Meghan Daum on Internet Rage
L.A. Times columnist Meghan Daum has a column today about the angry reaction to her column last week about the Columbia protests. Today’s column clarifies her point from last week, and mentions yours truly and this web site.
I give my reactions and the relevant background in the extended entry, including a description of the e-mail exchanges I had with Daum this week.
In Daum’s column from last week, I thought Daum seemed to give a pat on the back to Columbia protesters who rushed the stage and disrupted a speech by Minutemen co-founder Jim Gilchrist.
To me, Daum’s column largely excused the violent nature of the protest. After noting that the protest had ended in a brawl, Daum said that she gave the protestors “an A (OK, maybe a B+) for trying.” Making matters worse, she contacted as an expert a former terrorist, and (in my view) minimized his violent actions as a younger man.
I wrote a post about it which you can read at this link. It then gained a wider audience, as Daum explains in today’s column:
That column [Daum’s column from last week] was excerpted and discussed on a political blog called Patterico’s Pontifications, which was then linked to other blogs.
Early last week, I learned from someone at The Times that Daum had received some nasty e-mails regarding that column. I was told that people had called her the c-word, and that some had expressed the hope that she (or someone close to her) would be the subject of a violent attack. Daum describes the e-mails in her column today:
The “critique” — some of it political, some of it personal; some of it valid, some of it totally irrelevant — arrived in my inbox accompanied by obscenities and threats you’d be hard-pressed to find on most blogs. One individual from Virginia expressed hope that I’d be “burned at the stake as a [expletive] witch” and called me a word that is so unprintable my editors won’t even let me tell you what it rhymes with.
The Meghan Daum of last week’s column might say: At least the e-mailers cared enough to write! I give them an A (OK, maybe a B+) for trying!
But instead, she took offense, and I think she was right to.
I wrote Daum an unsolicited e-mail to let her know I condemned these e-mails. I wanted to make sure she knew that, while I strongly disagreed with the tone of her column, I have nothing personal against her, and had no intention of sparking such ugly feedback.
Daum acknowledges my e-mail in today’s column, saying:
I have no beef with most blogs or the communities they engender. And, for the record, Patterico blogger Patrick Frey, upon hearing about my foul-mouthed epistlers, wrote to me saying, “I unequivocally condemn people sending you mail like that.”
In response to my e-mail, Daum wrote me a very gracious note, saying that she didn’t blame me for the e-mails. She followed up in a later e-mail saying that she intended to use the e-mails as a springboard for a column about internet rage. She and I exchanged a few e-mails as she wrote her column.
In that exchange, I sent her some examples of internet rage experienced by folks like myself and Michelle Malkin. In light of the examples I gave her, it is amusing for me to read in her column today that she received “obscenities and threats you’d be hard-pressed to find on most blogs.” Here is my e-mail to her setting forth just a few examples of internet rage directed at me and Michelle Malkin. I’m leaving in the harsh language — this is a blog and I don’t have an editor, so I can — so be forewarned:
Ms. Daum,
By the way, this internet nastiness is pretty common stuff for us bloggers. I don’t know what it’s like for columnists. But just tonight a charming gentleman said to me in a comment on my site:
hey, halfwit:
Won any cases lately without having the judge make your case for you, you talentless incompetent moron?
What’s the matter, you afraid they’re going to “out” you for all that “going down” on your superiors you do to keep your job?
Watching a drooler like you try to make yourself out as something vaguely human is funny as hell, you pathetic, illiterate, incompetent. No wonder the only job you could ever find was working for the LA District Attorney, the biggest collection of morons in the State of California.
It’s violence you want? Back in April, this same fella said to me:
Go fuck yourself, you ignorant piece of shit.
. . . .
Do us all a favor and be the guest of honor at a single car fatality, you incompetent fuckwit.
Back when Michelle Malkin printed names and addresses of some protesters — information she had taken from a press release — she got e-mails like this:
You WILL burn in hell you disgusting cunt.
and
Someone ought to sew your cunt up with barbed wire. Not that it gets any use, you facist, hate spewing, disgraceful piece of shit.
and
You are a fucking slanty-eyed cunt.
Have a nice day
and
Fuck you for printing those SAW numbers, you bitch. Hope you get harassed and your numbers printed. Did I say “fuck you”….Oh yeah…I guess I did. Bitch.
Just to take a few examples.
So, while I deplore the hatred directed at Daum, she isn’t alone — and no, it’s not uncommon for bloggers to get the exact same kind of vitriol.
In a hopeful sign, Daum has now seen fit to make it clearer than she did last week that she deplores the violence shown by the Columbia protesters:
Last week in this space, I suggested that student political activists need to organize more effectively to have an impact and, by the way, avoid violence.
I don’t think that the stance against violence was that clear last week, Ms. Daum. What stood out to a lot of us was your approval of these students who started a violent protest.
But I’m pleased to see the clarification. I think it means that, when people ignore the rage-filled nonsense that the idiots spew at each other on the Internet, and talk to each other as human beings, they can come to an understanding of each others’ points of view — and sometimes learn that they weren’t as far apart as they initially thought.
It’s a thought to keep in mind as we navigate the sometimes rage-filled information superhighway.
Leftists tend to support violence when it is in pursuit of their goals (the world over: Communism is #1 example, people rushing stage at Columbia related) and oppose it when it is directed at them, naturally.
I’m not supporting caller Meghan Daum a c___ (can’t tell you what it rhymes with).
I’m not entirely sure why hearing reports of calling a black speaker a n_____ (rhymes with ‘bigger’) didn’t prompt her to rush to his defense… except the reason I gave above, which pretty much explains it.
You hit the nail on the head. Both were equally wrong (except that the emails were terrible words and did not risk physical injury like the Columbia fascists behavior: I still don’t doubt, however, that the writers are nasty people, some capable of such acts) and both should be condemned next time.
Let’s hope she realizes that. Then perhaps one day I shall call her a level, fair, and balanced writer — she hasn’t earned that yet.
Christoph (9824e6) — 10/21/2006 @ 2:28 pmI have absolutely no idea why you people get offended by obscene communications. Where the hell do you think you reside? On the perfect Planet Paradise? I used to get at least four of them per day but I never responded and only adjusted in that I monitor comments. I now get only one or so a week, and so what? I actually think most of them are pretty funny for some reason, maybe because they are lobbed from behind a wall of a sort of anonymity. Freedom of speech has its downside for some people, but we have it and we survive. You don’t like the insults, stop writing.
Howard Veit (28df94) — 10/21/2006 @ 4:56 pmThat is true, Howard, I certainly have the right to call someone an asshole or better (was going to say worse, but how a cunt is “worse” than an asshole is a mystery to me… on the contrary!), however, it’s very crude and I refrain ordinarily unless talking about Teddy Kennedy.
Threats, however, are a different matter as is physically shutting down a speaker by rushing the podium as happened at Columbia. These are crimes both against the person and against freedom of speech.
Christoph (9824e6) — 10/21/2006 @ 5:04 pmIn a free speech world, feedback can be a bitch. But it’s not a denial of freedom of speech.
I don’t care for profanity and obscenity. (I don’t consider “bitch” to be either.) It strikes me as a symptom of immaturity. But what should I care about Ms. Daum’s email? Does she really expect to post controversial stuff online without getting a response? Maybe up til now, she’s been imagining that her readers all just agreed with her.
AST (63d041) — 10/21/2006 @ 5:24 pmWhat I find ironic is that Duam finds the violent silencing of a public speaker by an angry mob to be the harmless antics of high-spirited, if misguided youth, but angry words directed at her through the internet causes her to throw up her hands in horror. Conservative speakers can be rushed, screamed at and silenced by physical intimidation, but nasty emails directed at liberal columnists? What IS the world coming to!
It’s good that your correspondence has been civil, as it should be, and I too deplore the stupid and counter-productive hate rhetoric, but Daum is a fool and hypocrite who seems to believe that the right to be heard free of violent intimidation only belongs to people of her political pursuasion. As such her opinion is pretty much worthless and you should probably stop talking to this glib little fascist.
Amos (3925d0) — 10/21/2006 @ 6:04 pmThis is hardly a new phenomenon. IF anything it’s just a bit more open. Email hategrams go back a long way. There is something about electronic communications that engenders a loss of tact in some folks.
Sending a message electronically and perhaps anonymously, one is unburdened of social constraints. In person, one always need fear the “punch in the nose” response, but fighting-words from a distance are attractive to a certain sort.
Since many of us never engage in this level of personal vitriol, one can only conclude that the internet looses the inner sociopath in some folks, based on a lack of personal feedback.
Is there some way we can vote them off the island?
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 10/21/2006 @ 6:53 pmYou’re on your own 20-yard line, it’s fourth and fifteen, and it’s early in the game. What do you do? That’s what the unknown word rhymes with.
Doc Rampage (4a07eb) — 10/21/2006 @ 9:57 pmWhat rhymes with “Hail Mary play”?
Oh wait, that’s just on Madden.
Angry Clam (132353) — 10/21/2006 @ 11:09 pm[…] Comment on Meghan Daum on Internet Rage by AmosWhat I find ironic is that Duam finds the violent silencing of a public speaker by an angry mob to be the harmless antics of high-spirited, if misguided youth, but angry words directed at her through the internet causes her to throw up … […]
You Have Two Cows - The Internet Takeoff… compared to -- Centplus Tech (3a65e5) — 10/22/2006 @ 12:59 am[…] Comment on Meghan Daum on Internet Rage by AmosWhat I find ironic is that Duam finds the violent silencing of a public speaker by an angry mob to be the harmless antics of high-spirited, if misguided youth, but angry words directed at her through the internet causes her to throw up … […]
Comment on Internet Explorer 7 Final Released by Andrew GrantIf -- Centplus Tech (3a65e5) — 10/22/2006 @ 1:00 am“Back when Michelle Malkin printed names and addresses of some protesters…”
Correction: Michelle did not print the protesters’ addresses. She printed their names, e-mail addresses, and cell phone numbers.
Anon (23c2b4) — 10/22/2006 @ 2:25 amI agree that you should never post someone’s email address without a compelling reason. It leads to a deluge of spam that never stops and is very disrespectful.
There’s a total difference from it appearing in a paper document and it appearing in text on the web.
However, Michelle Malkin didn’t post anything that already wasn’t on their press release and website.
So while your statement is accurate, Anon., it’s a distinction without a difference.
Christoph (9824e6) — 10/22/2006 @ 2:39 amGood note on her hypocrisy.
There is the rage at perceived injustice that summons up terrible images; anon. email allows one to express those inner horrors.
Too much of such “free expression”, especially obscene words, makes the words lose most of their “power” — and then, only actual physical violence can express the “forcefulness” of the opinion.
Lenny Bruce and the idea that obscenities should be acceptable has led to an increase in hate speech and such PC supported acts of violence.
Folks who use the F* or N* or C* obscenities should be considered morons, even if they support your side. Unfortunately, mutual side support has become more important than supporting the process of actual dialog.
Tom Grey - Liberty Dad (63acbf) — 10/22/2006 @ 7:07 amWhat strikes me is how so many in the media long for those days when people “would have yelled at the wall and been done with it”. They do not want a conversation, they want a pulpit.
Ed (272d91) — 10/22/2006 @ 2:27 pmThere should be no tears when activities embraced become standard operating procedure by those you despise.
Californio (4871bb) — 10/24/2006 @ 10:55 ammeghan daum whines that the internet has put the reader on a more equal footing with the writer. any rank upstart can now go head to head with a times columnist. oh, for the good old days…
assistant devil's advocate (d15d7c) — 10/24/2006 @ 10:57 am[…] concept of posting anonymously on the Internet is far from new. Internet Rage has been around for as long as the Internet. People have been stalked, bullied, threatened, […]
Anonymous Proxies | Rick Tech (75201e) — 3/26/2008 @ 11:29 am