Eric Goldman, the reviewer “journalist” who stanned L and thought Bellamy was the villain and told all his readers so. Who thought the show was about L and the grounders, not the 100. Who, i didn’t read this but have been told, actively said that Bellamy should die and that he was white. That’s gossip, I have no evidence, but I’m sure other people do. I didn’t read his reviews of season 3 because they were so off and so much the Lxa Show, but I did read his reviews of season 4, and, again, he took Bellamy out of the story to the point of barely mentioning him. Even worse, he nearly erased Clarke, too, now that she was no longer with L, because she was, apparently just the love interest. IDK. That’s my interpretation of his interpretation. He wrote about The 100 as if it wasn’t the story of Clarke and Bellamy, but instead the story of Lxa, and her girlfriend whatsername, Octavia the badass, and Raven, who is better than everyone.
Not coincidentally, those characters and actors are skinny hot brunette chicks…. anyone seeing a pattern here? I do. And it sure looks like he was biased towards the characters who gave him a boner.
Sure sure, he’s just got an interpretation, right? But you know what? He was in active communication with JR. He interviewed JR and spoke about the show, and presented JR’s viewpoint about the show. And, as we’ve heard from JR himself at SDCC, the 100 has always been the story of Clarke and Bellamy and it remains the story of Clarke and Bellamy today. I know JR has told Eric Goldman that Clarke and Bellamy were the heroes, I think I’ve seen it published. One might almost say that JR’s clear statement about that during SDCC might be in direct opposition to the reviews by Eric Goldman which consistently erased Clarke and Bellamy to minor roles. Interesting that Eric Goldman happened to be the moderator on The 100 panel. Also interesting that after SDCC, Eric Goldman left IGN, which means he will no longer be reviewing The 100 for them.
Despite his active communication with JR, he stuck to his interpretation of what The 100 was about, and more importantly, who it wasn’t about. It was really interesting reading his reviews of season 4, because if you go by what he said, and who he wrote about, the show was actually about Octavia, supported by Raven, and Clarke and Bellamy had minor supporting roles, if they were mentioned at all. And their relationship of any sort was nonexistent. And in season 3, the show was about Lxa. This is wrong. Whether it’s an opinion or not, it is WRONG.
So here we have a professional reviewer presenting his biased (and ACTUALLY wrong) interpretation as an authority. How much of what Eric Goldman, official media journalist and professional reviewer with a supposedly reputable site, fed into the shipwars and misinterpretations? How much of his “objective” opinion actually contributed to the continued group delusion that The 100 was a different show than what was presented on screen, leading to intense trauma and heartbreak when the conclusion of foreshadowed and clear storylines ended in the death of a favorite character who HE said was the star of the show? Hmm?
I’m not joking about how we should be suspicious of everything and look for the agenda of those we listen to in the media and on line. I don’t care if they are are professional journalists, government figures, show runners, big meta blogs or your internet bff who you love.
Someone says something about the way the world works. Stop. Listen to them. Think about what they are looking to get out of thisL Do they benefit from this statement? Are they creating divisions where there do not need to be divisions? Are they trying to steer the conversation to their pet theory/interpretation/mission? Do they have their facts right? Are they basing it on gossip and rumor and suggestion? Is there evidence for their statements? Are they using buzzwords so you have an emotional reaction rather than actually thinking about what is being said?
Eric Goldman was a bad reviewer. And sure, reviews are just opinions. Sure are. But too many people are confused between opinion, theory, canon and fact. Eric Goldman’s reviews of The 100 were BAD because he was WRONG and BIASED about what was happening on screen and he presented his biased, inaccurate opinion as right. Because he’s a professional reviewer. And that meant people didn’t question him.
Just in case you didn’t get how much I do not respect people who abuse their power and voice to manipulate others and push their personal agenda. In Eric Goldman’s case, the agenda appears to be wanking off to hot girls sword fighting, showing their underwear and having sex on prime time tv.
Let me be transparent. I have an agenda. I do not like Eric Goldman or his articles and I am offended by “journalists” who are stupid, biased, egotists, who don’t care if what they say is true or correct, and get off on using their position to influence people.
His name is Eric Goldman. And he is a bad journalist. Do not trust what he says.
