As Toronto Sun movie critic Jim Slotek once said, there sure are a lot of Mr. Anonymouses posting on the Toronto Sun Family blog.
When Jim speaks his mind, he puts his name to what he has to say, which has been a healthy, but rare, avenue taken by TSF readers who still work for Sun Media.
Freedom of speech doesn't have the same solid foundation it had during the first two decades of the Sun and that is lamentable.
There have been the numerous rejected anonymous comments containing libel, slander or just plain mindless cheap shots aimed at Sun staffers, Sun management and TSF.
But most worrisome since TSF was launched in December of 2006 have been the number of legitimate comments posted anonymously by employees too fearful to be named.
They fear losing their jobs for being critical of their bosses, Sun Media and Quebecor.
Canadian journalists fearing to speak their mind.
What a long, dark and debilitating road Sun employees have travelled since the 1990s.
Which brings us to AngryJournalists.com, a web site mentioned recently in Ian Harvey's blog. The moderated comment site, launched in February, recently passed the 5,000-comment mark.
Blogger Kiyoshi Martinez says while he was impressed by Roger Ebert's personal policy that he signs his name to anything he writes, he decided to promote anonymity to allow journalists to vent freely.
"AngryJournalist.com is for the underpaid, overworked, frustrated, pissed off and ignored media professionals to publicly and anonymously vent their anger," he says. "Share your story. With any luck, you’ll feel better.
"Granted, since it’s all anonymous, specific papers will never know they’re being discussed or ranted about (unless someone wants to name names, which I recommend against for obvious reasons), but the larger goal is to change the perception across the industry."
In a word, that is bullshit. Anonymity defeats all of the principles of journalism in democratic countries.
Why would any self respecting journalist work for an employer who does not respect his or her right to voice an opinion?
Why work for any employer you don't respect, period?
Numerous Sun Media journalists who lost all respect for Sun Media in the aftermath of Doug Creighton's ouster as CEO in 1992, and Quebecor's takeover in 1999, have walked out the door.
Journalists to the core, one and all.
Vent all you want anonymously, but don't consider it beneficial for you or for journalism.
We've said it before, but our favourite stand-up-and-be-counted moment in 40 years of newsrooms occurred minutes after Paul Godfrey announced Doug Creighton was out and he was in as CEO.
"Fuck this," said Christie Blatchford, standing at her desk in the Toronto Sun newsroom.
And so began the almost unanimous employee protest, highly visible in a full page "Why?" ad in the Sun, "Why?" buttons designed by Andy Donato being worn in the building and columns speaking out in support of Creighton being published.
We say almost unanimous because there were a few people who opted out of signing the "Why?" ad fearing their jobs would be in jeopardy under the new regime.
The "why?" of Creighton's ouster was never answered. but we have never felt more proud of colleagues than the hundreds throughout 333 who didn't hesitate to speak their minds in support of Creighton.
Creighton, who died a disillusioned man in 2004, wouldn't recognize his beloved tabloid today, diminished in size, in heart and in spirit.
And we're confident he would be repulsed by the need for anonymity among so many Sun employees wanting to speak their minds.
When Jim speaks his mind, he puts his name to what he has to say, which has been a healthy, but rare, avenue taken by TSF readers who still work for Sun Media.
Freedom of speech doesn't have the same solid foundation it had during the first two decades of the Sun and that is lamentable.
There have been the numerous rejected anonymous comments containing libel, slander or just plain mindless cheap shots aimed at Sun staffers, Sun management and TSF.
But most worrisome since TSF was launched in December of 2006 have been the number of legitimate comments posted anonymously by employees too fearful to be named.
They fear losing their jobs for being critical of their bosses, Sun Media and Quebecor.
Canadian journalists fearing to speak their mind.
What a long, dark and debilitating road Sun employees have travelled since the 1990s.
Which brings us to AngryJournalists.com, a web site mentioned recently in Ian Harvey's blog. The moderated comment site, launched in February, recently passed the 5,000-comment mark.
Blogger Kiyoshi Martinez says while he was impressed by Roger Ebert's personal policy that he signs his name to anything he writes, he decided to promote anonymity to allow journalists to vent freely.
"AngryJournalist.com is for the underpaid, overworked, frustrated, pissed off and ignored media professionals to publicly and anonymously vent their anger," he says. "Share your story. With any luck, you’ll feel better.
"Granted, since it’s all anonymous, specific papers will never know they’re being discussed or ranted about (unless someone wants to name names, which I recommend against for obvious reasons), but the larger goal is to change the perception across the industry."
In a word, that is bullshit. Anonymity defeats all of the principles of journalism in democratic countries.
Why would any self respecting journalist work for an employer who does not respect his or her right to voice an opinion?
Why work for any employer you don't respect, period?
Numerous Sun Media journalists who lost all respect for Sun Media in the aftermath of Doug Creighton's ouster as CEO in 1992, and Quebecor's takeover in 1999, have walked out the door.
Journalists to the core, one and all.
Vent all you want anonymously, but don't consider it beneficial for you or for journalism.
We've said it before, but our favourite stand-up-and-be-counted moment in 40 years of newsrooms occurred minutes after Paul Godfrey announced Doug Creighton was out and he was in as CEO.
"Fuck this," said Christie Blatchford, standing at her desk in the Toronto Sun newsroom.
And so began the almost unanimous employee protest, highly visible in a full page "Why?" ad in the Sun, "Why?" buttons designed by Andy Donato being worn in the building and columns speaking out in support of Creighton being published.
We say almost unanimous because there were a few people who opted out of signing the "Why?" ad fearing their jobs would be in jeopardy under the new regime.
The "why?" of Creighton's ouster was never answered. but we have never felt more proud of colleagues than the hundreds throughout 333 who didn't hesitate to speak their minds in support of Creighton.
Creighton, who died a disillusioned man in 2004, wouldn't recognize his beloved tabloid today, diminished in size, in heart and in spirit.
And we're confident he would be repulsed by the need for anonymity among so many Sun employees wanting to speak their minds.
Thanks for your thoughts, but I do feel somewhat compelled to respond to a few of your statements.
ReplyDelete"In a word, that is bullshit. Anonymity defeats all of the principles of journalism in democratic countries."
First of all, AngryJournalist.com isn't intended to be journalism. It's a collection of public frustrations penned by those in the industry. There's a distinction. It's a Web site and a punching bag for the industry. These "principles of journalism" don't apply.
"Why would any self respecting journalist work for an employer who does not respect his or her right to voice an opinion?"
Maybe because it's the only job offer you got. Maybe it's because you can't afford to take risks at your job and get fired for mouthing off about your employer. Yes, that part is bullshit, but that's also a reality.
Obviously, there's a lot of journalists who work for an employer they don't respect. But it's a job. It pays bills. It's where you are now until you can go somewhere better. And not everyone can just quit and find a new job. Not in this job market.
In an ideal world, yes, every Angry Journalist would sign their name. And they'd mention their employers. And things would change and get better. But that's not the case.
"Vent all you want anonymously, but don't consider it beneficial for you or for journalism."
People have written me to thank me for creating the site. They've said they feel better after being able to rant. It's stress relief. It lets you know you're not alone in this industry that's going through a bad time. How's that not beneficial for an individual?
As far as its value to the industry, well, I can't argue that it's helpful, but it sure isn't what's bringing the industry down any. Journalism and its owners are doing that just fine.