Not sure buzzfeed had any standards to begin with...
BuzzFeed having "standards" is a pretty loose idea.
That's just a fucked up article no matter what way you view it.
These athletes trained real hard and gave their all - so here's pictures of their spandex genitals.
This isn't acceptable at all, even if it wasn't from buzzfeed. The fuck.
And they don't have any. That's Buzzfeed business model; quantity over quality; fit the biggest audience you can in your articles.
Buzzfeed makes its money by naturally referencing products/entity (i.e.: they feature stuff they were paid to expose by writing articles and creating videos). For example, here the Olympic committee may have paid Buzzfeed to talk about them and hopefully make more people watch the Olympics.
Also, some of Buzzfeed products are made just to attract people and/or keep a stable audience.
On the plus side, most responses to that tweet and article are people just bashing the writer and her post in regards to their blatant hypocrisy.
There's a huge difference between being attracted to someone's appearance, and boiling them down as sex objects to the point of dehumanization. Look at the post. Buzzfeed didn't put out an article of some men. Just dick bulges.
Can you imagine if they made an article on top ten Olympic athlete cameltoes?
At least Buzzfeed is maintaining sanity on the topic of North Korea this week. What a bizarre time we're living in.
That's a bit reassuring
Doubt they get paid by IOC but as you say they make articles with a wide variety to fit the biggest audience
Saying someones attractive is a whole other ballgame, totally acceptable.
The whole notion that men and women shouldn't be attracted to each other's appearance is so absurd...
This is intentional. They are profiting of creating double standards its been a buisness practice of theirs ever sinse people started getting triggered about it.
Curling players probably never have to deal with this shit, but I have to say that the male mixed double player from Norway is attractive.
That’s Buzzfeed News, says so at the top of the page.
I have the extreme urge to give emma mac a high five right now.
Buzzfeed news is actually pretty respectable in their professionalism
Nobody cared because those people don't hold a hypocritical opinion. They don't go out of their way to say we shouldn't objectify men and then do it to women. Buzzfeed however has posted several articles where they say we shouldn't objectify women and then does this. That's what people are complaining and speaking up about, the double speak, not the actual article.
If BuzzFeed didn't have double-standards, they wouldn't have any standards at all.
Hahah... you said "writer" as if making a post on buzzfeed requires any writing.
Im pretty sure it's just a collage of 10 or so photos
This is a truly excellent point! At the heart of it, objectification is about respecting another's humanity. Part of that respect and etiquette is to engage with individuals on the terms they set. It is utterly dehumanizing to reduce a Olympic athlete to a dick bulge, or an expert scientist to her cup size.
There is a huge difference between saying "21 hottest female celebrities" and "11 women's cameltoe that all deserve gold medals."
11 Women's cameltoe and asses that deserve their own medal. - not creepy at all /s
Of course not. They've been doing this with women for a while now.
Hell, Reddit has entire subs dedicated to hot female athletes. For some reason nobody cared about any of that.
Edit: "Oh but that's different because..."
This is a prime example of how even bad publicity is good publicity for them. In the end who cares if they are incredibly hypocritical and have no sense of morals? They're just gonna attract more people to spread it out so more angry people can go to their website in disbelief to then write angry comments that they won't read or care about while still, in turn, giving them more revenue and publicity.
Everyone knows Buzzfeed and everything associating with it is utter trash so why don't we just not give it the light of day?
This reminds me of those things that farmers put in their field to scare away crows.
The above linked article uses hashtags, reaction gifs and pretty much follows Buzzfeed's 'x reasons why' list format....
I feel like people are willing them to be taken seriously by repeating it enough times.
This and then using some of the profits to hire a world class news room that pushes out top tier journalism to confuse the ever-living fuck out of everyone.
Well thats not looking at their genitals, plus by the looks of it they are all models.
What do you mean that they get paid by the IOC on some articles? Why would the IOC give a flying fuck if Buzzfeed was posting click bait articles about their games?
Seriously, I'd love any evidence of the IOC or USOC paying Buzzfeed for an article.
Absolutely bizarre. I don't see how modern US media corporations support in anyway a woman who actively participates in the Holocaust of an entire country. Not only is the corporations act despicable, their actions expose absolute bias: they'd rather praise and give positive media attention to an enslaving, raping, and torturing tyranny in order to black-eye our current Presidency.
I get it, we Democrats aren't supposed to like him. But how dare you prop her up in the name of shaming someone.
Yes. Yes I can. Do you think they will? Will someone? Please.
No those are called Birdspookers
Please stop speaking for people who aren't you.
Or maybe stop freaking out whenever there is a little nudity.
I can understand thinking someone in literal olympian shape is attractive. That's fine. i can understand only watching to oggle the shit out of them (it's about 30% of the reason I watch figure skating). That's fine too. What I have a problem with is so-called journalists, who have repeatedly published articles about everything wrong with sexual harassment, the sexuality of media, and the objectification of women, turning around and publishing this. Because it's a dick, so it's fine. The two-faced narrative they hold is pretty fuckin' obvious.
the exact same thing happened at the last olympics. And it'll more than likely happen at the next ones. Absolutely bullshit, and everyone involved should be fucking fired.
Nobody cared because those people don't hold a hypocritical opinion.
Or a platform. Big difference between a random reddit post and a published article on a 'news' website.
Yet the actual article content is good.
JBL, is that you?
I'm well aware.
Buzzfeed was posting click bait articles
I read that as 'dick bait articles', which would have been strangely appropriate here.
Considering most of those girls were actually modelling, then no, they shouldn't care.
Primary definition of holocaust, "destruction or slaughter on a mass scale".
So yeah any mass killings, keeping forced labor camps where people are worked till they die, and so on can technically be called a holocaust.
Generally though the term holocaust when used outside of connections to the jews is in regards to fire bombings, "nuclear holocaust", and similar such things.
Once N.Korea collapses or is overthrown you'll probably see the word thrown around a lot more in connection to the N.Korea concentration camp setup.
On some articles only, they get paid by IOC external organizations. It's often the case when they make comparison of some products or for their whole "Buy Me That" section (at the start of Buy Me That articles, they usually tell that they get profit from the sales of the showed products).
Edit: Not checking acronyms before writting and assuming meaning of unknown words. My apologies.
actively participates in the Holocaust of an entire country.
I'm not sure you're using that word correctly at all.
They're not really confusing most people, outside of /sub/politics, you'll almost never see anyone talking about "quality" Buzzfeed journalism.
Every post under cameltoe tag is plus 5 year old and contains this notice:
"This post has not been vetted or endorsed by BuzzFeed's editorial staff. BuzzFeed Community is a place where anyone create a post. Learn more or post your buzz!"
So it is a user post that isn't posted by BuzzFeed's staff or endorsed by them on their site or on any other social media like Twitter.
Get more pedantic. I can probably find a shitty buzzfeed article nobody freaked out about for it.
they helped break panama papers and have quite a good rep.
I was shocked to see this article (no, not really) but yeah. Sexual harassment and unnecessary objectification of men is not cool too. I'm surprised an editor approved of this shitty article.
Their investigative journalism is an entirely different company from their clickbait bullshit. One is a valid source, the other isn't.
It depends on what the news is and where the source of said news came from. If Buzzfeed is just rehashing things from Reuters, then it's usually correct if reported correctly as well. Buzzfeed can be a valid source, but most believe it's not a reputable one.
There is such a huge difference between saying someone is hot and rating their genitals that are showing through the clothing they need to wear...
maybe it doesn't that frequently anymore, but articles like this were definitely a thing not that long ago (in this case 2014):
I disagree, it's not dehumanizing to appreciate one particular part of someone's body or life or one particular achievement over others. You can enjoy an athlete's bulge AND appreciate the hard work they put into becoming the champion they are just like you can appreciate a woman's boobs and also like the way she handles her life otherwise why is it not objectifying to only mention their incredible accomplishments but not their body? Isn't that reducing them to a mere work machine? Focusing on someone's body parts doesn't make their accomplishments less amazing and focusing on someone's accomplishments doesn't make them less sexually attractive, the same can be said for someone who isn't attractive but is talented or attractive but untalented.
I find it incredibly hypocritical to expect people to engage with you on terms YOU set. First it doesn't work that way because you can't possibly know what someone's terms are and second, you can't expect someone you don't know to like everything about you or even like you at all. It's not dehumanizing to look at someone's body and find it attractive, sexual attractiveness is a defining drive to better ourselves and there is nothing wrong in appreciating someone's body.
For real. I realize I’m a perv for looking for nip slips and sideboobs, but I don’t see articles dedicated to them.
Websites, sure. But not articles.
Don't forget parts of Reddit consider buzzfeed a valid source too.
Nah, they actually try.
Oh yeah totally fake news amirite guys
It's sorta like aiming for equality by going backwards - now men's reproductive organs get equal time.
Same with cable and how more and more penises are on display.
Maybe we just don't need to show so many naked people. Or show everybody naked. I dunno. I don't think we have a handle on this yet.
"11 women's cameltoe that all deserve gold medals."
you know what blew my mind? When buzzfeed was getting so much attention during the election. Like they had "correspondents" at rallies and debates etc. I was like wtf seriously? Buzzfeed?buzzfeed???!? These guys are next to all the other outlets
Yes, that's my point. They produce very high quality journalism and also produce this type of garbage. It's extremely confusing because you don't know what you're getting.
They hired the former head of Guardian, Politico's Ben Smith, among other super renowned news reporters to provide top quality news...while doing stupid shit like this is what u/saynoob is talking about.
This is pretty much exactly what Cosmo did a while ago:
I already said most of it has been proven true. You can't call something that has evidence behind it "fake". Not a single bullet point in the dossier is provably false, and, many of hte bullet points are provably true. You'd think someone would have proven at least one thing false in all this time, but nope. It's been out publicly for over a year now.
Buzzfeed adds fuel to the whole social justice warrior stereotype.
"Not only do we have standards, we have double of'em!"
You tell them Emma! Damn truth.
Do they not realise that shit like this is massively damaging to the feminist cause? Look through the other articles that Julie Gerstein has published, then it seems that she is actively trying to sabotage feminism.
Sure they do, social justice ideology is their golden one.
It does a good job appealing to it's demo, which is in the teenage to college aged demographic.
Oh man the comments section....
WE LIKE TO LUGE ON FRIDAY NIGHTS MAGGLE
21 hottest asses or 21 nicest pairs of tits would be a comparable article.
No one is saying you cant look at attractive people. They are saying you can't write articles about them being a sack of flesh with nice bulges.
Heres an example of two opinions. One is a reasonable opinion and the other is dehumanising: "I like Margot Robbie because I think she's beautiful and is a great actress" "I like Margot Robbie because she's an actress with massive tits and a big round ass."
One person likes Margot as a person. They find her attractive but acknowledge that she is a person. The other person only likes Margot because she has a good body. To them it doesn't matter what Margot does, good or bad, as long as she looks pretty. Essentially boiling her down to be ass and boobs on legs.
It’s always way too easy to spot you donald posters. So fragile
Jesus christ... Never setting my foot there again
Next up, $1 dictatorship vs $1,000 dictatorship
Same thing happened to me. I was completely shocked at how buzzfeed went from pure clickbait to being considered credible.
Not sure buzzfeed had any standards to begin with...
Some of their videos aren't bad though. Most of them are bad but some of them aren't. Steven Lim's food show is pretty good. He, Adam, and Andrew are pretty entertaining.