Thursday, April 03, 2008

I'm watching and cringing and thinking "Gods, no!"

There's a very intense and depressing discussion happening over at Blackamazon's blog.

I saw the wreck coming a mile away, but this is just... it's... my head explodes.

Beth said: What I'm seeing here is that BA is allowed to be mad and write what she wants but Seal Press can't react off the cuf because they should know better. Seal Press gets told how to react to something written about them and then gets told how they should comment.

It's always the same thing. If Seal Press had just approached BA in a different way no one would be attacking them.

Right.


And what I'm seeing is a comment that so grossly mischaractorizes the situation that I'm almost at a loss for words. BA is allowed to be mad and write what she wants because it's her space. Ignoring, for the moment, that one of the comments that was being attacked wasn't even BA's, it's still BA's blog, and, the last time I checked, that means that that she gets to write about whatever she wants. So, yeah, she does get to write about whatever she wants. And, no, Seal Press can't react off the cuff because they should know better. They're representing a publisher and posting at BA's in at least a marginally official manner when they say "Seal press here." They came into another person's personal space. Whether you agree with them or not is irrelevent- it wasn't a very professional way to handle the situation.

Further, they weren't told how to react. Nobody said that agents of Seal Press couldn't be upset or annoyed or hurt or angry or any other reaction you want to name. The criticism is with how they acted on BA's site. And, yeah, they're told how they should or shouldn't comment there. You know what? That's perfectly fair. It's BA's blog, and she's got every right to decide how she wants people to post there. I don't think that's particularly unusual amongst bloggers.

And if you're trying to help the situation? Dropping lines like "it's always the same thing" is a really bad tactic to take.

I didn't see anybody promise that they wouldn't have attacked Seal Press if Seal had come into the conversation differently. For all I know, nothing that Seal could have said would have changed the attitudes of those involved. But, the tactic that was taken was pretty much sure to fail. For all of the reasons listed in that thread.

Telling any marginalized group "you're marginalized because you don't do enough to become unmarginalized"? Never a good strategy.

2 comments:

Kevin Andre Elliott said...

I hadn't realized that thread had blown up like that. Last I was there, there were maybe three comments.

I need to decompress after reading that, because right now, I'm really pissed.

roses said...

Calling somebody out for their rudeness is not the same as telling them they can't say or do something. BA didn't stop them from commenting, although she certainly could have. She just told them they were being rude and unproductive, which they were. Not to mention appallingly unprofessional. I'm trying to imagine what would happen if a PR person for the company I work for responded to criticism of our company (however strongly worded) by talking down to the criticisers and telling them to stop "hating". I suspect that person would be fired.