The things I didn’t say

Last week’s “keep it at the top” posting break meant omitting a couple of things I might otherwise have posted. On the whole, you didn’t miss anything except perhaps too-prompt responses that deserved being thought out better or abandoned.

Or, of course, turned into Cites & Insights essays.

Briefly, here’s what didn’t get posted (that I can even remember) and what might or might not happen to it:

  • A post about toxicity in the blogging environment that I’d been thinking about long before the incident that sparked a one-week break. I don’t believe anything will happen with that one. Fact is, I’ve unsubbed from one (obscure) liblog because the poster was consistently negative in a dispiriting manner–but that’s my business. I don’t suggest anyone else follow my lead. The other major aspect of toxicity (“Jekyll and Hyde” bloggers, who reflect one face when writing in their own blogs and another, much more difficult, face when comment elsewhere) probably isn’t worth pursuing, particularly since lots of us do that at some point. In any case, I now understand (even more than I did before) that libloggers are a relatively polite bunch as compared to the wolves out there in the blogworld at large.
  • A brief post on why my print copy of the April Wired–the last in my freebie subscription–lacks a cover (which found its two-part way to the trash). Yes, that has to do with the previous bullet, to some extent and indirectly. If you’ve seen the cover, you might consider what percentage of CEOs of either Fortune 500 or Wired Whatever companies are women, the likelihood that Wired would have a naked man (presumably an actor/model hunk) to make their cute point about corporate transparency, and what this sort of casual misogyny says…ah, the hell with it. I’d just get downgraded for being PC or a wuss or whatever the term is these days.
  • A post about being wrong. That one might turn into an essay. Or it might not. It can wait…
  • A post about the CLIR report E-Journal Archiving Metes and Bounds: A Survey of the Landscape–because I’ve finally (belatedly) read this interesting and important report and because it’s not likely to get covered in Library Stuff within Cites & Insights [see next bullet]. I do plan to write that post/mini-review. Real Soon Now.
  • A post about my personal heroes among libloggers–well, that wasn’t going to get written last week anyway, because I’m not sure what to do about it. Maybe in the future. Someone suggested “five unsung liblogging heroes” as a meme, but I wasn’t thinking in terms of five, and “unsung” wasn’t necessarily one of my criteria. (Which loops back to the Being Wrong post…)
  • A post about “citizens and consumers,” recognizing one peculiarity of my household that probably warps my perceptions on some issues. Maybe later.
  • Comments on the new set of “speaking” posts. I’d printed off a couple of them and thought about doing a Followup (on my “Little List” essay) in the next C&I. But there’s too much and it’s too interesting and the conversation’s still lively, so I’ll wait…

Whew. That’s two or three weeks’ worth of posts, but some of them really should be essays and others should be noisily abandoned (too late for quiet abandonment).

My goal for this blog was an average of two posts a week. I was way over that average for the first year. For the second year, if you take out bursts of energy and things like the 16 Balanced Libraries stub posts, I’m not all that far off–maybe 3.5 a week and certainly fewer than 4 a week.

Meanwhile, here’s another metablog. The blogging mirror is ever so shiny!

14 Responses to “The things I didn’t say”

  1. Seth Finkelstein Says:

    “Whatever companies are women, the likelihood that Wired would have a naked man …”

    Sex Sells.

    If you want unrealistic-looking man images, the place to look is at the products targeted to woman’s demographic and fantasy – e.g. romance novels.

    http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=oddlyEnoughNews&storyid=2007-03-24T210457Z_01_N22341707_RTRUKOC_0_US-HARLEQUIN-MODELS.xml

    Harlequin books seeks “real men” for covers

    “Until now, the publisher relied on modeling agencies to supply bodies for its concupiscent covers. But the readership — predominantly female and averaging 42 years of age — was upset when slight, young cover models clashed with the brawny, mature heroes described within”

    “From what I understand, (Harlequin) readers are women who want to escape from the relationship that they’re in,” said auditioner Carlos Troccoli, 30, who was tall, sturdy and muscular. “I can bring that to them.”

  2. walt Says:

    Seth, True enough, and if Wired really is FHM for pseudo-grownups, I guess there’s no issue. I would note that the men don’t actually pose naked, though…and in the case of Harlequin, there’s no hypocrisy: They’re selling heat.

  3. Not Liz Says:

    As a woman who actually paid for a subscription to Wired, I have to say, I agree with Walt about the most recent cover. I was already toying with letting the thing lapse, but after receiving that issue that deal was sealed.

    It seems to me that the tech field is male-dominated enough without reifying that bias with nudie-girl imagery, as that cover certainly did. So, shame on Wired. Perhaps they should think a little harder about who their readership is — and who they’d like it to be.

  4. walt Says:

    Not Liz: Thanks for verifying that it’s not just me being oversensitive. Fortunately, I’d already decided to let that sub (and Business 2.0) lapse once the freebie expires, which it just did.

  5. jennimi Says:

    I agree about Wired. And I paid! I get much better stuff in the good tech blogs, and if there’s a worthy article I’ll see it mentioned a bunch.

    Write the essays! Do it!!!!! Looking forward, as always.

  6. walt Says:

    The last five bullets are likely to turn into either posts or essays (Essay, Post, Unclear, Post, Essay), sooner or later–for the last one, “later” is likely since the conversations are midstream.

    The first one: Not a chance. I already said more than I should.

    The second one: I think I just made that post; there’s not much more to say.

  7. Steve Lawson Says:

    I have wanted to write a post on my personal liblog “heroes,” too, but I was afraid it would be more trouble than it is worth. I would inevitably leave out some great people.

    Incidentally, if forced to choose three, I think my list wouldn’t be “heroes,” but rather “heroines.”

  8. walt Says:

    I regard “heroes” as very much non-gendered in this case. Right now, a majority on my short list would also be women. And, actually, that’s going to be a tough one to do…not because they’re not out there, but because the list becomes vapid, voluminous, or wildly incomplete…

  9. Steve Lawson Says:

    Oops, I didn’t mean to imply that your list wasn’t gender-inclusive. Just that I was a bit surprised that my list wasn’t.

  10. walt Says:

    I didn’t really take any such implication. I was just adding on my own comment…you know, I suspect I gave jennimi an overly optimistic answer: That essay/post really won’t happen any time soon, given the minefield surrounding it.

    Now, maybe if you stuck your blog out and started a meme…then after thirty or forty people had chimed in, I might do a bit of strategic following.

    Five; three is really cutting it too tight. Or, hey, choose your own number. 13? Any prime number less than 62?

  11. Dorothea Salo Says:

    I think “blog heroes” is a great idea. If you don’t start it, Walt, I may have to. Goodness knows I do enough whining and moaning; it’s only right I do better every now and again.

    If you stick a number on it — say, five — and make clear that it’s not an exhaustive list, I think much “I GOT LEFT OUT!” drama will be avoided.

  12. walt Says:

    Hi Dorothea,

    I think you’re right about the “just five” limiting the grief. Part of my problem (other than a chronic problem with “fave raves”–any time someone asks me “who’s your favorite [author|musician|etc]?” I go blank) is that I’m torn between just “blogging heroes and “relatively unsung blogging heroes”–like the ten bloggers I thought more people should read (two lists of five each, buried in the 75th anniversary C&I).

    So, hey, if you want to start a meme, be my guest. I agree that it’s a good idea, regardless of originator (and I’m sure others have done this before I thought of it). I’ll probably participate at some point. Otherwise, well, I might figure out what it is I had in mind and do it, or someone like, say, Steve Lawson might jump in…

  13. Kathleen de la Pena McCook Says:

    Assuming that the host is exempt my five library blogs include:
    Shifted Librarian,
    Library Juice,
    Librarian.net,
    ExLibris,
    Library Stuff

  14. Kathleen de la Pena McCook Says:

    O, LISNEWS is, of course the hero of heroes.


This blog is protected by dr Dave\\\\\\\'s Spam Karma 2: 103772 Spams eaten and counting...