Kids around the world will have questions about Kim Kardashian's butt. We're here to help!

Full Credits

Stats & Data

November 13, 2014


Son turn around
here so I can talk to you
about what I found
on your computer.
I saw that you were looking
at a photograph of Kim Kardashian's butt.
But dad,
I didn't mean to.
I was simply trying to
look up the weekend forecast,
brought to you by the
Weather Channel on,
and the Yahoo homepage
just was talking about this butt.
And then I went on
Twitter, and everyone else
is talking about the butt,
and I didn't want to be left out
so I clicked on
the butt to see what
everyone was
talking about.
It's okay son.
It's not your fault.
It's just how the
internet is these days.
It's all about
click bait and SEO.
Think about it, why did
you even click on that picture?
Dad, I wanted to
see the raw hot butt
everyone was
talking about.
Exactly. You don't
care about the context right?
I didn't even
think about context.
So it's just a butt.
The butt's all you want.
That's all
anybody wants.
I mean, Chelsea Handler
posts a picture of her butt
moments after the
Kim Kardashian photo went up,
and it's a perfectly
fine ass, I mean...
Stop looking it
up and listen to me!
Maybe Handler did it as a statement,
most people don't know,
people just want
to see the butt,
and since we're
a click bate culture,
nobody cares
about the real point.
Does Kardashian's
butt have any?
It did, to get press,
but there's nothing of value.
We all know the name of the
magazine her butt was on and that's it.
We should care
about being used like this.
Sensational headlines
and pictures trump everything.
It's like the celebrity nude
photos that were leaked.
We don't care
about the context--
Like the fact that those
were a gross invasion of privacy?
And news outlets
weren't helping at all.
They've been posting
edited versions of the pictures.
They don't care about the
person, the human being.
They want views.
"Here are these
private images that leaked.
How terrible?
Look at them here."
And it wasn't just celebrity
based websites either.
These were
news outlets.
-CNN, Fox News, NBC.
-That's sort of sad,
but hasn't it
always been like that?
Like back in the 1890s when
William Randolph Hearst and
Joseph Pulitzer
had penny newspapers.
They were competing
against each other.
It was the beginning
of yellow journalism.
They published sensational
headlines and pictures
to drive up circulation,
and look at it now.
You have news networks
that bring in experts
to talk about
news stories.
You have magazines
that for decades have
been publishing listicles
about sex positions and
up and coming
Hollywood stars and
what to cook
for Thanksgiving.
Then a Hearst Award is
the highest college journalism award.
And a Pulitzer is the journalistic
equivalent of an Oscar.
So really dad, hasn't the delivery
mechanism the only thing that's changed?
Shouldn't we expect
more from our news outlets?
Shouldn't we want
a better world?
Shouldn't we want
to rise above click bait?
I mean, are you trying
to tell me that Kim Kardashian
is the same as
Pulitzer and Hearst,
the founders of
modern journalism?
A butt's a butt dad.
It was a butt when
newspapers were first printed,
and it's a butt now,
albeit in higher resolution.
DAD: Honey, our son just
put modern click bait culture into
historical perspective.
And I learned that butts are butts forever.