Blogging is a very new medium. It is so new that there aren't any real guidelines set forth. No, I don't mean censorship. I'm talking about responsibility. When a blogger puts up a post they add words to the collective knowledge. Whether that addition is useful or misleading is solely the responsibility of the individual. At least, that is the case when a site like Blogger or WordPress is involved, but what happens when a newspaper is doing the hosting?
I believe in news papers. It is corny sounding I know, but I believe in the power of the press to transform lives and enrich communities. I read a number of online news papers everyday, but only one actually materializes on my door step. Only one I read cover to cover with my daughter spreading each section around the living room as I finish them. I subscribe to The News-Gazette.
When the paper puts out a story it takes responsibility for it. Corrections are made to the smallest of errors. This does not carry over to the blogs they host. While I can respect the goal of offering a variety of view points from here in Champaign-Urbana. However they are, in at least one case, giving voice to someone that is a true embarrassment to the community.
The News-Gazette web log "Against The Tide" is written by Rhonda Robinson and it is woefully misleading and at times seriously offensive. Post titles include:
Are schools responsible for science and suicide?
Are a few Muslim taxi drivers taking the US on the road to a Muslim state?
Terrifying liberals
Local psychologist battles new McCarthyism
Are large families breeding contempt?
Maine Middle School now teaching Reading, Writing and Contraception
Her opinions are far from my own which isn't a crime and it's why I have kept my mouth shut thus far, but she has crossed the line with her post concerning the NIU tragedy. Please, read this. Does she present this post as an opinion or is it geared to look as though it is a legitimate article? Most of the post is made up from quotes taken from a Dr. Julian Whitaker, someone whose sells vitamins on the internet among other things, and who I imagine would be horrified to see his words connected to the phrase "emotionless killing zombie."
To see our local paper publishing her blog on their site is mind numbingly frustrating. This isn't the first time she's done this. She takes a fact or a quote out of context and spins it into something she can use to push her agenda. That's fine if she is publishing somewhere neutral, but not under the banner of my paper. I don't want people around the world visiting The News-Gazette Online to have this woman for an ambassador. This is an embarrassment to the community and completely unnecessary. This is a large community of diverse viewpoints and home to an excellent university. If the News-Gazette wants someone to stir up a little controversy then let them choose someone who can do so with intelligence and a respect for the truth.
I'm sorry if this is a bit much, but I haven't slept over this.
Interesting. I've never noticed her blog before.
I assume she's an employee/columnist/reporter for the NG?
What is so bad about the post? Her use of the term "emotionless killing zombie" is certainly colorful, but seems to be consistent with the student accounts of the shooter's behavior. Dr. Whitaker seems to be quoted fairly. It seems that the only reasonable concern you have is that Dr. Whitaker (who you describe as an Internet vitamin salesman) will feel bad that he was quoted in an article that uses the phrase "emotionless killing zombie."
Don't like it? Don't read it. This is America. The First Amendment cover BOTH Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press. Start your own paper and hire your own bloggers.
And FWIT, I support your right to complain about the blog.
hey, she's great! I never read her before. CoSIGN!
good thing she doesnt blog here. she'd run afoul of the liberals and get censored into a doily for the mind.
Well, she has every right to write her bigoted crap--read (or don't read) the "assimilate or get out" piece on Muslims in which she actually invokes Daniel Pipes, the "melting pot" and whimsically wishes for the good old days when we only allowed certain nationalities to enter the country--but as a business, the NG has responsibility for supporting it.
Furthermore, it is blogging, but when it's supported by a major newspaper and has glaring grammatical errors, that's pretty shameful too.
She also has a nasty habit of using rhetorical questions that aren't really rhetorical:
Are schools responsible for science and suicide?
No.
Are a few Muslim taxi drivers taking the US on the road to a Muslim state?
No.
Are large families breeding contempt?
For the most part, no. Nor should they.
For starters, the premise used to justify the necessity of this insanity was that there was an "outbreak" of pregnancies (17 over a four year period) among middle school girls, while sad, it's ridiculous.
How about 17 children failing to learn to read in four years, is this cause for alarm and drastic action?
Yes.
What about 17 children flunking the 6th grade over four years?
Yes.
Or what would the school do if 17 children were assaulted on the play ground by other children in a four year period?
Yes.
Then she goes on to essentially blame any adolescent sexual behavior on adults molesting them. What a thoughtful worldview.
We all get that she is incredibly stupid, bigoted, and a bad writer, but to keep things in focus, McBloggy claims that McBloggy ok with those things, but with her NIU article she "crossed the line." It would be helpful to all of us if McBloggy could explain why McBloggy thinks that's the case.
I don't see anything wrong with it. She's stating an opinion. If you don't agree with her opinion, leave her a comment, don't read her blog or better yet, call up the NG and see if you can get your own blog there to counter her opinion.
I find it interesting that in your efforts to "expose" something you don't agree with, you've actually drawn more attention to it. The best way to make sure a book becomes a best seller is to put it on a "banned book list". I wonder if IP is being used as an unknowing pawn to promote the NG blog site?
I don't find her compelling enough to read regularly, though I did take a look at some of the entries mentioned. To be fair, she's not the only person who's questioned whether there might be a link between violence and SSRI antidepressants.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A03E0DD143EF930A1575BC0A9629C8B63
"I wonder if IP is being used as an unknowing pawn to promote the NG blog site?"
The traffic on the NG website (even their blogs) certainly dwarfs anything we get here.