Antonia Zerbisias: Under Their Wheels

by matttbastard

Anyone following my Twitter stream this weekend would have noticed that yours truly was a little bit dissatisfied with several pieces recently published by The Toronto Star. We’ll deal with the egregious diversity fail over what constitutes the most ‘important’ works of art/literature over the past 10 years another time (as per the white male columnists commissioned by the Star to map the contours of contemporary Canadian culture, women need not apply). For now, I want to address Saturday’s cowardly hit piece on Star columnist/blogger (and good friend of the Logic) Antonia Zerbisias by Star Public Editor Kathy English.

The 800-word public flogging was apparently commissioned by Star publisher John Cruickshank, after a complaint was lodged by Bernie Farber, president of the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC). Farber, no stranger to public grandstanding, raised a stink after Zerbisias left an obviously tongue-in-cheek comment (on an otherwise unrelated post) ironically speculating on Farber’s sexual orientation following his curious participation in the Toronto Pride celebration. Of course, it’s kinda hard to earnestly claim ‘defamation’ on the part of Zerb when there are pictures of Farber in the parade wearing a t-shirt that reads “Nobody knows I’m gay.”

Not that there’s anything wrong with (apparently) bearing false witness to further a political agenda, of course.

A tone of thinly-disguised contempt towards new media applications (note how English repeatedly points out the marginal online audience Zerbisias’ Star-hosted blog, Broadsides, receives in comparison to her ‘real’ column–ZOMG ‘only’ 900 daily hits!) is apparent throughout English’s embarrassingly ignorant column, making one skeptical that she and Cruickshank can be trusted to craft a knowledgeable, nuanced social media policy for Star reporters/columnists, one that takes into full account the conventions and standards of the online landscape (to say nothing of basic respect for digital fora in general.)

Former Star intern Jen Gerson (currently based in Abu Dhabi) does the heavy lifting addressing (and utterly decimating) English’s thinly-sourced and imprecise charges (memo to Ms. English: a blog comment is not the same thing as a blog post, much like an editorial is not a horoscope, even though both are typically part of a broadsheet. Are you following so far? Good.)

Gerson:

Given the context of the comment, nobody but the most wide-eyed naif would assume Zerbisias was outing Mr Farber. She was calling a public lobbyist to account for his hypocrisy. You know, doing that “journalism” thing we all so love to talk about. Albeit, in the snippy tone of a blogger, rather than the staid voice of print.

The obligatory response by Mr Farber, and the ensuing blog banter are all standard fare. I only started to feel my hackles raise upon reading this one: ‘Gay’ blog post was just not fair’ by the Toronto Star’s public editor, Kathy English, who spent the next 870-odd words, knees bent, begging for Farber’s forgiveness while offering her columnist’s head on a sacrificial plate.

She writes: “blogs by Star journalists ‘may not put the Star in a negative light.’”

Yes, because God Forbid we express a Controversial Opinion that may or may not be perceived to be negative with people who we may or may not be trying to kowtow to.

The only journalist who has put the Star in a negative light is Kathy English.
As a columnist, Zerbisias represents herself. Her readership knows her views and biases and pick up the star to read and/or rail about them.

However, as the public editor, English is perceived to represent the wider paper. So that column made the entire publication look like it’s run by humourless, uncomprehending fools who are quick to throw their own people over the edge of the ship at the behest of a well represented and powerful lobby.

Perhaps the saddest thing about this chilling, over the top attack on journalistic autonomy and free expression is the fact that Zerbisias has been spanked–publicly–for violating an as-yet unwritten policy. Vague exhortations regarding ‘civility’ come across as fawning overcompensation; English is simply trying too damn hard to be seen as doing something, and, as noted by Gerson, ends up looking foolish in the process–especially when one considers Farber’s provocative reputation and contentious history with Zerbisias (another memo for English: if you can’t separate legitimate reader concerns from blatant concern trolling you have no business being a public editor).

Exactly why English–and Cruickshank–were so quick to jump on Zerbisias over something that, if inaccuracy is the primary complaint, could be addressed with a simple ‘regret the error’ mea culpa, remains unclear, though this certainly isn’t the first time that Cruickshank has zealously targeted an uppity, left-leaning woman columnist in response to manufactured outrage.

Dr. Dawg wonders if there’s something other than editorial prudence driving the TorStar bus that English and Cruickshank have tossed Zerbisias under:

Why, if there is nothing wrong with being gay, is Farber “forced” to state publicly that he is not? Why all the Sturm und Drang? What does it matter, one way or the other?

And then a Star editor and the publisher go into full damage-control mode–except that I can’t, as noted, discern any damage. Not, in any case, unless Farber, despite his protestations, thinks that the “gay” label is a stigma, and the Star brass agrees with him. Blogs by Star journalists, says English, “may not put the Star in a negative light.” An ironic comment about someone being gay does that?

Tempest. Teapot. And possibly a wee bit of homophobia disguised as hand-wringing concerns about fairness and accuracy? You decide.

Ultimately, however, this controversy isn’t about ‘gay panic,’ or defamation, or even ‘accuracy’; it’s about the gatekeepers of Old Media desperately and opportunistically attempting to assert top-down editorial control over a still-uncertain contemporary media environment where their presence is largely unnecessary and unwanted. Unless Cruickshank, English, and the industry in general learn how to craft an online identity for newspapers and newspaper employees acknowledging the rollicking, informal, interactive atmosphere that defines the blogosphere without sacrificing traditional journalistic ethics, their already fleeting relevance will continue to evaporate.

We still need the invaluable contribution to the public good that is provided by quality journalism; but we must also take into account the industry-wide online evolution that has taken place completely below the radar of certain oblivious publishers and oversensitive public editors.

Recommend this post at Progressive Bloggers

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Antonia Zerbisias: Under Their Wheels

  1. Repo Mandy says:

    Well said. What a ridiculous shitstorm.

  2. lawlibrarian says:

    First off:

    I am neither a fan of Mr. Farber, nor of Ms. Zerbisias (I find her tone often too snarky and that is something I do not really appreciate in a professional journalist).

    This has nothing to do with the content of either’s politics, since at times I have agreed or disagreed with both of them, depending on the issue.

    I must say that I am disappointed with the Toronto Star’s response to this incident.

    I do not know much about the appropriate politics of the gay movement, about who should be invited to march or not, nor am I sure most of the time about who is right or wrong in the Middle east.

    But I do know about policy and law, and in particular, I have researched the legal and professional dimensions of web 2.0 or social media policies in the workplace.

    I fail to see how Ms. Zerbisias can be taken to the woodshed for not conforming to a policy that has not yet been developed. Unless what she did is in violation of the existing code of ethics of Torstar, it is hard to see what she did wrong. Maybe her tone was off, as is often the case in my view, but if there is no policy in place on blogging, she cannot have violated it.

    This is a common dilemma in workplaces that are trying to tackle the web 2.0 world. The best polocy is to launch an internal dialogue about what all the sides in a workplace feel is appropriate online behaviour, then develop an acceptable use policy. But don’t flail away at your employees in the absence of a policy.

    Silly season, indeed.

  3. hysperia says:

    Oh that it was only about “silly season”.

    GREAT post mattt!

  4. Jen Gerson says:

    Nice point lawlibrarian.
    Also, thanks for the link Matt!

  5. Arcadia says:

    Note to Lawlibrarian:

    “Snarky” is the new “understated sarcasm.”

    Look it up.

  6. lawlibrarian says:

    I know what “snarky” means. I am just not one who thinks it adds anything, indeed I more often than not find that it detracts from a message, and in particular when used by a professional journalist.

    It comes across as, well, slightly teenagey.

    Sometimes, just outlining the set of facts – without all the attitude and epithets – is enough to expose hypocrisy or exaggeration.

    E.g. People can write: “The evil dimwit lamebrain Dubya lied about WMD in Iraq. Dipshit! I hate him!” – this seems typical of most political blogs I came across.

    Or they can write: “President Bush claimed he needed to order the invasion of Iraq to stop Saddam Hussein to develop WMDs. Independent weapons inspectors and the US Army’s own investigators have declared there is was never evidence that the Iraqi government was developing WMD programs”.

    I happen to find the second example much more effective and damning. The facts are usually sufficient. I do not need to wade through thick forests of irony and snark, thank you very much.

  7. Pingback: Antonia Zerbisias, Kathy English, and #TorStarFAIL: Great Expectations « bastard.logic

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s