You think this is bad, try taking a look at Lifehacker. Sometimes it's like "You should wear pants when you go outside." "Don't literally burn your money." "Use passwords maybe?"

Not most places worth eating in New York you can't (and to head off your complaint, it's an article by someone in New York, on a New York centric website. New York is the appropriate reference frame). Or at least, if you've found a pleasant place that will do that in tasty fashion, that's an amazing find and you…

No one except Jameis’s crew and FSU Twitter has affirmatively come to the conclusion that she wasn’t raped, but OK.

Odd-yeared alumni unite!

No no no no no. He cannot have Haywards. I SHANT ALLOW IT.

+1 to internet folks who probably know each other. ‘07. I also did not do campus ministry.

Thing that is oddly not specified in the article: was he getting paid by these companies?

“the problem is when you have a model that is 5 foot 11 and is 90lbs”

For some reason, I read this entire article as if it concerned Britney Spears the first time through. It was very confusing until I looked closer.

It’s mostly every single thing about how she looks. But RIP? The “Black Widow” chorus? Or “Hot Right Now”? Or Doing It? You don’t get “low rent Rihanna” at all from those? *shrug*

I’d find the video and then try to reenact it. Duh.

Um. Literally this entire article is irony and humor. I’m not saying it’s a great joke, but zero parts of it were said “with almost no humor let alone irony.”

Really? How?! Her publicists and stylists are basically holding up pictures of Rihanna and being like “OK let’s cut your hair like this now.”

Your numbers are way off. 18 BMI at 5’11” corresponds to 128 pounds.

Man, Azealia sure says a lot. Maybe do less, tho. Just....less everything.

Cheap nihilism is boring, man.

The picture they used is literally the entirety of the point, you willfully ignorant doofus. This is not a legal argument about intellectual property permission (that is an argument that only you are having). You're not on Above the Law. It is about the ethical implications of promoting anorexic weight loss. The…

That picture above is not what they used, which you could very easily have found out by clicking the links. That is a "healthy"/recovery picture of her. They used a picture of her at 90 pounds post-anorexia uncritically as an "amazing" weight loss.

Oh, ok. So you actually know that this is about illness and not intellectual property, and you're missing the point on purpose to troll. Got it.

Yeah, you're right - whether or not she voluntarily posted them on the internet is totally the point here. It's not the idea of using anorexia pics to show impressive weight loss, nope, not at all.