"Performance-enhancing hugs" is a delightful phrase! I also like the subtlety of "Teen Suicide-Help Line"-- the difference a misplaced hyphen can make... (A while ago I got an email about a suicide-prevention fundraiser, but the header was cut off in my browser so it just said something like "Will you join us for the annual suicide".)
The choice of Crock Pot is my favorite part of that lol.
RE: the Bush-vigilante item. I didn't mention Luigi, or the congressional baseball shooting of 2017, or other similar occurrences because there's no apparent throughline from that Onion article to those incidents. To me, it's interesting that such an open-ended headline was actually based on 2 very specific, long-forgotten news items.
Also, this headline was immediately forgotten; I couldn't even find meaningful Reddit threads or tweets after June 2005 that mention it.
It's fascinating to see what Onion headlines immediately fade, versus those that keep popping up, like“Special Olympics T-Ball Stand Pitches Perfect Game” or "Top Cute" (a favorite of longtime Onion staffer Maria Schneider).
Speaking of headlines, I have an Onion shirt with the headline "Drugs Win Drug War."
I think today's vigilantism (not with respect to specific incidents, but more the motivations and goals underlying) arise from a real and justified sense that the govt does not serve the people. For instance, mutual aid has become more prevalent as matter of necessity (such as when the court overruled Roe v Wade, or when millions of Americans were left to their own devices to survive during the pandemic). I think a lot of the vigilantism from 20 years ago was driven by cable news and the use of scare tactics and rhetoric to boost public support for the War on Terror. And, just as it is today, the mainstream media (as well as 99% of govt officials) are essentially in almost complete agreement about what is and what is not important and newsworthy. The only difference is that we now have the ability to witness current events as they happen, and not through the lens of TV news (both in what they choose to report and their opinions about same).
That blog post is so interesting because I totally agree with Elliot's premise that TV news is frivolous in its coverage. Kristen responds by asking what news is important and who gets to decide? Her argument is that presented with the array of news content online, most people will still choose the Paris Hilton stories as the "news." Like the shifting goals of vigilantism, I similarly think a major shift has occurred when it comes to "what people care about" when it comes to "news." Obviously, this is way overly simplifying what is also a result of the economic hardship and daily social injustices most Americans experience -- way more than 20 years ago when there was no real widespread urgency to constantly monitor current events. (I used to read Perez Hilton too! I'm not exempt!)
Hope this made sense - got a little rambly but hopefully my overall "take" comes through!
"Performance-enhancing hugs" is a delightful phrase! I also like the subtlety of "Teen Suicide-Help Line"-- the difference a misplaced hyphen can make... (A while ago I got an email about a suicide-prevention fundraiser, but the header was cut off in my browser so it just said something like "Will you join us for the annual suicide".)
oh no! I love spotting bad line breaks like that, although I worked in email for over a decade, so it's an occupational hazard.
The Onion was always remarkably pro-hyphen. Jokes like that one aren't possible if you don't understand how to use them.
Is that Eric Wareheim as “Michael Beasley”?
I came here to ask the same thing!
good question! I don't know, but I kind of see it now that you mention it
OK, got a DM on Instagram also saying it's him, so I'm persuaded. Good catch, everyone!
I of course immediately thought about Luigi Mangione, personal hero of mine, when I saw the vigilante justice headline. I was looking for an Onion article about him and there's basically nothing, but I saw this Reddit post that linked to this gem -- https://theonion.com/corporate-security-detail-not-sure-why-they-guarding-crock-pot-ceo/
The choice of Crock Pot is my favorite part of that lol.
RE: the Bush-vigilante item. I didn't mention Luigi, or the congressional baseball shooting of 2017, or other similar occurrences because there's no apparent throughline from that Onion article to those incidents. To me, it's interesting that such an open-ended headline was actually based on 2 very specific, long-forgotten news items.
Also, this headline was immediately forgotten; I couldn't even find meaningful Reddit threads or tweets after June 2005 that mention it.
It's fascinating to see what Onion headlines immediately fade, versus those that keep popping up, like“Special Olympics T-Ball Stand Pitches Perfect Game” or "Top Cute" (a favorite of longtime Onion staffer Maria Schneider).
Speaking of headlines, I have an Onion shirt with the headline "Drugs Win Drug War."
I think today's vigilantism (not with respect to specific incidents, but more the motivations and goals underlying) arise from a real and justified sense that the govt does not serve the people. For instance, mutual aid has become more prevalent as matter of necessity (such as when the court overruled Roe v Wade, or when millions of Americans were left to their own devices to survive during the pandemic). I think a lot of the vigilantism from 20 years ago was driven by cable news and the use of scare tactics and rhetoric to boost public support for the War on Terror. And, just as it is today, the mainstream media (as well as 99% of govt officials) are essentially in almost complete agreement about what is and what is not important and newsworthy. The only difference is that we now have the ability to witness current events as they happen, and not through the lens of TV news (both in what they choose to report and their opinions about same).
That blog post is so interesting because I totally agree with Elliot's premise that TV news is frivolous in its coverage. Kristen responds by asking what news is important and who gets to decide? Her argument is that presented with the array of news content online, most people will still choose the Paris Hilton stories as the "news." Like the shifting goals of vigilantism, I similarly think a major shift has occurred when it comes to "what people care about" when it comes to "news." Obviously, this is way overly simplifying what is also a result of the economic hardship and daily social injustices most Americans experience -- way more than 20 years ago when there was no real widespread urgency to constantly monitor current events. (I used to read Perez Hilton too! I'm not exempt!)
Hope this made sense - got a little rambly but hopefully my overall "take" comes through!