify keeping brent dicrescenzo on their masthead:

Last Tuesday, June 15th, Pitchfork published a review of the Beastie Boys' To the 5 Boroughs by Brent DiCrescenzo, a frequent and trusted contributor. In his review, Brent detailed experiences with the Beastie Boys' public relations firm Nasty Little Man, and its president Steve Martin, over the course of several years. Pitchfork has since determined that a number of DiCrescenzo's assertions were false, based on corroborated statements from the two parties he claimed were participating in the chain of events referred to in the review. With apologies to Steve Martin and Nasty Little Man, we have retracted the original review in its entirety, and would like to make the following known publicly, to correct any and all falsities perpetrated by Brent's review:

1) Radiohead were never in Milan in June 1999.

2) Radiohead never moved a concert from Villa Reale in Milan to Monza in 1999, 2000 or otherwise.

3) Steve Martin never "forgot to tell" Brent that the concert was moved, as it was not.

4) Neither Steve Martin, nor anyone working for Nasty Little Man, ever confirmed a Radiohead interview with Brent DiCrescenzo or Pitchfork.

5) Brent DiCrescenzo's declaration that Steve Martin had not gotten back to him or Mean magazine about a possible Beastie Boys interview after six weeks is untrue: Martin was in constant contact with Mean publisher Kashy Khaledi and editor Andy Hunter throughout that period.

6) Mean magazine never "delayed their publication to accomodate [Martin's] procrastination." Kashy Khaledi did so of his own volition in order to keep the Beastie Boys cover story Martin had confirmed and saw through with him every step of the way.

7) Steve Martin has never, to Brent DiCrescenzo's knowledge, "dangled [his] major artists... like carrots to the media in an attempt to blackmail press for features" on less established artists or bands.

Sincerely,
Pitchfork Media

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:12 (nineteen years ago)

Was he fabricating his own opinions in record reviews? Did he really hate those bands he liked and vice-versa?

Employers In Don't Like Working With Liars Shockah.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:12 (nineteen years ago)

Employers In Like Some Liars And Dislike Others Shockah

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:14 (nineteen years ago)

Wasn't that DiCres review obviously satire, and it's main sin was publicist-baiting?

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:16 (nineteen years ago)

Also that DiCrescenzo review had no reverberations outside of PFM and its readership. To an outside eye, it potentially looks bad to have "the guy from that Village Voice scandal that was reported everywhere" on staff.

― jaymc (jaymc), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:18 (nineteen years ago)

yeah i think the main difference with the brent thing was that ryan and the site were in on the joke and it was fairly parodic on the surface

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:18 (nineteen years ago)

Fritz, it's not like Pitchfork is some big company and they just discovered Nick lied on a feature for another publication...I'd assume Pitchfork had a long history with Nick, and wouldn't be so quick to dump him like that. It feels like a publicity move on their part. "yeah, he's worked with us for a long time, but we can't afford to be associated with him for a second longer."

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:21 (nineteen years ago)

and by "big company" I don't mean to reflect on Pitchfork's size, but trying to get at their relationship with one of their longtime writers.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:23 (nineteen years ago)

MAN: ARE YOUR SPONTANEOUS?

WOMAN: YES

MAN: DO YOU LIEK FUN?

WOMAN: IS THIS A YES-LADDER?

MAN: http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif

― lil' flipper (eman), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:27 (nineteen years ago)

yeah and I'm sure Neighborhoodies and fucking Aperican Apparel could care less about this. This is all a publicity play, there's no way any of their advertisers would pull out because of this.

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:27 (nineteen years ago)

My question is, what's a "Senior Associate Editor"???

I was a senior associate editor for like 5 years! it just means that you've stuck around long enough and they want to give you a bump in pay, but w/o any real change of position! it's a total "farmer ted, king of the dipshits" type thing.

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:27 (nineteen years ago)

dan, that sounds right. firing nick does seem like a bid for respectability or something. jaymc's argument that nick's fuck-up was more high profile than brent's echoes that.

here's the nasty little man story
http://www.timesnewroman.org/Brent%20Article.htm

seems to me of the "making up a bunch of shit to make someone look like a dick" school of parody aka libel, but i can be kind of dense. where is the tip-off that this is satiric fiction?

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:28 (nineteen years ago)

I never thought the Brent piece was satiric, I just thought he forgot shit, which is fair, although the piece in question was really repulsive.

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:32 (nineteen years ago)

""Oh, Steve forgot to tell you that the concert was moved to Monza." Monza is a suburb 30 minutes north of Milan. I had passed it on the train from Frankfurt."

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:33 (nineteen years ago)

Although the "Jmoke Jhop" point was good and has stuck with me.

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:35 (nineteen years ago)

Keeping Sylvester around is going to make it harder for other Voice reporters to do their jobs. Reporters like James Ridgeway and Jarrett Murphy, who collect sensitive information from anonymous sources, are going to have to work that much harder now to assure their sources that information will be handled properly. It goes straight to the credibility of the newspaper.

― reporter, Friday, 3 March 2006 17:35 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, I think in the old ILM thread about the Beastie Boys review, I figured out that he got the year wrong (2000 instead off 99 like he said) that all that shit supposedly went down, which might be the root of NLM denying it up and down.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:36 (nineteen years ago)

so is it parody, or is it reporting where the reporter got year wrong?

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:38 (nineteen years ago)

like james ridgeway doesn't make up shit.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:40 (nineteen years ago)

like james ridgeway doesn't make up shit.

Prove it.

― reporter, Friday, 3 March 2006 17:41 (nineteen years ago)

"Hello, Nasty," the girl on the phone says.

In one of the first "concept" reviews at Pitchfork, and one of my first for the site in general, I review Hello Nasty. I make some stupid Tibet joke, give it an 8.5...

It is not mentally possibly for me to switch on apathy towards the group-- and immediately hate this record because the Beastie Boys associate themselves with pricks like Steve Martin and his sycophantic fleet of product pushers who fail to see the benefit of funny, creative magazine pieces.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:42 (nineteen years ago)

like james ridgeway doesn't make up shit.
Prove it.

don't ask me, ask vice president mccain.

― hstencil (hstencil), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:43 (nineteen years ago)

This reminds me of the time my gaysians started eating each other.

― erklie (erklie), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:49 (nineteen years ago)

Too much, too little, too late.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:50 (nineteen years ago)

This reminds me of the time my gaysians started eating each other.

So you've been to SEA?

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:55 (nineteen years ago)

I knew Sylvester was lying about Annie kissing him on the cheek, a fabricator through and through.

― mike h. (mike h.), Friday, 3 March 2006 17:55 (nineteen years ago)

when annie played toronto i was introduced to her as being from pitchfork and the first thing she said to me was "do you know nick sylvester?"

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:03 (nineteen years ago)

He's everywhere, he's everywhere!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:07 (nineteen years ago)

now i realize she was just yes-laddering me

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:08 (nineteen years ago)

"drop the zero and get with the hero there svetlana or whatever the fuck your name is."

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:08 (nineteen years ago)

"your dj kicks sucked"

― NEGGED (Mark P), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:09 (nineteen years ago)

"dj kicks? I thought you said teenage kicks!"

― mike h. (mike h.), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:11 (nineteen years ago)

"i've got cocaine."

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:13 (nineteen years ago)

"Do you have a sister?"

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:15 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/notion?bid=15

― George 'the Animal' Steele, Friday, 3 March 2006 18:22 (nineteen years ago)

He's got a book deal?

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:24 (nineteen years ago)

Tony Yayo: The Untold Story

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:28 (nineteen years ago)

"He'll still get a book deal"

― dan. (dan.), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:29 (nineteen years ago)

Usually Sylvester writes pretentious, garbled, mumbo-jumbo name-dropping music reviews, and some have speculated that the poor kid just got in over his head.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:29 (nineteen years ago)

All this "confused wunderkind at twentysomething" talk makes him sound like journalism's Conor Oberst.

― Zwan (miccio), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:34 (nineteen years ago)

"The poor kid drank too much red wine and was too hungover to finish the story truthfully."

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:35 (nineteen years ago)

they make him sound brain-damaged.

― scott seward (scott seward), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:36 (nineteen years ago)

People who should be offended by the "give the kid a break!" shit:

1. journalists
2. harvard graduates
3. people who know you're not supposed to lie in articles

― Zwan (miccio), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:37 (nineteen years ago)

"He got in over his head" is just about the lamest thing i have ever read. dude knows how to write.

― scott seward (scott seward), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:37 (nineteen years ago)

"You see, Billy Mumphry was a simple country boy. Some might say a cock-eyed optimist who got caught up in a dirty game of world diplomacy and international intrigue. Had he not been so enthusiastic, he could have averted disaster."

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:38 (nineteen years ago)

"It's a story about love, deception, greed, lust and...unbridled enthusiasm. Well, that's what led to Billy Mumphrey's downfall. "

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:41 (nineteen years ago)

"I'm just a caveman. Your world confuses and frightens me!"

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:42 (nineteen years ago)

2. harvard graduates

Here the offense kind of stems from private "You should be giving ME a break!!!" thoughts.

― Dan (Just Saying...) Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:42 (nineteen years ago)

You know the Yalies are having a laugh at this.

― Zwan (miccio), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:43 (nineteen years ago)

pretentious, garbled, mumbo-jumbo name-dropping

course if he'd not used Lookner's name the transgression might have slipped under the radar.

― erklie (erklie), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:44 (nineteen years ago)

excerpt from the screenplay for Sylvestergate: The True Story

[intertitle]
Village Voice Offices
New York City
March 1, 2006

[fade in with v.o.]
Doug Simmons: It's a tough time for everybody right now. We're just going to take this one step at a time.
Chuck Eddy: Bob and I understand the position he's put us in.
Robert Christgau: It's really unfortunate. The boy showed such promise. So humorous.
Eddy: Smart as a whip.
Simmons: Adorable, too. Okay, let me go call back those Gawker assholes. They just won't quit.
[exit Simmons]
Eddy: Well, you must be pleased, Bob.
Christgau: Chuck, Doug's gone now.
Eddy: Oh, sorry... Dean Christgau.
Christgau: That's better. Now let's get down to fucking business. First thing, any new threats on the radar?
Eddy: Nothing, Dean Christgau.
Christgau: What about this Seward character?
Eddy: Scott's a good guy. He's a big Aerosmith fan.
Christgau: Right. Doesn't sound like anything that's going to excite these New Times fags. Fucking Cohen. Fucking... rat... bastard....
[Christgau gets a faraway look in his eyes]
Christgau: That is a step on which I must fall down, or else o'erleap, for in my way it lies... Stars, hide your fires... let not light see my black and deep desires...
Eddy: Dean Christgau?
Christgau: My apologies! Thinking out loud again. What's going on with Pitchfork?
Eddy: Schreiber's in. He wanted to be a hardass at first, but once he saw the pictures we had of him with the dog, he folded like a little girl. Sylvester's out.
Christgau: Excellent. When we're fucking done with him, Sylvester won't be able to write graffiti. That reminds me, hold on.
[Christgau turns to computer, logs onto ILM, types message]

Hey assholes, looks like your little buddy's career is going down the tubes! Amirite?

-- Dom Passantino (omydom@gmail.com), March 1st, 2006.

Eddy: I still don't understand why you do that.
Christgau: Psyops. I'm trying to send Clover around the bend. Alright, let's check in with the secret weapon, shall we?
[Christgau hits the speakerphone and dials number; phone rings, then -- ]
Tom Smith: What's up, bitch?
Christgau: Hello, Tom. It's Bob and Chuck. You're on speakerphone.
Smith: Oh, hey Dino, hey Chuck.
Christgau: Just following up on a job well done. Chuck read me your posting - it was an impressive takedown. Bravo! Breathtaking! A million thanks.
Smith: No worries, man. Nothing hurts like leaked e-mail.
Christgau: I'm pleased to report things are continuing to develop in a promising direction here.
Smith: Hey, I don't need a degree in Ethics to know he's fucked.
[all laugh]
Christgau: Great, great. How's the album coming?
Smith: Awesome. Last night we took all the grounds off the equipment and recorded our own electrocutions. It was fucking sweet.
Christgau: Well, we appreciate what you've done for us. I think you're going to have a good semester, Tom. I predict an A+ for Editors.
Smith: Uh, don't you mean "from the editors?"
Christgau: No, no, for Editors. Your band, Editors.
Smith: This is Tom Smith. From To Live And Shave In LA? You know, crazy noise dude? Motherfuck a zeitgeist!
[Christgau mutes phone]
Christgau: What the fuck is going on here?
[Eddy shrugs. Christgau unmutes.]
Christgau: Sorry, Tom. You'll have to allow an old man his lapses... just get your CD to Chuck and he'll take care of everything.
Smith: OWWW! FUCK!
Christgau: Hello?
Smith: FUCK! FUCKING CRACK WHORE! SHIT!
Christgau: Are you alright Tom?
Smith: I... I gotta situation here, Dino. I'm gonna have to... FUCK!
[click]
Christgau: He's an odd duck. What's the latest off the wire?
Eddy: The story's selling like hotcakes. Drudge, The Times, Boston Globe, NPR. We're still talking to CNN. The bloggers are going nuts.
[Christgau bangs desk with a fist]
Christgau: Hot damn! Wait until we unload the video of Nick lip-synching to Skrewdriver.
Eddy: Just, uh, one small problem.
Christgau: Well?
Eddy: ILMers are comparing him to Swift and Twain. We could have some kind of grassroots revolution on our hands here. He's like the Che Guevara of satire.
[Christgau rises out of his chair]
Christgau: What did you just say to me? Fuck ILM! Fuck them right in the bloghole! Sylvester's a fucking bug! A cockroach! I'm going to scrape him off my shoe! He cried, Chuck, we made him cry. I've never heard a more... pleasurable sound.
[Christgau removes his glasses and leans forward intently]
Christgau: Look, I've been doing this a long, long time. In some industries, men have to fucking claw and scratch their way to the top of the pile. In this business, I AM the fucking pile. Do you understand? And I'm not about to let a little ass-kissing Harvard entitlement pissant like Sylvester get in the way. I haven't decried the hegemony of white privilege in music for 30 years so he can waltz in here and treat rappers like dancing monkeys for the pleasure of those New Times whores of Babylon! I see the writing on the wall! This is war. "Men rise from one ambition to another; first, they seek to secure themselves against attack, then they attack others." Do you know who said that, Chuck?
Eddy: Umm... Slayer! No, wait… Varg Vikernes?
Christgau: Ah, Chuck. How you amuse me.
Eddy: Is all this really necessary, Dean Christgau? I mean, Nick's just a kid... an adorable kid.
Christgau: Oh, shut up, Chuck.
Eddy: I just think -
Christgau: Shut up, Chuck.
Eddy: - what we're -
Christgau: Shut up, Chuck.
Eddy: - it's -
Christgau: Shut up, Chuck.
Eddy: Okay.
Christgau: Just leave the thinking to me, and everything will be alright.
[long pause]
Christgau: Lunch?
Eddy: Sbarro?
Christgau: Let's do it.
[fade out]

― Edward III (edward iii), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:46 (nineteen years ago)

haha I just looked at Lookner's IMDb page and he wrote an episode of Seinfeld! unfortunately not the Billy Mumphrey one.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:47 (nineteen years ago)

though the idea that Sylvester's downfall was the irresistable urge to namedrop the head writer from "Last Call With Carson Daly" is pretty funny

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:47 (nineteen years ago)

it's funny because it's true

― Zwan (miccio), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:49 (nineteen years ago)

that wasn't an x-post, btw

― Zwan (miccio), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:53 (nineteen years ago)

you know carson daly is pulling all the strings in this escapade

― erklie (erklie), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:54 (nineteen years ago)

I've heard the second act of Sylvestergate ends with him shivving Christgau

― erklie (erklie), Friday, 3 March 2006 18:58 (nineteen years ago)

in the third act we cross the 1,000 post threshold (we can doo it guyz)

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 19:00 (nineteen years ago)

I only hope you guys have even half as much fun when my Russian love child scandal breaks.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 19:07 (nineteen years ago)

did you fabricate a russian love child?

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Friday, 3 March 2006 19:11 (nineteen years ago)

shhhh that was gonna be the surprise!

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 19:12 (nineteen years ago)

"It sucks that Al tricked all those people into giving toys to little Andrei, but I'm keeping him on. A little slow, but the kid's got moxie!" - Jess

― Zwan (miccio), Friday, 3 March 2006 19:13 (nineteen years ago)

a big stack of Pooski magazine isn't a fact-checking dept.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Friday, 3 March 2006 19:13 (nineteen years ago)

oh by the way Jess I need to pitch you a story about my Russian love child's new record (xp)

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 19:13 (nineteen years ago)

the thread that keeps on giving

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Friday, 3 March 2006 19:14 (nineteen years ago)

Lil' Andrei's "трудно быть младенцем 2000"

― Zwan (miccio), Friday, 3 March 2006 19:17 (nineteen years ago)

it IS difficult to be the baby

― ham'ron (dubplatestyle), Friday, 3 March 2006 19:21 (nineteen years ago)

hahahaha

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 19:22 (nineteen years ago)

From: Neil Strauss
To: Conrad Tenwick

Hi Conrad,

I was talking to a writer who was working on a now-controversial
story in this week's Village Voice about The Game. Part of it had
to do with a blogger named Dolly who had read the book and caught a
pickup artist using the lines in a bar. Later that night, she made
out with him nonetheless.

So it made me think: I've received hundreds of emails from guys
fretting that if the book or the community get too well-known, the
game won't work anymore.

So I did some thinking about that.

First of all, everyone knows how to diet, but not everyone does it.
Most of the people who read about these ideas and techniques won't actually put them into action. (Instead, they'll procrastinate by writing letters worrying about too many people finding out about the techniques.)

The fact is, the game will always work. It's just that some of the
wording to the scripts may have to change -- and that's only for
those who use the scripts for "training."

For example:

What's one of the most cliché pickup lines in the world?

The corniest, cheesiest one?

That's right: It's "What's your sign?"

If you walk up to a girl and say, "What's your sign?" she'll know
you're delivering a rehearsed pickup line from some bad 70's TV show.

But guess what? "What's Your Sign" is almost exactly like the
openers and DHVs (demonstrations of higher value) in The Game.

There was a point when "What's your sign" was not a corny way to
start a conversation. It was a non-sexual opener: a means of breaking the ice with strangers without hitting on them. It was a current topic, exciting and interesting. (As Mystery once put it, the best subjects for conversations are relationships and the unknown.) Furthermore, it was a way of demonstrating value. Instead of saying "let's ball" (or whatever the lingo was at the time), you were showing that you were spiritual and had interesting knowledge to offer.

In the parlance of the seduction community, it was a neutral entertaining opener with DHV spikes built in.

And, sure, we all know it's outdated and cheesy. But isn't it
extraordinary how a few minutes into seventy percent of all conversations with women, a discussion of astrology ensues? She'll
probably ask you, "What sign are you?" And if you know a lot about
astrology, it's actually a demonstration of higher value.

(Note to logical, empirical, factual men: Don't say, "I don't
believe in that bullshit." Cynicism and negativity are two traits
to avoid when meeting a woman, even if you think they make you seem
"cool.")

When I was researching the book, I spent hours in Miami with a PUA
named Maddash, who gave me a long tutorial on astrology. He taught
me what all the signs meant, what the twelve houses were all about,
how to identify astrological trends in people's lives, and how to
determine sign compatibility.

Whether or not I believed in astrology was immaterial: I now knew a
lot about it. And it made for great conversation, connection, and
value when I was meeting people.

So the epiphany I had was: "What's your sign" STILL WORKS. It will
always work.

Everything will always work. If people find out about it, all you
have to do is change the way you say it and perhaps when you say it.

For example, if saying, "Hey guys, I need a quick opinion on
something" telegraphs that you're delivering a pickup line because
the women read about it in a magazine, no worries. Just change it
to: "I need some quick help settling a debate." If opinion openers
don't work anymore, save the question for later in the
conversation. I already have three other types of openers I've come
up with that I'm waiting for the right time to release. And if I
can come up with alternatives, I've got a feeling YOU can too.

In the bigger picture, the thing that's important to remember is:
There is no such thing as a pickup line. The language and wording
don't matter. What's important is the intent behind them. The
Jealous Girlfriend opener works not because it's the Jealous
Girlfriend opener, but because it's a way to start an animated
conversation with a group of people without hitting on anyone. So
as long as you can always do that, you've got nothing to worry about.

Knowledge will not change the fundamentals of how women and men are
attracted to each other. To make a bad comparison: Guys who like big
breasts tend to be into women with fake breasts; it doesn't
even matter to them that they're NOT REAL. They still flip the same
attraction switches that natural ones do.

In the world of mating, perception is reality. And attraction, in
the words of David DeAngelo, is not a choice.

Yours,
Neil

PS Coming up next time: C-shaped smiles versus U-shaped smiles
EXPLAINED. Yes, I've been reading your letters!

― Confounded (Confounded), Friday, 3 March 2006 19:41 (nineteen years ago)

FYI: New Times papers are famous for running fake cover stories, sly, subtly done parodies meant to goof on public officials and community discourse. When i was in Phoenix, they did a great bullshit story on how environmetalists were blocking the construction of a new football stadium in Glendale due to the discovery to five extremely rare baby turtles. Everyone else in the local media bought it ... one ididot TV producer even put it into that night's cast without vetting it first.

Now, they usually come clean about the fakes the next week, and they're hardcore about keeping the real stories real ... but at least Nick's got one possible reason to remain on staff there. He's a smart kid with instinctual reporting skills who got carried away ...

― Chris O., Friday, 3 March 2006 20:02 (nineteen years ago)

That last sentence was a parody, yes?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:10 (nineteen years ago)

It's hard to separate the comedy from the tragedy in this thread.

― Edward III (edward iii), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:12 (nineteen years ago)

not so much really.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:12 (nineteen years ago)

I'm not surprised that this happened, and though Nick is at fault, I think that there's enough blame to go around. I can't personally speak for those at the voice, but few in Alt-Weekly seems to appreciate the differences between a music critic/satirist and a journalist, and I would be surprised if Lacy allows Eddy to continue to privilege the former. My own personal experiences with the New Times tells me that music criticism is not held in very high regard, though there are good examples of it in their papers, and that they are constantly trying to marginalize or do away with music criticism all together.

I don't know the history of this story, but I wouldn't be surprised if this didn't reflect growing pains arising from the merger.

Apologies for being so off-topic.

― s>c>, Friday, 3 March 2006 20:15 (nineteen years ago)

> they're hardcore about keeping the real stories real

like that's something you should have to make a special effort to do

"we'll run half real news and half The Onion, you guess which is which"

great idea

― Renard (Renard), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:19 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, WTF.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:23 (nineteen years ago)

I want my money back goddamn it.

― Steve Shasta (Steve Shasta), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:26 (nineteen years ago)

the differences between a music critic/satirist and a journalist

how many "music critic/satirists" are there out there? I didn't realize this was a whole category. i know of a lot of rock crits who'll let their sense humor show in what they write but Nick is one of the only ones who seemed to be operating on the premise that The Onion doesn't do enough indie rock gags.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:29 (nineteen years ago)

speaking of satirists, what's with the weird little script for a skit upthread? this isn't a wu tang album

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:33 (nineteen years ago)

is it?

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:37 (nineteen years ago)

If it is, it's probably Iron Flag.

― Edward III (edward iii), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:38 (nineteen years ago)

it is a bit like someone sewed ILM's asshole shut and kept feeding it and feeding it and feeding it...

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:40 (nineteen years ago)

I kind of chuckled at that skit. I know it was wrong though.

― o. nate (onate), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:47 (nineteen years ago)

Well, SPIN seems to be hiring...

― Mitya (mitya), Friday, 3 March 2006 20:50 (nineteen years ago)

sub custos at best

― vahid (vahid), Friday, 3 March 2006 22:00 (nineteen years ago)

weaksauce

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 22:06 (nineteen years ago)

Cryptic Slaughter is way better. It's all like, "why the slaughter?" "Who knows? It's cryptic." - adam

― Edward III (edward iii), Friday, 3 March 2006 22:11 (nineteen years ago)

this thread actually gets better as it goes on. mostly because the people trying to defend him gave up (seriously--wtf was up with that "THE EDITOR DIDN'T LIKE HIM BECAUSE HE IS A FRAT BOY AND NICK IS SOOPER INDIE HIP" argument?).

Also I am totally using the argument that I was "fatiqued" next time I just make shit up for a paper.

― Jessie the Monster (scarymonsterrr), Friday, 3 March 2006 22:20 (nineteen years ago)

Well, the Associated Press just called me. I apparantly am a worthy source of insight or something.

This shit is getting really fucking huge, man. Despit all the snark on this page, I'm sincerely hoping Nick's OK.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Friday, 3 March 2006 22:25 (nineteen years ago)

Guys who like big
breasts tend to be into women with fake breasts; it doesn't
even matter to them that they're NOT REAL.

This is the first lie I've read on this thread that bothers me.

― Jordan (Jordan), Friday, 3 March 2006 22:27 (nineteen years ago)

Gawker update.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 3 March 2006 22:34 (nineteen years ago)

only in America

― rizzx (Rizz), Friday, 3 March 2006 22:39 (nineteen years ago)

03 Mar 2006
Gawker’s Week in Review: Putting Nick Sylvester on Suicide Watch

this is just foul if they're trying to making a joke in that headline. Regardless of where you stand on the defending him/schadenfreude divide, dude is going through a lot right now.

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Friday, 3 March 2006 23:47 (nineteen years ago)

As far as I know/remember, Robert Wilonsky is the only guy in the entire NT company allowed to be almost exclusively a critic (well, him, and the movie reviewers). Rob Harvilla gets a little leeway in Oakland, too, but that's because he's really fucking good.

― Chris O., Saturday, 4 March 2006 00:07 (nineteen years ago)

gawker in douchebaggery shocker

― maura (maura), Saturday, 4 March 2006 00:19 (nineteen years ago)

That hat is unacceptable.

― Pam R., Saturday, 4 March 2006 00:51 (nineteen years ago)

I thought Wilonsky was a movie reviewer (at least in Dallas, where I knew him as resident smart ass at the Observer and various talk radio call-ins)

― Dominique (dleone), Saturday, 4 March 2006 01:25 (nineteen years ago)

anyone have to link or cut 'n paste of some of his better Lampoon stuff? Used to love Riff Central.

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Saturday, 4 March 2006 01:52 (nineteen years ago)

Hmm.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 4 March 2006 02:05 (nineteen years ago)

The man taking over Michel’s position is Andy Pemberton, who was an integral player in the launch of Blender. Pemberton has laid off all the valued, talented writers on the Spin masthead including pop-culture savant Chuck Klosterman and Mark Spitz. He reportedly told the remaining staff that the magazine is headed in a very drastic direction and that “any music review over 60 words is just too long.”

Soon it will be like NME where any music review over 6 words is just too long.

― Last Of The Famous International Pfunkboys (Kerr), Saturday, 4 March 2006 02:09 (nineteen years ago)

sylvester oughta pitch Gawker Media on a music blog, fer crissakes. lemons, etc

― erklie (erklie), Saturday, 4 March 2006 02:11 (nineteen years ago)

that bringbacksincerity post is one of the most milquetoasty pieces i have ever read

― mark p (Mark P), Saturday, 4 March 2006 02:22 (nineteen years ago)

uh, Spitz is way more qualified for a music gossip blog. and he's definitely looking for work, too (that's one thing Andy Pemberton got right his first day on the job.)

how far away is "sincerity" and "bringing it back" from the hallowed tenets of rockism, anyway?

― don weiner (don weiner), Saturday, 4 March 2006 02:23 (nineteen years ago)

"gawker in douchebaggery shocker"

seconded. I stopped reading that shit when they were all "hey I wonder if the Halloween rapist is at a lunch meeting right now, maybe he'll get a book deal, har har har"

― Renard (Renard), Saturday, 4 March 2006 02:28 (nineteen years ago)

x-post

Wilonsky does music and movies in equal doses, Dominique. Does a lot of the old-man rock coverage, ie, when Lou Reed rolls through town. But rest assured, he's a very, very good music critic (Once upon a time, he was also music editor at the ol New Times LA).

― Chris O., Saturday, 4 March 2006 03:14 (nineteen years ago)

and the knives come out...

its unreal how revolting the majority of this thread and "whats on nick's playist" are. i understand some of you dont like him/his writing, but lets have some fucking class.

something's amiss here. i find it hard to believe a hardvard grad who's been writing for the village voice,pitchfork, etc as long as he has(and who is an associate editor at the voice), would all of a sudden succumb to some sort of "pressure" from higher up.

what he did was wrong, but i dont buy the official narrative as to why.

― cheshire, Saturday, 4 March 2006 05:39 (nineteen years ago)

You're not making any sense. Why would "higher up" pressure him to make shit up? What "official narrative"?

― six mickeys bigmouths and some beef jerky, and a pack of pall malla, Saturday, 4 March 2006 06:01 (nineteen years ago)

sylvester oughta pitch Gawker Media on a music blog, fer crissakes

From what I've heard, they've already got one in development.

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Saturday, 4 March 2006 06:19 (nineteen years ago)

sylvester oughta pitch Gawker Media on a music blog, fer crissakes

From what I've heard, they've already got one in development.

-- Matthew C Perpetua (perpetu...), March 4th, 2006 12:19 AM.

blog under development, heh, that's rich.

― pot shot (zachary v.), Saturday, 4 March 2006 08:08 (nineteen years ago)

mark s = maker upper

(=probbly my favourite nme piece)

the lydon stuff must be on ilm somewhere geoff, though i forget where (haha or what my line was!)

― mark s (mark s), Saturday, 4 March 2006 14:08 (nineteen years ago)

(haha note buried sub-"quote" of g.marcus discussin r.meltzer!)

― mark s (mark s), Saturday, 4 March 2006 14:27 (nineteen years ago)

i guess the Warlocks, are finally getting an eye for an eye... karma's a bitch.

http://pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/w/warlocks/surgery.shtml

http://tuningforkmedia.blogspot.com/2005/09/nick-sylvester-unleashes-fuckin-fury.html

― rakka shan, Saturday, 4 March 2006 14:31 (nineteen years ago)

TS: "a promising career ruined!" VS "a ersatz non-story either way"

in the end the Voice is just another cheezy tabloid these days

WOMEN IN SEEING THROUGH MEN'S LAME SEDUCTION STRATEGIES SHOCKER

― m coleman (lovebug starski), Saturday, 4 March 2006 15:18 (nineteen years ago)

its unreal how revolting the majority of this thread and "whats on nick's playist" are. i understand some of you dont like him/his writing, but lets have some fucking class.

But people don't just dislike Nick's writing. They take great offense to the flippancy he displays, not only toward his subject matter, but for writing in general. He's that one "funny" guy (with the painfully unfunny column) at your local college rag with a press pass and an expense account: not merely a bad comedian, but an honest-to-God asshole who is just begging for a comeuppance.

― Tantrum The Cat (Tantrum The Cat), Saturday, 4 March 2006 15:50 (nineteen years ago)

This thread is totally sarged out.

― ng-unit, Saturday, 4 March 2006 16:05 (nineteen years ago)

i'm still waiting for that jaysonblair.gif atari penis riot CSS attack.

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Saturday, 4 March 2006 16:23 (nineteen years ago)

You might have to keep waiting.

WOMEN IN SEEING THROUGH MEN'S LAME SEDUCTION STRATEGIES SHOCKER

BUT IT WAS GOING TO WORK THIS TIME I MIGHT HAVE ACTUALLY LEFT MY BASEMENT.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 4 March 2006 16:34 (nineteen years ago)

I'm still at a loss as to why the dude would make up not quotes or facts but the circumstances of said quotes and facts. That is, what in that article is actually made up versus inaccurate, other than the setting of that concluding conversation? What it reads like to me (and I didn't/couldn't read that too closely) is what might happen if he turned in a couple of drafts, his editor said it needed a better ending, and out of desperation/deadline frustration he tied it all together with some leftover or unused quotes.

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Saturday, 4 March 2006 20:04 (nineteen years ago)

(my memory of mark s's line on lydon: he has genuinely interesting things to say, but won't/can't say them unless you corner him & challenge him on his natural/lazy inclination to answer questions with provocative good-copy in-character lines)

― Thomas Tallis (Tommy), Saturday, 4 March 2006 20:31 (nineteen years ago)

i've interviewed Lydon and i'd say he's completely aware of that, and does his best to make it as clear to you as he can from the minute you meet him that you'll get nothing out of him any other way. if he's not cornered/challenged he does the same sullen blank faux he can be just as automatic-pilot when he flips into his "genuinely interesting" mode.

In my interview, the most interesting stuff happened after the camera was gone and we just started chatting about Canadians and the Second World War. He brought it up, and he sounded much older than his years, almost as if he were old enough to remember the Blitz himself. Talked about stories he'd heard about the Canadian soldiers in the U.K. vs. the Americans after the war and so on... His basic thrust was, "you canadians are alright, and if it weren't for you we might've lost the war, but the Yanks take all the credit". It was a very weird and ancient uncle-ish thing to hear Johnny Rotten saying. Perhaps it was a very North American epiphany, but I glimpsed in that conversation how differently the war weighed on Brits, and maybe that 1945 wasn't so distant in 1976. Maybe I'm reading more into the brief exchange than I should, but it definitely stuck with me more than any of the interview theatrics.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Saturday, 4 March 2006 20:55 (nineteen years ago)

sorry, that had nothing to do with nick sylvester.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Saturday, 4 March 2006 20:56 (nineteen years ago)

("weird and ancient uncle-ish" = lydon since he wz abt 16!)

― mark s (mark s), Saturday, 4 March 2006 21:09 (nineteen years ago)

And clearly part of his strange Dickensian charm (see also the Great Pop Things take on the Pistols).

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 4 March 2006 21:40 (nineteen years ago)

ha ha.. too true. jack "artful dodger/h.r.pufnstuf" wild just passed away, leaving lydon the last of fagin's boys

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Saturday, 4 March 2006 21:44 (nineteen years ago)

You realize Mark S is truly Fagin and we are all his merry followers.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 4 March 2006 21:46 (nineteen years ago)

it's a hard knock life for us

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Saturday, 4 March 2006 21:50 (nineteen years ago)

wait, that was annie

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Saturday, 4 March 2006 21:50 (nineteen years ago)

& hove

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Saturday, 4 March 2006 21:51 (nineteen years ago)

Same principle. (But who is Daddy Warbucks, the best war profiteer ever?)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 4 March 2006 21:51 (nineteen years ago)

chuck eddy

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Saturday, 4 March 2006 21:52 (nineteen years ago)

Hahahaha!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 4 March 2006 21:56 (nineteen years ago)

sorry, that had nothing to do with nick sylvester.

no, but it's possibly the most interesting thing on this thread. and, gosh, it's something somebody actually SAID too, as opposed to something someone made up ;)

― grimly fiendish (grimlord), Saturday, 4 March 2006 23:01 (nineteen years ago)

you know, the first time i read this thread i thought it said "nick sylvester = makes supper", and i was all set for a photo montage of a hipster microwaving ramen noodles.

― gear (gear), Saturday, 4 March 2006 23:32 (nineteen years ago)

i open this thread like 3-4 times a day, yet don't read any of the posts. i guess it just has its draw.

― Susan Douglas (Susan Douglas), Saturday, 4 March 2006 23:39 (nineteen years ago)

at the wolf eyes show last night, i walked over to the bar right outside the stage, and noticed that the bartender was reading an article about the nick debacle in the new york post!

― geeta (geeta), Sunday, 5 March 2006 00:21 (nineteen years ago)

shut up britishes

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Sunday, 5 March 2006 00:26 (nineteen years ago)

you know, the first time i read this thread i thought it said "nick sylvester = makes supper", and i was all set for a photo montage of a hipster microwaving ramen noodles.

And if Nick spilled his ramen, he could've made a flash animation of him using bounty = the quicker picker-upper.

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Sunday, 5 March 2006 00:32 (nineteen years ago)

x-post Here's where I once again relate the story of interviewing John Lydon and having him hang up on me after about a minute and a half when I asked about his (to my mind, timely) old Afrika Bambaataa collaboration rather than the latest Sex Pistols reunion. Maybe he wasn't in the mood to be cornered/challenged that day?

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Sunday, 5 March 2006 01:48 (nineteen years ago)

are you guys trotting out the old Lydon chestnuts in a bid to be the next writers of Riff Raff?

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Sunday, 5 March 2006 03:03 (nineteen years ago)

Peanut butter jelly time?

― jimnaseum (jimnaseum), Sunday, 5 March 2006 04:30 (nineteen years ago)

900

― o -- (eman), Sunday, 5 March 2006 06:20 (nineteen years ago)

901!

― Jimmy Mod: The Prettiest Flower In The Pond (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Sunday, 5 March 2006 06:24 (nineteen years ago)

911.

never forget.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Sunday, 5 March 2006 06:41 (nineteen years ago)

4:20

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Sunday, 5 March 2006 06:43 (nineteen years ago)

And if Nick spilled his ramen, he could've made a flash animation of him using bounty = the quicker picker-upper.

sadly, there is no amount of paper towels that could clear up this kind of mess.

― maria tessa sciarrino (theoreticalgirl), Sunday, 5 March 2006 07:28 (nineteen years ago)

905

― o -- (eman), Sunday, 5 March 2006 08:10 (nineteen years ago)

life is a pigsty

― noizem duke (noize duke), Sunday, 5 March 2006 09:04 (nineteen years ago)

so, what's the latest?

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Monday, 6 March 2006 16:01 (nineteen years ago)

GET ONE GAWKER

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Monday, 6 March 2006 16:30 (nineteen years ago)

haha ok this radar article on the game is actually pretty good.

http://www.radosh.net/images/PUA.jpg

i mean, maxim-level stuff but still.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 6 March 2006 17:32 (nineteen years ago)

I liked the part about Menudo.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Monday, 6 March 2006 18:30 (nineteen years ago)

wow that was actually funny

― ,,,,,,,,,,,,, Monday, 6 March 2006 20:06 (nineteen years ago)

that article explains a lot about momus.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 6 March 2006 20:43 (nineteen years ago)

Dear Pitchfork:

When are you going to post a news story about this whole thing, explaining why Nick is no longer on your masthead? Or will he simply never be spoken of again, as though he never was a key member of your staff?

"What's up with you and Nick S man?/Y'all okay man?"

Yours Truly,
Indiefux4Life

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Monday, 6 March 2006 21:01 (nineteen years ago)

C'mon, dude, we've always been at war with Eurasia.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 6 March 2006 21:02 (nineteen years ago)

The Gawker coverage of this has gone way beyond neccesary. They need to move on.

― A. Poster, Monday, 6 March 2006 21:21 (nineteen years ago)

I have not read this thread, as I really do enjoy my free time, but someone directed me to this. Some quick points:

-Nick is a really great person (in person), and this is what's most important.

-My "case" is in NO WAY similar to Nick's. For one, and most importantly, I did not make anything up. I made a typo when typing a year (1999) at 3am, which my "editor" at Pitchfork did not pick up.

-In fact, my editor of the Radiohead story referenced in that PFM piece, JC at Stop Smiling, completely backs up my story as reflected in the Beastie Boys review. Email him if you actually give a shit.

-Also, it was a RECORD REVIEW, not front page journalism.

-Finally, Ryan has no spine whatsoever, and posted that retracted under bluffed legal pressure. Notice how I didn't write it? I was willing to call Steve Martin's bluff. Ryan was protecting his baby, and he no lawyer/legal experience and was not.

- PS, Steve Martin is actually an asshole. He wrote Chunklet in anger over not making their asshole list. He loves it when you call him that. Try it sometime.

Anyway, enjoy your board.

― brent_D, Monday, 6 March 2006 23:35 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.wiscasset.k12.me.us/wms/Graphics/F00014D7F/wizard

― Steve Shasta (Steve Shasta), Monday, 6 March 2006 23:37 (nineteen years ago)

oh shit dude, i thought yr. article was satire.

now it's not funny anymore.

or it's funny in a whole difft way.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 6 March 2006 23:40 (nineteen years ago)

does the 'r' stand for robot?

― W i l l (common_person), Monday, 6 March 2006 23:45 (nineteen years ago)

whether or not it was satire, the beasties review was funny in the same way.

― Zwan (miccio), Monday, 6 March 2006 23:48 (nineteen years ago)

no. now it's funny because it wasn't!

if i never thought it wasn't true then i probably would never have found it funny.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 6 March 2006 23:49 (nineteen years ago)

it's funny because i changed my mind, DO YOU SEE.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 6 March 2006 23:49 (nineteen years ago)

I have not read this thread, as I really do enjoy my free time, but someone directed me to this. Some quick points:

OK, shoot.

-Nick is a really great person (in person), and this is what's most important.

That's really cool. I'm glad that being a good person doesn't mean you're exempt from rules.

-My "case" is in NO WAY similar to Nick's. For one, and most importantly, I did not make anything up. I made a typo when typing a year (1999) at 3am, which my "editor" at Pitchfork did not pick up.

Yeah, we figured. Are you one of those cats who writes at wierd hours too? Fuck it's tough being an artist.

-In fact, my editor of the Radiohead story referenced in that PFM piece, JC at Stop Smiling, completely backs up my story as reflected in the Beastie Boys review. Email him if you actually give a shit.

We don't, but thanks for offering that.

-Also, it was a RECORD REVIEW, not front page journalism.

I have this tiny razor I use to split hairs. But we all appreciate that you don't consider yourself a journalist, because we don't either.

Yes, it's Ryan who sold out.

- PS, Steve Martin is actually an asshole. He wrote Chunklet in anger over not making their asshole list. He loves it when you call him that. Try it sometime.

WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING.

Anyway, enjoy your board.

Word.

― Jimmy Mod: The Prettiest Flower In The Pond (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Monday, 6 March 2006 23:52 (nineteen years ago)

I was basically laughing at the idea of somebody writing it. It's verity doesn't alter that.

― Zwan (miccio), Monday, 6 March 2006 23:52 (nineteen years ago)

brent d is a funny dood. i still like this one:

http://pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/s/sonic-youth/nyc-ghosts-and-flowers.shtml

― scott seward (scott seward), Monday, 6 March 2006 23:55 (nineteen years ago)

does he still write anywhere? hey, brent d. do you still write anywhere? (i don't get out much)

― scott seward (scott seward), Monday, 6 March 2006 23:56 (nineteen years ago)

The plot thickens. Somewhat.

― Brian O'Neill (NYCNative), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 00:16 (nineteen years ago)

haha "plot"

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 00:35 (nineteen years ago)

the plot for a 1000 post thread, obv.

― don weiner (don weiner), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 02:43 (nineteen years ago)

929

― o -- (eman), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 02:48 (nineteen years ago)

Wow, Sylvester's almost a year younger than I am and already has his first major media scandal. I feel so ashamed.

― Erick Dampier is better than Shaq (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 03:02 (nineteen years ago)

Save it until you're old enough to appreciate the moment, dood

― Jimmy Mod: The Prettiest Flower In The Pond (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 04:00 (nineteen years ago)

getting wasted is wasted on the young.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 15:29 (nineteen years ago)

GET THEE TO A BUMPER STICKER MANUFACTURER

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 15:40 (nineteen years ago)

"it's hard out here for a pimp"

(i have no clue what i mean by that)

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 16:57 (nineteen years ago)

here's another log to get this fire to 1,000 posts.

U R AWL BICHES

― Nick Sylvester, Tuesday, 7 March 2006 23:42 (nineteen years ago)

just post as yourself, midi.

― mark p (Mark P), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 23:52 (nineteen years ago)

no, it's funnier that way

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Tuesday, 7 March 2006 23:56 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.mr-atari.com/afbeeldingen/atariforceENboeken/wargames.jpg

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 00:01 (nineteen years ago)

I don't know Lookner at all, and I don't know if the article portrayed him in a negative light or not. However that letter to the editor sure makes him look like a whiney bitch, especially if he does know Sylvester as the letter claims.

(Please note that I am not disputing that it is perfectly within his right to be a whiney bitch.)

― Brian O'Neill (NYCNative), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 01:54 (nineteen years ago)

Gawker's just as much a punk as anyone in this situation. Gawker is a fan of that really hot tiny chick who can't write for shit but who got notoriety by being in those naked photos from Bronques aka BLACK PAPA SMURFs site. Nothing but a hoser party all around it seems.

― LC, Wednesday, 8 March 2006 02:07 (nineteen years ago)

Gawker is a fan of that really hot tiny chick who can't write for shit but who got notoriety by being in those naked photos

I'll bet you can get this puppy to P1K if you post pix...

― Brian O'Neill (NYCNative), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 02:17 (nineteen years ago)

Brent, I can't believe you're still carrying this shit around, trying to hang it on Ryan. First of all, I wrote that retraction, and I urged Ryan to run it, because Steve had you, and Pitchfork, nailed.

The situations are the same - Martin called you out the same way Lookner did Nick. You're right to point out that you didn't make anything up and Nick did (and I maintain Nick's aggrandizement is totally inconsequential and should have been taken care of with an apologetic edit, but Lookner had to flex his muscle with the "I'm gonna burn you down!!" bullshit). The problem in your case with the Beastie review is that, although you didn't make anything up - I believed everything you wrote in that review - neither did you have any corroborating evidence or witnesses to support your characterization of Steve Martin. You openly stated the guy lied to you in a business transaction and did not deliver on promises he made, when according to Steve he never even dealt with you, it was all through an assistant.

"JC at my website has my back" is not going to cut it when you put forward a step-by-step condemnation of a guy's business ethics and credibility on one of the most important publications in his industry. You didn't realize how serious it played, you didn't treat it with the scrutiny required: you fucked up, you got called out. Admit it, revel in it - I fuck up constantly, it keeps my blood going. Steve is an asshole for doing that to you, and to Pitchfork, but he was in the right.

Badmouthing Ryan over it, trying to look tough ("bluffed legal pressure") when you were playing with Ryan's reputation, career and money the whole time? You want to blame someone, blame me: I was the one on the phone at 9:00AM - at my day job - telling Ryan to back down after talking it over with a lawyer friend of mine. Ryan went to all the bother to massage your wounded pride after the fact, saying "Yeah we would've won, Brent's right" or whatever, and you still call him spineless? That's so out of line it's untrue.

Maybe you'd show more humility if Steve had sued you personally for libel. He would have won.

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 17:58 (nineteen years ago)

wow

― cutty (mcutt), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 18:03 (nineteen years ago)

1K = no sweat

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 18:06 (nineteen years ago)

seriously

― Eppy (Eppy), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 18:07 (nineteen years ago)

in other web scandals, i hear this kid doesn't even really like pokemon:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIYmVraRsv0&search=POKEMON%20KID

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 18:13 (nineteen years ago)

ouch. ott brings the smackdown.

― p-rez, Wednesday, 8 March 2006 18:33 (nineteen years ago)

Ott on some Calzaghe ish with that post!

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 18:35 (nineteen years ago)

pwn

― Jimmy Mod: The Prettiest Flower In The Pond (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 19:01 (nineteen years ago)

Grandsonned.

― jimnaseum (jimnaseum), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 19:03 (nineteen years ago)

This thread has been locked by an administrator because that post can't really be topped

― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 19:04 (nineteen years ago)

I guess I spoke too soon.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 19:06 (nineteen years ago)

"when you put forward a step-by-step condemnation of a guy's business ethics and credibility on one of the most important publications in his industry. You didn't realize how serious it played, you didn't treat it with the scrutiny required: you fucked up, you got called out"

do the publications that hire really young and green journalists teach them anything about the rules of journalism and covering their asses and on and on ...aka the basics?, b/c obviously for alot of these kids its not a common sense thing. i'm not just sticking up for the loser, it just seems like if you're gonna hire these kids and exploit their freshness, you should have an editor who's really on top of things and maybe give your writers some sort of journalism 101 class.

― Susan Douglas (Susan Douglas), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 19:06 (nineteen years ago)

Susan— Even if they'd just teach them that THEY WILL GET CAUGHT.

― js (honestengine), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 19:12 (nineteen years ago)

JC G of Stop Smiling borrowed a Mouse on Mars album from me like ten years ago and never gave it back.

― the watchtower, Wednesday, 8 March 2006 19:14 (nineteen years ago)

THE PLOT THICKENS

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 19:22 (nineteen years ago)

it just seems like if you're gonna hire these kids and exploit their freshness, you should have an editor who's really on top of things and maybe give your writers some sort of journalism 101 class.

Or they can hire enthusiastic young folks who actually went to journalism school.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 19:36 (nineteen years ago)

beefaroni

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 19:37 (nineteen years ago)

except they want smart precocious kids who are really excited b/c they've maybe never had a voice before so they can jack off, who have no concept of history so they can be obsessed with trends of the last 2 years, and give us all the details of useless social trends and bullshtit. and this does not mesh with the rest of journalism - industry with long history, VERY sober serious side, strict rules. if i were pitchfork i'd be worried and feel some responsiblity. also village voice and the other publications that exploit the freshness/young thing.

― Susan Douglas (Susan Douglas), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 19:43 (nineteen years ago)

this "won't somebody please think about the children" line of argument is nauseating. give young writers some credit for knowing right from wrong. it is common sense.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 20:10 (nineteen years ago)

otm.

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 20:11 (nineteen years ago)

not to mention that poor little lost nick sylvester is a harvard grad with a couple of years of clippings under his belt, not a mewling infant

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 20:14 (nineteen years ago)

I'm getting tired of the j-school suggestions. I know a lot of writers who didn't go to j-school (myself included) who know what the hell they're doing. J-school doesn't make someone a writer.

― Je4nne Æ’urÂ¥ (Je4nne Fury), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 20:15 (nineteen years ago)

(I know that's not what you were saying per se, Whiney. I'm just spouting off.)

― Je4nne Æ’urÂ¥ (Je4nne Fury), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 20:17 (nineteen years ago)

there are some people on this board who are just CONSTANTLY wrong.

multiple xposts

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 20:18 (nineteen years ago)

oh yeah, clearly nobody with a j-school background writes for pitchfork

― marc h. (marc h.), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 20:27 (nineteen years ago)

i'm not hoping they should hire only journ. school kids either. alos, i like pitchfork's writers.

― Susan Douglas (Susan Douglas), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 20:34 (nineteen years ago)

are you custos's mom?

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 20:35 (nineteen years ago)

ran across another Nick review and enjoyed it (thanks for the Daft Club reminder upthread!):
http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/l/love-is-all/nine-times-that-same-song.shtml

― Paul (scifisoul), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 20:36 (nineteen years ago)

Weezer: "Beverly Hills"
genre: modern rock

The only thing worse than this song's "ironic" 1-4-5, "ironic" lyrics, and "ironic" guitar solo are the people who genuinely like it all. You know the type-- he threw the party in Lowell House last week that had "Laid" and "Instant Pleasure" and "You Shook Me All Night Long" and "TNT" and "Baba O'Riley" on his Winamp playlist. He hung "Must Be 21 to Drink" signs on the walls between his Belushi poster and the inkjet printout of Carmen Electra wearing suspenders. He made a point of telling everyone he bought Smirnoff Ice "for the ladies." He wears flip-flops year-round, studies government, and at last count, has five different nicknames for his dick.

Actually I thought of one more thing worse than this song: all the L.A. kids smart enough to get Cuomo's joke, but still lame enough to quote the song's chorus in their AIM profiles when they really miss their big fucking houses and Harvard-Westlake proms and "animal-style" slabs of cowshit-- the world's most overrated sandwiches in the world's most overrated city. For Chrissake, somebody give Cuomo a star so we can forget about him again. [Nick Sylvester]

― T/S: Pinks/Oki Dog/Scoobys/Tail o' the Pup (Bent Over at the Arclight), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 20:40 (nineteen years ago)

thk you for the illustration.

― Susan Douglas (Susan Douglas), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 21:07 (nineteen years ago)

steely dan rules, you bastard. xxxxpost to bd

― gear (gear), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 21:19 (nineteen years ago)

Susan, now lash out at Stylus

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 21:26 (nineteen years ago)

i like you shook me all night long and tnt. a lot.

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 21:38 (nineteen years ago)

why is it bad to like good songs???

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 21:39 (nineteen years ago)

This thread needs to sink like the heavy turd it is real soon now.

― fandango (fandango), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 21:58 (nineteen years ago)

But there's the Lookner/Lucien conundrum.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 22:52 (nineteen years ago)

i have been wondering about that from the beginning.

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 22:58 (nineteen years ago)

through the looking glass!

― erklie (erklie), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 23:07 (nineteen years ago)

Wow...it just gets better and better! They're both still employed for what now?

― Candicissima (candicissima), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 23:41 (nineteen years ago)

Style and a certain inelucatable panache.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 23:43 (nineteen years ago)

has there ever been a cologne named "Panache"?

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 23:56 (nineteen years ago)

We need to get on that.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 8 March 2006 23:59 (nineteen years ago)

Words you have never heared spoken...

inelucatable

― Onimo (GerryNemo), Thursday, 9 March 2006 00:04 (nineteen years ago)

You haven't hung around me often enough. (We must correct that on a future visit of mine.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 9 March 2006 00:45 (nineteen years ago)

way back on the thread now but those letters really pissed me off. not a single one attacked the journalistic wrongness of the voice pulling the web article. i bet that they got some letters along those lines too.

and haha for "balance" to pick a few "who cares if he lied" letters? ffs.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 9 March 2006 00:59 (nineteen years ago)

the journalistic wrongness of the voice pulling the web article

please elaborate.

― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 9 March 2006 01:55 (nineteen years ago)

compare to, e.g. the 'monkeyfishing' slate article i linked above.

or compare to if the ny times pulled judith miller's cooked articles on iraq from its online archive or etc.

the fact that they published wrong stuff is part of their journalistic and factual record and removing the "evidence" of it is dodging accountability.

also c.f. the gawker's point about one mr. "lucien"

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 9 March 2006 02:24 (nineteen years ago)

yeah that lucien thing is really damning for the whole paper.

― erklie (erklie), Thursday, 9 March 2006 02:30 (nineteen years ago)

I don't know about "journalistic wrongness," but I don't dig the pulling of the article. They are trying to unring a bell. It's as silly as if these media outlets tried to erase history (albeit on a much smaller scale, fortunately for Nick):

http://preemptivekarma.com/truman.jpg

http://steveterrell.blogspot.com/NYPOST.jpg

It can be kept on the website with the appropriate disclaimers and links to the appropriate responses by all parties.

― Brian O'Neill (NYCNative), Thursday, 9 March 2006 02:34 (nineteen years ago)

992

― blunt (blunt), Thursday, 9 March 2006 02:36 (nineteen years ago)

I don't see any journalistic wrongness in pulling that. At all.

Also, media outlets all know that something like that is not disappearing. I'm not sure that legal threats regarding the veracity of the reporting would inspire the Voice to pull it off the site in order to make an honest effort to stop distribution.

― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 9 March 2006 02:51 (nineteen years ago)

"the letter that presumably, like Janet Cooke’s Pulitzer and Adam Penenberg’s reporting on Jukt Micronics, set in motion Sylvester’s unmasking"

Gawker in continued eyeball-gouging agony shocka.

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Thursday, 9 March 2006 02:55 (nineteen years ago)

6 left

― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 9 March 2006 03:12 (nineteen years ago)

Re: the Voice's Letters... Respected screenwriter in not-knowing-the-difference-between-"who"-and-"whom" shocker!

― Paul in Santa Cruz (Paul in Santa Cruz), Thursday, 9 March 2006 03:57 (nineteen years ago)

(Maybe "respected" is the wrong word.)

― Paul in Santa Cruz (Paul in Santa Cruz), Thursday, 9 March 2006 03:59 (nineteen years ago)

Weren't some posts deleted from this thread? The thread count was well above 900 at one point (to my amazement, and as noted in some of the posts upthread); currently it's in the 800s again.

― Paul in Santa Cruz (Paul in Santa Cruz), Thursday, 9 March 2006 04:01 (nineteen years ago)

it's been over a week, "new answers" constitutes the last seven days' worth

― mark p (Mark P), Thursday, 9 March 2006 04:12 (nineteen years ago)

Rolling 2006 Nick Sylvester Thread

― o -- (eman), Thursday, 9 March 2006 04:12 (nineteen years ago)

xpost Okay, that makes sense...

― Paul in Santa Cruz (Paul in Santa Cruz), Thursday, 9 March 2006 04:13 (nineteen years ago)

Rolling 2006 Nick Sylvester Thread

-- o -- (...), March 9th, 2006.

Post 1000

― deeej...., Thursday, 9 March 2006 04:17 (nineteen years ago)

Posts made arguing the number of posts do not count towards the final score.

― Jimmy Mod: The Prettiest Flower In The Pond (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Thursday, 9 March 2006 04:27 (nineteen years ago)

they do if u use the cheat code!

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 9 March 2006 04:29 (nineteen years ago)

(for details on the cheat code, email nick)

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 9 March 2006 04:29 (nineteen years ago)

happy 1K folks

http://www.arrakeen.ch/usacan/062%20%20champagne%20tower.jpg

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Thursday, 9 March 2006 04:39 (nineteen years ago)

btw i have now officially lost interest
(i know, a bit late)

― midi sanskrit (sanskrit), Thursday, 9 March 2006 04:44 (nineteen years ago)

Cheat code is up up down down left right left right b a start.

― js (honestengine), Thursday, 9 March 2006 05:20 (nineteen years ago)

I still love this one:

http://pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/a/audioslave/out-of-exile.shtml

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Thursday, 9 March 2006 12:50 (nineteen years ago)

I was hoping this would get locked at 999

― Chuck Woolery, Thursday, 9 March 2006 16:32 (nineteen years ago)

yeah, I have to admit that's the one time where Sylvester brings the funny and I can't hate. I think of it every time I hear an Audioslave song now.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Thursday, 9 March 2006 17:14 (nineteen years ago)

more mysteries explained: http://www.gawker.com/news/nick-sylvester/sylvestergate-once-more-into-the-final-scene-159421.php

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:21 (nineteen years ago)

i have a feeling everybody would stop talking about this if they'd just fire him already.

― ant@work, Thursday, 9 March 2006 20:32 (nineteen years ago)

Will keep a lookout for him tonight on CNN.
-- Edward III (ehonaue...), March 2nd, 2006 1:53 PM.

Apologies in advance to anyone stricken with apoplexy whenever this thread surfaces, but Reliable Sources, CNN's show on news media, ran a short piece on Sylvester this morning. The story started out "The Village Voice must be a very tolerant place to work..." and continued by saying the paper "merely suspended" Sylvester. Also mentioned he was forced to resign from Pitchfork.

Whatever the potential effects on Sylvester's career, the situation could end up being more damaging for the Voice in the long run. I have to imagine this is more ammunition for New Times to steamroller over the place.

New cover story next week: Christgau's Consumer Guide to Spring Fashion.

― Edward III (edward iii), Sunday, 12 March 2006 18:22 (nineteen years ago)

Hooboy.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 12 March 2006 18:33 (nineteen years ago)

Well, personally I'd read a Christgau's Comsumer Guide no matter what they were about (see his mid-seventies ones on beer and yogurt), but...

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Sunday, 12 March 2006 18:53 (nineteen years ago)

top of gawker, as of 5:54 EST, sez Doug Simmons has been shitcanned by NT boss Mike lacey…our beloved Nick is still onboard…

http://www.gawker.com/

― veronica moser (veronica moser), Monday, 13 March 2006 22:55 (nineteen years ago)

This is really bringing "an understanding of the boundaries of journalism" to everyone now.

― blunt (blunt), Monday, 13 March 2006 23:13 (nineteen years ago)

Dolly will surely love to hear this news.

― Yoo Doo Nut (donut), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 00:28 (nineteen years ago)

http://static.flickr.com/19/22935964_a78556bf06.jpg

"So!... (pause).... Heard any good jokes lately??"

― Yoo Doo Nut (donut), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 00:33 (nineteen years ago)

OK, the Voice has officially gone the way of Colonel Kurtz:
http://villagevoice.com/news/0611,news,72525,2.html

The only surprise is that that piece of paper is not smeared with blood and feces.

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:04 (nineteen years ago)

This is the end
Beautiful friend
This is the end
My only friend, the end

― gritty sanskrit (sanskrit), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:08 (nineteen years ago)

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:12 (nineteen years ago)

I am truly amazed.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:15 (nineteen years ago)

they so crazy.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:17 (nineteen years ago)

apparently they fired the napkin proofreaders, too.

― erklie (erklie), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:20 (nineteen years ago)

hahaha

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:23 (nineteen years ago)

I'm guessing Norman Mailer doesn't give a shit about any or this, right?

― gritty sanskrit (sanskrit), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:25 (nineteen years ago)

Can someone translate the napkin plz? I can tell whether to be wildly outraged or sympathetic until I can clearly read a note on a napkin. Anonymous napkin.

NORMAN READS TEH NYPRESS NOW

― Suzy Creemcheese (SuzyCreemcheese), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:28 (nineteen years ago)

arizona crony?

― arizona crony (gcannon), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:29 (nineteen years ago)

DOUG SIMMONS IS NO LONGER ACTING EDITOR. WARD HARKAVY, LONG TIME SENIOR EDITOR, AND A RISIBLE CRONY / ALEISTER CROWLEY, IS NOW UTENSIL EDITOR. CALL US TOMORROW AND OH MY GOD THE VOICES THE VOICES

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:35 (nineteen years ago)

that note is suspiciously Riff Raff-esque.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:38 (nineteen years ago)

i read it as "...and Arizona Crony..."

― erklie (erklie), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 02:39 (nineteen years ago)

Mike Lacey is a breathtakingly maverick guy, but that thing with the napkin is nuts even for him. I wonder if he intends it to be used as toilet paper ... for someone who one told an art director that he "wipes his ass with design elements," it wouldn't surprise me.

― Chris O., Tuesday, 14 March 2006 14:44 (nineteen years ago)

That's sort of the single craziest thing I've ever seen.

― Eppy (Eppy), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 15:13 (nineteen years ago)

And to think there were concerns over feelings being hurt upthread.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 15:16 (nineteen years ago)

It's sort of ironic that they're acting so much like a blog--announcing a vacancy for editor-in-chief on their letters page, making a major announcement in a "wacky" way, etc.

― Eppy (Eppy), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 15:20 (nineteen years ago)

Perhaps it's a sign that Nick's about to get the job.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 15:21 (nineteen years ago)

Maybe the whole thing's just one big Riff Raff prank. Brr.

― Eppy (Eppy), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 15:23 (nineteen years ago)

Nyurgh.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 15:23 (nineteen years ago)

I can't comprehend why they'd make an announcement like that in such a way. Maybe someone hacked in?

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 16:05 (nineteen years ago)

yeah that would be a great prank, malign the Voice's reputation so the next time it dispenses with the celebrity dj cover fluff pieces and does an expose on cop/mayoral staff corruption or an indictment of the Bush administation, no one takes it seriously.

― gritty sanskrit (sanskrit), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 16:06 (nineteen years ago)

I can't comprehend why they'd make an announcement like that in such a way. Maybe someone hacked in?

this napkin is too good to lose, so.. just in case:
http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/544/napkin0xz.jpg

― gritty sanskrit (sanskrit), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 16:13 (nineteen years ago)

Maybe the whole thing's just one big Riff Raff prank.

You see, you're making a joke there. But....

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 16:23 (nineteen years ago)

Simmons name has not been deleted from the masthead link yet.

― curmudgeon (DC Steve), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 16:25 (nineteen years ago)

Actually (puts on tinfoil hat), assume for a second that Simmons was a goner before the scandal and Sylvester was the new designated star writer. The whole thing becomes kind of perfect, no?

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 16:26 (nineteen years ago)

I'm pretty sure the note actually does say "Arizona Crony". (Arizona is where Times New Media is based out of)

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 17:08 (nineteen years ago)

the napkin has to be a hack, no? it's not displayed on the main "news" page.

― philip sherburne (philip sherburne), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 17:14 (nineteen years ago)

it's on the homepage tho -- as an "editor's note." the orig. retraction wasn't on the news page either.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 17:18 (nineteen years ago)

The plot thickens.

― Brian O'Neill (NYCNative), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 17:23 (nineteen years ago)

from NY post:

BOSS AT VOICE IS
AXED FOR LAX FACTS
By KEITH J. KELLY

The Village Voice has booted Managing Editor Doug Simmons one week after the cover story "Do You Want to Kiss Me" exploded in his face because the writer, Nick Sylvester, confessed he had fabricated the ending.

At the time, Simmons had suspended Sylvester but stopped short of axing him. "It would break my heart to fire him," Simmons told The Post.

Michael Lacey, the new editorial director of the Village Voice Media, apparently had no such concerns. He fired Simmons yesterday, shortly after meeting with senior editor Ward Harkavy and making him the acting editor.

Even before the Sylvester affair, many thought Simmons was a long shot to get the job on a permanent basis. Longtime Voice Editor-in-Chief Don Forst said in early December he planned to resign but stayed on board until the merger with New Times was completed in late January, and Simmons took over on an interim basis.

But when the new owners decided to run a help-wanted ad in the Voice, looking for a chief editor, Lacey had Simmons read it aloud to the staff. "The staff was horrified," said one source. "People felt very badly for him. It wasn't that he was loved by the staff, but it was a devil-that-you-know kind of situation."

Now insiders are scared and uncertain. Speculation is now turning on who will get the nod as the editor-in-chief. David Carr, a media columnist at the New York Times and former editor-in-chief of the Washington City Paper, had been approached by Lacey, but talks did not advance.

"I know him [Lacey] and we had a nice conversation about the editorial opportunity at the Village Voice, but it didn't involve me editing the paper," said Carr yesterday.

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 17:47 (nineteen years ago)

Lacey and Co. seem to get intense pleasure out of firing people. The whole thing is fucked up.

― Chris O., Tuesday, 14 March 2006 18:14 (nineteen years ago)

Some people are like that, it's weird. Weirder that they wouldn't take the opportunity to go ahead and axe NS, too, though.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 18:20 (nineteen years ago)

But when the new owners decided to run a help-wanted ad in the Voice, looking for a chief editor, Lacey had Simmons read it aloud to the staff.

that is fucked.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 18:23 (nineteen years ago)

Pop culture writers in behaving like teenage clique shock horror.

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 18:25 (nineteen years ago)

what "pop culture writers"?

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:03 (nineteen years ago)

why would anyone actually read that aloud when told to? grow some balls, simms.

― gear (gear), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:05 (nineteen years ago)

yeah i was wondering that too... what would they have done, fired him?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:05 (nineteen years ago)

fritz otm. more like "media conglomerate corporate types acting like petty dictators shock horror"

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:06 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, it's "the man" strongo. Good God...

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:07 (nineteen years ago)

No it's that old punk rock spirit you see.

― Eppy (Eppy), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:07 (nineteen years ago)

yeah strongo, it's not actually the owners who made him do it, it's the shadowy "pop culture writers" who are REALLY pulling the strings!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:09 (nineteen years ago)

You mean

"Pop culture writers in behaving like teenage clique shock horror SLAY".

― Should've Never Give Jimmy Mod Money (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:12 (nineteen years ago)

so doug simmons is made to read the ad to the staff and then this toilet paper picture shows up on the website. anyone gonna defend the voice now?

― gear (gear), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:15 (nineteen years ago)

More like "Drunk Dad scolds and humiliates son at a table full of uncles and aunts on Thanksgiving" shocker. It's pathetic, really.

― Chris O., Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:18 (nineteen years ago)

how could i have been so blind slocki!!

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:24 (nineteen years ago)

it's straight out of oliver stone

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:24 (nineteen years ago)

"pop culture writer" michael lacey:
http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/news/media/features/villagevoice051107_1_175.jpg

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:39 (nineteen years ago)

one also has to wonder how much say Lacey has as opposed to the new mgt, etc.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:42 (nineteen years ago)

Dibs on "Arizona Crony" as an EP title.

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:46 (nineteen years ago)

Behind the curve -- DJ Arizona Crony just released his mash-up of Public Enemy and the Strokes from his Williamsburg 'think tank.'

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:50 (nineteen years ago)

Is This It Takes A Nation Of Millions To Hold Us Back

― Fritz Wollner (Fritz), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:57 (nineteen years ago)

Be on the lookout for the debut mixtape CDR download NapkinAttack

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 19:58 (nineteen years ago)

How are you all forgetting the internet sensation "The New Times Likes Napkins."

― Eppy (Eppy), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 20:13 (nineteen years ago)

"DJ Arizona Crony is destined for greatness. 4 stars." - Steve Lucien

― erklie (erklie), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 20:42 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--villagevoiceedito0314mar14,0,1166040.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork

Sylvester returns in two weeks.

― Scrof Scrofula, Tuesday, 14 March 2006 20:52 (nineteen years ago)

But is it a sanitary napkin? :-)

― Chris O., Tuesday, 14 March 2006 20:53 (nineteen years ago)

awkward!

― erklie (erklie), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 21:00 (nineteen years ago)

___P>

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 21:00 (nineteen years ago)

"Doug Simmons is no longer acting editor," the napkin said.
Towelie ?

― blunt (blunt), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 21:51 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.gothamist.com/images/2003_10_towelie.jpg

Wanna get fired?

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 22:05 (nineteen years ago)

one also has to wonder how much say Lacey has as opposed to the new mgt, etc.

Lacey IS the new mgmt.

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 23:20 (nineteen years ago)

Yup.

― Chris O., Wednesday, 15 March 2006 00:01 (nineteen years ago)

OK, here's what we've got: New Time Media, in conjunction with the saucer people -- under the supervision of the reverse vampires -- forced Sylvester to run a story with fabricated quotes in a fiendish plot to eliminate Simmons.

We're through the looking glass, here, people...

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Wednesday, 15 March 2006 00:04 (nineteen years ago)

the riff raff comments box is gonna be a laff riot.

"OMG you gotta be shitting me, Nick! Did you make this up?"

― ant@work.com, Wednesday, 15 March 2006 00:12 (nineteen years ago)

nick (or someone) has apparently been studiously censoring the box.

anyway there should totally be a genre called nü-management.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Wednesday, 15 March 2006 03:41 (nineteen years ago)

two weeks pass...

Fin, apparently.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 31 March 2006 20:51 (nineteen years ago)

So Mr. Sylvester ended up losing not one but two jobs over this? Poor guy. Unemployment is a pretty harsh state, y'know.

― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Saturday, 1 April 2006 04:48 (nineteen years ago)

Poor guy my ass. He made the mag into a laughingstock in the affair and took down someone else in his damn vanity.

― Paul Hornung, Saturday, 1 April 2006 18:02 (nineteen years ago)

save your pity for all the people at the voice who got laid off despite doing their jobs well and knowing not to make up quotes.

― Zwan (miccio), Saturday, 1 April 2006 18:20 (nineteen years ago)

(shrug)

― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Saturday, 1 April 2006 18:58 (nineteen years ago)

he'll be over at vice mag in a week's time

― gear (gear), Saturday, 1 April 2006 23:19 (nineteen years ago)

he might displace momus as the star writer? :-(

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Sunday, 2 April 2006 00:47 (nineteen years ago)

"star writer"

shame about ridgeway

― j blount (papa la bas), Sunday, 2 April 2006 00:49 (nineteen years ago)

cemented with a four page story celebrating kill whitey with a cobrasnake-esque photo spread? : (

― gear (gear), Sunday, 2 April 2006 00:49 (nineteen years ago)

he'll be over at vice mag in a week's time

Excellent. I need a reason to stop reading Vice.

― Tantrum The Cat (Tantrum The Cat), Sunday, 2 April 2006 00:49 (nineteen years ago)

yes, draw the line there

― j blount (papa la bas), Sunday, 2 April 2006 00:50 (nineteen years ago)

No-one needs a reason to stop reading Vice.
xpost. Beaten to the punch.

― jimnaseum (jimnaseum), Sunday, 2 April 2006 00:50 (nineteen years ago)

it's ok, the Voice is still hiring more Pitchfork 'trap hop' groupies to balance out the loss of Sylvester:

http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0613,shots,72686,20.html

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Sunday, 2 April 2006 01:17 (nineteen years ago)

It's entertainment with ambition, but I can't front though; the soundtrack is pretty fly too.

copyeditors, count the things wrong with this sentence.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Sunday, 2 April 2006 01:43 (nineteen years ago)

also, was the voice "letters" section on the webpage always called "letters / corrections" or is that a recent, ahem, improvement?

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Sunday, 2 April 2006 02:23 (nineteen years ago)

Wow, I totally thought "debutant" wasn't a word, but it turns out it is! Never heard that one before.

― ant@work.com, Sunday, 2 April 2006 02:25 (nineteen years ago)

I'm sorry to hear James Ridgeway was let go. I don't really read the Voice that much for political coverage, but I've appreciated some of his reporting there (over a long period of time).

― Rockist_Scientist (RSLaRue), Sunday, 2 April 2006 02:30 (nineteen years ago)

I totally thought "debutant" wasn't a word

hahaha I thought the Voice was covering a different kind of "coming out" until I realized this word refers to the director's debut.

axing Ridgeway (as well as Nat Hentoff and perhaps Christgau and J.Hoberman next) is extraordinarily dumb IMO, to put it in marketing speak the Village Voice's "brand" value lies in its rich history and the surviving veterans who most readers love to hate/argue with.

― m coleman (lovebug starski), Sunday, 2 April 2006 10:53 (nineteen years ago)

...Cast of (mostly) certified ATLiens who bring organic charisma to their character's interactions, playing them sweet like mash notes yet grown-ass as the men and women the tale's teens are trying to be.

Good Lord. Note the bad apostrophe, the disparity between "like" and "as" in two back-to-back similes, the idiotic "mash notes," the reaching "grown-ass."

― Copy Edith (joseph cotten), Sunday, 2 April 2006 12:41 (nineteen years ago)

Agreed. It's horrible.

Astonished they would let Ridgeway go.

― Tracey Hand (tracerhand), Monday, 3 April 2006 00:46 (nineteen years ago)

I bet the NT has focus groop research demonstrating beyond a shadow of a doubt that the VV's ideal brand identity is, in their words, "a Pennysaver with boobies."

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Monday, 3 April 2006 01:09 (nineteen years ago)

Ogling breasts isn't just for straight men and lesbians anymore. Moving beyond traditional labels, gay men and straight women are outing themselves as "boobiesexuals."

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Monday, 3 April 2006 01:12 (nineteen years ago)

Well at least "my straight friend 'Amy'" won't be writing an angry letter.

― Zwan (miccio), Monday, 3 April 2006 13:31 (nineteen years ago)

Why was Nick Sylvester finally fired? “[A]bout a week ago I heard from someone inside the Voice that when Sylvester sat down with a lawyer to go through his emails on the story, his entire account has been mysteriously deleted. At that point, they asked him to leave, for real this time.”

― My Psychic Friends Are Strangely Silent (Ex Leon), Monday, 3 April 2006 13:31 (nineteen years ago)

i still cant stand this guy

― ++++, Monday, 3 April 2006 13:32 (nineteen years ago)

But Mr. Trife, he was so accepting of the kids and their ways. Do you hate youth?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 3 April 2006 13:48 (nineteen years ago)

that fucking guy on the 'atl' film -- j-ho wdn't have commissioned that?

― Real Goths Don't Wear Black (Enrique), Monday, 3 April 2006 13:51 (nineteen years ago)

http://riffmarket.blogspot.com/

I have to admit, the "PUTTING RIFF MARKET ON SUICIDE WATCH" headline cracked me up

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Thursday, 6 April 2006 01:12 (nineteen years ago)

what about Liquid Liquid nick?

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Thursday, 6 April 2006 03:25 (nineteen years ago)

good to see new stuff, but it reads like he's entering a fat Orson Welles twilight.

― jinx hijinks (sanskrit), Thursday, 6 April 2006 13:56 (nineteen years ago)

Is nick working for ANYONE at this point?

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Thursday, 6 April 2006 14:00 (nineteen years ago)

The weekend.

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 6 April 2006 14:29 (nineteen years ago)

i notice me, trife, and miccio are mysteriously absent from the new link's bar.

― strongo hulkington is a guy with a belly button piercing (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 6 April 2006 14:34 (nineteen years ago)

I was never on his links bar in the first place! We had a cautious relationship that only turned affectionate in private.

― Zwan (miccio), Thursday, 6 April 2006 14:55 (nineteen years ago)

OMG OMG he didn't link to me!

heavens!

― jinx hijinks (sanskrit), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:02 (nineteen years ago)

The net is about touching each other.

― Zwan (miccio), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:06 (nineteen years ago)

That's what my uncle steve told me, but believe me, he was wrong.

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:09 (nineteen years ago)

Plus Jess, you don't update for shit. In fact, I think I'm tired of sending readers over to a picture of King Biscuit Time.

― Zwan (miccio), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:12 (nineteen years ago)

^^ lol, otm, etc

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:18 (nineteen years ago)

i have an entire city to annoy with my half-baked ideas now

― strongo hulkington is a guy with a belly button piercing (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:21 (nineteen years ago)

be like me and post links to your "short list" then.

― Zwan (miccio), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:22 (nineteen years ago)

how's work going?

― strongo hulkington is a guy with a belly button piercing (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:24 (nineteen years ago)

i kinda miss retail, i gotta be honest.

― strongo hulkington is a guy with a belly button piercing (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:25 (nineteen years ago)

also gel & weave still falls under the banner of "don't update for shit" (xp)

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:27 (nineteen years ago)

What's a blog?

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:29 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, but you're making more. That's gotta be nice.

I'm burning a mix now and leaving for it in 15 minutes.

It goes "Round The Bend," "Rasputin," "Hot! Hot! Hot!," "Freak Scene" and so on. I say this so you don't think I'm ripping on King Biscuit Time.

― Zwan (miccio), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:29 (nineteen years ago)

well, ethan's got no excuse

xpost

― strongo hulkington is a guy with a belly button piercing (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 6 April 2006 15:29 (nineteen years ago)

if it makes you feel better, nobody links my blog anywhere that i know of!

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Thursday, 6 April 2006 19:46 (nineteen years ago)

then again i only update once a week and discuss music only on occasion

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Thursday, 6 April 2006 19:48 (nineteen years ago)

The Voice has an immediate opening for a staff writer. We're looking for journalists who understand the difference between magazine-style reporting and the hurried factoid-finding of daily papers. The ideal candidate must have the ability to create in-depth and compelling stories that explore issues, events, and people.

We offer competitive salaries and benefits. Send cover letter, résumé, and clips to: Ward Harkavy
Interim Editor in Chief Village Voice
36 Cooper Square
New York, NY 10003

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Thursday, 6 April 2006 22:03 (nineteen years ago)

No one's mentioned this yet, have they?

www.gawker.com/news/village-voice/vv-staff-protests-ridgeways-firing-management-doesnt-care-165363.php

― Martin Van Buren (Martin Van Buren), Thursday, 6 April 2006 22:18 (nineteen years ago)

Sorry, I'm not very good at the internet.

― Martin Van Buren (Martin Van Buren), Thursday, 6 April 2006 22:21 (nineteen years ago)

hey, man, it's cool, since you're from the 19th century and all.

― hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 6 April 2006 22:22 (nineteen years ago)

I'm O.K. with it, too.

― jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 6 April 2006 22:24 (nineteen years ago)

where did you find that opening, joseph? there's no sign of it on the voice website.

― geeta (geeta), Thursday, 6 April 2006 22:24 (nineteen years ago)

It's on the letters/corrections page and on the last pages of letters in the print edition.

― C0L1N B... (C0L1N B...), Thursday, 6 April 2006 22:27 (nineteen years ago)

did anyone ever reveal or postulate why they fired Ridgway? if its upthread don't bother responding, i'll event. get there.

― Susan Douglas (Susan Douglas), Thursday, 6 April 2006 22:34 (nineteen years ago)

I don't think anyone has said, Susan. It's just bizarre. The Voice's mission since Don Forst took over was to be "newsier." So... ? Is its mission now to be a kind of cheaper-looking Time Out?

― Tracey Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 6 April 2006 23:03 (nineteen years ago)

even if it were, its curious timing bus. sense-wise imo...firing multiple people for multiple separate reasons together. confuse the staff and yes, lower morale and foster resentment. i assumed it was somehow atleast vaguely related to the scandal. i know people thought it was unfair (which may be true) but the firings and esp. timing of firings up until then, I could make sense of.

― Susan Douglas (Susan Douglas), Thursday, 6 April 2006 23:15 (nineteen years ago)

Ridgeway writes political commentary. New Times hates political commentary. I think that's it. I'm mostly surprised they didn't axe Hentoff first. (Maybe they thought that was a worse PR move?)

As far as confusing the staff, lowering morale, and fostering resentment, NT wouldn't be the first newspaper bosses to operate from the "alcoholic stepdad" model of office management.

― Martin Van Buren (Martin Van Buren), Friday, 7 April 2006 03:18 (nineteen years ago)

oh man. on that letters page the voice's new aversion to "hurried fact-finding" gets pwnd even by a member of an, ahem, "mutant bike gang."

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 7 April 2006 03:23 (nineteen years ago)

The Voice has an immediate opening for a staff writer. We're looking for journalists who understand the difference between magazine-style reporting (EXCITING!) and the hurried factoid-finding of daily papers (BORING). However, if you don't get your facts straight, we will fire you.

We offer competitive salaries and benefits, including free soda and candy bars for the ADHD deficient and plenty of swords to fall on.

― Edward III (edward iii), Friday, 7 April 2006 14:36 (nineteen years ago)

Maybe the problem is he didn't go for the money.

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 7 April 2006 15:33 (nineteen years ago)

I've also been really curious about the Ridgeway matter. Tried digging up some stuff last week w/o luck but now there's more out there --

http://www.gawker.com/news/village-voice/vv-staff-protests-ridgeways-firing-management-doesnt-care-165363.php

I'm far less interested in picking up the Voice w/o him. I didn't agree with everything he wrote but I always enjoyed reading him because I knew he'd cover something nobody else had or cover something familiar from a different angle. It doesn't actually appear that JR did anythign to get fired. Rather, as Martin points out, it seems that it's because he is who he is.

― TRG (TRG), Friday, 7 April 2006 15:45 (nineteen years ago)

Well, my link's redundant now that I read further up, but it's active at least...

― TRG (TRG), Friday, 7 April 2006 15:46 (nineteen years ago)

Meanwhile, canned Voice proofers can take heart from this current headline on the webpage:

"Making Bohemia Save for the Oscars"

(And yeah, I read the story just to make sure it wasn't about the proposed elimination of federal Oscar-related loans or something.)

― Martin Van Buren (Martin Van Buren), Friday, 7 April 2006 15:58 (nineteen years ago)

Hurried factoid finding =

"Ridgeway became nationally known when he revealed in The New Republic that General Motors' had hired private detectives to tail consumer advocate Ralph Nader in an attempt to dig up information that might discredit him... The incident catapulted auto safety into the public spotlight and helped send Nader's book, Unsafe at Any Speed (1965) to the top of the bestseller lists."

magazine-style reporting =

"Did our eyes deceive us? Walking by Herald Square recently, we idly peered into Macy's windows, only to receive this cornea-scalding image: Maxim-brand bedding."

― Martin Van Buren (Martin Van Buren), Friday, 7 April 2006 16:04 (nineteen years ago)

I READ GAWKER TOO

(not rilly)

(i think Hentoff's pretty safe coz he's been treading on hitchens territory for some time now & writing about politics isn't "political" as long as you don't look too classically lefty about it)

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 7 April 2006 16:42 (nineteen years ago)

Making Bohemia Save for the Oscars

no, i get it: dominik hasek to star in havel biopic!

― blackmail (blackmail.is.my.life), Friday, 7 April 2006 16:44 (nineteen years ago)

he's been treading on hitchens territory for some time now

really?? guess I don't read him very often. every time I look at the Voice he's writing about Bush raping the Constitution. (as well he should)

― Renard (Renard), Friday, 7 April 2006 16:49 (nineteen years ago)

ok its a bit of an overstatement coz he's v. civil libertarian still (not that hitchens isn't?) but his pro-zionist bent has been increasingly informing all his bigger international policy stuff.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 7 April 2006 16:53 (nineteen years ago)

Oh, Sterling, the things you think make you Christopher Hickens.

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 7 April 2006 16:58 (nineteen years ago)

Or Hitchens. Man, it's amazing how quickly I can blow my credibility.

― Eppy (Eppy), Friday, 7 April 2006 16:59 (nineteen years ago)

Faster than you can say no Sufjan.

― Edward III (edward iii), Friday, 7 April 2006 17:36 (nineteen years ago)

Interview with Ridgeway, Hentoff, Schanberg ....

― TRG (TRG), Friday, 14 April 2006 19:11 (nineteen years ago)

a new riff central: game v. sylvester http://riffcentral.blogspot.com/

― katie, a princess (katie, a princess), Friday, 14 April 2006 19:34 (nineteen years ago)

as in, its sylvester's side of the snafu

― katie, a princess (katie, a princess), Friday, 14 April 2006 20:01 (nineteen years ago)

NICK SYVLESTER: NOTHING, YOURE RIGHT. I FUCKED UP THERE. IT'S JSUT WITH THESE PIECES ITS LESS ABOUT THE FACTS OF THE TREND, MORE ABOUT WHY PEOPLE NEED TRENDS TO EXIST, THEN THE NEED FOR PEOPLE TO REFUSE ANY PART OF THEM, STUFF LIKE THAT, AND SATIRE MUDDIES THAT INTENT
GAME @RIFFCENTRAL: GAME IS CONFUSED
NICK SYLVESTER: THATS WHAT IM SAYING

GAME@RIFFCENTRAK: IS THAT WHY YOU USED PEOPLES ACTUAL NAMES AND PUT YOURSELF INTO THE PIECE INSTEAD OF MAKING UP NAMES LIKE MOST TREND PIECES THAT ACT LIKE THE TREND EXISTS OUTSIDE OF THEIR GROUP OF FRIENDS?

― lf (lfam), Friday, 14 April 2006 20:04 (nineteen years ago)

I FUCKED UP THERE.
I FUCKED UP THERE.
I FUCKED UP THERE.

― lf (lfam), Friday, 14 April 2006 20:05 (nineteen years ago)

fun

― lf (lfam), Friday, 14 April 2006 20:05 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.bjacked.net/LuvToHunt/forums/phpBB2/modules/gallery/albums/album01/Beat_Dead_Horse.jpg

― M. Biondi (M. Biondi), Friday, 14 April 2006 20:09 (nineteen years ago)

i like the belle and sebastian album.

― noizem duke (noize duke), Friday, 14 April 2006 20:16 (nineteen years ago)

That Democracy Now transcript is waaay depressing.

― Martin Van Buren (Martin Van Buren), Friday, 14 April 2006 20:32 (nineteen years ago)

"You know, I don't think anyone should own 17 alternative papers."
Tim Redmond/SF Bay Guardian on New Times/VVM in 1st link.

― JAYA (blunt), Friday, 14 April 2006 20:35 (nineteen years ago)

this is all terribly depressing.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 14 April 2006 21:37 (nineteen years ago)

http://thephoenix.com/article_ektid9447.aspx

He also has review of the T.I. disc in the new Phoenix, but I can't find it on their site.

― Nigel (Nigel), Thursday, 20 April 2006 17:23 (nineteen years ago)

y'know, the fake riffcentral interviews were always by far my least favorite of Sylvester's schticks, but I thought that was a brilliant way to handle things, and it made me laugh a few times.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Thursday, 20 April 2006 17:34 (nineteen years ago)

I have some information that may vindicate Mr. Sylvester. Email me at rogue45@pookmail.com.

― Alex in Baghdad, Thursday, 20 April 2006 17:42 (nineteen years ago)

there were no WMDs found at misshapes!?!?@!

― JW (ex machina), Thursday, 20 April 2006 17:44 (nineteen years ago)

I'm doing the "I knew it!" amateur conspiracy theorist spit take right now due to that "it wasn't for the front page" crap. I hope Nick is back on his feet doing ok, there are way too many crappier "journalists" out there.

― mike h. (mike h.), Thursday, 20 April 2006 17:56 (nineteen years ago)

Here's his T.I. review:
http://www.thephoenix.com/article_ektid9289.aspx

― Nigel (Nigel), Friday, 21 April 2006 15:10 (nineteen years ago)

"I get to live the rest of my life like a schnook."

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 21 April 2006 15:32 (nineteen years ago)

hahaha sterling

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 21 April 2006 15:34 (nineteen years ago)

hahahahaha

― M@tt He1geson (Matt Helgeson), Friday, 21 April 2006 16:13 (nineteen years ago)

um. hahaha. hahahha
haha.

― Alex in Baghdad, Friday, 21 April 2006 18:00 (nineteen years ago)

three weeks pass...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/18/education/18cheating.html

it's better to be right than first

― Tracey Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 18 May 2006 01:33 (nineteen years ago)

Though the thread is only sorta related, nice opportunity to bring this up. Ad posted by Rob Harvilla on the Voice's Web site. Funny ad, yes, and as always am sure to say, I respect Rob's ability and know he's a dutiful (alebit talented) employee. But how fucking nuts is this? Reads:

Get paid to write about your mail for the Village Voice.
The Voice is looking to broaden its base of freelance music writers, who're responsible for reviews, features, interview profiles, investigative boondoggles, and existentialist rants. Though maybe not so much of that last one, and no using the word "angular" either. E-mail a few clips, your musical genres of expertise (all are warmly welcome), and a snappy intro to Rob Harvilla. No calls or regular mail, please.

That'd be normal if it was in maybe Scranton or Biloxi. But the Voice *soliciting* for music writers? Or needing an ad to get queries from the talented among us? Another weird example of NT's thinking -- as if having the most diverse and largest roster of music writers in the world on the Rolodex is a bad thing to them.

― O'Connor (OConnorScribe), Thursday, 18 May 2006 01:47 (nineteen years ago)

what? no napkin!?

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 18 May 2006 02:08 (nineteen years ago)

hahahahaha

― O'Connor (OConnorScribe), Thursday, 18 May 2006 02:10 (nineteen years ago)

Though he's right ... we kinda do get paid for being on the Schwag Pony Express.

― O'Connor (OConnorScribe), Thursday, 18 May 2006 02:12 (nineteen years ago)

"existentialist rants" = the NT's formulaic anti-intellectual dismissal of the best VV pieces of the past, no doubt

― Tracey Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 18 May 2006 02:17 (nineteen years ago)

"it used to be crazy man, all these, these ... i dunno, existentialist rants! those were different times though, you know?"

― Tracey Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 18 May 2006 02:24 (nineteen years ago)

Funny you should mention, Rob just e-mailed me today and asked if I wanted to do a fomulaic anti-intellectual dismissal of a great VV piece of the past.

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 18 May 2006 02:47 (nineteen years ago)

Also, I briefly confused the title of this thread with the one below it at the time and thought it was "nick sylvester = bon jovi". Now there's a think-piece for you.

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 18 May 2006 02:49 (nineteen years ago)

damn. i was in the middle of a pitch for an anti-formulaic intellectual dismissal of a great VV piece of the past. I guess that pitch has been nearly scooped.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Thursday, 18 May 2006 02:52 (nineteen years ago)

No, I bet we'll do different ones.

― Eppy (Eppy), Thursday, 18 May 2006 02:56 (nineteen years ago)

I'm pitching to review music blogs in the style of Cheryl Tweedy.

― alext (alext), Thursday, 18 May 2006 06:21 (nineteen years ago)

I never knew the Voice was lacking people who wanted to write for the music section!

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Thursday, 18 May 2006 10:50 (nineteen years ago)

HI ILX, WE HATE YOU TOO

― NEW TIMES GUY (Enrique), Thursday, 18 May 2006 10:53 (nineteen years ago)

that solicitation reads like a house ad that would run in a college newspaper. i guess the transformation is nearly complete.

― maura (maura), Thursday, 18 May 2006 12:06 (nineteen years ago)

i like the ad, i think it slightly demystifies the whole thing, it's sweet. lord knows if anyone will get through, but there's a whiff of entitlement among the antis.

― Enrique IX: The Mediator (Enrique), Thursday, 18 May 2006 12:13 (nineteen years ago)

entitlement? um, no. just unimpressed by 'cute' bits like the request for 'existentialist rants' followed by an immediate retraction of that request. i mean, wtf, seriously. in a venue that's shrinking its word counts by the minute, flabby ha-has like that -- especially when they're coming *from an editor* -- aren't a good sign ...

― maura (maura), Thursday, 18 May 2006 12:42 (nineteen years ago)

And sorry, but this does have an air of "you can all be replaced," whether intended or not. It'd be one thing to phase out the current crop of freelancers and use writers he prefers instead--that's just how the game goes. But the announcement sounds desperate, like "God, anyone would be better than these chumps I've been left with."

― Martin Van Buren (Martin Van Buren), Thursday, 18 May 2006 12:49 (nineteen years ago)

I kinda assumed this ad was because people they were "left with" stopped pitching, but I may be projecting.

― Zwan (miccio), Thursday, 18 May 2006 12:57 (nineteen years ago)

ok, how shd he go about getting in new talent?

blogs? pitchfork?

― Enrique IX: The Mediator (Enrique), Thursday, 18 May 2006 12:57 (nineteen years ago)

i just saw the ad and thought that if people have really stopped feeding the machine, then this has been an amazing bit of collective action. i may be projecting, but it's my guess that xhuxk didn't have a shortage of pitches.

and maura otm. that ad reeks of desperation. as far as getting new writers: pay them fairly (read: more) and allow for creative, interesting work.

― blackmail (blackmail.is.my.life), Thursday, 18 May 2006 13:09 (nineteen years ago)

yes yes, that hasn't been precluded. he's asked for pitches is all.

― Enrique IX: The Mediator (Enrique), Thursday, 18 May 2006 13:14 (nineteen years ago)

I APPLIED IMMEDIATELY. URGENT AND KEY XPOSURE!111!

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Thursday, 18 May 2006 13:15 (nineteen years ago)

doesn't the voice maintain a database of a couple thousand music critics already?

and did anybody notice the music section's lead review this week?

http://www.villagevoice.com/music/0620,harding,73181,22.html

― the barracuda sleeps at sundown, Thursday, 18 May 2006 13:18 (nineteen years ago)

Chuck used to get like 100 pitches a week.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 18 May 2006 13:38 (nineteen years ago)

doesn't the voice maintain a database of a couple thousand music critics already?
and did anybody notice the music section's lead review this week?
http://www.villagevoice.com/music/0620,harding,73181,22.html

-- the barracuda sleeps at sundown (libr...), May 18th, 2006.

people die, people start to suck, new eds want new blood -- shocking i know.

― Enrique IX: The Mediator (Enrique), Thursday, 18 May 2006 13:40 (nineteen years ago)

new eds want new blood who work cheaper than old blood -- shocking I know.

― Roy Kasten (Roy Kasten), Thursday, 18 May 2006 13:49 (nineteen years ago)

new blogd

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 18 May 2006 13:55 (nineteen years ago)

i just saw the ad and thought that if people have really stopped feeding the machine, then this has been an amazing bit of collective action.

are you seriously suggesting that everybody should quit writing for the village voice as a "collective action"? i can't wait to see how collectively active you clowns feel when your beloved pazz and jop rolls into town next year... and why is xgau off the hook here? it would take him like 2 phone calls to find a new roost and he's still "feeding the machine" last time i checked. and if the most established music writer in america can't be bothered to move his ass, why should us struggling hacks?

― Struggling Hack, Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:00 (nineteen years ago)

The goal is clear -- become an unstruggling hack.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:03 (nineteen years ago)

yes, i am. and i know a number of music writers who are getting paychecks elsewhere because of this trend against creativity and writing generally. i'm circumspect as to whether or not it's a collective action, since it's probably not something that was planned out, but i'm sure there are a number of people who are no longer pitching new times on principle. if the paper's starved for content, so be it. it's a tough lesson for management to learn.

― blackmail (blackmail.is.my.life), Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:04 (nineteen years ago)

hahaha yeah, it'll be new times who suffers!

― Enrique IX: The Mediator (Enrique), Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:06 (nineteen years ago)

i think that new times nyc is already suffering, hence the pathetic ad on the music page. xpost

― blackmail (blackmail.is.my.life), Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:08 (nineteen years ago)

Also, I currently see no reason to stop writing for the Voice. They still let me talk about bands.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:17 (nineteen years ago)

I didn't mean to suggest that people shouldn't write for the Voice if they want to. I was just saying I assumed the ad was in response to lack of pitches.

― Zwan (miccio), Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:25 (nineteen years ago)

it is fun to make struggling hacks defensive, though

― Zwan (miccio), Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:28 (nineteen years ago)

blackmail, do you think that the strategy of not pitching to the voice will make the management increase wordcounts?

― Enrique IX: The Mediator (Enrique), Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:30 (nineteen years ago)

But why would people stop pitching? The field is competitive and unstable as it is. And Harvilla, by all accounts, is a good guy.

Like a bunch of seasoned veterans who have to feed their kids on writing about rock bands are gonna turn their back on the best known alt-weekly in the nation because a big, scary corporation bought it?

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:34 (nineteen years ago)

I guess the Voice is turning their back on them, then!

― Zwan (miccio), Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:38 (nineteen years ago)

Like a bunch of seasoned veterans who have to feed their kids on writing about rock bands

The amount of people actually doing this and only this and making it work for themselves in this current historical moment is, I suspect, pretty damn small. (I'm sure Douglas Wolk isn't the only one, I agree, and it's not the only thing he writes about!)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:43 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, something's amiss. I realize that a lot of folks find the notion of collective action unsavory, and chances are this is just a coincidence, unless as Zwan suggests, it's a partial lock out situation that's produced a "talent search" of sorts. Management is clearly taking initiative in finding ways to get around established contributors - like Whiney G said, Chuck was never short for pitches. But without decent content, the New Times model is just another race to the bottom in an unstable industry that seems hellbent on needless self-destruction.

I understand people have to eat, but working for less and less with stricter rules isn't working toward stability either. It's just taking a pay cut.

― blackmail (blackmail.is.my.life), Thursday, 18 May 2006 14:44 (nineteen years ago)

if the most established music writer in america can't be bothered to move his ass, why should us struggling hacks?

-- Struggling Hack (hackoram...), May 18th, 2006.

― struggling hack, Thursday, 18 May 2006 15:13 (nineteen years ago)

working for less and less with stricter rules isn't working toward stability either.

having one less outlet to pitch to is another form of working for less and less

― struggling hack, Thursday, 18 May 2006 15:16 (nineteen years ago)

First assignment: this thread.

― Chris Ott (Chris Ott), Thursday, 18 May 2006 15:16 (nineteen years ago)

look, i can understand if some of you have some lingering loyalty to chuck eddy that would make you feel bad about continuing to write for the voice, that's your perogative. but for those of us for whom chuckles never did nothing no-how, fuck it... this sounds like an opening to me. one i'm gonna take. also, why the fuck should we feel that tug of loyalty for chuck (which i admit, i kinda do, not even knowing him, just as an admirer of his writing from a loooooong time ago) when his mentor can't even be bothered to make some noise...

― struggling hack, Thursday, 18 May 2006 15:23 (nineteen years ago)

its times like this i wish you people had an I Love Freelancing (ILF) board to fuck off to.

― and there are lot's of other sites, but all of them are fake... (sanskrit), Thursday, 18 May 2006 15:31 (nineteen years ago)

How do I get a hackland account?

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Thursday, 18 May 2006 15:31 (nineteen years ago)

"ok, how shd he go about getting in new talent? blogs? pitchfork?"

That would seem like the obvious place to start. The online world is crawling with amateur and semi-pro writers who wouldn't mind a paycheck. It'd be a hell of a lot easier than asking for blind submissions and hoping for the best. I mean, seriously, does this guy not have any favorite writers? And he's been doing this how long?

― Martin Van Buren (Martin Van Buren), Thursday, 18 May 2006 15:43 (nineteen years ago)

why the fuck should we feel that tug of loyalty for chuck (which i admit, i kinda do, not even knowing him, just as an admirer of his writing from a loooooong time ago) when his mentor can't even be bothered to make some noise...

what are you talking about? hot tip: faux-insider poses don't really work when you get things wrong.

― maura (maura), Thursday, 18 May 2006 15:44 (nineteen years ago)

If established writers stop pitching the Voice, it'll be as much or more a matter of self-interest than collective action in support of Chuck. The pay is only good by alt-weekly standards--nobody getting magazine work is surviving off Voice pieces. If there's no longer any presige to the section, and if creativity is curtailed, why not go make $1 a word as a hack and use yr blog as self-expression.

― Martin Van Buren (Martin Van Buren), Thursday, 18 May 2006 15:56 (nineteen years ago)

Oh, and, duh, if you're not getting pitches, you can always ask writers you like if they want to review something for you. Not sure when the idea of an editor *assigning* a story went out of style.

― Martin Van Buren (Martin Van Buren), Thursday, 18 May 2006 16:01 (nineteen years ago)

i'm not pretending to be an insider, i'm just saying i still see christigau's by-lines in the voice - so why should i join the "collective action" if someone like the dean isn't - especially since his taking a PUBLIC stand would mean about a million times more than most of us

― struggling hack, Thursday, 18 May 2006 16:07 (nineteen years ago)

Seems a slightly odd rationale on your part, s.h.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 18 May 2006 16:18 (nineteen years ago)

i'm beginning to understand the 'struggling' part

― j blount (papa la bas), Thursday, 18 May 2006 16:27 (nineteen years ago)

right. i'm rationalizing, but people who believe that an informal "collective action" (minus christgau) will teach new times "a lesson" are being reasonable.

― s.h., Thursday, 18 May 2006 16:28 (nineteen years ago)

I think they're voting with their feet, s.h., more than anything else. I don't find that hard to understand and neither should you.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 18 May 2006 16:31 (nineteen years ago)

Since when do ethics have any fucking place in journalism?

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Thursday, 18 May 2006 16:34 (nineteen years ago)

I think they're voting with their feet, s.h., more than anything else. I don't find that hard to understand and neither should you.

this is the reaganoid variant of what i said, more or less, and it's not an extreme position at all, nor is it tied in to what happened to chuck or what xgau does in his absence.

― blackmail (blackmail.is.my.life), Thursday, 18 May 2006 16:38 (nineteen years ago)

new times should start a high school writing program in the city

― lf (lfam), Thursday, 18 May 2006 17:19 (nineteen years ago)

I kinda assumed this ad was because people they were "left with" stopped pitching, but I may be projecting.

They haven't stopped pitching, but I'm sure the NT police sure wants them to. Oh well ... the current roster can't all suck to them. I'm sure things will work out there.

Also, whole episode is not a loyalty to Chuck vs. a loyalty to Rob issue at all. It's that the notion of ad being posted when, as has been mentioned, Chuck (and Eric Wisbard I'm sure) got like 50 unsolicited pitches a week is unbelievable -- and tacky ...

― O'Connor (OConnorScribe), Thursday, 18 May 2006 23:34 (nineteen years ago)

some of the same names have some pieces in this issue still -- gotta wonder if they were already in the works before this all hit (chuck also built up quite a backlog of ready to run copy) even tho maybe to my oversensitive eyes they feel like they've been through a difft. sort of editing mill than they woulda been put thru before. also, the new kickers are astonishingly earnest. i miss the roffles.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 19 May 2006 00:47 (nineteen years ago)

this thread revival is hilarious.

― don weiner (don weiner), Friday, 19 May 2006 01:27 (nineteen years ago)

[spam]

― tramadol, Saturday, 20 May 2006 04:37 (nineteen years ago)

say what? :-)

― O'Connor (OConnorScribe), Saturday, 20 May 2006 04:45 (nineteen years ago)

The college cheating methods are way more interesting than alt-weekly politicking. I can't imagine thinking that any student thought he or she could pull out a cell phone, photograph questions and start texting without getting caught.

― milo z (mlp), Saturday, 20 May 2006 04:50 (nineteen years ago)

sylvester wrote an article about new ways of cheating a while back that was at least half fabricated, was why i posted that.

― Tracey Hand (tracerhand), Saturday, 20 May 2006 04:54 (nineteen years ago)

i joined a gym because of that fucker and i have yet to run into a fellow ripster.

― jinx hijinks (sanskrit), Saturday, 20 May 2006 11:05 (nineteen years ago)

home loan http://20six.nl/homeequityloan [URL=http://20six.nl/homeequityloan]home loan[/URL] home loan
home loan http://20six.nl/californiahomeequityloan

― Home loan, Saturday, 20 May 2006 12:07 (nineteen years ago)

My bozack

bozack http://www.mybozack.com [URL=http://44.yourkidsdontgrow.bozack]My ballsack[/URL]Phenteramine
bozack http://www.mybozack.com [URL=http://44.yourkidsdontgrow.bozack]My ballsack[/URL]Phenteramine
bozack http://www.mybozack.com [URL=http://44.yourkidsdontgrow.bozack]My ballsack[/URL]Phenteramine
bozack http://www.mybozack.com [URL=http://44.yourkidsdontgrow.bozack]My ballsack[/URL]Phenteramine
bozack http://www.mybozack.com [URL=http://44.yourkidsdontgrow.bozack]My ballsack[/URL]Phenteramine
bozack http://www.mybozack.com [URL=http://44.yourkidsdontgrow.bozack]My ballsack[/URL]Phenteramine
bozack http://www.mybozack.com [URL=http://44.yourkidsdontgrow.bozack]My ballsack[/URL]Phenteramine

― Thomas Tallis (Tommy), Saturday, 20 May 2006 12:24 (nineteen years ago)

[spam deleted]

― Sesso, Tuesday, 23 May 2006 12:36 (nineteen years ago)

two months pass...

"Maybe because she kissed me on the cheek afterwards..."

i don't believe it

― a name means a lot just by itself (lfam), Friday, 4 August 2006 05:26 (nineteen years ago)

i'm disappointed that "maker upper" didn't become a catchphrase around here

― aaron d.g. (aaron d.g.), Friday, 4 August 2006 06:08 (nineteen years ago)

you never know, man...it still could happen.

i wish nick would start posting here again. he could use the screenname "Jayceon Terell Taylor."

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Friday, 4 August 2006 10:52 (nineteen years ago)

(and if he doesn't jess should)

― Raymond Cummings (Raymond Cummings), Friday, 4 August 2006 11:04 (nineteen years ago)

Voice welcomes EIC #4

― joseph cotten (joseph cotten), Monday, 14 August 2006 19:56 (nineteen years ago)

is he working for pitchfork again?

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/page/track_reviews/38116/Wolf_Eyes_The_Driller#38116

― a little knowledge can go a long way (lfam2), Thursday, 24 August 2006 16:02 (nineteen years ago)

he was reviewing in the dance column on stylus a while back, maybe still is.

― bad hair day house (fandango), Thursday, 24 August 2006 16:15 (nineteen years ago)

one month passes...

i'm better at telling lies than anyone else i know

― nicholas de jong (nicholas de jong), Friday, 20 October 2006 07:37 (nineteen years ago)

I don't believe you.

― ONIMO's fish might turn into lizards (GerryNemo), Friday, 20 October 2006 09:02 (nineteen years ago)

has this been discussed yet?

― don weiner (don weiner), Sunday, 22 October 2006 20:17 (nineteen years ago)

lol @ a college professor explaining to her students who Diplo is as part of a lecture

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Sunday, 22 October 2006 20:56 (nineteen years ago)

He's like the Dane Cook for creepy undergrad Harvard girls.

― GILLY'S BAGG'EAR VANCE OF COUPARI (Ex Leon), Sunday, 22 October 2006 21:10 (nineteen years ago)

Diplo or Nick Sylvester? I mean, either is applicable, I think.

― Alex in Baltimore (Alex in Baltimore), Sunday, 22 October 2006 21:24 (nineteen years ago)

I never even hated this guy or had it out for him or whatever but man some people in that comments section are really falling over backwards to defend his actions.

― deej.. (deej..), Sunday, 22 October 2006 21:27 (nineteen years ago)

lol at the guy compare sylvester to Chris Morris

― Sadly, he will be the next Alexis Petridish. (Dom Passantino), Sunday, 22 October 2006 21:33 (nineteen years ago)

lol that this occurred at Harvard Law

― don weiner (don weiner), Sunday, 22 October 2006 21:54 (nineteen years ago)

This thread needs Colin Meeder, stat.

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Sunday, 22 October 2006 22:03 (nineteen years ago)

"classes with riff"
cast: jake gyllenhaal -- nick sylvester
old guy from blade -- male presenter
wynona ryder -- female presenter

the soundtrack would be pretty good.

― Nicolas Boisvert Novak (Cliffsky!), Sunday, 22 October 2006 23:42 (nineteen years ago)

he is stunningly inarticulate and those Harvard students don't seem much brighter.

― shookout (shookout), Monday, 23 October 2006 19:34 (nineteen years ago)

They don't privilege public speaking at Harvard AT ALL.

― Young Fresh Danny D (Dan Perry), Monday, 23 October 2006 19:36 (nineteen years ago)

what shookout said. all I kept thinking about while watching that was what an incredible waste of time that class was, how that was a bush league lecture idea that I would expect at Cambridge Junior College and not Hah-vahd Law. At one point, you can see a student's laptop and she's surfing the net when the instructor's dad is rambling on.

― don weiner (don weiner), Monday, 23 October 2006 19:43 (nineteen years ago)

There's a reason Harvard is sinking in the ratings, guys.

― Young Fresh Danny D (Dan Perry), Monday, 23 October 2006 19:46 (nineteen years ago)

I like Nick, but I kept wanting to jump in there and tell his story for him, since he didn't seem to be doing a very good job at it himself.

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 23 October 2006 19:46 (nineteen years ago)

writer not being a very good public speaker shockah. Nick seems VERY young...jeezus, do the kids these days really say "like" that much? I thought it was just my niece. Who is in 4th grade.

if that video is representative, then all I can say is that Harvard must have been very easy for you D.P.

xpost

― don weiner (don weiner), Monday, 23 October 2006 20:08 (nineteen years ago)

jeezus, do the kids these days really say "like" that much? I thought it was just my niece. Who is in 4th grade.

People have been complaining about kids using "like" for, like, 30 years.

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 23 October 2006 20:17 (nineteen years ago)

I can't believe this is a class.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Monday, 23 October 2006 20:22 (nineteen years ago)

Nick is right about NBA Jam, though. Cool game.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Monday, 23 October 2006 20:23 (nineteen years ago)

I like how the professor describes M.I.A. as "rising to pop stardom."

― mike powell (mike powell), Monday, 23 October 2006 20:57 (nineteen years ago)

she's gonna be huge, fellas!

― gear (gear), Monday, 23 October 2006 21:09 (nineteen years ago)

Do you have to be holding a microphone to speak in college seminars these days?

― I.M. From Hollywood (i_m_from_hollywood), Monday, 23 October 2006 21:20 (nineteen years ago)

People have been complaining about kids using "like" for, like, 30 years.

Yes, and most grow out of doing it ad nauseum by the time they've finished high school, if not before them. Or so I'd thought. I'm not talking about casual use of the idiom, which is now commonplace. I'm talking about using "like" as a pause in diction when you appear to have no clue what the fuck you want to, like, say and shit.

― don weiner (don weiner), Monday, 23 October 2006 21:53 (nineteen years ago)

So what do you say instead: "ummm" or "y'know"?

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 23 October 2006 22:00 (nineteen years ago)

I usually pause and don't say anything.

― Young Fresh Danny D (Dan Perry), Monday, 23 October 2006 22:04 (nineteen years ago)

"dude"

― I.M. From Hollywood (i_m_from_hollywood), Monday, 23 October 2006 22:04 (nineteen years ago)

student: "How would you feel if the reporters on the staff of the NY Times took the same approach? If they said: I'm going to toss my notions of objective journalism, to the extent that those still exist, out the window and I'm going to explore through the art form of newspaper publishing how I personally feel about writing and what that means?"

Nick: "I think that sounds great!"

― I.M. From Hollywood (i_m_from_hollywood), Monday, 23 October 2006 22:35 (nineteen years ago)

yeah this is pretty gross to me.

― deej.. (deej..), Monday, 23 October 2006 22:39 (nineteen years ago)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/76/Colbert-truthiness.jpg/250px-Colbert-truthiness.jpg

― struttin' with some barbecue (jimnaseum), Monday, 23 October 2006 22:39 (nineteen years ago)

bio for one of the professors of that class:
I was born and raised in Cambridge, MA. I graduated from Cambridge Rindge & Latin high school in 1994. I graduated from Harvard College with a degree in Folklore & Mythology in 1998. Not knowing what to do, I entered Harvard Law School from which I graduated in 2001. While in law school I became interested in computer science as well as the reasons why I had not been interested in computer science in high school and college. I am currently pursuing a Ph.D. in computer science at Harvard.

― john, a resident of chicago. (john s), Monday, 23 October 2006 22:44 (nineteen years ago)

The sad thing is that Nick is still more articulate than I am.

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 23 October 2006 22:44 (nineteen years ago)

"internet jungle"

― am0n (am0n), Monday, 23 October 2006 23:16 (nineteen years ago)

john s that certainly is a triumph of navel-gazing there

i almost went to rindge! i bet he was in the pilot program instead of fundie

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 23 October 2006 23:39 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2006/03/29/mar25_watson_faces_4.jpg
http://www.clintonfranciscans.com/Stop_the_Hate.jpg

― R.O.Q.U.E. (RoqueStrew), Tuesday, 24 October 2006 06:42 (nineteen years ago)

seriously, if I had a nickel for every time I said "like" or "ummm" with a bright light in my face & staring out at a roomful of people who are staring back at me, I'b be, yeah, rich.

― Eggzakly Huhh? (zachary v.), Thursday, 26 October 2006 00:45 (nineteen years ago)

a roomful of people in a classroom, that is. strip club is another story.

― Eggzakly Huhh? (zachary v.), Thursday, 26 October 2006 00:46 (nineteen years ago)

A cute story!

― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Thursday, 26 October 2006 01:01 (nineteen years ago)

jeezus, do the kids these days really say "like" that much?

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y176/edwardiii/scoob_shag.jpg

― Edward III (edward iii), Thursday, 26 October 2006 14:54 (nineteen years ago)

xpost— The old guy in Blade is Kris Kristoferson (though I probably spelled his name wrong).

― js (honestengine), Thursday, 26 October 2006 16:22 (nineteen years ago)

one year passes...

where's our boy now??

― gershy, Monday, 12 May 2008 03:25 (seventeen years ago)

making up the rent

― elan, Monday, 12 May 2008 03:56 (seventeen years ago)

In terms of music writing, Nick is in the Wire a lot these days. He wrote a very nice Epiphanies column a few months back, and does the hip-hop column every two or three months.

― Mark Rich@rdson, Monday, 12 May 2008 03:57 (seventeen years ago)

http://thephoenix.com/article_ektid58849.aspx

― beta blog, Monday, 12 May 2008 15:35 (seventeen years ago)

I've seen him turn up in Spin a few times.

― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Monday, 12 May 2008 18:55 (seventeen years ago)

In terms of music writing, Nick is in the Wire a lot these days. He wrote a very nice Epiphanies column a few months back, and does the hip-hop column every two or three months.

-- Mark Rich@rdson, Sunday, May 11, 2008 10:57 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link

disgraced. such a shame ;_;

― deej, Monday, 12 May 2008 19:24 (seventeen years ago)

I predict a wry Ott.

-- Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Wednesday, 1 March 2006 23:45

― am0n, Monday, 12 May 2008 21:12 (seventeen years ago)

one year passes...

I really miss this guy/didn't think what he did sounded totally heinous

― balearific, Monday, 13 July 2009 09:35 (sixteen years ago)

In terms of music writing, Nick is in the Wire a lot these days.

oof, that's gotta hurt.

― FREE DOM AND ETHAN (special guest stars mark bronson), Monday, 13 July 2009 09:39 (sixteen years ago)

one year passes...

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/pWa0dZMHYeE/0.jpg

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/01/07/financial/f175833S15.DTL&tsp=1

― i love you but i have chosen snarkness (Steve Shasta), Saturday, 8 January 2011 05:17 (fourteen years ago)

http://cdn1.newsone.com/files/2011/01/340x_sgobbo.jpg

― buzza, Saturday, 8 January 2011 05:19 (fourteen years ago)

Rob grew up in Princeton, New Jersey where he would often ditch school to attend gallery openings in Chelsea at the ripe old age of 16. After attending Haverford College, where he received his BA in Politics, he moved to the East Village. Committing himself to two years with Teach For America, Rob divides his time traveling to the South Bronx and freelance writing. Some of his interests include traveling to dangerous places in Eastern Europe, photographing ugly dogs in Tompkins Square Park and playing with his new frozen margarita machine.

― buzza, Saturday, 8 January 2011 05:25 (fourteen years ago)

three weeks pass...

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1838474963/mr-dream-goes-to-jail-0

Matt Morello, Adam Moerder, and Nick Sylvester are MR. DREAM, a punk band based in Brooklyn.

― am0n, Friday, 4 February 2011 18:45 (fourteen years ago)

that is not good

― basedketball (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Friday, 4 February 2011 18:48 (fourteen years ago)

― am0n, Friday, 4 February 2011 18:49 (fourteen years ago)

If dude needs anything right now, it's probably to be left alone.

Whatever you think of his writing (or alleged ethics), he's still a part of our little online community, and I think we should give him a little respect.

― Whiney G. Weingarten (whineyg), Wednesday, March 1, 2006 6:25 PM

― am0n, Friday, 4 February 2011 18:51 (fourteen years ago)

our li'l online community

― am0n, Friday, 4 February 2011 18:51 (fourteen years ago)

awesome writer, and if that's the ep i bought digitally a year or two ago, it's pretty good

― markers, Friday, 4 February 2011 18:52 (fourteen years ago)

ksheeeeiiiiiit

― am0n, Friday, 4 February 2011 18:53 (fourteen years ago)

i don't know that emoticon

xpost

markers, you should hear 10,000 bands in every city or town in the world!

― basedketball (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Friday, 4 February 2011 18:53 (fourteen years ago)

he's a better writer than drummer

― bows don't kill people, arrows do (Jordan), Friday, 4 February 2011 18:56 (fourteen years ago)

In this week's issue, John Cassidy writes about online social networking—quoting a Yalie named Matt Morello about the "agonizing" process of choosing bands to list in his Facebook profile:
So what's there now? Albums by Babyshambles, Lady Sovereign, Marxy, and My Bloody Valentine, respectively an indie rock thing, a grime thing, a twenty-minute album released on my friend's record label that's brilliant and heard by practically no-one, and a canonic album from the late 80s.
The "friend's record label" is Beekeeper Records

― zvookster, Friday, 4 February 2011 19:43 (fourteen years ago)

yalie? isn't sylvester a harvard man?

― da croupier, Friday, 4 February 2011 19:55 (fourteen years ago)

quoting a Yalie named Matt Morello

― am0n, Friday, 4 February 2011 19:57 (fourteen years ago)

moerder's harvard too, apparently

http://www.nypress.com/article-20535-mr-dream-vs-father-time.html

These guys obsess about time about as often as Quentin from The Sound and the Fury. Even the band’s name is a caution against wasted time: Mr. Dream is named after Sylvester’s dad, a drummer who never achieved fame and now feels sad as he watches other percussionists “because they’re not him.”

“It’s the hallucination of what could have been, Mr. Dream,” Sylvester says. “It’s an American kind of sadness.”

― da croupier, Friday, 4 February 2011 20:00 (fourteen years ago)

“We’re feeling in a more primitive state than Grizzly Bear or LCD Soundsystem,” Sylvester says. “We can’t do what they do because we haven’t been working with software

― bows don't kill people, arrows do (Jordan), Friday, 4 February 2011 20:11 (fourteen years ago)

yeah moerder headed up the harvard lampoon

― zvookster, Friday, 4 February 2011 20:12 (fourteen years ago)

We can’t do what they do because we haven’t been working with software

― tedious all beef patties shipley sauce whiney deej (Edward III), Friday, 4 February 2011 20:31 (fourteen years ago)

anyone else read that as tom morello?

― symsymsym, Friday, 4 February 2011 20:41 (fourteen years ago)

heh that sense of familiarity was why i googled it

― zvookster, Friday, 4 February 2011 20:42 (fourteen years ago)

I like the Mr. Dream stuff, for what it's worth. I think the short version of what they're up to is basically ... "the kind of band Steve Albini might have produced around 1992" or "the kind of band that would have gotten asked questions about the Jesus Lizard" -- rumbly rattling punk stuff, big ropy basslines, etc. But they do it in a structured song-based way, not a lot of yowling workouts. (It makes sense as a niche that a band with critics in it would occupy, since it's sort of missing from the stuff critics usually cover.)

― oɔsıqɐu (nabisco), Friday, 4 February 2011 20:45 (fourteen years ago)

xpost - haha Tom Morello went to Harvard, and would not have been the Yalie outcast in here!

― oɔsıqɐu (nabisco), Friday, 4 February 2011 20:46 (fourteen years ago)

The demos on the kickstarter sound like amateurish wipers, but the stereogum stuff does give it an ironically glossy-in-comparison faux-albini vibe

― da croupier, Friday, 4 February 2011 21:08 (fourteen years ago)

jesus lizard? no way dogg

― basedketball (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Friday, 4 February 2011 21:17 (fourteen years ago)

maybe we should move the making fun of mr dream to the rolling punk thread

― a led zep of one (Edward III), Friday, 4 February 2011 21:19 (fourteen years ago)

not an expert in detecting protools, but the new stuff sounds like they're working with software now

― da croupier, Friday, 4 February 2011 21:19 (fourteen years ago)

mr dreamer upper

― zvookster, Friday, 4 February 2011 21:22 (fourteen years ago)

mr the-dream

― dayo, Saturday, 5 February 2011 00:31 (fourteen years ago)

Seems that Sylvester's journalism is far more creative than his chops.

― i love you but i have chosen snarkness (Steve Shasta), Saturday, 5 February 2011 00:36 (fourteen years ago)

one year passes...

I knew that Sylvester had been involved in a minor journalistic scandal some years back: He’d been caught fabricating some details in a story he’d written for the Village Voice.

― queequeg (peter grasswich), Monday, 25 June 2012 22:09 (thirteen years ago)

There is the theory of the Moebius.

― Ned Raggett, Monday, 25 June 2012 23:22 (thirteen years ago)

It feels shitty anytime your bike is stolen, but it’s doubly shitty on your birthday—tripley shitty when the temperature is 97 F and the birthday in question is your 43rd.
You could argue that my bike was a midlife-crisis purchase in the first place. It’s a three-speed Chief cruiser made by the California-based manufacturer Felt. The Chief isn’t expensive, as bicycles go, but it’s flashy. It has a sleek metallic-maroon retro-style frame with an old fashioned “tank” and a pretty brown leather saddle with matching handlebar grips. The pièces de résistance are the tires: enormous white Thick Bricks, a good deal bigger than the average balloon tire and a lot more eye-catching. In short, it’s a cheeseball retro-ride—a friend called it “the PT Cruiser of bicycles.” The Chief is a fish tank and a couple of flat-screens away from being the bike that West Coast Customs would make, if they were in the business of pimping two-wheelers.

excellent universal writing that makes references everyone can understand and enhances empathy dude, good job

― the hat's filthy lesson (sic), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 00:07 (thirteen years ago)

why did you bold those things

― funny-skrillex-bee_132455836669.gif (s1ocki), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 00:12 (thirteen years ago)

to enhance empathy

― Misc. Carnivora (Matt P), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 00:14 (thirteen years ago)

want to rewrite the slate article from the pov of pee wee herman

― some dude, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 00:30 (thirteen years ago)

'the wire' as rebooted by zach braff

― omar little, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 00:52 (thirteen years ago)

why did you bold those things

2nd par: because I have little to no idea what instant associations he expects anyone to make with them, but he obviously expects ppl to

1st par: what makes the 43rd different from other ones?

― the hat's filthy lesson (sic), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 01:20 (thirteen years ago)

i get why 43rd is kinda provoctive

― call all destroyer, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 01:22 (thirteen years ago)

but i know nothing about bikes

― call all destroyer, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 01:22 (thirteen years ago)

i guess i didn't get the 43rd bday thing either since i thought if you've had that many birthdays 1) you don't care as much 2) hopefully it's more likely you can afford to buy a new bike?

― Misc. Carnivora (Matt P), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 01:27 (thirteen years ago)

i enjoyed the article btw because i like his writing but i can see the ways it's also annoying

― Misc. Carnivora (Matt P), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 01:30 (thirteen years ago)

"what's the identifying mark?"

haha thank you for remembering my bike, seeing the tweet, backtracking your steps, and finally tracking it down but I'm going to need a little more from you, because, you know.

― sanskrit, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 02:06 (thirteen years ago)

oh c'mon it's good that he was thorough after he was finally close enough to get a really good look

― some dude, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 10:17 (thirteen years ago)

i love jody but btdt
http://www.whatever-whenever.net/blog/2010/08/justice-in-brooklyn/

― maura, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 12:21 (thirteen years ago)

He is my least favorite Jody Rosen.

― I found him in a Bon Ton ad (Nicole), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 13:04 (thirteen years ago)

i like the part where he sees the bike is parked outside a social services building and gives a kind of knowing sigh as if to say "times are tough pal, but not on my watch."

― funny-skrillex-bee_132455836669.gif (s1ocki), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 13:33 (thirteen years ago)

quite honestly, all I can think of is a 43-year-old man riding around on a bike that looks like this:

http://2009.feltracing.com/09/images/catalog/xl/8984.png

all of the conservative style neurons in my brain are overloading

― Victory Chainsaw! (DJP), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 13:59 (thirteen years ago)

When I saw the picture on Slate, I thought the lettering on the body read THIEF.

― Never translate Dutch (jaymc), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 14:10 (thirteen years ago)

i don't think he realizes how bad riding the pt cruiser of bikes actually is

― call all destroyer, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 14:11 (thirteen years ago)

it looks like a tricycle

― funny-skrillex-bee_132455836669.gif (s1ocki), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 14:20 (thirteen years ago)

for babies

― funny-skrillex-bee_132455836669.gif (s1ocki), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 14:20 (thirteen years ago)

quite honestly, all I can think of is a 43-year-old man riding around on a bike that looks like this:

how ageist!

i'm 44 and i ride a bike that looks like this. if you have a problem with that, it's yr problem!

http://bikereviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/electra-super-deluxe-3i-2010-city-bike.jpg

― stirmonster, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 14:38 (thirteen years ago)

I guess you didn't make it to the all of the conservative style neurons in my brain are overloading part of that post?

― Victory Chainsaw! (DJP), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 14:39 (thirteen years ago)

(also, your bike is distinctive-looking without being painfully fugly)

― Victory Chainsaw! (DJP), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 14:41 (thirteen years ago)

http://gallery.photo.net/photo/2669805-md.jpg

― buzza, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 14:44 (thirteen years ago)

i did read that part of yr post. i'm just trying to settle into grumpy middle aged man who doesn't give a damn mode but not fully convincing myself.

― stirmonster, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 15:12 (thirteen years ago)

Isn't Rosen riding that bike because he frequently writes about early 20th century music and this bike fits that old-school ethic

― curmudgeon, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 16:55 (thirteen years ago)

I hope not

― Victory Chainsaw! (DJP), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 16:56 (thirteen years ago)

that is a terrible reason to ride an ugly bike IMO

― Victory Chainsaw! (DJP), Tuesday, 26 June 2012 16:56 (thirteen years ago)

cheesy retro is his thang

― curmudgeon, Tuesday, 26 June 2012 16:57 (thirteen years ago)

is there another thread about this? i think the article deserves more discussion. i don't know what type of discussion, but just... more.

― s.clover, Wednesday, 27 June 2012 17:49 (thirteen years ago)

how much more discussion does it need?

― scott seward, Wednesday, 27 June 2012 17:56 (thirteen years ago)

"first world tragedies"

― omar little, Wednesday, 27 June 2012 17:56 (thirteen years ago)

/!\ BREAKING: Unlocked bike stolen from city street in NYC /!\

― queequeg (peter grasswich), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 18:06 (thirteen years ago)

http://makezineblog.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/make_1175.jpg?w=500&h=548

― am0n, Wednesday, 27 June 2012 20:37 (thirteen years ago)

"PT Cruiser" and "West Coast Customs" describing the same thing is some pretty heavy metaphor-mixing

― mh, Wednesday, 27 June 2012 20:43 (thirteen years ago)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/20/Ladri3.jpg

― s.clover, Wednesday, 27 June 2012 20:48 (thirteen years ago)

fuck bikes

― some dude nights (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 20:48 (thirteen years ago)

fuck bikes were great when they opened for blues control

― diamanda ram dass (Edward III), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 20:55 (thirteen years ago)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY2Gk0WuEB4

― am0n, Wednesday, 27 June 2012 21:11 (thirteen years ago)

fuck bikes

― some dude nights (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, June 27, 2012 4:48 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

lol. what will u hate next

― funny-skrillex-bee_132455836669.gif (s1ocki), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 22:32 (thirteen years ago)

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

― some dude nights (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 27 June 2012 22:35 (thirteen years ago)

http://www.emo-corner.com/forums/uploads_gallery/gallery/album_14152/gallery_145323_14152_57262.jpg

― omar little, Wednesday, 27 June 2012 22:36 (thirteen years ago)

RIP the old ilx FAQ that said "the jody rosen that posts on ilx is not the jody rosen that writes for rolling stone"

― J0rdan S., Thursday, 28 June 2012 03:46 (thirteen years ago)

two years pass...

Wait so we have him to thank for Shamir?

― jaymc, Thursday, 18 December 2014 05:20 (ten years ago)

he certainly has put his name on the Northtown wikipedia page a bunch of times, hasn't he?

― een, Thursday, 18 December 2014 05:33 (ten years ago)

Heh.

― jaymc, Thursday, 18 December 2014 05:34 (ten years ago)

the inexorable end game: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/hiring-a-music-writer-who-wants-to-work-for-you

― iggwilv azaelea (sanskrit), Tuesday, 30 December 2014 01:08 (ten years ago)

two years pass...

Anyway

http://www.vulture.com/2017/08/why-is-los-angeles-a-great-place-to-make-pop-music.html

― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 9 August 2017 16:13 (eight years ago)

Does the endless positivity start to feel fake after a while? Sure. Did I spend my first week here co-writing a terrible song titled “Bone to Bone”? Of course I did.

― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 9 August 2017 16:21 (eight years ago)

seven years pass...

just learned he is married to Mina Kimes

― jaymc, Thursday, 24 April 2025 17:43 (seven months ago)

His last few essays have been really good (and relevant to my interests)

https://smartdumb.substack.com/p/what-is-the-point-of-an-independent

https://smartdumb.substack.com/p/o-drum-fill-where-art-thou

― Jordan s/t (Jordan), Thursday, 24 April 2025 18:08 (seven months ago)

Xpost I’ve known that for a few years and it’s a very weird fact to have rattling around my brain

― circles, Thursday, 24 April 2025 18:11 (seven months ago)

(I don't know who that is)

― Jordan s/t (Jordan), Thursday, 24 April 2025 18:21 (seven months ago)

She's an ESPN sports reporter/TV personality. I mostly know her through social media tbqh.

― jaymc, Thursday, 24 April 2025 18:29 (seven months ago)

Can't believe Mina Kimes is married to a Eurorack nerd

― papal hotwife (milo z), Thursday, 24 April 2025 18:35 (seven months ago)

he definitely won out over the loser with all the commas upthread.

― Evans on Hammond (evol j), Thursday, 24 April 2025 19:38 (seven months ago)

two months pass...

Huh.

https://nicksylvester.bandcamp.com/album/stereo-music-for-breakbeats-and-samplers

― Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 24 June 2025 15:07 (five months ago)

conceptually nifty but giving me a headache.

― Evans on Hammond (evol j), Tuesday, 24 June 2025 15:15 (five months ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.