My Qualifications


A commenter on my Jimmy Fallon post asks:

What qualifies someone to write reviews on late night television? A bachelor of arts degree from a community college?

Now, technically, everybody is equally qualified to write reviews on late-night television, and everybody does, especially in the internet era. (Twittering while watching Jimmy Fallon is the modern equivalent of running to the phone after the performance to call in your review to the late-night copy boy at the paper.) But, on consideration, he has a point. If I’m not qualified, then someone could be fooled into agreeing with me only to discover that I wasn’t qualified, and therefore am totally wrong.

Even worse, let’s say someone disagrees with me and then discovers I am qualified. This is a legitimate danger. Sometimes I disagree with what somebody writes, but then I discover that he or she has all the necessary qualifications and credentials, meaning that I have no right to disagree with them. That makes me look bad, always having to change my opinion to fit the qualifications of whoever I’m reading.

So while I have to get my own credentials in order, I will say that these are the educational qualifications for writing about late-night television. If someone doesn’t have at least three of these on the list, that person is wrong even when he’s right.

– Bachelor of arts degree from community college
– Thetan level over IV but under VII
– Runner-up certificate from National Arts Centre Young Playwrights’ Competition
– Ability to describe an entire Jack Paar episode from beginning to end, not just the bits that are on YouTube
– Friendship with Marshall McCluhan
– Willingness to waste time writing sarcastic posts

Filed under:

My Qualifications

  1. This is more like it. I much prefer over the top sarcasm, and sentences like “If you’re tired of complaining you’re tired of life” or “Gratitude is death.”, than the pie-in-the-sky hippy vibe that’s often on display here at Macleans.

    • LOL,

      By “pie-in-the-sky hippy vibe” do you mean the commentors, or the writers, or both? ‘Cause if you think Macleans is a literary bastion of hippies (dirty, dirty hippies, lol) I fear you’d have a stroke if you ever met an actual hippie! It seems to me that calling the Macleans vibe “hippie-esque” is like calling the folks at the Fraser Institute “fascists”.

      Maybe I’m just a crazy hippie, but calling the vibe here “pie-in-the-sky hippie” sound like the sort of characterization one would make if one were high.

  2. By dropping strict grammatical considerations and going with the more plebian “whoever” over the elite-mandated, grammar-nazi “whomever”, your couch creds are worthy of mad props. Unless it was a dropped keystroke, in which case you are over qualified.

  3. Nice.

  4. You’re my hero, Jaime. Unless I find you’re not qualified, in which case you’re not.

  5. Since when they Canada have community colleges? Over here we just call that college. Also, you have to go to university for a Bachelor of Arts, not college.

Sign in to comment.