We knew L.A. Times editors were clueless about the Internet, but this is ridiculous:
Last night I wrote about L.A. Times editor David Lauter’s mass e-mail poorly justifying the paper’s failure to cover the 8000 – 15,000 person anti-tax rally hosted by John and Ken. A commenter to that post left the following amusing comment:
In reading your post and the comments, there is a fact missing that’s important. The editor David Lauter did send the response you cited to all that wrote him an email complaining about the lack of coverage. I received it. But, what he did do, was send it as a mass mailing to all that sent him a comment. In other words, I received his reply with hundreds of email addresses including mine in the list in the email.
Now, I asked myself, why do that? Save time for him? Uhh…embarrass those that wrote? Uhh…put us on a spam list?
Well since I received his reply, I am now getting all kinds of spam. Thanks David! I can only hope the LA Times goes BK.
I wrote the commenter and confirmed his claim. The commenter has now had to set up an elaborate spam-fighting process, which I had to negotiate to get the e-mail through: first my e-mail was returned as undeliverable, then I forwarded to someone who white-listed my address, and then sent it again.
Who wants to be the one to explain the “bcc” line to David Lauter?