I wrote once that it’s pointless to get mad atÂ Talk 1300 numbnut Paul Vandenburgh.
“Doing that would be like going to the circus and criticizing the clowns for â€” well, acting like clowns. Thatâ€™s their job.”
I’m not here to lecture you on media literacy, but we all need to remember that some people are paid to be provacative. Columnists, commentators, opinion peddlers, pundits — and sometimes bloggers.
That’s what they do.
Let’s take as an example this headline seen recently in the Times Union blog section:
Good riddance to Grandmaâ€™s Pies
That’s how Times Union staff blogger Kristi Gustafson-Barlette titled a post about the closing of Grandma’s, a local restaurant and pie
She made it clear in the post that she was never a fan of the place, but I think the title was calculated to make people angry.
Not everyone bought it, like this person in the comment area:
Content-wise, your article captures the truth: Grandmaâ€™s had lost allÂ of what made the pies local favorites and it was time for a change. However, your headline implies your revelry in the closing of a local business. The disparity in tone between headline is clearly evidence of a lame attempt at clickbait â€“ an insult to your readers.
But it worked. Her post rocketed to the top of the most-read list.
Whatever. Why are we so bothered about what’s in some blog or on a stupid talk radio show — especially when it can be argued that what you’re reading or hearing isn’t real, but cooked up to grow audience?
Probably for the same reason many of us can’t stop reading about Trump. It feels so good to be outraged.