I am really not a fan of gawker's new "already over" thing. gawker had always seemed like a hip older sibling clueing me in on the latest happenings in the city and providing a little witty commentary (much like my actual hip older sibling). but although gawker seems to think the best part of a "what's hip/ what's not" list is the "what's not" part, i totally disagree. the "what's hip" is what keeps the "what's not" in balance, preventing the listmaker from just looking like a snob. it makes the listmaker take a stand and put themself out there, so that their analysis of what is currently in makes them just as susceptible to mockery as their subjects. and that's the hard, scary part. you can pick anything you want and say it's not hot, and no one can really argue with you. even if it wasn't actually not hot, the act of putting it on the list has made it so. it is almost impossible to lose in such a case. even if the item is actually, on the contrary, very hot right now, you simply look ahead of your time, because of course everything that is in at some point will eventually be out. also, if reading the "what's not" list makes me feel bad because i'm still popping my collar and wearing trucker hats, i need a place to turn to that will tell me to buy shorts that are cut off at the knee or to go to american apparel.
and gawker's attempt at being meta by making their first "already over" gawker itself was just stupid. while pointing out all of the reasons that your blog is no longer very hip may seem like a really cool thing to do, very hipster and post-ironic, it is also raising lots of thoughts that may not have occurred to your less savvy readers. so there.