Comments on: Annals of bad journalism: Tim Nasson (again!)

By: David Manning

David Manning — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 02:26:26 +0000

Doesn’t he know that anyone web-savvy enough can just download an IP-scrambler from pretty much ANYWHERE, and that there’s nothing he can do about that? Doesn’t he know that IP addresses routinely change, or that such a thing as public libraries and friends’ houses exist? …Apparently not–he doesn’t appear to know anything.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:45:25 +0000

My favorite is that he refuses to name you so an unsuspecting reader can’t read what you wrote. Lovely.

By: treen

treen — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:19:55 +0000

I’m confused. His piece is in the same vein as your junket column - look at the stupid movie studios. How does this make you a complete psychopath but not him? He’s ratting himself out? (The “why this feature” section.) And giving a list of celebrities that he’s interviewed “in one of these settings” … so what? That’s like me referencing some of the receptions I’ve attended for work where the high and mighty such as Colin Powell and Hillary Clinton have also been in attendance.

(And don’t get me started on his typos and other errors. For someone who apparently writes for a living … yikes. One more reason to not take him seriously.)

By: Weezy

Weezy — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:11:47 +0000

Ooops, I meant junketeer, not junkeeter. (although you’ve said you are fond of Taco Bell)

By: Weezy

Weezy — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:08:28 +0000

“A ‘one time junketeer,’ whom will not be named”

Face it honey, you were never a one time junkeeter. You were a one time whore.

By: AdamOndi

AdamOndi — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:36:24 +0000

“But, please, donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t ever come back to our site again, or we will block your IP Address, so you wonÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t ever, ever be able to access our site. And trust us, our TECH guys are that good!”

I love reading threats to do technical things when the threats are written by people who have no idea what they are talking about. They think that IP addresses never change, even though most people’s IP addresses do change from time to time. But, seriously, from a business perspective, why in the world would you want to burn every bridge with every former customer? Maybe people just wanted to have less mail clogging up their inbox each week. Maybe people will decide, a couple of months later, that they want to go back to the site and click on a few advertisers’ links….

Well, if it was not already completely obvious, Nasson is a juvenile retard.

By: Zimm

Zimm — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:48:20 +0000

“…every movie studio banned him not only from junkets, but also, press screenings because he wrote about the one junket he attended in such a way that he seemed to be a complete psychopath.”

EVERY MOVIE STUDIO EVAR!!!!!!

Wow, Eric, you must spend a lot of money on movie tickets.

By: David Cornelius

David Cornelius — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 09:55:48 +0000

Eric: OK, so that makes more sense. Doesn’t make him any less crazy, but still.

By: Markk

Markk — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 09:08:16 +0000

Regarding the hostile opt-out instructions: could it be a joke? It looks like one to me, albeit a weird, not particularly funny one.

By: Eric D. Snider

Eric D. Snider — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 07:46:50 +0000

Regarding David’s point #3: I e-mailed Nasson a few weeks ago after it came to my attention that he was using transcripts of interviews he didn’t attend. I believe others have confronted him, too. I do think his article is probably a response to all that, not to the incident with him last year.