Extra, Extra
Extra, Extra
Extra, Extra
Extra, Extra
Early Addition
We'll be keeping a running list of nominees for this year's most inappropriate morning coverage of the fifth anniversary of 9/11-- around noon we'll crown a winner.
1. In a devious bit of counter-programming, Gawker kicks off their day's coverage with a club-kid party crash, featuring a girl named "Baby Sinead" getting a vodka shower and showing some boob. Nice!
2. The Post decides that today is the perfect time to advertise its new $6 Million Dollar Scratch N' Match game-- the appearance of Mr. Monopoly makes it particularly crass.
3. Curbed starts the day off sober, with a good 9-11 linkblock-- but by 10:15am, they've already returned to giddy real estate bubble coverage, featuring a tipsy beaver.
4. Ooooh: things are really heating up! Not to be outdone by Nikola, Jeff put up this party crash right here on Gothamist at 10:40am-- no boob shots, but there is a good picture of Rush Simmons. Bonus points for getting up the piece while the names are still being read downtown.
5. Our friends at the Brooklyn Record get into the spirit with a late-breaking but very competitive entry, featuring a picture of a nearly naked fat man and this description: "His buttocks and genitalia were bleeding (zoiks!), and he was scratching them vigorously."
6. Best Week Ever scores double points for a too-soon satire of the Steve Irwin death, posted on 9-11 at 11:03am. This is going to be a really, really tight race.
7. Commenter Frank White makes an excellent point: "WTF? Is this guy Jake for real? If he is I nominate Gothamist for this inappropriate use of a refrence to 9/11." Sadly, meta-coverage is not eligible to win-- but we will forward the entry to the people handling "the Most Inappropriate 9/11 Coverage Coverage Awards."
Seems that the reading of the names is wrapping up now, so it's time to call this race. The winner is... the Brooklyn Record, with the naked fat guy post. Well done. See you on the Pearl Harbor Anniversary! Now back to regular coverage.
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
Is life supposed to stop today? What's your point with this feature?
Good job, gothamist. You covered Sept. 11. Now stop patting yourself on the back.
inappropriate awards should only go to organizations like the post who are memoralizing the attacks--not some blog like gawker who offer no pretense of commemoration. i don't lke the implication that 5 years after the attacks, its inappropriate to NOT give over all coverage to insencere-seeming memoralization and false reverence.
You guys are too funny!
Jake is never funny. Always awkward. Always dumb. What exactly is your agenda, Jake?
I got excited when I saw the title, thinking that maybe somebody was going to take the Today Show to task for spending their first thirty minutes observing the tragedy by only interviewing people with the last names of Bush or Clinton.
But come on. If anything, we should be celebrating that we're all here to do inappropriate gossip coverage. Life goes on, but hopefully this inane idea of ridiculing any non-9-11-related coverage today won't.
There's inappropriate coverage of the anniversary, sure, but it has nothing to do with boobies.
WTF? Is this guy Jake for real? If he is I nominate Gothamist for this inappropriate use of a refrence to 9/11.
Gawker is a media and gossip site. BWE is an entertainment gossip site. Why shouldn't they post whatever they want? 9/11 isn't a national holiday (yet) so it's entirely appropriate for people to choose business-as-usual for today.
Can't wait to see what else Gothamist posts today. Unless your "Camera in the Kitchen" feature is a tribute to Windows on the World I'm sure at least one non-9/11 post will make it up.
Was your post about the fashion show 9/11 related or did I miss the connection?
This story is still developing, and, coincidentally, so is Jake Dobkin.
I guess I should be more surprised that the race is this competetive.
funny, all of last night until early this morning, the first thing that popped up on gothamist was:
http://www.gothamist.com/archives/2006/09/10/extra_extra_270.php
so is excluded because it was the 'eve' of september 11th? was 12:01am to..oh..about 9am not september 11th? are we only supposed to be sincere after breakfast? whats the story?
I have to agree with most of the posters above. this is ridiculous and maybe just a little bit self-righteous
Wow, I really don't like Jake Dobkin. My gothamist reading days are over.
I don't get it? Should those sites have 9/11 coverage and were it's readers were expecting them?
Should they slap on American Flags and Yellow ribbon graphics all over their site?
Not to mention the infamous Twin towers with a bald eagle looking at you graphic.
too late for this one but still funny.
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/52325
Actually, the worse tragedy is that we didn't even make the first cut. Tsk Tsk.
The post was pretty clear, Jake was pointing out sites that he thought had posted egregiously tacky items, like half-naked party chicks in bathtubs, on a day when the city is solemnly commemorating the 9/11 attacks. He didn't say they shouldn't have those tacky posts. He didn't say they should only have 9/11 coverage today. He was simply pointing out that maybe on the anniversary of a horrible event that is still fresh on our minds we could have a little extra thoughtfulness and self-restraint. You might not like his sarcastic method but I think he has a point.
The real tragedy today is that ANIMAL didn't even make the cut. C'mon we got Mexican Mariachi on the L-train Jake!
haha jake dobkin is getting torn to shreds and i love it!
YOU ARE A DOUCHEHAT.
Why should Gawker or any site have to excercise restraint on 9/11? Doesn't self-restraint come from individuals not visiting sites that probably won't deal with 9/11 or any other tragedy in a thoughtful way? Where do we draw the line? What kind of stories should people post, then? If you don't think Best Week Ever is going to fit your mood today, don't visit those sites! The world doesn't shut down because people like anniversaries divisible by five.
So what if the Brooklyn record posted a picture of a fat man? He had fallen into Sheepshead Bay, which by local news standards, is news. As far as I could tell, the NY Times still ran a story on Aaron Sorkin and a crossword puzzle. Is that appropriate? Where does Jake Dobkin draw the line?
Gothamist sure is one to throw stones. One could cite example after example of how this site is run by children. Cartoon images of trash bags to illustrate a grisly crime is just one. In the spirit of open-ended Gothamist questions, how many more can you think of?
Never forget Steve Irwin. Never forget.
did you also notice that most of the comments criticizing Jake are also anonymous?
good peal harbor reference. here's a particularly poignant post by jake dobkin that ran on december 7th last year.
http://www.gothamist.com/archives/2005/12/07/mta_hack_make_y.php
ahh.. nothing quite commemorates all the lives lost in pearl harbor than a nice mta poster hack.
sigh. if only there was a mash-up of some sort to convey how i feel today.
did you also notice that most of the comments on gothamist period are anonymous?
9/11 didn't change a thing.
Dobkin's hero Kottke has posts with such 9/11 appropriate themes as bed jumping, foods on a stick, and HBO's "The Wire."
I can't believe someone wrote "douchehat". That's too funny.
jake never, ever, EVER fails to jump on an opportunity to post a picture or reference to undressed women. and the proof is all right here in the gothamist archives.
Hey Jake, 9/11 isn't just about the attacks anymore. It will also now be forever remembered by some of us as the day of my mom's wake. The material you deem "inappropriate" has actually cheered me up quite a bit, so don't get your panties in a bunch. I'm guessing you also wouldn't approve of the helium balloons and kazoos (for a "singalong" of Amazing Grace) at today's ceremony.
thanks for the douchehat love, dirk.
is it inappropriate to use the word "douchehat" on 9/11?
May I have a say in any of this yukfest? Good, I'm so glad ....
I was rather flattered that the Brooklyn Record picked up on my post of the gentleman who found himself in the waters of Sheepshead Bay last Thursday afternoon ...
YET ... please, let it be known that my post, nor the Brooklyn Record's post, I'm sure, was meant in no way to coincide with, impinge upon or distract from the somber anniversary.
September 11, 2001 was the most dreadful day in this country's history and I personally would never make light of it, nor would any responsible blogger.
The timing was merely coincidence, and now that a friend emailed me a link telling me my own post was, in a round-about sort of way, nominated for and then crowned winner in a Gothamist contest dubbed "The Inappropriate 9/11 Coverage Awards" is appalling to me.
Have you nothing better to do with your time than pick people apart so callously ... ON SEPTEMBER 11?
Geez, talk about inappropriate.