Reminds me of this mind-blowingly brilliant piece by novelist/journalist Will Self, about his addiction.
Here on the op-ed desk, we’re familiar with readers taking serious issue with our pieces, although encouraging informed discussion and debate is our job, right? But after reading this article on the rise of “hate reading” we wonder if any of our readers actively seek out the writers they dislike for a bit of mental self-flagellation.
Ever deliberately read a Comment is free article knowing you’ll disagree with every word? Followed someone on Twitter just so you could take issue with every microblog they send? Or found yourself turning to your least favourite newspaper columnist first? In short: are you a hate reader?
Money in American politics was already an elephant in the room. Now the supreme court has given it a laxative, taken away the shovel, and asked us to ignore both the sight and the stench
- Gary Younge” —Comment is free
The huge salaries and bonuses, we are told, are essential if we are to prevent this tiny percentage of selfish, hoarding arseholes from moving overseas. Imagine if they flew to Singapore and started selfishly hoarding things over there instead. Drained of their expertise and reassuring presence, how would Britain cope? Within days we’d be walking on all fours and devouring our offspring for food.
I don’t want to panic you, but that’s the reality. Never mind weeping over the size of their bonuses: we should be dropping to our knees and giving them blowjobs, tearfully imploring them to remain seated each time we come up for air. Treble their wages. Form a human ring around Britain’s airports to prevent them from leaving. And for God’s sake don’t ask them to share anything. That kind of talk merely angers them.
Sharing is for the rest of us. Not sharing money or bison meat, but personal information. Where we are. What we’re doing. Share it! Make it public! Go on! It’s fun!” —Charlie Brooker on why people want to share *everything* online