Letters to the Editor
weeping for brunnhilde
Published Letters: 1150 Editor's Choice: 3
-
You know?
[Read the article: George Bush is John McCain's Rev. Wright]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]With so many passionate, thoughtful, articulate people expressing outrage to Salon's coverage (and Joan's in particular), many of them threatening to let their subscriptions lapse, one has to wonder what the hell is going on.
Why does Joan seem so hell-bent on alienating so many honest, intelligent liberals/leftists/progressives/free-thinkers?
Really, why?
What's the endgame here?
That we all be further marginalized from the public discourse than we already are?
That we be discredited?
There are literally countless voices, running the gamut from dismay to outrage, some expressing vitriol, others offering more dispassionate critique. Some focusing on the subtle (and not really so subtle) racism of this coverage, others on the simple violation of journalistic standards and intellectual laziness.
There are many, many angles from which the coverage here is being critiqued, but Joan apparently finds them all illegitimate, or one can only conclude she does by her deafening silence to specific, legitimate criticisms.
Why are so many productive voices from (broadly) the liberal side of the intellectual spectrum being so unceremoniously, even defiantly mocked?
Really, honestly, truly, can someone tell me how this serves the broad agenda of liberalism in America?
I'd really like to understand because as it is, I can only conclude that Joan's chief concern is for the bottom line.
Click, click, click, cha-ching, cha-ching, cha-ching.
My conclusion is that not only doesn't pay to uphold "liberal" standards, but journalistic ones either.
I'd like to entertain a less cynical conclusion, but frankly, I can see no other at this point.
If anyone has a more charitable explanation, I'm all ears.
-
@ designated_knitter
[Read the article: George Bush is John McCain's Rev. Wright]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"I'm trying to think of positive stereotypes that would work in Obama's favor as black. Sadly, not many spring to mind!"
Well, he is good at basketball!
And I'll bet he does a mean tap dance.
-
@ debaser
[Read the article: George Bush is John McCain's Rev. Wright]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I've been desperately trying to cut Joan some slack for some time now.
And I remain open to doing so.
Thus far, though, she's not earned the right to be cut slack.
When she responds thoughtfully and openly to the overwhelming, thoughtful criticism she's received, then we can talk.
Trust is a two-way street and she's violated (irreparably in some cases, it would seem) a basic trust between herself and her readers.
I remain open to Joan and would love for her to earn my (our) trust. She just seems intransigent right now, is all.
If there were just a couple of incoherent criticisms, I'd understand, but there are dozens and dozens of painstakingly thoughtful critiques.
When so many readers (or community members, if you like) cry out for what they see as some measure of justice and accountability only to be summarily ignored, no slack can be given.
Or, reduced to a slogan, no justice, no peace.
-
@ debaser
[Read the article: George Bush is John McCain's Rev. Wright]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Oh, and btw: "Ease up on Walsh will ya? Gahd! It's painfully obvious that she was not making any moral equivalency between Wright and Bush...just that McCain's connection to Bush is an even bigger problem for him than Wright's connection to Obama is."
I don't think she was drawing a moral equivalency between the two, but frankly, I don't even care. That's an inconsequential side issue to the basic arguments her critics have been consistently making.
Perhaps some have cited this as further evidence of the basic arguments we're making and we can argue over
whether it is or not, but frankly, there's so much on the table between us and Joan that we don't even need to
dicker over this one point.
The basic argument stands.
-
@ debaser
[Read the article: George Bush is John McCain's Rev. Wright]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Heh heh. Point taken.
Still, I thought I'd learned that that image, of the church as whore was a popular one attending Lutheran pamphlets, at least?
Thanks for the clarification.
-
@ dterrydraw
[Read the article: George Bush is John McCain's Rev. Wright]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yes, yes, of course such comments should be deleted.
They're abhorrent and foul.
I'm all for maintaining basic standards of civility. I guess I've just seen so much incivility and odious rhetoric that I inferred Salon had a policy of total and complete tolerance regarding comments.
If that is the case, and such comments will not be deleted, my personal approach is simply to ignore them on the (perhaps naive?) hope that 99% of us here are horrified by that kind of thing and that it doesn't merit a response.
But yes, I'd join you in calling on Salon to be vigilant in checking this sort of thing.