On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 12:55 PM, delancey <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Yeah, I saw this when io9 put it up, and was surprised that they did > so. The main impetus turned out to be the opinion of an SF short > story writer venting in passing on his blog; the other bad news that > io9 cites is very general, and the only specific mention of SF is an > upbeat report. So it doesn't seem they had good reason to splash the > question up as they have. If io9 is anything like the other Gawker properties, their writers have pretty strict (albeit perhaps vaguely documented) quotas. Their bonuses and continued employment rely on ginning up something to say about something several times per day. So the great surprise would be if they kept quiet. Surprisingly enough, they often find something to report that's actually interesting. When I'm in a blog-scanning mode (which I haven't been in a while), I usually glance through their feed. But io9 is definitely more "mainstream" than "genre" in its focus: As far as I can reckon, neither Charlie Jane Anders nor Annalee Newitz are orthodox fangirls. Personally, I think that helps. -- eric scoles ([email protected]) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
