On 7/26/06, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/26/06, Garion96 garion96@gmail.com wrote:
Saw this on the administrators' noticeboard.
Good example of why I can't stand the Onion. Fact and fiction (or satire, if you prefer) totally mixed together, with no way of knowing which is which. Some of the satire is well targeted, like the crack about LCD's influence on the drafting of the US constitution (we do have that kind of problem), but some is nonsense, like the Chuck Norris mention or the misspelling in "American Inderpendance". The article could make some telling points about vandalism, and other points about inaccuracies or hoaxes, but instead mixes them together as if they were the same thing.
Why isn't there any good satire?
Steve
Interesting - the reason I like the Onion is that they mix fact and fiction together so well that you can't tell for sure. But "American Inderpendence" makes me wonder if the person who wrote the article doesn't read AN/I and WikiEn-L - that spelling makes me think of Geni's unspellchecked contributions. As for the Chuck Norris comment and the ERIC IS A FAG - suggests some familiarity with basic WP vandalism. But didn't the Onion have a truly brilliam article about WP about a year or so ago?