Stalking the stock footage of your dreams:
Month: February 2013
The Atlantic’s New “Sponsor Content” Guidelines
Jim Fallows helpfully unpacks the two quotes I put up yesterday and argues the full chronology of them does not imply some big internal disagreement at the magazine. I’m delighted to say that the Atlantic has devised a new post-Scientology policy with regard to “native advertizing”, “sponsor content,” “enhanced communication techniques”, or whatever newspeak is used in creating confusing advertorials, designed to look like Atlantic articles, as a way to bring in more corporate income. Here it is, in full. Below is the critical section dealing with “Sponsor Content” or, as I think I’ll call them “enhanced advertorial techniques”:
SPONSOR CONTENT GUIDELINES
The guidelines in the following section shall apply to all Sponsor Content served by or appearing in the print and digital publications of The Atlantic, including ads purchased under AAAA/IAB Standard Terms and Conditions. (These are in addition to the general guidelines for advertising content that appear above, which apply to Sponsor Content as well.)
Sponsor Content is content created by or expressly on behalf of advertisers in conjunction with The Atlantic’s marketing team (“Atlantic Marketing”). The Atlantic allows Sponsor Content in two forms: (1) Content produced by Atlantic Marketing on behalf of its advertising partners and (2) Content produced by advertisers.
As with all advertising, Sponsor Content ultimately reflects the views and choices of the advertiser—not of The Atlantic or its editors. Accordingly, The Atlantic will prominently display the following disclaimer on all Sponsor Content: ‘SPONSOR CONTENT.’ The Atlantic will additionally include the following disclaimer on all Sponsor Content: ‘This article is written by or on behalf of our Sponsor and not by The Atlantic’s editorial staff.’ The Atlantic may additionally include, in certain areas and platforms, further explanation defining Sponsor Content to Atlantic readers. In addition, The Atlantic will ensure the treatment and design of Advertising and Sponsor Content is clearly differentiated from its editorial content.
The Atlantic does not require that Sponsor Content steer clear of controversy. Indeed, we expect that Sponsor Content, like our own editorial content, will sometimes address contested issues and will be written with a distinct point of view. That said, even with the caveat that Sponsor Content reflects the views of an advertiser and not of The Atlantic or its editors, The Atlantic will refuse publication of such content that, in its own judgment, would undermine the intellectual integrity, authority, and character of our enterprise.
As with all advertising, and consistent with the foregoing General Advertising Guidelines, The Atlantic may reject or remove any Sponsor Content at any time that contains false, deceptive, potentially misleading, or illegal content; is inconsistent with or may tend to bring disparagement, harm to reputation, or other damage to The Atlantic’s brand.
The Atlantic may in its sole discretion enable readers to comment on Sponsor Content on The Atlantic’s sites. If comment functionality is enabled on Sponsor Content, the sponsor will not have any role in moderating such comments. The only moderation of such comments will be performed by Atlantic employees who implement The Atlantic’s generally applicable Terms and Conditions — which prohibit spam, obscenity, hate speech, and similar content—elsewhere on the site.
I’m going to put this document out there before commenting. I have some issues with it – but it does seem at least to recognize a real problem, whereas Buzzfeed thinks that the corrupting bugs here are exciting new features. That may be because Buzzfeed understands itself more as an entertainment site – and its journalism and reporting are relatively new. But so far as I can tell, the dubious ethics of this exercize haven’t even seemed to cross their minds. “Andrew,” as one of my Buzzfeed hosts told me, “you have a lot to learn from us.” Obviously, I do. Consider me on a learning curve. And what I learn I intend to pass on to Dish readers, so you can also get a better idea of how to distinguish journalism from corporate propaganda online.
Reversing Literary Sprawl
After reading Mark Binelli’s Detroit City Is the Place To Be and Jonathan Franzen’s notorious essay on the state of the novel, “Perchance To Dream”, Alexander Nazaryan compares the decline of the great American novel to the decline of Detroit as an industrial powerhouse:
I guess what I am calling for is the literary equivalent of “rightsizing,” in the lingo of urban planners. The concept suggests that we reclaim cities by returning them to their core functions, by shedding the sprawl that doomed them in the second half of the 20th century — the same cultural sprawl that has diluted American fiction. Writing of Detroit’s plan to rightsize back in 2010, The Economist was glad that “harsh realities have produced radical thinking,” praising Mayor Dave Bing for recognizing the “painful necessity” that the Detroit of bustling factories could never be again. In fact, Detroit’s automotive industry has become back: not enough to return the city to its halcyon days, not enough to heal the scars of its decline, but certainly more than doomsayers would have expected a decade ago. It has done so by becoming leaner, smarter, no longer peddling Hummers, thinking of green energy and efficiency as more than just the fads of coastal elites.
Publishing will have to do the same thing if it wants to save the literary city. It will likely have to look at smaller presses that are publishing less but editing more, who are repacking classics in unexpected ways, who are finding ways to be beat Amazon at the ebook game.
Caption for the above video:
This Landsploitation Short explores the Detroit Book Depository as a scene of memory and forgetting, departing from an exploration of crumbling texts to raise questions about print, media, preservation, and the role of history in the age of digital archives.
The View From Your Window
Narrators With An Agenda
Adam Kirsch tackles contemporary essayists:
Essayists such as Rothbart and Crosley and Sedaris, one might say, represent the prose equivalent of reality TV. They, too, claim to be recording their lives, while in fact they are putting on a performance; and they, too, count on the reader to know the rules of the game, the by now familiar game of meta. What makes this kind of performance different from the performance of a fiction writer is that, by “acting” under their own names, they inevitably involve motives of amour-propre. The essayist is concerned, as a fiction writer is not, with what the reader will think of him or her. That is why the new comic essayists are never truly confessional, and never intentionally reveal anything that might jeopardize the reader’s esteem. “Love me” is their all-but-explicit plea.
Alan Jacobs chips in two cents.
Realizing You’ll Never Be A Novelist
Juliet Escoria describes the feeling:
I was in a heightened state of being, where I was entirely losing my shit (and by ‘shit,’ I mean ‘mind’). During this, I looked back at my novel-in-progress. I had written exactly ninety-nine pages, and this had taken me exactly six months. I looked at these pages, and realized that my book would be mediocre at best. I simply could not plant myself into my life at seventeen in a way that would enable my book to be great. I could not do this because of something I explained in my previous column, which is, to put it briefly, that my memory is shit. And while my imagination is a good one, it is only good enough to create a world that is semi-compelling. I can no longer allow myself to create something that is merely semi-compelling. I cannot allow myself to spend hours and years on a book that is mediocre.
Instead, she turned to writing a memoir – and began facing her fears, including mental illness:
If you want to be true to yourself, you have to be vulnerable. I’m sure you’ve all heard that you should only write about the things that scare you. If I want to be true to myself, I have to talk about exactly what it is like to be crazy, because doing this scares me more than anything else in this world. And I have to attach my own name and experiences to it, because doing so will make me that much more vulnerable. I have to open my ribcage and bleed out my heart.
I wanted to be a novelist, I really did. I wanted to do it to prove to myself that I was a hard worker, that I was a Real Writer. Some inner lit snob inside of me whispered and told me that fiction was where it’s at, in terms of ‘real art.’ That voice told me that memoir-writing is lesser than, not good enough, a genre for celebrities and former journalists. I don’t even know if what I’m working on now could be considered a memoir, but what I do know is this: That lit snob voice? She stems from the same little dark spot in my heart as my two illnesses. And that chick needs to be bled out. She needs to shut the fuck up.
The Core Of Capote
Michael Bourne states that “there is no tale sadder than the biography of Truman Capote” in all of American letters. He seizes upon this revealing passage from the author’s first novel, Other Voices, Other Rooms:
[A]ll his prayers in the past had been simple concrete requests: God, give me a bicycle, a knife with seven blades, a box of oil paints. Only how, how, could you say something so indefinite, so meaningless as this: God, let me be loved.
Bourne’s take:
This is the leitmotif for Capote’s entire life and career. All his characters wish only to be loved, and finding it impossible to be loved in any conventional way, seek love wherever they can find it, sometimes creatively, sometimes in ways that destroy themselves or others. In Other Voices, Joel’s father is alive, but reduced to a pathetic grotesque, a quadriplegic kept in a box who can communicate only by dropping red tennis balls to telegraph his distress. Instead, Joel finds his father figure in his deliciously odd Cousin Randolph, who watches him from an upstairs window wearing a woman’s dress and towering white wig. At the novel’s end, Randolph in drag beckons to Joel from the window, and Joel, finally understanding who he is, goes to him “unafraid, not hesitating,” pausing only briefly to look back “at the boy he had left behind.”
Previous Dish on Capote here and here.
(Photo of Capote in 1959, via Wikimedia Commons)
When Words Are Meant To Fail
Andrew Gallix ponders the purpose of intentionally difficult, almost unreadable books:
If literature cannot be reduced to the production of books, neither can it be reduced to the production of meaning. Unreadability may even be a deliberate compositional strategy. In his influential essay on “The Metaphysical Poets”, TS Eliot draws the conclusion that modern poetry must become increasingly “difficult” in order “to force, to dislocate if necessary, language into its meaning”. The need to breathe life back into a moribund language corrupted by overuse, chimes with Stéphane Mallarmé‘s endeavour to “purify the words of the tribe”. The French writer was very much influenced by Hegel, according to whom language negates things and beings in their singularity, replacing them with concepts. Words give us the world by taking it away. This is why the young Beckett‘s ambition was to “drill one hole after another” into language “until that which lurks behind, be it something or nothing, starts seeping through”.
Related Dish debate on the opacity of poetry here.
The View From Your Window Contest
You have until noon on Tuesday to guess it. City and/or state first, then country. Please put the location in the subject heading, along with any description within the email. If no one guesses the exact location, proximity counts. Be sure to email entries to contest@andrewsullivan.com (the old address still works as well). Winner gets a free The View From Your Window book. Have at it.
Unknown Highs, Ctd
Ned Beauman surveys the online recreational drug marketplace, which is largely made up of experimental chemical compounds. The drugs, “still legal or quasi-legal because no legislative body can possibly keep up with an enterprising chemist,” are usually sold under various names – bath salts, plant food, pool cleaner:
These websites don’t just have shopping carts and checkouts: they also have user reviews, product alerts, seasonal sales and multiple worldwide delivery options. (“Really great product these pellets are. compared to the “o5” pellets, and the 6apb powder ive had from numerous sources, these absolutely blew me away. 2 pellets made for an amazing reaction, the 5apb adds SO much to the mix. Also, top notch customer support and service, as usual. Shipped same day. rc-lab is always a pleasure to do business with.”)
But Beauman fears that online clearing houses have a major problem:
Methoxetamine, methiopropamine, ethylphenidate, etizolam, benzofuran, camfetamine, pentedrone—who can keep up? The merchants can give you the best customer service in the world, but the one thing they can’t do is explain the effect of these drugs and how much you might want to swallow, because, remember, they’re only selling plant food. Could it be that, just when it seemed like the internet was robbing the drug world of all its dangerous glamor, the problem’s actually just been flipped upside down? In the old days, you knew what you wanted but didn’t know where to get it. In 2013, you can get almost anything but have no idea what it is.
Earlier Dish on synthetic drugs here.


