Category Archives: Media

This is CNN (Warning: The post contains distasteful Miley Cyrus content)

Posted on by
2

I want to like CNN. As an Atlanta native it wounds me personally to see crazy Ted Turner’s once proud news empire rudderless and foundering. Recent high-profile reporting blunders and questionable editorial calls haven’t helped matters. But I at least like some of what they’ve tried since Jeff Zucker showed up to run things. Anthony Bourdain’s hyper-promoted show is as interesting an hour as any of the news channels broadcasts (although it’s still not exactly news). His visit to Libya was flat-out fascinating.

But, you know, this:

This Is CNN

Surely there are some actual news-minded editors at CNN who are ready to just give up. How thoroughly embarrassing that Miley Cyrus’s skank dance at the VMA’s is the breathless top news item on CNN.com. Right down to the triple-question-marked tabloid “She did what???” headline. You’re making it hard to root for you, CNN.

UPDATE: By the way, I was kidding about the “distasteful Miley Cyrus content.” I consider any Miley Cyrus content to be distasteful. We haven’t gone prude here at containseggs.

UPDATE NO. 2: Wow, The Onion rips CNN.com to shreds for this in a hilarious phony editorial. Outstanding.

K-Mart’s Fishy Holiday Charity Angels: Bah Humbug!

Posted on by
1

How cynical am I for thinking this is a brilliantly executed marketing campaign by K-Mart? Google “K-Mart layaway” (without quotes) and you’ll see 650 news links, national and local, all associating this feel-good holiday story with K-Mart. Why would these anonymous Christmas layaway angels not also drop by Wal-Mart or Marshall’s or Best Buy? (To be fair, these reporters at least checked with Wal-Mart, which said it had seen some cases of anonymous charity. But the overwhelming and extremely valuable positive press coverage focuses on K-Mart.)

I am officially calling a special Scrooge Edition Bullshit. Please Santa prove this cynic wrong.

Poor Judgment in Promotional Photos: Sesame Street Edition

Posted on by
2

So, apparently “The Office” star John Krasinski will kick off the 42nd season of Sesame Street by bracing for a high-velocity money shot from an enormous uncircumcised penis. Do Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity know about this outrageous filth PBS is peddling?

Scene Directed By Bert and Ernie

ATHF’s Frylock Reports on Polygamy for CNN

Posted on by
2

Looks like when Aqua Teen Hunger Force (now Aqua Unit Patrol Squad) is not filming, Frylock moonlights as KTVK investigative reporter Mike Watkiss. Today he weighed in on polygamy rights on John King’s usually tranquilizing CNN show.

Meatwad unavailable for comment

UPDATE: We were able to capture this mid-mutation frame from CNN’s broadcast:

Kelly M. Bray, Meet the Power of Charts

Posted on by
1

So, someone stood up for us (and intellectual justice) against the thieving pretenders at the L.A. Times Tech Blog. A woman named Kelly M. Bray commented, derisively questioning the popularity and readership of containseggs.com.

We’ve researched the site statistics, Ms. Bray. Just six weeks after we started, we’re already nipping the heels of the low-integrity hacks at the Tech Blog. Snark all you want at the objective power of visually represented comparative numbers:

 

(And El Camino College? Grades not good enough for Camaro University?)

Pack of Weiners: The best Weiner news headlines of the week

Posted on by
1

Best week ever for headline editors. We are unashamed juveniles and have collected some of our favorite actual Weinergate headlines from the Web the past couple of weeks:

And perhaps the final word:

Spanking a Johnson

Posted on by
Reply

OK, this is six years old, and a strange way to kick things off, but it amuses us. Here’s a 2005 email exchange with former NY Post Page Six gossip twit Richard Johnson.

The background: Johnson got busted on a media site for “reporting” a story about Denzel Washington making a huge donation to a military hospital. Johnson (tee-hee) lifted the item verbatim from a chain letter. Then, on that media site, he posted a totally lame defense of his plagiarism. So we sent him an email, and we had this exchange:

—–Original Message—–
From: containseggs[mailto:ivan@containseggs.com]
Sent: 6/24/05 10:14 AM
To: Johnson, Richard
Subject: Your Lame Response to Mr. Soriano
No, you didn’t choose to report something that “had become the subject of a chain letter,” you simply copied the content of the chain letter and reported it. Including the “quote” from a “source” that’s verbatim from the chain letter. And subsequent queries found that Mr. Washington did not write a check on the spot, but later made a large donation. You’re lazy, and Cesar Soriano is right, and your response makes you look like a bigger idiot.

“Johnson, Richard” <RJohnson@nypost.com> wrote:

I can tell from your tone you are an idealogue.

1) Washington visited the base

2) Washington made a big donation

3) This act of generositry and patriotism was ignored by the mainstream liberal press.

The rest is nit-picking and name-calling.

There is a reason why you don’t have your own column.

—–Original Message—–
From: containseggs[mailto:ivan@containseggs.com]
Sent: 7/5/05 9:57 AM
To: Johnson, Richard
Subject: RE: Your Lame Response to Mr. Soriano

I just noticed your reply. My email filter had wisely routed it to the Junk folder.

So, you think it’s nit-picking to call you out for plagiarizing a chain email that reported dubious facts. The fact that some of the material was ultimately true makes you no less lazy. You didn’t check facts. You didn’t even have an original thought.

And perhaps it was name calling to call you an idiot. It’s not reckless name calling, however, because it’s based on objective observation, validated further by your childish, partially coherent response. You are an idiot.

As far as me being an “idealogue,” I’m not sure what you mean. An idealogue is a theorist, or someone given to fanciful thinking. There was nothing fanciful in my email; I simply noted that you were disingenuous in your defense and a lazy reporter, both observations supported by facts.

Perhaps you meant “ideologue,” which means someone who advocates a certain ideology. In that case, I’m guilty—I advocate that journalists should not steal content from chain letters, pass it off verbatim as their own (including sources) without bothering to check facts, and then engage in an ongoing childish, spurious defense when caught.

The reason I don’t have my own column? I have another job and I’ve never aspired to be a columnist. Thanks for keeping the bar low in case I change my mind.

“Johnson, Richard” <RJohnson@nypost.com> wrote:

get a life

—–Original Message—–
From: containseggs[mailto:ivan@containseggs.com]
Sent: 7/5/05 11:42 AM
To: Johnson, Richard
Subject: RE: Your Lame Response to Mr. Soriano

Ouch, that really stung. You employ a crafty satirical wit in pure Swiftian tradition. Whose nephew are you to possibly remain employed?

Super!
Dick