D O I N T E R N E T C O L U M N I S T S H A V E A N Y
P R O F E S S I O N A L I N T E G R I T Y ?
B Y K A T H E R I N E - 3 / 1 8 / 0 2
As I become more and more appalled by the things I see written by so-called Internet columnists, I have to wonder if professional integrity is a word not in their vocabularies. When you declare yourself a columnist, shouldn't you have some kind of professional integrity about what you write and the way you write it. I mean, it's fine to indulge in actor bashing when your just a message board poster, but once you declare yourself a columnist or take on the role of a columnist on a web site, shouldn't you conduct yourself in a professional manner suiting that position?
Recently, a gossip columnist who calls himself Sage reported on a rumor that General Hospital's Maurice Benard might be leaving the show. Instead of just reporting the rumor and leaving it at that, he used his forum to launch an attack against the actor. He declared Mr. Benard had no acting talent and would never land a role in a prime time show because he didn't have enough talent to do so. When a lot of people e-mailed him and disagreed with his bash, he claimed that he met Mr. Benard twice and that proved he couldn't act. When others who had also met Mr. Benard disagreed with his impression, he then started making cracks about Mr. Benard being bipolar. Sage even printed his cracks about Mr. Benard being bipolar in his next column as he whined about being attacked for what he wrote. I have no idea what this Sage's problem with Mr. Benard is. Is it because he blames him because his favorite characters aren't getting enough airtime to suit him or is it that he's bigoted against anyone who has a mental illness? By his bipolar remarks he seems to have revealed a bias he has against people who have a mental illnesses. Whatever the case, was a gossip column the place for him to launch a personal attack against Mr. Benard? Just what does bashing an actor have to do with reporting gossip. And Mr. Benard was hardly the first actor this Sage has bashed this way.
I suppose expecting professional integrity from someone who goes through people's trash and spies and eavesdrops on private conversations to get tidbits for his column is expecting a lot. But the National Enquirer employs the same methods as this Sage does, and they'd never allow one of their columnists to launch a personal attack on the subject of whatever piece of gossip they're reporting on. So, apparently, even the National Enquirer has more professional integrity then this Sage and the rest of his ilk does. And make no mistake about it. This Sage is just the latest Internet columnist to use their column for whatever personal agenda they have.
A few months back the news and gossip columnist of the Soapzone web site was urging people to sign a petition to get Maurice Benard fired and the character of Sonny Corinthos written off the show. She insinuated to fellow Billy Warlock fans that if they got rid of Mr. Benard and his character her favorite Billy Warlock would get more airtime. And every time she does a gossip piece on Maurice Benard she writes it in a snide and insinuating tone, while she writes about her
pet, Billy Warlock, in a nauseating and gushing manner. She even used her column to bash some of the fan groups that post on the Soapzone General Hospital Message board and when they complained the web master backed her on what she said and said she has a right to say whatever she pleases. But apparently not everyone agreed with that assessment.
Recently when actor Real Andrews took her on publicly for things she wrote in her column, which were completely unrelated to Mr. Benard, she cried foul and declared she was being victimized by a powerful actor. Apparently, while liking to dish it out, when she gets it back, she was unable to take it without trying to play innocent victim, just like the aforementioned Sage did.
If both of these so-called columnists had been working for a newspaper or magazine, they would have never been allowed to use their columns to further their own personal agendas. If they had tried to do it, they would have been fired. Of course, neither one of these people and other members of their ilk would ever be hired to work for any type of professional publication
after the unprofessional behavior they've exhibited on more than one occasion. I doubt the National Enquirer would even give them a job on their staff. If the antics of these two columnists had been pulled in a national publication, they could have been sued, but on the Internet these people are able to get away with it without facing any kind of penalty. I guess the ultimate fault lies in the laps of the web masters and web mistresses of these web sites who let them get away with stuff like this. Until they start telling these columnists to look up what the word professional integrity means and tell them their columns can't be used to further their own personal agendas, what we're seeing done by these Internet columnists will continue until the people these people think they have a right to victimize in their columns fight back and threaten legal action against the owner's of the web sites as well as the columnists, themselves.
Don't get me wrong, there are Internet columnists who conduct themselves with professional integrity. The rumor's reporter on the Gedstern Scoops and Rumors site is one such person. She just reports the rumors she hears and doesn't use them to launch some bash against some actor she doesn't like or has a personal grudge against. There are others such as her, but there are also quite a few bad apples that abuse their position as a columnist to push their own agendas. Which, unfortunately, gives a bad name to all the Internet columnists who conduct themselves in a professional manner. Like the saying goes, a few bad apples can ruin the whole bunch. These bad apples need to be weeded out so the Internet columnists who do conduct themselves in a professional manner won't be tarred with the same feather as the ones who don't. |
