Something about DU I will never understand

[jpgray]

Why do topics like a Bush twin sticking out her tongue need untold thousands of threads all saying essentially the same things, while more substantive issues don't generate anywhere near the same posting frenzy? Is it weird that I don't find what Jenna Bush does to be particularly relevant or even interesting?

[Dirty Hippie]

1. Amen to that sister (or brother). n/t

[TrogL]

2. Great minds think alike

People like to express their creativity and post. The Jenna incident is fairly easy to write about. I was about to start a thread myself (with a different picture).

More substantive issues are more difficult to write about and take more time. Hence, there will be less of them.

Many people, like myself, write both.

[TrogL]

9. Here ya go, another caption thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x1430255

[truthspeaker]

3. Part of the problem is people posting without checking for threads first

I think people get really excited about a salacious story and post right away, not noticing there are already five threads with the same title on the front page of GD or LBN.

[Fovea]

4. After the absolute dreck

that the Arkansas Project hacks smeared all over Chelsea,

I think most of us would be happy to see the twins placed knee deep (head down) in raw sewage.

[pagerbear]

6. That's not a very noble thought.

I don't really like that kind of behavior on either side.

[GOPisEvil]

5. Because we can be easily distract...

...ooooh! Shiny thing!

What was I saying again?

[Nite Owl]

7. Well from my own experience

threads like that require a quick answer, no reading of stories. I am on my way out for the day and bookmarked several threads to read later. Maybe people are at work or busy at the moment that they are posted. Tne Jenna thing is relevant in that she seems so much like her daddy--immature and arrogant towards others and it goes right to his hypocisy.

[JVS]

8. Real topics require research. Scandals just need opinion.

Think of that thread the other day about the Left and Hitler's rise to power. One might need to go back and read up on stuff. Look up which political parties existed at the time. Even to make a bunk arguement a person might need to pull out a chart to say "All that it would have taken is a coallition of the SPD, KPD, DVNP and the Center party" (even though that could never have been arranged)


Meanwhile it is easy to talk about box-turtle love without having to do any studying.

[rumguy]

18. Do you have that thread bookmarked?

It sounds interesting...

[jpgray]

19. I think this is the thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2023417

[rumguy]

20. thanks

[MissMillie]

10. I imagine heavier discussions can be found

in the other forums. I kind of consider the DU Lounge to be a lot less serious.

[johnnie]

12. That was going to be my answer

If I wanted more serious discussion, I would be at one of the other sections at DU.

[jpgray]

14. There have been several threads in GD and LBN about this as well

They are not limited to the Lounge by any means. I wasn't thinking of any Lounge threads when I posted this.

[BiggJawn]

11. You're kidding, right?

Ever see the ratings numbers for shit like "Survivor", "Sex in the City", "Murkan Idle", ad Nauseum?

Crap is King.

And focussing on "substantive issues" all the time makes one dour, depressed, and sexually dis-interested.

[chicaloca]

21. Yeah, it's true that crap is king.

I guess I had just hoped that Republicans were the reason why crap is king. :( Of course, it's clear that they're much more responsible for the anti-intellectual state of our country...But at the same time, I guess I just hold my own to a higher standard. :shrug:

[sus]

13. yeah. can't those people find other ways of expressing themselves??

frivolity is so...jejune..

not to mention just plain silly.

[GOPisEvil]

15. Was that French?!

America-hater!

[jpgray]

16. Where does frivolity enter into it?

This post was inspired by the number of threads on this topic in forums other than the Lounge. Perhaps I need to edit that into the original post.

[sus]

17. your header is not Lounge Specific.

are they creating threads about the Bush Twins in GD or something?

if so, maybe i need to start hanging out over THERE.

yee-haw

[UrbScotty]

22. It reminds me of the Janet Jackson Super Bowl incident.

Half of the first page of the lounge was filled with threads about her, boobs, etc., etc., etc.

[SOteric]

23. I feel your pain.

You can file it with the same puzzlement that leads one to wonder why some of the more popular posters can post on a topic and generate a bazillion replies. But an earlier original post on the same subject, more in depth and with better analysis from a less known poster will sink like a rock.

I hesitate to conclude that we are, as a group, far too easily swayed by sensationalism and popularity, - but it kind of looks that way.