Careercow Taylor Lorenz - Crybully "journalist", self-appointed Internet Hall Monitor, professional victim, stalks teenagers for e-clout

[IDanceonTrannyGraves]

Covid fucked their brains, not their lungs.

 

[Vect]

>demands everyone wear masks to protect him from imaginary risks
>probably has full-blown AIDS from unprotected anal sex
Yeah whatever. Dude belongs in a mental ward.

The non-violent hysteria, group virtue signalling of their manifesto and lack of stupid flag emojis would suggest to me at least that this is a real woman who has bought the Ultimate Collectors Edition of Covid-76 : Eternal Pandemic - and to be honest, can you blame her? For three years she followed the official science, masking up and avoiding people and living in total fear of the ChudBud apocalypse until it became a fact of life, and one day the official science told her to chill out and fuck off.

I’d go insane.

 

[Chickenpolar]

Do these people not know how dangerous the flu is? Not just Olds deaths, but causing long running bad autoimmune responses in a very small number of unlucky people (usually women)


Nobody masked all the time for the flu before COVID. At some point you have to accept that life has risks you have to live with and not be a crazy hypochondriac cat lady shut-in.

 

[AirdropShitposts]

Do these people not know how dangerous the flu is? Not just Olds deaths, but causing long running bad autoimmune responses in a very small number of unlucky people (usually women)


Nobody masked all the time for the flu before COVID. At some point you have to accept that life has risks you have to live with and not be a crazy hypochondriac cat lady shut-in.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO you can't just show me the perfect shut-in life where I get to scold people as immoral inferiors for wanting a normal life while being blissfully ignorant of the human cost my preferences are imposing on everyone then snatch it away from me! THAT'S LITERALLY GENOCIDE! YOU ARE LITERALLY TAKING MY LIFE! This should have been the dawning of a new age! FINALLY MY DESERVED UTOPIA WAS HERE!

 

[behindyourightnow]

The non-violent hysteria, group virtue signalling of their manifesto and lack of stupid flag emojis would suggest to me at least that this is a real woman who has bought the Ultimate Collectors Edition of Covid-76 : Eternal Pandemic - and to be honest, can you blame her? For three years she followed the official science, masking up and avoiding people and living in total fear of the ChudBud apocalypse until it became a fact of life, and one day the official science told her to chill out and fuck off.

I’d go insane.

But that's the thing, what she is proposing was never accepted by any large section of the population, regardless of political faction. No matter what you think of lockdowns, masks, etc: the people who did accept them did it with the understanding that it was a novel virus that we didn't have a vaccine for. Once the vulnerable population was vaccinated and covid treatment was better understood, restrictions and guidelines would be lifted.

Whether the people who believed that were correct is irrelevant, the point is that even this woman's DSA buds never signed on for perpetual post-vaccine lockdowns, and never even pretended to. She just assumed they did.

What's fascinating to me is how she (and those like her) came to that assumption, and why others around them have not succeeded in gently correcting them.

 

[Trianon]

Taylor is mad because The New Yorker did not like her book!

link

The full review is pretty long, more of an essay talking about the subjects of Taylor's book and another book on influencers. Here's the ending that swipes at Taylor.

The New Yorker | Archive

How Glossier Made Effortless a Billion-Dollar Brand
...“Glossy” and “Extremely Online” seem at times to adopt the habitual postures of their subjects’ milieus. [Maria] Meltzer, as she negotiates [Emily] Weiss’s reticence, shows a touch of the traditional women’s magazines’ sense of deference. “I was genuinely wondering if I was—and continue to be—to put it bluntly, a complete asshole for writing this book and for putting this woman I respect through such anxiety and turmoil,” Meltzer frets at one point. The default register of Lorenz’s book, meanwhile, is promotional—the language of press releases and marketing copy. An event is not merely the first but the “first ever”; newly reported information is a “shocking reveal.” An influencer posts photos of herself in outfits “featuring trendy garments and must-have accessories.” The “creators” who are Lorenz’s subjects make up “an unprecedentedly innovative community.”

“Extremely Online” closes with an exhortation to follow where those creators have led, issued by a writer who has taken up the cause of brand-building. “We should heed the lessons of the first twenty years of online life, and reflect those learnings in our work to build a better internet,” Lorenz writes. “In this we must all be creators, influencing the online world we inhabit.”

Plenty are willing. In a 2019 Morning Consult poll of people between the ages of thirteen and thirty-eight, eighty-six per cent of respondents said they would promote a product on their social-media channels for money, with twenty per cent saying that they’d do so even if they did not like the product in question. Eight-eighty per cent, meanwhile, said they valued influencers for that elusive quality: their authenticity.

And the Kirkus Reviews one is pretty brutal.

Kirkus Reviews | Archive

A capable piece of historical research that breaks little new ground.
A technology journalist looks at the downside of the social media revolution.

A former tech reporter for the New York Times, Lorenz is now a columnist for the Washington Post, and she has been accused of reporting errors. In her debut book, the author walks us through the rise of the major platforms, such as YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook, and recounts the eclipse of MySpace and Vine. She identifies “mommy bloggers” as the first group to become influencers and the first to see the potential for monetization of their social media presence. (Readers interested in a more in-depth discussion of this aspect of the online world should turn to Stephanie McNeal’s Swipe Up for More!) The development of simple video editing tools switched the emphasis from written to visual material, and internet-enabled phones meant that social media became ubiquitous. The problem with this book is that Lorenz fails to offer enough novel analysis of the industry. There are already numerous books on influencers, YouTube, online celebrity marketing, and virtually every other aspect of the social media phenomenon. The author’s theme is that while social media has changed the business and cultural landscape by giving power to creative individuals, it has also created a dangerous whirlpool of conflict, exploitation, and disinformation. True enough, but it’s hardly a revolutionary insight. Is she unaware of the widespread view that has taken hold in the past few years that social media is a very mixed blessing? This points to the most surprising aspect of the book: It seems dated and dull. The author’s online followers might like it, but other people will probably be unimpressed. Social media, writes Lorenz, “is often dismissed by traditionalists as a vacant fad, when in fact it is the greatest and most disruptive change in modern capitalism.” If only the text reflected the gravitas of that disruption.

A capable piece of historical research that breaks little new ground.

 

[Popper Whiting]

Covid fucked their brains, not their lungs.

For the early stages of the pandemic I was pro-mask, pro quarantine, and I am pro-vaccine. Because it was a completely new virus that affects the respiratory system and there was potential for shit to go bad because of a complete lack of herd immunity (if the virus had lethality similar to 1918 Spanish Flu we would have been fucked).

But let's also look at current reality. The virus has effected most people on earth more than once. Most Western populations on top of this have had multiple vaccinations (similar to what we have with the flu). Peak death rates for the virus was late 2021-early 2022, and has completely fallen off since then whereas infection rates are currently about 5 times what it was during that 2021-2022 death peak. Yes people are still dying, but people are still dying of the flu, which we've had vaccinations and exposure to for over a century now. COVID is here to stay, it will come and go, but it will never be as bad as it was, the virus is a reality for all of us now, just like every virus that makes a species jump and infects us.

People panicking over COVID right now are just fucking retarded. Masks shouldn't be mandatory. I'll wear one if I got a cold or a flu, and that's because I know it lessens the risk of me giving whatever I got to the rest of you. It's done out of courtesy.

People panicking over COVID (on both sides of the argument) need to take a deep breathe and chill. Realize despite how much it did impact us, a lot of what we did lessened the impact, and we can all now go back to living a normal life (which was the aim of Quarantine to contain so we can max immunize and return to normal ASAP). The COVID strategy worked. They need to stop fucking complaining and be thankful it was COVID that made that jump, and not a virus like Ebola, Hendra Virus or Nipah virus, if those viruses made the jump with a COVID like transmission rates real estate would be a lot cheaper and undertakers a lot wealthier.

 

[AirdropShitposts]

Taylor is mad because The New Yorker did not like her book!

link

"What I'm saying is that we as users need to exert more power online collectively and push big tech for accountability. That whole section is about how fucked up the current internet is, how rife with misogyny and explotation and bad stuff, but the internet could be a place for connection. We all need meaningful connection and we could build an online world that facilitates that"

I can see why the reviewer didn't understand what you were saying because this is meaningless gibberish where seemingly every other word is packed full of personal assumptions instead of common reference points.

And it's also a blatant lie. Because if "we" the "users" "collectively" reject Taylor's vague undescribed vision, as is currently the case or else she wouldn't be making this exhortation to unclear action, she'll still want it imposed.

Probably at gunpoint. And for others to do the "building" of the "online world" for her. Probably also at gunpoint.

 

[AnOminous]

And it's also a blatant lie. Because if "we" the "users" "collectively" reject Taylor's vague undescribed vision, as is currently the case or else she wouldn't be making this exhortation to unclear action, she'll still want it imposed.

But REEEEEEE the government should enforce ideological conformity on all people even if only a minority of the woke want that!

 

[Trianon]

"What I'm saying is that we as users need to exert more power online collectively and push big tech for accountability. That whole section is about how fucked up the current internet is, how rife with misogyny and explotation and bad stuff, but the internet could be a place for connection. We all need meaningful connection and we could build an online world that facilitates that"

I can see why the reviewer didn't understand what you were saying because this is meaningless gibberish where seemingly every other word is packed full of personal assumptions instead of common reference points.

And it's also a blatant lie. Because if "we" the "users" "collectively" reject Taylor's vague undescribed vision, as is currently the case or else she wouldn't be making this exhortation to unclear action, she'll still want it imposed.

Probably at gunpoint. And for others to do the "building" of the "online world" for her. Probably also at gunpoint.

Because if "we" the "users" "collectively" reject Taylor's vague undescribed vision, as is currently the case or else she wouldn't be making this exhortation to unclear action, she'll still want it imposed.
The New Yorker reviewer made this quite clear. The point is that Taylor wants them to influence things in a certain direction, and the reviewer is saying, "They are already doing that. This is what they have chosen."

She's too dumb to get that the New Yorker reviewer is pointing out that Taylor's worldview does her subject matter a disservice. She comes across as being so influenced by being Extremely Online that she can't see how her solution of reinvesting in it, but this time as Censorious Girlbosses, is just putting a new sheen on the old problem (and honestly seems naive if only because aren't our social media environments heavily dependent on a few venture capitalists? I'm sure the book mentions this, but it makes the "solution" feel so fake). The reviewer found the other book to be more human because it did not provide three-step answers to total happiness as you would expect from the online crowd.

 

[Dean Pentel]

People panicking over COVID (on both sides of the argument) need to take a deep breathe and chill. Realize despite how much it did impact us, a lot of what we did lessened the impact, and we can all now go back to living a normal life (which was the aim of Quarantine to contain so we can max immunize and return to normal ASAP). The COVID strategy worked.

I agree with your post minus this part. We're not going back to normal (in the US), and I don't think the COVID strategy worked. Unless it was to ensure that what's coming couldn't hope to be stopped. Then yes, it definitely worked.

The part of this I don't think people like Tay Tay realize is that there's a reason why "Be careful what you wish for..." has been a saying for a long, long time.

 

[George Floyd Sneed]

The only people I know, including leftists, who want lockdowns and masks again were the COVID Karens who enjoyed hectoring anyone not up to snuff with their views on proper protection. If people want to go above and beyond vaccination, regardless of what you think how effective it is, is on you. This notion that we have to accommodate the most hypochondriac person in the room is shit the vast majority of the public has no tolerance for. If you want to reduce your chances of consequences with the coof, then lose some fucking weight.

She's too dumb to get that the New Yorker reviewer is pointing out that Taylor's worldview does her subject matter a disservice.

Which is funny because they share the same politics, it’s just The New Yorker is a 105-ish IQ publication and Taylor is a brainlet. This is her brain on social media.

 

[Cap-tan]

>rife with misogyny and exploitation and bad stuff
>a very tragic event with guns, insults, and... yuck!
Which one is a writer for WaPo?

 

[Popper Whiting]

I agree with your post minus this part. We're not going back to normal (in the US), and I don't think the COVID strategy worked. Unless it was to ensure that what's coming couldn't hope to be stopped. Then yes, it definitely worked.

The part of this I don't think people like Tay Tay realize is that there's a reason why "Be careful what you wish for..." has been a saying for a long, long time.

I suppose you're right.

9/11 effect unfortunately. 22 years later we're still talking about it and carrying on like complete retards as a result. Mainly because, in my honest opinion, journos like Taylor over hype things to the point of over the top histrionics. Yes it was an attack on US soil, yes a lot of people died, yes the images from the day are dramatic, yes I can understand people who lost family still being upset about it. 9/11 was bad, but objectively shit could have been a lot worse, and despite it happening (and the greater efforts of media), the world has moved on.

I guess that is the greater sin of Taylor, and the media as a whole. They discourage people from being objective. They discourage people at looking at events like COVID and 9/11 and working out what went wrong, we we did wrong, what we did right, learning our lessons from those things and moving on with life (like every other past generation). It creates fucking morons who blindly go for the Tay Tay histrionic narrative or fucking morons who blindly oppose the Tay Tay histrionic narrative with histrionics of there own.

The example I always want to follow with terrible shit happening is Japan post WW2. We bombed those fuckers into the third age in order to get them to surrender. We did a lot worse to them than 9/11 or fucking COVID did to us. We broke their spirit. Yet instead of crying their little brown eyes into their ramen noodles they got their shit together and moved on. 22 years after having nukes dropped on them and being conquered the Japs were an industrial powerhouse that rose from the ashes of a massive defeat. Look at us, 22 years and a couple of deliberate plane crashes and we've gone backward. We had less happen yet we're still crying salty tears into our burger and fries. That's the choice we have I guess, either harden up and hustle like the Japs or become a bunch of over emotional faggots that fail at even a basic task like forming a queue because every cunt has to have an emotional opinion about it.

 

[AnOminous]

That's the choice we have I guess, either harden up and hustle like the Japs or become a bunch of over emotional faggots that fail at even a basic task like form a queue because every cunt has to have an emotional opinion about it.

Perfect explication of why Amerilards in current year are complete faggots and we need to get over ourselves and get back to being the badasses we were at some point. *takes doompill* not that that's likely to happen.

 

[AirdropShitposts]

The New Yorker reviewer made this quite clear. The point is that Taylor wants them to influence things in a certain direction, and the reviewer is saying, "They are already doing that. This is what they have chosen."

She's too dumb to get that the New Yorker reviewer is pointing out that Taylor's worldview does her subject matter a disservice. She comes across as being so influenced by being Extremely Online that she can't see how her solution of reinvesting in it, but this time as Censorious Girlbosses, is just putting a new sheen on the old problem (and honestly seems naive if only because aren't our social media environments heavily dependent on a few venture capitalists? I'm sure the book mentions this, but it makes the "solution" feel so fake). The reviewer found the other book to be more human because it did not provide three-step answers to total happiness as you would expect from the online crowd.

Taylor's entire conception of the world is an elitist one. Not elitist in the moral sense (although it's partly that) but in the more descriptive. She literally believes all things happen because the elite classes order it to be so. Since she views herself as elite she believes she can simply order the world, vaguely, to shift to her desires and it will do so because this is simply how the world works. Hence, her book would obviously have no solutions, she considers working out such solutions to be beneath her. She's the lofty ideas class: "make the internet better" she spoke and everyone gazes at the wisdom of Athena they had never considered. Telling her it won't work is unacceptable and she doesn't care if you try to "mansplain" why it won't. You're not LISTENING to what's she saying.

To paraphrase many smarter people than me, this is the appeal of socialism to the self-declared elite, that they will be able to top-down order that only the proper (aka their) priorities are addressed by society. Capitalism and liberalism, for better or worse, makes the masses the priority while also addressing the priorities of the elite through simple math since that's where the money is. Taylor, and her type, can't stand this, they're openly disgusted by democratization. They think the constant levelling is pernicious by not ensuring the lower castes know their place. They have a conception of the classes of society and these boundaries are not to be transgressed. You can see it in her conception of her reporting, she goes out among the savages on the internet and reports back to the elite about what they're doing. You can see it in her COVID hysteria, she doesn't feel "safe" to go out among the masses because their lower status will harm her, but she's just fine with the "elites" like Dylan Mulvaney or whoever else since she knows they've been "scientifically" approved as higher status. You can see it in why she doesn't understand why the denizens of Mastodon keep posting about her avocado toast. I remember other instances, but not the details, from this thread where she's complained that other people have their own interests rather than prioritizing Taylor's at all times.

Ultimately her entire being seems to be class-based disgust. She can get over this with "troons" or whatever, despite them being disgusting and lower class like having no teeth or being Keffals, because she envisions the troonery as some kind of higher class status. If troonery wasn't considered "intellectual" but lower class savagery like anti-troonery, she'd despise it like she does libsoftiktok. Her complaint with Elon is that he seems (to her and her type at least) to be aligning with lower class interests like shitposters and Republicans rather than acting as how the once richest man in the world should act which is more like her boss who helps preserve the important status of the Washington Post by employing her. We live in a world where the elites have learned only all the many wrong things from the Marxist fad and simplified the useful (if not old) class analysis aspect into self-justifying meaninglessness.

 

[Next Task]

Such wonderful projection, it's quite breathtaking. It's not even novel, just yet another person whining about how much empathy they have/how little empathy other people have, when what they mean is people aren't just doing what she wants them to so they're just evil.

Personally, I haven't intellectualized my low/zero empathy. I just try to not give a shit about people who hate me. From just her unhinged wailing about covid, she hates me, because I think she's certifiable, as with Lorenz and all the other people who are demanding that we feel about things the same way they do. I won't have my personal risk assessments overwritten by harridans on social media, and I won't feel guilty about it either.

I think Taylor doesn't realise what she's saying with her own book, because she doesn't have control over her own narrative. She is, as The New Yorker points out, a leading example of 'journalism as a brand' thinking, with the attendant shallow addiction to cults of personality and social media groupthink. No matter what she thinks she was saying, I find it incredibly plausible that her need to sell herself instead of her work has seeped into the message of her book.

She's not much of a writer and definitely not much of a journalist, so the generic 'truth to power' pablum she thought she was producing - a massive lie, because she only wants to hold people accountable by pretending she, herself, has no power or privilege she should be judged by - being outshone by her real beliefs rings true. I won't be personally finding out, as I would never read her book. But I believe the writer for The New Yorker when they allude to that conclusion.

How much do you think she pushed to be on the cover of her own book, do you think? I'm thinking there were a number of heated emails, at minimum, as she passive-aggressively tried to get her publishers to agree to make it all about her.

 

[Meat Target]

The example I always want to follow with terrible shit happening is Japan post WW2. We bombed those fuckers into the third age in order to get them to surrender. We did a lot worse to them than 9/11 or fucking COVID did to us. We broke their spirit. Yet instead of crying their little brown eyes into their ramen noodles they got their shit together and moved on. 22 years after having nukes dropped on them and being conquered the Japs were an industrial powerhouse that rose from the ashes of a massive defeat. Look at us, 22 years and a couple of deliberate plane crashes and we've gone backward. We had less happen yet we're still crying salty tears into our burger and fries. That's the choice we have I guess, either harden up and hustle like the Japs or become a bunch of over emotional faggots that fail at even a basic task like forming a queue because every cunt has to have an emotional opinion about it.

Counterpoints:

Japan in 1945 was gearing up for an invasion of their homeland. They knew they were gonna lose sooner or later, but were prepared to take every last US Marine with them.

And even after two nukes, the US were lenient conquerors. They helped Japan rebuild via the Marshall Plan and promised military protection in exchange for trade, all while allowing Hirohito to keep his throne. Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki now, compared to Detroit and San Francisco.

The US in 2001 was in an entirely different position. We had won the Cold War. The digital revolution had come. It was a new millenium. It was the "End of History", and everything was supposed to be sunshine and blowjobs from here on out.

9/11 was a horrifying and abrupt end to the Roaring 90's. It shattered our fat and happy illusions. It showed that we are not invincible.

And don't forget that between then and now, we have had the two worst economic implosions since the Great Depression, from which we have never truly recovered.

It's also why everything is now nostalgiabait. People are living in the past because that was the last time they remember not having to worry about things, like whether you will be able to pay for groceries or if you'll be murdered by a random psycho for no reason.

And finally: Japan isn't better off, because two nukes led to the creation of anime.

 

[George Floyd Sneed]

Taylor's entire conception of the world is an elitist one. Not elitist in the moral sense (although it's partly that) but in the more descriptive. She literally believes all things happen because the elite classes order it to be so.

That is generally correct but the problem here is how those decrees get executed with a vast and diverse population and that doesn’t even account for the growing population that want her kind to fuck off forever. Those in Taylor’s class truly do believe the only reason things aren’t the way they want is because the untermenschen aren’t capable of understanding it. This is not an understanding that is exclusive to her, there are many who feel the same way. Taylor is just incapable of keeping quiet so she’s a pretty good canary in the coal mine.

 

[Punchoboe]

Taylor's entire conception of the world is an elitist one. Not elitist in the moral sense (although it's partly that) but in the more descriptive. She literally believes all things happen because the elite classes order it to be so. Since she views herself as elite she believes she can simply order the world, vaguely, to shift to her desires and it will do so because this is simply how the world works.

Conspiracy and elite theorists believe the same things: the powerful meet in secret, make history by decree, and the rest of us suffer the consequences,