harmful criticism
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| mbaehrlxer Sep 25, 2011 9:50 PM EDT |
tuxchick: this is a very nice article. i must have been to busy that week that i missed it. only discovered it now because someone else commented on it. since this topic is still relevant i'd like to add a comment. (and i think you are following the discussions so i hope you will see it)tuxchick wrote:Quoting: "It's not that Seigo wants FOSS media to avoid criticism. But he does suggest that criticism should be offered in "ways in which one can acknowledge a situation that gives various people a doorway through which to step" (that is, a way that doesn't make people defensive and maybe suggests constructive solutions)."Um. No. That is not the job of tech reporters. Journalists are neither cheerleaders nor advocates. The job of a tech reporter is to be as informed, honest and fair as possible. Our first obligation is to our readers. FOSS users are smart and can spot nonsense and hypocrisy a mile away "Man has been created to carry forward an ever advancing civilization" that includes journalists. your first obligation is not to your readers but to civilization as a whole. how can we do it? seigo's suggestion is one way. seigo is not suggesting that you should be a cheerleader or advocate, but he is suggesting that your criticism should not make people defensive. i think that is a key element here. writing in that way is not nonsense and it does not make you a hypocrite. greetings, eMBee. |
| dinotrac Sep 26, 2011 8:39 AM EDT |
Quoting: but he is suggesting that your criticism should not make people defensive That's an impossible standard to meet: 1. Some people will be defensive no matter what you say. 2. Harsh criticism is sometimes appropriate, and few people take harsh criticism well. Siego doesn't want criticism at all. He, like everybody else, wants back pats. |
| jdixon Sep 26, 2011 9:20 AM EDT |
> ...your first obligation is not to your readers but to civilization as a whole. That's complete and total bull. Your first obligation is to your own conscience. |
| mbaehrlxer Sep 26, 2011 9:35 AM EDT |
dinotrac: just because it seems impossible, doesn't mean we shouldn't try. if someone can't take any criticism, then i don't criticize them. i can still encourage them and gently suggest improvements. of course there are those that won't listen to anything, but as long as that person doesn't cause trouble that i need to deal with, i'd ignore them if necessary. if we want to build a global society we need to be inclusive of everyone. therefore my actions try to avoid making anyone feel excluded... greetings, eMBee. |
| dinotrac Sep 26, 2011 10:25 AM EDT |
@mbaehrlxer - No, we shouldn't try. To worry about making somebody defensive is to give up on the pretense of criticism. Now -- That doesn't mean we shouldn't be civil, and take advantage of opportunities to be encouraging and constructive, etc, but... there is no useful purpose served by playing Pollyanna. |
| mbaehrlxer Sep 26, 2011 11:04 AM EDT |
dinotrac: my english fails me, can you please explain what "pretense of criticism" is supposed to mean? greetings, eMBee. |
| dinotrac Sep 26, 2011 12:09 PM EDT |
@mbaehrlxer - More a matter of my english failing me. I was trying to say that being overly concerned with making people defensive will turn efforts at criticism into a pretense. |
| ComputerBob Sep 26, 2011 12:28 PM EDT |
I think that you're all doing a great job, and your opinions are all wonderful. |
| mbaehrlxer Sep 26, 2011 10:33 PM EDT |
dinotrac: thanks, now i get it. i am not sure i agree with the pretense part but i do agree that being overly concerned with making people defensive then this will affect what you say. however, i believe the right approach is to tune the criticism to the person. that is, if i know that a person gets easily defensive then i just avoid that. likewise if i don't know and get a defensive response then i back off and apologize and reword my comment (or stay silent). getting a defensive response is just one aspect though there are other negative responses like feeling hurt, etc that should be treated similarly. the point is to establish a positive relationship with this person. of course this requires to listen to each other. if i can not establish a positive relationship with someone then i rather not establish a relationship at all, meaning i stay silent. greetings, eMBee. |
| ComputerBob Sep 27, 2011 7:21 AM EDT |
I think that you're all doing a great job, and your opinions are all wonderful -- especially eMBee's. I apologize if I have offended anyone by me giving eMBee extra praise. |
| dinotrac Sep 27, 2011 7:34 AM EDT |
@cb - eMBee is putting forth a perfectly valid and sensible approach for personal interactions. Nothing wrong with that. It's important, however, to realize that we all venture into arenas that go beyond that. One non-FOSS, non-KDE example that comes to mind is the employment relationship. We certainly hope that our bosses won't be cruel, but a boss who avoids criticism in order to spare an employee's feelings is simply setting that employee up to fail and, ultimately, if times get tough, to be fired. Sometimes criticism is appropriate, even necessary, regardless of how the recipient takes it. Again, there is no need, nor excuse, for cruelty. On the other hand, dishonesty and avoidance are simply veneers on an inherent cruelty in the form of opportunity lost. |
| ComputerBob Sep 27, 2011 7:39 AM EDT |
In theory vs practice, practice always wins -- at least in theory. |
| mbaehrlxer Sep 27, 2011 9:25 AM EDT |
dinotrac: i also agree with what you say. the boss example is something i meant with "long as that person doesn't cause trouble that i need to deal with". but as a boss i also have the opportunity to establish a positive relationship before i need to criticize, and then offer the criticism in a setting where noone else can hear it so that comments remain private. these things don't necessarily apply to a journalist writing an article. greetings, eMBee. |
| dinotrac Sep 27, 2011 9:58 AM EDT |
@emBee: A journalist has a different problem. The nature of the job means you can't shrink away from criticism and still call yourself a journalist. You can be civil and respectful, but you can't shrink away. |
| mbaehrlxer Sep 27, 2011 11:29 AM EDT |
dinotrac: well, i disagree with that. this may be the expectation of journalism today, but i believe that if we really are to achieve a better society then journalism will have to change as well. as it is, journalism today is doing a lot of harm. maybe even more harm than good. that said, the kind of criticism that we are discussing here is probably just a marginal problem compared to the blunders that are happening in say the yellow press or elsewhere. greetings, eMBee. |
| dinotrac Sep 27, 2011 11:40 AM EDT |
Journalism that is afraid to criticize isn't good for much. It is, in fact, no longer journalism. It's advertising. |
| jdixon Sep 27, 2011 12:44 PM EDT |
>... as it is, journalism today is doing a lot of harm. maybe even more harm than good. Oh, I can agree with that. But somehow I doubt we agree about the details. And since discussing those details would inevitably lead to a TOS violation, I'll refrain. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!