The Washington Post scooped the world on the more-desperately-than-is-appropriate awaited news that the Obamas have at last picked out a freaking dog...and how did they open their story? With five shameful words:"Who let the dog out?"
Get it? That's kind of the name of a terrible song that was inexplicably popular for some time several years ago; it features the word "dog", which is the thing that the Obamas got and what the story is about! Hahahahaha!
This whole thing makes me make a frowny face--not just because of the patheticalness inherent to the newspaper of America's capital essentially sabotaging an exclusive by making the most obvious reference imaginable and thus driving additional nails into the coffin of print journalism, but also because I had hoped that the Obamas would have seen this coming and taken action to avoid it.
You deliberated your dog selection for over three months, Obamas; it must have occurred to at least one of you (likely one of the parents) that the first story about your selection--and perhaps many more thereafter--would make a cheap and lazy reference to the Baha Men's "Who Let the Dogs Out" that would be detrimental to journalism. No, you could not have avoided the fact that the animal would be a dog, but--with a little creative thinking--you could have thrown the media a curveball and chosen a name other than "Bo". A name such as:
"Electric Slide"...
"Da' Butt"...
"Tubthumping"...
"Macarena"...
"Buffalo Stance"...
And many others.
You could have named the goddamn dog "Rollin' With Kid 'N Play", for chrissake: to have applied the title of any terrible song that was once inexplicably popular other than "Who Let the Dogs Out" as your dog's name would have handcuffed the members of the national media into possibly thinking for themselves...and if enough them had done so, perhaps America would have had a chance to pull itself out of the toilet.
But they didn't, so it won't--not anytime soon, at least.
In any case, though: cute puppy (not pictured).
No comments:
Post a Comment