Glenn Reynolds, Chicken
Tweet
So, here’s how – hypothetically – Glenn Reynolds writes a post
SOME PEOPLE have an alternative view on the role of Jews in the world. Indeed.
Now, of course, if you read the link there you’ll see just how offensive such a blog entry is. But if you read the actual words Reynolds himself posts in this hypothetical, you realize how weasly it is. He parcels out the heavy lifting on to his linkees, pretending as if it’s not Glenn Reynolds who has the opinion, but just some interesting person he has linked to.
Ever since I’ve started this site, I’ve made a point to not write like Reynolds. I put my opinions out there for people to agree or disagree with. I’ve had people on both the left and right disagree with me when I write things. That’s how adults operate.
Which leads me to this post today from Instapundit. It’s a link to some commentary on Snakes On A Plane and why it bombed at the box office. Reynolds’ sole commentary is that Kenan Thompson looks “like Oliver Willis”. But if you read what he actually links to, the guy is saying that the sort of techno utopianism championed in the Dean campaign is somehow analogous to the failure of the Snakes On A Plane online campaign to put butts in seats.
Does Reynolds agree with this? Who knows. He’s too chicken to say.
The intriguing part is that between Reynolds and myself, I’m not the one who has written a book about how the Internet is going to shake the foundations of the establishment. In fact, if you read this site for any amount of time, you will clearly see that I’m mostly skeptical about the transformative superpowers of the interweb. Sure, its an equalizer, but some idiot blogger will not replace the New York Times much less even Fox News.
But Reynolds is too busy with Glennuendo to put his opinion up front and center. He’s just too chicken.
Kind of sad.
23 Responses to “Glenn Reynolds, Chicken”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
Why is it a requirement to agree or disagree with something a person links to?
If it’s interesting, you throw a link out sometimes. Why is it necessary to agree or disagree with it?
It’s not a requirement, it’s just that Reynolds is an egregiously shifty guy. And it’s that modus operandi that’s cost him credibility among everyone but die-hard conservatives — even as he protests that he’s a moderate.
I smell jealousy!
Jay,
It doesn’t matter whether you agree or disagree with what you link to, but the point should be you are adding your opinion and stating why you agree or disagree with what you are linking to.
Reynolds modus is to link to stuff with no comment (implying he agrees with it) then if someone points out that it is wrong, obnoxious, or whatever he can claim “hey I never said I agreed with it”
Its a pretty chicken-shit way of having his cake and eating it to.
Funny.. that’s why I like going to Instapundit. He links to interesting posts and I decide whether I agree with the post or not. Once in a while, he throws his opinion in and that’s just fine. It’s casual, it’s Reynolds saying “Hey, this is what I’m reading this morning! Check it out!”
You are “dissing” him, because his blog is a completely different style than yours. I understand, I hate people who are different than me too.
I don’t care if he’s different. But that doesn’t excuse being chickenshit.
I think what Oliver is saying is that what Reynolds does is similar to throwing out the theory that Bush was warned about 9-11 by the Saudis beforehand, but stressing it’s just a theory, but throwing it out there nonetheless.
The main difference is, one “chickenshit” is just a blogger, the other chickenshit is head of the DNC.
Theres a Difference Cyrus. Reynolds, saying such a thing, would link to it as “Another view on the Terror Attacks. Heh, Indeed.” without any qualifiers that show such a claim to be ridiculous on its face, implicitly suggesting that, with no sufficient evidence of such a ridiculous claim, that it is therefore equally valid as, you know, the actual damn truth. Dean, on the other hand, referenced such theories while simultaneously denouncing them, using their existence to argue a seperate point entirely about the presidents excessive secrecy at a time when he’s invading more and more privacy.
Nuance. Look it up.
Eric wrote:
Given that it is Mr Reynolds’ stock in trade to simply link a lot of things without comment, I don’t think it is reasonable to say that such implies he agrees with it. Rather, some readers may infer that, but such, while it can be correct, does not mean that it is justified.
Heck, I’ve got our gracious host blogrolled; since very few of my main articles mention Mr Willis at all, does that imply that I agree with Mr Willis on most things, or does it simply mean that I find the site interesting, even if I usually disagree?
Yeah, it is easier to pin down our honorable host’s positions — because he is very explicit in them — than it is with Mr Reynolds. So what? Mr Reynolds writes and links as he sees fit; that’s part of freedom of speech! And given his site traffic, it appeares to be a successful way of doing things.
This is the first I’ve read Reynolds, and I thought there was something wrong with my browser…I almost thought he was a spam warehouse where a site it set up and it just culls links automatically from other sources. Guess that’s how his site just is. Is that really blogging or just linking?
I can’t help you with that, Steve. Everybody’s gotta come to their own insights in their own way.
This is definitely NOT going to help Oliver get an Instalanche…
I followed the link to moderateleft. Hadn’t heard the term ‘glennuendo’ before; it suits Mr. Indeed nicely.
I read hairyfishnuts regularly; he occasionally has pithy observations about Mr. Indeed, which are inevitably more interesting and informative than the shrinkwrapped received wisdom that inspires them.
Oh please, this is so stupid. So if I link to an article with the title:
Pluto No Longer A Planet
And don’t add a comment, I’m being a chickenshit because I don’t give my view on whether or not it should or shouldn’t be a planet?
Reynolds modus is to link to stuff with no comment (implying he agrees with it)
Since when does linking to something automatically imply that you’re in agreement with something?
Is there like a blogging rulebook that I missed out on?
You’re better-looking than Kenan Thompson.
But he’s funnier.
Exactly!
Deniability is the name of Reynald’s game. I long ago got sick of his creepy style. Saying, “I only linked to it, didn’t say I was for it,” is just a dumb way of trying to avoid responsibility. If you link to astronomical stories every day, I rightly assume you like astronomy. Simple.
If you link to astronomical stories every day, I rightly assume you like astronomy. Simple.
Yes, but it doesn’t mean you think Pluto should no longer be considered a planet or that NASA should keep manned space flight. Simpleton.
Yeah, but… oh shit, who cares?
If the worst Reynolds can say about you is you look like Kenan Thompson, just accept the compliment. He is very talented.
So, uh, seen Kel lately?
I think you have precisely nailed his Modus Operandi. And any posters here who don’t get it… don’t want to “get it” on purpose.
Reynolds is NOT ALONE in using this sneaky-creepy technique to throw stuff up on the wall and see if it sticks, able (like a pussy) to deny ownership if the opinion comes boomeranging back to hit him in the ass.
Nice catch.
Rgds.
Someone from the peanut gallery wrote:
No, actually, such a thing doesn’t mean that you “like astromony.” It could mean that you either think that the story is interesting, but couldn’t give a fig about astronomy in any other way, or that you think your readers might be interested, even though you’re not, at least on a site that’s structured the way Mr Reynolds’ is.
1) I didn’t really see any resemblance between Oliver and Kenan Thompson. Then again, I once thought that Ewan MacGregor as seen in “The Island” was Jude Law.
2) As for Kel’s whereabouts, I just hope he hasn’t been reduced to making “good burgers.”