Slog - The Stranger's Blog

Line Out

The Music Blog

« DL with Darcy Burner | Darcy Burner Watch »

Wednesday, April 5, 2006

The Return of Seattle’s Smaller Weekly Watch

Posted by DAN SAVAGE on April 5 at 11:14 AM

We discontinued Seattle’s Smaller Weekly Watch a few months ago after the slaughter rule kicked in—we were 16 and 20 pages bigger than our arch enemies for a few weeks running, and writing SSWW every week felt like picking on the retarded kid. So why is SSWW back? Well, because Weekly partisans—Weekly employees all (hi, Chuck!)—would spin elaborate conspiracy theories in our forums and comments about why I didn’t bring it back this week.

For the Week of April 6-13, 2006:

Seattle Weekly: 112
The Stranger: 108

The last time they were bigger than us was December 15, 2005. This week’s paper is a regular issue for The Stranger, and a special issue for Seattle Weekly.

Yes, it’s the Weekly’s tepidly-anticipated fashion issue, which begs the question: Would you take fashion advice from this guy? Or this guy? You probably shouldn’t take fashion advice from this guy either, but that last guy doesn’t tell you what to wear, now does he?

(Oh, and about that t-shirt… When I spoke at the University of Missouri, the gay group was in hot water over a drag show they had sponsored and a kinda, sorta filthy t-shirt they had handed out. I wore the t-shirt in solidarity with the belegured gay group. While it’s true that my boyfriend is probably better hung than yours, that’s not the sort of thing I would normally wear a t-shirt proclaiming.)

Permalink

CommentsRSS icon

1

Why are local media outlets always sniping at each other like bratty kids? It is annoying, it's tired, and it's only interesting to people who work at these papers. Readers don't care.

Posted by gene | April 5, 2006 12:20 PM

2

Gotta disagree with Gene.  Granted, it's a bit juvenile, but along with the rest of the Slog it has the West-Wing-ish appeal of a peek at the non-public (or at least less public) faces behind the finished product.

Posted by lostboy | April 5, 2006 12:29 PM

3

i should have said *most* readers don't care.

Posted by gene | April 5, 2006 12:36 PM

4

there's a poll on this somewhere?

Posted by gnossos | April 5, 2006 12:39 PM

5

So what does it take to get you to speak at a college, Dan?

Posted by Jonathan | April 5, 2006 12:44 PM

6

Media watchdogging is important, and there's nobody better to do it than the rest of the media-- they know some backstory and can intelligently comment. If you don't want to read about it, Gene, skip right over any posts titled "Seattle's Smaller Weekly Watch." Simple as that.

Posted by giantladysquirrels | April 5, 2006 1:00 PM

7

What does it take to get me to speak at a college? Well, there's my fee. That's pretty straight forward. It's my rider that's a bitch, from fresh sheets to vegan meals to the captain of the lacrosse team being delivered to my hotel room after my speech with three rolls of black duct tape.

Posted by Dan Savage | April 5, 2006 1:08 PM

8

ladysquirrel -- well "Seattle's Smaller Weekly Watch" didn't really mean much to me as a headline. I guess if I'd thought about it for a couple hours before reading the post, I might have figured that the folks at the STranger are actually so lame that they count the number of pages in the Weekly every week to see who's, um, bigger. But hey, ladysquirrel, if your idea of "media watchdogging" is counting the number of pages in the Weekly, well, by all means, enjoy!

Posted by gene | April 5, 2006 1:12 PM

9

you don't have to count them, dude. you just have to flip to the back and look at the number in the corner.

Posted by annie | April 5, 2006 1:27 PM

10

You really think the trust the numbering done by the Seattle Weekly? You must be mad!

Posted by gene | April 5, 2006 1:32 PM

11

I think the shirt isnt saying my boyfriend's unit is bigger than your boyfriends unit, I think its saying my unit is bigger than your boyfriends unit. Or like, otherwise superior to your boyfriends unit. The subject unit would be yours, Dan, not your boyfriends.

Posted by to clarify | April 5, 2006 2:43 PM

12

Oh, UMSL...only in places like Missouri would a shirt as relatively tame like that get you in trouble.

Posted by Megan | April 6, 2006 1:13 AM

13

I anticipate SSWW each week because my theory, rather my gut feeling, is that when the Weakly gets down to 64 pages, pages 31 and 32 will reveal an incredibly sculpted "six pack". Go Weakly, you can spin it!

Posted by Lloyd Clydesdale | April 6, 2006 1:23 PM

14

Quality vs. quantity ... I say size doesn't matter. You may be a few pages bigger, but you'll always be a pipsqueak.

Posted by libby | April 7, 2006 11:06 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).