Oh, and this was funny
A blogger named John Savage writes about being disgusted by Rod Dreher's link to a porno picture. There was also a related post on which I commented briefly, but didn't stick around to read his brilliant retort. A commenter named Jamie recorded it:
In another post called “Pa Cyrus: Cynically brilliant?” Rod Dreher explains his real reasons for running the pornographic pictures after taunting a commentator called Pauli.
Pauli says “The short month of April is nearly over and the numbers must need some padding.”
And then Rod Dreher says “How many page views you got at your blog, Pauli?”
This seems to me to be the filthiest reasons of all, to show the pictures over and over just to get people to click on them while pretending to be disgusted and laughing at the fools who fall for it.
Welcome to Beliefnet, Jamie, and the upsidedown world of the Workin' Boy. I guess he wants to whip out his big weblog at me now for purposes of intimidation.
Quality over quantity.
ReplyDeletehmmm, how does dreher know you have a blog? why is it even on his radar screen? could he be ... reading it?
ReplyDeletethat's pretty funny btw. "nah nah, i got more page views than you!" as if we need more evidence the guy is perenially 12.
i confess i faithfully read the insane blogs out there. if i read, say, anchoress, i just agree with her most of the time and it gets boring. whereas when a blogger is having a slow-motion psychic meltdown before my eyes, i just can't stop watching.
pauli, maybe you should do more child murder posts, or particularly egregious tableaux from the holocaust (i seem to remember dreher latched onto one featuring the germans forcing a woman to give birth into a fire.) dude, stuff like that is a showstopper and THE HITS WILL GO THROUGH THE FREAKING ROOF! HA HA! HA HA! AND THEN THAT WILL SHOW DREHER! HA HA! HA HA! DUDE THAT WOULD BE SO COOL!
Pauli, thanks for the link. Good to know that you have a group of commenters who are skeptical of Dreher's commitment to social conservatism and Christian morals.
ReplyDeleteKathleen, great last paragraph! It's likely from Pauli's previous posts on Dreher that Dreher knows about Pauli's blog, but I think he would have made the same comment even if he didn't think Pauli was a blogger. It's just a way of saying, "I ought to be immune to criticism -- I'm just trying to feed my family and you don't have any right to criticize how I go about pumping up my hit stats." But if you want to be known as a conservative and a devout Christian, then there are things like putting up porn that you just don't do because you'd like to make a bit more cash this month.
Most of Dreher's commenters are liberal anyway, and he seems to have nothing against catering to them if that's a growth market.
K that's been my exact point all along about the internal contradiction in Dreher's content. I could post something with an indignant frown like "I can't believe that Br_____ Sp_____ did a n_ked photo shoot showing off her new br__st augmentation. Our young teenage girls are going to be stripping down nude in imitation... and I won't even mention L__dsay L_ha_,... etc. etc." Then you sit back an harvest hits on searches for "n_ked teenage girls", "n_ked photo shoot", and stuff involving the particular person's name, body parts, and what are most likely high-scoring words like "nude", "stripping" and "sex" etc.
ReplyDeleteThis to some degree is fine because you can say you're just reporting news & commentating. But this guy wrote an entire book about how modern middle-class Americans, mainstream conservatives, corporate heads, i.e., basically people he doesn't like, have consumerist, utilitarian attitudes toward everything. Well, why not so-called "religion writing" supported by click-driven advertising? Beliefnet seems to be the perfect example of how religion is being commodified & utilized for gain and it's not being done by Karl Rove or the religious right but by his empoyer, the thrid largest international media conglomerate (B-net is owned by News Corp.).
I don't know what percentage of his hits come from searches let alone searches on seedy material. To me, the Beliefnet model seems to resemble some of the things the man has railed against in the past, i.e., the soulless corporation spewing out bland candy rather than "permanent things" or substance. I suppose that perhaps I don't "get" crunchy conservatism and that's why I don't understand the complex moral code justifying his actions.
He has mentioned in the past how good the numbers are and this latest stab at me, an amateur part-time blogger, based on size and popularity betrays what his real motivations are, IMO. Of course, Bubba already posted on this a year and a half ago.
John, you're welcome and thanks.
ReplyDeletedon't know if you saw this. Lovely, eh? HT Jonathan Carpenter.
The resort to "how many readers do you have" is more than childish, it is revealing. Dreher is in the entertainment business. Even more so as the regular newspaper business goes away. When you're in the entertainment business, you have to give the customer what they want. I always remember the monologue in Network where Howard Beale says "we'll tell you anything you want to hear".
ReplyDeleteI could have never worked in media for that reason. You just give your soul over a little at a time while if you're egotistical enough you tell yourself that it is on priciple. In the end you survive be being a changling. Why? Cause you need the money and can't imagine another way to survive.
That's why I'm ever cautious about Dreher writing the big anti-Catholic book. He's got enough rumor and innuendo to put one together and as witnessed by some ot the unreasonable (and untrue) barbs he regularly throws against the church, he could churn it into a real potboiler. As far as I can see, it's the only big enough arrow in his quiver to get the real attention he so craves. CC became passe before anyone noticed and does anyone think his proposed book on the "Benedict Option" will amount to much?
While I do have sympathy for the tremendous number of problems he is having raising his children, at least we don't have to hear about how the happiness of his little family is the proof of his lifestyle choices. As someone with older kids than his who have had their share of scrapes and sadness (nothing like Rod's however), I always thought that was an arrogant claim.
Steve, I've thought about that before, but you bring up a good point that it's his biggest arrow yet. If he did that don't you think it would completely sever all ties that he has left with orthodox Catholics? The cover blurb authors would be a who's who of dissidents and so-called "progressives". Erin Manning has gotten disgusted with him over there already, and Mark Shea's patience seems to me to be pretty strained as of late. Shea's patience is the most reliable indicator in general, but with Dreher it is since they've been friends for a long time.
ReplyDeleteAlso -- ever wonder why Dreher never updated the Amy Welborn link to her new blog? It's been almost a year.
If he threw his talent into writing an anti-Catholic screed it would be unfortunate. I hope he doesn't... the guy is confused, silly and as irritating as Anakin Skywalker, but he's not Darth Vader... yet.
Oh -- thanks CrankyCon for the kind words, but I don't make a big claim for quality here. A lot of the chicken scratchings you see here are emblematic of a classic underachiever. I hope that doesn't sound like false humility, even though it probably is. Real humility is difficult, face it.
ReplyDeleteThe truth is that I'd been itching to use the word "emblematic" in a sentence.
Well I got edited out by the Rodster by suggesting that his animus for the church is at least partially fueled by guilt.
ReplyDeleteShould I be proud?
SiliconValleySteve, that is indeed a badge of honor, LOL.
ReplyDeleteAs someone said over at Mark Shea's blog, Rod allows only two opinions at the Dreherrhea Blog: his own and that of the sycophant agreeing with him. Not too insecyre, what?
And what makes you think I was talking about you and not your highly intelligent readership? ;)
ReplyDeleteAnd what makes you think I was talking about you and not your highly intelligent readership?
ReplyDeleteOh, that's easy. Pride, arrogance and an indefatigable superiority complex. Remember: conservatives are supposed to be elitists.
If Dreher wasn't getting more blog hits he would need a new line of work. Commentators and semi-professional bloggers kinda need hits...
ReplyDeleteI just do it for the satisfaction of knowing I have given the world a potpouri of popery.
If hits are the penultimate concern, I suppose I could post porn on The Black Cordelias...
As it stands, I have enough to answer for on Judgement Day.
I did write a post at my previous blog home on the Porn industry. No images, just cold hard facts and statistics about the level of sales, revenues and average first age of exposure to internet porn (11, if you were wondering). By the next morning our blog was at the top of the google hits returned...
Sex does sell. Even if it just the word "sex" or "porn".
Sex does sell. Even if it just the word "sex" or "porn".
ReplyDeleteLOL, if that's so, this blog should be tops in the Google SERPs by tomorrow night. :-)
Hmmm... If you are looking for hits every post should be titled "Another story not about sex or porn: ..."
ReplyDeleteLOL, Simple inner. Yes, I think that would do it. :)
ReplyDeleteBTW--off-topic: Wasn't Dreher all exercised about some gay priest or other, even though there was not the slightest evidence that the priest in question had ever violated his vow of celibacy? Well, now it turns out that Bishop Farrell has removed this priest form his recently assumed post at a parish in McKinney, Texas, pending an investigation into the priest's involvement with a now-defunct website founded as a spiritual support vehicle for SSA-oriented priests. (It seems the website later began posting sexually explicit stuff, but the priest claims he was associated with it only for the spiritual support.)
Well, I dunno what Dreher is saying about Farrell's action--and I don't want to subject myself to Dreherrhea in order to find out--but some of my lefty kneejerk-anti-Catholic acquaintances at another forum are jumping all over the bishop for his "intolerance" and "cowardice" in removing a "good pastor" just (??!!) because of involvement in a gay website.
I posted the following response to these rants, and someone replied that it was a "homophobic crock of sh_t." Talk about the inconsistencies and contradictions of the anti-Catholic Left! Well, I'll let y'all judge for yourselves how homophobic my post was. LOL! Here goes:
------------------
What else could Bishop Farrell do? Hellooooo? We've just emerged from a big honkin' whoppin' sex abuse scandal which largely involved GAY PRIESTS. No, I am NOT saying that all gay priests violate their vows or prey on children / teenagers. Not by a long shot. But some do, and some did, and that got us into a big ole stinkin' mess--morally, spiritually, reputation-wise, credibility-wise, and financially.
As a result, the bishops are now into Zero Tolerance to the Nth Power. Call it over-compensation, but that's the reality. Every diocese is super-sensitive about this. Mine certainly is, and believe me, no one would ever accuse our bishop of being a wooss. I've known of perfectly fine candidates who couldn't get diocesan jobs (we're talking heterosexual laypeople here), because there was the tiniest cloud over their reputations (and it was an undeserved cloud, too).
The bishops now feel that they absolutely must be like Caesar's wife, above reporach, and they can't take any chances. And honestly, would you want them to? If Bishop Farell did nothing and allowed the priest to remain at his post, sans investigation, wouldn't you crap all over him for that, too? It's a classic case of "Damned if you do; damned if you don't." With some folks, it seems, the Catholic Church just can't win, no matter what she does or doesn't do.
flute no dance/dirge no mourn
ReplyDeletePauli--excellent way to put it. Sounds vaguely familiar. ;)
ReplyDeleteYeah, it's the reggae version.
ReplyDeleteY'all, would you mind helping me out here?
ReplyDeletehttp://nicholasforum88957.yuku.com/topic/1458
I figure that once Kathleen gets finished with these bozos they truly won't know what hit them.
E-mail me for the back-story. :)
Diane
The sensible folks already seem to be holding their own.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite comment was "I'd say hold off judgment. If the bishop is trying to keep his vows he made as a bishop, he won't allow any sexually active homosexual to be a priest. Where is the surprise in that? If the priest cannot abide, he can always become an Episcopalian--maybe even an Episcopalian bishop."
ReplyDeleteBut of course that's because I'm a Catholic bigot.
LOL, Diane got compared to Dreher. Probably due to her use of the adjectival phrase "big honkin'".
LOL. :) Well, JT Apostate is actually a good guy. An idiot (liberalism makes you stupid), but a good guy. His heart's in the right place.
ReplyDeleteMagic Klingon or whatever his name is--he's deranged. I've known him for years; he used to post under a different moniker.
Joe Conder (JCO) is just mean and ornery.
Zbabs is GREAT. Far and away the best guy on the board. Everyone loves him, including people who vehemently disagree with him about everything.
Basically, that board is the Island of the Misfit Boys.
oops, the above was moi, Diane.
ReplyDelete