According to the book-jacket endorsements Stephen King (author), Dave Barry, (author), Bill Schulz (producer, Fox News), Chez Pazienza (producer, CNN) and The Smoking Gun website really liked this book. I think it is a one-eyed, mean-spirited view of the media written by a ‘tapeworm’.
Drew Curtis is the founder of the fark.com website. He claims that each day Fark receives 2000 news submissions from its readership, which he filters placing the ones he finds most interesting online.
Curtis does not like journalists or the media at all. For example (there are so many) I paraphrase this quote from his book
”Media will ask survivors the most deplorable questions, such as ”How do you feel right now?” ”Has this changed your life?”…… At any rate it’s not the interviewee’s fault coming up with stupid answers. Reporters shouldn’t be asking these types of questions in the first place. Just leave the poor bastards alone.”
Yes, I am sure the Bush administration would have been very grateful if the media had not gone to New Orleans to ask Hurricane Katrina survivors how ‘life’ was for them.
‘Bastards' pops up again in another context, when Curtis discusses a story about terrorists utilising heat seeking missiles. ”It said that the success rate with shoulder-fired heat seekers is extremely low because the terrorists are ignorant bastards who don’t read instructions and fire the things when the plane is to close.”
Curtis might like to consider just what is his definition of this swear word that he throws about so casually.
Jackass gets trotted out as well; ”there’s always some jackass who doesn’t come down with it.” He is referring to people who don’t get the flu over winter, where he makes the quite ludicrous claim that everyone gets the flu over winter; except for the ‘jackass'.
And let’s not go past his casual racism.
”You don’t see Canada or Mexico trying to invade the United States every decade or so, although some would argue Mexico has been doing it one person at a time for years now.”
As he wrote the above, it’s reasonable to assume that he agrees with the statement.
With this book Curtis has taken stories that have been on Fark and then rubbishes them and the media for even publishing the story in the beginning. In effect Curtis feeds off the media like a parasite (tapeworm).
In one instant he highlights quotes from an article in ‘Nature' magazine then adds this comment: ”Well no shit. No word if he actually ever said that. The article might as well have said ”If my aunt had balls she’d be my uncle.” Yes, indeed she would."
‘Nature' is a science magazine targeted at a highly-educated audience with a good grasp of scientific principles. Curtis mocks quotes that he does not understand.
Curtis also works up a head of enraged hot air over magazines/newspapers coming up with Top 10/20/50 lists of this and that.
In regards to a Top 50 Sidekicks of All Time article he writes
"Number two was Robin of Batman and Robin fame, followed by George Constanza, Chewbacca, and Ethel Mertz. Who is Ethel Mertz? Exactly my point."
I guess it never occurred to him to try Google!
I’ve only got as far as page 66 on this book. I’ll keep you posted on how the rest of it pans out.
PLEASE NOTE: There has been a further blog on this book. Here.
It's a shame you don't appreciate the humor, and can only look at it without any apparent ability to detect sarcasm. It seems very much to me that you don't really comprehend Fark's bitingly sarcastic sensibilities.
I've only to conclude that you're blasting a large target like Fark in order to draw eyes to your miniscule blog. I wish you well, and can comfortably predict your ultimate failure, since you're clearly too lazy to read an entire book before making up your ill-informed mind and blasting away.
Frankly, it doesn't bode well for your journalistic credibility.
Reply: Simply because Fark is big, doesn't make Drew Curtis right and 'little people' have opinions too.
Posted by: Sam McClintock | July 31, 2007 2:22 AM
Mentioning illegal immigration from Mexico (a fact) is racist?
The real message I take from your article is a personal dislike of Curtis. Regardless of if he should be liked or not, I don't want to get your personal opinion of him reading what should be a review of his book that you hadn't bothered to finish.
Posted by: Ben Neff | August 1, 2007 5:19 AM
http://farm.tucows.com/images/2006/06/internet_tough_guy_magazine.jpg
^ you?
Posted by: NINTENBOXCUBESTATION360 | August 11, 2007 11:09 AM
Wait... is this actually a book review based on "I’ve only got as far as page 66 on this book..."
Are you saying that terrorists aren't bastards?
And as far as the Ethyl Mertz reference... I'd like you to meet a close friend of mine: Sarcasm, this is Rodney. Rodney, this is Sarcasm. Please take a few minutes and get to know eachother
Posted by: Netizencain | August 22, 2007 8:37 AM
Wait... is this actually a book review based on "I’ve only got as far as page 66 on this book..."
Are you saying that terrorists aren't bastards?
And as far as the Ethyl Mertz reference... I'd like you to meet a close friend of mine: Sarcasm, this is Rodney. Rodney, this is Sarcasm. Please take a few minutes and get to know eachother
Posted by: netizencain | August 22, 2007 8:38 AM
You don't have a very good sense of humor. Your arguments are not very well reasoned.
Posted by: Dave Debag | August 22, 2007 8:42 AM
Holy crap, you are lame.
Posted by: ScienceRocks | August 22, 2007 8:57 AM
Who the fark writes a review up to page 66? Are you 12?
Rodney's Reply: there have been two further blogs on the book. Read the last sentencve a bit more closely.
Posted by: Anonymous | August 23, 2007 6:53 AM
I'm sorry -- who the hell are you again?
Rodney's Reply; A journalist with 22-years experience. I must say, having thought about it, Curtis should have just called his book 'Crap'. It would have been a superb double meaning.
He claims the the media publish 'crap', but in fact he was writing 'crap'.
And as for the Fark website. Well, one day you do have to 'leave' high school (college).
Posted by: Chez | October 2, 2007 4:38 PM