The internet is a double-edged sword at the best of times. For journalists and writers there are now far more opportunities to have their work published and find an appreciative audience. While it must be rewarding to recieve positive feedback from readers the flip side is that sometimes journalists are faced with very direct, uncomplimentary thoughts on their 'abilities'.
Usually the odd negative comment amongst a field of positive or indifferent comments is par for the course and something I imagine most would be able to brush off without a second thought. Sometimes however, the response to an article is unequivically (and often hilariously) derogatory. Such is the case with this article proportedly about how to spot 'Dodgy' lodgers from the Guardian's Money section.
You have to be doing something wrong when more than one person states that they registered as a member of the website just so they could slate the article!
Here's a sample:
"...this is just incredibly bad. No coherence whatsoever - it starts as an anecdote, segues clumsily into what could charitably be described as decorating advice, or uncharitably as a tedious description of the contents of the author's home, descends into a morass of poor-little-rich-girl-me and some useless information, and ends abruptly with a homily of breathtaking banality in place of a conclusion."
"This must have been written during the current hot spell."
"The piece outlines the kind of middle class existence and chatter that would make suicide seem a noble alternative if I came to close to it."
It's savage and sadistically amusing - read, read, read.
No comments:
Post a Comment