Dubai Debt Issues Push Stocks Down
GMA: Adam Lambert, No; Chris Brown, Yes
Family Gets Early Christmas Gift From Ellen DeGeneres
Mayor: Sex Trafficking Victims, Please Speak Up
Street Artist Proposes on Subway Signage
- Today on the Gothamist Newsmap: barricaded EDP in Brooklyn Heights, person on the tracks at 4th Avenue in Park Slope, and a police car MVA in Williamsburg.
- Our frenemies at Gawker started a weekend edition. Thank God-- we thought we were going to have to wait until Monday to hear about a bald Britney Spears.
- Worst Boss Ever: Dr. Bartha's assistant, nearly flattened in the Upper East Side explosion, is suing his estate for inflicting emotional pain and suffering.
- Downtown Express' moving elegy for a stolen bicycle taught us many things, but chief among them: "The crime prevention officer taught me a new expression: the “major seven.” These are the real crimes: rape, murder, grand larceny and the like. Bike theft is petty larceny or, as the officer who filled out our theft report spelled it, “petit” larceny, making it sound almost charming, which I guess it probably is to someone who books rapists and murderers all day."
- Ironic Sans compares Union Square Subway Station to the Death Star-- you have to see the video to understand.
Graffiti at 72 St. B/C downtown subway platform, NYC, 11 Jan 2007, by Carynsolly.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
tasteful photo.
Gothamist... Jake... if you're going to insist on constant coverage of "graffiti", you could do a little better than some idiot's marker scrawl on a subway ad. What's next? Pictures of "Mike and Judy" ads with the teeth blacked out?
Aside from that, the graffiti is incredibly tasteless... and so are you for encouraging it.
It's BRITNEY not BRITTANY. Don't pretend that you don't know the diff.
Jake, Jen - I am a big fan of Gothamist, but that graffiti is utterly tasteless, considering that very scenario played out in our city not once, but twice, killing thousands. What is the point of highlighting it?
Stupid, stupid, stupid.
www.graffitist.com
1/11/07 Nevar Forget
yeah, lame...why are you highliting this picture?
I've taken way better pictures that could grace your Gothamist pages...see mine my member name is peterkreder at flicker...that one has got to go...
Petit Larceny is the correct term. Petty is the falsely assumed term.
This picture is truly tasteless. Are you trying to inspire the terrorists?
WOW! Quality drawing there. Looks like it was done by the same people who do bathroom urinal wall graffitti.
It sure made ME wanna pee on it.
"Petit" larceny vs. grand larceny, by the way: the former is "petty theft", the other, well, grand theft. As in grand theft auto.
Come on, find a better picture. Next thing you know, the NYPD's gonna ground all Aer Lingus and all Air Canada flights.
*sigh* such boring, knee-jerk comments.
the choice to post the photo is not as tasteless as the simp who actually drew the plane on the photograph in the first place. posting it does not glorify terrorism nor belittle 9/11. brushing subversive elements under the rug, by not posting the picture, is not the answer. some new yorker drew this and since this is a blog about new york its completely appropriate to post this and show us how dumb and insensitive some of our neighbors are. that being said, i think the air canada logo might imply that at least a somewhat informed person vandalized the ad, and not just some random thug. that might be even scarier.
some people are offended by the graffiti. but, for some other people, morbid humor makes them feel better. i think it's fine.
ernie - how do you know it was a New Yorker?
And if people still feel this way more than five years after 9/11, how exactly is our reaction "knee-jerk"?
"James,"
am just playing the odds that it was a new yorker. i'm sure you agree with that line of reasoning - unless you think it was a canadian terrorist.
also, i'm not saying that the response to offensive actions related to 9/11 is knee-jerk but just any quick response to something that is deemed offensive. it just seems silly to get more angry about jake posting the picture than the fact that someone vandalized the picture as such. the anger is misdirected.
btw - loved your book.
"James,"
am just playing the odds that it was a new yorker. i'm sure you agree with that line of reasoning - unless you think it was a canadian terrorist.
also, i'm not saying that the response to offensive actions related to 9/11 is knee-jerk but just any quick response to something that is deemed offensive. it just seems silly to get more angry about jake posting the picture than the fact that someone vandalized the picture as such. the anger is misdirected.
btw - loved your book.
Hey thanks ernie - I'll send you an autographed copy. :-)
Okay, in rsponse to your criticism - I (and probably many others) are mad at BOTH the vandal and Jake for posting it. For the vandal, the stupid grafitti - mellowed by the apparent maple leaf on the tailfin or not - offends, at most, the folks who see the actual defaced poster.
But when Jake posts it on Gothamist - in much the same way CarynSolly does by posting it to her Flickr account - the photo becomes seen by multitudes more, increasing exponentially the number of us "angry" folk. And we take it straight to Jake, because - again - he is the one who posted it for all to see. That's hardly "misdirected."
Anyway, my next book comes out in May. It's called "Will Jake Respond To These Posts?"