Rafael Behr On Max Gogarty (Not-Related)
AFTER this: Nepotism In The Media: The Guardian’s Max Gogarty Goes On His Hols, this:
But as the case of Max Gogarty shows, there is no presumption of civility or community spirit online. His fate should be instructive to politicians. He was flamed because he was perceived to be bogus. Self-selecting judges ruled that he had no business writing for the Guardian. The message was transmitted swiftly, sometimes eloquently, sometimes wittily. His travel diary was extinguished. As an expression of mob will, it was very efficient. But that does not mean it was fair.
What’s not fair?
Cultural Revolution aside, we would venture that the “recent pillorying” of young Max happened to be because readers felt insulted that the Guardian tried to put one over on them. First of all, they hired the kid of a former travel writer write a lame travel blog about his gap year. Secondly! The kid’s writing had an almost unparalleled skill at being annoying.
Rather:
“There’s no point debating anything online. You might as well hurl shoes in the air to knock clouds from the sky. The internet’s perfect for all manner of things, but productive discussion ain’t one of them. It provides scant room for debate and infinite opportunities for fruitless point-scoring: the heady combination of perceived anonymity, gestated responses, random heckling and a notional “live audience” quickly conspire to create a “perfect storm” of perpetual bickering.”
Gogarty could respond. The web offers plenty of space to do so. If he wants to write, here’s his chance. Stop “shitting” yourself. You’ve got an audience – that’s the hard part…
Posted: 18th, February 2008 | In: Broadsheets Comments (3) | TrackBack | Permalink
