Are you aware of the My Daily Routine genre? It's a lie. A LIE I TELL YOU. Kernel:
A YouTuber’s morning is better than yours. While you’re still hitting the snooze button, they’ve made a healthy breakfast, put together the perfect outfit for the day, walked their dog, and tweeted a flawless selfie to hundreds of thousands of fans. I know this because I’ve seen it, in a “My Morning Routine” video. The “My Morning Routine” video plays like this: Our heroine—routine videos are almost invariably shot by female YouTubers—wakes early to the sound of an iPhone alarm, or a small adorable dog arrives and licks her face. She narrates the motions in a voiceover: She gets out of bed to let the dog out, then she puts on a pot of coffee and prepares a pious breakfast invariably including chia seeds. She washes her suspiciously already-perfect face and applies makeup.
Search "My Daily Routine" at you'll get 500K hits. You get the sense that the author doesn't like these things. Why? Read on:
The routine video presents itself as self-expression, a way to get to know its maker and her individual quirks. Yet almost every routine is the same, telling us more about the culture they exist in than about an individual subject. They repeat a series of Stepford-esque domestic tropes, a retrograde vision of online femininity.
Retrograde in the sense that the author doesn't approve or share the idea. Stop choosing things! But then there's this:
The job of YouTubers is to perform a more down-to-earth role than mainstream celebrities (or their cousins, reality TV stars.) The routine video sees their box-shaped world expanded: It raises and addresses the question of what a YouTuber does all day beyond their videos.
This may be the least important question I've heard this week, right next to "we do have another box of almond milk, don't we?"
These videos show a curious optimism, a reverence for getting things right that can absolutely help these girls and their viewers achieve success in the future. But I have yet to see a “routine” video that is creative or even interesting. As a genre they are conformist, derivative, and usually very boring.
That's because the people who are making them aren't particularly imaginative or interesting.
Elsewhere on the www: Internet consolidation continues apace.
Fandango has snatched up more online movie real estate. Today, the online ticket-seller announced it has signed an agreement to acquire social movie site Flixster and film rating site Rotten Tomatoes from Warner Bros. Entertainment. The addition of Flixster and Rotten Tomatoes, which reach 20 million unique visitors a month, will bring Fandango’s combined audience reach to more than 63 million monthly uniques.
It would be great if Flixster was remamed, so that we may hasten the end of the -ster suffix. The wikipedia article has this note:
Flixster's growth has been described in the trade press as attributable to "its aggressive viral marketing practices", including "the automated selection of your email account's entire address book in order to send a Flixster invitation to all of your contacts."
Hell's a diverse place with many locales, but I imagine they had to dig a special pit for the people who invented that one.
LET'S IMAGINE Revenge dioramas, with action figures! Courtesy of the Daily Dot, which links to the Facebook page:
A friend wrote this:
"VALENTINE'S DAY: "YOU KNOW WHAT I'D REALLY LIKE?" I SAID TO MY HUSBAND, "FOR YOU TO WASH THE POTS AND PANS AFTER I MAKE DINNER." HE SAID, "SURE." TWO DAYS LATER I'M ABOUT TO WASH THEM MYSELF."
So... I strung him up near some clean dishes so he could see what that looks like.
Click to see the picture of the male action figure strung up by a noose from a pot handle. It's harmless cathartic fun, but it's also a test of how well-acquainted you are with internet debates. Can you simulate the conversation that would ensue if the genders were reversed? Sit back and close your eyes. It's almost like meditation.