RG: WELL HELLO, KYLE. HOW ARE YOU?
KA: Greasy, but ultimately palatable. Yourself?
RG: Uhh. I had a dream last night where Tori Amos was singing Dresden Dolls covers. What do you suppose that means?
KA: Well. Like many Tori fans, you want to stay in a committed relationship, but you yearn for a harder edge. Amanda Palmer fills that void. I mean, I know how often I sing "The Power of Orange Knickers."
RG: As often as I sing her ten-minute live version of "Crucify"?
KA: The last time I heard that version, my friend and I drooled on the fans below our balcony seats--but because of sleep, not dumbstruck awe.
RG: Do you know what's terrible? I think that accurately describes my reaction to how insanely people are dealing with the the sudden Prop. 8 repeal. Like, they're overanalyzing it...like the concept of same-sex marriage is so utterly mindboggling.
KA: I don't understand why I'm being congratulated.
There is this whole thing up at Queerty asking us, "Do you have to be gay to work in the gay media?" and it's like, why bother reading the 492 or how many ever words that ensue because ultimately yes, you have to be gay to work in the gay media. But by quickly skimming Out's homepage, you'll find one Joshua David Stein, a straight guy - married even! And then you'll reason that such questions don't really matter, because magazines are doomed and most people in that trade will become pretty outmoded after the digital transition finishes making mincemeat out of print, and (more terrifyingly, journalism). Which is to say, Queerty's "investigation" was total comment-hungry non-news. But you know what's non-non-news? The news briefs that make up the flimsy architecture of this week's Civilization Progress Report!
• TWIST! The true surprise ending of Christopher Nolan's Inception that it was able to catapult one of its thesps to just-above-C-list status after he came out. [Us Magazine]
• Scientific evidence shows that bans preventing gay couples from adopting kids is bogus. [NYT]
• Anne Rice took to Facebook to denounce her Christianity. Related: I recently took to Facebook to denounce my sanity. [BuzzFeed]
Today we learn that the Sex & the City franchise's blatant disregard for the world outside of Carrie Bradshaw's bubble can make it just as surreal a polemic on the human condition as Lost. And its alien contempt for contemporary culture could give nations like Russia and Malawi some reason to join Portugal in giving gay men and women the surly side-eye. Also, Madonna only plays a peripheral role, but damn!...she really does look like a splayed frog! Your simultaneously far- and near-sighted Civilization Progress Report:
In journalism's prime, i.e. - when print was king, headlines were an art form unto themselves. Wit, pithiness and a bit of a come-hither (and read) attitude were necessary ingredients to create a good headline. As this New York Times article reports, headlines today - particularly those read online - are another matter entirely.
Upshot? Basically we're whores for Google. Again.
When's the last time you read a copy of OUT? Or even saw one, not on a newsstand? If you can't remember, you're not alone. My last impression was that the magazine was at the coffee shop on Fire Island last summer. Or was it two summers ago?
Why not read OUT? The magazine produced the attached video to sort of give an inside look at the goings-ons inside the magazine. The crew looks nice enough and clean and well-rested. The only negative that comes to mind is the "fashion" piece that offers a shirtless fellow with unachievable musculature. That's not fashion; it's soft-core porn and not even good soft-core porn at that.
Seriously though, it seems like this nice magazine is produced by nice people that have a nice time doing their work. As someone that really wants "gay media" to thrive, I really want them to succeed. Their platform to present homocentric features is unsurpassed elsewhere in mainstream media. The gay wide web pretty successfully presents you with all the news you need aggregated from other sources, but gay media's genuine in-the-trenches reportage and homocentric features need a home too.
With subscription dollars for print in general and OUT in specific nose-diving, is the "niceness" the problem? The video, while nice, gives you no reason to not read OUT, but it doen't really give you a reason to read OUT either. Overall the video is largely forgettable. Is the magazine too?