On BlogHer: Next Year in Kaliningrad Oblast

For about two years, I’ve blogged about travel for BlogHer, the women’s blogging network. I started as a volunteer writing about Europe while I was in Austria – I was bored and lonely, it seemed like a good use of my time. I tendered my resignation once, shortly after I’d returned to the US, but the landscape had shifted at BlogHer and the travel slot was open – I was excited to take it. Not long after I switched to writing about travel, BlogHer started paying their writers – a generous per post amount by the standards I’ve seen. While I’ve had random bouts of fatigue, in general, I’ve really enjoyed the gig. Not that long ago I dropped a line to the BlogHer founders thanking them for keeping me on, that’s how much I liked it. Writing about travel for BlogHer has been natural work, easy for me, and given my erratic work history, I’ve really appreciated the small but steady income stream. It’s been a great little gig.

I’ve been less than delighted with other aspects of BlogHer, but only because I’m not much of a joiner. A solo flier, I don’t like crowds or group events, large social gatherings make me nervous. I was tremendously put off by the negative reporting I read by those who attended the ’06 BlogHer conference, especially the mom vs. not mom divide (and a weird insistence that it didn’t exist). But after making cyber friends with BlogHer participants through the year, I decided I to attend the BlogHer ’07 conference to see what all the fuss was about – maybe my instincts were wrong and I was missing something by not participating in person. I had an okay time and I met some terrific people, but most of what I liked about the conference happened off site when I met some imaginary friends in person. I was frustrated by the crowded sessions, disappointed in the keynote speaker (Elizabeth Edwards, who I have really liked before), and in general, I felt like there were no big takeaways. “Meh,” I thought. “Maybe I’ve been at it too long?” Ultimately I decided that the thing to do was contribute more and, with the help of a handful of swell travel bloggers, I proposed a panel for the ’08 conference.

The panel was rejected, to my disappointment, though it came with a consolation prize – a request that I host some kind of informal gathering of bloggers interested in travel issues. “That could be okay,” I thought, after all, even though it’s not a panel, it could be what I made of it, so what the hell? Plus, I love San Francisco and I have wonderful friends from college in the Bay Area. Last week, I looked at the conference schedule to see what had made the cut and I was sort of pained by what I saw. I get that these things are important to many BlogHer constituents, but wow, the subject matter focus is just, well, let’s say it’s not for me. I’ve continued to try to talk myself into some kind of enthusiasm for the conference but then, I was confronted with, well, how do I explain this?

..purchase of the land called the Kaliningrad Oblast from Russia, would encourage Russian immigrants to return to Russia by means of financial enticements, and the transfer of the Israelis to the Baltic, would prevent anyone from questioning the legitimacy of this new Israeli homeland.

Briefly, if you haven’t clicked, one of the contributors to BlogHer, Dana Tuszke, posted about a book she’d read that suggested that the solution to the Middle East peace crisis was to relocate the Jews to somewhere in Russia. She provided no critical analysis for this hypothesis but does present her personal conclusions:

Quo Vadis, Israel is a fact-based book and at first glance was rather intimidating to me. Perhaps because of my lack of knowledge, it didn’t seem plausible to move an entire country. But, after reading the book I acquired a better understanding of the Jewish people and their history, and I can see why Nennhaus believes it may be in Israel’s best interest to be transplanted to more suitable land in eastern Europe.

Not surprisingly, readers went crazy. If you do bother to click on the link I provided above, you’ll see that the first response is, yup, that’s me. I received a personal note from BlogHer founder Lisa Stone thanking me for my comment and stating that she hadn’t seen the post or she’d have got to me sooner, and if I wanted to discuss it further, she’d be available. From within BlogHer, there were two responses, one thanking the community for their civility and another suggesting that readers review the author’s post. Comments run from personal attacks to lengthy history lessons. Some defend Dana’s position as naive, in a sort of “back off, she was just asking” stance, others are more conciliatory and strive for education, a few are closer to the bone. A few asked what I thought was a really important question: What’s the role and responsibility of contributors to the site? I followed up with BlogHer stating, in a spittle flaked missive, my additional concerns. I’ve received no response.

Bloggers like to talk about how they’re taking control of the media, but they also like to use their independence as an excuse for shoddy research. In the past month, I’ve seen the words “bloggers shouldn’t be held to the same standards as journalists” in multiple different contexts. On personal blogs, I’m happy to hand out the “get out of quality requirements free” card, after all, a personal blog is the quintessential home of one individual’s rantings. (case in point, Nerd’s Eye View). But when it comes to organizational blogs – especially those that claim to advocate for the power and value of independent media, I’m less forgiving. One of the contributors to BlogHer responded to the query about editorial controls with the statement that we didn’t need it, we weren’t mainstream media. I’d argue that we need editorial input because we aren’t mainstream media and that if we want to be considered as serious contenders, we had better act like it. That means doing our homework, knowing who our audience is, understanding our subject matter, and writing about it conscientiously.

It occurs to me that I don’t know what BlogHer’s editorial policy is, not really. I’ve never really worried about it and while I have wished for more from the site in the past, this is the first time I’ve regretted that there’s no apparent editorial guidance. Don’t get me wrong – after much consideration, I concluded that I did not want to see the post pulled, after all, I am a first amendment booster. I believe the author when she says she didn’t intend to offend anyone – but the road to hell is paved with good intentions and all that. I do think that in this case, any editor worth their red pen would have sent the author back to the drawing board with a series of questions. “What do Jews think about this idea?” for starters.

I’m feeling sort of schizophrenic. On the one hand, I love writing for the BlogHer site and I’ve appreciated it as a great opportunity to write about something I love for a broad audience. On the other hand, I’ve never been all that enchanted with the other aspects of BlogHer. This hasn’t really been much of an issue until today – the site and the conference have existed in separate spaces for me. But now, I’m questioning my involvement and wondering if I’m not a terrible sell out or worse if I continue to contribute. The angry, strident sector would say yes – I won’t crosslink, the vitriolic languages is not helpful, but they’ve called for Jewish bloggers to boycott the organization and pull their ads. I’ve decided to noodle it over for a week – and I do not run BlogHer ads – I don’t meet the editorial requirements to be part of the BlogHer ad network.

I like to think the founders are in a (virtual) room somewhere, maybe with a lawyer, reviewing their policies and strategizing, and that some time in the near future something will make this better. I don’t know what that would be. Maybe I’ll realize I’m overreacting and turn back to enjoying my role with BlogHer, I just don’t know. I’m standing by.

I hear Kaliningrad Oblast is all the rage as a conference destination.

Update: Sunday: BlogHer leaders have emailed the site contributors to assure us they’ll respond after the weekend and to request we don’t engage with the vitriolic commenters on the original post.

Update: Monday: In the comments you’ll see a link to Lisa Stone’s response to the dust up. I should also state that I have a contract that details the BlogHer terms, exactly. I haven’t cracked it since I signing it some time back. At some point I knew the guidelines in detail and I was absolutely due for a refresher. My not knowing the guidelines isn’t through some failure on BlogHer’s part to inform me, it’s because I hadn’t looked at them in a long time.

9 thoughts on “On BlogHer: Next Year in Kaliningrad Oblast”

  1. It is through you and other BlogHer writers that I got up the nerve to blog, to make collages, to reach out and (eventually) discover some interesting and profound online relationships. From a sentimental point-of-view, it would be sad to see you leave the platform. It is important that an evolution occurs; making sure the writers do their homework is the first of many serious steps the leaders of BlogHer have to make. It’s like any dance; you have to learn the structure before being able to move freely.

    Reply
  2. I guess that’s part of my issue. If BlogHer is meant to inspire the hesitant or those seeking guidance, where do posts like Dana’s stand? Do they cast aspersions on my own work (oh, the vanity!) or are they just journalistic howlers? If that’s the case, what’s the responsibility of the organization to address them? When I know the answer to these questions, will I feel differently or am I just too stubborn to graciously step away from the argument because of the sheer offensiveness of the original post? I still don’t know.

    But also, thanks for your kind words and for helping shine a little light.

    Reply
  3. Pam,
    We met last year at BlogHer ’07, and I remember particularly how friendly you were in that great sea of women. We met again over Dana’s posting. I just want to thank you for writing this post. You express so much of what I’ve felt over the past several years about BlogHer. I’m not sure how the three founders divvy up their responsibilities, but I suspect that they haven’t actually sat down and figured out what their editorial policy is. They’ve grown so fast and have become a corporate institution, but maybe they’re still operating on the old socialist collective rules.

    I do know that I rarely come away from an exchange with Elisa or Denise that I don’t feel I’ve been chastised. In fact, I’ve grow so sensitive to it that I really thought Saturday’s email might bring a post from them barring me from BlogHer permanently. Silly, I know, but a conditioned response.

    Maybe I expect too much. I remember the devastation I felt when I learned through experience that book publishing generally and my editor at Doubleday specifically was no longer of the Maxwell Perkins mode. So maybe I need to realize that just because there’s a ‘her’ in BlogHer and it was started by women doesn’t mean it’s a sisterhood.

    It will be interesting to see what their response to all this is. I have the feeling that they’re batten down the hatches and ride out the storm. They’re successfully “growing” BlogHer, and maybe that’s all that’s important to them.

    I’m glad to know you, and I will make an effort to keep our connection going.

    Jane

    Reply
  4. Oh, my.

    Wasn’t too long back that I was informed in casual conversation that anti-Semitism is dead, gone, done with. Good thing we’re past all that.

    Reply
  5. Wow. Color me ashen. Somehow, I missed the post of the century this week and all its attendant brouhaha. But I’m absolutely in agreement with you over the need for organizations to have some sort of editorial policy in place to regulate content. Such a policy does not mean people can’t have opinions or post about them – but it does entail that opinions be absolutely labeled as such, and that any facts used to back up arguments have been checked as to their accuracy. I’ve been a freelance writer for years, and tend to triple-check anything I’m stating as fact, particularly in the land of Internet, where every individual is an alleged expert about something.

    Keep up the good fight.

    Reply
  6. Just now seeing this. You know I support whatever decision feels right for you. re Jane’s comment…I always find it interesting when Denise’s name comes up in mention of the founders…I think there are lots of new BlogHer ‘members’ who think she is one. Yesterday saw Neil’s comment…and Grace’s response.

    Reply

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.