I was pretty appalled after reading today’s LA Times Calendar section cover article, “Critic Ben Lyons Gets Many Thumbs Down”, for a few reasons. (Full disclosure: While I am not a celebrity, Ben is a close friend of mine whom I go back with.)

Without delving too deeply into why I think the harsh crit of Ben is so undeserved, I’d like to put forth a couple points that may shed a counter argument to what is clearly a threatened old media guard putting up their dukes to fend off the next gen.

Ben is certainly an every guy/girl’s guy. I think what has truly put off many of his detractors is his ability to represent and connect with a broad audience, unlike the erudite and mostly pretentious film (or any other art) critics of yesteryear.

While my personal taste in film often conflicts with Ben’s, I still respect his opinion as a genuine film nut. He has an acute ability to recognize and relate to a popular product unlike anybody I know. Having studied film and media in one of the more pretentious academic settings, I can certainly understand how the high and mighty opinions of those who view film through a very specific lens and frame their opinions and criticism in terms of New Wave and Neo-Realist movements can easily hate on the dude.

Ben is in many ways not simply a film critic, but an entertainer himself. In a similar way that Perez Hilton is not simply a gossip columnist, but a public personality in his own right, Ben is also that. Whether critics/journalists accept or reject this notion of multimedia personalities extending beyond that of the confines of a singular medium is really the issue here.