Felicia Day Blogs About Vanity Fair's Piece on Twitter and New Media - Cast&Crew

This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

January 07 2010

Felicia Day Blogs About Vanity Fair's Piece on Twitter and New Media. The piece featured her and other women. Fair to say, however, that she's not impressed. The article Felicia takes issue with can be found here.

Animal Mother | Cast&Crew | 06:11 CET | 32 comments total | tags: twitter, vanity fair, felicia day

Nice photo, but annoying article. Felicia tweeted (with a link to a blog commenting on the article) thusly: "It was an honor to be included in the picture, but I can't disagree w/these pts re: the Vanity Fair article http://bit.ly/5qw1au /via @kiala"

[ edited by miri47 on 2010-01-07 06:20 ]

miri47 | January 07, 06:19 CET

And then she comments on how the article was written by posting a link to this article:
http://www.geekweek.com/2010/01/why-does-this-vanity-fair-article-hate-the-women-of-twitter.html

Nos | January 07, 06:20 CET

The response links -- including Felicia's blog item on it -- are more important than the original link.

[ edited by The One True b!X on 2010-01-07 06:29 ]

The One True b!X | January 07, 06:28 CET

I'm twisick. I accept tweeps because the awesome Alyson Hannigan uses it but I've had enough of people making up fake tweewords. Horrible article with an amazing response.

Jaymii | January 07, 06:31 CET

"Twilebrities"? WTF!

cko | January 07, 06:46 CET

Yes, miri, nos and b!X, I totally agree. And I think it's sad that we're giving the most attention to the photoshoot element of it. Any chance of changing the emphasis of this story? I mean, if we can't be relied upon to do this properly, who can?

curlymynci | January 07, 07:28 CET

Agree with much of the above, and have changed the link, link title, and captioning accordingly.

SoddingNancyTribe | January 07, 07:55 CET

Yaaay!!!!! Brilliant. I'm proud of this place. :)

(And this was certainly not a criticism of Animal Mother - I wouldn't have known about this at all if you hadn't linked it.)

curlymynci | January 07, 08:01 CET

Awesome reworking, thank you SoddingNancyTribe. :)

Nos | January 07, 08:10 CET

The photo doesn't do them any favours.

Simon | January 07, 08:18 CET

Agreed, Simon. While it is a really beautiful photo of beautiful women holding various communication devices, it doesn't speak to me of self-made, intelligent, socially connected women. It looks a little like Radio City Music Hall's tribute to flashers. Or Inspector Gadget. I'd love to have a picture of myself looking all fine and trenchcoated and leggy...but not if it was going to be the picture attached to an article that had anything at all to do with my career.

Raggedy Edge | January 07, 09:25 CET

Unless you were the aforementioned engadgeted investigator/pervert.

Yeah, very nice photo in a different context - basically, you can be sexy and smart (not exactly a shock to the enlightened but also worth re-affirming IMO). Presumably the idea is of trenchcoated citizen journalists reporting from the front-lines but that's really not the impression the article conveys, which is more "leggy flibbertigibbets waste their - and our - time with superficial nonsense". Good example of how to cast a group of people in a particular light without - presumably - actually lying (if there's such a course as "Intro to Propaganda" this would make a handy study item ;).

Saje | January 07, 10:36 CET

I tried making a text file which extracted the disgustingly condescending statements from the article but eventually there was very little I wasn't copying and pasting.

I'm not into that whole "If you're not jacked in, you're not alive" rhetoric which was so prevalent in the 90s, but this kind of blatant dismissal of powerful information tools does make me grouchy.

Twitter is about more than sandwiches.

Kiba | January 07, 14:39 CET

I tried making a text file which extracted the disgustingly condescending statements from the article but eventually there was very little I wasn't copying and pasting.

I didn't exactly try that, but I can see what you're saying. I got a few sentences in and nearly gave up on it. "Disgustingly condescending" is right. I might have expected more from VF, but this points more to their fear of the power internet media in overtaking print.

JTown | January 07, 16:09 CET

I also found it a little funny that one of the disparaging comments implied that these women tweet about things like "Tiger's mistresses"... in the magazine with the new NEVER BEFORE SEEN PHOTOS of Tiger on the cover.

ugh.

lisaspo | January 07, 18:48 CET

I'm with Felicia about how the magazine took a nice picture of her while making her and the other women look like gossipy valley girls. If the article bothered to explain how Twitter changed their lives and their careers, it would have been fine. But they'd rather condemn Twitter, and those who use it, as mororns who are ruining magazines in general. Considering the mag has been around for decades, it was probably the only view they were willing to make.
I'm glad TV networks aren't gunning for Felicia and Neil Patrick Harris because they dared to make good web media that's making people shun the boob tube more often.

[ edited by impalergeneral on 2010-01-07 19:59 ]

impalergeneral | January 07, 19:51 CET

Old Media vs New Media.

There's a reason they're Old media.

gossi | January 07, 19:55 CET

That says it all, gossi. It's like the blacksmith threatened by the automobile tire industry 110 years ago

impalergeneral | January 07, 20:00 CET

[ETA] Hmm, but the blacksmith was right to feel threatened. So in that light, isn't it totally understandable that they'd fight tooth and nail to survive ? [/ETA]

There's a reason they're Old media.

Wait, I know this one ... they've been around longer ?

[ edited by Saje on 2010-01-07 20:03 ]

Saje | January 07, 20:01 CET

I don't think the photo's very nice. The pantless trenchcoat look does even gorgeous models no favors. It just looks odd. It looks kind of like photos from one of the pantless Metro rides but without the fun goofball element.

Sunfire | January 07, 20:20 CET

impalergeneral, Saje Ah, but there is still need for good blacksmiths, although these days they're more commonly referred to as "farriers." Just ask any of the thousands of horse owners.

I haven't read the article, because I'm one of the few "unenlightened ones" out there who just doesn't get the point of Twitter. (I also can't stand "lol-speak," which I know a lot of Tweeps use to get around the character limit.)

I feel very much like Giles: "Yes, I called you a fad." (And, yes, I'm aware that Tony Head twits. Or tweets. Or whatever the hell you call it. So does his partner, Sarah Fisher, one of the above-mentioned horse owners.)

[ edited by ShadowQuest on 2010-01-07 20:25 ]

ShadowQuest | January 07, 20:24 CET

The trouble with Twitter is that in two or three years time we'll have moved onto something else (see MySpace). Would love to know when Twitter will make money.

Simon | January 07, 20:28 CET

Simon, Twitter made a profit last year.

gossi | January 07, 20:31 CET

Twitter has nothing to do with lolspeak. It's just a tool for very short public (or private) messages. People tweet about all kinds of stuff just like they blog about all kinds of stuff. It's neither the end of civilization nor the secret key to making millions overnight. Although I can point you to tweets saying either if you'd like.

Sunfire | January 07, 20:36 CET

Is it the secret to making millions within say 1-2 weeks ? Cos i'm patient that way.

Ah, but there is still need for good blacksmiths, although these days they're more commonly referred to as "farriers." Just ask any of the thousands of horse owners.

Yes but nothing like as many ShadowQuest (which is why most blacksmiths nowadays are just farriers, whereas before horse-shoes etc. would only be part of their business). 200 ish years ago there would've been a smithy in every town, clearly that's far from true today.

Saje | January 07, 20:38 CET

Simon, Twitter made a profit last year.

Do you have a source for that gossi ? I thought after the hacking incident they were a bit guarded about their finances ?

ETA: Nevermind, I was just being lazy ;).

[ edited by Saje on 2010-01-07 20:51 ]

Saje | January 07, 20:46 CET

I think the photo perfectly illustrates the article's contention that women are on Twitter just to tee-hee and expose themselves.

The One True b!X | January 07, 20:46 CET

And that they have nice legs, which the article didn't mention (OK, it's not a thousand words or anything ...).

Saje | January 07, 20:47 CET

Simon, Twitter made a profit last year.

I saw that. I also saw speculative reports that their operating costs were the same as their revenue.

Simon | January 07, 21:03 CET

A breezy, forgettable article. On a more positive Twitter note, Felicia is on the first page of the published collection Twitter Wit.

I don't know if there are more of her tweets in there.

"It's the postproduction phase of eating fast food that takes the experience all downhill" -Felicia Day

I've only recently starting tweeting, but I do find that the 500-character limit for Youtube comments is much less of a problem now.

Ying | January 07, 21:16 CET

Hmm, and yet somehow Felicia manages to say something more intelligent in 140 characters than Vanity Fair did in an entire article. If ever there was an industry that could learn something from Twitter, instead of taking such a condescending tone...

MattK | January 07, 22:02 CET

I've always appreciated brevity. Someone said it was the soul of wit once, I believe. I consider twittering online haiku, and Felicia is definitely very erudite about it.

hopitopia | January 08, 07:59 CET

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.

« Older NPH beats Barrowman in Big Gay Bat... | Dollhouse's Australian Neighbours. Newer »