Lesson on physics: a stone sinks deeper if it keeps on digging

May 31

Lesson on physics: a stone sinks deeper if it keeps on digging

Written by DJ on Saturday, May 31st, 2008 at 6:41 am
Filed under:media, News | Tags:China, earthquake, Hollywood, media
Add comments

Alright, I have to concede, after a few days of reflection, that I might have been a bit too harsh on Sharon Stone.

Some of the commentators, both on this blog and else where, have suggested/recommended leaving her alone for it was not worth the ink (or the LCD backlight decay) to argue over her remarks. I see the wisdom of such perspectives now. All I really should have done is to stand aside and watch her pushing the proverbial high heel and the attached flesh ever deeper down into her throat.

So Sharon, please keep going. And would you like a bigger shovel?

PS: Could anyone explain to me why Google News, when the term “Sharon Stone” is queried, would return a top ranked link titled “Actress Stone Contrite Over China Comments” whereas the referenced NYT article is actually titled “Actress Stone and Dior Differ Over Apology”?

There are currently no comments highlighted.

17 Responses to “Lesson on physics: a stone sinks deeper if it keeps on digging”

Opersai Says:
May 31st, 2008 at 6:45 am
maybe the google is a little slow to catch on? I mean it might take a little while for the search engine to realize the wind of the news has changed. Just guessing.
Nimrod Says:
May 31st, 2008 at 7:09 am
She really isn’t worth the ink of another post. I mean, there are dozens of Sharon Stones mouthing off every day and people will forget in a week. I hope we talk about things of more permanence than that.
DJ Says:
May 31st, 2008 at 7:19 am
Nimrod,

You are right. I actually had a line while drafting this post that promised I would never post another entry about Sharon Stone. I took it out only because it didn’t fit with the overall light hearted tone of the article.

Seriously, I feel my rage was wasted.
DJ Says:
May 31st, 2008 at 7:55 am
Opersai,

I suspected the same thing. However, it would suggest that NYT editors initially assigned the title “Actress Stone Contrite Over China Comments” without bothering reading the actual article at first. Now how could such a premier news outlet be so presumptuous of what the actual reporting would turn up before the facts are known? … Hmm, never mind my question.
bill t Says:
May 31st, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Could anyone explain to me why Google News …

It is all part of the anti-China conspiracy, obviously.

Also, did you read the whole article? Because it says at the end that she was “contrite” and it said that she said she looked like a fool for saying those things. I guess facts you don’t like are just filtered out of your head. It did say that she contested Dior’s version of her apology.

Also, about the google anti-China conspiracy funded by the CIA, newspapers often change their ledes online. And not only to fuel your imagined anti-China paranoia.
yo Says:
May 31st, 2008 at 4:15 pm
@Bill
Are you trying to manufacture an argument and a position that DJ didn’t take(or anyone else here) so that you can insult him? Buddy, you got to chill out, and stop fighting shadows that aren’t there.
DJ Says:
May 31st, 2008 at 4:23 pm
bill t,

I didn’t criticize Google News. I don’t see any sense how a search engine service based mostly on generic algorithms could be evaluated for humanly intentions in the results it produces. Well, it’s not infrequent that I see Google News places links to Xinhua high on the rank. I was actually curious on how frequently Google News’ data gathering process would refresh its database (because as a researcher I always like to peek under the hood to figure out how things work.)

I have read the whole article before posting. If I had the time and intention to actually quote and analyze the content of the article, I surely would have noted the last part of the piece. But in this case, I just felt alerting readers to that article was sufficient. After all, the eventual title selected by the NYT is good enough to summarize the matter.
Opersai Says:
May 31st, 2008 at 5:11 pm
bill t:

Please pardon my reading skills. I do remember the article say:

She admitted that her comments suggesting that karmic retribution may have caused the devastating earthquakes in China were blithering.

‘Let’s get serious here. You guys know me very well. I’m not going to apologize. I’m certainly not going to apologize for something that isn’t real and true — not for face creams.’

So, REALLY, REALLY pardon my reading skills. I could not see how she was “contrite” when she don’t want to apologize for the karma comment at all.
snow Says:
May 31st, 2008 at 6:00 pm
China and her people have marvelously survived even more “subtle” and “sophisticated” yet nonetheless more malicious and damaging insults orchestrated often by the “brightest minds” and most articulate of the leading members of international community for more than half a century now…. Let her remain un-apologized, let’s ignore her completely and move on.
EugeneZ Says:
May 31st, 2008 at 6:55 pm
I checked comments on TMZ, a tabloid news website, and realized that most of people there disagree with her comments, or have a low regard for her anyway. So let us move on, this is not a serious issue for China, it is a serious problem for her.

To become a truely confident nation, China (or Chinese people) does not need to play the victim role everytime someone says insulting things in the public about China. Reject her comments, point out how low she is, then move on.
Buxi Says:
June 1st, 2008 at 12:24 am
As a sign of the Chinese consumer’s growing importance… here’s what LVMH’s Managing Director said today:

LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA, the world’s largest luxury-goods maker, urged its model Sharon Stone to clarify remarks suggesting a May 12 earthquake may have been “karma” for China’s policies on Tibet.

“If there is a possibility of putting things in the right perspective, coming from the heart, I think that is the best thing to do,” Group Managing Director Antonio Belloni said at a luxury-goods conference in Tokyo today. The comments from Stone, who appears in advertisements for LVMH’s Christian Dior cosmetics and perfumes, were “unfortunate,” he added.

“If she doesn’t agree, I think we have to acknowledge she doesn’t agree and detach us from her,” Belloni said. Stone has apologized, Xinhua News Agency reported.

Sounds like he’s talking about something more broad/serious than just removing her from Chinese-language advertisements. I think Sharon’s getting the message however, and is probably working on her heart-felt apology speech as we speak.
Buxi Says:
June 1st, 2008 at 12:25 am
Looks like I’m a little slow. Here’s her actual apology, “with her own words”:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/31/sharon.stone/

“Yes, I misspoke,” said the statement released by Stone’s publicist and entitled “In my own words by Sharon Stone.”

“I could not be more regretful of that mistake. It was unintentional. I apologize. Those words were never meant to be hurtful to anyone,” Stone said. “They were an accident of my distraction and a product of news sensationalism.”
Chinawatcher Says:
June 1st, 2008 at 11:55 am
@ Opersai, who said:

So, REALLY, REALLY pardon my reading skills. I could not see how she was “contrite” when she don’t want to apologize for the karma comment at all.

–

Opersai, I’m not holding a brief for Sharon Stone (although I wish I were, if you know what I mean… 🙂 ), but there is a rational explanation that fits both circumstances.

Her refusal to apologise was articulated to Dior honchos, to whom she said: “Let’s get serious here. You guys know me very well. I’m not going to apologize. I’m certainly not going to apologize for something that isn’t real and true — not for face creams.’”

But to the New York Times reporter, she expressed her sense of contrition – and acknowledged that she did in fact sound blithering.

In other words, going by her statement to NYT, she is remorseful about her Cannes statement – enough to acknowledge that she does look like an idiot – but points out (factually) that she did not say that the earthquake was karmic retribution. (The karma connection is something she considered when the quake happened, she acknowledges, but was convinced by the Tibetan Foundation’s compassionate gesture enough to realise that the only thing to do in times of crises is to bow your head and offer your service -and not think of karma).

But contrite though she is, she doesn’t believe she wants to sell her soul by issuing a public apology (for something she did not actually say) – merely to sell a few more jars of face creams (which is what Dior wants to do).
DJ Says:
June 2nd, 2008 at 3:18 am
For your amusement, here is the reaction from Dior when contacted regarding Stone’s NYT interview:

Dior China’s publicity official reached by the Beijing Times threw oil on fire by saying that Sharon Stone is having an “unstable mood”.

“We don’t know whether we overestimate or underestimate her IQ,” The Dior official said adding, “We just hope that her latest statement was not for a new-round hype. It is out of our control in this complicated situation when she accepted other media’s interviews.”
DJ Says:
June 2nd, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Chinawatcher,

So the most favorable reading of Stone’s words merely shows her contemptuous pity towards the millions of killed and displaced. I fail to see how it helps the matter.
pmw Says:
July 30th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
Maybe she’s just contrite over loss of green, and her Karma comment is the cause of that. Now she may be ‘forced’ to forgo her integrity and sell her soul for facial creams. So yeah, I think she’s contrite over the comment.
pmw Says:
July 30th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Gee was I late. Somehow this became the top post on my screen and I clicked.
Yeah, it’s not worth it.

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Page not found - Sweet Captcha

Error 404

It look like the page you're looking for doesn't exist, sorry

Sweet Captcha is about living the sweet life. I’m Alexa and I’m all about travel, life, design, blogging, business, marketing and more. There is a lot to life and I don’t think you should put yourself in a box.