The Blogger Strikes Back

In a recent article found here in Dartmouth's conservative newspaper, The Dartmouth Review, written under the pseudonym "Kevin Parkman," several distressing statements were made defaming me and my character. Here is the letter I wrote in response:

5/10/05

Mr. “Parkman”:

In a recent article published on May 9, 2005 titled, “The Dartmouth Review of Blogs,” you make several personal attacks and jump to conclusions based on false evidence which causes me much distress.

You reference a collaborative blog, of which Laura Reyes ’08, Ian Tapu ’08, Ken Wells ’08, and myself are all members, titled “the randomness.” Let me begin by saying that my post dated Sunday, April 24, 2005 was an inside joke between friends. It was a fictitious story following a discussion about a hypothetical night during Dimensions Weekend. You yourself acknowledged that, “Mr. Jones, Ms. Reyes, and Mr. Wells all seem to be well-acquainted with one another.” Therefore, the intended audience understood the correct meaning of my joke.

An outside reader, such as yourself, not understanding the context of the post, read it and drew false conclusions and assumptions about me and my character. Your not knowing what an “MWT” is only further proves that you are out of the loop. What’s worse and quite reflective of your poor journalistic integrity is the fact that you lack an ombudsman on the staff of the Review to check the “facts” you put into print. I find it quite disturbing that you would choose to print judgments and assumptions about a person’s character and sexuality before verifying that your information is correct. Can you not see the deep harm that this could cause?

You state, “Jones is a homosexual, as we know from a post at the Randomness where he rhetorically opined about his experiences during admitted students’ weekend.” Yet, nowhere in my post do I say, “I have a sexual preference for men” or, even more directly, “I am a homosexual.” In an inside joke between my circle of friends who are also contributors to “the randomness,” I made reference to dancing with a prospective student. Now, what you misconstrued to be concrete truth letting you and your readers “know” I am homosexual, is actually merely a misguided supposition.

First, you make the egregious assumption that males’ dancing with males necessarily constitutes homosexual behavior. Second, you completely jump from A to C in your conclusion about my sexual orientation based on a joke, and not fact. Third, you pass uninformed judgment about my “misrepresentation” of the Admissions Office in my personal life. If you actually cared, I did not drink a “Mad Dog,” nor did I smoke a “J.” My remarks were obviously sarcastic as I stated, “Who knew drinking a whole Mad Dog and smoking (sic) a J would impair judgement (sic)? Couldn’t someone have told me?” Anyone with common sense would know that alcohol and drugs would impair judgment. So, before you decide to reproduce material from a website in order to make assumptions and jump to conclusions, it would be nice to consult the source, especially when it is easily accessible with a quick “blitz.”

Also, I fail to see how my sexuality has any relevance to the subject of the article, “blogging.” Instead, you used the opportunity to launch into your own personal crusade regarding homosexuality by using it in a negative tone and accusatory way. Your petty labeling only makes obvious your agenda regarding homosexuality. Let me assure you, that being called a homosexual is in no way an insult. Yet, I am a person, and when you label, you reject all of the many facets that comprise my character, personality, and humanity. So, whatever motivation you had in casually throwing out your personal assumptions and views about homosexual behavior was unwarranted and untoward.

According to my knowledge as a blogger and someone who is fairly familiar with blogs in general, they do not all have to have the philosophical waxing of a Daniel Webster. Rather, they are an open exchange of personal views, opinions, thoughts, and values. Not all blogs are the same—some are meant as alternative forms of journalism, like news blogs, while others are meant more as online diaries. To question people’s right to say what they want is to question free speech. Admittedly, my blog, “CJo: Ahead of My Time” (http://cjo.blogspot.com) does not have a strict agenda; thus, it more of an exercise in personal expression that anyone interested in reading is more than welcome to access.

If the Review chooses to print an article about blogs in general and the reasons why they are good or bad, they do not need to pinpoint specific blogs, because such an action not only fails to achieve a commentary on blogs themselves, but also unfairly takes blog entries out of context and can cause harm to the individual.

As a side note, I find it quite ironic that you chose to point out the number of writing “mistakes” with a “[sic]” as if grammatical correctness is the ultimate goal of my blog. I just wanted to call your attention to the last sentence in the second-to-last paragraph of your article:
But what of the fact that, unlike mainstream media outlets, the distribution of blogs is severely left-tailed, making the average blog is [sic] far less useleful [sic] than the average news outlet. (The Dartmouth Review, 5/9/05)

Lastly, I think it would be appropriate of you to step up and use your own name in writing your article. If you take pride in defaming and demeaning others in your work, laying everyone’s personal business out on the table, the least you could do is step up and share your own. Take some credit for your work, as poor as it is. You certainly do not hide anything about the people you reference in your article, so what do you, yourself, have to hide?

Christopher Jones ‘08

kinda pissed and a little disappointed in humanity, kiddies.