New York Times Saves Sex-Shaming App from Pits of Obscurity

Lulu, an app that lets women anonymously torment their dude Facebook friends with sexual feedback, is one of those you play with briefly and then forget. It's a gimmick—half malice, half prank, and all dumb, which is why it was plummeting in the app store. Until the Times stirred up the toilet bowl today.

It seemed like we'd all had our laughs, given that everything on Lulu is either a joke ("Hey, leave me some good feedback, it'll be funny") or skewed by spite ("I'll show that asshole!"). It's not exactly scientific! The novelty wore off:

New York Times Saves Sex-Shaming App from Pits of ObscurityS

(Data via App Annie)

Until today. The Wall Street Journal's Evelyn Rusli first spotted Lulu's publicity comeback:

Being ranked 531 is the app popularity of a nightclub in Hoboken—no one wants to be there, and will do anything in their power to get the hell out. In terms of business, you might as well not exist. But thanks to a clumsy newspaper writeup that avoids all the social complexity of a revenge-libel app and approaches none of the sorta-fascinating weirdness, it's back.

For now. We can only hope that a new wave of curious downloaders will tire of the concept like the last time around, and we can all go back to defaming each other privately via text message.

(Disclosure: I'm currently rated a 7.6/10 on Lulu, including a claim that I'm bad at assembling Ikea furniture, which is FALSE, and a claim that my phone's call log is "sketchy," which is TRUE)