Roger Ebert has written a very thoughtful blog post about the Twitter dust up with Bam Margera and his original intentions. It is worth reading. Let’s bring our boys home safe.

Comments (68)
  1. According to AV Club, Perez Hilton is involved involved with this, on Team Bam. I sure wish you would have told us earlier, so that we could all unite in our support of Roger Ebert and just move on.

    • This line was so perfect: “This second tweet was widely interpreted on many web sites as me “refusing to apologize.” Apologize to who? Perez Hilton?”

      He doesn’t even need to answer the question.

  2. Friends don’t let friends drink and drive. I can get behind that.

    • Yes, I can also get behind that cause as Ebert said “it’s true.”

      Ultimately, I think the lesson is that something can be both TRUE and CRUEL. They aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s a lesson I think we all learn as we mature. It takes wisdom and compassion to recognize how to present truth without cruelty.

  3. That was a very thoughtful post, but I can’t help thinking it would have had more impact spread over a couple dozen Tweets.

  4. It’s crazy how people misinterpret statements, Bam Margera supports drunk driving and thinks everyone who drives at a reasonable speed sober is a pussy

    • If I knew how to use photoshop, I’d photoshop Bam’s head onto Sammy Hager’s body but I can’t use photoshop so I’ll just imagine what that would look like.

  5. “What did I mean by that? I meant exactly what I wrote. I wasn’t calling Ryan Dunn a jackass. In Twitter shorthand, I was referring to his association with ‘Jackass.’”

    Um, yeah i don’t believe that for a second.

    The whole thing seemed pretty disingenous to me.

    • If Twitter would have existed when Tupac was shot, Ebert would have tweeted FRIENDS DON’T LET NIGGAZ BE SHOT.

    • Exactly. Imagine if it was a member of another group who had died.

      “Friends don’t let Los Angeles Lakers drive drunk.”
      “Friends don’t let Ghostbusters drive drunk.”
      “Friends don’t let Spice Girls drive drunk.”

      It doesn’t make any sense outside of the pun and Ebert is obviously a good enough writer to know that. What a fucking liar.

    • He should have capitalized the J then. And don’t blame it on your Autocorrect, Ebert!

    • Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see

      • I am shocked Gabe has not laid the BANNNED slam on you yet. Maybe he’s saving it for the Ball again.

        • Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see

          • Actually, I think we can all agree that the dickhead in this situation is you.

          • This still does not explain why you are choosing to attack someone for something related to their appearance that they cannot change.

          • That’s the other situation, facetaco. I’ll fully concede I’m the dickhead in the situation of the grumpy commenter who doesn’t matter on an obscure site that doesn’t matter versus the obscure site that doesn’t matter case. But not in the celebrity with hundreds of thousands of followers who made dickhead comments about someone who died knowing full well they’d get back to the mourners but did it anyway and then tried to backpedal on those comments because he doesn’t understand how social media and celebrity works case.

          • If this website is so “obscure”, then how did you come across it? Was there a link to it in the less obscure site that you usually frequent, YouTube?

          • filmdrunkard who follows morning links here occasionally

            drunk on

          • “I’ll fully concede I’m the dickhead”

            How about instead of conceding, you say sorry, and stop behaving so abhorrently?

          • I was like, “This is a well thought-out, albeit opinionated, viewpoint on this whole situation. I have no idea why it’s been downvoted so much.”

            Then I read the addendum paragraph and was like, “god hates fajita mcjones.”

          • Everyone who follows Roger Ebert on Twitter cares about what Roger Ebert has to say about anything, thus is the nature of twitter.

          • And also, why is it my fault that Roger Ebert decided to live an obviously unhealthy life that leads to things like cancers, surgeries and the eventual loss of your jaw in later years? I didn’t cause it, I’m just pointing it out. You know, kinda like he did with Ryan Dunn and his life decisions.

          • Even if you were “just pointing this out,” it’d seem like a strange non-sequitur. “I don’t like what Roger Ebert said. Let it also be observed that his heretofore unhealthy lifestyle, consisting of overeating and alcohol indulgence, certainly gave rise to his thyroid cancer, and subsequent loss of his jawbone. The cancer thus being his fault, the implication is unavoidably that we must live healthy lifestyles, else we be blamed—and fairly—for our health problems.”

            I suppose you do acknowledge that this is similar to what Ebert did for Dunn, only with the opinion that your public opinion doesn’t matter compared to Ebert’s, as his opinion is far more widespread. I don’t necessarily agree with that, particularly if his intent was to bluntly make a point, and your intent is purely to anger people by mocking a cancer victim. If nothing else, I don’t see why the difference in your public statures would excuse hypocrisy on your part.

      • WHAT THE HELL!!?!?!!?

      • Dude, you already secured the “lowest rated” portion of your EGOT this morning, you can cut it out already.

      • You really seem to have strong feelings about Mr. Ebert, don’t you? Have you considered getting a stress ball? I have a stress ball, it is pretty great.

  6. I am sure this will be the end of the whole thing, and everyone in both camps is going to get along now.

  7. Wow, this post has the recliner bros too! SPOOKY GUM!

    • Why does Videogum think that you might like different things than I might like? And which of us does it consider to have better taste?

  8. “I also regret that my tweet about the event was considered cruel. It was not intended as cruel. It was intended as true.”

    Worst apology ever?

  9. Key word here is “unseemly.”

  10. Key word here is “unseemly.”

  11. I don’t know, I’ve thought a lot about this all day (I’ve thought a little bit about this just before commenting here) and I can kind of understand the anger at Ebert, but, if there’s one thing he doesn’t come across as, it’s snarky. So I think I do believe him when he says he used the word “jackass” just because of the late Ryan Dunn’s affiliation with that show and the movies of the same name. Coming from anyone else, I would probably perceive that as a lie to cover his arse. But I think Ebert meant what he said (about meaning what he said.)

  12. I’m going to assume something i want to say has already been said BUT THIS:

    Bam Margera lives in a gothic themed house called “Castle Bam”.

  13. SEMI-RELATED: how great are these siskel and ebert outtakes from the 80s? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkwVz_jK3gA

  14. Even if he didn’t mean ‘jackass’ as a referral to the show, which I think he’s lying about, I think it’s definitely OK labeling him ‘jackass’ for driving that fast at night on a road shared by the public. Instead of lying and giving disingenuous apologies, I wish he would’ve stuck by the sane argument that Ryan Dunn and his friend would still be here if he didn’t do a massively jackass thing. He certainly could’ve come across less flippant about it right after the accident but Ebert lives on Twitter, I don’t think he meant it in a flippant way.

  15. That was a comically transparent backpedaling. Ebert, dude, just say what you wrote what shitty and that you are sorry. You can still make a point about drunk driving not being a good thing without calling someone who was just killed a jackass and making a cheap joke about it. You did mean it that way. Stop it.

    If you want to defend it, fine, but you’re still kind of an asshole for insensitively making a joke about it. Thems the breaks.

  16. In all the hundreds of comments on the other thread and this one there’s this ton of people are saying “Well, I mean, Ebert was right. don’t drink and drive. He could have killed innocent people…” And “the jackass guys should be the first to tell their fans not to drink and drive!”

    Do you guys that said that realize how easy it was for Ebert to say what he said? Do you guys that supported him for it realize how easy it is for YOU to say it too?

    It reminds me of David Cross making the joke about how if you think it is ok to kill and eat babies then he wants to tell you “NO WAY BUDDY! IT IS NOT OK TO KILL AND EAT BABIES!”

    This is a first grade lesson. Everyone is going to hear that lesson a lot of times. When it’s a normal, not hurtful time, everyone is going to hear it in the context of this accident. It’s not a secret, you don’t have to be smart, and you don’t have to be brave to say it.

    I don’t care that Ebert has no tact or whatever. Ebert is a moral coward. What does he have to get through in the next few months or years that is related to this? How hard is ANYTHING that he’s going to have to do related to this going to be for him? He’s an old man who knows exactly how hurtful he’s being to people that DO HAVE a LOT to get through. And he that it took NOTHING as far as effort or intelligence, or courage for him to say it, and he did it anyway.

    • Gonna have to disagree with your detective work a bit there backwaxer.

      I know that this is purely anecdotal, but I know a good number of people who think it’s fine to drink and drive because they’ve never hurt anyone before. Looking at all the comments I read on different places about this you do have people saying that drunk driving isn’t that big a thing in some cases. I’ve had friends who have died because they thought that it was okay to get into a car with an intoxicated person.

      I’m not saying Ebert was right in how he posted his tweet. I don’t think that at all, but to say that we shouldn’t be talking about the dangers of drinking and driving is nonsense.

      • yeah, ok, my bad, somewhat. I wasn’t clear that I WAS talking only about how he posted this specific tweet, other peoples’ defense of this specific tweet, and the suggestion that came up here that the surviving jackass guys should be talking about the dangers of drunk driving themselves already.

        so, my bad for being vague. But you did kind of run with that vagueness pretty far to get to a point where you summed my comment up as me saying “we shouldn’t be talking about the dangers of drinking and driving.”

        talking respectfully about drinking and driving already is as ok as killing babies is NOT ok. but since you and I agree that there was something wrong with the tweet, then take whatever it was about the tweet that made you say you think he was wrong in how he posted it: maybe that’s the cruelness of it, or the self-righteousness of it… I’m saying that anyone justifying THAT with the idea that “well, it’s true,” when they know this tweet is making it worse for the people that are going to be dealing with this for a long time, and when they themselves are not going to be forced to think about this a week or even a day from now, is cowardly.

  17. I normally only post snarky pictures every now and then, so this is gonna be a little weird. Because I’m going to be serious. But, Ebert had every right to do what he did. I don’t say this as someone who knew someone who died because of drunk driving on either side of the fence. I say this as someone who was once arrested for drunk driving.

    A lot of people are going to rationalize what Dunn did. The first thing my parents said to me after I told them was, “Well, everyone’s done it, you just got caught.” I have no doubt there are people who are thinking the same way about Dunn: “Everyone does it, he just made a mistake.” Because he’s a celebrity he’s already being canonized, and his death is being seen as a tragedy. It’s not. It was completely avoidable.

    I understand the request for tact, but what’s being lost here isn’t that he made a mistake that killed himself. What’s being lost is, he made a choice that killed another man. I feel bad for Dunn’s family and friends because I can empathize with the kind of public shame they’re being put through (though, I’ll readily admit I’ll never be able to understand their pain), but to ignore the circumstances surrounding his death solely due to grief is disingenuous and white-washing the legitimate tragedy: the other man’s death. I could have killed someone. He did. We’re both jackasses.

  18. Move over lat year’s summer of death, it’s the summer of heroes going down.

  19. You know that thing when you follow your favorite musicians on Twitter and then you hate all of their music two weeks later?

    That was me with Roger Ebert long before this incident. I truly feel sorry about his health situation and have a great respect for a lot of his work. He was a major influence on my tastes growing up, but the guy is a self-important ego-inflated asshole (you kind of have to be to be a professional critic right? (Don’t get me wrong I LOVE critics (triple parenthesis!)))

    My Point? Ebert has set plenty of precedents for the anger directed at him over this. He is TOTALLY the type of guy that would sacrifice dignity in the name of a clever (not so clever?) quip.

  20. Ya I think the tweet was a douche move and the apology was a douchier move. I like what Vince at Film Drunk said about it. Its like Ebert was scared to say he carelessly made a fucked up joke so he chose to defend it senselessly rather than saying ‘my bad’.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post, reply to, or rate a comment.