Showing posts with label bloggers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bloggers. Show all posts

4/23/2010

Only YOU

"Why Women Find Their Parents Unpleasant"
COMMENT
missdelite: That 7.2% accounts for men who love their mother so much no other woman can compare.

As for myself, I hate being around website administrators who - after 2+ years - don't feel I have anything of value to add to their site. I don't take it personally, but I think it's a crying shame when women don't support other women who challenge the status quo. Maybe if I peppered my comments with more super, oooh, totes, haz and squeee, I'd have a star by now, but that's not who I am and there's nothing wrong with that.

My comments have been promoted here more times than I can count, but I'm tired of seeing them show up in the grey in the first place. It's insulting to my intelligence that my presence here is given less consideration than Lindsay "Can't See Straight" Lohan and Kim "Toilet Bowl" Kardashian.

"Female Empowerment", my ass.

If there's one good thing to come out of me abandoning my Jezebel account, it's that I'll no longer have to look at my comment page dressed in that nauseating baby blue and pink colour scheme. It looks like a fucking nursery in here...oh wait.

I'm going to leave you all with one last thought: Only YOU hold the key to your own cage.

Later, Jezebishes
________________________________________________

4/11/2010

Date Rate

"Shut Up Bro, She Was Ugly": Indiana U. Student Explains How to Rate Girls
"Men have been using the trusty 1-10 rating system to rate girls for what seems like centuries. Obviously a 10 is a knockout, and a 1 is something that should show up on the Discovery Channel. It's as universal as the 4.0 GPA scale or the dewy decimal system. One of my favorite things to do with my friends is to argue about what number a girl is." [...]

Rating Jackasses
1. This is the bottom of the barrel. Minimum of two Livestrong bracelets. Loud, obnoxious assholes who have to pay people to hang around them. As adults, all Ones will be convicted of exposing themselves at a playground. [...]

VID
Entourage: Rating Girls
________________________________________________

3/18/2010

Gawker: I Quit

COMMENT
Testing..

So, the avatar only shows up now when my comment's promoted? Interesting.

Hey Gawker, grow some stones and disable my account. It's bad enough I've been denied a star after commenting here for 2+ years. It's not like I'm some incoherent, high school dropout with nothing relevant to say - or is that the point?

You know what? Fuck you.

Gawker is mediocre at best. The only time things heat up around here, is when real people fuck up in a BIG WAY, like Tiger Woods or Balloon Boy or those Jersey Shore freaks. So why don't you go out there and stir up some shit before you put everyone to sleep?

And just in case you didn't get it the first time: Fuck. You.

--------------------------------------------
UPDATE
[4:23pm]
Aannd..the avatar's back. Oh well, they should've given me a fucking star a long fucking time ago. It was insulting. They might scramble the comment, which is why I put it here. They'll probably disable the account too, but does it really matter? It's not like they ever wanted me around anyway.

At least here, my comments show up in the black, which is where they fucking belong.

missdelite's AWESOME comments on Gawker / Jezebel

UPDATE
[03.20.10]
Gawker's new EIC, Remy Stern, gave me a star. Yeah, you heard right. Ha! I guess sometimes it pays to kick up a fuss, although I certainly didn't do it with the intention of being rewarded. No, I was genuinely ticked off the other day and right now, I'm still basking in the glow of my verbal bird-flipping. Besides, it feels like I've burned a bridge and I'm not sure what I'm going to do next with my shiny little privilege. I won't stop having opinions, but I don't want to feel censured either. Has Stern put the proverbial loaded gun in the hands of a slightly reckless user? We'll see. But not right now, cause there hasn't been a new post up on that site since Friday @ 7:25pm. Where'd they all go? Oh god, I've broken Gawker already!
___________________________________________________

3/05/2010

Vegas,Baby!

Top 10 Sex Symbols of Las Vegas

+Jack Colton, "Mayor of Las Vegas"
+32 Most Beautiful People in Las Vegas

Surviving Vegas Nightlife

What Hosts and VIP Hosts Actually Do in Las Vegas

What to Wear to a Las Vegas Nightclub

The Most Expensive Las Vegas Hotel Rooms

The Hard Rock Hotel Pool Suites

Nobu

+Nobu review
+Extravagance Unleashed
+The Lotus and the Lever
+Where to Eat and Stay in Las Vegas

Joël Robuchon review

Newport Lofts LV

+Vegas Condo Scene
Aaron Auxier recently received national press for setting the top-three residential price-per-square-foot records in the history of Las Vegas by selling multiple penthouses to clients 'in the music biz'. [VIPGolfVacation.com]

+CityCenter Interactive Guide
+CityCenter details (vid)
+ARIA Resort and Casino ad (vid)
+Louis Vuitton at CityCenter (vid)

+Luxury Las Vegas magazine
+Closet Confidential
+The Spa at One Queensridge Place

Las Vegas photo gallery

WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS...
+High Rollers Bring Baccarat Boom to Las Vegas
+High Roller Suites (slideshow)
+Debt Topples Las Vegas High Roller
+Las Vegas Caters to Asia's High Rollers

+Sarah Larson's Sin City Secrets
+"GayGamer Eat Your Heart Out"
+Fave Vegas Moments
+10 Things Not to Do in Las Vegas

+The Palomino
+About
+Sunset at the Palomino

Vegas Retro

The Movable Buffet - blog
To me, the key to covering Vegas is to know when to leave the party and get back to work. More than that, as a writer, I also try to always remember that I am not actually an invited guest to this party (metaphorically or literally) that is Vegas, but rather am a paid observer of the town's business model: sell the world on a place with a manufactured and marketed permanent party where regular rules of etiquette and in some cases law do not apply. And, at core, that invention of Vegas, that image, collectively is Sin City. [...]


__________________________________________________

NEW POSTS
Design Moment
Design Moment
Felix Cane
__________________________________________________

2/24/2010

Crap Over Cool

Meh. I've seen better.

Like this one. Basically, it's a landscape similar to the one above, but the colours "pop" in contrast to one another and it looks more alive than the example above, which lays flat and looks like a whole lotta blah.

I left the following comments over at Selectism, a blog I never visit but just happened to check out the other day. The first two weren't published and I expect the third won't be either, but I derive great satisfaction from knowing that someone - hopefully the asshat who rejected the first two comments - will read it. The post's subject was some crappy photog they lavished praise on just because he's shot a bunch of celebutards. No, I won't name him here cause he doesn't deserve a mention. Needless to say, if Mary Jo Whackadoodle from Salt Lake City had taken the pics they featured, no one would've given a fuck.

COMMENT #1
Name: missdelite
Zzzz...Christian Schmidt kicks this guy's ass.
http://christianschmidt.biz/

Rejected! Ok, so snark didn't work. They don't have a sense of humour - or a sense of the Internet - do they? How about a little syrupy sucking up to fall in line with the other brown-nosing comments in an attempt to temper my blatant act of promotion?

COMMENT #2
Name: missdelite
Oh, awesome!
He and Christian Schmidt should do a co-project.

http://christianschmidt.biz/


Rejected again! Whattup with that?? Do they have something against vision, heart and soul in art work? Cause this guy Schmidt has it in spades. Well, now I'm pissed.

COMMENT #3
Name: MediocreArt
Fine, don't publish my comments.
Loser.
Obviously, you've got the market cornered on the IKEA crowd but you wouldn't know fantastic art if Picasso arose from the dead and pissed you a masterpiece. My 4-year-old niece takes better pics with her Fisher Price camera - maybe you can feature her work?
"Selectism"? Bwah! I crown you the king of selecting crap over cool. Be proud of your achievement and celebrate your mediocrity. You've earned it.


This comment's "pending approval" but I'm not holding my breath. I wrote it purely for the purpose of venting my frustration at someone who simply can't see something good when it's staring at him/her in the face. I liken it to wearing foggy goggles that afford only 10% visibility, and feeling comfortable doing it, not knowing how much access is being denied to better stuff out there. Screw Selectism. I won't be returning to that site for awhile and they've probably blocked my IP anyway.

12/08/2009

Blogtastic

___________________________________________________

Anyway, Lady Gaga may have been cooked up in modern capitalism’s test tubes, but she’s good.
___________________________________________________

Matt Langer

9/06/2009

Disconnected

So What Do We Think About This?
[The Sartorialist - Aug.29/09]

This month Glamour magazine ran this photograph which has created quite a stir here in the US.

It seems women desperately want more images that highlight the variety of beauty that the female form has to offer. If that is true, then this should become one of the biggest selling issues in Conde Nast history.

Actually it just might become the biggest seller. When we wanted to do a post about this Tracy went to three different shops to find the magazine but all three were sold out. We had to scan this from the NY Post.

When I am shooting on the street older women and larger size women often say "no" to my request to shoot them. Actually, much more than any other category of people I shoot. I think they have a real suspicion about how the image will be used. I also think there continues to be a growing disconnect between the fashion community and "average" women in general.

However, do you think that this economic crisis has forced the fashion community to open it's eyes a little bit to what the customers want?

COMMENTS
No offense, but I think that you are giving the fashion industry far too much credit for suddenly becoming more "tolerant" of curves. Rather, it is the promise of the "biggest selling issue ever" that has them smacking their lips. In short, if it sells, they will push it. The minute it becomes yesterday's news, they will go back to the anorexic waif image that has ravaged a generation or two of young women...I know it's been said a lot, but if Marilyn Monroe were starting out today she would probably never have even gotten to make her first movie. However, if you ask me to choose between her and, say, Calista Flockhart, as a reference for female beauty (and no disrespect to Ms Flockhart intended), I wouldn't even have to think once, much less twice!

In my opinion, the key is health. So long as we are eating as well as possible, getting exercise and periodic checkups, size and shape should not matter. And we women should not wait for fashion mags to show this kind of image to get comfortable with our bodies.

It would be nice not to feel plump at anything above 100lbs but it will take a long time for some people to see this as fashionable or beautiful.
As a 20 year old female all I can say is that it's too late, our brains are washed.

I'm 5ft tall, Asian, dark hair, weigh just over 100lbs. What are the odds you'll ever see anyone like me on the pages of these fashion magazines unless it's a "special" article about non-model size people with "odd" proportions? An article to help us dress and deal with our shapes? And I am part of the majority. Imagine?
Regardless what the reason is for publishing this pic, thank you for that! Because we're talking about it. But unfortunately, it's probably all about marketing rather than finally listening to what people want. Fashion does change...and I am still hoping I get to live and see that we are going to change for the better.


Although I'm all for a broader range of healthy women's body types being shown in magazines, I have to admit that this particular image grosses me out a bit.
Does acknowledging that the average woman is not 5'10" and rail thin mean I have to see every lump and bump?

I think people are just looking for a rationalization for their complacency, laziness, and unhealthy habits.
I'm all for a 'more natural woman' in magazines. I dislike the choices that are being made by the (euphemistically speaking) "fashion types" — the ridiculously skinny 15 year old girls. We're in an era when Giselle has been called "curvy." But, i also don't want to see fat/flab idealized and normalized. Fashion magazines are still about fantasy. If i want to see 'regular,' i walk down the street and can do my own calculations of 'what percentage of Americans is obese.' [I'm not suggesting THIS woman is "obese!"]


It seems that in a time of economic crisis companies should throw a wider net if they want to continue to pull in profits. The more women feel accepted by the "fashion machine" the more they will buy. I do agree that it's a trend thing though - she's not the first we'll see. Slowly the fashion industry will seem more accepting to see if their profits increase. If it works, then yay, and they'll keep going until it peaks. If it doesn't work, then fashion curves were just a trend.

It has nothing to do with the media, in my opinion; you hear men every day in the street gawping - very loudly - over pretty girls walking past, and making those who don't get as much attention feel worthless. They then go home and compare themselves to the pretty girls, who are all tall/thin/well-dressed/etc.
The media simply aggravates it. That's all. *shrug*


I don't think that this photo will ever become the "norm" in the fashion industry no matter how much people say they "want" it.
I do agree with Scott that there is a disconnect-which is unfortunate, but I don't know if the industry is to blame. It has been a VERY long time since society has embraced "larger" women.

I don't find this a very fashionable photo, nor a stylish one. She looks like a figure model caught in a joke.

I look to newspapers and blogs like yours to see "real" people and style. I don't expect, or want, to see it in the high fashion mags. Glamour is more a middle of the road mag so this sort of shot is perfect for them. They represent a more obtainable style.

I don't think this photograph really has anything to do with fashion... she's NAKED, for crying out loud. Okay, she's wearing a G-string. I saw this article in the magazine - yes, I will admit that I was slightly thrown off by the choice of photograph when I saw it too - but the article that it graces is about things that men find attractive and sexy about women. They use REAL quotes, from REAL men, about REAL women. The article itself really has nothing to do with fashion. However, I don't disagree that the public idea of what is "fashionable" when it comes to the female body is absolutely changing for the better. While models like Kate Moss are still at the top of their game, we now have more normal-looking girls popping up here and there, for example Lara Stone, an average size 4-6 and a top model to boot. There is hope.

See whether she looks fabulous without her (very pretty) face.

1. Yes, it is bad that models starve themselves for their job.
2. Yes, photoshopping models to perfection creates an artificial standard. i can't even express in such a small space how bad that is.
3. BUT one should not mix up runway fashion with what can be bought in stores. It is not the same and it does not serve the same purpose. One is inpiration, the other is work.


It's about being realistic. Glamour's readers are not wealthy socialites. They are working women, moms, maybe some men, who are just looking for some tips. They are looking for editorials that will help them achieve beauty and style by working with what they have. Glamour has, for a while, been printing stories on the best clothes for your body type and the best clothes for your budget. This is nothing new. They may have to run advertisements with skinny, skinny models, but they don't really have a lot of control over that. They have been sincerely, I think, heading in this direction for as long as I can remember. I applaud their efforts to make it easy for everyone to feel confident and look good.

Perfect! Now let's see some breasts that have gone south, as well, so healthy, middle-aged women can learn to stop hating their bodies.

"I also think there continues to be a growing disconnect between the fashion community and "average" women in general."
Oh, you don't say? I think it's (partially) the fashion community's fault that "average" women feel they have to measure up to some higher standard - as though anything less is subpar and inadequate. All that will do is alienate a population that will regard you as arrogant and elitist.
Shame on anyone who looks condescendingly at someone who doesn't quite fit their version of beauty.
I'm not trying to make a blanket statement about the entire community as a whole, but certainly these types of sentiments are prevalent.

I read some years ago that the super thinning of models began on the runways as a way to focus the attention onto the clothes and off of the beautiful woman underneath them. And now we have twisted that body type into THE body type. As several other people have said already, it needs to be about health and as Mr. Schuman shows us each day - it's about personal style.

Okay, why does there have to be such an extreme contrast?? Either a model is going to be skin and bones or she's going to represent the "average" woman by having abs that hang below her beltline?
Come on. I am 43, not a model, not chubby or unfit. I also don't regularly work out and my stomach still doesn't look like that AND I have a kid. There are plenty of real women that lie somewhere in the middle of anorexic and massive. Shoot - put ME on the cover of Glamour.

Every once in a while, a model or a celebrity decides to take some sort of stand against the rather distorted image of "woman" that the media shows. That image changes decade to decade, but I think right now, that image is very dangerous: super-skinny, almost pre-pubescent silhouette, yet ultra-tall. And almost always Caucasian. Now, there's nothing wrong with being any of those things, but all together, this image represents a very tiny percentage of the population. And women looking at these models will ask, "why can't I look like that?". This can lead to some very dangerous dieting habits and low self-esteem.

Touche, Sartorialist. Touche.
Over the past decade we've seen the fashion industry slip lustily toward the luxury market, leaving behind those not willing to chase a virtually unattainable standard of "beauty".
Perhaps we've fallen in love with megapixels and baubles to the extent that we've lost the plot, as the English might say. And you wonder why retailers are tanking? Because the very guardians of their pursestrings have seduced them into a fantasy world bereft of authenticity, and print media is now feeling the pinch, represented through a declination of ad pages and loss of subscribers.
Fashion need only be interesting, and people will be interested in it. Authenticity is a good place to start.

What I'd love to see is magazines where the models are WOMEN, not girls (or women who look like they are 17). The kind of women that Richard Avedon used to shoot. It is women who can afford to buy the clothes, not young girls.

Please stop calling voluptuous women "real"! ALL women are real just as all people of all colors are real people. It is extremely insulting.

i stopped buying women's magazines when i was 30--i finally realized they made me feel bad about myself. seventeen magazine helped fuel 9 years of eating disorders--i was obsessed with how skinny and tall the girls were, and what they weighed. i will NEVER have another fashion rag in my house, since i have two daughters, yet i love clothes. so THANK YOU for your blog that shows real people with real bodies and always inspiring choices of dress.

All I can say is...Why not Plus Size and In Shape?
The woman in this picture, and she is only 20 years old, has no muscle tone....plus size or not.
I think North Americans believe "It is all good". I simply do not agree.
As intelligent and discerning individuals, there is a desire to strive to be the best we can be.


[Comment Total: 540]
____________________________________________

Lizzie Miller

Do Women Really Want to See Themselves in Fashion Magazines?
While Glamour editor Cindi Leive swears that her magazine will strive to feature women of all sizes, following the praise they received after featuring model Lizzie Miller, Times of London writer India Knight remains unconvinced.

COMMENTS
>Knight is acting like it's just either or. It can be both. Just like I don't think we need to be so whitewashed in fashion mags, we could stand to be a lot more age, size, and racially diverse.

I mean, I just don't get the idea that it has to be all fantasy or all reality. Is there some kind of paradox waiting that will destroy the world if we start acknowledging that diversity is a good thing?

I did notice the incredible amount of negativity in some comments, though, with size comparing. But I think people do that anyway, whether it's Miller or someone else. We're taught to compare and find ourselves wanting. That's sort of the whole point of the "beauty myth".

Sure some people can look at the aggressively thin ideal and think, well, whatever, I don't look like that, that's okay. And some people clearly don't and internalize that ideal as a goal they are forever striving for and forever feeling inadequate for not meeting. Our weight obsession is not an accident. And likewise lots of people look at a pic of Miller and feel good, others don't. You can't "win" when it comes to beauty. But I still think diversity is better than none.

>Reading the comments on a piece in the Guardian about this got me thinking about who is really making women compare themselves to super thin models.

I'm noticing most of the nasty comments seem to come from men. Back when Jennifer Love Hewitt's badly fitting bikini was news, I remember noticing the exact same thing- most of the nasty comments were from guys. In real life, I seem to know more women who were hurt by male comments about their bodies than female comments. If a woman was involved, it was probably their mom, but it seems like the dad/boyfriend comments cut deeper.

Who do you think contributes more to women's body issues- men or women? Conventional wisdom seems to be that women cause body issues in each other, while men are just happy with a naked lady. But I'm not sure that's really true.

>The Guardian commenters this week about Lizzie Miller made me want to sob. As you noted, they were generally men (or very male sounding usernames) and incredibly rude and judgemental about all women's bodies.

I had been considering joining the Guardian Soulmates dating site, but working on the premise that some of those male commenters will also be on there, I have scuttled away in abject fear. Imagine going on a date or receiving an email along the lines of those comments...
>In my own personal experience, the only negative feedback I've received regarding my body has been from judgemental men (either male friends, boyfriends, or obnoxious men on the street). In fact, while I'm not saying this is representative of everyone, I honestly can't think of a single instance in which a woman has criticised my body.
>I think men are in denial about their bitchiness because they think of it as a female trait and insults from men are often more painful because 'No one wants to fuck you' is the ultimate insult in our pornified culture.
>I think we're encouraged to think that the only reason men are with women is looks. That whole "There is no female Seth Rogan" thing. So when a man insults our looks, it calls into question whether a man would ever want to be with us. Conventional wisdom says looks aren't as important to women, so its okay if a guy has a big gut, Katherine Heigl might get drunk and overlook it.
I know this is true for me. The people who were most critical in my life of my looks were boys and men. I'm sure other girls had issues, but they never said them to my face. It's probably why I can never really relate to the "mean girl" threads...not that I didn't know girls like that, but it was all more secretive and I could deal with it. But the men and boys were aggressive, public, and intimidating/threatening about it. And people just shrugged it off.

I hear the "well, men like x bodies" argument a lot...and I'm like, yeah, but what about all the men who don't? It's not like there's a shortage of body snarking online, much of it coming from men. It's a myth that all men are somehow accepting all body types. I think most men are taught they're entitled to comment on women's bodies because, after all, we have them FOR them, don't we? What value do our bodies have without men to either criticize or appreciate them?

That's always my issue with the "men like any body type" argument. It still relies on the same idea...that we should be happy with our body because some man is. And unhappy with it if he isn't. I don't like either, personally, because it makes women's bodies public property and not their own.

And as an anecdotal aside...I work with an office of mostly men. The amount of body commenting on celebs is intense, and is usually ridiculously nit picky. And I've had this stuff said to me, in my presence...and it's like...what the hell? If this is what you think of celebrity x, what are you thinking about me, an average person? They just don't think.
>There's a lot of confusion in your comment, and it's all valid. On one hand, there is absolutely nothing wrong with men's right to have a "type" of women that they pursue. Everyone has preferences when it comes to the imagined appearance of our ideal partner. This overlaps with men's (and women's) tendency to completely invalidate the women who do not meet that ideal.
>Yeah, I have no problem with preferences. We all have those. It's the way people are encouraged to comment, publicly, on other people's looks and bodies when they don't meet those preferences or ideals. And I think that happens with women more because we're valued by our bodies more, culturally. It's a frustrating thing to watch.

____________________________________________

NEW POST
Swimwear

9/03/2009

The Brand is YOU




The Upscaling of Julia Allison
[Excerpts]
Julia Allison has signed a year-long deal to make commercials for Sony. Let there be no doubt: This is a major coup for the fame-hungry "lifecaster." There, we said it.

Allison has come a long way from selling Dunkin' Donuts product placement on her blog and pimpage in Herald Square, and from getting paid to blog about a cheesy trip to Sea World. In the pantheon of brands Allison has been closely associated with — AM New York, Star magazine, Dunkin' Donuts, Sea World, New York Nonstop, etc. — Sony is easily the most distinguished. And the electronics company is putting her in good company, alongside writer Amy Sedaris, singer Justin Timberlake and Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning. Via national TV commercials, radio, print and online ads and retail display, Sony will hawk...

"...the BRAVIA television line, Blu-ray Disc home entertainment, Cyber-shot digital cameras, alpha digital SLR cameras, Handycam camcorders and Sony professional high-definition camera systems, VAIO notebook computers and Sony Reader digital books."

COMMENTS
FaceMelter
: I still have no idea what she does or why anybody pays attention to her. Unlike Sedaris, Timberlake, and Manning who excel in their fields and can (possibly) lend authenticity to a product, Allison has no credentials and really no defined personality outside of the false one she attaches to people/products at any given moment. Sure, Gawker and others talk her up as some dating columnist/new-media entrepreneur, but anyone who does the least bit of research knows that to be a bunch of bullshit.

At the end of the day, Allison is just a face that is going to be pimping out a bunch of Sony products. There is nothing behind the veneer, and few people will even notice her presence. For Sedaris et al. this is just a quick paycheck. They put on a smile, pretend to like some Sony crap, get paid, and go back to their day jobs. For Allison, this is her life's work. There is nothing outside of this, and there is no person behind the image. It's a bit sad and depressing, but I guess that's the life of someone who aspires to be a "brand".

I guess in the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15-60 seconds.


Julia Allison: Okay, okay, I get it. You don't like me. You think I'm untalented. You don't "know what (I) do." You believe me to have no personality and you seem to doubt I'm a real person. I get it!! I think you sound a bit repetitive (seeing as you comment on almost every single one of the posts concerning me here), but you're entitled to your opinions.

FaceMelter: Julia, I'll admit my opinions of you may be incorrect and are definitely misinformed. However, it is this misinformation that keeps me posting in these threads. The disconnect between what is said about you and what you actually do (again, what? ... I'm asking) is astonishing. I've no doubt that you are a real person, but I find your lack of creative output to be incredibly boring. I'm not saying I don't like you, I'm just saying that I don't understand what all the fuss is about. You have created a persona that exists solely to be a persona, and have spent little time building a base to fall back on. There is a shell that I see through quite transparently, but which others cannot. It is this dynamic that piques my curiosity, and in fact, your involvement is inconsequential.

If I've offended you in any way, I do apologize.


Julia Allison: Hi. I don't know if I should say this (SHOW NO WEAKNESS, JULIA!) but you actually sound rather rational here, which I appreciate. Clearly my standards are embarrassingly low.

Here's the deal ... I've been a writer for some time, I host a web & local tv show, I write for various places, and I try to run a business. You may think it sucks, but that's what I do. (Whether I'm a good entrepreneur or not remains to be seen. I know I've learned from my initial mistakes, but it's not an easy path. We'll see. Check back in five years.)

I don't know what the fuss is about except that I seem to get myself into low-grade trouble wherever I go. Not good stuff, like drugs and sex tapes. But boring crap, like "ooh, Julia twittered after the flight attendant told her to shut off her phone. WHAT AN ASSHOLE SHE IS."

I fed it at the beginning, when I was - frankly - really stupid, and I didn't (couldn't?) make the distinction between good attention & bad.

I haven't done anything controversial (in my opinion) in a long time, but unfortunately, fuss begets fuss, and so ... here we are.

I'm sorry that my creative output isn't up to your standards. It's not up to MY standards much of the time! I could make a ton of excuses, but the truth is, great content is goddamn hard and freaking time-consuming. People who can maintain a 24-7 blog well should be lauded like crazy, cause that shit ain't easy. In fact, I'm the first one to say that my website is NOT meant to be competing with blogs which have a great deal of resources, like Gawker!! :(

But for christssake, cut me some slack! My life isn't over yet.

I'm only 43.
[she's 28]

FaceMelter: I appreciate the honest response, and I will cut you some slack. I operate my own business and I know it can be difficult to get things off the ground. That being said, my work involves the creation/manipulation of things outside of myself, while yours involves the creation/manipulation of yourself, so I'm not sure if I will ever truly understand it. I don't mind a little biting here and there, but the way you live your life seems incredibly masochistic. Again though, what intrigues me isn't necessarily you, but rather the reaction to you. At least you understand your being complicit.

My advice, you need to step back and really focus on what it is you want to do - and endorsing products for a living isn't a viable choice. It's nice to have lofty goals, but instead of telling me to check back in 5 years, you should be telling me to check back tomorrow, because if you don't focus on tomorrow, you will be nowhere in five years. Stop focusing on yourself via pictures, videos, conversation snippets, etc., and focus on something outside of yourself, because in all honestly, no one wants to read your personal diary. You are not that interesting - no one is. The idea of the cool girl that everyone wants/wants to be is a false stereotype perpetuated by rom-com writers who set their stories in suburban high schools. It's an inauthentic way of being and everyone knows it. If you actually manage to create something of interest that doesn't solely relate to your life, then maybe, just maybe others will start to respect you. And enough with the oversharing. Watching someone getting off with themself is the worst kind of PDA.

-----------------------------------------------------

Sony to Refresh HDNA Advertising Campaign with Peyton Manning, Justin Timberlake and More

COMMENTS
I would hardly call "web celebrity" Julia Allison a leader in her field. She's not even employed as a columnist any longer and she has a long stench of negativity trailing her on the web. Do a simple google search to figure that out. Sony, I'd think twice before associating yourself with someone like Julia Allison. She does not have the most positive reputation and any association with her serves only to sully your brand.

If you did any due diligence, you'd know that Julia Allison (Baugher) is pretty much loathed throughout the web and media communities. It's not too late to shelve and not air her part of the campaign. She brings down anything she is associated with and has been fired by both Star magazine and Time Out New York.

She is not a tastemaker or someone that most people would aspire to be. She is repulsive and toxic to any marketing campaign.

You guys couldn't get iJustine? She's a true web celeb.

The woman is Brand Poison. Whatever freebies she shills are generally shunned by anyone who has ever come across her. The cheap hair pelts, the tacky dye job, the wonky eye from too much ill-placed Botox, the shiny skin and so on.
That woman is an anti-ad.

Julia Allison is neither a columnist nor a web celebrity. She was fired from her job as a columnist months ago and the only "fame" she has on the web is that of a universally reviled joke and new media punching bag. Julia has been associated with other brands before Sony and has done nothing but tarnish their image. I would think twice before using her in your new campaign. The negative association with her vastly outweighs any benefit.

As a life-long user of Sony products (having just purchased a new Bravia 46" LCD this past weekend) I am appalled by your choice of brand steward. Julia Baugher is - to put it kindly - laughable in her quest to be both relevant and revered. Her online presence consists of dated Gawker mentions, her sputtering vanity blog with absolutely no content, and a failed web start-up that is universally despised across the tech scene (if they've even heard of NonSociety). It is well documented that she has a terrible work ethic, little accountability for her actions and is a liar when the mood (or critics) strikes her.
I really thought Sony had a stellar industry reputation and chose to associate with like-minded personalities, but perhaps I'll think again. I am your core demographic: young, tech-savvy, with disposable income to use on the latest technology. And I can assure you that there are many out there just like me.


Just Google her to find out all the reasons why Julia = VERY BAD IDEA. I used to respect Sony and buy their products. Not anymore.

Julia Allison Baugher? Seriously? Someone at Sony has a twisted sense of humor or a strong desire to sabotage this campaign. She's a noted plagiarist and all-around failure. Have you even seen her lifecast, Sony? She's a walking nightmare. Good luck explaining this one to the shareholders.

Julia Baugher is a fraud. She is everything that epitomizes laziness, self-entitlement, and douchebaggery. Everything about her is fake: Her hair (clip on extenstions and badly dyed), her nose, her face (she admitted to and then subsequently lied about getting injections), and so much more. She is a pathological liar and possibly has yet to be diagnosed with Narcissistic Personality Disorder. I doubt anyone on your team did any real research about her before bringing her on, so shame on you. Ignorance is no excuse. How she can be in the same category as actual professionals who work for a living (she rarely gets up before noon and has no actual job - just look at her pink vanity blog for all the proof in the world of that). Come to think of it, she puts all the negative things about herself out there, so if you would have done the aforementioned research that was sorely needed -- you never would have given her another look in a million years. Good luck with the damage control you will need with this headcase. And consider me buying anything BUT Sony for the forseeable future.

And furthermore, what a slap in the face to Amy Sedaris, who is extremely funny, original, creative, hardworking and self-effacing--exactly the opposite of Julia Allison in every respect.

I am saddened by inclusion of Julia Allison with the other spokespeople you have chosen. Ms. Allison has accomplished nothing beyond gaining ill repute for her childish attention-garnering antics. She only became famous initially for appearing at a Nick Denton (Gawker media head) party as a "slutty Condom fairy." She was fired from her position as Star's "Editor at Large" after only a year. She is lucky to get one television appearance a month talking about celebrities (something she often claims she hates doing on her blog). Her business generates little to no revenue. One business partner left little after a year. She has a huge following of anti-fans who follow her every move and are very vocal about her poor business practices and personal ethics.

This was a very bad choice indeed to represent your company, and I will not be buying Sony products in the future as long as she is attached to your brand.



I am mystified by your inclusion of Julia Allison as a brand ambassador. First, she does not, nor has she ever in recent memory, spoken kindly of Sony products. In fact, I believe she resoundingly has supported your competitors. Second, she is not respected by the vast preponderance of those in your core demographic who are familiar with her. For those who are not familiar with her, it is unclear how she will reach them considering her vehicle for disseminating advertising (nonsociety) is, at best, quite poor. Third, Ms. Allison widely is known - against, amongst those who even have heard of her - as a shill, ego-blogger with fickle interests and horrific advice. By using her, I am concerned that her sullied reputation will be imputed to Sony.

Julia Allison actually landed a spot in this campaign? You're kidding, right?!
Who did she blow this time to nab such a gig?
Nobody likes this chick for very good reason. She's a toxic narcissist "web celeb" has-been who has been fired from every legitimate job she's ever had. People who work with her don't like her for her undeserved diva attitude.
All those other folks deserve the commercial mentions except for her. She has done nothing note-worthy beyond quickly becoming one of the most reviled fame-climbers online.
Why couldn't you even hire Perez Hilton? At least he actually has some web accomplishments to back up his obnoxiousness. What, were Chris Crocker and the 'Chocolate Rain' guy not available?
Sony, you so got this decision way wrong. My respect for your brand just plummeted.


Sony, I'm disappointed. I've heard of Julia Allison. I don't hate her but I don't like her either. From what I've read she's not a columnist and she's not a celebrity, although she is infamous. She's a self promoter and to my mind represents much of what is wrong with the web and the economics of fame. Unlike some of the other people on your panel -- who are among the best in the world at what they do -- Allison does nothing well. She seems to think that any publicity is good publicity, just as long as people are talking about her. This is perhaps the biggest reason I don't like her. I don't think people should be famous for promoting themselves. I thought Sony was about being the best at what it did and supporting excellence. I'm being honest when I say I will now have at least one negative thought come to mind when I see your products. You've associated yourself with mediocrity. You've made me think you didn't look into who you were hiring. You've made me think you don't know what you're doing. I ask you: would Apple hire someone like Allison?

Which one of these things is not like the other? You have a football star, a music sensation in every sense of the word, a woman who defied gender stereotypes to become a sports reporter on an overwhelmingly male network, two individuals noted and awarded for innovative camera work - both in print and in film, an amazingly hilarious writer turned actress ... and a girl who runs a vanity blog, has publicly proclaimed that women have an expiration date, and retains, at best, questionable journalistic ethics.

Of course, this is not to mention the paper trail following Julia Allison Baugher. Look back to her Georgetown days - there was a plagarism scandal with her sex and dating column. She publicly boasted - in magazines, on television, and to just about anyone who would listen - how she was dating a Congressman. Nowadays, after being "let go" from three publications (I'd advise you to talk to the people at AMNY - she seems to vent rather openly to the media about their treatment of her), and having two reality television show deals passed on her, Julia runs a "lifecast". For the uninitiated, this is a blog in which Julia posts pictures with little captions. When she does actually write, it's usually a "head to toe" detailing her outfits (be forewarned, you will hear a lot of mentions of "freshwater pearls", her "Chanel handbag", and now that a "kind reader" ponied up the cash for them, her new "YSL shoes"). A little due diligence on the part of Sony would demonstrate her ethics - or rather - lack thereof - towards sponsorships and disclosure. Only after Gawker wrote an article about her trip to Sea World did Julia disclose that she was being paid for her trip by a third party, and paid for her services as well. This is after Julia spoke for WEEKS about the impending Shamu experience. She fails to note when sponsors give her freebies or discounted services, a practice that ruins any shred of journalistic integrity the gal can claim to have.

The bottom line? Julia Allison Baugher isn't some controversial figurehead, known for inciting reblogs about her incendiary statements. No, it remains that Julia Allison is an unethical individual, and her sheer presence on this new advertising campaign sullies the accomplishments of the individuals she's joined by.



I recently purchased a 26inch Bravia flatscreen and love it. I am scheduled to buy the 40 inch one for my living room after Labor Day. However, after hearing that Sony deems Julia Allison a suitable spokesperson for its brand, I will be purchasing an alternate brand flatscreen. I have also liked Sony products. I found them to be high-quality and fairly affordable. However, your brand is now tainted. I will be alerting everyone I know--I also buy electronics products for my company---to boycott Sony until you sever ties with Ms. Allison. She has a horrible image, has done more to set women back than anything else in recent years and in this economy, I should think Sony would be more careful about who it partners with. Bad choice, Sony. This loyal customer is turned off.
It's about time you anti-Julia people got a clue. YOU ARE THE REASON SHE'S STILL RELEVANT.
She plays you over and over again. Now the lot of you will go to every blog that mentions this story, plus your own website, and repeat the name Sony, Sony, Sony hundreds of times. Do you get it now?

If you think that SONY should subscribe to the same "any-publicity-is-good-publicity" playbook that Julia Allison Baugher uses, you don't know the first thing about brands, marketing or customer retention. This outpouring is not about a re-blog.
It's because she is a narcissistic, plagiarist who lies and steals and cheats and uses other people to get ahead. There is nothing likable about her and she does not deserve to be part of a program with the talented people who make up the rest of the people selected to be brand ambassadors and SONY deserves to know that.

Julia Allison is a terrible choice for a brand ambassador. Have you ever even visited her blog? The content she produces is banal and borderline offensive. Julia has said things such as that she knows that "women have an expiration date" when it comes to beauty. Julia will be appearing in an HBO documentary coming out soon about young women who inject their face with botox. Julia has twittered about a private fight between Rosie O'Donnell and her wife that Julia overheard through the wall of her apartment (where Rosie lives next to her). Julia has taken pictures of strangers on public transportation and posted them on her blog, where she has called them names that can be construed as racist and threatened physcal violence on them. There are well documented rumors of Julia using "date rape" as an excuse to get out of obligations in college. Julia uses her cell phone on airplanes to Twitter, which is a violation of FAA rules. Julia consistently shows terrible judgment and little regard for others. She is just a terrible choice for the Sony brand and I am surprised that Sony has allowed anyone to spin her in a positive light. Please think twice about this, unless you want a brand ambassador who is a laughingstock on the Internet, and who is really a vile human being. To put Julia Allison in a line up with Peyton Manning, Justin Timberlake and Amy Sedaris is like putting a silk hat on a pig.

I agree with the suggestion of iJustine. She is a great example of a web celebrity. She has a consistent body of work, and I can't think of anything that she has done that would border on racist or anti-feminism or a violation of a stranger's privacy.

SONY - PLEASE RECONSIDER THIS CHOICE.



Oh no!
Such bad timing! I have been ON THE VERGE of buying a VAIO; they are advertised all over the office tower I work in. I love the laser-etched cases and what looks to be extreme portability. Plus, affordability etc. It was all stacking up to be a sell.
But really? Julia Allison?
Reading this press release today just sucked all the cool out of the brand for me. I'm sorry.
And I LOVE LOVE LOVE Justin Timberlake and Amy Sedaris! LOVE THEM!!!
Maybe they can convince me to reconsider, but seriously, I shudder at the idea of buying a Sony product if Julia Allison is anyway whatsoever associated with it. It's like instant lame. I'd be embarrassed.

But wait a second. For those who know of her, Julia Allison is well known to squee over everything Apple. She doesn't use a PC and in fact practically shamed one of her business partners into buying a MacBook. Julia went into raptures about her MacAir and filmed her trip to the Mac store (even though she was vocal about being disappointed she had to pay for it herself). She once bragged she had like 5 Mac Laptops (I apologize I don't know all the brand variations.) She was glee-filled and bragging about her iPhone. She is a typical (and somewhat childish) Mac fangirl. Check her blog, search Mac, Apple, etc.
This makes no sense. It's is so obviously a fake endoresement if she suddenly says she is PC. Nothing new there though, fake and Julia Allison (not her real name) kinda go hand-in-hand.


Who is Julia Allison?

The only people who know are a small group of haters who obsessively parse through her banal content. These people and a handful of creepy men are her audience. That's it. This is who you want representing your brand?

I think the only reason she got this spot was because you were looking for someone to fill the ambiguous Internet category. The others are easier to define: sports, music, journalism, fashion, comedy, and film. Julia Allison has a vanity blog business to give her legitimacy, and she is tenacious and moronic enough to call herself a Web Celebrity. It has nothing to do with talent. The fact that Sony thinks that Julia is at all a representation of the Internet is embarrassingly out-of-touch. I think next time I buy a computer, I will buy a Mac, because at least that company is classy enough to avoid enabling narcissistic sociopaths.

She has as much relevancy as Obama Girl or Chris Crocker.


Amy Sedaris is pretty awesome. Given her outside-the-mainstream career, I wouldn't ever peg her as a "sell-out." and I'd probably give a second look to a product she thought was cool enough to endorse.

On the other hand, as a 27-year-old female, I can't think of anyone LESS "refreshing" than Julia Allison, who always seems to be blatantly shilling for somebody, whether she discloses it or not. Why would I trust anything this woman suddenly has to say about Sony products? I don't trust her, I don't aspire to be like her, and I don't find her "relatable."

I mostly ignore Julia's mindless blathering about how much she loooooves her iPhone and Mac laptop because I already own and like these products, too...sans pink sheaths, of course. But I guess if you're looking to paint the SONY brand as an Apple also-ran for the non-early-adopter crowd, then Julia's schtick might play okay.


Personally, I thought the Bravia spot last year with Manning and the San Diego Chicken mascot was the best commercial of the year. (I even bought a 40" set & Blu-ray Player as a result). I'm sorry to learn they didn't include the Chicken for an encore. He was refreshing to watch.

The new set of "panelists" is quite a curious angle and they'd be yawners, if not for their dubious nature. Timberlake (Mr. Wardrobe Malfunction himself), Allison (a blogger--really?) and Andrews (whose recent transparent PR campaign of a fuzzy nude video for wider name recognition reeks of phoniness) are hardly a reach-out to family friendly living rooms.

Even Peyton's goodwill capital won't mask over this bunch of celebrity louts for the Sony name. They may have over-thought this one.

________________________________________________

Julia Allison's Sony Commercials Offer a Window Into Her Soul
The first Sony commercials are up on the web and boy, do they have a lot to teach us about life. At least life Julia Allison style!

COMMENT
Unless Sony is targeting Gawker readers specifically, wouldn't the vast majority of people watching this think "who the f--- is Julia Allison?"
________________________________________________

NEW POST
Makeover Madness

8/10/2009

A Model Life

TatianaTheAnonymousModel, aka...

...Jenna Sauers

I Am the Anonymous Model
Modeling was my first job, and is to date the one I've held the longest. My final stint, which started in Paris and wound through cities almost too numerous to mention, spanned almost two years. Then, this summer, I quit. [...]

The money doesn't make sense: designers sell next season's clothes at those shows, then fill their orders using proceeds from the collection of two seasons ago that retailers are, finally, coughing up for. This structural financial constraint makes nimble reaction to any external world event almost impossible, which explains fashion's famed disconnect from things that might be called "external" "world" "events." I learned early that the higher a job's fashion quotient, the less money I would be offered. How, exactly, I was supposed to make a living as a model never became entirely clear; when I worked two months in Australia last year, after agency fees and the rent were deducted, nearly AU$5,000 worth of earnings became AU$690.90. Less than the cost of my airfare, certainly less than the cost of the food and subway passes I'd had to charge during the trip. I left Sydney in November. I didn't get my $690.90 -- $413.70, after wire transfer fees and currency conversion -- until this April. "At least," said the agency accountant, "you worked!" [...]

Because the industry keeps even its marginal players endlessly occupied, but bored, there was always plenty of time to think. I often reflected on the fact that studies show that women, after looking at fashion magazines -- full of pictures of girls very much like me, sometimes even pictures of me -- feel bad about themselves. I also often wondered why it is, given this fact, that we buy the magazines again next month. [...]

And then there were the models. I knew, when I walked into my new agency, Elite Paris, in September of 2007, that I had found my tribe. They were the sweetest, dirtiest talking, weirdest, comic-book-loving, Internet nerding, most breathtakingly cynical, tallest, hard-drinkingest, Proust-readingest, silliest, one-day-I'm-going-to-fuck-all-this-and-be-a-lawyerest, funniest, toughest crowd I'd ever run with. They were all 16 and 20 and 23, and most were amenable to staying up late and talking about Lech Walesa and the problems of teaching post-WWII history in a country where 15 years ago neighbors turned each other in to the secret police for having an extra chicken. Or they would trash talk creepy clients while drinking white wine out of 7UP bottles in the street because none of us had the money for a bar tab and the apartment was too hot. That was good, too. [..]

When we were talking about mutual acquaintances, my Madonna lookalike friend told me a story about a fellow model, a teenaged scenester I'd been hanging out with in Los Angeles and New York earlier that year. The girl rolled with a musician boyfriend who was fucking my friend when she was 16, and she had a momager who lived off her earnings, which included at that time $25,000 for a major global campaign. And, said my friend, the teenager had actually just entered rehab in Arizona because the whole time I had known her, she was shooting heroin. The story -- with the stage mother, the influence of one of the many dudes who fuck 16-year-olds, the money jobs, the intravenous drug use -- all seemed at the time like a giant neon sign flashing Get Out Of This Industry Now. I still can't believe I didn't even realize she was strung out. Perhaps that contains a depressing message about the kinds of connections this business fosters between people. Or about how I coarsened as a person during my time wandering this earth selling the rights to my image for a living. Or both. I don't know. [...]

Yes, there were parties, often very strange ones. (The fashion industry relies on an astounding number and variety of externalities to make the investments it demands appear, to its principals, worth it.) I decided to stop seeing a dude when he pleaded, in the doorway of a Carroll Gardens townhouse, "Don't leave, baby, I just scored cocaine." And a curly-haired Scientologist teen sitcom actor who carried a wad of hundreds secured with a rubber band lectured me in a night club about the additive contents of Red Bull. I remember once hanging out in Los Angeles with a born-again Ultimate Fighting champion and his Playmate girlfriend -- "She shot her issue before she met me, you know," explained the champion -- at the home of a Texan introduced to me as Anna Wintour's de facto stepson. The Texan worked -- naturally -- in the West Coast office of Men's Vogue, and he kept a loaded handgun in his kitchen drawer, next to the aluminum foil. I started talking to the Texan's fraternity brother, who moved to Los Angeles from New York at 25 because, he said, he felt one couldn't move to Los Angeles at 28 or 29. If it didn't work out and you had to go back East, it would be too late.

"Do you miss New York?" I asked the fraternity brother.

The man looked at me for a second. In the kitchen, the Texan removed the magazine from his pistol and handed it to another guest.

"New York is the best place in the world to be," he said. [...]

New York was the place I kept returning to, at first excitedly, then grudgingly, then with relief, because at least I speak the language and the subway runs all night. (And I did try that goat taco place, and it is good.) Although I traveled widely as a child -- I had lived in four countries before I turned 18, and visited numerous cities in Western Europe and Asia, sometimes for work and sometimes for fun -- I didn't see New York until I was 22. And for that I will be forever grateful: this odd conglomeration of mostly working infrastructure and unimpeachable cultural security, this city where you never have to wonder if the movie will open or the band will play or the author will read, is a place I shall never take for granted. [...]

I'd love to say that traveling broadened my horizons, that all these places took on unique contours in my mind. That the Australian-accented Hasidic Jews I passed on the street in Bondi were somehow different than the ones I'd see rolling up the security gates on their bakeries as I stumbled home in Williamsburg at a quarter to five in the morning. Instead, after a time, everything reminded me of something else. And I hated this anhedonic change in my own perspective more than I hated any other change in me that the industry wrought. New York remained exceptional for a lot longer than anywhere else, but, eventually, I tried coke in the kitchen of the Beatrice Inn and then at a party I stayed long enough to hear a white magazine editor refer to a black magazine editor, not present, as "that fucking nigger," and slowly, the city lost its particular glamor. [...]

My bookings were actually steadier after the onset of this recession than before, but my interest in my modeling "career" was lessening markedly. My wonderful booker at Next in New York fell in love and moved to Paris at the beginning of this summer. I soon lost heart at the process of, at 23, finding a new agency; dashing all over to be interviewed, offering up my book as if it I still believed it comprised all of my achievements, felt almost shamefully stupid. I called my mother agent, a hardworking Christian from the Midwest who was fond of e-mailing abstract but heartfelt encouragements ("God is a rewarder!"), and told him to tell the new agencies no. (Only one even tried to change my mind.)

My last job -- "Oh, if only we could be shooting film," exclaimed the photographer, as he put in his memory card -- was for a bridal magazine, and I wore, among other things, a dress that cost $29,000 and was largely constructed of ostrich feathers. Before the job, the photographer had found an old personal blog I used to write, under the name I'll now be writing with for Jezebel. He wanted to know why I'd given up on that blog; I was good and kind of funny, he said. I told him I'd gotten bored, which was more or less true.

At the very end of the shoot, as the assistants were striking the set, undoing everything they'd jerry-rigged so convincingly the day before, as the stylists were packing up the couture gowns and the art director was looking at potential layouts with her boss, and as I was putting on my jacket and heading for the door, the photographer called out to me, "Jenna! Please just keep writing."

My name is Jenna Sauers.

I smiled, and told him that I would.
______________________________________________

NEW POSTS
Focus Fireplaces
Sugar Kitty Corsets

8/09/2009

It's Personal




Ever wonder what your favorite lensmen like to snap when they're not capturing pretty young fashion mavens? Yeah, we did too. So when we discovered that Yvan Rodic, the fashion-finding photog behind one of our favorite street style sites Facehunter, started a personal blog, we became instantly intrigued with his own quirky take on style and the playful-yet-arty candids from all his fabulous jet-set jaunts. Tune in daily for Rodic's visual musings that document anything from gotta-have-it accessories as seen on the street stars of various cities, wish-you-were-there nightlife photos, and even kooky self-portraits that allow for a rare glimpse at the man behind the lens. [Refinery29.com]