So I briefly became a TV Critic this spring. It was fun and I plan to cycle back to it once BIG PROJECT slows down (did I mention I have a BIG PROJECT over the next few weeks? Expect shorter blog posts). Being critic made me ground zero for a lot of spoiler-rage, especially as a few of the titles seemed too spoiler-y for some readers. I don't write my own titles, but I stand by my editors and the delicate dance of luring readers in without revealing too much.
Mostly, though, I am legitimately baffled by spoiler alerts. Oh, I get east coast shows vs west coast shows, for example, but once a show has aired, I am not very sympathetic. To me, the decision not to watch something but to go on the social internet is a choice. It may be a very heavily contingent choice (based on work hours or energy level at night or any number of other factors that might be out of your control), but still a choice.
And it's entirely arbitrary what we consider spoilers and what not. Yesterday I was not able to watch the World Cup final. My sister was arriving from out of town and I needed to grill spatchcocked Cornish Game Hens (my instagram account is mostly food porn), eat dinner with my family, and then clean up. These are choices I made and they led me to two options: First, stay offline. Second, accept that the internet would tell me the game results (as happened).
Not a single person tweeted: Spoiler alert - GOOOAAAALLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!
And I don't understand why not. What makes the finale of Game of Thrones more important not to spoil than a live sporting event? Both are just entertainment.
I continue to try and respect spoilers in my writing and certainly follow the conventions as a critic. I just don't get it.
Anyway, GOOOAAALLLLL! (This one made me cackle with glee, even though I watched it 5 hours after the live event once everyone else in my house was asleep).