Showing posts with label Writer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Writer. Show all posts

Wednesday, 8 August 2012

Writer Goes on Stalker-y Mission to Track Down the Women in Twitter Bot Profile Pictures [Twitter]

Writer Goes on Stalker-y Mission to Track Down the Women in Twitter Bot Profile PicturesThere are a lot of personages floating around social media sites, a disconcertingly significant number of them with no more life or substance than a discarded shell whose hermit crab tenant abandoned it a long time ago. These "bots" are used to help athletes and celebrities bolster their Twitter accounts, or trick lonely people into thinking that the great grandniece of the long-lost Princess Anastasia wants to be friends with them on Facebook (8.7 percent of Facebook's entire user population, btw, is composed entirely of such bots). More often than not, these bots feature pictures of women, and though the bots themselves aren't real, the women in the profile pictures are, a fact that spurred Jason Feifer of Fast Company to try and figure out who these women are and how some marketing bot appropriated their likeness.

Feifer is painfully aware of how stalkerish his quest is even before the first phone call he makes to a bike shop owner and possible distant friend of a Twitter bot woman. He's not even sure what he's doing beyond just sleuthing around for a link between a bot and a real, live human, and he certainly doesn't know what will happen if he ever finds that link.

This is a mostly pointless exercise, I knew: The story behind every photo would be different. And what would one of these women say—that she's flattered to find her face spamming everyone on Twitter? Clearly, no.

Bots, though, are becoming a more common presence on sites like Twitter because they're cheap to both create and purchase. According to Feifer, companies like Buy Real Marketing sell bots in packages of 1,000 for $17 to 25,000 for $247. Nobody admits to it (obviously), but a publicist Feifer spoke to said that bots are really popular among athletes looking to raise their profile, and, in the case of large companies, purchasing bots is about as risk-free a marketing ploy as one can imagine. There isn't any way to figure out if someone purchased bots or if they just accumulated bots by accident, but bot profiles like those that Feifer was combing through are pretty easy to spot because they usually have "a long digital tail, having been posted on dozens of sketchy porn sites or blogs devoted to the barely legal."

Eventually, Feifer tracks down a woman named Amanda whose 2009 SUNshine Girls calendar photo was used on a bot profile. Feifer calls her boss (accidentally revealing Amanda's stint as a SUNshine Girl), and finally makes a connection with a real person. That's it, though. After admitting that having her SUNshine Girls photo — which, so far as Feifer could tell, had been used for at least a few different bot profiles — circulating the internet was pretty creepy, the best solution Feifer can offer her is to "report the bot as spam, and hope for the best."

In the meantime, Twitter will be playing hot potato with a picture of lingerie-clad Amanda, and there's not a whole lot she can do about it except think of the internet as a big, occasionally wonderful, occasionally horrifying amusement park, where personal information gets lost as easily as a sandal on an inverted roller coaster.

Who's That Woman In The Twitter Bot Profile? [Fast Company]

Image via BestPhotoStudio/Shutterstock.


View the original article here


This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Saturday, 4 August 2012

Novelist Amanda Craig Says Maeve Binchy Would Have Been A Better Writer If She'd Had Kids [Motherhood]

Novelist Amanda Craig Says Maeve Binchy Would Have Been A Better Writer If She'd Had KidsSince the passing of 72-year-old Maeve Binchy, the much-loved (and childless) Irish novelist, the Telegraph has published an essay by British novelist Amanda Craig that immediately blew the fuck up, and it's easy to see why.

Craig says it's much easier to find the time and energy to write when you don't have kids. Fair enough. But ultimately, she poses this question: "Do you miss out on something essential about the human condition if you eschew childbearing?" And although she spends a lot of time dancing around it with hasty justifications, it becomes clearer that her answer is basically "Yup!"

How come, Amanda Craig?

No matter what your experience of adult love, there is nothing as strong as the bond between a mother and a child... Putting yourself last is one of the best things that can happen to a writer. I make no moral claims for motherhood ­- which can bring out the worst in a person, in the form of vicarious rivalry, bitchiness, envy and even mental illness - but going through the ring of fire does change you and bring about a deeper understanding of human nature.

See, Craig and the "we" she uses to indicate female novelists with children have to toil extra-hard, wayyyy harder, than those selfish, layabout childless women who "work in Hawthornden Castle, the luxurious writers' retreat which offers a month of working time uninterrupted by cooking, cleaning or child care." But it's OK, because she also humblebrags about her kids' undisputed brilliance (Ancient Greek! Russian! Oxbridge!)

I can't help but feel that [Binchy's] detailed portraits of ordinary life might not have been so predicated on the relationships between men and women had she had a child.

That's true, and neither would Jane Austen's, George Eliot's or the either of the Brontës—examples Craig herself brings up earlier, asking if Austen's fixation on romantic love would have lasted if she'd had a child. Is Amanda Craig dissatisfied with the novels that Jane Austen and her sad, unenlightened, empty womb produced? Does she read Pride and Prejudice or Middlemarch and think "This is pretttttty good, but it would be AWESOME with babies?" Craig's statement itself might be true, but it's the "I can't help but feel" that qualifies it: asserting that the focus on romantic love rather than the love of parents and children somehow reduces the importance of the writing is problematic.

Ultimately, Craig closes her essay with:

[Binchy's] first novel was about a 20-year friendship between two women [and she] didn't need the experience of motherhood to write about love and friendship in a way that charmed millions. But she might have dug deeper, charming less but enlightening more, had she done so.

Oh, shit, childless women writers! We have been banished from the bastion of Enlightened and unceremoniously dropped on our asses onto the slight Isle of Charming. Who wants to go to that castle with me? OMG, Hawthornden Castle 2012, WOOOOO!!!

'If Maeve Binchy had been a mother...' [Telegraph]


View the original article here


This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Monday, 30 July 2012

Vogue Writer Tries, Fails to Successfully Justify Fawning Asma al-Assad Profile [Mag Hag]

Vogue Writer Tries, Fails to Successfully Justify Fawning Asma al-Assad Profile Forget the tens of thousands of people who've died since Bashar al-Assad started slaughtering opponents of his regime in March 2011. The real victim of the ongoing Syrian massacre is Joan Juliet Buck, the writer whose Vogue article on Assad's glamorous wife, Asma, cost her "my livelihood and end[ed] the association I had had with Vogue since I was 23." Bummer. In a new essay, Buck describes how the disastrous "Rose in the Desert" profile like, totally wasn't her fault.

In the lengthy Newsweek piece, Buck recounts what happened when she met the Assads, starting with the first call she got from her editor telling her to go to Syria.

The editor explained that the first lady was young, good-looking, and had never given an interview. Vogue had been trying to get to her for two years. Now she'd hired a PR firm, and they must have pushed her to agree.

"Send a political journalist," I said.

"We don't want any politics, none at all," said the editor, "and she only wants to talk about culture, antiquities, and museums. You like museums. You like culture. She wants to talk to you. You'd leave in a week."

Buck said she'd think about it, and proceeded to have some very deep thoughts about Syria. For example: "Syria. The name itself sounded sinister, like syringe, or hiss." (The horrific quote has already spawned a hilarious Twitter hashtag, #countriesbyvoguewriters. A favorite: "Czech Republic. The name itself sounded like what I should have done before writing that Vogue article.")

Despite her onomatopoeia-related fears, Buck decided to go for it because she'd get to see some ruins. It's not like she didn't do any research; she called some "experts" (one person who had a house in Aleppo, and an "aesthete") who told her that Asma was bright and energetic and that the Assads "really care about their people." But the real reason Buck took the assignment is that she wanted an adventure:

It was an assignment. I was curious. That's why I'd become a writer. Vogue wanted a description of the good-looking first lady of a questionable country; I wanted to see the cradle of civilization. Syria gave off a toxic aura. But what was the worst that could happen? I would write a piece for Vogue that missed the deeper truth about its subject. I had learned long ago that the only person I could ever be truthful about was myself.

It's okay in my book for a writer to admit she took an assignment because she was curious. But Buck's curiosity seems rather specific; she was curious enough to go to Syria, but not enough to think twice about some of the more ominous incidents that took place during her stay. "I didn't know I was going to meet a murderer," she says. "There was no way of knowing that Assad, the meek ophthalmologist and computer-loving nerd, would kill more of his own people than his father had and torture tens of thousands more, many of them children."

Yet, Buck spends much of the Newsweek place remembering creepy details foreshadowing horrors to come. And we don't just mean the "Mustached men [who] stood in our path, wearing shoes from the 1980s and curiously ill-fitting leather jackets over thick sweaters." (How "curious," right?) Buck describes eerily empty museums, a mysterious metal prison on wheels, her blatantly hacked laptop, and a bizarre situation in which Asma basically fucked with a bunch of kids at a youth center by telling them there was no more money to keep the center open and then saying, "Just kidding!" (Really.) Buck could tell that her hosts were hiding things from her. As she recalls:

I sat in the hotel bar with the French ambassador and asked what was really going on in Syria. He took the battery out of my Syrian cell phone and then did the same with his. This must have set off an alert, because suddenly Sheherazade [an intern/the daughter of the Syrian ambassador to the United Nations] materialized in front of us.

"What are you doing?" she asked.

"Aren't you sick?" I asked. "Go back to bed."

The ambassador drew maps of Syria's shifting boundaries, with dates.

The next day Sheherazade took me to Ma'loula, the village where they still speak Aramaic, the language of the Bible.

She said: "We don't want you to talk to the French ambassador." "You can't talk to me that way," I said.

Buck seems to want her readers to think that she had no idea what she was getting herself into — that she couldn't possibly have known that the Arab Spring was about to begin, or that Assad would start mass murdering his people — but that she also was hesitant about writing the story. "I watched Al Jazeera constantly [when I returned home]," she says. "I didn't want to write this piece. But I always finished what I started." She says she asked her Vogue editors to hold the story or at least discuss how to handle it once things started to heat up in the Middle East, but that a meeting was held without her and she was asked not to speak to the press. Her piece went up in the middle of Libyan protests, received heavy criticism, and was finally taken down a year later. Buck's writing contract was not renewed.

But Buck can't have it both ways, and it's kind of ridiculous to pretend she couldn't have known it was inappropriate to cover Asma's "thin, long-limbed" beauty without touching upon Syria's political strife, even if she wasn't a political journalist and had never visited the country. In one of the first pieces denouncing Buck's profile, The Atlantic's Max Fisher recounted some of the reasons why the glowing article was disturbing:

November and December of 2010 were busy months for Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. He rebuffed international nuclear inspectors, rejected U.S. attempts at diplomatic engagement, stretched out peace talks with Israel (Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman accused him of undermining peace, calling Syria "the center of world terror"), ducked fallout from WikiLeaks revelations that he had attempted to arm Hezbollah with Scud missiles, and celebrated his tenth anniversary with first lady Asma al-Assad, whom he married only a few months after succeeding his father's 30-year rule and who herself spent those two final months of 2010 hosting a reporter from Vogue magazine, which on Friday published a glowing profile of her.

....

The article's fawning treatment of the Assad family and its portrayal of the regime as tolerant and peaceful has generated surprise and outrage in much of the Washington foreign policy community, which for years has viewed Syria as one of the most dangerous and oppressive rogue states in a region full of them, with the Bush administration dubbing it the fourth member of its "axis of evil." Bashar's Syria has invaded Lebanon, allied itself with Iran, aided such groups as Hamas and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, and, for years, ferried insurgents and terrorists into Iraq, where they kill U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians. But the worst behavior may be inside Syria's borders, where a half-century-old "emergency law" outlaws unofficial gatherings and abets the regular practice of beating, imprisoning, torturing, or killing political dissidents, human rights workers, and minorities.

It's odd (and embarrassing) that Buck didn't do more research before going to Syria, but it's unexplainable why she wouldn't have learned more about the country's politics after she returned, given her uneasy experience there. When you're a journalist, "finishing what you started" doesn't mean gritting your teeth and describing "the freshest and most magnetic of first ladies" even if you have a suspicion something's up. It means interviewing real experts, doing extensive research and, most importantly (and obviously), thinking critically about your profile subject — especially if your profile subject's husband is a known dictator. Buck isn't a scapegoat, and she deserves all of the criticism she's received.


Joan Juliet Buck: Mrs. Assad Duped Me [Newsweek]


View the original article here


This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.