Am I the Matt Taibbi of science journalism? Asked and answered.

April 5, 2010

Last night I vomited in my mom’s driveway. As the partly digested mashed potatoes, cabbage and corned beef passed my lips, little did I realize I would soon be struck with the urge to restart this blog, which, when I look back at it, was a fucking awesome blog.

In January I started a blog called Working Dogma over at True/Slant, the blogger network featuring Matt Taibbi. In a cheap ploy for kudos, I wrote a self-congratulatory post about science as “a resource for inspiring myself and others to get off our asses and create a better world.” Ugh, right? As usual, I didn’t think very far ahead. The only subjects I have any expertise in are the universe and myself (or what I like to call the Minkelsphere). A blog about world-changing science is gonna require one hell of a lot of research and reporting on the front end. In other words, I was setting myself up to fail.

It’s time to get back to my roots. I am about bullshit — mine, yours and anyone else’s who’s vying for our eyeballs.

I am about oversharing, sticking my foot in my mouth, backpedaling like a spineless jerk, and then loathing myself for not standing my ground.

So, without further ado, let the fun re-commence.*

*Edited for posterity’s sake. (See, the fun has started already!)


5 Responses to “Am I the Matt Taibbi of science journalism? Asked and answered.”

  1. Roya Says:

    That’s what i’m about too. 🙂 BTW, did you see that Matt Taibi is leaving Slant to write exclusively for Rolling Stone?

  2. JR Minkel Says:

    Hey Roya, no I didn’t know Taibbi is leaving True/Slant. I wish him well.

  3. J. J. Says:

    Dude. I had no idea you had this blog. This’ll keep me occupied for a while…

  4. JR Minkel Says:

    Ha, yeah I was posting here a lot a year ago, then had a crisis of confidence and stopped. I’ve since reimagined the source of my confidence, so I’m back to posting. Anyway, glad to be of service. 🙂

  5. You don’t give yourself enough credit. Your comments back on forth on Pinker were actually rather smart and interesting for someone who isn’t a technical expert in the related fields. Pinker is a brilliant writer, he isn’t easy to respond to because he covers his bases very thoroughly even when he makes a fairly radical argument. I thought you did a very good job.

    From my perspective, reflecting on your opinions and reversing them based on new information and consideration is a sign of wisdom, intelligence, and maturity, not backpedalling. Changing your opinion randomly or in response to unconvincing criticism would be backpedalling.

    I hope you resolve your crises of confidence and continue to write.

    kind regards,


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: