Technically Incorrect offers a slightly twisted take on the tech that's taken over our lives.
Falling out is rarely pretty.
I'm not aware, though, that Tinder and Vanity Fair were ever even dating. So I worried on Tuesday night when Tinder railed against the famous magazine, as if they'd been long-time lovers.
The spat was inspired because the magazine published an article that suggested Tinder was a hook-up app used by New York twenty-somethings to get their late night something-somethings.
The opus was entitled: "Tinder And The Dawn Of The Dating Apocalypse."
There were stories of penis imagery and objectification. There were tales of young men who slept with multiple women within a few days. There were suggestions that sex was a mere commodity, swiped (right) from the digital shelf and consumed before sunrise.
It was all very entertaining and unsurprising, in a New York kind of way.
That's not how Tinder saw it. It turned to another modern arena of love -- Twitter -- to swipe left and right (but mainly left) at Vanity Fair and writer Nancy Jo Sales.
It accused them both of being disinterested in facts. Oh, Tinder. Facts and love rarely go together well. Have you ever got into a fight with a lover and tried to bring up actual things they said or did? It never goes well, does it?
For example: "Next time reach out to us first @nancyjosales... that's what journalists typically do." But sometimes when journalists contact subjects they merely get corporate speak. How much more fun it is now to hear something truly unbridled, dripping with passion and anger.
For her part Sales replied: "@Tinder not clear: are you suggesting journalists need your okay to write about you?"
To which Tinder started going on about fairness. Hasn't the company ever heard that all is fair in love and war?
Tinder complained that actually it existed to create connections with people. It said that only 1.7 percent of its users are married, not.
And then it went on. And on. And on.
That's rarely a good policy if you want to win an argument of love. It offered that its service was "about meeting new people for all kinds of reasons. Travel, dating, relationships, friends and a s*** ton of marriages."
I'd like to interject that Tinder is telling (some of) the truth here. My very blessed friend George the engineer encountered his lovely new bride on Tinder. In Istanbul. They just met for lunch. Then lunch turned to dinner. And then dinner turned into a bliss uncharted.
Clearly, the service is so hypnotic, so beautifully gameified that it attracts all comers and all goers.
However, is it entirely wise to mount a series of hissy-tweets aimed at Vanity Fair? I have contacted both publications for their views and will update, should I hear.
Tinder did release a statement to Wired that read: "While reading a recent Vanity Fair article about today's dating culture, we were saddened to see that the article didn't touch upon the positive experiences that the majority of our users encounter daily. Our intention was to highlight the many statistics and amazing stories that are sometimes left unpublished, and, in doing so, we overreacted."
Many things in life, as in love, sadden us. All of us sometimes overreact. It's healthy to know when you have.
There again, hissy-tweets.