Welcome to Ick Court, where we debate/rate the ickiness of internet trends, “Am I The Asshole”-esque discussions, and various WTF-am-I-looking-at moments that come across our browsers. For this installment, we ask: Did the news cycle around Taylor Swift’s engagement give us “the ick”?

As news spread Tuesday that mega-pop star Taylor Swift and NFL player Travis Kelce were engaged, many online made the same joke: “I’ve gotten so many texts about these two, you’d think I was the one who got engaged.”

It wasn’t just group texts that were going off earlier this week, though. Countless news agencies ― ours included ― sent out “breaking news” alerts about Swift and Kelce’s engagement.

“Never in my life did i think i would find out about taylor swift getting engaged via ESPN notification,” one person wrote on X.

And, unsurprisingly, a lot of people got a little parasocial relationship-y about the couple: “I HAVE TO CALL IN SICK HOW AM I EXPECTED TO WORK TODAY MY PARENTS JUST GOT ENGAGED,” one fan joked.

Swift and Kelce, both 35, have been dating since 2023 after the football player divulged that he’d like to go on a date with the Grammy award-winning songwriter during an episode the podcast he hosts with his brother, former NFL player Jason Kelce.

Ever since, Swifties have been glued to updates about the couple ― Traylor, Tayvis? What’s the portmanteau for these two? ― so it was expected that they’d go into a Tay-induced tizzy over the news.

But if Tuesday was the internet’s virtual engagement party for Traylor (whatever, we’re going with it), not everyone wanted an invite.

Since the engagement announcement coincides with Swift’s promo cycle for her upcoming album, some are dreading yet another Swift-dominated news cycle. (It also coincides with the NFL season. You better believe a segment of football bros ― “a few dads, Brads, and Chads,” as Swift has called them ― are preemptively annoyed about another season of Taylor cam at Chiefs’ games.)

Swifties predictably went into a frenzy over the engagement news.

XNY/Star Max via Getty Images

Swifties predictably went into a frenzy over the engagement news.

Other commenters thought people, or at least press organizations, should be focused on weightier things.

“I’ve gotten more news alerts about taylor swift’s engagement than i’ve gotten about today’s school shooting in Minneapolis. Our national priorities are abhorrent,” one X user wrote Wednesday morning as details about the mass shooting at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis began to emerge.

Should so much news coverage be devoted to a 30-something couple doing the expected thing and getting engaged when so much else is going on in the world — school shootings, more than half a million people in Gaza trapped in famine, President Donald Trump sliding the country toward autocracy?

For our inaugural “Ick Court,” I asked people in our newsroom ― Swifties and non-Swifties alike ― to get a little meta and delve into the issue: Is it an ick that Taylor Swift’s love life is considered breaking news, or do some of us just need to calm down?

Taylor Swift is news because of her extreme influence, including on the American economy.

Paige Lavender, news director who’s not a Swiftie but not anti-Swift: “As a literal breaking news editor, I totally think her engagement is breaking news. Setting aside public interest in her or Travis’ lives, the choices she makes ― from the ring, to the engagement photos, to the wedding ― will likely impact the billion-dollar wedding industry in a big way. She also has a new album coming out and potentially a tour, so wedding timing could impact when fans could next see her… there’s a lot of money on the line here!”

Lydia O’Connor, senior breaking news reporter and a Swiftie: “I agree with all of Paige’s thoughts! She’s one of the most famous people in the world and she’s basically her own industry. You don’t have to understand her popularity or care to follow along, but you can’t deny that she’s extremely influential and commands attention in a way no one else really is right now. Even the president of the United States is aware of this (see: Trump’s ongoing meltdown at her endorsing Kamala Harris.)”

Lizzie Grams, PR for HuffPost and a Swiftie: “Yes, Taylor is fundamentally cringe! She’s a weird tall horse girl who tries really hard. And also, true love is so cringe, but it does not give me the ick; it gives me butterflies!

Taylor has a huge impact on the American economy and culture, so I think news about her is definitely ‘breaking’ worthy. She’s the only monoculture we have left! lol.”

"[Taylor Swift] is the only monoculture we have left!" said Lizzie Grams, PR for HuffPost and a Swiftie.

Neilson Barnard via Getty Images

“[Taylor Swift] is the only monoculture we have left!” said Lizzie Grams, PR for HuffPost and a Swiftie.

Celebrities’ personal lives as a form of breaking news is “technically icky,” but it’s always been part of the news cycle.

Lourdes Uribe, senior shopping writer, not a Swiftie but not anti-Swift: “Should she be breaking news? I mean, sure, why not? She’s likely the most famous woman in the world, so pretty much any new development in her personal or professional life could be considered warranting being breaking news. That’s clear [from] the reception from her fans.

It is technically icky when any celebrity engagement or personal issue becomes breaking news? Sure! You’d think we have enough serious business to deal with that it isn’t important. But celebrity culture is part of the news cycle and zeitgeist at large, so it makes sense that it is. Celeb news has always been news, back to the old Hollywood days, and the narratives were just as controlled by powerful stars then as they are now. Nothing has changed.

If she’s publicly posting about it, then she clearly wants it to be news. She could be one of those cool celebs that just never says shit about her personal life, or just gets courthouse-married, but she never will.

For the record, I am not anti-Taylor. I like some of her songs! I just think there’s a lot of cognitive dissonance between her persona and her actions, and it runs through her work and personal life, and the more critical thinking amongst the public, the better!”

"Setting aside public interest in her or Travis’ lives, the choices she makes ― from the ring, to the engagement photos, to the wedding ― will likely impact the billion-dollar wedding industry in a big way," said news director Paige Lavender.

Brooke Sutton via Getty Images

“Setting aside public interest in her or Travis’ lives, the choices she makes ― from the ring, to the engagement photos, to the wedding ― will likely impact the billion-dollar wedding industry in a big way,” said news director Paige Lavender.

It’s not Taylor that’s giving the ick, it’s the celebrity spectacle-consumption feedback loop.

Katherine Speller, senior Life editor, Family & Relationships, and not a Swiftie: “If I’m being real, it’s not that Taylor herself is giving me the ick, but [celebrities] as a whole. The wealth displays, the wasteful garbage merch, the terrible and tacky brand deals, the self-congratulatory yet brand-safe podcasts, the streaming service-exclusive movie events — all in the effort to extract more money from people who likely can’t fathom what a billion dollars looks like. I’m just fatigued by it.

The ecosystem that crops up from these moments turns these celebs into battering rams for whatever culture war is being fought, fuels our feeds with slop memes-turned-ads, and that makes it harder for me to just get lost in the sauce of what would otherwise be bland, tabloid-filler fun.

I’m far less interested in what she herself does in a vacuum and her own life (because I don’t know that lady), but I’m unable to ignore the ways the internet reorganizes itself around consuming and sub-profiting off whatever she puts out, which has always included her personal life. It’s not her fault, necessarily — and I imagine it’s difficult to be a human who is cast in the role of Mickey Mouse meets the internet’s parasocial bestie. It’s a freaky Faustian bargain, I’m sure, but she profits off it all the same.

Especially in the last year, I’ve tried to divest my attention from the various rich people jostling for it. I have to pay attention to some of them for work — and unsurprisingly, there’s plenty of people making art I love that shimmy in and out of different categories of ‘celebrity’— but it feels really freeing to rip a little something back for yourself in the attention economy, whenever you can.”

"This isn't paparazzi stalking her on a date; this is her fans being interested in the stuff she herself has told them to pay attention to," said news editor Lilli Petersen.

KENA BETANCUR via Getty Images

“This isn’t paparazzi stalking her on a date; this is her fans being interested in the stuff she herself has told them to pay attention to,” said news editor Lilli Petersen.

We arguably need more “happy” breaking news like this to balance out the bad.

Lilli Petersen, news editor, National & Politics, and casual Swift fan: “I’m very torn on this — on the one hand, her personal life shouldn’t be news at all! Celebrities deserve to have privacy and pieces of themselves that they don’t have to share with the world, the same as non-celebrities. On the other hand, T Swift has mined her personal life and particularly her romantic relationships for content in a way that she, herself, has put it up for public consumption.

This isn’t paparazzi stalking her on a date; this is her fans being interested in the stuff she herself has told them to pay attention to. I think, ultimately, the celebrity ecosystem of ‘anything to do with X celebrity is news’ gives me the ick, because people aren’t products like that, but Tay has also made herself a product that transcends the ecosystem a bit, so in her case, I have less of an ick.

Honestly, considering the rest of the news that is breaking, I am happy to see something that is innocuous and pleasant. I am currently looking at a screen about the school shooting and two dead kids in Minneapolis. There should be a place for happy and silly stuff to be important, too.”