I get that in today's world of social media with Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, tumblr, blogs, etc., the world and everyone with an internet connection has a platform to speak their mind, post their thoughts, tweet their feelings, and make videos freely for all to see. I get it. I do. But you have to admit, the secondary actions i.e.: the "comments" are often the most amazing parts. Comments are to be expected, often welcomed, especially if it sets off a lengthy dialog between the participants. Main media outlets love that.
Today, I was looking for something on YouTube, and came across a song from 1961- Dion & The Belmonts- "Run Around Sue" and another version by Dion & The Del Satins so I clicked on them and watched the black and white videos, appreciating the old footage and amazing myself that I knew the words and actually liked the song. I was having a blast. I don't know why but I started looking at the comments under the posting. "Classic." "Good stuff- the way music used to be.." "One of my all time favourites!" and so on…until I read one that said "I find this song so grossly offensive! How could someone even write something like that, let alone perform it?" My mouth dropped open, and thought "Whaaaaaat??" I mean, seriously- what's wrong with a guy trying to warn his buddies about a whore named Sue?
It became a hilarious thread where this woman called it "super catchy, yet offensive" and immediately someone chimed in to tell her that there are far more offensive songs now, like "Ho" by Ludacris, and then a bunch more people commenting that the song was about a cheater, and yet had no vulgar language or bad words, so how could it be offensive? Someone even commented that if the song were remade today, they would call it "Runaround Lakesha". It was at that moment I realised that the comments really are far more entertaining than the original post half the time (barring stupid spammers, Jesus freaks, political zealots and obvious shit-stirrers). Sometimes an article may suck, or maybe it's just some stupid celebrity gossip about Jessica Simpson's new bikini body, or Brad and Angelina's family outing in Zurich- but the comments BELOW the article will often be the funniest, craziest stuff you'll see all day. More so than when it's something on your own Facebook page, because we usually know (or know of) the people commenting or were expecting it and waiting for it.
This strange world of "commenters" led me to realise that I do ultimately read the comments more comprehensively than the actual articles, especially on Gawker, Jezebel, CNN and E!Online. And good grief, people are passionate with their opinions about Obama, their favourite celebrities, and gay stuff, I'll tell you that much. I've seen comments that will defend Bradley Cooper's eye colour to a degree that's oddly unsettling.
There are often lively discussions in response to online articles having to do with gay celebrities. It can be something as simple as a "Rosie gets weight loss surgery to save her life" and a short article on the why's and when, but the comments will roll into everything from her being a "big dyke" to "a sell out" to "an amazing person who's done so much for lesbians" to "the best Mom ever" to a plain ol' "fatty."
It's weird how invested people can be in a topic.
I feel like I'm just discovering this diverse, underground sub culture of anonymous commenters and I think maybe it's more entertaining than anything an actual reporter is writing. For comedians, it's like fodder for any act, because you can find either the most interesting opinion, the dumbest, the most far fetched, a realistic one you didn't think of yourself, a ton of hostilities, defensive, offensive, crude, narrow-minded, care-free and simple minded. It's like a steaming pot of material just waiting to be spooned up and dished out. An All-You-Can-Stomach buffet.
So…to that whore, Sue: thanks for opening my eyes to this internet bag of freakish treats.