WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2021
Clarifying a technical bungle: We're still annoyed about the misfire regarding Monday's afternoon post—the post which didn't bark.
For the sake of future historians, let's clarify the chronology:
On Monday morning, the New York Times finally did it! They published the third installment in Associate Professor Cottom's endless series of endless essays about Kyrsten Sinema's endlessly meaningful wardrobe.
This time, though, the Times published Cottom's essay in their print editions—in the space where the paper's editorials used to appear, no less!
We reacted as any sane person would. To read that report, click here.
On Tuesday morning, the Times published a letter in which Rev. Marian Edmonds-Allen complained about unnamed journalists who have allegedly been launching "sly biphobic attacks" against Sinema.
Edmonds-Allen included a quotation from one such alleged attack; the author of offending statement went unnamed. Upon googling, the quotation tracked back to the second essay in the Cottom triptych.
We swung into action again. To read that second report, click this.
Due to a technical bungle, our Monday report didn't get posted until Tuesday afternoon. Today, we clarify the chronology, and we offer this observation:
Certain journalists and certain news orgs seem to love discussing the endless deep meanings of disfavored politicians' clothes. Major orgs have been publishing such work for decades now. Cottom's essays about Sinema's wardrobe add a major dose of academic pomposity to this long-standing dumb idea.
Our news orgs seem to love presenting this dreck. Again and again and again and again, it's a dumb / very dumb idea.