(responding to katiebakes, and trying to find the middle)

I’ll add this: isn’t the problem with Hotelling’s Model that everyone, on the micro-scale, thinks that they’re arguing from the middle? Every person, even the extremist, thinks they’re just being rational, the only sensible one in the room! And if I may mix suspect metaphors, it’s the Long Tail of Hotelling’s Model that interests me.

So going back to the comments on my site and others…. Spiers response was intriguing. It was, if I may summarize, “The guy publicly makes a jackass of himself, so he shouldn’t be surprised when such ridicule occurs.”

Her word was “jackassery,” which again feels like a question of defining the middle. The internet is such a big wide open place, so what precisely is the purpose in identifying its fringes and then demonstrably debasing them? Does this serve an ethical purpose — or just an entertainment one? In a word, why?

What’s all the fuss that Lodwick is an Odwick?

There is more context, of course… two more things are true: 1) Lodwick decided to live his personal life publicly, in a manner that wasn’t very smart, and 2) he’s within a pre-established circle of people, not some weirdo from another land. Perhaps this is why he deserves such scrutiny?

Maybe?

It’s true, but there remains this: Scrutiny is different than unabashed ridicule. From where does that arise?

Back to Hotelling’s Model….

I have tried to talk about this before, and failed. I’ll try again: there is an increasingly prevalent impulse to make the internet the same. This is a very subtle maneuver, and anyone who is guilty of it (including me) would undoubtedly deny it. But I propose one slice of the Gawker Voice (which is extended well beyond Gawker by now) is the primary mover of this trope: identify the fringes and then ridicule them from the center.

I’m as guilty as anyone. It’s part of living in this time.

Before you denounce this trope, try to scan the sites you normally peruse in a day. You’ll see this happening over and over and over. (“Look at this FREAK” could be a folder name for my bookmarks.) Keep the goggles on for a while, and you’ll start thinking internet is annoyingly culturally conservative. It doesn’t feel good.

But let’s get back to the middle! Of course, this isn’t really Gawker’s fault — that’s retarded. And why the fuck do we care that some people who have power get taken down every once in a while? Isn’t this inevitably good for society?

Maybe?

Yeah, I dunno. Maybe Lodwick deserves it. Hell, maybe he even wants it. But the truth is, I want Lodwick out there acting like a weirdo, and I think it’s good for the internet, whateverthefuck that means.

Ultimately I think two things: 1) I’m actually quite glad that he’s doing this, and 2) I still want to make fun of him for it.

I don’t know why that is.