Apply Nasty Liberally as Necessary
An important discussion, if a back-and-forth is a discussion, happened in the comments to my entry about spotting Wendy McCaw and Arthur von (maybe he's a Baron of Physiology?) Wiesenberger at Lazy Acres last week. I thought it might be illuminating to make it its own entry, as I assume most of you don't wander through my comments from a week ago, so here's what transpired:
Anonymous said...
I'm not a Wendy fan, but your comments are extremely mean-spirited. The woman is imperfect, but has money, and so you speak of her as if she is not human.
Would we praise you for being so cruel to a penniless person who had trouble with her misfortune?
Think about it.
George said...
Anonymous said...
I'm not a Wendy fan, but your comments are extremely mean-spirited. The woman is imperfect, but has money, and so you speak of her as if she is not human.
Would we praise you for being so cruel to a penniless person who had trouble with her misfortune?
Think about it.
George said...
I want to respond to Anonymous 9:11 am. Gee, I'm mean-spirited. I didnt' realize I masterminded by my careless incompetence the destruction of a town's newspaper, messing up the lives of over 30 employees and their families, while ruining a town's major news source.
I'm sorry but I do hold the rich to a higher standard, especially when they choose to run something that isn't just a business but part of the public trust.
And I would hope that if you went through all two years plus of this blog, while you'll find plenty of snark, none of it has been pointed at the poor or powerless. That's mean-spirited. Making fun of the rich and powerful is really the only weapon against them we have, isn't it?
posted by George at 5:05 PM
6 Comments:
Well said.
To allude to the comments thread, I still don't know who these peeps are, not being a Sanat Barbaran (Santa Barbarino?).
But from what I can garner, I agree with James. Well-said.
Mike, it's been one long, on-going saga at the News-Press, our town's major daily. It's privately owned by Wendy McCaw, who, since at least june, has seemed determined to destroy the paper. To find out more you can search News-Press on my blog and see my tens of entries on the issue, or just go to this one, which links to an American Journalism Review article that sums the whole sad story up really well.
So, if you hold the rich to a higher standard of behavior, doesn't that imply that you hold the poor to a lesser standard of behavior?
Does that mean that you think people without a lot of money are not as accountable for their actions as people with money?
Do you really believe that peeking into a person's wallet before you decide whether to judge them is fair to anyone?
Dear, brave, anonymous 11:01 pm--
Why does one claim automatically mean the exact opposite? I don't hold anyone to lesser standards. But I do think those of us who are better off--and I realize that I am, if not in the Wendy McCaw zillionaire realm--owe the world something.
And I don't peek into someone's wallet first--morals are morals.
But when someone only sticks up for her rich friends (i.e. Rob Lowe), and constantly goes on and on about how she owns the paper, then she deserves what she gets.
George, you contradict yourself alot on this topic. You said that you hold the rich to higher standards. I didn't say that. You did.
Post a Comment
<< Home