Taking something seriously and pursuing it with passion is far riskier. People might laugh at you. You might be wrong. You might fail. You certainly won't be considered hip. It is far easier to stand aside and joke when things seem to be going to hell in a handbasket.

But if we just stand aside and joke, we pretty much guarantee that they will.

Of course, Gawker is intended to appeal to those within the media bubble, and it obviously appeals to them in a very big way. This may have something to do with the hipsterism. The media is in the business of planting your butt in front of the tube and feeding you commercials, for the most part. So passivity (with the important exception of swiping the credit card, which the store clerk will happily do for you anyway) is viewed as a desirable trait by that industry. Moving around and getting too opinionated and involved with stuff just screws up the demographic modeling and makes it harder for them to do their jobs. Sit down, shut up, and don't touch that dial. Please don't touch that dial. (I've already said too much about TV in another piece, though. Let me wrap up my thoughts on risk-taking versus detached irony.)

I may be accused of advocating the tilting at windmills, I realize. Many of the problems we see seem so overwhelming, so much larger than ourselves, that we feel helpless against them. In the face of such problems, it seems almost pointless to lead a charge against them. It would be nicer to joke about them.

The problems are so big.

They seem so insurmountable.

It does give one pause.

(Obligatory pause...)

What the hell. I happily plead guilty.

Hand me that lance, Sancho.