skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Last time I discussed Twitter on this site, I was making fun of it. I said that I didn't see the point of it, and I said that I would never start an account.
I lied.
I got an Twitter account sometime last fall, and I've noticed a number of benefits that weren't evident before I joined the site. For one, I like that I can follow publications and celebrities to get up-to-the-minute information on new stories, or new material from my favorite artists. I also like being able to share links instantly with friends without having to wait for them to check their Facebook profile. So yeah, it's not all bad.
Having said that, though, I must admit that I can only check up on Twitter periodically. If I go on too often, I usually just get frustrated. Why, you ask? Well, because most of the tweets I see on my timeline are bullsh*t. Now, this isn't a knock at any specific people that I follow (OK, maybe it is), but I just feel like a lot of people put inconsequential stuff on Twitter without realizing that no one cares at all. Twitter is supposed to be used as a social networking tool, but I find that far too many people use it just to write down all of their thoughts, as if Twitter were some sort of a public journal. Or the Internet's equivalent of talking to yourself out loud. I don't mean to be rude, but trust that neither I nor any of your other followers care that you're craving IHOP or that you lost your favorite pair of socks. That's not interesting. So, to help some of your hapless saps who tweet without any discretion, I have come up with three very simple rules to make your tweets more follow-friendly. I find that if your tweets fall outside of these three basic tenets, you're probably just typing nonsense. I call them "The Twitter Rules."
Yesterday, I was online checking out new music and I saw something that caught my attention. Gucci Mane had a new song featuring Talib Kweli. If you know anything about hip-hop, you understand why this is a big deal. Kweli has made a career for himself by being a top-notch lyricist with socially conscious rhymes, while Gucci's rhymes are mostly about jewelry and not much else. As someone who's been following Kweli's career closely, I was truly disappointed. And I wasn't the only one; when he mentioned on Twitter last month that he might do a song with Gucci, a number of his fans got so upset that they unfollowed him. He might think that his fans are being close-minded, but I understand why they were bothered. For someone with Kweli's talent and skill, doing songs with a hack of an artist for the sake of some publicity and a nice paycheck is a slap in the face to the people who have been riding with him since day one. It's a middle finger to the people who know he's better than Gucci, and it almost tells them that he would rather dumb it down with rappers worse than him than display his skills on his own.
I'll give one more (weaker but still slightly appropriate) parallel. In the movie "The Godfather Part II", Mafia leader Michael Corleone is almost killed in an assassination attempt at his home. Although the attempt is unsuccessful, Michael draws the conclusion that the attempt had to have been carried out with the help of someone within his inner circle. Come to find out, the betrayer was his brother Fredo, who accidentally let some secret information slip to some people who wanted Michael dead. When Michael approaches Fredo, he grabs his face, kisses him, and tells him, "I know it was you, Fredo. You broke my heart." After that, Fredo is as good as dead to Michael, who acts as if Fredo never existed. Towards the end of the movie, Michael eventually welcomes Fredo back into his life. But then in the end, he has him killed.
What LeBron James did last night reminded me a little of both Talib Kweli and Fredo Corleone. Choosing Miami was like doing a song with Gucci Mane. It was a complete disregard for his skill, and he deferred to a lesser talent instead of creating a better product on his own. Leaving Cleveland was like Fredo betraying Michael. Although the intent may not have been malicious, he could have single-handedly destroyed an entire organization.
Which brings me to the title of this post: Why I think LeBron James is a bitch.
Well, the season is over. Good playoffs, great final game, congrats to the Lakers. Now that that's out the way, I'd like to make a few notes on some observations I made throughout the playoffs that leave some questions for next season (considering there isn't a lockout).
- LeBron James - I've already talked about his free agency, but I think his losing in the second round raises a different question: is he really the key to a title? Has LeBron proven that he will be able to lead a team to a championship? He's super talented, there's no denying that. But I'm not yet convinced that he's going to guarantee his next team a trip to the Finals. People always compare him to Magic Johnson, but as of right now, he's a lot more like Dominique Wilkins.
- Boston Celtics - What happens now? Kevin Garnett isn't great anymore, Ray Allen is a free agent, Sheed might retire, and Doc Rivers might not come back as coach. On top of all that, Tom Thibodeau, the assistant coach that runs their daunted defense, is leaving to be the Bulls' head coach. This whole team could potentially blow up and be a bottom-feeder. What a shame. (Who am I kidding? That would be great. I hate this team.)
- Dirk Nowitzki - He has a player option on next season and has stated that he'll be testing free agency. There have even been rumors of him maybe signing with the Suns to reunite with his BFF Steve Nash... I do think he should leave Dallas (they're not getting any closer than 2006* again, let's face it), but I don't think Phoenix is the best option. An all-offense player on an all-offense team? And how can he and Frye coexist? I think he fits in better with Chicago, but I guess we'll see if he even leaves at all.
You see that picture? Pretty good, right? He looks nice in that orange and blue, don't you agree?
I think so. Of course, that clearly has everything to do with my being a Knicks fan, and us not having a star in God knows how long (although David Lee made the All-Star Game this year, shout-out to him). Considering his free agent status is t-minus 42 days, nothing would be better for us than seeing LBJ play in MSG.
Of course, we all knew this was coming. LeBron's impending free agency has been anticipated for the past 2 or 3 seasons, and the Knicks (along with a few other teams) have been preparing for it. Hiring Donnie Walsh as our General Manager was a great first step, as he's been able to give us the salary cap space that the last two losers spent so much time trying to throw away. But even after we had the money, I still had one concern: the Cleveland Cavaliers. I knew that if LeBron won a championship with the Cavs, the likelihood of him leaving would probably diminish. After all, what superstar leaves a team after they win a title?
As we all know now, that didn't happen. Despite winning 61 games this season, the Cavs blew it in the second round, losing to the Celtics in a Game 6 in which they didn't even seem to be trying at times. Personally, I was ecstatic. I was rooting for them to lose for my own selfish reasons, and it was probably the first time I rooted for Boston since 2002. When it was all over, Knicks fans everywhere rejoiced. Our chance had come! For a team that hasn't been to the Finals in 11 years, the Cavs' loss was our biggest win in years.
But what now? Free agency doesn't start until July 1, yet it still hasn't stopped everyone from speculating where LeBron might go and what his reason for going will be. I've heard he was staying in Cleveland because he's a loyal native of Ohio. I've heard he was leaving the Cavaliers because Delonte West slept with his mother. I've heard he would only sign with a team if they hired John Calipari as a coach. I've heard he was going to Chicago to play with Derrick Rose and Joakim Noah. I've heard it all. And then, of course, there's Worldwide Wes.
Truth is, none of us really know where LeBron will end up. He's getting the max contract either way, so you know there are only a number of teams that are capable of getting him (including the Cavs, who can actually offer him the most money due to the Larry Bird Exception). Do I hope he goes to New York? Of course. Will I cry if he doesn't? Of course. But I won't pretend that I know he'll definitely be a Knick, because I don't. Realistically? I think it's between us, the Cavs, and the Bulls. Because Miami is Wade's town, and who really wants to play for the Clippers, Nets, Wizards or Kings?
In the end, though, all I can do is hope. Because no one really knows. So if you hear any more news about where LeBron will go this summer, just ignore it. Chances are, they're just making up some news to keep themselves entertained since this year's playoffs have been so boring. Oh well.
Last night, I was lurking around on Twitter when I started to notice a few people commenting on ABC Nightline's latest special entitled, "Why Can't a Successful Black Woman Find a Man?" Provocative title, but it's nothing we as black people haven't already discussed ad nauseum. I was watching the NBA Playoffs, so I didn't bother to switch channels, but after I saw some outstanding responses from a number of people on twitter, I decided to see what all the fuss was about. So I logged onto Nightline's website to check the special out for myself.
Personally, I found the special to be well done, and felt that there were a lot of things discussed that weren't a part of the usual discussion on this topic. For one, I especially liked the point Hill Harper made about black men and women failing to be each other's friends. He argued that much of the disconnect between genders come from a lack of communication. When women get man advice from other women and men get woman advice from other men, everybody ends up being misinformed.
I also enjoyed Steve Harvey's point that many successful black women refuse to date men that aren't on the same social level that they're on, but they fail to realize that they are often the key piece that a man needs to get to that level. Harper repeatedly talked about dating a man for his potential as opposed to dating a man for what he currently has, and I'm not sure if the women on the panel ever really grasped what he meant at the end of the night.
Above all, I believe that the best point raised came at the end of the night from a woman in the audience.
Last time I discussed Twitter on this site, I was making fun of it. I said that I didn't see the point of it, and I said that I would never start an account.
