I think the headline is telling too much truth. The NIL deals and the SCOTUS case recognized that O'Bannon and other basketball players were being used for their talent, and getting $0.00 for it. I don't think anyone (I know I didn't) expected the NIL universe to reward so handsomely some mid level pretty women basketball players. The woke / race / intersectional NCAA and the press hate that people like the Cavinder twins are getting PAID with the new rules.
Left unsaid is when mid level pretty black women start raking in the NIL deals money as well. Will the NCAA 'crack down' then as well. Only time will tell.....
A topic for another day, but I think the "But readers don’t know that headlines are written by copy editors, not the writers themselves," isn't the full defense that it's often presented as. Criticism is often for the writer/publication/editor/etc. as a sort of amorphous blob and I'm not sure saying that somone else other than the writer wrote it defangs all criticism (other than those specifically, personally flung at the writer themselves). Particularly in the internet / social media age, we may need to think a bit about how we consider these sorts of criticisms.
I was going to say something similar. I think he's a pretty interesting guy that could be a nice interview on the podcast about the broader landscape of the media and journalistic practices.
Spike nailed it in his tweet. No one reads anything. The media members who jumped on the Strauss condemnation just outed themselves as not particularly bright or interesting.
I think you're right, they're bothered by the non-curated glimpse into how they do what they do, but I think it's something more specific than that. If they were medicore at basketball, then, technically, there is nothing that distinguishes them from any other attractive IG influencer. When you say that they are relying on "sex sells" for a huge part of their success - which happens to be obviously true, just go to their instagram page right now - the problem for them is that, since they weren't that good, then it means their sexuality is their whole brand. And whether it is or it isn't, in today's world, that is "regressive", i.e., not cool. A woman is not allowed to profit off only her attractiveness, then she isn't "empowered." You have to be hot while doing something else "inspiring." Hence the pablum in their response about how their goal is to inspire young girls to "achieve their dreams" to "work hard" and "think big." Of course they know that the major part of the inspiration is the second half of that maxim to which "sex sells" might be called a corollary, which says, "Men want them, women want to be them." But if they admit to all this, or allow it to go unchallenged, then it breaks the kayfabe.
Think it’s a bit of both, yeah it’s sex sells and that but they can hoop a bit that makes them a bit more unique than your typical IG influencer, Livvy Dunne can do the splits and wears a nice leotard which is why she gets the following she does as she has a bit more than her looks
Thinking more about this, it would be interesting for HoS or the Free Press to take a look at somebody like Gabi Butler. Another beautiful athlete who it seems is at least somewhat capitalizing on sex appeal in her brand but actually is among the top competitors in her field. Would be interesting to see how she sees the recent NIL developments not least because she has been developing and, I presume, monetizing her brand since long before NIL, what with cheer not being under NCAA purview (I think).
It’s not “sexist” to point out that someone makes their money because of their looks, there are plenty of guys who fall in that category too lol it cracks me up when these “influencers” get high and mighty about how they make their money and think it’s so insulting to say it’s because of their looks when anyone who knows anything about how this works knows that if they were average looking they would be essentially unknown. If you’re gonna go that route and profit off your looks the least you can do is be self aware enough to own it. Sorry Cavinder sisters you aren’t making your money because you’re “creative and driven”, and you might be those things, but there are thousands of girls who are creative and driven who don’t get the opportunity to make millions of dollars in their early 20s.
They win either way. Who's talking about them or this story on a national level had they not complained about it? They're influencers... it's all good for them. It would've been hilarious though if they made fun of Ethan's cool Miami haircut in their statement.
"They win either way" Which is why they are feigning outrage. It is probably engrained at some subconscious level. It's like the Zoomers have grown a clout-seeking lobe on their brain from being raised inside social media.
Coincidentally, earlier today I was just re-reading Barkan's poptimism piece about how to a growing segment of the powerful and already-winning, all journalism is either fawning PR or illegitimate "hating." This seems a perfect example, women who perform online for such a pliant following absent any regular human interaction or critical feedback, panicking over losing control of the message and their image for a second or two.
it's frankly bizarre that they're pretending that acknowledging that they're hot, and that their success is part of that (they're PRO-WRESTLERS for god's sake, if they think ETHAN is sexist, wait until they spend some more time with VINCE MCMAHON) is "blatantly sexist." some real emporer's new clothes shit.
WTF is a TV? A big ugly phone that you put on the wall?
These ladies live in a different world where they control their own coverage. They'll cuck Ethan or Vince if it helps their brand. It is very very Trump like in its simultaneous genius and idiocy.
Musing 1: So Ethan Strauss recently wrote a piece for The Free Press on Hanna and Haley Cavinder, the former University of Miami basketball players who earned shitloads of NIL money because, well, they’re physically attractive. And when the story, headlined, THE NCAA HAS A ‘HOT GIRL’ PROBLEM, ran, well, the sisters were pissed. The put out an angry Tweet, arguing that Strauss had misled them. And while I wasn’t present for the dialogue between scribe and subjects, I have grown a bit weary of not being allowed to just say what the fuck is going on. Namely, NIL dough isn’t necessarily going to the neediest or the most-skilled, but the best looking. And I’m not arguing whether that’s bad or good. But, I mean, the Cavinders were mediocre Division I players making shitloads of coin because they look nice and pose suggestively. It’s not a mystery.
I think most of the hate comes down to the fact it was in the Free Press and the irrational hatred of Bari Weiss. Was a pretty interesting article, although the HoS article going into Better was more interesting
yeah, ethan strauss writing for bari weiss' publication is going to send a certain corner of twitter into a foaming-at-the-mouth frenzy regardless of the subject matter. headline could've been "why puppies are cute" and it would've made no difference.
Are we sure the Cavinder's are actually upset with the coverage? Would it even matter if they were or weren't?? To me, this just seem like the twins using their Zoomer superpowers of instinctually driving clicks and gaining clout. All of us dumb non-Zoomies well will trying to hash out how they could feel so aggrieved given the fact patterns. We are in the dumbest post-post-modern nihilistic matrix. I don't think the DADD strategy will work this time. Just take the "L" and watch their latest bikini tiktok.
My take, when I read their response, i feel a lot of emotion on their part and its obvious they feel caught off guard. They referenced letting you into their home and things that indicate they are just simply hurt by the article. Now, does that mean you mislead them? I highly doubt that. Honestly it speaks more to how naive their 22 year old selves are. I would safely guess they live in little bubbles where everyone is always kissing their ass trying to get a piece of the Cavinder pie. The fact that someone could transparently present themselves with honest direct questions then write anything but a complimentary piece truly shocks them. I have empathy for the hurt they genuinely feel but also roll my eyes at the self inflicted pain.
There are two polar privileges. The privilege that everyone ACTUALLY wants (rich, attractive, powerful) and the modern version that comes from making a public claim of being oppressed or marginalized. No drawbacks from dabbling in the modern variant from time to time. It's all in the game.
Support from Jeff Pearlman is actually really cool. He's obsessed with journalism, so his opinions and insight carry some weight.
Pearlman did a follow up tweet right afterwards saying "[I will add — the headline sucks]" https://twitter.com/jeffpearlman/status/1668851592911802368
I think the headline is telling too much truth. The NIL deals and the SCOTUS case recognized that O'Bannon and other basketball players were being used for their talent, and getting $0.00 for it. I don't think anyone (I know I didn't) expected the NIL universe to reward so handsomely some mid level pretty women basketball players. The woke / race / intersectional NCAA and the press hate that people like the Cavinder twins are getting PAID with the new rules.
Left unsaid is when mid level pretty black women start raking in the NIL deals money as well. Will the NCAA 'crack down' then as well. Only time will tell.....
Ha - he’s right. But readers don’t know that headlines are written by copy editors, not the writers themselves.
That spicy headline is why Ethan is going through a minor firestorm right now. His article itself wasn’t unfair.
A topic for another day, but I think the "But readers don’t know that headlines are written by copy editors, not the writers themselves," isn't the full defense that it's often presented as. Criticism is often for the writer/publication/editor/etc. as a sort of amorphous blob and I'm not sure saying that somone else other than the writer wrote it defangs all criticism (other than those specifically, personally flung at the writer themselves). Particularly in the internet / social media age, we may need to think a bit about how we consider these sorts of criticisms.
I was going to say something similar. I think he's a pretty interesting guy that could be a nice interview on the podcast about the broader landscape of the media and journalistic practices.
Spike nailed it in his tweet. No one reads anything. The media members who jumped on the Strauss condemnation just outed themselves as not particularly bright or interesting.
I think you're right, they're bothered by the non-curated glimpse into how they do what they do, but I think it's something more specific than that. If they were medicore at basketball, then, technically, there is nothing that distinguishes them from any other attractive IG influencer. When you say that they are relying on "sex sells" for a huge part of their success - which happens to be obviously true, just go to their instagram page right now - the problem for them is that, since they weren't that good, then it means their sexuality is their whole brand. And whether it is or it isn't, in today's world, that is "regressive", i.e., not cool. A woman is not allowed to profit off only her attractiveness, then she isn't "empowered." You have to be hot while doing something else "inspiring." Hence the pablum in their response about how their goal is to inspire young girls to "achieve their dreams" to "work hard" and "think big." Of course they know that the major part of the inspiration is the second half of that maxim to which "sex sells" might be called a corollary, which says, "Men want them, women want to be them." But if they admit to all this, or allow it to go unchallenged, then it breaks the kayfabe.
Think it’s a bit of both, yeah it’s sex sells and that but they can hoop a bit that makes them a bit more unique than your typical IG influencer, Livvy Dunne can do the splits and wears a nice leotard which is why she gets the following she does as she has a bit more than her looks
Thinking more about this, it would be interesting for HoS or the Free Press to take a look at somebody like Gabi Butler. Another beautiful athlete who it seems is at least somewhat capitalizing on sex appeal in her brand but actually is among the top competitors in her field. Would be interesting to see how she sees the recent NIL developments not least because she has been developing and, I presume, monetizing her brand since long before NIL, what with cheer not being under NCAA purview (I think).
It’s not “sexist” to point out that someone makes their money because of their looks, there are plenty of guys who fall in that category too lol it cracks me up when these “influencers” get high and mighty about how they make their money and think it’s so insulting to say it’s because of their looks when anyone who knows anything about how this works knows that if they were average looking they would be essentially unknown. If you’re gonna go that route and profit off your looks the least you can do is be self aware enough to own it. Sorry Cavinder sisters you aren’t making your money because you’re “creative and driven”, and you might be those things, but there are thousands of girls who are creative and driven who don’t get the opportunity to make millions of dollars in their early 20s.
They win either way. Who's talking about them or this story on a national level had they not complained about it? They're influencers... it's all good for them. It would've been hilarious though if they made fun of Ethan's cool Miami haircut in their statement.
"They win either way" Which is why they are feigning outrage. It is probably engrained at some subconscious level. It's like the Zoomers have grown a clout-seeking lobe on their brain from being raised inside social media.
Was a totally fair story.
"You don't get the show" - Papi LeBatard
Coincidentally, earlier today I was just re-reading Barkan's poptimism piece about how to a growing segment of the powerful and already-winning, all journalism is either fawning PR or illegitimate "hating." This seems a perfect example, women who perform online for such a pliant following absent any regular human interaction or critical feedback, panicking over losing control of the message and their image for a second or two.
Ngl this controversy is really too online
Absolutely
it's frankly bizarre that they're pretending that acknowledging that they're hot, and that their success is part of that (they're PRO-WRESTLERS for god's sake, if they think ETHAN is sexist, wait until they spend some more time with VINCE MCMAHON) is "blatantly sexist." some real emporer's new clothes shit.
"they're PRO-WRESTLERS for god's sake" This is kayfabe. All is kayfabe. Zoomers understand the universe and it is why they are winning.
well, i'm afraid it's gonna be a shoot when vince asks them to have a threesome with him in exchange for more TV time.
WTF is a TV? A big ugly phone that you put on the wall?
These ladies live in a different world where they control their own coverage. They'll cuck Ethan or Vince if it helps their brand. It is very very Trump like in its simultaneous genius and idiocy.
That word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Probably, given I'm a troglodyte. Not sure which that is though.
Jeff Pearlman gave Ethan a mention in his Substack: https://pearlman.substack.com/p/the-yang-slinger-vol-lii
Musing 1: So Ethan Strauss recently wrote a piece for The Free Press on Hanna and Haley Cavinder, the former University of Miami basketball players who earned shitloads of NIL money because, well, they’re physically attractive. And when the story, headlined, THE NCAA HAS A ‘HOT GIRL’ PROBLEM, ran, well, the sisters were pissed. The put out an angry Tweet, arguing that Strauss had misled them. And while I wasn’t present for the dialogue between scribe and subjects, I have grown a bit weary of not being allowed to just say what the fuck is going on. Namely, NIL dough isn’t necessarily going to the neediest or the most-skilled, but the best looking. And I’m not arguing whether that’s bad or good. But, I mean, the Cavinders were mediocre Division I players making shitloads of coin because they look nice and pose suggestively. It’s not a mystery.
They are clearly trying to gin up publicity for themselves. In that sense, they may have won.
And who loses? Why, it's all of us.
I think most of the hate comes down to the fact it was in the Free Press and the irrational hatred of Bari Weiss. Was a pretty interesting article, although the HoS article going into Better was more interesting
yeah, ethan strauss writing for bari weiss' publication is going to send a certain corner of twitter into a foaming-at-the-mouth frenzy regardless of the subject matter. headline could've been "why puppies are cute" and it would've made no difference.
Are we sure the Cavinder's are actually upset with the coverage? Would it even matter if they were or weren't?? To me, this just seem like the twins using their Zoomer superpowers of instinctually driving clicks and gaining clout. All of us dumb non-Zoomies well will trying to hash out how they could feel so aggrieved given the fact patterns. We are in the dumbest post-post-modern nihilistic matrix. I don't think the DADD strategy will work this time. Just take the "L" and watch their latest bikini tiktok.
Did I misread it? I thought they came off pretty well.
My take, when I read their response, i feel a lot of emotion on their part and its obvious they feel caught off guard. They referenced letting you into their home and things that indicate they are just simply hurt by the article. Now, does that mean you mislead them? I highly doubt that. Honestly it speaks more to how naive their 22 year old selves are. I would safely guess they live in little bubbles where everyone is always kissing their ass trying to get a piece of the Cavinder pie. The fact that someone could transparently present themselves with honest direct questions then write anything but a complimentary piece truly shocks them. I have empathy for the hurt they genuinely feel but also roll my eyes at the self inflicted pain.
There are two polar privileges. The privilege that everyone ACTUALLY wants (rich, attractive, powerful) and the modern version that comes from making a public claim of being oppressed or marginalized. No drawbacks from dabbling in the modern variant from time to time. It's all in the game.