Emily Gould lay panting for breath on a bathroom floor in the throes of a panic attack. It was as if she could hear millions of voices, but they were not inside her head. Instead, her defenses were overwhelmed by a frenzy of blogging, narcissism and sniping from the Internet.
Gould was a star blogger with a glamorous career as a gossip journalist on the New York party circuit. Her job at a must-read Web site opened doors that old-school hacks had slammed in their faces. Yet the blog that gave Gould such power would also burn her.
“I had made my existence so public in such a strange way, and I wanted to take it all back, but in order to do that I’d have to destroy the entire Internet,” Gould wrote. “If only I could! Google, YouTube, Gawker, Facebook, WordPress, all gone. I squeezed my eyes shut and prayed for an electromagnetic storm that would cancel out every mistake I’d ever made.”
Gould, 26, has written a mea culpa of some 8,000 words, not in an epic blog but in an article in the most recent New York Times magazine. In it, she tells how, in her first tentative forays online, she crossed from the private to public sphere and found it impossible to turn back. Blogging caused a split from her live-in boyfriend and led to a disastrous appearance on national television. She was left feeling suffocated and struggling to breathe.
Hers is a cautionary tale in an era when it is possible to boast about sexual indiscretions, confess heartbreak or depression, or exact revenge against ex-lovers to a worldwide audience.
The medium of blogging is 11 years old. The first, written by New Yorker Dave Winer in April 1997, began with just four words: “Check this out. Amazing!”
Today, no one is sure how many blogs exist. There are 113 million being tracked by the monitoring site Technorati — a figure thought not to include 73 million Chinese blogs. It is estimated that more than one blog is created every second. The desire to self-publish and promote has spilled over on to the profile pages of social networking sites such as Bebo, Facebook and MySpace. Some bloggers have even signed lucrative book deals.
Gould has not been alone in pausing at the keyboard for a period of soul searching. Another enthusiast, Tracie Egan, has written frankly about her love life on her blog, “One D at a Time.”
It was a harmless pastime until she revealed her identity.
“When the people in my life knew that my interactions with them were potential fodder for something I might write, things changed. I began getting requests like: ‘Please, please don’t write about this,’” she posted recently.
Zoe Margolis used a pseudonym to chronicle her sexual adventures on “Girl With a One Track Mind” but was “outed” by a national newspaper.
Margolis said last week: “There still seems a long way to go before people grasp how revealing so much personal detail about themselves can have a permanent impact.”
The backlash started in earnest last year when Andrew Keen, a former dotcom entrepreneur, published Cult of the Amateur: How Today’s Internet is Killing Our Culture, an attack on what he sees as a noisy crowd with little interesting to say.
He has now attacked the New York Times for publishing Gould’s “naked manifestation of digital narcissism.”
Jeff Jarvis, a New York-based blogger and new media academic, said: “We all can speak in blogs and be found via Google and stay connected in Facebook. This is our identity. Like anything else, this ‘publicness’ can be misused and abused. But I argue that the benefits of this will outweigh the negatives. The internet is making us more social. And our mutually assured humiliation may make us more forgiving.”
At first, Gould’s blogging habit was occasional and controllable.
Her first blog, “Emily Magazine,” was read by a few hundred people. In 2006, Gould was headhunted by Gawker, the popular and fashionable Manhattan media gossip blog founded by British journalist Nick Denton.
Gould revelled in the attention she got from readers and gradually disclosed details of her personal life to encourage more. Soon this high, with its diminishing returns, became like a drug.
Her position led to an appearance on Larry King Live, CNN’s flagship talk show. On it she was grilled by comedian Jimmy Kimmel over Gawker’s celebrity “stalker map,” in which readers e-mailed in sightings of celebrities.
By her own admission, Gould failed to give a convincing defense. After the program, she logged on to her Gawker e-mail account and found her inbox flooded with hundreds of angry missives.
One said: “You looked like a little girl in awe of your surroundings.”
Another said: “I just want to tell you how uneducated and stupid you came off. You truly are a cheap, heartless human being.”
The clip of Gould’s performance appeared on Yahoo’s front page. A reporter called her parents. She realized “by going on TV and having a daily blog in front of thousands, I had put myself in the category of ‘people who make their livings in public,’ and so, by my own values, I was an appropriate target.”
“But that didn’t mean I could handle it. A week later, I found myself lying on the floor of the bathroom in the Gawker office, felled by a panic attack. I started having breathless bouts of terror that left me feeling drained and hopeless,” she wrote.
She left Henry for a Gawker colleague, Josh. She created a blog called “Heartbreak Soup” in which she wrote caustically about her sex life and her despair when she found Josh had a girlfriend.
Eventually, she became burned out and blogged out. She resigned from Gawker and “lost the will to blog.”
But it was too late. Josh wrote an article about her for the New York Post, claiming he felt violated by “Heartbreak Soup.”
Gould recalls: “I slumped to the kitchen floor and lay there in the foetal position.”
She was tempted to use her blog to strike back at Josh, but stopped herself.
Although she does not claim to be an entirely reformed blogger, she appears to have learned a lesson.
“Lately, online, I’ve found myself doing something unexpected: keeping the personal details of my current life to myself,” she wrote.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS