Thursday, July 2, 2009


This is a tough post because I criticize people that post comments to articles/op-eds and the status updaters on twitter, fb, et al. Posts tend to be anonymous or without accountability. There isn’t a neat way to have a discussion without sharing your crazy or being called crazy. Why let facts get in the way of an argument? Why bother with the facts since they can be skewed? There is no moral accountability in these mediums. Blogs too. I understand the absurdity.

The ongoing saga of the SC Governor, Mark Sanford is a good example of unchecked moralizing. What Mark Sanford did is wrong, but has anyone listened to his wife’s comments? Jenny Sanford, rather than the stand by your man Silda Spitzer and Hillary Clinton, has asked her husband to beat it until she can figure it out, while leaving the door open for reconciliation. The reconciliation may end in divorce, although her comments are hopeful and to the contrary.

Hateful words are used in posts to describe Mark Sanford, I concede he deserves some of it, but we all know people close to us that have gone through divorce. Do you pile on? Would you consider making a post on facebook about a friend going through a rough patch that criticizes their ability to handle the issue to your standards? I also concede that public figures should be criticized publicly. But the motherly expression, “if you have nothing nice to say, say nothing at all,” is meaningless. Constructive criticism is what we give our children. Why does it stop?

On facebook, I know who you are, after all we’re friends. I’ve been a part of and witnessed some of the morally wrong and questionable actions perpetrated. Some of the status updates I read have traditionally been reserved for quiet, private moments where confidentiality is unwritten. People share their opinions and personal lives with reckless abandon, and I don’t like it.

No comments:

Post a Comment