Sunday, October 18, 2009

Law Weekly on UVA Law Blog

The anonymous Around North Grounds ("ANG") doesn't like J Crew Model's column, and doesn't like UVA Law Blog as a whole, either:
Thumbs down to UVA Law Blog author J Crew Model for his barely coherent “column” attacking Law Weekly columns as unfunny. ANG doesn’t need competition for poorly written, anonymous commentary about not liking things. Some advice from the Bible for a certain humor-stunted website: Before removing the speck from your brother’s eye, first check to see if you write for a really boring blog.
So UVA Law Blog is really boring? Frankly, we couldn't agree more; we've always acknowledged that we're boring and unfunny. To rectify this situation, we plan to scrap all of our coverage on callbacks and employment, on rising tuition, on the various "scandals" at the Law School, and on issues that might actually affect people in favor of columns that mimic those that are in the Law Weekly.
xoxo,
Rule 12(f) (who works harder as an underling at the Law Weekly than he does as the EIC of UVA Law Blog, sadly...)
Next week: UVA Law Blog reaches the heights of hilarity when we call out our friends multiple times in each column, write about the same thing four issues in a row, make inside jokes, use a million bold headings, and, of course, use lists! You won't want to miss this!!!

(EDIT: In case it wasn't clear, we like the Law Weekly and its columnists. As one commenter noted, it's hard putting out 6-8 pages every week. We hope this 'feud' or whatever it is can be considered ended and we can get back to more successful collaborations.)

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

Haha - nice post. Eye-rolling article skipping has become my norm for the Law Weekly. But, in that publication's defense, unfunny filler material is probably required when you're putting out a 6 page issue every week. Law Blog can be much more selective, and that helps the relevancy factor.

Anonymous said...

3L here. Let it be known that many of your classmates have been complaining that whoever writes ANG this year is possibly the most UNfunny person ever. ANG 1L & 2L year was hilarious. Short, sweet, slightly deranged, yet funny. Someone stop the current ANG before I lose one of the only reasons for picking up the paper (the other being faculty quotes).

Anonymous said...

Yeah. I too hope this feud is completely over.

ANG does, in my opinion, get excessivley mean at times. I understand defending the Law Weekly, but negative comments, if necessary, should have been relegated to JCrewModel, who was the perpatrator of any unfair criticism.

Plus, this blog is really very good. It actually takes time to think through important issues. Careful thought being harder and harder to find these days, I appreciate that immensely.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, advice from the Bible is hilaaaaaaaaarious

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

As a LW alum, I am outraged by the unfunny ANGs. I am also outraged by the fact that the LW no longer has to publish weekly non-apology apologies for some bit of racism/misogyny/prejudice-against-babies

Anonymous said...

Law Weekly is a waste of trees for the most part. The columnists are annoyingly self-absorbed. This blog, on the other hand, is great...

Anonymous said...

Annoyingly self-absorbed is right. And I'm amazed by the sort of deeply personal stuff that people will write in those columns.

Anonymous said...

Wait, what? Don't you all want to hear about the columnists super sweet lives so you can reflect on how much cooler and more popular and more fun they are and wish/dream/hope one day you can be like them too???

t-pain said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

haha i thought i was the only one who thought those columns sucked.

Anonymous said...

Don't sweat it -- J Crew was just saying what everyone else was thinking. The columns in the Law Weekly really suck and everyone knows it -- it's just a few very unfunny and unwitty law students talking to themselves. If they can't be relevant/funny in each issue, then perhaps they should follow the strategy of US News and reduce the frequency of publication.

How come these columns seem so much more interesting?

http://www.hlrecord.org/opinion

I know they actually talk about issues--as opposed to beer, softball, and Foxfield--but they're still pretty good!

Anonymous said...

why doesn't the LW just get rid of the damn columns?? Nobody likes them, nobody reads them, nobody cares. If the LW weren't subsidized by the law school, it would be FORCED to get rid of them to save paper/money.

What's really sad is that these columnists actually spend time writing that drivel under the VERY mistaken assumption that anyone reads them or likes them. They're only embarrassing themselves and wasting time. It's sad. That's time that could have been spent with friends/family, studying (getting better grades for a JOB), watching TV, or sleeping.

JBrown said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Aquila said...

Law Weekly needs a crossword puzzle. Sudoku would also be acceptable, but law students don't like numbers that much.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
JBrown said...

@2pm: If people don't read the columns that the authors invest time and effort in, what incentive is there for them to exert themselves? Aren't we encouraging them just to shoot from the hip?

Anonymous said...

Chicken/egg problem.

Do writers submit poor columns b/c people don't read them or do people not read them b/c they're poor?

Bonus question: Who should take the lead in changing both of these problems? The many readers (aka the customers) or the writers?

Anonymous said...

Putting out six pages of relevant copy a week would not be difficult if there were enough students willing to put together a decent newspaper (having some staffers w/ journalism backgrounds would help too). But law students are busy and apparently few of them think it worthwhile to work for the newspaper. So you get repetitive humorless navel-gazing columns.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

The most recent Law Weekly was very good, one of the best issues this year! Lots of columns that were pretty funny, articles about food are always good.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

I think that some of the law weekly columns have been interesting, very occasionally...I could not agree more about a crossword puzzle, aquila. Don't reduce the frequency of the paper, though. That means less faculty quotes, ANG and engagement announcements (heaven forbid.) Just shorten the paper, trim the fat, and perhaps, if all works out, let competitive pressure improve the content.

Anonymous said...

Law Weekly authors should spend less time trying to cover up their acts of plagiarism and more time not plagiarizing.