My Top 10: Internet Habits that Need to Die

I haven't posted in a while, so I thought I'd rant about some things that have been bothering me for a while - the annoying Internet habits of others. Most of them concern youtube comments outside of the run-of-the-mill "pointless fights" complaint. We can all agree that we hate trolls and spammers, but I'm talking about the littler things that so many people do that just plain get on my nerves. [Warning: I am going to sound very bitter]

10. Youtube: "X brought me here!"


This isn't a huge pet peeve, but it's a pet peeve nonetheless. It's fun to show solidarity if a certain website or show brought you to a video. But it's also incredibly irrelevant to most other people. Then there are inevitably the people who are like, "well, I brought MYSELF here!" and it erupts into bitterness. Can't we all just agree that we like the video, whether we were were brilliant enough to find it on our own or not? People act like there's some pride to be had from finding a song on your own while discovering it through a TV show or movie is beyond reprehensible.

9. Any comments section: Liking your own comment

The absolute height of comments desperation and self-absorption. Like the crazy cousin of the troll, the person who likes their own comment tends to be someone with deeply passionate contrarian beliefs who wants to show they mean what they say and they are smart, damnit! Although I'd probably be more concerned if someone posted an opinion and then disagreed with themselves.

8. Facebook: Treating Facebook like Twitter
Unless you're actually posting your Twitter updates to Facebook, don't use hashtags. Hashtags are pointless on Facebook.

7. Youtube: "If I get X many thumbs up I'll do something wacky!"

Oh, really? If you get 100 thumbs up, you're going to perform the dance in the video at a club? If you get 500 thumbs up, you'll perform this wacky routine in class? And you'll post it on youtube so you can prove you really did it, right? Yeah, I thought so.

6. Any comments section: "First-world problems!"



Nothing annoys me quite like this. It surfaces a lot with Facebook redesigns and, lately, the Netflix clusterfuck. Someone inevitably declares that everyone is a moron and they should count themselves lucky if their biggest problem is Netflix raising prices. First of all, no one said that a site redesign or price hike is their biggest problem in life. But this breed of commentor insists that no one can complain about the little annoyances in their life because someone, somewhere is SUFFERING. By this logic, pretty much no one can ever complain about anything, because there will always be a worse issue to make your issue look small. The funniest ones are when the commentor complains about how everyone is talking about a "frivolous issue when there are wars going on" on an entertainment news site. But my biggest problem with this commentor is the fact that it's 95% likely they themselves live in a first-world country. And I doubt that they never, ever complain about anything.

5. Facebook: Constant resdesigns
"First-world problems!" Yes, I know it's silly to get irked over this, but it just doesn't make sense to me to keep fixing what isn't broken. A redesign every few years or once a year, I get. But the redesigns every few months just irritate your users who have to relearn how to use your site each time. This is especially annoying for the older generation who didn't learn the ropes very quickly the first time around. At this point, someone naturally says "then stop using Facebook, dumbass!" I would like to remind everyone that not every person who uses Facebook is an attention-starved fake who hoards "friends" to seem popular and loved. Some of us use it because it's a great way to stay in touch and share things with friends and family scattered around the country.

4. Youtube: Jokes about the number of people who disliked a video

These are funny the first couple of times you see them. I can still stand them if they're clever. But after a while, you just want people to shut up already about the people who disliked the video. And for some reason, these types of comments are probably the most popular, right up there with my Number 1 complaint. This is also annoying because the number of dislikes is constantly changing. And it smacks a little of "anyone who disagrees with me should be shot." (The above example comment is from Devo's "Whip It," hence the whipping comment. It wasn't really a violent outburst, although it's the Internet so this could pop up word-for-word on any video and it wouldn't seem too weird, unfortunately.)

3. Youtube: "I love this music, and I'm X years old! Today's music is crap!"


I'm a big fan of Motown, Disco, and 80s music despite the fact that I wasn't even alive in any of these eras. But people still seem to think that liking any decade of music outside your own is something rare and commendable. It's almost like it's impossible to praise one genre/decade without putting down another. Is there a law against liking Classic Rock AND Disco? Is there a law against loving music from today and music from the 50s? Is there a law that says kids can't like music from past eras? No, but people online act like there is.

2. Facebook: "Repost this as your status if you support X/if you're my true friend!"

I only have one friend who posts these, but one is enough. I blocked her updates after a while because I just couldn't stand it anymore. I am obviously pro-cancer because I didn't post your Fight Breast Cancer message for an hour as my status. I am obviously not your true friend because I didn't repost that sweet message about friendship. I'm obviously a sheep because I'm one of the 99% of people who won't repost your message. And you are obviously making a difference in the world by posting all those messages about such important issues. Bravo.

1. Youtube: "Thumbs up if you're listening in 2011!"


This one makes me want to reach into my computer and strangle the commentor when I see it. How the hell does this comment keep getting thumbs up from everyone? Do you think someone's going to respond, saying, "I don't listen to this anymore but I came to the video today to make sure everyone knows that"? Or "I'm listening to this in 2045!" "I'm listening to this in 1994!" This started out as someone making a point that they were still listening to a song from another era regularly, but it devolved into this inane statement. And it drives me crazier than any other Internet habit does.

My Top 10: Recent Emmy Snubs and Flubs

While the Emmys are a great platform to recognize outstanding work in television, there are many moments that leave me questioning its critical eye. I am an avid TV watcher, but not a professional of any kind in the field of TV criticism. If I can watch multiple shows a year and evaluate their strengths and weaknesses, you're damn right I expect Emmy voters to do the same, especially when it is their exact job to do so. Here are the top 10 nominations (or lack thereof) that made me lose any respect for or faith in the Emmy awards in recent years.

10. SNUB: "Southland" forgottenAfter being shuffled around to different channels and times, it's a wonder even critics found this show again every time. But what started as a bizarrely dark NBC cop show that refused to be another standard procedural blossomed into a fantastically gritty drama that never hesitates to be depressing. Shawn Hatosy should have had a lock on a nomination this year, with Michael Cudlitz close behind.

9. SNUB: Anna Torv and John Noble pull double duty for "Fringe"Torv really pulled her weight in later seasons and proved that she can step up to the plate of being a dynamic lead character. John Noble displayed the most range, believably playing two drastically different characters with entirely different personalities. Many of the sci-fi twists of this show can sound like soap opera dreck to the unitiated, but it's handled so intelligently and the actors are a huge part of that success.

8. SNUB: "Battlestar Galactica" suffers from genre curseI'm not a fan of "Battlestar Galactica," but I'm not going to pretend for a second that it was a bad show. In fact, it was an excellent show. But it's hard-core sci-fi genre pretty much guaranteed that it would never be recognized, despite stellar acting and writing. It won some random technical awards and a few writing nominations, but should have achieved so much more.

7. SNUB: "Community" strikes outOne of the most egregious omissions this year was ignoring this show in favor of tired yet crowd-pleasing favorites like "Glee" and "The Office." Innovative in its tongue-in-cheek style, "Community" takes sitcoms to the next level each week as it lovingly skewers expectations. It'll take cliches, twist and turn them, and throw them back in your face, saying the whole time "we're above that, we can do better." And they do every week, whether they're mocking action films with epic paintball games or poking fun at the standard clipshow episode. If nothing else, it should be well represented in the writing category.

6. SNUB: Lauren Graham and Kelly Bishop not taken seriously for "Gilmore Girls"Much like the Oscars, the Emmy Awards want to be taken seriously, so it votes for "serious" or "real" shows. Venturing outside the big networks or the prestigious cable channels is verboten. Hence the overlooking of SciFi, the WB, UPN, or the later CW network. In an ideal world, it shouldn't matter what network a show airs on. If it's a great show, it's a great show, no matter where it airs or who it stars or any other behind-the-scenes nonsense. "Gilmore Girls" elevated the family dramedy to something else entirely, proving that a little WB show could be whip-smart, heartbreakingly relatable, and side-splittingly hilarious. Lauren Graham ably switched from drama to comedy in a heartbeat as Lorelai Gilmore while Kelly Bishop perfected the love-her/hate-her WASP mother Emily Gilmore. Say what you will about the show itself, but these two actresses never failed to impress.

5. FLUB: Alfre Woodard nominated for sinister "Desperate Housewives" role She was nominated for Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Comedy Series. Comedy, meaning funny. Anyone who watched her season of "Desperate Housewives" was left scratching their heads in confusion when that nomination was announced. The new neighbor with a dark secret was great soap opera-esque dramatic fodder, but comedic it was not. You could argue that she gave a good performance in a show designated a comedy, but the award is put in the comedy category so the actor being recognized should be giving a comedic performance.

4. SNUB: Brilliant but undiscovered "Veronica Mars"Once again, the curse of a small network lives on. Even more obscure and less-respected than the WB, "Veronica Mars" started its run on UPN. While it sounded like a cutesy, fluffy distraction, viewers knew that "Veronica Mars" was a hip, noir mystery that didn't talk down to its audience. The high school drama plays out in class wars and the series stays firmly rooted in reality, like when a killer walks free simply for being a famous celebrity. Things weren't always tied up in a neat bow, and Veronica wasn't an invincible heroine. As played by Kristen Bell, she turned what could have been a fantastical character into a real person.

3. FLUB: Ellen Burstyn for brief moment in "Mrs. Harris"This is one of the biggest flubs I have ever seen because it proved clearly that Emmy voters don't watch all the performances they vote on. Burstyn was on-screen in this TV movie for 14 seconds in a role that contained 38 words. She is a fine actress, but I don't care if you're voting for Helen Mirren - you watch the person's performance to evaluate its merit. If there's any flub more outrageous than this one, I don't know what it is.

2. SNUB: Walton Goggins ignored for "The Shield"After watching "The Shield" for the first time earlier this year, I could not comprehend how he did not walk away with a single award. His performance as the often despicable yet painfully human Shane Vendrell was probably the best I have ever seen on television. The final season of the show had so many scenes that in and of themselves should have earned him a nomination and a win. Most "Shield" fans will also point out Forrest Whitaker as another snub, but I don't entirely agree. His Internal Affairs character was a dynamic, terrifying force, but I thought Whitaker tended to overact and he was the only character I felt was more a dramatic creation than a real man. While his scenes sometimes took me out of the show, Goggins' presence never for a second had me thinking about the actor rather than the character in front of me. Except maybe to think, "damn he's good." As another person once commented, "I have never simultaneously hated a character but loved an actor so much."

1. SNUB: "The Wire" celebrated by everyone but the EmmysOften cited as the best television show of all time, "The Wire" got next to nothing from the Emmys. Gritty realism at its finest, "The Wire" unfolded at a uniquely slow, ponderous pace. There were no sweeps week stunts, no suspension of disbelief required, and the actors didn't look like models. Watching "The Wire" is like watching literature on-screen for the density of the writing and depth of characterization. It never shied away from relevant and poignant social or political issues, and never delved into BS just for the sake of grabbing ratings. There were no heroes and villains, good guys or bad guys - just people surviving in tough situations. It examined societal issues with a sober mind, never for a moment sinking into the naive belief that anything has a simple solution or easy explanation. "The Wire" is serial storytelling at its finest and shows what television can do when it gets everything right. So why did it only earn two measly writing nominations from the Emmys?