cats

Corrected: A Sunday Cat makes the NY Times: in fact, 2 do

annejjacobson3 Comments

For the article in the  NY Times,  see here.  (Beware, it is somewhat defensive  and dismissive.)

For Maru, who has appeared here several times, check these out.

And the dear little surprised cat, also “discussed”, is here.

Left out: There’s a third Sunday Cat in the article, Iggy, the fearless ipad explorer.

3 thoughts on “Corrected: A Sunday Cat makes the NY Times: in fact, 2 do”

  2. Just as babies renew us, so do they make us feel the love emotion, hence, cute baby videos, ergo babies, may be joining with kitties and puppies to take over the planet. Would that be such a bad thing? I second the bunny motion!

  3. I love the bunny.
    There’s a pernicious suggestion in the article that watching these videos is a waste of time. E.g.,

    “Surprised Kitty” is 17 seconds long. [Since it has already been viewed more than 28,500,000 times], that means humans have wasted roughly 484,500,000 seconds watching this thing. That’s more than 15 years. It took just over a year to build the Empire State Building; about four years to construct the Golden Gate Bridge; eight to land a man on the moon. In the time that we collectively were watching “Surprised Kitty,” we collectively could instead have done all those things and still had a year to sit back and admire our work.

    Aside from the pretty horrendous reasoning – supposing an average of 100 people worked each day on the Empire State Building, that’s 100 people years – we might consider how much better off we’d be if some people spent all their time watching videos.

Comments are closed.