News-Record.com

You ignore those of us who've had the courage to sign our names. So what's the difference?

By the way, John. A doctor sued the Medical Board yesterday . . . citing conflicts of interest in the way physicians are "represented" (by the Medical Society) . . . and disparities in the way they are disciplined . . . that do not serve to protect patients.

It's kinda "relevant" to a story that's been sitting right under your nose (and you've been ignoring - despite the fact I've signed my name) for years.

I've have not seen the lawsuit (which is relevant to all of the citizens in NC - not just those in Wake County) reported online. Apparently Buffy the Vampire Slayer (don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan) is more important.

Read more carefully. The reference isn't about whether the blogger pays attention to people who sign there names. It is about giving little credence to people like me that leave comments.

And by the way, yes, Buffy is more important.

Alas, I've been reading for quite a while, nmtc. For a while I bought into the whole "citizen journalism" thing. My bad. John's problem is he gives little credence to people like me. In fact, his New Year's Resolution was to ignore us.

I'd suggest you read the complaint (posted at the N&O and linked on my blog). You might not think Buffy is more important after you read some of the stories cited in it. You might be glad your weren't one of them . . . and grateful some doctors are disgusted enough to take a stand.

Or not. Buffy's hot. And we all have our priorities.

That, of course, is not true, as almost anyone who read this can understand.

Chuckle, an oldie but goodie.

If "that is not true", John, where is the story on Dr. Faulkner's lawsuit against the Medical Board (featured in the N&O) . . . one that is certainly relevant to the kind of medical care patients receive in North Carolina (and the forces affecting that) . . . one that just might warrant a closer look at what's been going on in your own backyard?

Of course that would mean you'd have to actually change your mind (or grow a spine and stand up to some sdvertisers).

John, YOU are the guy here with all of the power and YOU determine who is "constructive" (that usually depends on if someone agrees with you & your decisions or not) . . . who/what is "relevant" . . . and who/what is not.

Meanwhile what did we get in the N&R today? More race-baiting.

Mary, I join you in the chuckle.

And there you have it. From his perch high in the rafters of citizen journalism, John Robinson thinks this is merely an exercise in oneupmanship. It's funny.

And please note, he hasn't answered the question I posed . . . the question to which I signed my name.

Where's the story?

Dr. Johnson I continue to applaud your efforts.

But, I'm afraid you and I -- and several others -- might as well just give up with this.

This has been going on for more than 2 years. Everyone is constantly asked to be part of the "community of ideas"

Ideas are shared, but when there is the least bit of disagreement or *chance* that thinking of the establishment at the N&R could be "wrong," everything just goes sideways.

It's not like we're ever shut down or closed out.

No, it's much worse. It's the typical environment of a newspaper: passive aggressive.

Never does anyone outright say "I'm running this blog and to heck with you" -- but that's where this all essentially ends up.

I can't think of ONE TIME over the last couple of years in which JR or Lex has ever seemed enlightened by the remarks on these blogs. I see that they get gleeful when Beau Dure and others agree with what they post. Or when someone augments their ideas with a small addition that just strengthens their overall point.

But, I don't recall when someone posted a differing opinion in this wonderful "community" and JR said "You know, I've been giving this a lot of thought and your idea is staring to make sense." OR "You know, I wouldn't have agreed with you two years ago, but after repeatedly seeing examples of (fill in the blank with any constant theme of these entries) I think I can really see your point of view."

(Actually, I think there was one time when JR *might* have accidently admitted in a backward way that there *might* be some bias at the N&R, but that would be *it* -- and it's still not exactly "open mindedness" to the overall different opinions shared here.)

Instead, it's as if the die was cast 2 1/2 years ago on every idea, decision and viewpoint from the N&R establishment and it gets spewed forth from this blog and Lex'. Any effort to disagree is simply swept under the rug. Is it overt? Not exactly, but it's certainly the way people at newspapers have always treated readers: "Thank you very much. I don't agree with you, but I've listened very well. Click. Now, where was I with putting my ideas of how the world is run in the newspaper?"

Passive aggressive newspapering at its best -- and probably even worse given the built-in passive aggressiveness of us folks in the South (I can say that because I'm from this area...)

re Jim's
"I can't think of ONE TIME over the last couple of years in which JR or Lex has ever seemed enlightened by the remarks on these blogs. "

3 points:
first-
People rarely do say "hey, what you just said has changed my mind", because that's not how minds change - instead, a comment plants a seed, and the seed grows...
and we often don't remember where it came from.

second, re absence of "You know, I wouldn't have agreed with you two years ago, but after repeatedly seeing examples of (fill in the blank with any constant theme of these entries) I think I can really see your point of view." -
It might be worth looking back at the caliber of those past comments, Jim. You've been a champion of the Iraw War from the get-go, right? I might be wrong, but I seem to remember someone (you?) a year or two back expressing utter incredulity that Iraqi civilians might feel that our invasion had not been to their benefit.

third -
never mistake a mirror for a window. Have there been any indications that your mind's been changed by anything you've read from JR and Lex, over the last couple of years?

and for Mary - can you write about something different, or is that the sum total of what you have to offer here?
(definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results)

maybe we need a related definition, of ineffectiveness: doing the same thing over and over again, not expecting (and not getting) different results.

(i have to plead guilty to this one, in some realms)

Don't waste your time and life, Mary, by commenting repeatedly and at length on the same subject. Time for us to move on.