Follow me on
Twitter

More Information

NEW Expanded Edition

PRESS RELEASES FROM HELL and How to Fix Them
The Traditional Press Release Is Dead! The Made-for-the-Internet Release is News Now.
Buy this Report.

REALITY PR STRATEGY: Everything You Need to Know to Get Free (or Really Cheap) Publicity Now. Before you spend another dime on PR, Buy this Report.

Blogosphere to NY Times: Five Days

Last week, we reported on the website, We Are Not Afraid, that sprang up on July 7, the morning of the London terrorist attacks. The story hit the New York Times a mere five days later. And Sarah Boxer wrote a ridiculous story criticizing the site because some of the pictures show people having fun at beaches. Doh! It's July.

"A few days ago, We're Not Afraid might have been a comfort. Today, there's a hint of "What, me worry?" from Mad magazine days, but without the humor or the sarcasm. We're Not Afraid, set up to show solidarity with London, seems to be turning into a place where the haves of the world can show that they're not afraid of the have-nots."

And then she accuses the people who sent photos to the site of "brutish flaunting of wealth and leisure." These are 5000 people from all over the world, from Kenya to The Netherlands, coming together to show their solidarity against the bombers. Their response was immediate and sincere. It's the terrorists who are brutes, not the people contributing to this website. The Times should be ashamed of Boxer's article.

Categories: Dead Tree Journalism, Politics, Worst Practices

BL Ochman | Jul 14 05 12:21 | TrackBack (0)

Comments

Considering that Boxer's column is in the Critic's Notebook portion of the Arts section, I wouldn't get too bothered by it. I think Boxer reasonably relates how the site has morphed into its current identity. The site is now selling goods via CafePress, so its original "art-worthiness" may have detiorated a bit, and I believe that is part of what Boxer is trying to convey. I think the sentence below from her article summarizes her bottom line rather well...

From Germany comes a picture of a man with a bong and a bottle of water. The caption says: "Afraid? About what??"

From Londoners rallying around each other and their country to stoned Germans in 5 days. I think Boxer's point is well-taken.

Posted by: Cortland Coleman at July 14, 2005 1:31 AM

The NYTimes should be more ashamed that it took five days to notice. I wonder how many other stories the Times mis-interprets by coming in three days late?

Posted by: ike at July 14, 2005 2:33 PM

Ike_ that's the reason I do this occasional series about the Times' lag from the blogosphere. It just shows that they aren't watching and listening.

Posted by: BL Ochman at July 14, 2005 2:53 PM

I totally agree with this post. I wrote a letter to The Times editor and posted it to my blog

The article may have been in the Critic's Notebook portion of the Arts section, but it was on The Times front page for a whole day.

The Times should definitely be ashamed of printing idiotic and unsubstantiated opinion like that.

Yes it is an op-ed, but it reads more like an overdue college essay with a thesis pulled out of thin air and no connection to reality.

At least The Times article gave werenotafraid.com some much deserved recognition. Viewers can makeup their own minds.

Posted by: Adam Saunders at July 15, 2005 12:52 PM

Email this story to a friend

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.whatsnextonline.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2457

Search

Contact: BL (at) whatsnextonline (dot) com
212.369.8312

RSS Feed

blog advertising

About BL Ochman

Blogger, social media strategy consultant to Fortune 500 companies, and sought-after corporate speaker B.L. Ochman heads the creative team of whatsnextonline.com. She also publishes the Ethics Crisis blog for SRF Global Translations

Poll ID 0 does not exist.