Hey Guys!
April 19, 2010 6:00 AM Subscribe
This should come with a "will make you want to destroy your computer" warning.
posted by nevercalm at 6:07 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by nevercalm at 6:07 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
Best: 0:59, 1:33, 2:00. 2:16.
posted by Daddy-O at 6:16 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by Daddy-O at 6:16 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
*flips hair back*
posted by Wolfdog at 6:19 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by Wolfdog at 6:19 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
It was posted by mozart595. I don't know if he composed it as well, but it seems an appropriate commentary on then vs now.
posted by cashman at 6:24 AM on April 19, 2010
posted by cashman at 6:24 AM on April 19, 2010
Galvanizing. As in, electrodes clipped to me and the current turned on.
posted by pracowity at 6:27 AM on April 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by pracowity at 6:27 AM on April 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
What is this "hayguise" these people keep talking about?
posted by mikepaco at 6:36 AM on April 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by mikepaco at 6:36 AM on April 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
Turns out they're all really big Electric Company fans.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 6:37 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by Horace Rumpole at 6:37 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
Hey, guys!
Hey, guys!
Hey, guys!
Hey, guys!
Hey guys!
Hey guys!
Hey guys!
Hey, guys.
Hey, guys.
Hey, guys.
Hey, guys.
HEY YOU GUUUYYYYYS!
Hey guys.
Hey guys.
Hey guys.
Hey, guys...
Hey, guys...
Hey, guys...
Hey, guys...
Hey guys...
Hey guys...
Hey guys...
posted by slimepuppy at 6:43 AM on April 19, 2010
Hey, guys!
Hey, guys!
Hey, guys!
Hey guys!
Hey guys!
Hey guys!
Hey, guys.
Hey, guys.
Hey, guys.
Hey, guys.
HEY YOU GUUUYYYYYS!
Hey guys.
Hey guys.
Hey guys.
Hey, guys...
Hey, guys...
Hey, guys...
Hey, guys...
Hey guys...
Hey guys...
Hey guys...
posted by slimepuppy at 6:43 AM on April 19, 2010
I wish there was a counter and a ding on each one, then I would be able to count off bits of my soul coming outta my head as I watched this.
This reminds me of a critique of Glenn Beck (and news personalities in all) recently penned but I forget the author, essentially the critique was that Glenn and friends spoke to "the nation" and traditionally good news people spoke to the viewer as an individual, as in "Hey Guys" versus "Thanks for watching friend". The "Hey Guys" greeting assumes multiple viewers and betrays a narcissism (earned or not) whereas an individual greeting, "Good Day my friend and thank-you for viewing" seems to display a bit more humility, like the presenter only expects you, the individual viewer to be watching and listening.
Does anyone remember this critique?
posted by NiteMayr at 7:03 AM on April 19, 2010 [4 favorites]
This reminds me of a critique of Glenn Beck (and news personalities in all) recently penned but I forget the author, essentially the critique was that Glenn and friends spoke to "the nation" and traditionally good news people spoke to the viewer as an individual, as in "Hey Guys" versus "Thanks for watching friend". The "Hey Guys" greeting assumes multiple viewers and betrays a narcissism (earned or not) whereas an individual greeting, "Good Day my friend and thank-you for viewing" seems to display a bit more humility, like the presenter only expects you, the individual viewer to be watching and listening.
Does anyone remember this critique?
posted by NiteMayr at 7:03 AM on April 19, 2010 [4 favorites]
Wow. I could only stand about 20 seconds of it before it stopped sounding like greetings, and more like random sounds squashed together. Hig eyes? Hague ice? Haggis? High guise?
And then another 10 seconds before I just couldn't stand it anymore.
BTW, what does "beauty guru" mean? Do these people actually offer some form of fashion advice normally? Or just semi-hot jailbait that viewers use as a form of meditation (hell, just the introductions made my mind go completely blank)?
posted by pla at 7:04 AM on April 19, 2010
And then another 10 seconds before I just couldn't stand it anymore.
BTW, what does "beauty guru" mean? Do these people actually offer some form of fashion advice normally? Or just semi-hot jailbait that viewers use as a form of meditation (hell, just the introductions made my mind go completely blank)?
posted by pla at 7:04 AM on April 19, 2010
BTW, what does "beauty guru" mean?
Aum... my God!
posted by pracowity at 7:08 AM on April 19, 2010 [4 favorites]
Aum... my God!
posted by pracowity at 7:08 AM on April 19, 2010 [4 favorites]
Firefox really needs to make that CLOSE THE WINDOW button bigger... 'cuz when your brain is about to explode, it's hard to hit that little dot on the tab!
posted by HuronBob at 7:10 AM on April 19, 2010
posted by HuronBob at 7:10 AM on April 19, 2010
After 30 seconds it just sounds like a foreign language. My mind stopped associating any sort of meaning to what they were saying.
posted by sciurus at 7:11 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by sciurus at 7:11 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
Someone needs to channel George Bernard Shaw and sort them by vowels.
posted by FuManchu at 7:30 AM on April 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by FuManchu at 7:30 AM on April 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
BTW, what does "beauty guru" mean? Do these people actually offer some form of fashion advice normally? Or just semi-hot jailbait that viewers use as a form of meditation (hell, just the introductions made my mind go completely blank)?
There are a lot of people on Youtube and blogs that do makeovers and product reviews and such (the beauty press is very fluffy and, more than likely because of advertising dollar, almost never critical of products). Lauren Luke is a good example - single parent filming makeovers in her bedroom, people liked what she did, and now she has a book deal and is making a career out of it.
There are also people like Lime Crime, though, who is a one-woman internet drama trainwreck by the looks of things.
posted by mippy at 7:36 AM on April 19, 2010
There are a lot of people on Youtube and blogs that do makeovers and product reviews and such (the beauty press is very fluffy and, more than likely because of advertising dollar, almost never critical of products). Lauren Luke is a good example - single parent filming makeovers in her bedroom, people liked what she did, and now she has a book deal and is making a career out of it.
There are also people like Lime Crime, though, who is a one-woman internet drama trainwreck by the looks of things.
posted by mippy at 7:36 AM on April 19, 2010
Too bad he couldn't throw in a "Hey hey hey" from What's Happening's own Rerun as a palette cleanser.
posted by willmize at 7:54 AM on April 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by willmize at 7:54 AM on April 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
BTW, what does "beauty guru" mean? Do these people actually offer some form of fashion advice normally? Or just semi-hot jailbait that viewers use as a form of meditation (hell, just the introductions made my mind go completely blank)?
They're usually makeup artists, hairdressers or amateur journalists (or perhaps none of those but merely someone with an interest in beauty products and accessories with a webcam and an ego,) who reviews products they've tried in a video blog format. The more established ones with dedicated followings are more successful at requesting sample products directly from various companies' marketing or pr departments / agencies, and of those the most ethical ones will mention that they've gotten products for free.
They (and print bloggers) sort of tread a fine line for publicists who work with beauty product companies. On the one hand, the larger ones have a dedicated audience that should be interested in hearing about your products, so they're desirable contacts. On the other, they're not traditional journalists and therefore a publicist can't assume they're going to stick to an ethical code of conduct. Fact checking with an unprofessional blogger can be a nightmare. On the other hand, they're also not an editorial department driven by advertising dollars the way that magazines are, so that can be positive thing for a consumer.
posted by zarq at 7:57 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
They're usually makeup artists, hairdressers or amateur journalists (or perhaps none of those but merely someone with an interest in beauty products and accessories with a webcam and an ego,) who reviews products they've tried in a video blog format. The more established ones with dedicated followings are more successful at requesting sample products directly from various companies' marketing or pr departments / agencies, and of those the most ethical ones will mention that they've gotten products for free.
They (and print bloggers) sort of tread a fine line for publicists who work with beauty product companies. On the one hand, the larger ones have a dedicated audience that should be interested in hearing about your products, so they're desirable contacts. On the other, they're not traditional journalists and therefore a publicist can't assume they're going to stick to an ethical code of conduct. Fact checking with an unprofessional blogger can be a nightmare. On the other hand, they're also not an editorial department driven by advertising dollars the way that magazines are, so that can be positive thing for a consumer.
posted by zarq at 7:57 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
Ugh. Apparently I have three hands....
posted by zarq at 7:58 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by zarq at 7:58 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
Zarg - a friend of mine is a noted beauty blogger (not going to link to her here in case she doesn't want me to) and she very much likes to review fairly - she is a writer, and a consumer, and she writes what she would want to read from someone else. Beauty magazines do not review products in the same way as, say, PC Gamer reviews games. It's not that they get the products for free so much as they have powerful advertisers and criticising products will break that link.
Bloggers on the other hand are able to give their opinions on whether something works - and while disclosure isn't required in the same way as it is in the States, many UK bloggers will say whether they've been sent something or spent their own money. If I want to buy a particular product, I will look at Temptalia or Make Up Alley, as I don't want to spend £10 on something that doesn't do what I want it to.
One example: a new brand called Lime Crime has just launched in the UK. there's a lot of controversy behind the brand - there are allegations that the eyeshadows are generic product repackaged at a ridiculous premium, and various drama surrounding the founder. 99% of potential consumers will know nothing about this, and probably don't need to know - they want to know whether their £16 lipstick is worth buying. The brand has launched lipsticks. Now, many of the regular press will write something like 'these new lipsticks are really bright, the brand is really cool, they're available at store X for £Y.' Bloggers have tested them, with pictures, and reported that they don't do the job they set out to very well at all. That is more valuable to me as a consumer.
(And before someoen says 'it's just face paint!' - it's about being an informed consumer. Imagine that every time you wanted to buy, say, a game, all you could read about was what it was about and where to buy it, not whether the gameplay was actually poor or there were crappy DRM restrictions as the magazine didn't want to piss off Ubisoft (NB lawyers: that's an example)
posted by mippy at 8:27 AM on April 19, 2010 [3 favorites]
Bloggers on the other hand are able to give their opinions on whether something works - and while disclosure isn't required in the same way as it is in the States, many UK bloggers will say whether they've been sent something or spent their own money. If I want to buy a particular product, I will look at Temptalia or Make Up Alley, as I don't want to spend £10 on something that doesn't do what I want it to.
One example: a new brand called Lime Crime has just launched in the UK. there's a lot of controversy behind the brand - there are allegations that the eyeshadows are generic product repackaged at a ridiculous premium, and various drama surrounding the founder. 99% of potential consumers will know nothing about this, and probably don't need to know - they want to know whether their £16 lipstick is worth buying. The brand has launched lipsticks. Now, many of the regular press will write something like 'these new lipsticks are really bright, the brand is really cool, they're available at store X for £Y.' Bloggers have tested them, with pictures, and reported that they don't do the job they set out to very well at all. That is more valuable to me as a consumer.
(And before someoen says 'it's just face paint!' - it's about being an informed consumer. Imagine that every time you wanted to buy, say, a game, all you could read about was what it was about and where to buy it, not whether the gameplay was actually poor or there were crappy DRM restrictions as the magazine didn't want to piss off Ubisoft (NB lawyers: that's an example)
posted by mippy at 8:27 AM on April 19, 2010 [3 favorites]
That is more valuable to me as a consumer.
Zarg[sic] never said that they were not potentially valuable to a consumer -- he simply noted the concerns that a company or hired publicist would have in dealing with the "unknown element" of a random YouTube blogger/reviewer. I think both of you make great points, but I don't think you necessarily are countering his statement (nor does it need to be).
posted by cavalier at 8:39 AM on April 19, 2010
Zarg[sic] never said that they were not potentially valuable to a consumer -- he simply noted the concerns that a company or hired publicist would have in dealing with the "unknown element" of a random YouTube blogger/reviewer. I think both of you make great points, but I don't think you necessarily are countering his statement (nor does it need to be).
posted by cavalier at 8:39 AM on April 19, 2010
Beauty magazines do not review products in the same way as, say, PC Gamer reviews games. It's not that they get the products for free so much as they have powerful advertisers and criticising products will break that link.
The gaming press actually has this problem in spades, and it's not limited to print sources, but I know what you mean.
posted by GameDesignerBen at 8:40 AM on April 19, 2010
The gaming press actually has this problem in spades, and it's not limited to print sources, but I know what you mean.
posted by GameDesignerBen at 8:40 AM on April 19, 2010
Can we combine this with the nuke test thread up the page?
posted by Mcable at 8:57 AM on April 19, 2010
posted by Mcable at 8:57 AM on April 19, 2010
Hike ice.
posted by beelzbubba at 8:57 AM on April 19, 2010
posted by beelzbubba at 8:57 AM on April 19, 2010
I miss read that as 'beardy gurus'.... I was expecting this and this
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 9:01 AM on April 19, 2010
posted by fearfulsymmetry at 9:01 AM on April 19, 2010
Zarg - a friend of mine is a noted beauty blogger (not going to link to her here in case she doesn't want me to) and she very much likes to review fairly - she is a writer, and a consumer, and she writes what she would want to read from someone else. Beauty magazines do not review products in the same way as, say, PC Gamer reviews games. It's not that they get the products for free so much as they have powerful advertisers and criticising products will break that link.
I've been a publicist for many years. Have literally helped launched a number of beauty brands without accompanying advertising campaigns. Am intimately familiar with the power advertisers have in creating editorial coverage of their products in various print and electronic media. However, companies that don't advertise in the magazines which review their products can and do find themselves the subject of negative reviews. There are also several magazines that have reputations for being objective, such as Good Housekeeping.
From a publicist's perspective, there are advantages and disadvantages to working with bloggers. From a consumer's perspective, there's little in the way of transparency. Little oversight exists on bloggers to require them to disclose potential outside influences or kickbacks. Magazines and especially newspapers do tend to have more stringent standards. But not always.
Bloggers on the other hand are able to give their opinions on whether something works - and while disclosure isn't required in the same way as it is in the States, many UK bloggers will say whether they've been sent something or spent their own money.
Well... the FCC now requires disclosure on the part of US bloggers but from experience, I can tell you that most still do not.
But If I want to buy a particular product, I will look at Temptalia or Make Up Alley, as I don't want to spend £10 on something that doesn't do what I want it to.
Which is good. That's the way it's supposed to work! But 90% of the "beauty gurus" in this video aren't associated with a decently sized website with established ethical standards. And yes, from experience, fact checking is a serious problem with most bloggers. Some reprint marketing language verbatim off a press release and don't do their own homework. Others don't check/confirm their work, because they either don't know whom to contact at a company, or can't be bothered.
One example: a new brand called Lime Crime has just launched in the UK. there's a lot of controversy behind the brand - there are allegations that the eyeshadows are generic product repackaged at a ridiculous premium, and various drama surrounding the founder. 99% of potential consumers will know nothing about this, and probably don't need to know - they want to know whether their £16 lipstick is worth buying. The brand has launched lipsticks. Now, many of the regular press will write something like 'these new lipsticks are really bright, the brand is really cool, they're available at store X for £Y.' Bloggers have tested them, with pictures, and reported that they don't do the job they set out to very well at all. That is more valuable to me as a consumer.
Good. Then you're getting what you need out of them. That's not really what my original comment was about, though.
It's worth pointing out as well that all magazines are not corrupted by advertising dollars, and at least a small number are clearly capable of being objective.
posted by zarq at 9:04 AM on April 19, 2010
I've been a publicist for many years. Have literally helped launched a number of beauty brands without accompanying advertising campaigns. Am intimately familiar with the power advertisers have in creating editorial coverage of their products in various print and electronic media. However, companies that don't advertise in the magazines which review their products can and do find themselves the subject of negative reviews. There are also several magazines that have reputations for being objective, such as Good Housekeeping.
From a publicist's perspective, there are advantages and disadvantages to working with bloggers. From a consumer's perspective, there's little in the way of transparency. Little oversight exists on bloggers to require them to disclose potential outside influences or kickbacks. Magazines and especially newspapers do tend to have more stringent standards. But not always.
Bloggers on the other hand are able to give their opinions on whether something works - and while disclosure isn't required in the same way as it is in the States, many UK bloggers will say whether they've been sent something or spent their own money.
Well... the FCC now requires disclosure on the part of US bloggers but from experience, I can tell you that most still do not.
But If I want to buy a particular product, I will look at Temptalia or Make Up Alley, as I don't want to spend £10 on something that doesn't do what I want it to.
Which is good. That's the way it's supposed to work! But 90% of the "beauty gurus" in this video aren't associated with a decently sized website with established ethical standards. And yes, from experience, fact checking is a serious problem with most bloggers. Some reprint marketing language verbatim off a press release and don't do their own homework. Others don't check/confirm their work, because they either don't know whom to contact at a company, or can't be bothered.
One example: a new brand called Lime Crime has just launched in the UK. there's a lot of controversy behind the brand - there are allegations that the eyeshadows are generic product repackaged at a ridiculous premium, and various drama surrounding the founder. 99% of potential consumers will know nothing about this, and probably don't need to know - they want to know whether their £16 lipstick is worth buying. The brand has launched lipsticks. Now, many of the regular press will write something like 'these new lipsticks are really bright, the brand is really cool, they're available at store X for £Y.' Bloggers have tested them, with pictures, and reported that they don't do the job they set out to very well at all. That is more valuable to me as a consumer.
Good. Then you're getting what you need out of them. That's not really what my original comment was about, though.
It's worth pointing out as well that all magazines are not corrupted by advertising dollars, and at least a small number are clearly capable of being objective.
posted by zarq at 9:04 AM on April 19, 2010
Cavalier, I wasn't disagreeing with Zarg, just adding my two cents. Or pence. Whichever the exchange rate favours.
GameDesignerBen - really? Any examples? I'm not a gamer but I do sometimes look at the blogs/magazine my SO reads.
There are also several magazines that have reputations for being objective, such as Good Housekeeping.
True dat, but I wouldn't consider GH to be a part of the mainstream beauty press . I work in advertising regulation, and have seen some (non-beauty - cosmetics claims are fairly subjective) products we have allowed to make no claims at all in their advertising- because in clinical tests they do nothing - written about in women's magazines in a way that suggests they do everything they promise. (I can't tell you which, mind.). This is information that few people will have access to, so it isn't a blogger vs print situation, more that I tend to find independent views more useful to me personally.
Some bloggers are more reputable than others, just as I prefer the comment/reviews in some print publications to others. It's pretty clear to me what's pulled from a press release, just because I take an interest in that kind of thing and I'm fairly savvy, but agree not the case for everyone. Amazon reviews being often one example.
For example - I am very pale, and I want to know whether something will suit my pale skin, so I find review sites good for that as you can search MUA by certain variables. I wish other industries did that - I find articles on 'bras for every size!' for example in magazines very very useless as that size tends to be 36C. I guess consumers tend to research what's relevant to them, and more people should know there are user reviews available to them.
It's worth pointing out as well that all magazines are not corrupted by advertising dollars
I don't think 'corrupted' is the right term - more that they're limited by them.
posted by mippy at 9:20 AM on April 19, 2010
GameDesignerBen - really? Any examples? I'm not a gamer but I do sometimes look at the blogs/magazine my SO reads.
There are also several magazines that have reputations for being objective, such as Good Housekeeping.
True dat, but I wouldn't consider GH to be a part of the mainstream beauty press . I work in advertising regulation, and have seen some (non-beauty - cosmetics claims are fairly subjective) products we have allowed to make no claims at all in their advertising- because in clinical tests they do nothing - written about in women's magazines in a way that suggests they do everything they promise. (I can't tell you which, mind.). This is information that few people will have access to, so it isn't a blogger vs print situation, more that I tend to find independent views more useful to me personally.
Some bloggers are more reputable than others, just as I prefer the comment/reviews in some print publications to others. It's pretty clear to me what's pulled from a press release, just because I take an interest in that kind of thing and I'm fairly savvy, but agree not the case for everyone. Amazon reviews being often one example.
For example - I am very pale, and I want to know whether something will suit my pale skin, so I find review sites good for that as you can search MUA by certain variables. I wish other industries did that - I find articles on 'bras for every size!' for example in magazines very very useless as that size tends to be 36C. I guess consumers tend to research what's relevant to them, and more people should know there are user reviews available to them.
It's worth pointing out as well that all magazines are not corrupted by advertising dollars
I don't think 'corrupted' is the right term - more that they're limited by them.
posted by mippy at 9:20 AM on April 19, 2010
I'm going to see if Mr. Mazzy's missing... missing.... missing.
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
posted by benzenedream at 9:28 AM on April 19, 2010
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
posted by benzenedream at 9:28 AM on April 19, 2010
jquinby, you think you're sorry? Not as sorry as me.
posted by barrett caulk at 9:30 AM on April 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by barrett caulk at 9:30 AM on April 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
mippy: "GameDesignerBen - really? Any examples? I'm not a gamer but I do sometimes look at the blogs/magazine my SO reads."
The gaming industry is notoriously skeevy for this kind of thing. I've heard lots of reports of "exclusive" reviews tied directly to the score given, so much so that I pretty much don't trust any review classified that way. The GFW Podcast (now sadly defunct) used to have pretty regular discussions on the negative effect of advertising on games journalism. Take a look at the IGN MusicHub fiasco for a pretty concrete example of lines being crossed.
posted by graventy at 9:36 AM on April 19, 2010
The gaming industry is notoriously skeevy for this kind of thing. I've heard lots of reports of "exclusive" reviews tied directly to the score given, so much so that I pretty much don't trust any review classified that way. The GFW Podcast (now sadly defunct) used to have pretty regular discussions on the negative effect of advertising on games journalism. Take a look at the IGN MusicHub fiasco for a pretty concrete example of lines being crossed.
posted by graventy at 9:36 AM on April 19, 2010
mippy, it's been an open and somewhat lamented secret in editorial circles for years that video game journalism has a serious ethics problem.
Back in 2003, The OJR talked about the expensive junkets video game companies were providing to media reviewers for free. Ubisoft apparently demanded positive reviews for Assassin's Creed II from at least one magazine. Eidos tried to prevent negative reviews from being released about Tomb Raider: Underworld. Also see "You can shove the gaming press around" here re: Activision and Modern Warfare 2. And of course, there's this Penny Arcade review of a review, which showed that Games Radar only spent 3 hours testing a game before reviewing it.
posted by zarq at 9:39 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
Back in 2003, The OJR talked about the expensive junkets video game companies were providing to media reviewers for free. Ubisoft apparently demanded positive reviews for Assassin's Creed II from at least one magazine. Eidos tried to prevent negative reviews from being released about Tomb Raider: Underworld. Also see "You can shove the gaming press around" here re: Activision and Modern Warfare 2. And of course, there's this Penny Arcade review of a review, which showed that Games Radar only spent 3 hours testing a game before reviewing it.
posted by zarq at 9:39 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
My favorite part was when that one lady says "hey guys".
posted by the jam at 9:46 AM on April 19, 2010
posted by the jam at 9:46 AM on April 19, 2010
I kind of faded out half way through, but please tell me that they included glowpinkstah (previously).
posted by maudlin at 9:50 AM on April 19, 2010
posted by maudlin at 9:50 AM on April 19, 2010
I work in advertising regulation, and have seen some (non-beauty - cosmetics claims are fairly subjective) products we have allowed to make no claims at all in their advertising- because in clinical tests they do nothing - written about in women's magazines in a way that suggests they do everything they promise. (I can't tell you which, mind.). This is information that few people will have access to, so it isn't a blogger vs print situation, more that I tend to find independent views more useful to me personally.
Oh, I totally know where you're coming from there. I used to work with a dermatologist who loved to tell beauty editors that certain claims being made by various creams and lotions were outright lies, and why.
I don't think 'corrupted' is the right term - more that they're limited by them.
Hrm. If a reporter either doesn't tell the truth to their readers or limits what they examine in an article or interview because someone is buying an ad in their magazine, then isn't that an ethical violation?
posted by zarq at 9:55 AM on April 19, 2010
Oh, I totally know where you're coming from there. I used to work with a dermatologist who loved to tell beauty editors that certain claims being made by various creams and lotions were outright lies, and why.
I don't think 'corrupted' is the right term - more that they're limited by them.
Hrm. If a reporter either doesn't tell the truth to their readers or limits what they examine in an article or interview because someone is buying an ad in their magazine, then isn't that an ethical violation?
posted by zarq at 9:55 AM on April 19, 2010
mippy, your throwaway comment about lime crime lead me into such an internet wormhole about makeup repackaging and internet drama. It was fascinating, but you owe me two hours of my life!
posted by piratebowling at 10:16 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by piratebowling at 10:16 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
Ugh. I'm glad I taught ESL before youtube.
posted by YoBananaBoy at 10:27 AM on April 19, 2010
posted by YoBananaBoy at 10:27 AM on April 19, 2010
"Hey guys" turned in to noise pretty quick, so what struck me us how few of these people are actually very attractive and how many are actually terrifying.
posted by cmoj at 11:02 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by cmoj at 11:02 AM on April 19, 2010 [1 favorite]
I'm sorry piratebowling! It is oddly fascinating, and makes me wish I had that sort of chutzpah.
posted by mippy at 11:50 AM on April 19, 2010
posted by mippy at 11:50 AM on April 19, 2010
a new brand called Lime Crime has just launched in the UK.
Yeah, they're based here in NYC. The owner, Xenia Voratova, is a model, singer and makeup artist who used to design clothing under the same label.
It's kind of amazing that SpaceNK took her on without doing additional research on the line and her ability to supply on demand. Diversion and repackaging are serious problems for beauty industry product companies, and they're usually a little more savvy.
posted by zarq at 12:20 PM on April 19, 2010
Yeah, they're based here in NYC. The owner, Xenia Voratova, is a model, singer and makeup artist who used to design clothing under the same label.
It's kind of amazing that SpaceNK took her on without doing additional research on the line and her ability to supply on demand. Diversion and repackaging are serious problems for beauty industry product companies, and they're usually a little more savvy.
posted by zarq at 12:20 PM on April 19, 2010
This makes me wonder; is there a word or classification of some sort for the phenomenon of when either a word or phrase is repeated enough times to "lose" its meaning, at least temporarily?
posted by pyrex at 12:39 PM on April 19, 2010
posted by pyrex at 12:39 PM on April 19, 2010
This makes me wonder; is there a word or classification of some sort for the phenomenon of when either a word or phrase is repeated enough times to "lose" its meaning, at least temporarily?
Jamais vu. See this AskMe for more.
posted by zarq at 12:50 PM on April 19, 2010
Jamais vu. See this AskMe for more.
posted by zarq at 12:50 PM on April 19, 2010
This conversation has all the flavor of a flower arranging circle peacefully co-existing with interpretive dancing leprechauns on acid. Hey guys!
posted by fcummins at 1:47 PM on April 19, 2010
posted by fcummins at 1:47 PM on April 19, 2010
Ha! I am currently obsessed with these guys, so I appreciate the humor. I'm living vicariously through their enormous makeup collections, because as a grownup I have to spend my money on things like functional automobiles and rent.
posted by Fui Non Sum at 2:07 PM on April 19, 2010
posted by Fui Non Sum at 2:07 PM on April 19, 2010
Greg Nog...
Lucky for me, my boyfriend will tolerate the socially-fraught pita and he wears gorgeously fabulous makeup when we go out, sometimes with a skirt and/or corset.
He's a soccer-goalie devoted-dad master-electrician the rest of the time.
Gawds, I love being a goth... boys in skirts, girls in boots!
posted by _paegan_ at 4:01 PM on April 19, 2010
Lucky for me, my boyfriend will tolerate the socially-fraught pita and he wears gorgeously fabulous makeup when we go out, sometimes with a skirt and/or corset.
He's a soccer-goalie devoted-dad master-electrician the rest of the time.
Gawds, I love being a goth... boys in skirts, girls in boots!
posted by _paegan_ at 4:01 PM on April 19, 2010
this is some kind of recursive thing, isnt it?
posted by misterhonk at 4:20 PM on April 19, 2010
posted by misterhonk at 4:20 PM on April 19, 2010
In other news, In North American English, "Hey, guys" is a common casual expression when addressing a group of people. Film at 11.
posted by zardoz at 4:45 PM on April 19, 2010
posted by zardoz at 4:45 PM on April 19, 2010
The "Hey Guys" greeting assumes multiple viewers and betrays a narcissism (earned or not) whereas an individual greeting, "Good Day my friend and thank-you for viewing" seems to display a bit more humility, like the presenter only expects you, the individual viewer to be watching and listening.
Please post the link if you find it. This is the opposite of the thesis of this book, which says that being saturated in media that personally addresses us is what generates narcissism and a sense of entitlement. It creates the impression that you're a celebrity and the whole world is the audience, desperately interested in talking to you and meeting your needs.
Perversely, it makes sense that this would eventually transition to celebrities addressing "America" as they do on American Idol--it's how they make themselves relatable the viewer. Even though the audience is being addressed directly, everyone who hears that exempts themselves from being part of the audience. Instead, they relate themselves celebrity: "She's speaking to her audience in the same way that I speak to mine." It still flatters the audience into thinking they are special snowflakes, which is today's form of authoritarianism. We submit to the influence of those who tell us they are empowering us as individuals. Like naturopathic doctors who attack the elitism of mainstream medicine and claim to empower patients, it always turns out that patients are being "empowered" to follow the advice, buy the books and services, etc., of the naturopaths.
posted by AlsoMike at 5:36 PM on April 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
Please post the link if you find it. This is the opposite of the thesis of this book, which says that being saturated in media that personally addresses us is what generates narcissism and a sense of entitlement. It creates the impression that you're a celebrity and the whole world is the audience, desperately interested in talking to you and meeting your needs.
Perversely, it makes sense that this would eventually transition to celebrities addressing "America" as they do on American Idol--it's how they make themselves relatable the viewer. Even though the audience is being addressed directly, everyone who hears that exempts themselves from being part of the audience. Instead, they relate themselves celebrity: "She's speaking to her audience in the same way that I speak to mine." It still flatters the audience into thinking they are special snowflakes, which is today's form of authoritarianism. We submit to the influence of those who tell us they are empowering us as individuals. Like naturopathic doctors who attack the elitism of mainstream medicine and claim to empower patients, it always turns out that patients are being "empowered" to follow the advice, buy the books and services, etc., of the naturopaths.
posted by AlsoMike at 5:36 PM on April 19, 2010 [2 favorites]
« Older "Ooh, I bet you're wonderin' how I knew" | The 120 Minutes Archive Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by wrok at 6:03 AM on April 19, 2010