Oh please, start one about me

THIS POST HAS BEEN UPDATED:

Whoa! Somebody doesn't like the Globe and Mail's Margaret (Peggy) Wente. Whoever that somebody is started a Wente Watch blog, the kind of site which proves that, as a columnist, she must be doing a great job if she is provoking people enough to give up their free time to pick apart her scribblings.

Seems that the blogger was tipped over the edge by Wente's words on AIDS and Africa, specifically this sentence: "Changing the behaviour of African men is probably hopeless." Complains the Wente Watcher:

Margaret Wente has made many ugly remarks during her career as a columnist, but this is the one that finally angered me enough to start this blog.

If someone had said that of "white men", or even just "men", can anyone doubt that Wente herself would be the first one screaming about radical feminism? But change the skin color of the men, and misandrist remarks become fine with her. Her jeer has no basis in fact; Uganda's famous ABC campaign proved that the sexual behavior of Africans, both men and women, could and would change with a community-based program of education.

But to Margaret Wente, this doesn't matter. Facts contrary to her ideological worldview don't exist. She is a writer who sees the world through the prism of good guys and bad guys. The good guys are capitalists, the United States, and white people; the bad guys are activists, critics of the US, and people of color. With that blinker in mind, her columns often follow a predictable formula:

1) Find a social issue, preferably one dear to the heart of liberal-leaning activists;

2) Blame it on nonwhite people;

3) Claim that only through conservative solutions can the problem be solved.

You know, I am totally fine with these sorts of blogs. After all, somebody has to watch the watchers. But what I object to is the anonymous part. If you're going to bushwhack people, then come out from behind the bush. Columnists such as Wente attach their name and face to their opinions. Attack bloggers should as well.

Unless they work in the same office.

Ya think?

UPPITY DATE: The blogger has outed himself in the comments below. Here's what he says:

Dear Ms. Zerbisias:

My name is Tyrone Nicholas and I am the author of Wente Watch.

Thank you for mentioning my blog. I'll try to upload a photo to it as soon as I get the chance.

Comments

[Idealistic Pragmatist]

Sparking debate is a good thing, but sparking debate doesn't necessarily imply that a columnist must "be doing a great job." It's certainly possible to spark debate by giving serious treatment to controversial issues (people are *still* talking about James Laxer's extremely controversial piece in The Walrus about the NDP, just to name one example). Wente, however, always goes for the cheap, one-sided, and yes, poorly researched shot. That's not "doing a great job," that's shoddy work, no matter how much debate it provokes.

[john Cameron]

It's a 'photo' for chrissakes in the upper left hand side of her column. What's the big deal? Oh, you guys are sick! Sick, I tell ya! Sick!

[Antonia Z.]

It's also sexism.

KNOCK IT OFF.

[AMJ]

Circa October 2001 Margaret Wente penned a column titled, "Sunera Thobani is an idiot!" Fascinated, wanting to hear what this Thobani person had said or done to provoke such an angry, emotional reaction from Wente, I read along.

Apparently Wente had attended some conference where early in her remarks/speech Thobani had spoken of how American foreign policy was soaked in blood. Wente, by her own admission, immediately got up and left the conference room in disgust.

The rest of Wente's column was self-indulgent, spiteful, and wholly unbecoming a professional journalist; and more importantly lacking any substance or facts with which to back up her superficial statement.

Silly me, I actually imagined that an experienced, seasoned, and professional journalist would have made some effort to remain detached and unemotional, stayed to hear the entire speech, made copious notes or taped it all, possibly posed questions afterwards, and then later prepared her column employing some facts she'd gathered to support her position and opinion. Wente did none of that.

I had no further interest in Ms. Thobani so I don't know what she actually said nor why. As for Ms. Peggy, I stopped reading her column that day and now regard her as untrustworthy and lacking credibility, and her behaviour as unprofessional and idiotic.

However, I also feel that a discussion or analysis of her photo or looks is superficial, puerile, and wholly irrelevant.

For the record, whether it's positive, negative, or neutral, I have no interest in reading a blog about her.

[estragon]

The town's best columnists are all women? I beg to differ.

Blatch gets 10/10 for her crime reporting, but a big goose egg for her often florid writing, her fawning and slobbering over any man in uniform, and her too frequent hanging out of her well-washed bloomers.

Joe Fiorito gets my vote.

[dave]

Is it still sexist if I make comments about Stepford Harper's robotic blue eyes and how it makes me think he's an advance scout for an intergalactic invasion force?

Regarding Wente, I will not read her columns any more. It's not the politics but the presentation; Mark Steyn bugs me the same way.

[Nate]

Sexism? Antonia, at least from my part, it so absolutely is not.

There is nothing I said or would ever mean to say about Wente (or her photo) that I wouldn't say (or mean to say) about a man (or his photo).

Gender just does't enter into it. Smugitude, sure. Superciliousness, absolutely. Sexism, not.

[arthurdecco]

A year or so ago, Wente wrote a column which I no longer remember the subject of. In my opinion, it was chock full of misleading statements and outright distortions of fact.

I took the time to assemble a list of web links to the appropriate correct information that I thought perhaps had escaped her notice in the lead-up to her writing the column and merrily sent it off. (I naively thought she had been misinformed and would jump at the opportunity to set things right.)

Her response?

...What response?

That's when I realized she was just another smug liar paid to pull the wool over our eyes.

I still occasionally read her column in much the same way that a moth flies into flames - I'm helplessly drawn closer in order to see what whopper she's stating as fact today - knowing full well the actual reading of her distortions and out-right lying will not have a happy ending for me.

(& on those days when both she and Gee have a column on the same page in the paper, I try to eat lightly so that I'm not at risk of losing my lunch all over the columnist’s page of the Globe.)

[Randy]

I agree with Nate, Antonia. The choice of headshot says everything about you, since people always focus on images first, and text second. That's why authors (or their publishers) spend mega-bucks on just the right portrait photographer -- this is the image you're conveying to the world for a good long time, and if you look like a smug dork, well... you get the idea.

Nothing to do with sexism on my part. Zip, zero, nilch. I believe in equality, and there's nothing to say men and women can't both look equally stuck-up/smug/condescending/funny/
stupid/charming/approchable/intellectual/moronic in their photos.

Imagine if George Bush wrote a column. THERE'S a headshot I'd like to see!

There are countless male writers who are vain about their headshots. I remember a doctor who wrote a column for The Sun who didn't change his headshot for decades; when he did, it was a case of "Omigod, how old is this guy?!"

[allderblob]

Wente's job is to "provoke." Fact is, you can't open the damn Glob letters page without at least one, usually several letters dressing her down for lapses of fact, judgment, taste, dignity, etc. In the normal world (say, a world where keeping your job depends on never exciting the customer to the point of rage), Wente would no longer be in print. But this is the newspaper world, where keeping your job depends on one thing only: are people reading you? And Wente gets read. It would be nice to ignore her, but that's impossible, unless you stop buying the Blog and Male. Which is what has happened to David Frum and Robert Fulford, by the way: no one buys the Naz. Past anymore, so no one gets steamed about their inanities.

[sooey]

grr. i figure the best columnists are the ones who appeal to our basest instincts. that's why they make some of us so mad. i'm crazy impressionable without EVER changing my political opinions (because i'm also an incredible snob and consider my views, well... you can only imagine...) and even though i might flat out agree with mark steyn while i'm reading him - ten min... no... five... no two seconds later my neurons kick in and i'm livid with rage. it'd be funny to have blood pressure tests reading different columnists.

[Stillstunned]

I thought I was the only one until I read Capital Cat's perceptive comments about Wente's "apparent habit of taking chunks of other people's work and scattering it through her columns with little or no attribution."

I wrote an article about Fetal Alcohol Syndrome in the Sept. 25/2000 issue of Report Newsmagazine. Within a few weeks, Wente wrote a column on the same topic, with enough striking similarities to my story that my son felt he must write to her about it. Her response: Oh, FAS advocates had sent all journalists a bunch of material on the subject at that time; hence the coincidence.
Actually, no they had not. That material was all gained through hours of painstaking research and interviews. One short attribution would not have damaged her credibility. But that was apparently beneath her. Don't get me started....

[Randy]

I tried getting onto the Wente Watch blog today, and as they say in the Deep South, "It ain't workin' no mo." Shame. FYI - Try saying "Wente Watch blog" when you have a cold... it comes out sounding like "Wente Wart Hog."

But I digress. Antonia, where are you? My Goodness, Belinda Stronach and Tie Domi are calling! The media rumour mill needs to strap on the feedbag, and get running again!

[V.K.J]

The Wente Watch site is still there and still active.

[Jerry Green]

Hey, Antonia,

I hope you get your own blog watch.

What has happened to the Star these days?

New publisher. Articles critical of the Liberals. Has it been hit that badly by craigslist or what?

Jerry Green

[J Munroe]

Antonia, I'd argue that YOU are one of the town's best columnists. Sadly, while I can see the elegance in the prose of Wente, Blatchford and DiManno, I'd rather punch myself in the gut than subject myself to their opinions.

In their political leanings, they're like a troop of cavewoman scratching themselves on the op-ed pages. Their writing is anti-educational and it does a disservice to the Canadian public.

If Blatchford and DiManno were any more in bed with the police, they'd be tattooed Sealy Posturepedic and have Julian Fantino's tush imprint on their faces. It's frightening that the police's ex-officio spin doctors are given such prominence in our national papers.

Lest this be construed as sexism, I should be clear that nutbars like Rex Murphy fall in the same category.

The only sexism I think I carry towards these women is that I would have expected female writers to know better.

[Yurg]

You know what kills me, salaried and unionized journalists in our incredibly small professional community saying that attacking high-profile columnists is a good way to get ahead in this business. Let's say the guy did work at the Globe, you're telling me its his duty to get reprimanded by his bosses? What if he's in a non-writing role at work? Then he doesn't have a byline, photo or column inches to defend himself if Wente goes after him or her. This is one instance of the typical media elite snobbery towards blogging, which really can't compete substantively with news but somehow bothers thin-skinned reporters and columnists so much that they need to attempt to delegitimize someone's thoughts or ideas by calling them "anonymous" like its a dirty word instead of a practice that's likely to save your job. Grow up and look at this media world the way it is!

[Vaidya Maneesh]

"But what I object to is the anonymous part."

Not everybody like to expose themselves or dedicate full time
like you to trash others. Not everybody has job at reputed Trash paper of Toronto. Anyway looks like you killed that watch now.

[LoveLump]

She's not the only one at the Globe irritating enough to provoke people into "watch" sites. At least one mega-snob elitist there got the job simply because mommy is an editor.