DISQUS

Jake · 2 years ago

I couldn't believe anyone fell for this. The first couple of posts were written in a fairly sincere-sounding manner, but the SUBSTANCE was absurd from the start. Not to mention the timing, just a day or two after the think secret thing came to light. And it was truly horrifying to read the credulous, clueless comments in the successively-more-ridiculous posts (e.g., "I will never buy another Apple product after the way they treated you!!!!" or "take the money, Dave--this is just a joke blog"). I mean, seriously, how can you take a satirical blog at face value?

I weep for humanity.

mathewi · 2 years ago

Well, maybe weeping for humanity is a little strong, Jake, but I know
what you mean :-)

Karoli · 2 years ago

I know, no one can believe that someone would be stupid enough to fall for it. But I did, and so I figured it was worth an explanation. Of course, had I read it today with the newest posts added on, I'd have been far less gullible. When the endpoint was the third post, however, it still carried a ring of truth.

Thanks for being gentle, Mathew. Perhaps I should rename my blog "The Perennial Optimist", or maybe "Gullible's Travels".

mathewi · 2 years ago

Like I said on Twitter, Karoli, if I had to choose between being too
skeptical and too trusting, I would choose too trusting every time.

scrawledinwax · 2 years ago

I tend to vacillate between two extremes on this: one, where I'm understanding and think that Lyons played off the post-Think Secret tone of the blogosphere; and another where I basically think people should be punished for their stupidity. I'm trying to force myself to lean towards the former as the blogosphere is full of enough condescension. Still, satire seems to be the ostensible - if not explicit - purpose of FSJ. I think this may be one of those moments where the downsides of the 'wisdom of crowds' came through - in this instance, the fact that the aggregation of opinion we see through Techmeme or the mix of feeds in our readers can really influence how we approach a story that, in a vacuum, we might otherwise be very sceptical of.

mathewi · 2 years ago

I know what you mean, Nav, but I'm not sure whether Techmeme makes it
better or worse. It may have pumped things up when the first post came
out, but I think the number of skeptical posts may also have
short-circuited it faster as well.

scrawledinwax · 2 years ago

Yeah, I see what you're saying. Maybe I was trying too hard to not descend into some sort of high-and-mighty "seriously?! you're kidding me right?". Also, it's just possible I wasn't boozed up enough at the time. Now that that serious problem has been rectified, I love everyone - even those who believed that a satirical site was being sued in a suspiciously similar manner to Think Secret. ;)

Scott Karp · 2 years ago

Oh come now, Mathew, give him some credit for this masterful work. The fact that be played the blogosphere like a fiddle is just a sideshow. This is the ultimate satire of Apple and a scathing critique of the Think Secret shutdown. My gut still hurts from laughing so hard. And the Andy Kaufman references -- Swift himself couldn't have done it better.

mathewi · 2 years ago

Maybe I'm just jealous, Scott :-)

I have to admit, putting Tony Clifton in there was pretty good.

Foober · 2 years ago

Wow, you totally missed the point. Sure, he was faking it: it's a FAKE BLOG. But there was a meaning to this charade - like all those that FSJ perpetrates - and being a blogger you should really be reading into this one a lot more closely.

mathewi · 2 years ago

Don't worry, Foober -- I get that.

Kim C. · 2 years ago

Mike--

Well, I sort of fell for it. Briefly. But then I started laughing, not only at the writing but at the kerfuffle it was causing in the overly serious, inside their own bubble world of tech bloggers and Silly Con Valley. Maybe it isn't brilliant, but it sure was good for a laugh.

P.S. Your ThinkSecret piece was right on the money. I love my Mac and its software, but the company and it's policies? Not so much.

mathewi · 2 years ago

Thanks, Kim.

Amanda Chapel · 2 years ago

How ‘bout the companion piece: Mathew Ingram: The Globe and Mail uber-lightweight?

Jesus. And who are the minds you reference to give credence to your post… Scoble, Shel Israel, James Robertson. Ridiculous.

Okay, how many literal minds does it take to unscrew a light bulb? None. There isn’t a light bulb among them.

C’mon Matt! Raise the freakin’ bar! Get off the Cluetrain. Step away from the pipe. Remember you are the company you keep.

- Amanda

mathewi · 2 years ago

Thanks, Amanda -- or whatever your name is. Not exactly sure what your
point is, but I appreciate the concern nonetheless.

jasonmann · 1 year ago

a thought:
i believe fakesteve's post serves the purpose of diluting the 'thinksecret' shutdown issue.
If not for anyone else, Apple PR guys should be really happy with fakesteve's job