For some inexplicable reason my local news outlet didn't report that today was the great Megan Fox Boycott. A group of websites, primarily those known for purveying scantily clad nubiles (fyi I decided nubile makes a good noun, so feel free to use it as one from now on) decided that Megan Fox was overexposed (ha, catch that double meaning?) and that they wouldn't publish any reports or pictures of her today.
What?
1. It's my right to have Megan Fox pictures, every day of the year. Twice a day. I have a prescription.
2. What celebrity isn't overexposed? That's kind of the definition. Though I certainly admit that Megan Fox "suffers" from overexposure more than most, especially in recent months.
3. Do these sites realize how the internet works? I can still access the thousands upon thousands of open-mouthed pictures of Megan Fox posted over the last 2 years. Not posting any pictures today isn't much of a statement. If they were really sick of her they'd take down their personal stockpiles. And they'd have a longer fast than 24 hours.
4. I'm guessing Megan Fox is in support of the Megan Fox Boycott. Because sites proclaiming their boycott did in fact post pictures of Megan Fox when they announced their boycott. And other sites are proclaiming Megan Fox Boycott Boycotts. They've just invented a new way to pay attention to Megan Fox. Congratulations.
The Megan Fox Boycott. Glad the internet is finally using its clout to make the world a better place.
No comments:
Post a Comment