Comments on: Megan Fox Endorses The Kindle, Sally’s Spa

By: ImNotBlue

ImNotBlue — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 15:37:44 +0000

I actually find Megan Fox and the Megan Fox coverage fascinating – I didn’t create it, I just noticed it and hopped on board.

I’m sorta rooting for her, but also, I find her legitimately to be an interesting media lightening rod.)

How’s that?

Man… what I splash I must be making! First Tommy Christopher addresses me, then Dan Abrams, now Rachel Sklar… any more comments from the people in charge of this place, and I’ll need to get paid!

But anyway… I still don’t understand the relevance of Megan Fox this site. How does this advance this site’s goals?

As far as I know, the purpose of this site is to talk about the NEWS media, not just “the media” in general. Ms Fox, attractive as she is (although, I find a lot of her dopey statements to make her less attractive), isn’t really relevant to the news… and certainly no more relevant than say, Britney Spears (ew) or Paris Hilton (ew-ew)! So what’s the point?

Relating her comments about her iPhone or Kindle to “new media,” is pretty flimsy. Why are her comments on those things any more relevant or knowledgeable than anyone else’s? And really… who cares about SNL? When SNL talks politics, or news presentation (Weekend Update, etc.), then we’ve got a platform to talk about… but otherwise, is this really the forum for that?

Maybe it’s me… but, I just don’t get the enthrallment or the relevance of Megan Fox… and certainly not around these parts.

By: Rachel Sklar

Rachel Sklar — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 00:58:45 +0000

I actually find Megan Fox and the Megan Fox coverage fascinating – I didn’t create it, I just noticed it and hopped on board. The Dentata stuff is hooked more on the fact that I saw an outrageous shirt at Top Shop and found it hilarious, and made the connection with her Rolling Stone comments – the Glenn Beck stuff, well, that was just an obvious leap. But actually, I saw this clip in the course of just watching Fallon and was struck by how different the interview was from the Rolling Stone interview – Jimmy was asking about slightly nerdy, offbeat stuff and the result was surprisingly charming. The Kindle and Sally’s Spa stuff is interesting from a new-media perspective, especially how an appearance on Fallon can goose an iPhone app (I had never heard of Sally’s Spa before). And she’s hosting the season opener of SNL in a season where expectations for them have never been higher – she’s not just a flash in the pan starlet, she’s got something and that is clearly recognized by other discerning sources. It’s not just about boobs, plenty of other people have those. She’s just having a particular media moment right now, and in her various apperances on shows and in magazines, she keeps somehow making herself relevant. It’s just something I’m noticing.

(And for the record, I did NOT post the clip of her on Regis & Kelly, though I found it very interesting too – Megan seemed way less comfortable than she did on Fallon, and Kelly responded with something sorta strange, some comment about how SHE was a man-eating cheerleader in high school too. Which was an oddly sexualized comment to hear from Kelly. Megan Fox just seems to have an effect on people. For me, she’s like my new Shamu (it’s a summer 2006 at HuffPo reference). I’m sorta rooting for her, but also, I find her legitimately to be an interesting media lightening rod.)

How’s that?

By: ImNotBlue

ImNotBlue — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 15:50:52 +0000

Is there a reason why you, Ms. Sklar, keep posting stories about Megan Fox? Is she a news personality, and I’m unaware? Was there something news related in this? Or do you think this site is Gawker or Perez Hilton, and need to be reminded it’s not?

Yes, Ms. Fox is fun to look at… but I fail to see how she’s relevant to this site.

(I don’t want to sound like I’m playing “site police,” I just want to understand what I’m missing here.)