Join 3,512 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


So it's finally come down to this.
February 7, 2002 9:16 PM   Subscribe

So it's finally come down to this. E-content, 2002 style. Could there be any more conclusive proof that the dotcom era is over?
posted by aaron (22 comments total)

 
Hasn't this been online for awhile now...?
posted by crog at 9:18 PM on February 7, 2002


Proof? You just lead a few hundred people to their pop-under ad. Seems to be working fine to me. croq, the issue is that they pulled their online version "due to it scavenging grocery store sales", when what it is really doing is getting quite a few people to even notice that they had a site.
posted by machaus at 9:27 PM on February 7, 2002


Ed doesn't scare me. I do have a computer in my bathroom.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 9:27 PM on February 7, 2002


I do realize it's a temporary joke. I just thought it was an amusing e-commerce action. One day Jakob Nielsen will declare the idea brilliant and innovative, you'll see!
posted by aaron at 9:33 PM on February 7, 2002


The last time I remember ever reading a copy of the Weekly World News was a decade ago when I worked in talk radio. It was sent to us for free and I was paid to read it, along with a bunch of other newspapers every morning. Part of my job was to xerox anything that the on air personalities would want to talk about on the show.

I scanned Weekly World News for maybe like one or two weeks, never found anything of value for our show, and dumped it in favor of real news articles from real newspapers. The free copies they sent us went straight to the trash after that. So if the Weekly World News stopped publishing tomorrow, it's ten years too late, and I couldn't care less.

They shouldn't blame the Internet for their failure, cuz they suck anyway. Maybe they should look at how they offer crap to their viewership, who don't have as much disposable income as they did a year ago and chose to stop buying crap in favor of covering their bills.
posted by ZachsMind at 9:43 PM on February 7, 2002


crog: follow the link?

Zach: fascinating story. You should talk about yourself more. Talking about the thread topic is boring.
posted by rodii at 9:45 PM on February 7, 2002


That figure skater scared me. She reminded me of O.J. Simpson {scroll down}.
posted by dhartung at 9:47 PM on February 7, 2002


Where's Batboy when you need him?
posted by Hankins at 9:55 PM on February 7, 2002


Rodii, I was talking about my experience with the thread topic. It was not my intent to talk about myself, and I resent the accusation.
posted by ZachsMind at 10:09 PM on February 7, 2002


How strange - I visited this site for the first time last week, for, um, research purposes, and I was amazed. It's basically become a comedy paper. And now, this wacky internet stunt.

Or maybe it was always a comedy paper? And there I was thinking "Chicken Filled with Gunpowder Blows Up House" was fooling some suckers somewhere. Maybe not.
posted by D at 10:17 PM on February 7, 2002


WWN is essential the same as the onion, except the writers for the onion have respect for the intelligence of their readers.
posted by kaefer at 10:32 PM on February 7, 2002


I love the weekly world news. They KNOW we know it's fake. It's a humor magazine.

Zach, your example is like looking through the Onion for newsworthy articles; of course you aren't going to find anything.
posted by Doug at 10:41 PM on February 7, 2002


"Area Man Notes 'Holy Crap, Weekly World News Is Fake'"
posted by owillis at 10:45 PM on February 7, 2002


If you knew the guy I was working for, you'd know that there was a reason why I was asked to look into Weekly World News. Fact is, I wish we had The Onion back in '93. The Onion IS what the Weekly World News never can be: funny. The Onion is good shit. Weekly World News is just shit.
posted by ZachsMind at 10:57 PM on February 7, 2002


The WWN is funny, I don't buy it but its always been something of an onion jr for me. Except that no one believes the onion and I'm sure more than a few people who pay $1.75 for it really want to know how urine drinking can change their lives or if Hitler's brain got loose again.

Me? I'm keeping an eye out for Nixon's zombie.
posted by skallas at 11:29 PM on February 7, 2002


Apparently there's a (rather clean-cut) band called Nixon's Head. But we probably could use another, more deranged one called Nixon's Zombies.
posted by LeLiLo at 12:51 AM on February 8, 2002


I love the attitude presented here. In fact, it makes me want to go out and steal a few dozen copies right now.
posted by phalkin at 2:55 AM on February 8, 2002


the cover story of the "HUGE DOUBLE ISSUE" of the WWN dated September 11, 2001: "President Bush CLONED ... & there's an imposter in the White House, say insiders." i seem to remember some legit news stories on that day where bush seemed to be several places at once.

next to the "PAGE FIVE GIRL" photo is the headline "New study proves it! Internet makes you stupid!"
the following bulet points appear in the article:
• Information on the Internet is often inaccurate.
• The Internet is too big and hard to navigate.
• The Internet has caused huge misconceptions about the economy.
• People express themselves less carefully on-line. The result is an "overall dumber atmosphere," that just perpetuates itself.
• Long-term, intense chat sessions with people who are ignorant may actually make you stupider.

...yes i am a proud owner of this issue.
posted by danOstuporStar at 5:19 AM on February 8, 2002


nixon's head is very very bad.
posted by maura at 6:22 AM on February 8, 2002


Er, actually, about 10 years ago, the Weekly World News actually had a true story in it. I know, because I knew the person involved--her daughter's heart had stopped for a really long time, and the doctor at the hospital decided to cut her chest open and see if he could massage it to get it to start again--and her heart did start again, and she made a full recovery. Made all the newspapers in metro Detroit, and the Weekly World News story had all the basic facts correct. They did sensationalize it, but it was a pretty sensational story to begin with.

That is probably the only time they ever ran a true story, though. I buy it once in a while for Batboy and the aliens. Or when they claim that dead presidents were really women. The sad thing about the paper is that there are probably people who do believe that all the stories are true.
posted by eilatan at 6:33 AM on February 8, 2002


Off topic, but I'm right there with maura about Nixon's Head.
With a clever name, I expect clever music, or at least a drummer who doesn't drum like a stroke victim.
They sell those sticks in pairs, you know, you can hit more than one thing at a time.

As you were.
posted by dong_resin at 8:00 AM on February 8, 2002


WWN is somewhere between obscure store and the onion I think - they don't really do satire, they just make up weird shit. And sometimes they don't make it up, but just search around for it. When i was a kid I thought people took it seriously (and maybe in those pre-ironic saturation days, they did) and that made it a lot funnier. If everyone knows it's a joke, it somehow loses half it's appeal.
posted by mdn at 8:35 AM on February 8, 2002


« Older Scalia: Think the dealth penalty wrong? Resign...  |  Presidential Makeover?... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments