this makes some interesting reading. Please, go ahead. I’ll wait. (A long time. Don’t say I didn’t warn you.)
I feel the need to preface this with a comment that I rarely create social commentary, or write about anything that strays from my personal experiences and try to keep my friends and family off the blog unless given express consent. Similar to the way I consider taking someone’s photograph without their permission extremely rude and an invasion of privacy, I see blogging about someone without their permission both rude and an invasion of privacy. Most sentences on this blog start with “I”, and there is a reason for that, besides my being a poor writer.
I know I’m late to the game again, but I’ve seen the Emily Gould posts floating around blog-land and have just now sat down to see what was such a big damn deal. Now I know, and I may be just as insensitive as the posts that got this young woman in trouble. Other, more eloquent and opinionated bloggers with much more invested online than a silly little craft blog have posted here, here, and pretty much all over WordPress.
Free speech is a fantastic thing. I can’t imagine living in a world without the ability to say what I want to say at any time, and that shows how very spoiled I have become. The Internet changed everything, blah blah, information superhighway, blah blah, Internet celebrity, blah, new media, belch. The point is, yes, anyone with Internet access and the ability to type coherently has the right to say whatever they want online, but that doesn’t make it a wise choice. I understand Gould was employed at Gawker (I’ve never even been on the Gawker site) and posting about other people was the way she made a living. Public people talking about other public people. Have at it. My issue isn’t with her day job. My problem lies with the decision to make all parts of her life blog fodder, regardless of the wishes of those she was writing about. If Ms. Gould’s former boyfriend expressed his concern repeatedly over her posts violating his privacy, free speech or not, she needed to delete the posts in question. I’m not making this a power struggle of the sexes “she should do what her man wants” issue, or of creativity vs. censorship, it’s an issue of personal comfort and privacy. If said boyfriend did not want an Internet presence, what is the problem with respecting that? She created a secret and private blog to keep in contact with a friend overseas. Fantastic. Why, if they are discussing relationships and other topics of a personal matter that she knew her current (at the time) boyfriend would not be pleased to see on the Internet, was the blog public and viewable by anyone else? Forgive me if I’m a little slow, but why? Why in the name of all that’s sacred, would a responsible adult, who has already damaged a relationship by blogging, do the very same thing over again? It’s refusing to learn, and that I do not have sympathy for, no matter how melodramatically it is phrased. “Losing the will to blog” anyone? Linking that “secret” blog to Facebook? Absolutely stupid. “Stupid” is not the most elegant of words, but it accurately describes the action. Stupid.
My point being (and that is the reason we are all here, correct? to discuss me?) personal responsibility. I’m sorry Emily Gould had panic attacks at work. I’m sorry anonymous people have been unkind to her. I’m sorry blogging was once an enjoyable part of her life, and she now feels to overexposed to carry on. Those are all uncomfortable and trying life experiences BUT… she did it to herself.
Anyone can write about themselves until they wear their fingers down from typing, and that’s their right. But writing and posting publicly about others against their wishes, specifically ex-boyfriend #1 in this case, is not only irresponsible and rude but potentially detrimental not only to relationships but careers and even personal safety. I know I’m missing a lot of angles here, about bloggers of different sexes and how the Internet community perceives their work, about creativity and boundaries, about what “overexposure” really means, but personal responsibility was the issue that chaffed me the most after reading the NYT aritcle, so that’s what I posted about.
And I can do that.
That’s all.
