SDB in Opinion Journal July 24, 2003 9:45 PM Subscribe
Jesus, that's awesome, to get a blog post on your personal site reprinted in the wall street fucking journal. I may not agree with a single word of it, but kudos to him for getting a spot in such a prestigous place.
Man, I remember he would post here so often and so lengthy that people urged him to get a blog so he did then he complained that no one read it, and now he's gone onto this. I told him to stick with it and it'd eventually pan out, but I'm surprised anyone with a blog could go this far.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:59 PM on July 24, 2003
Man, I remember he would post here so often and so lengthy that people urged him to get a blog so he did then he complained that no one read it, and now he's gone onto this. I told him to stick with it and it'd eventually pan out, but I'm surprised anyone with a blog could go this far.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:59 PM on July 24, 2003
Matt, you went all the way to Boston the other week, much further than SDB, who only goes down to Starbucks to compose his posts.
posted by billsaysthis at 10:03 PM on July 24, 2003
posted by billsaysthis at 10:03 PM on July 24, 2003
Sometimes I leave my computer chair and open the fridge. Sometimes....
posted by angry modem at 10:11 PM on July 24, 2003
posted by angry modem at 10:11 PM on July 24, 2003
Jesus, that's awesome, to get a blog post on your personal site reprinted in the wall street fucking journal.
Yeah, now he can be laughed at by millions.
posted by y2karl at 10:12 PM on July 24, 2003
Yeah, now he can be laughed at by millions.
posted by y2karl at 10:12 PM on July 24, 2003
Someday he'll threaten to leave the Wall St. Journal and never come back!
posted by jonson at 11:23 PM on July 24, 2003
posted by jonson at 11:23 PM on July 24, 2003
I'm not a blogger, and I don't remember den Beste because I wasn't here back then. I mention these things merely to indicate that I have no ulterior motive for saying what follows:
That is one seriously crappy piece of writing. It's poorly argued, comprehensively fallacious and atrociously written.
And I say this as someone who actually likes to read a well-argued opinion that he doesn't agree with. But I admit I find it curiously validating when none are to be found, and there sure as hell isn't one to be found here. I made a start on enumerating its deficiencies and didn't get two paragraphs before deciding that I simply don't have that kind of time. That the WSJ is reduced to running something like it indicates a severe poverty of lucid people willing to take the line they've chosen. Which, when you look at it that way, is a good thing, isn't it.
posted by George_Spiggott at 11:35 PM on July 24, 2003
That is one seriously crappy piece of writing. It's poorly argued, comprehensively fallacious and atrociously written.
And I say this as someone who actually likes to read a well-argued opinion that he doesn't agree with. But I admit I find it curiously validating when none are to be found, and there sure as hell isn't one to be found here. I made a start on enumerating its deficiencies and didn't get two paragraphs before deciding that I simply don't have that kind of time. That the WSJ is reduced to running something like it indicates a severe poverty of lucid people willing to take the line they've chosen. Which, when you look at it that way, is a good thing, isn't it.
posted by George_Spiggott at 11:35 PM on July 24, 2003
It's funny how really awful this essay looks under banner of a professional publication. There's nothing in it! Even an op-ed piece needs at least one or two facts, or a quote, or even just an anecdote. Otherwise it's just hot air.
posted by coelecanth at 1:56 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by coelecanth at 1:56 AM on July 25, 2003
bottom of the barrel looking for common-minded ideologues. The web is full of em
Considering the source, that's the most ironic sentence I've ever read.
posted by ttrendel at 2:04 AM on July 25, 2003
Considering the source, that's the most ironic sentence I've ever read.
posted by ttrendel at 2:04 AM on July 25, 2003
That's what I felt, coelecanth. The whole thing was just...sort of...empty. It didn't contain anything I haven't seen repeated ad nauseum elsewhere. That's not to say his point of view and theories aren't legitimate - I just don't know how people get off interpreting pulp as objective analysis.
posted by Jimbob at 2:47 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by Jimbob at 2:47 AM on July 25, 2003
Ah yes, the real, secret reason for the war. Pfft. Though it is shaped like a mortar board, it is in fact still a tinfoil hat.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 4:06 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 4:06 AM on July 25, 2003
It probably suffered a bit after being edited down from 3 million words.
posted by bifter at 4:59 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by bifter at 4:59 AM on July 25, 2003
As is usual with Steven Ben Beste, it's long, well written, and utterly wrong.
posted by salmacis at 5:11 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by salmacis at 5:11 AM on July 25, 2003
(I've had a few beers, and am breaking my own PUI moratorium here, but I do want to jump into the diss-fest and say that some congratulations are in order to SDB just for shattering the bloggy glass ceiling, content of his paternal-fellatory composition aside. A milestone for all us self-publishing wankers, I reckon. Congrats, SDB.)
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:12 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:12 AM on July 25, 2003
i look forward to quonsars weekly world news op-ed.
posted by sgt.serenity at 5:50 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by sgt.serenity at 5:50 AM on July 25, 2003
George_Spiggott, could you possible email me? (sean _at_ tangmonkey _dot_ com) There's no address in your profile but I was hoping to talk to you...
posted by Marquis at 6:27 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by Marquis at 6:27 AM on July 25, 2003
It's telling that Den Beste couldn't hack it in a debate forum as sophisticated and polished as MetaFilter.
[/sarcasm]
Den Beste is a very intelligent person who is too myopic and angry to be of much use. In other words, he makes a great blogger, but a crappy columnist.
posted by y6y6y6 at 6:28 AM on July 25, 2003
[/sarcasm]
Den Beste is a very intelligent person who is too myopic and angry to be of much use. In other words, he makes a great blogger, but a crappy columnist.
posted by y6y6y6 at 6:28 AM on July 25, 2003
Damn. After reading Stav's comment I actually went back & read the article.
WORST
WRITTEN
OP-ED
EVER.
posted by i_cola at 6:30 AM on July 25, 2003
WORST
WRITTEN
OP-ED
EVER.
posted by i_cola at 6:30 AM on July 25, 2003
getting a bit of a stroking from Old Media these days
This is now the mark of quality writing?
posted by walrus at 6:32 AM on July 25, 2003
This is now the mark of quality writing?
posted by walrus at 6:32 AM on July 25, 2003
Hardly. More the mark of the beast, found just under the camouflage of the faux-youthful combover cowlick.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:36 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:36 AM on July 25, 2003
Lest we forget *hehehehe*
PS Stav, I'm with you tonight/this afternoon ;-)
posted by i_cola at 6:41 AM on July 25, 2003
PS Stav, I'm with you tonight/this afternoon ;-)
posted by i_cola at 6:41 AM on July 25, 2003
Good night nurse. Next thing you know they'll be publishing Miguel Cardoso.
posted by konolia at 6:41 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by konolia at 6:41 AM on July 25, 2003
You know, today is Miguel's birthday. I'm just sayin'.
posted by ColdChef at 6:43 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by ColdChef at 6:43 AM on July 25, 2003
That is one seriously crappy piece of writing. It's poorly argued, comprehensively fallacious and atrociously written.
It just isn't argued at all, I'd say -- he's just flatly stating, without foundation, his views. Which is valuable on one's personal site, perhaps, but not so much standing alone.
If this is a victory for self-publishing, it's a hollow one. I'm happy for SDB; he's worked hard and has found something of a home with like-minded people (though I confess I'd call them ideologues). But that Opinion Journal picked this piece to republish isn't encouraging: Its total sum contribution toward understanding the issues is zero, and, as has been said above, it really isn't particularly well written -- its only merit is that it expresses a view that some people, having made up their minds, already agree with.
You'd like to see big media rewarding independent publishers for creating some new value (which SDB has done, even -- just not in this piece), not for simply marching under a shared rhetorical banner.
posted by mattpfeff at 6:52 AM on July 25, 2003
It just isn't argued at all, I'd say -- he's just flatly stating, without foundation, his views. Which is valuable on one's personal site, perhaps, but not so much standing alone.
If this is a victory for self-publishing, it's a hollow one. I'm happy for SDB; he's worked hard and has found something of a home with like-minded people (though I confess I'd call them ideologues). But that Opinion Journal picked this piece to republish isn't encouraging: Its total sum contribution toward understanding the issues is zero, and, as has been said above, it really isn't particularly well written -- its only merit is that it expresses a view that some people, having made up their minds, already agree with.
You'd like to see big media rewarding independent publishers for creating some new value (which SDB has done, even -- just not in this piece), not for simply marching under a shared rhetorical banner.
posted by mattpfeff at 6:52 AM on July 25, 2003
From "idealogue", I've just discovered the word "ideologist". A word as onomatopoeic as it is applicable in this instance. Cheers mattpfeff.
posted by walrus at 7:10 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by walrus at 7:10 AM on July 25, 2003
From the OED (cuz dictionary.com just doesn't cut it):
Ideologist: A person occupied with an idea or ideas, esp. with such as are regarded as unpractical; a speculator; an idealist, a visionary, a mere theorist.
posted by walrus at 7:12 AM on July 25, 2003
Ideologist: A person occupied with an idea or ideas, esp. with such as are regarded as unpractical; a speculator; an idealist, a visionary, a mere theorist.
posted by walrus at 7:12 AM on July 25, 2003
a visionary, a mere theorist.
This is why I distrust dictionaries : I hold these two types to be in opposition, one to the other. And thus do we miss the point, sometimes.
No offense, Dan. Just sayin'.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:16 AM on July 25, 2003
This is why I distrust dictionaries : I hold these two types to be in opposition, one to the other. And thus do we miss the point, sometimes.
No offense, Dan. Just sayin'.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:16 AM on July 25, 2003
It looks like the point of Den Beste's piece was that it was right for the U.S. to go to war in Iraq because otherwise these people would have eventually tried to kill us. That point was followed by a really long Oval Office speech. The image of Jacksonians being stirred from their sleep was a nice one, though.
It's not SDB's fault that the Wall Street Journal chose to publish it.
posted by Tin Man at 7:18 AM on July 25, 2003
It's not SDB's fault that the Wall Street Journal chose to publish it.
posted by Tin Man at 7:18 AM on July 25, 2003
It's not SDB's fault that the Wall Street Journal chose to publish it.
No, the whole idea of copyright being just a vague susurration in the nightmares of the RIAA.
posted by walrus at 7:31 AM on July 25, 2003
No, the whole idea of copyright being just a vague susurration in the nightmares of the RIAA.
posted by walrus at 7:31 AM on July 25, 2003
Oh wait there is. Some of these are juicy.
hmm...anyone else getting a GOP team leader vibe here?
posted by mcsweetie at 7:44 AM on July 25, 2003
hmm...anyone else getting a GOP team leader vibe here?
posted by mcsweetie at 7:44 AM on July 25, 2003
Lest we forget
Aw, c'mon, he looks much sillier in this thread.
posted by norm at 7:45 AM on July 25, 2003
Aw, c'mon, he looks much sillier in this thread.
posted by norm at 7:45 AM on July 25, 2003
On a more serious note, Liz Spiers has parlayed gawker.com into working for the NY Post's Page Six.
posted by liam at 7:46 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by liam at 7:46 AM on July 25, 2003
It's not SDB's fault that the Wall Street Journal chose to publish it.
No, the whole idea of copyright being just a vague susurration in the nightmares of the RIAA.
Walrus, my point was more that if people think the piece didn't deserve to be printed in the WSJ, they should blame the WSJ for printing it, not SDB for submitting it...
posted by Tin Man at 8:01 AM on July 25, 2003
No, the whole idea of copyright being just a vague susurration in the nightmares of the RIAA.
Walrus, my point was more that if people think the piece didn't deserve to be printed in the WSJ, they should blame the WSJ for printing it, not SDB for submitting it...
posted by Tin Man at 8:01 AM on July 25, 2003
Ok, good point Tin Man. This has been another "get my coat" thread for me. I still like the "ideologist" word though.
posted by walrus at 8:10 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by walrus at 8:10 AM on July 25, 2003
Congrats to SDB (but I'm pretty sure he used to write a LOT better at times when he was here...*wince*).
posted by rushmc at 8:13 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by rushmc at 8:13 AM on July 25, 2003
I'm just disappointed he didn't get to work in any juicy details about the capabilities of French aircraft carriers.
posted by furiousthought at 8:22 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by furiousthought at 8:22 AM on July 25, 2003
Lest we forget
Aw, c'mon, he looks much sillier in this thread.
posted by norm at 7:45 AM PST on July 25
Whoa, that thread blows my mind. Reading through it, I keep expecting him to resort to repeatedly posting "But these amps go up to eleven."
posted by COBRA! at 8:37 AM on July 25, 2003
Aw, c'mon, he looks much sillier in this thread.
posted by norm at 7:45 AM PST on July 25
Whoa, that thread blows my mind. Reading through it, I keep expecting him to resort to repeatedly posting "But these amps go up to eleven."
posted by COBRA! at 8:37 AM on July 25, 2003
Congratulations to SDB, and kudos to the wonderchicken for saying it first.
posted by timeistight at 9:08 AM on July 25, 2003
posted by timeistight at 9:08 AM on July 25, 2003
i look forward to quonsars weekly world news op-ed.
weekly world news considers me too intellectual to be trusted as a source. instead, i offer you this.
posted by quonsar at 9:48 AM on July 25, 2003
weekly world news considers me too intellectual to be trusted as a source. instead, i offer you this.
posted by quonsar at 9:48 AM on July 25, 2003
On the one hand, it's great to see bloggers moving into mainstream media. But on the other, this piece stands as an argument against: Something that looks great as a well-formed rant on a blog page, but looks rather silly as a newspaper op-ed.
I mean, yeah, SDB ain't the only one putting forward the "Those who say Bush lied are wrong because we had to do this one way or another, and lying was the only way to get it done" meme, but this is a particularly naked and crude example.
posted by soyjoy at 10:58 AM on July 25, 2003
I mean, yeah, SDB ain't the only one putting forward the "Those who say Bush lied are wrong because we had to do this one way or another, and lying was the only way to get it done" meme, but this is a particularly naked and crude example.
posted by soyjoy at 10:58 AM on July 25, 2003
Maybe the reason SDB left this place was everyone was too busy trying to score gotcha! points.
Yes, I've seen better writing out of him too, but I'd rather focus on congratulating him for making it this far.
Way to go, Steven.
posted by rocketman at 12:37 PM on July 25, 2003
Yes, I've seen better writing out of him too, but I'd rather focus on congratulating him for making it this far.
Way to go, Steven.
posted by rocketman at 12:37 PM on July 25, 2003
This is a probably stretch, but is it possible the WSJ knew SDB's blog post was bad and published it anyway to promote the worn-out phrase "Bloggers are not journalists"?
posted by munger at 1:33 PM on July 25, 2003
posted by munger at 1:33 PM on July 25, 2003
Um, just to clarify (and no slight to SDB, as I was one of the stronger advocates that he get his own blog and am glad he's had such success with it) but the Opinion Journal is *not* printed in the newspaper, though it does frequently link to online versions of the print editorials. That's why, when they charmingly described me as fatuous, I wasn't nearly as excited as I would have otherwise been. And that means that Steven, while certainly increasing his site's audience, hasn't actually been published in the paper proper.
Steven's a good writer about tech and military hardware. I think his political pieces are somewhat less successful, though clearly no less strongly held.
posted by anildash at 3:55 PM on July 25, 2003
Steven's a good writer about tech and military hardware. I think his political pieces are somewhat less successful, though clearly no less strongly held.
posted by anildash at 3:55 PM on July 25, 2003
People who think this is a low point for newspaper op-ed pieces clearly don't read many of them.
Most newspaper pundits suck. They're dull, safe, and experienced practitioners of phoned-in, go-with-the-consensus centrism.
A popular weblogger like Den Beste is more likely to be a good, engaging editorialist than the average newspaper hack because he's more connected to the public.
Newspaper columnists can ignore the public consequences of being stupid. The worst they can expect are one or two letters to the editor, selected by their colleagues and edited to run brief.
Webloggers, on the other hand, are writing in a medium where feedback is instantaneous, public, and often extremely blunt. It's a much tougher crowd, and as a consequence there are some pretty strong writers writing on blogs these days.
Though I wouldn't put Den Beste in that company -- too wordy and self-satisfied for my taste -- I'm extremely impressed with his trajectory from MetaFilter windbag to bitter former Metafilter windbag to weblogging windbag to ink-stained windbag. Getting in the Journal is a feat.
posted by rcade at 3:58 PM on July 25, 2003
Most newspaper pundits suck. They're dull, safe, and experienced practitioners of phoned-in, go-with-the-consensus centrism.
A popular weblogger like Den Beste is more likely to be a good, engaging editorialist than the average newspaper hack because he's more connected to the public.
Newspaper columnists can ignore the public consequences of being stupid. The worst they can expect are one or two letters to the editor, selected by their colleagues and edited to run brief.
Webloggers, on the other hand, are writing in a medium where feedback is instantaneous, public, and often extremely blunt. It's a much tougher crowd, and as a consequence there are some pretty strong writers writing on blogs these days.
Though I wouldn't put Den Beste in that company -- too wordy and self-satisfied for my taste -- I'm extremely impressed with his trajectory from MetaFilter windbag to bitter former Metafilter windbag to weblogging windbag to ink-stained windbag. Getting in the Journal is a feat.
posted by rcade at 3:58 PM on July 25, 2003
And that means that Steven, while certainly increasing his site's audience, hasn't actually been published in the paper proper.
Oh, I hadn't realized that. Thanks for the clarification, anildash.
posted by timeistight at 4:22 PM on July 25, 2003
Oh, I hadn't realized that. Thanks for the clarification, anildash.
posted by timeistight at 4:22 PM on July 25, 2003
I miss rodii.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:03 PM on July 25, 2003
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:03 PM on July 25, 2003
I always imagined rodii as lookng like Mr. Spock.
posted by crunchburger at 12:17 AM on July 26, 2003
posted by crunchburger at 12:17 AM on July 26, 2003
I miss rodii too - what a shame someone doesn't publish his opinion pieces in the WSJ.
posted by Lynsey at 1:41 AM on July 26, 2003
posted by Lynsey at 1:41 AM on July 26, 2003
Maybe we should leave the dearly departed rest in peace.
posted by thirteen at 10:03 PM on July 26, 2003
posted by thirteen at 10:03 PM on July 26, 2003
Counter to what most in this thread have said, I think it's an excellent op-ed piece. Well-written? Maybe, maybe not...but the thought and the ideology behind it is sound.
And to those who have questioned the validity of the piece in terms of "news", remember that it was posted on a site called "OPINION Journal."
posted by davidmsc at 12:58 AM on July 27, 2003
And to those who have questioned the validity of the piece in terms of "news", remember that it was posted on a site called "OPINION Journal."
posted by davidmsc at 12:58 AM on July 27, 2003
In fact, the real reason we went into Iraq was precisely to "nation build"
well, why didn't you say so! doesn't seem fair that the people paying for the war are the last to know.
posted by mcsweetie at 7:41 PM on July 27, 2003
well, why didn't you say so! doesn't seem fair that the people paying for the war are the last to know.
posted by mcsweetie at 7:41 PM on July 27, 2003
second to last. The guys that already died thinking they were protecting us from WMDs will never even find out.
posted by soyjoy at 9:04 AM on July 28, 2003
posted by soyjoy at 9:04 AM on July 28, 2003
Um, this is not the first time one of Den Beste's blog pieces has been picked up by Opinion Journal--that was May 19th. And he gets cited pretty regularly by James Taranto's Best of the Web column.
I only knew of him through his blog (I'm a fan, more often than not), and was somewhat surprised to realize a few months ago that he'd been a long-time MeFi poster too. Small online world, innit?
posted by Asparagirl at 1:36 PM on July 28, 2003
I only knew of him through his blog (I'm a fan, more often than not), and was somewhat surprised to realize a few months ago that he'd been a long-time MeFi poster too. Small online world, innit?
posted by Asparagirl at 1:36 PM on July 28, 2003
Wow. I can't decide whether Steven Den Beste has truly arrived, or Joe Conason's finally run out of other good stuff to bitch about.
posted by soyjoy at 7:17 AM on July 29, 2003
posted by soyjoy at 7:17 AM on July 29, 2003
My MeFi username is three years old today and the only person I miss is Holgate. I think I even proposed to him one time.
If he like died or something, please, for the love of God, remove me and my commas from this site forever
posted by fullerine at 4:05 PM on August 20, 2003
If he like died or something, please, for the love of God, remove me and my commas from this site forever
posted by fullerine at 4:05 PM on August 20, 2003
« Older Every time I post, the ping to weblogs.com times... | Anyone else playing these games? Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:47 PM on July 24, 2003