We shouldn't feel guilty for enjoying fashion

Eh?
Am I supposed to be outraged by this? And this is supposed to be newsworthy 20 years later?

Am I supposed to be outraged by this? And this is supposed to be newsworthy 20 years later?

21 years last Sunday. I wouldn't say "outrage", just astonishment at the utter tone-deafness of a fashion reporter being right in the middle of a major disaster and filing a report on shops being closed instead of the important stuff that was going on.

If they were filing a report for a fashion section then what's the problem with that?

If they were filing a report for a fashion section then what’s the problem with that?

Well, basically, everything was shut down so the fashion report side of things was pointless. However, there was a professional writer right in the middle of it all, at the hospital talking to people, and it never occurred to her that maybe writing a story about that would be what any journalist would think of first. Just because you're a fashion writer doesn't mean you can't do some news reporting when there is a big story right in front of you.

You have an unhealthy relationship with twitter, step away and take a break.

You have an unhealthy relationship with twitter, step away and take a break.

Excellent advice. Thank you for that.

What a bizarre post.

Write about what you know. I think they kinda set the scene. Quite well, the unnecessary shut but people still need pants.

To be honest who cares, they did the best thing they could possibly do, walked into a hospital and gave what they needed and they sat with people on probably the worst days of people's lives.

Joshvegas +1

I'm more questioning why the Twitter user who reposted and criticised a 20+ year old article felt the need to do that and also why they didn't recognise the role of editorial staff in choosing whether that content was fit to publish or not.

It's also clearly been written a number of days later and makes the point that retailers were paying their respects with messages of condolence in the shop fronts.

Maybe they themselves were in a state of shock, maybe they wake up every night screaming about how they got that one article all wrong in the wake of a massive terrorist attack because they were so far out of their comfort zone and didn't know what to do. A lot of whataboutery but before you slam someone or their actions it's perhaps worth thinking a bit harder about why something may have came to pass as it did.

Save the ire for the people who did it, the people who nefariously turned events to their personal advantage or who misrepresented facts and for those who create and maintain the political environment in which terrorism brews and grows.

The guy who posted it on Twitter works for Buzzfeed, that renowned haven of journalistic integrity and quality.

Also, there's a distinction between a writer and a journalist.

Should probably point out that the writer does commit the stories to paper but presumably they were part of another article or, an actual article. As opposed to what looks like a personal column.

So. What.

In the quest for hunting down things on the internet to be outraged at I have to admit this is an impressivly obscure find.

Journalist on scene of major terrorist attack writes to their strengths and provides content they are paid for. What that pathetic twitter post doesn't look into is whether the journalist also provided content to other parts of the newspaper because that wouldn't be at all outragous would it.

But that's cool. It's OK. I bet that journalist is loving all the extra social media abuse they are now getting as a result of this manufactured outrage. Slow. Clap.

Well this ain't the thread of gaiety I was expecting!

Also, there’s a distinction between a writer and a journalist.

Yes, there is, but it doesn't take a trained investigative reporter to so some simple on the ground reports about what they are seeing and hearing. The writer worked for a publication that also published news and tried to phone in a fashion story in the middle of a terrorist attack, which is quite bizarre. Maybe, as well as reporting that the fashion show was cancelled, an on-the-ground first-hand report would have a useful thing.

The writer worked for a publication that also published news and tried to phone in a fashion story in the middle of a terrorist attack, which is quite bizarre.

Meh. This post is bizarrer.

Yes, there is, but it doesn’t take a trained investigative reporter to so some simple on the ground reports about what they are seeing and hearing. The writer worked for a publication that also published news and tried to phone in a fashion story in the middle of a terrorist attack, which is quite bizarre. Maybe, as well as reporting that the fashion show was cancelled, an on-the-ground first-hand report would have a useful thing.

Like every 24h round the clock news channel was doing every day?

what was the reporter supposed to submit? the same "its dusty. lots of people are dead" as everyone else? Writing from their specific perspective helps readers build a picture up of the overall situation, how it affected life outside of the immediate, well told stories of the direct destruction.

Like every 24h round the clock news channel was doing every day?

Having someone on the ground was the thing. All public transport was shut down, there was no way to get reporters to the scene. Having someone actually there but trying to phone in a fashion show story was bizarre.

The writer worked for a publication that also published news and tried to phone in a fashion story in the middle of a terrorist attack, which is quite bizarre. Maybe, as well as reporting that the fashion show was cancelled, an on-the-ground first-hand report would have a useful thing.

Do you know that they didn’t also do that?

Devils advocate here

I’m seriously injured after a terrorist attack. In hospital I talk briefly to a women admitted to give blood. Turns out she’s a journalist and my story is all over the internet. I’m quite annoyed

She is a fashion writer, who in the middle of a disaster gets tasked to do something she is ill prepared for even in ideal conditions. Even in the middle of that she gives blood that could save someones life, and lends a sympathetic ear to some scared people without intruding on their privacy.

But her writing doesn't meet with the approval of thols2's twitter bubble, so he picks up the ball and runs with it deciding to come and share the criticism on STW as well, and showing all the self appreciation and common sense of a maga nut, ignores everyone who disagrees with his twitter informed offence, and keeps on running.

But her writing doesn’t meet with the approval of thols2’s twitter bubble, so he picks up the ball and runs with it deciding to come and share the criticism on STW as well, and showing all the self appreciation and common sense of a maga nut, ignores everyone who disagrees with his twitter informed offence, and keeps on running.

You might be over-reacting a little. I thought it was quite strange to phone back to a media office and try to do a fashion report in the middle of one of the biggest news stories of the last few decades. Obviously, I have offended your sensibilities. For that, I sincerely apologize. Next time I post anything, I will check in with you first that it meets your approval. If you have a list of stuff that doesn't meet your standard, it would help if you could post it now, it would save time later.

Also, if you think it's not interesting, you aren't forced to comment. You can just ignore stuff that you think isn't worthy.

. I thought it was quite strange to phone back to a media office and try to do a fashion report in the middle of one of the biggest news stories of the last few decades.

A "fashion report"? No it isn't. The irony is the apparent common ground between the twitterers and al Qaida, on such ephemeral western fripperies as posh high street clothes shops.

Obviously, I have offended your sensibilities. For that, I sincerely apologize. Next time I post anything, I will check in with you first that it meets your approval. If you have a list of stuff that doesn’t meet your standard, it would help if you could post it now, it would save time later.

I can almost taste the hypocrisy

We shouldn’t feel guilty for enjoying fashion

Every time I see the title I'm sucking my cheeks in and turning to one side. (I can only turn right..)

Also, if you think it’s not interesting, you aren’t forced to comment. You can just ignore stuff that you think isn’t worthy.

How would you know who you've offended with your lack of worthiness unless they post a really worthy post stating how unworthy yours is??

How would you know who you’ve offended with your lack of worthiness unless they post a really worthy post stating how unworthy yours is??

I'm not going to respond to a comment so lacking in worthiness.

I thought it was quite strange to phone back to a media office and try to do a fashion report in the middle of one of the biggest news stories of the last few decades

Someone who was quite possibly badly shocked by events and had blood loss (albeit by donation) defaulting to the subject they know best. I would guess a fashion journalist is going to be a fashion person first rather than a journalist who just happens to cover fashion.
So whilst unfortunate for the paper that they didnt have a war correspondent or similar around its not really that odd.

I'm glad I wasn't there. If I had been, photos of smashed up half buried bikes would no doubt have been the content I would have posted. In such devastation, you are bound to cling to what you know. The human cost was so high, I can't see how you could get that across unless you were in some way prepared for it... a war correspondent or something. Or just an unbelievably strong character with a special gift for retelling stories of loss. There is no shame in not being that person at that time. Very few of us could be. I'm pretty sure I couldn't.

+1 Kelvin, though I couldn’t have expressed it anywhere near as well.

Ok so the thread title was OK, so does anyone want to discuss fashion?

I quite like a bit of fashion, the way it changes and morphs with the times. Not just clothing fashion but fashion in architecture, cars, bikes, the way we speak, hell even politics can be said to follow fashions. It's our culture speaking back to us.

There is no shame in not being that person at that time. Very few of us could be. I’m pretty sure I couldn’t.

Absolutely nailed it.

The only shame is idiots on twitter (who weren't there) dragging up a 20 year old story to generate some outrage traffic. And probably resulting in the person who phoned in that report getting more abuse on social media, making an already traumatic day even more unbearable. But it got the clicks, eh?

Ok so the thread title was OK, so does anyone want to discuss fashion?

I quite like a bit of fashion, the way it changes and morphs with the times. Not just clothing fashion but fashion in architecture, cars, bikes, the way we speak, hell even politics can be said to follow fashions. It’s our culture speaking back to us.

Came across an old backissue of The Outcast where the editorial laments how singlespeeding had passed through the whole fashion cycle from niche, to cool, to popular and thence became uncool as it's popularity.

And for some reason the image that sprung to mind* given this forums demographic was "superdry dad's", and the idea that in 5-10 years time they'll all be wearing Trapstar hoodies.

*Actually, being too geeky for my own good the thing that actually sprang to mind first was that he was just describing an differential relationship where "cool" was actually just the second order differential of popularity. So things are only cool when the rate at which the rate of popularity is going up is positive, you can only be cool in the first and last quarters of the bell curve.

I thought it was quite strange to phone back to a media office and try to do a fashion report in the middle of one of the biggest news stories of the last few decades

I think the consensus is that it's not strange for someone to do their job, in a way they are trained/experienced while also going above and beyond in terms of blood donation. It's your right to feel aggrieved by a 20 year old article, but as other posters have commented they are not aggrieved and support the writer.

Having someone actually there but trying to phone in a fashion show story was bizarre.

Consensus of posters is that its not bizarre

an on-the-ground first-hand report would have a useful thing.

Plenty of other reports. Not sure how exactly this would have been useful. Fairly easy to see the link between fear derived from reports and that resultant fear being in the terrorists interests.

Also, if you think it’s not interesting, you aren’t forced to comment. You can just ignore stuff that you think isn’t worthy.

So if someone doesn't agree with an Ops frame of reference/feelings then they shouldn't comment on/contribute to a thread? Now this really is a bizarre comment, you appear to be defending your right to your opinion while trying to stamp on those who's differs from yours.

This feels more like a troll than a personal grievance. In what way has it caused any offence or harm? It could almost be argued that it helped bring the story to a wider audience or that it helped give some distraction for readers who were spiralling from the terrible news while being somewhat linked.

Not just clothing fashion but fashion in architecture,

I was only just the other day wondering at what point "dark grey" windows etc will become the new stone cladding.

Yep, thanks to fashion we don't get too bored with same old stuff.

I quite like a bit of fashion, the way it changes and morphs with the times

Daarling, fashion is only for people why don't have style

Well, quite, but it can't be denied

Yep, thanks to fashion we don’t get too bored with same old stuff

Fashion is a system to persuade us to buy new stuff, particularly cloths, before they have reached the end of their useable life

That's a very good point and applies to all aspects of fashion to some extent.
Slave labour is another massive downer.
Throw-away fashion is not defendable from an ethical or environmental standpoint so I certainly won't try.
Like I said it reflects our culture.

@thols2 just to try and get some context here I'm going to ask a personal question with the express caveat that not looking for details.

Have you ever experienced a traumatic event? Like, not just deeply unpleasant but on the level of ****ed up that you end up with PTSD?

Because if you've not then you really have no right to cast judgement here. And if you have you should really know better.

@squirrelking
Yes, I have. Have you? If you have, you'd know better than ask that question of people. Or do you just think it's a clever debating trick that gives you an automatic check-mate whenever you throw it out there?

I secretly love fashion. Proper haute couture is craft at an astonishingly high level, and seems massively under rated as an art form. Even fast fashion as a creative vehicle for (usually) young women has its place, although there’s too much exploitation at every level for me.

Delete twitter, put away your keyboards and watch the sewing bee is my advice.

I think if somebody from a cycling mag was there and wrote an article from a cyclist's perspective it might feel more poignant to people who read cycling mags than the wall to wall stuff that was written at the time.

“All of the stores in the SoHo retail district including Chanel, Louis Vuitton and Marc Jacobs was shuttered in the days following the disaster. Many uptown stores were closed as well, with condolences taped to their front doors.”

Gotta say, standards were slipping, whoever proof-read that should be ashamed of themselves!

😉

My point would be clearer if the underline or bold function worked without all the spurious crap text that gets added! 🤬

@thols2 yes I have actually which is how I can emaphise with someone who may be* going through the motions.

Seems empathy isn't your strong suit in that case.

*the tweets you linked to don't actually paint a complete picture or even half of obe, there's no context and no conclusion. Yet we're supposed to be outraged about something by filling in the gaps with whatever we imagine to have happened?

Yet we’re supposed to be outraged

@squirrelking
No, you're not supposed to be outraged. You need to tone it down for your own sake. It's just strange that a media organization would have someone on the ground during one of the biggest news stories in living memory but not actually make use of that. It's not outrageous, there's no need to start getting all hot under the collar about trauma and empathy, etc. It's just a very strange and trivial story to publish given the magnitude of the events. That's all, don't blow it up into something that it's not.

I think if somebody from a cycling mag was there and wrote an article from a cyclist’s perspective it might feel more poignant to people who read cycling mags than the wall to wall stuff that was written at the time.

If a cycling mag journalist was out doing a bike test and something of that magnitude happened nearby, I would expect them to report on the major news story happening around them. "The bikes shops were all closed," would not be what I would expect them to be concerned with.

That’s all, don’t blow it up into something that it’s not.

Too late - the op did that.

Must agree the strangest thing about the whole article is that someone cross posted it onto a cycling forum.

Must agree the strangest thing about the whole article is that someone cross posted it onto a cycling forum.

If you browse through the chat forum, you're going to be outraged. There's all sorts of stuff that has no place on a cycling forum. Political discussions, rugby and football discussions, woodworking and DIY tips. Utterly shocking! SHOCKING!!! Why don't you start a petition to have the chat forum closed, nothing in it ever seems to be bike related. (Although you could just ignore stuff that you think isn't interesting, much easier.)

You really are completely incapable of listening to any voice that doesn't parrot back what you want to hear.

And far from being "uninterested" I find your reaction a fascinating insight into the attitudes and behaviour of the "maga cult" and shows that behaviour isn't just restricted to that group (a behaviour that I am sure you have many times highlighted and criticised)..

No, you’re not supposed to be outraged. You need to tone it down for your own sake. It’s just strange that a media organization would have someone on the ground during one of the biggest news stories in living memory but not actually make use of that.

Do we know the name of the journalist? Are we sure that they didn't write anything else? Do we know if her enetry to the hospital was conditional on her not acting as a journalist. Do we have any source, other than Twitter, to confirm that the basic story is as described here.

Personally I think it is a very odd story to bother with 21 years later. I still thimk it's amazing that the rewason the box cutters got on the planes was that US internla flights had such poor security checks

https://www.npr.org/2021/09/10/1035131619/911-travel-timeline-tsa

You really are completely incapable of listening to any voice that doesn’t parrot back what you want to hear.

Needs an anechoic chamber in the house… 😉

The irony of this thread is that thois2 now also understands what it is like to misjudge the mood of their audience.

Classic stw pile on. Why critise the op so much?

It’s light hearted, I haven’t exactly made fun of his Mum.

Anyway, I admire his commitment. Always good to see someone doubling down on their position.

Classic stw pile on. Why critise the op so much?

I have to totally agree. I hadn't previously clicked on the thread as the comment in thread title didn't interest me, but as the thread was still live after several days curiosity got the better of me.

Having read it I agree that whilst the OP's point isn't imo really valid - I don't understand why the fashion reporter's comments should be considered unacceptable 21 years later, I also don't understand the apparent outrage the OP has caused.

Okay it seems that most people don't agree with the OP, but why give thols such a hard time? IMO thols has argued the point in a reasonable although apparently unconvincing manner, why, ironically, the need for all the outrage? All that does is intimidate people into not posting stuff which they feel might not be met with 100% approval.

Btw when I consider insensitive remarks concerning 9/11 I always automatically think of this......" Ground Zero, so this is the place where the first guy got AIDS" A classic example of Family Guy genius.

Ernie, snap only came in cos the thread was still going, why the pile on, because when it became apparent the OPs opinion hadn't resonated with the wider forum instead of stepping back they continued to argue the point and started trading insults.

A lot of people can actually see the damage this click baity web stuff does to individuals who are at the heart of the story, truth in general and many of the populations wider ability to filter real news from the guff.

Personally I didnt even read the report as fashioned centred, it was also clearly snippets so my cynical mind immediately assumed there was more context missing from the what was posted.

Anyway, shame, I usually like thols2 contributions.

when it became apparent the OPs opinion hadn’t resonated with the wider forum instead of stepping back they continued to argue the point

That reads like you should only share an opinion on here, or defend it if it chimes with an STW consensus?  That seems a bit sinister to me. FWIW, though I think thols' contributions are usually intelligent and considered, I disagree with him on this one.  I don't think he deserved the classic STW pile on though.  Challenge? Yes, but maybe tone down the vitriol a little*.  There is a general groupthink vibe across the forum sometimes which sees people getting unreasonably angry if someone dares to see things differently from the accepted STW group view.  Probably not unique to this forum but I don't think it's healthy.

*edit to say, not directed at @stumpyjon, even though I quoted you, but more generally at the tone of posts in the thread.

I wasn't judging, just answering Ernies question about why there was a pile on. Try the political threads for a proper pile on. The volume of posts from some forumite effectively drown out others views.

Edit: ooh stealth edit, noted and thank you. You make a fair point, what happened was just a reality of forums, it was a weird hill to choose to die on in the case of the OP, there's plenty more important issues to take on the forum consensus over.

Try the political threads for a proper pile on. The volume of posts from some forumite effectively drown out others views.

I know, which is why I and I suspect a lot of others, steer well clear despite (in my case) an interest in the subject.  It spills over into threads on any contentious or topical subject too.  The accepted group view is quickly established and anyone who disagrees is quickly shouted down.

I think this thread is a bit different to be honest, the consensus formed from more normal forumites, on the political threads it tends to the be the same 5 posters screaming at everyone else and posting consecutively so it can be difficult to find the dissenting voices yet alone for them to articulate their ideas without being told they are wrong or having their personal character attacked.

It doesn't always happen though, take the Andrew thread, a number of people jumped on the populist bandwagon accusing him of abusing his daughter in public, there was rather a lot of group think until Ernie had the guts to challenge the group view which gave others with less backbone (me included) the opportunity to also provide an alternative opinion of that specific event.

I do fully agree about walking away from the political threads, I'm not as strong as you and get sucked in from time to time. The irony is the noise on those threads just makes me more entrenched in my unpopular views. The bigger irony is I think my views have moved more to the left as I've got older directly as a result of the more intelligently argued posts on STW political threads, I've certainly started to have some empathy for people worse off with me which has impacted my voting habits. I think my visceral hatred for the current Tory party has also been stoked by what I've picked up from here rather than MSM.

I wasn’t involved in the pile on but I was really disappointed when I opened this thread for several reasons.

1. The title suggested some very different content.
2. The OP was amplifying a twitter pile on, for an article that was written 21 years ago by a person who (afaik) has very little significance. Seems really mean and pointless.
3. The OP and the twitter pile on crowd accused the writer of writing a vacuous piece about fashion during the fallout of 9/11, rather than writing about the experiences of those that went through it. But the extract they quote disproves their point:

Along with the trauma counsellors, I listened to these men and women describe how they had run for their lives.
I left the building and sat on a curb to write down what I had heard.

Whether there was a follow on piece that recounted those captured stories or whether the writer felt bound by the same confidentially the trauma counsellors had, who knows. Perhaps the experiences were too horrific to publish.

4. Finally, this paragraph seemed full of imagery and emotion and brought back the memories many people have of that event. Which suggests a writer less vacuous than the stereotype of a fashionista that these people have decided to direct their anger at.

the air began to fill with fine gray dust, like snowflakes. Only they weren't snowflakes, they were ashes. Ashes of the bond traders, the couriers, the insurance agents and receptionists who were in those buildings.

Feel free to ignore this post and go back to insulting each other. I recognise that this forum and other public internet spaces seem to fulfil a need many people have to anonymously vent anger. Ordinarily it’s easy to ignore threads like that, but like I said, the topic title drew me here under false pretences.

I think this thread is a bit different to be honest, the consensus formed from more normal forumites, on the political threads it tends to the be the same 5 posters screaming at everyone else and posting consecutively so it can be difficult to find the dissenting voices yet alone for them to articulate their ideas without being told they are wrong or having their personal character attacked.

It doesn’t always happen though, take the Andrew thread, a number of people jumped on the populist bandwagon accusing him of abusing his daughter in public, there was rather a lot of group think until Ernie had the guts to challenge the group view which gave others with less backbone (me included) the opportunity to also provide an alternative opinion of that specific event.

I do fully agree about walking away from the political threads, I’m not as strong as you and get sucked in from time to time. The irony is the noise on those threads just makes me more entrenched in my unpopular views. The bigger irony is I think my views have moved more to the left as I’ve got older directly as a result of the more intelligently argued posts on STW political threads, I’ve certainly started to have some empathy for people worse off with me which has impacted my voting habits. I think my visceral hatred for the current Tory party has also been stoked by what I’ve picked up from here rather than MSM.

Agree with all of that! The challenge to the groping accusation on the Andrew thread was a rare, but welcome example of a less popular view being given some credence.  It would be good to see more of that.

My views have also drifted to the left as I've aged, which I think is the opposite of what conventional wisdom says happens!  However, in the real world, I still have friends and acquaintances that don't share those views.  They are mostly good people who I still get along with, but I have to recognise that a different upbringing and life experiences have led to them coming to a differing political view to me. I think it's important to at least try to understand why and not assume that my take is the 'correct' one. I think most people do this - they see the good in people despite differences in views, but that tolerance seems to evaporate when they go on line.