From declanm@netcom.com Sat Sep 2 22:27:59 1995 Return-Path: Received: from po7.andrew.cmu.edu by mail3.netcom.com (8.6.12/Netcom) id QAA02961; Sat, 2 Sep 1995 16:40:03 -0700 Received: (from postman@localhost) by po7.andrew.cmu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id TAA05956; Sat, 2 Sep 1995 19:42:03 -0400 Received: via switchmail for fight-censorship+@andrew.cmu.edu; Sat, 2 Sep 1995 19:42:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from po5.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID ; Sat, 2 Sep 1995 19:41:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from netcom.netcom.com (netcom.netcom.com [192.100.81.100]) by po5.andrew.cmu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA12397 for ; Sat, 2 Sep 1995 19:41:07 -0400 Received: by netcom.netcom.com (8.6.12/Netcom) id QAA10246; Sat, 2 Sep 1995 16:37:55 -0700 Date: Sat, 2 Sep 1995 16:37:53 -0700 (PDT) From: D B McCullagh Subject: Mark Dallara on Martha Siegel and CMU To: fight-censorship@andrew.cmu.edu Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: Note that the Carnegie Mellon magazine's editor, Ann Curran, reports to Don Hale, the publisher. Hale is CMU's vice president for university relations who gave Rimm office space in the PR building to field press calls; who distributed copies of Rimm's study that were billed as the "Carnegie Mellon study"; who defended CMU's censorship policies to the press last November; and who was the university's initial spokesperson on the Rimm study this summer. -Declan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 02 Sep 1995 01:01:36 +0000 (GMT) From: Mark Dallara To: hud@netcom.com, brock@well.com, bdddal@aol.com, mikeyd@grove.ufl.edu, mnemonic@well.com, declanm@netcom.com, bb+graffiti.bboard-censorship@cmu.edu Subject: Re: Martha Siegel in CMU Magazine Posted to alt.internet.media-coverage, umem.talk, and perhaps forwarded FYI... mddallara@cc.memphis.edu (Mark Dallara) wrote: >As Declan noted in an earlier post, Martha Siegel, CMU alumna, is the >subject of an article in Carnegie Mellon Magazine. The title is "Mass >Internet Postings Bring On 'Screaming, Yelling, and a Lot of Business!'", Well, this has developed into an issue somewhat beyond the C&S problem. Apparently some journalists are not quite prepared for immediate accessibility and accountability. Here's a brief chronology of the situation (uh, without dates or times or real chronological information...) 1. A CMU alumnus gives me a copy of Carnegie Mellon magazine, so I can read the interview with Martha Siegel. I read. I snort. 2. I post two questions and answers from the interview, as well as two quotes from the editor's notes, to *five* _pertinent_ newsgroups. I also include my personal comments and the magazine's *published* contact information, consisting of a fax number and the editor's email address. 3. Several people post followups on USENET, basically echoing my sentiments. Some mention that they are forwarding their posts to the editor's address. A few people send comments to me, and cc: the editor. 4. One reader contacts me and says that he has been carrying on a brief correspondence with the editor, after forwarding his comments to her. He notes that she seemed a bit confused and angry, and was accusing him of posting her email address the the whole world. He forwards her a full copy of my post, and notes that now she is mad at me. 5. To clarify things for the editor, Ann Curran, I send her an email, which I posted to a.i.m-c under the subject title "Open letter to CMU mag editor". 6. She responds briefly, claiming that my actions are "vicious and reprehensible". 7. I respond with the following email: Sorry, but you've missed the point entirely. If you consider criticism to be "vicious and reprehensible", then you're in the wrong job. And let me remind you that YOUR MAGAZINE published your email address as the proper one for responses and letters to the editor. If you don't want honest feedback, you can always choose to not publish a fax number, email address, and snailmail address for responses, but that would be analagous to sticking your head in the sand. I offered candid criticism of the article, and encouraged others to do the same. Deal with it. 8. She responds with a repetition of her initial statement. My actions are "vicious and reprehensible". 9. I respond again: Yeah, I read it the first time, but I don't think you're paying attention. My only *actions*, my dear, were offering criticism in a public online forum, and including the mag's contact information. This is nothing personal. If the Letters section had said, "Send letters to cmu.mag@andrew.cmu.edu", then I would have posted THAT address. Here's a big clue: If you don't want letters from the online community in your personal emailbox, either (1) set up a separate account to handle letters to the editor, or (2) DON'T PUBLISH AN EMAIL ADDRESS. You're supposed to be an editor, for chrissakes. Grow up. If you're going to stay in the editorial kitchen, you'd better grow some thick skin and learn to take the heat. These accusations of viciousness are petulant and childish. I understand that you probably don't get much feedback other than the "rah-rah-go-alumni" variety, but you chose to cover a topic that's an extremely sore spot with net.citizens. Editors who make themselves accessible to networked readers had better learn to deal with public criticism of their articles. And that's where it stands. Ms. Curran has apparently bought into Martha Siegel's "conspiracy" theory, and thinks that all the university netizens are "out to get them". Newspaper and magazine editors had better get used to the fact that online responses to their articles will occasionally be: 1. Quick 2. Numerous 3. Biting 4. Presented in a public forum which may encourage other responses If they can't handle that, they'd better hire someone to process letters, and not publish their fucking email addresses in the "Letters" section. Sheesh... -- Mark Dallara | Finger for Graduate Student | PGP public key. Biomedical Engineering | University of Memphis | Public Key Fingerprint: * Florida '93, Memphis '95 * | 33 54 17 8C 07 DF CE F9 aka "Beast" on the iFrag Server | 3B 15 B1 FE B4 17 87 DD http://www.mecca.org/BME/STUDENTS/mdallara.html --