It’s no secret that Dan Savage hates us. In fact, with the end of Rick Santorum’s political career, we’re now fighting with Mark Driscoll for #1 on Dan’s list of People He Hates.

So, if we’re his “least favorite blog,” who’s ahead of us?

Introducing another of our new, irregular features: Blogs Dan Savage Likes More Than Us.

At the last authors’ meeting, the group centered on the man that made the following comment:

Metroblogging Seattle is the Seattle Weekly of blogs: a day late, too mainstream to be a real blog, and thus irrelevant, yet strangely popular with similarly clueless readers.

Posted by: Gomez | November 6, 2006 09:08 AM

Unfortunately, I realized who Gomez was — I’d actually met him at the last USSMariner Pizza Feed. And I said this out loud. And saying something like this out loud in a meeting is the same thing as volunteering.

So, here’s an interview with baseball fan and humanities major Stephen Gomez, today’s blogger beloved by Dan Savage. Did I say humanities major? Yeah, maybe it’s more like a discourse. It’s over 2500 words long.

On a Slog comment thread, you called us “the Seattle Weekly of blogs.” What did you mean by that, and look, we don’t want to give you any suggestions, but corporate down in Phoenix thought you might consider finding another job….

Ah, the Weekly, the shinier, corporately networked (and, it appears, edited) of the alt-weeklies. Every major city’s got a weekly paper like the Seattle Weekly, which is run by the major conglomerate now known as Village Voice/New Times Media. The papers of this conglomerate, all across America, look the same, read the same, have the same general types of stories, and when doing features on city hot-spots, restaurants, events… funny how they gravitate to the same overpriced, overhyped stuff than the mainstream media likes to do. They read like one of those weekend newspaper inserts.

In cities with two or more weeklies, it’s the one no one really reads, other than to find something to do on the weekend. It’s regurgitating common knowledge and mainstream media party-lines. You learn little from
reading it, and it sparks very little original thought.

So, yeah, I look at Seattle Metblog and see similar material. Looking at the blog right now, one of the top links is Zee Grega advertising the Best of the Northwest exhibit, which is something you’ll probably see referenced in the Seattle Times, in the Seattle Weekly, and on the news, a benign event for the mainstream. RIght below it is a post about ACS’s Great American Smokeout, which then links to… a P-I article.

We already watch the news and read the papers. Blog readers want to see something different or against the grain, a different take… not more of the same. Less about bands, shows, overcrowded mainstream Best of Seattle
festivals, readings and places we’ve already been… and more original stuff, thoughts, discourse.

A few months ago, I could have said the same thing about Seattlest, which operates under the same kind of network… but they’ve gotten a bit more creative.

How about a side of discourse with that Mainstream sandwich? And, in anticipating the next question, I think that’s what the Slog offers, even when it itself links to more of the same: discourse. A different take. Sure, there are some posts about the same news everyone’s talking about, and sure, there’s a post about last night’s episode of reality show du jour, but it’s not all there really is to see. There is a lot of ranting and different takes from the usual grain.

I think Seattle Metblog can branch out and do a lot more, away from the usual stuff, is all. I see a bit of it and even see some now (Aaron O writing Jean Godden about the viaduct and posting her reply was pretty interesting stuff). There is potential that isn’t being explored enough.

I disagree about us being the Weakly, though. P-I/Times regurgitator? We’re certainly guilty of that (although it’s gone the other way more than once). But we’re not underpaid corporate shills writing poorly researched stories. We’re unpaid, for one thing, unlike the Stranger writers and a few of the Seattlest people. And I think we’ve consciously focused on Seattle-area blogs and news and media because there’s already BoingBoing and MeFi and countless other global group blogs and filters and aggregators. At what point do you draw the line here between “focusing on local events” and “regurgiating BoingBoing?” Where does the line between opinion and advocacy get drawn?

There is the valid point that the Metbloggers are working without pay whereas the Stranger’s bloggers are paid staff writers. Clearly, there is a different level of demand and expectation, but also a different level of freedom, that comes from each perspective.

Being journalists (technically), the Stranger writers have more resources w/r/t connections and contacts (they can speak on a conversational level with city hall staffers and promoters, for example) than the rest of us. This adds a lot to their blog that a lot of us don’t have it our writing.

At the same time, they face news deadlines and as a result, it focuses their blogging topics on serious, thought provoking local issues. However, it does sharpen their focus and can limit their scope of discussion. I’m sure, for example, if Erica C. Barnett wasn’t a staff writer for the Stranger, that she’d spend nearly as much time dwelling on and discussing the viaduct issue as she does, and talk more about other issues and items that have her interest. If he wasn’t covering Darcy Burner’s run for Congress, I’m sure Eli Sanders has a lot of other things he’d love to talk about.

And this is where Metblogs can have an advantage. You guys can branch out and talk about honestly anything you wish, when you wish, as long as it’s relevant to Seattle. And you’re not simultaneously facing the pressure of a weekly deadline. And of course, no editor’s gonna pull your blog entries and say, Ahem, don’t like it, rewrite it the way I want, plz. You can do what you want to do within reason. Freedom!

Now does it mean posting a link for every craft show and Showbox gig that comes up? Well… that’s the prerogative of the writers, but there’s a LOT more material out there. Seattle is a crazy place where a lot’s always going on. There is an equalizing factor between the Stranger and Metblog. They have the connections and paychecks, you guys have the greater freedom in subject matter and expression.

Aside: Honestly, these are reasons I’ve never considered asking to write for the Stranger. I don’t get much from my own blog, save for token readership, but I can write what I wish when I wish.

The Weekly… I can agree that you’re fundamentally different and more editorially free from the writing staff of the Weekly, which has spent the months since the VV/NTM merger elevating its Tool status (and I’m not talking “Undertow”).

Here’s a better way to put it: Seattle Metblog is not modeled like the Weekly… though over time it had often read like the Weekly. As stated, we’re seeing better material and flashes of good stuff here and there. You’re getting somewhere… even if Savage has a bone to pick here and there, and people like me still say things like, “You guys read like the Weekly.”

Why does Dan Savage like you more than us?

Beats me. Kinda fresh coming from a guy so easily willing to rip Seattle’s metblog, but I’m not really sure. He’s taken a liking to some of my commentary, but I wouldn’t think any more than others who chime in on the Slog and the Forums.

I met him at the paper’s Hump! porn festival, and he’s actually a friendly and witty guy, not as biting as he can be in his articles or on the Slog. He remarked how he likes my ‘civil discourse,’ which struck me as odd given my tendency to call people out during discussions when I disagree or respond bluntly when I find something striking or hold a bad opinion.

Maybe there’s a realization there: we come across as far more blunt in text than we often are in real life (or IRL as the kids say on the internet). Our voices and body language can take tones that give subtext to our words; in text there is only the text of your words for interpretation.

I suppose this is a great time to clarify: In the Slog comments which have sparked this interview… I took a shot at the redundant blandness of what I saw from this blog, basically in response to Dan’s commentary on it. I compared it to the redundant blandness of the Seattle Weekly. My opinion of this blog isn’t that strong, and there’s actually a point there. I read this over a period and didn’t think much of what I read. So go figure I wrote what turned out to be such a strong opinion on my indifference. However, it was in response to whatever indignation he took at the time, to not take it so much to heart.

As I stated above, this blog has potential. Take it not as a slam of your existence, but as an opportunity to critique and improve… even if the critique is a bit harsh.

At least it’s nice to know someone is at least reading us enough to form an opinion.

Hey, it’s good to know your local blogosphere.

Better Mariners manager: Dan Savage or Mike Hargrove?

Dan Savage would probably have never asked for nor played a bigot like Carl Everett, so that alone makes him a much smarter man.

Then again, if he ever learned how right-wing leaning and homophobic many players and executives in baseball were, he’d likely run screaming from Safeco Field well before Opening Day’s bottom of the 1st inning. That is, if all the spitting tobacco juice and dugout littering didn’t drive him nuts first.

And yet I love baseball. Hey, you take the bad with the good.

I could see Savage managing in a Barney the Purple Dinosaur suit if the M’s still had Everett.

I can see Savage screwing with Everett’s head.

Dan: Great at-bat, Carl, watching that 90 mph fastball down the pike for strike three. Here, be a doll and hold my buttplugs.
Carl: Fuck you.
Dan: Oh, what was that? ‘Dan, please bench me and give Chris Snelling my spot in the lineup.’?
Carl: Dammit ::holds buttplugs::
Dan: Good man. And careful with those things. There might be santorum on them.

Speaking of bad, is there a free agent out there that would drive you from the M’s if they were to sign them? I mean, besides giving $15M a year to Barry Zito.

Unlike many Mariner fans, I wasn’t fully repulsed when I heard the M’s weren’t bidding for Japanese star Daisuke Matsuzaka… especially when they announced the final posting fee ($51 mil just to TALK to a guy!).

I know Chuck Armstrong and Howard Lincoln have fundamentally flawed philosophies on how to run a ballclub, but honestly, most executives in baseball do, and many of these teams still win.

Is George Steinbrenner any smarter than others in baseball because he can millions of dollars more on his Yankees than other owners can on their teams? The Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim in Orange County California aren’t particularly smart with regards to who they’re loyal to or how they promote their team, and the reason Mariner fans like me hate them so much is because they keep winning anyway. And before they hit the gold mine last year, the White Sox spent years throwing money at the wrong guys and fielding mediocre, boring teams. Their philosophy didn’t really change: they just got a confrontation ex-player to manage the team and four really good starting pitchers.

If owners and executives can win titles by throwing crap at the wall and seeing what sticks, I don’t see how Howie and Chuck can’t either. After all, from the mythical ‘95 season until a few years ago, the M’s were a winner, with the same guys calling the same shots.

As for what would drive me away… remember when, at the USS Mariner feed at Piecora’s, some guy came by after we met and went on about how the team should trade Ichiro and just replace him with whoever (I remember you were not amused). I think losing Ichiro to trade or free agency would do it for me, and I’m not a particularly big Ichiro fan either. I just understand what he’s meant to this team, far beyond being a good, speedy leadoff hitter and great outfielder. People don’t realize that he’s an ICON in Japan, like Babe Ruth was in the US decades ago. He’s brought the Mariners a giant Japanese fanbase that, if he leaves, isn’t gonna pay to see Kenji Johjima and Tomo Ohka. And yet he’s talked about as if he’s just another leadoff guy, like Juan Pierre. “Just trade Ichiro and go get
Gary Matthews Jr.” Uh, Japanese girls don’t walk up to Safeco between games to take pictures in front of Willie Bloomquist’s wall picture, and no matter how good he is, they sure as hell won’t pay for tickets to see Gary Matthews. You’re not just replacing VORP and runs created here. Keep him and give him the Dan Wilson treatment at the end of his career: he’s only 15 times the hitter Dan Wilson was.

How’s NaNoWriMo been working out for you?

Unlike previous years, where writer’s block slammed me against a wall after about 10,000 words, I’ve got a good story this year that never leaves me at a loss for subject matter. Inspired by the works of Geoffrey Chaucer during my classes, I decided to write the text for a modern-day sendup of the Canterbury Tales, using a plane crash in the middle of nowhere as the backdrop for 30-40 travelers to tell their tales as a time-killing contest while awaiting rescue.

Work and school have left me running behind. While school inspired this work, school itself coincidentally cut into time I’d like to spend writing. While I’d like to get in the requisite 50,000 words, I’d also like to pass the Chaucer class that has inspired it, so I can earn my Humanities degree in timely fashion.

When I do get to sit down, I can pound out 2500 words in an hour. Years and years of writing lengthy blog entries made writing thousands of words at once easy for me. Last weekend, I scheduled two 1-hour blocks of time
on each day just to sit down and focus on writing, and that worked wonders.

The issue is mixing those in: I’m sitting at about 11,000 words as I type this. Granted, I also had a midterm and a major paper to work on this month, among other real-life errands. I’ve already planned several hour-long blocks of time for this weekend. I actually plan to catch up to about 28,000 words by Sunday night (despite another midterm, which I’m much better prepared for), and then, with less going on next week, I’ll be ahead of pace.

I just talked way too much about my writing. Next question!

Favorite Gomez song?

For my disdain of the mainstream, I’m like the Top 40 charts: my favorite songs evolves over time.

Right now, the best song ever is “Holy Ghost” by the Bar-Kays.

Money Talks is a great piece of 70s soul. But didn’t you know there was a band named Gomez?

Growing up in Vegas, the music my parents were into in the early 80’s was the R&B and funk. I’m not a huge material guy, but one thing I wish my father had held onto, when he ditched his Jeep for a Harley, was the scores of funk CD’s he had in the 100 disc changer he had installed in the Jeep. I guess he threw it in when he sold it. I remember riding with him in the Jeep sometimes, and him bumping the Bar-Kays, Kool and the Gang, the Brothers Johnson, T-Connection, Earth Wind & Fire and all else on that stereo louder than the wind blowing by as we drove down the highway.

I do know about Gomez, and I remember a friend back in Vegas who worked at the coffeehouse I hung out at, who told me about them and played their music for me, for obvious reason. I’m not sure if you’re a fan or not, but I’m not a big fan of the indie and folk rock. I wished a band with my namesake played some harder music. But to each their own, and it’s certainly not bad.

Of course, I still had to joke that I was gonna find them and curbstomp them for using my name to make crappy music.

Thank you Gomez.

If Dan Savage loves your blog more than us and you’d like to submit to an interview, click on “Suggest A Story” on the right and give us a shoutout. Or click here.